ISCC/IDOC ADMINISTRATORS THREATEN TO CONFISCATE LEGAL MATERIALS AND OTHER DATA - DUE PROCESS OF LAW IMPLICATED

In a January 31, 2023 memorandum recently made available to prisoners who use a facility-supplied laptop to access legal materials and files provided by state prosecutors, attorneys general and courts on electronic media (flash drives, DVDs, etc.), ISCC Deputy Warden McKay and (IDOC) Access to Courts Coordinator Sandi Frelly write, among other things, that "... Use of the laptop is restricted to only viewing legal materials. Any other use of the laptop may result in loss of data, materials, or use of the laptop."

Although on its face, placing these restrictions on a state-owned laptop, (known as 'legal laptops") seems reasonable, one must consider other matters involved before jumping to that conclusion.

First, although the state owns the computer, they refuse to allow (most) prisoners to purchase their own systems, so [we] must use the state-owned laptop. Second, in some situations, electronic files are the only media in which prisoners may receive their legal documents - and failure to allow prisoners to access these data could constitute constitutional violations. Finally, threatening confiscation and the [intentional] "loss" of data, or otherwise denying access to legal materials may also involve due process and constitutional/civil rights of prisoners. According to posted notices, staff are already (unconstitutionally) accessing attorney/client [privileged] data in these files.

When legal files (documents, audio/video recordings, etc.) are sent to the facility by courts, lawyers and others, they are often done so piecemeal. Associated files may be received on several different dates, from various sources, and in a number of formats. Often there is a need to culminate the data from or between various files/folders, and to annotate it - just as one would do with paper documents - to make the data make sense.

In but one example, I myself received over one thousand separate .pdf files - and while these files are [keyword] searchable, each file must be opened - individually - then searched. Copying each of these files into a [freeware] text program (such as Notebook, Wordpad or Open Office) then allows the entirety of the data to be searched within the single file, allow any duplicate data to be removed, and annotations to be entered and saved for future research.

Other than a couple of installed "reader" programs (which only allows some files to be read but not changed), programs which would allow the activities described have been removed from the legal laptops by staff [and inmates working for them], preventing virtually any organization or reorganization of legal materials in a manner that can be researched or evaluated within a reasonable or limited amount of time.

You see, the IDOC uses the philosophy that if prisoners are denied legal research materials, it will prevent (or certainly inhibit) the ability of prisoners to fight their cases, or bring new ones. To that end, the state refuses to provide legal research materials, and actively prohibits possession of many legal research materials which would provide "argument and authority" for prisoners to use in court filings, despite the fact that court filings in both the state and federal courts REQUIRE both argument and authority as prerequisites to prevent summary dismissal of claims.

Although the administrators' memorandum and restrictions on legal laptops are significant, many IDOC prisoners are allowed virtually unrestricted access to state-owned laptops (see ISCC EDUCATION DEPARTMENT RENEGES ON LAPTOP COMPUTER PROMISE - PATIENCE SEEMINGLY NOT ENOUGH on this site), as well as any number of undocumented programs, movies, videos, photos and other electronic media brought into the facility for (privileged) prisoners by paroled "mentors", volunteers, facilitators and others. The disparity between legal laptops and other state-owned, prisoner-issued laptops makes it clear that it is the legal content that makes the difference.

It's no secret that on New Years eve and New Years day (2023) thumb drives from an outside " volunteer" were given directly to [a] prisoner who has had a laptop in his cell for years - apparently with staff knowledge and tacit approval. One of the drives, containing photos, programs, movies and videos (most of which have not been seen on the institutional video channel - with many guaranteed never to be shown due to content/subject matter prohibited by standard operating procedures and policy) was surreptitiously slid under a cell door, with the other handed off in front of several other prisoners - and cameras - the next day.

These computers, data files (and drives) are to this day allowed to be maintained by these privileged few prisoners (in their cell, without staff supervision) under the guise of being associated with their job assignment(s) or associations with "national organizations". Too often, files on the thumb drives are deleted (after coying the files to a different media storage device) then new files of other data are sent out of the facility without staff inspection. The data on these uninspected thumb drives is often used by these prisoners to conduct business (i.e., make money) and perform other operations -sometimes for staff - from their prison cells.

The restrictions on the use of the legal laptops, certainly as compared with the allowances afforded the privileged few of the ISCC cannot be reconciled or justified, and will soon be at issue in the courts. Only through the Discovery process will the extent of the malfeasance be brought to light. (I can hear the paper shredders starting up even now...).