QIalifllrnia ~tat£
~£nat£
STATE CAPITOL
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA
95814

December 1, 2010

Matthew L. Cate
Secretary, Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
Office of the Secretary
P.O. Box 942883
Sacramento, CA 94283-0001
David R. Shaw
Inspector General
Office of the Inspector General
P.O. Box 348780
Sacramento, CA 95834-8780
Dear Secretary Cate and Inspector General Shaw:
As you know, in May of this year we expressed to each of you and to the Governor serious
concerns about allegations of inmate abuse in the behavior management unit at High Desert State
Prison ("BMU"), and how those allegations were handled by the California Department of
Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). Since
that time, with the cooperation of your agencies, Senate staff has reviewed hundreds of
documents and conducted numerous interviews to better understand and assess these allegations.
The purpose of this letter is to share with you the substance of our inquiry, and to engage your
partnership in improving your departments' systems of accountability to ensure that allegations
of abuse and misconduct in correctional institutions are addressed swiftly, systematically, and
fairly for all involved.

Printed on Recycled Paper

Secretary Cate
Inspector General Shaw
December 1,2010
Page 20f8

The Senate's review of the BMU allegations indicates that reports of inmate abuses reached
department officials through several different sources, but did not trigger a complete or, in every
instance, methodical response. As explained below, it appears that CDCR's and DIG's
responses in this case - with reports of inmate abuse coming from different sources through
sometimes informal means - was largely inadequate, ad hoc, and displayed the absence of a
uniform and reliable system of response, referral and follow-through to ensure corroborated
abuses were addressed and corrected.
Allegations of serious inmate abuses at the High Desert State Prison BMU were described in a
letter dated June of2007 from a citizen named Brandy Frye. (Attachment A.) Attached to the
letter were several handwritten letters from inmates in the BMU alleging incidents of abuse and
staff misconduct. (Attachment B.) In a letter from a special agent with the department's Office
of Internal Affairs dated June 19,2007, Ms. Frye was informed that her letter had been
forwarded to the warden at High Desert "for his review," and that the warden or his designee
would "evaluate the complaint and determine whether the issue is supervisory in nature, if an
investigation is required, or if a written response to (Ms. Frye) will suffice." (Attachment C.)
On July 17,2007 the chief deputy warden at High Desert wrote Ms. Frye that, "(i)n investigating
your allegations, it has been determined that HDSP staff is following the policies of CDCR. If
staff misconduct is discovered during the inquiry, the appropriate corrective action will be taken.
However, you will not be informed ofthe results of the inquiry or the nature of the corrective
action taken." (Attachment D.) However, in an interview with Senate staff, the former warden
at High Desert stated that the prison did not investigate the allegations on the Frye letter. He
explained that, as a result of the Madrid case, the prison no longer conducted its own internal
investigations, that they had to be referred to the Office of Internal Affairs. Thus, the
correspondence issued by the department in response to the Frye complaints - both by Internal
Affairs and by High Desert - appears to imply a level of substantive investigation and response
that may not have occurred.

Secretary Cate
Inspector General Shaw
December 1, 2010
Page 3 of8

At our request, your department provided Senate staff with approximately 24 "602" grievances
from inmates in the BMU at High Desert. Our staff s review indicates that most of these
complaints initially were denied, as were their subsequent appeals; it appears that two of the 24
appeals were partially granted. In the letter noted above, the chief deputy warden at High Desert
stated that "many of the allegations ... have been investigated via the appeals process." Our
staffs review indicates that some of the more serious allegations raised by Ms. Frye - such as
prolonged periods of inmates being handcuffed, or being detained in the snow inadequately
clothed - were not raised in inmate 602 filings. We have received no documentation from the
department or otherwise indicating that these allegations, as well as other related complaints
about conditions and treatment in the BMU, were reviewed and investigated by the department at
the time they were made.
Interviews conducted by Senate staff and related documents indicate that in July of2007 the
chair of the Inmate Family Council for High Desert State Prison provided information about
alleged BMU inmate abuses to the department's then-Associate Director for High Security and
Transitional Housing for the Division of Adult Institutions. (Attachment E.) A memo dated July
25,2007 from a correctional captain to the associate director described the department's apparent
response to these allegations. The memo states in part:
During our recent audit at High Desert State Prison (HDSP), we observed
operations in the Behavior Modification Unit (BMU). This additional review was
prompted by numerous complaints from the inmates participating in this program.
. .. From our observations, HDSP is in compliance with all of the guidelines and
policies contained in the orientation booklet and Administrative Bulletin 05/02,
including those relative to the complaint issues.

Secretary Cate
Inspector General Shaw
December 1, 20 10
Page 4 of8

The memo enumerates the following subjects of review: how much time BMU inmates were
allowed for feeding; clothing issued and laundry process; ethnic breakdown of inmates; access to
the law library; how inmate behavior is monitored and documented; and how inmates are
graduated from one phase to the next. This review apparently did not address other complaints
raised about conditions in the BMU, including allegations that inmates had been shackled in the
snow improperly clothed; were being fed from carts contaminated with bird feces; were
receiving the wrong medications or medication dosages; and were subject to excessive force.
Two department researchers informed Senate staff that they made multiple efforts beginning in
July 2007 to report alleged abuses relayed to them by BMU inmates in the context of interviews
conducted as part of a research assignment. These allegations generally were published in
Appendix I of, Evaluation o/the Behavior Modification Unit Pilot Program at High Desert State
Prison, dated July 2008. (Attachment F.) One researcher reported two meetings with a
department undersecretary in the fall of 2007 describing these inmate allegations. The same
person advised Senate staff of several other meetings with CDCR management personnel
describing what had been related to them by inmates in the BMU. A second department
researcher similarly described several attempts to relay information to CDeR management staff.
These researchers informed Senate staff that their efforts to report the inmate allegations were
frustrated by some department supervisors, and apparently not pursued by other department
management staff that they approached. In an email dated July 17,2007, a research supervisor
described the need to "hammer out some formal language" to document a policy for reporting
observations that are "unusual, contrary to department policy or sound practice, or potentially
harmful to persons, property or the department in general ..."

In an email dated April 7, 2010 that discussed how to respond to a reporter's questions about the
BMU allegations, a department undersecretary noted the following when asked if anyone at High
Desert investigated the allegations of abuse raised in the BMU research report described above:

Secretary Cate
Inspector General Shaw
December 1,2010
Page 5 of8

Inmates have many ways to address their complaints: appeals, OIG, litigation,
BSA, OIA, Ombudsman, etc. As stated above the complaints appear to be
consistent with typical inmate complaints and I do not think concerns raised to
researchers would be natural methodfor us to address these stated concerns. So
maybe response is that individual complaints by BMU inmates would have been
investigated through traditional complaint processes and that we are seeking
information ... to determine the extent of internal review or even to the extent
that inmate's used the normal complaint process. (Emphasis added.)
(Attachment G.)
Interviews and documents clearly indicate that there is or at the time of these events was a gap in
training, policies and practices with respect to how all CDCR employees are expected to
communicate any information they have concerning abuse or misconduct in prison institutions.
As indicated by the email quoted above, it appears the department may rely on "traditional
complaint processes" which, arguably made evident by the incidents surrounding these
circumstances, may be so rigid as to limit the ability of the department's leadership staff to
become aware of improper, furtive prison activities or conditions. As noted above by a
department official, there are several ways for inmates to file complaints. Confining the
department to these "natural" or ''traditional'' means, however, could deprive you of important
intelligence available through other sources. We would regard as axiomatic that observations
made by any department employee in any work-related setting giving rise to concerns about
inmate abuse or institutional safety ought to trigger a set of protocol-based actions designed to
ensure a level of consistent and appropriate follow-through. Yet, that did not appear to occur in
this case and, based upon this example, we are concerned that the department now operates
without the benefit of a reliable accountability infrastructure.
We understand that there have been subsequent investigations by CDCR Internal Affairs on the
allegations of inmate abuse, the allegations of a "cover-up" by CDCR officials, and two
complaints of employment retaliation related to the abuse allegations.

Secretary Cate
Inspector General Shaw
December 1,2010
Page 6 of8

We are also of the understanding that most, if not all, of the allegations resulted in findings of
"not sustained," but that some employee training and other remedial actions will be taken. We
request that we be updated on the progress of these actions.

The Senate's review of the circumstances that gave rise to the public scrutiny of conditions at the
BMU at High Desert State Prison earlier this year highlights the importance of making sure that
the department's methods for handling reports of inmate abuse or staff misconduct are
performing well. Every means by which the department receives information about prison
conditions - whether formal or informal, or from an inmate, employee or member of the publicis a valuable opportunity for the department to ensure the integrity of its operations. Every
observer ought to be regarded as an asset, and every supervisor ought to be empowered as a
portal through which information about prison conditions will be shared, evaluated, investigated
and addressed. Our review of the BMU allegations suggests the department would be wellserved by a recalibration of how it handles complaint allegations, from intake through
investigation and resolution. Towards this end, our inquiry leads us to recommend the following
specific areas for your attention:

•

the effectiveness of the existing 602 process (inmate complaints) in ensuring inmate
complaints are addressed in an unbiased and validated manner that is swift, fair and
reliable;

•

employee training on the proper reporting of allegations of abuse or other misconduct,
including supervisors;

•

the effectiveness of the current approaches for assessing and investigating abuse
allegations, including the specific duties to be performed by the Office of Internal Affairs
and individual prisons and wardens; and

•

ongoing methods employed to validate the effectiveness of all aspects of the department's
complaint investigation systems.

