St.Petersburg P.D. Exploit 13 Year Old In ‘Worst Form Of Child Labor’ Then Dump Him


A 13 year old is not an adult and is not mature enough to carry the responsibilities of an adult.  It’s an impressionable age, when kids need guidance to prepare them for the world.  This is why we have laws to protect young people from exploitation, child-labour, etc. yet the law failed to protect Harold Hempstead.  From the age of 13 he was employed by various police departments in Florida in multiple, dangerous undercover operations.  Rather than allow him a chance at a normal existence, the police took a vulnerable young person and used him illegally for their own purposes.

In acting as it did, the State did a great disservice to Harold Hempstead and took from him something that can’t be replaced – his youth.  A lot of his problems seem to stem from his willingness to expose crime and wrongdoing within the police departments he was working for. 

Many of the operations he was involved with used entrapment and ‘stings’ to supposedly fight crime.  After he was arrested for allegedly possessing stolen goods, his long history of serving the State as a Confidential Informant was ruled ‘inadmissible’ at his trial, and was kept from his Department of Corrections file for several years, leading to Harold living with the constant threat of retaliation from those prisoners he had brought to justice in the past.

The State broke the law by employing and endangering the youthful Harold Hempstead.  His actions had helped protect society from some very dangerous criminals, yet certain people working for the State saw to it that he was not even afforded the basic minimum protection entitled by his status.

When you consider the sentencing-judge saying “I hope you die in jail” and handing down a one hundred and sixty five year sentence for non-violent property-crimes, with no hope of parole, it poses the question  whether Harold Hempstead was imprisoned for possessing someone else’s property or for daring to expose the crimes of the police. 


To:  Julie Brown, 3511 Northwest 91st Avenue, Miami, Florida 33172

Craig Patrick, 3213 West Kennedy Blvd. Tampa, Florida 33609

Michelle Gillen, 8900 Northwest 18th Terrace, Miami, Florida 33172

Eyal Press, Institute for Public Knowledge, 20 Cooper Square, 5th Floor, New York, New York 10003

Rachel Hoffman (a 23 year old) college student had been a Confidential Informant (CI) for the Tallahassee Police Department (TPD) for 2 weeks when she was killed in an undercover operation gone bad.  Rachel’s murder lead to the Florida Legislature passing Rachel’s Law (Fla. Stat. : 914.28) which governs the usage of CIs in Florida, and to a substantial amount of media attention on college students, etc. being used by law enforcement as CIs.

The St.Petersburg Police Department (SPPD) recruited the affiant to work as a paid CI when he was 13 years old.  The affiant’s juvenile recruitment as a paid CI violated state (Fla. Stat. : 450.012) and federal child labor laws.  Federal law defines affiants’ work as one of the “worst forms of child labor” because the nature or circumstances in which it was carried-out, was likely to harm the health, safety, or morals of the affiant  (19 USC : 2467 (6) (D) ).

From age 13, to age the 23, affiant was involved to some degree or another in dozens of undercover investigations with several different law enforcement agencies in the Tampa Bay area.

Affiant received training by law enforcement in the following areas:  Intelligence gathering, how to protect my identity, undercover operations, street fronts, infiltration, entrapment, debriefing and more.

During affiants’ trial the court prohibited him from introducing into evidence any testimony, or evidence concerning affiants’ prior CI activities even though all the detectives that testified knew affiant was a CI for law enforcement, and 3 of the detectives, the affiant had previously worked for as a CI.

The purpose of this affidavit is to bring to light what I was previously prevented from disclosing, and hopefully to obtain help in addressing events that happened while I was employed as a CI for law enforcement.


1} In 2015, the Pinellas County State Attorney’s Office disclosed a report proving that in 1993 the SPPD arrested affiant on 2 frivolous charges.  The report states that at the time the affiant allegedly committed the charges he was working as a CI for several detectives, and that there wasn’t any evidence to support the charges.  The foregoing frivolous arrest happened within approximately 90 days of affiant reporting that a SPPD detective was committing sexual crimes against children.

2} In 2015, the SPPD disclosed Police Reports from when affiant was working as a CI for SPPD in 1992 and 1993.  Three of these reports list affiant as “completely reliable”.  The facts in the reports further show that affiant was deemed reliable, and that several people were arrested in the investigations that affiant was involved with.

3} In 2000, SPPD Detective John Mosely testified that he confirmed the intelligence affiant provided in 1998 and 1999.  This detective also testified at an evidentiary hearing that the SPPD reinstituted contact with affiant in 1998 based on affiants’ prior work for them in the early nineties.  If affiant was unreliable in the early nineties, Detective Mosely wouldn’t have made this statement.

4} The Florida Department of Corrections (FDOC) verified affiants’ employment for the SPPD (going back prior to 1992), the FBI, DEA, etc., and that he was associated with the arrests of dozens of individuals.


In 1992 affiant was working the neighbourhood of 9th Avenue North and 9th Street as a CI.  The SPPD was providing affiant with money to aid in paying the rent on a one bedroom apartment in said neighbourhood.  The apartment was being used as a residence for 3 juvenile females (between the ages of 14 and 16) that were acting as escorts.  Two of the juvenile females were runaways.  SPPD detective Michael Brown authorized affiant to use the foregoing apartment, and females as a front to infiltrate criminal activity in the neighbourhood.  Detective Brown and other detectives visited the apartment several times in an undercover capacity.  The SPPD never reported the runaways or charged them with any crimes.  Affiant was 16 years of age in 1992. 

In 1992 and 1993, affiant attended the Police Athletic (PAL) on a regular basis to play pool and basketball.  In 1993, rumors started being spread that SPPD Detective Michael Brown who also frequented PAL was sexually molesting juvenile boys at PAL.  A PAL staff questioned several of the boys who were making the allegations.  In the month that followed nothing happened to Detective Michael Brown. 

After about 6 weeks with nothing being done to Detective Michael Brown, affiant brought up in a conversation with the foregoing detective, while in a vehicle alone with him in an undercover operation, the rumors being spread at PAL and some other matters.  Affiant intentionally did this in an attempt to disclose the foregoing problems to Detective Michael Brown  supervising detectives that were monitoring the recording devises that were in the vehicle with Detective Michael Brown and the affiant.  Detective Michael Brown denied that he was doing anything inappropriate to children to 2 other narcotics detectives from his same unit that questioned him that day.  Affiant was questioned as to why he did the foregoing in an undercover narcotics investigation.  Affiant told said detectives that he felt it was the best thing to do.  These detectives asked affiant if he ever witnessed Detective Michael Brown do anything sexual to a child, and if so, how?  Affiant told them yes and explained how.  These detectives told affiant he was misinterpreting the situations, and making accusations without evidence. 

The next time affiant attempted to go to PAL, he was told that he could no longer attend PAL, and that he would receive a trespass order if he entered back on PAL property.

Affiant later found-out that he was blocked from telephoning Detective Michael Brown at his office and home.

Prior to this incident, Detective Michael Brown was affiants’ handler.  A handler is a law enforcement official who handles all contact and intelligence activities with a CI.  After the aforementioned incidents happened affiant was told that he was being reassigned to a new detective, and that Detective Michael Brown would no longer be affiants’ handler. 

A short time after the above happened, the SPPD Vice and Narcotics Unit discovered that Detective Michael Brown again had contact with affiant in an undercover operation not authorized by SPPD supervisors.  When affiant was questioned about the foregoing, he admitted to such, and that Detective Michael Brown jeopardized affiants’ safety and cover in the operation.  Affiant was later told that a uniform officer who was present in the unauthorized undercover operation confirmed affiant’s foregoing statements as true.

Within 2 months of the foregoing incident, the SPPD maliciously arrested affiant for engaging in a front he was authorized to engage in as a CI.  In 2015, the Pinellas County State Attorney’s Office provided the affiant with a document proving that at the time of affiants’ arrest, he was working for law enforcement.  This document also states that the SPPD arrested affiant on the foregoing charges when there wasn’t any evidence to support the charges.  It is affiant’s position that the SPPD frivilously arrested affiant on the foregoing charges, in retaliation for affiant attempting to expose Detective Michael Brown’s inappropriate activities with minors.

In 2016, affiant was told that Detective Michael Brown had been forced to resign from the SPPD since affiant’s incarceration.  Affiant was told that one of the reasons Detective Michael Brown was forced to resign was because of an outcry that he victimizing minors on a softball team.  If the FBI, FDLE, and DCF have not investigated Detective Michael Brown’s activities going back to 1990, affiant respectfully contends that if an adequate investigation was conducted into the foregoing, it would reveal that Detective Michael Brown had victimized children going back to 1990 and possibly into the eighties.

