In 1993, Ed got out of prison. Since he was on parole, he wasn’t allowed to correspond with any convicted felons. We sued the Washington review board to challenge that order, but lost. Once Ed was out, he kind of moved on. I haven’t talked to him in over a decade.
Muting the messenger
I got to Clallam Bay right after it opened as a maximum-security prison. It was, and is, a pretty violent and racist prison—racist in the sense that all the guards were white. I filed complaints about it with the governor’s office, describing how unarmed and nonresistant prisoners were getting the crap beaten out of them by prison guards. There was one beating I witnessed where a bunch of white guards beat up a black inmate. I wrote press releases to all the media outlets I knew—this was in 1990—and got no response. So we ran the story in PLN, and then prison officials infracted me for “lying” about staff to get them in trouble. But I wasn’t lying; I saw it with my own eyes. Eventually they dismissed the infraction and, in the issue that circulated the prison, they blacked out the sentence naming the supervising sergeant of the guards who did the beating. But subscribers outside got the full version. The officials were miffed, so a couple weeks later, they put me in what they called “administrative segregation”—solitary confinement—for, like, three weeks. My thing has always been, don’t personalize things, and don’t get angry. You get angry, you make errors in judgment.
One of the ironies was that I got no media interest in the beatings themselves, but my being retaliated against for writing about the beatings made it to the front page of The Seattle Times. I’m glad that the shoot-the-messenger thing gets some media play, but I think it’s kind of a skewed sense of priorities.
Still, after the Times ran their story, the beatings slowed down for a while. The media does have some control over these issues. There are a lot of examples where doing big exposés and detailed series on stuff has led to concrete changes in the prison systems. We’ve worked with The Seattle Weekly, CounterPunch, and a lot of other outlets over the years. I’ve always been about disseminating. Our goal was to push stuff out to bigger media outlets. One of the reasons I started PLN is I think so much of what happens in American prisons is pretty indefensible. People will say, ‘Well, we don’t know what’s going on.’ If people don’t care about it once they know, I can’t do anything about apathy. But I can do something about ignorance.
Not such good PR
The issue we’ve single-handedly put on the map in this country is private companies profiting from using prison labor. These companies do this in total secrecy, and they go to great lengths to avoid being associated with it. We’ve broken a lot of stories about it, including the use of prison labor by some of the world’s largest companies. Microsoft and Starbucks used prison labor for packaging. Boeing had prisoners making aircraft parts. Planet Hollywood, Eddie Bauer, and Union Bay were all using prisoners as garment manufacturers. The height of irony was when Nintendo was using inmates at Twin Rivers Correction Center, which houses Washington’s sex-offender treatment program, to package children’s video games.
In 1994, a conservative Republican named Jack Metcalf was running for Congress in the district where the prison I was in was located. He was campaigning on a tough-on-crime platform, advocating his support for the death penalty. He was using a company, Washington Marketing Group, which employs prisoners, to do his telemarketing.
Well written!
#1 Posted by Cameron Gray, CJR on Thu 12 Jul 2012 at 08:10 PM
A teacher would be fired if her lectures were as unpredictable as the events the news media must investigate. But no one seems to care that "We know more about what's happening in the CIA's torture camps, or their assassination program, than we know about what's happening in the state prisons down the road from us." (see page 4 of article) A reporter who thought like a teacher would provide the public with an annual one week remedial education course on current events. Such a format could easily include statistics on prison overcrowding and other abuses. And the format would also improve the chances that there would be several local newspapers that covered state prisons as their regular assignment. Which could create a permanent bloc of voters who cared about prison reform. Everyone cares about this issue. But no one at CJR cares about communicating like a teacher instead of a reporter. I will bet there were a lot of crocodile tears when this article was read by the staff.
#2 Posted by Stanley Krauter, CJR on Thu 2 Aug 2012 at 04:27 PM
Hmm. Did the murder victim have a name? Any family?
#3 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Fri 3 Aug 2012 at 12:29 PM
FLASH!
Murderer doesn't like prison or guard, bitches for a living.
In other news, Cap'n Crunch prison riot continues - inmates demand Count Chocula as condition of hostage release.
Film at 11
#4 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sat 4 Aug 2012 at 10:47 AM
Jeez you guys. Didn't you read the article? The murder happened during a "botched hold-up" when "the cocaine dealer he went to rob reached for a gun." It coulda happened to anybody!