Secretary Cate
Inspector General Shaw
December 1, 2010
Page 70f8

With respect to the Office of the Inspector General, in particular, we remain concerned that the
DIG's processes for handling complaints relies too heavily on a misguided assumption that other
processes within CDCR are effective in investigating and responding to complaints and
allegations of misconduct. In fact, it is our view that an essential and basic function of the DIG
is to provide an independent assessment of CDCR operations, and not rely on the very systems it
is supposed to monitor. We have also been informed that the DIG's system of complaint intake
and investigation may be inadequately staffed and poorly suited to provide effective oversight.
We are concerned that such a scenario, if true, generally suggests a lack of prioritization and a
misguided view of the proper functions and role of the DIG.
To this end, we will continue to assess these procedures with your cooperation. To begin, we
request the DIG's immediate response to the following:
1. Provide statistics from January 1,2010 to November 30, 2010 (or most recently
compiled), showing the number and types of complaints received by intake and their
dispensation. Statistics should break down what happens to complaints where 602s have
been filed and where 602s have not been submitted. How many calls/letters were sent by
inmates/wards/parolees, family members, and staff? How promptly do call/letters receive
a response? Is there a backlog, how do you measure it, and what is it now? Does the
DIG follow up to determine if a 602 was handled appropriately? Does the DIG regularly
audit 602 records at the prisons to identify trends, recommend improvements, etc?
2. Provide copies of existing internal reports from January 1,2010 to November 30, 2010
(or most recent report), showing the summary and disposition/status of complaints logged
by the DIG. Who is contacted at CDCR to discuss the complaints (executives,
supervisors, correctional staff, or public information officers)? How many complaints
have led to an DIG inquiry (telephone call)? How many complaints have led to a full
DIG investigation? What are the criteria for determining whether a full investigation
should be initiated?

Secretary Cate
Inspector General Shaw
December 1, 2010
Page 8 of8

3. Please provide details on personnel in OIG intake unit. How many people work there,
what are their titles, and what is their traininglbackground? Please provide copies of the
form letters used to respond to complaints. How much tum over has there been in the
intake unit? Provide a detailed explanation of the inmate, family, and staff complaint
processes, including what personnel processes the complaint and when.
4. Provide flow chart, manual, policy, etc. on how the intake unit works - how calls are
handled, how they are processed. When were the current procedures put in writing?
What procedures existed before this current one and when were they put in place? Have
the written procedures been made available to CDCR, the Governor's Office, the
Legislature, the Federal courts, and other stakeholders? Has any trend analysis been done
on the kinds of complaints received, which prisons generate the highest complaints, etc?
The DIG is requested to provide responses to these questions no later than January 3, 2010. If
the OIG needs assistance or clarification with respect to any of the questions, please contact
Anthony Williams, Special Counsel to the Senate President pro Tempore, by email at
Anthony.Williams@sen.ca.gov or by phone at 916-651-4170.
We appreciate that your departments face extraordinary challenges during these difficult times.
In our view, strengthening how your departments intake and examine abuse allegations can
greatly improve your ability to discover and, where called for, remedy conditions that remain
below the correctional standards that protect the public, respect the rights of inmates and
employees, ensure the integrity of the institution, and the uphold trust and confidence of all
stakeholders. With this in mind, it is our hope that our review of the alleged BMU abuses and
how they were handled provide you with constructive observations that will further your efforts
to improve California's prison operations.
Sincerely,

b~Z~
STEINB~
DARRELL

MARKLENO

Senate President pro Tempore

Chair, Senate Committee on Public Safety

ATTACHMENT A
Letter from Brandy Frye dated June 4th, 2007

A

.Monday June 4th, 2007

R.ECEr\lE,D

Press Release

.JUI-.J

$

2007

. To whom it may cone em,

The intentions oftbis letter are to inform the public of the excessive abuse,
. that's taking place a1 High Desert State Prison; located in Susanville,
California. Within this prison there is a unit called the BMU (Behavioral
Modification Unit), where the men are being abused. They are being stripped
of all their personal property, but more importantly their being stripped of
their dignity and selfworth. Many men have had to resort to taking ant- .
psychotic drugs just to cope, now they walk around like zombies when.:their
allowed out oftheir c;eUs once every week. Some men are being given the
wrong medications or wrong doses, that may interact with their other
medications. Men have ~ physically forced out of their cell with heavy
doses ofpepper spray and·~x.cessiveforce, for not returning their food tray, in
the allotted two (2) minute time frame they allow them to eat. Physically
stripped naked,.handcuf:Ied,· waistJIeg shackled, physically and brutally beaten
and then pUt back in the same cell they were extracted from. Without being
allowed to' rinse off the pepper sPray they were drenched in during the cell
extraction. Their food portions are wB:y under dietary standards, as well as
being served off of unclean
that have bird feces on them 1ms is
unsanitary to say the least and greatly unhealthy, this could cause major health
proble11}S as well as diseases. The men are not pennitted outside for exercise.
The only time they're allowed outside is for ptmishment. They were placed
outside in the snow for tw0 (2) hours for'making too much noise. Some men
were in boxers
showet:shoes' only. The warden
has been
notified of this behavior on more than one occasion, yet nothioghas been
done to stop his employees from abusing these prisonerS. Actually the abuse
on the prisoners increased and so did the punishment. Now the men barely
get to even come out oftheir cells. We as taxpayers are not paying these men

carts

ana

~.

)

.... _ . I

~

to contribute to the abuse within these prison walls; We hire them' to maintain
a safe environment for all, pri~oDers and workers alike. i greatly' encourage
you to help in assisting these men in g~tting help, before something goes
drastically wrong and the abuse ends in some ones life.being.taken.. A lot oL.----.... _.
these men don't have family:rpembers to reach out to, to help them, so please
be their voice!!!! Enclosed are several statements from 'actual prisoners, that
are serving time in High Desert State Prisons BMU facility.

Thank You,

, f::'

BrandyFry~

)
~

..

'.

,

...

':: .

.

"

.

"

':.J

I: '

._-- ._--------- ._------

ATTACHMENT B
Various Letters from Inmates (8 total)

\
:.».~.Nf' J"WtCl'.

~
r.r;r.......~. """"

_ . """'or' ",.,..,.,-'-",.. . . . . . ..,4"~.r.. A".?"A'-r....v..<l:'~

II

.

,

J"__""; """".".,." .----...

v'........Jn"~ ...~?!~

"""~r.-~~ •. _~v
.,

~.,

v...- '.

........

~- Ik..r~e-.~ .~~,/r .-v~

•

. /! ...',

I '

~-: v

.~ ~,/'.A'.I.""..

-o/I-IC. '-.A:'"c=""A"...v'

'.'

, : •

p~_~.7r# ~/r,....,..Je. r""1'H:"'_ _~ e:"--.'r·...-r..-rrw-

..IIk/A'~A';f' l-cJ"...-r""~7
w.r , ....r.I
.. . !.P....,(.,,?,':.t"P.·

A ..............vnrr"

.

....,~p) . . '-

"""? ~ . ...t:::.r .'#I#lA..._ . /

rA"--...r":

P""'-:- ..

A':....,..J/tI!~«I'.• .t:J~~_ ~tVV'cr_.....,:r ...~ ;,T-~A~A'~ ...,·.

:

.

.....~. ~'4.. ~r..s:-· -'f'_~r.4::rn---:.,. M""~"",-:.~,,- e':"'"~A"""C"C"'"":...- ~.P~-'t:"~. """'~...:ta> • .I'1/IIIftZ:............~~ .

.

: "

r.~""r-;r.A

~ c/IIII"I:T.«A'Yr..J:::. e:"AI'IloT,(': /". ~r ".ytr' ~.rod:V_

~

....,....-e"I=':". r,p •..<re:' .C"~.r
.....IJ. ••-...'f/ ';J'.(o~A';PfZI. "vr-<-

..,....-,p.... ~.~'r", ...~. ~ .c'~r:
-"....."..... ~ .....,~ .. ,l!'""-.;:.r'.e:.J _,_C"'.r. .._~ - __ ~~~

.tr~ -..I.~. i1'~II:',Arrlr~,cZ) </&Jlltr T.1IIr. __...,C".-"'~ ~....,.~t1'(" -..r
.

~

# ...d"·:.,.N'.....a·-,.r~· ,C"VYC"'- -~

-Q'

~_."... ~ ~

-'~

-,

""--.-..-..r-?V..

"9"

4/_.

......,...
..,oIIf/fOf'.....
-,0('
'
~ ... ~--...... .-..:~..._(.'..... A"~~ .z....s:.r~ ..r~~
i

~
!

~ ~ .t!r -.,;,;.,. """'--'"""':F

•.I:M""
.....

,. '4Ar __AD

....-,-

~.,."'~"... ~.....~ ~~ .. ~.v
,
4IV_ '-',r.-t:C

.

t I f ' _ # " ( ' - - " ' - """foo __ ~lCI:!::>

"'-;";oa:'" ,AiD.,.-q..,.,,..- (O'<!t-J?1fI"_y -..../-'

"

'.

~~ ~r... _ 4 I ' .~.• J:Hdr~ ...."._cY~< P,l'~ _ ~ ~_'" ~

.'

~

CVV(''''''"r''''''''''

_~J!' ~. "--~--e'I:'r< ~ ~

~ ;.~ ~__

.

-... ...r ,.I>~_~/~_ U".~

:i""

.

7= ~ ~ ~:.-...,.... ....... hP"'
__................-.-~

.

..

__ ----_.. . . ~cIX""""'"'
~---....-r-

_

,;9'...--~ ....,c-:A"

__

.......

,

•...-lC1CI

.-...~.-,.~

4IkIoW' _ _ ~ ~ -:""'~_ ......t r.........

r....;:.-_...... ~......-

i.-'>"".r...v.<' ..tt:.,u ....--.r ""N'~

------.

__

•
._.,-~--

-.----_.

..

" •...,.. ...

