Gavin Newsome grants clemency to a POS that murdered a friend of mine

You want to know what happened. These two pieces of s**t went on a crime spree. Robbed people all night at gunpoint. Jim had just finished a gig, was loading equipment and these two guys come up and rob them at gunpoint. After they take the money, they go to pistol whipping the other guy, Jim says we already gave you all our money, asks them to stop beating up his friend. They laughed and shot him dead.


Jim was a friend of mine. I had not seen him for a long time after having moved to Texas in 1993 where I did my residency. In 1995 I was in Sacto visiting the folks, and was at my cousins place, getting some clothes that he had become too fat to wear anymore. We were sitting around on the porch of his current domicile, a nice, restored 75 year old duplex in mid-town, had a Murphy bed in living room. My friend of over 10 years, Jim Pantages, who I had not seen in about a year and a half, walked up. Asked how he was, where he was going, on his way home. Turns out he lived right next door to my cousin in the other half of the duplex, and he was very proud of this new tattoo he had. Treble clef surrounded by a whole note, he was a musician after all. It was pretty cool, nice color greenish blue in it. I said it was cool, but I would not get a tattoo. What is there that I would want to wear the rest of my life, right?

About a week later, after returning to Texas, I got a call from my mom, she tells me to sit down, then tells me Jim had been shot and killed by a couple of criminals out robbing people the previous night. Jim had just finished a gig, and was killed while he and Spider were loading equipment. Was a big group of us that hung out together, and I got to talking about it with my brother a day or two after he was murdered. I said I had never had any interest in getting a tattoo, but I wanted to get that one that Jim got right before he was killed. They caught the perps when they used Jim's credit card where one of the guy's girlfriends worked, lucky they were stupid. Turns out, several people had the same idea, and at the end of summer in 1995, went to the same tattoo artist and about a dozen of us got that tat. Well, not exactly, I got a mirror image of it, as Jim had it less than a week and died, so I figured I did not want the same thing exactly. Over that labor day weekend, there were a few benefit concerts, he did know most of the musicians in town after all, and now there is a Jim Pantages Scholarship Fund at El Camino HS in Sacramento. That is how I ended up with a tattoo.

Since that time, I met a couple who were robbed at an ATM, by the same guys that night. They were forced to take the max out, $300 or whatever it is. Guy had the good sense to throw the money one way and run the other, the murderers in question shot at them and luckily missed. We had a mutual friend, Doug Hanna. They told me about it when we met going out for drinks a few years after it happened. Neither of them knew Jim.


I happened to have a guy who worked at channel 13 with Jim for years come in as a patient, probably around 2006. I notice he works at the TV station when looking at his paperwork, mentioned I knew a guy who used to work there. I said Jim Pantages and the guys eyes get big and he says, "He was my best friend." Turns out he and Jim were both into music. TV station gives you access to a lot of equipment that for a musician is apparently like the proverbial kid in the candy store. Talked to him for hours, lucky he was last one, coming in after work. Small world.

I was talking to a patient at the hospital in 2017, she remembered that deal with Jim well enough that she remembered his name, last name anyway.


Jim was a goofy, charming, handsome young man. He was the most gregarious person I have ever known in my life. He was a musician, playing somewhere around the area often. As a consequence of this, he knew a LOT of people, it sort of seemed like he knew everyone sometimes. I am quite confident you could not find a single person that knew him and did not like him, and you would find a fair number that would tell you Jim was their best friend. I still cry about it sometimes, now for example. My mother was crying when we talked about Crater being granted clemency. This guy was offered a plea deal at the time of the trial by the DA that was similar to what he is being given now and turned it down. He was convicted of murder with special circumstances. He shot at the people at the ATM and missed. He does not deserve clemency.

