Press Release
Myths and Facts on Death Row Policies
MEDIA ADVISORY
May 25, 2000
Contact: Floridians for Alternatives to the Death
Penalty (FADP)
Abe Bonowitz, 800-973-6548
Contact: Florida Death Row Advocacy Group (FDRAG)
Michelle M. Agans, 904-824-5933
Response to DOC Press Release
On April 12, 2000, the Florida Department of Corrections (DOC)
issued a press release entitled "Myth vs. Fact on Death Row
Policies." This can be seen on the DOC's web page at: http://www.dc.state.fl.us/secretary/press/drpolicies.html
Unfortunately, much of the information provided by the DOC is simply
NOT factual.
Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty (FADP) and the
Florida Death Row Advocacy Group (FDRAG) offer the following truths
based on the experiences of attorneys, correctional officers, inmate
families, and clergy who are at the prison on a regular basis.
The DOC's myths and facts are presented in this typeface.
The responses by FADP and FDRAG are presented in this typeface.
TALLAHASSEE - Rumors continue to circulate about the proposed
new policies for Death Row inmates. The Department of Corrections
wants you to know the facts. Here is a comparison of myth vs. fact:
MYTH #1: The Death Row policy, including non-contact visitation, has
already been implemented and is in effect.
FACT: The policy is currently in proposal form and has not been
formally announced. Once it has been announced but before it can be
implemented, interested parties may request and DOC will be obliged
to schedule a public hearing on it.
The ACTUAL TRUTH:
The following excerpt is from a letter dated January 21, 2000, from
Peggy L. Ball, Director, Executive Affairs, and Michael W. Moore,
Secretary, Department of Corrections, to an inmates’ family member
who wrote to inquire about the proposed visitation policy change:
“Governor Bush asked me to thank you for your recent letter
regarding contact visits with Florida death row inmates... the
decision regarding non-contact visits was not an easy one to make.”
An e-mailed letter dated February 22, 2000, from Thomas Crews of the
DOC’s Bureau of Security Operations states: “The decision to
adopt a non-contact visitation policy was a conscious effort to meet
that goal (of security) by taking a proactive approach...”
The clear implication from these communications and many others
similarly worded is that the DOC has already made a decision without
public input. They may indeed hold a “hearing” but it would be
of little meaning if the decision has been made before the hearing
is even held. This process is like the fantasy story "Alice in
Wonderland," or reality in China: First the verdict, then the
evidence.
Agencies of a democratic government are supposed to hold meaningful
hearings to gather relevant input before decisions are made, not
after.
MYTH #2: The non-contact policy is designed to punish or hurt
inmates and those who want to visit them in prison.
FACT: The policy is designed to promote safety and security in
prisons that house Death Row inmates. Current policy allows inmates
and their visitors to congregate in a common visitation area. This
creates a potentially risky situation. The proposed policy will
promote safety and security by helping prevent the introduction of
contraband to Death Row inmates that may prove harmful to
themselves, other inmates, prison staff and the public. It will also
help prevent a hostage situation from occurring. We cannot and will
not wait for an incident to take place before changing the policy
that may lead to such an incident. Furthermore, the policy is not
designed or intended to punish or antagonize inmates, their families
or their visitors.
The ACTUAL TRUTH:
1) Contact visitation is used as a “carrot” by correctional
staff to promote safety and security. If inmates misbehave, they
know they will lose their contact visits. The DOC already has the
ability to impose non-contact visits on an individual basis as they
deem necessary. The contact visits are important to inmates, and
local prison officials know that. The threat of losing contact
visits is presently an effective
behavior modification tool. Inmates know there has been no incident
WHATSOEVER to justify this new policy, and so do the guards. People
who can never again hug or touch the hand of their mothers,
children, or wives will be far MORE likely to act out. These
proposals are creating a tension level between inmates and
correctional officers that has never existed before in Florida. The
elimination of the privilege actually jeopardizes staff safety.
2) The current “common visitation area” is a room with
approximately 25 tables with seats attached. Each inmate sits at his
assigned table with his visitor(s), constantly supervised by several
correctional officers. General mingling of people in the room is
forbidden. Furthermore...
3) Each inmate is handcuffed and strip-searched TWICE before being
allowed to enter the visiting room. Prisoner's uniforms do not have
pockets. Visitors may bring in only a few authorized items which are
accounted for, in writing, prior to and after the visit. Visitors
are searched, and go through a highly sensitive metal detector
before entering. Inmates are AGAIN strip searched after each visit.
4) IF these security measures are consistently applied by properly
trained and equipped guards, it is not possible for contraband to be
introduced via the visitation program. DOC should look for other
security lapses to learn how contraband enters prisons, and refrain
from scapegoating prisoners' families.
5) Visitors apply via a written application to the DOC to be able to
visit, and a police background check is done on each applicant.
