Transcripts For CSPAN3 Former Inmates Testify On Sexual Abuse In Federal Prisons 20230104

states. >> the permanent subcommittee on investigations will come to order. today's hearings will examine the findings of our eight month bipartisan investigation into the sexual abuse of women in federal prisons. before we proceed, viewers are advised that this hearing will discuss sexual another deeply disturbing issues, that we are duty bound to bring to light. anyone speak seeking mental health assistance can called a nationwide hotline at 988 to connect with a trained counselor. eight months ago, as chair of psl, i i launched an investigation into the sexual abuse of women in federal prisons. and with a ranking member johnson's support, our bipartisan staff reviewed extensive non public bureau of prison and which whistleblower documents. and conducting more than two dozen interviews with senior vip leaders and whistleblowers and survivors of prison sexual views. our findings are deeply disturbing. and demonstrate in my view that the b.o.p. is failing systemically to prevent attack and address the sexual bias of prisoners by its own employees. they say that -- abuse people prisoners and at least two thirds of persons that held women over the past two decades. we found that b.o.p. has failed to prevent, detect, and stop recurring sexual abuse. including by senior prison officials. at fci, dublin, california, for example, both the warden and the chaplain sexually abused female prisoners. we found that the opp has failed to successfully implemented the prison rape elimination act, or prea. for example, two prisons were multiple vip employees were abusing multiple women over an extended period, if cia dublin and s.e. coleman, nevertheless passed were found to have exceeded the prea audit criteria. which are mandated by congress, and intended to detect the risk of sexual views in the opening festivities. in the case of fci double, and they prepare compliance officer, the official specifically tasked with ensuring compliance with the federal law, whose purpose is the elimination of prison rape, was himself sexually abusing prisoners. in the case of fcc coleman in florida, all female prisoners have been transferred out of the facility, just two days before the pre-audit. making it impossible for the auditor to interview female prisoners, despite the legal requirements that the interview inmates as part of the audit. b.o.p. employees we found amidst more than 5000 allegations sexually beuse by the gop employees, they found that at least 134 against female detainees were substantiated by b.o.p. internal investigations or by criminal prosecutions. given the fear of retaliation by survivors of sexual abuse, the apparent apathy i senior b.o.p. officials at the facility regional, office, and headquarters levels, and severe shortcomings in the investigative practices implemented by b.o.p.'s office of internal affairs, and the department of justice inspector general, i suspect the extent of abuses ignorantly wider. indeed we found that there is currently a backlog of 1000 internal affairs cases at the bureau of prisons. including at least hundreds of sexual abuse allegations against b.o.p. employees that remain unresolved. doj's inspector general has found that b.o.p. who fails at times to properly credit allegations of sexual abuse brought forth by inmates. and, multiple b.o.p. employees who would later admit in sworn statements to sexually abusing prisoners have escaped criminal park prosecution due in part to witnesses in the process by which b.o.p., and the doj inspector general, work together to investigate such allegations. in fact, several officers who admitted under oath to sexually abusing prisoners were able nevertheless to retire with benefits. let me be absolutely clear, the situation is intolerable. sexual abuse of inmates as a gross abuse of human and constitutional rights and cannot be tolerated by the united states congress. it is cruel and unusual punishment that violates the eighth amendment of the u.s. constitution and basic standards of human decency. in july of this year, the former director of the bureau of prisons testified before this very subcommittee, and insisted that b.o.p. was able to keep female prisoners safe from sexual abuse by b.o.p. employees. we now know that that statement was unequivocal-y false. the purpose of today's hearing was to describe what's gone so badly wrong. to establish and describe the facts on pawn which we must build reform. progress begins with truth. it requires a full and unflinching, examination of grievance failure. on our first panel we will hear from three survivors of sexual abuse at the hands of b.o.p. employees that occurred why they were incarcerated in federal prisons. caroline richardson, brianna moore, and lynda della rosa. all of their abusers have since been acquitted. the first account -- i am deeply grateful. their bravery to make it easier for them to tell their stories. next we'll hear from brad obese the throw american university. we will ask her to put the survivors testimony in a broader context. finally we will cut a question to government witnesses. the inspector general michael horowitz whose office both overseas b.o.p. and investigates criminal misconduct by b.o.p. employees, and the new b.o.p. director collect peters who began her ten year just six months ago in july. incar cerati>> this hearing today is t of a two-year bipartisan effort is part of the subcommittee, under my leadership, to investigate conditions of incarceration and attention in the united states. from corruption of the u.s. penitentiary in atlanta, department of justice's failure to count almost 1000 deaths in custody across the country. to abuse of an unnecessary but gynecological procedures performed on women in the department of homeland security custody. ranking member, johnson i think you sincerely for your assistance in this effort in your staff. before i yield to the ranking member for his opening statement, it is important to acknowledge that law enforcement professionals working in our prisons have among the hardest jobs in our country. and i believe the vast majority of the opium ploys share our goals of ending sexual abuse once and for all in u.s. prisons. i want to also state for the record that the subcommittee investigating sexual abuse -- because of some unique consideration. women are more likely than male prisoners to suffer from trauma and sexual abuse, prior to incarceration. and particularly susceptible to sexual abuse in across aerial setting. they fully acknowledged sexual piece is not limited to female prisoners. finally, the subcommittees fight day which form the basis for today's hearing is laid it in a bipartisan staff report, and i ask anonymous consent this report you put into the record. ranking member johnson. >> mr. chairman, you pretty well laid out the case. i just asked my opening statement will be entered into the record. i think it is safe to say, based on your opening comments, what we have uncovered is deeply disturbing. and it is. i don't think anybody is looking forward to this hearing. i don't know about you, but a new movie i watch with some sexual, assault after. trade-off that is sexual fiction. we are hearing some pretty horrific testimony today. it is the government's duty to incarcerated individuals. to punish people for crime. for keeping dangerous people away from the general public. i don't want any thing in this hearing to downplay that very serious responsibility of government. it is not a pleasant responsibility. but it is also a responsibility of the government to make sure that where you were incarcerated individuals were safe, these types of rapes and assaults to not occur. this is something that the federal government has recognized has been a problem since 2003. i would say that is probably a pretty good effort to try to develop -- to try to prevent this. you will never eliminate all of this. but i do not think there is any doubt that the government can do more, looking at the director general's testimony, understanding what this administration is doing. it does appear that they are making good faith efforts to do more to try to prevent this. so, as deeply as disturbing as how i'm not looking forward to hearing any of this, i agree with you, it is our responsibility. we cannot turn our face from it. we have to face this. we have to do everything we can to eliminate it. recognize when the difficult task that really is. miss, chairman thank you. i think all of our staff for doing a good job of looking into something that is not fun to look at. but it is our responsibility to look at, and try to fix. thank you. >> thank, you ranking member johnson. we will now call our first panel of witnesses for this morning's hearing. miss caroline richardson was formerly incarcerated in metropolitan correctional facility in new york city. miss rand moore was formally across sorted at the federal prison camp in alderton, west virginia. miss lindell arose who was formerly incarcerated at the medical center. in a professor brenda b smith is an expert in custodial abuse in crystal settings. the rules of the subcommittee require all members to be sworn in. so at this time, i would ask all of you to please raise your right hand. you swear the testimony you are about to get before the subcommittee is the truth and the whole truth and nothing but the truth. >> i do. >> i do. >> let the record state that all witnesses have answered in the affirmative. we're using a timing system today. your written testimony will be pointed in the record, in this entirety. we asked you limit it to five minutes. and please confirm if you can, but the help of your council if necessary, that your microphones are on as indicated by the red light, before beginning. miss richardson, this will begin with you first, please. >>, hello. morning i would like to first express my sincere gratitude to -- and ranking member johnson to testify with you. today my name is caroline richardson, i was incarcerated in the federal b.o.p. custody from august 2016 to october 2022, when my motion for compassionate release was granted on the grounds of extraordinary -- representatives. i suffered in the metropolitan correctional center in new york. my testimony will focus on the sexual beast i suffered for several months at the hands of former officer colin -- well i struggle to speak about the of the, use i am hopeful that my testimony will give voice to survivors and similar circumstances. and help prevent sexual crimes in these facilities. in august 2016, i was involved in the conspiracy to prepare and distribute toxic oden. i am deeply emotional for what i had done. which was filled by my own addiction to oxycontin. i wasn't used to 12 years in prison, and spent those years away from my six children. what i didn't know i come to suffer neglect and abuse in vp custody. that would forever change my life. prior to my arrest, i had received a virus transplant. an official iris implant, excuse me. for cosmetic purposes. when i was taken to custody, i had no vision, it was a good physical health. shortly around after arriving in -- new york in 20, 16 i began to experience complications with my transplant irises. the vip personal failed to provide me with timely medical care, causing the acid to deteriorate beyond repair. when i was finally taking to an eye surgeon in 2017, i would be permanently and legally blind. and would require sensitive eye treatment. since then, i required periodic visits to outside hospitals, including seven eye surgeries. former correctional officer -- was a vip correctional officer tasked with taking me to this hospital appointment. i was in an extremely vulnerable state. physically, mentally, and spiritually, due to medical condition and -- when he took me to a doctor's appointments, -- was about to be somebody i can trust. he talked to me about faith and spirituality, which was of central importance to me coping with my loss of vision. he brought me food, and the medicine that i needed. which i could not otherwise obtain. right at my most vulnerable, i believe here is a person that cared about leaving one else did. i was wrong. after several months, around 2018 i began to sexual favors in exchange for the food. and the medicine that he brought. he switched from working the day shift to the night shift, and came to my cell at night. i did not have a cellmate. he told me that my cell was not perfect area in the security council cannot see him coming or going. it was his own officer working the night shift. which consisted of approximately 40 female prisoners. he used a flashlight to signal to me that he was coming to my cell. i felt utterly powerless. they have -- for news and transportation's and medical appointments. for about six months i regularly minutes actual favors. he became rough and cruel it. i told him that i did not like it, but he will not change his conduct. before the assault he would act like he cared about me and asked me what was wrong when i was looking down. rj sexual assaults began, he stopped showing any signs of caring, and all signs of sexual favors. i feel disgusted with him but also with myself. i felt worthless, like i was something less than human that he could do and deal with as he wished. after i told him i did not like what it was doing, he suggested -- i believed, him the gop and staff would retaliate against him and remove my privileges. i was worried about being questioned about. it -- secure them caring for me, especially after he manipulated me. everybody had ulterior motives. more than i felt ashamed about not speaking up about the abuse. i felt like i should have yelled and screamed when he was sexually assaulting me. even though at that time i have learned no voice. further details of abuse can be found in exhibit a. filed in my civil lawsuit. even though the movie has a zero tolerance policy towards sexual abuse, and realities extremely difficult for inmates to step up and report the abuse. it feels that there is no real protection from -- under a pretext or harassing you with a with already. even when the abuse is reported and people are trapped in the dark about the progress of the resignations and repeated questioning's are dar drawings emotionally scarring. i could personally gain a small measure of peace by cooperating with the criminal prosecution, with a piranha. resulting in his guilty plea. and by my civil lawsuit, which allowed me to gain information and knowledge about what happened. however, my hope is that no other inmate will have to suffer similar abuse. and that -- will be put in place to ensure that. i am appreciative of this opportunity to share my experience, that i have in -- and i'm here for other female inmates for this being sexual. because many of whom they feel that they are alone, without anyone to care about their story. like i used to feel. i hope that ensuring this it will prevent it from ever happening again. thank you. >> thank, you mr., tristan for your testimony. miss moore, you may not prevent your state present your statement. >> good morning. thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak. i am not an activist or