An Illinois prisoner has accepted $2,500 to settle a lawsuit against Ameritech, in which he accused the telecommunications company of fraudulently and intentionally disconnecting phone calls made by prisoners.

Prisoner Johnnie Flournoy filed suit in state court in 2002. He alleged fraud and negligence against Ameritech, a prison phone service provider, for intentionally disconnecting his collect calls early in order to force a second call that would require another connection fee and surcharge.

The state court dismissed the lawsuit on the grounds that the Illinois Public Utilities Act grants the Illinois Commerce Commission exclusive jurisdiction over complaints concerning excessive rates or overcharges. The Third District Court of Appeal for Illinois, however, found the matter was a civil action based upon alleged fraud and negligence that resulted in multiple surcharges and connection fees, and held the circuit court had jurisdiction. [See: PLN, Dec. 2004, p.31].

The parties litigated the case for the next seven years, including another appeal and appellate ruling in favor of Flournoy. [See: PLN, Aug. 2009, p.37]. The eventual settlement provided that Ameritech, which is owned by the Illinois Bell Telephone Company, denied wrongdoing. Nonetheless the company agreed to pay $2,500 to settle the matter. Flournoy represented himself ...

Mel Motel: "Strong Families, Safe Communities" Sends Clear Message for Phone Justice

2012-11-15

The Campaign for Prison Phone Justice is a national effort challenging prison phone kickbacks and the U.S. Prison Telephone Industry. The campaign is jointly led by: Media Action Grassroots Network, Working Narratives, Prison Legal News and Participant Media as part of the social action campaign for Ava Duvernay's film Middle of Nowhere.

As the crowd chanted, "Fair rates! Now!" I felt warm despite the breeze that whipped through the courtyard outside the Federal Communications Office in Washington, DC. Around 75 people gathered from across state lines and political beliefs to rally for "Strong Families, Safe Communities." Put another way, we were all standing in person to urge the FCC to lower the cost of prison phone calls by taking action on the Wright Petition.

The rally was a mix of inspiration, encouragement, celebration and truth telling. On both ends of the rally, religious leaders led us in faithful call for an end to policies that victimize poor families. The crowd also joined the lovely-voiced singer Kenyatta Hardison in uplifting songs to open and close the gathering.

It was incredible to hear the remarks of prison phone justice ...

Over the past 22 years Prison Legal News has been represented by dozens of lawyers around the country in a variety of cases, mostly dealing with censorship and public records requests. We have met many if not most of our attorneys because they subscribed to PLN, based on their interest in criminal justice issues and the fact that they are generally litigating prison and jail cases. That was how we happened to meet Brian Barnard.

Brian was one of the very few civil rights lawyers in Utah. When jails in Utah and the Utah Department of Corrections censored PLN in the mid 1990s, Brian was the person we turned to for advice and then legal representation. He represented PLN in five separate censorship suits over the years – four against jails and one against the Utah DOC. Brian had successfully represented prisoners in various cases since the mid 1970s; he was often the attorney of last resort for citizens in Utah whose rights were violated by government officials.

I am saddened to report that Brian died in his sleep on September 4, 2012. While in many jurisdictions there are dozens if not hundreds of lawyers who are capable and willing ...

Ed. Note: In April 2011, Prison Legal News published a comprehensive cover story on the prison telephone industry based on two years of research into prison phone contracts, rates and kickbacks nationwide. This article provides a summary and update of issues related to the prison phone industry, including the Wright Petition, which remains pending before the FCC. See the Prison Phone Justice Campaign ad on page 25 for additional information.

Exorbitant phone rates make the prison telephone industry one of the most lucrative businesses in the United States today. The industry is so profitable because prison phone companies have state-sanctioned monopolistic control over the state prison markets,1 and the sole federal agency with authority to rein in prison phone rates nationwide has thus far failed to provide meaningful relief.

Prison phone companies are awarded monopolies through bidding processes in which they submit contract proposals to the state prison systems; in all but eight states, these contracts include provisions to pay “commissions”—in effect, kickbacks—in either the form of a percentage of revenue, a fixed up-front payment or a combination of the two.2 Thus, state prison systems have no incentive to select the telephone company that offers the lowest rates; rather, they ...

On April 5, 2011, a Texas state court issued a temporary injunction ordering the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) to provide telecommunications to hearing impaired prisoners using the Texas Relay Service (TRS).

Leslie Arrington, Janet Lock, Kathy Williams and Laura Beeman are Texas state prisoners who, with the assistance of the Texas Civil Rights Project (TCRP), filed a lawsuit in state court challenging the unavailability of telecommunications for hearing impaired prisoners. Aided by TCRP attorneys Abigail Frank and Scott Medlock, they filed a motion for a temporary injunction which the court granted.

The temporary injunction requires the TDCJ to immediately make TRS services available to hearing impaired prisoners so they can communicate with people on their approved lists under conditions similar to those applied to prisoners without hearing impairments.
The only exception is that hearing impaired prisoners must submit a written request to the warden or designee two hours in advance of the requested TRS phone call.

The TDCJ was also ordered to “investigate ways to implement the use of videophone technology to accommodate inmates with disabilities within TDCJ facilities.” See: Arrington v. Securus Technologies, Inc., 419th J.D. Court, Travis Co. (TX), Case No. D-1-GN-10-000515.

