July 26, 2010: The John Odgren case

>>> TONIGHT ON "GREATER BOSTON,"
JOHN ODGREN WAS 16 WHEN HE
STABBED A CLASSMATE.
AND GOLD MINES FOR INVESTORS.
A COMEDY OF MANNERS.
STEPHEN McCAWLY ON
"INSIGNIFICANT OTHERS".
>> GOOD EVENING, I'M JARED
BOWEN.
IT'S BEEN THREE YEARS SINCE
ODGREN STABBED A CLASSMATE TO
DEATH AND YET, THEY'RE STILL
ARGUING OVER WHETHER JUSTICE WAS
DONE.
TODAY, THE ATTORNEY ASKED A
JUDGE TO REDUCE THAT SENTENCE.
DEFENSE LAWYERS SAID ALENSON'S
STABBING DEATH WAS SO HORRIBLE
THAT JURORS USED THEIR HEARTS
NOT HEADS WHEN THEY CONVICTED
16-YEAR-OLD ODGREN OF FIRST
DEGREE MURDER.
>> COURTS MUST BE PARTICULARLY
ON GUARD AGAINST TOO PASSIONATE
A REACTION FROM JURORS WHICH IN
THE LONG RUN WILL NOT PROMOTE
THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE CRIMINAL
LAW.
>> ODGREN IS SERVING LIFE
WITHOUT PAROLE.
A CHANGE TO SECOND DEGREE WILL
MAKE HIM ELIGIBLE FOR PAROLE IN
15 YEARS.
>> BECAUSE OF HIS YOUTH, BECAUSE
OF HIS MENTAL ILLNESS, AND THE
EVIDENCE, IT'S MUCH MORE
CONSISTENT WITH A VERDICT OF
SECOND DEGREE MURDER.
>> THE PROSECUTOR MARGUERITE DAN
ASKED THEM NOT TO SECOND GAS THE
JURORS IN THE CASE.
ED A -- ODGREN HAS BEEN
DIAGNOSED WITH BIPOLAR DISORDER.
>> WE DON'T REVISIT THE
PSYCHIATRIC ISSUES.
>> HIS PARENTS DECLINED TO
COMMENT TODAY, BUT THEY RECENTLY
TOLD JAMES ALAN FOX THEY'RE
CONSTANTLY HAUNTED BY THEIR
SON'S CRIME AND IMPRISONMENT.
AND THE VICTIM'S FAMILY SAID
IT'S UNTHINKABLE TO US.
SHAPIRO SAYS BOTH FAMILIES ARE
HURTING.
>> THERE'S NO QUESTION THAT BOTH
FAMILIES HAVE SUFFERED AN
ENORMOUS INJURY, AND WE DON'T
THINK IT'S NECESSARY TO CHOOSE
SIDES.
ONE CAN UNDERSTAND BOTH SIDES OF
IT.
AND YET, HAVE THE COMPASSION TO
SEE WHAT'S RIGHT.
>> WHAT'S RIGHT IS SOMETHING
JUDGE HAGGERTY WILL DECIDE IN
THE COMING WEEKS.
GIANTING ME NOW ARE JAMES --
JOINING ME NOW ARE JAMES ALAN
FOX AND JEFFREY DENNER.
WELCOME.
JAMES YOU HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING
THIS FOR QUITE A BIT.
YOU WROTE ABOUT IT IN THE GLOBE
YESTERDAY, AND HAVE BEEN WRITING
ABOUT IT ON YOUR BLOG, INCLUDING
TODAY.
WHAT DO YOU FINAL SO EXCEPTIONAL
ABOUT THIS CASE THAT THE
SENTENCE SHOULD BE REDUCED?
>> WELL, THE PROSECUTION SAID
TODAY -- RIGHTLY SO, THAT AGE
ALONE IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO
RATCHET DOWN THE SENTENCE TO
SECOND DEGREE MURDER AND LIFE
WITH PAROLE.
BUT IT'S AGE AND A WHOLE VARIETY
OF MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES THAT
ODGREN HAS BEEN DEALING WITH HIS
WHOLE LIFE.
HE WASN'T ACTING LIKE A CRUEL
AND SADISTIC KILLER WHO SAID
WHAT HAVE I DONE AND TRIED TO
GET HIS VICTIM HELP.
>> THEY DECIDED IT WAS
PREMEDITATED, HE HAD BEEN
READING STEPHEN KING NOVELS AND
TOOK A COURSE AT PLANNING THE
PERFECT MURDER.
IT WAS IN HIS INTENT THE JURY
DECIDED.
>> VIOLENCE WAS IN HIS BRAIN.
