COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON LAW AND GOVERNMENT - - - Tuesday, 6/11/02 10:45 a.m. Room 696, City Hall Philadelphia, PA - - - RESOLUTION NO. 020171 - Authorizing the City Council Committee on Law and Government to conduct a full and comprehensive investigation of allegations that biological and chemical research was forced upon people incarcerated in the Philadelphia prisons during the years 1949 to 1974. PRESENT: COUNCILMAN DAVID COHEN, Chairman COUNCILMAN ANGEL L. ORTIZ, Vice Chairman COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE L. BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN MICHAEL A. NUTTER COUNCILMAN FRANK RIZZO Tim Kearney, Committee Clerk Stan Shapiro, Counsel to Committee - - - VINCENT VARALLO ASSOCIATES, INC. Registered Professional Reporters Eleven Penn Center, Suite 600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 561-2220 WITNESS Angus Love, Executive Director................ Pennsylvania Institutional Law Project Lynn Weed, Human Rights Advocate.............. 7 Dorothy Alston, Experimentation Survivor...... 21 Former House of Corrections Inmate 8 Wesley Wilson Bey, Chairman................... 33 9 Men United Against Violence Network 10 Russell Green, Experimentation Survivor....... 36 Former Holmesburg Prison Inmate 11 William Harper, Lab Worker Inmate............. 45 Holmesburg Prison James Duckworth, Esquire...................... 59 Assistant Philadelphia City Solicitor Leon King, Esquire, General Counsel........... 60 Philadelphia Prison system Elise Bruhl, Esquire.......................... 60 Assistant Philadelphia City Solicitor Reverend Betty R. Hill........................ 132 Jack Barnett, Lab Worker Inmate............... 136 Holmesburg Prison Allen Hornblum, Author, Acres of Skin......... 143 Leodus Jones................................. 153 Community Assistance for Prisoners * * * 3 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
Good morning. Good morning, please. If I could have your attention, please, for a minute. This morning, at 10:30, is scheduled a hearing to investigate experiments that were done on prisoners that were done in four Philadelphia city prisons. That hearing will be delayed for a short period of time because there is also another prison-related hearing that was scheduled for 10 o'clock, which will start a little bit late as the committee is getting a quorum together. So if you are here for the 10:30 committee hearing of the City Council Committee on hearing on Law and Government, it will be delayed because the City Council Public Safety Committee and Health and Human Services Committee is first going to have a hearing on a report on prison health care currently. So I beg your patience. For all of those of you in the room who are here for the Law and Government Committee hearing, it will be delayed because there's a hearing that's going to go before us. So please be patient. If you want to take a break or use the 4 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 bathrooms, please do so. Thank you. - - - (Hearings of Committee on Public Safety and Health & Human Services take place, then committee is recessed.) - - -
Now we will go into the committee of Law and Government. Good morning, please. We have just finished with the Committee on Public Safety; now this is a hearing of the Committee on Law and Government. Councilman David Cohen is the Chair of this committee, I'm the Vice Chair of this committee. Councilman Cohen is -- has been indisposed for a few hours; he might make it to this meeting, but if not, we will proceed without him. We are not needing a quorum because we are not into a meeting, and the committee will not take action. I will ask first Tim Kearney, the clerk of the committee, and then Stan Shapiro to explain 5 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 some of the procedures that will be taking place. Tim? Read the resolution, please.
Good morning. Resolution 5 020171, authorizing the City Council Committee on Law and Government to conduct a full and comprehensive investigation of allegations that biological and chemical research was forced upon people incarcerated in the Philadelphia prisons during the years 1949 to 1974.
Thank you, Tim. The Chair recognizes Stan Shapiro, counsel for the committee.
A number of letters sent out after the last committee hearing to people and entities who, it came to the attention of the committee. Were involved in the experimentation that this committee is investigating. I'm going to read some of them into the record at this time. On May 29, 2002, a letter was sent to Albert M. Kligman at the University of Pennsylvania, and the letter said: "Dear Dr. , in Room 696, City Hall, the City Council Committee on Law and 6 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 Government, which I chair" -- this was signed by Councilman Cohen -- "will hold a hearing on the circumstances surrounding the experiments performed on inmates of Holmesburg Prison, the Philadelphia House of Correction, and the Detention Center from 1948 until 1974. As you know, these experiments were carried out at the request of various pharmaceutical, food and cosmetic companies for the purpose of developing products for them to market. Some were done at the behest of the Defense Department and the CIA. You were the leading participant in this process. Accordingly, we are asking that you testify at the hearing with respect to your exact role. "We also ask that you bring with you copies of all documents, including, but not limited to, letters, journals, research reports, memoranda, newspaper articles or advertisements, financial statements and forms, reports to government agencies, or electronic media of any kind which document the nature of the experiments, their results, the names of any products that were developed and/or produced as a result of the experiments, the profits that have been made as a 7 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 result of such production, the compensation you received from any of the producers of such products, and/or the names of inmates used for experimentation and the effects of such experimentation on such individuals or groups of individuals. "Please let me know by June 5, 2002 whether you will comply with the above requests for you to appear and bring relevant documents. " A letter basically saying the same thing addressed to the leadership of the University of Pennsylvania was also sent on the same date and, on June 10th -- no, excuse me. On June 5th, a letter was returned from the University of Pennsylvania from its counsel saying that they respectfully decline to appear pursuant to that letter request. On June 7th, a subpoena was issued both to the University and to Lawrence Kligman. The one to Dr. Kligman said, "You are ordered by the Council of the City of Philadelphia to come to Room 8 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. m. to testify before the Committee on Law and Government in connection with experiments and testing on inmates of Holmesburg Prison, the Philadelphia House of Correction, and the Detention Center in Philadelphia and to remain until excused, and to bring with you the following: "Copies of, and not limited to, documents, letters, journals, research reports, memoranda, newspaper articles, advertisements, financial statements, forms, reports generated in-house or to governmental agencies, and electronic media which document the nature of experiments names of products developed and/or produced as a result of experiments, and the amount of money paid to the City of Philadelphia and to any and all City commissions, agencies, boards, including the prison correctional system for the access and use of inmates, and the income or profits generated, and the compensation received as a result of the products. "Furthermore, provide the names of all inmates participating in the experimentation with 9 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. " The subpoena was signed by Robert Jaffe, who is counsel, co-counsel, to the committee, and was issued on June 7th. On June 10, 2002, a similar subpoena was also issued on June 7th by the University of Pennsylvania. On June 10th, counsel to the University wrote to Councilman Cohen, stating that -- this was signed by Wendy S.
White, Vice President and General Counsel, saying that, "Under these circumstances, on behalf of the University of Pennsylvania and Dr. " The letter acknowledged receipt of the subpoenas. In the first paragraph, it said, "I am in receipt of the subpoenas that you issued as chair of the Philadelphia City Council Committee on 10 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. D. " Let me just say that similar letters, followed by subpoenas, were issued to Johnson & Johnson Company and to Dow Chemical Company. Those subpoenas were acknowledged, and Johnson & Johnson replied that they would not be present. And we've gotten no response from Dow Chemical Company.
I'd like to acknowledge the presence of Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell and Councilman Wilson Goode, who was just here, and Councilman Frank Rizzo. Are any individuals representing the University of Pennsylvania here? (No response.)
That being the case, I would call, before we hear from the City Solicitor, attorney Angus Love. 11 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 (Witness comes forward.)
My name is Angus Love. I'm the Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Institutional Law Project. Good morning, Councilman Ortiz, fellow Councilmembers. Thank you for the opportunity to testify this morning. The Pennsylvania Institutional Law Project provides free legal assistance to 75,000 institutionalized people in Pennsylvania. The goal of our project is that all individuals, regardless of race, gender, wealth, or station in life, have access to our legal system so that they may receive just compensation for injuries that they have suffered. As was mentioned, between 1949 and 1974, the City of Philadelphia, the University of Pennsylvania, and several major corporations acted in concert to utilize human subjects incarcerated in our city jails for experimentation of various products that the corporations sought to market. Hundreds of inmates were used in the experiments for such projects as Retin A, dioxin toothpaste, 12 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 perfume, detergents, mind-altering drugs, radioactive isotopes, chemical-warfare agents, and anti-rash treatments. Experiments resulted in temporary and permanent injury to many of these subjects. I assisted the various folks who have rallied behind this cause and who suffered mightily over the years in an effort to bring about a legal solution to this problem. Unfortunately, those efforts to date have not been successful. While there may not be a legal solution currently possible, there is clearly a moral obligation that we all must come to terms with. Millions of dollars have been made, and continue to be made, over the marketing and distribution of these products overseen by Dr. Albert Kligman, Professor of Dermatology, at the University of Pennsylvania. Also involved were several major corporations, such as Johnson & Johnson, Dupont, and Dow Chemical. Essentially what happened was, the City let it be known to the University of Pennsylvania that there were folks available for human experimentation. The University then let the 13 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 corporate community know that they were reading, willing, and able to provide human experiments for the testing of various products, and the corporations took them up on this offer, and for some years, ran experiments in our city jails. 7 The moral obligation that we have is 8 bolstered by the Nuremberg Principles and by the 9 Hippocratic Oath. The Nuremberg Principles were 10 signed on by the United States after the atrocities 11 of World War II; the Hippocratic Oath goes back to 12 ancient days and is an oath that all doctors have 13 an obligation to respect. 14 Reparations are in order for those who 15 were used in these experiments. Fortunately, the 16 laws were changed in the 1970s to prevent future 17 abuse of this nature, as now human beings can no 18 longer be subject to experimentation. Now is the 19 time to settle with those who assisted in these 20 experiments but got no compensation. 21 The government has a high moral 22 obligation to its citizens and its taxpayers to 23 correct these abuses. The City can begin by 24 turning over all of the records of these 25 experiments, including the names of the 14 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 corporations, the types of products that were involved, and the individuals who were used as human guinea pigs. Our moral obligation demands nothing less. I urge the Council to support the resolution and to issue bench warrants for Dr. Kligman and President Judith Rodin to appear, just as anyone else who disregards a subpoena would have likewise done. Thank you.
Mr. Love, the City has consistently refused to provide these documentations?
That's correct. We met with various officials in our legal effort, and no one has responded in a positive manner.
And has the City ever offered any apology for their role in the -- and participation in these experiments?
No administration since the time that this -- that these acts were done has ever acknowledged our role within the 15 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 experiments that have been done?
That's correct. My direct knowledge involves the Rendell Administration and the Street Administration, and neither administration, to my knowledge, has acknowledged or offered any sort of compensation or cooperation in this regard.
Thank you. I just want to make a notation for the record that all of those individuals that were written to, subpoenaed, and contacted have not appeared and are not presently in the Council chambers today. Is Lynn Weed here? (Witness comes forward.)
My name is Lynn Weed I represent (inaudible), a nonprofit organization. We are a --
I represent the (indiscernible) nonprofit corporation. We are a 16 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 nonprofit --
We still cannot hear you. You got to get closer to the microphone, like this (indicating).
Okay. We represent -- basically, the purpose of our nonprofit is to deal with unauthorized human subject testing. I would just like to say a few words on the subject of unauthorized human subject testing. The declaration of Geneva, stated in 1949 by the World Medical Association, after the Nazi Holocaust, was a restatement of the Hippocratic Oath. It states: I will not permit considerations of religion, nationality, race, party or social standing to intervene between my duty and my patient. The second part was: I will maintain the utmost respect for human life from the time of conception. Even under threat, I will not use my medical knowledge, contrary to the laws of humanity. This declaration was a condemnation of the Nazi medical experiments. Physicians were urged to act with the utmost respect for human life 17 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 and to never use their medical knowledge contrary to the laws of humanity. In 1949, as Nazis were found guilty of intentional negligence by the Nuremberg court, the Nuremberg Code established. The outcome of these trials showed the world our capability to do justice in the face of enormously inhumane acts. During the trial, Nuremberg camp inmate after camp inmate gave testimony concerning the medical testing they endured at the hands of the Nazis. Healthy inmates remained sick in the name science. These tests were done in accordance with the Nazi principle that some people had a life not worthy to be lived and were a burden to society and the state. The determination made by the judges at Nuremberg was that these doctors were guilty of intentional negligence and harmful medical practices. They Went to jail for these practices. S. cast their votes at these trials, these men paid for their practices, and that their practices were criminal. S. citizens were aghast at pictures of victims who had been medical-test subjects without their agreement and, often, their knowledge. 18 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 These jurists at Nuremberg then constructed the Nuremberg Code in 1949. The first tenet of the code is the voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. 116: "No investigator may involve a human being as a subject unless the investigator has obtained the legally effective, informed consent of the subject. " This rule is passed to ensure that laws for humanity's sustenance in the face of these potentials for inhumanity would be checked and would never be allowed to develop into the complete disregard for human welfare, as occurred during the Nazi regime. We, the United States, and the world saw this potential and believed that our dramatic precepts and law were capable enough to check this potential for inherent evil and to deal with it. 19 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 45 CFR 45 is a federal rule. It clearly states that human subject testing, without signed informed consent, is illegal. It is the American version of this very necessary law that was legislated at Nuremberg. It is one of mankind's best defenses against his own inhumane urges. The year after World War II was a time of unparalleled growth and economic stimulus given to the scientific and technical communities. After the horrors of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, this affluent research community began testing plutonium and radiation absorption effects on unwitting American subjects. This was clearly in violation of 45 CFR 46. These men and women, with all of these research dollars available to them, felt that the law was for other Americans, not the esteemed researchers. Human subjects became very ill from these tests. Some test subjects died, and their families did not know why. It wasn't until 1995, when Hazel O'Leary exposed these unauthorized radiation experiments, that America became aware of decades 20 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 of secret radiation testing.
