'Three Strikes' Proponents Level Harsh Criticism Against Governor
The governor on Saturday sent the anti-crime bill back to the Legislature.
Gov. Deval Patrick set in motion a wave of criticism when he vetoed the popular "three strikes" crime bill on the grounds that it lacked sufficient provisions for judicial discretion.
Warning of possible unintended "unjust consequences" that can arise from mandatory sentencing laws, Patrick wrote in a letter to the Legislature, "None of us is wise or prescient enough to foresee each and every circumstance in which the new habitual offender provisions may apply."
But critics accuse Patrick of vetoing a good anti-crime bill by asking for amendments that only protect offenders.
"Governor Patrick has had a busy week defending the interests of those who break the law...," "His actions to jeopardize the passage of the crime bill are both ill-timed and ill-advised by trying to amend a good and balanced bill with an extraordinary measure to protect repeat violent criminals, with precious little time remaining in the legislative session."
The state's largest police union, the New England Police Benevolent Association, also had strong words for the governor: "The Governor's actions at the 11th hour are reprehensible and reckless. It will be on his conscience "when"—not if—the next innocent victim or public safety officer is killed in the line of duty by a career criminal, if he fails to sign this bill which is designed to protect the most vulnerable from serial predators."
Dubbed "Melissa's Law," after Melissa Gosule, the 27-year-old Jamaica Plain schoolteacher who was raped and murdered in 1999 by a felon who had 27 previous convictions, the bill eliminates parole for someone convicted three times of one of 40 or so violent crimes, with at least one conviction having carried a minimum three-year prison term. It was was passed in both chambers last week by an overwhelming margin.
But the bill did not enjoy the support of Boston's city council, which urged the Legislature to write in more judicial control, or by Boston Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz, who voted with Massachusetts Black and Latino Caucus, and said the bill lacks evidence-based solutions, removes judicial discretion, and does not elimination mandatory minimums on nonviolent offenses. The caucus also says the bill will cost the state more than $100 million over the next 10 to 15 years.
The Legislature has Monday and Tuesday – the end of the Legislative session – to try to override Patrick or to present him with a bill he will sign.
TimmKell
3:45 pm on Monday, July 30, 2012
Really....how so? What has he done that makes you say I want this guy as my leader.
Paul Buckley
4:56 pm on Monday, July 30, 2012
This is the full press release from the NE police union. Hopefully our legislature will override this nonsense.
PRESS RELEASE (7/29/12):
As ardent supporters of Melissa's Bill and as the largest law enforcement labor union in New England, we are distraught by Governor Patrick's refusal to protect the law enforcement community, and we are alarmed that his watering down of this legislation would put our members in harms way.
Our brother and fellow union member, Woburn Police Officer John "Jack" Maguire would be alive today if not for the ultra-liberal politics utilized by this administration to coddle convicted murders and allow them to destroy families and undermine public safety in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
The Governor's actions at the 11th hour are reprehensible and reckless. It will be on his conscience "when" - not if - the next innocent victim or public safety officer is killed in the line of duty by a career criminal, if he fails to sign this bill which is designed to protect the most vulnerable from serial predators.
Governor, on behalf of the thousands of law enforcement officers we represent, including our brother officer and member John "Jack" Maguire -- withdraw your amendment and SIGN THE BILL by Tuesday.
Jerry Flynn, Exec. Director
New England Police Benevolent Association, I.U.P.A., AFL-CIO
7 Technology Dr. Suite 102
Chelmsford, MA 01863
Jerry Chase
5:30 pm on Monday, July 30, 2012
The current governor, D. P., is dreadful. Dump the Coupe deValle in 2014!
paul
7:58 pm on Monday, July 30, 2012
It's called saving money. Enough sending people away forever because they smoke pot. That's what it comes down to, job security for the law enforcement community, jailers, guards, cops, court workers, all great jobs, I know a lot of folks would love to have a job like that on the tax payers back. Paul Buckley, I was gonig to vote for you, now I am not going to vote on that stupid extra special Seekonk election. Wake up people, who is paying 40K+ per yr to lock up people, we are! This country is broke, snap out of it! Does the Joker guy get 2 more strikes?
Michael McKenney
9:58 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Your totally wrong Paul, no one has ever been sent to jail "forever" for "smoking pot". Nor has anyone gone to jail for more than a day or two for "smoking pot". As for the great jobs that cops have, feel free to take the test and see what it's like to deal with the dregs of society, expose yourself to all sorts of communicable diseases, work nights, weekends, and holidays, and oh yeah, have people try to assault you, and perhaps even kill you. But I'm sure you have another agenda brewing by the sounds of it. Trying leaving your mothers basement once in a while and talk to a cop, see how he likes his job. I'm sure you will be surprised by the answer. Most can't wait to get out. It's a thankless profession with little reward.
