Transcripts For CSPAN3 Former Inmates Testify On Sexual Abuse In Federal Prisons 20230105

employees while in prison. >> the permanent subcommittee on investigations will come to order. today's hearing 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 violence and other disturbing issues that we are duty-bound to bring to light. anyone seeking mental health assistance can call 988 to connect to a trained counselor. eight months ago as chair, i launched an investigation into the sexual abuse of women in federal prisons and with ranking member johnson's support, our bipartisan staff reviewed extensive nonpublic prisons whistleblower documents and conducted interviews and survivors of prison sexual abuse. our findings are disturbing and demonstrate that the bmple o.p. is failing to present vint, defect and address sexual abuse of prisoners by its own employees. the subcommittee that employees sexually abused prisoners in at least 2/3 of federal prisons that have held women over the past decade. b.o.p. has failed to prevent, defect and stop sexual abuse including by senior prison officials. at f.c.i., both the warden and the chap you lane abused female prisoners. they have failed to successfully failed to eliminate the. two prisons, where multiple b.o.p. employees were abusing multiple women, dublin and cole man nevertheless passed or found to have exceeded the preaudit criteria, which are mandated by congress and intended to defect the abuse of sexual abuse. in the dublin, the compliance officer, the sphicial specifically tasked with ensuring compliance with the federal law with the elimination of prison rape was himself sexually abusing prisoners. in f.c.c. cole man, all female prisoners had been transferred out of the facility just two days before the audit making it impossible to interview prisoners despite the legal requirement that they interview inmates as part of the audit. amidst more than 5,000 allegations of sexual abuse by b.o.p. employees we found 134 against female detainees were substantiated by internal investigations and prosecutions and given the fear of retaliation by survivors of sexual abuse, the apparent apathy by senior b.o.p. officials at the headquarters' levels and severe shortcomings in the investigative practices implemented by b.o.p.'s office of internal affairs and department of inspector judicial, i expect the extent of abuse is significantly wider. we found there is currently a backlog of 8,000 internal affairs cases at the bureau of prisons including hundreds of sexual abuse allegations against b.o.p. employees that remain it's been found b.o.p. fails to properly credit allegations of sexual abuse and those who have sexually abused prisoners have escaped punishment due to the way they worked together to investigate such allegations. several officers who admitted under oath to sexually abusing prisoners were able nevertheless to retire with benefits. let me be absolutely clear. this situation is intolerable. sexual abuse of inmates is a gross abuse of human and constitutional rights and cannot be tolerated by 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 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 statement was unequivocally false. the purpose of today's hearing is to understand what's gone so badly wrong, to establish and examine the facts upon which we must build reform, progress begins with the truth. it requires a full and unflinching examination of grievous failure. on our first panel we'll hear from three survivors of sexual abuse at the hands of b.o.p. employees that occurred while they were incarcerated in federal prisons. carolyn richardson, breann moore and delareau savment all their abusers have been convicted. the firsthand accounts of survivors are important. their bravery will make it easier for others to tell their story. next weal hear from professor brenda v. smith, a national expert on abuse in custodial settings. we'll ask her to put the survive years testimony in broader context. finally we'll hear from an official who investigating b.o.p. employees and the new b.o.p. director, collette peters who began her tenure just six months ago in july. this hearing is part of a two-year, bipartisan effort by this subcommittee under my leadership to investigate conditions of incarceration and detention in the united states. from corruption at the u.s. penitentiary in atlanta, the department of justice's failure to count almost 1,000 deaths in custody across the country, to abusive and unnecessary gynecological procedures performed on women in department of homeland security custody. ranking member johnson, i thank you sincerely for your assistance in these efforts, and your staff. before i yield to the ranking member for his opening statement it's 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 b.o.p. employees 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 investigated sexual abuse of women in federal prison because of some unique considerations. women are more likely than male prisoners who have suffered from trauma and sexual abuse prior to incarceration and particularly susceptible to subsequent abuse in a custodial setting. however the subcommittee fully acknowledges that sexual abuse is not limited to female prisoners. finally, the subcommittee's findings which form the basis for today's hearing are laid out in a bipartisan staff report and i ask unanimous consent that this report be entered into the record. ranking member johnson. mr. johnson: thank you. you pretty well laid out the case so i'll ask that my opening statement be entered into the record. i think it's safe to say based on your comments that what we discovered is deeply during bing, and it is. i don't think anybody is looking forward to this hearing. i don't know about you but any movie i watch where there's any kind of sexual assault i just -- i have to turn it off. i can't watch it and that's fiction. so we're going to be hearing some pretty horrific testimony today. it is the government's duty to incarcerate individuals, to punish people for crime. for keeping dangerous people away from the general public. and i don't want this hearing to downplay that very serious responsibility of government. it's not a pleasant responsibility. but it's also the responsibility of government to make sure that where we do incarcerate individuals that they are safe. that this -- these types of rapes, these types of assaults don't occur. this is something that the federal government has recognized has been a problem dating back to 2003. i would say that's probably pretty good faith effort to try and develop data, do audits, try and prevent this. you'll never eliminate all of this. but i don't think there's any doubt that the government can do more and looking at the inspector general's testimony, understanding what this administration is doing, it does appear they are making good faith efforts to do more to try to prevent this. so as deeply disturbing, as much as i'm not looking forward to hearing any of this, i agree with you, it's our responsibility. we can't turn our face from it. we have to face. this we have to do everything we can to eliminate it. recognizing what a difficult task that really is mr. chairman, thank you, and thank all 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 and fix. thank you. mr. ossoff: thank you, ranking member johnson. we'll now call our first panel of witnesses for this morning's hearing. ms. carolyn richardson was formerly incarcerated in metropolitan center new york. ms. breann moore was formerly incarcerated in inch west virginia. ms. linda de la rosa was formerly incarcerated in kentucky. as professor brenda v. smith is an expert on sexual abuse in cust doadall arrangement. the rules of the subcommittee require all witnesses to be sworn in. at this time i would ask all of you to please raise your right hand. do you swear that the testimony you're about to give before this subcommittee is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god? let the record state that all witnesses answered in the affirmative. we are using a timing system today, your written testimony will be printed in the record in its entirety. we would ask that you limit your oral testimony to approximately five minutes. you'll see a time for the front of you. please confirm, if you can, with the help oyour counsel if necessary, that your microphones are on as indicated by the red light before beginning. ms. richardson, at your convenience, we'll begin with you first, please. ms. richardson: hello, good morning. i would like to first express any my sincere gratitude to chairman ossoff and ranking member johnson for the opportunity to testify before you today. my name is care line richardson. i was incarcerated from august, 2016, through october, 2022. when my motion for compassionate release was granted on the grounds of extraordinary compelling circumstances. i suffered while i was in metropolitan correctional center in new york. my testimony will focus on repeated sexual abuse that i suffered for several months at the hands of former correctional officer colin esperanza. while i struggle to speak about the abuse i'm hopeful my testimony will give voice to survivors in similar circumstances and help prevent sexual crimes in b.o.p.'s facilities. in august, 2016, i was invited to parties -- i was charged with conspiracy to distribute oxy coe done. i knew i would be taken away from my children, i didn't know it would change my life. prior to my arrest i had received an artificial iris transplant for cosmetic purposes. when i was taken into custody i had normal vision and was in good physical health. shortly after arriving in the facility in august, 2016, i began to experience komple rations with my transplanted irises. b.o.p. personnel failed to provide me with adequate care and caused my eyesight to deteriorate. i learned that due to delay in treatment i will be permanently legal blind and require extensive eye treatment. since then i required periodic visits to outside hospitals including seven eye surgeries. correctional officer esperanza was the officer tasked with taking me to these appointments. i was in an extremely vulnerable state, physically, mentally and spiritually, due to my medal condition and the officer preyed on this. when he took me appointments he made himself out to be someone i could trust. he talked to me about faith and spiritualty, which was of central importance to me in coping with my condition. he brought me food and medicine. at my most vulnerable i believed he was a person who cared about me when no one else did. i was wrong. after several months, in around may, 2018, he began to demand sexual favors in exchange for the food and medicine he brought. he switched from working the day shift to night shift and came to my cell at night. i did not have a cell mate. he told me my cell was in a perfect area because the curt cameras couldn't see him coming or going. he was the only officer working the night shift in my unit which consisted of approximately 40 female prisoners. he used a flashlight to sig mall to me he was coming to my -- to signal to me he was coming to my cell. i felt powerless. i was a vision 46 impaired prisoner who relied on him for transportation to medical appointments. for