Working

W
Working
ki to
t Extend
E t d Democracy
D
to
t All 
Volume
Volume
V
V l
1, N
1
Number
b 5
5

June

J
J
June
2012
2012


THE SOLITARY STRUGGLE IN
CALIFORNIA PRISONS
Until recent protests, California locked ‘validated’ gang members in concrete boxes
for years on end. So what’s changed?
By Sadhbh Walshe
or the past three decades or so, the
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)
has attempted to suppress gang violence in
its prisons by segregating anyone thought
be have gang affiliations in their notorious
secure housing units (SHUs) – and leaving them there for years or even decades.
Last summer, two state-wide hunger strikes
protesting SHU conditions shed an uncomfortable spotlight on these policies and the
CDCR was obliged to rethink its approach.
Recently, it issued an outline of its revised strategy, including details of the
much-anticipated step-down program.
While the new strategy has been welcomed
by stakeholders in an “anything is better
than nothing” kind of way, it falls far short
of addressing the grievances that forced it
into being.
The four-year step-down program
(SDP), will at least provide SHU inmates
with a mechanism to earn their way back to
the general prison population. That’s reasonably good news for new SHU inmates,
who, until now, would have had to resign
themselves to spending a minimum of six
years in an 8x10ft concrete box, with no
window and no human contact, before their
case even came up for review. But for those
who have been in one for years or decades
already, the SDP appears to offer little more
than a guarantee of at least three and a half
more years of almost total isolation.
In year one, for instance, the only change
SHU inmates can expect is to partake in

F

“in-cell studies designed to enhance life
skills”. Year two is more of the same, with
a few carrots thrown in, namely a deck of
playing cards, one phone call per year and
the ability to spend an additional $11 per
month (of their own money) in the canteen.
Year three allows for two phone calls per
year, and a few other random perks that
include “a plastic tumbler, a plastic bowl,
a pair of seasonal tennis shoes, a combination of 10 books, newspapers or magazines, and a domino game”. Year four adds
a chess set to the mix.
It’s not until year three that actual group
meetings are permitted, and only in the latter half of year four will the inmates get to
have some level of “yard interaction”. It’s
little wonder that both the inmates and their
advocates are less than enthused about a
supposed reform program that barely goes
further in the first two years than allowing
them to wear seasonal tennis shoes as they
play solitaire in their cells.
Naturally, the CDCR doesn’t want to
rush things, as the program could suffer
serious setbacks if anything goes wrong,
but the mediation team who negotiated on
behalf of the prisoners during the hunger
strikes has pointed out to the CDCR that
the Connecticut Department of Correction
(credited with establishing a national model for gang management) managed to do in
five and a half months what the CDCR is
hoping to achieve in four years.
Still, at least there a glimmer of light at
the end of the tunnel, which is no small
thing for prisoners who have spent decades

without normal access to sunlight. If they
manage to refrain from all future gangrelated activity, they will eventually be released from the SHU.
This is not as easy as it sounds, however, as what constitutes gang activity is so
broadly defined that it’s next to impossible
for inmates to remain violation-free. This
was highlighted for me by one of my SHU
correspondents in a recent letter:
“I was given a retaliatory 115 (a writeup) because I said ‘Hey, Abdul’ on my way
to the clinic and ‘All right, Vitani’, on my
way back. Again, I’ve been accused of
‘promotion of gang activity’. This is an attempt to ensure that when the step-down
program is enacted, I won’t be allowed to
participate.”
Terry Thornton, the CDCR spokeswoman, assured me that no inmate will be
precluded from participating in the SDP for
prior write-ups, but this inmate and others are right to worry that they may have
trouble staying violation-free and graduating from the program. If the language in the
proposal is so broad that just saying hello to
a fellow inmate may be interpreted as gang
activity, then their concern seems justified.
One element of the new strategy that is
very welcome is a change to the gang validation process that allowed inmates be sent
to the SHU in the first place. Most people
assume (I certainly did) that SHU placements are reserved for inmates who are
violent or dangerous. Yet the fact is that
Solitary Struggle...... Continued on page 7

INTERVIEW WITH
VO NGUYEN GIAP
VIET MINH
COMMANDER
Q: Was Diên Bin Phû a conventional
military victory or was it a victory for
military warfare?
Giap: The victory at Diên Bin Phû
was a victory for the people. But then, of
course, while the concept of a people’s
war and guerrilla warfare are not entirely
separate, they are separate nonetheless. In
this case, it was the people’s war that was
victorious. And guerrilla warfare was one
aspect of that people’s war. It’s all quite
complicated.... What is the people’s war?
Well, in a word, it’s a war fought for the
people by the people, whereas guerrilla
warfare is simply a combat method. The
people’s war is more global in concept.
It’s a synthesized concept. A war which
is simultaneously military, economic and
political, and is what we in France would
call “synthesized.” There’s guerrilla
warfare and there’s large-scale tactical
warfare, fought by large units.
Q: What was new about the idea of the
“People’s War”?
Giap: It was a war for the people by the
people. FOR the people because the war’s
goals are the people’s goals—goals such
as independence, a unified country, and
the happiness of its people.... And BY the
people -- well that means ordinary people
—not just the army but all people.
We know it’s the human factor, and
not material resources, which decide the
outcome of war. That’s why our people’s
war, led by Ho Chi Minh, was on such a
large scale. It took in the whole population.
Q: What do you think about the
significance of Diên Bin Phû for the world?
Giap: The history of the Vietnamese
people goes back thousands of years.
During that time we’ve repelled thousands
of invaders. Only, in former times the
countries that tried to invade us were on the
same economic level as we were. Theirs,
like ours, was a feudal society. That was
the case, for example, when we fought the
Chinese in the 13th century. But Diên Bin
2