Victims who realized that they had been unauthorizedly tested were compensated, and President Clinton offered them a long overdue apology. Another test which shocked the sensibilities of Americans was running secretly concurrently with the unauthorized radiation tests. The Tuskegee syphilis experiments were being performed on poor black sharecroppers in the South. These men were only told that this testing was for their medical health. This unauthorized, illegal medical testing continued for years. When penicillin became available as a cure for syphilis, these men were denied treatment because it would taint the test. The medical researchers determined the tests were more important than these men's health. The revelation of this kind of medical abuse shocked Americans. Victims of the unauthorized Tuskegee syphilis experiments were once again compensated because this unauthorized human subject testing is a violation of American law. We have a chance here to once again 21 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 give proper American justice to human subjects tested without their informed consent. Just as in the Tuskegee testing, if these people were not fully informed what these materials were and the possibility of pathogenic and genetic effects, 45 CFR 46 was violated, their human rights were violated. I ask that you pass the resolution 10 before you. These human test subjects deserve their day in court, and they deserve justice.
Good morning, everybody. My name is Dorothy Alston, and I used to live at 6224 Haverford Avenue, 62 years old. I was in the House of Correction in 1962 for approximately three months, and in 1963, for approximately four months. 22 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 During my stay in the House of Correction, I participated in two studies: A tampon study in 1962 and a biopsy study in 1963. I heard of these studies by word mouth and also through an inmate that worked in the nurse's office. The University of Pennsylvania never solicited for test subjects; they had others such as this inmate do that. At the time I decided to participate at the University of Pennsylvania experimental largely because I needed the money. I occasionally got money from my family or through writing letters for other inmates, but other than that, I had no other source of income. I was trying to save up some money for when I got out in addition to buying commissary items such as cigarettes, soap, writing materials, and cosmetics. The experiments seemed like the only way I could get some money. There were only about 35 or 40 jobs paying cents a day in the House of 22 Correction, and there were over a hundred women 23 staying there. There were no openings during the 24 time I was in the House of Correction. 25 The first study I participated in was 23 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 the tampon test in 1962, even though I wasn't normally a tampon user at the time I was pretrial detainee without the resources of the pay bail. I had seen -- I had been arrested for shoplifting two steaks. The University of Pennsylvania gave us a survey. On the survey were questions such as what kind of flow you have, how many tampons you use per day, what our brand preference was. If I had been asked to sign a consent form, I wasn't aware of it. I had to put our institution number on the survey as well so that they could keep track of the results. They gave us tampons according to our menstrual flow -- heavy, medium, or light. We were given clean plastic bags to put the tampons in after we had used them. I used one tampon; when I pulled it out, I noticed that the head was loose cotton. I only used one more until I gave the rest of the tampons to another woman who completed the study in my place. After my period ended that month, I had a bad pain in the bottom of my stomach. I had the nurse examine me, and she said that maybe I should 24 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 go to the Philadelphia General Hospital to have the cotton removed. I went there had it removed because it had not come out before. I received approximately $15 for participating in this study. After I had participated in the tampon test, a female inmate named Roberta Barnes told me about another study, a biopsy study. At that time, my understanding of the study was they would pull out flesh once. I agreed to do the study by telling Roberta Barnes, who told the nurse, and then the University of Pennsylvania people came over to me. This was in 1963. There were no paperwork that I had to fill out before I participated in the biopsy study. As I waited for the biopsy study, I stood in a line with the other women. The people conducting the study didn't let us talk to one another. A person with a white jacket that had a big "U of P" on it came out and asked each of us our names. Only nine women were allowed to participate in the experiment. We lined up in the order that the person told us, and we entered the room one by one. After the biopsy was performed, they made us go out 25 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 through another door that was a way down from the first door so that we wouldn't talk to the other women still in line. I was the third person in line, so I didn't see the first woman come out of the door where Gladys Macranette (ph), an officer, stood making sure that the women went back to their cells. The woman looked hurt. When I went into the room, they put my legs up in stirrups.
They didn't use any anesthesia, they had a lot of instruments set out. They ripped flesh from my womb, and it hurt terrible. They told me that if I only came in at one time, I -- and didn't complete the study, I wouldn't get my $100. I had to come in four to six times to complete the experiment. Each time they took a biopsy, this biopsy had to be done when I wasn't menstruating so I didn't come in... (Ms. )
Thank you. So I didn't come in for a biopsy this week because I was having my menstrual cycle. At the end of the experiment, they told 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 me that I would receive my money in seven to ten days. I received $100 for participating in this study. At first I was excited to go for the biopsy study. I thought that the University of Pennsylvania people would do a pelvic exam on me first. I didn't have a pelvic exam when I arrived because I was menstruating. At the time of my arrival, they only tested my blood for syphilis. The prison was dirty, and some of the women weren't very clean, and even the nurse's office and equipment wasn't very clean, so I wanted to be examined to make sure that I was doing okay. My menstrual cycle was every month and lasted only three to five days. There's no history of menstrual or gynecology problems in my family. By the time I got money from the biopsy study a month later, I started having irregular menstrual cycles. My period began to last longer. I complained to the nurse, and she told me to see the University of Pennsylvania people. I went to the University of Pennsylvania people, and they told me that they 27 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 were at the prison for a different study, so they couldn't -- they told me that they would send somebody else. No one else came, though. I kept asking the University of Pennsylvania people I saw in the prison, but each time, they just passed it off. I finally had to put in to see a social worker to have them call my family. I was hoping that my family could do something about the problem. To see the prison doctor was a slow process. I had to put my name on the list about ten days later, the doctor would come. He had a nasty attitude and would sometimes refuse to see inmates whose name had been put on the list. He said, "I've seen too many of you today. " I put my name on the list and finally got to see the doctor about my irregular bleeding. He gave me a couple aspirins and told me to go back to my cell and elevate my feet. I don't think he knew I was participating in the study, but the nurse, Miss Wilke, I think she seen me go in for the studies. After the biopsy test, I didn't participate in any more studies. When I got out of 28 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 the jail, my medical problems related to the studies I had participated in and continued. I still had irregular bleeding, and my periods were lasting to days; the longest one of my 6 periods lasted was 22 days. Sometimes I couldn't 7 get out of bed. I had to use towels to absorb the 8 blood. 9 I was 32 when I went to PGH where a 10 doctor did a D&C. The irregular bleeding stopped 11 for four months, but then it began again, and I 12 thought it wouldn't stop. I went to Einstein 13 Northern and checked into a gynecology clinic there. The doctor gave me a shot to stop the bleeding; it slowed my menstrual down, but it started again. They gave me pills, birth control pill, I believe, and that happened a little bit. I went to the emergency room three different times for a transfusion. On the last visit to the emergency room, they put me in the hospital. The doctor had tried everything they knew how at this point. I had followed all of the instructions they had given me. They said now that the only way possible to stop problem the problem was to remove my uterus, a partial hysterectomy. 29 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 I was only 34 years old. I was devastated. At the height of my life, I felt like my life was over. I couldn't function as a female anymore. My husband and I had separated because our sexual life had been very limited during this time due to my constant bleeding and discomfort. Our dreams of having a big family had been completely stopped. I was very depressed. I thought of suicide, but I never formed a plan. I had a nervous breakdown. I don't remember three years of my life when I was institutionalized in a hospital.
First I was in the mental ward at PGH, and then they sent me to Byberry State Hospital. I experienced all of this at too young of a age. It's a hell of a mental woman not knowing how to function as a woman. I went to a psychiatrist to try to help myself. )
Just relax. Just... stop for a few minutes. (Pause in testimony.)
I guess that's why the University of Pennsylvania didn't want to be 30 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 here.
I couldn't function as a woman. I went to the psychiatrist. I felt used and deceived. I felt like the University of Pennsylvania took advantage of us because of our vulnerability position as prisoners. I think the University of Pennsylvania robbed me of my youth. I would like to see the University of Pennsylvania stop research studies like this. I want them to use better experimental methods. I want them to explain the experiments to those people who participate in them so they can make a knowledgeable decision as to whether or not to participate. I felt like the University of Pennsylvania came and asked me to participate in the biopsy study and they didn't give me enough reasoning, they didn't explain anything to me, they didn't let me know the aftermath of what I would possibly face later on in life. And not allow my mother -- not allow me to be a mother, not allow my mother to be a grandmother numerous of times. Yes, I still feel the pain after 30-some years, but then I get angry. 31 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 Thank you.
When you went in, they just said you're going to get so much money and that's it?
They had a list with the nine women's names on 'em, and we had to sign our names and our institutional number alongside it. And they also said in the beginning, If you did not complete this study, you will not get the $100. And that was my concern. And I also want to say something else.
The University of Pennsylvania had told, I guess, the City Council that if we call 1-800-879-Penn, that we could tell them what we needed, tell them that we were experimented persons. That number's a joke. If you don't have insurance, they don't want to say anything to you.
Has anybody from the City ever contacted you about what you went 32 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 through?
No one from the City has ever contacted you and said, We should not have subjected you to these things, to these experiments?
Has anybody from the University of Pennsylvania ever contacted you and asked and said, We should never have done this to you?
At least from this part of the City, I apologize for what City administrations have allowed to go on for so long, and I'm very deeply sorry that the City of Philadelphia was ever a part of any act of this sort. 33 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 So I apologize to you and your family on behalf of the City since the Administration seems to want to cover behind some of the legalities.
We've been joined by Councilman Nutter. Mr. Bey, identify yourself for the record, please.
Good morning. My name is Wesley Wilson Bey, and I'm the chairman of Men United Against Violence Network. I come here in support of the experimentation survivors. I just want to say that it's sad that we even have to come this far, to City Council. A travesty of justice has been done. Many nations have suffered they own different Holocausts. The African-American community have suffered greatly and dearly, and are still suffering. The experimentation that took place at Holmesburg, in my mind, in my view, is the same 34 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 experimentations that took place in Nazi Germany. There's no reason why those who have profited from the experimentation of those who are here today to give they testimony of the tragedies that they have gone through should not be compensated. There is no price that could be put on the mental, the psychological anguish that they are going through today. The experimentations that is taking place -- has taken place is a travesty on all of humanity. And I pray that this Council will do the utmost to see that justice is carried out in favor of the experimentation survivors.
Many friends of mine that are here today. Men United States Against Violence Network is a grassroots organization, a nonprofit 35 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 organization, that deals with ex-gang members, gangs that are now community activists. I'd like to read to you today those organizations that are a part of Men United Against Violence Network: The Richard Allen Reunion Committee, Crossroads, the Norris Unification Council of the World Incorporated, Valley Management Corporation, Uptown LT Social Organization, 21st and Norris Community Committee, the Original Tender Lines Reunion Committee, Dog Town Social Club, Community Assistance for Prisoners, (indiscernible) Five Aces Community Committee, Camac and Diamond Social Club, the Prodigal Sons, and Seventh and (indiscernible) Social Organization. These are community organizations that are under the umbrella of Men United Against Violence Network who are doing some great things in their community, and we are here in support of the experimentation survivors, to say that it is wrong and should never have been done. And we pray that this Council will give them a speedy reply.
Mr. Rodney Muhammad. AUDIENCE MEMBER: He's not here either.
Hello. My name is Russell Green, and I was at Holmesburg Prison during the days when they were doing experiments in the early '60s through the '70s. I've experienced a number of different things that they did at Holmesburg Prison that wasn't right, because Holmesburg Prison itself was set up where inmates need money to survive, and if they didn't have family or people or loved ones to send them money, 'cause everything, the better haircuts, the better clothes, the money to try to get out of Holmesburg cost money. So I feel as though University of Pennsylvania knew what they were up against at the beginning. They knew that they could flash a dollar bill in front of some starving people's face 37 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 and get them to cooperate. The tests was ungodly. When I first got at Holmesburg, they had two benches sitting in front of different blocks where they would stick your arm under a slat and hold 'em, and I'm talking about brand, brand, different things on inmates and things like that. One inmate was on D Block with me -- I remember the (indiscernible) in the middle of his forehead in the middle of the night, and he screamed and hollered. I mean, this was telling them right off the bat what you're doing is not right, but they continued, and the people allowed them to continue. Now I'm going to go on with some of the things they did to me. They branded me in the back, in my back; all over my back is branded. Had they had of told me that this would go away, I wouldn't have took it.
