Bridge of Voices , Newsletter of Forum for Understanding ... · Bridge of Voices, Newsletter of Forum for Understanding Prisons (FFUP) December 2015, January 2016 29631 Wild Rose

Bridge of Voices , Newsletter of Forum for Understanding Prisons (FFUP) December 2015, January 2016

29631 Wild Rose Drive; Blue River, WI 53518, www.secondchancewi.org

This was going to be a legal newsletter- first edition –But to do it, we needed good communication between me and the

fine prison litigator who was putting together the rough draft of this new newsletter. He did his part and I awaited the rough

draft which never came-I am enquiring and complaining. This substitute is put together in a rush and its main goal is to answer

questions and engage some of you in helping charge up and change the course of the general parole and solitary confinement

effort. Here also are some on point essay submissions and a few news articles.

Good news first. The lawyers have made a firm commitment to take on a class action lawsuit and are in the process of

choosing a class representative(s). Their main objective will be to remove all mentally ill inmates from isolation (Both

segregation and AC) and mandate mental health treatment facilities like those built at Taychedah in response to that lawsuit. I

cannot tell you more in this medium. I ask you again for patience- They are good. Next: FFUP has received lots of letters from

inmates who want to do individual and class actions and I say yes yes. We have many reports of wrongly rejected complaints

and of court required documents taken in cell searches. This makes exhausting remedies very difficult and I will see that our

upcoming legal newsletter does get out there and addresses this problem. As most of you know, much of my mail is not private.

Because of that, while we get reliable communication going, it is best I do not respond to your legal inquiries unless and until I

have something significant to say or can help in some way. DO not assume your mail is not getting to me. At minimum I spread

the word so it is good to write - if I have a legal suggestion for help, you will hear from me. It is important that you note the date

you send a letter to me and I will note the date I get your letter and when I send a response. One more caveat to whole sale

support of widespread legal actions is that my funds are very limited and we need to coordinate if I am needed to make copies,

provide stamps and copies of cases, legal guides etc. I know we can save a lot of resources with coordination of some of these

cases also. And I know many of you have tried explaining to me what you are doing but I forget and this will be organized so we

will be able to keep the proverbial ball in the air. I have been overcommitted and that needs to end. With help I will decide

where to help in such a way that I can be consistent with that support.

PAROLE: There have been a lot of letters enquiring about the new rules- and new rules are news to me. There are no

parole rule changes proposed by Dean Stensberg through the legislative board that oversees rule changes. He may be doing

some verbal policy changes with the commissioners but nothing that rises to the level where the public (including prisoners)

have an official place and way to have real input. I have conferred with Senator Harris Dodd’s office and am myself on the

email alert list in case there should be something proposed. We also have a list of people, many knowledgeable in the specifics

of rule changes needed, who have agreed to testify at the hearings should there be a sudden proposal. And of course all

interested activists, family members , prisoners etc will be notified. We also received questions about what our proposed rules

were in the FFUP’s Petition using Statute 227 (August ). I will paste the rules themselves at end of newsletter- These were done

with the advice of some very dedicated WI prisoners and they are good. I ask you to incorporate some of these ideas in your

letters etc. to authorities. Use them as a guide.

As many of you have commented, there is much talk about reducing the prison population. Nationally the talk is about

releasing non violent drug offenders, which is wonderful and a start and in Wisconsin there is talk in favor of pushing for

effective alternatives to prison. This is all great, but the old law prisoners have been shifted to the back burner and we a have

almost 3000 thousand completely rehabilitated, wonderful people unnecessarily entombed. If the present policies are not

changed, many will die in prison (lifers with no parole date) and many Old Law Prisoners ,ready to contribute now and , are

sorely needed, will have to serve decades more.

“Release Rehabilitated Old Law Prisoners” is a hard message- so much to learn and then you have the HARD fact that many

of these folks killed people and WERE violent. We are not a very compassionate society right now because fear reigns and when

that happens, the brain pretty much shuts down to new thoughts, new people . Bomb em /Shoot em or lock em up is the

answer to all problems WHEN FEAR reigns.

THE PETITION DRIVE: Families and friends have put a lot of work into getting signatures for their loved ones petitions and

many have lots of signatures to get to the parole boards. We congratulate them. But we all can see by all reports that single

petitions will not change the course of this fiasco- cumulatively they might have some effect but parole defers are getting(2)

elongated not shortened. And few Old Law prisoners are getting out, that we hear of, until near their MR. There seems to be

extra resolve to hold everyone back by the parole chairmen and this is possible because no one much is talking about OLD LAW

PRISONERS- no one knows about them. So in the next few pages you will see proposal on how to tweak our parole campaign so

it is relevant to the fears and concerns of today.