-

_..-...-.~r ~,.;..y~

.....

__ ~.•~

.

eJ¥6,. ~ """,,,,.. , r ~ ......~ .....- ..",*, ~-

AIfr~-~

V-p

~ C"~....ft-~-~/,~,z,_~_....,.-V-~

.

~

4-'_ 't:!'~~..v' ~

e:"""""~ ~~ ~~.... ~~ . . '

. . . . .~ ~ ~.....,......··~~~.</~7~-~ ...............--"·

,.,. """..rH"H1"....-." ~ 01

a __

~Fnr-*, -~';"...- ~ ,,;tr"'f!A'ly t:!'.....-~".../, ........_~ ......._ _ ............ "~,;........-

~...v_ ~HP~ ,~~ ~ -r~'-...r~-~,.cr

~.-.......~

...... ~_.-..r/

".. ~·~.c-~.doinir-:-_......... t:,.- .....-~,_ ...-_ _ ...... d"'-~;r~----<

.-"'!Iv"..v~
_ _. . . - - • ..".~,.,v_..-

4..-4".-r~

~ ........ll".....

..." "'t'?"""',. .....~

c/"-'H'~..,....." l"?I-W"" ~ ......- .-c"'

CI'W4-r..-<:>;v_ _"'r'Ao'r....._ _<:I' ........~("' _ _

.4'>f'-~ ~"'1'

~ "• ...e.-

.........

.r.

e-t:r A.,. .., ""-AIY.r",- • .....

~

~

__._----~~ d'..,...~.:;>

("~

~AA./~<"'C77 ~,P,s; rt?~

-l:Ir....

r.-

.4t"o=- .?P.....

(}',

.. ·.,'-.::1:.

,

•

. :....~ Mtm:'_ (I 7l:?'if.{1~~.~
--'In:>

/;.ru/

, ...

~-n.,~..e..- /).t.'~" .~A'~Cf;S .£)~,I)~ ~r'aJ"'...v"A1"1:...ur~.. ,JJ
~ 1~~~~..a(C/1!t" crn....0~/,4.~ ~// r~ ..'7a-JL ,,£J1!Ibtf
a.??

.4<,j~..u:?A--. dJ.~1 . m.J~

.vn_ rA.;.; ./}-.~. ~~/I1.:"_.~

. 4';)~l.?rfO'J,(..;

.tj:f-~ . 2naH,;Y.. t/J[;Ii..~/~~ . m,,+~ Ca.t:t'J.4.-7":J/~ ....&J4//e//lCI. '" .

.. t~P.~:.e....fcfl'~

a. cf/~'

d~("'-:l. ?J.t?,~. /t.(.t.--

6 ..uYI?

.,

1

/i.J.-2i.t-_.,,~.~/J'.4t~/lI;..J.&v?,.(fJL!.

a7''d..~ ~a/..c.4thd.<./)aH..Q.:/i.2.L//f,/~o...1~ /)~1.Jp;.

.~ ,oY17e:-.'l'JC-eJ" .J'?kA.c~I)~,J-

;. ~I..JCb7.).:f!t'»? ..6,t./.i~J,Jj,"~", .t//'Q/«,J,-dr.l'j4,

~t(T~'f1:,~-:'~eAJ /PC7.6r.4<.;_cl--.AU/.~Ct.:
:.zZt:V;'n,.l/j{'/"v.A.-'

c t7U'I?~

w/UiJtVU).t.9;Iacr.

t::VT.Jd

~ d/;4C/!1Im ~(J..tfj:'Yt. n, .7?~~. 0.. ,.I-'..uv

: .~,~. ~n~,itvn~.J ~AM'~ ~.na' .2~_~·t..?~,_/~

:1//.(!.Jf~ALJ ~

r6....t..4si:.- a.~...cJ,.'t_

...

Cu/lr..&n.-t&-

..v.t.!2£.

4?7.

,0-

c#
'. .

"&.A.£tr.1...

J(J.#,M;,/a..r~':. .

i~'''~1fr~a/.(.O''/:>#3/~ unl·).:_. Q./~ ~J,.Ia2cJU;.R.4.._~

t'&z"'!. .t i) ..

~~OA,' m~9n~?",f'. UJJ/~ l... • .J.:7'~,..t/.)-~~\-~.I.1.e~.

r"M..;,t 1o/}(n7?1J~a..r-eo'. ink r!~' ~r......e.c~(~,.J.i?~A.~'~:UW_7i:b'~ IS

')

1.z.;~'"";r1;''''', _... ~ '..?~17" k,.vo.,/.L.t/, . .L2t?""AJ-~

"

;f,L 'm~OrY& . ~.0~ _imn.nCl..~

z:7S,'4.f

7~U-~::' ~&­

~ ..~.v:J-&a_. d2t:1~.. ,k7~O".J2.!"._._

~.4f)--& r::!Jt..';I- dJ~ ~ Ce//_ ?2q.a.e." I /}4/..I"p:;' ./.4WoCl ~-/jod_..u,?7~_
.~.bd,..,~ tl~.La,&"z.r e/.JiM')UrJ .~.~/,.:",.v........ ~~_.~./~~~_
. ,.y~.t:Prud eJ:'" h"Mm.t..(y ,~. 4Ul)./U fla~ .. hJ. ~'.,S'.I9.J.,~ ~ ~
~.9tJtj.r1:la...'-rlin?,1 xJ(,It-'. ~i/J"~J!vi.Aj' t/nd¥
Dv.!:::1::l' t'.:.a.o/a..r~, 7~~' ;
,./!.A.~ .,L(..J~
./;C OJi,.

Y'

IIlIIIIII6

tin ,/~
a~.r-'/a..-~, r/u.;..-..:..iiI
'l'n.LC-/

.~cf'r·t.(..(/.; i1I.tv A"CIo' 7?:-~ "
;.ac.r'.. ~.

~.... ~~:t ...
r'/JeP'. ~ ~. di.

._.:u...~:~.~'f:9. .

0£2t:Y

~ !5fJ-4h:/£,.,.4#7o'

~;.:1 .d,.~t"/~5-'

~ ~I ma.~

. ~¢/..I/J'n

~ ~ ;r'.4J.,j.t!4J

C4.11 :IVl::r/.l2l.e.)~. ." ,w¥j7AI) ~~..t.d,,_.~.a.not. a-:.t..
'"O/'lo/"J.I:).17' ana' ,t)..LIJ.A.<tI?J xU../~ ~A.J. A.,~. h.,mC?llAa!...,.&:rm. ~ .
Crt// M'Jt:Y #4. CtJ;'/ A.f}lUJ !7P,;. ~V>1Y .~l :t'a4I)~/.~ ~._/Q~~

_~..e-nd..ea/

.

tj

em.

(l..

.t

.c>~.<',~ ~nd' C~qnt:f W/~~~ .. r7/~

.1J~f7' oI~~()p?Pnc.~ The.

- - - -.. --·---k---P.~-1lUL.?2kU~ ....-I£.~

I

#'CIA

?7Cr Cv&
S4r"ero~

..

~. tZ",

"t/u,

~a:oJ2, ~ a~7r3"

,.e/~:...JZ:.~!'!.EP'.>??_ ~~_a..na' _C::~_.~~~.f

.

.__

-------,a=~"'"'". . . . .~c?' e>:lv "....J~,..:.r...Y'..c. .,. *',r'l'-'V" (A" .a4--O{c'9'--d.4.~4UI.b-~Z:-::"E;6I::~----?f!'Jr rUJ/A»7?", &"r/"f ~~ ~ /':?;t..!)M'7' ~ 4<./ C7'}.r;' (,.',~q,..«.. a-tno' Jt?a..a."." • • •

.,';' D!?· lOll.- BI-"\\J I-\i~h ~r+ ~~ PNDY\/S\l.sa."'''i\\~ CA.
t\~ i'n B,.tv1.U .. ''is
Q.tvI\\J

no+-

']£+-

S\Y\c<.

~ttY\~\e

\~vi':5 hd\ ~r

0..

-b ge4-,

0..

0..

01.

-9tc::.'h. k,4-

+i'...l.,. kUr- ~"'~

0,

O'.""~ ~\ou~ \~ ~oK.

C\.b>i.

'2.

moV'\~s ~ ~.\-.

\/L.\ I'2.C:Ol ~t; D~ \~ SJ~'ol

.\-h(b~h

tJls

our- ~. W)\~

s,",e. ~'$ m.o.d.e.

Ms

w'l\e.1"\ 'J:. ~-\- o,.~O\\ ....eJ. Jro ~\S. P~\tAW\:t:. cl.ici

tY\-f. •

C70..""~

c/o co..\\d

",\\

J:.

"":I .P~\~

OV+-. 0... . kA'ch~",

hO\.~. J:

M-e.

~o~

c::.b.;Is.e. -

~ +0
ho..\[-G.

~k:3

:t:.. bee..io\ n.e.r-e.

--(O.:f-J.,.

0.."'-''''':)1 sh.<-

'2.

~ +~W\es -

"=,,,~s

~o-\- her ~et.e..("

0'>+
2.