The TDCJ appealed, but ...

The Prison Phone Justice Campaign is gaining momentum nationally. As announced in last month’s issue, a number of organizations, including the Human Rights Defense Center (the parent organization of Prison Legal News) have launched a campaign to end the practice of price gouging prisoners and their families for the cost of phone calls.

Right now a critical issue is getting the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to act on the Wright Petition, which would cap interstate prison phone rates. If you and your friends, family members and supporters can call, write or e-mail the FCC, as described in the ad on page 21, that will let the FCC know this is an important issue affecting millions of prisoners and those who care about them.

In addition to organizing the Prison Phone Justice Campaign, we are also updating the information for all 50 states and the Bureau of Prisons with respect to their telephone contracts, the actual cost of prison phone calls, the kickbacks paid by phone companies, and who holds the contracts. We will report our progress in upcoming issues of PLN and will publish a comprehensive report on the topic in early 2013.

We have added almost a dozen new ...

by Matt Clarke

In 2007, when Texas became the last state in the nation to let prisoners make phone calls on a regular basis, the limit on phone usage was 120 minutes a month. [See: PLN, Nov. 2007, p.11]. Two years later the Texas Board of Criminal Justice (TBCJ) responded to requests by prisoners’ families and doubled the monthly phone minute allotment to 240. In 2011 the Texas legislature considered, but ultimately did not adopt, an amendment that would have increased the number of minutes to 480; regardless, the limit on phone usage was upped anyway.

Not surprisingly, Texas officials have not increased the number of phone minutes solely for the benefit of prisoners and their families, for whom phone calls are a primary means of communication. Rather, the reason for allowing additional phone minutes is strictly financial. The legislature needs to plug a large budget deficit and money from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) phone system is an attractive source.

Currently, phone calls from Texas state prisoners cost $.234/minute for debit in-state phone calls ($.26/minute for collect or prepaid) and $.387/minute for debit out-of-state calls ($.43/minute for collect or prepaid). While those rates are significantly less than ...

On November 30, 2011, a Missouri circuit court held that adding optional services to the state’s prisoner telephone contract without putting those services out for competitive bidding would render the contract void. The court found the current contract was valid, but to amend it to include the optional services would require the entire contract to be rebid.

From 2006 to 2011, Public Communications Services (PCS) provided phone services to more than 30,000 prisoners in the Missouri Department of Corrections (MDOC). The PCS phone system handled 12.1 million calls that totaled more than 117 million minutes in 2010. There are three methods by which prisoners can make calls: 1) debit calls, which are debited directly from the prisoner’s account; 2) pre-paid calls with accounts set up by friends and family members; and 3) collect calls that result in the accepting party being billed.

In December 2010, Missouri’s Office of Administration (OA), through its Director of Purchasing and Materials Management (DPMM), issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a new prison phone service provider following the expiration of the PCS contract in May 2011. Seven companies submitted acceptable responses: CenturyLink, Consolidated Communications Public Services, PCS, Securus Techonologies, Synergy Telecom Service Company/Telcomate, Talk ...

For the past 22 years, PLN has been at the forefront of reporting on the gouging of prisoners’ families by prisons, jails and the telecommunications industry as prisoncrats and corporations profit by charging families exorbitant phone rates for the ability to communicate with their incarcerated loved ones. PLN’s groundbreaking report on the prison phone industry last year – see our April 2011 cover story – has led to a growing movement that seeks real change regarding this issue. To date, we are the only news media organization to tackle this topic on a national level.

To end the injustice of unfair prison phone rates, the Human Rights Defense Center, the Center for Media Justice and Working Narratives have launched a national campaign to end the kickback “commissions” routinely provided to prisons and jails by prison phone companies. We have launched two websites, www.phonejustice.org and www.kitescampaigns.org/campaign/prison-phone-justice, where we have massive amounts of information on prison phone rates, contracts and corruption; these sites also include resources for people affected by prison phone rate gouging to tell their story and take action.

In March 2012 I was among a number of advocates on the topic of prison phone justice who met in Washington, ...

On October 14, 2011 the Iowa Supreme Court held that a prison telephone company did not commit a “cramming” violation by improperly billing a third party for fraudulent collect calls made by a prisoner.

Evercom Systems, Inc. provides phone services to more than 2,900 detention facilities nationwide, including the Bridewell Detention Center (Bridewell) in Bethany, Missouri.
On January 25, 2006, Evercom informed Iowa resident Ken Silver that on the previous day “over fifty dollars of collect calls had been accepted by his (Des Moines, Iowa) business line and that Evercom was placing a temporary block on his line.”

Silver denied accepting or having any knowledge of the calls. Evercom agreed to investigate and get back with him in 7-10 days. The next day, however, the company sent Silver a letter stating the charges would not be removed because “a thorough investigation” found no system deficiencies. Silver did not receive the letter because Evercom mailed it to an incorrect address; his local telephone company billed him $78.21 for the collect calls.

After several unsuccessful attempts to get Evercom to remove the charges, on February 27, 2006, Silver filed a complaint with the Iowa Attorney General’s office. Evercom quickly investigated and “concluded ...