There are about twenty petitions launched and some have gathered over a hundred signatures. We are also gathering

strength and learning to work together which is great and the petitions will be used for individual advocacy and will be sent to

the powers but the parole campaign itself needs to be mostly not on MOVEON website ,for it requires more time and expertise

than is available. I am gathering names of churches, media web and post, radio and TV, sympathetic groups and am asking you,

the affected prisoners to take the time to write articles, and internet blurbs. Please contact me if you want to get involved and I

will send you material OR just write what you need to say and send it along. We have lots of material to share and need your

help. Hopeful beginnings: We are forming a core strategy group to contact and use local and National media and internet

effectively. AND we now have new help with facebook and making the websites better.

SOME IDEAS TO STRESS: There are lots of statistics showing why we have to reduce population and many great articles. The general

dysfunction in our WI prisons is being discussed widely. WHAT is missing is discussion of the once violent prisoner- there is no talk of

forgiveness and not much on the fact that people change. I believe, we need to stress the age of Old law prisoner- all over 30 , many their

60’ and the fact that truth in sentencing prisoners are being released to the street without treatment or much programming. Overcrowding

,shortage of staff and resulting budget stress and more dangerous streets are all results of these policies.

Sampling of Charts and graphs from excellent studies:

1 At America’s expense: mass incarceration of the elderly 2014 ACLU(chart 1)

2) prison budget project of WI council on children and families 2014(2 charts

on end)

3) Adult Corrections Program; Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau; January,

2015, charts 2,3,5

4)UWM employment and training institute 2013 Study of the effect of mass

incarceration on the African American community2013(Chart 4)

Crime Declines Precipitously With Age

for all Crimes

(chart at right) Research shows that

long before age 50, most people have

outlived the years in which they

commit crimes. Less than 6% of

people aged 30 to 34 were arrested

(nearly 14 % for 19 year olds) whereas

a little over 2% of people ages 50 to

54 were arrested and 0% of those 65

and older were arrested. This trend of

decreasing crime rates from adult to

old age has held over time

2

(above left)notice the amount of people over 50-Nationally considered “old” for prisoners because of tough conditions. What are they doing

in there considering the “National arrest rates” graph above it?

.

B) We are in a dangerous situation in regards to our WI prisons and that is translating into more dangerous streets. (4)

These problems would be much alleviated with a wise parole policy, for most of the prisoners are ready to be contributing

citizens and in some cases, leaders and good role models. We also have release data from before TIS that needs to be digested

and collated and are looking for folks that like to do research. The resources now going into warehousing needs to go to

rehabilitation and treatment .

Providing an effective path for release of our over old law 2500 prisoners will help solve these problems:

1) Overcrowding is so severe we are putting two people in cells made for one, putting people on the floor to sleep. There is no

funding for adequate programs and guards shortages are acute. CCI was shut down a whole month and now periodic

shutdowns in most prisons are common. I have had reports where guards shortage are so severe that there were not enough

to ensure a smooth running of the floors and the less aggressive and weaker inmates become victims of prisoners who took

advantage of the lack of authority- Needless to say, Programming is sacrificed to provide extra funding for housing.

2) Many Truth in sentencing prisoners are released to the public without treatment or training while rehabilitated Old Law prisoners sit in prison. The court suggests programs and treatment but cannot mandate it . Yet many TIS prisoners beg for treamtne and programming and cannot get it. Mentally ill prisoners receive no treatment and are released when their Truth in Sentencing release date arrives. Many have spent their whole prison time in isolation. Prisoners in AC and segregation warn us about the danger we are in. Here is a plea for help from one drug addicted TIS inmate. “It is easier for me to get cocaine than it is for me to see a doctor. So more than likely I will go right back to using. I thought the point of being in prison was to be rehabilitated. But they don't seem to care. Sorry if I'm bothering you but I'm trying to find some help. I don't have any violent crimes. I'm a drug user. A Warning from man trying to get help for himself and others with him in isolation: (After describing an inmate, years in isolation with zero programming or treatment,) “This man is also getting out of prison.

This world is not getting better because the people with power are overlooking a real problem coming up. I should say it’s

already here and has been here for some time. It’s only becoming a bigger problem. But nobody cares until it’s their kids or their

family that is hurt or killed by a person who suffers from mental illness.