-\-l~

l~\te- fleX+ to 4h<.. s~ o..~cL ~~ s~\s ~d.1 ~.\.el\ c.lo~ 4-0 kAYYk.. q~ It- bu+- +h.e..:J· ck>",-\- co.-n::...·.:r:. ~ c~\.td -b s~ fY\'j O'.llC..:sjse{Of'
01-")
5-2..-01 \.,€.. _+0 lei vt1~ 4he..r-e.~ C\. cle.o..-\.h \""\ ':JolJ r ~1'Y\\\'j
o.,,~ d.~d. \'\0+- \e.A- YVk.···4~Hd. -ro_ . ~ .\.o"'~ori.e cl.~ ~ f\o-t- 5'~v~ -M~ ~ ".
{',",one.. 00..\\ . A cfo '3~\fe. ~- ot"'\-e.. ~l"'\..£:>\J\()
C\. \\~ -Q"
\L..\c..k\l"'\~

I

t)

)

~y"\ ~oY- ~"",d. i-e...\\~t'\~, -r 9oV\..+- be. \\~-e. e.....tc...<:j o>(\e.. ~s ~\\~ -:t.~
, nc:.-\- 5\ \~ t>v+. lte..rc :t:.. Cl\.\IV\ o..Y'\, eJ<.+f-q "30 d..o-.:J oS .. o~-\- ~~. C\,\'\

&rv1 V .:r.. ~ -\-0 ~-c.. \l-bf"O\.\j b ~YV\e..s ..
~ ca..u"'se.\o r'" do ~ .t.o..>o..V\t- ~ ~~"e.. VV'\.f.. 0.. (:) \d.. SOVV'-.e ('e"~~
'o.Y'\~ :t:. ~.eJ. copy~ 0.9 YV\j - ~,",kO\.\ .{.\ \e.-\-n~s

+\M<.- ~V""\

:

I...

J

-------,.-.-------

'

..

------------ -_. __._- --------------- -- --_....-

·

,'

: . "( :~~.tjl'

,

.

~., ,\1

!lyse/f If~,j 'J~ o/her. ck'.j/f~Nt.e'.s hl.re ;.11I' lI&h (J)e..serl 0i/ff~ PrisoN hlive, tue./I/ lidlVAffueti fJ-:OhJ fhe.
~G(!'Ner~/ POful",..f/~if$effl~ I'INc/ cI?s flnc£ d I~ /I .secrel·
1I;'c! is()trled S.~C!PN'I)f' flu. prt'stJN ON'" I-Aciliry [/)S bui /c1/"(j ,If - oe.c:!;oN, 1"1"11.'-£,1/1, w£, r4!t .l11,1f/;V- fh~ trim""
focus AlV"d ~"r,-~d cSu£/~cl.s u"vde:r StJi"(j /{ i/I/!.J A /
~><Iv-i me-HI A~r,~;~,/,:,~:, &l'A.v:ior-"" I IIIotl;/) C/I (tON ClIVi!.
t'('

)
....I

.tve.r! .5":~k cllp.ft'V·e," I/vz o(J()kb,/ w-/ln AAv'"e. OIVe.

flllfj/~

A,.,v~ AN':)tv1ft7 t'1.N'c!I;..r!eK-!iflN-f
IJ"; /?e. cI clo ~"'/YJ L ~l.$ kN'"t1.w1l/ A-S ,&/4..$ vfo4 II'~N' itt:pvl/R;VR.) ",;va" ~uN'd,us <iv/fir otlh05e, (;,ki£i.d r~f()rl(s), f/;~rL.
c!£~M/i1 (;IS ProJr/i/Yl r;,,;/ur£',f
wAlch ,,",./ It.trK rt'Jtlih us LIj,:£k -,1;, .,this "closecl doorN'
COI7'lIl'7Pfl/.·'Q"fA

17 .;;

f'1'

7

4ex.,eeri I"'1LNI.,

'~"

.

W::;rc!£IY'~;:J' C""flA'~'«:S', ~i~t..f!e,.r/f..v~

I I/1,/1SIN--e. if yat( irlll; .' fA(&.

rSerj4.-9~4 7. Corr.e.cf',OIv"'''! I c){'!J C~S~ CiA S'S;' flC,;{ ~ON'

Iprs

/fifd

cCJ""IV/I/Ie.'e i11L1116~S' All W'ZJrhO

-/-0 Cf)rVd'GlC

I "". ~,,6!0 ~'IC

du'l

.

"iN'

(};It/' ,:'" i11A

CiJ(,/AI'"S£-

cOArc~rl

fl',

fces .~,vh/~/

-Ihl! 1/1'01· fJr&Jj;;,;,Ji... ~, . by ,-flu. wlf('? wA~ch' Alfv:'~ N~t!I (
6e.tN AIf TO "re.d bl' f;;~ .leiml",v;sl;"~/bN'" IrQ c. ~ duri!..

p$.J.

d

y 1-, d {} IJ ...,

Ac.t /INc! or C!t'fpr-,vi/l . Corr£cl/CJr/ IJi./les (C C..e) 77f/~
/5.. il 1:r.6rt,rCJ;);; c~~,j / :/hti'; 14 ;:.re~tu-i die,.;,I'

ex IS f. ~Vl!r' Ihe kl.1S~ 11& It
ML./~bers

'1

/loS'

fh#!y ck~n -Ii I. Stlr~~ (h~f'l:S­

...I
)

r

it.J ( .sirYI '! I~Ne.()",.s -lie IV't:Jrm lor
fAA I /lrL (El"l' 10 J"{,/jl~r v;.re -/hLh7 s~ Iv~.s .
I

17t~

\\CJr~/iI'fi':z.e.c1cr/"mtt.

hAve.. ~Nd' cc;J,;..r,{,~",e.. f~ I'YIA-ke.. ~Nd' 6r4!!Ak

TUk$ "",vcl.IA~
~J"';H.:JI /hi!. (;,w
tl({;'cI/1!r5

@tLsu-1

IlAv~ .6~,v- ';;rc~;;/7 e"yJ::sld
/:.Y Ij~ L\"ltI'"ltw£!J"~;;c/;'/~J1~/~"It~1 fJr~rAM ArL.··

s"tJecls Ii,,';

. dri.lt.fst~. -f~ ml9l~~u;V -,/Ae.li- ~AN'if. W;Yh
dt'lullil~1 r!JJb

ANd

or r&Jr(s ~ h~v"~

NO

t:.t>A/-

A

~ff.A!

S(J~I!. v;c/;-"" !s-.I{iC &./;r fk..~qinfe;,/7 c.o~~ -/tI!""'fll'T~~
Si.J~c·ide,.) W"~/L il'l'~f.. /V-~ ,,;'" -/;' fhi!.- ··~~.IY;';-iN""",sJ/1f"
leAC.h/lf 0 f
. 7'AtZ /;c//; I~ iP.- W ~()hA.r

h.l!t!Ar Atll~r/z..£ iJy CApl.q;".N _
~ use II~ftJ~rt.,r ()f fS1c:ho.·locJ/c~1 ~o~ /'~,l/N/j;l/4/~
u.s ~ WAf -,t;CJ.P'1 f-1 e lex.I,6t:Jtlk rv4,s /1N"'d ;-LJi/~;;.pNS
o I' the C,l/I/;;rl'V/~. {i)£f/i,.-l'm~N/ 0 /' Grr~~,{,';,v /frr,./
f!.,t.hAi,'j,'!If,!;;'''/ <'''is W~// //I; .our lI~m~ lJ.if;/s n,vd
Cot>/",f/;·lulrd;.r~I 8v,.,rN(r:z~'s. 0($ IS ·{}r:.fA/I/; ~ ~cI' c;rN""t,
AI./4 .££.oS' I. .' ;'/It/d',-f ex:~V'/fl1~t,JaNe. W-TPtj AI
;Is Wor..:S<!. II10sl ViC "'.M::S 0 I 11£.' ;;'·-101 !Jr&JJ'~,q1Y1
'.

",

.r

1~'

/:.1, .

. , ~" i~!.;~· .' .'

..

. .. ..-..... _... -.- .".

",;'",!"
I.'.. ;.(::..... ,

PS·3.
Idl1/ "1, J. ()tJ 7
kN'I)W ~~!l0"', YVllli"/;;Lf4r, /I';-cI evR.I'I' desire AI! f-hL. /,005; -

fj",< co,rsl; Iv le.s I;{=e -6{,/A Ii It u.
6<./1 /.'VIZ ,1/1 kN'o~, w'lf;{~"I eP;r I ~.f' SGJM£ jJrA c; hell!
..-fli!/ci//roN', fh~S:~:6" .. /ilru will HtJl M~/m;"lrie,
f,"vt ~ Iir,. bu Ies

n{.b'(j r(,/~s St!.,~~'A~c( or/vee( 6/ Up~/,,.r~

c$tfAlly !hili ;71£rretr~
frulh:> Atvd wAIII; {/!Ally 8 0tH! . 4v dI:rI:,~I(f IAttrLI'i/ . r"Us- AN"'d. r~",,!A/;iJ#s
fhAt 6(,1il/s Ih~ 1Y1t:Jr"'!
c.
iiiV' ()f f!Je ,re. hll/;;!if,q ~~III' l;;Vc,-~hve ~f",.,r.:. /s

is rO"'1"!u/ /IS

)
.

)

A

..sur.£/y (I1~I9(1/ Sfir/ld /IN''c/ CtJN/r/.(l.Ir'~ ,~

«ec~~Ar/.«ej'A ~'I/;~. ,.".'
.tvtr( s/H;jlt- iN'mAftl. ;s'tfijedd ~

VN"-

Ci/l'iA,',./~'

Pi 101 ProJ.r-11'1 h"'V-4 ;Sitlrerd~',/It!- d.."'1jt!-S "
/tN'd 106" e S 'J)u L. 10 C/ifli/II/~, c.lN:do--cJrtJuN'd
IIlVd'\i/IL,JAI profvly folicr.. ~/L:' Per CC ~
.
77/t.. IS dO""lt.;,@if ,~f\(~~....~ <'10 (;i} /Ire. liL Ifjrll Al//~rtly
I

fOr fJri v'l !~f.- GrtJt.J,IJ ·C . fJrofJ~ rl!/;IA/~KC~ /lNd!().1- ,
se....ssioN'. /fhc; rlrl/c/e. ¥3
f/'~ f1JOI11 d£l.tri/s IA£
..sf~c/l7c /il1'1oJAI'I t)t /lllow~ik ;rPferf ';;r Ir/'v/ - ,
(~~ t9rt:lv;; 'C . . . ';YI,n",IL$". If ctJr'1Ik./~ eX;ll""" /";..r;q /;0 rV
Itt/d C&J/?1 i/fr-I';~/.r ~,8If1{/ j~.M,f~ CJr/~l'Vr;' .;;,,~

or

-.J

booile.f w/I! rt!.v~A/ Ih/1t
,

;'

f411!Z..

