Wednesday, June 10, 2015

CORRUPTION REIGNS IN HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND - Bouma v. Bouma

CORRUPTION REIGNS IN HOWARD COUNTY, MARYLAND

                                                          A CHILD'S NIGHTMARE

AN ELEVEN YEAR OLD CHILD HAS ARTICULATELY AND BRAVELY FOUGHT FOR HIS
 FREEDOM FROM A FATHER WHO HOLDS HIM CAPTIVE OUT OF SPITE AND
 VENGENCE

RICO: Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, commonly referred to as
the RICO Act, or simply RICO, is a United States federal law that provides for extended
criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing
criminal organization.

ALLEGED EVIDENCE OF RICO ACTIVITY AMONG MD COURT ACTORS, WITH COLLUSION OF LOCAL POLICE

The facts that back up this allegation are fully documented and have been presented to the Circuit and
District Courts in Maryland. Herein we describe the egregious acts of a corrupt Court.
The Foundation for the Child Victims of the Family Courts (FCVFC), a not-for-profit child advocacy
entity made up of family advocates, psychologists, medical doctors and clinical forensic legal experts
who have supported a protective parent in the case of Bouma v. Bouma in front of the Circuit Court in Ellicott City, MD., has endured the most vicious, libelous, and unprecedented assaults by this Court due to FCVFC’s aggressive and lawful efforts to defend its client.

The above named Court has blatantly supported the attorney for the father, Jason Karl Bouma, and has blatantly suppressed evidence on the part of the protective mother. We allege that the Court has
suborned perjury through Md. Child Protective Services (CPS) worker Ms. Bobbi Feher, and allowed
the “Best Interest” Attorney, Alysa Cummins, to perjure, and suppress evidence that would have
protected the child in this case, Jase Bouma, who she is paid to protect, although she has not seen or
spoken with him in over two years.

Staff of the FCVFC allege that Alyssa Cummins, in concert with Christopher Rand, attorney for the
father of the child, have themselves suspected to have been paid off by the father, while aiding and
abetting the paying off of lawyers for the protective parent, distorting any possibility of a just outcome in this case. We hereby state that the child's father keeps the child in what the child has described as deplorable circumstances, living alone in a basement, deprived of proper education and medical care.

We further allege that the reports submitted by Court appointed psychologist Paul Berman, well known in Maryland to be the psychologist used when one parent wishes to terminate the custody of the other, protective parent, wrongfully portray the situation of the child as living in a healthy situation with his father. Berman's reports defy all the evidence to the contrary, scientific logic, and scholarly practice with a blatant credo of whomever pays most wins: the child be damned.

The triumvirate of Rand, Cummins and Berman, and whoever CPS workers are assigned to the case has been acting in concert as a RICO, where the custody outcome has already decided behind closed doors, in illicit ex parte communications. In the present case of Bouma v. Bouma, in open court, the
corruption and pre-determined outcome was so blatant that Cummins and Judge Becker did not even
feel a need to disguise their contempt for the protective parent. The casual, open discussions in Court
between Cummins and Becker, with Feher sitting next to Cummins, openly speaking of how can they
could further destroy the mother’s credibility was astounding, especially in light of the overall facts of the case.

Legal charges and possible jail time for the mother was openly discussed, along with sanctions
including payment of $18,775 in Rand's legal fees were humiliating, along with the imposition of an
injunction keeping the mother from filing any legal actions in the case, as would be her right in
protecting her son against the father’s behavior, as described in the CPS report of Feher.

We claim that the actions of the Court have driven the subject child into a constant state of despair and a often openly repeated wish for death. FCVFC staff have also witnessed, in Court, the taunting of the mother by local police in Courtroom testimony, continuing the attempt to humiliate and dissuade the mother from every effort be in contact with her son.

High conflict custody litigation does not have to be a “blood sport”, unless, as evidenced by the RICO style behavior of those above bad actors, when one combines the ingredients of one-sided monetary throw-weight, pure vengeance and vindictive insistence, resulting in total control of the Court outcome.

The mother, in this case the protective parent, has barely been able to see or speak with her son. She is kept from any information about his health, schooling and limited social life. The Court’s subjective and wrongful decisions have willfully contributed to this toxic witches’ brew, as a mother who is desperate to care for a son she loves has lost custody. And the boy who loves her is being kept against his will with a father who has proven his consistent indifference to the child.

