Episode 1

From Sales Pitch To Reality, 6164 Petitions

This is a rebroadcast from January 2023, the first episode of the CHOICES podcast. We will focus on SB6164, a bill passed in 2020 by the Washington State Legislature that grants county prosecutors discretion to review past cases and request resentencing if the sentence no longer advances the "interests of justice." In this episode, host Ralph Dunuan examines the history and efficacy of SB6164 - does this bill truly offer relief to incarcerated folks and the communities and families they hope to return to? 

This episode features interviews with Demar Nelson, Jorge Macias, Eric Bacolod, and Clayton Gagnier.

Transcript

Ralph Dunuan [00:00:16] Hello, this is Ralph Dunuan. I am an inside community organizer housed here at the Washington State Corrections Center. I have been incarcerated for the last 23 years. I am a member of the Asian Pacific Islander Cultural Awareness Group, or APICAG, as well as Tribal Sons here at WCC. My background for social change began with participating with the APICAG looking at how to get more people involved in the things that affect them, such as new legislation or post-secondary education and the Second Chance Pell. I also have been working with the Native American Re-entry team to get people connected for success on the other side of the wall. It was these things that have led me to where I am today and looking for ways to keep people informed. With that in mind, welcome to The CHOICES podcast, where the issues are real and the time for change is now, where choices we address issues that are impacting our communities, allowing both sides to be seen and exposing the real effects to those communities. With every informed choice we  make, we create hope for opportunities for the communities we come from and engage solutions to impact positive change. Thank you for listening in. 

Ralph Dunuan [00:01:33] In today's episode, we examine a recently enacted bill that legislation and county prosecutors claimed would offer relief by alleviating pressure from the State Clemency Board and giving more power to county prosecutors in the form of a sentencing tool, called a 6164 petition. These petitions are supposed to allow prisoners the ability to be resentenced under certain criteria and circumstances. Today, we will look at whether or not this is really the case or just another illusion of reform that gives legislators and prosecutors alike the ability to continue to lie to communities that they say they are working to make us safer. In 2020, the Washington State Legislature signed into law a resentencing bill titled 6164, which most of Washington state's incarcerated population has heard of, applied for, or knows someone who has applied for. What this means is that someone who has been convicted of crimes can ask the prosecuting attorney of their county to be resentenced under the presumption that the sentencing falls under what would become the new language added to RCW 36.27. What this did was add a new section to that RCW in Section Two, Subsection Three of the RCW. It is supposed to give a guideline for a means to release. So for those who don't know this, this is what it says. Section two, subsection three, says the court may consider post-conviction factors, including but not limited to the inmate's disciplinary record and record of rehabilitation, while incarcerated. Evidence that reflects whether age, time served and diminished physical condition, if any, have reduced the inmate's risk for future violence. And evidence that reflects changed circumstances since the inmate's original sentences such that the inmate's continued incarceration no longer serves the interest of justice. Credit shall be given for time served. This is how RCW 36.27 Section two, Subsection three, currently reads. 

Ralph Dunuan [00:03:45] One of the key components to this language that is not being utilized is the court "may consider post-conviction factors, including but not limited to." What this means is that a court, not the prosecutor, can make a decision based upon all or one of those factors. However, in most cases these factors are not being allowed to be presented to the court. Most people cannot make it past the court's gatekeepers in the form of county prosecutors. What this type of reform was promoted as was a way for individuals who were sentenced to an extreme amount of years behind bars, an ability to seek relief. Primarily, it was seen as a way to reexamine past sentencing practices such as robbery in the second degree or any other sentences that were seen as excessive, which were supposed to be based off of the language within the bill. In so doing, changing the racial disparity in the Washington state prison system. So let's take a step back for a minute and listen to how this bill was sold to the prison population. Here to offer up the his say, as prosecutors from the various I-5 corridor counties sold their bill of sales to the folks on the inside, my good friend DeMar Nelson. 

DeMar Nelson [00:05:04] My name is DeMar Nelson. I am a leader, former president of the BPC at Shelton. I came here in 2015 and began the Shelton chapter of the BPC. I'm also a TEACH board member, that's Taking Education and Creating History, board member. I'm in a position that I'm in today's call to just kind of be a voice to the questions that we have surrounding 6164. I'm involved in a lot of community stuff, helping the evolutionary process through the growth of the man, the growth of the legislative system. Being a prisoner myself and also doing the work that's necessary for us to liberate ourselves and liberate others in an exchange with. 

