People aren’t aware of the possibility of evidence that exists in the Corcoran shootings of inmates by guards.  I believe that evidence will show that those, and any shootings were attempted murder, or 1st degree premeditated murder.  To fully understand the evidence of these charges one must know some of the past of prison life, for what life you could manage from it anyway, combined with instances of evidence of incidents occurring within. 

At one point in time it became necessary for the Courts to step in and protect certain rights of inmates.  One such right was the guarantee of free and equitable access to the court because conditions were such that inmates had to have complaints smuggled out to people to get it filed in the courts.  That is why regulation exists today of a legal mail procedure that guarantees confidentiality in processing inmate mail to the courts. 

Conditions were, unfortunately, also such that inmates and guards were being assaulted and/or killed by one and the other.  This was changed some by programs and privileges implemented giving prisoner’s more to do, but it was still understood that any staff assault would result in retaliation upon an individual—by several officers—while in the hole, or, “administrative segregation” as regulations deem it.  However, staff assaults lessened due to the programs and privileges (which have increased because they have slowly been taken since the Corcoran Shootings were exposed), and beatings while in the whole have lessened due to the right to file civil complaints in the courts, but soon prisoners and officers pretty much left each other alone—except for isolated instances. 

Now, those isolated instances, they were dealt with solely in a certain manner.  Individuals were given “Security Housing Unit” (SHU) terms and sent to places like Corcoran or Pelican Bay.  There, at Corcoran, and by a forced policy of integration, prisoners were led out to exercise yards (with known enemies) where fights would almost always ensue.  The shooting policy—that was strictly enforced—was a no warning shot policy where verbal commands of, “Get Down!” are shouted three times during incidents, to which, if combatants hadn’t complied, Officers were authorized and utilized lethal force upon one or both of them with “mini-14" or “9mm” riffles. 

It now becomes necessary to understand why any sane individual would not get down on the ground as shouted at to do so.  When an individual first enters the prison environment, it’s discussed (hopefully in all cases, but probably not) to keep oneself alive, that is’s possible that someone may try and hurt you using a weapon; through observation, it’s explained that if this happens to you, more times than not, if you fight like the devil, the weapon proves less fatal; It is also explained, the most common reasons a weapon might be used against you, so that individuals will behave accordingly and minimize the risk of this occurring. 

Unfortunately, the shooting policy failed to take this self-preservation into account as a motivating factor in not complying with official commands to “get down” on the ground.  This would result in an individual ignoring the sane choice to not get shot, combined, with utilizing common sense in realizing where the shot might come from, and, positioning one’s self to have a 50/50 chance of not being shot in not giving a weapon an opening that might prove fatal. 

In the Security Housing Unit and/or any hole exercise yard, the thinking changes.  It’s mandatory, as a general population prisoner, that you go to yard—no one really wants to go, but, if you make a mistake (as decidedly fellow prisoners), for that reason everyone must go to yard.  Staff classify which yard each individual goes to. 

It’s here where premeditation is shown by staff.  If staff enforce the shooting policy—and they know officers will always carry out that policy against inmates, and staff know inmates have enemies that will almost always fight as soon as placed on the same confined yard together, yet staff (in using their authority) still run them out to the same yard, then, by increasing the probability that lethal force will be used—and that that force could and did prove deadly the elements of premeditation are evident; Staff reviewed inmate files by committee—know which inmates assaulted staff, or even filed lawsuits—placed inmates on yards that had incident reports that showed certain inmate factions fought as soon as they were placed on the same yard together, and with the increased probability that lethal force would be used against inmates that they didn’t like, Staff wilfully intended for that purpose and all shootings were then Attempted Murder, and that resulted in death 1st Degree Murder. 

The officers at Corcoran were only tried federally for which they were found not guilty.  It’s not really the officers fault per se, though how any human being could watch that go on and participate day in and day out, and not know they were doing something wrong is beyond me, but the classification committees knew what they were doing by running warring factions to the same yard and attempted murder and murdered human beings—although human beings convicted by society of crimes and sentenced to prison as the sole punishment for those crimes. 

The then, Attorney General Dan Lungren refused to investigate and prosecute, and by those actions is alleged as an accessory after the fact to murder.  And, the then, Governor Pete Wilson, by not using his authority to order the Attorney General to prosecute these alleged crimes is alleged as an accessory after the fact to murder.  It is necessary to hold officials as mentioned above, accountable for alleged crimes or citizens and elected officials are no better than “Nazis,” that marched prisoners into ovens, cyanide showers, or simply lined them up in front of open pits and shot them. 