HE WAS INDEED OBSESSED WITH THIS
WHOLE STEPHEN KING DARK TOWER
STORY, AND WITH THE NUMBER 19
AND JANUARY 19th WAS UPON HIM.
HE WAS SO ANXIOUS, HE BROUGHT A
KNIFE TO SCHOOL BECAUSE
SOMETHING BAD WAS GOING TO
HAPPEN.
IT DOESN'T APPEAR AT LEAST TO ME
AND TO OTHERS INDEED THAT HE
BROUGHT A KNIFE SPECIFICALLY
WITH THE INTENT TO KILL SOMEONE.
BUT TO PROTECT HIMSELF.
AND IN THE BATHROOM THAT DAY,
HIS OBSESSION WITH STEPHEN KING
AND THE KING CRIMSON AND NUMBER
19 BASICALLY OVERTOOK HIS
FANTASIES.
AS SOON AS HE HAD REALIZED WHAT
HE HAD DONE, MOMENTS LATER HE
WAS ON THE FLOOR CRYING, WHAT
HAVE I DONE, WHAT HAVE I DONE?
AND TRYING TO GET HELP FOR HIS
VICTIM.
THAT'S NOT HOW MOST RUTHLESS
KILLERS RESPOND AFTER A CRIME.
>> BUT JEFFREY, THAT'S THE SAME
POINT, A JURY DID HEAR ALL OF
THIS.
THEY STILL DECIDED THAT HE
SHOULD RECEIVE FIRST DEGREE
MURDER.
IT'S NOT OFTEN THAT A JUDGE WILL
OVERTURN A VERDICT OR NOT
OVERTURN, BUT REDUCE A VERDICT
LIKE THIS TO SECOND DEGREE.
WHAT WILL SHE CONSIDER?
>> WELL, LET ME START BY SAYING
THAT THE JURY DID NOT FIND HIM
NOT GUILTY BY REASON OF A LACK
OF RESPONSIBILITY.
IT DOESN'T MEAN A HECK OF A LOT
IN HIGH PROFILE CASES.
THEY'RE VERY RELUCTANT TO -- IF
THEY GET SCARED, THEY COULD LOOK
AT THE VIOLENCE THAT WAS
PERPETRATED HERE.
THAT'S WHAT THEY SEE.
>> SO YOU THINK THEY ACTED LIKE
IT WAS SAID IN THE PIECE THAT
THEY ACTED WITH THEIR HEART?
>> WELL, I THINK THEY ACTED WITH
THEIR HEART AND THEY WERE ALSO
QUITE FEARFUL.
AND WHEN YOU TAKE A LOOK AT A
KID LIKE THIS, HE IS A POSTER
CHILD FOR SOMEBODY WHO'S
OBVIOUSLY SUFFERING FROM SEVERE
DISTORTIONS OF REALITY.
TO THE EXTENT THAT AT LEAST WHEN
HE COMMITTED THIS CRIME I THINK
A VERY GOOD ARGUMENT COULD BE
MADE THAT HE WAS PSYCHOTIC.
IF HE WAS PSYCHOTIC CERTAINLY HE
WAS LIVING IN A FANTASY WORLD
THAT HE WASN'T PREMEDITATING AS
THAT TERM IS UNDERSTOOD.
HE'S ACTING IN A ROLE AT THAT
POINT.
HE DIDN'T GO INTO THE ROOM OR
THAT SCHOOL AT LEAST FROM WHAT I
READ AND UNDERSTANDING HUMAN
NATURE WITH THE INTENT OF
KILLING ONE INDIVIDUAL.
THAT THE EVENTS TOOK HIM OVER,
AT SOME POINT HE DIDN'T EVEN
BELIEVE HIS DISTORTIONS WERE SO
DRAMATIC THAT HE WAS IN A
PSYCHOTIC HAZE AND DIDN'T EVEN
UNDERSTAND WHAT HE WAS DOING.
I DON'T THINK HE PREMEDITATED.
EVEN PUTTING ASIDE THE LACK OF
CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY, THE
DEFENSE, THE JURY FOUND HE WAS
CRIMINALLY RESPONSIBLE CERTAINLY
IT WOULD NOT BE A STRETCH FOR A
FAIR-MINDED JUDGE TO TAKE A LOOK
AT THIS AND DECIDE THAT HE
DID -- HE WAS NOT CAPABLE OF
PREMEDITATION AT THAT POINT AND
REDUCE THIS 16-YEAR-OLD KID'S
SENTENCE TO AN ONEROUS THING.
HE MIGHT BE PAROLED IN 20 YEARS
OR PAROLED IN 25 YEARS OR NEVER
PAROLED.