somebody who would normally lose my voice, like i am today. speaking about my experience in such a public setting is incredibly hard. we are willing to do so because other women are still in prison. and i don't. no i hope they will have to go through what i went through. i grew up in illinois, my grandmother raised. me supported, me loved me. when i was 17, i had my daughter. i wanted to make money to support myself. i made the wrong decision. i sold drugs, crack cocaine to be exact. i spent ten years in federal prison. i accepted that because that was my choice at the time. i could've chosen to do something else, and i chose to do that. i got ten years in prison. and i accepted that as well. because as a result of doing that, consequences happen. so i just decided to take the time, while i was in prison, to improve myself and do my time so i can get back to my family. the prison guards tell you when you can't sleep in when you can eat and when you can go. people in person do not get to choose the location the prisoners are sent. to first i was sent to alabama. i was there for about two years. i was transferred to -- both prisons are about 12 hours away from my home. it was difficult for my family to visit, not being able to see my daughter and grandmother was devastating. i put in a request to transport prisons, get closer to home transfers. so i could be close to home with my family. b.o.p. officials have permission to grant, and i requested. i was determined to survive. i follow the. rules took on the programs. opportunities available to. me i hope the transfer request would eventually be granted. i knew that i needed to do my best for a chance at a transfer, closer to home. family is the most important thing to me. i was determined not to let prison break me. i was determined to return home. when i was in prison, in 2017, -- to target me. he took me to areas that were isolated in the prison. where there were no cameras. he told me that he knew i was going to transfer to another president. he said the paperwork goes through. me in october 2017, supported me to go to the captain's office. the captain didn't summary into his office. there was a secretary's office within the captain's office. when i, arrived there was no sentencing. after the captain handed me alone, he said to close the door behind me. he reminded me that the transfer went through. he told me if i didn't follow his, orders he would interfere with my transfer. he then raped me. to be clear, even before the captain spoke those words, i knew he had the power to provide to before being transferred. to a person closer to my family, closer to my daughter. he was a -- less total control over me. he had no choice but to obey. i always had a -- in prison. it's hard to fully describe how this felt. the captain already has complete control over my day to day life. and was now forcing control over my body. using my desire to see my children to stay silent, the captain made it clear that if i wanted to transfer, i had accepted use. i felt power-less, and evs continued. before my request could go through for a transfer closer to home, but i escaped abuse when a person close to home reopened. when we ask for volunteers, i jumped the opportunity to save myself. i left all of this in december 2017. before i left the captain knew i was leaving. he raped me one final time. he wrote me five times. sexual assault and on other occasions. after the abuse, i could not sleep sleep or for. nights for months. i had reoccurring nightmares that played over and over. like a broken record. i woke up in a cold sweat. i would wake up cry after nightmares. that the captain was trying to kill me for reporting the abuse. i isolated myself from others. i developed ptsd and how to seek mental health treatment. the captain abused my -- power. and while he was raping, me he was raving other women in prison. we were not protected, i had no power to stop the abuse. the captain had total power over me, and he knew that. he knew i had no, control and cannot say no. the captain knew that i knew. that he made sure to make sure that i knew that. he made sure that he could -- from you know that he can make things worse for me. even before the, spread i knew that if i reported him, i could be placed in solitary confinement, or shipped. shipped out to another, president away from my family. which is something i did not want to do. i saw this happen to other women in prison, they would tell their story and they would be shipped. an officer would still be there. i left -- in 2017, after this investigation began. the prosecutor resigned for sexually abusing, me and other women at the prison were guilty. i am here today, five years later. and i want you to know that i am still suffering. this changes the course of my life. this has changed the course of my life forever. i'm a different person physically, emotionally, because of. this i am still in mental health treatment. i have lost trust in the system. i knew present would be tough. i accepted that. it will be punishment for crimes. it was not easy doing time. i was sent his to put in prison for choices that i made. i was not sentenced to prison to be raped and abused while in prison. this should not have happened to me. this should not have happened to -- speaking about this is not easy. the day i started to heal was the guy i could talk about what happened to me, without being afraid. thank you for your time. benefit of >> thank, you miss moore, for your testimony and -- of all the panelists. you may hear various sounds from the, clock and those have nothing to do with our hearing. but indicate us what is happening on the senate floor. so please do not be alarmed. miss richardson, miss moore, thank you so much for your testimony. miss della rosa, you may present your opening statement. >> chairman ossoff, ranking member johnson, and members of the subcommittee, i'm a victim and survivor of sexual abuse by a federal correctional officer. that part there is now serving 135 months, in a federal prison. in 2019, he sexually attacked me and three other women inmates at the federal medical center in lexington, kentucky. which is a minimum security prison. it took three years to arrest, prosecute, and convict and sentence. them on the one, hand i am grateful for the efforts of those in the department of justice who did help me. who successfully put my attacker away. in particular, fbi victims specialist cassie young it assistant u.s. attorney to sheena fanning. however, the bureau of prisons entirely failed. my attacker stated his job for years. even though b.o.p. managements and investigators knew he was a sexual predator. my life at fmc lexington was a living. i believe my eye talker had been investigated on numerous occasions, for sexual crimes against female inmates. fmc lexington management and investigators were well aware that female inmate victims were reluctant to come forward. because they rightly feared retaliation. which took many forms. including transfers to different facilities, so terry confinement, loss of early release rights, and detrimental write-ups. lots of work privileges, and interference with vocational skills programs. i witnessed many examples of punishments handed out to other inmates, that's challenged all reported abuse. by prison officials. the ongoing threat of retaliation stopped me and other inmates from filing complaints. let alone timely ones. let me tell you what happened to me. i was transferred from lexington after reporting the sexual views that happened to me in lexington and i was sent back to that facility. when they return to lexington, all of my belongings were missing. there were photos and letters from my son, and daughter's father. both of whom had passed. they can never be replaced. when i return, i also learned the attacker was still working at that facility. incredibly, they granted my attacker unrestricted zebras contact on working tails which gave no one access to those who abused or threatened to abuse me. for that, reason the attackers could and did -- my personal history, files of my telephone calls and personal emails. giving him additional leverage to extract sexual flavors that which turned my safety. the system failed at every level. management from the world on, down repeatedly. they failed to, mother supervise, discipline and remove male correctional officers. sexually abusing female inmates. special investigative services officers supposedly charged with investigating staff misconduct failed repeatedly. repeatedly, to investigate known and reported predators. it is not enough to call this horrible. i believe the problem is the old boys club. president staff, managers, investigators, correctional officers, they all work together for years, if not decades. no one wants to rock the boat. let alone listen to female inmates. there is no effective independent oversight, the mission of the b.o.p. is to protect society, but -- controlled environments prison that are safe, humane, and appropriately secure. the agency failed me and my fame -- fellow inmates, we were knowingly confined in a facility that was unsafe inhumane and, linda de la rosa unsecured. nothing was done that was wrong, it should've never happened. senators, i make one request, stop this from happening, from repeating, now. nothing you're hearing today is new. you have the power and authority to force the system to change, please use it. >> amen. >> thank you. >> thank you, miss della rosa. dr. smith, your opening statement, please. >> first, i want to say how privileged but i feel to be able to sit at the table with these survivors, because they are the ones who are doing the work to actually bring these issues to the four so i think. , you for your courage and for being willing to tell what has happened to you in custody good morning to you. ,. members i'm a professor at the unit -- i founded the project on addressing prison rape in 1993 after successfully representing a class of over 500 women who experienced physical, sexual, and medical, and psychological abuse as well as systematic inequality of services and opportunities in d.c. correctional facilities. i was appointed to the prison rape commission in 1994 by house minority leader nancy pelosi. having sat on the prison commission for -- on the prea commission for decades, there is no question that the prison rape elimination act standards could, if followed, prevent the abuse of women in custody. at the same time, we know that while the pre-a standards outlined a successful approach to preventing, reducing, sexual abuse in custody, agencies, as these testimonies have identified, often do not follow the standards. agencies complain that the standards are nitpicking and not consistent with their lived experience of people in custody or correctional settings. they also argue that women in custody are trying to gain -- game the system by claiming that they were abused. they claim that it would be too expensive or take too much time to follow the standards that would protect these women. they also argue that these standards are there, but you really don't have to pay attention until there is an audit. i am familiar with federal bureau fifth prison facilities because many of the d.c. women i represented served their sentences in federal facilities and return to the district after discharge from federal facilities. these women spoke of abuse they had observed or experienced in a number of the federal facilities that are the subject of this hearing today. the most recent incidents involving f c i dublin, fmc brooklyn, older son, and fmc lexington, are instructive but they are not unusual. in other words, this is not new behavior. the abuses -- broad cross section of the workforce. we have heard a chaplain, congressional officer, volunteers, and wardens. this points to abuse which is systemic in nature. what is clear from these incidents is that staff had unfettered, uninterrupted access to women. they abused with impunity and that will. they abused women in their offices, in quarters, out of sight from cameras and in collusion with other staff. they had also abused -- they also abused the authority of their positions. one of the assailants was a chaplain. another a warden, people who we should be able to trust. these system actors and leaders had intercourse with the women, took nude images of them, and threatened them as we have heard. one of the assailants ran the prea training, for preventing sexual assault, while actively involved in abusing women prisoners. given this is the systematic nature of this abuse i have three recommendations will that will provide women with great protection from abuse. first, reform the audit process from the -- pre-audits are meant to identify practices that affect the protection of people in custody from abuse. the current audit structure is not well designed to ensure its success. the requirements to become an auditor in the marketplace for auditors make it very difficult for anyone that does not work in corrections to become a doj certified prea auditor. having said that, we all know how hard it is for an institution to investigate itself. next, agencies should hire and pay auditors -- next, agencies higher and pay the of others who conduct the audit. so, in reality, others work for the very agencies that they audit, making independents difficult. this creates a financial disincentive to identify problems. next, another suggestion, some agencies are audited through consortia which means that state corrections agencies from one agency will send their staff to audit another states facilities in a round robin arrangement. this has not eliminated the potential for potential conflicts of interest in those arrangements. there is a quid pro quo. finally, the cost of audits in the time that agencies or third-party auditing bodies that employ auditors allow for the conduct of audits do not adequately compensate auditors or allow the time necessary to conduct the audit methodology, laid out by the doj. if there were time, then what could happen is they could actually go through and look closely at these institutions, interview women, interviews outside folks and be able to find problems. each of the facilities that are the subject of the hearing passed their audits with only minimal issues identified. again, neutral auditor is from an independent external auditing authority, diversifying the auditor pool to include individuals with experience working with victims. there also needs to be ongoing training for auditors with a focus on auditing investigation standards and meaningful responses to retaliation. because as we have heard, many of these women experienced and feared retaliation. i think one thing that we also have to do is we need to address the conditions of confinement that create vulnerability for women in custody. each of these women have identified common elements of vulnerability that relate to their victimization. women, as you know, often bring multiple well-known vulnerabilities into the correctional setting. past histories of childhood and adult physical and sexual abuse, poverty, involvement with powerful systemic actors like courts, child protection, housing, and