Wasted Honor 2: Underground Power

By Carl R. ToersBijns

In reality, prisons resemble small communities where the warden is the mayor of a small town and the unit deputy wardens serve as council members. As soon as you come to realize this background is very much like a miniature restricted adaptation of our free societies, you will understand the roles we play. The same responsibilities outside in the free world apply inside our prisons. Tools formalized to be available to administrators inside the prison consist of state statutes and policies and procedures that may be used to manage events which under the existing negative circumstances of a potentially hazardous work / living environment. This potential of danger may eventually lead to the use of force allowable by law that range from non lethal force to the use of deadly or lethal force, depending on the severity of the situation at hand. Thus when the comparison is finished, inside of the prison world we retain the basics of water, food, shelter, clothing and civility to a degree where these conditions resemblance limited and warped-minded kindness, compassion, respect, politeness and cooperation with each other to co-exist. Although there is no doubt of the correctional employees boldness to brag about the job at times, it has been established the less said in public, the better off we are explaining what we do.

This book is merely a reconstruction of events as they occurred and handled. Candidly written, the author tries to show part of a story as they were gleaned from his own eyes and his own mind. Regardless of what anyone else may think, judge or conclude to be truthful or untruthful this is his own story. In other words, it is purely personal from his point of view with a touch of reality to bring forth the issue at hand. Written in fiction and non-fiction, this book demonstrates logical and illogical decision making as well as sound correctional best practices and suggestions to make it better place to work and function.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Xlibris US
• Release date: Jul 20, 2010
• ISBN: 9781453529836

Carl R. ToersBijns

Carl ToersBijns Since his retirement from corrections in April 2010, Carl has been performing the role of an activist in the area of public awareness of mental illness and the incarceration of war veterans and the severely mentally ill persons. He is also currently a senior advisor to the LEOAC (Law Enforcement Officers Advocacy Council) that works closely to issues related to personnel and legal issues. Carl is also a current board member of David’s Hope Inc. a non-profit organization for the mentally ill and a member of the Arizona Criminal Justice Mental Health Coalition. Carl, a retired deputy warden, started with the New Mexico Department of Corrections in the year 1985. His experience working inside the New Mexico prisons spanned from 1985 through 2005 when he re-located to Arizona to go work inside the Arizona prisons from June 2005 through April, 2010. Carl has an Associate Degree of Arts – Criminal Justice Administration w/ honors from the American InterContinental University and graduated in 2006. A native of Columbus Ohio, he recently moved to Riverside California where he spends his time writing short stories and various articles for Yahoo Voice, Corrections.Com and other publications. Carl’s war experience consists of spending two years in the U.S. Army as a combat medic serving a 1 year tour in Vietnam during the period of 1967 to 1968. He earned the Combat Medic Badge while engaged with the Americal Infantry Division. Mr. ToersBijns has previously authored two books titled Wasted Honor and Wasted Honor2 – Underground Power that describes his experiences as a correctional employee in both New Mexico and Arizona prison systems.

Book preview

Wasted Honor 2

Underground Power

Carl R. ToersBijns

Copyright © 2010 by Carl R. ToersBijns.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

This book was printed in the United States of America.

To order additional copies of this book, contact:

Xlibris Corporation

1-888-795-4274

www.Xlibris.com

[e-mail]

82000

Contents

I.   Dedication

II.   Introduction

III.   Ingress

IV.   The Ring of Fire

V.   Management of Prisons

VI.   Systemic Failures

VII.   Blame Games

VIII.   Staff Discipline

IX.   Heroes

X.   Human Resource

XI.   Inside the Fire

XII.   Complacency

XIII.   SSU/STG Issues

XIV.   Population Control

XV.   Egress

I.   Dedication

Corrections professionals are key members of the public safety team. These law enforcement professionals play a vital role in the criminal justice system. They put their lives on the line everyday providing safety and security in the prison system,