PLEASE help us put together MEDIA material. We have wonderful blog and vignettes of prisoners that will also be compelling. Feel free to use some of the material here and we can supply you with more data and ideas. We also have release data from before 2000 that needs to be digested and collated and are looking for folks that like to do research.

Submissions: (and ideas for your letters) Violent VS NON violent BY Brother Malik Shabazz

The objective of this missive is to have attention brought to a segment of the prison population that continues to be largely

disregarded: I’m certain it’s by design from the political arena. All across the country, attention is being focused on “non violent”

inmates and ways to have them cut loose ASAP. Obama passed a law that has had federal non-violent drug cases released early

or afforded time cuts. Also in Wisconsin there’s a push to have non –violent offenders released,, which is well and good on the

surface. Let’s go into this and see what we find:

In relation to violent offenders, especially those who’ve been in prison since their teenage years into their 30’s and 40’s,

they have a low recidivism rate, especially those convicted of 1st degree homicide or who have a large number sentence. When a

human being is kept in an inhuman environment commencing at 16, 17,18 years young, until they’re in their 30, 40’s 50’s,

something happens to that person’s constitution that no one can relate to except one who has experienced it: we lose a portion of

our humanity. Living in cages, boxes and rooms for decades removes from most inmates their desire to commit crimes upon their

release, this has long been established statistically.

Lifers have the lowest recidivism rate amongst all felons, yet the Wisconsin DOC /DAI refuses to release them, as that will

clearly establish the fact that they’re unjustified in the lengths of time they’re forcing us to do. I am a lifer with 24 years served.

Lifers get out and continue to be productive and become assets in the community. Yet very little attention is afforded to the class

of felons that have 1% recidivism rate. Why?

Understand clearly as I am speaking from experience: We lifers are not attempting to minimize the reality that someone’s

live/lives were taken, This is a haunting truth that impacts us daily. Many of us must be involved in some form of therapy, not by

court order but by own volition. As such, most of us seek ways to give back. Just as living in these cages does something to a

person’s essence, so does taking a life. Lifers come to respect and appreciate life more than any other felon, I assure you of that.

With this in mind, it must be noted that lifers are long timers, are the ones who’ve helped and/or have created and ran (5)

or helped run these prison programs, Classes , groups, trades, jobs, etc. The vast majority of us do not have violent prison records,

which speaks volumes. Neither do we live within these prisons with the mentality of “I’m a lifer and have nothing to lose”. We

are the ones working to improve the conditions within these evil places, yet no consideration is provided to us. Why?

I, just like many others, recognize that a “tough on crime” stance with violent offenders is political gold. However, little

consideration is given to the fact that Wisconsin can’t afford to maintain this diabolical political stance.

With regards to non- violent inmates, by no means do I believe that some who breaks into a home should get 20-30 years of

time. However, those with the highest recidivism rate are the non- violent, the ones who cost businesses and private citizens

millions each year because of their crimes and based on how much it costs to warehouse them in prison. A non- violent felon,

within a ten year period, will serve two-three BIDS, whereas a violent felon, with a homicide in particular, will do a minimum of

tens of years of getting himself together within. The law-makers do not witness the prison environments “live” and in “Real

time”, which prevents them from “seeing and hearing” the major difference in the two mindsets. They don’t hear inmates plotting

their next crime upon release an their anticipated return to prison for another brief stay.

The politicians play on the lay person’s ignorance and fears of violent crime. They don’t tell the tax-payers that those

who’ve done ten years or more return to society as assets not threats. They refuse to tell the public how much of their tax dollars

are literally wasted on housing, then warehousing a “lifer” once he has been rehabilitated.

Let’s do a little math. Let’s say it costs 25 K a year to house/then warehouse an inmate with life-he’s 18 when he comes in

and has done 25 years. That’s a minimum of $1,375,000 which doesn’t include medical expenses associated with aging and

injuries. The politicians will say, that’s nothing due to the fact that a life was taken and a message needs to be sent to the public

etc etc etc.

They don’t tell you that a life sentence is in no way a crime detergent and it does not repay any form of a debt to society ,

on the contrary, it’s contributing to society’s debt by the millions and makes us much less safe because of the waste of money

that needs to be spent on programs and treatment. It is becoming clearer that over incarceration has devastated poor communities

and actually creates environments where crime flourishes.

