Senator Dan Debicella Press Releases
  Debicella Home Debicella Press
Senator debicella Press
July 31, 2007

Protecting Our Families from Violent Crime

By State Senator Dan Debicella

No words, no actions can ever comfort Bill Petit. His wife and two daughters were brutally murdered in Cheshire in late July—a tragedy on a level that I cannot even begin to fathom. To go through that amount of pain is something no one, no family, should have to endure. All our hearts go out to him, and we join the community of Cheshire in mourning his loss.

Laws cannot protect us one hundred percent from violent crimes and people who choose to commit such heinous, evil acts. But those of us in the legislature have a responsibility to try to structure the law to protect our families, take criminals off the streets, and ensure that punishment fits the crime.

I don’t know if changing the law could have prevented the tragedy of the Petit family, but I believe we need to strengthen our laws in Connecticut around parole, increase penalties for repeat offenders, and streamline the process of death penalty convictions.

First, we should eliminate parole for repeat offenders—even non-violent offenders. The two criminals who murdered the Petits did not have violent criminal records, but they had extensive records of burglary and other crimes.

Parole should be for first-time offenders who appear to be rehabilitating quickly from non-violent crimes to re-enter society. Parole should not be used as a way to save money, which it is too often.

We should eliminate parole as an option for any repeat offender of a felony. If someone commits a felony, is released, and then commits another felony, they should not be eligible for parole. It should not matter if the felony is violent or not—criminals should have to serve their full sentence for their second offense.

Second, we should automatically increase sentences for repeat offenders. In Connecticut we currently have a “persistent offender” law that allows a judge to increase a sentence if “extended incarceration would serve the public interest”. For example, a second-degree burglary which carries a 10-year sentence can be increased to a first-degree burglary which carries up to a 20-year sentence if the criminal has multiple felony convictions. However this is completely up to a judge—and is very rarely used in Connecticut.

I believe we need to make this mandatory, not optional. I am all for trying to rehabilitate people who make a mistake once, and pay their debt to society. But we should automatically increase penalties for career criminals who are convicted on multiple felonies. Removing persistent offenders from society is the best way to protect our families.

Third, we need to make sure that the death penalty is a viable option for heinous murders. I support the use of the death penalty for first-degree murder—both because the punishment fits the crime, and because it may deter some pre-meditated murders.

While the death penalty is allowed in Connecticut, we have only used it once in the past twenty-five years. Two reasons for this: endless appeals and something called the “mitigating factor” law. I believe we need to streamline the appeals process. Every defendant should have the right to appeal—you want to be as positive as possible about a death penalty case before the sentence is carried out. But all appeals should be filed within a prescribed time-frame, say within 18 months. Endless appeals make the death penalty a meaningless sentence.

We should also change the mitigating factor rules that discourage use of the death penalty. Connecticut’s mitigating factor rule says that judges or juries can convert death penalty convictions to a life sentence if the convict’s “mitigating factors” outweigh “aggravating factors”. These mitigating factors may include the type of childhood a criminal had or circumstances that led up to the murder. Juries can only choose the death penalties if the evidence in a murder is beyond a reasonable doubt—a ruling that can be appealed if there are new facts in a case. We should not be considering mitigating factors in death penalty cases—if the person is guilty of a heinous first degree murder, they should get the death penalty.

Limiting parole for repeat offenders, automatically increasing sentences for repeat felons, and streamlining death penalty sentences will all help protect our families. We can only pray for Bill Petit and his family, but I hope we can change the laws to lessen the chance of these tragedies happening.