image0.jpg

II.   Introduction

Law enforcement on the streets is a momentary lapse with a short degree of insanity that ends at the booking desk or holding cell. Excluding significant high-profile events, e.g., homicides, bank robberies, hostage situations, terrorism, etc., police officers deal with the mundane routine of arresting people and booking them accordingly. Law enforcement inside the prison is an everlasting moment of lunacy with no reprieve in sight. Craziness is a standard that makes coping inside the walls a much higher stress height and very frequently unrecognized until its warning signs grab your thoughts into a deadlock and quiver you into a reality. A reality that actually seems to be a combination of nightmarish dealings with a light touch of boredom to lull you into a false sense of being in your own little area considered to be your sanctuary and everything is just fine. It is with high hopes this book will provide the reader with some proper guidance for understanding prisons or, at the very least, provide the insight for individuals who have acquired the fire to become correctional administrators and wardens in the most provocative, bizarre profession scarcely anyone really understands but recognizes it does exist.

Keep in mind that in the penitentiary, administrators have the absolute power over the lives of thousands of human beings who live in a place where the rules exist to effectively manage society’s most difficult manipulative individuals but where the rules are often bent, broken, or ignored to achieve personal triumphs or success. It has been alleged this power has developed individuals into greedy and corruptive people who seek to strip away the inmate’s identity and replace it with a commonality among all the other inmates by giving them a registration number so they can be managed and controlled in a most efficient manner.

It is also disappointing that some of these power players sacrifice their staff for their own personal career growth needs, thus leaving a feeling of mistrust or desertion among those who really care about how they do their jobs. Not intended to maintain a moral high ground on any of the contained issues in this book, this is written in a sincere attempt to uphold a higher standard of justice and explain the dynamics inside our prison world without pointing fingers at any individual or organization. On that same note, it is very important to realize as a correctional manager you may be entering into debates or discussions where this tactic of maintaining your high moral ground can be used as a tool to fool your opponents into a false sense of security by thinking they are more superior. Assuming the moral high ground is to be used as an underhanded, condescending tactic in this business, this tactic is designed to give one person or party the advantage of projecting him or her or a collective them on a higher level than the opposition or other person; but by playing it smart, you can achieve your goal and win. As you sense an air of unfairness, those seeking to be unfair in the discussion or activity make the assumption they are stronger and their opponent is less defensible or supportable than others involved; thus, they may make a move to take advantage of this unfair opportunity, not realizing the other person, who is not convinced to be of lesser moral superior in this situation, takes a new stronger position with an artificial and underserved advantage, coming off as the good person and the mightier person fighting an uphill fight. In other words, sandbagging is a viable tool inside this system.

As you acknowledge the dire need to link the community with the inside of prisons worldwide, there needs to be a positive and progressive program implemented to provide the systems with a set of policies and procedures in our community corrections that will provide support and assistance to those entering and being released from prison by helping them set realistic goals regarding their drug use, anger management, work skills, and education.

This will provide a progressive sequence of communication that will enhance the community’s ability to understand prisons and what goes on in there. In reality, it is my opinion there is no reality or realistic connection between the prisons and your community as the rules of society differ from those in prison. Although there are many penology models out there encouraging parallel universe methods, the truth is prisoners could not act or conduct themselves the same in prison as they do outside of prison. The biggest difference between the two concepts is that prisoners must live with other prisoners. Thus, their exposure to the crime element is constant and reducing their odds for change in a most significant way to encourage making the right decisions between right and wrong. The social concepts as well as the social orders are dissimilar and create conditions much different in the community than inside the prisons. However, there are still many social conditions that are replicated inside the prisons as they are all part of our social structure whether we like it or not. Social issues are matters that directly or indirectly affect a person, many, or all members of a society, and are considered to be problems, controversies related to moral values, or both. Social issues include poverty, violence, pollution, and injustice allegations of suppression of human rights, discrimination, as well as rape. Homosexuality, gambling and drug addiction are prevalent within the prison systems but are rarely reported to the outside agencies. Social issues are related to the fabric of the community, including conflicts among the interests of community members, and lie beyond the control of any one individual. Some of the major social issues include the following:

• Ageism (dealing with getting old)

• Affirmative action (treated fairly)

• Assimilation (being alike or adjusting to be politically correct)

• Bullying or predatory behaviors

• Capital punishment (waiting to be put to death)

• Censorship (correspondence restrictions)

• Civil rights

• Corporal punishment (by staff and other inmates)

• Crime (theft, assaults, extortion, rape, etc.)