Nils Bakke [00:05:50] Can you explain briefly what went down in 2020 with senators visiting the prisons looking for advice on SB 6164? 

DeMar Nelson [00:06:01] Absolutely. It was it was a profound experience. We actually organized from the inside out to have a dialog with prosecutors, different lawmakers, things of that nature. We also have we want to on the prosecution association to talk about things like mercy, the  6164 bill, that was arising on behalf of incarcerated individuals. And what happened was we had a feeling that reading as the I-5 corridor reform kind of gathering, and the topic was mercy and understanding on our end. For them to understand the things that we're doing to grow through our experience, taking the victims and things like that into account, and for them to explain the things that they're doing to actually add changes and adjustments to a prison system that's bursting at the seams. So one of those tools that they were using was the 6164. So when they arrived, we began to talk about the 6164, what their true intentions was for the 6164, and how we would actually be able to measure up or qualify for the 6164. And it was a great meeting on their end. They spoke about how, you know, they realize there's a lot of errors within the justice system. There's a lot of people that are over-sentenced, meaning they have astronomical numbers. They realized that some people got struck out for things they wouldn't have got struck out for and said laws weren't on the books and if they weren't convicted at a certain time. And so they said they planned on using 6164 as a way to alleviate a lot of the pressure that was taking place within the system. 

DeMar Nelson [00:07:54] So when 6164 passed, what had happened was, we began to see that they actually focused on people that got life because of Robbery 2, people who had medical issues within the prison system, you know, women who had battered syndrome issues because we kind of kept tabs on the women results and what was taking place with the women in Purdy as well. I think you have guys in here who have failed at an age where they were under 21 or under 25 years old, who had violent crimes, who also was asking in that vein as well. Well, this is what we've been here doing with our time and we've actually given ourselves to rehabilitation. What does that look like in 6164? Well, you know, it's it's actually going to be a process where you can actually petition, you can ask to be seen. We'll take it to a committee. There was a process where, you know, they'll grant that petition as possible and they'll try to get you back if it's reviewed. And upon review, we see that there's the papers. So there was a lot of hope on my end for people who have been in here and who have done a lot of time but didn't have the issues that they were necessarily focusing on. 

DeMar Nelson [00:09:13] Now, fast forward, what happened was King County was was very proactive in seeing about people through 6164. They even made good faith in responding to people who actually reached out, said, hey, I'd like a second look, I've been locked up this long, etc., etc.. But what didn't happen was a lot of those individuals who had violent crimes, they said, well, we're not going to see you guys right now. That's not a priority for us. So those guys kind of fell to the wayside. What you also had in turn was you had people in different counties. Clark County, things of that nature, who said, hey, we don't care if 6164 got passed, we're not honoring it. So you begin to see the stress in the prison system. You begin to see the stress upon the families. We're here. You had a RCW, or you had a valve put in place for people to actually have a process to correct some errors or see some relief. But you had people in the county that you had people in gatekeeping positions that were not willing to adhere to that process. Some of them even denied that we would even want to deal with you. So that was a very, very stressful thing. And also, what we've ultimately seen is that, though 6164 was instituted it actually didn't change. Because what you did was change the hinges, but not the door. So now you have people who have the same power that they had before, 6164 came into play, but they're not willing to exercise that power, which keeps them in power. So it's like, hey, we got this law on the books, but we still have the power. So whether we choose to use it or not, that's on us. Whether we choose to see about you or not, we still maintain the power. So there's not any leverage for an individual to have a clear process, because you have some people who have written petitions and have asked to be seen, but they haven't even been considered. They haven't been responded to. And there's some people in some county prosecutors and D.A. offices have simply written back and said, we don't care anything about 6164. We don't want to be involved and we're not willing to look at you in 6164, and we don't care. So the powers that be have that power and disabused it. So that's that's what we've seen on our end. That's kind of how that works and that's how the power has unfolded and that's how it's affected the prison population and families. 

