Plaintiff in long-running prison lawsuit dies

Austinite David Ruiz spent all but four years of his adult life in prison.

By Mike Ward
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Monday, November 14, 2005
David Ruiz, the convicted armed robber from Austin whose landmark prisoner-rights lawsuit declared Texas' prison system unconstitutional and brought sweeping reforms, has died, officials confirmed today.

Michelle Lyons, a spokeswoman for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, said the 63-year-old Ruiz died about 5 p.m. Saturday of natural causes at a prison hospital in Galveston. While she would not elaborate, other prison officials said Ruiz died from kidney failure.

[The average life span of an inmate is 65 years, well below the average for those living in the free world.]

I was a law student when Ruiz v. Estelle was in trial in US Dist. Judge Wm. Wayne Justice's court. One summer I worked as a law clerk for the Tex. A.G.'s Ruiz defense team. Several other law clerks and I would take turns taking notes of what the State's witnesses said.

If I recall correctly, Ruiz was the token plaintiff that was in court for the trial because the other named inmates were too disruptive. Mostly he sat quietly by.

At the time, TDC used inmate trustees called building tenders and turn keys to keep control of the joint. The TDC had a very high ratio of inmates to guards. One of the central complaints of the plaintiffs was that the building tender system was subject to abuse, and was unconstitutional.

Even so, TDC had a very low murder rate, and a very low assault rate, compared to other, more "enlightened" prison systems. I recall one of the AG's Attys, who had been an inmate atty., tell me that prisons on the West Coast were run by prison gangs. The idea sounded totally bizarr. He went on to tell me that in the TDC there is only one gang allowed, and "they are our gang (meaning the bldg tenders)and they work for us--we don't allow any others. Mark my words, if the plaintiffs get their way, it won't be long before we'll have prison gangs just like they have in Calif. The murder and rape rate will go thru the roof."

No more prophetic words have ever been spoken. Today, we have no bldg. tenders, but we have plenty of prison gangs, and with it murders, rapes, and extortion. The ratio of guards to inmates has dropped tremendously, so that the cost to house inmates is far higher than before. TDC is so desporate for guards, that they will hire known criminals. Today's TDC, with the Ruiz "reforms" is a far more dangerous place than it was before. In fact, it is so dangerous many inmates feel compelled to join a gang to stay alive. When they get out of the joint, they are locked in to a criminal organization that demands they work for them on the outside. Instead of reforming criminals, it is more likely to make relatively minor criminals into much more active and dangerous criminals once they are released on parole.

The odd thing is, that in order to maintain order without the blding tender system, the TDC now makes major use of "Admin. Seg." of troublesome inmates. These men are kept in solitary confinement 23 hours a day. I understand that there are about 1,200 inmates in Admin. Seg. at any one time, and many are there for very long stretches of time. This is more humane than the bld. tender system?

Ruiz has been a human disaster.

Terry, you amaze me. You consistently take fairly complex meals and reduce them to what, on first bite, is a satisfying snack. But, as with most snacks, you mix artifical ingredients suited to your own tastes. The eventual result is a bad aftertaste and gas.

I don't think the history of TDCJ can be reduced to the simple formula of building tenders being better than guards. While I was no big fan of Justice Justice, he did have substantial evidence of problems in the prison system. While his formula for achieving constitutional relief may have been too much for too long, most would probably agree we do now have a much more modern and efficient system than before. Surely there is something you can nice about today's prison system.

[This message was edited by John Bradley on 11-15-05 at .]

[This message was edited by John Bradley on 11-15-05 at .]

OK, John, I'll get the ball rolling.

They make solid furniture and if you go to Huntsville you can stop for BBQ at the Church of the Holy Smoke.

But don't get me wrong, I'm all in favor of TDC and have been told by my co-workers and family members that I am in a much better mood after I've sent someone there.

When I worked for the Legislature, I received as a parting gift for the sessions a very nice belt made by an inmate. He even put my initials on it.

