July
12, 2012
Testimony of Bobbi J:
Family member of a murder victim of a juvenile killer serving
life in prison, opposed to any changes to past sentences in Pennsylvania,
proponent for reform of mandatory sentences in the future, with JLWOP maintained
as a sentencing option.
Introduction
I’d like to
start by thanking the committee for quickly acting upon the Supreme Court
ruling and scheduling these hearings. Also, I am grateful that I am able to
speak, on behalf of my family, and for those families who find this too painful
to endure.
I’m here
today as a victim, just a victim. I remember how odd that moniker felt the
first time I was referenced that way. I thought my sister was the victim, that
her baby was the victim; they were the ones who were murdered. However, I am a
victim of the crime committed by my sister’s killer, and time has shown me why
that title applies.
I serve on an
advocacy board for a National organization of people who are just victims. We
have prayed for the past five or six years that this day would never come. I’m
just a victim, who has testified before this committee twice, prior to today.
I’m just a victim who had all sense of closure and finality in my sister’s
brutal murder stripped away by five individuals in Washington, DC, in spite of
my best efforts to make them see what that decision would mean. I’m just a
victim who stood outside of the Supreme Court during the oral arguments,
because law students and people who support the murderers took up all the seats
inside. I’m just a victim, whose whole life is in complete upheaval because of
all of these things.
On Tuesday of
this week, while I was on a call for my job, I got a voice mail from a reporter
in Pittsburgh, where I live. The message was to convey that my sister’s killer
had filed for an appeal, and would I like to comment. I’m just a victim, who
found out on her voicemail that the person who brutally murdered her sister and
unborn child, was seeking to be freed.
As I see it,
there are three topics of concern, which should be addressed in these hearings.
The first is whether these existing sentences are eligible for review, the
second is if they are, how can is that best accomplished, and finally how
should the law be revised to accommodate the ruling.
Questioning Retroactive Action
I’m not a law
scholar, I know enough to get by, and us victims have to learn some of these
lessons the hard way. However, in regard to the retroactive application of the
Supreme Court ruling, I question why that is the appropriate course of action.
The sentences in these cases, cases like my sisters murder, were prosecuted and
sentenced under laws that were acceptable at the time.
In 1997, the
‘Crimes Against the Unborn Child Act’ was passed by the Pennsylvania
legislature. As I understand it, this means that my sister’s murderer committed
2 murders, not one. However, there is no do over for his sentence or another
trial as a result of the new law. The law when he murdered his baby was that
the baby didn’t “count”, and so that is what we had to live with. I would present
the possibility that this is comparable to now asking for a do over for his
sentence. In both cases, the law changed, and it should apply to all cases
going forward, not retroactively.
What if it is retroactive?
If it turns
out that the law is retroactive, which I fully anticipate based on how victims
rights have been completely ignored on this topic to date, then I beg this
committee to find a way to incorporate the victims. The notification on my
voicemail regarding the appeal just further fuels my fear that victims all over
this state will be completely blindsided or completely unaware of what is
happening here. I believe you can make a difference and elevate the perception
that we are just the victims, and help our voices be heard. The lack of
consideration for the victims of these crimes in the media, the government, and
by those Justices in many ways makes us feel like our dead loved ones mean
nothing.
How best to
make this a reality? That will be a complex endeavor that will require effort
and resources that probably do not exist today. There is no mechanism in place
to manage this situation. The victims in these cases have moved on, expecting
the closure the justice system promised them to stand. For every one of me, who
is notified by some reporter, there are probably several more families who have
no idea that these killers could go free. In many cases, they probably are not
signed up for updates, since we thought LWOP meant just that. Some things to
consider include:
1.)
Notification – a notification system
needs to be developed. These murder victims have families; those families often
participated in the court proceedings or gave impact statements. EVERY single
one of these families must be made aware of this ruling and the consequences.
I’m sure victims, such as me, would be willing to help determine how to do this.
2.)
Participation – the
victims of these crimes MUST be included in any development of a process to
hear these cases and evaluate them for an opportunity to be re-sentenced. The
glut of appeals filed via the appeal office should be held, immediately, with
no action until a statewide process for hearing and judging these appeals is
enacted. Anything short of that would be a travesty of justice for both the
general public and the victims themselves.
3.)
Respect – It is imperative that
victims’ rights be recognized in this process. The concept of victim impact
statements and notifications must be part of the appeal process. Furthermore,
the process of re-evaluation must be a one-time proceeding, without subjecting
the victims to further traumatization for years to come.
I urge this
committee and the State Supreme Court, to put the brakes on any appeal
proceeding until the above conditions can be explored. To act without the
above, would be cruel and unusual punishment for the victims, an irony not lost
on me at this point.
Future Laws
The question
remains, what to do with the JLWOP in the future. It is critical that you
maintain the ability to assign JLWOP in cases that warrant that sentence.
Again, I’m no law expert, but for the most part, I think the law works as
designed today. The mandated sentences, for first and second-degree murder for
juvenile offenders, should be replaced by a hearing to determine if that
sentence is appropriate based on the crimes. This will ensure that JLWOP
sentences are still available for murderers who kill in cold blood that deserve
that sentence. This hearing could be a secondary step in the process of moving
the case to Adult court, or a separate hearing closer to trial. In either scenario,
a simple examination of the case will help frame the appropriateness of the
sentence. For example, if you stab and beat your girlfriend to death, with a
knife you brought from home and leave her and your unborn child to bleed to
death in a schoolyard.
Conclusion
I thank you
again for your swift action on this topic. I urge you to be the voice of reason
in a world where we are just the victims. With careful consideration of the
issue, and how every action impacts people who have suffered more than you can
ever comprehend, you can be the light in our very bleak perception of our place
in the Justice system.
No comments:
Post a Comment