Phû was a victory in another era. What I
mean is that in the latter half of the 19th
century, when western imperialism divided
the world into colonies, a new problem
emerged. How could a weak, economically
backwards people ever hope to regain its
freedom? How could it hope to take on
a modern western army, backed by the
resources of a modern capitalist state? And
that’s why it took us 100 years to fight off
the French and French imperialism. Diên
Bin Phû was the first great decisive victory
after 100 years of war against French
imperialism and U.S. interventionism.
That victory that put an end to the war
and marked the end of French aggression.
From an international point of view, it was
the first great victory for a weak, colonized
people struggling against the full strength
of modern Western forces. This is why it
was the first great defeat for the West. It
shook the foundations of colonialism and
called on people to fight for their freedom
-- it was the beginning of international
civilization.
Q: Was Diên Bin Phû an easy victory
because the French made so many
mistakes?
Giap: It’s not as simple as that. We
believed that in the French camp, French
general staff and the military chiefs were
well informed. They’d weighed up the pros
and cons, and according to their forecasts,
Diên Bin Phû was impregnable. It has to
be said that at the beginning of the autumn
of ‘53, for example, when our political
headquarters were planning our autumn and
winter campaigns, there was no mention of
Diên Bin Phû. Why? Because, the Navarre
plan didn’t mention it either. They had a
whole series of maneuvers planned.
For us, the problem was that Navarre
wanted to retain the initiative whereas we
wanted to seize it. There is a contradiction
that exists in a war of aggression whereby
you have to disperse your forces to occupy
a territory but rally your mobile forces
for offensive action. We took advantage
of this contradiction and forced Navarre
to disperse his forces. That’s how it all
started. We ordered our troops to advance
in a number of directions, directions of key
importance to the enemy although their
presence wasn’t significant. So the enemy
had no choice but to disperse their troops.
We sent divisions north, northwest, toward
the center, towards Laos; other divisions
went in other directions. So to safeguard

Laos and the northwest, Navarre had to
parachute troops into Diên Bin Phû, and
that’s what happened at Diên Bin Phû.
Before then, no one had heard of Diên Bin
Phû. But afterwards, well that’s history,
isn’t it? French General Staff only planned
to parachute in sufficient troops to stop us
advancing on the northwest and Laos. Little
by little, they planned to transform Diên
Bin Phû into an enormous concentration
camp, a fortified camp, the most powerful
in Indochina. They planned to draw our
forces, break us, crush us, but the opposite
took place. They’d wanted a decisive battle
and that’s exactly what they got at Diên Bin
Phû -- except that it was decisive for the
Vietnamese and not for the French.
Q: Before Diên Bin Phû, do you think
the French ever imagined you could defeat
them?
Giap: Well, everyone at Diên Bin Phû,
from the French generals and representatives
of the French government to the American
generals and the commanding admiral of
the Pacific Fleet, agreed that Diên Bin Phû
was impregnable. Everyone agreed that it
was impossible to take. The French and
then the Americans underestimated our
strength. They had better weapons and
enormous military and economic potential.
They never doubted that victory would
be theirs. And yet, just when the French
believed themselves to be on the verge of
victory, everything collapsed around them.
The same happened to the Americans in the
Spring of ‘65. Just when Washington was
about to proclaim victory in the South, the
Americans saw their expectations crumble.
Why? Because it wasn’t just an army they
were up against but an entire people -- an
entire people.
So the lesson is that however great the
military and economic potential of your
adversary, it will never be great enough
to defeat a people united in the struggle
for their fundamental rights. That’s what
we’ve learned from all this.
Q: Why was the National Liberation
Front so successful in expanding the areas
it controlled between 1960 and 1965?
Giap: Throughout our long history,
whenever we’ve felt ourselves to be
threatened by the enemy, our people have
closed in the ranks. Millions of people,
united, have called for “Unification above
all,” for “Victory above all”.... The National
Rock

Liberation Front was victorious because it
managed to unite most of the people and
because its politics were just.
Q: Did you change your tactics at all
when the American troops began to arrive
after 1965?
Giap: Of course, but even so, it was
still a people’s war. And, a people’s war
is characterized by a strategy that is more
than simply military. There’s always a
synthesized aspect to the strategy, too. Our
strategy was at once military, political,
economic, and diplomatic, although it was
the military component which was the most
important one.
In a time of war, you have to take your
lead from the enemy. You have to know
your enemy well. When your enemy
changes his strategy or tactics, you have
to do the same. In every war, a strategy
is always made up of a number of tactics
that are considered to be of great strategic
importance, so you have to try to smash
those tactics. If we took on the cavalry, for
example, we’d do everything we could to
smash that particular tactic. It was the same
when the enemy made use of strategic
weapons.... And, when the Americans tried
to apply their “seek and destroy” tactic,
we responded with our own particular
tactic that was to make their objective
unattainable and destroy them instead. We
had to...force the enemy to fight the way
we wanted them to fight. We had to force
the enemy to fight on unfamiliar territory.
Q: Was your Têt offensive in 1968 a
failure?
Giap: As far as we’re concerned, there’s
no such thing as a purely military strategy.
So it would be wrong to speak of Têt in
purely military terms. The offensive was
three things at the same time: military,
political, and diplomatic. The goal of the
war was de-escalation. We were looking
to de-escalate the war. Thus, it would have
been impossible to separate our political
strategy from our military strategy. The
truth is that we saw things in their entirety
and knew that in the end, we had to deescalate the war. At that point, the goal of
the offensive was to try to de-escalate the
war.
Q: And did the de-escalation succeed?
Giap: Your objective in war can either
be to wipe out the enemy altogether or to
Vol. 1 Number 5

leave their forces partly intact but their
will to fight destroyed. It was the American
policy to try and escalate the war. Our goal
in the ‘68 offensive was to force them to
de-escalate, to break the American will to
remain in the war....
We did this by confronting them with
repeated military, as well as political
and diplomatic victories. By bringing
the war to practically all the occupied
towns, we aimed to show the Americans
and the American people that it would be
impossible for them to continue with the
war. Essentially, that’s how we did it.
Q: You are familiar with those famous
pictures of April 1975, of American
helicopters flying away from the American
Embassy. What do those pictures mean to
you?
Giap: It was as we expected. It marked
the end of the American neo-colonial
presence in our country. And, it proved that
when a people are united in their fight for
freedom, they will always be victorious.
When I was young, I had a dream that
one day I’d see my country free and united.
That day, my dream came true. When the
political bureau reunited Hanoi with Laos,
there were first reports of evacuation. Then
the Saigon government capitulated. It was
like turning the page on a chapter of history.
The streets in Hanoi were full of people.
The pictures of the helicopters were, in
one way, a concrete symbol of the victory
of the People’s war against American
aggression. But, looked at another way, it’s
proof that the Pentagon could not possibly
predict what would happen. It revealed
the sheer impossibility for the Americans
to forecast the outcome. Otherwise, they
would have planned things better, wouldn’t
they.
The reality of history teaches us that
not even the most powerful economic and
military force can overcome a resistance
of a united people, a people united in their
struggle for their international rights. There
is a limit to power. I think the Americans
and great superpowers would do well to
remember that while their power may be
great, it is inevitably limited.... Since the
beginning of time, whether in a socialist or
a capitalist country, the things you do in the
interests of the people stand you in good
stead, while those which go against the
interest of the people will eventually turn
against you. History bears out what I say.
We were the ones who won the war and

