San Quentin News

Written By Inmates - Advancing Social Justice

SF Mayor to close City Hall jail

by

By Dillon Kim, Journalism Guild Writer

California County Jails

San Francisco Mayor London Breed ordered City Hall to close down the Hall of Justice, including its jail, by July 2021 because the jail is structurally vulnerable to earthquakes.

This deadline has prompted city officials to try to find alternatives to rehouse the 300 inmates that are currently housed there, according to the San Francisco Examiner. While it searches for a place for the inmates, the city is already relocating the other departments also located within the Hall of Justice.

Possible rehousing options for inmates include renovating the currently unused jail in nearby San Bruno and transferring the inmates to Alameda County’s Santa Rita jail.

A member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors Matt Haney said, “I do not support sending folks to Alameda County. I don’t support building a new jail. I do support a plan for us to move forward and close this facility as soon as possible in an effective way.”

Haney and other supervisors think that a better solution would be to find alternatives to incarceration. Indeed, in 2015 the City of San Francisco made a commitment to seek alternatives to incarceration, establishing the Work Group to Re-envision the Jail Replacement Project. Matt Haney said,

“I don’t support building a new jail. I do support a plan for us to move forward and close this facility as soon as possible in an effective way”

The MacArthur Foundation awarded $2 million to District Attorney George Gascon’s office to address racial disparities in jails and reducing the inmate population to 1,044 within two years. Alternatives to incarceration can save substantial money. It costs the city an average of $250.11 per day to incarcerate an individual.

Mayor London Breed said if the inmate population doesn’t decline by the time of the jail closure, the inmates will be sent “to an alternative facility on a temporary basis.”

Haney stated he was “con- cerned about a lack of a plan” regarding Mayor Breed’s announcement. He continued, “Without having a plan, my fear is that the result of that is trying to back us into some- thing that we should not be doing. The sheriff herself said that it would be horrible for us to send people over to Alameda County. Then why are we considering that? Why are we acting as though that is a viable option in any way?”

Haney apparently believes that Mayor Breed’s “alternative facility” is the Alameda County Jail located across the bay in Alameda County.

Board members think the Santa Rita facility is a bad alternative in part because it further distances incarcerated individuals from their families and attorneys.

Sandra Fewer, the board’s Chairperson of the Budget Committee, said she is “look- ing to identify strategies to further reduce the jail population” and is seeking alternatives “to avoid a scenario where we have to send any people to Santa Rita or jails out of the county.”

Warren and criminal justice reform

by

Presidential candidate and Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) finally focused her attention and political career on criminal justice reform. Her plan includes combatting crime and improving public safety, according to an August Vox article.

Warren’s proposal emphasizes establishing a clemency board for early release, investing more on addiction treatment, ending the death penalty, eliminating solitary confinement, allowing inmates to make phone calls free of charge, improving mental health treatment and increasing police reforms. She also calls for repealing the 1994 crime law.

Warren’s proposed plan joins those of other Democratic presidential candidates who also support criminal justice reform.

The Vox article pointed out that the sheer mass of incarcerated people in America surpasses even that of authoritarian regimes such as those in Cuba, Russia, and China.

The article noted however that even if she does win the nomination and later the presidency, criminal justice reform may be an uphill battle for Sen. Warren. Eighty-eight percent of inmates are under state control rather than federal. In the past, state governments have resisted federal reform incentives, particularly in Republican-controlled cities and states, according to Vox.

Furthermore, two multi-billion dollar industries will oppose aggressively her most controversial proposals: a ban on private prisons and allowing inmates to make free phone calls while they are incarcerated.

Vox questions how much of Warren’s plan could get Congressional approval. The article cites the years that it took Congress to pass the “fairly mild criminal justice reform bill” in the First Step Act.

If Warren is also pushing for passage of her many other proposals, Vox noted, that may reduce “the possibility that Congress even gets to sweeping criminal justice reform at all.”

Maine and Vermont encourage the incarcerated to cast their vote even while in prison

by

When most felons go to prison they lose their right to vote in most of the 50 states, the strongest exceptions being Maine and Vermont, reported Mother Jones.

Depending on what you were convicted for, states like Mississippi, Alaska and Alabama let some of their prison population vote.