You can bet I will be writing letters to the parole board and the Governor about this

Edited to remove link to first thing that came up in search regarding the subject that is apparently too biased

Damn , all I can say is damn. I   had a close friend murdered on June 21 ,2018  I can't fathom someone excusing her killer. Hang in there my friend. Jim sounds like a good man to have known. you are fortunate to have been his friend. 

yeah that sounds tough.  As we get older the bad stuff never seems to go away.  The music business seems to be the coolest bunch of people sometimes.  No real egos at the local level that I've seen when working in restaurants with live music - just guys having fun.

thread locked for review

I’m all for free speech, so let’s unlock this and see if everyone can keep it civil. 

Remember, everybody: NO POLITICS. 

Thanks. 

If it helps, they are not automatically getting out of jail- from what I read is that they are now eligible to ask the parole board.  

And granting clemency does not pardon them, as they are still responsible for the crime they committed.  Just give them the opportunity.

(and Newsom is also not running for President...)

A lot can change in 24 years. Maybe even the nature of a human being.

Given the choice, I'd probably leave him locked up. Not because he hasn't reformed, but as a deterrent for others that are considering the same path. 

Found a less axe-grindey source for the story:

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article235063472.html

How was the decision reached that the people whose sentences were most worthy of commutation was this group of murderers plus a serial rapist? This has to be a politically difficult and fruitless thing to do.

In reply to GameboyRMH :

Yeah, this is odd to me. The #1 problem facing our country with violent crimes is recividism. Letting out violent criminals like htis just seems like we're looking at the problem and saying "screw it, whatever". 

I applaud the efforts being made behind criminal justice reform today.  I get that during the "tough on crime" years things like mandatory sentences and such got really out of hand.  I can get behind reviewing sentences for non violent offenders who got pinched for something like having a small amount of weed in the wrong place at the wrong time.

That being said, I have a really hard time making that leap with violent offenders.  In my mind, once someone has made the decision that it is OK to inflict harm on another human being for personal gain - it's hard to go back.  If you've mugged, beaten, or murdered another human being, it might just be in everyone's interest to have you separated from society for a good, long time.  Maybe after many, many, many years you may be able to rejoin society and be productive.  That's a big ask though and it's hard to say if and when a person is ready for it.

I always have a hard time balancing my belief in giving second chances with my belief in the value of rules.  Speaking generally, is it right to take someone who commits a crime at an early age and hold that against them for the rest of their life?  Where is the line where we decide what "indiscretions" are in the category of mistakes that people learn from and move on and which are unforgivable?  If someone who has committed heinous crimes has a true change of heart, is it right to remove some of their punishment or do we simply say that the rule is if you do X, the punishment is Y no matter how sorry you are?  Is the purpose of the law to be punitive or instructional?  Some days I want to just lock them all up and throw away the room but other days I'm not so sure.

One thing that is for certain, though, is that if we were talking about someone who had committed such a crime against someone I knew, my own judgment would be highly compromised and biased.  It's a lot easier to see a criminal from a distance and have an emotionally-detached opinion.

I want to give people a second chance, I really do, but murder in cold blood? That's one I really struggle to forgive or to see how that person could change. They never had a heart or a conscience in the first place, it's tough for me to imagine them turning into a decent person.

Criminal justice reform in CA has gone full wakadoodle.  The solution to having so many people incarcerated seems to be to simply let them out or not incarcerate them ("hey, where did all these homeless come from, and why are the crime rates up"!?!?).  I am certainly not against other options to criminal justice than just locking them up, but at this point, they seem to be entirely lacking the "other option"!  The basic thought seems to be: nothing is really their fault, something made them this way, so why should we punish them.

I think, as with many other "solutions" there seems to be a fundamental disconnect between how some people want things to be (e.g. treat everyone with respect, no mater how big their "mistakes") and the fundamentals of human behavior.  I don't care how many good thoughts you put out and how caring you are to people, there are just some people are pieces of crap and do NOT belong in society and cannot be reformed. I am sure many where damaged in childhood or by drugs, but I am pretty sure we don't currently have the ability to "fix" most of these people.