the Americans were the ones who were
defeated, but let’s be precise about this.
What constitutes victory? The Vietnamese
people never wanted war; they wanted
peace. Did the Americans want war? No,
they wanted peace, too. So, the victory was
a victory for those people in Vietnam and
in the USA who wanted peace. Who, then,
were the ones defeated? Those who were
after aggression at any price. And that’s
why we’re still friends with the people
of France and why we’ve never felt any
enmity for the people of America....
Q: Who invented the idea of People’s
war? Whose idea was it originally?
Giap: It was originally a product of
the creative spirit of the people. Let me
tell you the legend of Phu Dong...which
everyone here knows well. It’s a legend set
in prehistoric times. The enemy was set to
invade, and there was a three-year-old boy
called Phu Dong who was growing visibly
bigger by the minute. He climbed on to
an iron horse and, brandishing bamboo
canes as weapons, rallied the people.
The peasants, the fisherman, everyone
answered his call, and they won the war.
It’s just a legend and like popular literature,
the content is legendary, but it still reflects
the essence of the people’s thinking. So,
popular warfare existed even in legends,
and it remained with us over the centuries.
Q: Why do you think Vietnam is almost
the only country in the world that has
defeated America? Why only Vietnam?
Giap: Speaking as a historian, I’d say
that Vietnam is rare. As a nation, Vietnam
was formed very early on. It is said that, in
theory, a nation can only be formed after
the arrival of Capitalism -- according to
Stalin’s theory of the formation of nations,
for instance. But, our nation was formed
very early, before the Christian era. Why?
Because the risk of aggression from outside
forces led all the various tribes to band
together. And then there was the constant
battle against the elements, against the
harsh winter conditions that prevail here.
In our legends, this struggle against the
elements is seen as a unifying factor, a
force for national cohesion. This, combined
with the constant risk of invasion, made for
greater cohesion and created a tradition -- a
tradition that gave us strength.
The Vietnamese people in general tend to
be optimistic. Why? Because they’ve been
3

facing up to vicissitudes for thousands of
years, and for thousands of years they’ve
been overcoming them.
Q: What was the contribution of
Marxism and Leninism to your theory of a
People’s War?
Giap: The People’s War in Vietnam predated the arrival of Marxism and Leninism,
both of which contributed something when
they did arrive, of course.
When the USSR collapsed, we predicted
that 60 to 80 percent of our imports and
exports budget would be eliminated
because we depended upon aid from the
USSR and other socialist countries. So
people predicted the collapse of Vietnam.
Well, we’re still hanging on and slowly
making progress. I was asked what I
thought of Perestroika, so I answered
that I agreed with the change and thought
it was necessary in political relations.
But Perestroika is a Russian word, made
for the Russians. Here we do things the
Vietnamese way. And we make the most of
our hopes and the hopes of those in Russia,
China, the USA, Japan, Great Britain -- but
we try to assimilate them all.
As I mentioned, the Vietnamese people
have an independent spirit, stubborn people,
I suppose, who do things the Vietnamese
way. So now the plan is to mobilize the
entire population in the fight against
backwardness and misery. While there are
the problems of war and the problems of
peace, there are also concrete laws, social
laws, great laws, which retain their value
whether in peace or war. You have to be
realistic. You have to have a goal. You have
to be a realist and use reality as a means
of analyzing the object laws which govern
things. To win, you have to act according to
these laws. If you do the opposite, you’re
being subjective and you’re bound to lose.
So, we learn from the experience, both
good and bad, of Capitalism. But, we have
our own Vietnamese idea on things. I’d like
to add that we are still for independence,
that we still follow the path shown us by
Ho Chi Minh, the path of independence
and Socialism. I’m still a Socialist but what
is Socialism? It’s independence and unity
for the country. It’s the freedom and wellbeing of the people who live there. And, it’s
peace and friendship between all people.
From the: Freedom Archives
San Francisco, CA 94110
www.Freedomarchives.org
4

TIDBITS
From HS Support
SB-1363 sought to remedy current deficiencies in law regarding the use of solitary
confinement in juvenile facilities and to
curb its overuse and abuse. The California
State Senate Standing Committee on Public Safety voted on SB-1363 on April 17,
2012. Senators Hancock, Liu, and Steinberg voted in favor of the bill, but unfortunately the bill was defeated by Senators
Anderson, Calderon, Harman, and Price,
who voted in opposition.

From S.F. Bay View
As you may know, the hunger strike leaders at Pelican Bay are planning to resume
their statewide strike July 1 unless CDCR
substantially complies with their five core
demands. So far, CDCR is getting worse,
not better. The prisoners are mentally preparing themselves to fast to the death this
time. If their lives can’t improve, they’ll
give their lives to save others.
I hope we can come up with some dramatic ways to drive home the seriousness
and urgency of the situation. We need to
win in the court of public opinion -- your
trial and this letter are major steps -- so
as to put far more pressure on CDCR and
Gov. Jerry Brown, who could end solitary
confinement in California with a stroke of
his pen.

From Critical Resistance
In the past week, the Oakland Police
Department (OPD) and the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
(CDCR) released strategic plans they claim
would have thoroughgoing and sustainable
impacts on public safety. These reports join
the Obama administration’s National Drug
Control Strategy which makes many of the
same claims. What is interesting about all
three of these plans are their attempts to
subsume the language, ideas, and struggles
of organizations and communities who
have indeed worked tirelessly and too often
thanklessly against the destructive policies
and programs of these very institutions that
purport to have all the answers and solutions.
But we shouldn’t, and needn’t, get it
twisted. The institutions that make up, push
forward, and extend the prison industrial
complex will continue to do just that, however they might shuffle spending, overhaul
management, incorporate new technology,
reorganize personnel, subsume peoples’
demands, or call old things by new names.

Surely it is significant that these agencies
and institutions are shaken and bowed by
the fights put to them. Strategies certainly
do change, but as long as the priority remains containment and control the impact
will be continued state violence on local,
national, and international levels.

