Questions Legality

Minister Attacks Pen Censorship

By JOHN BEABER

Staff Writer

COLUMBUS Censorship of mail and restrictions on an inmate's mailing list at Ohio Penitentiary raise legal questions dealing with guaranteed freedoms, some Ohio religious and educational leaders believe.

The Rev. Thomas E. Sagen-{

dorf of Powhatan Point, who communicate with the inwas a religious intern in a mates is a denial of the freeclinical pastoral program at dom of speech guaranteed by the penitentiary last summer, the 1st Amendment.

sought legal advice after he “WITHOUT LOOKING into was barred from visiting or the question further, I would communicating with inmates. not predict the success of AS DETAILED in Sunday's such a contention.

Plain Dealer, the Rev. Mr. "It is possible some relief Sagendorf insists he was might be obtained through barred after he suggested the courts."

making Playboy magazine The Rev. Mr. Sagendorf available to inmates to relieve and others seeking the liftthe homosexual atmosphere in ing of rigid restrictions at the the prison by use of pinup penitentiary believe present photographs. Yesterday's arti-restrictions on inmate mail cle also reported his suggesare unreasonable. He is writtion for allowing conjugaling a report for the Methodist visits in the prison. Prison auChurch in Ohio on "dehumanthorities say this is not likely. izing" of convicts.

Regarding return of firstAt present, an inmate is class mail the minister had permitted to write one letter a week, unless authorized to sent prisoners, Gerald A. Messerman, director of the col-write a special letter in an lege of law at Ohio State Uni-emergency. versity, told him in a letter:

i

REGULAR LETTERS can "I think an argument could be written only to those on be made that the refusal of his approved list, generally the warden to permit you to relatives and one friend. In-

mates with no relatives on the approved list may write to three friends.

Incoming and outgoing mail, may be returned, or an inmate may be punished by the prison's summary court for violating regulations governing what may be written in his letters.

One of the 15 infractions listed in the inmate's manual) for which he may be cited to the court is that of "writing criticism against the institution or officials."

INCOMING MAIL may be returned to the sender for 12 reasons listed in the manual. These include improper address, writing a letter longer than four pages on one side, containing references to other inmates or communications from other persons not approved, or containing criticism, material of a disturbing nature, vulgar or indecent language, or lewd suggestions.

Warden Ernest L. Maxwell said many restrictions are necessary to prevent inmates from writing letters asking private citizens for money or help, or operating confidence games that prey on the unsuspecting.

"A prison at Jackson, Mich., lifted censorship one time and it created such a mess it had to be restored," Maxwell said.

"WHAT WE ARE dealing with here is not the best element of society. We run into difficulties over matters civilians do not understand," he said.

The Rev. Mr. Sagendorf said present censorship methods should be abolished and inmates should be permitted} to write as often as they want. "While at the prison, I learned of instances in which letters to lawyers of inmates or relatives were rejected and neither the person or the inmate ever learned that the letter had been rejected," he said.

1)

"This relaxation of censorship should be done not only to ease the worry of the prisoner, but also his family.' THE MINISTER said prisoners are told to maintain their contacts with the outside world, yet restrictions on visits and mail prevent this by the only avenue open to them.

NEXT Rehabilitation, not just confinement, criminologist urges.