The situation seems eerily familiar to what happened with mental health and institutions.  The institutions where bad, so they got rid of them, let the people out... without any effective alternative.  The results of that are pretty obvious.

Mr N has also publicly stated that he will absolutely not execute anyone while he is Governor (I am sure this is part of that).  Despite, not only that being the law in CA, but a recently passed proposition, publicly voted on, required death penally cases to be expedited! (I guess he knows better).  It's a pretty empty promise though, since the last person executed in CA was probably at least 20 years ago! (hence the proposition)

Very sorry about your friend.  It does point out something very important that seems to be missing in most of these reform movements:  What about the victims of these crimes, what about the future victims?  Where is the compassion for them? My perspective: It's not Mr. N place to offer clemency, that should be the responsibility of your friends parents / spouse.

Minor P content: (If you think Mr N is no running for P you are kidding yourself)

Seems like in just a few posts, most has missed the fact that:

Commute the sentence is NOT setting him free.  It's also NOT a pardon.

It's just changing a mandatory life sentence to one that is now eligible for parole.  So even if the person has reformed, and whatnot- the same concerns that all of you very rightly have about recidivism will be on the minds of the parole board.  And I would offer that if there IS a parole hearing, that the victim's family and friends will be allowed to speak, and say your side of the story, too.  Which is clearly important.  

Edit- I'm wrong about the friends part- but here's who can talk at the hearing- https://www.cdcr.ca.gov/victim-services/victim-services/parole-hearing-info/

Lest we forget, Charles Manson has been eligible for parole for a couple of decades now, and he's still in prison.  Still an a-hole, sure.  But just because you can go and talk to a parole board does not mean you go free.

Charlie ain't in prison anymore.

He committed murder during the course of committing felony.  That is murder with special circumstances.   Sentence for that is life without the possibility of parole.  He was offered just that as a plea deal and refused.  I am of the opinion that he should live with that decision.

19 of the 21 people given clemency were in the hoosegow for violent crimes committed using a gun.

There were two guys involved in the crime spree that resulted in the death of my friend.  The one that did the actual shooting was an ex con.  The guy granted clemency was a college student that bought the guns they used. 

dinger said:

I can get behind reviewing sentences for non violent offenders who got pinched for something like having a small amount of weed in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Hi dinger,

I totally agree in the case of victimless crimes.

However, I think differentiating between violent and non-violent crime is overly simplistic given the huge leverage technology (internet & vast databases) has created.

If I run an internet scam or hack tons of people’s personal information, I can easily cause the loss of many, many human lifetimes. No one person may be tremendously harmed but if I cause thousands of people to spend hours / days on the phone trying to resolve the theft of their identity or recover money or spend money on the purchase of a Lifelock, etc. policy or not be able to make an important purchase (vacation-car-house) because their credit has been trashed, it can be extremely damaging cumulatively.

Let’s say the average person spends 90,000 hours working and makes 2.5 million in their lifetime. If someone costs 10,000 people 9 hours each and/or $250 each, congratulations Berktard, you just destroyed a human life…they didn’t have any quality of life while sitting on hold stressing out over what was going to happen to them…those stolen dollars will need to be made up for by trading precious time for money.

As far as I’m concerned, every 90,000 hours and/or 2.5 million dollars represents the loss of a human life and the punishment should be the same as if you had senselessly blown someone’s head off.

Toebra said:

 

19 of the 21 people given clemency were in the hoosegow for violent crimes committed using a gun.

 

There were two guys involved in the crime spree that resulted in the death of my friend.  The one that did the actual shooting was an ex con.  The guy granted clemency was a college student that bought the guns they used. 

This right here is the crux of the problems we have in this country. We want to talk about guns, or cars or drugs but the real issue is that somewhere in the neighborhood of 70% of violent crimes are committed by felons previously convicted of violent crimes. Imagine being able to drop those 11k gun murders every year by 70% just by keeping those violent felons away from society? 

