Phone Zap To Exonerate Stevie Wilson From False Misconduct Charge



Phone Zap for Stevie!

Email Zap for Stevie!


Stevie Wilson, an incarcerated writer, organizer and educator at SCI Dallas, has been asking for weeks to be moved off his block because the first shift COs have been harassing him since he arrived at SCI Dallas recently. Stevie has made all of his outside comrades aware of this for some time. On 3/21/23, one of the COs that has been harassing Stevie escalated his harassment of Stevie by falsely accusing him of “threatening a CO.” The misconduct was initially supposed to be informal, not affecting Stevie’s parole. But Stevie was never placed on the call out list by the Unit Manager, and as a result, was never notified of his chance to attend an informal hearing. At this point, it turned into an official misconduct, which if convicted, would prevent Stevie from receiving parole. 

Another CO attended the hearing and testified on Stevie’s behalf (which is virtually unheard of), confirming that Stevie was not on the call out that day. But the fix was already in. After realizing that she made the mistake of not putting Stevie on the call out, the Unit Manager actually went into the computer and ALTERED the records to make it look like Stevie had been on the call out list. Yet, even with the CO testifying on Stevie’s behalf that the Unit Manager had not put him on the call out that day, it was not enough to find Stevie not guilty. Using the fabricated call out from the Unit Manager as evidence, the Hearing Examiner found Stevie’ guilty of the misconduct.

As so many prisoners have told us, prisons do their worst under the assumption, based on years of practice, that no one outside finds out, or no one outside cares what happens inside. Make these calls and emails and shut down their phones so they know that we see them. 

Please share this document with anyone you think might take 5 mins to make a call or email today (3/31/23), this weekend, or this week. We want as many calls and emails as we can get.

Phone Zap for Stevie!

SCI-Dallas: 570-675-1101, ask for superintendent Kevin Ransom… if they won’t transfer, talk to the person who picks up

SCRIPT: I am calling to ask why Stephen Wilson (LB8480) was found guilty of a class 1 misconduct [they will deflect or say they have heard this before or haven’t heard of it]. The misconduct is completely unfounded and I demand Stevie be found not guilty. The CO who falsely accused Stevie of the misconduct is someone who has been harassing Stevie ever since he arrived at SCI Dallas, and that CO made up the allegation against Stevie to escalate his harassment of Stevie. [that we know another CO testified at his hearing on his behalf, go for it!]. I also demand that Mr. Wilson be moved from the Veteran’s Unit and to another block. 

Email Zap for Stevie!

PA-DOC Main Office:,


To PA-DOC re: SCI Dallas,

I am writing to demand that Stephen Wilson (LB8480)’s misconduct from 3/22/23 be overturned immediately. The misconduct is completely unfounded. The CO who charged Mr Wilson with the misconduct has been harassing Mr. Wilson since he arrived at SCI Dallas, and made up the allegations against Mr. Wilson as a way to continue harassing him. 

What’s more, the Unit Manager on Mr. Wilson’s block fabricated evidence against Mr. Wilson that led to the misconduct. Among other things, the Unit Manager did not place Mr. Wilson on the call out list for March 22, 2023, but she then went back into the computer and entered the call out retroactively. This is unacceptable, and is easily proved.

At Mr. Wilson’s hearing on March 29th, 2023, a CO testified that the Unit Manager had fabricated that evidence, yet the hearing examiner still found Mr. Wilson guilty based on the fabricated call out slip from the Unit Manager. This is unacceptable. I demand that you rectify this horrible injustice immediately by reversing the finding against Mr. Wilson, and moving Mr. Wilson from the Veteran’s Unit (he is not a veteran) and to another block. 



Abolition in Action

Two months ago, a friend and fellow prisoner, prepared to max out her sentence. She is a Black trans woman who had to do her time in a men’s prison: over two decades of time. The world has changed tremendously since she came to prison. I worried about her transitioning to the “free” world. She didn’t have a strong support system out there.

I was able to connect her to some abolitionists in NY and PA. I wanted her to know that there are people out there who care about her, that don’t want to see back inside. Before she left the prison, she had spoken to some of these folks on the phone. They created a fund to help her prepare for release. When she found out, she was grateful and floored by their generosity. These abolitionists even spoke with her family to ensure she had a home to go to upon release. They even got her furniture. When she left, she knew she had a support team. And I am glad she did.

Her living situation turned ugly. She had to face transphobia daily. She persevered, but enough is enough. I had her promise me, before she left, that she would use her network if things got bad. I didn’t want her to fall into despair and end up back inside.

