Prison Talk

Prison Talk (http://www.prisontalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   Pelican Bay State Prison (PBSP)- California (http://www.prisontalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=196)
-   -   SHU "Step Down" Program (http://www.prisontalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=596258)

JavisLady 03-29-2012 04:11 PM

SHU "Step Down" Program
 
http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Reports/docs/...03-01-2012.pdf

Sheryl P. 03-29-2012 11:17 PM

About time they stoped punishing them for affiliation and not behavior.
It is not great but at least they have a chance of getting out at some point,if their behavior is "acceptable".
Some guys have been in shu for a very long time and just want the chance to show they are not a threat.

mrsgonzos 03-30-2012 03:45 AM

Don't be fooled by all the time they had on their hands to come up with new words for the same thing. Instead of the word gangs they are changing it to Security Threat Group (STG). If you are STG-1 it is still based on 3 pieces of evidence an you are considered an associate...hmmm...sounds the same as a validated gang associate. STG-2 is considered a member based on the same criteria as a validated gang member, but it just had a new name. This "step down" process should take about 5 years if they are absolutely perfect and cops are in a good mood for 5 years for each inmate in the SHU...in reality, the people who decide if they pass each "step" that takes a year are the same ones who placed him there in the first place and they have to believe that they are ready...hmmm...yeah... If they don't feel that they are ready for the next step there we go extending it to year six of the process already. It's the same song and dance to try to appease an audience who may not pick up that all they did was change words and provide a process that takes as long as it basically did before to reach consideration to be moved out the SHU. It's plain and simple, with this name change, the institution only has to state that they "believe" that the individual is still a "security threat" and they are staying in the SHU, point blank period. And look at that, if they believe you are still a "security threat" then you remain in the "security threat group" in the SHU. LETS BE REAL...THINGS HAVEN'T CHANGED, JUST THE TERMINOLOGY DID.

Sheryl P. 03-30-2012 04:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrsgonzos (Post 6678808)
Don't be fooled by all the time they had on their hands to come up with new words for the same thing. Instead of the word gangs they are changing it to Security Threat Group (STG). If you are STG-1 it is still based on 3 pieces of evidence an you are considered an associate...hmmm...sounds the same as a validated gang associate. STG-2 is considered a member based on the same criteria as a validated gang member, but it just had a new name. This "step down" process should take about 5 years if they are absolutely perfect and cops are in a good mood for 5 years for each inmate in the SHU...in reality, the people who decide if they pass each "step" that takes a year are the same ones who placed him there in the first place and they have to believe that they are ready...hmmm...yeah... If they don't feel that they are ready for the next step there we go extending it to year six of the process already. It's the same song and dance to try to appease an audience who may not pick up that all they did was change words and provide a process that takes as long as it basically did before to reach consideration to be moved out the SHU. It's plain and simple, with this name change, the institution only has to state that they "believe" that the individual is still a "security threat" and they are staying in the SHU, point blank period. And look at that, if they believe you are still a "security threat" then you remain in the "security threat group" in the SHU. LETS BE REAL...THINGS HAVEN'T CHANGED, JUST THE TERMINOLOGY DID.

I agree that their proposed "step down" is quite a lengthy process with the first three years being the exact same shu "program" and year four not sounding much better.Years five and six could be quite an improvement,if CDC is serious about giving these guys a chance to get back into the general population.
I hope this proves to be a step in the right direction,though I can see why many people just see it as the same old song and dance in new clothes.
They can of course just choose to say there was a violation of the step down "contract" and send them right back to square one.
Lets face it,there are pages of things they use to define these men as "threats" and justify validating them or the new term (stg).
Since the man I love is gang validated and in shu,I pray that CDC actually makes positive changes.
If he comes back again (God forbid) he could be doing 25-life as a three striker and right now that is straight life as a validated gang member:mad:

mrsgonzos 03-30-2012 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheryl P.