This eleven year old child has, in the most detailed manner, has described the abuses of the father
toward him, and the father's attempts to alienate him from his mother. Additionally, the father's
willingness to force the mother into financial destitution is beyond factual questioning, given the Court record and the continued desperate declarations of the child, which are clearly detailed in the CPS reports ignored by the Court. Officially, CPS is “sealed” from prying eyes, but the detailed reporting of Feher has, despite all efforts, come to light, describing the depraved indifference of the Court, and the RICO-type actions keeping a child apart from a mother.

Currently, on December 2, 2014, the mother, in her own defense has taken action by filing a
Federal Civil Rights Action in Federal Court in Md. against Judges McCrone, Gelfman, Becker, and
Alyssa Cummins, Esq., et al.

From the desk of: THE FOUNDATION OF THE CHILD VICTIMS OF THE FAMILY COURTS
275 Madison Avenue, Sixth Floor, New York, NY 10016
www.fcvfc.org 866-553-6931

Attachment- Letter written in July 2014 to:
The Judicial Disabilities Board
Att: Alex Wright
The People’s Resource Center Room
100 Community Place
Crownsville, Maryland 21032


Dear Mr. Wright,

I write to you as Jill Jones-Soderman, PHD, MSHS, Executive Director of the
Foundation for the Child Victims of the Family Courts, a 501(c) 3, a Not-for-Profit
Foundation. I am the Trial Advocate and Legal Forensic Expert for minor litigant
Jase Bouma (DOB 6/15/03) and his mother, Laura Bouma, principals in the case of
Bouma v, Bouma, now in front of the Circuit Court in Ellicott City.

I am currently writing to the Disabilities Board and to the Court to address the fact that
there are severe and provable irregularities which are currently interfering with the
Court’s ability to accurately and completely be presented with hard evidence in this case,
on behalf of my clients, due to the consistent and pernicious interference of key actors in
this case, and against my clients’ interests. It is to be noted that both the child and
mother are under severe mental and economic distress that cannot be overstated, due to
the lengthy court proceedings and the unnecessarily adversarial actions of the Court.
It has come to my direct attention, as per my organization’s intensive investigation and
case review, that Christopher Rand, Esq., the attorney for Jason Bouma, father of Jase
Bouma, has threatened various attorneys that have entered the case on behalf of my
clients with spurious legal actions, in the attempt to repress evidence and to stop the
psychological evaluations and court appearances designed to protect the life and welfare
of the child, Jase Bouma, thus denying Jase and his mother’s Constitutional rights to a
full and fair hearing in Court.

Attorney Rand has spoken at length with Ms. Bouma’s most recent counsel, David Oles,
Esq., and in the past had spoken with Loyd Byron Hopkins, Esq., who then informed Dr.
Monty Weinstein, an expert witness and Founder of the Family Therapy Center in New
York, that Mr. Rand was insistent that Dr. Weinstein not be allowed to examine the child
or testify in court. Mr. Hopkins, as with other attorneys involved in this case, suddenly
withdrew from the case before presenting to this Court hard evidence on behalf of my
client, evidence which has so far been consistently suppressed by Alissa Cummins, Esq.,
a “Best Interest Attorney”, and Christopher Rand. Esq.

Mr. Rand has consistently distorted the facts of the case, suppressed pertinent and
factual evidence, and has managed to intimidate attorneys paid for and sworn to work
with Ms. Bouma for the protection of her child. These facts seem to be of little or no
interest to this Court. Indeed, several Judges involved in the case have been publicly
named as having unduly humiliated the mother and child in a public forum, violated the
clients’ HIPPA rights and trounced on the clients’ rights under Maryland law and the
Constitution.

I am unhappy to report the demonstrable level of sheer indifference, and failure of
concern or compassion that anyone can see evident throughout the transcripts and

hidden testimony in this case. The disgraceful behavior of Judges and other Court actors
in this case, including the nefarious shadows of several well-known, and otherwise
respected mental health professionals have not gone unnoticed, and have been
documented and reported to the appropriate Maryland licensing boards. Whether or not
these individuals momentarily escape sanction or punishment, they will be held fully
and completely accountable for their deeds harmful to the correct prosecution of this
case, on behalf of my clients.

