C.L.M, from Taconic wrote:
Sgt. D is rude, racist and blatantly discriminatory towards the white women offenders of this facility. She is extremely unprofessional in her work manner and her show of favoritism among the offenders is quite obvious…CO W.K is also openly honest to the fact she is allergic to white people, though she overlooks the fact she is white herself. She is rude, nasty and blatantly cruel to most of the offenders on Taconic grounds. Most of the women here avoid her out of fear. She will taunt you, tease you, ridicule you and I can compare her to the bully we have all enccountered in either grade school or high school. She thrives off of the fear from the women.
A. L. P from Green Haven wrote:
At my sentencing the judge compared me to a bent penny that just needed to be thrown away, because it could not be straightened out. Well 19 years later, one month shy of my 37th birthday I am here to tell you just like that bent penny I did not need to be thrown away. I just needed to be straightened out. I am just one of the many youthful offenders who made a really bad misguided and uninformed choices as an adolescent that the rause the age bill will hopefully impact.
L. F from Taconic wrote:
I filed a pro se article 78 in the 1st Department court. It was sent right back to me with the enclosed note saying that only Albany Country Court can hear only legal matters related to parole. Obviously, this is factually untrue and legally incorrect. Several other women who submitted pro se article 78s parole appeals have received the same form. CPLR 596 (b) clearly allows us to nring our article 78’s to any one of the 3 locations including the first Department. It is legally absurd for the first Department to claim that no other county in NY can hear parole matters but Albany. ( The note was form Ex parte motion term and special term part Supreme Court in NY County).
K.E from Taconic CF wrote:
I was just denied release at my fifth Parole hearing. My COMPAS is made up of all very low risk assessments with almost all level 1 assessments. With such a low COMPAS Commissioner Ferguson said at my hearing ” according to COMPAS you are going to be released and never be re-arrested or harm someone or abscond. Your criminal involvement , histoyr of violence, prison misconduct, all numbers ones, low. Substance abuse unlikely. So these are all positives in your favor. Then Commissioner Ferguson said in his denial,. this panel has determined that if released at this time, there is a reasonable probability that you would not live and remain at liberty without again violating the law…So in my hearing Commissioner Ferguson praised my low COMPAS levels and then in his decision he totally ignored my COMPAS and relied on something that he never articulated in his decision mak8ing a determination out of the clear blue sky that “this panel” determined that I would probab;y reoffend. It seems that the COMPAS tool so carefully and scientifically designed by DOCCS to predict the probability of successful reintegration to parole supoervision is nit reliable in Commissioner’s Ferguson’s opinion. When COMPAS first began we all thought it would make a difference.