immigration authorities that control their existence, their future, and their families. these factors create the levers of pressure that correctional staff employee to ensure compliance with both legitimate and illegitimate requests. given this inequality of power, women bargain, capitulate, and comply even as they fear for their lives, their freedom, and often for their families. those are constitutional limitations on cross sex supervision, male staff still have found ways to have unfettered, unsupervised access to women in their care. clearly identifying and implementing better supervision strategies are in order. these strategies include increasing the numbers of females staff at all every level including leadership of women's correctional facilities. they also include decreasing the numbers of women in custodial settings. women inmates are still incarcerated for primarily nonviolent offenses. increasing the opportunities for supervision in the community would also help keep women safe from the pervasive sexual abuse culture we are discussing today. finally, we need vigorous prosecution of these cases, and enhanced penalties. the penalties for abusing a person in custody should be against minister it with the harm in the damage they do to women in custody, there community, and to our ideals of the rule of law. the sentence -- prison sex offenders receive are not commensurate with the injury that they inflict, or the harm that they cause. in my view, the penalty should be comparable to the offenses for other individual victims who have been framed by the law as unable to consent. that would include people with developmental and other disabilities, children, and individuals in institutional settings, including prisoners. finally, what i want to say is that the abuse of women in custody has created a stain. a stain on our society. it is a stain that i do not believe can be cleaned, but i hope that what we can do is repair and go forward and do better and create the conditions that we can provide safety for these women, provide safety for our communities, and actually improve the integrity of the system, and actually have us be a community, a country that we can be proud of. a community that provides de-punishment where -- punishment were appropriate, but also justice for people who are abused in custody. so again, i thank you for this opportunity and i look forward to answering your questions. >> thank you very much, professor smith. and thank you to our first panel. thank you miss richardson, miss moore and miss linda de la rosa in particular for having the strength to share these horrific ordeals that you endured with the u.s. senate and the american public. i would like to begin, please, by discussing the imbalance of power. the imbalance of power that underlies so much of this abuse. miss de la rosa, you made reference to this in your remarks, power over transfer, power overall aspects of your life. how did it feel, and how did that play a role in making you vulnerable to this abuse? >> senator, i felt trapped, powerless. it wasn't -- there were so many things that were taken from me or times i was stuck in transit. i was held longer than i was supposed to be because of not being at a facility that could file my paperwork. i was in prison six months longer than i was supposed to be for this investigation. there is just so much that we need to work on as far as the being able to report it. >> and miss the officer who assaulted you, de la rosa had been previously investigated yes sir. >>,. >> for sexually abusing other female prisoners. >> yes, sir. >> but we still on the job? >> yes, sir. >> so you are in a federal prison supervised by a male officer who had complete control over all aspects of your life? >> yes, sir. >> unrestricted access to you while working? >> yes, sir. >> who eventually pled guilty to sexual abuse and what's to 135 months in prison. >> yes, sir. >> while that abuse was ongoing, did you have any safe outlook or outlet to report it or did you feel you have a safe outlet to report? it >> no, sir. >> in lexington they have something called the penalty box which is if an officer is under investigation they put them in the phone and email room so they listen to your phone calls and your emails. so, the inmates would call it the hot box but all officers called it the penalty box. so anyway that you could report something to outside staff on the throughout the prison is an prea email or a phone number. but you would not feel safe when reporting it when the officer you want to report is in the penalty box listening to all of your phone calls and reading all of your emails. so, no, at lexington i did not feel safe reporting. >> what kind of retaliation did you fear? >> all of the retaliation that i got. i was working on an 8000 our welding apprenticeship. i got transferred to a prison that did not have that program. i was 46 hours from completing that program. i was transferred to the prison that i was scared to be at. i got transferred straight back there after reporting its. i got put back at the prison that i had reported. all of my belongings ended up missing. there were letters from my son and my grandpa, my papa, that passed. pictures over the last nine years that i was incarcerated of my child coming to see me, and he passed away. i cannot ever get those things back. letters that he wrote me since he was ten years old, i will never get those things back. and they just came up missing. it is supposed to be -- they tell you that whenever you tell the officer that it is -- whatever you tell on an officer that it is completely confidential, but all of those things that happen to be afterwards were not coincidence. they were not. >> access and proximity to your family, how did they play a role in your fear of retaliation any retaliation that you experienced? >> not being able to make phone calls, constantly being put in, when covid started, quarantine. they would restart your quarantine, put you 21 days, no phone calls, no anything. so, every time they moved you, you have 21 days of not being able to contact your family. of not being able to have video visits with your kids, and for nine years, that is what my kids look forward to every week. they can do anything they want and they do. >> miss moore, i'd like to ask you the same question. how access to family, in proximity to family play a role. >> -- >> and if you wouldn't mind, miss more, to make sure your microphone -- >> like she said, the same. fear of getting incident reports for nothing, not being able to call home, not being able to have contact with visit -- video visits. i did not necessarily have that happen where i was at. but i did fear retaliation, which is why i never reported it while i was still at the prison. my whole goal was to try to get closer to home. i put in a near home transfer before i went to all hurston, and because all hurston needed head count, i had to go there. so that is how i ended up at alderson, so again, here i am trying to get to the fight to get closer to my family so that i can have visits because i had one visit while i was there for my daughter's birthday but, and i did seven years in prison there. and so being able to talk to my family, and my grandmother, because she is older, sickly, that was very important to me. and my daughter was seven when i went to prison. so, that was very important to me. like she said, the officers have a lot of control, you know? they have a lot of control and we really do not have a say so. i had already been in prison with women who had reported stuff and been sentenced, and sent to county jail where the food is moldy, and they are wearing underwear that are previously worn. it's like, no one wants to be uprooted from a prison that you've taken time to do programs in, and be sent to another prison because you report this stuff. so, i'm sure that's why a lot of people don't report, besides the retaliation. and i had already heard that he had been under investigation before, but nothing was done, so, i mean, who was honored to report something if something was gonna happen? and i didn't report it, and they called me after i transferred prisons. i was at a whole other prison when they called me to ask about it. >> thank you, miss moore. miss richardson, all have a question for you in the next round. at this time i'm going to yield to ranking member johnson for his first round of questions thank you mister chairman. >>,. >> thank you mister chairman. i think that miss morris highlighting the most difficult aspect of this, is the inability to report. the power that prison guards have over the presenters and how, most certainly some of them,, peripherally abuse that power i want to. quickly go over -- to put this on the table, we know, miss more, you never did report the sexual assaults, correct? >> how do they ever come to light? why are you sitting here before us? at what point in time is it during the prosecution of your abuser? >> no, i guess, the day after i transferred, the day after i'd left to go to peak in from alderson, he got walked off. and maybe like a couple, maybe a week or two, they called me at the prison i was at, like they called my counselor and he came down and got me and it was somebody investigating, and they wanted to, i don't know how they got my name, but they wanted to know what had happened. >> so, somehow, somebody had heard about your abuse and we had talked to a fellow prisoner? did you talk to anybody else about it? >> not really, no. >> somehow the investigators found that they -- they contacted you, and then you told your story to the investigators. >> yeah. they asked if i wanted to tell my story that first i said no. and they gave me a couple of days to give them a call back. and i don't know. i know that they have cameras in the administration building, so i don't know if maybe they went through the cameras and seen that i -- >> saw something -- miss richardson, what about you? did you have a report this to anybody when you were in prison? >> no, sir. i didn't. i had actually found out through a former inmate that, -- been rested for it and that empower me to come forward. but prior to that, i would've never told anyone, because i was mandated to be there in the mcc because i was on medical hold for my eyes and i'd already been sentenced. >> what about you miss de la rosa? did you ever report this when you were a prisoner? >> -- >> yeah -- >> i was moved from lexington to brian, texas to complete a program there, and when i was in bryan, texas someone came and spoke with me and asked me about it and i was reluctant to talk to them at first and i ended up reporting it while i was in bryan. and shortly after that -- >> so again, one of the only reasons than any of your situations came to light is because somebody investigating abuse came and talked to you. >> yes. >> miss smith, being an expert in this area, just, again, i'm not looking for a hard and fast answer, i'm doubting this is been researched. you've seen that probably most cases of this kind of abuse go completely unreported. would that be -- >> i think these cases are like sexual abuse in the community, as well. often those cases go unreported as well. to be victimized means that you don't have power. and i think it is that sense of powerlessness that makes you think that either you can't report, nobody is going to believe you or that nothing is going to happen to you. you will not be protected because you are not protected in this situation. >> so, chances are, based on the statistics that we have something like 8000 complaints that have not been filed, that may still be just the tip of the iceberg? >> absolutely. >> obviously, those audits haven't worked,, prea but i mean maybe they haven't some. -- cases, but they've certainly not eliminated sexual assaults. >> so, let's say, aspects of it have worked, but some of the procedures have not so. what i would say in the audits that -- they need a tremendous amount of work. >> can you think of -- can any of you think of any process of reporting where you might feel safe enough to actually try and report it? i have a hard time of thinking of one, quite honestly. it is such a devilish problem. miss smith, can you think of some kind of reporting -- i mean, we find out a chaplain is doing the abuse of this, you think that there will be a place for somebody to go. somebody set up inside the prison that could be in a position of power -- what, what is the solution lie here? >> i think that there are a number of issues. okay, so, first of all, you start with being able to report outside of the institution. >> correct. so, where would you go outside? how would that be done when they're monitoring phone calls, email messages, that type of thing? >> well, you know, the fact is is that there should be a phone line that you can use that is not monitored, right? that can go for a report outs to a rape crisis center, or some other, or an inspector generals office. >> but the prison guards are going to know that you're using that phone. writes? that's -- >> yes, yes, but the fact is -- the fact that there is a potential for abuse as their currently is already, does not mean that you don't take those steps. i think you also have to protect people from retaliation. we are also hearing here is that these women did not report because they actually had no confidence at all that they would be believed. >> no, again, yes, the retaliation, the power is real. >> exactly. >> the power is real to transfer you away. the power is real. so, it really does come down to, if you really gonna prevent this, it has to be some kind of method event in an honest reporting system that cannot be abused for, you know, for other things that prisoners may be doing from inside the prison. i mean, there is the real devilish problem, here. >> yes, a great. >> can any of the three witnesses, can you think of a reporting system that you would've had confidence and? can you think of one? i will start with you, miss de la rosa. can you think of something that if it would have been available you might have used to try to report this or is the power just so overwhelming and the threats of retaliation are so horrific that you just had to bear it? >> i honestly cannot think of a way that you can reported that the staff will not know about. >> miss moore, can you think of one? >> no. >> miss richardson? >> no, sir. because one thing is for sure, wrong or right, it doesn't matter, they all stick together. >> so mister chairman, to me there is the crux of the problem that needs to be solved. how can people inside prisons report without having very high probability of being retaliated against because people are abusing them? i mean, again, i think our next panel, that will be the main question, of what mainline of questioning that i will be pursuing there. thank you, mister chairman. >> thank you very much, ranking member johnson. senator padilla? >> thank you mister chair. as you have so well laid out, the purpose of today's hearing is to address sexual misconduct that plagues federal prisons, and the irreversible horror that it causes victims. well the various investigations tell us that abuse and exploitation has an