Volunteers at the Maine and Vermont prisons come into the facilities to register prisoners to vote and give them encouragement, by letting them know that their vote is very important.

Law librarian John Sughrue, who works at one of Vermont’s prisons, thinks that voting is imperative, the only “effective tool” prisoners have. Yet he noted that only a small percent of the population exercise their right to vote.

“It seems the current political climate has rendered us inexorably divided,” he wrote via the prison email system.

Madeline Motta, who volunteers in Vermont’s prisons and helps register prisoners to vote, said of her effort that most of the prisoners are their own worst enemies, according to the article.

“We explained to inmates that elected officials are making decisions about your quality of life both while you are incarcerated and once you are out,” she noted.

More variables need to be looked at as to why those who are incarcerated and can vote, don’t vote. They feel that their votes will not make a difference. A high percentage of the inmates cannot read or write, so filling out a registration ballot becomes an issue. Since they are cut off from the Internet, most can’t get news or form opinions about issues or candidates.

Executive Director of Prison Legal News, Paul Wright, says that lower turnouts among prisoners are to be expected.

“We don’t have much of a democracy when it comes to candidate choice,” he said. “Making the conscious choice in refraining from exercising your rights is just as important as exercising them,” Wright told the Mother Jones reporter.

Just like outside on the streets, inside prison walls you have voter apathy among the incarcerated.

Several states are working on solutions that will allow the incarcerated to vote or get back their voting privileges/rights once out of prison.

Ten states and Washington, D.C., are currently trying to pass legislation to get prisoners the right to vote while in jail, according to Mother Jones.

Many top American companies were founded by immigrants

by

About 45% of America’s top companies were founded by immigrants or their children. These firms brought in $6.1 trillion in revenues in the fiscal year 2018, according to a recent report.

This figure put into context is larger than the GDP of Germany, Japan and the United Kingdom, reports the New American Economy Research Fund.

These companies are strong drivers of both the American economy and the global economy. Employing 13.5 million workers, a population, if ranked as a state, would be America’s fifth largest, the July 22 report says.

The report, called the New American Fortune 500, revealed that 223 companies were founded by immigrants or their children. Of those companies, 101 were founded directly by people born outside of America. Children of im- migrants founded 122 of the 500.

New York leads the nation with 35 firms founded by immigrants. California was second with 29, followed by Illinois with 21, Texas with 18, Virginia with 12, Florida and New Jersey with 10 each.

These companies play a significant part in the states economies. New York reported 56.3% of GDP was brought in by these firms. In Illinois the percentage was 70.3% of GDP.

The New American Fortune 500 reported 3.2 million immigrants own and operate businesses.

Former presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke visits SQ

by

Beto O’Rourke with Father George Williams (back), SQ staff (second from right) and SQ tour guides

Presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke, who has since dropped out of the race, came to San Quentin Sept. 18 to witness firsthand the power of rehabilitative transformation.

A small group of prisoners met with O’Rourke in the SQ chapel to speak about how they used their incarceration to become better human beings—fully cognizant of the harms they once caused society.

“One of my big takeaways is that we are all capable of change,” O’Rourke said to news cameras outside SQ afterwards. “When we focus on the person’s ability to make that change and their ability to transition into civilian life successfully— there’s a better outcome not just for that former inmate… not just for the taxpayer….

“There’s a better outcome for this country.”

O’Rourke and his team’s arrival— devoid of any fanfare—brought choir practice to a standstill as the inmates stopped to introduce themselves and shake the presidential hopeful’s hand.

“How can I go to my constituents and tell them why I support releasing you?” O’Rourke asked of the prisoners who greeted him.

Seven incarcerated SQ tour guides opened the discussion by asking those present to join in a moment of silence to honor fallen victims everywhere, including those killed amongst the recent Texas mass shootings in O’Rourke’s home state.

“We’d also ask you to be vulnerable today,” said Kevin Neang, who will be released at year’s end after serving almost nine years for a manslaughter plea agreement. “Close your eyes and think of somebody you love, a person you would do any- thing for.

“Imagine if we could look at each other—everybody— in that same light.”

Watson Allison, incarcerated now for over 37 years, stood before O’Rourke and described his own personal journey from Death Row to substance abuse counselor and advocate for change.