I'm talking about a patch study test, which to the day, which was over 40 years ago, still remains on my back. I'm talking 38 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 about tests where they did all types of ungodly things to inmates because they could get away with it, and society said nothing. Not only did they do things to people that they could get away with it; if the test was not completed and the inmate had become discharged, they would send him in the street with all kind of hangups. They had a Army study, a GI study there, where they would test guys and give 'em all kinds of drugs and stuff at this time. I have never in my life taken a drug. When I came around, I found myself in a yard surrounded by a number of inmates not knowing what had happened to me. They had the audacity to put us on a "pay-me-no-mind" list, which meant after we drove 'em crazy, pay him no mind, he's okay. I mean, these things was allowed, and they did these things to us, and it hurts me to the depths of my heart to hear Allen Hornblum's -- I mean, not Allen Hornblum, but the guy who did these studies to us say he didn't -- Kligman say he didn't do anything to us. I mean, and we sit, like you over there with humor on your face. This wasn't funny; I 39 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 witnessed these things. This wasn't funny for them to take and put patches. You could ride a street car here in Philadelphia and see a number of people, and you could distinguish that they had been on University studies. You know, it was over and over. And I've been on a number of studies, and they have hurt me through the years. At the time, I thought it was a blessing because we needed money in that prison to survive -- the better foods, the better haircuts, the better anythings cost money. I mean, it was something else. I just hope that you take it in your heart to bring this up to par and do something for those that have suffered these injustices, and we are the men and women that have suffered these injustices.
I was on quite a few experiments because I needed money; I wanted money to get out to pay my bills. I wanted --
Can you tell me which experiments you were on? 40 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
The patch study was a study when they changed over the different patches, the Band-Aid, they used to Band-Aid you. You know when they went from the hurting Band-Aid, when you used to take it off, it used to hurt you. Then they went to the not-so-hurting Band-Aid -- this is one we were under, which I was told which would come off easy. They used a scale to weigh it, to see how much stuff would come off. They put a little acid on your back and burned it, and those marks are still there until today. I mean, what they did wasn't right to us. I mean, you can look there and you can say anything. It didn't happen to you. One of the guys told me to show him. I'll show you. (Witness comes forward to show committee members scars from burns on back.)
That's up and down your spine here? 41 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
These men, if it was someone had a ailment and they cured it, that would have been beautiful, but you don't give a person an ailment and then try to cure it. I mean, they were ungodly things that they did to us because they could get away with it. I mean -- and what makes it so bad is they take the citizens of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania and they say, Well, they don't count, they was inmates anyway. Some of them was untried inmates, some of them was still babies, just finding they way around, and they did ungodly things like that.
About 18 years of age when took advantage of me and did not only that, but they took little samples of -- 42 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
And they came to you experiment and they said, We have this experiment, and you're going to get some money. And they didn't tell you what the experiment really was about or what it might do to you or it might harm you in any way?
What they did was -- it's a tricky thing what they did. Some of the inmates that we trusted, they used them to recruit. Hearing a inmate saying it was okay, a guy that we trusted, we went on, and then we saw the jackets. They knew what they was doing. 43 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 I didn't hear no one say that they had inmates as doctors did at that time, like running the studies for them, putting little things on them, you know, and then today in time, what I'm saying, it's true, you could take me to a lie detector and I'd say the same thing. If you took me to a lie detector, I'd want double the money from the University of Pennsylvania for the stress and stuff they put me through. They did wrong, we know they did wrong, you know they did wrong, but we're sitting up here arguing about what we should be compensated with. I mean, we're being put up and sit up here and being put through all kind of new things and stuff, brand-new stuff, but don't nobody say they did you wrong and then just say, Let's do right by these men. And that's what they did. In 1998, I happened to read the paper which Leodus was on it and he had started -- and thank God that there was a person like Leodus to get in there and pitch for us. I don't have to explain to you. If it happened to you, any one of ya'll, y'all would feel the same way that the inmates and the survivors of 44 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 Holmesburg Prison feel right now. That's all I have to say.
I think it's indisputable that the City and the University of Pennsylvania and the prison administration and Johnson & Johnson and all of the other companies did wrong. And we were wrong. Just that it's taken so long for this to even have a hearing for this even to come up, and the people of Philadelphia understand what it is that was done in their name all of those years back. I don't know what the rightful compensation is but, definitely, the City should be stepping up to all of the families and the individuals that are still surviving. Thank you.
My name is William Harper. I'm 66 years old and I live at 5457 Wayne Avenue, Apartment 716. 45 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 In 1964, I received two and a half years at Holmesburg Prison and I was accepted on the H-Block as a worker, starting off with $25 a month. And at that time, I had begged the social worker, Mr. Otis, to give me something where I could have some money, because I didn't have any sort of support. I started over working at H-Block with doubts of Mr. Otis, who was my social worker, because he felt like it was a cesspool. I had said to myself if I ever got any time, that I would make good use of it, that I wouldn't allow anything to happen which happened to me by working for the University of Pennsylvania. I didn't care what I did. I started off taking blood and spinning it down the serum, working the autoclave, and after six months of working there, I went outside to work in the dermatology cell where we did blisters, biopsies, we worked with radiation. I even had a person's hand that was treated with radiation to use it on the Geiger counter. I had things like (indiscernible), DMSO, LSLS, various chemicals. I even had the -- what you call "Spanish fly," which 46 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 is (indiscernible) to make blisters. I could apply a blister, and you wouldn't be able to see me in four hours. I have had a guy, after I put a blister on his scrotum, pass out, and I had to --
I put a blister on a guy's scrotum, and he came to me in less than three hours and I had to take the blister off. I put him on the table, took the blister off, and he went back to the block. We did a series of blisters, and it's guys in here that I worked on, you know? And I'm here to bring a closure to all of this 'cause I don't feel good about it, working for the University for two and a half years. I used to take books in my cell to read how to carry out the protocols that was given to me directly from Dr. Kligman. Dr. Kligman, Dr. Papa, all of those protocols I had to do, and I did suturing, stitching. I took --
Well, how I learned was from the guys that were in the cell. 47 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
But no medical -- you were assisting these doctors in doing these experiments; is that correct?
At any time, did you have a doctor or a nurse or somebody in the medical profession train you as to what it was that you were going to be doing to these prisoners?
But the only people who told you really what to do were other prisoners?
So you were doing -- and you were doing medical procedures on people in Holmesburg without any training whatsoever from medical individuals and --
And knowing what you might be doing, I mean, the effects that these 48 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 things might have on people?
I did not care at that particular time; all I thought about was doing my time, getting out, and having a few hours, you know, and also learning. I thought that maybe after this was all over, that I could get a better job, that I could do better for myself. And I did pursue it, and I wound up with a nervous breakdown, going to OIC for biochemistry. But out of all this, I have the least experience to show from the University of Pennsylvania. I had a transparent [sic] done from my lip to my arm, right here, see? (Witness shows committee members scar under upper arm.
Yes. Moving from one area 49 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 to the other.
It did not take in my lip, but it took here, as you can see (indicating). That gets chafed and I have to peel it off like, you know, your lip been would get chafed or chapped, and I would have to peel it off. And sometimes it itches. It's been there since '65. And they were supposed to take it out, do biopsies. I received about $150 for that, you know.
I'm just hoping for some closure so this whole thing could be over with because I haven't felt too good about it; I apologize about it. But unless you experience these things yourself, then you wouldn't believe that people -- if somebody came to me now and offered me something like this, I think I would get rather angry.
Did you get special treatment by the prison guards and so on because you were --
I was like a king up 50 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 there. You know, I was keys, I had a watch, I had everything that I wanted available to me but -- except for a woman, everything else.
Mr. Chairman, I don't have a question for the witness; I actually wanted to ask the Chair just a couple background 51 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 questions, and I apologize for being late. So whenever the gentleman is finished, I have a couple questions for the Chair.
Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to try to get a better understanding. I think I've been at all of the hearings, and I apologize for being late today. Is there any information in this record or the previous record with regard to from the City's perspective what was going on in Holmesburg Prison at the time? Is there any acknowledgment that testing activity was going on? There are a variety of letters and responses here that seem to indicate by different parties that there was apparently some activity in the prison, but no one seems to specifically state either, what it was the nature of it was, who was in charge of the prison during these years from 1948 to 1974, and, I guess, what was the City's knowledge or participation in any of these events. Do we have anything about that? 52 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
I don't think we have that on the record, but we have the City Solicitor here that will be answering some of those questions for us.
Okay. Is there -- I'm assuming that there are more people to testify. Is there some other moment when I might be able to ask those types of questions?
The City Solicitor will be the next witness to come up.
You're welcome. Sir, thank you very much. We'll take a five-minute recess right, now, and the City Solicitor will be next. (Break taken.) (Proceedings resume.) - - -
The five-minute recess is over. I'd like to continue the hearing, the five-minute recess is over. I'll wait until everybody comes in from the hallway. Thank you very much for being patient. 53 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 I will now turn over the chair of the meeting to the Chairman of the committee, Mr. David Cohen. David?
Thank you. I apologize to everyone for my inability to be here at the time of the inception of the hearing. We've been trying to get to the bottom of the story to find out whether it's a figment of some people's imaginations because there are aspects of this story told and of the evidence given already that make people think that it could not possibly have happened in Philadelphia; some people think it could not possibly have happened to human beings anywhere in the world, but particularly not in Philadelphia. And we felt it important to give all of the parties the opportunity to be heard. If, in fact, it did not happen or if others have a different kind of a story to tell, they ought to be given an opportunity to do it, because oftentimes, we are accused of being one-sided. So we decided this time to go out of our way to be very much all-sided to let everybody tell their story. And an amazing thing happened. 54 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 Suddenly, those who have been clamoring for the right to tell their story, saying that we had not heard their version of it, suddenly decided they didn't want to tell their story. And so, as I understand it, at the early part of the meeting, some letters were read into the record from companies that felt we had not been fair to them, that they had not been given an opportunity to be heard. We gave them the opportunity mand they declined, saying no. And we told them we wanted to do it in as friendly and a cooperative manner as possible; we're not assuming any final conclusions. So we wrote to them and invited them to come as guests, but in fairness, we had to tell them that the resolution passed by City Council had authorized the chairperson of the committee, if necessary, to issue subpoenas, because if Council is to do its legislative work properly, we've got to be able to get at facts. And usually people who don't want to talk when they have knowledge usually have a good reason not to want to talk. That is a good reason from their point of view, because if they did talk, they would show how wrong they had 55 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 been in what they had done. And so an interesting thing happened on the way to the story being told. So far, every company that we have subpoenaed and the University of Pennsylvania and Dr. Kligman have all refused the opportunity to talk, after all of them had complained that they had not been given the opportunity. So given the opportunity, they've declined it. And we moved on to the stage of subpoenaing them, and each of them, so far as I can tell, is in defiance of the law, because each of them has said they will not comply with the subpoenas. I'm not going to take your time to talk about what City Council intends to do in that case except to say that we don't intend to have the interests of justice in the City of Philadelphia thwarted by obstructive actions by people who have a responsibility to tell their side of the story when they're involved in a matter concerning a legislative inquiry. The Home Rule Charter gives us that power, and it's been put there to enable us to do our work. 56 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 With respect to the City of Philadelphia, since obviously, it is a sister part of our organization, the City government of Philadelphia, we are glad to see that the City Solicitor is here -- not as a result of a subpoena, but as a result of the original request. Because none of this is personal. You know, I don't want anybody to feel -- we have nothing personally against the University of Pennsylvania. I'm one of five people out of six in my family who have degrees from the University of Pennsylvania; in fact, I have both my degrees -- the pre-law and the law degree -- come from the University of Pennsylvania, and I was a pretty good student there since I lead the law school. So that I'm somebody that the University of Pennsylvania has recognized in the past.
I had a Gowan Fellowship from the law school that was awarded by the law school. I think the University's a great institution, but with greatness comes greater responsibility as well. And we don't think that refusing to comply with the subpoena is the right way to go. 57 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 But I would like at this point to invite those representatives from the City Solicitor's department to take the witness stand. I've told them whoever's here all ought to come up tother. And we're going to address questions. )
If any member of the committee wants to make a statement before the questioning --
No? Basically what we want to know is: Did the things that were testified to by people who had been in our prison system some years ago, did it happen? What was the City's involvement? Did the City get approval? Did the City receive any form of compensation? Has the City acknowledged its role? Has the City said that what it did thought it was right in doing; or has it said it thought it was wrong? 58 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 What has the City done to alleviate the complaints that we have heard here and that have appeared in a book and have appeared in the City's media outlets? I would like the -- it seems to me government, above all others, has the major responsibility -- since the government in this country is elected by the people, it seems to me that the responsibility of government, any government agency, is the highest responsibility there is to a council of the people or its activities. We all know government is not perfect; some people might say it's not even good by its actions. But we would like to feel that the City of Philadelphia, if this did happen, if evidence indicates it was wrong, we would hope the City would come forth and admit it. And then we would hope the City would do a second thing: Having admitted it, which would be the first important step, the City ought to find a way to take leadership in resolving the difficulties that the former prisoners have had as a result of their being subjected to human 59 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 experimentation which still today, many years after it occurred, shocks the conscience, I think, of everybody who hears about it. So I may address to the three attorneys representing the City Solicitor, if you would each be good enough to give your name and your position with the City first, and then I'll ask whoever among you wants to comment in general to the comments I have made.
Good morning, Councilman; good morning, committee. My name is James Duckworth, and I'm an attorney with the City of Philadelphia. Sitting to my left is Mr. Leon King, who's general counsel for the Philadelphia prison system and was the trial attorney that handled the litigation that was recently filed and was pending before the Third Circuit. To his left is Elise Bruhl, who is currently handling the appellate issue that is pending before the Third Circuit.