The Ruiz case is another in a long line of cases that illustrate how unwise it is to get all macho when a federal judge has started ordering you around. It also made it clear that some of the most satisfyingly punitive and cost-effective penological policies have what might be called "constitutional infirmities".

When I was very young, and my family would pass through Huntsville and other east Texas prison locales on the way to visit relatives in Smith County, my Father, then an assistant DA in Harris County, would explain the prison system and how it was the only self supporting prison system in the nation, due the the agricultural endeavors of the inmates.

I for one support the return to an agricultural prison system. Tired inmates are well behaved inmates. Yeah, you can't make them work but you can link priviledges to working.

And as an aside, to totally anger all of those related to the highly profitable road building contractors throughout the state, we should have inmates performing some of the manual labor involved in building and maintaining roadways.

A tired inmate is a well behaved inmate.

I was born and raised right down ther road from the Ferguson Unit in Midway. Some of the most beautiful country around that unit and there are many others like it. I have always griped that TDCJ could be a self sufficient (even profitable) endeavor if it was run right. They have acres and acres that could be used for crops and livestock. They shouldn't have to buy a thing from outside the system. Makes that whole Soy Meat Substitute scandal several years ago all the more frustrating.
As for the Highways, that Sheriff in Arizona has them out on the chain-gangs cleaning up. If the thought of prison isn't doesn't deter potential criminals, I would think that passing by a line of cons in White picking up trash of whacking weeds around 2:30 p.m. in July just might do the trick. "You can take my weight lifting equipment and my cigs, but please don't put me out in the Texas, July sun."

You are right, Greg.

I have always marvelled at the fact that I could send my son to his room with no supper for misbehavior; I could make him sweep the driveway or rake leaves; I could -- watch it now -- paddle him for doing something bad; I could ground him, or even make him write me an essay on why integrity matters. I could do any or all of those things and so far anyway, the government couldn't stop me from doing such. But if a prison inmate doesn't want to work; you can't force him. If he rapes another inmate or stabs a guard, you can't even take his supper, even though to do so would probably not kill him or cause him such mental anquish that he suffers nightmares the rest of his life. And by no means, can anyone lay a hand on a convicted felon who might have broken any number of rules, without 15 minutes of verbal intervention, the presence of a supervisor, video, 2 arch bishops and a stand-by psychotherapist. Some of that might be exaggerating, say the 15 minute part, but not by much.

Gosh, I sure didn't mean to cause anybody to get heartburn and gas.

I never meant to say that bldg. tenders were better than guards. Obviously a prison has to have guards, and very intelligent and dedicated guards to make it safe. But blding. tenders provide a crucial edge in controlling a prison that no increase in guards can overcome. A TDC officer explained to to me that prison inmates live by a code which is enforced by violence and even death, which requires, among other things, that an inmate never snitch to "the Man." This rule did not apply to the bldg. tenders--it was understood that they were talking to the guards. And it was also ok for an inmate to talk to a bldg. tender.

Thus, if an inmate knew that the psychopath in the bunk next to his had a shank in his bed, he could, on the QT, tell the bldg. tender, who in turn would tell the Building Lt. That night you could expect a squad of C.O.s to make a surprise inspection of the bay, and turn all the beds upside down. Three-fingers, the psychopath, just figures he was unlucky when this results in finding his shank, and the source of the info can start sleeping better at night. Without a go-between, this form of intelligence is impossible.

Is such a system subject to abuse? Of course. It takes close management of the bldg. tenders to keep them from becoming dangerous to weaker inmates, and of course things would go wrong. But this system, when properly run, results in a far safer prison than one that relys only on guards.

In any case, the proof is in the pudding. Some years, pre-Ruiz TDC would have no murders. That is to say, it had a lower murder rate than free-world Texas. I doubt if a month goes by in today's TDC without at least one murder. The place is far more dangerous than the pre-Ruiz reform TDC. And because of that, prison gangs take over. If you read the TDC's history of the various prison gangs, you'll see that many were originally formed solely for protection from other inmates. In time, the self-protection gang becomes a preditor gang, and moves on to other crimes.