ramped. there's no misconception that incidents are isolated to only the facilities explicitly mentioned. the horrendous reality is that detaining abuses, are pervasive across the country. my office has received numerous reports about california facilities suffering from dangerous living conditions, you are long delays in providing adequate health care in the midst of the covid-19 pandemic, and yes, claims of sexual abuse and assault. now, yesterday, senators durbin, feinstein, grassley and i send a follow-up letter to our original letter requesting more information from the gop regarding sexual misconduct allegations by its personnel. now, we are reiterated that the department of justice must take immediate action to root out staff misconduct at b.o.p.. this behavior cannot continue. across thethe bureau must act uo make meaningful, systemic improvements, in facilities across the country. now it has been reported that incarcerated individuals who are victims of sexual misconduct and abuse may become overwhelmed with crippling anxiety and fear of retaliation if incidents are reported. correctional facilities should not be contributing to an environment where victims are terrified of reporting abuse due to fear of retaliation. now, one detainee in dublin said that she was quote, overwhelmed with fear, anxiety, and anger and cried uncontrollably after enduring abuse and retaliation for reporting. miss richardson, miss moore, and miss de la rosa, i want to thank you as well for being here today and for your courage to share your stories. no one should have to suffer what you have and your testimony today is invaluable as we work to ensure that these abuses are prevented in the future. would you each be willing to share a little bit about your mental health journey? how you've been able to manage, cope? again, it's taken courage for you to be able to tell your story. to tell your story publicly, and to be here today to participate in this hearing. if you just talk a little bit about what the impacts have been, what resources or support you've been able to access to help. miss richardson? >> i was diagnosed with ptsd and i believe it is called persistent anxiety disorder. since that diagnosis i have been on medication and also my spirituality comes into play, and keeps me grounded, somewhat. >> thank you. miss moore? >> i continue to see a therapist at the prison that i've transferred to, and the prison after that, and then when i got home, i was out three years, i continue to see a therapist. i have not really been -- i've not had anxiety since i've been out of prison because i feel like i'm not contained anymore. and so the retaliation is not so -- it's not as scary as it is in there. but with this, like before, when we took -- when they asked me if i wanted to do it, at first, i was afraid. i felt like, you know, what kind of retaliation can i get from this? you know? so, my anxiety has been higher in the last couple of -- you know, knowing that i'm coming here to do this. but as i told my attorneys, i'm not the only one who's went through this, and if my story can help somebody else, then -- or maybe going through, or could potentially go through it, i decided to put my anxiety to the side, and like she said, my faith helps me. i have two children, and i work every day, you know? so i'm trying not to use it as a crutch and let it control my life. i'm trying to keep control of my life, and keep the control of my life since i've got it back after what happened. and i'm just trying to move on with my life. but a part of this is a part of me, healing by doing this today. >> thank you. >> miss de la rosa? >> anxiety has definitely been my biggest struggle. >> i was a lot more anxious prior to his incarceration. during his trial, they did not even have him incarcerated. he got a bond and he was out. and my anxiety was so high during that time. but since he's been incarcerated i feel much safer. >> thank you. thank you all for, again, being able to speak to that publicly. because we know that there's still a lot of stigma around mental health and accessing, a counselor, therapist, and things that we need to overcome. it is okay to not feel okay. professor smith, i wonder if in the brief time you have you could begin to discuss more generally the mental health impacts of correctional officer abuse on detainees both while they're in custody and when there are no longer incarcerated. >> what we know is that a significant number of women who come into custodial settings come in with past histories of abuse and trauma. and that abuse, the abuse as these women have talked about in custody actually highlights that existing -- it deepens the existing trauma that they already have. and as we know they -- they don't have many resources available for women in custody to actually deal with the trauma that they are experiencing. they experience before they were in custody, while they are in custody, and also that they will experience upon their return. and so i think that it is really important that we really enhance those services in custodial settings before they returned to the community. >> thank you very much. thank you mister chair. >> thank you senator padilla. miss richardson, you stated in court, described a meeting in 2017 where a b.o.p. supervisor told you and other assembled prisoners, quote, i don't want to hear nothing about my officers touching you. and another officers who ignored pleas, from female prisoners, and said that your abuser, quote, will eventually get caught. what was it like to hear those things? and what in your view was it about mcc new york, any environment there, that contributed to that culture? >> well, two of those statements were not actually made by me. it was made by the other ladies on the complaints. but i did hear one of the statements by counselor louis, and at the time it did not register to me what it actually meant. but the dynamics of that place, i guess, look at said before, wrong right, it doesn't matter, they all stick together. >> unpack that a little bit for us, please, miss richardson. >> you said the statement of, counsel lewinsky saying, well, i don't hear anything about what my officers are doing to you ladies. everybody wants to cover their own, so they basically, they don't do anything about what they hear. they sort of sweep it under the carpet. >> thank you, miss richardson. >> miss moore, you explain how the captain would take you to isolated areas where there were no security cameras. talk a little bit about the presence of cameras in the prison, the lack of coverage of certain areas in the prison and how that contributed to an environment where you and others were vulnerable. >> where i was, it was a camp. so the cameras are very, there's not very many at a camp. maybe they have some of the buildings, but alderson, if you've ever been there, it's really big. so the 75% of the place that is not covered by cameras. and then in his office, of course, of course, his office, does not have a camera in it, you know? and there are certain parts in the building where we slept that were like the counselors in the case managers were they did not have cameras in those areas, you know? so being at a camp, they say supposed to be low securities, i'm assuming that's why they don't have as many cameras, but for things like this i feel like there could be more even if it's just some outside you know, just more. and then, you know, what can you do about a camera in his office? you know, he's a captain, of course, they're probably not gonna put a camera in his office, you know? so it's like he had a perfect opportunity, being there. a little visibility for anyone to see. >> thank you, miss moore. >> professor smith, let's talk a little bit about the prison rape elimination act. it is perhaps obvious, given the title but what is the purpose of the prison rape elimination act? >> the purpose is not only prevention, but also detection, punishment, and also to create the conditions, whether it's the law, whether it is policy, whether it's related to prosecution, to end sexual abuse of people in custody. that is the aim. >> professor smith, one of the most concerning aspects of our investigation is that we found these prea audits that was conducted in times where there was ongoing sexual, abuse inside dublin, inside coleman, and yet, the auditors found and stated in these reports that both facilities met, or exceeded every standard talk a little. bit about that and have to ask the question. , do these audits work? >> i think, as i testified, there are six significant problems with the audit. and there need to be substantial improvements. currently, we have the -- we have prisons, you know, as i've mentioned we have a prison nurse who -- we have the people who are supposed to be being audited auditing themselves, essentially. so, what happens, there's not a great deal of diversity. what we have as we have audits, auditors who formerly worked at prisons as wardens. we have auditors who -- agencies, who audit each other and so there is a disincentive for them to actually find another agency out of compliance because they are concerned that when they are audited that they will be found out of compliance. so i think what is really important is having neutral auditors. to have people who are sort of, clearly, not a part of that system. and also to have audits of the audits. to actually go behind in the same way that you did in that report to actually identify, yes, there were zero complaints here, but we looked at case law, and we looked at actually criminal complaints. and this doesn't match up with what you're reporting. so i think that it has to be more than the actual audits, but they're actually has to be some other independent verification of that audit which would include, as the committee has done here, looking at whether their complaints. looking at litigation, talking to external organizations, talking to people who are out of the system. >> my time remaining is brief, if you can attempt this one, do you think it will be helpful to have more women working in facilities that incarcerate women? >> absolutely. absolutely. and i testify to that as well. i mean, the presence of female staff, i mean, in fact, one of the huge issues that comes to bear in each of these situations is how did these male staff actually have unfettered access to women inmates? they should have been -- a door should have been open, the male staff should have been walking through, and in many places what's happened is female staff are the only ones who are allowed to do's -- performance certain services, or perform in certain ways for female inmates. >> thank you, professor smith. senator johnson, give further questions for this panel? >> thank you, mister chairman. yes, it was miss smith's point earlier, obviously, sexual assault occurring throughout society, you can actually argue inside the walls of a prison, might be one place where you could actually prevent it from happening. i mean, there are guards, people there to enforce the law. you could argue that it just should not happen. i think with my last round of questioning here, i just want to get some sense of how pervasive it is within prison, obviously, and society, there are so many reasons why rape victims do not come forward. you have those same dynamics occurring with prisoners, plus you have even more horrific power and fear of retaliation which prevents victims from coming forward and really blowing the whistle on it. so, i guess what i'd like to ask through -- the three witnesses is within the spectrum of isolated, too pervasive, having talked to fellow prisoners, do you have any sense whatsoever that this is -- that you are unfortunately a victim of an isolated problem? and maybe it is different for every facility. there are different problems different facilities, but you have any kind of sense, whatsoever, in terms of what kind of problem we're dealing with here? something, again, that you're the unfortunate victim of, an isolated case, or just unfortunate victim of something that is pervasive within the prison population of women's prison? i'll start with you, miss richardson. >> i was one of seven victims from mcc, that the officer pled guilty to, and that was in the pretrial that i was housing, i was transferred to tallahassee -- prior to me leaving in october, there's three inmates there that were sexually assaulted by an officer, one of which, an officer walked off the compound. it seems to be in all facilities. >> yes, it's occurring, again, i'm trying to get some sense of, what's the total prison population of women, around 17, 000, for my briefing? anyway, miss moore, what is your sense, isolated, or just pervasive throughout prison systems? >> i think it's throughout the prison systems, as well. the captain had more than just me, i never knew the ladies, but there were other women on his case, as well that came forward. for him to get prosecuted, so, it's not isolated. again, you are kind of dealing with the same information that we are looking at right now in terms of what has been in the end, prosecuted. what has come to light. i have trying to get some sense, through conversations with fellow prisoners -- do you have any sense, whatsoever? i will go to miss de la rosa for that? >> pervasive throughout. it is way more people than the people have reported. it is throughout the system. >> so, that would also imply, there are a lot more perpetrators? >> yes. >> again, miss chairman, i appreciate you forcing us to look at something we have to look at. we just do. we really do need the department of justice to step up to the plate. examining this carefully utilize different tools. recognize the pre act has certainly not limited this. try, we just need more of a sense of how pervasive this is and what we can really do again, pointing out the real problems. how can prisoners have any confidence to report? the other thing that i found bizarre, we will cover this in the next panel, the strange situation if the office of internal affairs compels a guard to do an interview, and they find out wrongdoing has occurred. that is a get out of jail free card. i think obviously we have to look to the office of the inspector general to step up their investigations. because the supreme court has ruled on that. that is the way it's going to be. that is compelled testimony. we have to figure out a better way to investigate. one of the ways you reduce this, at least, is more consistent prosecutions and very severe penalties. by the way, penalty includes incarceration. even those perpetrators deserve to be in a prison that is safe. this is a big problem. as i said in the outset, it is not a fun problem to look at. . . >> ranking member johnson, i very much appreciate your consistent support and engagement in this investigation and that of your staff. it's a powerful message to the department, that there is strong bipartisan will to address this crisis. we will have the opportunity to question government witnesses in the next panel. i want to take this opportunity to thank each and every one of you, and i want to thank, in particular, you miss richardson, miss moore, and miss de la rosa for coming