Prison ‘justice’ for the incarcerated—is it fair?

Since being incarcerated 18 years ago, Amani Fardan has become an artist. This has helped him connect with himself and his family members. 

“I find it therapeutic,” said Fardan. “One of the pieces I was working on was basically a picture of a family dog that passed away. So just trying to do something like that has sentimental value.” His work has been exhibited through an organization called Art From The Inside, most recently at the Minnesota Attorney General’s office.

Sometimes, he experiences difficulty creating artwork. In February, officers at Stillwater prison did a shakedown of the A-East unit where he lived. During their inspection, they found a small half-ounce bottle of ink and powder in Fardan’s cell. 

In a series of phone calls and emails his father Suluki sent to the MSR, Fardan says the ink was used to create art. He also says the powder in his cell was used for laundry detergent. Despite being tested negative for drugs, officials believed the powder was drugs, and the ink was used for tattooing. 

Fardan was tried on aggravated charges. Though DOC officials told Fardan they planned to withdraw the medication charge, he said he was nonetheless convicted of it and another charge and sent to solitary for 25 days. His unfinished artwork was deemed finished by prison guards and sent to his father. 

“I didn’t know these items would be misconstrued and looked at as drugs and weapons; otherwise, I would [have] gotten rid of these items,” said Amani Fardan in an email. Fardan also wondered how he was punished on aggravated charges based on a preponderance of evidence. 

MnDOC can punish the incarcerated for breaking a rule, but they must follow a process. According to MnDOC policy 303.010, they must first issue a “notice of violation.” Incarcerees have a right to a hearing, and if they face time in segregation, serve a longer sentence, or pay at least $100.01 in restitution, they can have witnesses and representatives at those hearings. Incarcerees can also waive their right to a hearing and accept whatever punishment MnDOC staff offers them. 

If an inmate is found guilty of an offense while incarcerated, MnDOC says they can be punished by having privileges withheld, be relegated to a segregated unit, or be incarcerated for longer than their sentence. They can also receive aggravated punishments if they have been convicted of committing the act three times before, acted with premeditation, or with multiple participants. Incarcerees can also receive aggravated punishments for committing an act while living in a “restrictive” or “high-risk” setting or benefiting a “security threat group.” 

“A high-risk setting is one where there is the potential of collateral consequences or for the conduct to escalate beyond the original incident,” said MnDOC spokesperson Aaron Swanum. Examples Swanum provided include if two people were to fight in a fully-occupied dining hall or if an incarcerated person did “something while being transported in the presence of the public.” 

“There isn’t a defined list per se since any area could be high risk depending on who’s present or what is occurring,” added Swanum. 

Hearing officers determine guilt based on a “preponderance of evidence” standard. This differs from the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard used in the criminal court system. MnDOC says they use this standard because of a 1974 consent decree. They also say they continue to use the standard because the courts tell them it is fair to use. “It has also been litigated in Minnesota and upheld as providing sufficient due process for prison disciplinary hearings,” said Swanum. 

Fardan does not believe the preponderance standard does justice to his case because he believes the powder the DOC found in his cell was laundry powder and not drugs. Swanum of the DOC confirms laundry powder is readily available for purchase through its canteen. 

However, Fardan says a warden in Stillwater prison said it was an unknown substance. Fardan wanted the powder tested and even offered to do so on his behalf. However, Fardan reported in his correspondence with prison officials they did not appear interested in testing the substance. 

“We don’t test medication, and we don’t send that out due to cost,” said Lt. Michael Warner in a message to Fardan on March 21, 2024. The message appears to contradict statements from the DOC, which says they do test substances, adding they do not disclose the process for security reasons. “We use a variety of technologies that allow us to positively identify substances,” said Swanum.

Meanwhile, Warden William Bolin said in a note to Fardan that there wouldn’t be any point in testing the substances. “The preponderance of evidence was met. The hearing findings and penalties were appropriate,” said Bolin. 

“So I got found guilty on something that was never tested? How can Warner and [another warden] be so sure this unknown substance was medication without even bothering to test it,” wondered Fardan. 

Fardan also believes DOC officials arbitrarily applied aggravated enhancements to his charges. “All of my charges were Aggravated, even though I haven’t been in trouble for so long, and when I asked staff why everything was Aggravated, I was told that was how it was now,” said Fardan in an email. 

“In order for a charge to [be] aggravated, it needs to meet one of six factors, and these factors must be documented in the [Notice of Violation], correct? None of this has been done, and none of my charges meets the criteria to be considered aggravated, not according to the Offender Discipline Rulebook,” added Fardan. 

To this day, Fardan wonders how his charges could have been aggravated. “For over three years, I have been in complete behavioral control and discipline-free, employed as a GED tutor in Higher Ed, and actively engaged in positive programming,” said Fardan.

Fardan, who is enrolled in classes at Metro State University, has tried to appeal his charges to no avail.