GALE NORTON - TOO CRUEL TO RULE! From: Keith Hunter [
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] © 2001
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 10:01 PM
Subject: Request for Senate Inquiry of Gale Norton Re: Request for Senate
Inquiry of Gale Norton To the United States Senate and Interested American
People: I am writing in regards to the upcoming confirmation hearings of
Gale Norton for the Cabinet position of Secretary of the Department of
Interior (DOI) of the United States. I have deliberated long and hard, and
had many discussions with those close to me, regarding what I am releasing
due to concerns of retaliation from Gale Norton and members of the Republican
Party in the State of Colorado. I am on parole from the State of Colorado and
the content of this information concerns my experiences and knowledge of Gale
Norton derived from the time I was incarcerated in the Colorado Department of
Corrections (CDOC). Myself and others endured severe repercussions from the
State of Colorado the of what I am about to divulge was originally released
and contested in state and federal courts and political processes, and due to
this experience the reality of retaliatory actions by Gale Norton and her
political allies are not unfounded. My experience with Gale Norton began when
she was first elected as the Attorney General for the State of Colorado. At
the time I was a plaintiff and a class representative in a United States
District Court case, Nolasco v. Romer, which had been filed in the United
States District Court in Colorado by the American Civil Liberties Union
(ACLU) and the ACLU National Prison Project from Washington DC. I was also a
law clerk in the Legal Access Program operating under the Ramos Consent
Decree, a previous class action settlement in prison conditions in Colorado
in the U. S. District Court Colorado, as well as being an Inmate
Representative pursuant to the Marioneaux Consent Decree also from the U. S.
District Court Colorado. In 1992 the Colorado Supreme Court determined that I
was qualified to testify as an expert witness in Colorado prison and parole
board regulations. It is my belief that the actions and policies of Gale
Norton's tenure and reign of the Colorado Attorney General's Office and that
office's relationship to the issues litigated and settlement processes on
behalf of the State of Colorado are germane to the consideration of her
confirmation as Secretary of the Department of Interior. Based upon my
observation and experience of Gale Norton's operation of the Attorney
General's Office of the State of Colorado, I believe it imperative that her
confirmation to this highly responsible position of trust and duties be
denied. This letter is intended to be demonstrative but not exhaustive and
these incidents (as well as similar incidents) are recorded in public and
agency records and in files of cases which I had first hand participation in,
was personally aware of, and/or witnessed. I am willing to assist in any
manner in to facilitate gathering this documentation of what I am submitting
for your review.
Human Rights Issues Gale Norton's Office denied that it is cruel and unusual
punishment to handcuff prisoners naked to the bars of their cells and use
stun guns to testicles for "behavior modification". Gale Norton's office
refused to comply with discovery orders and withheld documentation which
showed this practice existed and it was only after obtaining confidential
documents and releasing this information to the Aspen Times which printed
this information was the sadistic practice ended. Gale Norton's Office was
totally and completely aware of this practice and publicly and in court
denied that it existed and/or in the alternative that it was constitutionally
protected activities for the State of Colorado. Although this practice of
police brutality was documented by the State of Colorado's own documents
there were never any suspensions or other disciplinary or criminal actions
taken by Gale Norton's Office. During the phase immediately before the trial
was set before the US District Court in Colorado on the Nolasco case the
CDOC, in consultation with Gale Norton's Office, opened the Limon
Correctional Facility which was statutorily mandated to be operated as a
Level III facility. However, to avoid contempt of court proceedings pending
before the US District Court for non-compliance with the Ramos Consent
Decree, the CDOC opened Limon prematurely and operated this facility in
