Colorado Independent
Evan Ebel, suspected murderer of Prisons Chief Tom Clements, filed a
series of grievances with the Department of Corrections shortly before
his release from prison that document his concerns about transitioning
directly from years in solitary confinement to the free world.
The
'illegible' DOC grievance filed by Evan Ebel on 12 December 2012,
asking if he shouldn't receive some transition training from solitary
confinement before being released directly onto the streets.
“Do you have an obligation to the public to reacclimate me, the
dangerous inmate, to being around other human beings prior to being
released and, if not, why?” Ebel asked in three formal grievances, each
almost verbatim, filed in the months before he walked free in January.
Ebel’s concerns fell on the deaf ears of prison officials who,
documents suggest, seemed to care less than Ebel himself about the
volatility and threat posed by a prisoner who had a history of
threatening and injuring prison guards. Instead, the officials to whom
the grievances were addressed focused on Ebel’s failure to dot the I’s
and cross the T’s in his paperwork. They repeatedly found cause to
dismiss them. Ebel “failed to follow the grievance procedure,” they
wrote, and his messy handwriting failed to stay within the lines of the
forms.
In fact, the department didn’t answer Ebel’s final complaint until he
already had been set free. The DOC wrote its final grievance rejection
letter on February 11, two weeks after it had released Ebel on parole.
The letter gives a glimpse into his frustrations with the prison system,
what Ebel saw as its soullessness and counter-productivity. Earlier
grievances show Ebel felt those conditions were crushing his humanity.
It’s unclear if Ebel ever really expected to receive a considered
response to his anxious questions. What he got was bureaucrateze.
“In this instance, you have written two lines of narrative into many
of the lined spaces intended for just one line of narrative,” Grievance
Officer Anthony A. DeCesaro wrote in a response dated February 11. “This
resulted in a great deal of your grievance becoming illegible. So, when
you claim in the Step 2 that the Step 1 response didn’t read your
grievance perhaps it was because the Step 1 was the most part illegible.
In addition, you claim that you are just looking for answers to
questions about policy, Grievance Procedure is not the appropriate
method for debating policy questions nor is it designed to address the
policy questions you have posed. Please review AR 1350-03 Constituent
Services Coordinator for more information about directing your
concerns.”
An
almost identically worded, more legible grievance submitted by Ebel 11
January 2013, just days before his release from prison.
Ebel, 28, was originally sentenced to eight years for robbery, then to four more years for assaulting a prison guard.
Authorities believe he shot and killed Denver pizza delivery driver
Nathan Leon on March 17 and Prison Chief Clements on March 19, before
being killed on March 21 during a police chase and shootout in Texas.
The Colorado Independent has reported accounts by Ebel’s
friends and former prison mates who say his experience in long-term
solitary confinement exacerbated his mental health problems and enraged
him about a department he felt had eroded his ability to interact with
people, let alone survive outside
prison.
Through a freedom of information request to the Corrections Department,
The Independent
this week obtained 51 pages of grievances Ebel filed between 2006 and
2013, during which he served most of his time in “administration
segregation” or “ad seg” – the prison system’s term for solitary
confinement. That entails living alone 23 hours a day in a concrete cell
the size of two queen sized mattresses. In Colorado State Penitentiary —
the prison where Ebel served most of his time — prisoners’ 24th hour is
also spent alone, exercising in an indoor cage with no direct sunlight
and only a small window for fresh air.
In that context, human contact consists mainly of passing a food tray
through a slot in their door three times a day, being shackled by
prison guards on the way to and from the exercise room and sending notes
to other prisoners using, among other methods, synchronized toilet
flushing to move the plastic wrapped letters up and down between floors.
Family visits in a booth divided by heavy glass are allowed, though in
many cases infrequent, given limited visiting hours and the 114 miles
between CSP and metro Denver. Mail is a lifeline to the outside world.
But that, too, is often curtailed by a curiously high rate of letters
that don’t make it in or out of the prison.
For Ebel, “offender #125083,” as for about 800 other state prisoners
still living in solitary confinement, “ad seg” is an existence that cuts
off virtually all social stimulation, normal conversation and human
interaction. It’s marked by an enduring sameness that, study after study
has shown, exacerbates mental illness, atrophies social abilities and
can beat down the psyche with hopelessness or spite.
Some prisoners cope by taking up meditation or religious practice.
Some read and reread as much as possible, given the limited number of
books they’re allowed in their cells. Some tune into TV and radio, if
and when they’re allowed those privileges. Some draw or compose songs
that nobody hears them sing. Some do push-ups. Some pace in circles.