My concern as a professional psychoanalyst with many years of successful experience,
is as to whether or not Jase Bouma will live to experience the consequences of the
justice he so well deserves. He is, I believe, in mortal danger due to his current
psychological state, which is not finding any relief in the actions of the Court. The
complete ignorance of the Court as to the critical nature of this child’s mental health is
partially due to the negligent and misleading report by Child Protective Services’
caseworker Bobbi Feher. The report (refer to CPS report of 2/11/2014, presented to
Judge McCrone) displays a failure of CPS and the State to act in accord with any
professionalism, undermining the most basic standards of acceptable care for those in
circumstances of severe distress. In this case, the CPS Caseworker should be held
responsible for negligence, especially when she includes statements related to her own
personal opinions and preferences, and against the interests of her charge. Judges must
also be held responsible for refusing to accept evidence, or secreting relevant evidence
that conveys information critical to a party’s case, especially a helpless minor.

Laura Bouma has fought tirelessly to present relevant and pertinent evidence on behalf
of her son. She has been personally vilified, libeled and defamed publicly in a manner
that defies reason or logic. That evidence has been suppressed, distorted and ignored by
the Court is an indisputable fact. It is time that a qualified, fearless and objective
professional be allowed to evaluate this child, and opine on the state of affairs of this
important case, which until now have been kept from public view by the irresponsible
and vindictive actions of attorneys Christopher Rand and Alissa Cummins, Esq., and the
actions of the Court.

The above attorneys in this case have gone far beyond advocating for their client’s
interests; they have deliberately acted against the interests of a minor and are in danger
of doing incalculable and irreversible harm. Ms. Cummins has committed actions which
rise to the level of professional indifference to human suffering and harm, and has
consciously and intentionally suppressed critical evidence, placing mother and child at
great risk and long enduring harm. The Court’s automaton-like acceptance of
impropriety has been going on for years due to laziness, thoughtlessness, and
professional indifference. It is for this reason that we are alerting you as to the
underbelly of this case, and seek relief with your Agency, and in the Court of Public
Opinion, as we have not received justice in the Circuit Court as yet.


Dr. Weinstein will be writing his own letter to the Court, providing in his own words his
experience of the unconscionable violation of the due process rights of the litigants –
minor Jase Bouma and mother Laura Bouma.

Our immediate concern is having Jase Bouma seen and evaluated by Dr. Monty
Weinstein at the earliest possible convenience. We have every confidence that Dr.
Weinstein will neither be intimidated by the Court or the adversaries of Jase and his
mother, nor will he be biased in any manner by the strong feelings generated by the
gross injustices and malfeasances committed by this Court, whose officers were sworn
to objectively uphold the highest legal standards for every litigant, but who have
seemingly failed up until today in this case.

On July 28, 2014, there will be yet another hearing in the case of Bouma v Bouma. It is
hoped that despite the many questionable, unethical, immoral, and unprofessional
allegations that have been permitted to be aired in this Court against Jase and Laura
Bouma, that justice will prevail. The unholy alliance of those who try to intimidate
litigants and their attorneys, suppress facts and denigrate experts, will be confronted and
communicated at the highest levels, until all actions perverting justice under the law are
corrected and properly addressed in Maryland.

Most Sincerely,
Jill Jones-Soderman
Executive Director
Foundation for the Child Victims of Family Courts



Monday, June 8, 2015

Letter to US Senate Select Committee on Ethics Re: Mark Warner


Janice Wolk Grenadier
15 West Spring Street
Alexandria, Virginia  22301
202-368-7178

May 18, 2015

U.S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics
220 Hart Building
United States Senate
Washington D.C. 20510

HAND DELIVERED

Re:  Senator Mark Warner his involvement in Judicial, Government and with Elected Officials corruption in the State of Virginia.  That Janice Wolk Grenadier was jailed from October 22, 2014 thru November 12, 2014 - 22 days in jail, 14 days in solitaire confinement –  released from solitaire confinement  at 5:00 pm election day November 4, 2015 to maliciously silence me from exposing e-mails between myself and Senator Mark Warner’s office. 

Dear Chairman Isakson and Vice Chairwomen Boxer:


In October 2014 I learned in the newspaper and on line the collusion of Mark Warner and others in the sale of the Federal Judgeship in Virginia.  Having been a VICTIM of the Judiciary, the Government and the Elected Officials in Virginia and the District of Columbia since 2007 and asking help from Senator Warner and his office it became very clear to me his involvement in the cover up of my case with the help of the “Old Boys Network” in Virginia. 

