Took it upon themselves to single out sex offenders for what they felt were well-earned beatings
After a week-long trial, Tory Kelly, 41, a former Pennsylvania prison guard, was convicted Friday on four counts -- felony intimidation of a witness and misdemeanor simple assault, official oppression and terroristic threats. He was acquitted on 10 other counts. Kelly, a correctional officer at the State Correctional Institution Pittsburgh, had taken it upon himself to personally punish an inmate because he was in prison for involuntary deviate sexual intercourse with a child. A number of other COs are also facing criminal charges and being sued for abusing prison inmates at SCI Pittsburgh.
From Tuesday’s PACOVILLA Corrections blog:
Bob Walsh says: “It’s part of Prison Guard 101, inmates are there as punishment, not to be punished. Those who don’t appreciate the difference shouldn’t have the job.”
Jeff ‘Paco’ Doyle says:
“Correctional Officers must repress the urge to oppress sex offenders.
We have all worked with officers who are unable or unwilling to suppress their disdain for sex offenders. Invariably, these officers make it a point to identify sex offenders–It is a safe bet they don’t do so in order to keep an eye out for those at-risk inmates.
Sadly, despite academy training that clearly prohibits doling out punishment, a handful of cretins manage to graduate without knowing the difference between a law enforcement officer and an enforcer. Tori Kelly is now the poster child for would-be enforcers.
Curtis Hoffman, another former SCI Pittsburgh CO testified Kelly tried to intimidate him to prevent his cooperation with investigators. He told the court he had witnessed other officers “singling out inmates” thought to be sex-offenders and asserted the the practice was “widely known” at the prison. Surely, if the practice was widely known at the prison, HQ must have heard a whisper or two?
Paco thinks we should hear what California’s new Secretary of Corrections Dr. Jeffrey Beard, the Pennsylvania Secretary of Corrections at the time, knew about what was clearly institutionalized brutality at SCI Pittsburgh and when he knew it. Which isn’t to say I think he is culpable or responsible. However, this happened on his watch – Due diligence demands he be asked to explain.”
And ‘Alley Cat’ says:
“This is why, apart from its frustrations and inanity, I agree with the need for a psych review in the background clearance process. People who were abused as children, especially sexually abused, or who’ve had their children become victims of such abuse, probably should not be allowed to hold this job without a much more thorough examination. It is very often that when officers commit crimes like this, there are hidden personal reasons behind what they do.
Why do inmates hate child molesters so much that one is living-dead if the walk the GP yard? Well, my research reveals that a god number of those in prison were once victims of abuse themselves. There must be a revenge element being met somewhere. “
No comments:
Post a Comment