Law-makers are well abreast of the fact that “crime pays in a major way – hence the need to keep these evil institutions

packed and stacked. Yes, they are ready to release the non violent offenders- they know they’ll be back within three years of their

release. The public must demand from law makers the records of business with contracts with the DOC /DAI. It is natural to

make money on prisons in services needed etc- but another thing when profit from prisons over shadows the public need and the

public are fed falsehoods in order to keep the money flowing. The flip side of this is the impact these places are having on

families and neighborhoods. The DOC has abandoned it’s mission to rehabilitate and is set on keeping the parole ready inmate

locked up for as long as possible. There are approximately 2500 hundred inmates, Call OLD LAW inmates cause they were

sentenced and are ruled by the laws that were in place before truth in sentencing in 2000. Over 1000 of them are over 55 and were

in prison when there were fine rehabilitative programs. Many got degrees when there were Pell Grants available to prisoners.

These men and women are truly missed and needed in what is left of their homes, neighborhoods and society. They want nothing

more than to contribute to the redevelopment, growth, prosperity of his community. I have a son, he was 11 months when I came

to prison- he came to prison at 18 with a 15 year bid for 1st degree reckless homicide. Quite naturally I blame myself for not being

there to help him. We old law prisoners are needing to be home, where we can be good role models and help to bring our

wounded community back from the brink. Wisconsin leads the nation in the incarceration rate of Black Americans. Milwaukee

has also leads the nation in poor school test scores and now we spend more on prisons than we do on our whole University

system. There are some glimmers of a shift away from this wrongheadedness, with Governor Walkers’ main backers, the Koch

Brothers, backing off from the “lock em up forever policies.” This is a time when your input is needed to say loud and clear – we

believe people Change, we believe in Second Chances.

Brother Malik Shabazz

Editor’s Note research question: where is the study/data that lifers have a low recidivism rate? Have other crime also been

studied-we could use the data)

Letter to State auditor by Jason Faber. TO; Joe Chrisman;[email protected]; 266-2818;22 E. Mifflin Street, Suite 500; Madison, WI 53703

Formal Report of Fraud, Waste and Mismanagement in State Government RE: Investigation of the Wisconsin Department of Corrections & Parole Commission for Failures to Effectively Review

Inmates for Custody Reduction, Program Placements, and Parole Review Pursuant to Department of Corrections/Parole

Commission Mission and Policy Statements and Related Administrative Code Provisions

Dear Mr. Chrisman:

Upon receipt and review, as a citizen of the State of Wisconsin and as a taxpayer who funds the identified agencies'

operational budgets, I hereby request the initiation of a program audit of the effectiveness of the identified agencies to properly

review inmate rehabilitation or "correction" for custody reduction and program placements by the Bureau of Offender Classification

and Movement (BOCM) and individual institutional Program Review Committees (PRC) and parole review of parole-eligible inmates

by the Wisconsin Parole Commission.' (6)

Based on direct and/or indirect communications of observational and/or experiential instances of fraud, waste, and

mismanagement within these agencies by and through state actors, I cite the following to substantiate my request for program

audit:

1. Inmates are routinely denied required programming based on limited availability or space in programs. This denial or

deferral of required programming until "endorsed" by the Parole Commission—an authority outside their legislated purview—or the

inmate is months from release, is prejudicial to the needs' of parole-eligible inmates for parole consideration and for both parole-

eligible and Truth-in-Sentencing inmates for custody reduction.

2. The failure of institutional PRCs to properly identify and promote rehabilitative review and custody reduction for inmates in

compliance with Administrative Code provisions is ineffective, wasteful, and prejudicial to inmates.

3. The pro forma review of inmates before the institutional PRC is often predetermined and biased by correctional staff

assigned to the committee who exercise their will over that of the BOCM Classification Specialists in custody reduction decisions.

4. The continued use of the outdated and ineffective Risk Rating System by institutional PRCs as a "guideline" that takes the

form of a requirement for custody reduction is prejudicial and further illustrates the inability of the PRCs to effect proper review and

placement.

5. The population ratio of Truth-in-Sentencing to Old Law parole-eligible inmates is significant and illustrates the non-use of

parole by the Parole Commission. Over 15 years since Truth-in-Sentencing was enacted. The Department of Corrections still houses

over 2,500 parole-eligible inmates who could and more often than not, should have been paroled if proper, unbiased, and non-

politically influenced reviews were being conducted. This inaction by the Wisconsin Parole Commission is a known fraud that

wastes taxpayer money on pro forma, predetermined parole denials and deferrals up until the inmates is mere months from release on

mandatory release.

6. The open-ended and arbitrary criteria for parole release consideration is so incomprehensible that no inmate nor their

loved ones can ever know what the inmate can do to meet the parole criteria, especially for "insufficient time for punishment" and

"risk to the public". This creates an unending state of denial of discretion for parole that is wasteful and hurtful to those involved.

