1. The Defendant, Richard Sherman Williams #013568

Richard arrived at the state prison, as a young man, for a relatively small offense.

As you can see from below he ended up staying a lot longer than originally anticipated. He was targeted after winning the strip cell case by the guards and their inmate thugs. Conditions in the prison were exteremely violent back then and Richard testified about the violent conditions in the prison when the Ad Hoc Committe held hearings.

2. The State Attorney, Eugene Whitworth

3. Assistent State Attorney, Kenneth Hebert

4. Public Defender, William Airth

5. The presiding Judge, Theron Yawn

6. State Attorney, Tomas Elwell

7. Public Defender, Mack Futch

8. Doyle Kemp

9. 1980 case presiding Judge, Buzzy Green

10. District Eight Medical Examiner, William Hamilton

11. Current 8th Circuit State Attorney William Cervone

12. Bradford County Clerk of Court, Ray Norman

Having become a “guest of the State of Florida” after getting unfairly charged and convicted of grand theft auto and felony forgery the young Richard Williams decided to walk off the prison farm and head north to visit friends and family for a while. Upon his return to Florida he was charged with escape and moved to a more secure location — the Florida State Prison (FSP) — a maximum security prison that was home to Florida’s most violent and notorious criminals.

Conditions there were less than optimal at FSP for a young offender like Richard Williams and he eventually found himself in a strip cell on Q wing. He felt that no one should have to be subjected to such inhumane living conditions and in the spirit of improving things for the men there he filed a suit against the Florida Department of Corrections and won.

Richard S. WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. L. L. WAINWRIGHT et al., Respondents

Civ. No. 71-900

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

350 F. Supp. 33; 1972 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12176

August 28, 1972

JUDGES: [**1] Charles R. Scott, District Judge.

OPINION BY: SCOTT

OPINION

[*33] FINAL JUDGMENT

CHARLES R. SCOTT, District Judge.

The parties having stipulated and agreed with regard to the major issues herein and having agreed to entry of the following, it is

Ordered and adjudged that:

1. Respondents are permanently enjoined from the use of strip cells such as those on Q Wing of the East Unit, Florida State Prison, Starke, Florida, for punitive detention.

2. Prisoners exhibiting violent and ungovernable tendencies reasonably thought by respondents or their agents to be caused by psychiatric disturbance may be temporarily detained in strip cells while psychiatric advice and assistance is obtained and arrangements are made for transfer of such prisoners to reasonable and suitable medical facilities or alter-nate detention facilities. Such detention may be for no more than ten hours except with approval of a qualified psychia-trist made in writing and placed in the prisoner’s permanent medical record.

3. Non-psychiatric prisoners conducting themselves in violent and ungovernable fashion and reasonably thought by respondents and their agents to be intent on willful destruction of prison property [**2] may be confined in strip cells while other sufficiently secure facilities are made available. No such confinement shall be for more than ten hours unless alternative facilities are unavailable. If any such prisoner is detained in a strip cell for more than ten hours, a writ-ten report shall be placed in his permanent file, giving the dates and duration of his confinement and an explanation therefor.

4. Under emergency conditions caused by such occurrences as riots or rebellion by prisoner groups, strip cells may be used without regard to this order if all other alternative high security cells are in use and cannot reasonably be made available. Such use of strip cells under emergency conditions shall continue only so long as the emergency conditions exist. Respondents are required to use all reasonable effort even under emergency conditions to avoid and limit the use of strip cells. When any prisoner is confined in a strip cell because of emergency conditions, a written report stating the dates, duration and reasons for his confinement shall be placed in his permanent record.

[*34] STIPULATION

The parties through the undersigned attorneys do agree and stipulate as follows:

[**3] 1. There are certain cells located on Q Wing of the East Unit at the Florida State Prison, Raiford, Florida, which are called “strip cells”. These are tiled cells equipped only with a flushable drain. There are twelve such cells on Q Wing.

2. The strip cells have in the past been used as deemed necessary by prison officers for detention of violent, uncon-trollable prisoners considered likely either to harm themselves or to destroy fixtures and equipment in other cells. Pris-oners for whom the strip cells have been used have been either persons subject to irrational conduct because of psychiat-ric problems or prisoners deemed incorrigible and/or deemed intent on wilful destruction of prison property.