Following the foregoing incidents, with the SPPD in 1993, the affiant didn’t have any further contact with said agency as a CI until 1998.

Between the years of 1994 and 1997, affiant initiated contact with a law enforcement agency in Tampa, Florida.  Between the years of 1994 and 1998, affiant communicated with an agent from the foregoing agency about the following matters: {1)xxxxxxxx. {2}xxxxxxxx; {3} xxxxxxxx; {4} xxxxxxxx{5} xxxxxxxx; {6} The mysterious disappearance of a guy with the nickname “X” after xxxxxxxx; {7} SPPD Detective Donnie Williams’ personal relationship with xxxxxxxxx in xxxxxxxx, Florida; {8} A murder committed by Z in xxxxxxxx, Florida; and {9} etc..

Affiant was told that in 2015, SPPD Detective Donnie Williams was still under corruptions investigations.

In 1998, some events forced the affiant into being reactivated as a CI for the SPPD.  Within 3 months of affiants’ reactivation, SPPD disclosed his identity as a CI to  xxxxxxxx suspected of committing more than one murder.

In March 1999, the SPPD again arrested affiant for charges he was innocent of.  During the court proceedings in the affiants’ case, the court prohibited him from introducing into evidence anything concerning his prior employment as a CI. 

After affiant was placed in the Florida Department of Corrections (FDOC), he had years of protection problems that came as a result of his prior employment as a CI.   FDOC records will prove that for approximately 4 years Pinellas Assistant State Attorney Pat Saracusa told FDOC that affiant was never a CI for law enforcement.  If Mr. Sarcusa didn’t do the foregoing, the affiant wouldnt have had the protection problems he had his first 4 years in prison.  In 2004, FDOC verified with the SPPD that affiant had been a CI going back prior to 1992.  In 2011 FDOC verified that affiant was associated with the arrest of more than 70 individuals when he worked as a CI.

Affiant would like to provide the documents his family and him have, and the witnesses and evidence stated herein.


Under penalty of perjury, I swear that everything stated herein is true, and correct.

Affiant:  (Signature of Harold Hempstead appears here on original hand-written document) 4/5/16

Harold Hempstead, D.C.# 268866, B2-102 Single, Martin Correctional Institution, 1150 Southwest Allapattah Road, Indiantown, Florida 34956

C.C.  Tampa Bay Times, News Service of Florida, Orlando Sun Sentinel, Florida Times Union, Broward Sun Sentinel, Palm Beach Post, New Yorker Magazine, Rolling Stones Magazine, Times Magazine, People Magazine, New York Times, Prison Legal News, 60 Minutes, Inside Edition, 20/20 (Brian Ross), Elizabeth Patty-Lugo, Windy Hempstead, Susan Chandler, George Mallinckrodt, K. Harris (Second Chance Effort Project), Howard Simon (ACLU), Adam Tebrugge (ACLU), Randall C. Berg (Florida Justice Institute), Rev. Russell Meyer (Florida Council of Churches), Steven Wetstein (Stop Prison Abuse Now), Actual Innocence Project (Tallahassee, Florida), Tampa FBI, Tallahassee FDLE, Tampa FDLE, Department of Children and Families (St.Petersburg, Florida), Melinda Miguel (Chief Inspector General for the Governor), Mike Fasano (Senator), Jeremy Schanche.

Note: Some parts of this typescript of the document have been redacted for reasons of public safety.  

Caged Crusader Advocates Disabled Rights Florida D.C.


Harold Hempstead takes on the cause of Disabled Rights in the Florida Department of Corrections.  From the information he’s also submitted to Rick Scott, Governor of Florida and the U.S. Department of Justice, it would seem that the needs and safety of the mobility-impaired inmates are not being taken seriously.  The following affidavit meticulously details the many obstacles and difficulties daily encountered by those convicts confined to wheelchairs.  Once again, the law has prescribed a series of measures to be taken and standards to be upheld and these are simply not being respected and implemented properly.  Once again, it takes the efforts of a prisoner to raise these matters and ask the authorities to uphold their own laws and regulations.  When those authorities start listening to Harold Hempstead and implementing the strategies already in place for protecting disabled rights, and basic human rights;  as well as the many other grave matters that he has raised;  then perhaps Florida can one day truly claim to be a place administered by justice, democracy and the rule of law. 


To:  U.S. Department of Justice, Disability Rights Section, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest, Washington D.C. 20530.

Florida Governor Rick Scott, 400 South Monroe Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399.

Florida Department of Corrections,  Attn:  A.D.A. Coordinator, 501 South Calhoun Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399.

The Federal A.D.A. Act (42 U.S.C. : 12101) and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Acts (29 U.S.C. : 794) apply to prisoners,  Pennsylvania Department of Corrections V. Yeskey, 524 U.S. 206, 118 S.CT.1952 (1998);  Harris V. Thigpen, 941 F.3D 1495 (11th Cir. 1991).


The wheelchair impaired inmates are housed in 8 housing dorms at Okeechobee C.I.  In order for them: to leave their housing dorms and go to the chowhall 3 times a day to eat their meals;  to go to medical, dental and mental health call-outs for treatment;  to go to chapel, law-library, library, education and classification call-outs;  to go to the inmate canteen (commissary) to purchase food items, stationary and hygiene items;  and to go to the inmate visitation park for visitation they have to use the large quantity of interconnecting sidewalks.  The sidewalks have dozens of large cracks and minor potholes in them.  Oftentimes wheelchair impaired inmates are ejected from their wheelchairs when going over the cracks and by accident fall into the potholes.  28 CFR 361;  Ganstine V. Buss, 211 U.S. Dist. Lexis 148497.  This violation is causing A.D.A. inmates to be physically hurt.

The dirt and/or grass on both sides of all the sidewalks, etc. are parallel or lesser in elevation than the sidewalks.  Often times wheelchair impaired inmates roll off the sidewalks, or are pushed off the sidewalks by other inmates intentionally.  When this happens the wheelchair impaired inmate is ejected from his wheelchair when the wheels of the wheelchair hit the dirt and/or grass.  28 CFR 36.  This violation is causing A.D.A. inmates to be physically hurt.  If the dirt and/or grass was elevated above the sidewalks, etc. it would prevent the foregoing.

1.) 28 Code of Federal Regulations 36 is the A.D.A. Accessibility Guide.

The entrances to the 8 housing dorms and numerous other entrances at Okeechobee C.I. are unsafe for wheelchair impaired inmates to pass through.  The elevated steel that the wheelchair impaired inmates have to cross over in the entrance ways oftentimes causes them to be ejected from their wheelchairs if they’re not very careful.  28 CFR 36.  This violation is causing A.D.A. inmates to be physically hurt.

Several of the restrooms at Okeechobee C.I. don’t provide accessible door hardware that can be opened with a closed fist as required by 28 CFR 36 Section 4.23.9.

Securely attached matts are not provided at the entrance of each building and into each wheelchair impaired shower in violation of 28 CFR 36 Section 4.5.3.

The counter in the law library that law clerks and orderlies stand behind to help the inmate population with their law work is more than 34 inches high from the floor in violation of 28 CFR 36 Section 5.2.

The U.S. postal mailbox and inmate request box are more than 34 inches high from the ground in violation of 28 CFR 36 Section 5.2.

The restrooms don’t have papertowel dispensers at an accessible height in violation of 28 CFR 36 4.22.7.

Okeechobee C.I. doesn’t provide adequate direction and accurate information signage for A.D.A. inmates in violation of 28 CFR Section 4.1.3 (16).

Okeechobee C.I. has 36 wheelchair accessible cells.  6 of these cells are in confinement wings.  Okeechobee C.I. doesn’t have a sufficient amount of wheelchair accessible cells to house wheelchair impaired inmates in violation of 28 CFR 36;  Florida Statute 553.503.  This is causing wheelchair impaired inmates to be housed in cells and living quarters that are not in compliance with the A.D.A.

The wheelchair impaired inmate showers have showerheads stuck to the walls like non A.D.A. wheelchair impaired showers.  These types of showerheads make it where wheelchair impaired inmates can’t properly wash the whole backside of their bodies that are in the wheelchairs.  Okeechobee C.I.’s failure to provide handheld showerheads that are connected to the showerheads on the walls via a hose so wheelchair impaired inmates can properly shower themselves is causing them to be denied proper hygiene and is in violation of 28 CFR 36.