For these instances of fraud, waste, and mismanagement—a by far limited listing of known and available reasons to justify an

audit—I request that you, as State Auditor, initiate an investigation with your findings detailed to the Joint Legislative Audit

Committee for legislation to correct these agencies and their conduct for proper use of taxpayer funding and representation in

the area of corrections Thank you for your time and attention to this urgent matter. Sincerely,

Congratulations! Good News Racial Discrimination In Jury Selection Leads to New Trial By Mustafa-el KA Ajala On June 8, 2015, in Ajala V Swiekatewski, #13-cv-547-BBC(Wd WIs) during my jury selection from a pool of over 30 potential Jurors, all were white except for 3: One Black, one Asian and one Lebanese juror. AAG Brando Flugaur used his preemptory strikes to remove them all. Judge Barbara B Crabb herself called us to the sidebar and requested his justification for excluding the Black Juror. He stated it was because she’s stated the father of her child had been incarcerated, to which I responded a white juror too had an incarcerated relative and he did not seek to exclude her, and moreover, he excluded the only other 2 people of color. He hurriedly agreed to add the other two back, and Judge Crabb permitted it, as well as the Black juror to be struck. Despite overwhelming evidence of defendants’ guilt, in large part due to their own admissions, Judgment was rendered for defendants; after which I motioned the court for a new trial based on the discriminatory exclusion of the Black juror. In a somewhat scathing rebuke of the AAG’s actions, on further review, a new trial was granted (see the court’s 10-15-15 opinion and order for details). This decision may be helpful to other future civil (or criminal ) trial litigants. The jury make-up does matter; Fight for its diversity, even if it means a motion after judgment or an appeal. Adding Some Color to the Jury Pool: For a more just verdict By Mustafa –EL K.A. Ajala Judge Barbara B Crabb, Us District Court (W.D.WIS)while acknowledging the right to a racial unbiased jury pool, recently denied the pretrial motion for a more diverse jury pool on the basis that the court’s jury selection process itself prohibits racially biased jury pool selections and has measures in place to help prevent it. However, she added this invite:”If the plaintiff has suggestions for improving the district’s jury plan in any respect, he is free to put his suggestions in writing and send them to the court for consideration for future cases.” We all reading this, must take her up on her offer. In 2 civil trials I had before her this year (June and August) there was a single Black juror in the pool of over 30 people. The reasons we have US Supreme court cases Such as Miller-El v Dretke, 545 U.s.231,241(2005) and Snyder V LA,552,U.S.472,477-

85 (2008) outlawing racially biased jury selection),is because the color of the jury pool does matter. These cases acknowledge the historical and still present deep-seated racial biases that exit, primarily against Black litigants, by all-white (or nearly all white jurors);and it’s real. (7) The court’s policy: “plan for the random selection of Grand and petit jurors for service in the Western District of Wisconsin”(April 2014), has flaws of the same kind that have been challenged (in criminal cases) by the Milwaukee and Racine County Public Defenders Offices; i.e.(1) it selects from “official list of actual Voters” only (Source of names of prospective jurors section and (2) prospective jurors are excluded if they are not adult citizens who have resided within the judicial district at least one year, or can’t read or write, or if they have pending criminal charges or past convictions (w/o restored civil rights) for a crime punishable by more than one year. These conditions exclude too many otherwise eligible jurors, and without a doubt disproportionately impacts Black potential jurors because in the state of Wisconsin (as elsewhere throughout the US) Black citizens are racially disproportionately targeted and prosecuted for criminal offenses, and made to serve lengthier sentences. A better, more just and diverse jury selection system would be one that selects from any free Wisconsin resident, 18 or older, who has a WI I.D. or driver’s license and resides in the Western District currently (i.e.at the time of the selection and jury duty call) and suffers no mental incapacity that would render them incapable of understanding the facts presented before them or making a determination on those facts. Write the court and suggest the same, or, if you have one, a better idea. A more diverse jury pool ensures a more just verdict for litigants of all races.

Editor’s Note: Address to write to give your ideas for picking fairer jury: U.S. District Judge Barbara B. Crabb;

c/o Clerk of Court; U.S. District Court; Western District of Wisconsin;120 North Henry Street, Room 320

Madison, WI 53703 Quote her quote:”If the plaintiff has suggestions for improving the district’s jury plan in any respect, he is free to put his suggestions in writing and send them to the court for consideration for future cases.” We all reading this, must take her up on her offer.

