It's mission is to "grant parole to those whose release is compatible with public safety." |
Second Chance Month Falls Short Of Its Promise
Governor Northam designated May, 2019, as "Second Chance Month," but according to the official numbers posted on the Parole Board website, there were only 8 regular releases granted in May and only 5 geriatric releases.
By way of comparison, in May of 2018 there were 27 regular releases and 6 geriatric releases.
This is truly heartbreaking to the many individuals behind bars who have worked hard for decades to earn their second chance, only to be routinely denied on the basis of the "seriousness of the offense," something they are powerless to change.
Inmate Sues Parole Board, Claims Violation Of Separation Of Power Clause
On August 10, 2019, Steven Goodman, an inmate at Greensville Correctional Center in Jarratt, Virginia, filed a lawsuit in the Greensville Circuit Court against the Virginia Parole Board. See Goodman v. Bennett, Case No. CL 19-264. In this lawsuit, Goodman claims that certain Parole Board rules violate the separation of power clause in Article III, § 1 of the Constitution of Virginia. Goodman says:
In July of 1997, the Parole Board replaced their prior rules with the Parole Board Policy Manual with the approval of Governor Allen. These changes went into effect in January of 1998. In Part I of this manual, the Parole Board sets forth fourteen (14) "Parole Guideline Factors."
In Factor B, the Parole board replaced the statutory term "prisoners" with the word "individuals." These words are not synonymous. While all prisoners are individuals, all individuals are not prisoners. By changing this one word, the Parole Board empowered themselves to investigate crime-related factors (Factors D, E and F). The statute, however, limits the investigation of the statutory factors to that period of time in which the "prisoner is . . . in prison."
As evidenced by the following, the General Assembly did not give, nor does the Parole Board have, the authority to investigate or consider any crime related factor when they review eligible prisoners for parole:
• No statute gives the Parole Board the power to investigate crime-related factors;
• If the General Assembly had wanted the Parole Board to investigate or consider crime-related factors when making their parole decision, they would have said so in a duly enacted law;
• The General Assembly did not do so because they already considered, used and disposed of crime-related factors when they established parole eligibility criteria;
• Crime-related factors have zero probative value as to the suitability determination the Parole Board is required to make: e.g., whether an individual will live a law-abiding life and will apply with all conditions of parole if released;
• If the General Assembly had empowered the Parole Board to investigate and consider crime-related factors, they would have encouraged and allowed arbitrary decision-making: e.g., one year the Parole Board uses crime-related factors too deny parole, but the next year they grant parole to that same individual though the crime-related factors did not change.
Under the separation of powers clause, it is well settled that neither the courts nor administrative officials may amend a statute. The power to enact or amend statutes lies solely with the legislative branch of government. It is the duty of administrative officials to execute and enforce the law as it is written. Administrative officials cannot add to, change or ignore statutory language.
Inmate Sues Parole Board, Claims Violation Of Separation Of Power Clause
On August 10, 2019, Steven Goodman, an inmate at Greensville Correctional Center in Jarratt, Virginia, filed a lawsuit in the Greensville Circuit Court against the Virginia Parole Board. See Goodman v. Bennett, Case No. CL 19-264. In this lawsuit, Goodman claims that certain Parole Board rules violate the separation of power clause in Article III, § 1 of the Constitution of Virginia. Goodman says:
In July of 1997, the Parole Board replaced their prior rules with the Parole Board Policy Manual with the approval of Governor Allen. These changes went into effect in January of 1998. In Part I of this manual, the Parole Board sets forth fourteen (14) "Parole Guideline Factors."
In Factor B, the Parole board replaced the statutory term "prisoners" with the word "individuals." These words are not synonymous. While all prisoners are individuals, all individuals are not prisoners. By changing this one word, the Parole Board empowered themselves to investigate crime-related factors (Factors D, E and F). The statute, however, limits the investigation of the statutory factors to that period of time in which the "prisoner is . . . in prison."
As evidenced by the following, the General Assembly did not give, nor does the Parole Board have, the authority to investigate or consider any crime related factor when they review eligible prisoners for parole:
• No statute gives the Parole Board the power to investigate crime-related factors;
• If the General Assembly had wanted the Parole Board to investigate or consider crime-related factors when making their parole decision, they would have said so in a duly enacted law;
• The General Assembly did not do so because they already considered, used and disposed of crime-related factors when they established parole eligibility criteria;
• Crime-related factors have zero probative value as to the suitability determination the Parole Board is required to make: e.g., whether an individual will live a law-abiding life and will apply with all conditions of parole if released;
• If the General Assembly had empowered the Parole Board to investigate and consider crime-related factors, they would have encouraged and allowed arbitrary decision-making: e.g., one year the Parole Board uses crime-related factors too deny parole, but the next year they grant parole to that same individual though the crime-related factors did not change.