DeMar Nelson [00:11:46] On the other hand, as well, because you've had communities get ready and rally around this thing, but there hasn't been any fair momentum. I can honestly given applause to King County because I believe that they're trying to keep it on the up and up. Karla Lee, who is a very transparent individual with honest about that, how she dealt with it, and also she was doing a really, really good job, still does, and trying to get back to people and let them know where King County is in terms of status when it comes to 6164 and who they're willing to deal with. Pierce County hasn't been on board, it's been very lackluster.  There's Snohomish county, which has been kind of fair. There's been people getting relief. The people in Clark County, Kitsap County, and things of that nature. It's been like full of people. I just I'd like to say that it hasn't been using, used fairly. 

Nils Bakke [00:12:39] So just real quick, reflecting on everything that you just shared. Would you say that 6164 had been effective in its  initial goal? 

DeMar Nelson [00:12:51] No, I wouldn't say it's been effective. Like I said, I don't want to throw anybody in particular under the bus when it comes to what they're doing or rob them of their credit because I know King County has done an excellent job in trying to be proactive. I've written them. I've spoken to them. It's been a leader for my cultural group, youth. We have a great communication bridge with the King County division, especially on the stance that as far as we're on our feet, they try to be as transparent as possible with what they wanted to do. But I can honestly say that 6164 has not been effective. It hasn't been effective. 

DeMar Nelson [00:13:30] And I think at this point, the taxpayers need to know it. I realize that there's a hard on crime type of thing, do your crime, do the to time in the crime type of thing. But the taxpayers are stakeholders in this position. You have some individuals in here who are ready for release because they've actually applied their life to rehabilitation and they qualify to be into the reformed society and be in the community. I think we should give those guys a look. I think they should be considered, especially if we use taxpayers dollars. It's something like 6164. that's that sleeping giant. They have no idea that these things are being passed and that people have the option to be seen again so that they can grow within a society that they've actually grown, but 6164 hasn't been effective. The powers that be have abused that discretion. They made the changes because financially Washington's prison system is bursting at the seams. Blake, it opened up a lot of beds. But at the end of the day, you still have a county jail system that's bursting at the seams because of crimes coverage. There's a lot of violence trials that are on pause that are just now resuming because of that. So we're going to be back in the very same position that they were in before the Blake passed. The 6164 was passed to appease those issues that they realize that things are just fine with the justice system. Systemic lies when it comes to the marginalization of different people and ethnicities. But when they actually put it into place, 6164 is not even spoken about in the prison system no more. Nobody has faith it. Families don't have faith in it. Families are disappointed about that because it was, you know, a lot of news online and things about 6164. They read the language. They believed in the process, but it's not being used effectively. And I think that that should be brought up. I think that should be challenged, especially as a society. Society should know the processes in place that have not been utilized. And that's unfair. 

Ralph Dunuan [00:15:36] Thank you, DeMar, for taking the time to share those thoughts. Next, let's examine what or if this resentencing tool is one really transformative? Two, does this really change the racial disparities in the prison system? Or three, what type of impact this is having on families and communities? First of all, let's talk about reform. Most people only think about it as change. So unless you are close to the issue in some way, such as being a legislator, prisoner of the prison industrial complex, activists or law enforcement, then we rarely ask what type of reform an issue is, or whether it's carceral reform or abolition reform. One promotes consistent carceral practices which make it easier for someone to find themselves back inside of prison walls. Well, the other abolition reform looks to move away from criminalization and carceral practices. Choosing a path that addresses what people and communities need to heal from an oppressive system. What the 6164 petitions have done allow people to believe there is hope. Offer a chance. Or maybe that's just another illusion also. Here is someone who has just submitted a 6164 petition. Let's listen to his story and how he hopes for a chance for something more than concrete and razor wire. 

Jorge Macias [00:17:05] (Mi nombre es Jorge Macias...) My name is Jorge Macias. I've been in jail in Washington State for 25 years now. I committed my crime in 1997. And my crime is first degree murder. I'm from Mexico, and I was 25 when I committed my crime. Now I'm 51 years old, so I've been in jail for 25 years now. And I just submitted my petition for the new Washington state law 6164. 

Nils Bakke [00:17:36] Was your petition granted? 