about six month he is demanded sexual favors for the. he became increasingly rough and cruel in the way he treetd me. i told him i didn't like it. he continued the misconduct. before the assaults he would act like he cared about me. and would ask me what was wrong when i was looking down or sad. after the sexual assaults began he stopped showing any signs of caring and all he wanted was sexual favors. i felt disgusted with him but also with myself. i felt worthless, like i was something less than human that he could do with as he wished. when i indicated that i did not like what he was doing, he suggested that we would both get in trouble if i were to tell. ibelieveed him, i was terrified he or other staff would retaliate g against me or take away my privileges. i was afraid of being questioned and doubted. i thought officers would stick together instead of believing me or caring for me especially after he manipulated me. i felt that everyone had ulterior motives. but then i felt ashaped and blamed myself for not speaking up about abuse. i felt like i should have yelled and screamed when he was sexually assaulting me. even though at that time i thought i had no real voice. details of the abuse can be found in exhibit a in the complaint filed in my civil lawsuit. even though b.o.p. has a zero tolerance policy toward sexual abuse, in reality it is extremely difficult for inmates to step up and report abuse. it feels there's no real protection from the guards retaliating against you or harassing you with their authority. even when the abuse is reported, inmates are kept in the dark about the progress of the investigation and repeated questioning is jarring and emotionally scarring to the trauma. i could gain a small measure of peace by cooperating with the criminal prosecution with the officer 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 suffer similar abuse and safeguards will be put in place to ensure that. i am appreciative of this opportunity to share my experience that i had in that institution. i stand here for other female inmates who suffered sexual abuse, many who may feel they're alone without anyone to care about their story, like i used to feel. i hope in sharing this we can fix our system and prevent this happening again. thank you. mr. ossoff: thank you for your testimony. ms. moore, you may now present your statement. ms. moore: good morning. thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak. i'm not an activist or someone who would normally use my voice as i am today, speaking about my experience in such a public setting is incredibly hard. i'm willing to do so because other women are in prison and i am out. i hope they will not 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 my way. i made bad decisions. i stole drugs, crack cocaine, to be exact. i was sentenced to 10 years. i accepted that because that was my crime. i chose to do that. i got 10 years in prison, i accepted that as well because as a result of doing that, consequences happened. so i just decided to take the time while i was in prison to improve myself, do my time so i can get back home to my family. the prison guards tell you when you can sleep, when you can eat, when you can go. people in prison don't get to choose location of the prison nair sent. to first i was sent to alabama. i was there for about two years. i was transferred to f.t.c. arlington. beth 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 transfer prisons to be closer to home so i could be closer to my family. b.o.p. officials have discretion to grant or deny requests but i was determined to survive. i followed the rules. i took all the programs. opportunities available to me. i hoped the transfer request would eventually be granted. i knew 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 returned -- i was determined to return home a better mother. when i was in federal prison in 2017, they began to target me. he took me to areas where there were isolated in the prison where there were no cameras. he told me he knew i wanted to transfer to another prison. he said the paperwork goes through me and in october of 2017, he officer ordered me to go to the captain's office. he captain summoned me into the office. there was a secretary's office in the captain's office. there was no secretary when i arrived. after the captain had me alone, he locked the secretary's door and closed his door. he remainded me the transfer went through him, he said if i didn't follow orders he wouldn't transfer me. he then raipped me. even before he said that i knew he had the power to keep me from being transferred. i had no choice but to obey. i had to follow orders in prison. it's hard to fully describe how this felt. the captain had complete control over my day-to-day life and was now unfortunately controlling my body. i -- he was using my desire to see my children to threaten me to stay silent. he made it clear fi wanted to transfer i had to accept this. i felt powerless. the abuse continued. before my request could go through for a transfer closer to home, i escaped abuse when a prison close to home reopened, when they asked for volunteers i jumped on the opportunity to save myself. i left in december of 2017 and before i left the captain knew i was leaving. he raped me one final time, in total he raped me five times, sexual assault on other occasions. after the abuse i could not sleep full nights for months. i had recurring nightmares that played over and over like a broken record. i woke up in cold sweats. i would wake up crying after nightmares that the captain was trying to kill me for reporting the abuse. i isolated myself from others. i developed ptsd and had to seek mental health treatment. the captain abused his authority and power and while he was raping me, he was raping 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 could not say no. the captain knew i knew that. he made sure i knew that. he made sure that he could -- he made sure to know -- for me to know that he could make things worse for me even before this threat i knew that if i reported him, i could be placed in solitary confinement or shipped out to another prison away from my family which is something i didn't want to do. i saw this happen to other women in prison. they would tell their story and they would be shipped and the officer would still to be there. i left alderson in 2017, after the investigation began the captain resigned and was prosecuted for sexually abusing me and other women at the prison. he pleaded guilty. i'm here today, five years later, i want you to know that i'm still suffering. this changes the course of my life. this has changed the course of my life forever. i'm a different person physically and emotionally because of this. i'm still in mental health treatment. i've lost trust in the system. i knew prison would be tough, i accepted that. i would be punished for my crime, it was not easy doing time. i was sentenced and put in prison for choices i made. i was not sentenced to prison to be raped and abused while in prison. this should not have happened to me and shouldn't have happened to anyone in prison. speaking about this is not easy. the day i started to heal was the day i could talk about what happened to me without being afraid. thank you for your time. mr. ossoff: thank you, ms. moore, for your testimony. for the benefit of panelists, you may hear various sounds from the clock, those have no bearing on the hearing but indicate what's happening on the senate floor. please don't be alarmed. ms. richardson, ms. moore, thank you for your testimony. ms. de la rosa, you may present your opening statement. ms. de la rosa: chairman ossoff, ranking member johnson, members of the committee. i'm a victim and survivor of sexual abuse by a federal correctional officer. that predator is serving 135 months in the 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 to sentence him. 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, f.b.i. victims' specialist kathy young and assistant u.s. attorney fanning. however the bureau of prisons entirely failed. my attacker stayed at his job for years even though b.o.p. management and others knew he was a sexual predator. my life at f.n.c. lexington was a living health. -- living hell. i believe my attacker had been investigated on numerous occasions for sexual crimes against female inmates. investigators were aware female inmates were retalk lant -- reluctant to come forward because they feared retaliation which took many forms, including transfer to different facilities, loss of early release rights, detrimental writeups, loss of work opportunities, and interference in vocational programs. i watched the punishment of many who exajed -- challenged or report aitd buse by prison officials. the ongoing threat of realuation 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 reported the sexual abuse that happened to me in lexington, i was sent back to that facility. when i returned to lexington all 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 returned i also learned my attacker was still working at that facility. incredibly, f.n.c. lexington management granted my attacker unrestricted and unsupervised contact with me on work details which gave him one-on-one access to abuse or threaten to abuse me. because of his position, my attacker could and did access my personal history. files, recordings of my telephone calls, personal emails. giving him additional leverage to ex-track sexual favors and threaten my safety. the system failed at every level. management from the warden on down. repeatedly. they failed to monitor or supervise, discipline and remove male correction officers, predators, sexually abusing female inmates. special investigative services officers supposedly charged with investigating staff misconduct failed repeatedly to investigate known and suspected predators. it is not enough just to call this horrible, i believe the problem is the old boys' club, prison 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's no effective independent oversight. the mission of the b.o.p. is to protect society by confining offenders in the controlled environments of prison. that are safe, humane, and appropriately secure. the agency failed me and my fellow inmates. we were knowingly confined in a facility that was unsafe, inhumane and unsecure. and nothing was done. that was wrong. it should have never happened. senators, i make one request. stop this from happen, from repeat, now. nothing you're hearing today is new. thuf epower and authority to force the system to change. please use it. thank you. mr. ossoff: thank you, ms. de la rosa. dr. smith, your opening statement, please. dr. smith: first i want to say how privileged i feel to be able to sit at the table with these survivors. because they're the ones who are doing the work to actually bring these issues to the fore. i thank you for your courage and for being willing to tell what has happened to you in custody. good morning, chairman. ranking member johnson. committee members. i am a law professor at the american university washington college of law. i found the project on addressing prison rape in 1993 after successfully representing a class of over 500 women who experienced physical, sexual, 