Okeechobee C.I. has 2 inmate recreation yards.  One of the recreation yards doesn’t have any cement, etc. sidewalks on it.  Wheelchair impaired inmates cannot access it.  As it concerns the second recreation yard, wheelchair impaired inmates have sidewalks that go to the front and side of the recreation building, basketball court, small pavilion, and toilets.  On this recreation yard wheelchair impaired inmates don’t have access to the 2 large pavilions, 2 water kegs, the football and soccor fields; and because the basketball court only has enough cement to make the court, wheelchair impaired inmates cannot park their wheelchairs on the basketball court.  These violations prohibit wheelchair impaired inmates from being able to watch sporting events like the rest of the general population.  Approximately 90 percent of this recreation yard cannot be accessed by wheelchair impaired inmates.  None of the 3 pavilions have tables under them that can be used by wheelchair impaired inmates.  Neither of the recreation yards have a cement sidewalk that go all around them for wheelchair impaired inmates.  These violations make it where wheelchair impaired inmates don’t go to the recreation yards to sit in the sun, get fresh air, or watch sporting events.  28 CFR 36;  Florida Accessibility Code (Florida Statute 553.503);  Ganstine V. Buss, 2011 U.S. Dist. Lexis 148497 (2011).

Wheelchair impaired inmates cannot have access to the inmate canteens;  medical, mental health, dental and classification departments, pilline to receive medication;  and library, law library and education departments without travelling up and down inclined cement sidewalks.  Also, to exit the north and south chowhalls wheelchair impaired inmates have to travel down inclined cement sidewalks.  The health of a lot of the wheelchair impaired inmates prohibit them from being able to push themselves up the inclined cement sidewalks.  If a staff or inmate don’t help them up the inclined sidewalk, they’ll have to wait at the bottom of said sidewalk until somebody agrees to help them.  Also, a lot of the wheelchair impaired inmates can’t safely control their wheelchairs when having to travel down the inclined cement sidewalks.  This oftentimes scares them to attempt such.  Some of the wheelchair impaired inmates who attempt to travel down the inclined sidewalks without help end up hitting inmates at the bottom of the inclined sidewalks and sometimes hit the fences and/or go into the dirt and/or grass which are about 12 feet from the bottom of the inclined sidewalks.  Also, these inclined cement sidewalks don’t have handrails.  28 CFR 36.

Inmates that are acting as impaired assistants with wheelchair impaired inmates are extorting, physically and (possibly sexually) battering wheelchair impaired inmates.  28 CFR 36.

The law library at Okeechobee C.I. doesn’t have a primary research book/source for A.D.A. inmates to research A.D.A. violations.  This violation makes it where A.D.A. inmates can’t properly defend themselves against A.D.A. violations in violation of the A.D.A. and 28 CFR 36.


For the U.S. Department of Justice Disability Rights Section, Florida Governor, and Florida Department of Corrections to take immediate action to correct the A.D.A. violations mentioned herein that are at Okeechobee Correctional Institution.

Executed on this 2 day of December 2016.


Under penalty of perjury I swear that everything stated herein is true and correct.

Affiant:  (Signature of Harold Hempstead appears here on original handwritten document)

Harold Hempstead, D.C.# 268866, Okeechobee Correctional Institution, 3420 North East 168th Street, Okeechobee, Florida 34972

C.C.  ACLU of Florida (Howard Simon)

Stop Prison Abuse Now (Steven Wetstein)

Disability Rights Florida (Molly Paris)

Florida Legal Service (Peter Sleasman)

Florida Justice Institute (Randall Berg)

Forgotten Majority

Human Rights Defence Center (Lance T.Weber)

Miami Herald Newspaper (Julie Brown)

WTVT Fox 13 Tampa (Craig Patrick)

CBS 4 Miami (Michele Gillen)

New Yorker Magazine (Eyal Press)

Tampa Bay Times

Palm Beach Post (Pat Beall)

Windy Hempstead

Susan Chandler

George Mallinckrodt

Jeremy Schanche

FDC Permitting Child Sex Abuse At Visitation Parks – Evidence


Harold Hempstead’s affidavit of 4th November, 2016 describes Florida Department of Corrections’  failure to protect children, women and men in the prison visitation parks, where sexual predators are free to abuse their victims.  The document contains material of a disturbing nature and is not suitable for young people – it is, however, highly suitable reading for the U.S. Department of Justice, Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Florida Department of Children and Families, Melinda Miguel – Chief Inspector General for the Governor,  etc.. 


To:  U.S. Department of Justice, Attn:  Vanita Gupta, Assistant U.S. Attorney General, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest, Washington D.C., 2053o.

Department of Children and Families, Attn:  Mike Carroll, Secretary, 2383 Phillips Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32301.

Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Attn: Richard Swearingen, Commissioner, P.O.Box 1489, Tallahassee, Florida 32302.

Florida Department of Corrections {FDC} staff have been permitting sex offenders and predators to congregate with children at parks on a weekly basis at every close custody institution in Florida where sex offenders and predators are incarcerated.  These sex offenders and predators are committing lewd and lascivious acts and sexual battery on children and adults at the parks FDC is permitting them to visit.  FDC staff are aware of the foregoing and they haven’t done anything to stop the incarcerated sex offenders and predators from doing the foregoing.

Florida Statute :  775.21 is “The Florida Sexual Predators Act”.   Florida Statute : 775.21 (3) (A) and (B) reads:

“(A) Repeat sexual offenders who use physical violence, and sexual offenders who prey on children are sexual predators who present an extreme threat to the public safety.  Sexual offenders are extremely likely to use physical violence and to repeat their offenses, and most sexual offenders commit many offenses, have many more victims than are ever reported, and are prosecuted for only a fraction of their crimes.  This makes the cost of sexual offender victimisation to society at large, while incalculable, clearly exorbitant.”

“(B) The high level of threat that a sexual predator presents to the public safety, and the long term effects suffered by victims of sex offenses, provide the state with sufficient justification to implement a strategy…”

Florida Statute 775.21 (4) list the criteria that sex offenders must meet in order to be deemed a sexual predator. 

Florida Statute 775.21 (10) (B) explains how a sexual predator commits a felony, if he visits a business, school, child care facility, park, playground or other place where children regularly congregate even if their job requires them to do such.

The legislature deems protecting adults and children from sex offenders and predators so serious that they passed Florida Statute 775.215 (Residency Restriction For Persons Convicted Of Sex Offenses) making it a crime as high as a first degree felony for sex offenders to even have a residence within  1,000 feet of a school, child care facility, park, or playground.

If a judge issues an order preventing a sex offender or predator from having visitation with children while in FDC, FDC has a rule that says they will honor the foregoing type of court order (FAC 33-601.720).

 However, if a court doesn’t issue an order preventing a sex offender or predator from visiting with children, FDC staff won’t comply with the Florida statutes herein and other Florida statutes and limit them from visiting with children in FDC.

Also, FDC staff are allowing sex offenders and predators to receive visits from adults at the visitation parks in FDC on the same days, and at the same time, that inmates who aren’t sex offenders are receiving visits from children. 


In other words FDC has been allowing convicted sex offenders and predators to attend the visitation park every Saturday and Sunday where the children of non-sex offenders are.  FDC has even been allowing sex offenders and predators who the court issued orders restricting their visitation with their kids and other kids to attend the visitation park every weekend where kids are visiting with inmates not convicted of sex offenses.  FDC’s reasoning behind the foregoing is that according to the paperwork the children are visiting with non-sex offenders.

Additionally, FDC staff are obviously aware of all the laws (statutes) mentioned herein and that they under any circumstance are not supposed to allow sex offenders or predators to attend visitation parks when children are congregating at them.  To permit the foregoing is to permit sex offenders and predators to violate the Florida statutes mentioned herein.

Also, sex offenders and predators are committing lewd and lascivious acts and sexual batteries on children in the visitation parks FDC staff are permitting them to visit.

Sex offenders and predators are known for looking at children very lustfully in visitation parks.  They are also known for looking up the dresses of ladies and juvenile girls and up the shorts of ladies and children.

Sex offenders and predators are known for showing the shape of their private area with their hands through their pants to ladies and children in visitation parks.

Sex offenders and predators place their children and children they know on other inmates visitation lists so the sex offenders and predators can visit with their children and children (i.e. their children, grandchildren, nephews, nieces, and friends children) in FDC visitation parks.

