Anthony Lester Suicide, Preventable Death, Shoddy Investigation

There are many questions still unanswered why there were no administrators disciplined for the death of inmate Anthony Lester, a mentally ill person, incarcerated and sentenced to die at his own hands. Diagnosed with a severe mental illness, his judgment and sentence report contained a recommendation by a judge to be admitted for psychiatric care while in prison. In addition, his medical and mental health files was covered with his treatment needs and were ignored by the Arizona Department of Corrections as he was admitted, classified and sent to a non-mental health unit in Tucson, Arizona. Soon months after his incarceration, Anthony was put on a mental health watch for suicide risks and self-harm statements made to staff and mental health providers. His watch didn’t last long and he was released back to general population but instead of going to the yard, he was placed in isolation via a stay in a detention cell. His needs of the “voices” he was hearing was not addressed nor was he on any medication that was part of his treatment. Shortly after being put in a detention cell, Lester, with the help of a cellmate, took a razor erroneously given to him by an officer and removed the blade. He then cut his body in many places and finally, he wrote the words “voices” in his own blood before he cut his jugular vein and bled to death.

The investigation was personally handled by the director of the agency as he hurriedly appointed an investigator via telephone and gave specific instructions on his expectations and time frames to conduct this investigation. The investigator was given a week to put the case together. Such cases usually take anywhere from two to three months and have a 53 day window for action but the director insisted on limiting this case to one week. Under pressure, the investigator did what he could under the circumstances. It was not a very thorough job but it revealed the staple of the case, unauthorized razor issued to the inmate that facilitated the death. It did not thoroughly glean enough facts of the culture, the practices and the decision making of the unit’s administration and custodial responsibilities. As a result, disciplinary action was limited to those present at the time of the suicide and for not performing first aid on the inmate as they took no action what so ever to preserve life and remained there in the cell until the paramedics arrived thus admitting they stood around for almost 23 minutes doing nothing.

Admittingly, the DOC admitted to it be an “preventable suicide” but did nothing to correct the problem and disciplined staff by taking two weeks pay from their paycheck. The investigative process was tainted the moment the director got involved personally and directed courses of action that negated those the assigned investigator would have taken without being under duress of such administrative pressure. Meeting with the chief executive officer of the facility before any active case work is done, they develop a dialogue with them creating a compromising prejudice in the handling and direction of every investigation as the warden’s input is capricious and often tainted to reflect personal interests thus adhered to as law by these investigators.

Their discovery of evidence is based on their summary and not conclusive evidence based convictions but rather personal conjectures that are flawed and personal as well as restricted by tight time frames. The reality has revealed the witnesses will lie and cover up outcomes to validate the truth as it was gleaned during the process. Thus this practice called “false dichotomy” that includes eliminating conflicting or contradictory information skews the reports and sends an altered message as a final result that has been deliberately botched to protect those politically sensitive in such cases. This problem could be fixed by hiring qualified personnel, training them properly and providing an ethical and adequate oversight, separating their authority and supervision from influence of direct executive administrative personnel or have an outside law agency do the investigation process.

Source:

http://www.azcentral.com/video/#/Watchdog/Arizona+inmate+suicide%3A+Did+correction+officers+fail+to+administer+aid%3F/40280768001/35389240001/1259212342001


People also view

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *