 |
  |
|
|
|||||
|
PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 05/24/01 For Additional Information, contact: Mikal C. Watts Toll Free: 1.888.887.0560 mcwatts@wattslawfirm.com G. Joseph Barrientos Toll Free: 1.888.887.0560 jbarrientos@wattslawfirm.com WATTS LAW FIRM, L.L.P. Tower II Building, 14th Floor 555 N. Carancahua Street Corpus Christi, Texas 78478-0801 Phone: 361.887.0500 Fax: 361.887.0055 Toll Free: 888.887.0560 |
|
||||
|
TEXAS PRISON SYSTEM SECURITYMEASURES FOUND LACKING FEDERAL JURY FAULTS TEXAS PRISON SYSTEM SECURITY IN INMATE STABBING ESCAPABLE JAIL CELL FOUND AT FAULT IN PRISON STABBING WATTS LAW FIRM ATTORNEYS WIN IN PRISONER’S RIGHTS LAWSUIT |
|||||
A federal jury of 5 men and 3 women reached a verdict late yesterday that condemned the actions of some Texas prison officials in allowing an inmate to be repeatedly stabbed by another inmate. "The constitutional rights of all of us were at issue in this case…and the jury found that those rights cannot be ignored, even for people in our prison system," said Plaintiffs’ attorney Mikal Watts. Watts and Joseph Barrientos of the law firm Watts Law Firm, L. L. P. represented the injured prisoner. They were acting as counsel, after being appointed by United States District Court Judge Janis Graham Jack. The jury, following a 3 day trial, reached their verdict after about 10 hours of deliberation. They also assessed $70,000.00 in combined punitive damages against three of the defendants, all of whom were officials or employees of the McConnell Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice prison in Beeville, Texas. The civil law suit arose from the attempted murder of the Plaintiff, a 39 year old Dallas area man, imprisoned for felonies involving robber and burglary of a habitation. On November 2, 1997, inmate Jesus Lopez, and the Plaintiff were both housed in the Administrative Segregation Unit of the prison. The Administrative Segregation Unit houses inmates who are security risks, potential victims and protective custody prisoners. The evidence showed that inmate Lopez had rigged his cell door in a such a way that made it appear to the guards and their security systems that the cell door was secured. In reality, it was not and could be opened by the inmate at any time. The Plaintiff, his hands cuffed behind him at the time, was being escorted from the shower area to his cell. Two guards, named as Defendants in the case, were with him. Inmate Lopez opened his own cell door and attacked the Plaintiff with a 9" long piece of metal fashioned like a bayonet, a weapon commonly known by prisoners as a "shank." The guards were unarmed, and were unable to stop the attack until the Plaintiff had been stabbed over a dozen times…in the head, neck, back arms, legs and chest. Fortunately, the inmate was able to escape fatal injuiries by running from the attacker. His injuries were not life threatening, and the he was released after 3 days in the prison hospital. The Plaintiff, through Attorneys Watts and Barrientos, alleged that the assault was a result of the deliberate indifference of the prison officials to a substantial risk of harm to the Plaintiff. The jury agreed. It found that the actions of three of the Defendants followed known practices, customs and policies of the Defendants and the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. The Plaintiffs attorneys offered evidence in the form of memos from prison officials that they knew of the problems with the cell doors long before this attack. In the pre-trial discovery, Attorney Joseph Barrientos uncovered evidence that the problem was widespread. "The type of door that allowed our client to be brutally attacked is present throughout the Connally unit… the prison officials knew it. They new of escapes on other units. This jury refused to put a stamp of approval on the prison officials’ failure to act." Specifically, Barrientos and Watts were able to show that prison officials knew that the cell doors allowed prisoners to fool guards into believing the prisoners were secured…even when they were not. Documents that were made part of the evidence of the case showed that over 1400 of these "Michael Type" cell doors exist in the Beeville facility alone…and thousands may be in other Texas prisons. Watts Law Firm attorneys brought other inmate witnesses to trial, who testified that even on the day of the trial, the same doors were being used… with the same problems. Coincedentally, the "Michael Type" doors were of the same design the cell doors of the "Texas 7" inmates, who escaped from the Connally unit of the Karnes County prison earlier this year. The Plaintiff’s mother and brother traveled to to be with him during the trial. They were all very pleased with the findings of the jury. Following the jury’s announcement, the Plaintiff said, "I am happy the jury saw that I should never have been placed in the kind of danger I was in. It’s hard enough to be in prison, trying to become a better person, without worrying about whether prison officials will protect you from other prisoners. My lawyers were outstanding, and they showed the jury that even prisoners can’t have their Constitutional rights ignored." He said, however, he is still extremely concerned for his own safety…about being taken back to the very facility and people who failed to protect him in this incident…and to cells that can still fool guards into thinking they are secured. Neither the attorneys for the Defendants, nor Texas Prison officials have indicated what measures, if any, will be taken as a result of this verdict, to correct the "escapable cell door" problems. The Plaintiff told the jury that any punitive damages he was to receive, would be given to charity. The Court is expected to award case expenses and significant attorney fees to Watts Law Firm lawyers and Joseph Barrientos. They have both indicated that any and all fees will be used to set up college funds for the Plaintiff’s children. The Plaintiff himself completed his GED while in prison and has accumulated over 70 hours of college credits. He will continue his studies as he works for the parole he is hopeful of someday receiving. The Defendants in the case included the two prison guards who were escorting the Plaintiff on the date of the stabbing. The jury found no liability on their part in the incident. The jury found that the Senior Warden of the prison, the Assistant Warden and a Captain of the guards acted with deliberate indifference in failing to protect the Plaintiff from a substantial risk of harm. The 5 men and 3 women on the jury awarded only nominal actual damages to the Plaintiff, but assessed the punitive damages as a means of sending a message to the Defendants and Texas prison system that they were being punished for the actions that resulted in the stabbing. Plaintiffs’ allegations were essentially that the Defendants’ failure to follow security guidelines and failure to protect the Plaintiff violated his Eighth, Amendment Rights under the United States Constitution, to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. In addition, hel alleged violations of the Federal Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 et. seq. The jury found that no reasonable prison official, including these Defendants, could have misunderstood that their actions clearly violated established federal laws. Therefore, the jury found, the Defendants were not entitled to immunity for their actions. Judge Jack is expected to enter a judgment on the matter after attorneys for both sides confer. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISIONADAMES § CIVIL ACTION NO. CA-C-99-437 § VS. § § PEREZ, ET AL. § JURY TRIAL ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS |
|||||
|
|
|
info@wattslawfirm.com ©2001-2003 by Watts Law Firm, LLP, All Rights Reserved Terms & Conditions |