
Healey vowed more gubernatorial mercy. Those convicted of murder wait to hear if that means them.
Yet, the first-term Democrat has yet to issue a decision in each of the cases, which landed on her desk anywhere from five to
nearly 18 months ago. The board had also recommended a fifth man have his sentence commuted last fall, but he was paroled before Healey acted.
Such gubernatorial reprieves have long been uncommon. Healey's five immediate predecessors combined to grant just four, with Charlie Baker, a Republican,
Advertisement
Commutations typically involve those convicted of some of the most violent crimes — murder, assault, armed robbery — adding a layer of moral and
That the recommendations are now stalled with Healey has surprised both petitioners and their attorneys. The former state attorney general has otherwise generously wielded her clemency power like few, if any, governors before her, issuing nearly two dozen pardons, which, in effect, forgive a crime. Her actions raised expectations that she would, too, embrace commutations, which reduce a criminal sentence.
Advertisement
'To some extent, they're losing hope,' attorney Patricia DeJuneas said of Florentino, 66, and Fielding, 74, both of whom are her clients and are serving sentences of life without parole. The board recommended them for commutations in August and October, respectively. The 'radio silence,' she said, is what weighs on them.
'I tell my clients: This is a political favor we're asking for. It could be controversial,' she said. 'But right now it's kind of a black hole.'
Karissa Hand, a spokesperson for Healey, said last week the governor was still reviewing the four recommendations the Advisory Board of Pardons sent her. Her
The board also sent Healey three other so-called unfavorable reports, in which it voted that the person's sentence should not be commuted.
Since taking office, Healey has
Healey also issued a
Advertisement
'She expects to recommend more pardons and commutations in the near future,' Hand, Healey's spokesperson, said.
Commutations would be a new front. Healey has yet to issue one, and should she approve all four favorable recommendations before her — and the Governor's Council approves them — it would mark the most issued by a governor in nearly 30 years. (Bill Weld, a Republican
who left office in 1997, granted seven commutations.)
Those with favorable recommendations before Healey were all convicted of murder, three of first-degree and one of second-degree.
But in the years, and sometimes decades, since, they've received degrees, helped mentor others in prison, and committed to rehabilitating themselves, according to the Advisory Board of Pardons' reports. The panel, which also doubles as the state's Parole Board, recommended a mix of remedies, including reducing their sentences to make them eligible for parole.
William Florentino, left.
In many cases, they were young, troubled men when they committed their crimes, according to the board's reports. Florentino was 20 years old when he participated in a 1977 liquor store robbery in which his partner shot and killed a customer, Edward Stevens.
Florentino didn't fire the gun, but was convicted of first-degree murder. He's since become known in prison as 'the peacemaker' and 'wise Will' for his mentorship of others, according to the board, which recommended his sentence be reduced to second-degree murder, either clearing him to be released or to be eligible for parole.
Advertisement
Fielding, a Vietnam War veteran, was 21 and addicted to heroin in June 1972 when he and another man robbed a liquor store, where Fielding said he panicked and shot Joseph Reppucci. His partner, Joseph Yandle, had his sentence commuted in the mid-1990s by Weld, while Fielding has served the last 42 years without a single disciplinary report. Most of the board recommended his sentence be commuted to time served.
A third petitioner, Randy Arias, shot and killed Julio Zuniga outside a Lawrence night club in 2008, and has served the last 16-plus years on a second-degree murder conviction. He also received a consecutive 10- to 12-year sentence on a charge of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon.
He's since received a GED and bachelor's degree and helped train dogs, and argued that, as a Latino, he wasn't offered the same kind of plea deals that other white inmates received. The board recommended that his consecutive sentence on assault be reduced, giving him an earlier shot at parole.
Scott Kirwan, a Navy veteran who was 24 and struggling with substance use when he stabbed and killed Steven Meagher outside a Pembroke bar in 1999, has been awaiting a decision the longest.
