November 5, 2013……

A day that will forever be etched in the life of Ronald Faulkner.

This is the day that Mr. Faulkner will finally see the outside of the razor wire he has looked at since May 1998. You see, the Utah Board of Pardons charged Mr. Faulkner with an additional crime during his Parole Hearing. They were convinced that Mr. Faulkner THOUGHT about committing the additional act.

Now, for those of you who don’t know, the Board of Pardons and Parole is a committee of five people, appointed by the Governor to oversee the “sentencing” phase of Utah’s Indeterminate Sentencing. In Mr. Faulkner’s case, he was given a sentence of five years to life by his trial judge. This was for a 1^st Degree Felony for Aggravated Burglary.

In September of 2009, Mr. Faulkner had his Board Hearing. At this hearing, the hearing officer, a Mr. Sullivan, decided that Mr. Faulkner was guilty of a crime of Sexual Aggravated Assault. The trial judge DID NOT sentence him on this….he was NEVER even charged with this offense!(The police report even stated that "no sexual intercourse took place".) Then the hearing officer gave a rehearing date to be held in twenty years! AND, he added that the Board would consider an early release if Mr. Faulkner completed the Sex Offender Treatment Program at the prison.

Now, this would be all well and good but in order to get into this program, the Offender has to CONFESS to committing the crime. And Mr. Faulkner was not CHARGED or CONVICTED of Sexual Aggravated Assault. So here begins the Catch 22 situation for Mr. Faulkner.

After many, many petitions to be heard, Mr. Faulkner finally won his opportunity for a rehearing which took place just a few weeks ago. Mr. Sullivan was not the Hearing Officer at this hearing and low and behold, the Board found that Mr. Faulkner had served his time and should have his Inmate Sentence TERMINATED IMMEDIATELY!

So, those who sit on the Board, take this as a lesson that you are not gods! You cannot and will not charge someone with something YOU think they might have THOUGHT about doing. In order for this system to work, the Board MUST NOT STAND AS JURY to those who come before them. They have already been adjudicated. IT IS NOT YOUR JOB TO ADD charges to those that brought the Offender before you in the first place.

Mr. Faulkner, good luck and thank you for being persistent!

VISITATION FAVORITES???

This past weekend, I went to visit with my loved one at Central Utah Correctional Facility. When the guard, (oh, excuse me, officer), admitted him to the visiting room, he stopped and spoke with him. When my loved one reached our assigned table, he told me that he had to sit across from me.   I looked around and saw no less than five other Offenders visiting with their wife, girlfriend, etc. and they were not sitting across from one another. One couple was almost sitting on TOP of one another. Nothing was said to them.

Why is it that some Offenders have one set of rules and there is another set for others? Should there not be consistency among the Officers? It seems that this “rule” is only being taunted by one Sergeant. If he feels “threatened” by the outspokenness of the visitors, the rule comes into play. Why the favoritism? Why?

One can just look at the shoes of the Offenders to see who gets “preferred” treatment. How is wearing $200.00 Jordan’s approved by UDC? I know they cannot be ordered via commissary. How do they come in? They are being allowed to be ordered from outside somehow.

 Is the prison system so afraid of contraband being brought into the prison? Are they afraid that drugs are will be brought in? Better that they look at other avenues for these illegal substance entering the facilities because they are still coming in

.

 Visitors have gone through the main gate, the front desk, metal detector, x-ray machine for their shoes, gone through the locking doors and then to the visiting desk. The loved one has gone through similar security checkpoints....as well as a pat down search before entering the visiting room. They are not even allowed to bring in their reading glasses! What is sitting beside a loved one going to do to compromise the security of the facility?

 It is a proven fact that Offenders who have constant contact…including close physical contacts... fair better in their rehabilitation. It is just INHUMANE to deny these people the touch of a loved one during the visit. I know, you will say, "We allow a hug and a kiss at the beginning and end of a visit.", but can you survive on only touching your loved one that little? Most of the people I have observed at CUCF are all respectable people. They are respectful of the family oriented atmosphere and act accordingly.

 Something is most definitely wrong. We, the visitors, do have common sense....for the most part. Please do not insult us by thinking otherwise!