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 elimination commission in 1994 by house minority leader nancy pelosi. having sat on the prison commission for prison -- on the pria 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 aim time -- at the same time we know that while the pria standards outline a successful approach to preventing, reducing and punishing sexual abuse in custody, agencies as these witnesses' testimony has 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 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 the standards are there but you really don't have to pay attention until there's an audit. i am familiar with federal bureau of prisons facilities because many of the d.c. women i represented served their sentences in federal facilities and returned to the district of columbia after discharge from federal facilities. these women spoke of abuse they had observed or experienced in a number of federal facilities that are the subject of this hearing today. the most recent incidents involving f.d.i. dublin, f.t.c. alderson, and lexington are instructive but not unusual. in other words, this is not new behavior. the abusers represent staff from a broad cross-section of the work force. we have heard a chaplain, correctional officer, volunteers, and wardens. this points to abuse which is systemic in nature. what's clear from these incidents is that staff had unfettered, uninterrupted access to women. they abused with impunity and at will. they abused women in their offices, in quarters, out of sight of cameras, and in collusion with other staff. they had also -- they also abused the authority of their position. one of the assailants was a chaplain. another a warden. people who we should be able to trust. these people had intercourse with women, took nude images of them and threatened them, as we've heard. one of the assailants ran the prea training, the training for preventing prison sexual assault, while he was actively involved in abusing women prisoners. given the systemic nature of this abuse, i have three recommendations that have the potential to provide women with greater protection from abuse. first, reform the audit process for the prison rape elimination act. prea audits are supposed to identify problems or 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 and the marketplace for auditors make it very difficult for anyone who does not work in corrections to become a d.o.j. 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 for -- next, agencies hire and pay the auditors who conduct the audit so in reality auditors work for the very agencies that they audit, making independence 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 state facility in a round robin arrangement. this has not eliminated the potential for potential conflicts of interest in those arrangements. there's a quid pro quo. finally, the cost of audits and the time that agencies or third party auditing bodies that employee 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 d.o.j. if there were time what could happen is they could actually go through and look closely at these institutions, interview women, interview outside folks, and be able to find problems. each of the facilities that are subject of the hearing passed their audits with only minimal issues identified. again, neutral auditors 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've heard many of these women experienced and feared retaliation. i think the other thing we also have to do is we have 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 system actor -- 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 employ to ensure compliance with both legitimate and illegitimate requests. given this inequality of power, women bargain, capitulate and comply. even if they fear for their lives, their freedom, and often for their families. though there are constitutional limitations on cross-sex supervision, male staff still have found ways to have unfettered, unsupervised access to female inmates in their care. clearly identifying and implementing better supervision strategies are in order. these strategies include increasing the numbers of female staff at 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 opportunities for supervision in communities would help keep women safe from the pervasive sexual abuse cull cher we're discussing today. finally we need vigorous prosecution of these cases and enhanced penalties. the penalties for abusing a person in custody should be commensurate with the harm they do to women in custody, their family, the community and our dwhroastles rule of law. the sentences that prison sex offenders receive are not in line with the harm they cause. in my view the penalties 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 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 re-- that we can be proud of. a community that provides punishment where punishment where 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. mr. ossoff: thank you very much, professor smith. thank you to our first panel. thank you, ms. richardson, ms. moore, ms. 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'd like to begin, please, by discussing the imbalance in power that underlies so much of this abuse. ms. de la rosa, you made reference to this. in your remarks. power other transfer, power over all aspects of your life. how did that play in role in making you vulnerable to this abuse? ms. de la rosa: i felt trapped, powerless. 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 imprisoned six months longer than i was supposed to be for this investigation. there's just so much we need to work on as far as being able to report it. mr. ossoff: the officer who assaulted you had previously been investigated for assaulting other female prisoners but was still on the job. ms. de la rosa: yes, sir. mr. ossoff: so you're in a facility with a man who had complete control over all aspects of your life, access to you while working. ms. de la rosa: yes, sir. mr. ossoff: who was eventually sentenced to prison for. this while the abuse was ongoing did you have any safe outlet to report it? did you feel you had any safe outlet to report it? mr. de la rosa: no. in lexington they have something called the penalty box. 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 inmates would call it the hot box, officers called it the penalty box. so any way you could report something to outside staff on the prea signs throughout the prison is an email or phone number but you wouldn't feel safe 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. mr. ossoff: what kind of punishment did you fear? ms. de la rosa: i was working on a welding apprenticeship, i was transferred to a prison that didn't have that program. i was 48 hours from finishing that. i got put back at a prison where i'd 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 could not ever get those things back. letters he wrote me since he was 10 years old. i'll never get those things back and they just came up missing. it's supposed to be -- they tell you that whenever you tell the officer that it's -- tell on an officer that it's completely confidential but all of those things that happened to me afterwards were not coincidence. they were not. mr. ossoff: access and proximity to your family. how did they play a role in your fear of realuation and the retaliation you experienced? ms. de la rosa: not being able to make phone calls, constantly being put in -- once covid started, quarantine. they would restart your quarantine, put you 21 days, no phone calls, no anything. so every time they move you you have 21 days not being able to kak your family. of not being able to have video visits with your kids. and for nine years that's what my kids looked forward to every week. they -- they can do anything they want. and they do. mr. ossoff: ms. moore, i'd like to ask you the same question, how access to family, proximity to family play a role. and if you wouldn't mind, just to ensure your microphone. thank you. ms. moore: like she said, same. fear of not being -- getting incident reports for nothing. not being able to call home. not being able to have contact with those video visits. i didn't necessarily have that happen where i was at but i did fear retaliation and 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 had put in a near home transfer before i went to alderson and because alderson needed head count i had to go there. so that's how i ended up at alderson. so again, here i am trying to fight to get closer to my family so i can have visits because i had one visit while i was there for my daughter's birthday. and that was -- i did seven years in prison and so being able to talk to my family, my grandmother, because she's older and sickly. was very important to me. and my daughter was 7 when i went to prison. so that was very important to me. and like she said. the officer had a lot of control, you know. they have a lot of control. we really don't have a say-so. i had already been in prison with women who had reported stuff and been sentenced to -- been sent to county jails where the food is moldy and they're wearing underwear that are -- been previously wore. nobody 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 retaliation. and i had already heard that he had been under investigation before but nothing was done so i mean, who was i to report something and think something was going to happen? and i didn't report it. they called me after i transferred prisons. i was in a whole other prison before they called me to ask about it. mr. ossoff: thank you, ms. moore. at this time i'll yield to ranking member johnson for his first round of questions. mr. johnson: thank you, mr. chairman. i thank ms. moore is highlighting the most difficult aspect of this is the inability to report. the power that prison guards have over the prisoners and how certainly some of them preferly abuse that power. i just want to quick go down the table, so we know ms. moore you never did report your sexual assaults correct? how did they ever come to light? why are you sitting here before us? at what point in time, was it during the prosecution of your abuser? ms. moore: no. the day after i transferred, the day after i left to go to peakin from alderson he got walked off and then maybe like a couple, maybe a week or two they called me at the prison i was at, they called my counselor and he came and got me, it was somebody investigating, i don't know how they got my name, they wanted to know what had happened. mr. johnson: so somebody heard about your abuse? did you talk to anybody about it? ms. moore: no. mr. johnson: somehow the investigators found out you may have been abused and they contacted you and you told your story about the investigators. ms. moore: they asked if i wanted to tell my story, at first i said no they gave me a couple of days to give them a call back. i know they have cameras in the administration building, i don't know if maybe they went to cameras and seen something there. mr. johnson: what about you, ms? did you report this to anybody when you were in prison? ms. richardson: no, sir, i didn't. i found out through a former inmate that the officer had been arrested for it, that empowered me to come