And I'll turn it over, actually, to Mr. King at this point. 60 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
Okay, would you please identify yourself for the record.
I'm Leon King, and I'm general counsel for the Philadelphia Prison system, as Mr. Duckworth said, and I --
Would you speak directly into the microphone. You know, this is our temporary meeting room, and the acoustics are pretty bad.
All right. I have been in the position of general counsel for the prison system since 1997, and I was responsible for this case before it was litigation, and I would just like to explain what the City did in response to the complaints that we heard first.
All right. You'll have an opportunity to do it after the identification of the third attorney.
Good morning. My name is Elise Bruhl, and I am an assistant City Solicitor.
Okay, I'll try. My name is Elise Bruhl. I am an assistant City Solicitor with 61 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 the Appeals Unit for the City of Philadelphia.
All right. Now, which one of you -- do you, sir, want to explain whatever it is you started to say?
Yes. I want to explain first what the City did in response to --
All right. Could you do as I'm doing -- try to get as close as possible to the microphone.
Yes, okay. As my recollection serves me, Mr. Hornblum's book came out some years ago, and there was some press about it, and when the Law Department, when we heard about that, we went out and purchased a copy of the book, and we began to do legal research on the issues that we saw. We also instigated an investigation to see if we could find out some information about what went on back at Holmesburg in the time period in question. Our research revealed then, and it hasn't changed till this point, and this is a big problem in the case, is that this stuff happened, the most recent stuff happened in 1970. So the City doesn't have records from 1970. There's no 62 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 way for to us research that issue. Most of the people that may have been running the City jails back at that time are either dead, moved away, or are retired, and we can't talk to them. There's no one in an official position in the prison now that can comment on what went on at Holmesburg Prison during the time period in question. Despite that, though, and I think the City Solicitor, if he were here, would say that, you know, the Law Department doesn't just dismiss a case based on, you know, statue of limitations or whatever; we always recognize that as representatives of the City of Philadelphia --
Yes. As representatives of the City of Philadelphia, the taxpayers, etc., there's always one thing that we take into account when we consider settling a case, is whether someone was wronged. You know. Sometimes we have settled cases in the past where there was maybe not so strong of a legal case, but we feel the person was wronged and that they should get some money. 63 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 And I think we took that approach to this case. We didn't know whether people were wronged, but from what we heard and from what we read in the book, there may have been some issue there. So what did we do. We didn't just ignore the problem; we researched it, we got as much information together as we could, and we initiated a dialogue with the attorneys who were representing the inmates at the time. They weren't the same attorneys that are representing them now; it was a female, whose name escapes me. We had two or three meetings with these attorneys, and our intention was to get some sort of a sense of how many people were out there, what the injuries were, what the stories were. And based on that, we could then make an eternal determination as to whether we should put some money out. And you have to remember that from the City Solicitor's point of view, not only are we the City's lawyers, but we also have an interest in protecting the money that -- the taxpayers' money that we, you know, settle cases with. So we can't 64 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 just settle a case because you say you were injured; we need some sort of independent documentation. So we met with the attorneys for the inmates, we discussed their legal theories. Our big legal impediment in this case was the statute of limitations. We tried to get from them some sense of what their argument was to overcome the statute of limitations. They never were forthcoming, they never said anything. We asked them on three or four occasions -- I believe both in writing and orally, and I was at these meetings -- to please provide us some documentation to show that other than what these folks say, that they were in Holmesburg Prison, that they were in the House of Correction. If you don't have that, can you provide us with at least some documentation that you've sent these people to a doctor and that the doctor has talked to them and said, This went on, that went on, and the injuries and the things that you claim are a result of this testing. Give us that, and we will then evaluate to say whether or not we can settle this case and 65 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 offer some money to these folks. They wouldn't provide it. As a matter of fact, in one of the meetings, their attorney flat-out refused to provide any documentation. So without any documentation, without any supporting evidence, we were sort of in a bind. There was no way for us to justify expending taxpayers' dollars based on just what one person said, and I don't think City Council or anybody else would want the Law Department settling cases or handing out money without documentation. So what happened was, the talks sort of stalled. The lawsuit was filed, we answered the complaint in the lawsuit. Our position was still the same: We'd be willing to consider something, but you've got to give us some documentation. We don't have any. We filed a complaint, and after the complaint was filed, from my point of view, the attorney for the inmates fell asleep. He didn't do one thing in the lawsuit after that. He filed the complaint and he did absolutely nothing. We sent him discovery requests, and we said, Please provide us with information, please 66 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 provide us with written summaries, please provide us something. Nothing was forthcoming from counsel for the plaintiffs.
I just have -- from all you said, it kind of struck me. You mean the City doesn't keep records at all?
I mean, is there not a responsibility that the City has to keep records? I mean, you just can't say the warden at that time died, the deputy warden died, the cops or prison guards retired. I mean, you just can't say that. And so we don't have any history as to what happened?
The City does have an obligation to keep records, and we do keep records so --
Does or does not? 67 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
And we do keep records, but we do not have an obligation to keep them for 30 years. And if we kept all of our records for 30 years, we'd have so many warehouses filled up around the City with City records -- we have a retention policy for each department.
Excuse me for interrupting, but when President Clinton made the apology to the people involved in the Tuskegee Institute problem, it seems to me he did not use that as an excuse. He said, It's our responsibility to find out what happened, and then he did what we're asking for, he apologized and set the stage for proper action to occur. Now, are you saying that the City has -- because it's 30 years ago, the City has no 21 responsibility to do whatever can possibly be done?
We're not here to go over a lawsuit. It is not the responsibility of private counsel for individuals to deal with and 68 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 find out the history. Since these charges exist against the City, it seems to me clearly that it's the City's responsibility to go to every possible extent to find out what happened so that it's in a position to say no, it did not happen, if that's their conclusion, and we can deal with that; or if it did happen, to say it happened, it was proper; or it happened and was all wrong, we will never do it again, we apologize, and we intend to make whole. It seems to me government has that responsibility. Government doesn't have the responsibility to act like a corporate defense firm, trying to avoid responsibility; government has the responsibility for treating its citizens fairly. And you -- and the City's been charged with a terrible series of events that occurred many years ago, and it seems to me that it's the responsibility of the City, not attorneys for the people that suffered for the victims if this incident really occurred. It seems to me it's the responsibility of the City to come forth with proof one way or the other. 69 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 Councilman Nutter, I understand that you had questions.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. King, were you trying to finish your response?
Well, I was going to say in response to Councilman Ortiz that we do have a responsibility to preserve records, but that responsibility doesn't require us to keep 'em for 30 or 40 or 60 years; there's no reason for us to do that. And as far as what Councilman Cohen said, of course, the City has the responsibility to look into this, as we did when it came up, and we made every reasonable effort to find records, to find documents, and ask other people who may have had access to information for information. And the documents just aren't there; I don't know what I can do about that.
Did these 70 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 experiments --
All I can tell you is that there has been testimony in Council, there's been evidence presented in the book that indicates that at Holmesburg Prison, most especially, experiments were conducted. The City cannot admit that for purposes of this hearing because there's pending litigation. But I can say that.
Well, you know, it seems to me that what the City is saying is that the people who testified on what occurred to them did not happen and that they're lying.
And that seems to me to be a terrible thing to be saying.
The evidence is loud and clear that human experimentation, uncivilized human experimentation, taking advantage of low-income people, of minorities, even of women as well as men, occurred. There are many witnesses. 71 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 Now, in legal cases and in investigative inquiries, it's human beings who testify. You don't wait until some record appears in a book; you either have to decide are these people telling the truth or are there engaged, in your judgment, in a massive conspiracy of some kind to lie and to create a circumstance that you say didn't occur. Didn't these companies -- weren't they involved until the experimentation --
The man that was supposed to be the man that was basically in charge of the University of Pennsylvania? Can you tell us if he says nothing like this ever occurred?
Dr. Kligman hasn't denied that nothing like this occurred. I believe his position is that there were experiments that were done and that they were fine. And that's his position. (Laughter.)
It seems to me 72 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 that -- Councilman Nutter?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. King? Mr. King, let me ask you just a couple questions, and this may be a long the lines of what Councilman Ortiz asked. I had written this down initially and then I wrote some other notes to myself. Have you been able to determine whether any experimentation at Holmesburg Prison between the years of 1948 and 1974?
I haven't been able to determine that based on any City records or any City witnesses. We only know that from the people who are complaining. That's the only basis we would have to form that opinion.
So let me make sure I understand. You have not been able to determine independently whether any experimentation occurred at Holmesburg Prison between 1948 and 1974.
Now, let me ask about your investigation. I'm reading from a 73 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 letter from Wendy White, Vice President and General Counsel from the University of Pennsylvania, dated June 5th to Councilman Cohen. This is a letter basically explaining why the University cannot testify here today. But what they say is that the medical testing at Holmesburg ceased nearly 30 years ago. Prior to and after its cessation, it was the subject of hearings in the United States Senate in March of 1973, State legislative hearings in June 1973, litigation and extensive discussions in the media. In recent years, the University and Dr. Kligman have publicly commented on this issue. And then they go on to talk about the litigation in the Third Circuit presently. Would you take from this letter and the opening sentence, the medical testing at Holmesburg ceased nearly 30 years ago, does that lead you to believe that there was medical testing 30 years ago?
If that's what -- are you saying that's what the University of Pennsylvania said?
I'm reading from a 74 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 letter on University of Pennsylvania stationary signed by Wendy White, Esquire, Vice President and Office of the General Counsel. Her letter to Councilman Cohen says, "The medical testing at Holmesburg ceased nearly 30 years ago."
That medical testing occurred at Holmesburg Prison, according to the University of Pennsylvania. I mean, I don't dispute that. I'm saying --
Right. I'm saying that the City hasn't been able to independently verify it and we have no records. I mean, that's all I'm saying.
Well, why does the University of Pennsylvania know that it occurred and the City doesn't?
It's our prison, right? 75 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
No, that's a different question. I don't know what records they have or how long they keep them. I don't know. We asked them for their records too, and they didn't turn them over.
They did not turn them over? Well, let me ask you this question: The United States Senate and the state legislative hearings from 1973, are you aware of those hearings?
Have you read any of the testimony from those hearings?
Inmates, officials, lots of people. 76 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
What officials testified at the hearing? I didn't have the opportunity to read the testimony.
Oh, I can't remember what officials, but I know inmates and other people testified at the hearings.
Did any officials from the prison testify at either of these legislative hearings?
Did any officials from the University of Pennsylvania testify at any of these hearings?
But it's been years since I read that; I haven't read it in a long time.
Well, let me make sure I'm understand this. There were complaints made by individuals about human experimentation in a City-owned facility.
You read the notes of testimony from United States Senate hearings and state legislative hearings, you believe, two years ago.
But you have no 14 recollection now, and are not aware now, of any of the official individuals who may have testified in those hearings about human experimentations alleged at a City prison?
And you have no 20 recollection of any of the parties involved?
Have you interviewed the author of the book? You indicated that you had read the book.
I didn't interview him, no. 78 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
There would be no reason for me to interview him; we have the book, we know what he said.
Can people in the audience hear the responses? AUDIENCE MEMBERS: No. 14
Because I'm having great difficulty here. I would like the witness to specifically answer about whether he read the book or not.
Okay. And you're saying in the investigatory process to try to get 79 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 answers to these questions, that you are comfortable in leaving the scope of the investigation to the reading of the book versus having a discussion with the author of the book, who is a live person that you could actually talk to.
Yeah, and I'm going to tell you what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that we read the book, we knew what was in the book. For purposes of discussing with the inmates prior to the litigation as to whether the City was willing to put money on the case, we knew what we needed to know. But as far as the lawsuit went, we probably would have deposed Mr. Hornblum, but we never got that far. I mean, I would not have left it after the lawsuit started to move forward without taking the man's deposition but, you know, we weren't at that point. I mean, we had enough information 80 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 before the lawsuit began where there was a basis for to us engage the inmates and their attorneys in a discussion about whether they could be compensated. I mean -- but it's a different situation, when, you know -- I mean, even now, if people could provide the City with some documentation and records some medical records and some expert testimony, I mean, the Law Department will look at that and consider compensating these people, but nothing's forthcoming.
Let me try to understand something. I mean, is this strictly -- I mean, is there a philosophy at work here that we've got a complaint, put aside the egregious nature, the outrageous nature, the travesty and tragedy that's happened aspects of this. We have a complaint, we'd like to get to the bottom of it; if we can settle it, we'd like to settle it and move on. Is that fundamentally what we're dealing with here?
Is there any 81 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 interest in a search for the truth? Is there any interest in trying to figure out actually what happened and who did what to whom and who should have responsibility for it? And at the end of it all -- I mean, there might be a financial settlement, but is there any interest in the search and in the pursuit of truth, which then might lead to an acknowledgment that something wrong has happened and subsequently and finally an apology? Is that a part of this? Or is it just --
-- let's figure out what the number is and have everybody go away?