• Disability rights (limited opportunities)

• Discrimination (racially profiled)

• Divorce (experiencing domestic strife)

• Drug laws (interdiction efforts and substance abuse treatment)

• Education and school-leaving age (mandatory literacy act)

• Family values (visitation limitations)

• HIV/AIDS (including hepatitis A, B, and C)

• Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE deportations after serving time)

• Marginalization (influence or power)

• Population (overcrowded and dense housing)

• Pornography (access restricted)

• Privacy (not possible because of crowding)

• Racism

• Sexism

• Social exclusion (doing time)

I think it’s fair to say that the community and prisons share commonalities when it comes to acquiring the basic necessities for survival. We all agree that water, food, and shelter are required as well as clothing, medical care, and other things not considered a luxury but rather a need. However, when we speak of civilization and the civility of human beings, the needs become more complex as in theory; we practice other rituals in order to be functional and socially acceptable to others. We normally live in small or large communities depending on our job and willingness where we want to live. We are civilized as we don’t eat one another and normally are not savages or barbarians since hunting for food is no longer a necessity to survive. Humans have struggled for hundreds of years by fighting with one another and killing and attacking one another for reasons associated with power and greed. It would be hard to disagree that these wars are self-inflicted and not necessary to survive but exist because of human mankind’s greed for power. Good reasons for war include disputes over religious preferences, territorial claims, cultural clashes, and political reasons that are unlimited and unreasonable when reviewed as the cause for war. Performing a test in the community and comparing it with the civility in a prison, you will find similarities that are not all shocking as they are just as basic and easy to understand. In fact, you will find that such human qualities as showing disregard for one another’s personal property or disrespect can escalate into more violent crimes just as they do inside prisons. Remaining even more basic, your looks can result in a homicide inside prison as well as outside of prison. Thus, when the comparison is finished, inside of the prison world, we retain the basics of water, food, shelter, clothing, and civility to a degree where the levels are resemblance of kindness, compassion, respect, politeness, and cooperation with one another to coexist. As a reader running your own views throughout this book, you may find it to be a rivulet of paranoia and think of a man who created his own issues and his own problems.

You may also say the entire book is soaked with infusions of descriptions unreal and unwarranted to the profession, but you have to remember and keep in mind this is such a secret subculture; only a few have spoken of the cult and its happenings. The writer must be hiding something or is at least attempting to write something interesting for those who do not work or exist inside such a culture and that sinister motive exists to reveal such corruption, power, and greed, which runs random throughout every system worldwide. Lastly, one might infer that my own behavior was a little suspicious as to what I was doing and how I inferred those dynamics that surrounded me during my career in both New Mexico and Arizona.

Now, were I to be paranoid, I might at this point accuse others of concealing evidence or misconduct. Instead, I have offered this book review as a point of view on my stance within this culture and allow the readers the courtesy by suggesting merely these conditions do exist and letting the reader make up his or her own mind as to the facts as they stand or perceived. Before you choose to interpret my writings, do not allow your own ignorance of the facts as they are and suppress information incompatible with your way of thinking of how corrections function administratively and, in all practical sense, operationally. This book is merely a reconstruction of events as they occurred and how the facts were gleaned from my own eyes and my own mind regardless of what anyone else may think, judge, or conclude to be truthful or untruthful.