(f.',fhor/"z e.c:( ;;r~j7U'7

PS··;f··

1l1A( '7,dOO t
e.N 1ts-/~c1' gN'

f11J~' cP /s dlf. r;-;.r/~Iy /,-..r V/I I(/'i/M/d
o-erv£S ./Vt:J lij'/IIMA Ie;, -1vlJ~r/7 /1.5 /r rt:rk.. ~I
~/1.s 6e~A/ clt/A/·f prOMI.I/tfA~d i y rhL. "".11.//.
A,vd .C ~ ~ 7i-f/~ IS- Ct?~7t;-C:A,t;Q"V. 7Ju2r'c!!'. £r~)'
C/rflA/;"·
fO/;7 M~r/I' /vCJ tA/~&A'7" /1$ .
A ;tJ.j~N"7 /-,." ~Lrlrer;,/r,;~..
.
?be
AW,.I'VZL.Khb.ifal"
./j ON"/V o/V~· ~ ~ MA;,/"'~ /S~c/L.s
.
.
I ' .
)
IJ6.-f t::CJ,v.s:l',·~." }t'.~:.. .. r:~j!
VIO
.?,,t';;A./u ~,r two dtP:!!;'~N
". .
.
.
/I~cI ntJ:J/"'4- /;j~;:Ie;'·· b)/ CJN"'e. CAJ1'~/;...r ~c;.s~blV'¢ ..
',

)
/
1

)

"

~ Ar~ ht-l!IIt.,l;; f.4,4-/

fA;:r '·""'£rl'n,,'f/~v-··L.. /'/e-~vS

. sl'Ark #4 I~fzris( ""f' C(Jrrcer~eci 'pAr~~J'
wht:J I"fr~. I¥;/I,fy TO /i/d riNd ~ b4'.;/ uS" /~ ~hc! .
6Ir'0'tf/~ ~ e.;;~/;""A~. uK~r -;j'rCJI./"v-c/ /'0 ;';C,;4.$
/IN'"d CP -v~rl' r',..,c~cJ. etjcr~.,L~f ;>"e,;-r;;.h?e.d·.b,Y
cr/;"'/,.;~/ n11:Vc/~d t7~cr;" &-

h/d';·-i:Y

~~ ~~d .,.t~e.

c.jp..-pk o~ ht:);v~/;-.

LN"c lo.s u r ~ : . ;-I. J. S. P.·

81- hI! .",iar !lit> J! r;c~ hOrl {j,vif L i'Vl'I1l1tt!-

Pr/~NInItDI\7 '&JOIt/Lot (ivvzrA/ £rokoJ' 7'frd ,Pr~~..c:.L-S:_--./

,,~.

i·. I

r

~

,

,I.. ",

';ir·, ,:., ,}.

, .,
. (

.

.:... '1_

O'!'

••

!

_'" ... 'r

•

-

-

.~ .\....£)\:\.0 ~~.

.,... . .!

.

' •. -' •• "

\:\

':i':l~. b·$\(.£..~'":'~~..

. _.. .--.TQ~.~ . .

. . . . .-._.t'

-

... _..

'j

':!-.!!'- . -!?'1.:.a. _\$:l~....&:-:re..... _.c.l..:'I..'R.~ :::G:,,:Y

;

_

.

.

.

. ..... ~.. .....

. ". . .

..... --- ....

_--.... - ..

.... .. •.. '-' . ..

-

..

_~~C:.....~'?.R-.. _&::L~~.

.:¥-~.~:c.~ .. ~..J>:;, __ :3~~~.~\·~£-3'"~

'f;::>."1E..--r£...

::fp . ,fb,A;_l.~D~~

~ 'T'r'1 ~~~\O~.;) .5c......

