Securus Defends Filings on Threats, Reveals FCC Finding of Apparent Violation

Securus cited an FCC “emergency” exemption to the lobbying restrictions. "The written death threats contained in Securus’ filings plainly 'relate[] to an emergency in which the safety of life is endangered or substantial loss of property is threatened,'” the company said in its response posted Wednesday in docket 12-375. “As such, the Securus filings are exempt from the Commission’s rules, and no violation can be found nor any sanctions imposed. Moreover, these filings could not have been made prior to the Sunshine period, because the threats arose from the Commission’s press release issued October 22.” Securus rebuked Lee Petro, the counsel for Martha Wright Petitioners, for showing “callous disregard” for the safety of company personnel in dismissing the seriousness of the threats.

In response, Petro told us: “While the Petitioners certainly do not encourage or take lightly threats of bodily harm, we are comforted to know that the FCC agrees that the ex parte presentations apparently violated the FCC’s rules.” A commission spokesman had no comment.

Securus said it contacted FCC staff to ask how it could bring the threats to the commission’s attention during the period of the Sunshine restrictions. Securus said it “was told that such a filing was possible” and it submitted a letter Oct. 26 from CEO Richard Smith citing the death threats with online screen shots of the threats attached. “Securus believes that it conformed its filing to Staff’s guidelines,” the company said, noting Global Tel*Link made an Oct. 27 filing citing similar threats.

Securus was informed on Oct. 29 via email that commission staff believe its Oct. 26 filing violated the Sunshine Act lobbying restrictions, the company said. “That e-mail stated that Securus could file a declaration explaining the circumstances of the October 26 filing within ten days." Securus noted it re-filed the screen shots on Oct. 30 with a brief cover letter identifying the document and quoting the Sunshine Act exemptions.

Securus said it hadn't attempted to change the outcome of the Oct. 22 vote, nor had it asked that any adopted rules be changed. It said its filings weren’t substantive ex parte presentations but “a means to inform the Commission of exigent circumstances arising from the press release.” An attached declaration from Smith demonstrates that “law enforcement has taken the death threats seriously,” the company said. Securus said Petro's “characterization of a ‘false emergency’ is simply wrong." The FCC shouldn't consider the Securus filings violations of its rules and should deny the "unfounded" motion of the Martha Wright Petitioners, the company said.

Robert McCrie, a professor of security management, said the Securus concerns were understandable. “Any threat against a CEO or company employees should be taken seriously and not dismissed out of hand, and it should be reported to law enforcement, as is the case in this instance,” said McCrie, who teaches at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York. He suggested the FCC could have made clearer that the highest ICS charges it cited were exceptions, but he also said hefty ICS costs have indeed burdened many poor inmate families. “The FCC ruling is a salutary one because it corrects a problem that has affected the families of prisoners as the burdens have continued to grow over the years,” he said. “At the same time, the industry is performing a service for the families and inmates and society at large because a prisoner who stays in touch with his family and relationships is less likely to re-offend.”