The board recommended his sentence be commuted to second-degree murder in October 2023 — a day before Healey issued her rewritten guidelines — saying he was 'deeply remorseful' and had 'seriously committed to his rehabilitation.' Though the recommendation has been sitting for more than a year, Healey's office told Kirwan several months ago it was still being considered, said his attorney Robert Griffin.
'The recommendation is there. There isn't much more we can do,' Griffin said. 'He's been the absolute model prisoner. . . . I'm at a loss for what's holding it up.'
Advertisement
In October, the board also recommended that Artem Vaskanyan, who served decades in prison for his role in a deadly home invasion, receive a commutation. But he won parole a few weeks later, and state officials closed his commutation case in December, according to a letter the board provided.
In most cases, the victim's relatives spoke out against the commutations, either to urge the board to uphold their original sentence or express the pain their loved ones' deaths caused.
Pamela Meagher, Steven Meagher's sister, told the board her two children remind her of her brother, but that sharing memories of him is 'not the same as having him in their lives.'
'Every time there is another hearing [in Kirwan's case], the heartache and grieving start all over again,' Tom Foley, a family friend of the Meagher's, told the board, according to its report.
Other board reports did not detail relatives' exact reservations, and in some cases, redacted their names.
The effects of the long wait on a decision from Healey have rippled elsewhere. DeJuneas, Florentino and Fielding's attorney who also helps lead a committee that pairs pro bono attorneys with others seeking clemency, said few lawyers are willing to take on cases for free if 'nothing's happening' with those already in the pipeline.
'Her administration put a lot of effort into this. And yet, she's not moving on these things,' DeJuneas said. 'It doesn't really make sense to me.'
Matt Stout can be reached at
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


San Francisco Chronicle
33 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
South Korea's liberal-led legislature passes bills calling for special probes into Yoon and wife
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — South Korea's liberal-led legislature on Thursday passed bills to launch special investigations into former President Yoon Suk Yeol's short-lived imposition of martial law in December and criminal allegations against his wife, targeting the ousted conservative a day after his liberal successor took office. The bills previously were vetoed by Yoon and South Korea's caretaker government after his Dec. 14 impeachment over the martial law debacle. They are expected to be signed by new President Lee Jae-myung, a Democrat who won Tuesday's snap election triggered by Yoon's formal removal from office in April. Many members of the conservative People Power Party refused to participate in the votes, which took place after one of the party's lawmakers accused the liberals in a speech of being driven by vendetta. Lee, who as an opposition leader drove the legislative efforts to impeach and oust Yoon, pinned his presidential campaign on unity, promising not to target conservatives and calling for an end to political polarization. Yet Lee has vowed a full investigation into Yoon's martial law stunt and the allegations surrounding his wife, moves that could overshadow the new government and inflame tensions as Yoon faces a high-stakes rebellion trial carrying a possible death sentence. The Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office indicted Yoon in January over his Dec. 3 martial law decree, charging him with masterminding a rebellion and describing his power grab as an illegal bid to seize the legislature and election offices and arrest political opponents. Liberals have insisted independent investigations into Yoon are essential, saying probes by prosecutors, police and an anti-corruption agency were inadequate and hampered by Yoon's refusal to cooperate. If Lee approves the launch of independent investigations, special prosecutors could request the transfer of relevant cases for expanded probes, or direct public or military prosecutors to continue handling them under their supervision. The bills calling for independent investigations into Yoon's martial law decree and criminal allegations involving his wife both passed by a vote of 194 to 3. Dozens of retired marines, dressed in red shirts, saluted and cheered from an observation box after lawmakers passed the bill for a special prosecutor investigation into the marine's death, which also passed 194 to 3. Yoon's martial law decree lasted only a few hours after a quorum of lawmakers pushed past a blockade of hundreds of heavily armed soldiers and voted to revoke the measure. Yoon defended the move as a necessary act of governance, accusing the Democrats, whom he labeled 'anti-state forces,' of abusing their majority to obstruct his agenda and paralyze state affairs. That same majority now gives Lee a far more favorable path to advance his agenda, though conservatives claim it could grant him virtually unchecked power and allow him to pass laws that shield him from legal trouble. Yoon's wife, Kim Keon Hee, also faces multiple corruption allegations, including claims that she received luxury items from a Unification Church official seeking business favors, as well as possible involvement in a stock price manipulation scheme. She also is suspected of interfering with PPP's candidate nominations ahead of legislative elections in April last year.

