GUILTY AR - Beverly Carter, 49, Little Rock, 25 Sep 2014 - # 9

[KayKay.85]

How long was CL single between previous ex hubby and marrying AL? Trying to recall...wasn't AL her 4th marriage?

 

[ConnectZDots]

Here you go. I had posted it awhile ago.

http://www.writeaprisoner.com/back-to-work/inmateresume.aspx?i=z-151373

 

[arkansasmimi]

I will say this, and it is just my opinion from looking at documents and sourced information, public information, not just one person or document.. multiple... There are connections... whether those connections have any thing to do with why whatever happened on Sept 25, 2014 happened.. we will have to wait for the trial.

 

[ConnectZDots]

How long was CL single between previous ex hubby and marrying AL? Trying to recall...wasn't AL her 4th marriage?

6/23/11 was divorce date from the "DJ" husband

https://caseinfo.aoc.arkansas.gov/c...=P&case_id=60DR-11-2298&begin_date=&end_date=

AL is #4, I believe.


ETA document Verifying plaintiff ID via maiden name - see #8. "restored maiden name of Lowery" (which is funny because her maiden name is Manley but...gets hard to keep track after 3 name changes)

https://contexte.aoc.arkansas.gov/imaging/IMAGES/DMS/CK_Image.Present2?DMS_ID=60100028051008

 

[arkansasmimi]

Go ahead, Link! You are the queen of links, for sure! I love it!!!

you crack me up. Makes me think of those commercials on tv... there is an APP for that lol

 

[ConnectZDots]

Hmm, restraining clause? Just below the maiden name clause. Maybe that's standard verbiage? Maybe not.

 

[arkansasmimi]

Hold on I have that link..

Ok... here is the link... have to be careful but this is significant to me.. http://www.writeaprisoner.com/back-to-work/inmateresume.aspx?i=z-151373

Only quoting my own post so that I can prove this is the same Arron Lewis listed in write a prisoner.
Arron Lewis - 151373
Arkansas DOC
523 Brewer Road
Little Rock, AR 72206 USA



Arron Michael Lewis

ADC Number: 151373
Name: Lewis, Arron M
http://adc.arkansas.gov/inmate_info/search.php

 

[arkansasmimi]

Hmm, restraining clause? Just below the maiden name clause. Maybe that's standard verbiage? Maybe not.

That is standard.

 

[arkansasmimi]

My first reaction was WTH!!!! But after thinking about it, it will probably be easier for them to read email messages and there isnt a chance of drugs being smuggled in. Once communication becomes mostly email, the paper mail will certainly be scrutinized more for why something had to be physically sent.

I am thinking they probably print out the correspondence and give the paper product to the inmate.

 

[concernedmother]

http://people.howstuffworks.com/prison-telecommunication3.htm
Cell Phones in Prison: Contraband
Another way for inmates to dodge prison eavesdropping is to gain their own phones. Prison authorities have found it's surprisingly easy for prison inmates to get their hands on working cell phones (with chargers to boot). One tipoff came from an inmate's mother who wrote to a warden in a Texas prison complaining that her son's cell phone reception was bad [source: Butterfield].

Cell phone accessibility has become a serious problem for prisons -- in addition to the crimes that inmates are known to commit over the phone. Gangs can organize themselves far more easily when members in prison have cell phones. For example, in 2006, incarcerated gang leaders in Brazil orchestrated large, synchronized riots using their cell phones, reportedly in order to prove their influence even behind bars [source: Reel]. The gang caused uprisings in more than 70 prisons, and meanwhile, members outside of the prison caused riots and wreaked havoc on public busses and police stations. Gangs transcend prison bars in the U.S., too, where gang leaders have been able to wield their power from inside prison walls -- even ordering gang murders [source: Dolan].
So, how do inmates get their hands on cell phones? Apparently, visitors and corrupt prison guards have been known to furnish these phones to inmates.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/08/17/tabletsforinmates/2651727/
As of August 2013 6 states were allowing prisoners to purchase tablets. Eventually, this will probably be the norm.jmo


http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/internet-access-prisoners_739266.html
Current rules permit all federal inmates and most state prisoners to send and receive emails through special, monitored systems. Starting late last year, some federal prisons began allowing inmates to buy MP3 music players and download songs to fill them. These systems​—​financed entirely by charging inmates per message and per song​—​work better than what they replaced. Unlike physical mail, email can’t be used to smuggle contraband. It also can be monitored automatically and doesn’t require staff time to distribute. The electronic alternatives also appear to be more secure. There are dozens of cases of inmates running criminal operations by phone or mail, but thus far, no documented cases involving email since the U.S. Bureau of Prisons began its pilot program eight years ago.



Just was curious how all this technology is playing out in prisons.

 

[Nehemiah]

I will say this, and it is just my opinion from looking at documents and sourced information, public information, not just one person or document.. multiple... There are connections... whether those connections have any thing to do with why whatever happened on Sept 25, 2014 happened.. we will have to wait for the trial.

Can you opine as to what some of the connections could be?