Innocence case Successful at long last August 8, 2015 In 2010 Richard Harrison was charged with Burglary, Criminal Damage, Resisting and Theft, all with repeater enhancers. He was convicted by trial on 7/13/11 and sentenced to 16 years prison. He was revoked for an additional 9 years consecutive. Harrison proclaimed his innocence throughout trial but still lost. On appeal, Harrison argued that the judge unlawfully refused to step off the case, violating his right to a fair trial. On 11/5/13, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals agreed and reversed his conviction. On 1/22/15, the Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal. The State has declined to retry the case. During the five and a half years Harrison continued to proclaim his innocence in this crime and learned that the tire pattern in the photo taken by the sheriff's office was a very different size and could not even fit his truck. He shared this new evidence with his attorney who in turn filed a motion to dismiss the charges in their entirety. The judge granted the motion to dismiss and Harrison is officially exonerated, partially. Harrison is now challenging his wrongful supervision revocation which was premised on these bogus, now dismissed charges. We wish Harrison the strength and patience to continue his fight for justice and urge him to take full advantage of his

legal options and reunite with his family. Stay strong,"Little Rhino," and anybody else in the same situation. Don't give up! Richard Harrison, #261812 JCI

WISDOM urges reform of parole system FROM Catholic Herald News November 5 2015 Written by Ricardo Torres

St. Martin de Porres Parish is located in a part of Milwaukee to

which not many non-residents are drawn, especially as the sun sets.

But on Tuesday evening, Oct. 20, individuals from the neighborhood,

outside the neighborhood and parishioners gathered to talk about

Wisconsin parole reform during an event sponsored by WISDOM.

Sr. Fran, Walker, Moczulewski and others read letters from prisoners

eligible for parole but haven’t had it granted.“We don’t want to deal

with the lower class so we make them disappear to prison,” Capuchin

Fr. David Pruess, pastor of St. Martin de Porres, said. “Ultimately, we

have to figure out how to rehab people … pure punishment isn’t going

to do it.”

The event was organized by WISDOM, a grassroots, faith-based coalition that addresses social justice issues

A PERSONAL REPORT from A PARENT at the Madison Wisdom event of Oct 2015. (8) The event in Madison was great. We had a slide show with five (5) key points to a solution: 1) Invest in programs to end racial & economic disparities that fuel the mass incarceration. 2) Cut state prison population in half by 11,000.

3) View people convicted of crimes as people/human beings.

4) Remove barriers, such as, voting rights, jobs, housing & etc. 5) Create opportunity for people with conviction history. The speaker repeated told us that the time is NOW!!! The problems still persist. Wisconsin is dead last in nation for incarceration. Our leaders lack courage to do or stand up for justice. We spend 1.3 billion dollars a year, thats on housing 22,589 inmates. Prison capacity is grown over its capacity. There were alot of representatives from EXPO. (Ex-prisoners organization). We had a nice breakfast prepared for us at

Bethel Lutheran Church. Then we had prayer outside Dept of Corrections, as they watched us from the windows. We also yelled out to Ed Wall and waved at them in the windows. After the press conference, by the way led by outstanding speakers, to name a few was Jerome Dillard who told us our ship has come in and it was time to turn it around at sea. We then went back to Bethel Church and had lunch. We left there feeling motivated. Nice event. Barbara

Places to write: a starter list: We will have many more ideas in next newsletter but here are some good ones.

above (pg 5 and 6)are two suggestion: 1) State Auditor in Jason Faber’s letter and 2) Barbara Crabb Court about

jury selection

Write YOU LEGISLATOR : Teach them about old law parole and your specific case: Always one of the most effective

things to do is write your legislator- they do open you mail and they learn. IF you are prisoner your legislator is wherever you last

lived on the outside. You can contact FFUP giving your old address or Senator Harris Dodd has staff who will forward your

letters but you must give your old address. WHO REPRESENTS ME?

phone number to get contact info on legislators is: 800 362-9472 (state switchboard)

Here is the website to find out your legislators’ contact information:

http://legis.wisconsin.gov/-you or just google “who are my legislators in Wisconsin”

give your zipcode and they will give you your legislators and their emails and phones

address for senators: PO Box 7882, Madison, WI 53707

address for representatives by last name

a-l : PO Box 8952, Madison 53708;

m-z : PO box 8953; Madison 53708

Wednesday, November 4, 2015 - Press Release

Governor Scott Walker Creates Commission on Government Reform,

Efficiency, and Performance Commission will focus on continual improvement making government more effective, more efficient, and more

accountable to the public

Madison – Governor Scott Walker issued Executive Order #179 ,creating the Governor’s Commission on

Government Reform, Efficiency, and Performance. Let the commission know what you think loud and clear. If you can, send us a copy.

