Massachusetts Failures

Beacon Hill, the peak of Massachusetts government, has allowed itself to become obsessed with a flawed Gambling Bill that overshadows all of the People's Business.

Maybe they might not be faulted if the legislation was truly thorough, but it's not. Claims of 'we'll get it right' fall short.

Eagerly promoting phony job creation figures and false revenue claims, glad handing Gambling Industry lobbyists while scandals, indictments, cronyism and Ethics issues abound, the citizens have been shortchanged on major issues.

Below is merely one more example:


Murder victim's Quincy dad fears casino bill overshadowing offender bill
By Steve Adams
The Patriot Ledger


A murder victim’s father who’s been fighting for more than a decade to keep violent offenders behind bars said he’s worried anti-crime legislation is being overshadowed by the Legislature’s focus on casinos.

“As long as we can get revenue and more fees, that’s more important than if a woman gets raped or a person gets murdered,” Leslie Gosule of Quincy said. “The casino bill is trumping the habitual offender bill, which is wrong.”

Gosule’s daughter Melissa Gosule, a schoolteacher, was kidnapped, raped and murdered in 1999 after she accepted a ride from a passer-by after her car broke down in Sagamore. Her killer, Michael Gentile of Halifax, had a record of 22 arrests.

Since Gosule’s death, her family has been lobbying for legislation that would make it more difficult to parole violent offenders. Melissa’s Bill would eliminate the possibility of parole for offenders with at least three felony convictions. Currently, offenders are eligible for parole after serving half of their sentences.

The Legislature’s joint public safety committee is considering several bills that would impose stricter penalties on repeat violent offenders.

After the Dec. 26 shooting death of Woburn police officer John Maguire, 11 legislators filed a bill that would eliminate the chance of parole for offenders serving more than one life sentence.

Maguire’s killer, Dominic Cinelli, had been paroled despite being convictions that led to three life sentences.

Gov. Deval Patrick has proposed a law that would require an offender convicted of three felonies to serve at least two-thirds of the third sentence before being eligible for parole. Another bill filed this session would eliminate parole for anyone serving more than one life sentence.

Many backers of sentencing reform who testified this past Wednesday at the State House said they would support Melissa’s Bill or legislation that combined elements of all of the bills.

“It could be a mix of the bills,” said state Sen. John Keenan, D-Quincy. “Some things in the governor’s bill will have to be looked at, as well as some things in Melissa’s Bill.”

Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr, R-Gloucester, said some version should emerge from the committee this week.

“I think they will be pleased with the core elements of the bill,” Tarr said. “It should be ready for a floor vote next week. My philosophy about this is we can’t do it soon enough and it’s long overdue.”

Laura Schroeder, a spokeswoman for Senate President Therese Murray, said some version is expected to be released from the committee this week. It will likely contain various elements of the competing bills, she said.

Currently in Massachusetts, convicted felons are eligible for parole after serving half of their sentences, except for first-degree murderers, who are not eligible for parole. Those convicted of second-degree murder must serve 15 years of a life sentence before they are eligible for parole.

Opponents of mandatory sentencing have argued that the language in both Melissa’s Bill and the governor’s bill is too broad, and that the sentencing guidelines do not apply only to violent felons.

Representatives from groups including the Massachusetts Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and Massachusetts Families Against Mandatory Minimums have testified against Melissa’s Bill.

Leslie Gosule said the influence of defense attorneys in the Legislature has thwarted tougher crime legislation over the years.

“A criminal defense attorney gets paid every time a guy commits a crime,” he said. “It’s a great system. Money is more important than public safety.”