 

[ConnectZDots]

That is standard.

Actually, it's not. Just found many divorce decrees, same county, same court, without any restraint orders mentioned, with only separation of property or custody specifications. Search at Pulaski court records, domestic cases. Running back to work now but there are plenty at the site.

So we know there was a need for a restraining order to both parties to refrain from "threatening, mistreating, molesting, causing injury or harassing" the other. I could not find this verbiage in other divorce decrees. Have a look. ??

https://caseinfo.aoc.arkansas.gov/cconnect/PROD/public/ck_public_qry_cpty.cp_personcase_setup_idx

 

[arkansasmimi]

Actually, it's not. Just found many divorce decrees, same county, same court, without any restraint orders mentioned, with only separation of property or custody specifications. Search at Pulaski court records, domestic cases. Running back to work now but there are plenty at the site.

So we know there was a need for a restraining order to both parties to refrain from "threatening, mistreating, molesting, causing injury or harassing" the other. I could not find this verbiage in other divorce decrees. Have a look. ??

https://caseinfo.aoc.arkansas.gov/cconnect/PROD/public/ck_public_qry_cpty.cp_personcase_setup_idx

I have known a few people who have gotten divorced and I looked a few up. It looks like each one, as well as I pulled mine out from many yrs ago. None of them are of a form like same wording. Back when I got mine, that there is a clause that is for lack of better words restraining you or ordering you for harassing the other party and so forth. In this instance, not knowing the circumstances, possible it was of a domestic nature? So I will respectfully withdraw my "its standard" comment

 

[ConnectZDots]

I have known a few people who have gotten divorced and I looked a few up. It looks like each one, as well as I pulled mine out from many yrs ago. None of them are of a form like same wording. Back when I got mine, that there is a clause that is for lack of better words restraining you or ordering you for harassing the other party and so forth. In this instance, not knowing the circumstances, possible it was of a domestic nature? So I will respectfully withdraw my "its standard" comment

Well it's probably a good idea in any case to permanently restrain each from "molesting" or threatening to injure the other, as is stated.... But I looked at a bunch of similar dates, same court & county, and didn't find another one in the mix. Was most likely an attorney decision to add it based on either request of the client, existing circumstances or just being cautious.

 

[arkansasmimi]

My first reaction was WTH!!!! But after thinking about it, it will probably be easier for them to read email messages and there isnt a chance of drugs being smuggled in. Once communication becomes mostly email, the paper mail will certainly be scrutinized more for why something had to be physically sent.

I went to that link at the freq asked question. I never heard of such lol til I saw on the ADOC website.

Here it says about printing out, which would be what I would think they do. Not sure if I understand if the inmate responds back by email. I thinking that would be a headache in the making security wise. Anywho, there a whole page of STUFF lol


How do I know if and when an inmate received a message?Once you send a message though Access Secure Mail, the message is immediately sent to the mailroom located at the inmate's facility. It is up to the facility to review, approve and print messages. Access Corrections is not able to confirm an inmate's receipt of a message. However, most messages are reviewed within 24 hours by facility staff.

https://www.accesscorrections.com/index.php?p=9

 

[jstkiddn]

Asking friend with nephew who had recent stay in Arkansas prison.

She said her main form of sending him things, including pictures, was via email. The prison would print it all out and take it to him, but if he wanted to respond he had to write a physical snail mail USPS letter or call on the phone. He was not allowed to email back.

On the other hand, her husband had a cousin in a Federal prison and they emailed back and forth just like she emails with anyone else. He was allowed computer access.

 

[southsleuth]

Well it's probably a good idea in any case to permanently restrain each from "molesting" or threatening to injure the other, as is stated.... But I looked at a bunch of similar dates, same court & county, and didn't find another one in the mix. Was most likely an attorney decision to add it based on either request of the client, existing circumstances or just being cautious.

IMO, cautious.
OT: The final decree in my divorce stated the "minor daughter" who was a senior in HS had to be bathed, dressed and presentable for visitation with her father. This was never a contention, she had her own car, her Dad went to watch her softball games and they went out for pizza after games if his sleazy GF didn't go. Guess I could have been cited for contempt for not dressing her up like a doll with bows in her hair instead of a smelly softball uniform?

 

[jstkiddn]

Bathed, dressed and presentable for visitation? Omg! WTHeck? Not to mention she was tending to her own bathing and dressing at that age.

The wording sounds like something for a funeral visitation! Lol

 

[southsleuth]

Bathed, dressed and presentable for visitation? Omg! WTHeck? Not to mention she was tending to her own bathing and dressing at that age.

The wording sounds like something for a funeral visitation! Lol

In my case it was ridiculous. Neither one of us would have ever thought to put that in. My lawyer did it. I'll never know why, he said it needed to be in the document.
That's why I was mentioning CL's last divorce decree, re: harassment and restraining order. Either the attorney decided to flower it up or CL asked for it to be included. No telling what's going on in her head.

 

[TKL123]

How long was CL single between previous ex hubby and marrying AL? Trying to recall...wasn't AL her 4th marriage?

approximately two years