33 minutes ago
Bipartisan deals on voting and election changes are rare. It just happened in one swing state
LAS VEGAS -- Facing a legislature dominated by Democrats, Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo stood before Nevada lawmakers earlier this year with a message that some did not expect to go far: 'Set aside partisan politics.' It was a plea that might have seemed more aspirational than realistic, given the country's deep polarization. Yet it set the stage for one of the session's most unexpected outcomes — a bipartisan agreement to bring voter ID requirements to the perennial battleground state by next year's midterm elections. In a deal that came together in the waning days of the session, the Democratic-controlled Legislature approved a bill that combined a requirement for voter ID — a conservative priority across the country and something that has been on Lombardo's legislative wish list — with a Democratic-backed measure to add more drop boxes for mailed ballots in the state's most populous counties. Lombardo is expected to sign the bill. The compromise represents a form of bipartisan dealmaking that has been especially scarce in recent years as the country's political divisions have deepened, especially around any potential reform to voting and election laws. President Donald Trump's lies about his loss in the 2020 presidential election fueled a wave of restrictive voting laws in Republican-led states that Democrats countered with changes to make voting more accessible, while an executive order Trump signed earlier this year seeking to overhaul how elections are run was met with a wave of Democratic lawsuits. Election legislation has mostly hit a dead end in states where the parties share power, making Nevada's bill all the more remarkable. A requirement for voters to show photo identification at the polls has long been a nonstarter for Nevada Democrats, who have argued that it threatened to disenfranchise low-income voters and make it more difficult for people to vote, especially older voters, those with disabilities and those without driver's licenses. Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager, the Democrat who brokered the deal with Lombardo after the governor vetoed his original bill to expand drop box access, acknowledged it was a tough concession. But he said it was the best they could do with the time they had left. 'If you told me at the beginning of the session that we would be passing a voter ID bill, I probably would have told you you're crazy,' he said in an interview Wednesday. 'But I think that highlights the importance of being open and receptive.' It's a stark contrast to the 2023 legislative session, the last time lawmakers met. Lombardo outlined voter ID as one of his main priorities, but Democrats in the statehouse refused to give the proposal a hearing. The governor vowed he would take the issue directly to voters. Last November, Nevada voters overwhelmingly approved the voter ID ballot initiative that Lombardo supported. Voters will have to pass it again in 2026 to amend the state constitution, and the requirement would then be in place for the 2028 presidential election. Yeager said he was nervous about presenting the bill because he wasn't sure how Democrats would receive it, but told his colleagues over the weekend that voters seemed poised to give their final approval to the measure. He argued that passing a voter ID law now would give the state a two-year head start on implementing the requirements, to get ready before the next presidential contest. Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar, a Democrat, said he respects the will of the voters and will work with the governor and local election officials 'to continue strengthening our elections.' That includes, under the proposal, a new — and free — digital form of voter ID that his office will be in charge of rolling out. Polls have shown that most Americans support voter ID laws, and that has been consistent over the years and across party lines. A 2024 Gallup poll found 84% of Americans supported requiring all voters to provide photo ID at their voting place to cast a ballot, consistent with Gallup findings from 2022 and 2016. That includes about two-thirds of Democrats, according to the 2024 survey. 'This may not be my favorite policy to have to implement, but I think as a Legislature we have a responsibility to do this,' Yeager told his colleagues. State Sen. Carrie Ann Buck, a Republican, praised the effort, saying, 'I think this is very thoughtful and very courageous of you to bring this in a bipartisan way ... I think our common goals are that every legitimate voter gets to vote.' But not all Democrats were on board, with five voting against it when it passed the Senate. 'I recognize what you're attempting to do, to stave off something worse,' said Democratic Sen. Dina Neal. But she said she was 'wrestling with the philosophical issue with voter ID.' 'I'm not in the space where I am openly willing to disenfranchise a population who may not even understand this law as written.' If Lombardo signs the bill, Nevada will join 36 other states that either require or request voters show ID when voting in person, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Not all states require photo ID, though. Some accept documents such as a bank statement, and some allow voters without ID to vote after signing an affidavit. A few states allow poll workers to vouch for voters without an ID. Under Nevada's bill, voters will be required to show a form of photo ID when voting in person, which will include government-issued IDs and Nevada-issued university student IDs. 'Nevada has some of the most secure and accessible elections in the country,' Yeager said when he introduced the legislation, 'and this bill is a set of compromises between the Legislature and the governor that I believe can ensure that tradition continues.'

