“The agents told him he was going to be released. But Daniel Chong was not released. Instead, he was taken back to a holding cell in handcuffs, and he was left there for dead for 5 days–5 days without food, 5 days without water, 5 days without sunlight, 5 days without any basic necessities of life, in a holding cell not much larger than a bathroom stall. He cried out for help. He kicked and banged on the door of the cell but to no avail. He became so desperate and dehydrated that he even drank his own urine in an effort to survive”, said Grassley.
On July 29, 2014 Senator Chuck Grassley from Iowa asked for and was granted permission to address the United States Senate regarding the unconscionable way the Drug Enforcement Agency treated Daniel Chong:
“Mr. President, today I come to the floor to speak about the unconscionable way in which the Drug Enforcement Administration treated Daniel Chong, a San Diego college student, back in 2012. Unfortunately, the American people still do not know all the facts. They do not know what lasting changes are being made to make sure something like this never happens again. And they do not know what is being done to hold the DEA agents involved accountable because if people are not held accountable, there are not going to be any changes made. Most of the time, for people to be held accountable, heads have to roll, and there is no evidence that is the case in this particular case. But here is what we do know. It is a story that you might expect to hear set in some Third World country but never in the United States of America. So here it is.
Back in April 2012, Daniel Chong, a college student at the University of California, San Diego, was arrested by law enforcement conducting a sweep for drugs at a college party. He was taken into custody by the DEA and transported to the local DEA field office. He was questioned by the agents who had arrested him, and the agents apparently concluded that there was no basis to charge him with a crime. The young man may well have simply been in the wrong place at the wrong time.
The agents told him he was going to be released. But Daniel Chong was not released. Instead, he was taken back to a holding cell in handcuffs, and he was left there for dead for 5 days–5 days without food, 5 days without water, 5 days without sunlight, 5 days without any basic necessities of life, in a holding cell not much larger than a bathroom stall. He cried out for help. He kicked and banged on the door of the cell but to no avail. He became so desperate and dehydrated that he even drank his own urine in an effort to survive. Incredibly, the one thing Daniel Chong found in his cell that he tried to live on turned out to be some methamphetamine. That is right, he found an illegal drug in the DEA’s own holding cell. Apparently, it was never searched before Mr. Chong was tossed inside. It got so bad that this young man tried to kill himself. He tried to carve the words “sorry Mom” into his own skin. He intended it to be the last message for anyone to pass on who might one day discover his lifeless body in that DEA holding cell.
After 5 days someone finally responded to Daniel Chong’s call for help. He was taken immediately to the hospital. He was found to be suffering from extreme dehydration, hypothermia, kidney failure, and cuts and bruises on his wrists. It took 4 days to nurse him back to health.
This all occurred in April 2012. Soon after I learned of it, I sent a letter to the DEA Administrator demanding to know what could have led to such a calamity. I asked how, in a modern age of computers and surveillance cameras, it was possible that an innocent person could be left for dead in a DEA holding cell. I asked about the DEA policies and procedures in place to help prevent this from ever happening again. And I asked whether those responsible for what happened to Mr. Chong were going to be held accountable.
It took the DEA more than a year to respond to my questions–more than a year. In June 2013 the DEA trotted out the familiar response we so often hear from bureaucrats when they do not want to tell you what really happened. They said at that time the DEA could not comment on many aspects of the matter because the Department of Justice’s own inspector general was conducting a review. The DEA assured me that, in their words, an “interim” policy had been adopted to make sure no other innocent people would be abandoned in a prison cell and left for dead. But the American people would have to wait for a permanent policy change and a full accounting until after the inspector general finished its investigation.
Just a month later, in July 2013, the DEA announced it would be handing over $4.1 million to Daniel Chong to settle his lawsuit. Mr. President, $4.1 million of taxpayer money–almost $1 million for each day he spent forgotten and also ignored in that dark and drug-infested DEA holding cell.
