Inmate Sues Crime Magazine for Labeling Him a 'Rat' - New York Times

When a magazine makes a mistake, it usually gets its facts straight and publishes a correction. The subject of the error may feel insulted or aggrieved, but generally speaking nobody gets hurt.

That is not, however, what seems to have happened when the crime magazine Don Diva published an article nearly 10 years ago reporting incorrectly that a federal inmate once worked as a government informant and testified against a murderous Brooklyn drug lord. According to a lawsuit working its way through Federal District Court in Brooklyn, the inmate, Russell Allen, was considered “a rat” because of the gaffe and claims to have spent the last decade in a kind of living hell behind bars, suffering death threats, stints in solitary confinement and the pain of being disowned by his family.

“The consequences of this particular article has been drastic,” Mr. Allen wrote in his complaint, which was filed two years ago. Representing himself while in federal prison in Mendota, Calif., Mr. Allen is now seeking damages of $1 million from Don Diva, maintaining that its factual lapse caused him to spend the last 10 years “combatting threats, fighting, and defending hisself against known and unknown persons.”

In 2008, Mr. Allen pleaded guilty to taking part in a vast drug conspiracy run by a notorious crack kingpin, Kenneth “Supreme” McGriff, who based his operations in a Queens public housing project and who the authorities said had played a role in the murder of the rapper Jam Master Jay and the attempted killing of 50 Cent, another hip-hop artist. Mr. Allen was sentenced to 30 years and began to serve his term in 2009.

But unbeknown to Mr. Allen, his nightmare had begun in late 2007, when Don Diva published its 30th edition, which contained an article titled “The Bad,” an interview with Mr. McGriff who inaccurately claimed that Mr. Allen had testified against him.

Given the popularity of the publication among inmates, the interview — and rumors of it — began to spread through the prison system, Mr. Allen claims, branding him with “the erroneous, wicked and reckless label” of a government informant. Over the next several years, according to prison records Mr. Allen filed with his complaint, he became involved in a host of fights with fellow inmates who were apparently trying to avenge Mr. McGriff — a man he described in his suit as “not your average street guy,” but “one of the most feared drug lords of all time.” He also claims that his friends and family disowned him for being “a rat,” cutting off their financial and emotional support.

During Mr. Allen’s first year in prison, Don Diva’s editors realized they had made a mistake and published a retraction in Issue No. 36, stating that Mr. Allen had not in fact testified against Mr. McGriff and reassured their readership of “the integrity” of their reporting.

But before Issue No. 36 could reach its target audience, federal officials banned the publication, whose slogan is “the original street bible,” from the prison system — because of its penchant for outing informants. The attempt to correct the record, and to spare Mr. Allen further harm, was therefore “useless and did not nothing to alleviate the damage,” he wrote.

Mr. Allen did not respond to a letter seeking comment on his suit and attempts to call him in prison were unsuccessful. A telephone conference with the presiding judge, Cheryl L. Pollak, was scheduled for Monday, but was canceled when prison officials were unable to get Mr. Allen to a phone.

Don Diva’s lawyer, Alexis Padilla, acknowledged on Tuesday that Mr. Allen had indeed found himself in “an unfortunate situation” — one, he added, that has troubled Kevin Chiles, the magazine’s chief executive, a former inmate who founded the magazine while he was serving time in prison. While Mr. Padilla cast doubts on Mr. Allen’s legal claims, he said the publication had offered him a deal.

If Mr. Allen agreed to drop his suit, Mr. Padilla said, Don Diva promised to write a feature-length article describing his travails.

Let's block ads! (Why?)