Lauren Canario arrested in New London

[Kat Kanning]

BTW, Lorrey's article made the front page of digg, and also Dvorak's blog:

http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=7405#comments

[Dave Ridley]

Sent third letter today.  Russell you're free to report all the stuff I've put on this thread about how various folks have reacted to my questions and visits.

[KBCraig]

BTW, Lorrey's article made the front page of digg, and also Dvorak's blog:

http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=7405#comments

Sadly, the detractors on Dvorak are right to question an unsourced, unverifiable report. It relied on Kat's statement on an internet forum, but she also said that she hasn't talked to Lauren and only presumes that she is being held in shackles.

Lorrey's article also incorrectly states that she was on property which she had leased, but she wasn't at the Van Winkle house she had rented.

Sorry, guys, I'm outraged that Lauren is in jail, no matter what the conditions. But as spin goes, this article is just as wrong as anything made up by any of the groups on the moobat fringe.

It boils down to untruthfulness, and that doesn't help our movement.



Kevin

[mlorrey]

BTW, Lorrey's article made the front page of digg, and also Dvorak's blog:

http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=7405#comments

Sadly, the detractors on Dvorak are right to question an unsourced, unverifiable report. It relied on Kat's statement on an internet forum, but she also said that she hasn't talked to Lauren and only presumes that she is being held in shackles.

Lorrey's article also incorrectly states that she was on property which she had leased, but she wasn't at the Van Winkle house she had rented.

Sorry, guys, I'm outraged that Lauren is in jail, no matter what the conditions. But as spin goes, this article is just as wrong as anything made up by any of the groups on the moobat fringe.

It boils down to untruthfulness, and that doesn't help our movement.

I wouldn't say untruthfulness, it is being misinformed. Everything in the article was gleaned from forum posts and internet articles. I invented nothing. I had thought that her court appearance was to do with this arrest, my mistake, but the fact is that she was previously treated this way, the events did happen.

Kat is right: that she's being held in the same facility, in the same ward, and furthermore, under even more secure lockdown now than before, bodes very poorly for how she is being treated, and we should assume, given that institutions like that are creatures of habit, and tend to err on the side of brutality, that she is being treated the same way or worse. I assumed that Kat said what she did because she or someone in the Keene crowd had visited Lauren, as she or Russell said she could receive visits.

Furthermore, as a commenter on Dvorak notes, York Prison has had prior run-ins with Amnesty International for its brutal and even criminal treatment of prisoners, including male guards raping or exchanging favors with female prisoners for sex, physical abuse of prisoners who reported brutality, among other grossly offensive treatments that should not occur in this country. Now, I'm not normally a fan of Amnesty International, and though their reports made nationwide news, we've seen no indications that any attempt has been made by the prison system to improve its practices at York.

I would be interested in trying to visit her. If anybody was planning on going down there this week, I'd be very happy to come along. If the prison system can prove to me that I was wrong in my article, I will happily print a retraction, and not as a little box on page 10 as newspapers do. I will promote it on Digg like all my other important articles.

[FrankChodorov]

I wouldn't say untruthfulness, it is being misinformed. Everything in the article was gleaned from forum posts and internet articles. I invented nothing. I had thought that her court appearance was to do with this arrest, my mistake

how about the fact that she wasn't on the Van Winkle property that she had previously rented when arrested?

you made no mention of this mistake which was the basis for her being detained as the property she was on was being boarded up to keep out the homeless from squatting in it and it is her claim that she wasn't one of the squatters but rather she was homesteading what was unowned as she does not recognize the legitimacy of the new owner's title claim as a result of the Kelo decision.

[Kat Kanning]

BTW, Mike, I was trying to find the Amnesty International info on York Prison.  All I could find was about a York County Prison in Pennsylvania.  Do you have some other info?

[Kat Kanning]

Caleb called Amnesty international to ask if they'd look into the conditions Lauren is being held under.  They are going to try and contact someone in CT about looking into it.  He also called the prison and asked, again, if she's being held in shackles all the time.  They refused to answer again.  The LT in charge also refused to answer.  He did say that he'd let someone from Amnesty in to check on her.

Also, Caleb asked if we could send her books and they said No.

[Caleb]

My suggestion to you, Kevin, would be that if you don't like Mike's article, write your own and let us help you get it spread around the internet circles.

For the record, Mike's article needs a little spiffing up with some facts, but I don't think he was trying to mislead anyone. 

Caleb

[Spencer]

BTW, Mike, I was trying to find the Amnesty International info on York Prison.  All I could find was about a York County Prison in Pennsylvania.  Do you have some other info?

I know that I'm not Mike, but I guess you'll have to make do (the following is available at http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR511612000?open&of=ENG-2AM):

November 2000

Amnesty International renews call for urgent investigation in Connecticut women's prison

Amnesty International today renewed its call for an urgent investigation into allegations of sexual abuse at York Correctional Institution for women.

