Prison Archives - David Hendricks

Another Parole Denial for Tom Henry

Thursday, April 27, 2017, was Henry’s en banc hearing. That’s where the parole board member who interviewed Henry at Menard CC gave her report to the full board. It occurred in Springfield and was again attended by Henry’s sister and, for the first time, his son, Thomas, who drove from southwestern Missouri. The board allowed only one family member to speak for up to 10 minutes. Thomas spoke.

Henry really thought he had a chance this year. The parole board member who interviewed him in March questioned him for hours, and he felt she understood him and was favorable toward him (which turned out to be true). Then after her visit, a risk assessment was administered, and then the original parole board member returned for a second visit, during which she told Henry he had done well on the risk assessment. What was against him was that two of last year’s four affirmative votes had retired from the board, and one member who was actively opposed to Henry, who was to retire last October, did not. As it turned out, Henry did pick up two votes, which replaced the two who had left, but even if those two had not left, he would have fallen one vote short. He needs seven.

After voting to deny Henry parole, the board voted on how long before he is reevaluated for parole. It appeared to the family members in attendance that he was going to get a three-year “set,” but in the end they voted to review his case again next year, which by now is only a bit more than ten months hence.

(I’m writing from memory of a phone call from Henry two nights ago. I didn’t take notes and can’t find any news report of Henry’s en banc hearing result.)

Henry Denied Parole

I was sad to read an email that came in last night from Andrea Ryken, one of the two fantastic student advocates who worked for Tom Henry’s release. To give you the story from her perspective, I’ll copy her words here:

“The en banc hearing did not go as well as we had hoped. Henry received the same two votes as last year, and he did at least receive a one-year set once again. However, the tone of the hearing was disappointing, to say the least. Eric Gregg, the Board member who had interviewed Henry in Menard, spoke about Henry with really positive language, and we were at first very optimistic. But then we were asked to leave so the Board could hear the protest letters from the victims’ families and, when we returned to the room, the tone had changed. It felt like all had gone cold.

“The Board allowed Rosie, Dick, and the two of us to say a few words. The Chairman was very short with us all, though, and Rosie in particular. We tried our best to clarify some points and emphasize that Henry has met every one of their supposed markers of an ideal parole candidate. And yet, some members could not get past the crime itself. One member described Henry as a Jekyll/Hyde character, and at this point Gregg seemed to back pedal and express worries about Henry that seemed at odds with how positively he described him from interview at first. Finally, Gregg recommended denying him parole, and he even hesitated about the set length, citing the difficulty it puts the victims’ families through with each attempt.

“We are sorry to report bad news. We stood with Rosie and Dick afterward, and some tears were definitely shed. It was a sad moment.

“We have both gained so much from this amazing experience. Our graduation is on May 16th, and we both agree this is one of the most important things we have had the privilege of doing in law school. It has been our absolute pleasure to get to know Henry, Rosie, Dick, and you through this process. We have memorialized the process in memos that we have passed on to our professor, and we have organized and re-named all of the electronic files for Henry’s petition in hopes that all future attempts are as smooth as possible. As our professor told us after the hearing when we called him, disappointed, it is absolutely worth it to keep trying because one never knows how the PRB will change with new members or how the situation will hit members differently, year to year.”

Thank you for viewing my blog. Please return often. I value your comments.

Regards,

David Hendricks

www.authorhendricks.com

Tom Henry’s Prison Parole Hearing

I received a phone call from Henry Tuesday evening, during which he filled me in on his parole hearing Thursday of last week, March 20. First, a little background on the process.

To decide on parole for a prisoner, the IPRB (Illinois Prisoner Review Board) first sends a single member of the board (called a “Hearing Examiner”) to the prison. That parole board member interviews the prisoner and prepares a report and a recommendation for the full board, which meets later at their monthly meeting of the full Board in Springfield (that month’s en banc session).

The petitioner (inmate) is allowed to have a representative at the hearing, who may make a brief statement on the inmate’s behalf. There is also an opportunity for the inmate to tell his or her own story and to express personal thoughts on why they feel they should be paroled. The interview is recorded.