Jorge Macias [00:17:38] Why or why not deposing someone they with? I was very glad to submit my petition because it gave me the opportunity to have a second chance because as far as I understand, this gives inmates the chance to be resentenced  based on our behavior and the way we serve our time here in prison. That's basically the reason that gave me courage to submit it to Clark County in Washington State, begging for a chance to read the law petition, because I think that the 6164 law that if we behave, it gives me the chance and maybe my family, friends and community to be helped. 

Nils Bakke [00:18:39] Why do you feel that you meet the needs for the criteria of the petition standard? 

Jorge Macias [00:18:46]  I met all the qualifications that were outlined by the Washington state. My behavior record is clean and I got no violations or infractions.  So far in this past 25 years, I've been here, my counselors are continually surprised by my records because every six months we get reviews and I've been clean for these 25 years. I never had a fighting here or any major infraction. I've sent every requested paper for them to see that I want, and I really need, help from the 6164 law. 

Nils Bakke [00:19:36] How do you feel the decision of your petition affected your family or friends? 

Jorge Macias [00:19:44] This decision has a lot of impact on friends, family and the community, and mostly all the people we love. For me to have this chance or this opportunity is a great joy and also a great relief for me and my sons. To my aging mother, it brings her joy that they're giving me this chance. In this past 25 years, I could only see my father once and he passed away three years ago. So my sons, grandsons, brothers and sisters and friends, they're all happy that this law might release all this pain from all these years of being apart and alone. That we weren't able to enjoy birthdays or Christmas and a lot of good moments we could have had. I think that 6164 is a relief for inmates and family, also friends and brothers. 

Nils Bakke [00:21:02] Was the process for filing a 6164 petition clear and straightforward? 

Jorge Macias [00:21:10] Okay. Yeah. It was very easy, very fast. And there's no problem with it, really. I think that for every inmate or my friends and companions that I have known that had the chance to file their petition, they didn't have any issues or troubles with it. 

Nils Bakke [00:21:34] So, now that you can see how the bill is actually been used as a sentencing petition, what do you think needs to change in it? 

Jorge Macias [00:21:47] 6164 is a law that can really help a lot of people, a lot of inmates, and a lot of families that are waiting for us outside. Many families that have suffered and many families that are still crying for each of their sons, each of their brothers, each of their husbands and each of their grandfathers, each of their friends. I think 6164, it's an exemplary law, because it's a second chance for new generations, new generations of inmates that can look at the example of others. The example of people that have been locked up for years and the example of people that have been in prison for years to see that it's possible. 6164 It's a major opportunity to us all and to all of our families. 

Ralph Dunuan [00:22:52] Thanks for sharing those thoughts. Good luck on your petition. Hopefully the Clark County prosecutors can be the change. So what is it for an issue to be transformative? I believe that in order for something to be transformative, it has to create a significant change in that something, almost making it something completely different. It's not just creating a change, however. That's what legislators, prosecutors and actors of the Department of Corrections would have everyone believe. That transformative change has this less bad mentality. So why are our loved ones and our communities of color consistently being asked to maintain that 'less than' mentality in regards to the criminal justice systems reforms? With that in mind, how does this reform of transformative change apply to the 6164 bill? This bill was sold as something that would relieve some of the pressures that these excessive sentencing practices placed upon the state clemency board, giving prosecutors, yes prosecutors, the added power to pick and choose individual sentences to change, the power to change being at their will, which has seemed to be one that will only further their careers. 

Ralph Dunuan [00:24:11] Now, has the will of any prosecutor in this state been for either transformative change in BIPOC communities or fair and racially equitable sentencing practices? Which leads me to what does racial disparity in prison look like? We can all see that the prison industrial complex traps, traumatizes and impacts our communities of color more than any other in this country. We see those effects as people come and go. Men, women and even children are held in these facilities, in institutions. The majority of those held captive by these environments don't realize they were set up from birth by the color of their skin or what side of the poverty line they grew up on. That's what keeps the disparity within the U.S. penal system at a constant, with the realization that the system does neither keep communities safe nor rehabilitate the ones behind the walls of concrete and razor wire. 