3. Respondents agree that use of such cells for prolonged punitive confinement is not necessary to either prison administration or the maintenance of prison discipline. It is the position of respondents that prisoners who become vio-lent and uncontrollable because of psychiatric difficulties should be handled under psychiatric supervision in appropri-ate medical facilities. Non-psychiatric prisoners conducting themselves in violent and ungovernable fashion can be ade-quately handled in specially [**4] equipped cells secured against harm by destructive prisoners but which at the same time provide such basic living facilities as a toilet, wash basin with running water, and a mattress.

4. From time to time in the future respondents may need to utilize strip cells as temporary holding facilities for vio-lent, destructive prisoners, whether psychiatric or non-psychiatric, until psychiatric consultation can be obtained or other facilities more consonant with modern penal standards made available. Such detention should ordinarily not exceed ten hours, except under emergency conditions resulting from such problems as riots or group rebellion by prisoners during which all other maximum cells may be in use.

5. Respondents are willing voluntarily to discontinue the use of strip cells, except to the limited extent specified above, and will give notice to their officers and agents that use of strip cells for punitive detention is contrary to the official policy of the Division of Corrections. Respondents intend, as funds permit, to replace the strip cells in Q Wing of the East Unit of the Florida State Prison with more modern maximum security cells.

Richard Williams has been targeted by the Florida DOC and the good ole boy’s circle of corruption ever since. It wasn’t even a year before the powers that be at FSP had Richard targeted and attacked. And in a effort to perserve his own life he ended up killing one of their “hitman” inmates and found himself indicted on a capital offense.

This is the fraudulent testimony given by Doyle Kemp at Richard Williams’ 1980 trial. The prosecutor Tom Elwell knew this was fraudulent testimony because his office had the case file containing the body diagram of the 1973 case victim showing that there were not 16 stabs in the back.

The autopsy report done in 1973 confirms this. Yet the state suborned fraud and perjury in the Kemp testimony and the states own files prove this.

Doyle Kemps Fraudulent Testimony

Please click the above link and take the time to read the testimony.

It has been said by numerous individual having had experience with State Attorney Tom Elwell that in the 80’s he was prosecuting his way to the bench and would seek to win convictions at any cost.

This is the body diagram from the official autopsy of the victim in the 1973 case. Notice that there are NOT 16 stab wounds to the back like stated in the PSI or by Doyle Kemp under oath in the 1980 captial case.

A picture is worth 1000 words!!!

The full offical autopsy report can be found here…

It might be of some note that this autopsy report and body diagram do not match the one found in the prosecutors files and used at trial. In fact the prosecutors file of the 1973 case itself proves that not only was the condemning testimony by Doyle Kemp fraudulent but the state attorney knew it was fraudulent and that Kemp was lying and they did nothing about it.

This is the letter from the 8th Judicial Circuit of Florida State Attorney stating that he looked into the matter of the lost, sealed, and non-produced records in the Williams’ Cases, Notice he stated that they were never sealed and then take a good look at the letter from the Clerk of the Bradford County Court dated in the year 2000 where Ray Norman’s office says the 1973 file is sealed.

Obviously, they are lying. When this lie was recently pointed out to State Attorney Cervone by both Richard Williams and Mr. Hickey, Cervone refuses to respond or comment.

This is the letter from Ray Norman’s Office telling Richard Williams that they cannot provide him with the information requested because the 1973 is sealled and the 1980 case is on microfilm.

Letter from Ray Norman’s Office

Now, the Clerk’s office is stating that the 1973 records are lost and it a recent trip to the Bradford County’s clerk of the court office tto view the microfilms of the 1980 case revealled that two of the four microfilms are sealled. Of course this must the part containing the erroneous PSI and anything to do with the perjured testimony of Doyle Kemp.

The Clerk of Court is now tryng to say their are no sealled files in the 1980 case either. So, what is on the two microfiles designated SD then that show on the computer under Richard Williams 1980 case number?

summary here