[$tinkle]

Male inmates' bid to marry denied

The state Department of Correction has denied permission to two male inmates to marry at a state facility for sex offenders, according to a letter signed by the prison superintendent and obtained by the Globe yesterday.

Essie Billingslea and Bruce Hatt, committed to the Massachusetts Treatment Center, requested permission to marry in early February. Superintendent Robert Murphy denied it because of ''very serious security concerns," and yesterday, Governor Mitt Romney's chief spokesman said the governor agreed with the decision.

''A wedding/marriage between you and resident Bruce Hatt would present a significant security risk to the Massachusetts Treatment Center and the Department of Correction," Murphy wrote in a March 23 letter to Billingslea. ''A marriage between two residents . . . would have a direct impact on the orderly running of the facility."

The letter was released yesterday, as the same-sex marriage debate returned to Beacon Hill. Legislators presided over a packed hearing on eight bills relating to same-sex marriage, including one to remove Supreme Judicial Court justices who ruled in favor of same-sex marriage in November 2003.

Eric Fehrnstrom, Romney's communications director, said the governor supports the Correction Department's stance in denying permission for the marriage.

Supporters of same-sex marriage said the timing of the letter's release was suspect.

''It seems likely that supporters of Governor Romney are trying to diminish the validity of our relationships by connecting us to sexual predators," said Arline Isaacson, cochairwoman of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus. ''They are trying to change the image of the gay couples who have married or plan to, from the very traditional and conservative people they are, to the image of sexual predators. It's clever, very clever. It's an old trick that used to be used against the gay community all the time."

The Correction Department has received two other requests for same-sex marriages from inmates since such marriage became legal last May. One case was denied because, like the one disclosed yesterday, it involved two male inmates housed in the same facility, a department spokeswoman said. The other request was approved, because it involved the marriage of a female inmate to a woman who is not in prison.

Inmates have a constitutional right to marry in Massachusetts, but the department considers requests on a case-by-case basis.

''The distinction is . . . between a request for an inmate to marry someone who is also incarcerated, versus someone who is not incarcerated," said Kelly Nantel, a Correction Department spokeswoman. ''We would review each request based on its own merits."

In denying Billingslea's request, Murphy also said he was concerned that one of the men might be coercing the other into marriage, and that they might be unsafe in the facility.

''There is the potential for you to be harassed, up to the point of assault, by other residents and/or inmates," Murphy wrote. ''There is also the potential for you to be exploited both personally and financially as a result of this relationship. I am concerned for your safety and for the safety of Mr. Hatt."

Murphy wrote that he was more concerned that Billingslea was being coerced into marrying another man because he had previously said he was not gay.

''Your request to marry another man while stating you are not a homosexual raises concerns as to the free will of both you and Mr. Hatt," Murphy wrote.

The Massachusetts Treatment Center, part of the Bridgewater Correctional Facility, houses ''sexually dangerous sex offenders," Nantel said. It is a Level 4, or medium-security, facility. According to Murphy's letter, Billingslea has been ''guilty of several disciplinary infractions" there, including ''threats to another resident, encouraging a riot, and threatening a staff member."

ACLU lawyer Sarah Wunsch said she was concerned for the safety of the inmates now that the letter has been made public.

Meanwhile, advocates and opponents of the court decision that legalized same-sex marriage packed a steamy basement room at the State House yesterday for more than four hours of hearings on bills and amendments.

Among the proposals are: a measure banning both same-sex marriage and civil unions; a proposal to oust four of the five SJC judges who voted to sanction same-sex marriage in the state; and a measure that would repeal a 1913 law that prevents out-of-state same-sex couples from marrying here.

''The legislature has a right to define marriage, not the judiciary," said Representative Philip Travis, a Rehoboth Democrat who sponsored the legislation to allow only heterosexual marriages.

The committee must now decide whether it will submit the legislation to the House of Representatives and the Senate.

Many of the proposals deal with issues that lawmakers are set to decide later this year, when they will debate a constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage and allow civil unions.

''That debate has already happened, and they want to reopen that debate," Representative Byron Rushing, a South End Democrat, said of same-sex marriage opponents.

Aides did not know yesterday when the committee would vote on the bills discussed yesterday.

boston.com (printer friendly)

a few key questions:

• the full concern of the ACLU is for the prisoners' safety, and not their right to marry?
• what "security concerns" trump the usual for housing sex offenders in their own area? (i.e., i don't believe the prison official is being forthright)
• what "significant security risk" for a wedding ceremony is above & beyond what is in place for a hetero ceremony performed at a prison?
• upon what basis can Arline Isaacson (co-chair of MGLPC) make the claim that mit romney supporters are behind this request? (that chic is "straight-up" paranoid!)
• if marriage is a basic human right - as proponents of same-sex marraige say - then why doesn't the gay marriage lobby come to the rescue of these humans? are they saying that marriage is about sex (b/c these 2 claim to not be gay); this marriage would be no different that david gest & liza minelli
• does being a convicted felon relegate the constitutional right to marry subject to panel approval?

what do yous think of this?

 

[valve bouncer]

I googled "prison sex" and got 5,070,000 hits.

 

[RhinofromWA]

I googled "prison sex" and got 5,070,000 hits.

ewwwww did you open any links?

 

[valve bouncer]

ewwwww did you open any links?

Most of them were for Tool or took you to www.$tinkle.com

 

[genpowell71]

Depending on what they did, I would think that this would be a bad idea also. They're already in prison for sexual crimes, lets let them have each other for happiness. I was under the impression that Prison was NOT supposed to be a happy place...