July 21, 2023

Parts of the hearing yesterday keep replaying in my mind. I had no idea what I was walking into. Preparing my novice motions was such a waste of paper. One motion was to change venue after multiple guards told me how foolish it was to challenge the word of staff. The second motion was to include the video that Jander said was "out" as grounds to have an adequate record for appeal consideration. When I objected to the supervisor, Jessie Schneider, about the video not being included resulted in the first response about how "this is not court." The third motion I prepared was a dismissal for inadequate notice. Dropping the Adult Conduct Report on me about 5:30pm and giving me fifty minutes to scramble for a legal defense with my hands shackled together on the prisons least functional keyboard was bogus. The fourth motion I wrote was for the insufficiency of the complaint since it had unreasonable and unverifiable claims. Everything I wrote was summarily refused without review. The whole thing was such a farce.

At one point Schneider did look at a video of unit 11. I was not allowed to see it. I imagine because it showed fans in the hallway. Big, not quiet ones. He did say that the librarian went to unit 11 multiple times. She had testified that she went to get butter from the unit. She claimed she went from her office to unit 11 directly, which is not true. She sent me back and went and ambushed me in the unit 11 entry where cameras capture the least. If male staff set up a trap for a female inmate. I wonder if it would be treated differently. Jander even explained to me that she reviewed the video for the law library and saw her dismiss me but it was deemed irrelevant to the allegations. It was so obviously orchestrated by her, especially with her testimony, that I can't understand why reconsideration was not imposed. Or even that Jander or the supervisor she viewed the video with not allowed to offer some truth to the matter. "I don't have to disclose that." Her bitter retort when I was only asking for some honesty to help clear my name. It was just so resentful. Spiteful. Then was the second "This is not court" plus "she is not a lawyer" and some other stuff about how it all works differently. At one point Schneider was even explaining how nothing really matters and that his only interest is determining if the allegations were possible. Probability was not part of his determination. I argued that his reasoning means that all inmates are then under the potential threat of any guard at any time, since they know where surveillance is deficient. I said there needs to be more than possibility, especially when there is evidence that contradicts the plaintiffs testimony or if we call the other witnesses back they can provide follow up questions for the record. His response to that? File an appeal.

July 12, between 2:15pm and 2:35pm, law library surveillance shows the librarian going to law library and inmates getting up to leave. July 17, between 1:15pm and 1:35pm, Jander consults with me at Unit 18, cell 14. That meeting is interrupted by delivery of my "allowables" after the four day discipline would have already expired. July 19, between 5:00pm and 6:30pm, I am served the Adult Conduct Report and given less than an hour to learn about DOC 303 disciplinary procedure and research case precedent about the interpretation and application of the policies. Plus, this was after I guessed at what questions would need to be asked and gave those to Katrina Jander. 

July 20, about 11:15am, I am taken to a hearing almost completely unprepared and find out my advocate is compliant with whatever supervision wants to railroad me about. And the fake testimony is just infuriating. Now, tonight, July 21, I get a copy of the determination and see how crooked the hearing really was. Schneider did not even note her response to one of the questions being "I'm hard of hearing." She also claimed I asked her to write me in "county jail" but I wasn't served with a warrant  for going to jail until eight days after the incident and there was no mention of which county jail. Why? Because I didn't say that! I said I was "staffed" and going to be "transported" or "transferred." I didn't say anything about being attracted to anyone. Gah! It's so frustrating! Oh, and it is considered a major violation too, by the way which means they consider it so serious that it will affect, or could effect how I am classified and my opportunities to get work, and anything else. So, it isn't just four days of punishment, that is really eleven days that they try to say it isn't. Its a turd in the whole punch bowl of prison life because I ignored the advances of a woman who is... not attractive. The paperwork says I "created a risk of serious disruption at the facility" but it was her that ran to two other officers to turn whatever she thought she heard (or didn't) into a disruption. My gut feeling about the whole thing is that she keeps her job so the sexless existence of inmates will keep eyes pasted to her shirt so tight that her curved spine and rib cage make me think about zombies. I think Schneider's determination is more of an admission that he would be willing to sample the goods. Four days of discipline after I have already done seven of the same conditions that they claim are not discipline? This is so crooked. And I got covid swabbed today so I almost definitely going somewhere on Monday.