76-13-B1
- Main Page \ Reagan Radio Commentaries \ 1977
| << Previous Broadcast | Next Broadcast >> |
Punishment[edit]
Transcript[edit]I've been as critical as anyone about lenient judges who are reluctant to impose severe sentences, or who send the guilty back to the street on probation. Sometimes, however, the judge has no choice under state statutes and those can be changed if enough of us will make our wants known to our legislators. A few weeks ago, a judge of the California Superior Court, Harry V. Peetris, sent me a copy of his remarks made in open court as he sentenced a convicted murderer. He explained that it was the obligation of the court to deter the convicted man from committing crimes in the future, to deter others, and to protect society. The Judge told me he was frustrated in achieving these goals by California's new Sentencing Act of 1976. The man before him had served two prison terms for armed robbery and burglary, and an extra term for parole violation. Now, after a four month trial, he had been found guilty of four cold-blooded, deliberate murders -- one of them for hire. His victims were a man, a 15 year old boy and two women. In describing the crimes, Judge Peetris said a woman and her son were seated in their living room. The murderer placed a gun deep in the woman's ear and fired. The boy begged for his life but was killed in the same manner, because, in the words of the killer, he couldn't leave an eyewitness to the first murder. His third victim was his cocaine supplier who also begged for his life. This time the weapon was a sawed-off rifle and the victim was stuffed into a plastic garbage bag and buried in the forest. He was hired to kill victim Number Four, a woman. Using a handgun, he shot her in the head four times. Miraculously, she lived but was partially paralyzed. Two months later, for an additional fee, he returned and finished the job, saying, --QUOTE -- "This time she's really dead." -- UNQUOTE. In passing sentence, Judge Peetris said the only appropriate punishment would be death in the gas chamber. But the people of California, who voted - better than two to one - to reinstitute capital punishment several years ago, are still waiting for the legislature to pass the implementing legislation. The next proper sentence would be life imprisonment without parole, but under California law such a penalty doesn't apply to first-degree murder. And, the New Sentencing Act of 1976 forbids the judge from passing sentence for each of the four murders and having them run consecutively. All the Judge could do is sentence this cold-blooded, professional killer of four people to prison with the knowledge that he will be eligible for parole in five years and 10 months. Judge Peetris said, -- QUOTE -- "The sentence that the law allows me to render also fails to provide protection for the witnesses who in this case came forward under threats of death from the defendant." -- UNQUOTE. There were four women who couldn't hide their stark fear while they were on the witness stand. They will live with the knowledge that, in less than six years, the man they helped to convict might possibly be free to carry out his threat on their lives. The law properly provides for a judge to be lenient when the case calls for leniency. It does not provide for his being severe when that is called for in order to protect society. Only the people can make their legislators change the law. This is Ronald Reagan. Thanks for listening. |
Details[edit]
| |||||||||||
Added Notes[edit] |
