NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/misc/activism/progress/9554

Text File | 1992-12-22 | 11.4 KB | 191 lines

Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive
Path: sparky!uunet!wupost!mont!pencil.cs.missouri.edu!daemon
From: New Liberation News Service <[e-mail]>
Subject: NLNS: The Terror's Revenge
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: ?
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 13:22:37 GMT
Approved: [e-mail]
Lines: 176

/* Written  9:57 pm  Dec 20, 1992 by [e-mail] in igc:nlns.samples */
/* ---------- "NLNS PACKET 3.6 *** 12/11/92" ---------- */

The Terror's Revenge
Adrian Lomax, The Madison Edge
(with notes by NLNS staff)

[NLNS note: On November 18, 1992, a regular column by Wisconsin
prisoner, Adrian Lomax appeared as usual in The Madison Edge, a
Madison, WI progressive bi-weekly community paper. "Chronicle of a
Death Foretold," as the column was called, told the story of Lomax's
experience with a guard commander who was particularly viscious to the
inmates of the Waupun Correctional Institute. When Lomax was transferred
to another prison, he felt safe enough to write about this "Terror of
Waupun" freely and publically--thinking it to be his first amendment right.
The title of the article refers to a statement made by sociologist Kelsey
Kauffman in her research on prisons regarding a certain type of prison
guard she calls a "Hard Ass." Lomax printed this statement in his column,
which, taken together with his title, could give the reader of the column the
impression that the "Terror of Waupun" probably won't last much longer.
Kauffman, herself a former prison guard, said,: "[t]he Hard Ass role is a
poor way to survive, [behaving that way in the long run] is an open
invitation for a shiv in the back."
    The same day the column ran, Lomax's feeling of safety was proven
unsound when he was put into solitary confinement without a charge.
Shortly after Lomax's column ran, the Madison Edge was approached by
Department of Corrections officials and told to remove Lomax's column
from any copies they mailed to prisoners. At the present time, Lomax is
only allowed to use a pen for two hours a day. Nonetheless, he managed to
write and mail the following column for release in the December 2nd issue
of the Edge.]

MADISON, WI (NLNS)--In my last column I wrote about Captain Patricia
Garro, "the Terror of Waupun." Noting that I'd recently been transferred
from Waupun to the Racine Correctional Institution, I confessed that I
would not have written the column had I still been confined at Waupun, for
fear of the Terror's wrath. I concluded by expressing hope that Captain
Garro had no like minded friends working here at Racine.
    So much for hope. On Wednesday, November 18, Lieutenant
Ronald Molnar and his minions descended upon me as I was playing a
game of chess in the dayroom of my cellblock. They clamped the steel
bracelets on my wrists and transported me to the RCI segregation unit. I sit
in "the hole" as I write these words.
    Lieutenant Molnar signed the order to throw me in the hole. The
segregation placement form states Molnar's reasoning as follows:
    Inmate Lomax was placed into TLU under DOC 303.11(4b) due to a
newspaper article in the Madison Edge (11/18/92) that encourages
disrespect for Captain Patricia Garro (WCI). The articlee encourages
inmates to defy the Captain's authority and her ability to control a particular
situation. Because this same article can easily be communicated to other
inmates it has the potential for encourging desrespect and defiance of all
staff authority. Possible violations of DOC 303.16--Threats, 303.271--
Lying About Staff.
    So I'm serving time in the hole for writing a newspaper column.
And the reasoning is curious. "The article encourages inmates to defy the
Captain's authority. . ." Of course, my column didn't encourage anyone to
do anything. I merely reported some of Captain Garro's particularly abusive
actions and repeated a nationally-known sociologist's conclusion regarding
the fate likely to befall prison guards who behave as the Terror does.
    Captain Garro's respect among prisoners and her ability to exercise
control is indeed being eroded, but the cause is her own outrageous
behavior. Throwing me in the hole for writing about her is a classic case of
killing the messenger. Prison administrators have no objection to a guard
acting as Garro does. In fact, they cherish guards who are willing to go far
beyond the call of duty in ruthlessly degrading prisoners. That's why
they've promoted Garro to such a high rank.
    But prison administrators do object to anyone informing the public
about these guards. Widespread knowledge of the psychotic guards running
amok in our prisons would damage public confidence in the correctional
system. So rather than rein in the sadistic guards, prison officials instead
seek to silence anyone attempting to speak publically about their mischief.
    "Because this same article can easily be communicated to other
inmates it has the potential for encouraging disrespect and defiance of all
staff authority." The column's real crime, apparently, is that it can be easily
communicated to other prisoners. As it happens, any time I put words on
paper they can be easily communicated to other prisoners. If I write a letter
to my mother, for example, expressing criticism of prison officials, my
mother could make photocopies of the letter and mail it to numerous
prisoners. By Lieutenant Molnar's logic, no inmate may ever put into
writing words critical of prison authorities. Any such writing could be
easily communicated to other prisoners and would have "the potential for
encouaging disrespect and defiance of staff."
    All of Molnar's concerns about disrespect and defiance of staff
authority, however, are shown to be pretexts by the fact that no prisoners
are likely ever to see the edition of the Edge with my column about Captain
Garro. If officials at the various prisons in this state believe my column is as
prone to cause trouble as Molnar makes it out to be, they will surely prevent
prisoners from receiving it. [Editor's note: On Monday, November 23, the
Department of Corrections issued a memo saying the Nov. 18 issue of the
Edge could only be distributed to prisoners if Lomax's article was first
removed from it.] State law grants prison administrators authority to censor
publications that "present a clear and present danger to institutional security
and order."
    Prison officials also know quite well that my column about the
Terror of Waupun was not written for prisoners. The circulation of this
newspaper is 17,000. About 100 subscribers are inmates in Wisconsin
prisons. I wrote the column to inform the general public about one of the
particularly abusive guards who find refuge in the Wisconsin prison
system. But that, of course, is the correctional administrators' real fear.
Lieutenant Molnar couldn't care less if I tell every prisoner in the state about
Captain Garro's mayhem. What worries him is my telling the general
public.
    By saying that my column may have violated the prison rule that
prohibits "lying about staff," Molnar suggests that the facts I reported about
the Terror are untrue. When my first column for the Edge appeared last
March, Department of Corrections spokesman Joe Scistowicz contacted
Nancy Rost, the Edge's editor. Scistowicz questioned the accuracy of the
facts I'd reported and attempted to convince Rost that she shouldn't publish
any more of my writings. Rost told Scistowicz that if the DOC wanted to
write a rebuttal to my column, she would gladly print it. Despite that
invitation, the DOC has never yet sought to rebut any of my columns in
print. How telling it is that prison officials respond to my criticism of them
in a pulic forum not by taking advantage of the same public forum in an
attempt to demonstrate their rectitude, but by tossing me in the dungeon
    Speaking of my very first column for this newspaper, I pointed out
in that column that correctional officials very often talk a lot about prison
security when the underlying issues have no impact on prison security. My
confinement in segregation is a lucid example of that truth. Lieutenant
Molnar's statement of his reasons for throwing me in the hole is couched in
the rote language of concern for prison security. Yet my column about
Captain Garro cannot possibly affect prison security since the administrators
will surely prevent any inmates from reading it. The decision to confine me
in segregation has nothing to do with prison security and everything to do
with discourging me, and all other inmates from publically criticising prison
officials.