Henry told me that, in attendance, besides prison employees, were the Hearing Examiner, Henry’s sister, Rose, and her husband, Richard—who have become known to members of the Board by appearing at each of Henry’s hearings—and the two law students appointed by Alan Mills, Adjunct Professor at the Northwestern University School of Law.

Here’s what Henry told me: “Dave, it went better than any hearing I’ve ever had! The guy from the parole board was real friendly and me and him got to chatting before the others got there and we had a real good time, and the two gals from Mr. Mills were fantastic! They helped me to answer the questions and … one of them even put her hand on my leg and said, ‘Henry, you’ve gone beyond the question. Let’s come back to the point,’ one time.”

Henry talks fast and rambles when he talks. He is, in some ways, his own worst enemy at a formal hearing because of the jocularity of his demeanor and his no-telling-where-I’m-headed-next stream of consciousness method of communication. Back in January I told Ariel and Andrea that the best way they could help Henry at the hearing, in my opinion, was to tape duct tape across his mouth—and make sure to run it around the back of his head so it stays in place! Thankfully, they didn’t take me literally, but they, according to Henry, were fantastic advocates and excellent controllers as well. “They didn’t miss a single point we talked about beforehand,” he said.

The Springfield en banc meeting is scheduled for May 1, Henry informed me, “which will be one day before the anniversary of my arrest in the woods of McDonald County, when that FBI agent said to me, ‘It’s been a long time, Henry Hillenbrand’.”

Thank you for reading my blog.

Regards,

David Hendricks

www.authorhendricks.com

Where to Buy Tom Henry

For months we’ve been struggling to make my book as available as possible. As of yesterday another piece fell into place when Tom Henry: Confession of a Killer became available on Apple’s iTunes store. So now, when you click on the “Buy the Book” link anywhere on my website, www.authorhendricks.com, you’ll be presented with a menu of selections.

If you want to download the ebook, you can do so from Amazon, Barnes&Noble, iTunes, Smashwords, and Kobo. Whether you have a Kindle, Nook, Sony, or any other kind of electronic reader, there are choices available for you. No matter which you choose, the price will be $2.99.

If you’d rather hold a printed book in your hands, you can purchase the paperback from Amazon, Barnes&Noble, and diesel eBook Store. The paperback price is $11.99, but it sells at prices ranging from $8.98 to $11.99. I don’t understand their pricing algorithms, but I’m pleased when vendors choose to discount my book.

If you’re one who likes to try before you buy, you can read part of the book for free on your computer or e-reader. From www.authorhendricks.com you can download the first 50+ pages in Kindle, Nook (ePub) or PDF formats. That free download begins with the Forward. Or, you can sample the book for free from Amazon. Just go to their page where Tom Henry is offered and click on “Send Sample now.” It’s been a while since I looked at it, but I believe their sample starts with Chapter One and extends farther into the book.

There is still no audio book of Tom Henry available, but the writing of this very blog was interrupted by a phone call from a professional book performer, who will send me follow-up information. So we’ll see what the future holds in that regard.

I’m still waiting on news of the results of Henry’s recent Parole Board hearing. I’ll let you know what I know when I know it.

Thank you for viewing my blog. Please return often. I value your comments.

Regards,

David Hendricks

www.authorhendricks.com

Parole Hearing for Henry Hillenbrand

Tom Henry’s parole hearing was scheduled for last Thursday, March 21. Before I tell you what I know about how it went, let me start with a dark joke. (Yes, your Honor, it’s relevant.)

Question: What do you call the guy who graduates from medical school with the lowest grades in his class?

Answer: Doctor

That said, let me tell you a little about the two Northwestern University law students working on Henry’s Parole Hearing. Both were assigned to assist Henry with his parole hearing by the legal director of the Chicago Uptown People’s Law Center, Alan Mills, a Northwestern adjunct Professor. Alan Mills is a prince among men, standing up for the poor and disenfranchised, doing pro bono work for justice for those unjustly treated by the Illinois Department of Corrections, slumlords, and other tyrants. For more information or to donate to this worthy cause go to http://uplcchicago.org.