forward and having the strength and courage to address the u. s. senate in this setting. to speak publicly about what you endured and to help senators and the entire congress to understand the dynamics that led to this exploitation and the horrific ordeals that you suffered and please know that we will continue to work on the basis of what you shared with us. and i believe the courage you have demonstrated today will inspire and empower others as well to share their stories. so it is with gratitude and admiration for your courage that i thank you and professor smith, thank you for lending your expertise to the senate today. i hope as senator johnson and i continue to work together and identify a solution, either at the legislative or executive level, you will remain engage with us. at this time, we will excuse the panel. thank you again for your contributions. we will take a brief recess and set up on the second panel of government witnesses. [applause] >> we will call our second panel of witnesses. >> michael horowitz, serves as a inspector general for the department of justice, colette peters serves as the director of the federal bureau of prison. the rule of the subcommittee requires all witnesses to be sworn in. at this time, i would ask you to please stand and raise your right hand. do you swear that the testimony you're about to give to the subs of committee is the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god? >> thank you, you may be seated, let the record show that both witnesses have answered in the affirmative. your written testimony is in full will be printed in the record and i would ask that you seek to limit your oral testimony to five minutes, as indicated by the clocks in front of you. mr. horowitz, we will hear from you first. >> thank you, chairman, ranking member johnson, members of the subcommittee, during my tenure as inspector general, i have identified for each of the five attorneys general and deputies that i've worked with that the safety and security of the federal prisons is one of the most important and compelling issues facing the department of justice. i am particularly pleased to be here today to talk about these issues and to work with the committee on how to address them. i also want to thank you for the important and impactful report that was released today by the bipartisan work and through the bipartisan work of the committee. i also want to take a moment to thank miss de la rosa and miss moore and miss richardson. for their courageous and compelling testimony that we heard in the first panel and for their bravery in cooperating with my office as we pursued the wrongdoers who committed the heinous acts that they described. because of their assistance, those corrupt employees were held accountable in federal court and are no longer able to terrorize other inmates. no inmate should ever suffer sexual abuse in prison. as your report details, female inmates are particularly vulnerable to such assaults. we must do everything we can to eradicate such behavior and you have my commitment that the oig will continue to make this fight against sexual assault one of our highest priorities. indeed, our office regularly assigns and, commits about 50% of our investigative resources to addressing criminal administrative wrongdoing by b. o. p. employees. an outsized percentage of resources given that the b. o. p. accounts for about 30% of the departments employees. however, i only have about 113 agents nationwide. which means i have the equivalent of 56 agents available to handle the thousands of allegations we receive across the 123 federal prisons. it is clear that more independent oversight is needed and that is why we have asked congress, and i'm working with congress to try to get more resources, to do that kind of work. we continue to see widespread instances of sexual assault. most recently, it was discussed earlier, the b. o. p. 's prison in dublin, california. an all female prison. just last week, a jury convicted the former warden of sexually assaulting eight inmates at the prison. the investigation that we have conducted with the fbi has also identified other employees and charged other dublin employees, including the former chaplain and we have a very active and ongoing investigation there and these problems didn't just happen overnight and the b. o. p. must do more to prevent and detect them before they become endemic at other institutions as we have seen at coleman and others as we heard in the first panel. in short, these are substantial problems that need immediate attention and action. the subcommittee's report, and the recommendations in it, are going to be very valuable as we move forward to address them. we are also pleased by the recommendations contained in the deputy attorney generals resource part by her task force on b. o. p.'s sexual assault. those recommendations need to be implemented promptly. i've also had several positive discussions with director peters, she became the director in july of this year. let me mention some additional issues that i am hoping the committee will consider. first, the b. o. p. needs to be and take more timely and effective action holding accountable corrupt b. o. p. employees that. second, the b. o. p. needs to rely on credible inmate testimony in its administrative misconduct proceedings. third, the b. o. p. must prepare and improve its camera systems. fourth, the b. o. p. needs to implement an effective staff search and contraband policy. one of the things i am hoping the committee will consider is a potential increase in the penalties for contraband smuggling. in some interest, as those are merely misdemeanors. contraband is smuggled into b. o. p. prisons to provide contraband to inmates that they are grooming for their sexual assaults that should be addressed. i am also taking several steps within the elegy to ensure we can do a better job in our office, investigating and pursuing these investigations. i've included them using data analytics, to identify problems early on, like we have recounted in fci coleman and what occurred there. we will take more action and i'm assuring this committee that we will take those steps. i appreciate the support of this committee and of the congress and pursuing the work and allowing us to conduct our investigations. we will use all the tools you have provided us to take action to prevent this scourge from occurring. i look forward to answering your questions today and thank you again for the important work that you've done. >> thank you inspector general horowitz, director peters. >> good morning, chairman ossoff, ranking member johnson, and members of the committee. i am honored to appear before you as the bureau's 12th director and to provide leadership to corrections professionals in the largest corrections agency in the country. after 30 years and public safety, working in roles from victim advocates and inspector general, to serving as the director of the oregon department of corrections, i can tell you that the topic of this hearing is of immense importance to me and i thank the committee for their years of work. i especially thank the victims who are here today, bravely sharing their heartbreaking and compelling stories. i welcome accountability and oversight. i welcome this hearing. we must come to this work with our arms wide open. our work with congress, the office of the inspector general, and the government accountability office among others has helped us identify and address areas of concerns within our agencies. sexual misconduct by bureau employees is an issue of critical importance. and i also appreciate this committee's support in this area. with your oversight, i see this moment as an opportunity to work together and to make our facilities safer for the people in our care and custody. i believe we all want the same thing, a safe, humane, and effective federal bureau of prisons. any kind of misconduct, especially sexual misconduct, by bureau employees is always unacceptable and must not be tolerated. the vast majority of our employees do come to work every day ready to serve in complex and challenging jobs. that can also change lives and make our community safer. i joined these dedicated employees in being horrified by the small number of employees who engage in inappropriate egregious and criminal behavior. we must hold accountable those who violate that public trust and we are strengthening our processes, realizing resources and clearly communicating those expectations. our work is to combat sexual misconduct. and that work is complex and must include prevention, reporting investigation and discipline and prosecution. we must begin with assessing and changing the culture. at all women's facilities, we want to ensure gender responsive trauma informed practices are followed. we must train all bureau employees on their obligation to report misconduct. since leadership is essential to creating the appropriate culture, we are examining how we select, supervise, and select wardens in our womens facilities. i believe that detection and accountability is critical to deterrence. we will leverage both technological and human resources to better detect and prevent sexual misconduct on the technological side, we are working on upgrading camera technology and usage. i have also been very clear in my communication to bureau employees that while i am proud of those who come to work dedicated to our core values and missions, for those that aren't, we will feather them out and hold them accountable. up to and including termination and conviction and we will also not tolerate any acts of reprisal there is no and should be no limitation on who may submit allegations of misconduct and our office of internal affairs work closely with the office of inspector general and other entities to ensure all obligations are viewed. in this view, we are looking to collaborative formerly incarcerated individuals and using the lessons learned from their experience. myself and other bureau employees have already participated in two very powerful listening sessions. >> it included formerly incarcerated individuals. we too are bolstering and reorganizing investigative resources and personnel to support the office of inspector, the office of internal affairs in conducting timely, thorough, and unbiased investigations. this includes adding more than 40 employees to the oia team, realigning, reporting structure for those agents and training investigators in trauma informed techniques. when criminal misconduct is uncovered, it is important that people are held accountable, either administratively or criminally, if legal action is warranted. that is why i'd like to publicly thank the inspector general for his commitment to ensuring the bureau success through the timely investigations and i'd like to thank the deputy attorney general forgiving very clear direction to all u.s. attorneys on prioritizing prosecution of criminal misconduct in the bureau. as i've said many times, and i will repeat here today, i believe in government. i believe in transparency and i know we cannot do this work alone. we must come to this work with our arms wide open. chairman ossoff, ranking member johnson and members of the subcommittee, i am honored to speak on behalf of the bureau and it's dedicated employees. this concludes my opening statement, and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you, director peters. and i will begin. director peters, you were appointed over the summer, you've been on the job about five months. i think it's important to acknowledge, and i know ranking member johnson and i, i think both acknowledge you are new in this post, the overwhelming majority presented in the report occured prior to your tenure nevertheless as you and i have discussed in your --, and it judiciary committee, the buck now stops with you. and one thing i want to state at the outset of your response to our questions today, while we are deeply interested in your plans for reform, and you will have every opportunity to present them, the purpose of this hearing as well is to examine what happened in the past, what went wrong and what it has been broken at the bureau prison. and you in your capacity, lead in the b. o. p. is to help us understand that. i hope that's clear, director peters. thank you, i appreciate that, same to you mr. horowitz. ranking member johnson made reference to this in his questions to our prior panel. defining the scope of the problem. we agree that is vital. what we have found in the course of this investigation is that in two thirds of the federal prisons that house women the last ten years, there has been sexual abuse of female prisoners by b. o. p. employees. i believe this number is likely significantly higher. both in the number of facilities and the number of cases. in part because of the severe deficiencies we have identified in terms of how, director peters, the office of internal affairs handles investigations of allegations of sexual abuse. the limitations that you have acknowledged, inspector general horowitz, and your office. as well as the widespread fear of retaliation. and a culture of impunity that we have seen prevail in multiple cases. we start with dublin. it was widely known before much broke into the official record that there is a serious problem at dublin. there have been some multiple convictions, there are over a dozen ongoing criminal investigations. this went on for years. the warden and the chaplain were sexually abusing prisoners. before dublin, multiple officers abusing multiple female inmates and other facilities. fcc new york, nbc brooklyn, fcc coleman. every few years. despite the culture of impunity, despite the fear of retaliation, it has broken in to the public consciousness that there is a serious problem. yet nothing systemic has been done to address it. in fact when we asked senior b. o. p. personnel, what was done after the brooklyn facts came to light, what was done after the coleman facts came to light? little or nothing in the way of a systemic attempt to address the issue. >> i want to understand from you, director peters, why? you have been in the job now for five months, presumably you have debriefed senior leadership, that's outgoing, yes? >> yes. >> you have inspected prisons, you have discussed these issues with regional directors, with warden's, i presume you have done your best to understand so you can be effective in addressing it. before we get into what you're going to change, why is it that for ten years, despite it being known to bop leadership there is a serious problem, nothing was done to address it in any kind of systemic or effective way. >> senator, i wish i had a good answer to that question. what i can tell you is that when you look at the institutions that you are highlighting, the brooklyn, mcc new york, dublin, you see an institution that has been riveted with cases. it is hard to explain. it is hard to understand how systemic changes were not implemented. when you look at the power differential inside an institution, there is no ability for an individual who is incarcerated to consent to any form of sexual relations. and then when you look at individuals like a