“O’Rourke told me that I’m the first person he’s ever talked with who was actually from Death Row,” Allison told SQ News. “He said he was very intrigued by my level of insight and my humble demeanor.

“I know he was surprised when I told him I support the idea of capital punishment—even in my own circumstances. But the way the death penalty has been administered so unjustly across the country, that’s what needs to be changed.”

The tour guides, whose convicted crimes and prison terms offered a wide range of perspectives, wanted to know what topics O’Rourke would most like to hear about.

“Whatever you’re willing to share with me, whatever thoughts you have on any is- sues—prison reform, climate change, I’m here to listen to you,” said O’Rourke.

“I talked to him about how we need to do away with Three Strikes and mandatory minimum sentencing,” said Ron Ehde, incarcerated 27 years for second degree burglary. “And he was listening. Man, he was really listening.

“Me, a three-striker serving 50-years-to-life, sitting across and dialoguing with a presidential candidate— only at San Quentin.”

O’Rourke’s staff took notes while each prisoner offered his own narrative to- ward significant pieces of the criminal justice reform puzzle: childhood trauma, the school-to-prison pipeline, substance abuse, sentencing reform, wrongful convictions—and the potential for change.

Choir member Dwight Krizman said, “My impression was O’Rourke was taken aback when he realized that only a small portion of inmates were positively affected by Proposition 57.

“He definitely seemed shocked at how slow the implementation of the law’s execution was by CDCR itself and their reinterpretation of what the voters voted for.”

Allison explained how one of O’Rourke’s staff commented on the prisoners’ level of accountability and how they consistently referred to their victims by name. “They did not expect that type of format coming in here—where we honor our victims, put our victims first,” said Allison.

A planned tour in August needed to be canceled when the shooting crisis erupted back home in El Paso, and this time the prisoners’ insights proved more relevant than O’Rourke walking the facility.

“Once we got rolling and opened up to him, Lt. Robin- son [who escorted O’Rourke in] told us, ‘There’s no time for a real tour—you guys keep doing what you’re doing,’” said Ehde. “O’Rourke was trying to really gain clarity on a bunch of stuff.”

Choir member Kelvin Ross sat in the pews and listened to their interaction.

“Remorse and personal accountability seemed to intrigue Beto as the men shared their testimonies,” noted Ross. “And later they questioned him on his thoughts regarding crime and punishment.

“I am curious if the narrative concerning real prison reform and excessive sentencing will make its way into the national conversation and effect a positive change—as opposed to the same age-old rhetoric from a new set of talking heads.”

Pennsylvania Governor grants clemency to eight prisoners

by

Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf has granted clemency to eight prisoners serving life terms—more than any governor in the past 25 years, the Philadelphia Enquirer reports.

Granting commutations started to diminish when Gov. Richard Thornburgh took office in 1979. It all but ceased in 1994, after lifer Reginald McFadden was released and went on a killing spree, the newspaper reported.

Today commutations have to be recommended unanimously by the state Board of Pardons before the governor can consider them.

One clemency went to George Trudel Jr., imprisoned for 30 years without the possibility of parole.

He told the newspaper, “I went away as a juvenile. I went away from my mother’s house, from being taken care of, to prison, where the state took care of me, I never paid a bill,

I didn’t know what it was to have that sort of responsibility. “It wasn’t until I got that job and started working, and I was able to go to the store and purchase things with my own money, that I truly felt like a man. I felt, for the first in a long time, that I was able to hold my head high. And that’s when I really started to believe that I belonged out here.” There are now more than 5,000 people serving life without the possibility of parole in Pennsylvania, according to the story.

California’s dark secret: prisoners sentenced under prior guidelines have little hope of ever being released

by

Some men serving life sentences in California say they’re “political prisoners.” While there’s technically no legal definition for the term, some facts and evidence suggest they may be right.

At San Quentin State Prison, there are men who have served 40-plus years, continuously. These men are survivors of carceral Darwinism, having lived through changes in state politics, parole laws, parole boards, restructured prisoner classifications, a prosperous prison guards’ union, crime victims’ influence on laws, changes to the death penalty, and the most violent period in California prison history.