The perception that inmates have that they must join a prison gang to survive is very destructive to the rehabilitation that prisons are supposed to provide, and results in even more crime once they are released on parole.

My suggestion: if these facts cause heartburn, take a Rolaids.

Since as far back as 1983, there has never been a year without at least one murder in the Texas prison system.

Since 1984, the year the Special Prosecution Unit came into existence, there have been 139 prison homicides -- those are not deaths that could have been justified as self-defense or necessity. The 139 homicides were indictable, prosecutable deaths of inmates and guards, committed by incarcerated felons or, as in the case of Kevin McCoy, committed by 2 guards (also prosecuted by us).

In 1997 there 11 murders; 1998 - 6 murders; 1999 - 8 murders; 2000 - 8 murders; 2001 - 4 murders; 2002 - 7 murders; 2003 - 3 murders; 2004 - 4 murders; to this point in 2005 there have been 2 murders.

The most prison murders have occurred in the Darrington Unit, with 16 homicides there. Second is Ellis with 13 murders, Polunsky has had 11 murders, including the one where guards killed an inmate. Other units have had "only" 6, 7, 5, even 2 or 1.

In the 10-year period ending 12-31-1999, there were 49 prison killings in Texas, and those killings were perpetrated by at least 84 convicts. That's 84 that we could identify, indict and prosecute.

In 2 1/2 months in 2000, there were 6 prison murders and 4 of those killings involved gang members.

3 of the 8 murders in 1999 involved convicted capital murderers doing life sentences.

Doyle Hill, a Texas Mafia lieutenant, killed 2 inmates at two different units during his stay in prison, and he paroled a few years ago. Yes, after he was convicted and sent to prison then killed twice while in prison.

I have all the names, dates, etc. if anyone wants to challenge me or has trouble believing the facts.

is the degree of society's civilization really judged by entering its prisons, or was that just something that dostoyevsky said because he had been, in fact, a prisoner? of course Mr. Underground would feel that it was because he was not only a prisoner in a very awful prison, he was also a political prisoner. (he was a radical utopian socialist, by the way -- for clarification please consult your DSM-IV, it's a new craze that's coming soon to invalidate a hard-won death sentence near you.) that's kind of a broken yard stick to measure civilization by though. won't prisons always be awful and judged harshly because they are, by definition, an awful place to go. if they weren't some degree of awful they would have no deterrent effect. and isn't it possible that a society could be deemed more civilized than it was in dostoyevsky's time simply because there are less political prisoners and more real prisoners (regardless of the prison conditions themselves)? more importantly, should we even take this kind of quote seriously after Jerry Bruckheimer bastardized it and forced John Cusack to say it in Con Air to make the movie seem deeper than it was?

[This message was edited by David Newell on 11-17-05 at .]

Yep, Dennis, it sure sounds like prison is a better, more tolerable place to go to now than it used to be. Hey, wait a second, what's wrong with that picture?

Did Dennis' last reply disappear ??

Who's pushing that ignore button again !!

Earlier, I read the post by Dennis Foster on this subject, which made me question whether he mistakenly thought he was posting on an ACLU website, and also made me angry. Now, I don't find his post, so cheers to whomever removed it.
Going back to the subject, while there were some abuses under the old building tender system, our prisons at that time served the proper purpose of punishment quite a bit better than they do today, which could be one reason we have such a problem with the prison population today. Also, I believe that because of the Ruiz lawsuit, prison inmates are treated a lot better than our senior citizens in nursing homes in a lot of cases, and if that isn't a sad commentary on our society, I don't know what is.

As part of the 'edit function' you can delete your own message. Maybe he did it himself. Then again, maybe not.

"Mr. Foster" (not his real name, incidentally) will no longer be posting here. And that's all we will be saying about that.

Carry on.