Ralph Dunuan [00:25:08] Communities have begun to demand change. The response to those demands are reform. These idealism is of reform to a criminal justice system that is doing what it was designed to do have overshadowed significant change and has not changed any racial disparities within the system itself. What it has done is allowed state actors and agencies to continue the cycles of incarceration and maintain the racial imbalance. We can see exactly that with how the 6164 bill was written and how it currently is being utilized. The 6164 petition was supposed to be a means of relief for incarcerated individuals who could show rehabilitation, age, and time served for less likelihood to commit future acts of violence. And as the sentence no longer serves the interest of justice, which individuals were given the relief that these petitions are supposed to give would affect the racial imbalance in the Washington State prison system. However, because the language of this bill failed to define what those terms actually mean in regards to tangible actions, the 6164 petition is left to the whims of an already-biased prosecution. Which is why the Prosecutors Association was so adamant about the bill passing when it was before legislation. 

DeMar Nelson [00:26:31] As my friend DeMar conveyed earlier today, prosecutors assigned to review these petitions refused to define any of the criteria that the bill talked about, which is what allows each county the ability to deny almost all petitions submitted. King County had even went as far as creating a standard denial response to those petitions, which is vague and unclear. Even when county prosecutors do grant petitions, the past is still difficult. Here to share their experience with these trials and tribulations is Eric. Tell them how it is, Eric. 

Eric Bacolod [00:27:08] My name is Eric Michael Bacolod, my DOC# is 760310. I have been incarcerated since 1996 upon being convicted of three counts of assault in the first degree with three gun enhancements. I was given a sentence of 500 months, 41 and a half years. I've been incarcerated for nearly 27 years. My 6164 petition out of Pierce County has been granted. However, I've been waiting for a year and a half to be resentenced. I'm here to provide my views and opinions about how 6164 is is being applied in. 

Nils Bakke [00:27:59] So as you mentioned, your petition was granted. Why was it granted? 

Eric Bacolod [00:28:04] I believe my petition was granted because I meet most of the criteria that was set out by the Pierce County prosecutor's office and that I was 18 at the time the crime occurred. I was given an excessive sentence. Nobody was injured, this was a non-homicide, non-injury case. It was imposed consistent stacking of enhancements, third consecutive to each other and to the underlying  sentence. And I served probably well over half the time that was imposed, almost two thirds of the time. And it just doesn't, keeping me incarcerated doesn't serve any justice. ... I'm just simply being warehoused. I've exhausted all punitive and all rehabilitative efforts that I can from incarceration being in prison. So taxpayer dollars are just being wasted on me being here. And it's just it's becoming cruel and unusual to just warehouse me here when I'm just getting older and time is moving by. So I believe that I met most of the criteria. And it's pretty obvious that the prosecutors can see that, that's why they merited the petition. 

Nils Bakke [00:29:32] All right. Thank you. How do you feel the decision of your petition affected your family and friends? 

Eric Bacolod [00:29:39] I think it gave them a lot of hope. It gave them a lot of motivation and has inspired them to want to be in my life more. And that helped me feel healthy. Help me with the next step in being released. It's definitely brought us closer. Because now we can see the light, so to speak. Whereas I was just here and they were there, life was just going on, now they can see me walking out these doors and coming back home. So it's been a  it's had a positive effect. 

Nils Bakke [00:30:27] On that note, how has the year and a half delay affected your family and friends?

Eric Bacolod [00:30:36] That's probably one of the bittersweet parts of it or the bitter part of it... because it's just anticipation, the build up, the limbo, the suspense. And then, you know, when you come in home?  I mean, they accepted it, so when are you getting resentenced? why has it taken so long? What is what is the hold up? So that's been kind of stressful on my family and I because I'm sitting here in limbo wondering when it also hinders me from some programing or adjusting to another stage, or basically transitioning back into the community. Because I can't partake in any programs such as work release, graduate or graduate reentry. I can't take certain classes in here because as of right now, my current structure, my sentence is still the same. It hasn't changed because resentencing hasn't occurred. So, it's had,  a year and a half delay, it's just pretty stressful because also I don't know what the prosecutor how, where they fit. Are they reconsidering, or is their decision still standing, if you know, anything can go on within prison walls, you know, something out of my control can happen to where I make it involved somewhere or be accused of something, and then I get an infraction and then that might blow or have a detrimental effect on my resentencing. So it's kind of maybe volatile is the word and and just kind of restless. But at the same time, I'm still hopeful. But the delay is just, it's had an effect. Because everybody is waiting with open arms, which resources, there's jobs waiting. And because the time has elapsed, some of that stuff may diminish. Some of those resources may not be available when the time does come because it's taken so long. 