Email:[email protected]; Mail: Office of Governor Scott Walker; 115 East Capitol; Madison, WI 53702; Phone:(608) 266-1212

There are 12 people on the Governor’s Committee: We can get addresses for 4 of them

1)Adam Jarchow State Representative, 28th Assembly District/ 2) Howard Marklein State Senator, 17th District and

3)Janis A. Ringhand State Senator, 15th District and 4)Dave Ross ,Secretary of the Department of Safety and

Professional Services, PO Box 8935,Madison, WI 53708-8935

They gave a direct email for suggestions but no addresses except the general one here. I suggest writing the general numbers

and, although most legislators do not consider mail outside their district, why not try the individuals too.

Address for Senate members: PO Box7882, Madison WI 53707;

Addresses for Assembly: PO Box 8952 ( A- L ) ; Po Box 8953 (m - z) Madison 53703

Finally , we have had many requests for a complete listing of the parole rules we proposed. They are good- They (9)

are below. Remember, the statute 227 just allowed us to be heard and responded to and Dean Stensberg did that. These

give us a template to aim for.

Broad Outlines of What We Would Like to Achieve for OLD LAW Inmates

• 1) For inmates sentenced for crimes committed prior to December 31st, 1999, the mandated 25% of their sentence shall be

considered sufficient time for punishment. Afterwards, release on parole shall be granted, absent substantive extenuating

circumstances, based on conduct and accomplishments while incarcerated.

2) If parole is not granted, the Parole Board must state in written detail the specific requirements an eligible inmate must meet

to be granted parole. This cannot contain a catch-all provision that might allow the decision-maker to base his or her decision

on a factor of which the inmate has no control such as ”insufficient time for punishment” or “seriousness of the crime”. Also,

there is no statutory requirement that a prisoner be transitioned to a minimum security Institution ,that he/she has a work

release job or must work outside the prison before release from prison. Yet unwritten rules often require these steps and the

chronic lack of space in lower security prisons, lack of jobs near the prisons and paucity of work release jobs leave many parole

ready inmates and their families waiting years for the next transition. We hope our new rules make it clear that although these

steps are laudable, they are not essential and the lack of availability on the part of the prison system shall not be used to keep

the inmate from rejoining his or her community.

3) Availability of programs and prison overcrowding cannot be a factor in determining release eligibility. The Department of

Corrections and Community Supervision shall provide parole eligible inmates access to the programs/facilities necessary to

complete the requirements for their parole release within 90 days of denial of parole for reasons of programming. If this is not

possible, the prisoner will be allowed to complete the program in the community or the requirement will be waived .

• 4) The Parole Board shall have the widest possible view of the prisoner. In addition to allowing victims and victim advocates to

testify at the hearing, prisoners shall be able to invite family members and advocates. Also, the prisoners shall be allowed to

submit letters of recommendation by WIDOC staff and WIDOC volunteers who have worked with him/her. Staff and community

members who are against the release shall be allowed to speak.

• 5) The decision whether to release an inmate shall be made based on testimony at the hearing and documents in the prisoner’s

file only and the prisoner shall be able to view and contest contents of his/her file beforehand.

THE RULES THEMSELVES: Below is a Rewriting of PAC 106 (16) through (20) with proposed changes inserted

PAC 1.06(16) (16): A RECOMMENDATION FOR A PAROLE GRANT OR RELEASE TO EXTENDED SUPERVISION ORDER MAY BE

MADE AFTER CONSIDERATION OF ALL THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA:

(NEW RULES IN BOLD PRINT)

PAC 1.06(16)(a) The inmate has become parole or release to extended supervision eligible under s. 304.06, Stats., and s. PAC

1.05.

PAC 1.06(16)(b) Once a prisoner has served the statutorily imposed minimum amount of time necessary to become parole-

eligible, the Parole Commission shall recognize that the prisoner has served the "sufficient time for punishment" portion of

his/her sentence. ) For inmates sentenced for crimes committed prior to December 31st, 1999, the mandated 25% of their

sentence shall be considered sufficient time for punishment, for those with life sentences, it is 13 ½ years. For prisoners

sentenced pre-1981, parole eligibility for those serving life sentences started at 11 yrs, 3 months.

PAC 1.06(16) (c) The inmate has demonstrated satisfactory adjustment to the institution.

PAC 1.06(16) (d) The inmate has not refused or neglected to perform required or assigned duties.

