Connect with us

Connecticut

CT’s incarcerated seek say in debate over assaults on prison staff

Published

on

CT’s incarcerated seek say in debate over assaults on prison staff


Roughly 24 hours before lawmakers convened for a special legislative session earlier this fall, the unions representing correctional officers were upset that the state did not plan to take action in response to a series of assaults on prison staff.

“We have worked with Democratic and Republican legislative leadership. We have met with the chairs of the Judiciary Committee and the governor and his staff,” said Robert Beamon, vice president of AFSCME Local 391, at a press conference. “We’ve been pushing the department to make more changes. But we need help from our elected officials to help us reduce the increase in the staff assaults that’s been happening.”

In the most recent fiscal year, the Department of Correction documented 214 staff assaults — the highest in the last five years. Union representatives said the morale of the workforce was diminished because of it and that correctional officers were struggling to maintain safety.

Seated at a conference room table that day, they presented increased staffing as one solution to the violence they believed was spurred by a law requiring more out-of-cell time for prisoners. It was the legislature’s duty to allocate the funding to meet the needs of the rank-and-file, union officials said.

Advertisement

But as their messaging about out-of-control prison violence circulated, the people locked behind bars felt unheard.

In interviews conducted by The Connecticut Mirror through letters with incarcerated people at Cheshire Correctional Institution in Enfield, one of the facilities with documented staff assaults, they said the current narrative has unfairly portrayed prison violence as widespread, failed to address the causes of the recent attacks and attempted to undercut the increase in out-of-cell time.

Recent publicized assaults, they say, have mostly involved people with serious mental illness, a perspective backed by statistics provided by the DOC. Of the staff assaults since 2021, 69% included people with either mild, moderate or severe “mental health issues.”

There’s a belief among incarcerated people that some officers are attempting to push prisoners to violence as a way of furthering their agenda.

“There has been a shift in here lately … I can see some c/o’s trying to upset us,” said Anthony Garofalo, who’s serving a 25-year sentence for manslaughter. The 49-year-old resides in Cheshire’s H.O.N.O.R. unit, a specialized housing program created to provide expanded educational opportunities for rehabilitation. The letters stand for Honest, Ownership, Nobility, Obligation and Respect.

Advertisement

Recently, three correctional officers at Garner Correctional Institution in Newtown were charged with third-degree assault for allegedly beating an incarcerated person who they claimed threatened them and refused to follow their orders.

Connecticut State Police concluded that the guards used excessive force in the incident captured on camera, which fell on the same day that union officials urged lawmakers to allocate more funding in response to staff assaults. The officers, including one of the union heads who spoke at the press conference, were placed on administrative leave by the DOC two days later.

Shahrzad Rasekh/CT Mirror

Barbara Fair, the leading organizer for Stop Solitary CT, co-wrote and advocated for the PROTECT Act. (Shahrzad Rasekh/CT Mirror)

Incarcerated people say that events like what occurred at Garner are exactly why the PROTECT Act was necessary. The DOC was previously condemned in investigations, court rulings, and testimony for practices — particularly the use of solitary confinement — deemed inhumane.

“There is absolutely no justification for anyone to assault another person. However, I strongly believe the assaults are related to the never-ending stress of being dehumanized,” said Joe Vega, 56, a paralegal housed in the H.O.N.O.R. unit who’s serving a 60-year sentence for first-degree assault. He has been a member of Cheshire’s mentor group since 2015.

Advertisement

Prisoners, advocates and correctional experts say that instead of focusing solely on increasing staffing and criticizing recent laws, unions and state officials should also strive to provide a safe and humane environment for everyone.

“Corrections unions are correct that every person who lives and works in prison should be safe,” said Hope Metcalf, a law professor at Yale University who co-teaches the Lowenstein International Human Rights Clinic. “But where we might differ is that there is not more need for babysitters or for people to be pushing buttons for gates to open.”

The legislation at the center of this debate, Senate Bill 459, comprised three major components: increasing the number of mandated hours that prisoners can spend outside of their cells, limiting the DOC’s use of solitary confinement and establishing independent oversight of the agency.

Referred to as the PROTECT Act, shorthand for Promoting Responsible Oversight, Treatment, and Effective Correctional Transparency, the bill followed years of testimony from incarcerated people and court rulings that exposed the agency’s “cruel and unusual” practices. A representative from the United Nations testified before the law’s passage that Connecticut’s use of solitary confinement likely amounted to torture.