Absolutely, Councilman. And that's what we were doing. When we became aware of the book, we were trying to gather information to try to determine what went on at Holmesburg Prison, who was involve and how the people were injured. That's what we were doing.
That was in '97, sir. 82 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
How long does it take you to figure out that something very bad happened at Holmesburg and that it was sanctioned by the City?
And the City refuses to acknowledge that it was sanctioned by the City, and even refuses to offer on apology. How long will it take? Will it take until they all die? And then there will be really no records.
I told you, in the process 83 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 that we were going in before the -- the City was willing before we talked to --
I understand. Let's figure about the process for a moment; that's on the legal side.
I'm talking about the pursuit of information and anybody's notion of justice and what's right and what's wrong. You don't need a process to go interview people, if that is the pursuit. So I guess that's the part I'm trying to understand.
I mean, obviously, you know, I'm at a slight disadvantage. You're attorneys, I'm not; you're in a much better position to talk about who does what to whom, who deposes whom, we've got a case, we've got a process, rules of civil procedure, rules of federal procedure. It's all very interesting. What I'm saying is, if someone is out on a mission to find out what happened, you interview anybody you want to interview about whatever you want to interview 'em about, and if 84 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 they're around and alive, you go and talk to 'em.
Well, I have two responses to that. I'm telling you that before the lawsuit was filed, we felt we had a basis to engage the inmates in discussions about settling the case. We didn't feel we needed to go and interview Dr. Kligman or anyone else. We felt we had enough information to engage them in a discussion about resolution of the case.
When the lawsuit started, certainly Dr. Kligman would have been someone else that we would have deposed, but I can guarantee you that even before the litigation, when we got letters from counsel for the inmates, that's how we knew they wanted to engage in settlement discussions. The counsel for the inmates also sent letters to Dow Chemical, Johnson & Johnson, and Penn, and sort of behind the City's back, were trying to get money from them. If I had called up Dr. Kligman and said, "I want to interview you," chances are, his attorney would have said no. So, I mean, I know that because I know what goes on, and I'm telling 85 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 you that at the time we engaged in the discussions with the inmates, we felt we had enough information to at least engage them in a discussion about it, and we had hoped that they would provide us with some information so that we could sit down and make a decision about whether we should compensate people, but we just didn't get the information.
Just so I understand, and, I mean, as you obviously know, I'm not an expert in the procedure, but now that there is a lawsuit, do you at some point in time have a conversation with Dr. Kligman or any of these other parties involved?
Well, the problem with the lawsuit was -- and, again, you're going to be annoyed with me because I'm going to talk about the process, but the process works like this: You get the lawsuit in, you send out written questions, you ask for documents. When those are done, you review those written questions, you review the documents, then you schedule the depositions to interview the people. We would have deposed everybody, all of the inmates, we'd still be involved in that. 86 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
The problem was, we never got the initial information, and after having waited and waited, the City made a decision, All right, you're not providing us with any information, we're going to file our motion and the plaintiff's attorney never responded to it, never said one thing; we just filed our motion. No 10 response, it was dismissed.
I filed a motion for summary judgment. I said the two-year statute --
Yes. I said the two-year statute has run, and no one's provided us with any information on --
Because plaintiffs lost and then appealed. 87 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
But they never filed a response to what was said; that would even have been helpful.
Do you think, sir, that the only interest of the City of Philadelphia is in this lawsuit and not in the question as to whether this human experimentation occurred?
Are you saying that the only concern the City has is to dispose of a lawsuit.
And if people who filed the lawsuit didn't give you the information you needed, then your responsibility was over? You're not concerned really with whether it happened? What kind of a government do we have in Philadelphia that permits people entrusted to it to be subject to this kind of illegal conduct?
That threatens the 88 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 (indiscernible) --
You're only interested in whether we're going to pay out dollars?
That's what Frank Keel, the Mayor's advisor, said, that he was startled that City Council was interested in something where the City was the defendant. Why should he have been startled; shouldn't the City have been investigating it from the moment a rumor, just a rumor, started? The City should have been involved full-scale in trying to determine all of the facts. You should have been talking to everybody here long before a lawsuit was filed. Now, I'm not saying you as a lawyer; you're the City's lawyer. But to your knowledge, has any other part of the City government -- has the Mayor been interested in this issue? Have any 89 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 other people involved in City policy been interested, or are they saying to you, Try to figure out a way to get this case finished so it will be out of the way?
We want to pay as little as possible to take advantage. The people involved were poor people, so they probably don't have enough money to carry through with the lawsuit anyway?
Well, who is it in the Law Department, in defense of this case, is working to find out all of the facts of this case?
When this came in, as I recall, there was communication from the Mayor's Office to look into this to see what we can do for these people, and that's what I was doing when we got the information; I was trying to find out what went on to establish a basis to compensate the 90 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 inmates for what may have gone on. And when you say, do we have an interest in doing anything other than --
Well, let me tell you one person who certainly knows a lot: The author of the book, Allen Hornblum, who happened not only to be the author of the book, but he -- wasn't he a member of the Board of Prisons for many years?
He was active in the whole prison society; the City was depending on him for information in general about prisons; they were depending in large parts on his judgment. Have you ever interviewed him personally and said, Allen, come in. I don't want to talk about your book; I want to know what is it you know about the situation? Have you been barred in any way from doing that?
I think I explained that already. 91 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
I told you about the process we went through to get to the bottom of this, that we had --
Have you ever called him on the phone and said, Can we talk about --
Are you hoping this is a bad dream that's going to go away?
Who in the City -- it's not going to go away, because until the City comes to grips with this problem, either submits proof that it never occurred or submits an apology of it did occur and takes remedial steps to try to make whole these injuries suffered and damages suffered by these people, not that they can ever be made whole, but at least the City ought to be out trying to show that it doesn't believe in this kind of unprincipled conduct, and that people entrusted to it, whether in the prison system or in hospitalization or in any other form, are entitled 92 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 to respect as human beings. Isn't that what this thing is about, for government to do? What was done here is unthinkable.
And that's the reason we wanted the City to have an opportunity to say, The moment we learned about this, we got excited, it couldn't be so, we'd never do it. And, by God, if we did it, we're sorry, and we want to make whole everybody involved.
Not through the course of a lawsuit, but because it's the decent, proper, responsible thing to do.
Well, tell me, who other than the lawyers for the City have been working on this problem?
That's who the Mayor's Office inquired of, and we were the ones who handled it.
Sir, what you did 93 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 was to file for summary judgment.
That was after we got no 4 cooperation from anyone. I mean, we're sitting here now, there were 200-and-something plaintiffs, sir. Even before they filed the lawsuit, their attorney wouldn't even give us the names. We're, like, Give us the names, give us their dates of births, give us their Social Security numbers so that we can see if we have any information on any of these people, and their attorneys refused to give us the information. How are we supposed to know, how are we supposed to do an investigation --
If you come in and you say that you're John Smith -- (Audience members shout out in response to Mr. King.)
Wait a minute. If you come in and you say you're John Smith and you were in Holmesburg Prison --
-- and this happened to you, 94 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 how's the City going to research its records. We might have something on you from -- (Audience members shout out in response to Mr. King.)
Mr. King -- (Audience members shout out in response to Mr. King.)
You can go back -- we might have something on John Smith from 1980, but how many John Smiths have been in the prison system. We need to know more than your name; we need to know your date of birth, we need to know some identifying information that differentiates you from all of the other people who have had your name. And before the lawsuit and during the lawsuit, nobody provided the City any information like that, despite the fact that we asked and we asked and we asked.
Mr. King, I think you can understand that it is a little -- this is 95 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 not directed to you individually but, I mean, you have to understand that it is slightly disingenuous when a claim is made about something that may have happened in a government institution and the person making the claim has the burden, seemingly the complete burden, of responsibility to produce records, produce documents, and they were an incarcerated person in a system that has more records and documents about more people than anyone could ever figure out.
And that the defense is, Well, since you can't prove that you were here, even though we had you -- I mean, it's not like people produce their own paperwork when they are either incarcerated or processed; that is all generated by the government. And, I mean, your testimony is, We don't have it, we don't know who was here, we don't know when they were here, we don't know what happened to 'em while they were here, but if you can bring a truckload of information in and show us, we maybe will believe that you were here and that something may have happened to you, and if it 96 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 looks okay, we might settle with you. We'll never actually get to the bottom of it, and we may not research for ourselves to determine that you were actually here and something may have happened to you, but if you can flood with us enough paperwork and information to prove that you may have been around or close to it at that time, we'll settle your case, goodbye.
I mean, you understand that that's not necessarily how we want to conduct business.
If you put it that way, it sounds like it's disingenuous, but that's not what I was doing, it's not what the City was doing. In a normal lawsuit --
Are you saying that we don't know who was incarcerated at Holmesburg Prison between 1948 and 1974?
We have no documents to know that, none at all. (Audience members shout out in response to Mr. King.)
Let me tell you something: If one of these individuals here today goes out, goes out, commits a crime --
-- somewhere in the report, it will say, "Joe Smith, with a prison record dating back to Holmesburg 1970, 1965..."
First of all, that may be true; there may be a record. You know, if you have a record from 1964, there may be a record. First of all, it's not going to tell you what prison it's in; and second of all, which is my point that I was trying to make, I can't find it if you don't tell me your name, you date of birth, and some supporting information. How am I going to look for 98 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 it.
I appreciate that. Let me finish my questions. I think I left with, you did not interview Dr. Kligman; is that correct?
Have you interviewed anyone from Dow Chemical about this issue?
Have you interviewed anyone from the University of Pennsylvania about this issue?
Have you interviewed any former prison officials, guards, or inmates about any of these issues?
I've had confidential attorney-client-privileged conversations with people about this, but I haven't talked to anybody who was there at the time.
Well, is there 99 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 anyone who was in an official capacity at the time that is still alive?
Well, many of the prisoners are still alive, and I think some of them are here with us today. I mean, last I checked, most of the folks in this room are alive. So do you know who worked in the prison during those years?
Right, I figured that. Who were the prison, wardens, or superintendents during those years?
Have you done any research to determine who the prison's superintendent or warden was during any of those years?
You don't remember. Based upon your reading of the book, do you believe that experimentation occurred in the Holmesburg Prison during those years?
I can't comment on what my belief is in this context; my belief is irrelevant.
It's relevant to the question I asked. You may not want to answer the question, you can say that; but you can't say that your response to a question I ask is irrelevant.
That's true, I apologize. I can't answer that, Councilman, based on the circumstances.
Do you believe that 101 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 the information in the book is true or false?
So what happened between -- what did you say, '97, when the first complaints started coming out?
No, that's when the book came out; we didn't get any complaints.
All right. So the book came out in '97, you read the book, somebody thought it was kind of interesting, and you thought that you might pursue some information.
Okay. So what did you do between '97 and about '99, when the suit was filed, to get to the bottom of this? You've already indicated that you didn't talk to any of the various parties involved. So what were you doing?
We instituted an investigation by way of asking different City departments to try and research their records based on, No, we didn't have names, we didn't have any information to see if they could find records from Holmesburg Prison back during that period of time.
And then we tried to also talk to other people in the prison system to see if, you know, anyone knew who was there at the time and who was running it, and we weren't able to. I mean, I don't know what else --
I understand. Your earlier response to one of my questions was that the research was done on who the various wardens or superintendents of Holmesburg Prison may have been during those years; is that correct? 103 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
Okay. Then I would ask you to forward to the Chair that information since you've already done that research.
Just one moment before Councilman Rizzo. Did you ever talk to the University of Pennsylvania to get their records? Maybe they kept records. Did you ever ask them?
Well, did they ever investigate, for example, the money that Dr. Kligman allegedly made in this as a professor at the University of Pennsylvania in charge of the experimentations?
I can't speak for the University of Pennsylvania, but my sense is that 104 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 they have a lot more documentation than the City does. That's my sense, I don't know.
Well, did you find out if the University of Pennsylvania knows? Is Dr. Kligman a person or is he somebody's figment of imagination?
Well, was he ever involved in something in called "human experimentation"? Did you ever talk to him about it?
I don't know that means, that you explained the process. Have you ever talked to Dr. Kligman?
No. He's represented by counsel. I can't just talk to him. I can't just call him up and say, "Dr. Kligman, let's chat."
Well, it seems to me 105 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 that the University of Pennsylvania is in a very special position. Its president, Judith Rodin, represents the City in many activities. What do you mean, we don't have any -- do you have a legal agreement not to raise issues? They put up their lawyers to defend their people from having to talk to you; is that what you mean when you that say he's represented by counsel?
Have you ever asked the counsel for the University of Pennsylvania to permit you to discuss with Dr. Kligman what he knows about the situation?
I'll say two things. We were willing to discuss with the inmates settling the case, offering some compensation before we talked to anybody. After the lawsuit started, of course, I was going to talk to Dr. Kligman, I was going to depose him and I was going to depose everyone from the University of Pennsylvania, and we would have found out specifically what they had to say.
It seems to me the 106 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 University of Pennsylvania's record-keeping must be different than the City's. You're saying that because the City dumps its records, that clears the record. Unless the City maintains records of something, that nothing ever existed. What you're saying is that the records that you were supposed to have kept for the City of Philadelphia, that you're saying the responsibility was for the people who were victimized to keep those records when they were in jail at the time. How could they have possibly kept records?
