Advocates: Allegheny County Jail violating solitary confinement ban

A referendum banning the use of solitary confinement at Allegheny County Jail took effect Dec. 5.

Yet, according to the Jail Oversight Board Segregation Report dated Wednesday and posted online, nearly 300 people were locked down in the jail throughout the month.

Many of those people spent the entire month segregated from the rest of the population, while others spent multiple days and weeks, the report said. For each of the 294 entries on the list, the only reason given for segregation was “safety.”

On Thursday, advocates for those incarcerated sent a letter to the members of the Jail Oversight Board alerting them to the jail’s failure to comply with the referendum, which also bans the use of chemical agents and the restraint chair.

“We are extremely concerned that since these bans took effect, there have been many reports from incarcerated individuals and others that ACJ has been flagrantly violating these prohibitions in a (manner) that jeopardizes the physical, psychological and emotional health and well-being of all those confined,” the letter said.

A message sent to the county Thursday was not returned. The Jail Oversight Board met late Thursday afternoon.

During the meeting, Warden Orlando Harper said the jail is in compliance with the referendum.

“We are fully compliant and have been fully compliant,” Harper said, claiming that the jail no longer has solitary confinement.

Instead, he used the term “segregation,” which he said is “for the safety and security of the institution and the inmates.”

Under the Allegheny County Code, which was amended by referendum in May, the only exceptions to the solitary confinement ban are a facility-wide lockdown; emergency use for “a period of 24 hours, but no longer than necessary, to determine whether that person should be isolated from other detainees and/or inmates for medical reasons or in order to ensure the safety of other detainees or inmates”; and if a person requests protective custody on their own.

Jaclyn Kurin, an attorney with the Abolitionist Law Center, said that the reason given for every instance on the report — “safety” — is not an approved exception.

“Incarcerated individuals have reported that their rec time was denied for non-safety reasons such as a person not wearing a mask properly, an elevator not working and a person screaming for medical attention,” Kurin said.

Bethany Hallam, a member of the Jail Oversight Board and an Allegheny County councilwoman, said she visited the jail last week. Although she was only on two pods during the five hours she was there, she said no one she talked with said they were receiving four hours out of their cells each day.

“The jail is very blatantly disrespecting and not complying with (the referendum),” Hallam said. “If you have a reason you’re putting someone in solitary, all you have to do is say why — and safety is not a reason why. Safety from what?”

Hallam challenged Harper’s claim of compliance during the meeting, noting that nowhere in the code does it reference an exception for “safety.”

He responded by saying that under the code chapter that bans solitary, “The warden can make the determination as to what the reason is.”

Specifically, the language in the code says, “No person may be held in emergency or short-term solitary confinement unless the warden has made and documented an individualized determination of the necessity for that person’s confinement.”

Hallam said that listing the word “safety” for 294 people is not an individualized determination.

The two argued back and forth repeatedly during the meeting.

“I fully disagree with you,” Harper responded. “We are compliant.”

In May, nearly 70% of Allegheny County voters approved the referendum to end the use of solitary confinement, the restraint chair and chemical weapons at the jail.

During the Jail Oversight Board meeting, Hallam also asked Harper about the ban on the use of the restraint chair and a motion passed by the board in September meant to ban the use of less-lethal weapons at the jail.

First Hallam asked if the jail has, instead of a restraint chair, strapped incarcerated people to a gurney. Harper said they have.

“We did use a gurney at one time to transport a hostile individual who would not walk to another location,” he said.

“So you’ve replaced the restraint chair with the same concept — just now using a gurney instead of the restraint chair?” Hallam asked.

Harper responded: “If we have a hostile inmate refusing to walk, we will continue to use a gurney to transport that hostile individual from one location to another.”

Once the person is transported, he said, they are removed from the restraints and gurney.

Hallam also asked Harper if officers were patrolling the jail carrying weapons that look like firearms — despite a ban on the practice by the board in September.

“We do have officers carrying special delivery devices,” Harper replied.

He went on to read the language of the motion that passed, which said, “Further, the Jail Oversight Board prohibits Allegheny County from bringing into the jail any shotguns, rubber bullets or other similar equipment or animals identified or described in any C-SAU training program until permission is granted by the Allegheny County Jail Oversight Board.”

Harper said, “We have not brought in any shotguns because we already had shotguns in the facility.”

“Come on, warden,” Hallam responded. “It’s clearly an action of bad faith.”

Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Elliot Howsie, who chaired the meeting and is newly appointed to fill the position previously held by President Judge Kim Berkeley Clark, interjected and asked Harper if he was in violation of the motion.

“I am not,” Harper said.

Hallam responded, “This just seems too absurd to me. I must be misunderstanding something. What are we going to just sit up here and let them lie to us? We’re not going to do anything about it?”

“What would you have us do?” Howsie asked. “Any suggestions you have? If you’d like to submit a recommendation, I’m more than happy to discuss it.”

No one else on the board responded.

Brandi Fisher, the president of the Alliance for Police Accountability, which pushed for passage of the referendum last spring, said she will now work to ensure compliance with it.

“We fought for more than words on a paper. We fought for the rights of community members in the jail to not be tortured with solitary confinement,” Fisher said. “The jail has many inhumane issues that need to be addressed … This should be a priority of everyone and especially to those in leadership positions responsible for how the jail operates.”

The letter, signed by nearly three dozen social justice groups and political leaders, asks for the Jail Oversight Board to enforce the referendum.

“The referendum was cleared by the county’s legal department, so any beef the warden has with the language, I’d love to hear it,” Hallam said.

The Alliance for Police Accountability has created a hotline for those incarcerated at the jail, or others, to report compliance problems. It is 412-708-5200.