Besides, if somebody breaks into your home with a loaded weapon and kills you when you try to defend yourself, it's totally reasonable for them to plead self defense, right?
#5 Posted by JLD, CJR on Sat 4 Aug 2012 at 11:37 AM
Y'know, if a poacher reports a forest fire, the forest is burning no matter who carried the news. And if an onlooker wants to chase after the rustler while ignoring the flames? The forest is still burning down, and now the onlooker has made a choice to be a bit responsible.
Unless we can somehow miraculously change reality to make every person in prison entirely guilty to a degree worthy of all the b.s. and awfulness, maybe we should stop trying to make ourselves feel better by attacking the herald and listen to what he's saying, instead.
#6 Posted by parhelion, CJR on Sun 5 Aug 2012 at 10:00 AM
^^^ This.
I never cease to find it, amusing isn't the right word, fascinating how conservatives willing to jump at the slightest hint of "government overreach" by regulation or enforcement on their lives defend or ridicule the critiques of enforcement excesses on someone else's.
Going to jail in a civilized country does not mean you can suddenly become the safe target of criminal actions by the authorities in charge. If murder was a crime when someone who's "career goals were always in the law-enforcement arena" and who was a member of the army killed a person during a robbery, then murder, rape, robbery, assault, property destruction, etc.. are crimes when they are committed by law enforcement inside the penitentary. If that's what's being reported, then that's what matters.
Unfortunately, anyone who's studied the Stanford Prison Experiment knows that authorities are particularily vulnerable to these kinds of violations and that watchdogs of any sort are really demanded by the circumstances of incarceration.
But, typical, the right wing trolls around here fail to see any of this. It's all black hats, white hats cowboy drama to them.
#7 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Sun 5 Aug 2012 at 02:59 PM
Thimbles..
Nobody is advocating criminal conduct by prison guards...
We're all aghast at the injustice of the Cap'n Crunch taken from our "cereal killer".
But seriously...
Leave it to CJR to approach prison reform from the perspective of a murderer... What about crime victims? The taxpayers? The courts? The prosecutors? The correctional officers?
How about maybe looking at more than one side of the issue?
This is CJR standard operating procedure - namely to go to some radical leftist advocacy group in Vermont and then to write it a press release under the guise of "professional journalism".
Of course prison guards commit crimes, and this murderer is doing well to address this important issue. I don't have a problem with the murderer's advocacy. The problem lies in CJR's pervasive leftist bias.
It will be a snowy day in Hell when CJR does such a story from the perspective of a victim's rights organization. And if this snowy day does ever arrive, you can rest assured that CJR will do all it can to paint the other side as ignorant, vindictive, narrow-minded and petulant.
#8 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sun 5 Aug 2012 at 04:30 PM
"We're all aghast at the injustice of the Cap'n Crunch taken from our "cereal killer"."
Omg, yur telling me that 56 pages a month of magazine is dedicated to the plight of Paul Wright and his cereal? Oh, in that case I guess all these right wing sneer addicts have a point, what a silly piece to put on cjr.
Oh wait!
"The issue we’ve single-handedly put on the map in this country is private companies profiting from using prison labor."
That's interesting, but wait!
"We do a lot of litigation. Some of it is public-records stuff, but the bulk is against prisons and jails that try to ban us."
Hmmn, does the prison system really take stories about Captin' Crunch so seriously?
"People are dying every day in prisons and jails, people are being beat to death, and the press release goes out that Johnny Smith died in an “altercation.”...
If you as the reader don’t have a problem with people dying of medical neglect for easily treatable illnesses, or with prisoners being raped by the people who are supposed to be guarding them, or billions of tax dollars being funneled off to private corporations, nothing I can tell you is going to change your mind."
And I guess as right wingers, all you can see in this story is cereal and a guy who was in jail for a crime you'd let him get away with if he commited it in a jail while employed by the jail.
So yeah, not much point in continuing the conversation. Nothing said is going to change your minds.
#9 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Sun 5 Aug 2012 at 09:16 PM
One more time, Thimbo:
Of course prison guards commit crimes, and this murderer is doing well to address this important issue. I don't have a problem with the murderer's advocacy. The problem lies in CJR's pervasive leftist bias.
It will be a snowy day in Hell when CJR does such a story from the perspective of a victim's rights organization. And if this snowy day does ever arrive, you can rest assured that CJR will do all it can to paint the other side as ignorant, vindictive, narrow-minded and petulant.