>> HE IS BEING TREATED AT BRIDGE
WATER, HE WAS PUT IN THERE
ALMOST IMMEDIATELY AND THERE'S A
STRONG CHANCE HE COULD SPEND THE
REST OF HIS LIFE AT BRIDGE WATER
WHICH IS A STATE MENTAL
FACILITY.
WHY IS THAT NOT THE MOST
APPROPRIATE TREATMENT FOR HIM OR
INCARCERATION FOR HIM?
>> WELL, HAD HE BEEN FOUND NOT
GUILTY BY REASON OF INSANITY
HE'D BE WHERE HE IS NOW.
SO IN EFFECT IN TERMS OF THE
CURRENT STATE OF HIS TREATMENT
IT DIDN'T REALLY MATTER.
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS AT SOME
POINT IF HE'S WELL UNDER A NOT
GUILTY BY REASON OF INSANITY
DEFENSE HE COULD THEN WALK.
UNDER HIS CURRENT SENTENCE HE
GOES TO PRISON.
NOW LET'S POINT OUT THAT IT'S
RARE THAT CRIMINALS JUST WALK
WITH NOT GUILTY BY REASON OF
INSANITY SENTENCES.
THE AVERAGE TIME SERVED WITH AN
INSANITY SENTENCE IS LONGER THAN
THE ONE FOR THE UNDERLYING
CRIME.
SO THE BEST PLACE POSSIBLE FOR
HIM RIGHT NOW, BUT THE ISSUE IS
PAROLE.
PAROLEABILITY.
AND INDEED, THE FACT THAT HE
COULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR PAROLE
AFTER 15 YEARS IF THE JUDGE DOES
REDUCE THE SENTENCE DOESN'T
NECESSARILY MEAN THAT HE WILL BE
PAROLED.
IN FACT --
>> THE PAROLE IS VERY TOUGH HERE
IN MASSACHUSETTS.
>> EXACTLY.
PARTICULARLY FOR A SECOND DEGREE
MURDER.
THE RATE IS ONLY 20%.
BUT LOOKING AHEAD, THERE MAY BE
A TIME WHEN HE IS OLD ENOUGH AND
MATURED WHERE HE'S WELL ENOUGH
THAT HE COULD WALK FREE AMONG US
AND THAT WILL -- THAT SHOULD NOT
REDUCE THE HORROR AND TRAGEDY OF
THE CRIME.
>> JEFFREY, WHAT ABOUT THE
OUTSIDE ELEMENTS FOR THE JUDGE?
WILL IT MATTER WHAT THE PARENTS
OF THE VICTIM ARE SAYING?
I MEAN, THEY HAVEN'T REALLY
SPOKEN AND THEY HAVE COME OUT
WITH A VERY FORCEFUL STATEMENT
HERE.
>> AT THIS POINT IT SHOULD BE A
MATTER OF LAW.
THE JUDGE HAS TO LOOK INTO THE
FOUR CORNERS OF WHAT HAPPENED AT
THE TRIAL, HAS TO TAKE A LOOK AT
THE EVIDENCE.
JUDGES ARE VERY RELUCTANT TO
UNDO WHAT JURIES HAVE DONE, BUT
OF THE MANY CASES I HAVE SEEN
OVER IF LAST -- THE LAST 38
YEARS IF THE JUDGE WERE TO
EXERCISE THAT DISCRETION THIS
WOULD BE THE PERFECT CASE TO DO
IT.
YOU HAVE A YOUNG MAN WHO
OBVIOUSLY IS DEEPLY TROUBLED,
WHETHER IT RISES TO THE LEVEL OF
PURE INSANITY OR NOT, HE'S A
DEEPLY TROUBLED KID.
HE HAD NOTHING TO GAIN BY THIS.
HE DIDN'T KNOW THIS KID.
IT WASN'T A VENGEANCE KILLING,
IT WASN'T FOR MONEY OR DRUGS.
HE'S VERY BRIGHT, BUT OBVIOUSLY
VERY TROUBLED WHO COMES INTO
SCHOOL ACTING OUT SOME KIND OF
STRANGE FANTASY.
HOWEVER YOU WANT TO TERM IT.
ENDS UP KILLING SOMEBODY AND
IT'S IMMEDIATELY IN SHOCK THAT
HE'S DONE IT.
THERE'S A HUGE DISCONNECT HERE.
AND WHEN THERE'S A HUGE
DISCONNECT, YOU HAVE TO START
TAKING A LOOK BEHIND THE
DISCONNECT, TAKE A LOOK WHAT'S
GOING ON, PSYCHOPATH LOGICAL
LEVEL AND YOU HAVE TO BE FAIR.