I agree that their proposed "step down" is quite a lengthy process with the first three years being the exact same shu "program" and year four not sounding much better.Years five and six could be quite an improvement,if CDC is serious about giving these guys a chance to get back into the general population.
I hope this proves to be a step in the right direction,though I can see why many people just see it as the same old song and dance in new clothes.
They can of course just choose to say there was a violation of the step down "contract" and send them right back to square one.
Lets face it,there are pages of things they use to define these men as "threats" and justify validating them or the new term (stg).
Since the man I love is gang validated and in shu,I pray that CDC actually makes positive changes.
If he comes back again (God forbid) he could be doing 25-life as a three striker and right now that is straight life as a validated gang member:mad:

CDC is not of any help, the only thing that may be of help is prayer. I recently overheard CO's talking about being told about increasing cell checks on the mainline and to continue with validating. This new song and dance is just that.

JavisLady 03-30-2012 05:06 PM

I'm just hoping something gives. If my man can get moved from PB to Tehachapi /Corcoran but still has to be in the SHU I'll be happy with that as those two are only 2-3 hours away for me, compared to the 13 hours he's away right now. That was the biggest thing I got out of it, the potential of them to move closer to home....

Sheryl P. 03-30-2012 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrsgonzos (Post 6679298)
CDC is not of any help, the only thing that may be of help is prayer. I recently overheard CO's talking about being told about increasing cell checks on the mainline and to continue with validating. This new song and dance is just that.

That is so depressing!
My man told me they cell checked him twice in a week ,right before I visited and he thought someone had "snitched" but said that there was nothing to find since he was behaving himself.
UGH.

desertmoonwoman 03-31-2012 12:13 AM

I will keep you all updated, G may be moved to GP after serving 13 years in the SHU. Try to stay positive, till it is proven this will not work.

Sheryl P. 03-31-2012 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by desertmoonwoman (Post 6680371)
I will keep you all updated, G may be moved to GP after serving 13 years in the SHU. Try to stay positive, till it is proven this will not work.

I am sure many prayers are being said and I am trying to hope for the best.
I would be thrilled for you if G. can be returned to GP.
Thank you for keeping us up-dated on any progress.

JavisLady 04-01-2012 10:46 AM

Always hopeful
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by desertmoonwoman (Post 6680371)
I will keep you all updated, G may be moved to GP after serving 13 years in the SHU. Try to stay positive, till it is proven this will not work.

We are all hoping this works out for him & you DesertMoon!! :)

Sheryl P. 04-01-2012 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JavisLady (Post 6679780)
I'm just hoping something gives. If my man can get moved from PB to Tehachapi /Corcoran but still has to be in the SHU I'll be happy with that as those two are only 2-3 hours away for me, compared to the 13 hours he's away right now. That was the biggest thing I got out of it, the potential of them to move closer to home....

So sad the tings we see as wins.
I hope he gets moved closer!
I understand the guys calling th shots at PB are not happy with the CDC proposal and sent a counter proposal.
I really pray this does not mean another hunger strike:(

JavisLady 04-03-2012 11:31 PM

Counter Proposal
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheryl P. (Post 6682222)
So sad the tings we see as wins.
I hope he gets moved closer!
I understand the guys calling th shots at PB are not happy with the CDC proposal and sent a counter proposal.
I really pray this does not mean another hunger strike:(

Hi Sheryl.....you and me both...my man is already down to 215lbs which is waaay too light for him, he's almost 6ft tall....:mad:

Sheryl P. 04-03-2012 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JavisLady (Post 6686777)
Hi Sheryl.....you and me both...my man is already down to 215lbs which is waaay too light for him, he's almost 6ft tall....:mad:

I hear you.Mine was really fit with almost no body fat (he works out like crazy) and is over six feet.He lost so much weight he dropped to less that 165 and should be well over 200.It was crazy seeing him since he looked frightening.He still is under 200 and was so weak when the last strike ended that he could hardly write.What he did write was not all together clear since he was so close to dying that his mind was getting affected.That was so scarry that I doubt they have enough body fat for another prolonged hunger strike.I'm sure many of the men are in the same situation since most are super fit and don't have any fat to spare and the usual shu diet is pretty poor to begin with.He is always hungry:(
:sad&blue:

onetruelife 04-06-2012 06:49 PM

Keep in mind that the concept paper is only a proposal, and we, advocates, families, friends are asking CDCR to come up with something much better then this, it's going to take a lot but we have to continue to speak up for our loved ones!