forward. prior to that i would never told anyone. i was mandated to be there because i was on medical hold for my eyes and i had already been sentenced. mr. johnson: what about you, msr report this when you were a prisoner? ms. the lareau is a: i was moved from lexington to bryan, texas, 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. shortly after that i was moved back. mr. johnson: the only reason any of your situations came to light is because somebody came and talked to you? ms. de la rosa: yes. mr. johnson: ms. smith, being an expert in the area, i'm not looking for a hard and fast answer, i doubt this has been researched but it would seem that probably most cases of this kind of abuse go unreported. would that be -- ms. smith: 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 weren't protected in this situation. mr. johnson: so chances are that something like 8,000 complaints that haven't been file, that may still be the tip of the iceberg. dr. smith: absolutely. mr. johnson: obviously prea, those audits, haven't worked. maybe they have in some cases but they have not eliminated sexual assaults. dr. smith: so let's say prea aspects of it have worked but some of the procedures have not. what i would say is that the audits, as i testified, need a tremendous amount of work. mr. johnson: any of you, can any of you think of any process of reporting where you might feel safe enough to actually try and report it? i mean i have a hard time thinking of one, quite honestly. it's a devilish problem. can you think of some kind of reporting? i mean, find out chaplain is doing the abuse of that, you'd think that would be a place for somebody to go. somebody set up inside the prison could be in position of power could be -- what -- where is the solution -- where does the solution lie here? dr. smith: i think there are a number of issues. first of all, you start with being able to report outside of the institution. mr. johnson: where would you go outside and how would that be done when they're monitoring phone calls and that kind of thing? dr. smith: there should be a phone line you can use that is not monitored. right? that can go for a report out to a rape crisis center or some other -- or an inspector general's office. mr. johnson: but the prison guards will know you're using that phone. right? dr. smith: yes. but the fact is, is that the -- the fact that there's a potential for abuse as there currently is already doesn't mean that you don't take those steps. i think you also have to protect people from retaliation. what you're also hearing here is that these women did not report because they actually had no confidence at all that they would be believed. mr. johnson: the retaliation is real. the power is real to transfer you away from your family. the power is real. it really does come down to, if you're going to prevent this, there's got to be some method of an anonymous reporting system that can't be abused for, you know, other things prisoners may be doing frommed inside the prison. there's the real deafish problem here. any of the three witnesses, can you think of a reporting system you would have had confidence in? can you think of one? we'll start with you, ms. 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 so horrific that you just had to bear it? ms. de la rosa: i honestly can't think of a way you can report it that the staff will not know about. mr. johnson: ms. moore, can you think of one? ms. moore: no. mr. johnson: ms. richardson? ms. richardson: no. one thing is for sure, wrong or right one thing is sure they all stick together. mr. johnson: to me there's the problem. that needs to be solved. how can people inside prisons report without having a very high probability of being retaliated against by the very people abusing them? again, i think our next panel that's going to be the main question, main line of questioning i'll be pursuing there. thank you, mr. chairman. mr. ossoff: thank you, ranking member johnson. senator? >> thank you, mr. chairman. as you have so well laid out, the purpose of today's hearing is to address the sexual misconduct that plagues u.s. federal prisons and the irreversible harm it causes victims. while the virus investigations tell us that abuse and exploitation has run rampant there's no misconception that incidents are isolated to only the facilities explicitly mentioned. the horrendous reality is that detainee abuse is in facilities across the country. my office has received reports of california facilities with dangerous conditions, year-long delays in providing adequate health care in the midst of the covid pandemic, and yes, claims of sexual abuse and assault. yesterday senators durbin, feinstein, grassley and i sent a followup letter to our original letter requesting more information from d.o.p. concerning sexual misconduct allegations by its personnel. we reiterated that the department of justice must take immediate action to root out staff misconduct at b.o.p. this behavior cannot continue. the bureau must act urgently to 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, i'll quote, overwhelmed with fear, anxiety, and anger, and cried uncontrollably after enduring abuse and retaliation for reporting it. ms. richardson, ms. moore, and ms. 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, how you've been able to 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 can just talk a bit about what the impacts have been, what resources or support you've been able to access to help. ms. richardson. ms. richardson: i was diagnosed with ptsd, and i believe it's called persistent anxiety disorder, since that diagnosis i've been on medication. and also my spiritallty comes in play, keeps me grounded somewhat. >> ms. moore? ms. moore: i continue to see a therapist at the prison i was transferred to, and the prison after that, and then when i got home, i've been out three years, i continue to see a therapist. i have not really been -- had anxiety since i've been out of prison, because i feel like i'm not contained anymore so the retaliation is not so -- is 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 because i felt like, you know, what kind of retaliation can i get from this? so my anxiety has been high the last couple, just knowing i'm coming here to do this. but as i told my attorneys, i'm not the only one that's been through this, and if my story can help somebody else that may be going through it 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. soy just -- i'm trying not to -- not trying to keep control of my life. 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. >> anxiety has been my biggest struggle. >> professor smith, can you discuss the mental health impacts of a correctional abuse on detainees while in custody and when they are no longer in custody. >> what we know, there is a significant number of women who come in with past histories of abuse and trauma and that abuse, the abuse as these women have talked about in custody highlights that existing trauma they already have and there are not a lot of resources and to deal and while they are in custody and when they will experience. i think it is important that we really enhance those services. senator osoff: thank you, senator. ms. richardson, you stated in court and described a meeting in 2017 where b.o.p. supervisor told you and other female prisoners i don't want to hear anything about my officers touching you and another officer who ignored pleas for help said your abuser quote, will eventually get caught. what was it like to hear those things and what was it in the environment there that contributed to that culture? >> two of those statements were not made by me but other ladies. but i did hear and it didn't register to me what it actually meant. and dynamics. wrong or right, they all stick together. >> you said the statement on those counselors, i don't want to hear anything what my officers are doing to my ladies. everybody wants to cover their own butts and they don't do anything about what they hear. they sweep it under the carpet. senator osoff: thank you, ms. richardson. ms. moore, you explained how the captain would take you to isolated areas where there weren't cameras. talk about the lack of coverage of certain areas in the prison and others were vulnerable. ms. moore: the cameras are very -- not very many. maybe they have some in the buildings, but not covered by cameras. so being at a camp, they said it is supposed to be low security and that's why they didn't have many cameras, but things like this, there could be more, even if it is just from outside, just more -- what can you do about a camera in his office. he's the captain. and put a camera in his office. like he had the perfect opportunity being there, little visibility for anyone to see. senator osoff: professor smith let's talk about the act and it's perhaps obvious given the title but what is the purpose of the prison rape elimination act? smith. >> punishment and also to create the condition, whether it's the law, whether it is policy and whether related to prosecution to end sexual abuse of people in custody. senator osoff: one of the most concerning aspects of our investigation is we found these preaudits that were conducted during times when there was ongoing dublin and cole man and yet the auditors found and stated that both these facilities exceeded every standard. talk about tay and i have to ask the question, do these audits work? >> i think as i testified there are significant problems with the audit and there needs to be substantial improvement. currently, we have the -- we have prisons as i mentioned, we have prisons -- we have the people who are supposed to be being audited awing themselves essentially. and there is not a great deal of diversity. we have audits and auditors who formerly worked as wardens and officers, we have agencies that audit each other. so there is a disintent sentive for them to find another agency out of compliance because they are concerned when they are audited that they will be found out of compliance. what is very important is having neutral auditors to have people who are -- who are clearly not a part of that system and also to have audits of the audits. to actually go behind in the same way we did in that report to actually identify, yes, there were zero complaints here, but you know, we looked at case law and we looked at actual criminal complaints and doesn't match up with what you are reporting. i think it has to be more than the actual audit and has to be some other independent verification of that audit, which would include as the committee has done here, looking at their complaints and litigation, talking to external organizations, talking to people who are outside the system. senator osoff: my time is brief. do you think it would be helpful to have more women working in facilities that incarcerate women? >> absolutely. absolutely. the president of female staff, one of the huge issues that comes to bear in each of these situations is how did these male staff have unfeathered access to women inmates? a door should have been opened and female staff should have been working through and female staff are the only ones who are allowed to do certain services and perform with certain female inmates. senator