·

'..! '.Ql:,.A~_U£~•. .ok-

~. "V C G _~\:w.\.(;.\.e.....s..b:;--.,s:::::;:'i.;~~~.--:D:\~::r-~~c;;..~-CQ..~

____

~~~.o.£_'_'~"""Qls'S:-E "'vi=.,~wr...£iQ..~~

Ag.L?,:

~~S)::!~~

~J~,",\.~.. :.b.S:"~\...L..~._~.:.a..u..._'\S.I.-~~
_~

-->-.~ .... _~(). <.... ~<2.-\\

A'; \c&e

..

~\ft\")A'1=~ .~<) \ '

.._ '"

US-ie,:) "\ §.

.

------t~.~~~Ob:eD .:30 %e,-A-_~".cCK:)~~~") .\U.~ ..~~.:J.~ \~.. _'. __
. ----.-+r~ eJ1.c.c~~ '¥z;::12 C::l'::&~~"'\i."I@.V b Q ~ ~·~S~cR..-.
_
_
+QCXO~~l.e~~.~~~\A3'eQU)\~.\\ en).~t< '~5~~~::'.'CVX
•
_ ••__ 1 ~J2.--:;;'
i5A..'K2- .~~ S:.QS:\A~X~~ \~(')\ ... ~ ess:·c __

.-.,) r .}~_~~e.n y.g"S?R-..').S.>.O.-~~ ..~·'Y,H-.'::> ~£\._""'\\n\ S3'R~.5?-O·

_ .:..•...: _ ...j :::\~.~_-.olQ........Q~._~_ S)as.\C.4~2.-_'te~~.:L~~:Q_,S"SU~~

I

..

. __.... _.. t~e\"",,\'\:)kJ..- ~~~C\A\.... \IR~_. ---_. __.•. _-_.._

_

_

. . t -- .::s:.~ ~.e.~t::!S:.~~'i-. .SO~.~~~~__..~~~ ...Iib~_~~ ...,~\.~Q:;?~__~~~)2 ~)~ ~\~. ~'t ~~D~·\A.\.... ~.e..~~.\\b...~._
: C""'_
~-...~ T~ (.' 1""1 ("""\ ' ll,l... 0
r\......... \.TY~:-_~
'=- .............-..~"") .c:fl- y
~I ~Q.
~'U-"'=--",.I
\.0 e:-,">
~~........
. . . .-rn0'~~
. . \~.' t~
,
I

i

.

.'

_ :/ I','"

.,.

.'

l

,

.

'

i 'CU'-.F\\\," G ~")':L ~Q..\t$<::f,ti~~','~~-'':::L ·'r:i.~-s. ~~-~,,~~""\=I~~,~.
1

.,

.

•.

'.

.

~~'~A~'- \ ~ 'OQ\,\\!.,;), W)l~~':-=:"\),·. p.::.\~ci O~~ .'~ C~\.J....... "'3\ '!~ \\~;::.~eR.C\.

.. ~e..<';\'0.ve.a. ~'.~~ A~e.~.q1~S?

\ 0 ·vD ~"\~ \(\t-o~~'i~\.

.

..~:,,~ .~~ o~'?·.cQ
i A\",,- '.¥"
"Il"\ l\:Y'l IC:... ~\ \.•":l
~ 1..."1--;:7
<7.:
\.,.~
<- ........
\ "......
r-.r_ t'"_al"'<...... -0 .<:.... -.;
V.
\ ~
-"('~. , \ .. ~r.: ..U'~ \ .. _~I:::l.. ~, ..
, •
. ,
; \\ ~-~. (,C)I\-:-:;-\,i\~
.JD"'"C'~ =:. ',).\0'...0 ~\ ~~~~-C- ~'J\) .\:.J.~ ~~~~

i~

~\~ 9Q,x_&::1'\D\\.oJ· !Q\LU:<~~~.) ,,",\\'-L 2.\<::::::"h~ ~.~. ~ J\\'s;".~.:,-~.

; Q.\..3-t<.S. .~p ~b.~tlo\\\o~\~ ~ t.:\:J:::.,«'- v,)~..

"'3..-::

G::>\\-'iGv;'\-S.

. J. ~A-: \ ~. ~~ e.~~~:-c ~f.J.-"\.::\ 1.'::,",;.. /l-:'J...... v;-,,~·..:..~.;S~Ji::: ...,"_~'..;i.._ ....

i 9.R.SD.:::>~~.s /)<I.1s2- \.h l\\\\:'Q....0 ~.~:;:).•.....':!:-~. ~(.."*.{\ to .0..,.).'1... -co.
·I•.~ . ~ \" ~~ ~.~~" c.e. ~ '\~. Go~ ':-1).:-,~. '\ ...." A.\. ~D~..e..,""""<I.~ W\\..L...
i_ .~-=?'<. ~t.."\"'.2..-.
. ,"

:s...,.).

~Q.~S2.. \\~\,~. - ..... ...

'" .• ..

....

."....-

;-------

ATTACHMENT C
Letter from S.A. Wells to B. Frye dated June 19,2007

STATE OF CALIFORNIA-DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, GOVERNOR

OFFICE OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS
Headquarters Office

'If .0. Box 3009

. :acramento. CA 95812

June 19,2007

B. Frye
3208 2 nd Ave, #4

Sacramento, CA 95817
Dear Ms. Frye:
The California Department of Corrections and Rehabiljtation (CDCR), Office of Internal Affairs
(OlA) is mreceipt of your corresponp.cnce regarding aJ.leged abuses towards inmates hoosed in
Unit (BMU)
~ocated
at High Desert State Prison (HDSP).
the Behavioral Modification
.
.
,

On JW'\e 19, 2007, I forwarded your complaint to HDSP Warden Tom Felker for his review.
Warden Felker or his designee will ~valuate the complaint and determine whether
issue is
supervisory in nature, if an investigation is required, or if a written response to 'you win sU:ffice.

the

)
I

.l

If you have any further questions regarding your concerns regarding this matter, please contact
the HDSP Public Information Officer at (530-251-5001) or you may contact George Giurbino,
Associate Director, Division of Adult Institutions, General Population, High Security and
Transitional Housing, at 1515
S~eet, Room.l44N, Sacramento, CA 95814.
.
,

,

"s"

Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention.
Sincerely,

w~~~

WILLIAM WELLS
.,
Special Agent
Offi ce of Internal Affairs - Headquarters

ATTACHMENT D
Letter from M. McDonald, Chief Deputy Warden, to B. Frye dated July 17, 2007

STATE OF CALIFORN/A- OEflARTMENi OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION

ARNOLOSCHWARZENEGGER,GOVERNOR

'ISION OF ADULT INSTITUTIONS
t '''lI.l Desert State Prison
P. .0. ~ox 750

5

'tllle. CA 96127-0750

July 17, 2007

COMPLAINTS REGARDING THEBEHAVlORAL MODIFICATION UNIT

Dear Ms. Frye:
This correspondence is in response to your Jetter that was submitted to the California
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (eDeR) Office of Internal Affairs (OlA).
In your letter you allege numerous acts of staff misconduct' on behalf of several inmates
housed in the Behavior Modification Unit (BMU)'at High Desert State Prison (HDSP).
Also enclosed with your letter were copies of complaints from numerous inmates housed
in the HDSP BMU.

)

AU allegations of staff misconduct are taken seriously and many of the allegations you
speak of in your letter have been investigated via the appeals process. In investigating
your allegations. it· has been determined 1hat Hl?SP staff is following the. policies of
CDCR. If staff misconduct is discovered duril:tg the inquiry, theappmpriate corrective
action will be t8k~, However, you Will not be informed of the reSults of the inquiry or
the nature ottbe corrective action taken.
It is my sincerest hope ~at this infonnation has been of some help to you in answering
your questions, in a general fonnat, due to the sensitivity of the issues being addressed:
If you have any additional quespQ9s. regarding, these issues~ please contact C. Bolls,
Administrative Assistant at 530-251":5501'.

.Sincerely,

~.~
M. D. McDONALD
ChiefDeputy Warden

.

.'

:.

"

'j,:;: ;

ATTACHMENT E
Letter from G. Giurbino to Sen. Steinberg dated August 16,2010

STATE OF CALIFORNIA - DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTiONS AND REHABILITATION

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, GOVERNOR

DIVISION OF ADULT INSTITUTIONS
PO Box 942883
Sacramento, CA 94283·0001

August 16,2010

The Honorable Darrell Steinberg
President Pro Tempore
State Capitol, Room 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
Attention Nettie Sabelhaus
Dear Senator Steinberg:
Enclosed for your consideration are my responses to the questions provided in preparation
for my Senate confinnation hearing scheduled on August 25, 20 10, for Director, Division of
Adult Institutions, for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
Additionally. per your request, a copy of my Form 700, Statement of Economic Interest
dated August 16, 20 J0, is also enclosed.
Should you or your staff have any additional questions, please call me at (9 J6) 322-6081.
Sincerely,

~~J~
Di;~'ct;C

~

_ivision of Adult Institutions

Enclosures

Senate Confirmation
George J. Giurbino, Director
Division of Adult Institutions
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

Statement of Goals

The director provides leadership, management, and oversight for the state's adult
prisons. As part of the management team for COCR, the director also collaborates with
all divisions responsible for programs, such as education and juvenile justice. As with
the entire agency, the director is facing how to manage the system in a time of limited
funds.
COCR is responsible for incarcerating about 169,000 adults in 33 institutions and 40 fire
camps and other facilities, and 1,500 juveniles. The department manages another
109,000 adult parolees, as of December 30, 2009, and 1,663 juvenile parolees in state
and 42 out of state. The stated mission of the department is to improve public safety
through evidence-based crime prevention and recidivism-reduction strategies. When
you were confirmed as associate director of High Security and Transitional Housing
Units in 2007, you said your role was "to provide the leadership, the oversight, courage
and motivation for our mission to manage safe institutions and create and provide
rehabilitation services to our offender population in both a safe and secure living
environment. "
1.

Please provide us with a brief statement of your goals as director. What do
you hope to accomplish during your tenure? How will you measure your
success?

As the Director of the Division of Adult Institutions (DAI) my primary focus and goals will
be to further enhance and maintain public safety and confidence through the operation
of safe, secure and productive correctional environments within the adult institutions
and camps. Based upon the fiscal crisis that have significantly impacted the nation and
all areas of state government, it is understood that these efforts will need to refocus on
the fundamental nuts and bolts of operational security and regular monitoring of
resource efficiency. It is further recognized that both innovative collaborative efforts will
need to be considered and established to provide for rehabilitative and/or productive
activities and programs for our inmate population.
I believe that our Department has made many strides during the past ten years;
however, based upon the public and political nature of our work environment,
sometimes our efforts becomes lost in the fog of fiscal limitations and press/media
headlines. To this extent, I intend to provide the type of open effective leadership to
instill public confidence in our institutions' operations, together with constructive labor
relations to interact most effectively with our dynamic employee culture.

George J. Giurbino
August 16, 2010
Page 35
inmates that successfully completed the BMU program during the initial gO-day
placement.

17. Why was the program at High Desert c;Jiscontinued? What role did you play in
its discontinuance and COeR's inquiry following the news reports?
)As I identified in question 16, the BMU at HOSP was activated as part of a COCR pilot
program, which was intended for participation by inmates who were deemed a program
failure, who participated in organized criminal activity (gang activity), who refused to
participate in integrated housing (Johnson v California), who refused to double cell, and
those released from ASU or SHU. The pilot was designed to run for two years, from
November 21 , 2005 through November 21, 2007.
The information provided by the institution and available from documented research
reflects that the pilot program essentially encompassed the two-year parameter of the
established pilot as identified within the corresponding Administrative Bulletin. Reviews
and feedback received from the Warden and staff who managed the BMU at HOSP
reported that although the resulting data from the pilot appeared promising, their
experience identified a critical need for additional custody staffing positions to
compliment the need associated with providing all activities and services associated
with the program. In addition, information received from other institutions managing
BMU programs provided a recommendation that property should not be mailed home
upon an inmate's placement within a BMU, but rather should be retained and used as a
program incentive for reissuance upon an inmate's successful completion of the BMU
within the guidelines of the original gO-day placement assignment. The COCR·
essentially adopted this change in policy related to the retention and reissuance of
property to inmates upon their successful completion.
HOSP, as with other COCR institutions with pilot BMU programs, were initially informed
that they would receive an education instructor position authority to complement and
facilitate the programs with the BMU; however, due to budget constraints these
necessary positions never materialized. I and other staff within OAI at headquarters
moved forward in establishing a BCP to request additional personnel resources for
additional custody coverage within the BMU programs, as well as requesting for a
specific allocation to provide education instructor positions for the education/training
portion of the program. However, based upon a fiscal crisis in the State and a
Department requisite for a realignment of fiscal priorities, the additional position
authority was never approved. HOSP and other institutions were not mandated to
continue their operations without the provision of additional resources, but were advised
that they could continue to operate their BMU operations if the institutions could
facilitate an internal redirection of staffing to complement their existing programs.
The Warden and management team at HOSP elected to discontinue the pilot program
at HDSP based upon the lack of additional personnel resources deemed critical for the
long term success of the program locally. The inmates that were assigned to the BMU

George J. Giurbino
August16,2010
Page 36
at HDSP were ultimately released to GP through attrition during the final 90 days of the
pilot program.
Directly following the publication of a newspaper series on allegation of employee
misconduct at HDSP, I initiated a timely tour of the two remaining institutions in the state
at SATF and Calipatria State Prison. During these tours, I also requested that the AD of