They’re called “7 Ups” in prison vernacular, a slang term for those sentenced to life and eligible for parole after serving seven years. That was be- fore 1977, when Senate Bill 42 passed and was signed into law by former Gov. Jerry Brown, the first time he held office from 1975-’82.

Seven-ups are serving life sentences under California’s old Indeterminate Sentencing Law, where judges imposed indefinite time. Under this law, different prisoners convicted of the same crimes spend fluctuating lengths of time in prison. Today, some 7 Ups have no idea when, if ever, their sentence will end.

Changes in California politics and the policies of all governors since Brown have politicized parole deci- sions. “They use this against all life prisoners,” said Johnny “Zakiy” Arafiles, 66. He’s been incarcerated since age 25.

Arafiles was sentenced to a 7-Up term for murder and was found suitable for release by the parole board in 1991. But Gov. Pete Wilson reversed the decision beyond the time allowed to do so. California’s Court of Appeals upheld that decision.

“This is bad law,” said Arafiles. He’s appeared be- fore 16 different parole boards while his sentence lengthens and his chance for freedom diminishes. “There are so many in here being illegally detained because they don’t know the law, and they’re (parole board) taking advantage of it.”

From 2000 to 2008, the parole board denied 98% of cases. The remaining 2% of cases that the parole board granted release during that time were overturned 60 % of the time by Gov. Gray Davis and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, accord- ing to author Keramet Reiter’s book 23/7.

“It has been clear to me that there is a general conspiracy to prevent life prisoners from paroling, especially those whose offenses include murder,” wrote Albert M. Leddy in a July 2000 declaration. He’s the former district attorney of Kern County, Calif., and for- mer Board of Prison Terms chairman.“I am in formed that Gov. Gray Davis has expressed his policy that no murderer offender will be paroled on his watch.”

Parole boards have become more punitive over the years, many 7 Ups say. When some of them were sent to prison, parole was granted by the Adult Authority. It later changed to the Community Release Board, then to the Board of Prison Terms (BPT). Today it’s the Board of Parole Hearings.

Allen “Squirrel” Ware, 64, was arrested in 1974 and sub- sequently convicted on a first- degree murder charge. He was the lookout on a burglary, not the actual killer. Still, he was given a 7-Up sentence under the rescinded felony murder law, changed last year by Sen- ate Bill 1437.

“Today we find you credible,” the transcript from Ware’s 21st Board hearing reads. He said the parole board apologized for not believing him sooner.

Ware was incarcerated at the peak of California’s prison violence, when between 1970 and 1974 there were 82 murders, 11 prison guards and 71 prisoners, according to Reiter.

“…there is a saturation point in practically every man’s servitude beyond which every additional hour is wasted and destructive punishment”

Tough-on-crime posturing, 7 Ups said, placed them in the cross hairs of political intrigue. In Leddy’s declaration, he wrote, “After Governor Wilson’s election in 1990, he substantially intervened to reduce parole grants; in actual effect his policy practically eliminated paroles. He accomplished this, first, by appointing and re- appointing BPT Commissioners known to disfavor parole or to favor a ‘no-parole’ policy.”

“Convicted murderers don’t deserve any more breaks,” Wilson said in his 1992 State of the State speech. In his 1994 speech, he said, “We can’t let killers walk out of prison early just because they’ve done a good job folding shirts in the prison laundry.”

“The most you would do is 11 to 12 years,” Arafiles said about the 7-Up sentence. “If you did 13, you were messing up.”

Terry “Duck” Alexander, 73, has been incarcerated nearly 43 years after his conviction for a 1977 murder in San Jose, Calif. He received a 7-Up sentence and has appeared before different parole boards at least 13 times.

“There’s no set guideline for what it takes to be rehabilitated in California,” said Alexander. “When you go to the Board and they read about you, they’re looking at past tense. They like to dwell on the past.”

Under the Indeterminate Sentencing Law, a prisoner’s individual conduct and rehabilitation was what the parole board considered to deter- mine who was released. But rehabilitation was expunged from the state’s Penal Code by Governor Brown in 1976, replaced with the Determinate Sentencing Law, which stated, in part: “The Legislature finds and declares that the purpose of imprisonment for crime is punishment.”

“Although the reluctance to grant parole began in the early ‘80s under Governor Wilson’s regime, BPT panels denied parole in over 99% of cases by employing procedures that violate the parole statutes and regulations,” Leddy wrote.