ACLU Challenges Debate
About Prison Privatization
The American Civil Liberties Union today challenged the chief executive officer
of the nation’s largest private prison company to a public debate on the merits of
prison privatization.
“We would welcome the opportunity to
defend our views on for-profit incarceration
in a public debate – one that also gives you
a full and fair opportunity to express your
views,” reads the ACLU’s letter, delivered
today to CCA’s CEO Damon Hininger.
Exempted from the Freedom of Information Act, CCA and other private prison
companies are shielded from public scrutiny by a veil of secrecy, despite locking up
nearly 130,000 prisoners and an additional
15,000 immigration detainees each year
while receiving billions of taxpayer dollars.
CCA in recent years has voted down
shareholder resolutions demanding financial accountability and for greater transparency in efforts to curb prison rape.
In March, CCA sent a letter to officials in
48 states announcing what it called a “corrections investment initiative,” in which
CCA offered to purchase prisons from
states.
A report released by the ACLU last year
revealed how private prison companies
have capitalized on the nation’s addiction
to incarceration to achieve gigantic profits.
The report also found that despite serious
questions about the wisdom of privatizing prison systems, some members of the
for-profit prison industry use shrewd tactics, including extensive lobbying, lavish
campaign contributions and efforts to control information, to garner more and more
government contracts and lock up ever-increasing numbers of people.
“We believe that the taxpayers who finance private prisons; the families whose
mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters are
incarcerated in these facilities; and the
communities where for-profit prisons are
situated deserve more than sound bites,”
the ACLU’s letter to Hininger reads. “They
deserve a full, fair, and public examination
of for profit incarceration.”
Rock

[Note: Names of letter writers will be
withheld unless the author of the letter explicitly approves printing of their name.]
To whom it may concern:
I’m one of the four principal negotiators
who represent PBSP-SHU prisoners. I find
myself writing this short not to all our outside supporters to clear up a “rumor” that
has been spread around that we are declaring another Hunger Strike (H.S.) on June
26, 2012. That is absolutely not true. There
will be no H.S. here at PBSP-SHU on June
26, 2012. And, if any H.S. is to take place
in the future, us four would follow the same
protocol we followed in the last two H.S.
We would “serve” a copy of the reasons for
it on the Administration here and in Sacramento months prior to any H.S. And we
would have sent all our supporters (you) a
copy of it and joint statement from us four.
It’s counter-productive to keep any H.S.
secret. Therefore, if you don’t receive our
intentions as mentioned above, then you’ll
know it’s not true for PBSP-SHU. I hope
this rumor is now cleared up. Thank you.
Sincerely yours,
Arturo Castellanos, C-17275
PBSP SHU D1-121
PO Box 7500
Crescent City, CA 95532
PS: Please send a copy of this to Ed Mead
—because the letter in his May “Rock” is
not true—none of us sent it. That letter’s
author’s name was “withheld”—we would
have printed our names.
[Ed’s Response: I looked through the
May issue of Rock and could not find the
reference to a renewed HS in any of the letters. But a check of the “TidBits” column
did find what might be the item that talked
about “the third and final hunger strike”
[Rock, Vol. 1, No. 4, p. 9] It did not come
from a prisoner, but from an outside person,
who had posted it on the Internet. I trusted
that source for accurate information. I’ll be
more careful in the future.
I have put out a correction and self-criticism to the HS list for assuming what I had
read on the list and elsewhere was factual.
I agree that I should have verified the information rather than merely assuming that
any discussion of a third strike had come
from SHU prisoners. I won’t make that
mistake again. My apologies to everyone
Vol. 1 Number 5

Quantity into quality
In a recent issue of Rock, volume 1, number 3, you said the following: “Your financial help in keeping this newsletter going is
not only essential, it is also the yardstick by
which I measure the importance of this effort. If it is not important enough to readers
to materially support, then I would prefer
to spend my ‘golden years’ doing something a little more fun. Two or three stamps
a month from each reader will help to keep
this newsletter going.” I could not agree
with you more, so, I concur with your position and that is why I seek to do my part.
Please find my stamps enclosed with this
mailing. I also encourage others to pay attention to this request.
Thank you for promptly sending me
Mao’s essay “On Contradictions” that I
asked for. I seek to learn from everybody
who is willing to teach. I find it admirable
that people of elder status still continue to
push forward and seek to provide guidance
in this great effort. As you know, by understanding the laws of contradiction will help
us to remain at a principled level the unity
and struggle of opposites with the secondary features of materialist dialectics are still
taking root. Quantity into quality, negation
of the negation. I won’t tire you out with
what you already understand, I’m utilizing
these tools as a teaching methodology to
help people grasp the fundamental laws of
contradictions using simplicity for the laity.
You’ve been of commendable service,
and I would not have a problem if you were
doing something more fun in your elder
years. You most certainly earned it.
[A Pelican Bay SHU prisoner]
How To Send Support
Are there other ways to subscribe to Rock
other than stamps? Checks, money orders?
Candy bars, cigarettes (LOL). For now I’ll
send stamps. Thank you for all your time in
service for all of us, I hope you put some
good resource addresses in the newsletter.
I’m going to write back soon with some
fundraising ideas you may or may not like.
Many people have fallen asleep and lost
hope and the hunger strike kind of woke
up some, but someone needs to kick this
movement into high gear.
[A PB SHU prisoner]
[Ed’s Response: yes, there are other
ways in which prisoners can materially

support this newsletter. Even
candy bars and cigarettes (that’s
a joke). Rather than duplicate the
efforts of others by printing resources in this small publication,
write to the Prison Activist Resource Center, PO Box 70447,
Oakland, CA 94612, and asked
for their Prisoners Resource Directory. It was just updated in
January 2012.]

LETTERS

LETTERS

for causing this confusion. I should have
known better.]

Form a PAC?
Thanks for your sincere response to
my predicament. When initially wrote I’d
hoped CPF intended to call for nationwide
in prison work strike. However, as I can see
by the demands of the California hunger
strikers, the issues are not nationwide.
The shame of it is that we’ve all failed to
rally around the heart of the matter, which
is the rampant overuse of imprisonment
as the panacea for all social conflicts. The
time for such a nationwide strike is now,
especially with the boost by the worldwide
struggles for human rights.
Someone needs to unify all the national
and state prisoner focus groups into one
PAC, and from there push the overuse issue. Given the right leadership that could
be done.
Name Withheld, Waupun Prison, WI
The Power of Law?
I read several prison related media outlets and they all say the same thing. Well,
it’s time some once said something different and brought a cold dose of reality and
not so common sense to the front.
Many letters to editors encourage inmates to file 602s and Sue. People have
been suing for decades and prison just
keeps getting worse. And reality some
workaday correctional officer doesn’t care
(or most times even know) what a prisoner’s rights are. And the administration
doesn’t care what court decisions or regulations say 95% of the time. Suing usually
only gains relief for the individual, if any.
For a prime example, here I am in CC
I–Tehachapi SHU. Now the CCR T–15
section 3343(g) has said for years (over
a decade) that we are supposed to get 10
hours of yard minimum per week. And
three cases off the top of my head which
ban deprivation of exercise are: 1) Wilson v.
Seiter, 501 U.S. 294, 304; 2) Spain v. Procunier, 600 F2d 189, 199 (9th Cir. 1979);
and 3) Toussaint v. McCarthy, 597 F. Supp.
1388 (N.D. Cal. 1984). You know what, no
5