PAC 1.06(16)(e) The inmate has participated in and has demonstrated sufficient efforts in required or recommended programs

which have been made available by demonstrating one of the following:

PAC 1.06(16)(e)(1) P.A.C.1.06 (16)(e) 1.1 Inmate has participated in required programs satisfactorily, OR

PAC 1.06(16)(e)(2.) The inmate can complete programming in the community OR

PAC 1.06(16)(e)(3) The inmate has not been able to gain entry into programming because the program was not available at

his institution. In cases where the inmate is in administrative confinement, a non punitive status, all efforts shall be made to

see that programming required for release is successfully taken. If the inmate requests such programming and a good faith

attempt to supply it is not made, this lack of programming shall not be used against the inmate when deciding readiness for

release.

PAC 1.06(16)(e)(4) Where such inmate chances to obtain favorable parole is contingent upon his completion or participation

in such program or treatment, the Parole Commission and Program Review Committee, shall work together in securing an

inmate a space in required programs and treatment, as required by DOC 302.15 (4)(9) WI Adm. Code.

PAC 1.06(16)(f) The inmate has developed an adequate release plan.

PAC 1.06(16)(g) The inmate is subject to a sentence of confinement in another state or is in the United States illegally and may

be deported.

PAC 1.06 (16)(h)Inmates who committed their crimes before 1999 who were ordered by the judge to be deported upon

release, shall , if permission is given by the host country and the inmate, be deported to his or her country of origin.

PAC 1.06(16)(i)In order to assess whether or not release would pose an unreasonable risk to the public and would be in the

interest of justice , the Parole Commission shall be afforded the widest possible view of the prisoner. Therefore:

PAC 106(16)(i)(1) In addition to permitting victims and victim advocates the opportunity to be heard at each hearing, the

Parole Commission shall permit interested parties to speak at parole hearings on behalf of the prisoner. These interested

parties may consist of family, friends, members of the prisoner's support group, clergy, employers or other advocates as well

as prison staff who support release.

PAC 106(16)(i)(2) The Parole Commission shall also permit two institutional staff and/or community members who voice

opposition to release to speak at the hearing. In addition, Correctional staff or any person in the community will be allowed

to submit written testimony in opposition to the parole.

PAC 106 (16)(i)(3) The commission may use the independently scored findings of evidence-based-practice evaluations used

initially to identify essential program needs during the Assessment & Evaluation process and subsequently used to evaluate

current dangerousness to the community in preparation for release. IF these test scores are used in the assessment, copies of

the questions, answers and test results shall be made available to the prisoners before the parole hearing. He/she shall be

able to comment on test process and fairness.

PAC 106(16)(j)All documents used in accessing whether to release an inmate shall be made available to the prisoner.

PAC 1. 06 (19)If parole is not granted, the Parole Commissioner must detail in writing, exactly what specific, achievable

requirements the prisoner needs to satisfy to become suitable for release. These requirements cannot contain any highly

subjective, catch-all provisions that might allow a decision-maker to base his or her decision on immutable factors over

which neither the prisoner nor the Parole Commission has any control such as "seriousness of the offense" or "unreasonable

risk to the community" without detailing exactly what achievable requirements the prisoner needs to satisfy to become

suitable for release. Any such requirements shall then be endorsed for prompt implementation/action in the written

decision of the hearing in which they were made.

PAC 1.06 (20) Once the prisoner has been issued a deferment, the Parole Commission shall not increase or repeat that

deferment for any reason other than the following:

• The prisoner's negative institution conduct based upon a lawful finding of guilt made by

Department of Corrections personnel authorized by rule to make such findings;

• The prisoner's refusal to participate in essential programming mandated by the court or

• The negative removal of the prisoner from such essential programming during the

current deferment period for a well documented cause.

PAC 1.06 (21)In every case, each Parole Commissioner shall be required to maintain continuity in the decision making process

by continuing with the case plan set forth in any written decision which was made subsequent to the implementation of

these proposed rules.

IN addition we add this rule which honors the education effort made by many old law prisoners. A similar provision was in

the 1989-90 statutes (304.06(1r)(a)(2):

PAC 1.06 (22) a parole eligible prisoner who came into prison without a high school diploma, GED or HSED, and has attained his

HSED or GED shall be paroled unless the prisoner has received a major provable behavior conduct report within the last one

year or if his current parole review that indicates his or her release would post a significant risk to the public. Also a prisoner

who gained a college degree or completed a vocational course while in prison shall be paroled if there is no provable evidence

within the last one year to show that his or her release would pose a significant risk to the public.