Wende Correctional Facility
Robert Seth Hayes
#74A-2280 A-2-17

Superintendent, Robert Kirkpatrick
Wende correctional facility

FORMAL COMPLAINT

November 14, 2006

Superintendent Kirkpatrick,

I know you are quite busy with daily activities, so I will make this one complaint as brief as possible. My formal complaint concerns the actions of your officers who I believe were acting outside the employee's manual. Doing so, they broke protocol, causing a breach in the smooth and appropriate function and structure of this facility. My personal dignity and self-worth were called into question, and to this day, no formal resolution has come forth from either officers or Sergeant (area Supervisor) of A block. The problem occurred as follows:

1. On November 8, 2006 while en route to the gym for recreation, I passed through the metal detector with the following: (1) New York Times newspaper, (2) print-outs of Yahoo! web page contents and one Upbeat newsletter. All permissible items carried to gym on more than one occasion. On the above date, approximately 9:24 a.m. these items were reviewed by CO Kyle. Upon seeing the Yahoo! Web sheets, he immediately questioned me on where I got them from. I explained that they came to me via the mail. CO Kyle stated they were illegal. I countered by explaining they were not and had come to me via the mail room. He sought out Sergeant Higley for clarification and I heard Sergeant Higley state to Kyle, "yes they were permissible. Inmates are entitled to receive said print out so long as it was only five pages per envelope." But in deference to CO Kyle, Sergeant Higley informed me that I shouldn't be taking this material to the gym. That the gym was for recreation. Therefore, the Yahoo! would be turned over to the Hall Captain of A block and I could retrieve them after recreation period. First, I'd like to point out that reading material is permissible in the gym and other recreation areas per policy and procedure. I did not discuss this with Sergeant Higley, but accepted his decision and went to recreation without the Yahoo! materials.

2. At the conclusion of recreation period and in route to my cell (A-2-17), upon entering 2 co. gallery, I was informed by my floor officer that my cell was being frisked and that I needed to proceed to the gun walk where I could stand outside my cell and observe. I complied. In my cell I observed CO Hartfield (like CO Kyle, from B block) engaged in a thorough cell frisk. After approximately 15 minutes of my watching he exited my cell carrying a manila folder stuffed with papers. I asked him where he was taking the folder and he stated, "this stuff is leaving for inspection." I then asked if I might see what it was he was taking and he briefly exposed the contents to me. I saw inside Yahoo! pages, what appeared to be a Buffalo Forum newsletter folded in half and a quantity of papers I could not tell what was written on them. I immediately recognized the folder as one that I kept beside my bed holding copies of letters I'd previously written and expressed that to CO Hartfield. Officer Hartfield stated to me, "I don't know anything about that." I then asked him did he know what it was he was taking from my cell? He replied to me, "I've been doing this job over 20 years, I know what I'm doing." I left off the discussion and entered my cell to make assessment.

3. Upon immediate search I learned that several things were not in the cell. (A) I had just received two days prior a printout of my approved telephone listings. That was gone. (B) I happened to glance at the wall over my lockers and discovered that my 2006 calendar was missing. After searching I discovered that not only was the 2006 calendar missing, but (C) the recently received through the mail, 2007 calendar was missing as well. To the best of my recollection, calendars have never been considered hostile, especially having come through correspondence without any indication that it did not pass muster.

4. Reading the cell frisk notification sheet and Officer Hartfield's comments on items removed from my cell which read, "(1) one bundle of papers." There was no itemized listing of papers removed.

I am still in the process of determining what was removed and that's proven difficult. I know for a fact that the above listed items have disappeared without reason per the cell frisk removal.

I spoke with Sergeant Hinckley on November 9, 2006. I inquired about what happened to the Yahoo! papers taken from me to be delivered to A Block Hall Captain. Sergeant Higley's response was that "they were turned over to Officer Hartfield who performed your cell frisk." I also spoke with the Hall Captain concerning whether or not an itemized listing was filed and left in the block concerning my cell frisk and was informed no. That I should read the cell frisk notification for items taken. I explained what the slip stated and he himself seemed surprised by what I stated.

Thereafter I contacted my attorney, family and friends, communicating this matter. We all agree that what occurred is dangerous and needed investigation. Protocol was breached and procedure violated. What was taken did not confirm the cell frisk standards. The fact that correctional Officer Hartfield stated he had over 20 years in corrections indicates to me that the search crossed the line and was intended to convey a message other than removal of alleged questionable materials. I/we are seeking a full investigation and return of materials described above and other materials in hand.

Further that some type of standards be set in place to offset this type of protocol violation. I feel at this point, that no real reason ever existed for a cell search. That CO Kyle took exception to the material in my possession and called on his coworker to perform the cell frisk to destroy the cell. As an afterthought, several non-contraband items were removed to convey a message of next time you won't be so lucky. Finally, the worrisome part is, by taking a printout of my updated telephone listing, Hartfield took with him the names, addresses, telephone numbers and relations to me listed persons that I cannot for the life of me see why it was considered contraband. We have in place a media review system which makes lawful determinations whenever the question of unacceptable materials enters the facility. Why items were taken and why to date, nothing was returned or to date not itemized makes this entire act questionable.

I hope you will look into this matter. Question my facts and see for yourself that the search was both illegal and inflammatory. That no protocol was followed and the resulting state being, CO’s carrying out private determinations outside their employee manuals, in violation of the superintendents handbook and creating an inflammatory circumstance.

This formal complaint is concluded at this time subject to revisit based upon newly discovered items missing listings. I hope to hear from you soon on this matter. I want to reiterate that to date, November 14, 2006, 6 days after initial search, no item listing of materials removed from cell or spoken word from any supervisor has been forthcoming.

Sincerely yours,

Robert Seth Hayes

RSH/rsh

CC: Susan Tipograph, AAL
American Civil Liberties Union
NYS Comm. of Corr,
NYC Bd. of Corr.
Files