Personal feeling, if you're a convicted violent felon and you commit the same crime, there should be no long jail sentence. No rehabilitation. They have already proven TWICE that they do not value human life and refuse to live by societies laws. Since they cannot be allowed in society, society has no use for them and they need to be euthanized like a rabid dog. 

Dr. Hess said:

Charlie ain't in prison anymore.

 

Forgot he died.  But he was never paroled.  

It probably won't make you feel any better, but they are talking about the absurdity of this (and how insensitive it is to his victims) right now on a radio station in LA.  They specifically mentioned your friend.

To punish the oppressors of humanity is clemency; to forgive them is cruelty.

Maximilien de Robespierre

Jim was a musician, but his day job was TV producer.  Like I say, he knew everybody, and I never met anyone who knew him and did not think he was a great guy.  I would not be a bit surprised if there are people that knew him at an LA TV or radio station.  He was the sort of guy that if your daughter came home with him, you would be a happy dad.  

This is quoted from Crater's 9th Circuit Appeal  This is what the Judge said in camera conversation with accused, their counsel and the DA

"Well, Andrew [Crater], you've been in my court a few times during the trial of your co-defendant, Robinson.   So you should know that I'm Judge Park, and I'm going to be trying your case.   And I'm going to be sentencing you as well if you're found guilty, which I expect will happen.

I understand that the District Attorney's office has made a major concession in your case, and has made an offer to you which, for reasons I want to talk to you about, you're not so sure you want to accept.

Based upon what I know about this case-and I'm in a very unique position in this case, because I've already heard all of the witnesses, I know everything that happened that night, and I have assessed everything that the witnesses have said, and therefore, I know what they are going to say about you.

And based upon what I've heard about this case, I'm real sure that you're going to be convicted of all of those robberies, that you're going to be convicted of shooting the first robbery victim.   You're going to be convicted of all of the attempted robberies, and you're going to be found guilty of murder in the first degree.   I'm real sure all that's going to happen.   And I suspect Miss Gutowsky 10 is real sure of that as well, as I'll bet she has been telling you that.   Miss Gutowsky is a very experienced lawyer, and you should listen to her.

The risk you run in going to trial is that the jury may find the special circumstance to be true․ The special circumstance which makes you ineligible for ever getting out of prison is very similar to the felony murder rule, but does require evidence that you acted recklessly that night with respect to the murder of Pantages.   That's the only real issue that this jury would decide․ [B]ased upon everything I've heard, that is a monumental risk for you.

A jury is not going to like you.   A jury is going to be frightened by what they hear from these witnesses occurring that night.   They will put themselves at the ATM. They will put themselves out walking the streets․ You have very little to go on in this case.   You might beat the special circumstance;  I don't think you will․

And I, as the judge, am supposed to keep an open mind about what sentence to impose․ This much I can tell you, I would have no discretion on first degree murder, none․ I can also tell you that most judges looking at what happened that night would probably be inclined to impose consecutive penalties ․ So most judges, I think, would throw the book at you.

So in a nutshell, this is an offer which gives you, at some time in your life, an opportunity to get out of prison.   If you go before this jury and lose on the special circumstance issue, you will get out of prison someday, but it will be in a pine box.   You will die in prison if you are found guilty of the special circumstance․

You have a right to go to trial.   In my opinion, it's a mistake for you to take that kind of risk, because I think all you have is downside and no upside potential."

Toebra, you are stronger than I could possibly imagine. Thoughts are with you, JIm, friends and family.

I saw this today in a news source:

"Newsom’s commutations can be rejected or upheld by the California Supreme Court. Recall, the California Supreme Court rejected 10 clemency actions by the state’s former Gov. Jerry Brown."

The 10 that got rejected from Brown were the first since 1930 to get turned down

I need to write the Parole Board, already wrote the governor