Sex offenders and predators touch the children of other visitors improperly in FDC visitation parks.  They hug children, tap kids on their buttocks, touch and grab their legs, and touch the private areas of children.

Sex offenders and predators use their fingers to penetrate the rectums and vaginas of juvenile females and the rectums of juvenile boys in FDC visitation parks.

FDC records show the visitation parks are insecure.  Records show cellular phones, narcotics, and tobacco are smuggled into FDC visitation parks on a weekly basis, and that inmates are having sexual relations in them with other adults.  These facts prove the insecure status of FDC visitation parks.

FDC is aware that the violations of the Florida statutes mentioned herein have been going on for a long time.  They have elected to not do anything about the foregoing because of the inconvenience it would cause them and because of how much it’d cost FDC to fix the foregoing problems.

During affiants’ close to 18 years of incarceration he’s witnessed the matters herein, has been told by other inmates who witnessed the foregoing, and has spoken with sex offenders that have done the foregoing.

Florida statute : 20.315 reads in part:  “…The Secretary is responsible for planning, coordinating, and managing the corrections system of the State.  The Secretary shall ensure that the programs and services of the Department are administered in accordance with State and Federal laws, rules, and regulations, with established program standards and consistent with legislative intent.”  The Secretary has failed to comply with this statute as it concerns the violations mentioned herein.

Florida statute : 944.31 reads in part:  “… The office of the Inspector General shall see that all the rules and regulations issued by the Department are strictly observed and followed by all persons connected with the correctional systems of the State…”  and “… The Inspector General and Inspectors shall be responsible for criminal and administrate investigation of matters relating to the Department of Corrections…”  The FDC Inspector General’s Office has failed to comply with this statute as it concerns the violations mentioned herein.

Florida Statute : 944.14 reads:  “Subject to the orders, policies, and regulations establish by the Department, it shall be the duties of the Wardens to supervise the government, discipline, and policy of the State correctional institutions, and to enforce all orders, rules and regulations.”  The Wardens at each institution have failed to comply with this statute as it concerns the violations mentioned herein.

Over the close to 18 years that affiant has been incarcerated in FDC other inmates have attempted to get FDC to correct the matters herein.  All of these inmates have been subjected to some type of retaliation.  History shows FDC would rather subject inmates to retaliation for trying to get this serious matter corrected then stop sex offenders and predators from committing the violations of state law mentioned herein. 

It is reasonable to say that thousands (if not tens of thousands) of sex offenders and predators in FDC are allowed to visit FDC visitation parks (FAC 33-601.721) where children congregate on a weekly basis.  Also, it’s fair to say that hundreds if not thousands of adults and children are being victimized on a weekly basis by the sex offenders and predators that are allowed to be in the visitation parks with them.   

Based on the foregoing affiant respectfully requests that the U.S. Department of Justice, Florida Department of Children and Families, and Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigate the matters stated herein, and that the Florida Department of Children and Families issue protective orders protecting the children of visitors to FDC from any further victimization by sexual offenders and predators.


Under penalty of perjury, I swear that everything stated herein is true and correct.

Date 11-4-16  Affiant : (signature appears here on original handwritten document)

Harold Hempstead, D.C.# 268866, Okeechobee Correctional Institution,  3420 Northeast 168th Street, Okeechobee, Florida 34972.

C.C.  Julie K.Brown (Miami Herald)

Michele Gillen (CBS 4 Miami)

Eyal Press (New Yorker Magazine)

Craig Patrick (WTVT Fox 13 Tampa)

Clair McNeill (Tampa Bay Times)

Pat Beall (Palm Beach Post)

Howard Simon (ACLU Florida)

Steven Wetstein (Stop Prison Abuse Now)

Randall Berg (Florida Justice Institute)

Peter Sleasman (Florida Legal Service)

Lance T. Weber (Human Rights Defense Center)

Greg Evers (Florida Senator)

Melinda Miguel (Chief Inspector General for the Governor)

Windy Hempstead

Susan Chandler

George Mallinckrodt

Jeremy Schanche

Second Chance Effort Project

Forgotten Majority

Florida D.C. v. Free Speech


Free Speech!  Wars are fought in its name.  Laws and Constitutions enshrine it.  It is one of the most fundamental freedoms at the heart of Western culture, yet its existence is under constant threat by agents of the State who are sworn and paid to protect it.  The following document from Harold Hempstead – key witness to the Rainey murder – shows the nature of the retaliation he and other inmates suffered as soon as it became known that they were planning to talk to the press about prison conditions.  I’m the Jeremy Schanche on the list of people the affidavit was copied to.  I can vouch for its contents as I only received my copy of it in January 2017 when it was eventually re-sent.  Various other letters and documents sent between Harold and me from the period he mentions also failed to arrive.

The Civil Right of convicted persons to engage in free speech is fully protected in Federal law.  Only a hopelessly corrupt regime would desire a situation in which prisoners are kept in such a state of terror that they dare not complain about the violent physical and extreme psychological abuse they are being tormented with.   If certain prisoners are prepared to risk getting their bones broken to get the truth out about corruption and torture in jail, perhaps there’s something us free citizens can do to help protect free speech too?


To:  Ms. Vanita Gupta, Assistant U.S. Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest, Washington, D.C. 20530.

Senator Greg Evers, 209 East Zaragoza Street, Pensacola, Florida 32502.

Wexford Health Sources Inc., 425 Holiday Drive, Foster Plaza Two, Pittsburg, PA. 15220.

American Civil Liberties Union, Attn: Howard Simon, 4500 Biscayne Blvd., #34o, Miami, Florida, 33137.

Stop Prison Abuse Now, Attn.:  Steven Wetstein, (Mailed to home address)

In March and April 2016, affiant mailed 2 different sworn affidavits about the unconstitutional conditions of Florida Department of Corrections (FDC) Protective Management (PM) Units to the Department of Justice, and almost 2 dozen representatives of the State of Florida, Human Rights leaders, news reporters, and bloggers.  Copies of these sworn affidavits can be read at;;  Stop Prison Abuse Now (SPAN) at Nations Inside; 

About the second week of March 2016, a reporter with the Miami Herald newspaper started making arrangements to interview several inmates at Martin C.I. about among others things  unconstitutional conditions in FDC PM units.  Affiant was one of these inmates.

Immediately following the reporter discussing the names of the inmates she wanted to speak with, several of the inmates started reporting being subjected to different types of reprisal by Martin C.I. staff.

From the time arrangements started being made for 67 year old L.S. to speak with the reporter, he was mysteriously moved from the cell he had been in for over a year into a different cell, and then given 3 gang members as cellmates over the next about 30 days.

Inmate J.C. was placed in confinement within about 10 days prior to speaking with the reporter.  Inmate J.C. reported that he went to confinement for possession of ink.  Ink pens are sold in the inmate canteen.

Inmate F.H. reported that he was threatened by a correctional officer on the way to his interview with the reporter, and punched in his face by a correctional officer on the way back to his housing dorm from the foregoing interview. 

Affiant has been subjected to the following forms of retaliation since around the middle of March 2016:

1)  Mailroom Supervisor Ms. Walker started withholding his incoming and outgoing mail.  Ms. Walker withheld mail affiant mailed {1} The Miami Herald newspaper;  {2} Florida ACLU Director Howard Simon;  and {3} several personal letter affiant mailed family and friends.  Ms.Walker also withheld mail mailed to the affiant from:  The Miami Herald newspaper;  Ministry of Reconciliation Outreach;  Human Rights leaders;  and possibly other individuals.

2)  ARNP Chatalier discontinued affiant’s low residue diet which he started receiving about 6 years ago for his stomach condition that causes him to go number 2 up to 7 time a day and gives him severe stomach pain.  Since affiant’s diet was discontinued on April 7, 2016, he’s had severe stomach pain and has been going number 2 an average of 5 times a day.

3)  Affiant has sinus rhythm with sinus arrhythmia.  On May 2, 2016 affiant passed out in his cell, and reported the foregoing to classification officer Ms. Posten, and correctional officers Johnson and Pellirenne, affiant wasn’t permitted to see medical.  Affiant has advised Martin C.I. staff for several weeks now that he has been having chest pain, and over these last about 3 weeks affiant has not been allowed to see medical.

4)  On April 7, 2016 ARNP Chatalier also tampered with affiant’s pain medicine and discontinued affiants allergy medicine.  Now affiant has no pain medicine for his broken right wrist, sciatic nerve damage, and hurt back.  Affiant has been living in pain with the foregoing medical problems.