#10 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sun 5 Aug 2012 at 09:48 PM
And another thing Thimbles...
Since you believe that "black" journalists are entitled to freer expression on matters of race than "white guys" (quotes are your words) and since this murderer writes on matters of racism in prisons...
Is he "black" enough to meet your standards?
From the graphic he appears to be a little beige to me... But I don't know if his skin pigmentation meets your criteria for unfettered journalistic expression.
I've asked you this over and over, but you keep dodging... Given your belief that "black" journalists should be treated differently than "white guys" on "hate radio"... HOW can we determine whether any particular journalist is "black" enough to make the cut?
HUH?
#11 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sun 5 Aug 2012 at 10:17 PM
"Of course prison guards commit crimes, and this murderer is doing well to address this important issue."
Oh, you see, someone might get a different impression by the frequency you dismissed the work he'd been doing as complaining about cereal. Honest mistake.
"I don't have a problem with the murderer's advocacy."
I know, you really support scrutiny of government operations in any other setting. This one happens to involve people in jail, and a guy who went to jail, so your right wing skepticism of government power is just a little off. Because people like you don't go to jail. People like you don't murder. And if government is punishing someone else unjustly, who are you to question their actions or motives? They're murderers, as you keep reminding us, and why should we concern ourselves with their captin' crunch, right? Everything that's written about, in 56 pages per month, boils down to captin' crunch, right?
"The problem lies in CJR's pervasive leftist bias."
Sure it does. I could tell that from your very first post on the thread.
"FLASH!
Murderer doesn't like prison or guard, bitches for a living.
In other news, Cap'n Crunch prison riot continues - inmates demand Count Chocula as condition of hostage release."
Sell it to someone who doesn't know you and your ilk.
If you cared about victims, you'd be alot more concerned about the crimes bankers got away with and the damage those criminals did to the public, but you don't care.
I understand there's a side to the crime and punishment debate for victims. I understand that a system, which allows violent criminals to go free because states can't afford to keep the non-violent criminals who are caught in a stupid drug war, is broken. I understand that police need a little leeway in order to do their job of protecting and serving and it is a shame that much of the revenue required to maintain a solid justice system has to rely on drug crime related property forfeitures to function (perhaps we'd have a better system if the banks hadn't cheated states and municipalities out of billions of dollars of revenue through fraud-enabling MERS, LIBOR interest rate fixing, and anticompetitive collusion on derivative deals). Doing a piece on a penal system watchdog does not equate to ignoring the victims of crime. If that's how you want to cast your ridicule (as a "get out of jail free" card) sorry, that's really weak.
You have nothing nice nor meaningful to say, so say nothing at all guys. Leave your type of press critique up to Statler and Waldorf; they do a better and more substantive job of it.
#12 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Sun 5 Aug 2012 at 11:06 PM
"And another thing Thimbles..."
Hey Sara, since I can't defend myself against this oft repeated obtuseness without putting a thread off topic and my posts getting the receiving end of a moderator's axe, can I leave this clean up in your hands?
Cheers.
#13 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Sun 5 Aug 2012 at 11:18 PM
Thimbles...
The murderer is doing just what a prison reform activist should do. CJR isn't doing what a "professional journalism" publication should do.
The issue of prison reform is complex. Prisons exist to deny rights to prisoners and the extent of this oppression is a grey area that deserves investigation from all sides - not solely from the perspective of a murderer activist in Vermont.
What about the cost of inmate litigation? What about the cost of freedom to the inmates themselves (inmate-on-inmate crime increases when inmates have more freedom)? What about the need to punish (like for instance why a murderer get Cap'n Crunch in the first place)?
If we could rely on CJR to present anything but the leftist point of view on any matter of societal import, then articles like this one would have a lot more value.
#14 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sun 5 Aug 2012 at 11:24 PM
What "cleanup" Thimbles?
I'm just asking you to explain your own position. What's wrong with that?
If this question amounts to implicit criticism of your stance... So what? What's wrong with criticizing the position of a commenter? Doing so is not a "personal attack".
You have plainly stated your belief that "black" journalists should be allowed a freer expression on matters of race than "white guys".
And the issue is most certainly topical here. Mr. Wright here writes about matters of race, directly in Alysia's interview.
I'm just asking whether or not, given YOUR stated belief, if Mr. Wright is "black" enough, in your estimation, to be permitted free expression, or if instead, he should be restricted as YOU believe "white guys" should be.