johnson: obviously rape and sexual assault occur throughout society. you could actually argue inside the walls of a prison might be one place where you could prevent it from happening. there are guards that people are there to enforce the law and it shouldn't happen. i think my last round of questioning, i want to get some sense of how pervasive it has been within prison. obviously in society, there are so many reasons why rape victims don't come forward. you have those same dynamics occurring with prisoners, plus you have the even more horrific power and fear of retaliation which would prevent victims coming forward and really blowing the whistle on. so i guess what i would like to ask the three witnesses is, within the spectrum of isolated to pervasive, having talked with fellow prisoners, do you have any sense whatsoever that this is a where you were unform a victim of an isolated problem and maybe different in different facilities, do you have a problem what we are dealing with, you were a victim of an isolated case or something that is pervasive within the prison population? >> i was one of seven victims that the officer pled guilty and i was transferred to tallahassee, florida, one which -- [indiscernible] senator johnson: whether there is a population of women, 17,000 is that from my briefing. i go to ms. moore, what is your sense, isolated or pervasive throughout prison systems? >> examined this carefully. utilized different tools, recognize that the not eliminated this and we need more of a sense to figure how pervasive this and again point out that the real problem is how can prisoners have any confidence to report. the other thing that i find bizarre and cover in the next panel is the strange situation if the office of internal affairs compels a guard to do an interview and find out that wrongdoing has occurred. so we have to look to the office of inspector general to step up their investigations because the supreme court has ruled on that what it's going to be and we have to figure out a better way to investigate because that's one of the ways you reduce this at least would be more consistent prosecutions and very severe penalty by which of penalty includes incarceration, but even those perpetrators deserve to be in a prison. this is a big problem. i said at the outset, not a fun problem. and i appreciate you are forcing us to look at it. senator osoff: i thank you for your consistent support and consistent engagement and sends a powerful message that there is strong bipartisan will to address this crisis and have the question to question. i thank each and every one of you and i thank you ms. richardson, ms. moore and ms. dela rosa to speak publicly of what you endured to help senators and the entire congress to understand the dynamics that led to the exploittation and the ordeals you suffered. we will continue to work and the courage you demonstrated will inspire and others to share their stories. with gratitude and admiration for your courage. i thank you. professor smith, thank you for lending your expertise and as senator johnson and i continue to identify solutions at a level that you will remain engaged with us. at this time, we will excuse this panel and thank you for your contributions. and take a brief recess and set up for government witnesses. senator osoff: i want to thank you for the important and impactful report that was released by the bipartisan work and through the bipartisan work of the committee. i also want to take a moment to thank the three women for their courageous and compelling testimony that we heard in the first panel and for their bravery and cooperating with my office as we pursued the wrong doers who committed the hawaiian us acts. -- heinous acts. they are no longer able to terrorize other b.o.p. inmates. no inmate should suffer sexual abuse in prison. 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 o.i.g. will make this fight against sexual assault against one of our higher priorities. indeed our office regularly assign about our investigative resources to address criminal and administrative wrongdoing by b.o.p. employees and percentage of resources that the b.o.p. accounts for 30% of the b.o. i have only 113 agents and i have 56 agents available to handle the thousands of allegations we receive across the 123 federal prisons. more independent oversight is needed and we have asked congress and working with congress to get more resources to do that kind of work. we continue to see widespread instances of sexual assault. the b.o.p.'s dublin prison. just last week, the jury convicted the former ward enof sexually assaulting eight inmates. the investigation that we have conducted with the f.b.i. identified other dublin employees including the former chaplain and we have an active and ongoing investigation. these problems just didn't happen overnight and the b.o.p. must defect them before they become endemocratic as we have seen at cole man and others as we have heard in the first panel. in short, these are substantial problems and need immediate action and the reports and recommendations are going to be very valuable as we move forward to address them. we are pleased by the recommendations contained in the attorney general's recent report by her task force. those recommendations need to be implemented promptly. i have had and the b.o.p. administrator. let me mention some additional issues that i'm hoping the committee will consider. the b.o.p. needs to be and take more timely action b.o.p. corrupt b.o.p. employees. the b.o.p. needs to rely on credible inmate testimony in its misconduct proceedings. third, the b.o.p. must repair and improve its camera systems. fourth, they need to implement an effective search and contraband policy and one of the things i'm hoping the committee is increase in the penalties when contraband provides to inmates they are grooming. that should be addressed. i am also taking several steps to ensure we can do a better job in our office investigating and pursuing these investigations. i have included in my testimony to identify problems early on like you have recounted in cole man. we will take more action and we will take those steps. i appreciate the support of this committee and of the congress in pursuing our work and allowing us to go conduct our investigations. we will use the tools you have provided us to take action to prevent this from occurring. thank you again for the important work you have done. senator osoff: director peters. >> thank you member johnson and members of the committee, i am honored to appear before you and provide leadership to correctional officials. after 30 years in public safety working in roles from victim advocate and inspector general serving as the director of the oregon department ofcorrections, the topic is immense importance and i thank the committee for their years of work and i thank the victims sharing their heartbreaking and compelling stories. i welcome accountability and oversight and i welcome this hearing. we must come with our arms wide open with the congress and inspector general as help us identify areas of concern. sexual misconduct by buyer of of employees is critical importance. with your oversight, i see this moment as an opportunity to work together to make our facilities for the people in our care and custody. we all want the same thing, a safe and humane bureau of federal prince. another kind of misconduct is always unacceptable and must not be tolerated. our employees comes to to work and change lives and make our communities safer. i am horrified at the small number of employees engaged in egregious and criminal behavior. we must hold accountable and we are strengthening our processes and realigning resources and our expectations. and that work is complex and must include prevention, reporting, investigation, discipline and also prosecution. we must begin with the changing the culture in our facilities at all women facilities and trauma-infirmed practices are being and we must train employees on their obligation to report misconduct. this is and examining how we select, supervise and support wardens in our women's prince. detection and we will leveraging technological and human resources to better defect and prevent sexual misconduct. we are upgrading camera usage. i am clear that while i am proud of those who come to work every day dedicated to our core values and mission, those who are not up to including termination. we will not tolerate. there is no and should not be limitations on misconduct and we work closely with the office of inspector general to ensure all are reviewed. we are working with formerly incarcerated individuals. myself and other bureau employees have participated into very powerful sessions which included formerly incarcerated individuals. we are bolstering resources and personnel to help the office of internal affairs in conducting unbias investigations, this includes 40 employees on the team, realigning structure for those agents and training investigators in trauma-informed techniques. it is important that people are held accountable either administratively if action is warranted. i want to thank the inspector general for his commitment to ensure the bureau's success to the timely investigations and thank the attorney general to giving to all u.s. attorneys. as i said many times and i will repeat here today i pleive in good government and transparency and i know we cannot do this work alone we must come with this work wide. thank you, i am honored to speak on behalf of the bureau and dedicated employees. this concludes my statement. senator osoff: thank you, director peters. you were on the job for five months, so i think it is important to acknowledge you are new in this post, the overall overwhelming majority of all the events occurred prior to your tenure, nevertheless as we discussed in your first hearing in the judiciary committee, the buck stops with you and i want to state at the outset of your response to our questions today is that while we are deeply interested in your plans for reform and you will have an opportunity to present and the purpose of this hearing is to examine what happened in the past and what has been wrong and you in our capacity is to help us understand. i hope that's clear. i appreciate that, same with you, mr. horowitz. ranking member johnson made reference to this, defining the scope of the problem, we agree that is vital. what we have found is that in 2/3 of the federal prince that house women in the last 10 years, there has been sexual abuse of female prisoners of b.o.p. employees. and 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, you have knowledged as well as the widespread fear of retaliation and culture of impunity that we have seen prevail. we start with dublin. it was widely known before much broke into the official record there was a serious problem at dublin. there have been multiple convictions. there are over a dozen ongoing investigations and this went on for years. the warden and the chaplain were sexually abusing prisoners. before dublin, multiple officers abusing, new york, and every few years, despite the culture of impunity, it has broken in to the public consciousness that there is a serious problem and yet nothing systemic has been done