violation of statutory staffing requirements and as a Level IV facility. Gale
Norton's Office defended these actions of statutory violations of the CDOC
and the result was a total lockdown of the facility following an incident
provoked by the DOC which was then attempted to be depicted as a racial riot
by the CDOC and AG office public relations. During the following six months
five prisoners died in that prison. Functioning in my capacity as an
individual, Inmate Representative, and Law Clerk I filed a petition into the
Colorado Supreme Court requesting application of a new statute created for
Conflict and Dispute Resolution. The very day I filed this action the CDOC
was actively engaged in the literal beatings of numerous prisoners, at least
one of which suffered a paralyzed face as a result of being brutalized in his
cell. The Director of Legal Affairs, working for the Attorney General Gale
Norton, instructed the contract attorney I was working for to fire me from my
job for the "unauthorized" filing of a petition seeking redress from the
courts. This contract attorney refused to fire me based upon the position
that the right to petition the courts for redress of grievances was a
constitutionally protected right and that it was illegal for the State of
Colorado to censor prisoner petitions to the court seeking relief. This
attorney was immediately fired by the Gale Norton's Attorney General's
Office. This attorney was further instructed that to obtain her contract
payment that she had to obtain a list of all names and confidential legal
assistance case details of all prisoners that were accessing the Legal Access
Program. I was instructed to supply such information and when I refused to
comply due to attorney client/privileges being breached between the Attorney
General's Office and inmates accessing the law library this attorney's
payment was withheld and she had to file a civil action against the State of
Colorado to receive her payment. I was scheduled to testify in this case
since it was my refusal to submit a list of names and confidential materials
which triggered this retaliation by Gale Norton's Office. On the day I was
being interviewed in pre-trial preparations two weeks before the trial was to
begin Gale Norton's Office settled the case. A whistleblowers audit four
years following this sequence of events made the findings that the State of
Colorado had knowingly violated statutory requirements for security ratings
and staffing levels. Gale Norton's Office was fully participatory in and
actively engaged in a cover-up to prevent public knowledge, judicial review,
and/or knowledgeable and possible corrective legislative action. The
Secretary of the DOI is responsible for law enforcement activities of federal
agencies such as the BLM, National Park Service, and the Bureau of Indian
Affairs (BIA). Censorship and retaliation against licensed attorneys,
obstructing access to constitutionally protected avenues of redress, and
documented instances of police brutality which were never prosecuted or
investigated by her office, is not appropriate for appointment to head the
DOI.
Health Care Delivery Gale Norton's Office denied that it was deliberately
indifferent for a prisoner who had major back surgery, who was then moved
back to prison from the state hospital four days after surgery and denied any
and all antibiotics and other medications which had been prescribed by state
hospital doctors, who then suffered to the extent that it required a Federal
Court Order to have the prisoner taken to the doctor, which then state
hospital doctor stated that had it not been for the court order the prisoner
would have died from blood poisoning. Gale Norton's Office denied it was a
constitutional right for adequate health care delivery of medical and dental
services from a delivery system which was staffed and implemented for 540
individuals which had grown to serve over 1200 with no increase in space,
equipment, or medical staffing. Waiting lists of over one year were common
for routine and emergency dental care, instances of broken bones being
X-rayed by dental X-ray machines, and a marked increase in rates of TB
exposures were documented from state records. Gale Norton's Office not only
denied this violated constitutional and state obligations and/or medical
standards, but obstructed justice and corrective action by refusing to comply
with discovery orders and defended DOC employees destroying and hiding
evidence to prevent solutions to this grossly inadequate health care issue.