It was only by the fight of good people that corrections officials were forced to change the shooting policy, and, for the first time, recognize “the sanctity of human life,” in relation to inmates.  Unfortunately, I’ve endeavored to see responsible individuals uncovered and prosecuted, I believe this has led to retaliation against me by corrections officials and by judges.  The corrections officials by driving a wedge between myself and my family, by sending me as far away from my parents (who despite my whole life—still love me), causing them and family to incur significant monetary loss, time and effort in getting me stamps, which came up missing from my mail, books I had a lawful right to receive—sent back to my family, typing paper sent and called “onion skin” paper and disallowed, as well as holiday cards my Mom has sent over the years being return with no notice as to why, and other incidents. 

It was after the Imperial Grand Jury came and interviewed me about a complaint I filed with them, that the food portions were inadequate and medical treatment being substandard, that the latest rounds of retaliations have begun—about three weeks after in December 2000. 

Judges have retaliated quite differently against me.  I appealed something relating to this, but I don’t have all the facts yet, by inmate grievance—which staff of course denied at all levels of their grievance system; then I delivered it to, and through the State courts—denied; up to the Federal courts—where it was not only denied, I was charged $345.00 in filing fees (which I paid for and made sure my family wasn’t made to pay for this time), for two $5.00 habeas petitions, and one appeal I was granted.  And all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court ad denied; I’ve even reported the Judge issue to Senators; I reported the possibility of the Corcoran issue and retaliation to the Inspector General (which I will try again by sending a copy of this to him as well as others), who refused to investigate.  And, finally I’ve attempted to get these charges recognized by the U.S. Citizen in the form of U.S. Grand Juries for indictment of judges, that had a duty once this was reported to them by my Complaint, to hand it an investigative body or special prosecutor, for obstruction of justice and abuse of power—in direct violation of statute and executive order. 

Clerks of the Courts opened these Confidential Complaints, addressed to the U.S. Grand Jury Foreman/Foreperson (A Federal crime in-and-of-itself, just go over to the neighbors and open and read their mail, and you’ll be prosecuted to the full extent of the law—I promise), and delivered them to the judges complained about.  One Judge even ordered the complaint placed in the civil file and disregarded, nice to be able to decide whether you yourself have committed a crime alleged against you. 

But in answer to these charges, I’m sure I will be portrayed as a disgruntled inmate that files lawsuits—the kind that politicians passed the “Prison Litigation Reform Act” against frivolous lawsuits like “Chunky Peanut Butter,” or “Broken Cookies,” but the lawsuit mentioned within was dismissed as frivolous, and, if anyone checks, they’ll see all my filing are at least logical and tend to show prejudice by the judges against legitimate complaints by prisoners. 

[Excerpted from lawsuits filed by Joel Brown] 

United States Court of Appeals 
for the Ninth Circuit 
Case No. 02-15915 
DC#CV-01-2399-GEB, Eastern California 

Brown v. U.S. Attorney’s Office, et al. 

NOTICE OF MOTION OF UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF STATUTE AS APPLIED 
28 U.S.C. §1915 

COMES NOW appellant’s notice of motion of unconstitutionality of statute as applied: 

1.  The Statute 28 U.S.C. §1915 violates the United States Constitution’s protection under the 14th Amendment; 
A.  A similar Grand Jury Mandamus is pending in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (Please See Exhibit-A) in which I’m being allowed to proceed in forma pauperis while this Court will not let me proceed, claiming the appeal was certified “Taken in bad faith.” 
B.  Judge Kozinski violated due process and equal protection in participating in the Order, as he’s a real party interest named in the grand jury complaint as he participated in a “Judicial Misconduct Complaint,” in question, 11-28-99.  In the July 30 2002 Order by judges Kozinski and Berzon it purports, “Our review of the record confirms that appellant is not entitled to in forma pauperis status for this appeal.”  Had they truly reviewed the record they would have noticed judge Kozinski had a conflict of interest just as Magistrate Hollows had refused to recuse himself as well as District judge Burrell covered up, after I pointed out that information to him. 
C.  The Court should review the entire matter and they would see that the “Certification” that the appeal was taken in Bad Faith is designed to protect the judicial system from the scrutiny of the American People, in the form of a U.S. grand Jury that could indict them for obstruction of justice and abuse of power, for yet another government scandal the likes of which England caused the Colonist’s to the American Revolution that infects the Courts today. 

Therefore I assert that the integrity of the court has been breached by the Order of judges Kozinski and Berzon and is patently Unconstitutional to deny in forma pauperis when an equal court granted me leave to proceed—though they will most likely protect themselves by simply denying the matter, without trying to cover up what I claim is judges criminal activity. 

Dated: 8-14-02  Respectfully submitted, Joel Brown Pro Se.