to address it. when we asked senior b.o.p. personnel what was happened after the brooklyn facts came to light or coalman facts came to light, nothing was addressed. i want to understand from you, director, peters. why? you have been in the job for five months and debriefed. you have inspected prince and discussed thinks issues with regional directors and wardens and you have been effective and what you are going to change it, why is it after 10 years, despite it being known there was a serious problem, nothing was done to address it in any systemic or effective way? >> i wish i had a good answer to that question. what i can tell you is when you look thy institutions of brooklyn and coleman and dublin, it is hard to explain and hard top understand how systemic changes weren't implemented. there is no ability for an individual who is incarcerated to consent to sexual relations and look at individuals like a warden or a chaplain and there is something there in terms of that power differential. i find that that situation is absolutely egregious and about the systemic change. we need to look in all of the categories that i mentioned. we have to prevent this and figure out how to investigate this streamline resources and hold people accountable. senator osoff: i appreciate that. and i think it is important for the people that the events predated your tenure. i think you have top understand why systemic change was neither attempted nor succeeded, because for you to reform this vaster bureaucracy, which is diseased and this subcommittee, we looked at corruption and misconduct in atlanta and 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. this is something i want to understand, we in the course of conducting this investigation heard different folks at different levels. we interviewed a former warden at dublin, not the one who was convicted, and this is a quote, bad people making bad choices. he identified is and i'm now paraphrasing, but a few bad aims, people making wrong choices and we spoke with your chief of internal affairs who described a culture of abuse, who described it as systemic at that facility. have you talked to the regional director who was in charge at the time to understand how it could have evaded their attention this was going on at dublin and how is it different views in a former warden saying a few bad a.m. himself and others saying it was a culture of abuse. >> i see how the warden said that. i have not spoken to that warden but conversations with the administrator and we agree. that is a culture of abuse and misconduct and that culture needs to be in order to ensure those in the care and custody and we have systemic changes in the works that will help reset our culture there. >> those sorts of warning signs that we want to be able to find so we don't have a dublin repeat again and those individuals in our care and custody are safe. we look forward to continuing those cultural assessments and ensuring we are taking all of that data into account. senator johnson: do you have any idea in terms of how someone is being sexually abused ins a prison can report that without having a like that fear of reprisal? can you think of anything -- understanding you have a hotline and not using the hotline. you provide confidential not being abused. tough nut to crack. do you have any ideas of what might work? >> i appreciate those questions to those who are formerly incarcerated and i think the answer there has to be many avenues. we have to create a culture where they have developed with the front-line officers and do feel comfortable with them. absent that, family members and they can report internally and externally and if you listened to the women to report without any tracking directly to the to crack that nut. senator johnson: they are in prison and how can they report without people knowing? and after a certain amount of time, people are asking questions. i mean -- >> right now, the way they can report to the inspector general without us knowing is through true link and send an email outlining their allegations and concern. and questions are asked and so the information is inside the institution. it can't be reporting alone but convictions we are seeing out of california and that our bureau employees if they engage in this type of behavior or acts of reprisal they will be held of accountable and that level will be allowing us over time to develop an environment that individuals can come forward. senator johnson: how many of the inmates are questioned of those things? >> i don't know the answer to that question. senator johnson: that would be one way of all-inclusive survey, surveillance audits. how many personnel do you have in the office of internal affairs? >> we added more than 40 positions in order to help us. senator johnson: probably in the hundreds. inspector general horowitz, do you know snr. >> i would be guessing. i'm not sure how many they have. we have about 113 agents around the country devoted to that. and i think you hit on as we talked about in the first panel a critically important question. there is there is an ability to send an email to us that cannot betrayed. the question is who is watching over peoples' shoulders. where is the terminal, what happens when we respond. obviously we want to respond. and that has to be addressed. one of the things critically important is the culture question, the question is why don't the employees say anything? why do we need the inmates to step up? we have the warden, a chaplain and many other employees at the dublin prison and talk about brooklyn and new york and atlanta, we could talk about thompson prison, we could keep going. why aren't those employees coming forward when they have a predatory among their fellow employees. they are the eyes and ears along with you. they are the ones who need to come forward. there needs to be that accountability who are responsibility. senator johnson: there is local enforcement having a difficult time recruiting. defund police movement, plame cops tiers, that type of thing. what type of recruitment issues are you having in the bureau of prisons. >> i can't agree with what the inspector general said. and i think it ties directly into your next question how do we hire the right people who want to change hearts and minds and if there was ever a time where it was difficult to hire at the bureau of prisons. it was difficult to hire before the pandemic and made jobs less attractive as well as the other issues you just raised in the fields of lam. our top priorities and we have been working intelligently with the bureau and in hopes that we can rely on their expertise to hire not just people but the right people for this business. senator johnson: indulge me for one more point. there is a real problem of false reports. do either of you have any indication how sing significant a problem. people have committed crimes and some of them aren't the most honorable and most honest and how does the bureau of prince and house of inspector general sift through the true claims versus the fraudulent ones? >> having done police corruption cases is one of the key questions is you had a lot of allegations and the drug dealers knew it was a convenient way to impact them. you have to be very careful to understand that. and the way you do it is getting the complaints and vetting them and not jumping to a conclusion and that's one of the challenges that we face because it is challenging to get into the prison to see if there is corroboration. i could talk about this for days, it is on assaults in prison. how many times do we get a complaint that an inmate was assaulted by a correctional fer. a lot of those are falls. there is no camera. no excuse. senator johnson: i agree with that and that is -- that has to be fixed. cameras have to be fixed and provide as much as possible, 100% coverage and take care of an awful lot of this. and one of the most cost-effective ways of addressing this. senator osoff: i know that are senator grassley had the prison reform act and anybody can get that and we deeply appreciate it. senator lankford. senator lankford: i have a couple of questions. i want to take advantage. i want to take up director peters in this discussion of cameras. a summon story on the sexual assault was that the assault was happening with locations that weren't monitored. how do we get that fixed and until we get cameras to get additional staff andize and ears that if you are passing through these locations can't do it one-on-one? >> thank you. in my 30 years of public safety and been the frm safety general of oregon. the stories we heard this morning, people know where those cameras are and probably more important they know where the cameras are not. the more we can improve that technology. i have seen this type of behavior and other nonsexual behavior decrease dramatically with the introduction of cameras both with the static cameras inside the institution and use of body cameras. one of the concerns i have today as the new director of the pureo is the lack of resources we have for the camera installation and these cameras that have been approved is concerning to me. always appreciate the support of congress and accomplishing those resources to ensure those institutions are safe and secure. go. senator lankford: what facilities were chosen and the process thrown for the rollout as well and how that happens and how the priorities were actually set. different subject on this, but technology is the micro jammers and the managed access, that is the security issue for individuals not to be stalked inside the prison or cell phones to coordinate activities within the prisons. i have worked on this years and there have been pilot programs and not wide description and manage access or micro jamming in all of our facilities and not being rolled out. what is needed to do that? >> i couldn't agree more, contraband is the beginning of sexual assault. and so eradicating the use of cell phones for the various reasons you just talked about, addressing this issue of drones to erp introduce contraband and ensure that that type of technology isn't the technology of criminality. the cor has to be safety and security and this issue is important to me and to answer your question it's about fund idges and being able to ensure that that technology is kept outside that. we are relying on our institutions and local law enforcement toll come in with their cell phone dogs to help us where the cell phones are. senator lankford: you can answer as well. >> something we have been writing about as well. other states are doing it. long ago, the b.o.p. and appreciate them taking that effort. but as director peters, cell phones in a prison are a deadly weapon. we did a case in puerto rico where it was used to put a hit on a correctional officer. they are used to courtroom future abused inmates. smuggling a cell phone into prison is a misdemeanor. senator lankford: several issues, both the disincentive to bring that in and the consequences whether it be a drone or staff member or contractor and get that cell phone in. but for the longest, states, local entities couldn't do this jamming. this is a big issue for us and we are still blocking the micro jamming and acting like this is 20 years ago and the access is being used to effectively to deter future crimes. i appreciate the engagement. this is an area we have to make our prisons more secure and our staff that are there that are gg actors and director peters, i want to ask about the first step act and move to other things. one of the things of the first step act is outside groups being allowed to do any recidivism. this has been difficult for the bureau of outside entities and very common in state facilities and a lot of programs but the bureau of prisons even after the first stem act has passed many have applied and faith-based entities are trying to step in and being blocked out. i would like to have a followup with you and your team. and what i got is we're thinking about it, working on it and no requirement but clear from congress to allow outside groups on recidivism issues. will you meet with me. >> i look forward. senator lankford: we look forward to working with you. we talked about staff to inmates assaults that are there this is an issue with 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 in the bureau of prisons. as of june, we have 1, 427 individuals in bureau of prince that are transgeed fer gender. 