Welcome to the Prison Talk Online Community! Take a Minute and Sign Up Today!






Go Back   Prison Talk > U.S. REGIONAL FORUMS > CALIFORNIA > California Prison-Specific Forums > Pelican Bay State Prison (PBSP)- California
Register Entertainment FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

Pelican Bay State Prison (PBSP)- California Topics and discussions specific to Pelican Bay State Prison located in Crescent City, California.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-29-2012, 04:11 PM
JavisLady JavisLady is offline
Account Closed
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: CA USA
Posts: 521
Thanks: 568
Thanked 523 Times in 243 Posts
Default SHU "Step Down" Program

http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Reports/docs/...03-01-2012.pdf
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 03-29-2012, 11:17 PM
Sheryl P.'s Avatar
Sheryl P. Sheryl P. is offline
Registered User
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: california
Posts: 5,162
Thanks: 2,740
Thanked 3,943 Times in 2,166 Posts
Default

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.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-30-2012, 03:45 AM
mrsgonzos's Avatar
mrsgonzos mrsgonzos is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 255
Thanks: 2
Thanked 151 Times in 95 Posts
Default

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.
__________________
MRS. GONZOS
Reply With Quote
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to mrsgonzos For This Useful Post:
ap&sd4ever (03-30-2012), celamar56 (04-03-2012), cybrlid1 (08-17-2012), Diablo'sWifey (09-29-2012), lassy2013 (04-03-2012), onetruelife (05-14-2012), Staying*Strong*05 (06-25-2012), TheForgoten1 (07-09-2013)
  #4  
Old 03-30-2012, 04:36 AM
Sheryl P.'s Avatar
Sheryl P. Sheryl P. is offline
Registered User
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: california
Posts: 5,162
Thanks: 2,740
Thanked 3,943 Times in 2,166 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrsgonzos View Post
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
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-30-2012, 11:13 AM
mrsgonzos's Avatar
mrsgonzos mrsgonzos is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 255
Thanks: 2
Thanked 151 Times in 95 Posts
Default

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
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.
__________________
MRS. GONZOS
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-30-2012, 05:06 PM
JavisLady JavisLady is offline
Account Closed
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: CA USA
Posts: 521
Thanks: 568
Thanked 523 Times in 243 Posts
Default

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....
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-30-2012, 09:55 PM
Sheryl P.'s Avatar
Sheryl P. Sheryl P. is offline
Registered User
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: california
Posts: 5,162
Thanks: 2,740
Thanked 3,943 Times in 2,166 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrsgonzos View Post
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.
__________________
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Sheryl P. For This Useful Post:
desertmoonwoman (04-01-2012)
  #8  
Old 03-31-2012, 12:13 AM
desertmoonwoman's Avatar
desertmoonwoman desertmoonwoman is offline
G'z Sweetstuff
 

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: 1/2 of me is in CA
Posts: 1,533
Thanks: 479
Thanked 816 Times in 483 Posts
Default

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.
__________________
Quote:
"Did you vote? Because if you did not, you can't complain about the conditions of prison."
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to desertmoonwoman For This Useful Post:
Sheryl P. (04-01-2012)
  #9  
Old 03-31-2012, 12:48 AM
Sheryl P.'s Avatar
Sheryl P. Sheryl P. is offline
Registered User
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: california
Posts: 5,162
Thanks: 2,740
Thanked 3,943 Times in 2,166 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by desertmoonwoman View Post
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.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-01-2012, 10:46 AM
JavisLady JavisLady is offline
Account Closed
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: CA USA
Posts: 521
Thanks: 568
Thanked 523 Times in 243 Posts
Default Always hopeful

Quote:
Originally Posted by desertmoonwoman View Post
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!!
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-01-2012, 11:19 AM
Sheryl P.'s Avatar
Sheryl P. Sheryl P. is offline
Registered User
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: california
Posts: 5,162
Thanks: 2,740
Thanked 3,943 Times in 2,166 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JavisLady View Post
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
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-03-2012, 11:31 PM
JavisLady JavisLady is offline
Account Closed
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: CA USA
Posts: 521
Thanks: 568
Thanked 523 Times in 243 Posts
Default Counter Proposal