Under the separation of powers clause, it is well settled that neither the courts nor administrative officials may amend a statute. The power to enact or amend statutes lies solely with the legislative branch of government. It is the duty of administrative officials to execute and enforce the law as it is written. Administrative officials cannot add to, change or ignore statutory language.
- press release by Steven Goodman, published at his request
September 3 Memorandum Limits Allowed Number Of Visitors To Ten
While the Department of Corrections claims to encourage contacts with an optimal number of good people in the outside world, it has just drastically cut the number of visitors a prisoner may have on their approved list, one that can be modified only twice a year. This is creating a lot of anguish on the part of prisoners who find regular visits a source of hope and support while they are incarcerated.
The reason given is to limit contraband brought in from the outside, although it is not clear what this new policy will do to resolve that problem.
Number Of Prison Deaths On The Rise
According to report by Sandy Hausman of WVTF radio, Walt Isenhour, 63, died July 15 at Buckingham Correctional Center in what was ruled a heart attack, but one that may have been precipitated by extreme heat, which puts an extra strain on the heart.
Buckingham is one of 18 Virginia prisons without air conditioning, and many of its antiquated exhaust fans are no longer working, resulting in inside temperatures that often exceed 100 degrees. Isenhour had just been transferred from Sussex II, an air conditioned facility, and had not yet been able to purchase a fan for personal use. Of course, when temperatures reach 100, even that provides no real relief, but is like using a hair dryer in an attempt to cool off.
In that same month, 39-year-old Margie Ryder died of pulmonary arterial hypertension at Fluvanna Correctional Center for Women, according to an August 14, 2019, report by Ned Oliver in the Virginia Mercury. Department of Corrections Officials insist her death was unpreventable, but the Legal Aid Justice Center, representing her case and that of others at the Center, are attributing her death and that of numerous others to poor medical care, citing medical professionals at the UVA Medical Center who stated her condition was indeed treatable, and that she should have been able to live many years with proper treatment.
According Shannon Ellis, an attorney in the case, “If the state has decided that they’re going to incarcerate this number of people, then it has to come to terms with the cost of that decision – including their medical care.”
And now that the percentage of Virginia inmates who are 55 or older has more than doubled over the past 10 years, medical costs will only increase, as will the number of needless deaths.
Shortage Of Guards Reaches A Critical Point
Richmond reporter Kerri O'Brien of WCIR Channel 8 News recently quoted numbers of corrections officers at a town hall in Emporia who expressed serious concerns about staff shortages, low pay and resulting security concerns.
Secretary of Public Safety Brian Moran agreed the officers do deserve more pay, according to the Virginia Mercury. “We need to pay correctional officers more, and we need more correctional officers.”
Moran also agreed that what’s cutting into their pay was the rising cost of healthcare, some $200,000 to provide for the needs of an aging prison population. Ultimately, he says, more pay for the officers comes down to budget and the General Assembly would need to approve any raises in its next session.
Unfortunately, this may not happen without serious changes in the mindset and/or the membership of the Virginia Senate and House of Representatives.
Virginia Prisoners Deserve A Raise
Prisoners in Virginia have not received a pay raise since the late 70's, and their pay is only between 0.27 and 0.45 per hour for a 30 hour week.
Meanwhile, the following changes have been made within the Virginia Department of Corrections:
Prisoners in Virginia have not received a pay raise since the late 70's, and their pay is only between 0.27 and 0.45 per hour for a 30 hour week.
Meanwhile, the following changes have been made within the Virginia Department of Corrections:
1. Prisoners are served poorer meals with smaller portions.
2. Prisoners are now charged medical copays for their healthcare services and medications.
3. Prisoners have 10% of their incoming funds automatically taken for court cost, fines and/or child support.
4. Prisoners have 5% of their funds from the outside automatically taken from their account and placed in a savings account (until they receive $1,000).
5. Prices for commissary items have escalated.
6. Prisoners are not allowed to purchase personal items from catalog companies with more reasonable prices than those charged by their only vendor - Keefe Commissary Network Sales.
7. Prisoners are no longer provided a free bar of soap weekly, but are required to purchase such hygiene items from Keefe Commissary. For the cheapest soap sold, the average prisoner has to work 4 hours to purchase one bar.
8. Prisoners are no longer provided a free stamped envelope and paper weekly for regular mail and ten free stamped envelope and paper weekly for legal letters.
9. Prisoners who work can no longer get 40 hours a week, but are restricted to 15 to 30 hours.
10. Prisoners are no longer given a grocery bag filled with assorted candies, writing supplies, hygiene items or anything else for Christmas.
- information provided by an anonymous prisoner
HARD TIMES is edited and published by Harvey Yoder of Harrisonburg, Virginia.
1 comment:
Thank you, Mr Yoder, for your works I will be sending a copy to my loved one Mr. Thorpe in Texas a copy. I hope this finds you healing well and in good spirits. Take Care Dee
Post a Comment