Back to the law students assigned to help Henry. By assigning two, Alan Mills assured the safety of redundancy, which was good because on the date of Henry’s parole hearing, one was on a school-related trip to South America, so her partner was slated to attend Henry’s hearing to speak for him.

I received an urgent text that evening from Henry’s son, Tom Elliott of southwestern Missouri, asking me to call him. He was agitated. “What’s wrong?” I asked. “The lawyer never showed,” he said, “and the parole board lady asked Dad if he wanted to go on with the hearing and he said yes, since his sister and her husband had driven all the way there for it.”

I could imagine the blow to the gut that must have been for Henry—now that he’s done 30 years with good behavior and is 65 years old and has a realistic chance at parole—to have entered that hearing room and to be told his lawyer didn’t show or even call and to have felt he had to continue with the hearing because of his sister driving over four hours to be there. I felt so bad for him.

I was at dinner with friends at the time, but I immediately emailed Alan Mills from my phone to ask what had happened. He didn’t know, but he forwarded my email to the student who hadn’t showed and the next morning the answer arrived:

“Prof. Mills, I planned on making the trip today, but I had car trouble and couldn’t obtain another car for the day. I spent all of yesterday trying to get my car repaired. By 7pm I knew I wouldn’t be able to have it fixed in time. I didn’t know who to call at that hour to inform Henry I wouldn’t be able to make it. David, extend my apologies to Henry.”

I wanted to scream! Not just because this sounded like a the-dog-ate-my-homework excuse, but even if it were true, he says he “didn’t know who to call.” How about the parole board (IPRB)? Any lawyer representing any parole applicant has to communicate with them and has their contact information. How about Alan Mills, the Professor who assigned him? How about Henry’s sister or his son or me, all of whose contact information he has? How about Henry at the prison? According to his story, he had all day Wednesday to think about this.

Well, hopefully this won’t end badly for Henry. He still has a chance at parole. The letters of support people wrote have gone to the parole board, I’m told. The student who is now in Chile plans to attend the en banc hearing in Springfield. I don’t know when that is scheduled.

As I’ve said before, to all who have shown interest and support, thank you. To those of you who pray, please continue doing so.

Thank you for viewing my blog. Please return often. I value your comments.

Regards,

David Hendricks

www.authorhendricks.com

Officer Bombed by Milk Carton

The following is a story that didn’t make the final cut of Tom Henry, but I like it. It shows Henry’s quit wit and jocular character. So, with no more ado …

“Good shot, Bro! I’ll pay you the two squares tomorrow,” Tom Henry yelled out the cell bars. A ripple of laughter spread throughout the cell house. I looked up from my typing to see an officer standing on One Gallery, rubbing his scalp, and staring at a milk carton on the floor. Tom Henry was laughing.

“What happened?” I asked.

“That officer was just minding his own business when that milk carton hit him right on top of his head.”

Just then the officer himself joined the laughter, looked up at Tom Henry, nodded, as if to say, “good one,” and continued his walk.

Flying milk cartons were not that rare in the cell house in Menard. Milk was served every day, at least once, in individual cartons, brought to the cells by officers during deadlocks. Sometimes they weren’t drunk. Perhaps the inmate was asleep and it got warm. Often they were already warm and starting to sour by the time they were served. Once the milks served throughout the cell house had all been sour and that had caused a riot, complete with cursing, bar rattling, and trash and debris—including human shit—thrown onto galleries.

But this evening there was no riot and they weren’t on deadlock. Some inmate from a high gallery had decided to throw a full milk carton out of his cell, through the bars on the far side of his gallery, so that it would plummet down onto the wide floor of One Gallery. They liked to watch them burst open and the milk ooze out. Often they would save old milk for just this purpose, waiting until it was semi-curdled.

This one had landed without breaking open, thanks to its fall being interrupted by a square hit upon the officer’s bald head, from which it had bounced up about a foot, still intact, then landed on the floor in front of the startled officer’s feet.