But as the legislation traveled through the hands of state lawmakers for two years — it was vetoed by Gov. Ned Lamont in 2021 — it crashed into intense opposition from union officials.

Advertisement

“Of course out-of-cell time is going to contribute to more opportunities for assaults to occur,” said Beamon, who also works in the DOC’s Employee Assistance Unit, which provides peer support to staff, in a recent interview. “But the lack of consequences for the inmate population also contributes to it.”

Most of the bill went into effect in July 2022, and it required that all incarcerated people receive at least four hours per day outside of their cells, with an increase to five hours starting in April 2023.

Correctional officers were frustrated with their lack of involvement in drafting the legislation. They felt as if the state was attempting to strip away essential tools for keeping prisons safe.

“I don’t like the fact that people that don’t know our job or do our job are telling us how to do it,” said Sean Howard, a recently retired Cheshire correctional officer and former president of AFSCME Local 387. “To me, those are the major contributions that have led to the more assaults.”

The DOC defines a staff assault as “any inmate assault on a Department employee resulting in a non-serious or serious injury.” The 214 staff assaults in FY2023 were an increase from 184 in the previous year and 126 in FY2019, before the COVID-19 pandemic.

Advertisement

A “careful review” of the incidents showed that 9% of the assaults were attributed to the increase in out-of-cell time, said Ashley McCarthy, the DOC’s director of external affairs.

However, the numbers provided by the agency show that the significant rise in staff assaults began before the law was passed. The most drastic year-to-year increase over the last five fiscal years, from 100 assaults to 168, took place between 2020 and 2021.

And the number of staff assaults alone doesn’t provide much, if any, context about the people involved in them.

“There’s an ebb and flow to the numbers,” said Scott Semple, a correctional consultant who served as DOC commissioner under the Gov. Dannel P. Malloy administration. “As far as incidents are concerned, less than 10% of the population are responsible for 90% of the incidents.”

Cheshire Correctional Institution

Shahrzad Rasekh/CT Mirror

The H.O.N.O.R. unit has not offered programming as it was intended, said men housed at Cheshire Correctional Institution. (Shahrzad Rasekh/CT Mirror)

Forty-three percent of the staff assaults since 2021 involved prisoners considered by the agency to have mild or moderate “mental health issues,” and 26% included people whose mental health needs were considered severe, according to the DOC.

Advertisement

During the same time frame, McCarthy added, there was a “corresponding jump of 178% in the incarceration” of unsentenced people accused of violent crimes. Research shows that increased exposure to a jail environment could have adverse implications for social order, in part because of the strain and trauma associated with incarceration.

The DOC views the surge in people behind bars who are awaiting trial as a “possible contributing factor to the increase in assaults.”

While the staff assault numbers hold significance to the department, correctional officers and the unions representing them, many of the PROTECT Act’s proponents believe that full implementation of and buy-in to the law could aid in curtailing some of the violence.

To correspond with the out-of-cell time mandated by the PROTECT Act, the agency said it “continues to offer a wide range of programs and services focused on assisting incarcerated individuals.”

But many say they have yet to see things change in dramatic fashion.

Advertisement

“The reality is the PROTECT Act says that instead of leaving people in a cage 23 hours a day, you now have to let them out for five; we said with social programming,” said Barbara Fair, the leading organizer for Stop Solitary CT, who co-wrote and advocated for the legislation. “They haven’t put the social programming in place. And so, for me, it’s a recipe for disaster.”

When the top officials from local correctional unions assembled for the press conference in late September, their message was clear: the legislature needed to distribute more funding for staffing posts so prison workers could fully comply with the law.

“Enough is enough. We need help. We need change, and we need it now,” said Patrick McGoldrick, the local chief steward for AFSCME Local 1565 and one of the three Garner officers facing criminal charges for allegedly assaulting an incarcerated person. “We need more action taken to curb this trend of violent assaults before it gets worse. Without action, it will get worse.”

Some of the officers said in later interviews that outside of specialized counselors at Garner, the DOC’s mental health facility, they were unaware of mental health training that might allow them to improve their communication with incarcerated people.

“You have failed miserably in training the staff on how to deal with this inmate population,” said Howard, the retired Cheshire correctional officer. “We are not trained properly on how to do our job. We are not trained on how to handle situations.”

Advertisement

They also said that Connecticut prisons don’t have the infrastructure to keep all incarcerated people out of their cells at the same time. With the passage of the PROTECT Act and recent prison closures, they expressed frustration with not having many places to send those who act out.