the Level III/IV mission, Mr. William "Joe" Sullivan, attend the tours with me. In advance
of the tours, I requested the two institutions and the DAI Classification Services Unit to
pull together a package of oversight information to assist in our review of the two BMU
programs. General parameters of the two tours included the following:
•

Review of local BMU OP;

•

Review BMU Yard Schedule;

•

Random C-fiIe review and assessment, 10 random C-files (or all if less than 10
inmates) of current BMU inmates for our review;

•

Call Sheets for Classification actions within the BMU for the last 90 days for our
review;

•

Appeals Coordinator to compile a list and/or copy of any BMU appeals
received/responded to during last 12 Months;

•

A list of incidents and use of force occurrences (837s) that have occurred in the
BMU during the last 12 Months;

•

Private meeting with five random inmates;

•

Cell-front tour of all inmates assigned to the BMU program(s).

On Friday, May 14, 2010, I spent a day at SATF reviewing documentation and
conducting a tour of the BMU with the Warden. We found the BMU operations to be
clean, organized and quiet during the tour, and the present staff demonstrated a good
working knowledge of the local BMU procedure. I observed at SATF that, because of
previously addressed fiscal constraints, the BMU was operating without sufficient
resources to fully provide for the training/education components of the BMU.
In addition, the institution appeared to be operating on a misconception that all inmates
completing a SHU term were "required" to process through the BMU before returning to
the GP. The assigned inmates expressed they experienced/witnessed no abuses within
the BMU; however, they voiced concerns about the program, and the requisite for all
inmates completing a SHU term to be required to complete a subsequent BMU
program. The criteria has since been clarified with the Warden and management team
at SATF, and a program sponsor has been identified to facilitate the education and
training program within the BMU at SATF. Additionally, efforts are in process to create
an education model within DEVOP's current structure to provide an instructor to further
facilitate what appeared otherwise to be an effect program at the institution.

George J. Giurbino
August 16, 2010
Page 37

On Monday May 17, 2010, Mr. Sullivan and I traveled to Calipatria, and used the day for
reviewing documentation and conducting a tour of the BMU with the Warden. Again at
Calipatria, the BMU operations were found to be clean, organized and quiet during the
tour, and the present staff seemed to have a good working knowledge of the local BMU
procedure; however, the staff expressed that based upon the recent change in
education models and limited resources, the institution was not providing any type of
formal/informal education or training program. It also appeared that staff at Calipatria
were using the BMU, to a large extent, to manage inmates with a history of possessing
cellular telephones, which does not truly correlate with the base criteria for BMU
assignment. Also at Calipatria, the BMU operated as a non-privilege housing unit,
where the inmates were being required to mail their televisions and property home upon
placement in the program. The assigned inmates expressed they neither experienced
nor witnessed abuses by staff within the BMU; however, they voiced concerns about the
program, and the requisite for all inmates to send their property home upon placement
. within the BMU. The criteria has since been clarified with the Warden and management
team at Calipatria; however, based upon a continued lack of authorized resources or
volunteer sponsors, I have elected to suspend the program at Calipatria until further
notice. Information was shared with the management team that efforts are in process to
create an education model within DEVOP's current structure to hopefully provide an
instructor position in advance of any future consideration to reestablish a BMU Program
at Calipatria.
I have interacted with some members of the IFC (local and statewide) regarding the
information provided within the news articles, and advised that each of the allegations
presented are currently under formal investigation.
The chairperson of the HDSP IFC had previously contacted me during July 2007,
expressing general concerns about processes and issues within the HDSP, as
presented to her by inmates assigned to HDSP and their respective family members.
The general issues addressed at that time pertained to:
•

Feeding: how much time are the inmates afforded to complete their meals?

•

Clothing: what are the inmates issued and what is the laundry process?

•

What is the ethnic breakdown within the BMU?

•

Law Library: are the inmates afforded access to the Law Library?

•

How is inmate behavior monitored and documented?

•

How are decisions made to graduate from one phase to the next?

Upon receipt of the issues, I had each of the areas reviewed by headquarters auditing
staff during a previously planned audit of HDSP. On July 25, 2007, I received feedback
from the reviewer regarding these issues, which essentially prOVided insight that

George J. Giurbino
August 16, 2010
Page 38
appropriate procedures and practices were observed to be in place within the BMU.
I subsequently shared the results of this review with the chairperson at HDSP and
advised her that I would be open to further review on additional issues that may arise.
In the three months that followed this assessment at HDSP, the timeframe associated
with the pilot project concluded, and the Warden elected not to move forward with
further implementation of the BMU based upon the lack of sufficient and necessary
personnel resources.

Contraband
You previously told the Rules Committee, "The control and management of contraband
within our institutions is probably one of our greatest concerns, and the concern for our
rank and file and supervisory staff that are managing our institutions daily." You added
that COCR viewed cell phones "as a threat to our operations." In the past three years,
the number of cell phones recovered by COCR has grown from 992 in 2007, to 6,995 in
2009. Federal legislation to allow signal jamming appears to have stalled in Congress.

18. Why have the number of confiscated phones increased, despite efforts to
crack down on offenders? What new strategies can CDCR develop to reduce
the flow of phones into prisons? How do you evaluate the danger these
phones pose to prison staff and the public?
Inmate possession of wireless communication devices within State prisons and
correctional facilities allows unrestricted means for these inmates to continue
perpetrating felonious activities against the citizens of California. Inmates can facilitate
criminal/unauthorized enterprises, compromise institution safety and security, and exert
their negative influence in the outside world despite being incarcerated in a State prison.
The incidences, use and subsequent discoveries of cellular telephones and similar
electronic communication devices within correctional institutions have expanded
significantly over the past three to five years.
During the past three years, the number of cellular telephones and wireless
communication devices found in the possession of inmates, strategically concealed but
easily accessible, or intercepted and confiscated prior to introduction within the
institutions' security perimeter has increased dramatically. During the three year period
of 2006 through 2008, 4,064 cellular phones were discovered and confiscated at the 33
adult institutions.
During calendar year 2009, approximately 7,000 cellular telephone discoveries were
made on State prison grounds, and current data suggests that this number will grow to
exceed 10,000 by year's end.
The increase in discoveries of cellular telephones within state prisons is based upon
several interrelated factors, including a stepped-up effort by CDCR to detect contraband

ATTACHMENT F
CDCR Adult Research Branch, "Evaluation of the Behavior Modification Unit Pilot
Program at High Desert State Prison, Appendix I: Summary of BMU Inmate Interviews"

Evaluation of the Behavior Modification Unit Pilot Program at High Desert State Prison

APPENDIX I
Summary of BMU Inmate Interviews
Reason for BMU assignment and perception of fairness
Most of the six inmates interviewed had been at HDSP less than six months, although one had
been there for considerably longer. The specific reasons the inmates gave for being placed in
the BMU ranged from too many generic Rules Violation Reports (115s) to refusing a cellmate.
Several inmates claimed that they were sent from another prison directly to the BMU as
punishment. Among the comments that they made regarding the perceived unfairness of their
placement in the BMU are the following:
• Not justified.
• I shouldn't be here.
• 115s were based on lies made up against me.
• I got sent here because of an incident that involved 30 guys, but only 6 of us - all Black
- were sent to the BMU.
• I shouldn't be here. They say the bulletin allows what they are doing, but it doesn't.
There are no regulations or program rules. Any time you show any resistance to staff,
they come down on you - charging you with things like delaying a peace officer because you asked for a laundry basket.
Inmates' descriptions of their BMU experience
Two of the inmates spoke well of the workbook curriculum and the instructor. Others indicated
that they spent much of their time reading or working on legal appeals. However, each of those
interviewed gave the research staff many negative descriptions of their treatment in the BMU.
Some of the accounts are rather typical prisoner complaints; others are serious allegations of
mistreatment. The complaints that may be considered typical involve both minor complaints
related to being incarcerated and those that allege flaws in programming and prison
management:
• No programs, like AA, NA, which are on the main line.
• Deprivation and loneliness.
• It's Bullc_p. If it were fixed it could be helpful.
• Day room in BMU is dirty. Sanitation: walls are not cleaned. And inmates are reluctant to
clean because there is no reward.
• They take recreational clothing (jumpsuit and socks), hygiene stuff, and books.
• Shouldn't send property home, already punished by coming here.
• Doing CDCR a favor by accepting a celli. Not haVing a celli is best for me, because I get
frustrated.
• It's hard to get a job. Half-time inmates get jobs as first priority, and there are a limited
number of jobs.
• Hlegal - program is punishment. Gain from workbook. Guards don't respect the inmates.
• They don't allow us to grow here. The officers often bite into a confrontation with the
officers.
• ASU inmates should not be mixed with BMU inmates.
• The floor is dirty. They have left a bird flying around and sh_ting on everything. There is
food on the walls by the stairs, and it's been there for 5 months. They never clean the
trays. The kitchen people don't wear hairnets - we are the dirty little secret.
• Some inmates kept in here 13 to 16 months even when they refuse to program.

Adult Research Branch
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

Page 68 of 72

Evaluation of the Behavior Modification Unit Pilot Program at High Desert State Prison

•

They never clean our tray slot, and they refuse to let us clean our toilets. They say
supplies are out, or they say they are against regulations. We write it up, but it
disappears.

Although we were unable to verify them, some of the allegations went well beyond typical
prisoner complaints. Some involved racial issues, and others involved what would appear to be
serious constitutional issues:
• Want programs, religious services, yard time, and more access to Law Library.
• I just wanted to program and go home. I would write 602s, but they block them - they
delay our 602's. They keep asking me to make changes on my 602s and this ends up
delaying it so the appeal time runs out, and it's too late.
• There was this time when we had been kept from the day room and canteen. A lot of
inmates started kicking their doors. Not all, because some are sick and can barely walk.
But we were all punished. We were taken outside and made to stand in the snow for
over 2 hours. Some guys were only in boxers and socks. The guard, who was supposed
to be in the tower, wrote 115s for all of us. But he couldn't have seen all of us kicking. He
admitted he didn't see it, but he said he did what he was told to do.
• And out of the 28 in here, 22 are black, and the rest are Latinos. There is racism here.
• No yard or religious services, and restricted Law Library access. No other services are
available that can be found on the main line.
• No, because of no access to yard, jobs, religious services, and limited access to Law
Library.
• Lack of access to religious services, except for occasional visits by volunteers.