Some 7 Ups say for the state to release them now would be to admit its past wrong, which was to deny them parole for so long, because they’re intricately tied to past underground political decisions.

More than 30 years after many 7 Ups arrived in prison, Governor Schwarzenegger added the word “Rehabilitation” to California Department of Corrections. 7 ups say nothing has changed.

As former San Quentin warden Clinton Duffy wrote in 1952, “…there is a saturation point in practically every man’s servitude beyond which every additional hour is wasted and destructive punishment.”

Stockton Mayor Michael Tubbs checks out San Quentin Enneagram program

by

Enneagram class on lower yard with Micheal Tubbs & wife Anna Tubbs
Enneagram class on lower yard with Micheal Tubbs & wife Anna Tubbs

Stockton Mayor Michael Tubbs and his wife, Anna, came to San Quentin to join a class aimed at helping prisoners gain self-respect and overcome childhood trauma.

Anna Tubbs said they came to the prison because they’re “both social justice concerned. It’s important to meet people directly impacted by policy choices—to be seen personally—to understand the needs of the people.”

Michael Tubbs & wife Anna with Enneagram class & Sponsors
Michael Tubbs & wife Anna with Enneagram class & Sponsors

The incarcerated men par- take in a program led by Susan Olesek. It is called The Enneagram Prison Project (EPP): Freeing the Incarcerated from the Prisons of Our Own Making. The program takes participants on a 20- week journey aimed at get- ting a better sense of self. rd, Prior to class on June 3 Micheal Tubbs sat down for an interview. He compared the city of Stockton and its “significant amount of re- sources” with coming inside a prison to see programs such as EPP, computer coding, and college programs. His reaction: “Why did I have to come inside a prison to see this? Why don’t we have these programs on the outside?”

Once the class started, Raiveon “Ray Ray” Wooden read a poem, “Temptation Within Myself.”

He then told a story about childhood abuse and how it traumatized him. Trauma turned to shame, he said, which turned to doubt that warped his thinking about himself.

Wooden said coming to prison gave him the chance to rethink his life from “being one of distant loneliness to finding support and love.”

“It’s hard to share these things and not worry about my pride,” Wooden said as he cited a stanza from his poem: “How to love yourself— how to find yourself”

“I came to prison to be safe,” Wooden said.

Olesek told the class that Wooden’s story is “one of a hero’s journey, on how to reclaim his life; to say it out loud to people makes them look at you in a good way.”

She commented on how adults don’t recognize painful lives in their children. Looking at Wooden she added, “Where did he get the idea that he had no worth? Who wasn’t there?”

Olesek turned to the class and said, “Don’t put yourself down by only focusing on what you did to get in prison without putting your life in the context of the circumstances.”

She told the class that “trauma is when you keep re- living the past.”

Then, she asked how many participants suffered from a childhood trauma. All hands went up, including Michael and Anna.

“How do we organize our society so that we value families?” Michael asked. His concern is to provide a safe and healthy environment for growing families.

“How can you protect your child?” Anna asked. “ You can’t control everything, but you can be there 100 percent as a parent who decides to bring a child into the world.”

Anna talked about working with students who felt like they couldn’t tell their own stories.

“But when these kids do get the opportunity to share their stories, they find out that they are not alone and share similar experiences—the sharing gives them the chance to connect,” Anna said.

Some people are locked up emotionally, the mayor implied. “You don’t have to be in San Quentin to be in prison,” he said.

Governor Gavin Newsom appoints new players in three key CDCR positions

by

Gov. Gavin Newsom announced in late March three key appointments for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). All three appointments require Senate confirmation. His appointments include a Republican, a Democrat and a person without political affiliation.

Secretary of CDCR Ralph Diaz

Ralph Diaz has been appointed Secretary of the CDCR. He began his corrections career as a CO at Wasco State Prison in 1991. He worked multiple jobs as counselor supervisor, captain, chief deputy administrator and warden of the California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility and State Prison at Corcoran. He then served as associate director of high security institutions for the CDCR, and later as the deputy director of facility operations. He was undersecretary for operations and then acting secretary prior to his appointment to secretary of CDCR. The secretary’s compensation is $265,920 per year. Politically Diaz is without party affiliation.