one has received 10 hours in any week here
since I arrived in March of 2011. We are
lucky if we get five hours a week. The 602
I filed did nothing, letter to Raylyn Conner (ombudsman), nothing. Lawsuit being
filed, nothing. Having a federal court decision in my favor, worth about as much as
toilet paper.
The true power of law is and those who
enforce it. Those who are in law enforcement and in CDCR only apply the law
which oppresses inmates. As Lieutenant
“friendly” (let’s call him that) said to me as
a vein popped out in his forehead, and as he
slammed his fist on the desk (really) during
a 602 hearing, I am “the kind of guy you’d
like to sock right in the mouth”; I am “acting like a SNY” for filing 602 (I’m not an
SNY); I “act like [I] got everything coming, but don’t because [I’m] just a piece of
shit inmate.
And that is the respect the CDCR as for
litigation. This is coming from accomplished jailhouse lawyer—litigation is
not the answer! And in fact makes things
worse many times. I miss tobacco (thanks
lawsuit!). Interracial cell compactions are
eventually going to force me into a conflict
of interest (thanks lawsuit). SNY yards are
taking over the yardiverse (thanks to a lawsuit by a dropout). No more transfat in our
diet (man I miss my Honey Buns, thanks to
a lawsuit).
The redress of grievances is a whimsical
affair at best and the age of litigation and
this Marxist class struggle is over. Furthermore, since the courts (and societies ‘law’)
in general refused to uphold a standard of
human courtesy and decency for prisoners (some of which are truly innocent let’s
remember), and since CDCR has successfully divided and conquered the prisoners,
I and my peers are left to suffer the fate of
the pre-Civil War Negros and just take it
like a man wants to give it to us until some
group of real citizens get tired of seeing us
get abused like a child porn star and finally
says two wrongs don’t make a right, until
they say quit punishing the prisoners so
badly.
Buck, Tehachapi SHU
[Ed’s Response: If you plan to wait for
citizens to get tired of seeing you abused,
your abuse will never end. You must be
your own liberators. Nobody on the streets
is going to fight this fight for you. We can
support your struggle, amplify your voice,
but the struggle itself, the struggle against
these persistent abuses, against your status
as slaves of the state, is all yours.
6

As for litigation, it is a defensive tactic,
to be used when your back is against the
wall. Litigation is not a mechanism for
substantial change. At best it serves as a
pressure relief valve, whose purpose is to
dribble out some small reforms in order to
diffuse a growing movement for positive
social change.
We saw this process unfold during the
height of the prisoners’ rights movement
back in the 1970s, when the courts granted prisoners some long-overdue reforms.
Once that movement was placated, however, the courts immediately began a process
of rolling back those advances.
Relying on the courts or the promises of
prisoncrats is a dead end street. Only the
strength of a peaceful struggle for justice
by prisoners can win and enforce meaningful change.
As for “at best the age of ... Marxist class
struggle is over”, let’s agree to allow unfolding history to make or break that assessment. Still, you might note that the
only prisoners movement this nation ever
known was led by communists. Just as it
was communists in the labor movement
who brought you the eight hour day, etc.
When the government drove the communists from the unions, that was the time the
unions stopped working to advance the labor movement, that was when union bosses
became partners with capitalism. It was all
down hill from there, all the way down to
the sorry state of labor unionism in the U.S.
today.]
Combat Homophobia
I saw your ad in Prison Focus and would
like to check out your Rock newsletter. I’m
enclosing two stamps. I know a lot about
diversity in prison as I am a transgender
inmate who is on hormone therapy. People
discriminate and hate on me daily. You do
know what I’m saying.
Name Withheld
[Ed’s Response: Sex is biologically
determined, while gender is a social construct. Let’s agree to allow each other to
choose our own gender, and to do so without oppressing each other. While I’m on
this general subject, let me remind readers that homophobia is a form of sexism
that works to divide us and thus serves the
interests of the class enemy. It the duty of
men to combat sexism within their ranks.
When someone makes a homophobic or
sexist joke or comment, call them on it.
Only then will it stop.]

Yeah! Money!
Here you go, forty stamps enclosed to
help with the Rock, or in any way you see
fit. I’ve also been trying to send a few dollars off my trust account but I’m getting
the run around. Hopefully many others are
contributing as well.
Name Withheld
[Ed’s Response: Prisoners are indeed
responding with donations of cash and
stamps, so far I’ve received enough to cover the cost of the printer toner, paper, and
stamps necessary to produce and mail out
this issue. This month there has been one
$25 donation and 242 stamps received.]
Issue Damaged
Thank you for your newsletter. Unfortunately this is all I received! As you see, it’s
been damaged and they took pages out!! I
only got pages 1 & 2 and 9 & 10. I’ve enclosed them so you’ll see what CAL-ASU
mailroom is doing to your newsletter. I
would still love to read vol. 1, #4 if possible [it has been sent to him]. I got to read
the Tidbits section continuing from page
three. I guess CAL-ASU doesn’t want us
to read the article since they’ve been giving everyone their TVs. Your TV is on the
floor and you’ve got nowhere to plug in the
cable … a static box. “We don’t care. Yeah!
We won!”
Name Withheld
Another Bad Validation
I am writing to request an issue of Rock
so that I can be more informed about news
and analysis around prison related issues.
I’ve been incarcerated since 1995 on
a sentence of 25 years to life under the
3-Strikes law for the crime of being in possession of zero point zero four grams of
rock cocaine.
Since 2007 I’ve been in solitary confinement, validated as an associate of the
Black Guerrilla Family after literature,
a photocopied picture of a dragon and a
photocopied book that had in it the name
of someone said to be a gang member, was
found in my property.
Falling into the web of the 3-Strikes law
and the validation process put me in a position to wake up from a submissive, hypnotic state of mind, and now my consciousness has risen to a level where I can see and
understand the true mission of the powers
that be. It is my hope that the newsletter
Rock will contribute to my education.
Name Withheld
Rock