Johnnyangelo1 05-11-2012 10:28 AM

I know a few people that are doing time in the CDCR and the SHU, and I know a few people that work within the CDCR...It is my knowledge tha the Proposed STG (Gang) Prevention, Validation, and Mangement Process will provide enhanced validation requirements, as well as not include an automatic SHU placement for validated STG I (Gang) Associates or STG II Members/Associates...Although I hear it is true that there are similar validation criteria that will remain in use, those criteria that can be assocaited as "behavior" will have a Rules Violation Report issued, which is what the fella's requested in their submitted 5 Core Demands, and will provide a due process hearing for the alleged charge. I have also heard that the validation authority is changing from that of one of the gang investigators validating each person, to that of a possible validation committee...which will provide more oversight above that of an officer and will provide additional "due process" <= Legal Stuff.... to the existing method....:thumbsup:

Sheryl P. 05-11-2012 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnnyangelo1 (Post 6755598)
I know a few people that are doing time in the CDCR and the SHU, and I know a few people that work within the CDCR...It is my knowledge tha the Proposed STG (Gang) Prevention, Validation, and Mangement Process will provide enhanced validation requirements, as well as not include an automatic SHU placement for validated STG I (Gang) Associates or STG II Members/Associates...Although I hear it is true that there are similar validation criteria that will remain in use, those criteria that can be assocaited as "behavior" will have a Rules Violation Report issued, which is what the fella's requested in their submitted 5 Core Demands, and will provide a due process hearing for the alleged charge. I have also heard that the validation authority is changing from that of one of the gang investigators validating each person, to that of a possible validation committee...which will provide more oversight above that of an officer and will provide additional "due process" <= Legal Stuff.... to the existing method....:thumbsup:

So what about guys validated for "gang associated" tattoos?
What about behavior that happened over six years ago?
What about kites that are alledged to contain the inmates name but not on their person?

Johnnyangelo1 05-11-2012 02:28 PM

Validation and Step Down Program
 
So what about guys validated for "gang associated" tattoos?

From what I understand, an individual can still be "partially" validated for having a specific STG/Gang Tattoo; however, this by itself does not validate the individual for placement into the Step Down Program. The individual would have to have 3 seperate source items, (a tattoo worth 6 points being just one), and that the total points would have to equal 10+. Also one of the source items would have to be a direct link to an existing validated member/associate (possession of a letter from another validated STG). Also for an assocaite, they would not be automatically placed in to the Step Down Program based simply on their validation, there would have to be additional behavior associted with the STG to be placed into the Step Down Program. Also, if the person has the tattoo inked on after he has been already validated, this would probably considered "new behavior."

What about behavior that happened over six years ago?

I understand under the proposed policy that the STG behavior will only go back as far as the total time as it would take to complete the Step Down Program...In this case, four years would be the amount of time. So again, he may be validated as an associate, but would need to have behavior (as determined by a committee) that has a link to an STG within the preceding four years.

What about kites that are alledged to contain the inmates name but not on their person?

I understand the reliability with information (kite, letter, list) found in the possession of a second/third party may not carry the same weight for validation purposes, as information they might actually find in the person's individual's possession. I believe I understood it to be: In person's possession = 4 points, in someone else's possession... = 2 points...half the reliability.

