Bureau of Prisons Continues to Purposely Under-test Both Prisoners and Staff, asking "If All of the Guards Test Positive, Who will Watch the Prisoners?"

 DOJ Policy to Limit Tests of Both Prisoners and Staff Puts Everyone at Risk

 

By Derek Gilna

 

            DOJ’s ”nothing to see here” response to COVID-19 is merely an extension of the long-term policy of the most publicity-adverse agency in all of government: “If we don’t test everyone, we can limit our number of ‘positives,‘” and make it look like we are actually accomplishing something." This policy puts not only prisoners and staff but also surrounding communities, at very serious risk. Also, does anyone know of ONE warden approval of CR while the pandemic has raged? Have yet to see my first one.

            Meanwhile, DOJ prison system policy continues to attempt to keep website counts artificially low by counting people as “recovered” who are still suffering symptoms, meaning that since you didn’t die from the virus, you have validated the policy of doing little or nothing to stop the spread. See: Elkton, Lompoc, Carswell, and Forrest City (and others) where the number of very sick people (counted  by DOJ as “recovered”) continues to grow, especially among guards (Gilmer, Pekin, Sandstone). However, despite the clear undercount, double digit increases have occurred in Waseca, Greenville, Pekin, Coleman (where the CDC now runs the show like they did at Forrest City, complete with tents), and Terre Haute. The San Diego facility has over 50 positives. Never mentioned is the fact that people with chronic issues are no longer receiving ANY, let alone basic care of chronic conditions. Some like Ashland, have no doctor.

            Has the wide-spread rioting (Downtown Chicago stores are covered in plywood)  hurt the cause of prisoner reform? No. In meetings the past week, I was told that it is still a top priority of at least one major political party meeting in Charlotte this week, although reform was not a hot topic at the Dem conclave the past week, especially with the former California AG and current vice presidential candidate, who fought hard to keep non violent offenders locked up.

            In the circuits, in US v Bostic, 19-50591, (5^th Cir. 8-18-20),the court vacated and remanded an inflated sentence of 235 months when the guidelines called for 21 to 27 months, for the court’s failure to “(justify) such a sentence, or to impose a lesser one.” on US v Cook, 18-1343, (7^th Cir. 8-18-20) the court reversed a 922(g)(3) conviction, on Rehaif grounds, where the indictment did NOT allege that defendant  “knew…that he belonged to the relevant category of persons barred from possessing a firearm.” Also in the 7^th, in US v Corner, 19-3517, (7-24-20), in a violation case, the court failed to assess FSA eligibility, and vacated and remanded for further proceedings.

            For those of you still contemplating Compassionate Release or CARES Act petition, please be sure to have all of your supporting medical information available for our inspection to see if you might qualify. Also, if you feel that you received inadequate representation of counsel, and are not more than one year out from your appeal, we want to hear from you. One again, we look forward to your updates, and contact me if you wish to take advantage of Prison Legal News generous (almost free) six-month trial subscription.

Be not afraid and let not your heart be troubled.

Federal Legal Center, Inc., 113 McHenry Rd., #173

Buffalo Grove, ILL. 60089, (And Indiana)

dgilna1948@yahoo.com; Blogging as “Derek Gilna’s Criminal Justice Blog.”