She held onto that promise. In the face of severe transphobia, feeling despondent, she reached out. And abolitionists were there to support her. She is able now, through the efforts and generosity of others, to get her own place. She is working, but needed help with the move in. And help she got. This is abolition in action.

Recently, I asked people to define abolition in just six words. Two people, one in Illinois and the other in New Jersey, paraphrased Ruthie Gilmore: not just absence, but a presence. Abolition is very much so a presence. It is about what is there and/or what we are building to be there. It is not just about eliminating something (e.g., police and prisons); it is about creating what we need to live, love and thrive. What these abolitionists did was about being present for another human being.

More and more, I am discovering that a major part of abolitionist praxis is just showing up, being present for others. How else will we be in and grow community? It is showing up that really demonstrates abolition to others. We are creating the world we want to live in. A world of care, concern, and connection.

I want to thank those people involved in supporting my, our, friend. She knows abolition is real. Their actions were the best possible advertisement of abolition. These folks know who they are so I haven’t named them. They are living abolition. Thank you.



Criticism and Self-Criticism in the Struggle Against Jail Expansion: NYC

“We cannot solve our problems using the same thinking we used when we created them.” – Albert Eistein

“We cannot solve our problems using the same thinking we used when we created them.”

Albert Einstein

Everyone needs to understand how we got here. Believing that caging and exiling people would produce safety and solve socio-economic problems got us here. So let us not promote more of the same. Three things I’d like everyone to understand:

1. NNJ and JLUSA did not build the cages, pass the draconian laws, arrest people, sentence people, deny people bail, oppress people inside or eliminate funding that would help our communities. They didn’t create the problems. They are two sides promoting different solutions. While we bicker, the real enemy’s boot remains upon the necks of millions. Our energies should be focused on defeating the PIC, not each other.

2. As long as there are cages, there will be suffering. Any solution that entails expanding or building new cages fails to alleviate suffering. In Pennsylvania, until the early 90’s, we had 9 prisons. Today, we have 29- all shiny new cages. We are suffering more today than in 1990. Anyone who claims they want to alleviate prisoners’ suffering , but isn’t for closing and not relocating prisons, is either totally ignorant of the baseline cause our suffering or is lying. I’m for closing Riker’s. And I’m against building new jails in the boroughs. Eliminating prisons/jails ends suffering.

3. As for the suffering of those currently caged, let us remember that most people held in jail are pretrial detainees. Building new cages won’t alleviate their suffering, but doing the following will:

a. Eliminate money bail. Many are stuck in jail because they are poor and cannot post a money bail. How many people would not be at Riker’s if not for their inability to post a money bail? How many cages would he empty?

b. Prohibit Reincarceration for Technical Violators. They are many people sitting in jail for technically violating probation or parole, not for committing or even being accused or a new crime. How many cages would be empty if technical violators weren’t reincarcerated? How much suffering would be alleviated? Today, my niece’s mother, who gave birth to her on April 19, must report to jail to serve a 90 day sentence for a technical violation of her probation. She must leave her newborn and enter a cage and no crime has occurred- at least not by her. The reincarceration of technical violators wrecks havoc on people. It needs to end.

c. Press for speedy trials. Every state and the US Constitution have speedy trial provisions that are routinely ignored by judges and prosecutors, leaving thousands locked in cages. In Pennsylvania, the law says the state has 6 months to bring a person to trial and if it fails to do so, the person, if detained, is to be released upon nominal bail. If the state fails to bring a person to trial in 12 months, the case is to be dismissed. Theoretically, no one should endure more than 6 months of pretrial detention or 12 months of criminal charges hanging over one’s head. In jurisdiction after jurisdiction, speedy trial rules are ignored, leaving people to languish in cages until they are coerced into plea deals. In my own case, I spent 33 months under pretrial detention. In one case, the defendants were caged under pretrial detention for 9 years before the courts recognized their speedy trial violation claims. Pressing the courts to uphold speedy trial rules would empty cages and alleviate suffering.

d. Build strong connections with those inside. Prison is a site of substraction. Prisoners lose freedom, relationships, opportunities and hope. Connecting with us restores relationships, opportunities and hope. Connecting with us enables us to fight for our freedom and transform ourselves. Your support will alleviate suffering on a level that empowers us to fight the PIC.

We have to remember what the ultimate goals are, who the real enemy is and how we got here in the first place.

In Solidarity,


Statement of Solidarity with No New Jails NYC

The truth is that Just Leadership USA is not abolitionist. It is another liberal, nonprofit that has appropriated abolitionist terminology to broaden its appeal. That’s how they fooled us into becoming members. They support the caging and disappearing of poor folk. Their only concern are the “excesses” of the PIC, not its fundamental existence. That being the case, we renounce our memberships in Just Leadership USA. We strongly support the work and efforts of the No New Jails Movement in NYC.