warden and like a chaplain, there is something even more exponential there in terms of that power differential. so, i find that situation is absolutely egregious. it is about the systemic change. that is what we need to look at, senator, we need to be able to look in all of the categories that i mentioned in my opening statement. we have to figure out how to prevent this. we have to figure out how to better investigate, streamline resources, hold people accountable and work to prosecute those who deserve prosecution. >> thank you, director peters, i appreciate that. again, i want to stipulate, that support for the public to be reminded that the events that we are in investigative have occured prior to your tenure. nevertheless, i think you have to understand why systemic change was neither attempted nor succeeded. because for you to reform this vast bureaucracy, which is diseased, and the subcommittee has done other look work looking at the open last moments. we looked at corruption and misconduct in atlanta, for example. and we examined, in the course of that hearing, a lack of accountability from the very top. you need to understand that in order to change it. here's something i want to just put to you and get your response, director peters. we in the course of conducting this investigation heard different things from folks at different levels of your organization. so, for example, we interviewed a former warden at dublin. not the one who has been convicted, a former warden at dublin. who, described this as, and this is a quote from his interview, bad people making bad choices. he identified it as, and i'm now paraphrasing, but the gist of it was, a few bad apples, people making a few bad choices, not so much systemic. he denied there is a culture of abuse. we spoke with your chief of internal affairs who described a culture of abuse. who described it as systemic at that facility. have you, for example, talked to the regional director who was in charge at the time to understand how it could have evaded their attention that this was ongoing at dublin for so long. how is it that there are different views within your own bureaucracy. your former warden saying, just a few bad apples. your own internal affairs folks saying it was a culture of abuse. >> i have a tough time understanding how the warden drew that conclusion based on the facts as i had observed them today. i have not spoken to that warden. i have had lengthy conversations with the administrator responsible for our office in the internal affairs. and we agree. that is a culture of abuse. that is a culture of misconduct. and that culture needs to be reset in order to ensure the safety and security of those in our care and custody. we do have systemic changes in the works that will help us reset that culture there. and then throughout the federal bureau. >> ranking member johnson? >> director peters, how do you determine if it's a few bad apples versus a culture of abuse? how do you make that a determination systemically? obviously, when you had the warden and the chaplain, you kind of figure it's a culture. again, you have a number of facilities. how do you make that determination? thank you, senator, the bureau is now putting together assessments where we have teams who are trained to come in and assess that culture. i think some of the signs are absolutely, senator, like you said high-level officials engaging in this egregious, criminal acts. there is clearly a culture. also, it when you find those who are incarcerated who openly tell our cultural assessment team that they don't feel comfortable coming forward. they don't feel like there are avenues to report in a way where they can report without fear of reprisal. it's those sorts of warning signs that we want to be able to find during these cultural assessments. so we don't have a dublin repeat again. those individuals in our care and custody are safe. and so, we look forward to continuing those cultural assessments and ensuring that we are taking all of that data into account. >> do you have any idea, in terms of how someone who's being sexually abused inside a prison can report that without having a very legitimate fear of retaliation and reprisal. can you think of anything, understanding you have a hotline, well, they're using the hotline. you have provided communication, that will be abused by drug traffickers it's tough not to crack. you have any possible ideas about what might work? >> thank you, senator, i appreciate those questions to those who are formerly incarcerated now victims of these acts that you asked earlier this morning. i think the answer is there has to be many avenues. first we have to create a culture where they have developed relationships with the frontline officers. and they do feel comfy will talk to them. absent in, that we have to develop a culture where family level winds can report internally or externally. the key, as we listen to women talk this morning, the ability to report independently without any tracking from the bureau directly to the inspector generals office is a key component of being able to crack that night. >> again, they are in prison, how can they report without people knowing? let's face, that they report, after some amount of time, all of a sudden people are asking questions? i mean -- >> that's right. right now, the way they can report directly to the inspector general without us knowing is through true lengths. they're able to send an email to the inspector general outlining their allegations and their concerns. you are absolutely right, investigators come, senators, questions are asked. the information is inside the institution. and so i can just be reporting alone. it has to be things like the convictions that we are seeing at a california, so that our bureau employees know that if they engage in this type of behavior or engage of acts of reprisal, they will be held accountable. and i think that level of prosecution and accountability will allow us overtime to develop an environment where individuals can come forward without that fear of reprisal. >> in the audience, how many inmates are actually, what percentage of the inmates are questioned during the rulers things in a confidential manner? >> i don't know the answer to that question. and i would certainly be one way, more all inclusive survey., surveillance audits. that type of thing. how many personality you have in the office of internal affairs? >> i don't know the total number. i do know we added more than 40 positions to the office of internal affairs in order to help us. >> probably in the hundreds. inspector general, horowitz, do you know? >> i don't know the exact number. i think it's -- i begun. i'm not sure exactly how many they have. we have 130 agents around the country devoting about half their time's up to this. and if i could answer that, i think you've hit on, as we've talked about in the first panel, a critically important question. as director peter said, there is this ability to send an email directly to us that is not -- that isn't automized, that cannot be traced. the question is, of course, who is watching over people shoulders when that occurs? where is the terminal? what happens when we respond? obviously, we want to respond. and that has to be addressed. i think one of the things that is critically important is the culture question we have been talking about. as you know from having run a business, -- why don't the employees step forward? >> why do we need the inmates and only inmates to step up? it's a very serious problem. we have the warden, a chaplain, and many other employee employees at the dublin prison. we can talk about brooklyn, and d. c. brooklyn, we can talk about mcc new york, we could not exit lanta. we could talk about thompson prison. we could keep going. why aren't those employees coming forward, when they have a predator among their fellow employees. they are the eyes and ears along with the inmates and they are the ones that need to come forward. for people who are responsible, and for people who should've come forward, including supervisors. >> director peters, i know local law enforcement, for a host of reasons, are having a very difficult time recruiting. the defund police movement, blame cops first, that type of thing. what kind of recruitment issues are you having the bureau of prisons? >> thank you for that question, senator, first i can't agree more with what the inspector general just said, our employees have an obligation to come forward. i think it ties directly into your next question, which is, how did we hire the right people to come in who want to change hearts and minds and who want to do the right thing and who have the core values and we have the ethics. if ever there is a time when it was difficult to hire at the bureau presence, it is now for all the reasons you just mentioned, senator. it was difficult to hire before the pandemic and then the pandemic hit and made these jobs even less attractive as well as the other issues that you just raised in the field of law enforcement one of our top priorities is recruiting and retention strategies and we have been working diligently internal with the bureau. but we also reached out to two organizations in contracted with them and hopes that we can rely on their expertise to approve the ability to hire not just people but the right people for this business. >> if you will indulge me for one more point and question. there is a real problem a false reports, correct? do either of you have any indication of how significant a problem that is? you are talking about people who have committed crimes, some of them maybe aren't the most honorable or most honest. not a bad way to retaliate against a guard either. how do you, how does the bureau prisons, how does the office of internal affairs, how does the office of the inspector general try to sift through the true claims verses the fraudulent ones. >> excellent question, senator. it's something having done police corruption cases back in as a federal prosecutor, it was one of the key questions also. you had a lot of allegations against the bad caps, but you had allegations against the good cups because the drug dealers knew that was a good way to impact them. you have to be very careful of investigators to understand that. frankly, the only way you do that is by getting the complaints, carefully vetting them and not jumping to conclusions. and that is one of the challenges that we face also particularly because it is so challenging to get into the prison, and to see if there is cooperation. and this is where cameras come in. i could talk about this for days. it's not only on sexual abuse, it is assaults in prison. how many times do we get a complaint that an inmate was assaulted by another correctional officer? a lot of those are false. because they had an injury, it was their own doing. we don't have a camera. there is no excuse for that. none what so ever. >> i completely agree with that. and that is just -- that has to be fixed. the cameras have to be fixed, they have got to be and provide, the hundreds and coverage, that would take care of an awful lot of this. in the scheme of things, probably one of most cost-effective ways are really addressing this. >> you are 1000 percent right. >> thank you, ranking member johnson, and i would not disappoint upper final privilege, senator grassley and i have the present camera form act. it passed the senate unanimously. any help that anyone in this room can muster getting that through the house before the congress ends will be appreciated. senator langford. >> chairman, thank you for your work and i have several questions on this topic and a couple of questions that are unique and i want to take advantage of that moment and i want to pick up director peters in this discussion about cameras. that was my first question. a common story that we have heard already was that the assault was happening with staff members in locations where they are not monitored. can we get that fixed. in the meantime, how do we make sure until we get cameras in monitoring those locations we, get additional staff, eyes, and ears in those locations. certain policies, if you're passing through these locations you can't do it one-on-one. what is in process right now? >> thank you, senator, i couldn't agree with more of your sentiments and that of the inspector general in my 30 years and public safety, having formally been the inspector general of oregon and the director of the oregon department of corrections, technology and cameras usage is key. you're absolutely right. the stories we heard this morning, people know where the cameras are, both my employees and those in our care in custody and probably more importantly, they know where the cameras are not. so, the more that we can improve that technology inside, in my experience, i have seen this type of behavior and other non sexual behavior decreased dramatically with the introduction of cameras, and both the static cameras inside the institution and also the usage of body cameras. so, one of the concerns i have today as the new director of the bureau is the lack of resources that we have for the camera installation. so, the time it's going to take to install these cameras that have been approved based on the resources we have is concerning to me. always appreciate the support of congress in establishing those resources so we can ensure the institutions are safe and secure with the most upgraded technology possible. >> we appreciate that. we are going to look forward to getting a chance to track what facilities were chosen for us what, the process was for the rollout of that. that will be important we able to see as well, how that actually happens. and how those priorities were actually set. while i'm on the technology conversation, different subject on, this still technology related to this, the micro jammers and the manage access. that is a securit, issue, not only within the prison, but outside the prison for individuals to not be basically stuff inside the prison or using contraband cell phones to communicate with other prisoners to be able to coordinate activities within the prison, as well. this has been one that i've worked on for years. i've tried to push, it there have been pilot programs but we have not seen wide distribution of the technology currently exists to do manage access or micro jamming in all of our facilities but it's not being rolled out quickly. what is needed to do that, where does it land on the priorities? >> i couldn't agree more. the attorney general alluded to this. the contraband is the beginning of sexual assault. and so, eradicating the use of cell phones and cider institutions for the various reasons that you just talked about, addressing yes you of drones, the new way to introduce contraband. and really figuring out to ensure that type of technology isn't the introduction of further criminality. at the core of the bureau has to be safety and security. and this issue is really important to me. to answer your question, it is about resources and funding and being able to ensure the technology is kept outside of our institutions. >> absent of the funding, we are relying on local law