Over the past two months, the human rights organization has received numerous testimonies from inmates and former employees alleging sexual misconduct and general abuse by male guards at Connecticut only women's prison -- which houses girls as young as 14.

Women prisoners have described male correctional staff having sex with prisoners to gain sexual favours; male guards viewing female inmates while in a state of undress, including while showering and using the bathroom; and abusive strip searches. Amnesty International has also received accounts of highly intrusive pat-down searches by male staff: two or more male guards were alleged to have taken it in turns to pat-down frisk the same woman; another guard reportedly squeezed an inmate's breast and groped her between the legs.

The State of Connecticut criminalizes all forms of sexual conduct between prison staff and inmates, but it is reported that prosecutions under this legislation are relatively rare and that the authorities' practice is to deal with violations by either "walking off" (dismissing) or reassigning the employee. It is further alleged that prisoners who dare to speak out or complain live in fear of retaliation. The organization has received several letters stating that staff members, particularly as a result of recent media attention, were taking retaliatory actions against inmates.

Amnesty International has also called on the Connecticut authorities to investigate other allegations of ill-treatment at the prison. This includes the claim that teams of armed guards, in full riot gear, use heavy-handed -- and even brutal -- tactics to deal with women who are "playing up". The women are then hand-cuffed and shackled to the bed face down, sometimes with nothing on. This was claimed to have happened to a 16-year-old juvenile who weighed only 94 pounds.

The human rights organization is also disturbed by reports that girls between 14 and 17 are being housed in the maximum security unit of the adult prison and are guarded by male guards -- including guards who are perceived as sexual abusers or predators by the women inmates.

In its letter to the authorities, Amnesty International said that while it was not in a position to confirm the above allegations, the frequency and consistency of reports suggested that serious abuses may be occurring at York Correctional Institution which are either tolerated by the authorities or are not being adequately dealt with. The organization is urging the authorities to institute a full and impartial investigation into the allegations. Such an inquiry, Amnesty International said, should include a review of measures taken to safeguard against sexual abuse and retaliation and to investigate abuses, and of use of force policies in the institution.

Amnesty International is also calling for an immediate review of the role of male guards in York Correctional Institution. The organization believes that unsupervised access of male guards to female living quarters creates opportunities for abuse which may be difficult to substantiate after the event. The Connecticut authorities' reported practice of training male guards to "look at the feet" of naked women are insufficient to prevent abuse. Furthermore, the organization contends that certain practices, such as allowing male guards to conduct pat searches, is inherently cruel and degrading. It is widely argued that pat frisks performed by male officers, inflict particularly severe trauma on many women who have been victims of physical and sexual abuse. The authorities should amend prison policies so that male guards do not routinely conduct pat-down searches of women prisoners.

The Connecticut Department of Corrections stated that it cannot ban men from jobs in a women's facility because it is an "equal opportunities" employer. However, Amnesty International maintains that there can -- and should -- be a restriction on the role of male guards in areas where women have an expectation of privacy.

Amnesty International is calling on the Connecticut authorities to promptly review policy to ensure that female inmates are guarded only by female officers and that male staff operating in female facilities should always be accompanied by female officers, as required under international standards. Some US jurisdictions have placed certain restrictions on male duties in women's prisons or facilities in response to abuses and the courts have upheld such restrictions as lawful.

The organization is also urging the authorities to ensure that all employees at York Correctional Institution are aware of state law criminalizing all forms of sexual conduct between prison staff and inmates and that any allegations involving a possible violation of the law be vigorously investigated with those responsible brought to justice. The authorities should also take steps to prevent sexual abuse and to improve investigation of sexual misconduct complaints.

Background
Connecticut is one of six states which still routinely permits male officers to pat frisk female inmates(1) -- a practice defined by a 1998 class-action lawsuit as a "form of legalized sexual molestation". In spring 2000, the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington State ruled that such practices were "cruel and unusual", changing the policy of that state's correction department.
ENDS.../


November 2000
York Correctional Institution
Selected Testimonies and Allegations

Sexual Misconduct

Allegations from Inmate 'Q' include:
• Correctional Officers having sex with inmates in exchange for food or lipstick;
• Affairs taking place between inmates and staff;
• A Correctional Officer grabbing an inmate's breast;
• The dentist has inmates perform oral sex in exchange for dental treatment

Allegations from Inmate ''W'':
Inmate logged a complaint against a Correctional Officer, stating that he had squeezed her breast and groped between her legs. She has since been placed in 23-hour lock-down, and is currently restricted from using the phone, or from receiving visitors.