Now, up to date, finally, just this month and more than 2 years after this debacle, the Department of Justice’s inspector general finally issued its report of the investigation. We still do not know the full truth about what happened to Daniel Chong. In many ways the inspector general’s report raises more questions than it answers, and what the report does tell us is quite disturbing.
According to the report, Daniel Chong was not just forgotten by the agents who arrested him; he was ignored by other DEA employees who knew he was there but assumed he was somebody else’s problem.
And the report suggests the DEA may have tried to cover up the whole event.
According to the report, there were three DEA agents and a supervisor directly responsible for making sure this young man was not abandoned in that holding cell. So it is obvious these four agents failed miserably in their responsibilities. But it gets even worse. According to the report, at least four other agents passed in and out of the holding cell area during the 5 days Daniel Chong was imprisoned. These four agents admitted they had either seen or heard Chong in his cell, but they simply assumed someone else was going to take care of him–in other words, he was somebody else’s problem.
Daniel Chong was arrested on a Saturday. One of those agents saw him in the cell on Sunday, and one saw him there on Monday, and another two agents either saw him or heard him on Wednesday, but nothing compelled these law enforcement officers to address his plight because they did not believe anything was amiss.
I hope to all my colleagues that what I just told you is very difficult to believe.
In addition, Daniel Chong’s holding cell was near a workspace area used by dozens of DEA personnel. According to the report, anyone in that workspace could have clearly heard banging and yelling from inside the cell.
But not a single one of the 25 DEA employees interviewed by the inspector general who worked this area could recall hearing any unusual noises during the time Daniel Chong was imprisoned there. So this is very difficult to believe. It defies all common sense. It contradicts what Daniel Chong says he did by crying out for help and banging on his holding cell door. It contradicts what his injuries tell us he did. It contradicts what anyone left in a holding cell without the basic necessities of life for days would do.
Why did no one respond to Daniel Chong’s cries for help? The report does not even attempt to answer that question.
These eight DEA agents were in some way responsible for this young man’s wrongful captivity. The report does not say what happened to these agents. This is where you get into accountability. Who is responsible? Are heads going to roll so this behavior changes? Are these agents still working for the DEA? Have they been disciplined? Are they still arresting other people, tossing them behind bars and leaving them for dead?
The problem does not stop here. According to the report, the DEA may have tried to cover up this entire event. The inspector general learned about what happened to Daniel Chong from an anonymous whistleblower who called one of its field offices.
This is another example of the value of whistleblowers, heroes who stand up for what is right, sometimes at great personal risk. According to the IG’s report, the whistleblower indicated that the DEA “was trying to contain this matter locally.” That is another way of saying, essentially, that a coverup could be in the works.
Incredibly, as it turns out the DEA office in San Diego assigned the very agents who were responsible for Daniel Chong’s captivity to process the holding cell area where Chong was held for days. That is right. The agents who left Chong behind bars for 5 days were assigned to investigate their own egregious mistakes–kind of like the fox guarding the chicken house.
DEA management also decided that it was going to conduct its own internal management review of the incident; that is, it would conduct it is own interviews and investigations before DEA notified anybody else. DEA management justified this decision by telling the inspector general that it assumed the conduct “which resulted in Chong’s detention did not amount to misconduct and was not criminal.” But, of course, as the inspector general found, it should have been readily apparent to DEA management that this was not true. Of course, DEA management may have calculated that undertaking its own investigation could head off an independent outside review; indeed, perhaps the investigation could even be contained “locally.” How many other DEA misdeeds have been similarly contained?
So it is obvious what happened. It is outrageous. How it was handled is outrageous. We need to know more about why the inspector general was not called in immediately–that is, even as DEA policy requires–rather than having people who conducted the wrongdoing investigating, in a sense, themselves. We need to know if indeed this was a deliberate attempt to sweep this dereliction of duty under the rug.