I'm not saying that they should have or that they had any responsibility. All we did was ask if they had any documentation and --
Well, are you saying their word is no good? Are you saying that their testimony, their statements cannot be believed? It seems to me if you threw out your records, then you've got to accept those statements as the facts of what occurred when you're the one that has the responsibility to produce records that disagree with them if you can. 107 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
I'm saying, Councilman, that their word is one thing we would take into account. But, again, in the beginning, before they sued, we asked for their names and supporting information, and we weren't given them. So even if we decided we were going to interview 265 people, we didn't know who they were. How could we go interview them.
We now know, and the lawsuit has proceeded as the lawsuit has proceed and, you know, they had their chance, and I guess they still have the opportunity to provide the City with some information, and I'm sure the Law Department will consider what they're able to provide.
Well, that's far as the lawsuit, but what's responsibility of the City to the people of Philadelphia who want to know, are we, as the citizens of Philadelphia, supporting a government in the City that permits this kind of experimentation to take place? I haven't delegated, as a citizen of Philadelphia, my responsibility and my concern to a 108 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 lawsuit; I'm concerned as a citizen of Philadelphia, as somebody elected to City Council, when I go out in the community, and they ask me, Is this City policy? what do I tell them? Do I tell them I'm waiting for answers from the lawyers in the lawsuit? I'm talking about City policy, not about a lawsuit.
It's not City policy to conduct experiments as they were described here today, that's not City policy.
And if they were so conducted, are the people -- let's follow through with what you said. Since it's not City policy to so conduct experiments or to have these kind of experiments conducted, if in fact they were, what is the City's situation then? Has the City issued an apology, saying that if this really occurred, we say we were wrong in doing it, we will never do it again, forgive us and let us know what we can do to correct the 109 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 situation? Doesn't the City owe that to all of the people of Philadelphia? I'm not talking about a lawsuit; that's the concern of the lawyers involved and the people individually. We have a much broader concern. What kind of a government do we have in Philadelphia --
-- that permits this and is not willing to acknowledge that it was engaged in wrongdoing if this occurred. And then you've got to answer Councilman Nutter's question as to what occurred and what your opinion is. Councilman Rizzo.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Counselor, I've been sitting here very patiently listening, and when you answered some questions just recently, you kind of lost me totally. When I say "lost me," I don't mean that I lost following you. You talked about credibility earlier, about this being a credible hearing. 110 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 I just can't imagine -- I mean I'm not the sharpest investigator in the world, but if you want to go back less than 30 years, we have a pension bureau that probably -- lots of people that were trying to locate are on pension. And we're talking about the early '70s here, and I'll bet you if I reached out to people that are getting 9 pension checks that worked at Holmesburg and asked 10 them, were experiments conducted at that facility? 11 you'd get the answer to the question that you want. 12 Either they'd say no or they'd say yes. 13 Did you ever think of doing that? 14
We requested of all of the 15 relevant City departments that we could think of at 16 the time to get us information. 17 But again, you know, I can't send a 18 request to the Board of Pensions and say, Give me 19 the names of all the names of the people who 20 retired from Holmesburg in the last 30 --
Let's just say in 19 -- give them a window, give them 1969 to 1974. 111 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 Give 'em one year, give 'em 1972, and you'll probably come up with a number of people. Again, it doesn't sound like there's any sincerity in the effort to really get to the bottom of what occurred here.
Councilman, I think that what you say sounds like a plausible way to go about things. I'm just telling you that I do not think that I could send a request to the Board of Pensions and say, "Please provide me with names of folks who worked at Holmesburg Prison during this relevant time period and send them to me." I don't think they file their records based on who worked where. They file their records based on who you are.
Just asking to see who they send -- if the pile's this high on who gets pension checks, sir, you have competent investigators in the Law Department that could sift through that and come up with a dozen names that you could interrogate, or whatever the word is, and come up with the information that you want. This is -- you know, this is not a complicated issue here that we're dealing with, and 112 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 you're making it sound like -- and I'd like to go back. If our prison system -- and I'll ask the Chair to have another hearing -- if they don't know the population of the prison, if you couldn't go back to a file -- when that prison closed, those files were moved to the State Road correctional facility, and I am confident that if somebody really asked and really cared about getting the answer to the question, and you said, Who was incarcerated in 1969 in Holmesburg prison? I'm confident that they would know the -- they probably know every visitor that went.
And you're telling me -- and I think it's embarrassing, Counselor, that if that's the spin that you've been told, that they don't who the population is, I think that you, as a lawyer and a good one, that should -- I'd be embarrassed if I had to sit at that table and tell this committee that Holmesburg Prison doesn't know who was in their custody 30 or 40 or 50 -- (Applause.) 113 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
You talked about being disingenuous, you talked about credibility in the last ten minutes. Now do you understand what I mean, that you lost me? I was sitting here keeping my mouth shut and listening carefully, but when that starts coming across, you lost me, sir. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Just going along the line of Councilman Nutter and Councilman Rizzo, have you asked Mr. Costello, who is the current commissioner, where he was around 1969, '71, '72?
I can't answer that question; that's attorney-client privilege, but I believe --
Wait, wait, wait, hold it a second. You just went through a whole line with Councilman Rizzo and Councilman Nutter. 114 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 I'm giving you people that you could talk to to find out what really happened, 'cause you weren't there. But, you know, it reminds me of the apologists for what happened during the second world war. Are we trying to say that this didn't happen, that the City has no responsibility, moral or political or policy? I mean, that's what bothers me about this whole process right now. You standing there, sitting as an apologist for an atrocious act perpetrated by the City, with the consent of the City government, and no one has the decency to turn around to these individuals and at least say, Listen, we did it, we apologize. We have no money, but we apologize, all right? That's what really bothers me about this. You know that we were sitting here, and I feel a surge of... Because an atrocity in name of the City of Philadelphia was committed -- not once, but over a series of years. And City representatives come before us and hide behind a whole series of legal procedural maneuvers. It's shameful, it is shameful. The 115 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 City should be ashamed. If this administration is not willing to admit -- because the City doesn't cease running from administration to administration; every administration becomes responsible for the acts that were done before it. Nuremberg, they all had their apologists. In Nuremberg, they said that they were all, within the Supreme Court of Germany, they were all obeying the law. My God, an atrocity, a complicity between the University of Pennsylvania and the City of Philadelphia was perpetrated on citizens of the City of Philadelphia. Doesn't anyone have the moral fiber to stand up and say, We are sorry, we apologize, we did wrong. Do not tell me that you can't find the records. They're human beings right behind you, by God. Look at them, turn around, look at their faces.
Tell me, have you, in preparation for your appearance here today, did you speak to any ranking City officials?
I spoke to the City Solicitor yesterday, and he designated me the one to represent the City's position on this today.
Well, I think he sought to be cooperative, but the City Solicitor doesn't make the policy for the City; it stems from the Mayor and appointees from the Mayor.
Now, have any of them spoken? My deep concern, as Councilman Nutter and Ortiz and Rizzo have explained -- and I see Councilwoman Blackwell isn't here, but she mentioned at the previous hearing how concerned she and her husband, then-councilman Blackwell, how deeply concerned they have been with the situation. It just seems to me that the City has got to do something policy-wise, not legal-wise. Let the lawsuit go its way, but that doesn't concern a million and a half people who make up Philadelphia; they want to know what's the policy of government. 117 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 Everybody who has a child and a family and who learns that the child may have been arrested for something and pending trial or after trial is going to spend some time in the prisons is very much concerned. Is that child going to be subjected to human experimentation in order to enrich some corporation? Tell me, what do we answer to people out in the community?
How do we know that? You may not have the records and you may try to brush everything off, saying it didn't exist 'cause we didn't have the records.
We can tell you what's going on in the prison system at the present time and what the present City policy is.
You know, it seems to me that if you don't have the records, you've got to take the word of everybody. Are you saying that Philadelphians ought not to be believed if they're poor or if they're minorities? Because if you don't have any records to disprove what they say, you've got to accept the truth in what they say; everybody knows it's so. 118 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 The only one that doesn't know it's so are the leaders of Philadelphia and maybe Frank Keel, the Mayor's press representative, I don't know what he knows. He apparently is not outraged -- he apparently doesn't agree with you. Would you say the City -- in your judgment, should the City apologize if it was engaged in this conduct?
That would not be a decision that I will make; that would be the Mayor's decision whether he wants to apologize or not, not the Law Department's decision.
But if you had an opinion, would you make a recommendation to him?
Yeah, I would advise him legally. I'm not going to tell you what I'd tell him, but I'd have an opinion about it legally, yes.
Well, tell me, in the search for records, if there has been such a search, have you kept a record of what you tried to 119 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 find? How do we know that there was really a search for records made even? Do you have any records of the search?
I don't understand. Now, this is a Council committee. We are investigating the conduct that's been alleged to have been pursued by the City of Philadelphia in its official position as the government. You say that you've made efforts to obtain information. I asked you to show those 120 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 records because we've got to know to what extent the City Administration has shown an interest in this and has sought to get information. You say you're not going to turn that over?
You know, I will take that back to the City Solicitor, and we will make a decision, but I'm just telling you, as you presented it to me --
I think we're absolutely entitled to such information. How else do we carry out our job of overseeing functioning of City government if we don't have a right to see what you're doing to investigate matters? How would -- give me your legal answer. Suppose in a courtroom, just for a moment, since I'm a lawyer and you're a lawyer, tell me what happens when a person gets on the witness stand and testifies, and the defense says, We have no records to show whether this exists or not, so we have no 22 way of knowing whether the person's telling the truth or not. What would have in the courtroom?
Wouldn't the 121 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 plaintiff win?
Well, if they believed in the credibility -- in all my years of hearings, I can tell you I found no witnesses more credible than the witnesses that have testified to this brutality that took advantage of their poverty and the fact that they were confined and didn't have rights at that time, because they were confined in the Philadelphia prisons. It seems to me clearly that judgement would be in their favor because you have no defense to offer.
You have no records of anything, so how are you going to deny anything?
That's why they have the principle known as the "statute of limitations." You're not supposed to be in a position when you go to court not to have records. That's why we --
Up until now, I was 122 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 able to respect your judgment, but if you're telling me the City's going to try to use a technical procedural process such as the statute of limitations to say, Oh, we don't have to answer this because you're too late in filing. When you're dealing with poor people who have been taking advantage of, you have a very, very tough policy decision in front of you.
I think that's a fair explanation of it. These were crimes against humanity and they affected everybody in the City, whether they were the immediate victims or not because any of us might at anytime be in the same position as those people were. And incidentally, I want to salute their courage in coming forth and showing their injuries to us and relating the stories, because people often try to hide acts of inhumanity against them. Councilman Rizzo?
Thank you. Counselor, you heard here today that 123 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 there's an apology that's requested. Did you advise your client not to apologize?
Okay, next question. What would be the rationale of an attorney -- what would be the -- why would you advice -- if -- let's say that you advised your client not to apologize; why would you do that?
I can't answer that one either 'cause that would be revealing what I would tell my client.
There would be circumstances where I might say, Maybe you should apologize. There might be circumstances where I might say you shouldn't, but I'm not going to tell you the basis for which I make those --
Well, what would be your reason for not wanting to tell the committee 124 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 that?
I'm just asking you -- forget this case for a moment. Another situation: Why would you advice your client not to make an apology? If you're protected by the statute of limitations, why would you advise them either to apologize or not to apologize? It's not a tough question.
No, I don't think it's a tough question, Councilman, and if we weren't in this forum, I could answer that for you, but I cannot answer that question given the pending litigation.
I'm not suggesting that you're afraid, but would the consequence be that if the apology was made that that would open the door to some other litigation? 125 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
Well, then why -- if an apology suffices and it's not opening a door for the next step, I don't understand why we can't admit -- because I think today, I could probably go back to my office, go through my personal phone directory, come up with ten names that worked within the prison system, talk to some of the board members that served on the Board of Prisons, and be able to confirm, with pretty good fact associated with it, that experiments either occurred or they didn't occur. This administration's not stupid, they know whether it occurred or didn't occur. And if it did occur, apologize. If it didn't occur, then stick to your guns. But I have a feeling that at the end of this hearing today, when I go and start making some phone calls because, again, I know many of the men that worked there, I know many of the people that served on the board, and I think within an hour, I'll be able to find out whether or not experiments occurred. They're going to say to me, Sure, 126 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 Frank, everybody knew that that was going on up there. Or they might say, No, I don't know anything about that. But I have got a feeling that that's not the answer that I'm going to get. So did you -- and you said you wouldn't answer this question, but let me ask it again. Was the recommendation in the Law Department not to apologize?
The recommendation -- the intention of the Law Department was to engage the inmates in a discussion, hopefully have them provide some information to see if we couldn't do something to compensate them; that was the intention.
So you're basing -- go ahead, I'm sorry. Go ahead, sir.
I mean, that was our intention, and I think it was a good intention.
But you're telling me that because you have no information to support an apology, that's why you're not giving one.
No, I'm just -- and even 127 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 during the litigation when we went out our requests to give us information, you know, we have things called "interrogatories," and each one of the plaintiffs was sent one, and there's a part in there for them to say, This is what happened to me, these are the injuries I have, etc., etc. We'd need to interview them, but no one answered them, no one answered them. If we got that, maybe we would have enough information to do something else, but we didn't even get that.