Thus, it is reasonable to say that once a person is released from prison, it is highly likely that the person and his or her family will have no remaining interest in what goes on in the prisons unless they have another curiosity inside those darkened walls that keeps them in touch with what really happens inside this subcultured community of criminals and correctional employees who keep the order and peace under most difficult conditions not assimilated in the community by any means alleged.

It is true that there are many things to worry about once you are released from prison, and you have to face the reality that you need to make significant changes to your own behavior in order for you to be successful in your new endeavors in becoming a law-biding citizen, free from drug use and responsible enough to take care of the family and earn an income to sustain your needs as well as your wants. Having cleared the first step and recognizing that you shouldn’t worry too much about things you don’t have direct control over, you learn to adapt and overcome your habits that got you in the joint to begin with and start a journey to regain your composure and control.

Looking from the inmate’s point of view concerning his release into the community, I would strongly recommend he or she gains control over their worry syndrome, as you need to face the facts that worrying is somewhat obsessive and compulsive. Strictly looking at the release from an inmate’s point of view, I would strongly suggest he or she gains will take you down in a negative spiral if you spend too much time worrying about the problems; and if through your own individual weaknesses, you follow a path of least resistance, you will fail in your efforts as you must currently realize you are making it easier for you to justify your actions by not gaining the upper hand on the circumstances at hand. You have to deliberately break free from your previous state of mind that has failed you up to this point and decide to break away from it all to break the spell of doom. Choosing to break free will allow you new thinking and, at the very first part, will be very difficult as you may have spells of breaking down and giving in to your old ways. Assessing your personality and asking for social support to be successful are keys to breaking free as you learn new ways to experience life’s modality and impress new emotions, personalities, and alternative thinking into you new positive means of thinking and communicating. Acting deliberately different will keep you focused on the positive things in life and enhance your chances of remaining out of jail or prison.

III.   Ingress

In reality, prisons resemble small communities where the warden is the mayor of the settlement, and the chief of security is the police chief; other appointed officials such as unit deputy wardens serve as council members, and as you come to realize this background is very much a miniature adaptation of our free societies, the roles we play inside prisons are interchangeable to those same duties we expect our public officials to perform as we elect them to serve the public. Inside these walls, life is much like the small communities where the local government must make decisions to protect and preserve the welfare of the citizens. From within the interior physical perimeters of the prison, preservation of the institutions supersedes everything else imaginable including the personal or institutional needs of the individual inmate. Tools made available to administrators inside the prison consist of state statutes and well-developed policies and procedures that may be used to manage events that, under the existing negative circumstances of a potentially hazardous environment, may eventually lead to the use of force allowable by law that range from nonlethal force to the use of deadly or lethal force, depending on the severity of the situation at hand. The other side of a civil society reflects incivility type of behaviors that include tools of intimidation, punishment, coercion, and physiological warfare that are intended to subdue individual behaviors and make them conform to the imposed institutional standards or expectations as written by rule or law of the culture that exists within that particular facility.

Today, sprawling prison grounds—spread out throughout the entire world, sparing no place I know of—house millions of incarcerated persons who have to deal and function daily with all the drama of real-world scenarios that include suicides, homicides, rapes, violent assaults, gambling, homosexuality, extortions, and many other vices known to mankind. This makes this environment so difficult to manage by those who wear a badge of fairness. For all realistic purposes or rationale, the mere existence of such an institution within your own locale or community is considered to be an underground facility based on the sheer manner the order of the security operation is performed and the formality of regulation of life inside the institutional walls are maintained and synchronized. In addition, notice how no one whispers its daily business and how those well-kept secrets of its operations subsist as it is very seldom an open topic of discussion in the home, the café, or social circles. Although there is no doubt of the correctional employee’s boldness to brag about the job at times, it has been established that the less said in public, the better off they are explaining what they do for a living and how that job is done. Having said that, although society’s expectations are to keep this unhinged milieu under control, every now and then, it explodes just like a volcano; and when it does, it disrupts life in the free world and makes the headlines in our newspapers, television news, or talk radio, whenever the conditions of those prisoners living there reach levels of chaos and discontent. As it spews smoke and fire high into the air, helicopters representing the local television stations circle high above the prison grounds, invading what is normally a very quiet airspace.

