On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Barrett Brown <
barriticus@gmail.com> wrote:
> Howdy-
> I'm afraid I've moved to Texas for a while and will be out to LA soon as
> I've been offered the chance to help run a new cable network.
>
> On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 9:57 PM, Brooklyn Heights Blog
> <
brooklynheightsblog@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> What's your week like next week?
>>
>> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 12:00 AM, brooklynheightsblog
>> <
brooklynheightsblog@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Friday morning could work for me in Brooklyn heights
>> >
>> > Typos courtesy of my iPhone
>> > On May 26, 2010, at 11:10 PM, Barrett Brown <
barriticus@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > Howdy-
>> > Let me know if you'd still like to meet or talk on the phone at some
>> > point
>> > soon.
>> >
>> > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 9:36 AM, Barrett Brown <
barriticus@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I don't have any plans. Let me know when would be god for you.
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 7:11 AM, brooklynheightsblog
>> >> <
brooklynheightsblog@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> What's your day like Friday?plans
>> >>>
>> >>> Typos courtesy of my iPhone
>> >>> On May 17, 2010, at 12:15 AM, Barrett Brown <
barriticus@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Sure, let me know when you're ready to meet.
>> >>>
>> >>> On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Brooklyn Heights Blog
>> >>> <
brooklynheightsblog@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> No update on Bugle, but let's try to meet this week or next. the
>> >>>> Heights, DUMBO best for me.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 10:47 PM, Barrett Brown
>> >>>> <
barriticus@gmail.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Hi again-
>> >>>>> Checking back with you about the relaunch. Get back to me when you
>> >>>>> have
>> >>>>> a moment, if you would.
>> >>>>> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Brooklyn Heights Blog
>> >>>>> <
brooklynheightsblog@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Great timing. We'll be rebooting the site this month. Ping me
>> >>>>>> again
>> >>>>>> in like a week or so.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 2:55 PM, Barrett Brown
>> >>>>>> <
barriticus@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>> > Howdy-
>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>> > This is Barrett Brown; we spoke last year about having me
>> >>>>>> > contribute
>> >>>>>> > to the
>> >>>>>> > Brooklyn Bugle and your other blogs at some point. Let me know if
>> >>>>>> > you'd
>> >>>>>> > still be interested in giving me some assignments at some point.
>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>> > On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Barrett Brown
>> >>>>>> > <
barriticus@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>> > wrote:
>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>> >> Sounds good; get in touch when you'd like to discuss it further.
>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>> >> Thanks,
>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>> >> Barrett Brown
>> >>>>>> >> Brooklyn, NY
>> >>>>>> >> 512-560-2302
>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>> >> On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 3:05 PM, brooklynheightsblog
>> >>>>>> >> <
brooklynheightsblog@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>> Let's talk this week. Would love for you to have a diary (fka
>> >>>>>> >>> blog)
>> >>>>>> >>> about bushwick which would be unpaid but a good platform -- but
>> >>>>>> >>> I'd also
>> >>>>>> >>> want to give you paid assignments... all this is a erik in
>> >>>>>> >>> progress so I'd
>> >>>>>> >>> want to create a situation where both of us are happy in the
>> >>>>>> >>> collaboration
>> >>>>>> >>> jl
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>> Typos courtesy of my iPhone.
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>> On Mar 7, 2009, at 1:17 PM, Barrett Brown
>> >>>>>> >>> <
barriticus@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>> Hi-
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>> Glad you liked the article. I live in Bushwick near Flushing
>> >>>>>> >>> and
>> >>>>>> >>> Broadway, sort of on the edge of Williamsburg. I'd be up for
>> >>>>>> >>> covering pretty
>> >>>>>> >>> much anything at all; I've done everything from restaurant
>> >>>>>> >>> reviews
>> >>>>>> >>> to public
>> >>>>>> >>> policy pieces, although I think the local subject I'd probably
>> >>>>>> >>> be
>> >>>>>> >>> best
>> >>>>>> >>> equipped to write about is Bushwick's fast-changing cultural
>> >>>>>> >>> scene
>> >>>>>> >>> in
>> >>>>>> >>> general. For instance, I could do pieces somewhat akin to the
>> >>>>>> >>> New
>> >>>>>> >>> Yorker's
>> >>>>>> >>> shortish front-of-the-book pieces that profile some quirky or
>> >>>>>> >>> otherwise
>> >>>>>> >>> interesting slice of local color. Let me know what you think.