After reading about his involvement on my Blog, through Twitter and Facebook I went to expose further the corruption in Virginia and the involvement of Senator Warner.  My computers and all my accounts are regularly hacked into – which we all know is illegal but, with the right people’s support and the FBI, DOJ and other agency’s ignoring criminal acts of the wealthy and powerful, you as a citizen have nowhere to go for help. 

Mark Warner uses and used his POWER to illegally have me - Janice Wolk Grenadier jailed and put in Solitaire Confinement till 5 pm Election Day on Tuesday November 4, 2015 so he could be re-elected without further question of his collusion in the tampering with the Judiciary in Virginia and District of Columbia Federal Court.  His collusion goes much deeper than this one insistent that appears to not be limited to him but, includes Governor Terry McAuliffe, and many others.

It starts with the obvious Democratic / Old Boys Network in Virginia and the District of Columbia’s collusion to protect one of their own Divorce Lawyer Ilona Grenadier Heckman and the Judiciary, the Government and other Elected officials that are actively in the Cover up of her Criminal Actions the acts of those participating in the cover up.

That I reached out to Senator Warner’s office for an appointment, when I could not get one I showed up in his office.  I have reached out to his office and now to Congressman Don Beyer in the past and been blind sighted thinking he would help a constituent.  When the facts are he is in this position for POWER, and to further line his and his friends pockets financially – Not for the People of Virginia. 

I have since spoken with Luke Albee and Nicholas Devereux in Senator Warner’s office.
I request a meeting with this committee to discuss his illegal acts and actions and include the following evidence that cannot be ignored:

1.    E-mails From August 1, 2014 after meeting with Nicolas Devereux in Senator Warner’s office in DC – which all are ignored and no response to help me

2.    Press Article October 2, 2014 McAuliffe Staff involved in Senator’s daughter job

3.    Press The Washington Post article “McAuliffe aide suggested job for senator’s daughter if he remained in his seat”

4.    Press October 12, 2014 “Is Sen. Mark Warner in trouble?”

5.    Police Report that was tampered with in the City of Alexandria and other notes on the collusion and the corruption in the State of Virginia

6.    October 13, 2014 Blog VaLaw2010.blogspot.com by me in regard to the Corruption and Hate crime against me

7.    October 13, 2014 Press “Mark Warner Appears to have Committed a Crime to Advance Obamacare”

October 22, 2014 Janice Wolk Grenadier illegally jailed for 30 days

October 28, 2014 Janice Wolk Grenadier sneaks out documents to get her out of jail and sat down by the Sheriff and Head DCHS in Alexandria and explained she had fewer rights than someone who had committed MURDER. 

8.    Press November 1, 2014Incumbent Warner pulls out all the stops as Va. Senate race tightens”

November 4, 2014 Election day 5:00 pm Janice Wolk Grenadier released from Solitaire Confinement – Mark Warner wins

November 12, 2014 Janice Wolk Grenadier released early

9.    Statement Read on November 12, 2014 by Janice Wolk Grenadier in court to Judge Clark who denied court reporter and its entire reading in court – which shows the law and the illegal jailing.

10. The Blog entrees November 16, 2014 by Janice Wolk Grenadier  on VaLaw2010.blogspot.com

11. January 16, 2015 Letter from Republican Party of Virginia in regard to the facts about Senator Mark R. Warner

12. Press PilotOnline.com  “Va GOP files ethics complaint against Mark Warner”

13. Press Channel 12  “Va. GOP files ethics complaint against Sen. Mark Warner”

14. Press associated Press “Va. GOP files ethics complaint against Sen. Mark Warner”

That Mark Warner is 100% involved in the Cover-up along with many others in the Criminal Acts and Actions of Divorce Lawyer Ilona Grenadier Heckman, the Old Boys Network and his hands as described by the press and myself he puts his Power and influence to the test to protect those that in the Social Hierarchy have more Power and Money. 

That we send our young men and women to war to fight for rights we no longer have in our own country.   That a citizen can be jailed so a Senator can be re-elected after he has committed a crime and for there to be no recourse is a sad day in American history.

15.  Letter to Governor Terry McAuliffe

16. Notice to all those that have acted outside there Oath of Office and allowed the criminal acts and actions of Divorce Lawyer Ilona Grenadier Heckman, with the intend of filing a Rico and Racketeering suit. 

Therefore, I request this committee to look further into his collusion in my jailing and in Senator Warners inappropriate behavior towards the people of Virginia and the United States of America.  That Mark Warner took an Oath of Office that the appearance and the facts show he has violated the trust of the public. 