Gale Norton's Office denied that it was deliberately indifferent for a State
Hospital Doctor to prescribe treatment based the doctor's reliance upon state
documents of medical services provided by the DOC which were knowingly not
being provided by the DOC and ultimately Gale Norton's Office. Gale Norton's
Office admitted said equipment existed but not accessible due to not being
staffed, but no notification or other arrangements were made to return the
prisoner to the State Hospital where treatment could have been made available
for a degenerative crippling arthritic condition. The Doctor at the State
Hospital testified that had he known the DOC was not able to provide the care
prescribed the patient would have been provided the necessary care at the
State Hospital. Notwithstanding this information, Gale Norton's Office
persisted in denial of the medical treatment needed and maintained the
position that the patient had no right to access adequate medical care
although that care was funded by statute from legislative intent that such
care be provided demonstrated by the purchase of said medical equipment and
funding for trained medical staff to operate such treatment methods. An
internal "whistleblower" audit three years following this incident showed the
State of Colorado was deliberately operating in violation of statutory
staffing requirements with no accountability for non-compliance with
statutory staffing levels. Although Gale Norton's Office was totally aware of
this situation prior to the audit, absolutely no action was taken by her
office and in fact her office vigorously defended against all attempts to
enforce adequate staffing and adequate health care delivery. The Secretary of
the Department of Interior is responsible for oversight of the BIA, which
include delivery of Indian Health Services, and as such Gale Norton's
demonstrated positions regarding adequate health care delivery is an
endangerment to the health and lives of Indian People who depend upon IHS for
health care services.
Environmental Issues Gale Norton's Office denied that the State of Colorado
had any legal obligation to cease practices of dumping raw untreated sewage
into Rifle Creek from the Rifle Correctional Center into the Colorado
Division of Wildlife's Rifle Creek Wildlife Refuge. In a separate incident,
Gale Norton's Office denied that the State of Colorado had any legal
obligation to cease practices of dumping raw sewage and open pit dumping of
toxic materials onto the drainage of the Arkansas River from the Buena Vista
Correctional Facility. Gale Norton's Office's position was that the State of
Colorado had no compliance obligations to any local, state, or federal laws
based such laws being inapplicable to state owned properties and/or
facilities. Although it was proven by independent local community citizens of
the State of Colorado that the sewage discharges were in fact routine, and
that the State of Colorado had failed to operate sewage treatment facilities
with licensed qualified technicians, no actions were taken by Gale Norton's
Office to correct these situations and in fact her office obstructed at every
opportunity any and all investigations which could have led to the Colorado
General Assembly having factual evidence to base legislative funding to
correct the environmental damages being done by the State of Colorado. As
part of the duties of the Secretary of Interior, advising Congress of facts
and information pertinent to Congressional actions is required. Gale Norton
has proven, in many instances, where she used her position of trust as
Attorney General of Colorado to obstruct investigations and fact findings
which were critical to the Colorado General Assembly being able to make
responsible and fully informed decisions. Based upon her office's practices
and actions, Gale Norton's obstruction of information in regards to
environmental damages is a detriment not only to the environment, but to the
abilities of elected representatives to be able to make timely,
knowledgeable, and relevant decisions in the law making process.
Native American Freedom of Religion and Sacred Site Protection In 1991 the
Colorado General Assembly unanimously passed legislation granting "freedom of
religion" to Native American prisoners. The internal opposition from state
employees to the use of traditional spiritual practices was immense, and
period of negotiations between representatives of the Native American
Spiritual Community and the State of Colorado began. Gale Norton's Office
totally refused to investigate or take action on numerous documented
instances of racial and religious discrimination by State of Colorado
employees. Gale Norton's Office obstructed investigations into the
"disappearance" of a legislative appropriation which was to go toward
establishing the affirmative obligation of the State of Colorado encountered
by passing of this state statute, later reflected by the United States
Congress Act in regards to the Restoration of Native American Religious
Freedom and Protection Act. Gale Norton's Office defended the bulldozing of a
sweat lodge by the State of Colorado. As Secretary of Interior among Gale
Norton's duties will be the oversight of the BIA as well as Public Lands
which contain Sacred Site designation for American Indian Tribes. Gale Norton
has demonstrated her indifference to Native American Religious Freedom and
her defense of racial and religious discrimination practices by governmental
employees. Gale Norton's appointment to this position is a detriment to the
rights to freedom of religion, protection from racial discrimination, and
protection of sacred sites.
Conclusion I also realize that what I offer here may be judged by the fact
that I myself was in prison. I daily live with the prejudice that comes from
many in regards to how prisons and crime are viewed in this society. I have
presented nothing in this release that cannot be verified by existing
documents a