The Department of Correction is falling short with the PROTECT Act, say advocates.

“I believe that the issue is that people just want to go home safely, and that’s it,” Beamon said. “I am confident to say that if there were adequate tools for us to keep the inmate population and ourselves safe … I don’t think the officers and DOC would have any issue with that.”

But the union’s calls for more staffing haven’t traveled far with Sen. Gary Winfield, co-chair of the legislature’s Judiciary Committee. The New Haven Democrat helps oversee the correctional budget for the Appropriations Committee.

“If you can demonstrate that there’s an actual need for more posts, and that will actually make the job of the people there be able to be done better, more efficiently,” Winfield said, “or even it might allow them to actually do their job the way it’s supposed to be done, then we’re having a conversation, a real conversation. But it’s not just saying you need more posts.”

Advertisement

Winfield said he would instead like to see the DOC try to expand initiatives like the T.R.U.E. unit at Cheshire, a mentorship program that drew national applause for its transformative approach to prison reform. The DOC said the costs of staffing and running the small unit make it difficult to replicate. But the judiciary’s top senator said he has yet to see the agency make a request for the funds.

The CT Mirror asked for the DOC’s most recent budget proposal through the Freedom of Information Act, but it was denied by the Office of Policy and Management on grounds that the Lamont administration considers it a draft document.

“You look at something like the T.R.U.E. unit that sits inside of a prison … the rest of the prison functions in a traditional way, and nobody says, ‘This doesn’t make any damn sense,’” Winfield said. “Who has vision on this? We’re just going to keep doing the same crazy stuff we’ve been doing and then complaining when people are tired of being treated a certain way, like they’re not human beings.”

Metcalf, the law professor at Yale University, worked closely with Fair and Stop Solitary to draft the PROTECT Act. She said the law always intended that the DOC would hold the responsibility of providing programming and support to both incarcerated people and staff.

“What there is an urgent need for is staff who are trained up to engage with people, to do programming, to find ways to make prison a place that is less of a warehouse and more of, actually, an environment where a person can actually become rehabilitated,” Metcalf said.

Advertisement

Incarcerated people and advocates are also awaiting the appointment of a correctional ombudsperson in the state’s Office of Governmental Accountability, another critical component of the PROTECT Act. Grouped with other responsibilities, the independent authority will hold the power to conduct site visits, communicate with prisoners and review agency records.

At some point in the coming weeks, the committee responsible for helping appoint the ombudsperson is expected to hold a public hearing for the position’s three finalists, one of whom is Fair from Stop Solitary. The hearing presumably will be followed by a final decision from the governor.

“This transition moment just underscores why independent oversight is so critical for the system,” Metcalf said. “We should not have to be depending on rumors or anecdotes from corrections unions about assaults or the causes for such assaults.”

The men housed in Cheshire’s H.O.N.O.R. unit say recent events at the prison are representative of where the DOC is falling short with the PROTECT Act. The unit has not offered programming since it was launched, they said. They’re missing out on activities like creative writing, embracing fatherhood and building a positive self-concept.

“You come here to correct your past and be a better person to integrate back into society,” said Ganesh Bharrat, 42, nearly two decades into a 75-year murder sentence. “If you were to sit down for two hours in the morning and two hours at night for recreation and just play cards, you’re not improving your ability or your skills. … We need programs, and that’s what this unit was created for.”

Advertisement

Vega, the paralegal, said that some correctional officers are speaking to prisoners in a menacing, confrontational and disrespectful manner. People who complain about the conditions are being denied privileges. And, as evidenced by the lack of programming in his unit, those with significant time left are being refused opportunities for rehabilitation.

“The work and progress have been derailed. I have witnessed it, experienced it, and have been affected by it,” Vega said. “It has made me wonder, ‘What is the real agenda?’”

Jayden Edison is a reporter for The Connecticut Mirror (https://ctmirror.org/ ). Copyright 2023 © The Connecticut Mirror.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Connecticut

Connecticut Public lays off 4% of its staff, citing expenses growing faster than revenues

Published

on

Connecticut Public lays off 4% of its staff, citing expenses growing faster than revenues


Connecticut Public announced on Friday the nonprofit broadcaster is laying off four full-time and several temporary employees. That’s a 4% reduction in staff, according to the Hartford-based organization.

In a statement, Connecticut Public said expenses “have grown at rates that have exceeded revenues for the last few years” and that some expenses were because of “deliberate investments” and also inflation.

