Last Tuesday’s (October 22) meeting of the Democratic Committee of Lower Merion Narberth (DCLMN) was missing the verbal fireworks that had characterized several of the meetings earlier this year. But Democrats being Democrats, they did manage to whip up a spirited discussion when the topic turned to the controversial ballot question that will be put to the voters on Election Day, November 5.
The question, on which voters will be asked to vote Yes or No on, will determine whether or not the Pennsylvania Constitution will be amended. That proposed amendment has been called “Marsys Law” by its supporters.
Adrian Seltzer (8-2, Ardmore) was the first DCLMN member who spoke out against the ballot initiative. She cited opposition to “Marsy’s Law” by the ACLU and the League of Women Voters.
Township Commissioner Anna Durbin (Ward 8, Ardmore) also expressed her discomfort with the amendment. She called attention to a clause in it that refers to “timely notice and opportunity to take part in public proceedings.” Durbin said that she believed that the language could be interpreted as a requirement that defendants in criminal cases could not get bail unless the victim was present at the bail hearing. And according to Durbin, that could result in a huge number of additional defendants not getting bail, and having to stay in jail the entire time before their trials.
Marsy's Law was on the ballot in Georgia last year (and passed). This video gives a reasonably balanced account of the amendment's pros and cons.
Not a single DCLMN member spoke in favor of the amendment, however the committee chose to follow the leads of the Pennsylvania and Montgomery County Democratic Committees, neither of which has taken a formal position on the amendment.
The consensus among DCLMN members seemed to follow the argument that Bill Leopold (12-2, Merion) made, that on Election Day it was more important to get the two Democrats elected in what is expected to be a fiercely competitive Pennsylvania Superior Court race, rather than getting involved in lengthy complicated discussions with voters over a ballot question – one which was not be supported or opposed by any of the other Democratic Committees.
So Who Is Marsy?
According to the Marsy’s Law for Pennsylvania Website, “Marsy’s Law was named after Dr. [Henry] Nicholas’ sister, Marsalee (Marsy) Nicholas, a beautiful, vibrant University of California Santa Barbara student, who was stalked and killed by her ex-boyfriend in 1983. Only a week after Marsy was murdered, Dr. Nicholas and Marsy’s mother, Mrs. Marcella Leach, walked into a grocery store after visiting her daughter’s grave and were confronted by the accused murderer. The family had no idea that he had been released on bail.”
And Who Is Dr. Henry Nichola$ ?
Last November, Forbes reported that Henry Nicholas had a net worth of $3.3 billion, and at that time he had spent $71.8 million in six states on behalf of the Marsy’s Law Campaign. More recently, Forbes increased their estimate of his wealth to $4.1billion. Nicholas was a co-founder of Broadcom, a manufacturer of microchips and integrated circuits.
The NAACP also came out against it. Most of the positive things about it are already in the Crime Victims Act of 1998. The unintended consequences of the amendment are not easily fixed.
SHAME on the Democrat Party for not supporting a YES on this Ballot question . As a Victim of serious Crime I should have had the rights enumerated in this Ballot Question . I am sick and tired of Criminals having all the Rights and The Victims having no rights