Adam Edward
12:11 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
this is about VIOLENT offenses. Last I checked smoking pot isn't a violent offense, also people don't go to jail for smoking pot they go to jail for selling pot. about the money arguement you could free every prisoner and I guarantee you wouldn't see your taxes drop.
Paul Buckley
8:26 pm on Monday, July 30, 2012
Thanks for letting me know that I do not have your vote Paul.
I won't waste my money sending you any campaign literature.
Amy
9:36 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
He's much too busy to pass a tough anti crime law, he has to make sure strip club owners, bars and package stores are allwoing the use of EBT cards! The man has his priorities. We arn't one of them.
Paul Buckley
10:48 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Nelson,
Why did you delete your comments on this post?
If you plan on being a selectman, you will not be able to delete your votes
or comments at meetings.
Dave Abbott
11:34 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Mr. Buckley you have earned my vote.
paul
11:06 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
3 strikes does not work and taxpayers end up paying for it. Anything can wind up costing someone a strike or two. We have 5000 jails with 2 million people locked up and have become the land of the unfree. How many are locked up by mistake? Don't hate Patrick just because he's a Democrat.
Jonathan Friedman
11:11 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
paul, do you know of any studies showing that it does not work?
paul
1:03 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
If you google 'do 3 strike laws work' you will find many studies that they don't. California is broke and their jails are overflowing, many getting 2 strikes for the same incident. 3 strike laws do not reduce violent crime, they reduce the money in our coffers.
Sailor
4:09 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
@paul They certainly work for the moron who does the third crime knowing he's going away forever.
Adam Edward
12:14 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
As it is now a man could beat his wife for years and spend small amounts of time in jail just to get released and do the same thing over and over again. Also remember this is VIOLENT offenses it's not like you get caught stealing 3 times and go to jail forever. I think if anything this would be a deterant to criminals who choose to keep up the same violent behavior.
Adam Edward
12:23 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
http://www.thesunchronicle.com/news/local_news/man-accused-of-beating-woman-bloody/article_0c816d9e-4ff7-59ea-9da8-ae62d652723a.html This is one reason I believe in the three strikes law.
Sailor
12:50 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Maybe Coupe Deval has plans to run for public office again and doesn't want a large segment of his supporters locked up and unable to vote. And before knees start jerking out there and charges of racism are spewed forth I'm referring to politicians AND voters who support this clown and his policies.
paul
1:18 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
The states largest police union had strong words for the governor, what a shock. 3 strikes would give them even more job security and extra cops/guards could be hired with full benefits and underfunded pensions. 3 strikes makes more government and puts more strain on people that work in the private sector.
Jonathan Friedman
1:23 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Paul, I lived in California for the past 10 years. There are many reasons why California is broke. Three strikes is not among the top 10.
deb of see-attleboro
2:44 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
If he were a Republican governor, the Dem's would be shouting from the rooftops, "This veto of Melissa's Law is just another example of the Republican *war on women*!!!"
paul
2:47 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
So you know first hand that 3 strikes does not work. You also know how packed the states 33 prisons are. Do you think Massachusetts should follow California just because? Why do we pay judges? Are we going to skip court and lock up for life after strike 3? We should leave strike 3 to the Boston Red Sox!
Jonathan Friedman
3:02 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
I think there are good arguments for and against three strikes.
Sailor
4:17 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
penitently - penitentiary (wrong form) LOL
paul
3:23 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
The guy that killed Melissa had 27 previous convictions, we don't need more laws we need the judges we have now to do their jobs. Are guns going to be banned in the wake of the Joker shooting? No way, the NRA would never let it happen. Republicans hate Patrick but he's right in this case.
Sailor
4:07 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
@paul I'm a Conservative. I assume by "Republicans" you actually mean Conservatives mostly. Since I've never met him I don't hate Coupe Deval I’m against his policies and his liberal ideology. I'm not sure how you think the NRA could stop any federal legislation that would ban guns or even add another layer of gun control on to already overburdened law abiding gun owners if a majority of “We the people” wanted it. I'm for three strikes and your out for very few violent crimes and a few illicit drug distribution crimes. I'm more of a one strike and your out for most life threatening violent crimes, sexual violence, sexual violence against children etc. Three strikes and your out for crimes against property is overkill in my book. However, anyone who has done even short time in a state penitently knows what goes on there. If they are hardcore enough to do two more crimes knowing they are going away for the duration have proven they have no place in civil society. As far as costs? I would venture a guess that an all or partial offset would be achieved by savings in law enforcement resources and judicial resources. Maybe not all the costs would be recouped but what price do you put on security and peace of mind?
deb of see-attleboro
3:47 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
What am I missing? Melissa's Law is nothing like the California three strike law. Admittedly, I have not read either law. But doesn't the CA. law mandate a life prison sentence after three violent offenses? According to the article, this proposed law simply eliminates the possibility of parole after three of the listed violent offenses.