That as a citizen trying to get in front of the Judiciary in Congress or the Senate I have been blocked by Senator Mark Warner and Congressman Don Beyer.

More can be read at ProSeAmerica.blogspot.com, YouTube.com/ProSeAmerica, VaLaw2010.blogspot.com, Scribd.com/VirginiaLaw.  I have been fighting for my fundamental rights under the law since September of 2007 to only be squashed by those that believe their Power buys them extra rights in the United States of America. 

I was born an America – I am an American Citizen that believes, that gives me the right to fairness in the Courts and in my country.  I will NEVER, NEVER, NEVER give up till that happens. 

I look forward to setting a meeting with your committee.

Warmly,


Janice Wolk Grenadier




ProSeAmerica.net * Facebook.com/ProSeAmerica * @ProSeAm

Sunday, June 7, 2015

Torture: The Use of Solitary Confinement in U.S. Prisons


Torture: The Use of Solitary Confinement in U.S. Prisons
May 31, 2012
Learn more about our work challenging solitary confinement - useful links and related resources:
·         Take Action: Pack the Court December 2015
*Updated May 2015*
What is Solitary Confinement?
In the early nineteenth century, the U.S. led the world in a new practice of imprisoning people in solitary cells, without access to any human contact or stimulation, as a method of rehabilitation. The results were disastrous, as prisoners suffered severe psychological harm. The practice was all but abandoned. Over a century later, it has made an unfortunate comeback. Instead of torturing prisoners with solitary confinement in dark and dirty underground holes, prisoners are now subjected to solitary confinement in well-lit, sterile boxes. The psychological repercussions are similar.
 
Today, tens of thousands of individuals across the country are detained inside cramped, concrete, windowless cells in a state of near-total solitude for between 22 and 24 hours a day. The cells have a toilet and a shower, and a slot in the door large enough for a guard to slip a food tray through.  Prisoners in solitary confinement are frequently deprived of telephone calls and contact visits. “Recreation” involves being taken, often in handcuffs and shackles, to another solitary cell where prisoners can pace alone for an hour before being returned to their cell.

Ever since solitary confinement came into existence, it has been used as a tool of repression. While it is justified by corrections officials as necessary to protect prisoners and guards from violent prisoners, all too often it is imposed on individuals, particularly prisoners of color, who threaten prison administrations in an altogether different way. Consistently, jailhouse lawyers and jailhouse doctors, who administer to the needs of their fellow prisoners behind bars, are placed in solitary confinement.  They are joined by political prisoners from various civil rights and independence movements.
CCR’s Challenges to Solitary Confinement
In May 2012, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) filed a lawsuit against the state of California for its use of prolonged solitary confinement in the infamous Pelican Bay prison. Ashker, et al. v. Governor, et al., is a federal class action challenging prolonged solitary confinement and deprivation of due process, based on the rights guaranteed under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, at Pelican Bay. The case challenges inhumane, unconstitutional conditions under which thousands of prisoners live. The case argues that ten years or more of solitary confinement cannot be imposed on any prisoner, regardless of his mental health status, and that prisoners must have meaningful notice of the reason for their placement in solitary, and frequent reviews of that status.  While California has implemented major changes to its process for placing and retaining prisoners in solitary confinement in response to prisoner hunger strikes and the litigation, grave rights violations remain at Pelican Bay and other prisons, and the case is set to go to trial in December 2015.
 
CCR’s case against solitary confinement at Pelican Bay is the latest in a long history of challenges to the use of isolation in prisons. In Wilkinson v. Austin, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in support of CCR’s claims that prison officials cannot confine prisoners in long-term solitary confinement in a super maximum prison without first giving them the opportunity to challenge their placement. CCR has engaged in solidarity efforts alongside hunger striking prisoners, as well as engaged in advocacy against the use of isolation in prisons.
Solitary Confinement is Torture
The devastating psychological and physical effects of prolonged solitary confinement are well documented by social scientists: prolonged solitary confinement causes prisoners significant mental harm and places them at grave risk of even more devastating future psychological harm and at times, these harms were found to be permanent or persist even after one was released from solitary.
Researchers have demonstrated that prolonged solitary confinement causes a persistent and heightened state of anxiety and nervousness, headaches, insomnia, lethargy or chronic tiredness, nightmares, heart palpitations, fear of impending nervous breakdowns and higher rates of hypertension and early morbidity. Other documented effects include obsessive ruminations, confused thought processes, an oversensitivity to stimuli, irrational anger, social withdrawal, hallucinations, violent fantasies, emotional flatness, mood swings, chronic depression, feelings of overall deterioration, as well as suicidal ideation.
 