5)  Affiant has 2 or more cyst in his right wrist.  Medical is refusing to prescribed affiant an antibiotic to prevent infection from entering affiant’s body.

6)  Affiant was approved to see an orthopaedic surgeon for wrist surgery prior to this retaliation starting.  Health Service Administrator Ms. Rebele told affiant he will be taken out of his cell and placed in another cell the night prior to his surgery.  The foregoing and the conditions present in the other cell would violate affiants’ 8th Amendment Right to Protection from cruel and unusual punishment.  Ms. Rebele told affiant that if didn’t want to submit to the foregoing conditions, he would be denied wrist surgery on his broken right wrist. 

7)  Since around April 10, 2016 affiant stopped receiving his FDC grievances back that he filed on the issues mentioned herein.

8)  Around January 2016 Robert Hendry (Present Bureau Chief of Security), Martin C.I. Assistant Warden Royce Marlow, and Martin C.I. Colonel Colon placed affiant on House Alone Status in Cell B2-102 Single based on the fact that one of his prior cellmates’ (TJ) attempted to kill a cellmate (JN) that TJ had after affiant.  TJ and the affiant were not compatible as cellmates they should’ve never been housed in the same cell.  On May 6, 2016 affiant was moved from Cell B2-102 Single to B2-108 Lower by Martin C.I. Warden Elizabeth Mallard, Assistant Warden Mr. Swineburg, and Classification Supervisor Mr. Parrish.  The mounted security camera tapes for Bravo Dorm Wing 2 on May 6, 2016 between 11:30am and 12:00pm will show the three foregoing staff in affiants’ cell (B2-102 Single) taking a picture and talking to the affiant.  This was prior to these staff moving affiant to Cell B2-108 Lower.  The foregoing staff moved affiant into Cell B2-108 Lower with inmate RD whose criminal history proves he has a very long history of physical and sexual violence.  FDC records will prove that RD shouldn’t be housed with the affiant by the Inmate Risk Management System / Sexual Risk Indicator (IRMS / SRI) system.  Affiant is listed as Identified Prey (IPY) on the IRMS / SRI system.  Housing violent offenders with non-violent offenders violates state law.

After affiant’s 6 May 2016 retaliatory cell change, Martin C.I. staff have alleged that they moved inmate YN into affiant’s prior cell (B-102 Single) because he qualifies to be housed in said cell.  The grievances and requests form in inmate YN’s classification files show that he has been told for over 4 months that he doesn’t qualify to be housed alone for any reason.  Also, in January and March 2016, the ADA Team at Martin C.I. told inmate YN that he doesn’t qualify to be housed alone.  Finally, FDC staff  Robert Hendry, Royce Marlow, and Colonel Colon have held that inmate YN doesn’t qualify to be housed alone.  Accordingly, there’s substantial evidence that proves that the following mentioned Martin C.I. staff didn’t move inmate YN into B2-102 Single because he qualified for said cell, but because said staff wanted affiant to be housed in the cell where inmate YN was housed (B2-108 Lower) with a physical and sexual violent offender.

9)  In the month of March Warden Mallard told affiant that he had to place all his active legal materials in the Law Library where he could access it 6 days (but only 1 day) a week to obtain access to the courts on his legal matters.  This is in violation of FAC 33-501.301 (4) (C) which says inmates will be afforded access to their legal materials.  The law library storage records will prove thousands of pages of affiants’ law work is in the Law Library storage closet where affiant can’t access it 6 days a week.  This is in violation of his First Amendment right to access to the courts.

On May 6th, 2016 affiant was threatened between 11:30 and 12:00 in the morning with frivolous Disciplinary Reports, to be placed in confinement, and to have his personal property taken from him.  This threat was by staff.

Affiant has filed several complaints with Chief Inspector General Melinda Miguel concerning the retaliation by Martin C.I. staff, and the unconstitutional conditions in FDC PM Units.  The following is a list of the dates on the letters he received from Miguel’s office and the case numbers her office assigned to affiants’ complaints: (1) November 12, 2015 (Case No.:201511120007);  (2) December 15, 2015 (Case No.: 201512140002);  (3) December 15, 2015 (Case No.: 201412110006);  (4) February 16, 2016 (Case No.: 201512140002);  (5) 2 letters on February 23, 2016 (Case No.: 201512140002 and 201511120004);  (6) March 7, 2016 (Case No.: 201512140002);  (7) March 30, 2016, (Case No.: 201512140002);  and (8) April 29, 2016 (Case No.: 201512140002).  Other than the foregoing, affiant has recently filed additional complaints with Miguel’s office.

On May 8 and 13, 2016 the affiant made a total of 9 TIP calls (where he gave his name and D.C. number) on the matters herein.  The following numbers were assigned to these prison TIP calls:  (1) 971527, (2) 127485, (3) 316384, (4) 812239, (5) 188725, (6) 168806, (7) 593692, (8) 829299, and (9) 144286.

On May 8, 2016 affiant’ sister (Windy Hempstead) sent an email to several FDC staff and others about the retaliation mentioned herein.

On May 13, 2016, Steven Wetstein of Stop Prison Abuse Now (SPAN) sent an email to McKinley Lewis and Timothy Reed about the retaliation mentioned herein.

Affiant is requesting that FDC please preserve the following recordings which are needed for criminal and civic reasons and for the DOJ: (1) The Martin C.I., Bravo Dorm, Wing 2 mounted security cameras tapes for May 2, 2016 between 8.00am and 8.30am;  May 6, 2016 between 11:30am and 12:00pm, and May 9, 2016 between 8:00am and 9:00am.  Also, the May 13, 2016 audio recording between an FDC Inspector (who affiant knew at Dade C.I.) and the affiant.  This recording will show affiant requested to see a doctor and went into some detail concerning the retaliation with his health and May 6, 2016 cell change.

FDC inmates need and want to help media and Human Rights leaders with trying to get FDC to become a safer place.  FDC inmates have a 1st Amendment Constitutional Right to Freedom of Speech to speak with the media and Human Rights leaders about the unconstitutional conditions in FDC.  When FDC staff take reprisal against inmates for doing the foregoing, FDC staff are not only violating the Federal Rights of prisoners, but they are also violating other rights of the media and Human Rights leaders.  Because this pattern and practice of FDC staff taking reprisal against inmates who speak-out against the conditions in FDC is statewide and systematic, and has lead to inmates being severely harmed and killed, affiant is requesting that the U.S. Department of Justice conduct an investigation into the foregoing pursuant to the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA) (42 USC : 1997).


Under penalty of perjury I swear that all the facts stated herein are true and correct.

Executed on this — day of May 2016

Affiant (Signature of Harold Hempstead appears here on original, handwritten document)

Harold Hempstead, D.C.# 268866, Martin Correctional Institution, 1150 Southwest Allapattah Road, Indiantown, Florida 34956.

C.C.:  Florida Justice Institute (Randall C. Berg), Disability Rights Florida (Molly Paris), Forgotten Majority, Miami Herald (Julie Brown), CBS4 Miami (Michelle Gillen), WTVT Fox 13 Tampa (Craig Patrick), Florida Department of Law Enforcement (Commissioner), Chief Inspector General for the Governor (Melinda Miguel), FDC Inspector General (Kenneth Sumpter), Florida Department of Health Medical Quality Assurance, American Correctional Association Standards and Accreditation Department, Windy Hempstead, Susan Chandler, Jeremy Schanche, George Mallinckrodt.


‘Protective Management’ in Florida’s Gulag

Harold Hempstead


One of the duties of the State is the protection of its most vulnerable prison inmates from the most dangerous and predatory. Certain prisoners fall into these special categories that require them to be segregated from general population – either because they are particularly vulnerable, and should be housed in Protective Management housing units; or because they are particularly dangerous, and should be housed in Close Management housing units.


The following sworn statement by Harold Hempstead – who’s serving one hundred and sixty five years for allegedly organizing various burglaries – describes how the Florida Department of Corrections is blatantly abusing its responsibility towards the basic human rights and civil rights of its prisoners by placing violent predators in ‘Protective Management’ units. This is being done as policy and is a way of taking away even a minimum sense of protection from inmates.  This official disregard for the rule of law has led to much suffering, fear, injury and death, constituting cruel and unusual punishment.

For bringing this issue to the attention of the press and media, whistle-blower and witness Harold Hempstead has himself suffered serious persecution at the hands of the jail authorities. Please read his evidence and use your free speech to help share this info – these days, Human Rights need all the help they can get.


To: Vanita Gupta, Assistant U.S. Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest, Washington D.C. 20530.