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>> Barrett Brown
>> >>>>>> >>> Brooklyn, NY
>> >>>>>> >>> 512-560-2302
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 1:20 PM, The Brooklyn Bugle
>> >>>>>> >>> <
info@thebrooklynbugle.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> that's a great piece!
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> we'll be launching the bugle soon - if you need a soapbox
>> >>>>>> >>>> we'll
>> >>>>>> >>>> have an
>> >>>>>> >>>> area for diarists to set up (ie huffington post)... will
>> >>>>>> >>>> totally
>> >>>>>> >>>> keep you in
>> >>>>>> >>>> mind for paid assignments... what interests you re: Brooklyn
>> >>>>>> >>>> news/happenings
>> >>>>>> >>>> etc?
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> What neighborhood are you in?
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Barrett Brown
>> >>>>>> >>>> <
barriticus@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>> Hi, John-
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>> Thanks for your reply. As for what I've been doing, I just
>> >>>>>> >>>>> did
>> >>>>>> >>>>> my first
>> >>>>>> >>>>> piece for Vanity Fair this week; it can be seen here:
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/politics/2009/03/friedmans-follies.html
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>> Thanks,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>> Barrett Brown
>> >>>>>> >>>>> Brooklyn, NY
>> >>>>>> >>>>> 512-560-2302
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 4:29 PM, The Brooklyn Bugle
>> >>>>>> >>>>> <
info@thebrooklynbugle.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for your interest.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> We currently publish two neighborhood blogs - Brooklyn
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Heights
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Blog
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> and Cobble Hill Blog.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Later this year, we'll be launching The Brooklyn Bugle - a
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> community
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> news site for the 21st Century.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> We'll keep your info on file and we'll be contacting
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> finalists
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> closer
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> to our official launch.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> In the meantime, feel free to keep us up to date with what
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> you're
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> doing.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> John Loscalzo
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Publisher
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> BHB/CHB
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Brooklyn Bugle Media LLC
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Barrett Brown
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> <
barriticus@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi-
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> I understand that you're looking for writers for your news
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> site, and
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd like to be considered. I've written for a variety of
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> print
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> and online
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> news outlets and other publications, including Skeptic,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> PoliticalBase.com,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> National Lampoon, The Onion A.V. Club, Austin Monthly,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dining
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Out, and The
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Fortean Times, and my first book, Flock of Dodos: Behind
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Modern Creationism,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Intelligent Design, and the Easter Bunny was released in
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> 2007
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> to praise from
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School, Rolling Stone, and
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> other sources.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> I've also contributed to reference books by publisher
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thomas
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Riggs and
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Company.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> I generally work for around twenty cents a word, although
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> this
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> is
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> negotiable.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Along with my attached resume, I've pasted a couple of
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> samples
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> below.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> The first is a simple news summary of the sort I used to
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> write
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> for Political
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Base, and the second is an article on new Texas prison
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> regulations which
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> effectively prevent inmates from freely communicating with
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> journalists; it
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> was cited by Sonoma State University's Project Censored as
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> one
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> of the most
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> important underreported stories of 2004.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Please take a look and get back to me if you're interested
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> discussing the position further.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Barrett Bown
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Brooklyn, NY
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> 512-560-2302
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> White House Legal Trouble Update
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. The CIA's covert service head who some believe to have
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> presided
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> over the destruction of tapes which may depict the use of
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> torture against
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> al-Qaeda operatives is requesting immunity ahead of an
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> expected appearance
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> before Congress next week in which he'll be providing
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> testimony on exactly
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> what went down and why. Attorneys for the White House,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> meanwhile, are still
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> urging a federal court to hold off its own investigation
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> into
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the incident,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> claiming that it would interfere with ongoing
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> investigations
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> by Congress and
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the Justice Department. At any rate, they've been
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> successful
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> in their
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> efforts to convince Judge Edward Kennedy that a judicial
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> inquiry is
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> unnecessary; Kennedy announced yesterday that he agrees,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> citing the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> inability of lawyers for a group of detainees to come up
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> with
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> evidence that
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> a specific law pertaining to Guantamo captives was broken
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> light of
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> revelations that the detainees in question were actually
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> being
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> held in
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> secret prisons elsewhere at the time of the alleged abuse.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> 2. Allegations by the National Security Archive that the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Bush
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Administration is hiding millions of e-mails that it had
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> previously claimed
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> were accidentally deleted has prompted a federal judge to
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> order the White
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> House to make a formal response to the charges within five
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> business days of
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> last Tuesday. White House spokesman Tony Fratto has thus
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> far
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> declined to
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> comment.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Texas Prisons: Silencing Inmates
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> by Barrett Brown
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> (Toward Freedom, June 2004)
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> In March of 2004, a jailer at an Arlington, Texas, prison
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> confessed
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> that he had helped another jailer rape a female inmate the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> previous evening.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Israel Mouton, a prison employee since 2002, told police
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> that
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> he watched his
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> colleague commit the assault from the jail control room in
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> order that he
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> might alert his colleague if anyone were to approach.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> According to both
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Mouton and the inmate, who was questioned later by
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> investigators, Mouton
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> afterward told the victim via the cell's intercom, "Don't
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> say
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> nothing. You
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> don't know nothing."