27% are mail and of those those are incarcerated for sex crimes. my question is how are we protecting other inmates where we have individuals that have sex crimes conviction that have transitiononned in another and biologyically male? based on that, what policies are there to protect the inmates. and honor those individuals in the gender they have chosen about what about other individuals and what are you seeing? >> this is an issue that i have been personally working on as the former department ofcorrections and director of the bureau of prince. -- prisons. not making sweeping decisions around our transpopulation and what their situation is and what is the safety and security of the institution we are considering to assign them and understand the complex of housing individuals and ensuring their safety and those who are incarcerated and safety of our employees. senator lankford: thank you for extra time. when i read through the transgender policy, shall be separated from other inmates when schauer stalls are not available. and are be soley. that gives rights to them. is that extended to other individuals so biological male is placed in a female prison. do other prisoners have the same rights on protecting themselves and not be housed with a biological male according to one that is charged with sex crimes? >> that is on us. it is our obligation that replacing them on units where they are safe and people on those units are safe. i wouldn't and determine their safety and security. senator lankford: they are able to choose. what i'm asking the individuals they are housed with, do they get that same opportunity or only given to the transgender inmate? >> the opportunity to provide is only a choice of placement is not up to the individual that is incarcerated and on us. lamping laking the opportunity is not given to the other folks? >> that's correct. senator lankford: why? >> it is important for us to own that placement direction. we are the ones to determine where they can be appropriately housed. senator lankford: some people and if you give and what they feel secure with their own background and perspective, i think that should be given to all in that situation. senator osoff: investigating the abuse of incarcerated women by b.o.p. employees, i want to some questions about management, accountability, what's gone wrong for the last 10 years such that there has been no systemic effort and acknowledgement by the inspector general that it is widespread. we found prl 52 hitch 500 allegations of sexual abuse by b.o.p. employees as the ranking member noted. not all of them will be valid. we heard from three survivors in the first panel, none of whom themselves made a complaint. given the fear of retaliation, given the power that bop employees have over the lives of those in their custody, it stands to reason there is a substantial number of incidents where no complaint is made. . . we also found to our shock that the office of internal affairs director has an 8,000-case backlog, including at least hundreds of sexual abuse allegations. first question for you this round is, how and by when will you clear it? ms. peters: thank you, senator. so i spoke earlier, we've added more than 40 positions to thes office of internal affairs to help shore up that backlog. i think when you talk about what's gone wrong over the last 10 years, it has been lack of resources. it has been 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 those investigations. and so it's my hope that those additional positions will help shore up that backlog. but 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 two years to clear that backlog. sen. ossoff: understood, director peters. i hope those sexual abuse allegations will be prioritized as you work through those 8,000 cases. and 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 pepper el and -- personnel and sometimes that's true but there are deeper management problems here. and so, director peters, i want to discuss a little bit about how you're approaching, again, with the stipulation that you've been on the job for five months, you're new to this role, you're taking charge of the institution and these events predated your tenure, how you're going to handle ensuring that you have all of the information about what's happening within your facilities, that the regional directors have all of the necessary information about what's happening in their facilities? how could it be based upon your experience thus far and the role and your experience managing this organization for the last five month, for example, that the regional director responsible for dublin would have been unaware that the chaplain and the warden and other employees, now over a dozen investigations, were abusing inmates, such that it spilled out into the associated press reporting that it was dubbed, quote, the rape club? why was the regional director unaware? ms. peters: thank you, senator. you know, in my 18 years in adult corrections, this is -- one of the biggest questions i've been faced with since i've taken on this new role. having been in institutions, countless times, understanding how corrections work, the warden can't leave his or her office without people knowing. so how this type of behavior happened unaccounted for without people stepping fard, i don't understand it. but 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 and the ugly that's happening inside this organization. which means they too need to know. they need to know -- have a pulse of what's happening in their regions and in their institutions. going back to the previous question, it starts with the investigators. one of the changes that 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're going to ensure that that reporting authority is changed and then myself and the deputy director will be meeting with the administrator of o.i.a. and our h.r. division director regularly to review those cases. also as it relates to the broader leadership structure, we're really looking at how those appointments are made, how we recruit for those positions, who fills those positions, but i've also sent 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. sen. ossoff: all well noted. 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 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 with that person? to understand how they possibly could have been blind to that severe abuse happening on their watch? ms. peters: yes, senator. sen. ossoff: thank you, director peters. one of our courageous witnesses from the first panel, ms. de la 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? ms. peters: i wouldn't want to surmise what she meant by that. senator. sen. ossoff: i think you probably have an idea. ms. peters: senator, i think the notion of an old boys club as i've seen and experienced in my career is one where decisions are made often behind closed doors, they're often made without women in the room, and i assume that's what she's speaking to. sen. ossoff: 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, but in fact what we heard from the survivors who testified in the first panel is a culture of mutual protection. talk a little bit about that, please, mr. horowitz. mr. horowitz: that's one of the biggest challenges we face. these are not secrets. the warden taking these actions, the chaplain taking these actions, other inmates taking these actions, they're not secrets. you mentioned atlanta. the federal prison there. it was essentially closed for a period of time when they tossed the prison to go look, we've been doing case after case there, dozens of phones found, other contraband found. it's not a problem that happened overnight. in fact, we looked at the past audit reports. they got passes. but 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., at the regional levels of the b.o.p.. and 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 supported by the organization, rather than have the people who are engaged in the wrongdoing promoted. sen. ossoff: thank you. senator johnson? sen. johnson: mr. chairman, i'm very mindful of the fact that this hearing really is about prison personnel preying on prisoners. i got that. but i think senator lankford brought up i think a pretty relevant point as well that certainly coming into this hearing i was thinking about, are there sexual assaults occurring between prisoners? director peters, how many biological males are being housed with biological females in federal prisons? ms. peters: i don't have an answer to that today. sen. johnson: do we have some? ms. peters: yes, senator. sen. johnson: i'll just go on the record, i won't belabor this point, but let me go on the record for when we are incarcerating somebody because they've committed a crime, we've taken away their right of being -- moving around freely around society, i would say they have no right to determine if you're a biological male to be housed with biological females. they have no right. that's the insane policy, we're talking about sexual assaults, to have the federal government engage in a policy that allows biological males to choose to be housed and come in close proximity with female 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, mr. chairman. sen. ossoff: thank you, senator johnson. director peters, let's talk about how the b.o.p. implements the prison rape elimination act or prea, whose purpose is indeed in the name of the legislation. it is to eliminate prison rape. 