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheryl P. View Post
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....
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-03-2012, 11:48 PM
Sheryl P.'s Avatar
Sheryl P. Sheryl P. is offline
Registered User
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: california
Posts: 5,162
Thanks: 2,740
Thanked 3,943 Times in 2,166 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JavisLady View Post
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....
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
__________________
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Sheryl P. For This Useful Post:
JavisLady (04-06-2012)
  #14  
Old 04-06-2012, 06:49 PM
onetruelife onetruelife is offline
onetruelife
 

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: bay area
Posts: 14
Thanks: 10
Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts
Default

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!
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to onetruelife For This Useful Post:
JavisLady (04-11-2012), Sheryl P. (04-06-2012)
  #15  
Old 05-11-2012, 10:28 AM
Johnnyangelo1's Avatar
Johnnyangelo1 Johnnyangelo1 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: California, United States
Posts: 53
Thanks: 1
Thanked 30 Times in 5 Posts
Cool

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....
__________________
Johnny Angel
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-11-2012, 11:48 AM
Sheryl P.'s Avatar
Sheryl P. Sheryl P. is offline
Registered User
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: california
Posts: 5,162
Thanks: 2,740
Thanked 3,943 Times in 2,166 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnnyangelo1 View Post
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....
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?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-11-2012, 02:28 PM
Johnnyangelo1's Avatar
Johnnyangelo1 Johnnyangelo1 is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: California, United States
Posts: 53
Thanks: 1
Thanked 30 Times in 5 Posts
Cool 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...
__________________
Johnny Angel
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-11-2012, 11:19 PM
Sheryl P.'s Avatar
Sheryl P. Sheryl P. is offline
Registered User
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: california
Posts: 5,162
Thanks: 2,740
Thanked 3,943 Times in 2,166 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnnyangelo1 View Post
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...
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.
__________________
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Sheryl P. For This Useful Post:
JavisLady (05-12-2012)
  #19  
Old 06-07-2012, 12:11 PM
desertmoonwoman's Avatar
desertmoonwoman desertmoonwoman is offline
G'z Sweetstuff
 

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: 1/2 of me is in CA
Posts: 1,533
Thanks: 479
Thanked 816 Times in 483 Posts
Default

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/
__________________
Quote:
"Did you vote? Because if you did not, you can't complain about the conditions of prison."
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to desertmoonwoman For This Useful Post:
JavisLady (06-07-2012)
  #20  
Old 06-07-2012, 01:59 PM
JavisLady JavisLady is offline
Account Closed
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: CA USA
Posts: 521
Thanks: 568
Thanked 523 Times in 243 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by desertmoonwoman View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 06-07-2012, 11:10 PM
Sheryl P.'s Avatar
Sheryl P. Sheryl P. is offline
Registered User
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: california
Posts: 5,162
Thanks: 2,740
Thanked 3,943 Times in 2,166 Posts
Default

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!
__________________
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Sheryl P. For This Useful Post:
gabbsplus2 (08-23-2012)
  #22  
Old 06-08-2012, 09:47 AM
JavisLady JavisLady is offline
Account Closed
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: CA USA
Posts: 521
Thanks: 568
Thanked 523 Times in 243 Posts
Default

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!
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-08-2012, 11:18 AM
Sheryl P.'s Avatar
Sheryl P. Sheryl P. is offline
Registered User
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: california
Posts: 5,162
Thanks: 2,740
Thanked 3,943 Times in 2,166 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JavisLady View Post
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
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-25-2012, 02:55 PM
JavisLady JavisLady is offline
Account Closed
Donation Award 
 

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: CA USA
Posts: 521
Thanks: 568
Thanked 523 Times in 243 Posts
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-27-2012, 04:09 AM
MyBookins MyBookins is offline
Registered User
 

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CA USA
Posts: 210
Thanks: 1
Thanked 145 Times in 57 Posts
Default

have they responded to the counter proposal yet?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:28 PM.
Copyright © 2001- 2017 Prison Talk Online
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Website Design & Custom vBulletin Skins by: Relivo Media
Message Board Statistics