Ward Bird is a free man!
Yesterday Ward Bird–the New Hampshire man who was jailed for defending his property–had his pardon hearing and today the Executive Council and the governor voted on whether or not to grant him his pardon. The Executive Council (which holds a 5-0 majority) pushed for a full pardon which would expunge Ward Bird’s record but Democrat Governor John Lynch overrode this decision. So the Executive Council held a second vote on commuting Ward Bird’s sentence to time served and the governor approved the verdict–sometime either later tonight or tomorrow morning Ward Bird will be a free man.
While this is not a full victory for Ward Bird because he will no longer be able to practice his second amendment right–he turned down two plea bargains to avoid jail time because he would have lost his second amendment right and he felt he did nothing wrong–at least Ward Bird will finally be reunited with his family.
I think there would have been a chance at a full pardon if a recent revelation about Ward Bird’s past record had not been known. Back in 2002 Ward Bird and a few of his buddies had a few drinks and began shooting at a nearby tree stump, but one of Ward Bird’s shots went through the window and into the house of a neighbor. Ward Bird pleaded the charge down to a violation and the owner of the house dropped the charges when Ward Bird agreed to pay for the damages.
I have to be honest; with this revelation I think it was very hard for anyone to totally wipe Ward Bird’s record clean. After all, he acted careless and irresponsible by drinking and using his firearm and he was damned lucky that nobody got hurt, and it is pretty hard to defend someone who has neglected to act responsibly with a weapon in the past. But it still brings up the question of whether or not Ward Bird’s sentence fit the crime he was found guilty of and it also has made me question how wise the idea of mandatory minimum sentencing is.
It still seems to me that Ward Bird’s original sentence did not fit the crime, and the judge that sentenced Ward Bird to the mandatory three years felt the same way as he stated that he didn’t feel Ward Bird deserved any jail time. I have always been a supporter of mandatory minimum sentencing because I felt that it kept liberal judges more honest; by this I mean, mandatory sentencing would force a liberal judge to sentence a person who deserved jail time to jail time instead of letting that person off easy–maybe with just a slap on the wrist. But this case has made me realize that there are times when a judge must use his judgement (go figure) and look at any extenuating circumstances surrounding a case before he or she hands down a sentence–not every case is as cut and dried as one might think.
Ward Bird is now about to be freed and so justice has been served, at least on one level, because he never should have been jailed in the first place. Ward Bird can still seek to clear his record if he still feels he was wronged, but at least now he will be able to do it from home. I have the feeling he will let it go now that he is a free man.
UPDATE: The Republican controlled Executive Council voted 5-0 in favor of a pardon but were over-ruled by the governor who favored the commutation. Ward Bird and his wife are happy with his freedom, but still disappointed that he didn’t receive a full pardon. Ward Bird will be able to apply again in two years for a full pardon.
America's Watchtower 
It must of been hell for his family. I agree. He should never have been convicted in the first place.
LikeLike
He shouldn’t have been convicted, it was his word against another’s and I honestly don’t see how they had the evidence to convict him.
LikeLike
This is what happens when people abandon reason.
LikeLike
At least he is going home.
LikeLike
From what I know of this case, the man deserved to be returned to his family, and I don’t begrudge him the freedom.
But I disagree on the mandatory sentencing – the fact is, we train judges for years not only in the application of the law, but also how to temper it with mercy, and then we forbid them to use any discretion in sentencing at all, just to make an ideological point.
Ward Bird was jailed because political pressure was brought to bear on the legislature, which decided to substitute its judgment for that of those specifically appointed to hear cases and make decisions based on each case’s unique features.
Who knows how many others are unjustly sitting behind bars because someone whipped up a crowd or two into an ideological frenzy?
Take good care and may God bless us all!
TGY
LikeLike
I think we now agree on the mandatory sentencing, because I have had a change of heart because of this case and I now understand why a judge should be able to apply some discretion when sentencing a person.
LikeLike
No pardon? The governor gets away with that? the man has a record now and can’t own a gun. That isn’t freedom. I hope when a new governor gets in there he gets his pardon. That is just plain wrong!
LikeLike
Bird can apply for a pardon in two years and New Hampshire’s governors terms are only two years, so maybe then he will have a better chance at a pardon.
LikeLike
He should have qualified. I hope you guys vote that governor out!
LikeLike
I hope so too! I have been trying to for years but he still is fairly popular.
LikeLike
At least he’s a free man. As I understand it though, while his past actions were irresponsible, that should not have factored in this case. “Irrelevant” is the legal term I think. It might be in his interest to fully clear his name.
LikeLike
His past actions shouldn’t have been considered (and in his trial the jury was unaware of his past) but I still think that his past had something to do with the decision. He will have another chance at a pardon and as of right now it looks as if he will try again.
LikeLike
I am very greatful for your coverage of this. Just about everything I know regarding this case came from you and it was shared with others who literally wrote me back and asked if this was for real. Yesterday when I scrolled my emails and saw this title in the subject, I gasped. I didn’t get to read this til now, but the good news had already been released. It scares me how the justice system works sometimes because all emphasis on its execution should veer towards preserving liberty, and I know of so many instances of that being violated unjustly.
This may not have been a perfect case in point, but the Governor over-riding what the 5 parole board members voted is a tad disturbing. It’s not like this was a bill on something, this was a man’s liberty. I cringe at some of the things I know that threaten people’s liberty, but your coverage of this inspiring to that end. Thank you.
LikeLike
Thank you!
New Hampshire’s state government is practically unique in this country–I believe there is one other state which also has an Executive Council. In effect the governorship in itself is bicameral. The governor has limited power in some respects because he must work in unison with the Executive Council on some issues. This was not a parole board which voted to pardon Ward Bird but the Executive Council and when it comes to parol hearings in New Hampshire the governor can veto the Executive Council–there are other issues which the governor cannot veto if passed by the Executive Council. The Executive Council when viewed in conjunction with the governorship provides a check on each other which helps to ensure that the executive branch in the state government does not gain too much power. (Unless of cource both are of the same party, when they can rubber stamp each other.)
LikeLike