I would have no idea about this kind of horrendous suffering either, except for reading these kinds of articles, so the more that people like you can share people’s stories, the more we can all have informed opinions. It is so amazing to see what incredibly wonderful human beings these people are who have written to you–they sound like people who have such good hearts and who are also in so much pain. So thank you for the incredible work you are doing to both be a friend to people and to share their stories.

Solitary Watch didn’t delve into the fact that the post 2011 decrease in the number of prisoners detained at ROSP Administration-Segregation had as much to do with the fact, VADOC transformed half of ROSP’s four buildings back to its original quasi-general population operational model. Had Solitary Watch factored this into it’s work, it would have discovered that since opening in August and September of 1998, VADOC hasn’t been able to resolve what it needs ROSP for and subsequently needs it to be, besides the obvious economic role ROSP plays in the economic depressed, rural and politically marginalized region of Southwest Virginia. This bureaucratic vacillation by VADOC has only confirmed the fundamental objection opponents of ROSP have expressed all along that not only doesn’t VADOC need ROSP but it built it against the conclusions and findings By the Virginia Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission in its 1985 and 1986 reports on August 4th-5th, 1984; uprising at ROSP’s precursor, Mecklenburg Correctional Center that VADOC shouldn’t confine at one place it’s so-called “worst of the worst”.

If as Solitary Watch writes VADOC is reducing confinement of prisoners in Administrative-Segregation [AdSeg] why didn’t it obtain the current VADOC rate for placing prisoners in AdSeg. And for what in contrast with pre-2011 rates and reasons. Also what are the figures for prisoners held in AdSeg. in other Virginia prisons i.e Wallens Ridge, River North, Green Rock, Keen Mountain, Pocahontas, Augusta, Sussex I and II to name some of the major ones. What this would have revealed is the AdSeg. practice in Virginia is arbitrary. Detention and confinement in Virginia’s AdSeg. varies from prison to prison. Based on an arcane calculus which falls in the all too familiar dynamic of: Vindictiveness of prison officials who have scores to settle against certain prisoners for 20 and 30 year old acts and allegations. So VADOC due process policies are misapplied, documents are falsified, infractions are fraudulently concocted against prisoners to effect placement in AdSeg. which are all unlawful and in some cases criminal acts by prison officials. Other factors are: Racism, where White prisoners are not generally subjected to the extremity of AdSeg. and relative length of confinement as Black and Latino prisoners for identical acts and allegations. Also: Black, White and Latino prisoners from urban areas of Eastern, Central and Northern Virginia, bear the brunt of AdSeg. and are more likely to be transferred to the rural prisons of Red Onion and Wallens Ridge AdSeg. in contrast with prisoners from rural Virginia. The urban bias is an unchallenged fact. But the more implicit insidious suggestion is, the mainly Black and Latino staff of prisons in non-rural areas are incapable of managing urban prisoners.

Solitary Watch in this article shy’s away from calling for an independent criminal investigation into criminality and malfeasance that is the operative conduct of ROSP officials and its rank and file guards:

ROSP guards assaulting and battering prisoners who are handcuffed behind their backs, shackled and kneeling. See [rebuttal to petitioner response, Canada v. Methena 7:13-cv00322 also Re: Complaint of Abuse and Misuse of Restraints DOC-2013-401055].
Also…Asiatic Allah #1030654 on 7/15/15; punched in the face and beaten by ROSP guard upon arrival at ROSP from Augusta C.C.
Also…D Freeman #1108494 in 2015; assaulted and beaten up by prison guards at ROSP-B/3 Pod.
Also…T James on 7/29/15; prison guards broke his hand while he was handcuffed and shackled at ROSP – B/3-31 Pod.
Also…Andre Goodwin #1008696 on 6/16 /15; aussalted in ROSP-C/3 Pod by unidentified guards.

The practice and racist totem of ROSP; all white K-9 Corp sizing attack dogs on a majority Black and urban population, reminiscent of White police officers behavior during the anti-Segregation struggles of the Civil Rights Movement.

The unlawful practice of ROSP guards denying prisoners meals and criminal acts of ROSP guards tampering with prisoners meals.

The unlawful act of ROSP guards denying prisoners showers for months on end despite VADOC AdSeg. policy mandate prisoners are given showers 3 times per week.

The unlawful practice of denying AdSeg. prisoners outside exercise for months on end,8-9 months straight.

The misuse of Stripped Cells and unlawful practice of depriving prisoners property.

The unlawful practice of deploying OC Pepper gas inside the confines of a 8×10 foot cell without regard for prisoners held in windowless cells.

The unlawful practice of using food as punishment by skimping and not providing the VADOC Master Menu and Food Service Manual required portions to AdSeg. prisoners.

The unlawful practice of chaining prisoners wrists to ankles, thereby denying the prisoner the ability to stand upright for hours on end.

The unlawful and unethical treatment of Mental Health prisoners confined at ROSP AdSeg. where the are subjected to denial of showers, outside exercise, food, meals tampered with, deprived of property, taunted, insulted, provoked by ROSP guards and once they react, they are gassed with OC Pepper Gas, put on Stripped Cells for weeks on end, tied to bunks everything is done to Mental health prisoners, save for a legitimate and professional Mental Health Care.