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> A few hours after the inmate confirmed the detailed
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> confession,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Mouton and his colleague were arrested. But unlike the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> inmate
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> whom they had
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> violated, both jailers were able to make bail, and in fact
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> were released the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> same evening. And despite the fact that one perpetrator had
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> voluntarily
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> confessed to a second-degree felony, neither man was
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> immediately fired;
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> instead, they were placed on paid administrative leave.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Later in the week, the wire services picked up the story,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> which ran
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> in every major newspaper in Texas. The timing was
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> moderately
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> ironic; the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Texas Board of Criminal Justice (TBCJ) was set to meet in
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Austin a few days
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> later to vote on several proposed prison policies. Given
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> that
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> corrections system had just been hit with a rather
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> disturbing
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> scandal, one
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> might have expected the TBCJ to adopt some new regulation
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> ensuring inmates a
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> reliable means of reporting staff abuse to a third party
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> assuming that one
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> was ignorant of Texas in general, its cultural climate in
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> particular, and
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the increasingly disturbing manner in which the nation's
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> largest state
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> prison system is being administered.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Censoring the Mail
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> During a two-day meeting at Austin's Hyatt Regency, rather
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> than pass
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> any new reporting policies to help prevent cover-ups, the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> TBCJ
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> instead did
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the opposite. On April 2, members passed Board Policy
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> 03.91,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> by all accounts
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the most drastic restriction on Texas inmate correspondence
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> rights in more
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> than two decades.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Actually, the board passed two major policy changes during
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> their
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> meeting. One was a ban on incoming mail containing
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> "sexually
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> explicit"
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> images, "material that shows the frontal nudity of either
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> gender, including
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the exposed female breast(s) with nipple(s) or areola(s),
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> or
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the genitalia
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> or anus of either gender." Explaining the new policy, Texas
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Department of
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Criminal Justice Executive Director Gary Johnson pointed
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> out
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> that his office
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> strives for "a more positive and safer environment for both
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> staff and
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> offenders," adding that "the elimination of sexually
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> explicit
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> material helps
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> us move in that direction."
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Because it dealt with such an attention-grabbing issue as
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> pornography, the new "Playboy Policy" received nearly all
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the media
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> coverage; one Associated Press piece devoted all but two
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> sentences to the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> porn ban. The remainder consisted of a verbatim reading of
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> second
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> measure passed at the April meeting, Board Policy 03.91:
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> "Outgoing special or media correspondence will be opened in
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> cases
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> where there have been known problems ('special
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> correspondence'
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> is defined as
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> any official of any federal, state or local law enforcement
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> agency,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> including offices of inspector general). The intent is to
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> prohibit offenders
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> from sending correspondence that seeks to threaten, harass
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> or
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> intimidate in
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> any way (including anthrax hoaxes)."
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> In other words, Texas prison officials are now permitted to
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> read mail
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> written by inmates to journalists, but only "in cases where
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> there have been
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> known problems."