Are you sure they got them, are you sure they didn't get thrown in the trash before they got mailed?
I sent them to their attorney and I never heard. I have no reason to believe that they were thrown away, but I --
So what you're saying, though, possibly is that there was a defective counsel, that the lawyer might not have done the job they were supposed to be doing. So you're basing this entire issue on something that was sent to an attorney, the attorney possibly never receiving them or not caring to respond for one reason or another. It 128 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 sounds to me like maybe a letter or something else possibly should have been done after there was no 4 response.
Well, I don't know what the attorney did. All I know is we sent out the request for the response, and we didn't get them.
Councilman Cohen, I thank you for that opportunity. I'm finished.
City Council has not delegated to any attorneys the power of the City Council to get to the root of this problem, and so that whatever is being put forth by the attorneys for the City has no relevance to the probe by City Council. We're asking for responses. The attorneys who handled the case for the prisoners have nothing to do with City policy.
They're representing their individual claims, and I hope they're doing it to the best of their ability; and if they're not, I'm sure their clients will handle that situation, but it's certainly no defense. We did not turn over to them the responsibility for this heinous offense, if it took place. It's the people 129 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 of Philadelphia that are demanding information, and we're going to get to it. And I'm going to ask at this point that -- there are two are more witnesses.
There are three additional witnesses that will be heard, and then we'll let everybody know what we're going to be doing. But I have to tell you one thing clearly, before anybody leaves: This is not a matter that will ever go away until there is full justice, full explanation, full acceptance of responsibility for whatever took place. And until that occurs, this matter is alive. And if anybody has the belief that legal tactics or hiding behind the statute of limitations is going to work, I want to disabuse them of that. And in my judgment, in a matter this serious and this momentous, for the City of Philadelphia to have ever used the statute of limitations as a defense is an insult to all -- not only to the people, the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, but to all of the people of Philadelphia. 130 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 We don't want to hide from the truth; we want the truth to come out so that it can be corrected. Don't you see, this is not just a legal matter; this is a matter that affects the whole quality of government. No wonder people are cynical about government. If government feels free to commit these kinds of crimes and then hides behind the fact that it can't find records and then says to the people who are trying to get relief, it says to them, You're too late, you weren't timely in asking for help, that's no kind of decision for a government that represents people to make. So please go back, let not only the Law Department, but every part of the government of the City of Philadelphia learn that it's going to have to account to the people of Philadelphia, and until that happens, this matter will be alive and kicking until we get all of the information, and appropriate corrective action is taken. So I thank the attorneys for the City for at least appearing here. I think you were given a mean job to do, and we know there's nothing personal, but we feel sorry that you have to do what you're apparently doing, and that's trying to 131 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 hide the facts.
We need the facts to come out, open, and admit to whatever has to be admitted to. Thank you for appearing today. The three witnesses representing the City at this point are dismissed.
And the next witness is... Reverend Betty Hill is going to be the next witness. Reverend Hill, if you can move to there. And take the cane with you if you'd like, 'cause it looks so good, I may want to use it. (Witness comes forward.)
Reverend Betty Hill, please identify yourself for the record. We're delighted to have the honor of having you appear as a witness here today because we all know of your many years of service to the community in the City of Philadelphia. Reverend Hill, identify yourself for the record. 132 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
My name is the Reverend Betty R. Hill. My address is 1114 West Nevada Street in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Do you have testimony which you wish to give to this committee?
I have much interest in this. I lost a son's good health. I lost his legs in this. I'm a living witness that it did happen. To this Council, these people here are interested in this case. We want to see justice happen, and we want to know, why is it taking so long, when we pay taxes, when we walk these streets, to have you, you, and you -- there's not a councilman sitting there that don't know me know that I deal for the right. I had to lose a son; he's sleeping in green (indiscernible) because they took his leg and they treated him like he was a dog out there. And I raised three children by myself, and I went everywhere I could to get help or get everything for these people. These people are not looking for nothing that's not justice; they are looking to either come forth with the truth to so the future 133 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 generation and no other generation don't have to go through with what we they through out there. It's not fair and it's not fair for City Council, whom I voted for each and every one of you, to take so long to bring us down here and talk to us like this. You know we need help. You know we don't have money to hire lawyers and pay 'em. Get the solicitor, get the people to help us. We love our family and our children just like you love yours. And we want justice. We stand for justice and we demand justice. Until we get justice, we going to be a pain in your butts right down here in City Hall. And I want City Council to know that I'll be right down here on you. My son is sleeping in his grave. He lost his health on account of this. His leg, you couldn't even see his leg; you could see the bones of his leg. And you go out there and ask those guards or ask those people anything, they'll tell you, We ain't got time to talk to you, or you don't have an appointment. Well, we not going to hear that from you all. We lost our friends, we lost our 134 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 children, we lost our husbands and some of our daughters. Everybody don't do everything right. They may go wrong once in a while, but you bring 'em back to the fold. And my son is sleeping. His legs, he couldn't walk and all of this down there. Go down there and talk to the guards or talk to anybody in prison. Do you have a pass or who sent you or do you have a lawyer? All of us wasn't able to hire a lawyer. Most of these people in here know me, and I know them. All of us is not rich. We couldn't get voted into politics and run down to City Hall to keep you -- in fact, I asked for a ticket, and they tell me, I'm not your Councilman. I can't even get a ticket if you're not my Councilman. I can't get help for my son, my friend, or my neighbor. And this is what we demand: Nothing but the truth. It did happen, Councilman Cohen. I'm a living witness to this happening. And all of these people can raise their hands. They know it happened. (Audient members raise hands.) 135 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
That's why we are down here. Some of these people are losing a hard day's work just to come down here to sit with you to see what is going to happen. You can settle any other case, you can to for us when you need us to vote for you, you can run to us for this, that and the other. Now give us some justice. Settle this case with truth, happiness, and fairness so this won't happen to the incoming generation. The 20th of this month, I'll be 89 years old. Give these people some justice, let them know what's going on. You are our leaders. Protect us. When we come to you, don't say you have to wait till next week or another month or I didn't get it or you didn't have the right lawyer or you didn't have this. Come up and give us some help, strengthen us. Sometimes our leaders is the cause of we go wrong, 'cause you don't give us the thing that we need and we have to have. I say to you, whatever justice it is, this did happen right out at the prison. I looked at it through my son. He died with those legs. 136 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 He's not here to speak. I want these people to get justice and help. Will you do it? Will you consider it? On my birthday, on their birthday. How many here, you all here with me, raise your hands. (Audience members raise hands.)
God bless you and God deep you. Will you do that for us? Thank you.
Thank you so much, Reverend Hill, thank you so much. This Council is going to stay on it until you tell us we're done. The next witness is Jack Barnett. (Witness comes forward.)
Good afternoon. My name is Jack Barnett. I live at 6310 North Tenth Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19141. I'm here today for more than one purpose. I was incarcerated in Holmesburg Prison. I became employed in H-Block. I was taught by the inmates working there how to draw blood, so I began 137 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 to draw blood on inmates. I had mixed feelings about it, but the way the system worked was that if you were fortunate enough to land a job of that caliber, you should consider yourself very well off. It allowed me to purchase things that I needed from the commissary. I had no family at the time to support me. So that was my way of surviving in the prison. I put my thoughts behind me as to the things that I was doing to my fellow human beings, but there's very few days that pass that I don't think about it and I wonder, suppose I pass one of these people on the street, you know, how would I feel, how would they feel? And at this time, I would like to apologize to all of the former inmates that are sitting here today and to those that may not be here, and also to the people of the City of Philadelphia for participating in this. But, as I said, that's the way life is, I thought I had no choice, and I did that. And I became very proficient at it. I was an excellent phlebotomist. I would bleed, like, some people in studies, you would have 50 people on the study, and 138 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 they would have to be bled sometimes every 30 minutes, so that would give you, like, 30 minutes to get those 50 people out of there, and you had maybe two phlebotomists working on it. That's how good we were. After going through this -- in the earlier testimony, one of the past inmates that was employed there spoke of a burn test. This is one thing that definitely troubles me today. I think about it sometimes at night. Inmates were inflicted with third-degree burns to see what type of treatment would work on burns. They would be inflicted with first-degree, second-degree, and third-degree burns. And there are people walking around today with scars on the inside of their wrists that are around that were inflicted in Holmesburg Prison, and I know this because I've seen some of them. As I said, I became very proficient in that. I was put in charge of a cell to run studies on my own. I have conducted studies of up to 150, maybe 200 inmates during the day. As I said, you have maybe to 50 people on one study. I would 25 run three or four studies at a time, at one time. 139 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 I drew up graphs, I drew up charts, showing the effectiveness of the medications that were being tested. I did skin pops -- this was what you saw on the inmate's back, this is what's called "skin pops," where you would insert, inject solutions, different types of solution under the skin.
And did you receive different compensation than the victims have testified they got?
Well, first I want you to know that we very much appreciate your honesty and the apologies that you're making, and we think you're setting a great example for the rest of the City of Philadelphia. Go ahead with the rest of your information.
Yes, sir. I have one important point I'd like to make. As I said, I became very proficient in this. After my discharge from Holmesburg Prison, I went to work for the University of Pennsylvania for Dr. Albert Kligman. At that time, my duties were 141 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 to receive the results of the test, to compile, as I said before, charts and graphs plotting the effectiveness of the medications that were being tested and used. It was a very good job, but I only stayed one year, and I went to work in hospitals after that. But I'm just happy to have a chance this morning to, as I said before, apologize and get some of this off of my chest, because this is something that has definitely stayed with me. And I'm asking Council this morning to please believe that this happened, because I lived it, and I continue to live it to this day. Thank you. (Applause.)
Thank you very much for your testimony. Has anybody from the City of Philadelphia ever asked you for information?
Did the prison officials know of your involvement at the time?
Would you be 142 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 prepared to give that information?
I think that pretty much disposes of the -- if it was so easy for this body to get that information, for the City of Philadelphia to say they couldn't get it boggles the mind. We thank you very, very much, and we want to commend you for your forthrightness in coming forward. I think we're going to see more of you as this matter progresses. We're going to follow the injunction of Reverend Hill to follow this until justice is done. We hope it's soon, but if it's not soon, I'm telling you, we're going to be as persistent as it's humanly possible to be to bring justice, full justice, to everybody as quickly as possible. Thank you very much, Mr. Barnett.
Thank you, Councilman Cohen. I understand that the author of the book is here, and I wonder if -- and to a limited purpose, if he could shed light on the City's contention that there are no records and no way to 143 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 find them. Mr. Hornblum, would you be prepared to come forward, and in that limited area, tell us your evaluation of the testimony of the City's lawyers this morning. (Witness comes forward.)
Chairman Cohen, members of the committee, I'd like to preface my comment by saying --
Allen Hornblum, H-O-R-N-B-L-U-M, author of the book, Acres of Skin. I'd like to thank you for continuing to press this issue. Your predecessors, unfortunately, over many decades, did not have this issue on their radar screen, and I guess we can say better late than never, so I want to applaud your efforts. With regard to the comments you heard from Russell Green, from Dorothy Alston, from the last gentleman, there is no doubt that these medical experiments went on. In fact, they even proceeded when I said they did. According to my 144 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 research, they went on from 1951 to '74. After the publication of the book and all of the publicity it received, I received numerous contacts and calls from academics as well as individuals who resided in the City, who were up in age and asked me, why did I say the experiments started in '51? And I said that was what I thought the beginning was, when Dr. Kligman walked into Holmesburg Prison and said he saw acres of skin, meaning the inmates of Holmesburg. Well, one individual told me in fact, that when Willy Sutton went over the wall of Holmesburg Prison in 1945, he was wearing patches, because this individual put them on him during the second world war. So even during the early '40s, Holmesburg was used as raw material for medical research. The City, I believe, has not pursued this case because it's a nuisance, it's a problem, it's an embarrassment. When this deal was solidified and initiated in 1951 to allow Holmesburg to have its inmates used as guinea pigs, it was basically over a handshake, a handshake between Dr. Kligman and Dr. Frederick Baldi, who 145 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 was the superintendent of the prison system. They were both doctors, they were both interested in advancing science; they thought this could be useful to everybody concerned, including the inmates who would make, as the inmates say, "some chump change "out of it. Dr. Kligman, of course, was as much an entrepreneur as he was a physician, and he recognized the potential, the economic potential, of using Holmesburg as a research facility for all of the pharmaceutical companies in the post-war period who were looking to gain a bigger share of the market. So where initially in the early '50s, these tests were rudimentary university academic studies, they quickly turned the corner and became very big entrepreneurial endeavors with Rohm & Haas -- I'm not sure with Rohm & Haas -- but SmithKline, with Merk, with many of your largest pharmaceutical companies coming to Dr. Kligman, the University of Pennsylvania, and Holmesburg Prison -- it was that iron triangle of the physician, the university, and Holmesburg; whereas the citizens of Philadelphia, even the lawmakers of 146 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 Philadelphia, did not know it was taking place. People around the country in the business of testing humans knew about Holmesburg. J. S. Army and Maryland, their medical testing unit, came to Philadelphia. These records do exist. In fact, I brought some of the them to show the legal counsel of City Council today some of the things that I collected over my five-year investigation. And as Councilman Nutter said earlier, that you really had to go on a mission to solve this. And at the time I was the Chief of Staff of the Philadelphia Sheriff's Office, but I became so involved in this quest because I had witnessed these experiments when I first started working in the prisons in the early '70s, that when I talked to many of the mates -- and quite frankly, I didn't know hardly anybody of this group here. This group got together after the book Acres of Skin was published, and they finally realized how they were used and misused. 147 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 But I did track down a number of inmates, and they told me what they were used for.