I do not share, and in fact strongly disagree with your belief in a race-based test for freedom of expression. But it's certainly fair game to ask you to defend it.
That's all.
They're YOUR words, after all. If you find them objectionable, it would see the "cleanup" necessary would be a purely internal matter for you..
No need to tug at the Comment Nanny's apron strings.
Just explain your position.
#15 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Sun 5 Aug 2012 at 11:42 PM
If you have more than a few minutes, you should watch the whole thing. if you have 10 minutes, you should watch from the 20 minute mark this documentary called The Farm.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFqVIlL0A2A
Victims have rights, but so do the innocent, so do the guilty. We forget that at our peril.
And if you get a chance, this too looks interesting.
http://www.pbs.org/pov/prisontown/
It shows a town's transformation as it goes from making steel bars to guarding the people behind them. This is what happens when economic dislocation occurs and people have no legal opportunities to make their way. I mean my god, what is wrong in a society where states are cutting budgets to educate people so they can spend more to imprison them?
#16 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Mon 6 Aug 2012 at 12:31 AM
No exaggeration:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/03/us/03prison.html
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/06/28/classrooms-or-prison-cells.html
#17 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Mon 6 Aug 2012 at 12:39 AM
Losing a job doesn't justify murder or robbery.
Unemployment doesn't cause crime, though criminals certainly get busier in bad economic times. However, absent causation, there is no doubt that there is a strong correlation between a bad economy and an elevated crime rate.
This is the result of a calculated risk. Criminals have a cost basis, just as everyone has. There is the cost of doing business, even criminal business.
In good times, when jobs are plenty and wages are high, the cost (in terms of punishment) of doing criminal business, relative to the cost (in terms of labor) of earning honest money, is high enough to keep some criminals working. When bad times hit, that relative cost decreases, and criminals get busy.
Nonetheless, even in the worst of times, there are always "legal opportunities" to make money.
Criminals just aren't interested in them.
#18 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Mon 6 Aug 2012 at 12:43 AM
If I were the Emperor of the Universe, there would be two kinds of prisons.
Violent offenders would be sent to secure facilities and put to work busting big rocks into small rocks, if no other more useful hard labor can be found. No Cap'n Crunch. Do what you're told, and you get a better meal, less work and maybe one hour of TV every other day. Don't do what you're told, and you get peanut butter sandwiches, water, no TV and no leisure time. Get violent, and you go to solitary. Handled.
Nonviolent offenders work off their crimes 5 to 1. The victim gets three times the amount of the loss and the state gets twice the loss. You get out of jail at 6 am and check in at 8 pm to work. You find jobs. You feed yourself. You bring in a minimum of a week's worth of minimum wage money every Friday, or you do the next week in solitary. You act up, do drugs, loiter, get in more trouble while you're supposed to be working... Same thing - Solitary.
If you owe more in restitution and fines than you can pay during your period of incarceration, you are released on the condition of making weekly payments of least 20 hours a week at minimum wage for as long as it takes to pay the fine. You don't do it? Back to jail for a period equal to your initial incarceration and the whole thing starts over.
Criminals are afraid... Deathly afraid... Of only ONE thing. HARD WORK.
The way to get the crime rate down is to force convicts into hard labor..
#19 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Mon 6 Aug 2012 at 01:01 AM
Something I stumbled across, since I was looking for the documentary on the prison and its paper I watched years back (and it turns out it was "The Farm" and the prison paper inside was this, doh!)
"LOUISIANA INCARCERATED - How we built the world's prison capital"
#20 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Mon 6 Aug 2012 at 01:23 AM
I've been a victim of serious, violent, crime, and I'm tired of being deployed as a symbol by reactionary jerks who want to see prisoners abused in jail. When you deride the work that's being done to prevent abuse of prisoners you do not speak for me.
#21 Posted by eastvanhalen, CJR on Mon 6 Aug 2012 at 09:40 PM
Who is "deriding the work that's being done to prevent abuse of prisoners"?
We're just calling for journalistic perspective for Pete's sake!
As I wrote earlier... The murderer here is doing good work. The murderer is doing what a prison rights advocate should be doing. CJR just doesn't do that "journalism" thing by providing balance, and I am castigating its one-sided coverage...NOT the murderer's advocacy!
Speaking of which, it sounds like you're dealing with some serious Stockholm Syndrome or something worthy of some journalistic investigation.
#22 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Mon 6 Aug 2012 at 10:12 PM