Nils Bakke [00:32:56] Thank you. Was the process for filing the 6164 petition clear and or straightforward? 

Eric Bacolod [00:33:04] Well, I filed back in September of 2020, and that was shortly after it went into effect. I believe it went to affect July of 2020. So it was fairly new. I basically wrote a letter just as a one page letter, just summarizing how long I've been incarcerated, what I'm incarcerated for, what I've been doing as far as certificates and my behavior. There was no real clear direction. I just took it upon myself to just include what I believe the prosecutor would want to consider. And I used the template for clemency and pardons process in a nutshell and provided them with my infractions, history, my behavior, observation entries and whatnot, my record, all my achievements, my family support, community support. And I it wasn't until April of 2021 that I received a decision six months later, six or eight months later that they decided to grant. The process wasn't straightforward, probably because at the time it was fairly new. Since that time, I've seen criteria come out from several different counties and a lot of criteria, it's kind of clear. But the actual process is still kind of there's there's no clear direction. It's basically asking you to write them a letter stating all your infraction history,  everything regarding your life, from the time that the crime was committed to the present day of filing a petition. And it's just kind of vague, it probably could be a little bit more clear or precise, but, you know, the process wasn't all the way clear. But I don't know, is it? It probably should have a better a better instruction or better a better method of of clarifying. 

Nils Bakke [00:35:24] Thank you. And last question. Now that you can see how this bill is actually being used as a sentencing petition, what do you think needs to change in it? 

Eric Bacolod [00:35:37] Well, I'm glad mine was granted. I'm very grateful and thankful of mine and blessed, however, for those that I've seen that were denied, there's no transparency. There's no they don't really give a reason why they deny that. There's actually really no reason why they granted mine, they didn't provide any reason for why they granted mine either. So I think transparency would be would be good. Would they provide reasons as to why the other is declined? I believe that there should be maybe a hearing process that can be optional, sort of like the clemency and pardons process where a person can present their case rather than just sending in written material that can maybe be represented by an attorney if they need to, or they can just at least be there to where they're a person. And it's seen as a person, not just some documents, maybe like a teleconference or via Skype. I think that that should be implemented. Some kind of process like that should be implemented. I think that they need to exercise their discretion and their authority more because while this is a good law, it's a step in the right direction. It's very, very few and far between that I've seen where people have actually benefited from from this law and the prosecutors, find. And I'm the exception. Again, I'm thankful for that. But at the same time, I think it's very you're asking the same people who've put us here to let us out and naturally they're, I don't know, some would say indoctrinated or just it's their job to want to keep us in here. It's just hard to put it in their hands to want to be progressive of criminal justice reform. So I think it should be this should be, I don't know, maybe some more someon in the public overseeing or maybe the public in general should be able to weigh in on whether or not the prosecutors are using this the right way. And what it's designed for. 

Eric Bacolod [00:38:01] Because it was designed, we had a prosecutor summit here in November of 2019 with all the major prosecutors from all the neighboring counties in Wetsern Washington, Kim County, Pierce County, Kitsap and Snohomish, just to name the main ones and the main prosecutors out of all the head prosecutors were here from those counties. And if there's something that we discussed before, it became a law with those prosecutors and it was all based on the disparity of people who are being convicted of getting excessive sentences, that that's that's what caused this law to go into effect. And they're not utilizing this law for that purpose, at least it doesn't seem like for the most part. It's just it's a law on the books that looks nice, gives people hope, but it's not being used for the purpose it was meant for all the way. I mean, it's just there's just still like I said, the prosecutors need to have a change of heart. Change of heart, Change of mind. It needs to be more progressive and need to understand that, you know what? These laws are designed for. Many people of color, people who are disenfranchized, people who are poor, impoverished. If the criminal justice system is railroaded or or just for whatever reason. Treated unfairly. They need to use these laws to correct those mistakes. 

