American Bar Association
1997 Silver Gavel Award Winners: Radio

1997 WINNERS | NEWSPAPERS | BOOKS | TELEVISION | RADIO | FILMS & VIDEOS

"When and how should a convicted killer go home before the end of his sentence?" So begins "Murder, Punishment and Parole in Alabama," a 45-minute two-part NPR "All Things Considered" radio series that aired April 24-25, 1996. NPR reports that while most states still have parole, it is an "institution ...under attack and in retreat...[yet] in Alabama, there's an old-fashioned parole board wielding a degree of discretion that most states no longer allow." The series takes listeners inside an Alabama parole board hearing--a forum with neither rules of evidence nor cross-examination--to illustrate some of the problematic aspects of parole. Murder victims' families stress their suffering and the need for retribution and punishment. Prisoners and their families cite rehabilitation, redemption, and mercy. Parole board members, none of whom are lawyers, go about the delicate task of satisfying the demand for retribution, acknowledging the possibility of rehabilitation, and addressing the economic imperatives resulting from the glut of prisoners in the system. Ultimately, the series shows ordinary people grappling with the sometimes conflicting concerns of--and appeals to--public safety, humaneness, retribution, the high cost of incarceration, and justice itself.

Availability: call NPR at 1-888-677-6397, $24.95 for audiotape (includes transcript).

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

COMMITTEE COMMENTARY

National Public Radio opens the doors of the Alabama parole board hearing room in a revealing and reflective way. The series explores the informal world of parole that exists in the shadow of the formal world of trial and sentencing. Listeners have a unique opportunity to hear firsthand the moving accounts of victim's family members, as well as pleas for release from inmates and their relatives. Through these stories, it becomes clear that the complex values of the American penal system often clash at the parole board hearing.

E X C E R P T   F R O M   M U R D E R,  P U N I S H M E N T   A N D
 P A R O L E   I N  A L A B A M A

ROBERT SIEGEL: Based on his behavior in prison and his work record and the fact that he is now a middle-aged man, Barry Davis struck at least one of his evaluators as a good candidate for parole. But to the widow of his victim, he must still be judged not by what he has become but by what he did.

AUDREY GILBERT: Just think, two murders. Not just one, but two. And tell me that he's changed? Hey, you have to be good when you're locked up. But let him out and see what happens. I beg you, please, please, for our sake, don't.

ROBERT SIEGEL: Barry Eugene Davis was denied parole. He'll be eligible for another hearing in one year. And if he's denied then, he could come back a year later. Mrs. Gilbert says she'll be there, too.

AUDREY GILBERT: My sons will keep coming, my sons' sons will keep coming. We'll always be here at every parole. Thank you.

ROBERT SIEGEL: Prisons are bulging with inmates. There's economic pressure on corrections departments to get them out of prison as soon as possible. But public pressure on prosecutors and judges is to be tough, so they seek and give sentences which, when taken in the aggregate, the state cannot afford. So, the parole board doesn't so much decide who should get parole as which of the many inmates with favorable recommendations in an overpopulated system should not get it. In that decision, the emotional and sometimes eloquent appeals of the victim's families are often decisive. The right of victims to argue against parole has evolved into a responsibility to do so.

Gavel Awards Home | Entry Form & Guidelines | Award Winners | Archives