Which was when Tom Henry had yelled, “Good shot, Bro! I’ll pay you the two squares tomorrow.” He had no idea who had thrown the milk, but his quick mind had formulated the scenario moments after the milk carton’s impact. The officer, who was familiar with Tom Henry’s quick mind, nodded his acknowledgement of the witticism and moved on.

Thank you for viewing my blog. Please return often. I value your comments.

Regards,

David Hendricks

www.authorhendricks.com

20-20 Hindsight

Last night the American people elected President Obama to a second term. I watched on CNN, until I fell asleep waiting for Florida. When I awoke this morning, Florida was still undecided, but it no longer mattered.

Today, Barry Eisler, a novelist I follow on Twitter, retweeted an @froomkin tweet with a link to a blog by Eric Boehlert, Senior Fellow for Media Matters. Here’s the link: http://bit.ly/TuhXjb

Boehlert discusses pundits who got it wrong, who “misread the campaign through partisan eyes.” He writes, “It was fascinating to watch because these claims were supported by nothing but blind faith, as well as the far-right’s signature hatred of the president and a conspiratorial view of the media.”

Fox News had predicted a Romney Landslide. Boehlert quotes their predictions: Dick Morris: “Romney 325, Obama 213”; Glenn Beck: “321-217 victory for Romney in the electoral college”; Rush Limbaugh: “Everything—Except the Polls—Points to a Romney Landslide”; Michael Barone: “Romney Beats Obama, Handily”; George Will: “Romney 321, Obama 217”; Newsmax: “Expect a Mitt Romney Landslide”; and Larry Kudlow: “I am now predicting a 330 vote electoral landslide.”

“It didn’t work out that way,” Boehlert concludes.

I’m reminded of the following passage from Chapter Five of my book, Tom Henry: Confession of a Killer. This is a scene that took place in a prison cell in 1985. I’ve just suggested that it’s time for Tom Henry to start dictating his story.

“Which reminds me,” Tom Henry said. “You know who I saw the other day?”

“Give me a hint,” I said.

“Well, what reminded me is this guy was examined by psychiatrists.”

“The clown?” I said.

“John Wayne Gacy himself. He was in chains and four guards were taking him from Death Row to the medical building.”

“Now there’s a psychiatric session where I’d have loved to be a fly on the wall.”

“I’m sure he talked about his childhood,” Tom Henry said.

“This guy had sex with young men, tortured them in this attic, killed them, buried them in his crawl space, and they have to examine him to see if he was sane?” I shook my head. “What I’d like to see them do is interview a hundred normal guys, then predict which one is going to go nuts. They get that right, they’ve got my respect. Like those talking heads on TV. The stock market dives and the next day they tell you why. Where were they the day before?”

I wasn’t thinking about political pundits back there in that prison cell in 1985, but I could have been. So tonight, 27 years later, for the first time in … well, since I can recall, I’ll watch Fox news, just to hear these same pundits explain why the American people committed mass insanity and voted more four more years of the same.

It ought to be entertaining.

Thank you for reading my blog. I hope you visit often. My upcoming book, Tom Henry: Confession of a Killer, is now available on Amazon as an ebook.

Regards,

David Hendricks

www.authorhendricks.com

This I Believe

Today my niece, Paula, who blogs for True Woman, a Christian ministry, referred to my 30-year-old case in her well-written blog (in case you can’t tell, I’m proud of her). She referred to something I told her recently, that my doubting of my former faith began with a comment made to me by a member of our Christian fellowship during the wake of my wife and three children. He had said to me, “God must have some great work for you to do!”

The following scene is from my upcoming book, Tom Henry, in which I tell, for the first time ever, of that comment and how it affected me. The setting is Tom Henry’s prison cell, into which I had just moved because we had decided to work together to write his story. Here is that scene:

“You go to chapel for something to do, or are you serious about your faith?” I asked.

“Dead serious. I got saved at a place down home called Penitentiary Bend, believe it or not. I went there to commit suicide by running my car off the road over a cliff. I was drunk at the time. But my car skidded and got stuck in the mud and I got saved. And I’ve been saved ever since.”

“Do you think it was God that got you stuck, or you being drunk?”

