Deukmejian Charges Bradley ‘Went AWOL’ in War Against Crime

Gov. George Deukmejian, in a sharp attack on his Democratic rival’s law enforcement record, Friday strongly disputed Mayor Tom Bradley’s claim that he supports the death penalty and charged that “when it comes to the war on crime, the mayor went AWOL long ago.”

In remarks delivered at a $100,000 fund-raiser in Riverside, Deukmejian declared: “The truth is as plain as the big nose on my face. Tom Bradley doesn’t support the death penalty. He never has.”

However, Bradley aide Ali Webb said the Los Angeles mayor’s support for the death penalty “has been a lifetime position” and she accused Deukmejian of “weaving a scene that looks like Swiss cheese--full of holes.”

“The mayor spent 21 years as a cop,” Webb added. “He’s had a lot more practice at putting real criminals behind bars than Gov. Deukmejian has. Deukmejian has only succeeded in talking about it and writing laws about it.”

Cutting Issues

Campaign strategists for the governor see the death penalty and the battle over reconfirmation of Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird as cutting issues in the Nov. 4 election. One Los Angeles Times Poll taken last year, for example, found that Californians, by a 75%-to-16% margin, favored the death penalty.

In the past, much of the governor’s law enforcement criticism of Bradley has focused on the mayor’s refusal to take a position on the Bird reconfirmation and the governor’s assertions that the police ranks in Los Angeles have dwindled during the mayor’s administration.

In his speech text, Deukmejian took the criticism one step further, portraying Bradley as a indecisive politician who has stood on the sidelines, while Deukmejian has been in the forefront of legislative battles over the death penalty.

The governor cited his efforts in the early 1960s to keep then-Gov. Edmund G. (Pat) Brown from abolishing the death penalty and the 1972 voter-approved initiative he authored while in the state Senate that reinstated capital punishment after it was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Veto Override

Deukmejian also lauded his role in the veto override by the Legislature in 1977 of a revised death penalty law and his support for a 1978 initiative by then-Sen. John Briggs that expanded the type of murders punishable by death.

In each case, he said, Bradley either “was silent” or “he says he doesn’t remember how he voted.” Deukmejian also criticized Bradley for opposing the 1982 so-called “victims’ bill of rights” initiative, which, among other things, established a fund to compensate crime victims.

“But now it’s 1986,” Deukmejian said, “and the mayor hungers for higher office. So he wants the people to believe that he has always been a strong supporter of the death penalty and law enforcement.”

Webb said much of the criticism is unfounded, because the issues were debated in the Legislature at a time when Bradley either was on the Los Angeles City Council or serving as mayor.

“He would have no cause to get involved in (the legislative) fights,” she said.

Webb also said Bradley opposed the 1978 Briggs initiative “because he felt it was bad law.” Portions of the initiative have since been struck down by the state Supreme Court as unconstitutional.

Opposed Measure

On the issue of the victims bill of rights, Webb said Bradley opposed the measure, along with “other elected officials and community groups, because the law itself was very ambiguous.”

“The mayor has had some problems as has the Supreme Court on various death penalty laws because they were bad laws,” Webb continued. “But that has nothing to do with his belief in the death penalty as an appropriate penalty. That has been a lifetime position. He’s been very clear.”

In an interview last year, Bradley said his views had “grown tougher” over the years but have been fundamentally pro-death penalty “as far back as I can remember.”