Undersecretary of operations of CDCR Kathleen Allison

Kathleen Allison has been appointed undersecretary of operations for the CDCR. Her career began with the CDCR as a medical technical assistant at North Kern State Prison in 1993. She is a licensed registered nurse. While working at Avenal State Prison she worked as community resources man- ager, senior medical technical assistant and medical technical assistant. While at the California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility and State Prison at Corcoran, she served as warden, chief deputy warden, associate warden and correctional health services administrator. She was the director of the CDCR’s Division of Adult Institutions from 2016 to 2018, and she has served as Acting Undersecretary of Operations since 2018. Her yearly compensation is $189,456. Allison is Republican.

Connie Gipson was appointed director of adult institutions for the CDCR. She began her corrections career at the California Institution for Women in 1988 . She then worked at Wasco State Prison as captain, business manager and health program director. While at California State Prison at Corcoran she served as warden, acting warden and chief deputy warden. She then worked as the CDCR’s associate director of general population male offenders and as deputy director of facility operations. She has been the acting director of adult institutions since 2018. Her yearly compensation is $174,344. Gipson is a Democrat.

Judges overwhelmed with immigration case backlogs makes it difficult for them to work

by

The Trump administration’s controversial strategy to reduce the growing back- log of immigration cases has failed, according to a university study. The average wait for an immigration hearing is now more than two years, The San Diego Union Tribune reported.

The plan to reduce the backlog of immigration cases by forcing judges to take more cases was implemented in October 2017. Since then, the number of pending cases has grown from 655,932 to 830,000, according to Syracuse University’s Transactional Access Records Clearinghouse, which tracks data from immigration courts.

The backlog is likely worse than figures provided by Syracuse University due makes it difficult for them to work to the 35 day-government shutdown in December and January, the Feb. 21 story said. That resulted in the cancellation of roughly 60,000 hearings because around 400 immigration judges were absent or furloughed. Thousands of cases were rescheduled, thus extending the already long wait times.

The plan was described as a “comprehensive strategy for significantly reducing the caseload by 2020.” It was intended to reverse the growth of the caseload and reduce it, according to the Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR), which administers immigration courts

The plan “has not only failed to reduce the backlog, but has eroded the court’s ability to ensure due process,” according to the American Immigration Lawyers Association, a group made up of more than 15,000 lawyers and professors.

The group said the administration has failed by pressuring judges to rule “at a breakneck pace” on whether an immigrant should be deported.

In defense, the Trump administration stated, “Policy changes in recent years have slowed down the adjudication of existing cases and incentivized further illegal immigration that led to new cases.”

Trump administration officials said illegal border crossing were encouraged by former President Barack Obama’s attempt to deport immigrants with serious criminal records and defend immigrants known as Dreamers who were brought to the U.S. as children.

Another argument regarding the aggravated situation was brought up by Stephen Legomsky, Homeland Security’s chief counsel for immigration.

“Immediately upon taking office, President Trump essentially advised Border Patrol agents and ICE officers that they were to begin removal proceedings against anyone they encounter that they suspected of being undocumented, without sufficiently increasing resources for immigration judges,” Legomsky said.

Another aspect of the immigration equation is the need for autonomy of the immigration judges. Immigration judges are not independent, in contrast to the regular court judges. The immigration judges are part of the Justice Department, which means that the attorney general is both the chief prosecutor in immigration cases and the boss of the judges, who are classified as government attorneys, The Union-Tribune reported.

The National Association of Immigration Judges has called for Congress to end the built-in conflict of interest and to create an immigration court apart from the Justice Department.

“As long as we continue to allow the court to be used as a law enforcement tool, you are going to get these kinds of backlogs and inefficiencies,” said Ashley Tabaddor, president of the National Association of Immigration Judges.

The Trump administration increased the number of immigration judges by 74 percent to 414 by the end of 2018. House Democrats requested an investigation by the Justice Department Inspector General’s office based on the suspicion that hiring was politically motivated.

The Immigration Lawyers Association wrote, “The current administration has taken advantage of the court structural laws by introducing numerous policies… that dramatically reshape federal immigration law and undermine due process in immigration court proceedings.”

Translate »