Home News Local news Feds, V.I. Meet Over Golden Grove Prison Suit

Feds, V.I. Meet Over Golden Grove Prison Suit

0

Attorneys from the federal government and the U.S. Virgin Islands met in court Friday to discuss the U.S. Department of Justice’s suit to put the Golden Grove Correctional Facility in receviership.

The attorneys appeared before Magistrate Judge George W. Cannon at the U.S. District Court in St. Croix, who after about 45 minutes sent them to conference room to work out the calendar.

"The process initited by the U.S. Department of Justice will require them to come into our facility and show us what constitutional violations we have," said Julius C. Wilson, director of the V.I. Bureau of Corrections, "and of course our position is we resolved them."

The U.S. DoJ sued in June to have the St. Croix prison put into receivership, claiming conditions there violated the Constitution and that during 25 years of sparring, the territory has failed to make the necessary changes and reneged on promises. Among problems identified by the federal government are escalating violence, an "alarming amount" of contraband, failure to protect prisoners from serious harm, constitutionally nadequate medical and dental care, and constitutionally inadequate physical conditions.

Since 2006 the prison has been overseen by a special master.

When filing the suit, U.S. Attorney for the Virgin Islands Ronald Sharpe said, “Receivership is the last resort. We arrive at this juncture only after spending the last 25 years exhausting every other viable alternative … We cannot continue to allow prisoners to live in unsafe, filthy and hazardous conditions without constitutionally required medical and mental health care.”

Having the facility taken over by a receiver means the federal government takes over all aspects of the operation of a local facility, including hiring and expenditures.

When attorney Emily Gunston of the U.S. Department of Justice and the territory’s speial counsel, Richard Lewinski, argued in court Friday over a 30- or 90-day stay under the terms of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, Cannon asked if "something as important as the security of the prison and the safety of the staff and prisoners could be delayed 90 days."

A short time later he adjourned the session, sending the two attorneys to a conference room to work out the schedule.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here