42 minutes ago
In a crowded NYC mayoral debate, Cuomo faces attacks from all sides
New York City mayoral race front-runner Andrew Cuomo was forced to fend off a volley of attacks from his Democratic primary rivals in a debate Wednesday, with his opponents unleashing pent up barbs at the former governor in an attempt to crack his lead. Cuomo was on the defensive from the opening bell. From a crowded stage, Cuomo's opponents swiped at him over the sexual harassment scandal that forced him from the governor's mansion, his coronavirus response and the federal investigation into whether he lied to Congress about his handling of the pandemic in nursing homes. At one point, Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist state lawmaker who has emerged as one of the leading candidates in the race, pressed Cuomo on the overlap between the former governor's political donors and those who donated to Republican President Donald Trump. 'The difference between myself and Andrew Cuomo is that my campaign is not funded by the very billionaires who put Donald Trump in D.C.,' Mamdani said, calling himself 'Donald Trump's worst nightmare.' Weathering the onslaught, Cuomo started flicking out his own jabs. 'Mr. Mamdani is very good on Twitter, with videos, but he actually produces nothing,' Cuomo said. 'Donald Trump would go through Mr. Mamdani like a hot knife through butter. He's been in government 27 minutes, he's passed three bills. That's all he's done." The pile-on came after Cuomo, who has led every poll since entering the race, has avoided his opponents in public, giving them virtually no opportunities to meet him face-to-face. That all changed Wednesday night. The former governor's opponents had him in their sights throughout the debate, working in criticisms of Cuomo in their responses to questions or interjecting at points to get in another quick dig at the former governor of New York. The cross talk was heavy on a stage that hosted nine candidates. In one exchange, Cuomo deflected on a question about whether he had any regrets from his time in politics, saying that if he regretted anything, it was 'that the Democratic Party got to a point that we allowed Mr. Trump to be elected, that we got to a point where rhetoric has no connection to reality.' The other candidates pounced. Adrienne Adams, the speaker of the New York City Council, spoke up, asking Cuomo if he had regrets about his record on health care, child care and more. 'Really, no regrets,' she said as she shook her head at Cuomo. As Cuomo moved to respond, Jessica Ramos, a state senator, tried to get a point in, but was drowned out by a moderator who directed the former governor to answer Adams' critique. 'It is just not accurate,' Cuomo said. Incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, a Democrat who pulled out of the primary to instead run for a second term on an independent ballot line, did not participate in the debate. Cuomo had been considered one of the Democratic Party's rising stars before his dramatic downfall in 2021 following a sexual harassment scandal. The former governor has said he did not intentionally mistreat the women and had fallen out of step with what was considered appropriate workplace conduct, though his lawyers and consultants have worked to discredit his accusers. Cuomo repeated a similar refrain on Wednesday during the debate. In his comeback run for mayor, Cuomo has faced renewed scrutiny about his decisions during the COVID-19 pandemic and is under investigation by the Justice Department over whether he lied to Congress about how he handled the virus as it spread through nursing homes. During the debate, moderators tried to pin Cuomo down on the truthfulness of his congressional testimony about a state report on nursing home deaths during the pandemic, but he sidestepped the question. 'I was very aware of the report,' he said, drawing a laugh from one of the other candidates.