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 obligation and your moral obligation, director peters, as i believe you know and have stated you accept, is to eliminate sexual abuse of those in your custody. and i was pleased to hear you describe the possibility that this hearing could be a turning point. those were your words. a turning point. because again, and i'm repeating this so that the public viewing this hearing understands this because it's important. you're new to this job. and the events that we're describing did not occur under your tenure. but now that you're 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 those audits are viewed and they testified by b.o.p. leadership as an essential tool. ms. peters: that is correct. sen. ossoff: help us to understand, again, you were not in the role at the time, but 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, high level, ongoing sexual abuse, months, in some cases years. could both pass their prea audits during the period in question? ms. peters: thank you, senator, for the question. so, i was with the oregon department of corrections when the prison rape elimination act was passed. i was the inspector general as we implemented those recommendations. and it's an issue that is with every corrections agency. we had hoped that those standards would he will name ate -- would eliminate sexual misconduct as you mention it, but ha we've learned is that that is only one tool in our tool box. those audits come in and ensure that the institution is compliant with the federal standards that were created. it doesn't address cultural issues. so i think there are, back to my opening statements, other avenues and other tools we need to rely on in order to work towards eliminating sexual misconduct inside our institutions. i heard the professor speak earlier. there are concerns about how audits are conducted in some state correctional systems, some audits themselves 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 those prea audits so that's a good step in the right direction but again, i think the bottom line answer to your question is the prea you haddities are just -- audits are just one tool in our tool box. sen. ossoff: i think we need to understand how this tool can be so ineffective that at dublin, for example, and 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 that 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's 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. you and your team believe it's a key tool. it's clearly not working, right? ms. peters: that's correct, senator. it has not eliminated prison rape. sen. ossoff: 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'm correct, your comments to the effect that if the warden and the chaplain are engaged in widespread sexual abuse of inmates, there's no way that's a secret. mr. horowitz, is that -- mr. horowitz: yeah. sen. ossoff: so you have abuse occurring at this facility that's so severe and high level that it must have been widely known. it eventually spit out into the 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 inmate had been removed from the facility. i'm not saying there was or wasn't foul play involved there, but it's true, isn't it, that interviewing inmates is a core part of the process of conducting a prea audit, yes? ms. peters: yes. sen. ossoff: so if every female inmate had been removed from the facility two days before the prea audit, those interviews could not have been properly conducted, could they have? ms. peters: that's correct. sen. ossoff: and this was before your tenue. my point is, this -- your tenure. my point is, this process is badly, badly broken. as a result, the tool that you're going to have to rely on, i know you're also letting these cultural assessments, i'm eager to see how effective they are, to know what's happening in your own facilities is not currently functioning to give you the visibility that you're going to need. and if you lack that visibility, with you as the leader of reform, we're not going to be able to implement change. let's talk a little bit about o.a.i. processes, the precedent, inspector general horowitz, when prosecutions are or are not brought, what the consequences of those are. looking into coleman, multiple b.o.p. employees who eventually admitted in sworn statementsle, compelled by bureau of prison's office of internal affairs, admitted in graphic and explicit detail to sexual abuse of prisoners, all or most of those cases had been referred to your office as canned daylights for criminal prosecution -- candidates for criminal prosecution. the outcome is that none of them were criminally prosecuted. and in fact many retired with their benefits intact. how did that happen? mr. horowitz: so, i've looked at those cases and there are multiple reasons for it. first and foremost, we need to do, as a general matter, and arguing, a more effective job at looking at these cases when they come back to us. initially, remember, we're essentially in a triage business. we get thousands of complaints every year. we've got a dozen agents, for example, in the florida region to -- in our miami field office, to coverle a number of prisons throughout the southeast. so we're 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 hammedle. it's very -- handle. it's very simply a resource question. some of the cases, a dozen agents spending half their time on b.o.p. work can take. b.o.p. then investigates and they on occasion, when they find things, come back to us and say, we've 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 of the people by the way are no longer in the organization because many of these happened years ago, so i haven't been able to talk to the actual decision makers, but it appears looking at the file that in most cases we could have done, taken several steps to further investigation those before deciding to send them back to the b.o.p. again. and 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 self-incrimination and everything they say is tainted from a prosecution which is how they ended up not being prosecuted. so we need to look at with a more trin jent review -- stringent review. 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're now doing with that analytics, which is looking for trends at prisons so that we can not look at these anymore as one-offs. but do they reflect a broader problem, suggesting that we might have more witnesses out there if we go in and talk to inmates. because what we've seen frankly at coleman, and i've talked to my agents about this around the country, once we go into a prison, and by the way, the three inmates on the first panel who said they didn't report it, we went to them because we had learned about wrongdoing in the prison and reached out to them as potential witnesses. my agents tell me this over and over again. once inmates see us on the grounds and see action being taken, like when we searched the warden's residence, we searched the warden's home during that investigation, we have been received a substantial number of complaints from inmates, several of which we've corroborated. but those happen once they saw that action. so there are a lot of things that need to occur. both on our end and the b.o.p.'s end. and i'll go back to talking about, you know, two things that would help up front. cameras, search policy. contraband. penalties. inmates are being groomed am, contraband is a huge problem and if we had cameras, i can't tell you 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, and the credit to the deputy attorney general for doing this, she has told the u.s. attorneys they need to prosecute these cases because keep in mind, that's the other thing my agents are looking at these cases for. if there was a crime but no one's going to prosecute it, there's no art investigating it as a criminal matter, doesn't make any sense. there needs to be the partner on the receiving end. sen. ossoff: you mentioned the proactive monitoring of data to include complaint data. my view is that both o.i.g. and o.i.a. need to be engaged in that. we heard from o.i.a. that they are not doing that. and i'll enter into the record, without objection, some charts that we produced that show that at several of these key am, most notorious facilities, there was a data signature of increased complaints in the years during which the misconduct was occurrg but before there was significant official action. will you commit to ensuring that o.a.i. is proactively monitoring sexual assault complaint and data at the facility level to get ahead of any possible major crises at a facility? ms. peters: yes, senator. the inspector general and i just met a couple weeks ago and he talked about this notion of data analytics and i went back and talked 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. and so our office of internal affairs is looking forward to that collaboration and ensuring that we're monitoring the same sets of data. mr. horowitz: most of the data we receive are the referrals we get from the b.o.p.. the ones we can't share with the b.o.p. are the whistleblower complaints that the inmates come straight to us that need confidentiality. so short of that, we should have the same data. sen. ossoff: i think proactively monitoring that data is going to be essential and you noted that in those coleman cases, the least in several of them, o.i.a. brought them back. mr. horowitz: correct. sen. ossoff: but still no prosecution was brought. as a result those folks face no criminal penalties for pretty egregious acts, clearly. it sounds that you are engaged in and change is necessary. and i understand you both face resource constraints but 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 beenle genuinely encouraged by the tone of your tenure thus far, by the ambitious reform objectives that you set out in public. when we've met in private and during these public engagements, i've 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've got. and i think you should expect that will so long as i have the ability, i will be calling you back to the senate to ask what progress you've made. and the one thing that concerned me from today's discussion is that your admirable plans for reform, which i hope you implement with speed and strength, need to be informed by a full understanding of what's gone wrong in the past. and when we investigated atlanta, what we heard from your predecessor was that he was blind. in my view, willfully blind, but blind, to what was happening at the regional level and facility level and the regional director didn't know what was happening at the facility level. you will be held accountable for knowing. and i believe you have an opportunity to establish a legacy 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. pen tenchry atlanta that were submitted following that july 26 hearing. you need to set the tone within your organization and working with d.o.j.'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 and please make good on it. please corporate 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 that the work that we've 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 and misconduct at bureau of prisons facilities, we've investigated the medical mistreatment of women in d.h.s. custody. we've investigated failures to implement the death in custody reporting act. we are now continuing 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's not the end of this. it's the turning point that you reference in your opening remarks, director peters. thank you both for your testimony and the hear something adjourned -- hearing is adjourned. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2022]

Related Keywords

Miami ,Florida ,United States ,New York ,Alabama ,Brooklyn ,Texas ,Kentucky ,Illinois ,California ,Togo ,Oregon ,Dublin ,Ireland ,Colin Esperanza ,Arlington Beth ,Brenda V Smith ,Carolyn Richardson ,