Lieutenant Edward “Eddie” Bance is the head of Special Investigative Services (SIS) for the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) at the Federal Correctional Institution in Sheridan, Oregon (FCI Sheridan). As head of SIS he is in charge of mail censorship and theft as well as spying on inmates. At times he assists the FBI with spying on innocent inmates being investigated for crimes they did not commit even though he knows that there is no credible basis for the allegations. In one case he assisted serial snitch Scott Joseph Franklin with his efforts to frame the founder of CopBlaster.com for a fake murder for hire that he never solicited. According to FBI paperwork being uploaded with this report, Bance along with FBI Special Agent John Mandrafina were the ones that interviewed Franklin. Franklin was later convinced to wear a wire on his cell mate. The results of the investigation were that although the owner of CopBlaster.com does not like Judge Marco Hernandez, no evidence beyond the work of crackhead supports any claim that he ever tried to hire a hitman to whack Judge Hernandez.
Now, some might respond to this by saying things like “so what, wasn’t he just doing his job?” or “shouldn’t the FBI be to blame for this?” Both responses have merit but what is bothersome about the Franklin paperwork is that nowhere does it include any statements made by Bance about Franklin’s history of assaulting staff or making false statements. When Bance received word that Franklin was making these accusations he should have put a stop to them going any further because Bance knows that Scott Franklin is not a believable witness. Even if he could not stop the FBI he should have at least made enough of a point about Franklin to be worth mentioning in the paperwork.
While under investigation Bance directed his subordinates to spy on the Cop Blaster and censor his mail. As a result efforts to send out posts to be put on this site resulted in mail theft and incident reports by the likes of SIS officers David Prock and Michael Johnson. This was completely unnecessary and in this author’s opinion a violation of the First Amendment because although it is well known that mail is subject to inspection, inspection should not lead to censorship unless the mail contains contraband or constitutes some sort of unlawful activity.
Published at Tue, 01 Oct 2019 13:06:32 +0000