Not sure if any of this information helps at all...just trying to assist in clarifying what has been shared...:thumbsup:

Sheryl P. 05-11-2012 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnnyangelo1 (Post 6755923)
So what about guys validated for "gang associated" tattoos?

From what I understand, an individual can still be "partially" validated for having a specific STG/Gang Tattoo; however, this by itself does not validate the individual for placement into the Step Down Program. The individual would have to have 3 seperate source items, (a tattoo worth 6 points being just one), and that the total points would have to equal 10+. Also one of the source items would have to be a direct link to an existing validated member/associate (possession of a letter from another validated STG). Also for an assocaite, they would not be automatically placed in to the Step Down Program based simply on their validation, there would have to be additional behavior associted with the STG to be placed into the Step Down Program. Also, if the person has the tattoo inked on after he has been already validated, this would probably considered "new behavior."

What about behavior that happened over six years ago?

I understand under the proposed policy that the STG behavior will only go back as far as the total time as it would take to complete the Step Down Program...In this case, four years would be the amount of time. So again, he may be validated as an associate, but would need to have behavior (as determined by a committee) that has a link to an STG within the preceding four years.

What about kites that are alledged to contain the inmates name but not on their person?

I understand the reliability with information (kite, letter, list) found in the possession of a second/third party may not carry the same weight for validation purposes, as information they might actually find in the person's individual's possession. I believe I understood it to be: In person's possession = 4 points, in someone else's possession... = 2 points...half the reliability.

Not sure if any of this information helps at all...just trying to assist in clarifying what has been shared...:thumbsup:

Thank you for this information.
Now I guess we will see how the 115's given for the participation in the hunger strikes affects things and if they are serious about letting the guys who are already in shu as "validated associates" out.

desertmoonwoman 06-07-2012 12:11 PM

The SHU Step Down... for what ever reason, G has his hearing in July and sent a letter saying not to get my hopes up. I am not sure if it is because of this information or something else. I can only hope...


http://sfbayview.com/2012/a-response...ment-strategy/

JavisLady 06-07-2012 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by desertmoonwoman (Post 6806143)
The SHU Step Down... for what ever reason, G has his hearing in July and sent a letter saying not to get my hopes up. I am not sure if it is because of this information or something else. I can only hope...


http://sfbayview.com/2012/a-response...ment-strategy/

DesertMoon,

I read the article, - thanks for the info, it pisses me off but what else can I say??

I hope for both of you he gets out as you'd hoped.

I went to see my man this last weekend, and I was pulled out of visit by one of the IGI staffers (are they the ones in the Milatary - type uniforms?) Anyways, I got to go back into visit, thank goodness, guess I was being bad sucking on my fingers for my man (I've done this before and nothing was ever said to me). But anyways, ya we decided to go ahead with our wedding while he's in the SHU, just because he really doesn't think anything is going to change.

Sheryl P. 06-07-2012 11:10 PM

From the depressing sound of things.it appears we may be facing another hunger strike at some point.This is so frustrating.
I had to agree with the posters comments about no shu inmates being overweight ,due to lack of food and commisary.These men can't afford to lose weight because they can't gain weight!

JavisLady 06-08-2012 09:47 AM

Sheryl,

Ain't that the truth?? :(

Did you see the article posted by DesertMoon? The pic of that idiot in there - he's so FAT!

Sheryl P. 06-08-2012 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JavisLady (Post 6807892)
Sheryl,

Ain't that the truth?? :(

Did you see the article posted by DesertMoon? The pic of that idiot in there - he's so FAT!

I want my man at whatever shu that guy was in,if he was ever in one at all.smh

JavisLady 07-25-2012 02:55 PM

http://prisonerhungerstrikesolidarit...cdcr-proposal/

What I hadn't seen before reading this webpage is contained within the link on this page that outlines the counter proposal sent from the Short Corridor in March of this year.

MyBookins 07-27-2012 04:09 AM

have they responded to the counter proposal yet?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:15 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2001- 2017 Prison Talk Online