Ralph Dunuan [00:39:42] Thank you for your words and honest insight with your struggle. Now if this bill that was supposed to offer real relief for people who have showed rehabilitation, then why is it that prosecutors refuse to clearly define the language for granting these petitions? Furthermore, why is it that these state agencies refuse to commit to address the racial disparities in the Washington State prison system? Next, let's see, what types of impact are these types of bills really having on our families and communities? For those behind these walls, who have found the process that works for them on a path to rehabilitation from criminalization, we are consistently given the least action for release. Is it because we are the ones usually with the most time, the ones that see the vast machine that is the prison industrial complex? Or the fear that they have, that the more of us that are on the other side of these walls, we'll have a positive impact on our communities. Exposing every failure of incarceration. Whatever the case may be. 

Ralph Dunuan [00:40:51] What is usually overlooked or ignored is the impact these types of decisions have on families and the communities that people are returning to. When individuals plead to the kindness of organizations such as county prosecutors for 6164 petitions to be heard, families and communities become involved. Once involved, the families and communities begin building hope around the nightmare that is incarceration and the idea that it will possibly end sooner rather than later. In some cases, prosecutors have added fuel to the fire by hinting that they are strongly leaning towards advocating for resentencing. It's statements like this that these families and community members to begin preparing for their loved ones to come home, then the reality of these bills come to light. When prosecutors failed to follow through with any resentencing hearings, they seldom think about what they say and how that impacts the people waiting for someone to come home. There's two opinions. Perspective is great. Giving us a look at the real impacts for those who are in this with us. 

Clayton Gagnier [00:42:00] My name is Clayton Gagnier. My number is 761931. I've been down since 1996. I filed for the 6164 resentencing petition August 23rd of 2020. I filed in Snohomish  County, provided seven pieces of community support, including my stepfather, my mother, my sister. 11 Job offer. Yeah, 11 job opportunities. I have two outreach programs, one for Scientists, Children's Research Hospital, and another for covering up gang related tattoos. I am a tattoo artist. I think that the 6164 petition had an extremely negative impact on my family. My father won't even talk about it anymore because of the way that they responded to him. He called once a week on Mondays, and every time he called they said that they're not dealing with that at this time. Didn't refer him to anyone else, just hung up on him. In January 3rd of [2021], I received a response saying that everything looked good. I was on track and all I needed was a better release plan. So I sat down and I wrote out a better release plan. I even wrote down hour by hour for the first couple of days and my day by day for a couple of weeks, about month by month. I included multiple job opportunities and I have as whereas I'm moving to a small community town in Fulton. So it was really simple to find job opportunities out there because everybody's looking for work right now. And when they did reply back, he replied back, it says here they replied back... August 26th, 2022. And they said that they reviewed my submission and their determination was that I did not demonstrate that the sentence no longer served the advancing or interests of justice as required by our RCW 36.27.130.0. And they said that it is closed as of that time. They said that in their letter it says that I no longer that I still do not demonstrate as if I was able to function properly in a community setting. But my last letter to them, I sent updates on them and my last letter to them told them that I do work on a security group which is out in Airway Heights, out in in Medical Lake. I work at the Eastern mental health facilities and so I'm in the community all day and have been for a couple of months, you know, three, three months now. And they know this. But their letter states that I'm still, I still do not demonstrate that the community would be safe. So I believe that they failed me there. I don't think they even read it. I had multiple family members write in to explain to them who I was in the petition itself to members of the community. The job opportunities that I had had never met me, although they said that they would give me an interview on the day that I was released... And so it was rejected, of course. 

