DORA Puts CDOC in the Hot Seat

DENVER, The InsideWire has learned this week that the Department of Regulatory Agencies or DORA has opened an investigation on four members of the Colorado Department of Corrections mental health program for allegations of wrongdoing.

According to records received by the Wire, DORA has agreed to look into the actions of CDOC Director of SOTMP Margaret Heil, CSW; Director of Phase 11 Burl McCuller, LPC; Director of Phase I James Lander, LPC; and senior Phase 11 therapist Michel Davis, RP. Several other therapists from the Fremont Correctional Facility in Canon City were also named in the complaint.

Hail, McCuller, Lander, and Davis will be investigated by the State Board of Social Work Examiners, the State Board of Licensed Professional Counselors, and the State Board of Registered Psychotherapists.

In response to questions, DORA replied that the investigation, "will be forwarded to the Board for its review following the receipt of the therapists' response to the concerns noted in the inquiry."

The complaints leveled at CDC's mental health providers by an unnamed plaintiff include accusations of falsifying state records and making false statements, violating due process requirements before terminating a client from treatment, and overuse and abuse of polygraph testing to illegally prolong an inmate's sentence.

According to CDOC regulations and state law, inmates are guaranteed a hearing from neutral and unbiased panel prior to termination from treatment. The plaintiff alleges this is not the practice in the Fremont facility where the therapists who request an inmate's termination from treatment meet privately with the panel and come from the same department as the panel members.

Following removal from treatment many inmates are sent to the Administrative Segregation Unit under 23 hour lockdown as additional punishment and could wait years to get back into treatment.

The plaintiff also accused treatment providers of using the Sex Offender Monitoring Board's (SOMB) polygraph requirement to unlawfully extend an inmate's sentence. The SOMB standards and guidelines for treatment assert that, "neither of the physiological instruments (P.P.G. or Polygraph)* can be used to determine a client's guilt or innocence of a specific crime," and, ''neither...can be used as the sole criterion to terminate a client from probation, parole, or treatment in prison."

As evidence of CDOC abuse the investigation claims that at a public hearing in May 2010 Heil said that if an inmate invoked his 5th Amendment right to refuse a polygraph, "they will be terminated...in a 'treatment time out'...that could be for a lifetime."

In other complaints made to DORA, Davis is accused of instructing a group of inmates that incidental contact made on the basketball court during a game can be considered sexual contact and should be reported as such during a polygraph exam. Another claim is that a senior polygraph examiner from Amick and Jenks, the company that has the contract to perform polygraphs for CDOC, regularly tells inmates that a rectal exam performed   by a medical doctor can be considered sexual contact and should be reported during the polygraph exam and noted on the inmates’ sexual history.

Although committed to investigate state agencies for abuse, DORA is limited in their ability to sanction those agencies if found guilty. The regulatory agency says they are not authorized to impose civil or criminal remedies, but they can take licensure related measures to protect the public and licensing boards are legally authorized to seek remedies related to the license status of a licensee legally found guilty of wrongdoing.

The DORA investigation is only the latest scrutiny into abuses alleged in the state's application of the controversial Sex Offender Lifetime Supervision Act.

In addition to the DORA complaint there was a civil suit filed in District Court against CDOC mental health providers in August 2010 alleging civil rights violations. A ruling in this case is yet to be made.

In the 2004 case of Beebe v. Hail, Beebe successfully sued to force CDOC and Heil to recognize that a denial of treatment violates a prisoner's constitutionally protected liberty interest.

The Beebe suit was followed swiftly by the Spitz v. Zavaras (former director of CDOC) suit filed in El Paso County District Court that again forced CDOC and Heil to recognize a liberty interest and requirement to provide treatment to inmates sentenced under the lifetime act.

Lastly, there is a pending calls action law suit being filed by attorney John Pineau and a team of volunteers from the University of Denver's law school on behalf of over 600 CDOC inmates that have exceeded their intended prison sentence and still require treatment to be considered eligible for release by the parole board.

For more information investigation go to: about DORA'S complaint process and the CDOC www.dora.state.co.us/menatlhealth

Margaret Heil, CSW: Case No. 2012-000415(SW)

Burl McCuller, LPC: Case No. 2012-000419(LPC)

James Lander, LPC: Case No. 2012-000418(LPC)

Michel Davis, RP: Case No. 2012-000416(RP)

For more information on the class action law suit go to the May 2011 Advocates for Change newsletter at: www.advocates4change.org

 * Parentheses add by journalist

In related news, The Denver Post's August 14, 2011 Sunday edition highlighted the plight of two inmates currently in the CDOC sex offender treatment program. One inmate struggled for over 10 years just to get into treatment and another inmate has been repeatedly refused parole despite meeting all the treatment standards required for release.

In response to the August 14 article, The Denver Post published two letters to the editor condemning the sex offender laws in Colorado. There were no letters published in support of current sex offender laws. The letters are printed below, for more information go to: www.denverpost.com.

TheOpenForum

Friday, August 14, 2011

Lawsuit against state by sex offenders' families

The sex offenders families are suing for justice. When we, through our state, put someone in prison, or in any way inconvenience anyone, it had better be correct. To imprison or inconvenience someone unjustly, to force them to go through needless hoops, is just as evil as burglary, rape or murder.

But we want our life together to be inexpensive and we consumers (formerly known as citizens) refuse to pay for true justice. We brand people for whatever crime and think we can be at peace throwing away the key. Our cheap justice in America makes so many mistakes and fails so many people, it is beginning to be seen for what it is: immoral and wrong. It is not the fault of a judge here or some attorney there; it is we the people who have lost our way.

Pastor Jeff Neuman-Leer Denver

An important addendum to your article is the little-known fact that numerous men, who are not sex offenders at all, are trapped in this system as a result of police sting operations that exploit vulnerable men and actually create “new criminals.'' State resources are being used to monitor and treat these “new criminals” who are not sex offenders, just unlucky enough to get caught in a trap set by a trained professional. These valuable and limited state resources should be used for actual sex offenders - such as the men who are mentioned in this article and are waiting for a chance to obtain the sex-offense-specific treatment they need.

It is time to put an end to this unethical practice of creating bogus sex offenders through the use of police sting operations and concentrate our efforts on reforming the actual offenders.

Janet Mitchell, Arvada