A recent hearing to consider whether dangerous killer David Peterson should be released from Whiting Forensic Division of Connecticut Valley Hospital (CVH) exposes a serious flaw in a recent change of Connecticut law.
As a former Connecticut criminal defense attorney, I support legal protections for those institutionally committed for mental illness (as here). However, new rules granting unilateral rights to violent offenders to apply for release needlessly perpetuate victim trauma. This imbalance can and must be remedied promptly.
David Peterson was found not guilty by reason of insanity in 1971 and 1988 stabbing attacks. Ordered to CVH for a 15-year sentence in May 1988, Peterson left the facility on a day pass in 1989, and viciously stabbed 9-year-old Jessica Short more than 34 times in the head, neck, and face in front of her mother and young sister. His subsequent commitment to 70 years in CVH expires in 2060, but that timespan is a fiction: under a new law, CVH residents like Peterson can apply for release every six months. This puts Jessica Short’s family, and the entire community, on edge repeatedly.
The new law (Public Act 22-45) provides:
At any time after the confinement of an acquittee in a hospital for psychiatric disabilities, … the acquittee … may apply to the board for an order of temporary leave. ….An application for temporary leave under this subsection shall not be filed more frequently than once every six months from the date of the initial hearing held by the board pursuant to section 17a-583. …. If the board grants an application made under this subsection, (1) the acquittee may be permitted to leave such hospital or the custody of said commissioner temporarily, under the charge of his guardian, relatives or friends….
As an attorney who has attended countless periodic release hearings with family members of killers at CVH found “not guilty by reason of mental illness,” I can personally attest to the profound trauma and reliving of these horrible crimes that impact these victim families, including deep anxiety that these very dangerous offenders may be released into society after supposedly being committed for decades. Presumably, this statutory change (unanimously supported in the General Assembly) was prompted by recent revelations of abuse at Whiting Forensic. But throwing crime victims under the bureaucratic bus is the result.
Too many current laws disproportionately protect dangerous felons at the expense of creating more victims. A balanced solution here would be to implement a two-stage process whereby CVH would hold these hearings without notice (and stress) to the victims’ families. If it was determined that the dangerous, insane “acquittee” was to be considered for temporary release to stroll at the local parade (as Peterson did before publicly mutilating and killing young Jessica), a second hearing could be scheduled, allowing for victim and public comment. Instead, victims’ families must go through a torturous ordeal every time a patient or their representative tries to get back on the streets.
This is no light matter. Victims may travel great distances at their own expense, and feel a profound duty to others to protect them from what happened to their loved ones. Not all victims have the monetary resources to take time from work or pay for airfare and hotel, let alone hire legal counsel to speak on their behalf. Malicious offenders can simply file frivolous applications for release, deliberately tormenting their victims’ families for decades from within their confinement, with the rigid, callous assistance of the State of Connecticut.
This sentiment was expressed concisely by Jessica Short’s uncle, Andrew Reynolds, at Peterson’s recent release application hearing. Since 1989, Reynolds has been showing up to hearings like these to advocate for his family, reminding psychiatrists, judges and members of the public of the lifelong trauma they continue to endure. “I deeply did not want to come here,” he said after the recent hearing, noting that he felt angry and anxious on his drive to Middletown that morning. “Nobody wants to come to these hearings.”
But he does, he said, because he feels a responsibility to advocate for Jessica, for her mother, and for every other family who has had a loved one murdered in Connecticut. ….“It’s not just about our family, it’s about every family that has to go through this. ….People don’t understand what those families have to go through,” he added.
Just receiving a letter that Peterson is due for a hearing, Reynolds said, “creates havoc” in their family. They never know what will happen at a hearing, whether his restrictions will be lowered, or if he may even be granted access to day passes.
While paying lip service to homicide victims’ families, the Connecticut legislature has implemented laws that torment them and inflict recurring harm. This is obvious to anyone who has had any involvement with these sorts of horrible traumas. It should be more obvious to the legislature: the cure is simple enough, and would protect hundreds of innocent family members from this state-sponsored psychological duress while fully protecting the rights of the mentally unwell.