Tom Henry paused a thoughtful beat. “Let me put it this way. God did it, but it was one of his easiest jobs ever! Clarence from It’s a Wonderful Life could’ve arranged it.”

“Never seen it. I grew up in a house without a TV and Susie’s home growing up was the same way.”

“You didn’t have a TV?”

“No, we were a very devout church and we believed we should keep our homes free from the influences of the world. Actually, about half of us had TVs. I’d guess in a few years most will. Times change.” I remembered those good, sober, devout people. “But those folks don’t change too fast.”

“Do you still consider yourself a member?”

“No. After I was convicted of these murders, I resigned. Even then, some of them didn’t want to accept my resignation, but it was for the best. You can’t be a Biblical church and have a convicted murderer as a member!”

“What kind of church was it? I’ve heard it called a cult on the news.”

“Well, cult is a tough word to define. If it means a small religious group that’s a little bit unusual, yes. They take the Bible as the literal, inspired Word of God. They believe we’re sinners in our natural state, because of Adam and Eve’s original sin, and only the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross can satisfy a righteous God as payment for our sins.”

“That’s not unusual. My church believes that,” Tom Henry said.

“OK, then, how about this? They don’t call their buildings churches. They’re ‘meeting rooms’ or ‘assembly halls.’ And they don’t have an ordained preacher. So it’s pretty old fashioned, but not a cult. If you want a simple way to peg them, think of them as Baptists on steroids.”

“So you’re not a member, but are you still a believer?”

“That’s a good question. After being hit by this tragedy, I looked around and I noticed what appears to be blind random luck, not divine guidance, regulating human affairs. Bad luck and good luck, and you’ll never know what’s going to strike you until it does. So that’s a pretty humanistic belief. It’s certainly not faith.”

“Well, if you don’t have faith no more,” Tom Henry said, “you’re not a believer.”

“I’m still willing to get my faith back, but, to be honest, I’m angry at God—which is a stupid thing to be, I know, because by definition God is good—but it just kills me when people from my church group tell me things like, ‘God must have some great work for you to do.’

“What are they thinking? To form me to be useful for some job God had my family killed? They’re talking about children who never had a chance to grow up. They’re talking about a woman who was the sweetest, most selfless person I ever knew. And a good God had them savagely murdered so I could be prepared for some work? Are they nuts? Who would even want to work for such a God? That’s no God; that’s a beast!”

I’d uttered the last three sentences with such vehemence I was trembling.

Tom Henry sprang off his bunk. “Man, I’m sorry! I would never—I didn’t mean to get you like this!” He paused, searching for words. “You got a lot of anger in you.” He started to sit back on the edge of his bunk but before his butt hit the mattress he sprang up again. “But you can’t call God a beast!”

“I know. I got carried away. For the last year and a half I’ve had to take it and take it and take it and I’ve never had a chance to talk it out with anyone. I can’t talk to my family or Susie’s family like this. It would just kill them. Just knowing I’m losing my faith is tearing them up. So I’m really glad to have you to talk to. I hope you aren’t sorry I moved in.”

“No, Big Stuff, it’s cool. When I get to the point in my story where I tell you about how low I got before I found God, you’ll understand. But anyway, I’m glad you’re here and I’m glad to be here for you. I mean that, Bro.”

“All right. Let’s just put this down as ‘to be continued.’”

But the need to continue that conversation never arose. I’d opened my heart to Tom Henry and he’d received what I had to say, despite his obvious disagreement. A bond of understanding had been formed between two guys about as different as two guys could be.

I thank you for reading my blog. I hope you visit often.

My upcoming book, Tom Henry: Confession of a Killer, will be e-published in September.

Regards,

David Hendricks

www.authorhendricks.com

Coming Blogs

Because I’m a new author, I figured I’d better start a blog—my first book, Tom Henry, will be published in September. Normally a first blog would give readers some idea of what’s coming but, since I got derailed by a news story that struck a nerve the first time, I’m doing that here.

So what will I blog about? Well, I’ve got two rules: First, the age-old writer’s advice, “write what you know.” Second, “write what others might want to read.”