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Unfortunately, the term "known problems" isn't defined,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> which
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> may
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> seem odd in light of the great extent to which the board
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> went
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> in defining
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the female breast, which, as the reader may recall,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> includes
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> both nipple(s)
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> and areola(s). In contrast, the criteria by which media
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> correspondence may
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> be read by low-level officials are left to the imagination
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> prison staff.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> "Known problems," then, might very well include instances
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> which prisoners
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> have spoken to the press about prison conditions or other
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> issues of
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> legitimate public interest.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> In fact, this has already proven to be the case. In one of
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> few
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> articles that actually focused on the board's new outgoing
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> mail censorship
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> provision, Houston Chronicle staffer Polly Ross Hughes
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> described the case of
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> William Bryan Sorens, a convicted rapist whose sentence was
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> extended by one
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> year after it was discovered he had sold Penthouse an
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> article
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> detailing his
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> prison experiences. (Texas prisoners must get permission
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> before accepting
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> any payment for work they undertake while incarcerated.) In
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the course of
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> researching her article, Hughes asked TDCJ spokeswoman
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Michelle Lyons about
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> this incident; Lyons confirmed that Sorens' mail would most
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> likely be tagged
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> for automatic inspection under the new policy.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> But aside from deterring the extremely small percentage of
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Texas
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> inmates who run freelance writing businesses from their
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> cells,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the other
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> major purpose of the policy, according to Lyons, is to
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> protect
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> media
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> personnel from inmate threats and harassment. And how do
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> journalists feel
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> about being thus protected? Not surprisingly, they're
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> almost
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> unanimously
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> against it.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Each of the Texas newspaper staffers I contacted regarding
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> case
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> said they would prefer that inmate correspondence to
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> journalists be
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> privileged, in the same way that legal correspondence is,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> or
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> rather used to
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> be; another provision passed by the board during its April
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> meeting dictates
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> that "incoming special, legal and media correspondence will
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> be
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> searched for
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> contraband and only in the presence of the offender." This
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> includes letters
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> from lawyers.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Speaking on condition of anonymity, one staffer with a
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> major
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Texas
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> daily pointed out that, among journalists who cover the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> prison
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> system, mail
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> is used as something of a barometer. Although reporters
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> rarely
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> reply to
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> individual inmate letters or even take their assertions at
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> face value, a
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> large volume of mail detailing a specific problem often
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> serves
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> as the only
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> indication that something might be awry in the state's
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> prisons. After all,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Texas inmates were already among the most elaborately
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> muffled
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> prisoners in
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the US; in mostly every other state, inmates are permitted
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> make phone
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> calls whenever they please and at their own expense,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> whereas
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Texas inmates
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> get only one five-minute call every 60 days. And Policy
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> 03.91
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> comes just a
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> few months after another new policy which prevents
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> journalists
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> from speaking
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> to inmates unless the journalist in question is working on
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> specific
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> deadline, thus preventing many writers from gaining
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> in-person
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> access to the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> prisoners they may be writing about.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Lack of Concern
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> The "no deadline, no meetings" policy is part of the reason
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> why few
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> of the journalists I contacted were surprised by the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> passage
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> of 03.91. Among
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Texas crime reporters, it's common knowledge that
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> institutional procedure
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> has undergone major changes in the last few years. Retiring
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> corrections
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> officials, they say, are often being replaced with a
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> younger
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> crowd possessed
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> of a somewhat more Draconian view of prisoner rights and
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> public access, and
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the overriding philosophy of this new breed is that the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> best
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> way to deal
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> with a crack in the wall is to apply a fresh coat of paint.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Indeed, 03.91 and similar new policies would hardly seem as
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> threatening were it not for the fact that the Texas prison
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> system is
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> notorious for its cracks. Nationwide, the state is perhaps
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> most famous for
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the often haphazard manner in which people are tried and
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> executed; perhaps
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the most damning account in recent years involved a man
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> found
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> guilty of
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> murder and sentenced to death during a trial in which his
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> court-appointed
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> attorney fell asleep several times.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Much of the criticism has come from progressive watchdog
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> organizations of the sort one would expect to raise
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> questions
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> about such
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> things. But some of the most serious warnings have come
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> from
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the federal
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> government itself. In 1998, the US House of Representatives
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> asked the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> General Accounting Office (GAO) for a report on
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> staff-on-inmate sexual
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> misconduct in four of the nation's female prison
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> jurisdictions, including
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Texas. When the investigation ended in 1999, the resulting
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> document didn't
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> do much to help the state's already-tarnished image.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> If Texas prison officials really strived for "a more
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> positive
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> safer environment for both staff and offenders," as
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> asserted
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> by Johnson in
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> his statement to the press, they would most likely strive
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> compile data on
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the subject to inform recommendations for further action.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> But
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> this hasn't
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> happened. In fact, while conducting research for its 1999
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> report, the GAO
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> found that Texas, like the other three jurisdictions deemed
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> worthy of
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> investigation, didn't have "readily available,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> comprehensive
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> data or reports
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> on the number, nature, and outcomes of staff-on-inmate
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> sexual
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> misconduct."
