Law

Statement From Barrett Brown on Getting Re-Arrested

We're doing our best to get him out.

Last week, Barrett Brown was locked up again for a pretty flimsy reason. Yesterday, via his mother, he had the following to say:

Federal Correctional Institution
Seagoville, Texas
April 30, 2017

Last week I was re-arrested by the U.S. Marshals Service on the orders of the Bureau of Prisons, which still technically holds sway over my life until May 25th when my sentence officially ends. Contrary to BOP policy, and indeed federal law, I was not provided a written infraction report, much less given the disciplinary hearing that normally precedes punishment. When one is taken back to prison or put in the hole, the institution has 24 hours to give you the infraction sheet detailing your offense. After 72 hours, I have still received nothing.

Luckily, in the days leading up to my arrest, I managed to make audio recordings of BOP regional chieftain Luz Lujan and two halfway house staffers threatening me with a “refusal” or “refusing an order” charge if I did any further media interviews without seeking Lujan’s prior approval; Lujan also demanded that outlets seeking interviews first fill out and submit to her a form which is in fact only required for news representatives seeking to actually enter a federal prison. As I explained to Lujan and the halfway house staffers in those recordings, there is nothing in the BOP media program statements that requires even actual inmates to seek permission to communicate with press, much less those like myself, who have already been released to home confinement; as the policy is publicly available, anyone may verify this for themselves.

Anywho, D Magazine Publisher Wick Allison has been kind enough to enlist the services of David Siegal of the Haynes and Boone law firm for my defense; my attorneys Jay Leiderman and Marlo Cadeddu are also involved. In the meantime, I have agreed to briefly revive the Barrett Brown Review of Arts and Letters and Jail for D Magazine, and as The Intercept editor Roger Hodge has noted, I will have a column in to them presently, as well, IF ONLY I CAN THINK OF SOMETHING TO WRITE ABOUT.

Newsletter

Get a weekly recap in your inbox every Sunday of our best stories from the week plus a primer for the days ahead.

Find It

Search our directories for...

Dining

Dining

Bars

Bars

Events

Events

Attractions

Attractions

View All

View All

Comments

  • Jim Schermbeck

    Thanks to Wick and Tim for helping out, and they should probably drive the speed limit for awhile.

  • Arlie Tater

    How is this possible? Seriously. How?
    Without needing to decide whether this guy was wrongly targeted/treated unfairly/etc., he shouldn’t be treated like this just because he’s a pain in the ass.
    What’s next? Randle Patrick McMurphy?

  • JamieT

    “IF ONLY I CAN THINK OF SOMETHING TO WRITE ABOUT.”

    Barrett, write about the Kurt Eichenwald – John Rivello affair and its implications from your unique perspective.

  • RAB

    Not to be nitpicky, but it should read: “anyone may verify this for himself.”

    I blame the crappy editor in charge of his blog.

    • Jason Kennedy

      Wrong

  • tbond

    This is abhorrent and unjust, or course. Thank you for the statement and May 25 can’t come soon enough.