Exposure to such life-shattering conditions clearly constitutes cruel and unusual punishment – in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Further, the brutal use of solitary has been condemned as torture by the international community.
A Growing Human Rights Movement against the Use of Solitary Confinement
Across the United States and the world, there is an emerging movement calling for the end of solitary confinement.
In the U.S., prisoner-led movements have attracted media attention and public scrutiny to harsh conditions of confinement, including overcrowding, the use of isolation, deplorable health conditions, substandard medical care, and the discriminatory and careless treatment of people with mental illnesses. Several prisoner-led hunger strikes have drawn attention to these harsh conditions, including efforts in Georgia, Ohio and California.
International human rights experts and bodies have also condemned indefinite or prolonged solitary confinement, recommended that the practice be abolished entirely and argued that solitary confinement is a human rights abuse that can amount to torture. In August 2011, Juan Mendez, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, concluded that even 15 days in solitary confinement constitutes torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and 15 days is the limit after which irreversible harmful psychological effects can occur. Other independent human rights bodies at the UN have also expressed concern about Pelican Bay prison and the overall use of solitary in U.S. prisons. However, many prisoners in the United States have been isolated for far longer than just 15 days.
Solitary Confinement at the Pelican Bay Security Housing Unit
Opened on December 1, 1989, Pelican Bay State Prison is the most restrictive prison in California and one of the harshest “super-maximum” prisons in the country. The prison was specifically designed to foster maximum isolation. It is one of four Security Housing Units (SHU) operated by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR).
Prior to the hunger strikes, more than 500 of Pelican Bay’s SHU prisoners have been held in solitary confinement in the SHU for over 10 years. Over 78 prisoners have languished in solitary for more than 20 years. Prisoners are detained inside windowless cells, are not allowed to call home and are served substandard or rotten food.

Prisoners are frequently assigned to the SHU without any significant disciplinary record; instead they are designated for indefinite solitary confinement based on their alleged gang affiliation.  They can be labeled “gang members” for waiving hello to another prisoner who has already been so-designated, or for possession of artwork, or even the subject of their tattoos.

Until recently, the only real way out of the SHU was to “debrief,” to inform on other prisoners, thus condemning other prisoners to the same torture, and risking retaliation.  In response to the prisoner’s organizing, California has now created a “step down program” which allows prisoners placed in solitary for gang affiliation to earn release to general population after spending 3-4 years in solitary without any gang-related activity, so long as they take part in mandatory journaling and other programming.  While many states have implemented step down programs, California’s requires longer in solitary than any other state, and is being imposed upon prisoners who have already spent a decade in solitary, misconduct free.
The California Hunger Strikes
In 2011 and again in 2013, prisoners across California organized coordinated hunger strikes in protest of inhuman and degrading conditions of confinement and outlined five core demands: (1) end group punishment; (2) abolish the use of debriefing; (3) end long-term solitary confinement and alleviate conditions in segregation, including the provision of regular and meaningful social contact, adequate healthcare and access to sunlight; (4) provide adequate food; and (5) expand programming and privileges.
Though CDCR convinced the prisoners to suspend the strike by promising change, the resulting reforms have not gone far enough, and CDCR has punished the hunger strike leaders with prison discipline and other retaliation.
TAKE ACTION AND GET INVOLVED:
1. Pack the Court December 2015Learn more here.
Pelican Bay SHU prisoners have organized to combat cruel conditions of confinement, and have launched hunger strikes in order to raise attention to their demands. The CDCR must honor the Pelican Bay SHU Prisoners’ Demands.
Attachments 
Last modified 
June 1, 2015
The bigger picture
Spread the word
·          Tweet
·          Share
·          Email
Top of Form
Get the latest
Email*
Bottom of Form
Support CCR
Join us on the front lines for social justice
·         $70
·         $150
·         $350
·         $600
·         $1000
DONATE
·         What We Do
o    Issues
o    Cases
·         How We Work
·         Who We Are
·         Get Involved
·         Press Center
·         Bertha Justice Institute
·         Blog
·         Donate
666 Broadway
7th Floor
New York, NY 10012
Telephone: 212-614-6464
Fax: 212-614-6499
CONNECT WITH US
·          
·          
·          
Top of Form
GET THE LATEST


Email*