TO BE FAIR HERE, THIS IS NOT THE
KIND OF KID THAT SHOULD BE
BEHIND BARS WITH HARDENED
CRIMINALS WITHOUT THE
POSSIBILITY OF PAROLE.
>> NOT WITH HARDENED CRIMINALS
RIGHT NOW.
I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT THAT,
BECAUSE YOU DID WRITE ABOUT THAT
IN YOUR PIECE YESTERDAY DOWN TO
WHEN HE WAS FIRST PUT IN JAIL
BEFORE THE TRIAL AND HOW HE
NEEDED A THICK CARPET.
BECAUSE HAVINGS A PERSIAN
GULFER'S HE NEEDED THAT LEVEL OF
INSULATION.
I'M WONDERING, GIVEN THAT HE
NEEDS THAT LEVEL OF CARE, HOW IS
HE?
HOW IS HE DOING AT BRIDGE WATER
RIGHT NOW?
>> WELL, AS WELL AS COULD BE
EXPECTED.
THESE KIDS DON'T DO WELL IN
CORRECTIONAL SETTING, OTHER
INMATES AND THE STUFF DON'T
REALLY UNDERSTAND THE QUIRKY
NATURE.
>> EVEN AT A STATE MENTAL
FACILITY?
>> EVEN THERE.
IT'S A DIFFICULT TIME.
NOW, YOU KNOW, GIVEN ONE OF THE
OPTIONS THAT IS THE BEST PLACE.
RIGHT NOW FOR THE ODGREN'S, THE
CHALLENGE IS NOT LIKE IT WAS
BEFORE, FINDING THE BEST PROGRAM
FOR HIM.
NOW THE DECISIONS ARE OUT OF
THEIR HANDS.
VERY DIFFICULT FOR THEM.
>> THEY HAVE LIMITED TIME WITH
HIM.
A FEW DAYS A WEEK.
THE PHONE CALLS, HE HAS TO MAKE
TO THEM.
>> RIGHT.
BUT THEY HOPE AND PRAY FOR HIS
SAFETY.
THEY'RE DOING WHATEVER THEY CAN
FROM AFAR, BUT ULTIMATELY,
THEY'RE NOT IN CONTROL THE WAY
THEY WERE BEFORE IN THE CRIME.
>> AND DON'T FORGET, FOR A QUICK
SECOND, HE'S NOT LIKELY TO STAY
AT BRIDGE WATER.
HE WAS FOUND GUILTY BY REASON OF
THE -- RATHER THAN BY NOT GUILTY
BY REASON OF INSANITY THEY'RE
GOING TO KICK HIM BACK INTO THE
POPULATION AT SOME POINT.
>> THEY'LL HAVE TO.
HE'S UNDER A SIX-MONTH TERM
COMMITMENT AND EVERY YEAR
THEREAFTER THIS COMMITMENT CAN
BE RENEWED.
>> THEY DON'T HAVE TO.
BUT HE'S QUITE RIGHT.
IN MY EXPERIENCE, THEY REGULARLY
DO THAT BECAUSE THEY TRY TO SEND
AS MANY PEOPLE BACK INTO THE
SYSTEM AS THEY CAN.
AND THIS IS ONE OF THE LAST KIDS
IN THE WORLD YOU WANT TO FIND
EITHER AT BRIDGE WATER FOR A
LIFETIME OR CERTAINLY BACK IN
THE SYSTEM FOR A LIFETIME.
>> AND IS THE VICTIM'S
PARENTS -- DID YOU HAVE ANY
OTHER CORRESPONDENCE OR CONTACT
WITH HIM TO --
>> NO, I TRIED TO REACH OUT TO
THEM TO RETURN -- THROUGH THEIR
ATTORNEY.
THEY HAVE DESIRED THEIR PRIVACY
WHICH IS CERTAINLY
UNDERSTANDABLE.
NONE OF US CAN IMAGINE THE PAIN
THEY'RE GOING THROUGH.
AND WE ALL SHOULD RESPECT THAT.
>> ALL RIGHT, JAMES ALAN FOX,
JEFFREY DENNER --
>> CAN I JUST SAY --
>> WE'RE OUT OF TIME BUT WE KNOW
THE JUDGE'S DECISION WILL COME
IN A FEW WEEKS.
TOMORROW, EILEEN McNAMARA WILL
JOIN US AND SHE'S WRITTEN A
PIECE ABOUT JUVENILE JUSTICE AS
IT RELATES TO THE ODGREN CASE.
IN A MOMENT, THE FORTUNE
FINDERS.
WHAT MASSACHUSETTS HOT SPOTS
THEY FOUND RIPE FOR INVESTMENT.