6) There has NEVER been an incident of violence in the death row
visiting room.
MYTH #3: The policy will also limit the access Death Row inmates
have to clergy or religious advisers.
FACT: This is false. There is no such proposal.
The ACTUAL TRUTH:
The proposed rule changes dated February 11, 2000 issued by the DOC
says ALL visits are to be non-contact. Furthermore, it makes no
reference to outside clergy but does refer extensively to the duties
of chaplains. If clergy are not to be governed by this new policy,
the rule should be re-written to state this clearly.
MYTH #4: The policy will eliminate canteen privileges for Death
Row inmates.
FACT: Death Row inmates are currently allowed to purchase up to $45
worth of canteen items weekly. The type and number of items are not
regulated. The proposed policy calls for canteen privileges every
other week and limits purchases to four food items and five non-food
items (with the exception of stamps and writing paper). Death Row
inmates will use the standard canteen order form to order canteen
items.
The ACTUAL TRUTH:
The DOC gives NO reason to justify this proposed change. DOC says
these proposals are not punitive, yet it seeks to severely restrict
canteen purchases. “Non-food” items include deodorant and other
toiletries. DOC does not state any reason for this restriction. If
there is no valid reason other then to further inconvenience
prisoners, why is this policy being implemented? As an aside,
this proposal results in less income for the DOC!
MYTH #5: The policy will prevent Death Row inmates from using
radios.
FACT: Death Row inmates currently are allowed to have large,
battery-powered "boombox" type radios that are prohibited
for all other inmates. The proposed policy will permit Death Row
inmates to use "walkman" type radios only.
The ACTUAL TRUTH:
The DOC gives NO reason to justify this proposed change. Regular
radios that do not use batteries were sold by the DOC to death row
inmates at Union Correctional Institution for $63.20 each as
recently as last fall. They are NOT “boomboxes” and they are not
allowed to be used WITHOUT earphones. Previous prison
administrations ordered these to sell specifically to death row
inmates because batteries were considered a potential security
problem. The DOC is now declaring these radios contraband,
confiscating them, not refunding the money inmates paid for them,
and selling only battery-powered walkman-type radios. P-dorm at UCI,
which houses death row, allows little to no reception on these tiny
radios. In essence, then, death row inmates at UCI will not have
radios. This change has already been put in place without a hearing.
This is clearly a move to further punish and isolate prisoners.
MYTH #6: The policy will prevent Death Row inmates from using
pens.
FACT: Death Row inmates have been allowed to use common ink pens for
correspondence. The proposed policy calls for the use of rubber
security pens that cannot be used as or made into weapons.
The ACTUAL TRUTH:
There has never been an incident of a pen being used as a weapon on
death row. Although DOC again says this policy is just a proposal,
all pens, pencils and colored pencils have already been confiscated.
Security pens are used in housing areas for Close Management or
Disciplinary Confinement. This is another example of DOC saying it
is not being punitive when, in fact, this is another move to treat
all death row inmates the same as those who have been assaultive in
prison or violated prison rules. The fact is that death row has the
lowest discipline rate in the prison system. Death row inmates are
not the troublemakers.
Additionally, security pens are extremely difficult to use. Surely
the DOC should not make even simple correspondence with loved ones a
tremendous ordeal. The DOC should return regular writing utensils,
as well as art supplies.
MYTH #7: The policy will eliminate library privileges for Death
Row inmates.
FACT: The proposed policy will allow inmates to check out one
library book weekly.
The ACTUAL TRUTH:
The DOC gives NO reason to justify this proposed change.
Furthermore, this policy change mirrors what is known as "Close
Management," the status for troublemakers. DOC has stopped
allowing death row inmates to do art work, (no orders for paint,
pencils, yarn or other supplies have been allowed since last
summer); radios are restricted to walkmans that have little or no
reception, and now they propose restricting inmates to one book per
week. This is not punitive?? Are they trying to bore the men to
death? There can be no other explanation OR justification.
Finally, the Department of Corrections understands that friends
and
relatives of inmates may have questions or concerns about them.
That's
why we have an inmate family services office.
The ACTUAL TRUTH:
What the family members of prisoners need is physical contact with
their loved ones; to be able to keep their families together under
the worst of circumstances. Children need to be able to hug and be
comforted by their fathers (and mothers) in the few hours they are
allowed each week. Families do not need DOC’s empty words and
platitudes. Floridians do not deserve to be misled by state
officials.
For more information, please contact:
Florida Death Row Advocacy Group
CONTACT: Michelle M. Agans, 904-824-5933
Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty
CONTACT: Abe Bonowitz, Director
800-973-6548 fadp@fadp.org
Posted By:
Abraham J. Bonowitz
Director
Note: For fiscal & legal purposes, FADP is a project of CUADP until FADP is incorporated as
it's own entity.