President and CEO Mark Contreras declined to be interviewed and a Connecticut Public spokesperson declined to answer questions beyond the statement.

“These decisions are never easy and only come after taking many other steps to stabilize finances,” Contreras said in the statement.

Advertisement

Connecticut Public did not release the names of affected employees.

In a separate letter to staff, Contreras said, in addition to the layoffs, there will be no across-the-board salary increases for the next year. In addition, tuition and student loan reimbursement would not be offered and there will be limits on “training, conferences, overtime and discretionary travel.”

But Connecticut Public will offer its employees an increase in paid time off around the holidays.

The nonprofit reported to the IRS total revenues of nearly $23 million for fiscal year 2023 — a decrease of about $2.5 million from the year before, when reported revenues were nearly $25.5 million.

The announcement Friday follows layoffs at other public media stations around the country and in New England.

Advertisement

In May, GBH in Boston announced it was laying off 4% of its workforce — 32 employees — citing an increase in the cost of business coupled with flat revenues.

In April, WBUR, also in Boston, announced it was cutting as much as 14% of its staff through buyouts and layoffs, due to a big drop in underwriting.

NEPM in Springfield, Massachusetts, laid off 20% of its staff in March of 2023.

In the letter to employees, Contreras wrote, “Those affected by these changes have made lasting and impactful contributions to our organization, for which we are all grateful.”

“We believe that the changes discussed above—while difficult—will allow us to deliver on our mission sustainably into the future,” he wrote.

Advertisement

NEPM reported and edited this story independently, at the request of the Connecticut Public newsroom. No Connecticut Public staff or leadership had oversight or reviewed the story before it was published.





Source link

Continue Reading

Connecticut

More Pharmacy Chains Closing Connecticut Stores: What's Behind It?

Published

on

More Pharmacy Chains Closing Connecticut Stores: What's Behind It?


CONNECTICUT — Drugstore chains Walgreens and Rite Aid announced a slew of pharmacy closings this week, creating more uncertainty among Connecticut residents about where they can get their prescriptions filled as pharmacy deserts become more common.

CVS also has a plan to shutter stores.

Chain pharmacy executives have cited a variety of reasons for closing stores in Connecticut and other states, including reduced spending by inflation-weary customers, low reimbursement rates for pharmacy care and low dispensing fees for Medicaid enrollees.

Walgreens this week announced that it is planning to close “certain underperforming stores” as part of a “significant multiyear footprint optimization program.” The announcement was made following the release of the Illinois-based Walgreens Boots Alliance third-quarter earnings report.

Advertisement

Pharmacies have also said that current business models are outdated in an environment of increased competition from stores that sell much of the same merchandise, and pharmacies are still adjusting to a spike in demand for services during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Here are the closings big pharmacy chains have announced:

  • Walgreens plans to close a “significant share” of its 8,600 U.S.stores nationwide to turn around its struggling pharmacy model. In an earnings call with investors Thursday, Walgreens Boots Alliance CEO Timothy Wentworth said as many as 25 percent of the stores — about 2,150 of them — could close. That’s on top of about 2,000 stores the Deerfield, Illinois-based chain has closed over the past 10 years, 484 of them since February.
  • Rite Aid, struggling under billions of dollars in debt and more than a thousand federal, state and local lawsuits accusing the chain of illegally filling painkiller prescriptions, said in court filings that it will close another 27 stores in two states — or virtually all of its Michigan and Ohio pharmacies. That’s on top of the nearly 500 stores the chain has already closed.
  • CVS has shuttered about 600 stores since 2022 and plans to close 300 more this year. The closings “are based on our evaluation of changes in population, consumer buying patterns and future health needs to ensure we have the right pharmacy format in the right locations for patients,” CVS spokesperson Amy Thibault said in an email to CNN early this year.

What does it all mean for Connecticut?

An Associated Press analysis in early June shows that states have several chain pharmacy options. In Connecticut the brand names include the aforementioned Walgreens, CVS and Rite Aid, along with pharmacies at big box stores like Target and Walmart and supermarkets like Big Y, Stop & Shop and Shoprite.

Whether independent or a chain, pharmacies can be important assets in their communities. They are health centers where the pharmacists and staff know everyone’s names and the drugs they’re taking, and often can spot signs of a serious illness. These local businesses are often stocked with supplies such as catheters, colostomy supplies and diabetes test strips that people need to stay in their homes as they navigate serious illnesses.