American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, Attn:  Howard Simon, 4500 Biscayne Blvd. #340, Miami, Florida 33137.

Stop Prison Abuse Now, Attn:  Steven Wetstein, mailed to home address.


Protective Management Status in the Florida Department of Corrections (FDOC) is a classification status FDOC uses in an attempt to comply with their 8th Amend. Const. Duty To Protect Prisoners from harm by other prisoners and the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Farmer V. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 164 5 Ct. 1970 (1994)

The following types of inmates are legally housed in P.M. Unit Status: Prior Law-Enforcement, Ex-Government, High Profile Inmates, Transgenders, Petite or Young Inmates whose size or characteristics show they’d have protection problems in General Population, and Inmates FDOC Has Verified Have Been Subjected To Sexual Battery (FAC 33 – 602.220 (3) (c) 3).

FDOC has been housing gang members in FDOC Protective Management for approximately ten years now. These gang members are reigning terror in Protective Management Units by committing severe acts of violence against inmates the FDOC are supposed to be protecting with the most protection.  Out of the approximate 400 Protective Management inmates in FDOC dozens of them are registered gang members with FDOC and the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) (FLA.STAT.: 874-09)

FDOC used the words “Security Threat Group” to identify gangs. The following rule says that FDOC is supposed to place gang members in Close Management: Fac 33-601.800 (2) (A) 2. N, (2) (C) 2.6. Instead of placing gang members in Close Management which they qualify for by FDOC ‘s foregoing own rules, FDOC has been placing gang members in Protective Management which they do not qualify for by FDOC’s following rule: FAC 33-602. 220 (3) (c) 3.

FDOC has a classification system called the “Inmate Risk Management System / Sexual Risk Indicator”.  (IRMS/SRI).  The two highest rankings on the IRMS system are “Identified Predator” and “Potential Predator”.  FDOC considers the inmates that have these rankings as the most physically aggressive inmates in FDOC.  FDOC has been placing inmates in Protective Management Units that FDOC deems predators by their own IRMS classification system and/or qualify to be ranked as predators by the IRMS classification system.  These predators do not qualify for Protective Management by FDOC own rule (FAC 33-602.220 (3) (c) 3.), but these predators do qualify for Close Management by FDOC following rules: FAC 33-601.800 (2) (B) 2.B., F., H., 33-601.800 (2) (C) 2.D. These predators are committing severe acts of physical violence in Protective Management Units to inmates FDOC are supposed to be providing with the highest protection.

On the SRI classification system “High Aggressive Risk” and “Moderate Aggressive Risk” inmates are considered the most sexually violent inmates in FDOC. FDOC has been placing these types of inmates that have these rankings on the SRI classification system, or that qualify to be ranked as such in Protective Management Units.  These Aggressive Risk inmates have been raping and sexually battering inmates in Protective Management that FDOC is supposed to be providing with the highest protection.  By FDOC own rules, these sexual predators qualify for Close Management (FAC 33-601.800 (2) (A) 2.L, 33-601.800 (2) (B) 2.H) and do not qualify for Protective Management (FAC 33-602.220 (3) (C) 3.)   The foregoing actions violate the Prison Rape Elimination Act (42 USC : 15601).

FDOC has not only permitted these gang members, predators, and sexually aggressive inmates into Protective Management Units in violation of FDOC’s own rules, but FDOC has also allowed these inmates to reign physical and sexual terror on inmates that qualify for Protective Management and that FDOC is supposed to be providing with the most protection in FDOC. In other words, FDOC has placed gang members, predators, and sexually aggressive inmates in the same housing wings with ex-law enforcement and government inmates, high profile inmates, transgenders, petite inmates and those inmates FDOC has recognized as being on their own IRMS classification system as “Identified Prey” and “Potential Prey” inmates.  This is in violation of Federal Law.   Marsh V. Butler County, Ala. 268 F.3d 1014 (11th Cir. 2001);  Brown V.Budz, 398 F 3d 904 (7th Cir. 2005).

Additionally, FDOC staff at the institutions where Protective Management Units are located refuse to adequately discipline these inmates when they commit their extreme acts of physical and sexual violence. Since affiants’ June 20, 2014 placement on Protective Management, he has witnessed inmates spend an average of 30 days or less in confinement for stabbing Management inmates, sexually battering Protective Management inmates, hitting Protective Management inmates in the head with broomstick, and face and head with steal locks, and physically battering Protective Management inmates after spending their thirty days or less in confinement, these gang members, predators, and sexually ageressive inmates are placed back in a Protective Management Unit where they resume their reign of terror.  The failure of FDOC to take corrective action in response to high rates of assault or to particular patterns of assault violates the 8th Amend. of the U.S.Const.. (LaMarca V. Turner, 6.62 F.Supp. 647 (J.D. FLA. 1987), Abrams V. Hunter, 910 F.Supp. 620 (M.D. FLA. 1995). This failure to take corrective action also violates FDOC’s following rule: FAC 33-600. 800 (2) (A) 2. B, L, (2) (B) 2. C,F,H.

The following FDOC documents will prove the matters stated herein (1) The Housing Rosters on all four Protective Management Units. (2)  The classification files of all the inmates on Protective Management status.  (3)  The Disciplinary Records and Protective Management records of all the inmates on Protective Management in FDOC.  (4)  The Incident Reports for the last five years of all the incidents in the four Protective Management Units.

Affiant previously filed 42 USC : 1983 Civil Rights Complaint Lawsuits in the Jacksonville Federal District Court (Case No.:3:2015-CV-00130, 3:2015-CV-00374, and the Miami Florida Federal District Court (Case No.: 1:15-LV-23367) that are located on the internet on “pacer”.  These lawsuits mention in some detail the violations of Federal law mentioned herein.

Copies of prior sworn affidavits affiant filed on the unconstitutional conditions of FDOC Protective Management Units can be reviewed at:;;  and at SPAN (Stop Prison Abuse Now) at Nationinside.

FDOC has a long documented history of setting up inmates with frivolous Disciplinary Reports and subjecting them to retaliatory transfers when inmates assert their rights under the First. Amend. of the U.S. Const..  Affiant is concerned that FDOC might attempt to censor affiants assertion of his 1st Amend. Rights by subjecting him to retaliatory disciplinary action via a frivolous Disciplinary Report, or to a retaliatory transfer.  Affiant was not told this would happen as of the date on this affidavit, but he does know that FDOC staff do not like that affiant is trying to obtain help for the victims in Protective Management Units in FDOC.

Around the beginning of April 2014, affiant’s wrist was broke prior to transferring from Dade C.I.. Affiant was called to the Transitional Care Unit (TCU) at Dade C.I. to clean up a blood spill on the upper tier in wing J3.  The events that happened afterwards caused affiant to get nervous and take flight running down the stairs from the upper tier to the lower tier.  Affiant fell while doing the foregoing and broke his right wrist.  Since the foregoing FDOC staff have refused to arrange surgery for the affiant’s wrist at a safe location until recently.  Presently medical staff at Martin C.I. have arranged for affiant to have wrist surgery at a safe location.  Affiant believes FDOC staff might attempt to transfer him to a location where he cannot have the wrist surgery at the doctor’s’ office hes’ been approved to have surgery at as a form of punishment for his attempts to help the victims in Protective Management Units in FDOC.

FDOC staff are clearly subjecting the inmates who qualify for Protective Management to violations of their 8th Amend. Right to protection from cruel and unusual punishment by failing to protect them, and to prison rape in violation of the Prison Rape Elimination Act (42 USC 315601).

Relief sought: Affiant is requesting that the U.S. Department of Justice conduct an investigation into the unconstitutional conditions in FDOC PM Units to protect the civil rights of those incarcerated in them in accordance with Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA) (42 USC : 1997). Affiant will assist in anyway he can with said investigation.

Unnotartized Oath

Under penalty of perjury, I swear that everything stated herein is true and correct.

Executed on this 15 day of March 2016.

Affiant: {Signature of Harold Hempstead appears here on original document}

Harold Hempstead, D.C.# 268866

Martin Correctional Institution

1150 Southwest Allapattah Road

Indiantown, Florida 34956


Florida Senator Greg Evers

Chief Inspector General Melinda Miguel

FDLE Commissioner

Florida Justice Institute (Randall Berg)

Florida Legal Services

Disability Rights Florida (Molly Paris)

Forgotten Majority Inc.