And it was somewhat helpful, but they didn't really know exactly what ointment or what potion or what substance they were being injected with or swallowing. I then went to the doctors, the medical technicians who coordinated these experiments. Their response? Somewhat like you received: They wouldn't talk to me, they'd hang up to me, they'd only talk if they could have their attorney present. They pleaded with me not to investigate this case. They had been running from it for decades. I knew at this point that this was a serious story, and I had always expected from the early '70s that there would be a medical ethicist, a journalist, a historian who would look into this story, but they never did. So I started to do it in the mid '90s and gave up my job and nearly went into hock pursuing this story for five years. And I had to go through a very thorough search of government documents, using the Freedom of Information Act, 148 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. S. Army, everywhere I could go that had documents. The City, who has numerous people, numerous attorneys, who certainly make a hell of a lot more money than I do, could have done the same thing if they were interested. As Councilman Rizzo knows, there are procedures to keep track of people. S. Army and CIA experiments. But there has never been interest in this. Two reasons primarily, I would suggest. Certainly if you look in the audience here is that the test subjects were not sympathetic individuals. Just as your Tuskegee syphilis study subjects were African-American, uneducated, unsophisticated sharecroppers from Macon County, Alabama; the 149 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 people in this audience who have joined in this suit are overwhelming, if not exclusively, African-American and exclusively former individuals who were being held as prisoners. Why expend time and effort and money to try and rectify the injustice that took place. They never used the string section of the Philadelphia Orchestra for experiments, they didn't use the members of the Chamber of Commerce; they were using people across the board who were vulnerable subjects. It could have been prisoners, it could have been retarded individuals, it could have been people in mental hospitals. They were the ones who were used in the post-war period as raw material for experimentation. Holmesburg, unfortunately, in the City of Philadelphia, became quite possibly the greatest center of human research in post-war America. Although half the states in America had at least one prison that used prisoners as test subjects, Pennsylvania had nine or ten; and by far, Holmesburg for its or more years, was the K-Mart 24 of human experimentation. 25 There are documents that the City can 150 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 get showing the experiments that took place so that the City Solicitor, who was placed on the hot spot here, in having to deny what he knows what was definitely the case, that experiments took place, will show you the types of experiments, the length of them, who was paying for them. In some cases like this, they redacted the names so that you can't see, but there are cases where names are on these sheets and you can identify them. And I have been able to track down individuals who told me their story and then found their name in some document that the federal government had, because Dr. Kligman was doing experiments in conjunction with a federal agency or department. And there are individuals currently up at the prison system, such as Tom Costello, the Commission, such as Press Grooms, the Deputy Commissioner, such as many others who saw the experiments because they were there when I was there. Now, they may not know the specifics of them, and I wouldn't doubt that's the case, 'cause I spent five years trying to track it is down, but it was a very free and easy and loose system where 151 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES.
020171 the prison system of Philadelphia was like a plantation and loaned out people that it was holding as test subjects. And that went on day after day month after month, year after year for a quarter century. And it really is a dark mark on Philadelphia. A lot of it occurred during the progressive era of Philadelphia politics when Mayors Dilworth and Clark were in office, and it proceeded through the '60s and into the '70. And a lot of Democrats, Republicans, people in the clergy were all blind to the fact that this was going on, just as it happened in Tuskegee, where for 40 years, African-Americans were used as test subjects and never treated. Holmesburg is the flip side of Tuskegee. You had healthy people who were made ill. Some people profited greatly from that. And I applaud the efforts of Councilman Cohen and the other Councilmen who have come in here and paid attention to this and tried to redress this grievance that these individuals legitimately have. ) 152 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
Thank you. Thank you for taking the time today in making this available to us. I want to be careful how I ask you this question. We heard about statute of limitations today, but as far as you know, did any of this medical testing cause the loss of life?
I have been told by numerous inmates, and even by some correctional officers, that people died. I could not track it down, I could not confirm it; and if I could not confirm something, I did not place it in the book. But the rumors exist widely throughout the individuals who were used as test subjects, and even some guards were under the belief that that happened. But, as I said, if I couldn't document it, I did not write it in the book.
Well, I could understand that, but I was just interested on your 153 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 thoughts on that. It's very interesting. Well, again, I thank you for this and I thank you for the opportunity.
All right. Councilman Rizzo has made what I think is a very good suggestion, and I would like to know how everybody feels about it, particularly Mr. Leodus Jones -- where is Mr. Jones?
Would you come forward to the table for a moment? (Witness comes forward.)
We would like you, as the chair or leader or whatever, we would want to call you, to maybe consider getting lists of names of everybody that you can who are here who were in prison. We'd like to get their involvement in naming other names of people they know who know. We'd like to show that there's an abundance of material available now, if the City only sought it. 154 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 Now, we don't want to prejudice any rights that anybody may have in lawsuits, but a lawsuit is not the province of City Council. Our investigation is our business. But if you would consider it and the folks here would consider it, it could prove very helpful. We would like to establish clearly that more than enough exists just listening to Mr. Hornblum. One can see it just looking at the faces of people here. We know you're dealing with the truth. As a matter of fact, I suspect that most of you have understated the problems that you face because human beings, when subjected to inhuman conditions, we try to often hide it from knowledge of your family or of other people. So we have no question at all about where truth lies. Our job is to make those who perpetrated these kind of activities, is to make them come forward, ultimately admit their guilt, and do what is necessary to make everybody as whole as people could be made. Now, Mr. Jones, would you raise that subject with your people? 155 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
I don't want to ask anybody to sign a name and address unless it's agreeable to you and to the counsel for your lawsuit, that's not our responsibility. But we're aware that there's a lawsuit and you certainly have every right to pursue that lawsuit.
Yes. Well, one of the things that we would like to do is discuss it with our attorney and see what he advises us.
But I'm sure that we can get that information to you. As was stated before, we have over 300 individual members that were test subjects during that period. And since that time, since 1999, when we came together, we have lost over individual 19 members who have died from, you know, other 20 illnesses and whatnot and foul play and things of 21 that sort and natural causes. 22 But, you know, as we stretch this out, 23 as you can see, we're not kids. You know, when we were going through this, I was what they called the "Young Buck," you understand? Now they look at me 156 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 as a junior senior-citizen. We don't have too much time on this planet. We have a lot of illnesses and things of that sort. Some of 'em we can't even relate to, you know, whether or not they were a part of the test studies or whether or not it was a part of growing old, you understand? But we don't have too much time to be around, you understand? So, you know, we going to talk with Mr. Nocella, and we --
Talk to your attorneys, talk to Reverend Hill, talk to whomever you'd like to talk with, but we would be interested in establishing clearly that there's a real abundance of evidence available, that the City is negligent in not having pursued it all of these years. We're going to work very hard on the subpoena question. You may ask, What's the problem? Well, in -- there's only been one subpoena ever issued by the City Council of Philadelphia prior to our efforts today, and that was issued 50 years ago and went only to a City agency. So we have some new ground legally to 157 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 pursue. We intend to pursue it, we intend to do everything humanly possible to make the chemical companies that profited from this human exploitation, we intend to make them bear their appropriate responsibility. We intend to make the University of Pennsylvania put some meaning into some of the educational slogans about truth-telling, because we think the University of Pennsylvania ought, in the interest of education, come forward and say, In the interest of truth and humanity, we admit our guilt. And we think that to the extent that there were profits, that money ought to be recaptured from those who profited from this illegal human exploitation, and that money should be made available in every way to help correct the conditions that existed. Now, that, in general, is our approach. I cannot give you precise dates; I wish we could, but the law and legal procedures and legislative procedures don't work out that way. But we intend to be working very hard all during the summer in perfecting this. So I'm going to recess today's hearing. 158 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 Before I do, Councilman Rizzo, do you wish to make a comment?
Based on your conversation about your life expectancy, if you hang around with Councilman Cohen, you're going to be on this planet for a long time.
But my question is, during the testimony of the City lawyers, and they can't figure out who worked there as security guards, I'm going to ask the chairman of the security force, the wardens and the correctional officers, I guess we call them now, I'll bet you that you could sit at that seat and think of ten names of people that you know that worked at the jail that were correctional officers. And I'm suggesting to the Chair that if they would consider -- if the City can't figure out who the City workers were up there, that you might help them figure it out by this entire group just 159 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 recollecting some of the names. You know the names, probably you could sit here and talk about every one of them that worked in that jail. You could put a list together that you would also consider talking to your lawyers appropriately, providing those names to the Chair in the event that we have to start looking for some of these folks. That, I think, would be very helpful. But that is the request I make to the Chair. I wanted to explain it, but if the Chair would agree that that would be helpful, I would -- I think that that could be helpful down the road, since Councilman Cohen will not let this go.
Yes, sir. I could think of -- Owens at the time was the captain. I could think of Earl Hatchet (ph). I could also think of Press Grooms, Costello. You know, we can come up with some --
You could brainstorm for an hour with a group and come up with all of the names. Wasn't it at Holmesburg Fromhold and Curran and were --
Yeah, they're deceased, but my point being that just in my own mind, I think I knew a half a dozen people that worked up there that are still alive.
So you could be helpful there, but that's the Chair's call.
Yeah, well, we have a meeting coming up and we can begin to put them names together. I'm sure we wouldn't have a problem. Can I say two things before you adjourn, Councilman Cohen?
In answer to your question about whether or not there has been any deaths as a result of these experiments, we have heard rumors such as was stated, and we going to investigate into that a little more thoroughly, because I'm sure with all of the individuals that's a part of the survivors that have worked for the University of Pennsylvania during the time that they were in prison can give us some leads, if not some information, on that. So we going to pursue that. 161 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 And the other thing in reference to the University of Pennsylvania, the number that we got from Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell. Some of our members had called that number and the receiving end was sort of less -- was uncooperative or uninformed or whatever, you understand? So, you know, there are some things that -- I mean, we pursued this once before, and we did the same thing. And what I suggest is that some of y'all have someone to dial that number and see what kind of results that y'all get for the record.
All right. And I would like to thank on the behalf of the experimentation survivors each and every one of the individuals who have taken time to really pull this together and try to get some results for us on this resolution.
If, in the course of gathering all of the material, you feel it's necessary to bring a lot of folks together to get the information and you let my office know, we will 162 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 arrange for you to have the use, say, of an area like this courtroom, maybe this courtroom or some other area where you could all meet together.
Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone. You're saying that even the second number for Penn did not work?
Yes. This was what we were told. Is Dot in the house? Somebody call Dot, please. I'm going to straighten this out right now.
Well, like I said, if any of the Councilmen get somebody to call that number.
Don't put 'em on notice, okay? Just let it simmer and let's make these calls to see what happens.
And certainly, that is unconscionable. 163 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
Yes, here's Dorothy here. Dorothy, didn't you say you tried that number, Penn whatever?
Will you let the Councilwoman know what happened? (Witness comes forward.)
Good afternoon. Your testimony was excellent and I'm very, very sorry you went through so much.
Yes. When I first heard about the number from Penn, I think it's 215-879-Penn. We had had a meeting, the steering committee, and I told Leodus that I was going to call the number and see what the results was. I called the number and they wanted to know what clinic I wanted and what type of insurance I had.
And you're saying they asked you about your insurance?
Absolutely. They wanted 164 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171 to know what type of insurance I had, and I said I was told that I could call this number, and I explained a little bit to the operator that answered the number what I wanted.
Oh, dear, that's unbelievable. All right, I will certainly report to Mr. Jones and report to the Chair of the committee, Councilman Cohen, and obviously, I will contact Penn as soon as this hearing's over. But thanks for letting me know. We don't know these things if you don't tell us. Thank you very much.
All right, then the hearing will stand in recess until the call of the Chair. We're going to work and come back with additional hearings until this matter gets fully resolved. We want the companies to be compelled to appear here and give testimony. And we want the wrongs that have been done to get righted. To that we're committed. Thank you all for coming today.
When you say "the call of the chair," what does that mean? Anytime between now and the next week or next month?
I don't know what that means until the committee meets and the staff meets and we work out our schedule.
As always, we will wait to hear from you. 166 6/11/02 LAW & GOV'T - RES. 020171
Okay, but you're free to make recommendations to us all, sir.
The hearing stands in recess until the call of the Chair. (Committee hearings end at 2 o'clock p.m.) - - - 167 CERTIFICATE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing proceedings of the Council of the City of Philadelphia's meeting of the Committee on Law and Government of Tuesday, June 11, 2002, are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me, and that this is a true and correct transcript of same. RE: Resolution No. 010271 _______________________________, Josephine Cardillo Registered Professional Reporter and Notary Public (The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means, unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter.)