Another incredibly informative article detailing court battles and concerns–and possibly uncovering a full-on conspiracy!–with the Idaho Department of Correction’s procurement of execution drugs appears to be making the Department uncomfortable. So uncomfortable, in fact, that the article’s title alone is grounds for immediate mail and messaging censorship, as found out today by our First Amend This! editor, the ever intrepid Patrick Irving Esq., who is unavailable for breeding but maturing like fine wine.
The following message, sent 1-18-22 over JPay, was ominously censored with no explanation:
Want to see something crazy?
“Cash buys, private flights, changing rules: How Idaho hides from execution oversight“
–Kevin Fixler, Idaho Statesman
And then try a search for “Is Director Josh Tewalt the Angel of Death?”
😀
This isn’t the first time transparency battles have been forbidden from discussion by the Powers That Be. For years we’ve taken issue with the censorship, misinformation and other creative means used by the Department to coverup misconduct.
Learn more by viewing “Exhausted Grievances In Summary (for legal and investigative purpose)” and our First Amend This! archives.
We also encourage you to shine YOUR light on THEIR lack of transparency by sharing relevant articles and personal stories wherever and whenever you can.
This has been a First Amend This! “F*** You.”
Come get some, Censorship!
UPDATE
1-26-22
Almost a week later, in response to an Inmate Concern Form questioning the Department’s reason for engaging in censorship, I finally received notice back from Investigations. It is their position that the contents of the message sent on 1-18-22 “advocates hatred” and “encourages violence.”
A grievance has been submitted. It reads as follows:
The problem is: A JPay message referring my contact to two published local news stories was censored for “advocating hatred” and “encouraging violence.” Both articles did neither. They presented legitimate concerns with IDOC transparency, specifically regarding their methods of execution. I wrote one of the articles myself and had no problem sending it out over JPay, because it encouraged a higher level of accountability, not hatred or violence.
I suggest the following solution for this problem: Release the email or make a case in detail as to how accountability seekers are advocates of hate. I will be happy to publish this grievance with all related articles as an exercise in courtesy and example of civil discourse.
—
I look forward to sharing the discussion that follows, but at the same time remain disappointed that the only way I am able to engage in civil discourse is by forcing my captors to play using forms.