Temporarily, the world, as we have known it to be as calm and orderly, has turned upside down until order is returned and the after-action seeks blame for the catastrophe at hand as the governor or legislators want to know what in the hell happened, what went wrong, and whose fault was it that their world was rudely interrupted with mass hysteria from family members concerned about their loved ones to prison advocates screaming that this was a result of gross administrative failures and neglect and immediately calling for someone’s head on the chopping block.

Special attention must be given to the fact that prisons draw the eye of the media almost immediately whenever there is a controversy. Early in 2009, the Phoenix New Times, a small newspaper in Phoenix, Arizona, ran an article referencing the possibility of the governor of Arizona appointing someone from a former regime under prison boss Terry Stewart and who was allegedly involved in the prison controversy in Abu Ghraib prison torture events in Iraq. The article, written by New Times reporter Stephen Lemons in the Feathered Bastard, said,

As you may have read elsewhere, Arizona Department of Corrections Director Dora Schriro has announced her resignation, and by the end of the week will have vacated her offices to follow ex-Governor Janet Napolitano to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Yet, what exactly she’ll be doing there remains a little vague.

Though Schriro has been labeled a reformer by some during her five-plus years as director, she’s come under criticism from both advocates of prisoners’ rights and old school corrections hands. For instance, opinion was, and still is, split over her handling of the 15-day Lewis Prison hostage crisis in January of 2004, where a pair of inmates took control of a guard tower, keeping two guards hostage. But whatever good work Schriro may have done during her tenure might be imperiled if former ADC chief Terry Stewart takes her place, as has been rumored. Stewart, who served as director from 1995 to 2002, has a reputation that does not endear him to the prisoners’ rights crowd. Already opposition to Stewart is galvanizing among prison reform advocates who fear repeat abuse under this man’s administration. Under Stewart’s watch prisoners at Arizona facilities were also made to stand outside in the summer for up to four days in the summer and for up to 17 hours in the winter without sanitation, adequate drinking water, changes of clothing, proper food or protection from the elements. In a third questionable incident a class action suit was brought against the Arizona Department of Corrections during Stewart’s tenure charging that the prison system had failed to properly use protective custody to shield certain at-risk inmates from harm.

Stewart never makes it past the talking points but one of his right arm cronies did. It was rumored because Stewart had a zero chance of getting past the confirmation process; Charles Ryan was their best bet and their paramount candidate to take over the agency. Ryan, the newly appointed Interim Director has a long history of working closely with Terry Stewart and it was said his prison philosophies are that much different than Stewart, if different at all.[1]

Because of the constant fears of not being politically correct and the idea regarding the attendance of the number one perceived nemesis of corrections, the media, the agency will always attempt to block efforts to the truth as the medium works hard to hunt and seek out the many flaws of the agency. Already a matter of record, they boldly report the typical manners of political or administrative blunders; reporters use all their trained talents as journalists to aggressively expose these segments of mismanagement and corruption.

Because of the constant fear of exposure by the medium, administrators seek to control their environment, which translates into aggressive power plays on their conduit to carry on the exploration for control, as they learn quickly from one another how to manipulate the environment so issues are contained and kept close to their personal circle of influence who share their quest for this power grab inside this underground concrete jungle.