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Additionally, if Texas prison officials were actually
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> concerned with
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> preventing inmate abuse, they might consider cracking down
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> harder on prison
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> guards who have "known problems" with sexual misconduct in
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> same manner
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> in which they crack down on prisoners with "known problems"
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> selling articles
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> to national magazines. But that hasn't happened, either.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Many
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> staff members
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> who sexually abused inmates during the four-year GAO survey
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> were simply
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> suspended. In other words, they were forced to take a leave
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> absence, but
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> returned to work in the same capacity at a later date and
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> often supervised
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the same inmates they abused in the first place.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Today, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice supervises
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> about
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> 150,000 prisoners. Of these, nearly half have been
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> incarcerated for
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> non-violent offenses ranging from possession of marijuana
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> writing bad
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> checks. Their safety and well being depends upon the good
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> will
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> competence of prison guards, some of whom have proven to be
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> criminals
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> themselves. And those who run the Texas prison system,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> although obviously
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> aware of such facts, have done nearly everything possible
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> ensure that our
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> fellow citizens are unable to protect themselves in the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> only
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> manner in which
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> a prisoner is able - to communicate with the world beyond
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> walls.
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks,
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Barrett Brown
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Brooklyn, NY
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> 512-560-2302
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>> in which a prisoner is able - to communicate with the world
>> >>>>>> >>> beyond
>> >>>>>> >>> the
>> >>>>>> >>> walls.
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>> Barrett Brown
>> >>>>>> >>> Brooklyn, NY
>> >>>>>> >>> 512-560-2302
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>>
>> >>>>>> >>> /div>
>> >>>>>> >>
>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>> > --
>> >>>>>> > Regards,
>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>> > Barrett Brown
>> >>>>>> > Brooklyn, NY
>> >>>>>> > 512-560-2302
>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> --
>> >>>>>> Brooklyn Bugle Media LLC
>> >>>>>> (646) 657-9242
>> >>>>>>
info@thebrooklynbugle.com
>> >>>>>>
brooklynheightsblog.com
>> >>>>>>
cobblehillblog.com
>> >>>>>>
thebrooklynbugle.com
>> >>>>>> -------------------
>> >>>>>> This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or
>> >>>>>> privileged information. Do not forward this email or otherwise
>> >>>>>> disseminate the information contained herein unless you are
>> >>>>>> specifically authorized to do so. If you believe that you have
>> >>>>>> received this message in error, please notify the sender by reply
>> >>>>>> transmission and delete the message without copying or disclosing
>> >>>>>> it.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>> Regards,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Barrett Brown
>> >>>>> Brooklyn, NY
>> >>>>> 512-560-2302
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> John Loscalzo
>> >>>> Founder/Publisher
>> >>>> Brooklyn Bugle Media LLC
>> >>>> (646) 657-9242
>> >>>>
info@thebrooklynbugle.com
>> >>>>
brooklynheightsblog.com
>> >>>>
cobblehillblog.com
>> >>>>
thebrooklynbugle.com
>> >>>> -------------------
>> >>>> This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or
>> >>>> privileged
>> >>>> information. Do not forward this email or otherwise disseminate the
>> >>>> information contained herein unless you are specifically authorized
>> >>>> to do
>> >>>> so. If you believe that you have received this message in error,
>> >>>> please
>> >>>> notify the sender by reply transmission and delete the message
>> >>>> without
>> >>>> copying or disclosing it.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Regards,
>> >>>
>> >>> Barrett Brown
>> >>> Brooklyn, NY
>> >>> 512-560-2302
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Regards,
>> >>
>> >> Barrett Brown
>> >> Brooklyn, NY
>> >> 512-560-2302
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Barrett Brown
>> > Brooklyn, NY
>> > 512-560-2302
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> John Loscalzo
>> Founder/Publisher
>> Brooklyn Bugle Media LLC
>> (646) 657-9242
>>
info@thebrooklynbugle.com
>>
brooklynheightsblog.com
>>
cobblehillblog.com
>>
thebrooklynbugle.com
>> -------------------
>> This electronic mail transmission may contain confidential or
>> privileged information. Do not forward this email or otherwise
>> disseminate the information contained herein unless you are
>> specifically authorized to do so. If you believe that you have
>> received this message in error, please notify the sender by reply
>> transmission and delete the message without copying or disclosing it.
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Barrett Brown
> Brooklyn, NY
> 512-560-2302
>