Solitary Struggle.. Continued from page 1
many men who have ended up in California’s SHUs are there simply because they
have been “validated” as a gang member
or associate. Until now, the validation system has been arbitrary and capricious, with
no due process and no external review: X
says Y is a gang member, so Y gets sent
to the SHU. CDCR’s own former undersecretary, Scott Kernan (who retired shortly after the hunger strikes), admitted in an
interview that the department was guilty of
“over-validating” inmates, and that their
SHU policies had “gone too far”.
Most people have little sympathy for
these men: they are criminals, after all, who
at one point in their lives mistreated and
abused other citizens. But when the state
that is charged with correcting these criminals goes on to abuse and mistreat them, in
turn – and I’d say mistreatment and abuse
are gentle terms for locking a person in a
concrete box for 10-20 years – they lose the
moral high ground.
With its new gang management strategy,
the CDCR has taken a step towards regaining some of that terrain, but right now, it
looks like there’s still a steep climb ahead.
Interested parties can write to:
Sadhbh Walshe,
PO Box 1466,
New York, NY 10150

Our current tactics are idealistic in content and therefore incorrect. The focus on
the “form” and “manifestations” is incorrect in that it fails to address the “essential” source of our perpetual isolation—the
SHU.
Does an oncologist treat a cancer patient
solely by addressing the side effects of cancer? That is, does the doctor treat the cancer patient simply by providing him or her
with a wig? Of course not. The patient is
given chemo, radiation, and, if it is a viable
option, surgery to remove the cancerous
tumors.
To reform the validation process, even
to eliminate it and other formal manifestations of it, while leaving the SHU facilities
intact, is to treat the outward manifestations while leaving the cancer intact. We
need to refocus our struggle from primarily the various expressions and side effects
of the existence of the SHU. Otherwise
the Pelican Bay State Prison officials, the
California Department of Corrections, and
its army of bureaucrats, will manufacture
other pseudo-justifications and excuses to
permanently isolate us to indefinite sensory
deprivation (social extermination).

A COURSE
ADJUSTMENT?

To eliminate the SHU as we know it to
exist, or to even reduce its isolation, is to
effectively deprive CDCR of its current and
future excuses for subjecting us to indefinite dehumanization. So long as the SHU
exists, however, even within the elimination of the validation process, the state will
achieve the same thing by other means. We
need to eliminate the SHU internally, as we
know it.
Without changing the fundamental five
demands, we can incorporate “Association” into demand number three. The demand for Association is a tactic that has
been pursued and achieved by various
other prisoner rights groups with effectiveness in the past. It garnered significant support internationally, and resulted in group
Association of prisoners held in strict isolation, allowing anywhere from 8 to 14
prisoners to spend time together for social
intercourse, to develop socially and prevent
“social- extermination.”
These tactics were pursued with various
degrees of success by the IRA and INLA
of Ireland, The Red Brigades of Italy, Ger-

By C. Landrum
ispleased with the direction in
which all is developing, I’ve pretty
much taken a backseat. I find no
pleasure anticipating that all is inevitably
doomed to fail—even success in the context of our existing demands will be a failure. It is more disappointing that there are
others who know this yet manufacture excuses for keeping quiet and supporting the
current trajectory.
There is no justification for remaining
quiet, or neutral. Neutrality does not in fact
exist. This is not philosophic speculation,
but philosophic materialism backed by scientific fact. Inaction is in itself action that
facilitates both the existing status quo and
its direction of development, for even that
which appears motionless in its outward
manifestation is in fact in a continuing state
of perpetual transformation. Simply said,
neutrality is an abstract concept devoid of
substance.

D

Vol. 1 Number 5

Our current tactics are
idealistic in content and
therefore incorrect.

many’s Red Army Faction, ETA of Spain,
etc. These are examples we can study and
incorporate with our own ingenuity and apply to our own conditions.
We can demand, peripheral to our demand for Association, installation of two
(4-man) tables, and a phone in each pod for
dayroom time. One tier at a time; total of
eight men. Pull up/set up/dip bar for each
yard. All of which is accompanied with 10
hours a week time for social intercourse.
Potentially other social development fostering aspects, like in general population,
the opportunity to check out board games,
etc.
What makes a SHU and SHU? Isolation.
The goal is to transform the “essential” existence and function of the SHU as it currently exists—a tool of social repression
that dehumanizes and socially exterminates
the individual identity.
To merely alter the side effects and formal expressions of the SHU while simultaneously leaving the SHU intact in its
essence is ultimately to fail. Even in the
context of what “appears” as a success will
ultimately be a failure.
A distinction between strategy and tactics, essence and form, are of absolute necessity for success. This requires a dialectical comprehension of reality, and although
centrality of decisions are of necessity, it is
also necessary that when we put our ear to
the floor, we hear more than our own voices. How effective are centralized decisions
when they are not the concentrated expressions of the best ideas and knowledge?
Such exclusive methods in themselves are
isolating and causes mass support to be
replaced with resentment, even if not expressed openly. Such circumstances create
the conditions in which right opportunism
is bred.

Notice
This issue of Rock (June) is going
out to readers a little early. I have a
medical issue to deal with shortly
and need to get this newsletter and
the next issue of the PHSS News
finished before I address that problem. I’ll be out of commission for
short awhile, but should be in good
enough shape to have the July issue
of both newsletters out on schedule.
Unless there are some dramatic
changes, the next issue of Prison
Focus probably won’t be out until
late summer at best.
Ed
7

EDITORIAL
The Money
et’s start off with the important
stuff—money. Back in 1991, another prisoner and I started a small
monthly newsletter we called Prison Legal
News. Like this one, PLN began life as five
sheets of paper copied on both sides (ten
pages). The initial mailing list was about
75 people (smaller than this one). My PLN
editorials often contained pleas for money
from readers. And readers responded to the
extent that the newsletter became successful and continues to be published to this
day (although without me).
In my comments section of the last issue
of Rock I said, “[t]his issue of Rock, as well
as the next one, will go out to everyone
on the current mailing list. After that only
those who have contributed something will
get the paper. If at that point the list is too
small I’ll stop doing this.” Well, that next
issue is here already. It’s time to turn quantity into quality, and in this case that quality
is measured by a demonstrated willingness
to materially support this newsletter, or at
least a letter saying you want to continue
getting it but have no money.
Your ongoing material support for prison-related news and progressive opinions
is the yardstick by which the need for this
publication is measured. So, for all of you
who have donated only two stamps, your
subscriptions are now up for renewal.
In asking for your financial support, you
should know this newsletter is not beholding to, or a part of, any other organization,
group, gang, faction, or party. Rock is a totally independent publication aimed at progressive prisoners but supported by all who
seek peaceful, constructive change.
For those of you who have not contributed at all since the first of the year, or who
have never contributed to any newspaper
for prisoners, this will be your last issue.
To continue will cost two stamps per issue,
three if you can afford it. It’s cheaper to
send more than two stamps at a time, but I
know it’s hard to get by in there. I’m easy.
In the last issue of Rock I reported receiving a total of 130 stamps since the first
of the year. Since then prisoners have sent
242 more stamps and a $25 donation. The
last issue was mailed out to 125 people;
this one is going to 136 readers. Congratulations! You have paid for the postage of
this issue plus $72 towards paper ($8.50/
ream) and laser printer toner ($154 each).
This is exactly what it takes to keep this
publication going. Thank you.