Some incessantly write letters to relatives, friends, friends of
friends, politicians, clergy members, journalists and anyone else they
hope will open their envelopes.
Instead of using violence or smearing feces on the wall – two other
ways Ebel used to voice his frustrations in isolation — filing formal
grievances is the prison system’s suggested method of voicing concerns,
big and small.
Ebel’s grievances were well written in relatively neat penmanship
that degenerated near the time of his release. They generally were
succinct and polite — usually ending in “thanks” or even an underlined “
thanks” – but they were also demanding and at times idiosyncratic.
The subjects of his grievances included problems sending and
receiving mail and DOC’s decision not to let a woman visit him on
grounds that her driver’s license wasn’t valid. Ebel complained about
what he called inadequate medical treatment for a knee problem, tremors
and spasms, intestinal issues, a colostomy bag and a persistent eye
infection. He grieved that the prison censored his “Resistance”
magazines, a publication popular among white supremacists. And he
decried the confiscation of his literature about Asatru, a faith based
on Northern European white lineage that Ebel listed as his religion. He
complained about the cost of canteen items, and the lack of food
products with protein for sale to prisoners. He grieved about his
laundry going missing.
In 2006, Ebel was agitated about problems with the lighting in his cell.
“I have repeatedly contacted maintenance through the pod staff about
having my light fixed. They responded and informed me that an
electrician needs to come fix it. The electrician came stayed in my
house for 5 minutes and deemed the problem static electricity. The
problem lies in the fact that every time I turn my light off it comes
back on, therefore keeping me up at night. The button also gets stuck
and when I turn the top light on and cover it in an attempt to get some
sleep my desk light comes on. The remedy I am requesting is that they
fix it. If so, I’d really appreciate it,” he wrote in August of that
year.
Five weeks later, he filed another grievance about the maintenance workers who repaired his light.
“They put their toolbox and other assorted things on my bed therefore
leaving grease stains on my blanket and sheets. This is extremely
disrespectful and could easily be a source of conflict between me and
staff. I recommend that from now on you tell maintenance to either put
their toolbox and tools on the ground or to fold my mattress in half and
place them on the concrete slab. Thank you.”
The official response was sensitive to his frustration.
“Talked to inmate. Told him maintenance was sorry and it wouldn’t
happen again. Also told him I would talk to the staff in the shop about
laying tools on the bunk,” it read.
Also in 2006, Ebel complained about “the fact that the toilet brush
and the hand brush we use to sweep our floors are in constant contact
with each other and rarely if ever cleaned.”
“This is extremely unsanitary,” he wrote. “You wouldn’t clean your
own floors with a broom that’s been saturated in dirty toilet water and
exposed to a feces smeared toilet brush and I ask that you don’t let us
suffer the same indignity. Thanks.”
His grievance was denied on grounds that the “cleaning kits are cleaned with the cleaning agent Virex when required.“
“Staff is aware of the cross contamination issues and the individual
compartments of the cleaning kit separate the toilet brush from the rest
of the kit,” he was told.
By the end of 2006, Ebel’s grievances show he was becoming
increasingly agitated. He complained about the satellite “super shuffle”
radio programming repeating the same set of songs.
“Our lives are monotonous enough in CSP where we’re locked down 23
hours a day and basically do the same thing over and over again. The
least you could do is give us a little variety of music to listen to so
we could leave here with a small degree of our sanity intact,” he wrote
in December of that year. “Also you continue to take privileges from us
for no reason at all and then wonder why we act up. Well here’s your
answer. If you could please revert to the old radio station schedule
we’d most surely appreciate it. Thanks.”
That same month, Ebel wrote a grievance complaining about the split
lip, bloody nose, four stitches above his right eye, and abrasions on
his face, head and body caused by prison guards restraining him after
they say he hit one of their colleagues. He also complained about his
$10 copay to be stitched up.
“It doesn’t matter what my alleged actions are there’s nothing that justifies assaultive behavior by staff,” he wrote.
DOC flatly rejected his complaint: “The situation you reference
involves you slipping the handcuffs and attempting and striking staff in
the face. Your actions warranted an immediate response from staff so
that they could protect themselves from your assaultive behavior. Staff
lowered you to the ground and controlled you. Your injuries were
incurred based on these actions. Staff used reasonable restraint in
dealing with you, considering your ill intent to harm the officer. Based
on these facts, your grievance is denied.”
