November 2, 2012
Yesterday, I was notified that you affirmed the decision of the Rules Infraction Board (R.I.B.), which should already be posted unless your lawless staff removed it from my outgoing mail to conceal the ridiculousness of this whole debacle. If they did, I’ll just have to send another copy. You lawless fascists will get tired of digging through my mail before I get tired of telling the truth about your ineptitude and corruption.
At any rate, I didn’t get a copy of your decision yet, but it was read to me, and according to Lt. Lynch, you wrote that there was “sufficient evidence” to find me guilty of all 3 charges. So, if you don’t mind (and even if you do) I’d like to discuss your conclusion with you- in front of the eyes of the world. I think it’s important for this to be public since their dime is paying for what you do.
So this is the issue I have: you claim there was “sufficient evidence.” If you don’t mind, I’d like to know what it is. Not being funny here, but I was at the hearing. The only evidence before the R.I.B. were three fliers. Nothing else was presented. That means your crack investigator – I mean, “Ideology expert” – proved the Army of the 12 Monkeys exists… But the whole world knows that. There were thousands of fliers on the compound and your crack investigator- I mean, “ideology expert,” sorry – managed to get her hands on three of them. But in her testimony, she admitted that someone else copied and disseminated that stuff, not me. So, the only evidence presented- 3 pieces of paper- had nothing to do with me.
What else was there? I mean, in terms of evidence. You know, real, tangible evidence? Something you could set down in a circle drawn on your desk.
Exactly. No evidence at all connected me to any 12 Monkeys activity, to any incitement, to any crime furthered by mail… unless writing a letter posted to the internet constitutes a crime, in which case, you’ll have to come on back here to segregation and arrest me again. I’ll wait.
In the absence of evidence- and just to be clear here, evidence is something real– your “ideology expert,” Angela M. Hunsinger, fabricated “ideological” evidence to connect me to the Army of the 12 Monkeys. And again, to be clear here, an ideology is a framework of thought and belief. So, when Angela M. Hunsinger says my ideology matches the Army of the 12 Monkeys’ ideology, what she is saying is that 1. I have an ideology; 2. she can comprehend the full depth and scope of my ideology; 3. the Army of the 12 Monkeys has an ideology; 4. she can fully understand that ideology based on her three pieces of paper she rounded up out of thousands; and 5. she is an actual ideology expert.
No offense, but if that blank-eyed person is an ideology expert, I’m a NASCAR champion… and you‘re a personal trainer. Simple reasoning here warden, but if Hunsinger had the aptitude for analyzing ideology, would she make a career out of kicking around cargo on the slave-ship Amistad? I think not.
Now, don’t take that wrong. I’m not saying that because you run an Ohio prison, that you’re a replaceable lackey serving the ulterior political, social, and racial/demographic interests of a tyrannical state.
Okay, well, maybe I am. But we ventured off point here. My point is, Angela M. Hunsinger knows as much about ideology as you know about the Iron Man decathlon.
So what does it mean when Hunsinger testifies that my ideology- my framework of thought and belief- matches the 12 Monkeys? Isn’t she saying that, in her opinion, I seem like the kind of asshole who would do the same stuff those other guys are doing? I ask this because we’re not exactly dealing with C.S.I. using science to match ballistics here, are we? We’re dealing with an opinion. What Hunsinger thinks.
But instead of writing, “it’s my opinion that Swain seems like the kind of asshole who would do this type of stuff,” she cleans it up to make it sound like evidence by saying my “ideology” matches the 12 Monkeys… my volumes and volumes of published academic work matches three fliers about flushing toilets to break your pipes.
So, to you, that is “evidence.” No, there’s only 2 possibilities here. Either 1. you really believe that, or 2. you don’t. Let’s go with the second one first. If you don’t believe the random thoughts bouncing around in Hunsinger’s head are evidence, then you lied. You lied and said there was “sufficient evidence” when there wasn’t. You lied and scapegoated me, perhaps because you’re under pressure from Gary Mohr to neutralize my JPay criticism, or you’re under pressure to regain control of your prison and you don’t want your bosses to know that you haven’t caught any of the legitimate ringleaders of this widespread uprising that had literature in all 16 blocks; you don’t want the world to know that a widely-organized resistance is still under your nose, getting bigger and planning actions.
So either you’re a moral coward with no spine who protected his mediocre retirement package by flushing my life down the shitter, or you’re a hapless buffoon hiding his ineptitude from his boss by flushing my life down the shitter. That’s if you don’t believe Hunsinger’s random thoughts are evidence.
But if you do believe Hunsinger’s random thoughts are evidence, you’re dumber than a picnic basket full of socket wrenches. So, here. Let me try to work on your level. If Hunsinger’s “ideological evidence” is compelling, then here- I’ll present to you this pouch of moon-beams, a sprinkling of faerie dust, and a pocketful of magic beans. You can also accept the testimony of this unicorn I’m riding.
All of that is on the level of Hunsinger’s “ideological evidence.”
“I know Swain is guilty. His ideology did it.”
And what is my ideology anyway? You should know. You have a multi-page affidavit on file from me, telling you exactly what I think and believe. Your religion experts approved my change of religion based on that affidavit. You personally signed off on a religious accommodation for my ideology.
Now my religion is a thought-crime, an ideological offense magically discerned from Hunsinger’s tea-leaves, and that’s enough to make me die in prison.
So, I’ve got an idea. See, my thinking is, tax money bought that computer and digital recording system that stored every moment of my R.I.B. hearing. Tax money paid the two irremediable ass-clowns who posed as the R.I.B. Tax money paid “ideology expert” Hunsinger for her testimony, and paid you to pretend like you believe it is evidence.
So what do you say? Let the people whose money funded this atrocity listen to the proceedings. Make the tapes public. We can post the audio right on seanswain.org for the world to hear it. Then the whole world can decide whether you’re a liar or an idiot, whether you willingly participated in my future inevitable murder, or whether you’re actually an idiot. Personally, I think public disclosure of a public recording is a fantastic idea. Unless you’re an incompetent scumbag abusing power and subverting justice, you shouldn’t have anything to hide, right?
Excellent. I’m in cell 2070 in SMU 3, back in segregation. Stop on back and let me know how we can get this recording on my site.
I’m really excited about this.
Transparent government. Democracy.
Or, you can try to hide… and the whole world will know what that means.
Freedom or death,
Sean Swain
PS Holding me in a torture cell for 48 hours and then holding me incommunicado for an extended time likely triggered release of a sworn statement that has international implications. Nice work. Can’t wait to see what you step in next…
PS: If you scapegoated me just to save your pathetic career… How do you think that‘s working out for you???