L

8

The Rant
Today I read that Americans are “the most
totally disinformed and ignorant people on
earth.” I agree. I make it a point to review
both sides of what’s going on in the world.
For example, I have no use for religion in
general and in Islamic fundamentalism in
particular. They are homophobic, sexist,
anit-communist, and generally reactionary.
Yet I read the communiques of al-Qaeda
in order to better understand the nature of
their struggle—to learn the material basis
for the conflicts taking place today.
Former President G.W. Bush and the
likes of Dan Rather said these people fly
airplanes into our buildings and strap on
suicide vests because “they are jealous of
our abundance.” But do people really give
up their lives over something as petty as
jealousy? No. Al-Qaeda actually has two
demands to end the war; 1) remove your
bases from our lands, and 2) stop killing
us. Really not that unreasonable for a nation that was founded through the struggle
against (British) imperialism.
At root it’s all pretty simple and can be
reduced to a single word—oil. The US,
Saudi Arabia, and Israel funded and have
backed regional army of Sunni terrorists
since 2007 specifically to overthrow Syria
and Iran. Before we can get our hands on
Iran’s oil we have to cripple Syria, who
is Iran’s ally and a staunch supporter of
Hezbollah (the Party of God) in Lebanon.
Hezbollah would attack Israel if the U.S.
attacked Iran. All of this is aimed at China.
The US wants to control the oil spigot that
limits China’s economy to grow. This of
course a recipe for world war.
I can’t blame prisoners for their ignorance as their only source of information is
the bourgeois media outlets, who feed us
all a steady diet of lies and half truths. And
while most Americans have access to the
Internet and thus the means to learn more
about the actions of their government, they
are too busy earning a living and watching
some kind of ball game. Yeah, bread and
circuses.
The Lesson
The one power every human being has is
to peacefully withhold his or her labor. The
factories can’t run, the store shelves can’t
be stocked, and the prisons cannot function
without the labor of workers.
Yet we are so steeped in the individualism at the core of the American culture of
greed and self-interest that we can’t see
ourselves as anything other than a collec-

tion of atomized individuals. We are never
able to realize that end result of this process
are people who contribute labor to an unjust
enterprise, and thus to become complicit in
that injustice—they become accomplices
in the crimes of that enterprise.
Well, that’s fine I suppose if one is satisfied with his or her conditions of existence
on this path we all travel. Yet for those who
think there is something wrong with being a literal slave in the 21st century, and
who would like to peacefully and lawfully1 speak out to the world—thanks to the
heroic sacrifices of the California hunger
strikers and their allies on the streets—the
world is now listening. Speak!
1. Just what does “peacefully and lawfully” mean, especially coming from a guy
who’s been in shoot outs with police, an
armed bank robber, mad bomber, etc.? The
cops have all the guns, thus violence is a
dead end within the prison setting. The use
of violence will only reinforce the general
stereotype of prisoners as dangerous thugs
who must be segregated. Lawful means to
not break any state or federal laws during
the struggle for justice, as to do so will only
result in getting people more prison time.
A prison rule, on the other hand, is not
a law. It is against the rules to engage in
peaceful mass struggle, such as the recent
hunger strikes, or to unionize on the inside.
Yet there is a higher law than prison
rules. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a treaty the constitution says
is the “law of the land”, proclaims that all
humans have the inherent right to such
things as freedom of expression, and the
freedom to work and form labor unions; to
freedom from slavery, forced labor, torture,
cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment; to a
standard of living adequate for health and
well-being; and to be recognized as a person before the law.
Under the Thirteenth Amendment prisoners are not persons, but slaves. This must
change, and only a national organization of
prisoners and their allies can bring about
that change.
There are 2.3 million people in America
in some sort of government custody (federal, state, or local), 7.3 million more people
in the U.S. who are under some form of judicial supervision (probation, parole, etc.),
and that there are 14 million ex-convicts in
the U.S. That’s almost 25 million people!
Count the friends, family members, and
supporters of those 25 million and you are
getting a sizeable number of impacted citizens—enough for a strong movement.
Rock

FOR IMMEDIATE
RELEASE:
Ohio Super Max Hunger
Strike Continues and
Expands

T

hursday, May 3. According to a
level 5 prisoner participating in the
hunger strike at Ohio State Penitentiary (OSP) there are forty-eight (48)
prisoners who have refused nine meals and
should be officially recognized as on hunger strike. Warden Bobby refused to comment or return calls requesting information
about the hunger strike.
The prisoner’s demands include the following:
1. Lower commissary prices. One striker
writes: “Commissary items are permitted to be marked up to 35% above retail, while many of us receive only $8
a month.”
2. No more indefinite terms. Prisoners on
the highest security level at OSP (level
5) currently have little prospects for reducing their security level and increasing privileges. “We are taken in front of
a privilege review board every 90 days,
yet can expect no [increase in] privilege
for a year or longer” the hunger striker
says of prisoners on Level 5B. Men on
Level 5A have a privilege level review
every six months, but there has been no
increase in their privileges in recognition of good conduct for some time.
3. Healthy and nutritious food. According to the hunger striker, “austerity cuts
have allowed our food portions to be
shortened.”
4. Access to educational and enrichment
materials. “There has recently been a
major ban on books and music” the hunger striker said.
The hunger strike started on April 30th
and was timed to coordinate in solidarity
with May Day demonstrations and celebrations happening outside of prison. May
Day is an international worker’s day, commemorating the 1886 Haymarket affair in
Chicago. The hunger strikers are asking
supporters to call Warden David Bobby
(330 743-0700) and ODRC director Gary
Mohr (614-752-1164). They say they intend to continue on their hunger strike until
their demands are met.
This is the second hunger strike at OSP
this year. The first occurred on Feb 20th23rd in solidarity with the Occupy movement’s call for an “Occupy for Prisoners”
Vol. 1 Number 5