Unfortunately, the truth is rarely printed in the tabloid as the pertinent facts are either withheld or skewed by public information officers or other agents for the department. Putting in their own twist, they alter, manipulate, or revise the sequence or severity of events. Never revealing the implicated number of inmates actually participating in the event(s) or whitewashing the event entirely, pertinent intelligence or data of those issues at hand. They attempt to minimize the negative impact of shocking government efforts to quell the incident or forcefully manage the inmates. It is without doubt that this article in the New Times newspaper spurred numerous blogs and resulted in one reader searching the web for pending lawsuits against the exiting director Dora Schriro, finding the following pending active cases on file, and sharing it with their readers to illustrate a litigation-prone State of Arizona Department of Corrections; for it has notoriously been brought into a courtroom many more times than some of the other southwestern states with the exception of California, which leads the country in inmate litigation. Let the record show the following lawsuits pending hearings or closure/settlements:

January 27, 2009

Proctor v. Schriro et al., AZ Murguia general petition for writ of habeas corpus (state)

Petitioner: Jerime Antwon, proctor

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, Arizona attorney general

January 20, 2009

Vijan v. Schriro et al., AZ Campbell general federal question

Petitioner: Masum Vijan

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, Arizona attorney general

January 13, 2009

Clark v. Schriro et al., AZ Teilborg general federal question

Petitioner: Eric Michael Clark

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, James Arnold, Terry Goddard

January 12, 2009

McGhee v. Schriro et al., AZ Silver prison condition federal question

Plaintiff: Glenn L. McGhee

Defendant: Dora B. Schriro, Franko, Cocuzzo, Clark

January 8, 2009

McGhee v. Schriro et al., AZ Silver prison condition federal question

Plaintiff: Glenn L. McGhee

Defendants: Dora B. Schriro, Jim Taylor, Karen Barcklay, medical director

January 5, 2009

O’Hines v. Garcia Investigations et al., AZ Teilborg prison condition federal question

Plaintiff: James Lynn O’Hines

Defendants: Garcia Investigations, ADOC, Jatto MD Incorporated, Dora B. Schriro, Janet Napolitano, et al.

December 31, 2008

Leonard v. Schriro et al., AZ Rosenblatt general federal question

Petitioner: Anthony M. Leonard

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, Arizona attorney general

December 29, 2008

Stokes v. Schriro et al., AZ Campbell general federal question

Petitioner: Keith R. Stokes

Respondents: Dora B. Schriro; Jackson; Terry Goddard, Arizona attorney general"

Ford v. Schriro et al., AZ Silver general federal question

Petitioner: Kenneth Alexander Ford

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, Arizona attorney general

December 23, 2008

Brinkman v. Schriro et al., AZ Jorgenson civil rights federal question

Plaintiff: Albert L. Brinkman

Defendants: Dora B. Schriro, Rodney Daughtry, Ivan Bartos, Ramos, Mejia, et al.

December 22, 2008

Thomas v. Schriro et al., AZ Jorgenson general federal question

Petitioner: Donnell Thomas

Respondents: Dora B. Schriro, Terry Goddard

December 18, 2008

St. Clair v. Schriro et al., AZ Campbell general federal question

Petitioner: Frederick Larry St. Clair

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, Arizona attorney general

Hughes v. Schriro et al., AZ Collins civil rights federal question

Plaintiff: Joel M. Hughes

Defendants: Dora B. Schriro, James Warren Baird, Dennis R. Kendall, Robert Jones, Mike Hegmann, et al.

December 17, 2008

O’Hines v. Arizona Department of Corrections et al., Arizona Teilborg prison condition federal question

Plaintiff: James Lynn O’Hines

Defendants: Arizona Department of Corrections, Janet Napolitano, Dora B. Schriro, U.S. Con Rep civil agencies, and McAllister Institute, Juttomo Incorporated, Los Dayoloo Ca, Phoenix, Arizona, et al.

