In our 1999 publication, "Red Onion State Prison: Super-Maximum Security Confinement in Virginia," we reported the excessive and unnecessary use of force at Red Onion. Although the report focused primarily on the use of shotguns and electronic stun devices, we also noted inmate claims that staff placed them in five point restraints as punishment or retaliation for misconduct and kept them restrained for arbitrarily determined periods of time. The Department of Corrections issued a blanket denial of the reports of abuse and, to our knowledge, never initiated any investigation into use of force policies and practices at Red Onion. In the middle of this year, we began to receive a new surge of inmate complaints about the abusive use of five point restraints.

Many, although not all, of the inmates subjected to five point restraints this year who have written to Human Rights Watch were accused either of masturbating publicly or deliberately exposing their genitals. Major Rochester Greenville, former chief of security at Red Onion, reportedly told one inmate that staff were putting men in five point restraints as a form of "behavior modification" designed to curtail inmates from exposing their genitals to female staff.

While Human Rights Watch recognizes the state's authority to discipline inmates for inappropriate conduct in violation of prison rules, such discipline cannot take the form of placement in five point restraints -- a severe use of force that, when imposed as punishment or unnecessarily is abusive and degrading. Both the U.S. Constitution and international human rights law prohibit corporal punishment. In addition, human rights standards contained in international treaties ratified by the United States and binding on state officials prohibit cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment of prisoners.

According to widely accepted correctional standards, five point restraints are a use of force that is warranted only in extreme, emergency circumstances, e.g., when an out-of-control inmate poses a serious risk of injury to himself or others, and when other types of restraint are ineffective. If the circumstances require an inmate to be strapped down, the period of immobilization should be for as short a time as possible and with frequent breaks. The information we have seen suggests staff at Red Onion have ignored these basic standards.

For example, one inmate wrote to us that he was strapped down because "he was at the toilet urinating when the nurse came to my cell." Whether the exposure of his genitals to the nurse was deliberate or inadvertent, his conduct did not place anyone in imminent risk of physical danger or otherwise present an emergency for which five point restraints would be warranted. It is telling that in upholding the warden's denial of the inmate's grievance about being placed in restraints, the regional director stated that information he had "revealed that [the inmate was] put down for being a possible threat to the staff"(emphasis added). This is a manifestly inadequate basis for subjecting an inmate to prolonged immobilization.

Red Onion records sent to us by the inmate indicate he was restrained for 50 hours with only two documented breaks to eat and use the toilet. According to the inmate, "When I was strapped down on that bed and after so long I couldn't hold my bladder and urinated on myself. I laid in my own piss, it came all down my chest, was in my head, and I couldn't clean my self up til they let me up." After so many hours with his arms secured over his head, when he was released from the restraints "it felt like if someone were to touch my arm it would snap in two."

Another inmate wrote to you in June about the abusive use of five point restraints. In his letter - a copy of which he sent to us - this inmate asserted that being restrained twenty-four hours with his arms pulled back over his head and his shoulders immobilized by a chest strap caused "the shoulder joints and muscles…to burn and ache extremely - many times spasmodically - with the pain reaching unbearable levels in ... a few hours."

The punitive use of five point restraints has not been limited to inmates who expose their genitals to female staff. One inmate told us he was strapped down for twenty-four hours because he refused to talk to the warden at his cell front, conduct the warden claimed was "disruptive behavior." Several months later he was restrained again after a verbal debate - again while he was locked in his cell - with the assistant warden. Another inmate filed a grievance at Red Onion complaining that five point restraints were being used abusively as "a weapon of torture…for the sole purpose of inflicting pain and humiliation." As an example, he cited an inmate who was strapped down after laughing when an officer was kicked by another inmate. In denying the grievance, the warden asserted that five point restraints were used in accordance with departmental policy.

Last June, Human Rights Watch wrote to Warden Page True to inquire about the facility's policy and practice regarding use of five point restraints. The warden forwarded the letter to Ronald Angelone, Director of the Department of Corrections, for a response. We subsequently wrote to Mr. Angelone directly and placed follow-up calls to his office. He has never responded.

The number and consistency of the inmate letters about the abuse of five point restraints at Red Onion State Prison warrant your direct attention. Virginia should not countenance corporal punishment in any form, including the punitive use of an extreme measure that is appropriate only for emergency situations. As you know, the excessive use of restraints at another Virginia prison, Sussex II, is currently the subject of a federal lawsuit filed last August.

It is incumbent upon you to take the necessary steps to put an end to the misuse of five point restraints, to ensure that the Department of Corrections' practices with regard to the use of force conform to legal and human rights requirements, and to hold accountable corrections officials who have engaged in or condoned the abuse of inmates. As a first step, you should authorize an independent investigation into the circumstances in which five point restraints have been used at Red Onion and the length of time inmates have been kept restrained. While the Department of Justice's recently announced investigation into unconstitutional practices at Red Onion presumably will include the abuse use of five point restraints, you should not wait for the conclusion of a federal investigation before taking the necessary steps to end human rights violations by state corrections officials.

We would welcome the opportunity to meet with you or your staff to review our concerns in greater depth and to discuss the steps you might take to address the misuse of force at Red Onion.

Sincerely,

Jamie Fellner
Associate Counsel