Prisons are violent institutions, not because who’s caged inside, but because they produce and present violence as the only and natural outcome of conflict and harm. As incarcerated abolitionists, we struggle daily to counter this idea and find ways to resolve conflict and remedy harm without resorting to violence. We hold fast to a praxis that grows our capacity to care and resist. As we work to overcome state and interpersonal violence, we continually search for ways to resist that don’t entail harming others, including oppressors. We believe harm will not remedy harm.

As we pursue life-affirming ways to deal with conflict and harm, we subject our thoughts and actions to persistent analysis and critique. There are two general questions that serve as a compass as we travel this path of liberatory work. What is the abolitionist response in this particular situation? In this situation, what is incompatible with abolition? These questions help us stay the course and remain principled. We wish other groups, especially those purporting to represent incarcerated and formerly incarcerated people, would keep these questions in front of them when deciding what actions to take or what causes to support.

One group, Just Leadership USA, a group we were members of, has publicly supported the construction of four new jails in New York City. Moreover, they claim this is an abolitionist stance. We have always known that “abolition is about breaking down things that oppress and building up things that nourish,” so we were taken aback by their claim. A true abolitionist position focuses on dismantling systems and sites of violence, not expanding them. How can supporting the caging and disappearing of people ever be abolitionist? How can strengthening the grip of the police state ever be abolitionist?

It is clear to us that this group has no abolitionist principles guiding its work. Abolitionists believe every measure of carceral confinement is unacceptable. We don’t work to build the arsenal of the criminal punishment system.

What vexes us most is that this group claims to represent those with imprisonment experience. Have they forgotten the daily degradation of detention? Have they forgotten that it’s poor people who are kept in jail for not posting money bails? Do they really believe erecting more sites of violence will produce safety? Do they really believe investing $11 billion in the PIC will help our communities? Their stance betrays their ignorance of a basic abolitionist point: the only way to make prisons and jails safer is to dismantle them.

If this group would have asked itself the two simple questions we keep in front of us, there is no way they would have supported the construction of new cages in NYC. They would have known that efforts to expand or legitimize the underlying ideologies or structures of the PIC are antithetical to penal abolition. How could any abolitionist organization support prison expansion? What is radical about building new cages?

The truth is that Just Leadership USA is not abolitionist. It is another liberal, nonprofit that has appropriated abolitionist terminology to broaden its appeal. That’s how they fooled us into becoming members. They support the caging and disappearing of poor folk. Their only concern are the “excesses” of the PIC, not its fundamental existence. That being the case, we renounce our memberships in Just Leadership USA. We strongly support the work and efforts of the No New Jails Movement in NYC. We stand in solidarity with the Movement. They, like us, know that we must explore new terrains of justice, paths that do not depend upon the carceral logics of surveillance, confinement and punishment.

In Solidarity,

SASS (Smithfield Abolitionist Study Squad)


Circle Up -Smithfield

Addressing Harm and Accountability in Spite of the Carceral State: #1

Questions for Prison Activists

Scenario #1

I recently held two meetings with the prisoners enrolled in the Circle Up/restorative justice course. It didn’t go well. I believe I understand the problem. The criminal legal system shields perpetrators of harm from the effects of their behavior. We are punished, but we aren’t held accountable. We rarely consider the harmed party. Preliminary hearings are the only time many of us hear the harmed party’s version of events. The courts are not interested in the impact of our actions upon them, just details. Since most cases end in plea agreements, we rarely hear victim impact statements either. This course is the first time many of us have been confronted with the effects of our choices.

The new readings centered on the work of organizations that provide comfort and support to mothers who have lost their children to gun violence. Many of the men were triggered. Some were paralyzed by guilt and shame. They were unable to work through theiremotions and be present to benefit from the readings. Others were angry. They felt that they too are victims of gun violence. Many prisoners have lost family and friends to gun violence. Some have been shot. They angrily wondered where their support was.

The PA DOC does not require prisoners to consider the impact of their behavior on others, let alone work to remedy it. The only program that requires us to admit we even committed harm is the sex offender program. This is new ground for many men here. They want to do the work, but these unresolved feelings are getting in the way.

I need some guidance on what we can do to provide the infrastructure necessary to do this important work. How can we help the men work through and resolve their feelings of anger over their own losses AND work through the accountability process? How can we help them overcome shame AND still accept responsibility for the harm they’ve committed? We really need advice and suggestions on materials to do this foundational work.

In Solidarity,

Stevie & the Circle Up study group