The DEA is entrusted with a lot of responsibility and authority. We ask the DEA to enforce our drug laws. We ask the DEA to protect our communities. The DEA has a very tough job. The Obama administration is not making that job any easier because this administration is undermining the DEA by turning a blind eye to illegal marijuana trafficking. It is trying to release convicted drug dealers from our prisons. It is trying to reduce the criminal penalties and minimum mandatory sentences for drug dealers who are still on the streets peddling death in our communities. So I understand these are very challenging times for the DEA.
When the DEA or any law enforcement agency neglects its responsibilities and then possibly even covers up wrongdoing, then those who are responsible must be held accountable. So I have to ask, if the employees at DEA are not held accountable, what needs to happen in order for action to be taken? Do we need to wait until someone dies?
The DEA’s conduct in this case is inexcusable. After 2 years and more than $4 million of taxpayer money, the DEA owes the American people more answers. The American people deserve answers to the questions I posed in my letter to the DEA back in May of 2012, so, not getting a proper answer, I will be writing to the DEA again this week to pose additional questions, including about the possibility of a coverup.
Most importantly, the American people deserve to know that those responsible for the detention and the mistreatment of Daniel Chong will be held accountable for this horrendous event”, said Grassley.
Source: Congressional Record http://thomas.loc.gov/
See video; Daniel Chong forgotten in jail cell for 5 days http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-USSyj8MvMo
Note:
Senator Grassley is a member of the following Senate committees:
Committee on the Judiciary. Senator Grassley has been on this committee every year that he’s served in the Senate and today has a leadership position as the committee’s Ranking Member. The Committee on the Judiciary is one of the Senate’s original standing committees and has a broad and influential jurisdiction, including crime, antitrust, bankruptcy, intellectual property, the federal courts and judges, civil liberties, constitutional law and amendments, and immigration.
Committee on Finance. Senator Grassley served as either Ranking Member or Chairman of this committee from 2001 through 2010, and he remains a senior member. Senator Grassley calls this committee the quality of life committee because of the committee’s jurisdiction, which includes all tax matters, health care, Social Security; Medicare, Medicaid, social services, unemployment compensation, tariffs and international trade. Legislation acted on by the Committee on Finance raises virtually all federal revenue, and expenditures authorized by this committee represent as much as two-thirds of the federal budget.
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry. Both on and off the Senate Agriculture Committee, Senator Grassley is an outspoken and effective voice for American agriculture. Senator Grassley farms corn and soybeans 50-50 with his son in Butler County, Iowa, and works to stay in close touch with the realities facing producers of farm commodities, including livestock. The Agriculture Committee is responsible for federal farm program policy, nutrition programs and forestry matters, as well as oversight of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Committee on the Budget. Senator Grassley is a senior member of this committee, which is responsible for drafting an annual budget plan for Congress. The budget resolution prepared by the Budget Committee sets out a broad blueprint for Congress with respect to the total levels of revenues and spending for the federal government as a whole. Other committees in the Senate and House of Representatives prepare the legislation that establishes specific tax and spending policies.
Joint Committee on Taxation. Senator Grassley is a member of this committee because of his seniority on the Committee on Finance. Members include five senators who serve on the Finance Committee and five members of the House of Representatives who serve on the Committee on Ways and Means. The Joint Committee reports on the effects of taxes and the administration of taxes.
Senator Grassley is a member of the following Senate caucuses:
Caucus on International Narcotics Control. Senator Grassley is the Co-Chairman of this caucus.
Senate Caucus on Foster Youth. Senator Grassley is the Co-Founder and Co-Chair of this caucus.
4-H Caucus
Central Community College Caucus
Congressional Coalition on Adoption
Congressional Fire Services Caucus
Congressional Waterways Caucus
Czech Caucus
Lewis and Clark Congressional Caucus
National Guard Caucus
Senate Anti-Meth Caucus, Co-Chair
Senate Cancer Coalition
Senate French Caucus
Senate India Caucus
Senate Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Caucus
Senate Rural Health Caucus
Senate Taiwan Caucus
Terrorist Financing Task Force