day of action. That hunger strike ended
with Warden Bobby, as well as officials
from Central Office in Columbus, promising to increase recreation time to the courtmandated minimum as well as improve
enrichment programming, food quality and
commissary practices. Until recently Ohio
State Penitentiary housed death row as
well as the highest security level prisoners.
When all but 6 death row prisoners were
moved to Chillicothe, the number of Level
4 and 5 prisoners at OSP increased from
270 to over 400, and rec time was reduced
to 3 or 4 hours per week. The court required
minimum is 5 hours per week.
Yesterday, OSP officials confirmed that
rec time has been increased. According to
a unit manager and Warden Bobby’s secretary, after recent changes, Level 4A prisoners receive 5 hours a day congregating with
up to 8 other prisoners at a time. Most level
4B prisoners are allowed to rec in pairs,
for 5 one hour and forty-five minute periods a week. All level 5 prisoners rec alone,
most receive 5 one hour and fifteen minute
periods per week. The four exceptions to
this rule are Level 5 prisoners sentenced to
death for alleged involvement in the Lucasville Uprising. These men are allowed 7
hours a week due to an agreement following a twelve day hunger strike they staged
in January 2011. Recreation is the only
time when any of the prisoners are allowed
out of their 7’ x 11’ isolation cells.
Updated information about the hunger
strike can be found at RedBirdPrisonAbolition.org and LucasvilleAmnesty.org

PALESTINIAN
HUNGER STRIKE
DRAWING TO AN
END?
Egyptian official says Israel agreed
to proposal that would end hunger
strike. Deal will see Israel move
prisoners from solitary confinement
to regular cells, soften its ‘administrative detention’ policy
By Elior Levy
fter 26 days, a hunger strike conducted by some 1,550 Palestinian
prisoners may be drawing to an
end.
An Egyptian official said Israel has
agreed to a proposal that would end the

A

hunger strike in Israeli jails.
The official says the Egyptian-drafted
proposal still needs to be approved by the
prisoners.
The official, who spoke on condition of
anonymity because of the sensitivity of the
issue, said Sunday that under the deal Israel
will move prisoners currently in solitary
confinement to regular cells.
Israel also will soften its “administrative
detention” policy, under which prisoners
deemed a security risk can be held without
charges.
Earlier on Sunday, Kadura Fars, the head
of the Palestinian Prisoner’s Club told Ynet
that the Israel Prison Service is likely to
give its answer on the inmates’ demands on
Monday.
According to Fares, the IPS has already
formed a response. He estimated that a proposal to end the strike will be raised during
a formal meeting between representatives
of the IPS and the prisoners likely to be
held on Monday.
Fares said that if the prisoners see that
their demands are being met, they will immediately freeze the strike. The strike will
officially be stopped when the prisoners see
that the agreements are being implemented.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’s
envoy to Egypt, Azaam al-Ahmad is currently in Cairo discussing the matter with
senior intelligence officials. He estimated
that the IPS and the prisoners will sign an
agreement “very soon” adding that the “final points” are now being finalized.
Among the strikers, 15 are hospitalized
at the IPS medical center where they are
getting treatment. Three security prisoners
are hospitalized at the Assaf Harofeh Medical Center. The rest have been transferred
to separate prison wings away from the
other inmates. The hunger strikers are now
being denied such privileges as access to
a TV, the canteen, family visits and more.
Last week, a hearing was held following
a petition demanding to hospitalize all hunger strikers currently held at the medical
center in civilian hospitals. The court ruled
that the IPS is responsible for the prisoners’
health. The IPS is set to file its response to
the petition on Tuesday.
The Palestinian prisoners are demanding to abolish solitary confinement, allow
family visits from Gaza, allow studies in
prison, abolish administrative detention,
add TV channels and increase monthly allowance for the prison canteen.
Source: http://www.ynetnews.com/
articles/0,7340,L-4228624,00.html
9

PRISON LAW
WRITING CONTEST

T

he Yale Law Journal welcomes submissions for our first Prison Law
Writing Contest. If you are or recently have been in jail or prison, we invite
you to write a short essay about your experiences with the law. The three top submissions will win cash prizes, and we hope to
publish the best work.
Background: The Journal is one of the
world’s most respected and widely read
scholarly publications about the law. Our
authors and readers include law professors and students, practicing attorneys, and
judges. The Contest offers people in prison
the chance to share their stories with people who shape the law and to explain how
the law affects their lives. Where permitted by state law, the authors of the winning
essays will receive prizes: $250 for first
place, $100 for second place, and $50 for
third place.
Topics: Please write an essay addressing one of the following questions: What
does fair treatment look like in prison?
How does your institution deal with inmates who are violent or disruptive? Are

people sent to solitary confinement? Is the
disciplinary system fair, and does it help to
maintain order?
Tell us about a notable or surprising experience you’ve had with another person in
the legal system—whether a judge, a lawyer, a guard, or anyone else. What did you
learn from it?
The goals of criminal punishment include retribution (giving people what they
deserve), deterrence (discouraging future
crimes), and rehabilitation (improving
behavior). What purpose, if any, has your
time in prison served? Should one of these
purposes be emphasized more?
Have you ever filed a grievance with
jail or prison authorities to complain about
conditions? Tell us about it, and explain
how the grievance process works. Are
grievances effective? How do prison authorities respond to them? How do you feel
about federal law’s requirement that prisoners file grievances before suing about
prison conditions in court?
If you have been released from prison,
what challenges did you face in reentering
society? How, if at all, do you maintain relationships with your family while in prison? Describe the prison rules that govern

how much contact you can have with your
family. How has being in prison affected
your family relationships?
Please do not discuss your innocence or
guilt or ask for legal assistance with your
case. Submissions are not confidential.
Whatever you write will not be protected
by attorney-client privilege. If you have an
attorney, please speak with your attorney
before submitting your work.
Rules: You may submit an essay if you
have been an inmate in a prison or jail at
any point from January 1, 2010 through
September 30, 2012. We welcome essays
of about 1000-5000 words, or roughly 4-20
pages. Please type your submission if possible. If you must write by hand, please be
sure your writing is readable. Feel free to
work together with others, but your essay
should be in your own voice.
Essays must be received by October 1,
2012. Email submission to YLJprisonlaw@gmail.com. If you do not have email,
mail your work to: The Yale Law Journal,
ATTN: Prison Law, P.O. Box 208215, New
Haven, CT 06520-8215. Please include
your name and the name of the institution
where you are or were imprisoned, and tell
us the best way to reach you now.

Ed Mead
P.O. Box 47439
Seattle, WA 98146

FIRST CLASS MAIL