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?