Abusive Pat-down and Strip Searches

Allegations from Inmate ''T'':
• 1999: was strip-searched in a room which doubles as a passage way - a male officer, walking past, saw her completely naked.
• 2000: a guard burst into a utility closet in the gym while an inmate was being strip-searched; male team member standing by the door at the time, saw her in only a bra and jeans;
• During the past two years, new arrivals have been forced to walk in groups, clad only in nightgowns and sash-less robes, to and from the medical unit.

Information provided by visitor to Institution
• Prisoners reported sexual abuse by female and male guards. Female guard engages in inappropriate actions when she strips searches the female inmates: such as making remarks in a sexual tone, or asking inmates to part their genitals for a period of time.

Beatings and Assault

Allegations from Inmate ''Y'':
Inmate was said to be severely beaten on a number of occasions. During her last beating she was reportedly so severely beaten that her wrists were broken. The guards apparently tied each limb apart, and left her to suffer for hours. She was put into segregation before she could submit an account of her story for investigation.

Information provided from an anonymous caller: caller stated that used to work as an Intern at York County Prison several years ago. Confirmed as true, recent reports in press about the beatings administered to prisoners. The caller asserted that such beatings were common, and stated that the Deputy Warden of the prison was aware of the beatings, as was the President of the Prison Board.

Inadequate Medical Care

Information provided by a visitor to the Institution:
Prisoners are denied medication for psychological problems; not given essential medication promptly (including standard psychiatric drugs or those for HIV treatment) or mis-diagnosed and given medication with adverse side-effects. One source has reported the over use of sleeping medication.

****

(1) The other states are Kansas, Michigan, New Hampshire, New York and Pennsylvania.
Telephone survey by NIC Prisons Division and Information Centre, 1 January 1999.

[Kat Kanning]

Thank you, Spencer.

[KBCraig]

Fuck you too, Kevin.

Did I attack you, Kat?

You were writing out of concern for Lauren and frustration with the system. Mike took your vent --which you later said you don't know to be true-- and ran with it in a news release.

I don't believe Mike intended to deceive. But he posted as fact something not known to be true. If one hopes to have credibility, that is something that one simply cannot do!

I don't think you're lying, Kat. You're a very honest person. You believe it's likely that Lauren is held in shackles around the clock. It would be a lie to say that she is when you know she's not, but that's not the case here.

Kevin

[Revmar]

Okay, so I was going to ask if anyone knows if Lauren was able to get the letters I've sent when it occurred to me me to just call the prison and ask for myself. 
Sometimes the obvious goes right past me.  Anyway, the bureaucrat I talked to sounded very bored (he took a deep sigh) when I mentioned Lauren's name.  Must be getting a lot of calls!  He than said, "yeah, why wouldn't she?" So I said she's not able to do a lot of things she'd like, being locked up and all.  His only response was "is there anything else". 
I have to say, it was kind of fun feeling like I contributed to his having a rotten day at work.

[Dave Ridley]

Heh heh the sigh is priceless.  When we first started calling they didn't know who she was.

Thanks for calling, Rev, and keep it up!

Anyone had a chance to ask for the warden?  I always seem to call after she's off.   In fairness to Kat, when we've asked whether she's shackled, they won't tell us.  Please guys keep calling and asking!

However what is with the nastiness to KB?  From what I can see he is just keeping us factual.  Let's not play that old libertarian game of griping about our loyal friends when we could be directing that energy against actual bad guys

[mlorrey]

BTW, Mike, I was trying to find the Amnesty International info on York Prison.  All I could find was about a York County Prison in Pennsylvania.  Do you have some other info?

There is a link in the Dvorak copy of my story, down in the comments, one of the commenters posted a link to an AI report.

[mlorrey]

I wouldn't say untruthfulness, it is being misinformed. Everything in the article was gleaned from forum posts and internet articles. I invented nothing. I had thought that her court appearance was to do with this arrest, my mistake

how about the fact that she wasn't on the Van Winkle property that she had previously rented when arrested?

you made no mention of this mistake which was the basis for her being detained as the property she was on was being boarded up to keep out the homeless from squatting in it and it is her claim that she wasn't one of the squatters but rather she was homesteading what was unowned as she does not recognize the legitimacy of the new owner's title claim as a result of the Kelo decision.

I had been led to believe she was on property she had a legal right to be on, by permission from the owners, either verbally or by lease. The material I read was that she was at Van Winkles home with his permission, and was on his porch. If that was incorrect, that can be corrected, but it is really immaterial, because apparently the porch she was on belonged to people who had given her permission to be there. Until they get their checks, its still their property, even if they did sign a deal with the development company or the city.

Secondly, being "on a porch" is hardly squatting in the home. Talk to any cop: people drinking with open containers on their porches are not deemed to be within the threshold of their homes, and are thus drinking in public. If that rule is good for them, then Lauren wasn't trespassing by being on the porch, either.