Human Rights Defence Centre (Lance T. Weber)

Miami Herald newspaper (Julie Brown)

CBS4 Miami (Michele Gillen)

WTVT Fox 13 (Craig Patrick)

New Yorker Magazine (Eyal Press)

Windy Hempstead

Susan Chandler

George Mallinckrodt

Harold Hempstead’s Evidence – Darren Rainey Murder

Harold Hempstead is the key witness to the torture and murder of Darren Rainey, a mentally disturbed, black Muslim convict who was serving two years for possession of a small amount of cocaine, at Dade Correctional Institution, Florida.  While in the prison’s ‘Transitional Care Unit’,  Mr Rainey’s Koran was thown in the trash and he was forced into a specially rigged shower where he suffered temperatures exceeding 180 fahrenheit for almost two hours, before finally collapsing and dying from the effects of the super-heated steam.

Most of Darren Rainey’s skin had come away from his body, but rather than treat the area as a crime-scene, the guards told a convict to throw the dead man’s skin “in the trash.”  The guards then conspired to conceal the crime.  It would very likely have remained concealed, recorded as an ‘accidental death’,  just another black man dead in a U.S. jail, had it not been for the relentless efforts of fellow-prisoner Harold Hempstead.  After filing over 80 grievances with the Florida Department of Corrections, which were all ignored, he made contact with the Miami Herald newspaper, which published the story.

Since Darren Rainey’s murder on 23rd June 2012, Harold Hempstead, the ‘Caged Crusader’ has spoken several times with reporters, and paid a high price for his attempted free speech.  Rather than protecting this witness, the FDC have at least four times, given him murderers for cell-mates.  His various medicines have been stopped, his medically-prescribed diet has been stopped and he has been waiting years for an operation on an untreated fractured wrist.

In a recent twist, the Department of Corrections held him in solitary for several months, claiming that he was involved with his own sister and some other convicts in an insurance plot to get himself shot for money.  When investigated by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, the allegations were proved to be totally groundless.

By standing up for justice for others, by insisting that all human lives are valuable, he has been rewarded with persecution, injustice and intimidation.  This is unlikely to stop him.  In future publications at this site, we’ll attempt to give a detailed overview of the Darren Rainey murder and the other extremely serious human rights and constitutional violations in the Florida Department of Corrections that Harold Hempstead has been bearing witness to.

What follows is his sworn statement describing the murder of Darren Rainey:


To:  Ms Vanita Gupta, Assistant U.S. Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest, Washington, DC 20530

Katherine Fernandez Rundle, State Attorney, F.R. Graham Building, 1350 Northwest 12th Avenue, Miami, Florida 33136

The Florida Department of Corrections (FDOC) houses some of their most severe mentally disabled inmates in the Dade Correctional Institution Transitional Care Unit (TCU).  The Westside TCU has 3 wings and 12 showers.  The shower in Wing J3 next to Cell 201 was the only shower with 2 showerheads in it prior to June 26, 2012.  The showerhead on the sidewall of that shower was a PVC pipe in the wall that was hooked to a PVC pipe in the closet next to the shower.  That PVC pipe was connected to a hose which was connected to a commercial sink.  The commercial sink had hot and cold water knobs.  The hot water knob was marked “H” for “hot” and color coded red;  the cold water knob was mark “C” for “cold” and color coded blue.  The construction of this shower, and the fact that the temperature in this shower exceeded 180 degrees violated the environmental health and safety manual.

Ofc. Roland Clark was assigned to work wing J3 on the 4:00pm till 12:00am shift.  Part of Ofc. Clark’s work assignment was showering 2 to 4 dozen inmate patients every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.  Ofc. Clark had approximately 20 months experience with showering inmate patients prior to January 2012.

In or around January 2012, inmate Daniel Geiger  (J42951) was moved into Wing J3.  Geiger was considered to be the loudest inmate in the TCU.  Geigers’ schizophrenia caused him to yell and make noise constantly.  His presence in Wing J3 made it hard for other inmates to live and sleep in Wing J3.  Geiger’s constant yelling also caused Ofc. Clark to get in trouble with his superiors because of the constant noise coming from his wing (J3).

In or around January 2012, inmate X told Ofc. Clark that Geiger would stop yelling if Geiger was placed in the shower next to J3-201, and the water was turned on full hot.  X told Ofc. Clark to tell Geiger that the only way he could get out the shower was to stop yelling, and making noise and to stay quiet once he was taken out the shower.  Ofc. Clark tried X’s recommendation and it worked.

When Ofc. Clark seen that the shower treatment worked as a punishing devise, he from thereforth used it on the most severe mentally disabled inmates in the TCU that refused to comply with his orders.  From January 2012, till June 23, 2012, Ofc. Clark placed the following inmates in said shower as punishment: {1} Z; {2} Y; {3} V; {4} Q;)  and Darren Rainey (060954).  These inmates were placed in the shower one or more times a piece.  Every inmate yelled in someway or another about how hot the shower was and how they wanted to be let out of it.

This shower where the shower treatment was performed was in a blindspot in J3, and not able to be viewed by any mounted security cameras.

On June 23, 2012 Darren Rainey lived in Wing J1 cell 109.  The mounted security cameras in Wing J1 were able to view the whole wing including Rainey’s cell.  There were 6 working showers in said wing.  One of those showers was about 10 feet from Rainey’s cell, a second shower was next to the front door of wing J1 which Rainey would walk pass when he was being escorted out of Wing J1 to receive the shower treatment.

On June 23, 2012 Rainey went number 2 in the middle of his cell floor around 11:00am.  Ofc. T told affiant that he witnessed the foregoing.  The feces was left on the floor until shift change at 4:00pm.  After shift change, Ofc. Clark ordered Rainey to clean up the feces.  After Rainey continued to refuse to do the foregoing, Ofc. Clark removed Rainey from his cell, escorted Rainey from Wing J1 to Wing J3, placed him in the shower next to cell J3-201, turned the water on full hot, and left Wing J3.

The mounted security cameras in wings J1 and J3 prove Rainey didn’t have any feces on him.  Ofc. T told affiant that Rainey didn’t have any feces on him just prior to shift change.  On the night Rainey was murdered, affiant was housed in J3-101.  When Ofc. Clark entered Wing J3 he walked Rainey within 2 feet of affiants’ cell door where he was standing.  Affiant didn’t see or smell any feces on Rainey’s body.

While Rainey was receiving the shower treatment, he continuously kicked the shower door and yelled “It’s hot.  Get me out of here.  I’m sorry.”  His last words that he reiterated several times prior to dying was “I’m sorry.  I can’t take it not more.  I won’t do it again.”  His constant yelling and kicking of the shower door was heard by all the inmates housed in Wing J3 and the staff working that night.

The names and ranks of the security staff working the night Rainey was murdered are: Lt. Pickney, Sgt. Fanfan, and Ofcs. Clark, Cornelius Thompson, Gibson, and Hood.  Nurses Strobbel and Robinson were the 2 nurses posted on the Westside TCU the night Rainey was murdered.  Ofc. Clark told affiant that Dade CI. Dr. Julio Poueado said that Rainey’s body showed signs that Ofc. Clark used extreme physical force on Rainey.  Sgt. Johnathans was the regular Sgt. assigned to the Westside TCU on the 4:00pm till 12:00am and Ofc. Clark’s regular supervisor.  Sgt. Johnathans wasn’t working the night Rainey was murdered, but he was working several of the times that the other 4 inmates received the shower treatment by Ofc. Clark.

Ofc. Thompson was the first staff to find Rainey dead in the shower.  Ofc. Thompson left Rainey dead on the shower floor for about 8 minutes before Ofc. Clark returned to the shower to act like he just found Rainey dead.  During this 8 minute period, staffs’ witnessed actions were consistent with them discussing how to cover up Rainey’s murder.

Ofc. Clark placed Rainey in the shower on a night no inmate was supposed to be in a shower.  Out of the 11 working showers in the Westside TCU, Ofc. Clark placed Rainey in the only shower Ofc. Clark could control the water temperature in.

Prior to the June 23, 2012 murder of Rainey, Ofc. Clark had more then 2 years experience working in the Westside TCU.  Ofc. Clark knew that FDOC rules and procedures required him to advise the Duty Warden and Senior Psychiatrist, if Rainey refused to shower, and obtain permission from them, and the Chief Health Officer to institute the Hygiene Compliance Procedures.  Ofc. Clark didn’t do the foregoing, because Rainey didn’t need to shower, and didn’t refuse to shower.   The video footage from the mounted security cameras, and this affiant and other inmates witnessed Rainey being compliant when being escorted to the shower that would eventually be used to kill him.  The fact that Rainey had handcuffs on him when he was being escorted to the shower, shows at the least that he was compliant to some degree.  Why?  Because it means he complied with the command to submit to handcuffs.  If Rainey didn’t comply with the command to submit to handcuffs, than that means Ofc. Clark used unreported and unlawful force to place the handcuffs on Rainey prior to escorting him to the shower.

