FRP: Confusion and Lies

A couple of months ago I reported that after some unnecessarily convulted discussions with the SCU (death row) “case manager” I had managed to negotiate an understanding and agreement that would get me off of “FRP refuse” status so I could spend more than $25 a month on commissary. Well, it seems that there never was any agreement, or understanding, as far as the “case manager” was concerned.

The agreement that I thought we were clear about was that I would pay $25 out of the money that a friend sent me as a gift (so I can buy things like stamps, coffee, hygiene items, and maybe a little candy once in a while, but mostly to pay for phone calls, which cost $3.20 for 15 minutes) into the FRP fund (which I asked several times for information about what this 'fund' is used for but never received an answer except, “it is part of your court ordered financial obligation”, which is as much a non-answer to my question as you can get). I had agreed to pay the $25 even though according to B.O.P. Policies --- which I read carefully --- I should have been “FRP exempt” because I received less than $450 in the previous six month period. I tend to not argue with how staff here choose to “interpret” the policies, since they have already established their ability to ignore policies when they choose by simply replying nonsensically to any written requestion for compliance (see: What's Justice Got To Do With It?). 

So, after I asked my friend to send some money to pay my “court ordered fine”, I sent an e-mail (I'm allowed to send e-mails to staff, but not to my lawyers or anyone outside of the prison because I am a “sex offender”) to the “case manager” to let him know the money had been posted on my account so he could arrange for the $25 FRP withdrawal per our agreement.

I even attempted to accept responsibility for the misunderstanding we had prior to our agreement, figuring as I usually do that it takes two people for a misunderstanding to happen. I had genuinely hoped the issue was finally going to be resolved by my paying the $25 FRP fine.

But, Mr. Shepherd, the “case manager” had other ideas. He replied, rather harshly, that no agreement had been reached, and in fact I had “refused to sign any new agreement”. Of course no “new agreement” was ever presented for me to sign when I spoke with him at my cell door for the “Unit Team” hearing. He was plainly lying in order to cover up the fact that no new “FRP contract” had been drafted or offered. If one had been drafted, which the computer system can do automatically, then I would have been assigned “FRP exempt” status because of my low funds, which were clearly shown to be well below the “FRP participation” level (i.e. below $450 for six months). So, according to Mr. Shepherd, I “refused to sign” an agreement that would have made me “FRP exempt” and I wouldn't have had to pay the $25, which I had verbally agreed to pay, as I clearly indicated in this first e-mail to Shepherd concerning the matter.

 

It was instantly clear to me what was happening, but I didn't want to believe it. I thought Shepherd was the one “Unit Team” staff on death row that had any integrity at all about doing his job. I thought he might condone the lies and manipulative behavior of other staff (which is a defacto prerequisite of prison employment), but I never thought he'd do it himself. So, I reasoned that maybe he just mistakenly got me confused with another prisoner or something. To find out I sent him another e-mail, that very planly and explicitly spelled out the verbal agreement and understanding that we had come to at the “Unit Team” hearing (at my cell door a couple of weeks prior), and specifically asserted that I had not refused to sign anything.

And, I again attempted to accept my part of the responsibility for our misunderstanding in this e-mail as well, hoping beyond hope that Shepherd would realize that I was not trying to “get one over on him”, so he would be more willing to admit and accept responsibility for his error (something I knew almost never happens amongst any prison staff because it's simpler and more prudent to push their mistakes off onto the prisoners).

Shepherd again denied that any agreement was reached, this time in a lengthy reply that was clearly to me meant to distract from his primary lie (i.e. that he offered me a new contract at the celldor “Unit Team” and that I had refused to sign it) by providing a lot of superfluous and irrelevant information, including a lot of direct and implied accusations of wrong doing on my part (standard, “blame the inmate” rhetoric), and misrepresentations of B.O.P. Policies (he claims that I must be “indigent” in order to be “FRP exempt”, but that's not what the policy says at all).

I was sadly disappointed in Mr. Shepherd. He just proved once more that prison staff, even the most benign staff, are no more than a bunch of criminals themselves. I knew there was no point in trying to argue (or request an “Administrative Remedy” since “Unit Team” control that entire process also). So I just sent him one last e-mail in order to express my disappointment and hopefully “guilt him” a little into thinking about the broader consequences of his deceit (i.e. undermining all prisoner “respect for authority” to start with).

  

I didn't bother checking to see what his reply to this last e-mail was until a couple of weeks later, when it was time to “revalidate” my MP3-player. I pretty much knew exactly what he would say (I even told my attorney what his final reply would be a few days later on the phone). He replied exactly as I expected; more denials and accusations. Staff generally never let the prisoner have the last word about anything, because to do so would create the appearance that they aren't the one in control --- which is something that seems to concern them greatly (i.e. maintaining the appearance of control).

[J.D. January 7, 2015]