--   --   --

    In the early morning of November 7, a woman by the name of
Christine Bohl was arrested in Madison for her involvement in a sale of
crack cocaine. It so happens that Ms. Bohl works as a guard at the Waupun
Correctional Institution.
    Bohl's arrest was reported in the November 8 edition of the
Wisconsin State Journal. The WCI library subsribes to the State Journal,
but prison officials censored the article about Chirstine Bohl before
delivering the newspaper to the library. That's right, they broke out the
scissors and clipped the article right out of the newspaper.
    A year ago several Waupun inmates were arrested for selling
cocaine. WCI officials trumpeted the incident to the hilt, issuing press
releases and declaring the need for increased security to combat prison drug
dealers. Now why do you suppose it is that prison officials publicize the
story of inmates arrested for dealing cocaine, yet they do precisely the
opposite when a prison guard is arrested for the same thing? Maybe they
don't want people to laugh out loud every time correctional officials try to
deflect criticism about harsh treatment of prisoners with the time-honored
canard that prison guards are highly-trained professionals who, after all, are
watching over a bunch of criminals.

[NLNS Endnote: Poor Adrian Lomax's scene has gone from bad to worse.
. .to even worse since he wrote this article. His attempt, with attorney
Gillam Kerley, to get a court injunction against his placement in solitary
confinement without charges was stymied when Dane County circuit Judge
Nowakowski rejected Lomax's arguments that he was under lockup solely
for exercising his First Amendment rights--according to a UPI report.
    The hearing, held on the 13th day of the 42 days the Wisconsin
Department of Corrections is allowed to hold a prisoner without charges,
ended with the court allowing the DOC to keep Lomax in solitary the full 42
days.
    As NLNS goes to press, however, the DOC is preparing to press
trumped-up charges on Lomax in their own Kangaroo court that could mean
a much longer stay in solitary or even an extension of his prison sentence.
According to Nancy Rost of the Edge, he is now being charged-- in addition
to the "Lying" and  "enocouraging disrespect" charges hinted at in the
preceding column--with "adding-and-abetting battery" and one other charge.
Lomax is not allowed to have a lawyer present at the DOC court.]

Those readers who wish to lodge a protest against the unjust solitary
confinement of Adrian Lomax can do so by calling the Racine Correctional
Institution at [phone] and telling Warden Oscar Shade to release him
from segregation

The Madison Edge can be reached at: The Madison Edge, PO Box 845,
Madison, WI 53701-0845; [phone].

--- 30 ---