Andy Thibault

     [Back to Columns & Stories]

Cool Justice 
Jailhouse Lawyer Prevails over AG `Suit'
By ANDY THIBAULT, Columnist
Law Tribune Newspapers
March 14, 2005

Vindication comes in many ways, and sometimes the smallest victories are the sweetest. So it was for jailhouse lawyer Peter Ventura, who smote a suit - as in an assistant attorney general -- pro se.

For more than a decade, Ventura has acted as a jailhouse lawyer in both New Hampshire and Connecticut prisons. He has helped numerous other inmates with their legal challenges and complaints.

Here are the golden words - from New Haven Superior Court Judge Clarance J. Jones - that were the fruit of Ventura's labor: "Inasmuch as the plaintiff asserts that he has complied with the principle of administrative exhaustion, and he claims the Department [of Correction] is denying him the right to have his Bible for his use during the recreational period when other inmates are allowed to use secular materials, the court finds that it is appropriate to determine whether the plaintiff's exercise of religion has been burdened … Motion to Dismiss is denied." The ruling was filed on Nov. 22, 2004.

It is unusual for an inmate to win a motion to dismiss pro se. Although this is no guarantee of anything, it helped that Ventura had the law and the facts on his side.

The so-called Correction Department seeks to stifle Ventura because he studies the Bible on his own and shares the Gospel with others outside the supervision of the official chaplains. These are the same chaplains who turn a blind eye to abuse in prison and admit to inmates that they will not report crimes to the outside world. Some of these chaplains are phonies who have no real flock but instead are stooges for a corrupt system.

Ventura says he has been praying with inmates and sometimes guards since 1998. Indeed, Judge Jones notes: "The plaintiff argues that the Department previously allowed him to engage in prostelytizing activities. He further claims that the defendant burdens his exercise of religion by disallowing him to take his Bible into a recreational area for his personal use. The latter point clearly is worthy of judicial review."

Ventura eloquently describes the milieu in which it is OK for prisoners to become zombies playing violent video games while inmate-led Bible study is banned.

"Put violent games in their hands … Offer them no rehabilitative programs, but occupy them with games. They won't miss the rehab programs, and the guards and the next generation will have secure employment!"

As a budget issue, Ventura also points to the jailing of a 60-year-old man who had been paroled after 30 years, then violated on probation for having several grams of marijuana: "For over two years he has been imprisoned at a cost of at least $50,000. Your tax dollars at work! Any other state would have sent [the inmate] to a six-month drug program."

A recent Brandeis University study of Connecticut prisons amplifies this point. Inmates who have received substance abuse treatment are much less likely to be rearrested, resulting in a benefit of 1.8 to 5.7 times the cost of treatment. Almost 46 percent of Connecticut's prison population gets rearrested within the first year after release, but that figure drops to 37.4 percent for inmates who receive basic treatment and 23.5 percent for those who receive intensive substance abuse treatment, according to the study.

What we have in Connecticut is a self-perpetuating inmate factory that cannot tolerate independent thought or genuine rehabilitation. The recidivism rates should make any taxpayer choke. The Ventura case is but a symptom. If the Legislature really wants to know what is going on here, they should hear from inmates like Ventura when they look at the operations of Connecticut's jail system.

Back to Top