So here are my three categories of blog themes:

Editorial – These will include my take on recent events. June’s blog was an example. A news story appeared days before I wrote it, and I had an opinion on that subject based on my life experience.

Tom Henry – I’ve just finished writing Tom Henry, a book about a double murderer who escaped and lived as a fugitive for 13 years and told me his story in a prison cell—tales of murder, escape, life on the lam, and anecdotes of animals, birds, bees and snakes.

Crime and Punishment – I learned a lot, in my seven years of incarceration, about criminal thinking and behavior, as well as the thinking and behavior of the criminal justice system.

I’ll occasionally write about my hobbies and interests—things such as humor and sports, or airplanes and motorcycles.

Be on the lookout for one of the Tom Henry true stories. From a tree stand in the woods he observed a fox self-administering a flea-and-tick treatment. You’ll be amazed at what this smart little fellow did.

I thank you for reading my blog. I hope you visit often. If you have an idea for a post, please let me know.

My upcoming book, Tom Henry: Confession of a Killer, will be e-published in September.

Regards,

David Hendricks

www.authorhendricks.com

Justice for All

Just last week the news reported the resolution of a 32-year-old murder case. You may remember it as “the dingo’s got my baby” case.

In 1980 a young Australian family was vacationing in a remote area. Lindy and Michael were a God-fearing couple—devout Seventh Day Adventists—with two boys, ages seven and four, and a brand new baby girl. One night Lindy, returning to the tent, saw a wild Australian dog shaking her two-month-old baby in its mouth and running away. She screamed, “Michael, Michael, the dingo’s got my baby!” A massive search was mounted but the baby was never found. A week later, however, a bloody jump suit she had been wearing was discovered about 4,000 meters from the tent.

The rumor mill began pumping its bilge. The religious couple, seemingly a normal, loving family, was “sacrificing” their daughter. Her very name, “Azaria,” meant “sacrifice in the wilderness.” Lindy always dressed her in black. Their religion was a cult that killed infants as part of religious ceremonies. Lindy was a witch. Her demeanor was too cold, too unemotional. The family’s car was “awash in blood.” Azaria’s bloodied and torn clothing was found folded in a ceremonial manner. And on and on. Mindless piling on and, under the apparently universal notion that seeing a person down is a good and valid reason to kick them again, morbid dingo-dog jokes proliferated.

The police examined the case. Lindy was tried for murdering her daughter and, doomed by a world-famous “expert” and new blood evidence—both he and it would later be discredited—she was convicted and sentenced to “life in prison with hard labour.” She was pregnant and soon delivered the couple’s fourth child, a boy, who was taken from her and she was returned to prison. The High Court refused to hear her appeal. Lindy was finished.

Three years later an English tourist inadvertently gave his life for Lindy’s freedom. He did it by falling to his death while climbing in the area where Baby Azaria had been abducted. Searchers looking for his bones, which were thought to have been carried off by dingoes, came across Azaria’s jacket, the one Lindy had said she had been wearing, an idea the prosecutors had mocked. It was found in a dingo den. Lindy was released.

Since then Lindy has been a free woman—in the sense that she wasn’t in prison—but it took four coroner’s inquests over a 32-year period before Lindy was proffered an official apology and a correct death certificate for her then two-month-old baby, Azaria, who the day before would have turned 32.

One tweeter wrote, “Finally, justice was done.” That made me angry.

I thought of that mother of three, her horror in seeing her baby shaken in the grip of a wild dog’s teeth, her shame as newspapers ripped her dignity to shreds, her stabbing pain when comedians created laughter at her daughter’s expense, the degradation of people spitting on her in the courtroom, the finality of her conviction and denial of appeal, and her heartache after being thrown into prison for life and denied the company of her children—the two who remained and the one who was born there—and, when she was finally freed, the dull desperation of living with the knowledge that she was a national pariah.

Justice was done? After 32 years they may have stopped the bleeding, but justice for Lindy can never be done.

Thank you for reading my first monthly blog.

My book, Tom Henry: Confession of a Killer, will be e-published in September, with a paper version to follow shortly after.

Regards,

David Hendricks