Clayton Gagnier [00:45:44] I know that I meet the criteria. I know it. I haven't received any infractions at all since 2016, and in the petition it said that they were looking for people who were changed, who were eligible for this. So when I first fell in 96, I was the bad guy. And I did bad things. I received a lot of infractions and then a lot of whole time. And now I'm nothing. I have at least 20 staff members here just in this facility alone that probably comes out here. I had a recommendation from a psychologist named Susan Crow who wrote in there and sent it with my petition saying that, this sentence no longer serves any means at all. All this is costing taxpayers money out of doing and creating suffering for my family, which may be. I know that it affects my family in a bad way. My mother sat in a mess now for decades, and she I mean, it broke her down really bad. She  doesn't eat right a lot and she won't talk about law with me. I'm filing for clemency now, but she won't even really get into that. She doesn't think there's... She doesn't trust the justice system anymore after the way that Adam Cornell, who is the deputy prosecutor now in Snohomish County, and he was also the prosecutor on my case, and he was the one who reviewed it, along with Matthew Knobloch, who is the chief deputy. And they both have. They had, after all, in all of my proceedings with them criminally, I believe, and they won't even talk to her. She called all the time trying to get an update or trying to give them more information about new classes that I finish in school today ever tried to get into. And they won't discuss anything with her now. They won't discuss this at all. I think that it was I think it was a poor decision on the courts to give the prosecution the ability to tell us, know when they're the ones who were prosecuting us to begin with. I don't think that it's served anybody. As a matter of fact, I think only a handful of people even got out. I think that it needs to be taken away from prosecutors and it needs to be given to a committee or a group of people who actually serve the community. In the hands that it's in now, it's just not going to do anything. It's not going anywhere at all. I actually don't think that they even read my petition.

Ralph Dunuan [00:48:44] Thank you, Clay, for giving us a look at the other side of things. One can interpret this as an intentional and hostile act against people and communities that care about those of us behind these walls. I myself have to wonder why is it that consideration is rarely given to those who patiently wait for us to come home and the emotional drain on the loved ones who have to endure this madness right alongside us? We on the inside of these facilities and institutions have failed to consider the impacts of our actions which caused our loved ones and communities in our path such pain and hardships. However, it is supposed to be the legal systems, in effect, prosecutors, judges and legislators jobs to consider these things. So who's creating more harm in these situations? The ones who are learning or the ones who are trained to know better. Creating hopelessness does not correlate to faith in a system that perpetuates just as much harm and trauma as the crimes individuals committed to find themselves behind bars. Those who find themselves trapped in the shackles of mass incarceration have personal, environmental and or generational trauma that are dealing with. What's the reason for prosecutors? Why is the State Department of Corrections and legislators to call these harmful tactics to block people in their communities whose only involvement with all this is that they care about someone trapped in the chaos of the prison industrial complex. When prosecutors fail to follow through with the 6164 petition, they send a vague rejection letter to a petitioner. These letters have no clear understanding of why the petition was turned down. I have read numerous rejection letters looking for the criteria for the means to relieve. However, none that I came across where the petitions have met the priority criteria were given just reasoning. 

Ralph Dunuan [00:50:49] So I have to ask what was the real intent behind these resentencing tools? Because the harm that the rejections impose are evident, after act upon act of rehabilitation, the legal system still only wants another hit to fill its institutions bed space. So we seek reform. I challenge you to think about what is the real issue, really...  Is the reform is going to perpetuate the cycles of mass incarceration through more oppressive systems of control? Or can we honestly say that the reform act will provide avenues to greater solutions which will lead us away from incarceration and towards better and safer communities, while strengthening families at the same time. We are responsible for our own choices, and if what we choose to do or not do that allowed violence and crime at all levels to flourish. So I encourage everyone to educate themselves in order to make better and more fruitful choices, so we may have the kind of communities that heal and promote stronger and more positive futures for our coming generations. 

Ralph Dunuan [00:52:02] In the case of the 6164 petitions, can we really say that it has reformed much of anything? I honestly can't say that it has. Neither can I say that this bill was truly transformative or that it had any kind of impact to the racial disparities within the Washington state prison system. I can say from my own experience that the whole 6164 petition process would have had a negative effect on not only my family but also the community I am returning to. 

Ralph Dunuan [00:52:34] Therefore, in the coming years before you, when you make the choices that impact others or communities you live in, make an educated and informed choice. So what we create is hope instead of hopelessness so that we shed light on the opportunities for our communities. And those choices lead to engage in solutions. Thank you for listening to this episode of CHOICES where liberation of information is found and the impacts are real. Thank you to all those who have made this possible. First and foremost, my comrades at Liberation Media Northwest, Demar Nelson. And to those who are looking for some spiritual truth and growth, check them out at Salt21 on IG or just google DeMar Nelson Salt and it takes you to all streaming platforms. Professor Marc Bolan at Scripps College and Critical Resistance and to the countless others that played their part in my life to push me to where I am today, most importantly and essential, stay strong son. Sending love and respect to all of you out there. Until next time, make the choice that creates hope and opportunities in community and engaged solutions.