The unlawful practices of retaliation against prisoners who dare complain and speak out against the criminal and malfeasante actions of ROSP officials and guards. Prisoners are accused of false infractions, mail is tampered with, outside exercise and showers denied. Meals denied. In some cases prisoners assaulted and battered by ROSP guards, AdSeg. confinement extended.

Last but not least ROSP, with tacit approval from VADOC executive leadership has effectively quashed the filing of Complaints and Grievances despite VADOC policies that speak to the filing of Complaints and Grievances. This quashing of Complaints and Grievance filings is what allows VADOC to be quoted by Solitary Watch that “It has successfully decreased the grievances filed by men at ROSP by 71%” and Solitary Watch just as it hasn’t called for an outside independent investigation into the operation and practices at ROSP, didn’t ask VADOC on how it managed to decrease complaints in any prison for that matter, let alone a Supermax one by the astounding revelation of 71%.

SOLITARY WATCH IS ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF HISTORY

What the advocacy of Solitary Watch imperative needs to understand, then subsequently emphasize in its work is: The situation at ROSP as I have attempted to show isn’t the colloquial “cruel and inhumane treatment” as Solitary Watch paraphrases certain ROSP prisoners as saying. But the issue is specific. Red Onion State Prison is a lawless prison. Each and every aspect of its operation is a text book study of malfeasance.

The attitude of ROSP official, inculcate into its rank and file, bubbling beneath the veneer of pseudo-professionalism is ROSP prisoners are convicts, the worst of the worst, so if a ROSP guard commits the criminal act of spitting in a prisoners food or committing the criminal act of assaulting and battering a prisoner in the ROSP guards mind it is not a criminal act because the victim is a prisoner. The Irony is casually lost on the guard that he/she are breaking and violating the same law that effected and permits the imprisonment of the prisoner to begin with. This fact isn’t a simple issue of mistreatment, or harshness of conditions. But these are crimes that have to be recognized as such and its one thing for prison officials to excise hypocrisy as the only refuge-rationale of their lawlessness and malfeasance. But its entirely another for Solitary Watch and its side of history work, in an expose’ that pursues as it’s imperative governmental-accountability to give cover to and enable the lawlessness and malfeasance with distortive semantics

Solitary Watch and its allies should lend their voice and talent to the cause of demanding that Red Onion State Prison is investigated by the outside independent agency and in the interim the Virginia National Guard manages its daily operations

Distinguishing between whether someone is truly an active danger or is just difficult to deal with due to belligerence, lack of cooperation, or whatever is an important starting point. While people who are truly extremely dangerous at any given point may need to temporarily be in their own room for safety reasons, other alternatives should be explored for working with people who are not an imminent danger.

Ensuring that people who are in their own room due to their extreme risk of harming others are still provided with human contact is essential. Whether this ongoing contact is provided by correctional officers, mental health specialists, chaplains, volunteers, other clergy, their visiting family, etc, people need human contact. Confining someone to their room for safety reasons should not preclude human contact. Human contact also needs to be ample enough to prevent the documented adverse effects of isolation–which are multiple and serious.

If there are concerns about staffing levels, these concerns need to be clearly delineated so that politicians and the public understand what the issues are. Use of isolation is a basic human rights issue. The effects of isolation are extremely serious and problematic. While it is important to address safety issues for officers, concerns about safety issues should not be an excuse for not addressing the issue at all. If it is truly unrealistic to implement humane changes until training and staffing levels increase, then correctional institutions need to be at the forefront of vigorously and repeatedly demanding increased funding in order to create humane reforms that align with basic human rights.

Correctional institutions should learn from their peers who have had either success or failure with making humane changes. Successes in other institutions can be the impetus for creating reforms and innovating in one’s own institution. Similarly, attempts at change that have gone poorly can provide great information for learning what not to do.

I love the idea “People don’t fail. Solutions do.” It is possible to learn as much from things that have not worked as from things that have. This does not mean there is anything “wrong” with an institution–it is a sign of being wiling to try things and evolve. Correctional institutions should adopt best practices both from the United States and abroad so that they do not end up trying to reinvent the wheel. When possible, they can also innovate and improve on solutions.

This is not an impossible problem to solve. It is possible to be realistic and pragmatic while also being humane and compassionate. The basic idea is that everyone needs human contact to function as a person. Without it, people psychologically deteriorate and suffer immense pain. If they are able to have this contact within the general population, they should. If they are not able to at any given point, due to extreme safety issues, they should still have warm human contact with a variety of people within their own room. Efforts should be made towards reintegration.

While this is a challenging subject that requires thoughtful consideration by both experts and lay people alike, this issue is fundamentally about a very basic human value. Everyone needs people to talk with. Giving everyone people to talk with is something that as human beings we really should be able to do. Correctional institutions should work together to create a very basic set of norms that are humane, reasonable, and promote prosocial behavior and good psychological functioning. It is not necessary to address every single possible issue at this stage, but agreeing on a broad set of principles that apply in general could be very helpful.

If within a given institution there is simply not funding to provide staffing and training to meet this professional norm of humane treatment, then this can provide a starting point for demanding increased funding.