December 15, 2008

Sealy v. Schriro et al., AZ Martone general federal question

Petitioner: Anthony St. Clair Sealy

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, Arizona attorney general

Rivera v. Schriro et al., AZ Zapata general federal question

Petitioner: Israel Andrew Rivera

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, attorney general

December 12, 2008

Creamer v. Schriro et al., AZ Bolton general federal question

Petitioner: Matthew R. Creamer

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, Arizona attorney general

December 11, 2008

Estrada v. Schriro et al., AZ Wake general federal question

Petitioner: Raul Gonzales Estrada

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, State of Arizona attorney general

December 8, 2008

Valenzuela v. Kelly et al., AZ Wake prison condition federal question

Plaintiff: Melinda Gabriella Valenzuela

Defendants: P Kelly, Carl ToersBijns, Roberts, Dora B. Schriro

December 3, 2008

Wathen v. Department of Arizona Corrections et al., AZ Martone other federal civil rights

Plaintiff: Vera Wathen

Defendants: Department of Arizona Corrections, Dora B. Schriro, Jerry Sternes

November 14, 2008

Manning v. Schriro et al., AZ Murguia general federal question

Petitioner: Ronald Lee Manning

Respondent: Dora B Schriro, Arizona attorney general

November 12, 2008

Pasmino v. Moylan et al., AZ Bury civil rights U.S. government defendant

Plaintiff: Robert Pasmino

Defendants: Moylan, Ekers, Jacobs, Dora B. Schriro

November 5, 2008

Potts v. Schriro et al., AZ Silver prison condition federal question

Plaintiff: Marvin L. Potts; Defendants: Dora B. Schriro, Bennie H. Rollins, L. Bartos, Herb Hailey, Maria Madrid, et al.

November 3, 2008

Ratcliff v. Schriro et al., AZ Murguia prison condition federal question

Plaintiff: Larry R. Ratcliff; Defendants: Dora B. Schriro, John Palosaari, K. Curran, J. Cruz, Sanchez, et al.

October 28, 2008

White v. Schriro et al., AZ Snow death penalty federal question

Petitioner: Michael Ray White

Respondents: Dora B. Schriro, Robert Stewart

October 27, 2008

Mason v. Schriro et al., AZ Rosenblatt general federal question

Petitioner: Jerome Mason

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, Arizona attorney general

October 24, 2008

Satala v. Schriro et al., AZ Murguia general federal question

Petitioner: Robert Daniel Satala

Respondent: Dora B Schriro, Arizona attorney general

October 23, 2008

Barraza v. Schriro et al., AZ Martone prison condition federal question

Plaintiff: Brian B. Barraza

Defendants: Dora B. Schriro, Bennie Rollins, Herb Hailey, Maria Madrid, Michelle M. McComas, et al.

October 9, 2008

Hale v. Schriro, AZ Jorgenson general federal question

Petitioner: Keith Morris Hale

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, attorney general

October 7, 2008

Valenzuela v. Schriro et al., AZ Wake general federal question

Petitioner: Melinda Gabriella Valenzuela

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, Arizona attorney general

October 6, 2008

Hussein v. Schriro et al., AZ Campbell general federal question

Petitioner: Abo Obaida Hussein

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, Arizona attorney general

October 1, 2008

Herzog v. Schriro et al., AZ Rosenblatt general federal question

Petitioner: Randy W. Herzog

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, Arizona attorney general

September 29, 2008

Pym v. Schriro et al., AZ Martone general federal question

Petitioner: Mario Pym

Respondent: Dora B Schriro, Arizona attorney general

September 18, 2008

Perez-Valenzuela v. Schriro et al., AZ Campbell general federal question

Petitioner: Jose Alfred Perez-Valenzuela

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, Arizona attorney general

September 15, 2008

Arnold v. Allred et al., AZ Bolton prison condition federal question

Plaintiff: Gary J. Arnold

Defendants: Terry L. Allred, Jerry L. Sternes, Karen Barcklay, Dora B. Schriro, J. A. Brand, :et al.