Ebel’s use of the grievance process took a turn in November 2012
when, in handwriting that was remarkably smaller and more frenetic than
before, he started asking broader questions of the DOC. He apparently
had been released from, then sent back to solitary confinement after a
fight with another prisoner involving a knife.
“It’s important that you understand I’m not grieving the ad seg level
review…nor your decision regarding my own level review but rather have a
few questions regarding your general policy,” he wrote.
He wanted to know the department’s position on self-defense.
“I have a basic and undeniable right as a human being to defend my
life. If I’m being attacked with a knife am I just supposed to lie
down…?” he asked.
He wanted to know how the DOC justified his placement back in
solitary confinement for gang activity when he said the department
couldn’t prove any active gang involvement.
And he wanted to know why the department was about to release him
directly out of solitary confinement without preparing him for human
contact.
The DOC didn’t answer, dismissing his questions “because the
grievance procedure cannot be used to review convictions or segregation
placement….”
Ebel wasn’t satisfied. On December 12, 2012, he filed a follow-up
complaint, starting with “Clearly you didn’t actually read my
grievance.” He went on to pose the same three questions to the
department.
DOC’s response read as follows: “A Warden review was conducted on
October 24, 2012. The decision at that time was that you be retained in
Administrative Segregation. It has been your continued negative behavior
that has resulted in your retention in your current status. You have
been (sic) multiple opportunities to progress as we strive for you to be
given opportunities to succeed. I do not see a requested remedy,
however, if you are requesting release from Administrative Segregation I
need you to understand that AR850-4, Grievance Procedure, section IV.D
states, 2. This grievance procedure may not be used to seek review of
any of the following: a. Code of Penal Discipline convictions,
administrative segregation placements, Parole Board decisions, and
decisions of the Reading Committee have exclusive appeal procedures. b.
Classification is entirely at the discretion of the administrative head
and classification committee of each facility.”
Ebel kept at it, filing yet another follow-up grievance on January 11, 2013.
“Again, now for the third time what I’m looking for here are answers to 3 questions,” he wrote.
Among those questions, again, was the issue of his forthcoming
release from prison without step-down programs preparing him for social
interaction and life beyond prison walls.
“Do you have an obligation to the public to reclimatize ‘dangerous’
inmates to being around other human beings prior to releasing them into
society after they have spent years in solitary confinement? If not,
why? The remedy I’m requesting is answers to these 3 questions. Thank
you.”
DOC’s non-answer about Ebel’s messy handwriting was written two weeks
after his release. By then, he was living in Commerce City and
confiding in his friend, parolee and former CSP inmate Ryan Pettigrew,
about his struggles adjusting to regular social interaction, handshakes,
eye contact and other aspects of life outside isolation. Text messages
from Ebel show he was anxious about his freedom and tempted by the urge
to ease that anxiety through violence.
“…im just feeling peculiar & the only way i know i know to remedy
that is via use of ‘violence’ even if that ‘violence’ be something as
petty & inconsequential as a fist fight which id prefer be with
someone i can trust as opposed to some renegade civilian who odds are
will tell,” Ebel texted Pettigrew in mid-February, just as his grievance
officer was citing problems with his penmanship in belatedly dismissing
his concerns about his release.
A month later, Ebel is believed to have gunned down the DOC director at his front door in Monument.
Since Clements’ murder, much has been reported that Ebel was released
four years early because of a clerical error failing to log his
additional sentence for the attack on a prison guard. Questions also
have been raised about why Ebel’s sentence was cut for participating in
rehabilitation programs that he didn’t complete. In Clements’ honor,
state lawmakers are contemplating measures to prevent such errors and
loopholes in the future.
What’s not slated for consideration in the remaining 12 days of the
legislative session is one of Clements’ top priorities: to improve
rehabilitation services and end DOC’s practice of letting prisoners walk
straight from isolation onto the streets. Clements wanted step-down
programs and longer transition periods instead of releasing prisoners
directly from solitary confinement.
“You have to ask yourself the question – How does holding inmates in
administrative segregation and then putting them out on a bus into the
public, [how does that] square up?” Clements said in an interview last
year. “We have to think about how what we do in prisons impacts the
community when [prisoners] leave. It’s not just about running the prison
safely and securely. There’s a lot of research around solitary and
isolation in recent years, some tied to POWs and some to corrections. My
experience tells me that long periods of isolation can be
counter-productive to stable behavior and long-term rehabilitation
goals.”
1212 Mariposa St. #6, Denver, CO 80204. 303-825-0122 www.ccjrc.org
1212 Mariposa St. #6, Denver, CO. 80204, www.ccjrc.org 303-825-0122
