Thornsley Testifies in Clemency Court Case

Testifying before U.S. District Judge A. Richard Caputo, Thornsley, an associate professor of Criminal Justice at Mansfield, was interrogated by legal counsel representing the Pennsylvania Prison Society and cross-examined by an assistant state attorney general in the hearing pertaining to a lawsuit brought by the Pennsylvania Prison Society versus the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

“The 2006 case in question is attempting to challenge how the state Board of Pardons now reviews requests for clemency from inmates serving a life sentence,” Thornsley said.

Before amendments to the Pennsylvania Constitution in 1997, inmates only needed to obtain three of the five votes from members of the Pardons Board to send a recommendation from the Board to the Governor. “Now, inmates need a unanimous vote from the five member Board, which is made even more difficult since the composition of the Board now has a victim advocate, replacing a lawyer,” Thornsley said.

In his class, Thornsley talks about “how the state Pardons Board has undergone significant constitutional changes since it was last amended in 1997 after (then) Governor (Tom) Ridge’s ‘Special Legislative Session on Crime,’ and how one criminal act can change the course of a gubernatorial election, create new state law, alter correctional public policy, and change forever the way clemency is decided in Pennsylvania.”

Thornsley was brought into the evidentiary hearing because of his knowledge of Pennsylvania’s life-sentenced inmate population, acquired from a variety of perspectives over the years. Most recently, in June 2005, Thornsley, acted as chair of the Advisory Committee under Senate Resolution #149 of 2002. He presented his committee’s findings to the Pennsylvania General Assembly as to the state’s seriously ill and geriatric inmate population.

That report contained a controversial overview of Pennsylvania’s rapidly growing life-sentenced inmate population, made only more disheartening by the fact that the Board of Pardons has virtually ceased to hear cases from life-sentenced inmates requesting clemency. The committee report also contained statistical information which Thornsley believes demonstrates a direct link between Governor Tom Ridge’s ascension to governor in 1995, changes in the state Constitution based on legislation enacted in Governor Ridge’s “Special Legislative Session on Crime” and the lack of life-sentenced inmates now receiving public hearings before the Board.

“I was called to testify in the evidentiary hearing to support the Prison Society’s argument that the committee’s report should be admitted into evidence before the case is returned to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals,” Thornsley said. The report was accepted into evidence. Thornsley was also successful in entering into evidence what factors have routinely been considered by Board members in the past as they have made their decisions on life-sentenced inmates.

In May 2005, Thornsley represented a life-sentenced inmate before the Board of Pardons, and received a 4-1 vote, with State Attorney General Tom Corbett voting not to recommend, from the Pardons Board. “Before 1997, that same vote would have been sufficient to recommend the inmate for clemency to Governor Ed Rendell,” Thornsley said.

Prior to beginning his teaching career at MU, Thornsley worked for the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections. He volunteered his services to represent inmates before the Board of Pardons, which is chaired by the lieutenant governor. As the former director of the Office of Legislative Affairs for the state Department of Corrections, Thornsley saw firsthand the legislative efforts taken during the 1995 Special Session on Crime.

According to Thornsley, the legislative efforts to change both the composition and voting requirements of the Board of Pardons in 1997 can now be tied to the virtual impossibility of life-sentenced inmates to get a 15 minute public hearing to state why they should be considered for clemency, let alone being able to acquire a recommendation from the pardons Board.

According to former state Attorney General Ernie Preate, who is co-counsel to the Pennsylvania Prison Society lawsuit, Thornsley was “able to bring clearly to Judge Caputo the historical growth of the issues involved” in the lawsuit.

During the interrogation, Thornsley surprised the court by stating that he routinely discusses the history of clemency in Pennsylvania and conveys how public policy, state law, and Constitutional amendments can often arise from one single criminal act. Preate said that Thornsley’s teaching these topics is “a tremendous and creative way for them [students] to understand the substantive and procedural constitutional rights, as well as allowing them to see that compassion and forgiveness are important in our justice system.”

Preate believes that Thornsley will once again be asked to assist the Pennsylvania Prison Society in their legal efforts as the case proceeds once again to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.