Following the Rainey murder, Ofcs. Clark and Thompson advised affiant to say that Ofc. Clark was the first staff to find Rainey dead, and that it wasn’t Thompson.

In the 6 months following Rainey’s murder, affiant discussed several times Rainey’s murder with Ofc.T and Psychological Specialist Ms. Cesar.  These staff to some degree contributed to affiant’s safety the last 6 months of 2012.

About 2 months after Rainey’s murder, Ofc.T told affiant that Rainey went number 2 on his cell floor at lunch on the day he was murdered because of an incident that occurred with him Ofc.T.

From around August 2012 till May 2014, a staff at Dade C.I. aided affiant in trying to bring to justice the staff who murdered Rainey.  This staff went by the name Robert Anderson when talking with the following agencies, etc. about Rainey’s murder:  U.S. Department of Justice, Miami-Dade Police Department, Dade County Medical Examiner, and the Miami Herald Newspaper.

From around July 2012, till May 2014, affiant did the following trying to obtain justice for the murder of Rainey:  {1} Filed approximately 80 FDOC Grievances; {2} Wrote letters to the U.S. Department of Justice, Miami-Dade Police Department, Dade County State Attorney’s Office, Dade County Medical  Examiners’ Office, and Miami Herald Newspaper; and {3} Verbally communicated with the U.S. Department of Justice, Miami-Dade Police Department, Dade County Medical Examiner’s Office, and Miami Herald Newspaper.

In 2013 and 2014 Ofc. Clark told several inmates and staff that he got away with the Rainey murder because “Hempstead kept his mouth shut.” In 2014, Ofc. Clark referred to affiant several times as his “cody” (short for co-defendant) to staff and inmates thinking that affiant had kept his mouth closed about the Rainey murder.  Affiant believes there is evidence to support that in 2014, a person on his own initiative recorded one or more conversations wherein Ofc. Clark was calling affiant “cody” and talking about how he “got away with the Rainey murder” because of the affiant.

Dade C.I. has a long history of state and federal investigations being conducted at it.  An internet google search for “Operation Bird Cage” should reveal one or more news articles that discuss one or more of the prior criminal investigations conducted at Dade C.I..  Affiant believes another investigation conducted at Dade C.I. was called “Operation Monster”.  Affiant believes that in 2013, and 2014, investigations were being conducted at Dade C.I. into income tax fraud, credit card fraud, internet fraud involving sex offenders, and drug smuggling.


There was a total of 11 working showers in the Westside TCU.  The wing Rainey lived in had 6 working showers.  Why wasn’t Rainey placed in the shower about 10 feet from his cell?  Why wasn’t Rainey placed in the shower next to the front door of Wing J1 which he walked pass when being escorted out of Wing J1?  Why was Rainey placed in the only shower out of 11 working showers that staff could control the temperature of the water in?

The damage to Rainey’s body shows how hot the shower was that Rainey was murdered in.  Obviously any shower that hot would cause the person in the shower to yell, etc. to get out of the shower.  The amount of damage the hot water caused to Rainey’s body proves he was yelling, and doing what he could to get out of the shower that murdered him.

Affiant was told by staff the week of Rainey’s murder that Rainey wasn’t taken his medicine.  The June 24, 2012 initial autopsy report agrees with the foregoing, also, it would’ve been impossible for Rainey to take any medicine that he wasn’t authorized to take because all medicine had to be consumed in front of an Ofc. and a nurse, and an inspection of the inmates’ mouth always followed.

The Housing Rosters for Wing J3 for the months of January 2012, till June 23, 2012, show all the inmates who were housed in Wing J3 during the foregoing months.  The inmates housed in Wing J3, during the foregoing months that witnessed inmates being placed in the shower as punishment are witnesses to Sgt. Clark’s action of using the shower as a torturing devise to punish mentally disabled inmates.  These witnesses should be found and interviewed.

The inmates housed in Wing J3 on June 23, 2012 are witnesses to the Rainey murder.  These inmates should be interviewed.

The following Mental Health Staff who use to work the TCU were told by inmates that Sgt. Clark was using the shower to punish mentally disabled inmates:  Dr. Basasa, and Ms. Cesar, Arencibia, and Cortada.  These staff should be interviewed.

TCU coach Nichole Ocanna was told by several inmates that security was using the shower as a torturing devise to punish mentally disabled inmates.  Coach Ocanna should be interviewed.

One evening when Ofc.T was working overtime and he was in Wing J3 talking to the affiant, Sgt. Clark had an inmate in the shower he was punishing.  When Ofc.T asked affiant why the inmate was yelling about how hot the shower was and how he wanted out of the shower, affiant told Ofc.T that staff on that shift (4:00pm till 12:00am shift) used that shower to punish inmates that didn’t comply with their orders.

Inmates placed in the shower for punishment could avoid placing their body under the hot water.  The extreme heat and steam caused by the hot water is what made the shower punishment.  The extreme heat caused the body temperature of the inmate in the shower to rise, and the heat and steam together made it where it was hard for the inmate to breathe who was in the shower.

The June 24, 2012 Medical Examiner’s Report says security staff “set the temperature to the water” in the shower.  The same report shows that Rainey was compliant.  The report says Rainey allegedly requested soap to shower.  Since Rainey was compliant why wasn’t he placed in a shower in his wing (J1).  The report also mentions visible trauma throughout Raineys body, and states that the water controls to the shower were controlled by Dade C.I. staff.  Finally, the report shows that Rainey was known to be healthy by his family, and doesn’t make any reference to his FDOC medical files saying Rainey had any medical problems.

In 2013 and 2014, Ofc. Clark told the following staff he got away with Rainey’s murder because affiant kept his mouth closed:  Cpt. Green, Sgts. Johnathans, Fanfan, Seals, and Lewis; and Ofcs. Jackson, Lennedy, Jolly, Levy, Corbert, Drinkwater, McBean, and a white male officer who worked under him in 2014, in foxtrot dorm.

Affiant witnessed all 5 inmates get placed in the shower as punishment, and the Rainey murder.  Affiant also heard all the yells to be removed from the shower, and all the yells about how hot the shower was from the 5 inmates placed in the shower.

The amount of witnesses and evidence that exist proves Ofc. Clark was torturing mentally disabled inmates and that he murdered Rainey.  Affiant cannot think of any reason why an arrest and prosecution hasn’t been instituted against Ofc. Clark and etc. since June 23, 2012 with as much witnesses and evidence existing that proves Rainey’s murder.  Affiant prays that the Rainey’s murder hasn’t been receiving the treatment that it has received because Rainey was a poor, black mentally disabled, Muslim, prisoner and his life did not matter.  Affiant prays that the U.S. Department of Justice and State of Florida will not let Rainey’s killers get away with murder, and that they make a public statement that Rainey’s life and the lives of all poor people, all black people, all mentally disabled people, all Muslims, and all prisoners matter by arresting and prosecuting Raineys killers.


Under penalty of perjury, I swear that everything stated herein is true and correct.

Affiant: (Signature of Harold Hempstead appears here on original, hand-written document) 5.5.16

Harold Hempstead, D.C.# 268866, Martin Correctional Institution, 1150 Southwest Allapattah Road, Indiantown, Florida 34956

CC: FBI (Case Agent), Miami-Dade Police Department (Case Detective), Dade County Medical Examiner, ACLU of Florida (Dr. Howard Simon), Stop Prison Abuse Now (Steven Wetstein), Florida Legal Services (Peter Sleasman), Disability Rights Florida (Molly Paris), Florida Justice Institute (Randall Berg), Forgotten Majority, National Action Network (Rev. Al Sharpton), Rainbow Push Coalition (Rev. Jesse Jackson), National Domestic Workers Alliance (Alicia Garza), Black Alliance (Opal Tometi), Nation of Islam (Louis Farrakhan), Miami Herald Newspaper (Julie Brown), CBS4 Miami (Michelle Gillen), WTVT Fox 13 Tampa (Craig Patrick), New Yorker Magazine (Eyal Press), Windy Hempstead, Susan Chandler, George Mallinckrodt, Jeremy Schanche