From: "Political Prisoner News" <ppnews@freedomarchives.org>
Date: Thu, November 26, 2009
To: Friends and Supporters
Fr: A. Jalil Bottom
Re: Parole Denial
Dt: November 19, 2009
On 11/17/09, I sat before the parole board
comprised of Parole Commissioner Ludlow and
Commissioner Hagerty, also in the room were
facility parole officers A.J. Ruters and M.
Saben, with a stenographer recording the
proceedings. Commissioner Ludlow conducted the
hearing, reviewing my parole folder and the
record, placing no emphasis on any specific
area. I, of course, emphasized all of my
achievements, the tremendous level of supporters
in the country, including a victim impact
statement urging my release on parole, letters
from 2 San Francisco Supervisors, a letter from
NYC councilman, and a letter from the Honorable
Archbishop Desmond Tutu supporting my release on
parole. There were many letters from people of
different walks of life extolling my achievements
and exclaiming their support for my
release. More importantly and extraordinary
was the letter from Waverly Jones Jr., the son
of the victim in this case on behalf of his
family telling the parole board his family
forgave me and stated there could be no closure
for his family until I am released from prison.
The parole board ignored the overwhelming support
from the community for my release, and denied me parole.
I have come to the conclusion after this, my
fourth parole appearance, with essentially the
same reasons for denying me parole, that the
parole system is not a fair and impartial
decision making body. It is a political
institution with a law enforcement agenda.
Because it has a law enforcement agenda the
parole board is incapable of being fair and
impartial in cases where a police officer’s death is involved.
Therefore, in order to win release from prison on
parole it is necessary that progressive
supporters understand how this institutional
government bureaucracy operates in its self
interest. As a bureaucratic body part of the
Executive government, it is beholden to the
governor’s office and the state legislature. The
judiciary generally supports the law enforcement
agenda of the parole board. As an example, NYS
appellate Division for the Third Department
recently affirmed the decision of NYS Division of
Parole rescinding the original granting of parole
to a prisoner in a 1974 killing of a prisoner
after the PBA demonstrated their dissatisfaction
of the parole board’s original decision. The PBA
actively persuaded the victim’s survivor to file
a late negative impact statement. The court
ruled the importance of the victim impact
statement compelled a reversal of the original
granting of release. Here, we find an obvious
“double standard,” where a positive victim impact
statement was filed in my behalf and it was
ignored or disregarded because the victim’s
family is also Black and considered less
important in comparison to the self-interest of
the law enforcement agenda. For this “double
standard” to be rectified and to effect a
reversal of the parole decision it will be necessary to do the following:
1. We need to organize a coalition of
progressive folks willing and able to concentrate on this issue.
2. The religious / faith based community must
be brought on board in support of Archbishop
Desmond Tutu’s position on humanitarian grounds after 38 years in prison.
3. Elected officials must be challenged for
their refusal and failure to intervene and oppose
special interest groups of the PBA’s overwhelming
influence over the parole board—circumventing
court established sentences- and the
rehabilitative achievements of prisoners.
Specific elected officials must be targeted and
urged to take a public stand against the practices of the parole board.
4. Governor Patterson must be told his choice
of parole chairman and commissioners must reflect the desires of the
community.
The four above points are specific objectives
that need to be addressed in a uniform and
deliberate determination to effectuate change. If
there is not a significant increase in support
demanding my/our release, it will only be because
progressives continue to do the same things or
nothing expecting different results. Instead
they need to change their practices directly in
response to the objective political reality of
institutional repression and racism endemic of
the NYS prison and parole system.
As I process the appeal of the parole denial,
letters directed to both Gov. Patterson and NYS
Division of Parole Chair Andrea Evans must
continue. However, these letters need to be more
demanding and poignant. For example, Governor
Patterson needs to be told in no uncertain terms,
that because of his failure to release former BPP
members, and his failure to monitor and correct
the NYS Division of Parole adherence to former
Gov. Pataki’s parole policy denying release to
A-1 felons despite their rehabilitative
achievements, the progressive community will not
support his bid for re-election.
Governor Patterson needs to receive hundreds of
letters, faxes & phone calls making this
point--adamantly campaigning against him unless
he becomes responsive to the progressive
community’s desires and demands. This position
must be held in every borough through NYC, and
other elected officials should be taken to task
on this issue. Furthermore, a campaign should be
directed to elected officials, especially State
legislators, demanding the resignation of the
Chairwoman of the NYS Parole Board for continuing
the former Gov. Pataki’s parole policies and for
succumbing to the PBA’s pressure and
propaganda. We need to demand the resignation of
Andrea Evans, further demanding the appointment
of a chairperson reflecting the desires of our community.
This is “Power Politics” that will require the
powers that be take notice--and the strength of
the initiative will ultimately yield our success.
Yours in Struggle for Freedom
Jalil
Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
415 863-9977
www.Freedomarchives.org Questions and comments may be sent to
claude@freedomarchives.or
PDF
No comments:
Post a Comment