September 11, 2008

Johnson v. Schriro et al., AZ Roll general federal question

Petitioner: Robert Otha Johnson

Respondents: Dora B. Schriro, Jeffrey Freeland; attorney general

September 10, 2008

Jenkins v. Schriro et al., AZ Bolton prison condition federal question

Plaintiff: Junies Alberry Jenkins Jr.;

Defendants: Dora B. Schriro, Daryl Johnson, Barbara Ulibarri, unknown employees

September 2, 2008

Cable v. Schriro et al., AZ Teilborg prison condition federal question

Plaintiff: Rodney Cable

Defendants: Dora B Schriro, Terry L. Allred, Karen Barcklay

August 27, 2008

Norman v. Schriro et al., AZ Murguia general federal question

Petitioner: Derek Andrew Norman

Respondent: Dora B Schriro, Arizona attorney general

August 25, 2008

Reed v. Schriro et al., AZ Teilborg prison condition federal question

Plaintiff: Kenneth W. Reed

Defendants: Dora B. Schriro, William R. White, Anne Reeder, Sandra Lawrence, James Gilchrist, et al.

August 19, 2008

Williams v. Schriro et al., AZ Collins general federal question

Petitioner: Kevin G. Williams

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, attorney general

August 8, 2008

Lopez v. Schriro et al., AZ Rosenblatt general petition for writ of habeas corpus (state)

Petitioner: Everardo Lopez Jr.

Respondent: Dora B. Schriro, State of Arizona attorney general

August 7, 2008

O’Hines v. Napolitano et al., CA Southern Jones civil rights federal question

Plaintiff: James Lynn O’Hines

Defendants: Janet Napolitano, ToersBijns, John Ontiveros, Dora B. Schriro, Arnold Schwarzenegger

Settling in on my personal manifestation of successfully completing my twenty-five-year tour of duty with the Department of Corrections in both New Mexico and Arizona, I am truly excited and motivated to express, in my own handwriting, my sincere desire to share my personal and professional experiences while employed with these two agencies. The reader will no doubt be able to compare my writings and my thoughts with their own experiences as well as their individual agency as I cannot be completely honest if I didn’t include my own formula of political knowledge for symptomatically viewing and demonstrating how to survive in such a volatile political arena as corrections.

After all is said and done, I have spent over two decades struggling with two distorted corrections systems that were so flawed and so political. I refused to compromise my own personal morals and values as chief executive management team members continued to harass those who stood up for principle and attempted to hammer those identified to be noncompliant with their individual train of thoughts into compromised vile weaklings, hoping to drive them away and keep their mouth fastened and shut. On the contrary, it was their persistent methodology of degrading persons such as me that made me realize it was on with an anything-goes modus operandi. The leader and followers have continually and will always conduct themselves in the most unscrupulous and unethical manner in order to achieve their ultimate goal, personal greed, and their personal taste for power. Throughout this illustrated journey, I will project and inject their so-called wisdom into conversations that ultimately made no sense as you step back and realize all they did was to avoid the problem and covered it up with unadulterated bullshit and political rhetoric to appease those in gubernatorial power.

It is with high anticipation that by having the ability to communicate and illustrate these deliberate mishandled dealings of their personal quests for acquiring power through individual appetites of greediness and corruptive methods, I will continue to express my concerns in hopes of reaching the right ear while making the slightest change to enhance the correctional work environment and to improve work conditions and make them safer. Change must be achieved if the true mission statements are to be believable and realistic with the blessings of the executive branch and those individuals that matter the most: the public whose perception of correctional staff are still Neanderthal animals walking upright on two feet and speech impaired with vulgarity and nonintelligence.

As we recognize ourselves as Homo sapiens or models of modern human beings and not gorillas, the task was to bring forth the truth. In this book, I will usher you down the road and cover such subjects as multicultural diversity, the internal/external environment, and self-management and self-organization for the first ninety days as an executive administrative officer in a new complex. Always ensure your approach is the appropriate way of dealing with the issues at hand and most of all what information is most important and prepared to become aware. Try to avoid the bends and personal depths of despair that lay out in front of your arrival, before you accept this new challenge into the correctional administrative career path. The most important element in my estimation will be your ability to balance both your internal and external environment so