• Inconsistent assignment of inmates to BMU (case conference irrelevant).
• Grievances (602s) not handled in a timely manner (staff hold them up, ask for
corrections, then hold them up again before asking for additional corrections and by that
time it is too late to submit them - must be submitted within 15 days of an incident).
• Personal, irreplaceable family items taken and not returned after cell searches (items
were not contraband).
• BMU is harsher than ASU (lose property when assigned to BMU, but not ASU); inmates
assault staff to go to the less strict environment of ASU.
• Inadequate time to eat (approximately 5 minutes - if inmates try to keep tray longer, they
are written up).
.
• Inmates are not given 1 hour of out-of-cell exercise time each day (or even 5 hours per
week; some have had as little as 3 hours over several months).
• Entire group punished by being forced to stand in the snow for 2 hours (some with only
boxers and socks). Medicines and medical equipment prescribed by medical personnel
withheld.
• Mail sometimes withheld or tampered With; outgoing mail sometimes does not get out.
• Facility is dirty (including bird droppings from a sparrow that has been in the unit for 2
months; bird droppings get on food trays at times).
• No law clerk in the law library; have to use computers to access law rather than books.
• Use of "underground regulations."
• Inmates not given a written copy of the BMU rules and regUlations.
• Do not always decontaminate inmates after gassing.

Perceptions of safety.
Some of those interviewed said.that they don't feel safeanywhere at HDSP. Several others
indicated thaf fheY·felff safeas Tong as fneydfd-nornave acellmale;out tfiaTtheir insistence-on
Adult Research Branch
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

Page 69 of 72

Evaluation of the Behavior Modification Unit Pilot Program at High Desert State Prison

having a single cell got them to the BMU. Inmates spoke of fearing for their health, indicating
that medical records did not follow them and those necessary medical devices and medicines
were taken away. Several inmates described an incident when staff left one inmate on the floor
with rectal bleeding and refused to take him to get medical attention.
• Another thing that happened was when they responded to a medical emergency - an
inmate was bleeding from his rectum and they sent all these officers over here... When
they got to his cell they said "It's the f_ing N_ _ again, let him die." And they left
him there.
• Inadequate medical attention (delays of several days for serious medical problems).
• Lack of facilities for physical handicaps (such as no handicap showers).
• I was on psych meds, and they bring them when they feel like it.
Treatment versus punishment
Although some inmates indicated that the BMU involved some treatment, all inmates who were
interviewed indicated that they believed the program was mostly or all about punishment:
• Everything is deprived. No opportunity for rehabilitation services. No access to services
and jobs.
• Inmates are made to clear sections, as a porter, but there are no rewards to do job. It's
supposed to be the COs job to clean, unless an inmate is given privilege. I'd be more
Willing to program if they didn't take stuff.
• Basically punishment because you can do steps without doing curriculum, but it's the
only relevant treatment, since it helps cope with anger.
• Just the curriculum. No school. No job training/vocation.
• It should be about treatment, but now there is no motivation to program for those placed
in BMU.
• Nothing like treatment or real education. Some can't read, and there is no attempt to
change literacy/no effort at all.
• Some believe it's worthless - and I guess I would say it is too.
• Just punishment. Like there is no reason to accept a celli. You see they remove all
motivation for cooperation with loss of TV - and TV helps with stress.
Experience with BMU Officers and Counselors
Some reported that things were run well and that some correctional officers and staff were
respectful. There were some problems that were relatively minor or more typical and others that
were not. Among the more routine comments were the following:
• So-so. Not so bad. They're a little respectful. Only one is disrespectful.
• No problems. I try to ignore them, and I don't get written up.
• One thing, they run the day room late intentionally.
• The officers do not have respect for us. They come at us without respect - it is not like
the CYA, juvie, or even county jail where you at least get some respect as a person.
• Confrontational, except for three.
• Only see those [counselors] at committee, once a month. Don't get to talk to them.
Although we were not able to verify them, a number of serious allegations against officers were
raised:
• Some officers try to provoke confrontations with the inmates (some want inmates to act
out so they can put them on Jockdown, which is easier for them given how understaffed
they are).

Adult Research Branch
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

Page 70 of 72

Evaluation of the Behavior Modification Unit Pilot Program at High Desert State Prison

•
•

•

•
•

Horrible, they [counselors] lie constantly, deny your requests. Ignore the fact that the
rules conflict with title 15.
They aren't able to run the prison the way it's supposed to be run. They are understaffed
so they can't run the prison correctly. And they work double. So they cause
.
confrontations with us so they can put everybody on lockdown and make their job easier.
They want you to act out because then it justifies what you are doing. And you get
punished more if you try to get your rights.
Lots of problems with correctional officers. They promote confrontations - promote
physical confrontations. There is no one here to watch over these people. The Captain
says he is "god of the BMU." When they searched my cell they took letters from my
family, photographs, my bible, a dictionary, coffee, tea and a hand print my little
daughter did. They took my toothbrush and broke my pencil into little tiny pieces. The
officers say they don't have these things - and we are allowed to have them. It was
reprisal for filing 602s. If you send something to internal affairs, they send it back to the
person you are complaining about and then the captain will say "You are going to pay for
it." You get punished more if you try to get your rights.
They are disrespectful of inmates. They use the N word and have paraded inmates
chained and naked after gassing without fully decontaminating them.
Two of the officers mess with our mail, and one is always trying to get us into a
confrontation ....

Teacher and social workers
None of the inmates indicated any problems with the teacher assigned to the BMU or any of the
social workers with whom they came into contact. Several had good things to say about them:
• Good. See him [teacher] twice a week to get new packages and homework. Also sees
inmates on request.
• Interaction [with teacher] is non confrontational. He is always trying to encourage us to
do the program.
• Social worker from Mental Health helped request medication. She got it started, and now
I'm receiving meds.
-Has the BMU made a difference on the General Population Units?
Although there were mixed responses regarding the influence of the BMU on the General
Population Units, some program participants thought that it did have an impact:
• Yes, some. It has made inmates think before they get involved in negative behaviors
• No, they are still on lockdown.
• Inmates think twice before getting involved in something.
• Before BMU started, GP inmates didn't know what to expect from the program. After it
started, GP inmates wanted to avoid it.
Type of inmate who benefits most from BMU placement
The perceptions of participants regarding the type of inmates who benefits from a BMU
placement are mixed:
• Haven't seen any that would.
• It might help the guy who has enough common sense to learn the curriculum - to take it
to heart.
• For those open to getting help with life and relationships.
• There might be some, but BMU for inmates who won't take a celli is wrong.

Adult Research Branch
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

Page 71 of 72

ATTACHMENT G
Email from S. Kernan re: "SacBee follow-ups from discussion today" dated April 7, 2010

Chapman, Steven (Research)@CDCR
Kernan, Scott@CDCR
Wednesday, April 07,20109:42 AM
Hidalgo, Oscar@CDCR; • • • • • • • • •; Chapman, Steven (Research)@CDCR;
Giurbino, George~CDCR; McDonald, Mike@CDCR: McDonald, Terri@CDCR

From:
~ent:

b

C r-'

~-

RE: SacBee folrowups from dISCUSSion today

Subje:;t~

Please find mv suggested responses to the reporter! am inducting the warden and George for help_ Its clEar that the
2008 research paper is being used as a basis to say we covered up all this abuse and constitutional violations, Any help
that can be had to fill in the blanks would be appreciated. See my responses to the questions below.

Scott
From: Hidalgo, Oscar@CDCR
Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 8:53 AM
To: Kernan, Scott@CDCR
Subject: Fw: SacBee follow ups from discussion today

from',

•

vharles Piller with the Sac Bee interviewed Scott Kernan yesterday. Here are his follow up questions.
Please review and advise. Thank you.

http://www.cdcr.ca.gov

From: Piller, Charles - Sacramento [maHto
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 5:09 PM
To:'-'-""
cc:~
Subject: SacBee followups from discussion today

'8

Dear"
. nanks again for your assistance today.
1

Here are my followup questions as we discussed with Mr. Kernan:
1) Why was the HDSP BMU evaluation never publicly released?
, not sure how to explain this really. Once Research does a project do they put it on their web site, distribute
",(ernally, what's our business practice here (Steve Chapman)? I know I received a copy when it was completed, so
mC1vbe response is that its distributed internaliv and provided exte rnally if reque,;ted directly to Research Tn Also
confirmed that when researchers at prISon completed study they did an eXit and provided findings and presumabiv the
inmate allegations to priSon leadership Cannot confirm that they did an\fthing with the information. HO'vvever, my
review of the aliegcltions irl their ap~)endii. is consistent with inmate complaints thmughcJLn the: s,/stem

2) Were the changes mandated in the atlached court ruling from ]vlonrerey County implemented in aU BlVfUs. statewide',' If selectively
lmplemented, pleas'" explain.

Mike/George, need help here. Old \fOU guys do anything with 8M U exercise hours a;:; a resull of this ruling. i understand
this ruling required SVSP to ensure that BMU inmates received same exercise time as GP?

3) Did anyone at HDSP investigate the allegations of abuse and constitutional violations raised in the BMU research report') If so,
please provide an); details and outcomes. If not, why not?
Inmates have many ways to address their complaints: appeals, DIG, litigation, BSA, OIA, Ombudsman, etc. As stated
above the complaints appear to be consistent with typical inmate complaints and I do not think concerns raised to
researchers would be natural method for us to address these stated concerns. So maybe response is that individual
complaints by BMU inmates would have been investigated throug h traditional complaint processes and that we are
seeking information to the reporters Public Info Request to determine the extent of internal review or even to the
tent that inmate's used the normal complaint process.

4) Did Dr. Chapman raise the question of alleged abuse and constitutional violations with anyone at the prison or at CDCR
headquarters or at the IG office? Ifso, to what end? lfnot, why not?
I think this response is same as above. Research work product is not traditional complaint method. Alleged abuse and
constitutional violations are addressed through the processes identified above. So no, Dr. Chapman did not nor is it
natural for him to use research work product to report inmate complaints.
5) Are you able to approve my request to interview researchers Norman Skonovd and Nildci Baumrind?

Oscar, maybe you can help here. I see no value in stopping an interview of an employee who clearly has spoken off the
record to this reporter. Gets into grey area. Might want to let them do interview and if they raise anything significant
we can be clear that they did not report or use any of the employee complaint, whistleblower, or even told beyond their
direct supervisor these allegations. I am still going to try and talk with them to see if I can understand their angle, but
need help on if we should permit direct interview. I lean to yes as to not let them will only add to the conspiracy the
reporter believes is present.

any thanks.
Charles
2

Charles Piller
The Sacramento Bee

3