The AP analysis focused on rural communities, finding the gaps are greatest in those states. An earlier study by University of Southern California researchers found that Black and Latino neighborhoods in 30 large US. cities had fewer pharmacies than white and diverse neighborhoods from 2007 to 2015, before the current wave of pharmacy closings.

Advertisement

“If you’re located in a low-income neighborhood, and effectively in a Black and Latinx neighborhood, having any pharmacy is less common. And having a pharmacy that meets your needs is much less common,” Jenny Guadamuz, a co-author of the study, told CNN.

The question prevails, can Connecticut’s independents close a potential gap caused by bigger names closing?

The state’s independent pharmacies face their own set of challenges and are likely unable to fill pharmacy voids, according to the National Community Pharmacists Association, a trade group that represents more than 19,400 independent pharmacists.

The group said in a statement earlier this year that new Medicare and Medicaid rules resulting in lower prescription reimbursements, in particular, put a third of independent drugstores at risk of closure and that “millions of patients could be stranded without a pharmacy.”

The latest 12-month NCPA statistics for Connecticut are:

Advertisement
  • Number of independent community pharmacies: 120
  • Total sales: $507,360,000
  • Pharmacy sales: $470,322,720
  • Front-end sales: $37,037,280
  • Total number of employees: 1,428
  • Total prescriptions filled: 7,946,160
  • Part D prescriptions filled: 2,781,156
  • Medicaid prescriptions filled: 1,271,386

Patients suffer when pharmacies disappear, industry experts said.

“You can think of a closure as a disruption of care,” Guadamuz, who is an assistant professor at the UC Berkeley School of Public Health, told CNN last fall. “You had a routine: You would go to a pharmacy that was geographically accessible — ideally affordable — and was probably preferred by your health insurance plan. And then that pharmacy is no longer there.”

Pharmacy access is an important consideration in decisions about store closings, CVS spokesman Matt Blanchette told The AP, but the company also looks at local market dynamics, population shifts and competition from stores selling the same over-the-counter products, he said.

The Associated Press contributed reporting.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Connecticut

EX-CT man gets federal prison in sex crime case. He has to pay the victim $100K.

Published

on

EX-CT man gets federal prison in sex crime case. He has to pay the victim $100K.


A former Connecticut man and “American Ninja Warrior” champion was sentenced to more than 10 years in prison for receiving child pornography and enticement to travel for illicit sexual conduct, according to federal authorities.

Andrew Drechsel, 35, now of Saint Cloud, Florida, pleaded guilty on June 1, 2023, before Chief U.S. District Judge Renée M. Bumb in New Jersey to an information charging him with one count of receiving child pornography and one count of knowingly persuading, inducing, enticing and coercing a minor to travel interstate to engage in sexual activity for which the defendant can be charged with a crime, according to the office of U.S. Attorney Philip R. Sellinger.

Bumb imposed the sentence in Camden federal court, according to authorities. Bumb also sentenced Drechsel to 15 years of supervised release to pay $100,000 in restitution to the victim.

Authorities, citing documents in the case and statements made in court, said Drechsel lived in Hamden from 2014 to Nov. 8, 2019. The victim lived in New Jersey.

Advertisement

Law enforcement agents in 2019 searched one of Drechsel’s phones and “found images of child sexual abuse, including photos and videos of the victim when the victim was 14 and 15 years old,” authorities said in a statement. “Drechsel admitted that he originally met the victim in 2014 through his activities in the parkour community as an ‘American Ninja Warrior.’”

Authorities also said Drechsel “admitted texting the victim and discussing his plans to engage in sexual activity with the victim.”  Further, “at Drechsel’s urging, the victim traveled across state lines in July 2015 so that Drechsel could have sexual relations with the victim.”

Sellinger credited special agents of the FBI South Jersey Resident Agency, under direction of Special Agent in Charge of FBI Philadelphia Special Agent in Charge Wayne A. Jacobs, with the investigation leading to the sentencing. Sellinger also thanked the Camden County Prosecutor’s Office, the Burlington County Prosecutor’s Office; the Cherry Hill Police Department; the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut; special agents of the FBI New Haven Resident Agency; the Connecticut State’s Attorney’s Office, Hartford Judicial District; the Connecticut State’s Attorney’s Office, New Haven Judicial District; the Windsor Police Department; the Hamden Police Department; and special agents of the FBI Tampa Resident Agency.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending