Gov. Davis OKs First Parole of Convicted Killer

For the first time since taking office, Gov. Gray Davis has authorized parole for a convicted murderer, deciding that a San Bernardino woman was battered by an ex-boyfriend and feared for her life when she killed him in 1986, Davis’ office said Sunday.

Davis previously had vowed that he would not free people convicted of murder for any reason.

Facing criticism from some lawyers and legislators for repeatedly blocking paroles, Davis agreed late Saturday with the Board of Prison Terms that Rose Ann Parker should be freed.

But even as he showed her mercy, Davis modified the board’s finding by extending Parker’s sentence until Dec. 8, so that she would complete her minimum prison sentence of 15 years. If Davis had not extended her sentence, Parker, 41, would have been freed Sunday from the women’s prison at Corona.

“On rare occasions,” Davis said in a statement Sunday, “a case arises in which we must give weight not only to extraordinary and compelling circumstances, but to legal defenses adopted in law since the original jury verdict. This is such a case.”

Parker killed Arthur Boga, her estranged boyfriend, on March 27, 1986. She was convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to an indeterminate term of 15 years to life in prison. In 1986, the law did not permit women to raise a defense that they had been battered. The battered woman syndrome defense did not become part of California law until 1992.

“There is no question,” Davis’ statement said, “that Rose Ann Parker believed she was in imminent danger of losing her life, as well as that of her 2-year-old son and her unborn child, when she shot and killed Arthur Boga, with whom she had a four-year relationship marked by violence and abuse.”

Davis, like his Republican predecessor Pete Wilson, has taken a particularly hard line on criminal justice issues, including parole.

Under California’s system, the Board of Prison Terms considers parole requests by inmates sentenced to indeterminate terms for such crimes as murder and kidnapping. When the board grants parole--something it rarely does--the governor can review the decision, and has the power to invalidate a parole grant.

The board is supposed to consider such questions as the inmates’ remorse, behavior in prison, attempts to improve themselves by learning a trade, and the gravity of the offense. People convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole have no chance of being freed, and do not appear before the board.

Until Parker’s case, Davis had opposed parole in all 29 cases sent to him by the Board of Prison Terms. Davis recently tried to block the release of another battered woman, Jane Woods, 37. In that case, however, his hands were tied somewhat because Woods had won her parole date before Davis took office.

Davis nonetheless tried to intervene by asking that the parole board reconsider the release date that it had granted Woods during the Wilson administration. In a surprise move, the board reaffirmed its original decision and sent her home. She had been in prison since 1987 for masterminding the murder of her abusive boyfriend.

In an interview last year, the Democratic governor told The Times: “If you take someone else’s life, forget it.” At the time, he said, extenuating circumstances, such as an abusive husband shot by a battered wife, would not change his view. Since then, his aides have tried to soften that comment.

“The governor believes murder is a heinous crime,” said Phil Trounstine, Davis’ communications director. “But when it comes to parole, he looks at every case. . . . From day one, the governor has made it clear he reviews each case. There is no blanket policy, and there has not been a blanket policy on parole of murderers.”

Attorneys for a group of 17 inmates have sued Davis alleging that he automatically rejects parole, no matter the circumstances. Legislators have been threatening to cut funding for the Board of Prison Terms.

And a judge in Los Angeles has ordered the release of Robert Rosenkrantz, 33, concluding that he is not a danger to society, and that the Davis administration parole board is treating him unfairly. The state is appealing in an effort to keep Rosenkrantz behind bars at the state prison in San Luis Obispo.

Rosenkrantz, who has wide support and is a model inmate, has been imprisoned for 14 years for the murder of Steven Redman, a schoolmate. Redman broke into the Rosenkrantz family beach home and exposed him as being gay on the night that Rosenkrantz graduated from Calabasas High School. Convinced that his father would disown him, Rosenkrantz demanded that Redman retract the statement. When Redman refused, Rosenkrantz killed him.

“I’m pleased for [Parker],” said Rowan Klein, attorney for Rosenkrantz. “It sounds like she really deserves to be released based on her accomplishments. . . . I hope that [Davis] now understands that he has an obligation to consider each case.”

Parker’s case began when Boga, then 54, learned that Parker was pregnant by another man. Boga came to her apartment in Ontario armed with a revolver, ushered Parker and her 2-year-old-son into a bedroom, and demanded she have an abortion.

When she refused, he threatened to kill Parker, the father of her unborn child and members of Parker’s family. Parker begged him to put the gun down. When he did, she picked up the gun and shot him in the back, killing him. Parker was 26.

“Ms. Parker committed a grave crime,” Davis’ statement said. “However, this case has all the characteristics of battered women’s syndrome, a now legally recognized defense which was not available at the time of her trial.”

According to Davis, San Bernardino County Deputy Dist. Atty. Clyde A. Boyd acknowledged that Parker believed she needed to use force because of Boga’s prior abuse of her. The sentencing judge, retired Superior Court Judge William Pitt Hyde, said he believed Parker should have been acquitted, or, at most, found guilty of voluntary manslaughter. In addition to extending her sentence until December, Davis is requiring that she undergo drug testing and complete a class in parenting skills.

“It is significant and I hope it is a harbinger of things to come,” said Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco), the most prominent critic of Davis’ parole policy.

Davis, like many elected officials, has learned the lessons of past governors who allowed inmates out, only to have them commit serious crimes. His decision to free Parker is relatively safe. Odds are long that women who suffered abuse from boyfriends or spouses will commit new crimes.

“It’s a huge change,” said Rich Pfeiffer, a Tustin attorney who knows Parker and tries to help inmates win parole. He attributed the governor’s decision to public pressure. “She is not alone. There are so many safe people in there who could be released.”

Cheryl Montgomery, a Sacramento attorney who represents inmates, called it a “step in the right direction. But many other lifers have been found suitable for release by this board, and in each and every case, the governor has denied the grant.”