Saturday, August 17, 2013

TDCJ chief, family had 24-7 security detail, says The Backgate

Earlier this year Grits broke the story that the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement Standards and Education (an agency whose name was since changed to the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement)  created a protection detail for the executive director and board members during public appearances. Now it turns out the Texas Department of Criminal Justice did the same thing for at least three months this spring, reported The Back Gate website:
Armed body guards, state of the art surveillance equipment and alarms? A hit Hollywood movie maybe? Not exactly. The Backgate has learned from a reliable whistle blowing agency insider that it's not a cool new action movie plot, it's reality. The insider told the Backgate that after the March 2013 murder of Colorado prison chief Tom Clements that someone implemented a secret service style personal protective unit for TDCJ Executive Director Brad Livingston. TDCJ pulled as many as 5-7 armed OIG (Office of Inspector General ) officers to act as his personal protective unit 24 hours a day, 7 days per week on and off of the job. The source also stated that the protection did not end with Livingston, it also included his wife and child.

OIG officers were assigned to each separately as the child participated in sports practices, and his wife browsed the shelves at the local grocery store. All on the dime of Texas taxpayers. Although there was in fact one reported threat to Livingston's safety by a women identified as " an older female who was obviously mentally ill,"  that threat was quickly downplayed and resolved by investigators. For 90 days, the protection continued with officers staking out Livingston's personal home in an affluent Huntsville subdivision. But it doesn't stop there, Livingston reportedly had thousands of dollars in surveillance and alarm system equipment installed in his private home also at taxpayer expense. When questioned as to who may have approved such a large expenditure at taxpayer expense, the insider confirmed that Texas Board of Criminal Justice chairman Oliver Bell approved the measures.
The 24-7 protection detail has apparently ended but the taxpayer funded surveillance equipment at Livingston's home appears to remain there. The Back Gate quoted an unnamed CO making the obvious comparison to line officers: "When myself or any other Correctional Officer is threatened, which is everyday, TDCJ doesn't supply a body guard for me or my family or any other families, what makes him better then us?" That's a good point, particularly when the protection was based on an incident in another state, not a specific threat to Livingston here in Texas.

Livingston's security detail sounds much more extensive than TCLE executive director Kim Vickers, who told Grits they only use them at public events where he and the agency's board fear confrontations with armed police officers losing their licenses. Grits has always thought the Governor's security detail was over the top and the copycatting by others like Attorney General Greg Abbott was more about vanity than real-world threats. Now, unelected state agency heads are getting into the act. I wonder how many other agency pooh-bahs have implemented similar security measures at the taxpayers' expense?

6 comments:

  1. On August 9, 2013, the American Correctional Association held a Standards Committee meeting in Prince George’s County Maryland. While browsing the ACA website I discovered a curious fact: Brad Livingston, Executive Director of the TDCJ, which currently has numerous lawsuits pending against it, is the Chairman of Standards Committee.

    One might think that creates a conflict of interest-- to allow prison officials to chair the ACA Standards Committee. The ACA creates “standards” that the prisons they accredit must be in compliance with. Texas taxpayers have shelled out hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars to have TDCJ prison units accredited by the ACA. Accreditation is supposed to ensure that prison facilities are in step with the U.S. Constitution and current case law, but how can we trust the ACA to meet that obligation when it allows prison officials to dictate which standards they have to meet?

    The following was taken from the ACA website:

    ACA Executive Director James A. Gondles welcomed the members of the Committee. Mr.
    Gondles also thanked the departing members for their dedication to the Committee. Mr. Gondles
    introduced Commissioner Epps as the incoming President of ACA and Texas Department of
    Criminal Justice Executive Director Brad Livingston as the new Chair of the Standards
    Committee.

    Most people think of the ACA as a sort of “watchdog” over prisons, but in fact they’re a pack of foxes watching the henhouse.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Standards Committee has many members who do not rubber stamp. I have observed many of these meetings where opposing opinions were stated very clearly and publically. The ACA does stand for promulgating national standards and is involved with helping to improving international standards as well. You need to visit more facilities and to observe the many positive changes the Standards Committee implements.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Standards Committee has many members who do not rubber stamp. I have observed many of these meetings where opposing opinions were stated very clearly and publically. The ACA does stand for promulgating national standards and is involved with helping to improving international standards as well. You need to visit more facilities and to observe the many positive changes the Standards Committee implements.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The Standards Committee has many members who do not rubber stamp. I have observed many of these meetings where opposing opinions were stated very clearly and publically. The ACA does stand for promulgating national standards and is involved with helping to improving international standards as well. You need to visit more facilities and to observe the many positive changes the Standards Committee implements.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This should not surprise anyone. This is an agency that the chairman broke the law by trying to get his sister-in-law a job on the board and she falsified official documents without any repercussions at all. Now he authorizes a private home security system to be placed in a home the state does not own at tax payers cost. When the home is sold who keeps the profits from the sale? Tax payers? I thought this would be consider fraud or thief of government funds. There are plenty of people in TDCJ's prisons for this same behavior. The ACA is as corrupted as they come. Useless! Another waste of tax payers dollars It is long over due to fire both these people!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Does my browser have an echo, or does this person just like to drive his message home???

    ReplyDelete