enforcement to come in with their cell dogs, their cell phone dogs, to help us figure out where the cell phones are. and how to ensure that the least amount of contraband is being introduced into our institutions. >> you want to comment on that as well? >> it's something, senator, i know you have been working on. it's something we have been writing about for ten years now. other states are doing it. long ago, finally the b. o. p., we appreciate them finally taking that effort. as director peter said, cell phones in the prison are a deadly weapon. a deadly weapon. we did a case in puerto rico where it was used to put a hit on a correctional officer. they run drug businesses. they are used to groom future abused inmates. smuggling a cell phone into a prison is a misdemeanor. >> there are several issues we have to resolve here. both the disincentive to be able to bring that in, the consequences for smuggling that into, whether that be a drone, a staff member, or however they may get that in, a contract, or they can get that cellphone in. for the longest, states, local entities couldn't do this jamming because it was blocked in federal law. this is still a big issue for us. and we are still blocking the micro jamming that the technology is there, we are acting like this is 20 years ago. but the technology is there. and the access is being used to effectively deter future crimes that are there and i appreciate the engagement and this is an area we have to continue to advance on to make our presence more secure and our staff that are there, the vast majority are good actors. to continue to protect them as well. director peters, i want to ask you as well about the first step act. and going to make a quick comment and with until they're things. one of the aspects of the first step act was outside groups being allowed to do the annual recidivism work that was there. this was very difficult for the bureau of prisons to be able to allowed outside entities to do. this is very common in state and county facilities. there are popular programs that are done in state and county facilities and recidivism. the bureau of prisons has continued to lock them out, even after the first step act is passed, many have applied and few are actually getting in to be able to do that work. faith-based entities and others are trying to be able to step in and they're being blocked out to do that. i would like to have a follow-up conversation with you and your team on this. i met with a previous director on this. and what i have really got was, we are thinking about it, we are working on it, there is no requirement to do many. it was very clear from congress, start allowing some outside groups to work on recidivism issues within our federal bureau of prisons as we do in state and federal. will you commit to getting a chance to meet with me so you get a chance to talk about? >> i look forward to the conversation. >> thank you.we do want to be able to help in that area of congress has spoken clearly on this. we talked a lot about staff to invade assaults that are there. this continues to be an issue within inmates as well. i have a culturally difficult area that you have to deal with all the time on this, and that is the transgender population that is now in the bureau of prisons care at this point. as of june of this year, the best numbers i have, we have 1427 individuals in the bureau of prisons custody that are transgender. of those, 72% of those are male, of those, 47% of those male individuals are currently incarcerated for sex crimes. so, my question, is how are we protecting other inmates in that, where we have individuals that have a sex crimes conviction. they have currently transitioned already, and they are at another facility, where they are biologically male in a female prison, or biologically male and a female prison. based on, that what policies are in place to be able protect the inmates? i have read through the areas on the policy to be able to honor those individuals and the gender that they've chosen. what about rather individuals that are in the present as well? what are you seeing? >> thank you, senator, this has been an issue that we -- that i have personally working on as the former director the darn of corrections. of course, now is the director of the bureau of prisons. the bottom line answer is safety and security. individualized case management. not making sweeping decisions around our trans population. really, looking at that individuals sitting in front of you. what their situation is. what is the safety and security of the institution we are considering assigning them to. and then trainingour employees to understand the complexities of housing individuals who are trans inside of our institutions and ensuring not just their safety, but as you, said senator, the, safety of those who are incarcerated and the safety of our employees. >> i appreciate that. mister chairman, thank you for the extra time on this. i'm going to make one more statement on that. when i read through the bureau presence transgender policy, it has a section there, transgender in may to be given the opportunity to shower separate from other inmates when individual shower stalls around available. the agency shall not place trying to enter intersects inmates and dedicated facility units are wings as only on the basis of such identification or status. they give some rights to them. is that also extended to other? individuals? so, in the biological male is placed in a female prison, to the other prisoners there also have the same rights and protecting themselves as well, saying, hey this is also our preference to not be housed with an individual that is a biological male especially when there is incarcerated for sex crimes. >> senator, i think that obligation and that onus is on us not the not those who are -- it is our obligation to ensure where they are safe and the people on those units are also save. i wouldn't want to put that ownership on the adults in custody to determine their safety and security. that is an issue that lies with us. >> based on this policy, what i'm asking is, the individuals that are housed with a, do they also get the same opportunity. is that opportunity for tries only given to the transgender inmates? >> the opportunity to provide input is only given to the transgender inmate, the choice of placement is not up to the individual that is incarcerated. that is on us to make that security and housing placement. >> it is not given to the folks they are placed with. >> that is correct. >> i think that it is really important for us to own that safety and security and, that placement decision. we are the experts in corrections, we are the ones that need to determine where those individuals can be appropriately housed. >> you also have a situation where some get the input and some do not. i think if you're going to get input individuals on housing and safety and what and what they feel secure, i think it should be given to all in that situation. >> thank you. >> thank you, senator langford. investigating the abuse of incarcerated women by b. o. p. employees, i want to return to some questions about management, accountability, what has gone wrong for the last ten years, such that there has been no systemic efforts to address this crisis, despite acknowledgment today from the inspector general that it's widespread. let me begin by saying, we found approximately 5200 allegations of sexual abuse targeting inmates by b. o. p. employees over the last decade as the ranking member noted. not all of them will be valid. we also heard, however, from three survivors in the first panel, none of whom themselves made a complaint. given the fear of retaliation, given the power that b. o. p. employees have over the lives of those in their custody, it stands to reason that there is a substantial number of incidents where no complaint is made. we also found who are shocked that the office of internal affairs director peters, has an 8000 case backlog, including at least hundreds of sexual abuse allegations. the first question for you this round, how and by when will you clear it? >> thank you, senator, i spoke earlier, we have added more than 40 positions to the office of internal affairs to help shore up that backlog. i think when you talk about senator, what has gone wrong over the last ten years, it has been lack of resources. it has been a lack of accountability. when you have investigations open for as long as we've had, it's hard to hold people accountable. at the end of the investigations. it's my hope those additional positions will help shore up that backlog. as you know, and from the testimony of the administrator to you from our office of internal affairs, even those additional resources, it's going to require us years to clear the backlog. >> two years, understood, director peters. i hope those sexual abuse allegations will be prioritized as you work through those 8000 cases. i recognize the resource constraints. but i think ranking member johnson, it's fair to say, we hear pretty consistently that the solution to intractable bureaucratic deficiencies is more funding and more personnel., sometimes that is true. but there are deeper management problems here. so, director peters, i want to discuss a little bit about how you are approaching again with the stipulation that you have been on the job for five months. you are new to this role. you are taking charge of the institution and these events predated your tenure. how you are going to handle ensuring that you have all the information about what is happening within your facilities, that the regional directors has all the necessary information on what is happening in their facilities. how could it be, based upon your experience thus far and the role and your experience managing this organization last five months, for example, that the regional director responsible for dublin would have been unaware that the chaplain and the warden and other employees, now over doesn't investigations were abusing inmates. such a spilled out to the ex oh seeded press reporting that it was dubbed, quote, the rape club. why was the regional director unaware? >> thank you, senator, in my 18 years and adult corrections, this is one of the biggest questions i have been faced with since i have taken on this new rolel. having been and institutions countless times, understanding how corrections works, the warden cannot leave or his or her office without people knowing. how this type of behavior happened, unaccounted for without people stepping forward, i don't understand it. what i have been working on is sending very clear messages to every member of my executive team and the wardens that i must know about the good, the bad, the ugly that is happening inside this organization. which means they to need to know. they need to know, they need to have a pulse of what's happening in their regions and in there and there still solutions. going back to the previous question, it starts with the investigators. one of the changes we made was to ensure that the investigators that are handling these very significant sexual abuse cases report to headquarters. there needs to be more accountability. in headquarters, there needs to be more accountability in the director's office. and so, we are going to ensure that reporting authority is changed. and then myself and the deputy director will be meeting with the administrator of oia and our hr division director regularly to review those cases. also, as it relates to the broader leadership structure, we are really looking at how those appointments are made. how we recruit for the positions, who fills the positions. i have also set a very clear message to the organization that we are going to be transparent and that we need to be aware of what's happening inside our institutions. >> all noted, director peters. returning to the question, i think it is important that the congress and you personally have answers to these specific questions. how is it that the regional director with direct responsibility for fci dublin did not know the extent of ongoing abuse in a facility for which they were directly responsible. if you have not, will you seek to speak to that person to understand how they possibly could have been blind to that severe abuse happening on their watch? >> yes, senator. >> thank you, director peters. one of our courageous witnesses from the first panel, miss stella rosa who was assaulted at lexington described the culture of the institution as an old boys club. what do you think she meant by that? >> i wouldn't want to surmise what he meant by that senator. >> i think you probably have an idea. >> senator, i think the notion of an old boys club as i have seen and experienced in my career is one where decisions are made behind closed doors, they are made without women in the room, and i assume that is where she speaking to. >> inspector general horowitz, you made this point in the previous round of questions. not just that, b. o. p. employees are not reporting when they're aware of abuse, that is perpetrated by their colleagues. in fact, what we heard from the survived who testified, a culture of mutual protection. talk a little bit about that, mr. horowitz. >> one of the biggest challenges we face. these are not secrets. this is -- the warden taking these actions, the chaplain take these actions, other inmates taking's actions, they are not secrets. you mentioned atlanta the. federal prison there. it was essentially close for a period of time. when they toss the prison to go look, we had been doing case after case there. dozens of phones, other contraband found. it is not a problem overnight. we looked at the past audit reports. they got passes. if you read those reports, you couldn't miss the problem. and so, there needs to be more ownership at the director and senior levels of the b. o. p. and at the regional levels of the b. o. p.. there has to be, put in place, a process by which the good actors, the people who don't want to be working next to a predator, and i think that's probably most employees, are comfortable coming forward and reporting it, knowing they're not only not going to get retaliated against for doing that, but they're going to be held on a pedestal. and then supported by the organization, rather than have the people who are engaged in the wrongdoing promoted. >> thank you, mr. horowitz, senator johnson? >> mister chairman, yeah, i'm very mindful of the fact that this hearing really is about prison personnel praying on prisoners. i got that. i think senator langford brought up something very relevant, it's a point as well. certainly, coming into this hearing, i was thinking about to what extent are their sexual assaults occurring between prisoners? director peters, how many biological males are being housed with biological females in federal prisons? >> senator, i don't have an answer to that today. >> we have some? >> yes, senator. >> well, i will go on the, record i won't be labour this point. let me go on the record. when we are incarcerating someone because they have committed a crime, we have taken away there right of moving around freely around society. i would say they have no right