Former Rep. Ralph Samuels sent impassioned letter to Sen. Scott Kawasaki regarding Parole Board bill

Testimony during a Senate State Affairs Committee hearing last week on a bill to reform the Parole Board prompted a former legislator to write an impassioned and at times scathing letter to Senator Scott Kawasaki (D – Fairbanks), who chairs the committee.

Sponsored by Senator Löki Tobin (D – Anchorage) and Senator Elvi Gray-Jackson (D – Anchorage), Senate Bill 176 is a bill proponents say will help reform the Alaska Board of Parole, while others believe it is in direct opposition to the Victims Rights Amendment to the Alaska Constitution that passed in 1994.

Ralph Samuels, who served in the House from 2003-2009, was watching the testimony when he heard a familiar name. The name was of the man that brutally murdered his brother in 1989. In the letter Samuels wrote that he and his dad “found his [brother’s] bloodied, lifeless body stuffed in a closet in his own home.”

During testimony, Sylvester Byrd Jr., a convicted murderer who was paroled three years ago, appeared with Megan Edge from the American Civil Liberties Union. Byrd implied Norton was unfairly treated because he was not paroled like Byrd was. Here is an excerpt from Samuels’ letter.

Another comment made by one of the ACLU’s invited testifiers, while commenting about incentives while in prison was, “…if an individual like Jon Norton, or any other person who has tried to change their life were not granted parole…” (referring to discretionary parole release). During his testimony, he specifically used Jon Norton as an example of a prisoner who should have been let out early on discretionary parole.

Below is a synopsis of what Jon Norton actually did to end up in prison.

Jon Norton burglarized a home in South Anchorage a couple of times in the summer of 1989. He could not find the keys to a sports car he wanted to steal, so he returned when he knew the owner would be home. Norton had advised friends that he was going to get the car and kill the guy to get it.

Jon Norton rang the doorbell, and the owner of the home answered the door. The owner was shot three times, with the last shot coming at point blank range while he crawled across the floor of his own bedroom. After executing the homeowner, Jon Norton returned to the home several times, once to hide the body, once to show off his murder to a friend, and the last time to steal beer from the fridge.

Mr. Norton had previously been institutionalized at Charter North Hospital. Following the pre-meditated murder, he had examinations by State psychiatrists and was sentenced to the maximum sentence for murder in the first degree (99 years), with ten years suspended. He was eligible for discretionary parole – early release from prison BEFORE serving the sentence ordered by the court – in 2019 (having served only 1/3 of his court-ordered sentence) and was denied. He is eligible to apply again in 2029.

How do you think the homeowner’s family felt when they saw invited testimony by the ACLU somehow making Jon Norton the victim in this situation?

That family is STILL going through the “administration of the criminal justice system,” even 35 years later, with no end in sight.

Article 1, section 24 of the Alaska Constitution reads, in part, “Crime victims…have the right to timely disposition of the case following the arrest of the accused…”  I cannot imagine how being dragged through the criminal justice system for 35 years does not violate this constitutional right. In Alaska today, there is no final disposition of a case for victims. Not ever.

The homeowner’s name was Duane Samuels. He was my brother. My Dad and I found his bloodied, lifeless body stuffed in a closet in his own home.

Having a convicted murderer, sponsored by the ACLU testify about how Jon Norton is a victim of the system was the most insulting thing I have ever heard. Considering that I have spent my entire adult life in politics, that is quite a statement.

The full text of Samuels’ letter is printed below.

Subscribe
Notify of

12 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Corsair
1 month ago

Ralph is right. Always has been. Always will be. Little Yamaha never has been, never will be.

Martin
1 month ago
Reply to  Corsair

And your racial prejudice has always been apparent, always will be.

Bills Johnson
1 month ago
Reply to  Martin

Murderer will always be a murderer, should get no consideration. Serve out his sentence. Fuck you for your “racial prejudice” bullshit.

Someone who wants Jeff to grow up
1 month ago
Reply to  Bills Johnson

Not bullshit. Calling Senator Kawasaki “Little Yamaha” is, in fact, racist.

Akwhitty
1 month ago

Glad you both left Hondas name out of this

Doug Thompson
1 month ago
Reply to  Martin

Ralph is right. You are a moron. Maybe it will come to your world

Someguy
1 month ago
Reply to  Doug Thompson

Martin’s comment doesn’t make him a moron. He’s just point out he obvious. You apparently are the moron if you can’t see that.

Dan
1 month ago

Samuels’ letter is important and he makes persuasive points. I understand that he finds Byrd’s testimony to be offensive – I think that’s fair. I don’t understand what the criticism of Kawasaki is, as it would be outrageous for him to not allow the ACLU and/or a released felon testify. It is worth being a little bit more specific about the controversial part of this bill. Currently, an eligible prisoner may be granted discretionary parole if it is determined that (paraphrased): 1) They won’t re-offend 2) Parole will further their rehabilitation 3) They won’t pose a threat 4) Parole won’t… Read more »

Dan
1 month ago
Reply to  Dan

It should be added that nothing I see in the current law governing the parole board considers the right of the victim. That may be a serious, unconstitutional oversight. Again, if you read the attached Walker file, you will see that the board does consider the impact of parole on the victims of the crime. Perhaps SB176 should be amended to bring statute in line with practice. Lobin and Gray-Jackson’s proposed language isn’t really relevant to that issue either in support or opposition.

Someguy
1 month ago

Are we going to get the stalker back! The primary reason I read this blog is to hopefully find a new stalker article. Now all we get in its place is advice from a cat. Although advice from a cat was cute at first,it has lost its charm and the advice sometimes given is dangerous in the sense that if someone follows it may do more harm than good. I wonder if the best advice cat could give would be to refer someone to a therapist. Viva la Stalker!

Someguy
1 month ago

Is the Alaska stalker coming back?! The main reason I read the Landmine is to hopefully get to read another stalker post. Viva la stalker!

Someguy
1 month ago

Hey Allison. Is this a teaser for an Alaska Stalker return?! The main reason I continue to return to this website is that I hope one day to again see the best and worst of Alaska’s social media landscape. Viva la Stalker.