to determine if your biological mail to be housed with biological females. they are no right. that is an insane policy. we are talking about sexual assaults. to have the federal government engage in policy that allows a biological males to choose to be housed and come to close proximity with the male prisoners. that is insane. that's something congress probably ought to address if the administration isn't smart enough to reverse this policy. thank you, mister chairman. >> thank you, senator johnson, director peters, let's talk about how the b. o. p. implements the prison rape elimination act, or prea. the purpose is indeed in the name of the legislation. it is to eliminate prison right. and we must dispense of any notion that there is any inevitable level or, any acceptable level of sexual abuse of inmates by b. o. p. employees. our objective, our imperative, our moral obligations, and your moral obligation director peters, i believe you known stated except, to eliminate sexual abuse of those in your custody. and i was pleased to hear use describe the possibility that this hearing could be a turning point. those were your words a turning. point, again, and i am repeating this so that the public viewing this hearing understands this. it's important. you are new to this job. the events that we are describing did not occur under your tenure. now that you are in this role, i want to respectfully tell you that, i believe your tenure will be judged by whether you succeed in eliminating the sexual abuse of those who are in your custody. i think this is your highest and most immediate moral imperative in this position. prison rape elimination act. audits are conducted periodically to assess the compliance of b. o. p. facilities and it's correct, is it not, that these are viewed, testify to interviews or the subcommittee by b. o. p. leadership as an essential tool. >> that is correct, senator. >> help us to understand, again you are not in the role of the time, you do need to understand this, help us to understand how it is that let's, take dublin and coleman, two facilities with widespread, in the case of dublin, and high level, ongoing sexual abuse, in some cases, years, could both pass their pre audits during the period in question? >> thank you for the question. i was the oregon department of corrections when the elimination act was passed. i was the inspector general as we implemented those recommendations. and it is an issue that is with every corrections agency. we had hoped that those standards would eliminate sexual misconduct as you mentioned it. but what we have learned is that is only one tool in our tool box. those audits come in and ensure that the institution is compliance with the federal standards that we created. it doesn't address cultural issues. i think, back to my opening statements, there are other avenues in tools we need to rely on in order to work towards eliminating sexual misconduct inside of our institutions. i heard the professor speak earlier, there are concerns about how audits are conducted. in some state correctional systems, she alluded to, some audit themselves. some rely on other jurisdictions to audit their jurisdiction. and then vice versa. at the bureau, we do hire outside contractors to come in and conduct the pre-audits. that is a step in the right direction. again, senator, i think the bottom question, the audit is just one tool in the tool box. >> >> we need to understand how this tool can be so ineffective that at dublin, for, example, here is the 2017 dublin audit. it was found that the facility met the standard of, quote, zero tolerance of sexual abuse and sexual harassment. it says the facility meets the standard. the warden, the chaplain, others who have been convicted, allegedly over a dozen who may be under investigation at this time were, in fact, engaged in sexual abuse. here is what really, i think stands out about this. it cites the prea coordinator as the key source for making that finding. the prea coordinator was sexually abusing inmates. so, i understand the intent of these audits. and you and your team believe it's a key tool. it is clearly not working, right? >> that's correct, it has not eliminated prison rape. >> well, i think it's not just that it hasn't eliminated prison rape. it's that it's generating false negatives at facilities where, as the inspector general said, and mr. horowitz, if i am correct, your comments to the effect that if the warden and the chaplain are engaged in widespread sexual abuse of inmates, there is no way that is a secret. mr., horowitz is that --, you have abuse occurring at this facility the so severe and high level that it must have been widely known. the, fact as i said, and eventually spread out into public. the place was called, quote, the rape club. but the prea audit found that it met the standard of zero tolerance. in coleman, again, predates your tenure. two days before the prea audit was executed, every female inmates have been removed in this facility. i'm not saying there was or wasn't foul play involved there. it is true, isn't it, director peters, that interviewing inmates is a core part of the process of conducting prea audit, yes? >> yes. >> if every female inmates have been removed imbecility two days before the prea audit, those interviews cannot have been probably conducted, could they? >> that's correct. director peters, this was before your tenure, my point is this process is badly broken and as a result, the tool you're going have to rely on, a cultural assessment, i'm eager to see how effective they are. do you know what's happening in your own facilities is not currently functioning to give you the visibility that you are going to need. if you lacked that visibility, with you as the leader of reform, we are not going to be able to implement change. >> let's talk a little bit about oia processes, inspector general horowitz, when prosecutions are or not brought, what the consequences are. looking into coleman, multiple b. o. p. employees, who eventually admitted in sworn statements, compelled by bureau of prisons office of internal affairs and knitted and graphic explicit detail to sexual abuse of prisoners. all or most of those cases had been referred to your office. as candidates for criminal prosecution. the outcome is that none of them were criminally prosecuted. in fact, many retired with their benefits intact. how did that happen? >> so, i looked at those cases. there are multiple reasons for it. first and foremost, we need to do, as a general matter, and are doing a more effective job at looking at these cases when they come back to us. initially, remember, we are essentially a triage business. we get thousands of complaints every year. we have got a dozen agents, for example, in the florida region to, and our miami field office to cover a number of prisons throughout the southeast. so, we are doing triage initially. keeping the ones that look like they need independent oversight by us. and we are returning the vast majority to the b. o. p. for their internal affairs to handle. it is very simply a resource question. only so many cases, a dozen agents spending half their time on the hope you are can take. we are looking for those at the outset. b. o. p. then investigates, and they, on, occasion when they find things, they come back to. as they say, we found additional evidence. it's in particular at that stage, that many of these cases came back that we probably could have done, and most people, by the way, are no longer in the organization because many of these happened years ago. i haven't been able talk to the actual decision makers, it appears looking at the file that in most cases, we could have done and taken several steps to further investigate those, before deciding to send them back to the b. o. p. again. it was at that stage that the b. o. p. sought to compel the officer and, of course, as has been alluded to, once an employee is compelled to speak it means they can't invoke their fifth amendment right against health incrimination. one thing they say is tainted from a prosecution. which is how they ended up not being prosecuted. so, we need to both look at those cases that come to us with a more stringent review and we also need to make sure we are well coordinated with the office of internal affairs at b. o. p. and sharing insights including what we are now doing with that analytics, looking for trends at prisons so we can not look at these anymore as one offs but do they reflect a bladder problem, suggesting that we may have more witnesses out there if we go in and talk to inmates. what we have seen at coleman, and i talk to my agents about this around the country, once we go into a prison, by the way, the three inmates on the first panel who said they didn't report it, we went to them. we had learned about wrongdoing in the prison. and we reached out to them as potential witnesses. >> my agents tell me this over and over again. once inmates see us on the ground and see action being taken, like when we searched the warden's residence, in connection with dublin, and we searched the warden's home during that investigation. we have been received a substantial number of complaints from inmates. several of which we corroborated. that happened once they saw that action. there is a lot of things that need to occur both, on our end and the bops end. and i will go back to talking about two things that would help upfront, cameras, search policy, contraband, penalties. inmates are being groomed, contraband is a huge problem. if we had cameras, i can't tell me how many cases we have where the absence of video testimony makes it extraordinarily difficult. and one other thing that's important on the accountability front, credit to the deputy attorney general for doing this. she has told the u.s. attorneys, they need to prosecute these cases. keep in mind, that is the other thing my agents are looking at these cases for. if there is a crime but no one is going to prosecute it, there is no, are investigating it as a criminal matter and doesn't make any sense. there needs to be the partner on the receiving end. and that has been helpful. >> you mentioned the proactive monitoring of data to include complaint data. -- my view is that both oig and oh i a need to be engaged in that. in fact, we heard from a y. a. that they are not doing that. and i will enter into the record without objection some sharks, several of these key and most notorious facilities, there was a data signature of increased complaints in the years during which the misconduct was occurring, but before it broke into the public domain, and before there are significant official action. dr. peters, will you commit to ensuring that oia is proactively monitoring sexual assault complaint data at the facility level to get ahead of any possible major crises at a facility? >> yes, senator, the inspector general and i met a couple weeks ago. talked about the notion of data analytics. i went back and talk to my team. we certainly want to be looking at the exact same data that the inspector general is looking at. so we see that information parallel to him looking at it. so, our office of internal affairs is looking forward to that collaboration and ensuring that we are monitoring the same sets of data. >> keep in mind, most of battery received all the referrals we get from the b. o. p.. the ones we can share at the b. o. p. are the whistleblower complaints, in the inmates who come straight to us that need confidentiality. >> short of that data, we should have the same data. >> practically monitoring the data is going to be essential. inspector general horowitz, you noted in those colon cases, at least in several of them, oia brought them back. >> correct. >> still no prosecution was brought. as a result, those folks faced no criminal penalties for pretty egregious acts. clearly, it sounds that you are engaged in and changes are necessary. i understand you both face resource constraints. this is a crisis that requires immediate action. we're going to close now, just a couple final thoughts for you. director peters, i have been genuinely encouraged by the tone of your tenure thus far. by the ambitious reform objectives that you have set out in public. and when we have met in private, i have encouraged you to make good on those intentions and those promises. and i want to encourage you again to embrace the possibility that you can turn this agency around with everything that you have got. and i think you should expect that so long as i have the ability, i will be calling you back to the senate to ask what progress you have made. the one thing that concerns me from today's discussion, is that your admiral plans for reform which i hope you implement with speed and strength need to be informed by a fulsome understanding of what has gone wrong in the past. and when we investigate atlanta, what we heard from your predecessor was that he was blind, in my view, willfully blind, about blind to what was happening at the regional level. and at the facility level. and are the regional director didn't know it was happening at the facility level and you will be held accountable for knowing. and i believe you have an opportunity to establish a legacy of as a reformer who saves lives and protects vulnerable people from sexual assault. one of the most heinous things that can happen to any human being. this has to stop. you have the power to stop it. i also hope that you will be responsive to the u.s. congress. and i want to note that we are still awaiting answers to specific questions regarding u.s. penitentiary atlanta that were submitted following that july 26th hearing. you need to set the tone within your organization and working with doj's office, that responsiveness to the senate is essential, because it's not an encouraging sign when we are stymied in our efforts to conduct oversight. so, thank you for your commitment to change, please make good on it. please cooperate fully with our efforts to support reform. we should be working together to make these changes. this will be the final hearing for the permanent subcommittee of investigations this congress. i believe the work that we have done investigating conditions of incarceration and detention in the united states has been among the most substantive and focused effort in the history of the u.s. congress. we have investigated corruption in this misconduct at the bureau of prisons facilities, we have investigated the medical mistreatment of women in dhs custody, we have investigated failures to implement the death and custody reporting act, we are now continue to investigate the sexual abuse of women in federal custody. and this work will continue, accountability will continue. both of you have key roles to play in making sure that when i close this hearing, that is not the end of this. it is the turning point that you reference in your opening remarks, director peters. thank you both for your testimony. and the hearing is adjourned. >> thank you, senator. >> thank you.

Related Keywords

New York ,United States ,Alabama ,Brooklyn ,Texas ,Kentucky ,Illinois ,California ,Oregon ,Dublin ,Ireland ,American ,Caroline Richardson ,Michael Horowitz ,