Mary Ames had her day in court—and now she’s asking for another one.

Ames, who was convicted of murder in 2013, sent in written testimony to support SB 1327, or “An act concerning the reduction of a sentence by the sentencing court or a judge.”

Judges in Connecticut are allowed to reduce a person’s prison sentence or release them for good behavior. This doesn’t apply to everyone, however: if someone is serving a mandatory minimum sentence or made a plea deal that resulted in them being incarcerated for more than 7 years, they are ineligible for sentence modification. 

And if an application is rejected, like Ames’s was in 2023, then a person needs to wait another three or five years before reapplying for sentence modification.  

SB 1237 would reduce the required waiting period between applications to two years. It would also make sentence modification available for every inmate, regardless of the crime.  

Ames was one of the individuals whose testimonies were read by state representatives and formerly incarcerated people at the capitol on Monday, March 31. In total, more than a dozen testimonies were read and one recording was played of a prisoner talking about why he supports SB 1327.

There was a hearing on this proposed bill earlier this month. Some state representatives wanted to have inmates give live testimony over Zoom, but their request was refused. So instead, Rep. Anne Hughes (D-Easton, Redding, Weston) arranged a news brief for those testimonies to be read aloud by elected representatives and formerly incarcerated people.

“When we are having public hearings, and they are public hearings for all of the public,” Hughes said at the news briefing on March 31. “The people most impacted by this legislation were not allowed to testify virtually from their incarcerated homes, where they live, so we found that that was really unjust.” 

In 2010, Ames stabbed Christopher Hall to death at a bar where Hall worked. 

While in prison, Ames took her rehabilitation seriously, according to her testimony. She organized drives for homeless, became a live-in mentor for the work unit for 18 to 25 year olds, facilitated Alcoholics’ Anonymous meetings for the west compound in York Correctional Institute, and earned a bachelor’s degree from Wesleyan University’s Center for Prison Education.

“I came to prison at age 47—with zero violent history—my sentence is, in effective, life, as I would be 82 upon release. Incidentally, they say life expectancy in prison is 69. I am now 62,” Ames wrote. Her testimony was read aloud by Rep. Antonio Felipe (D-Bridgeport). 

She applied for a sentence modification in 2023, but that appeal was rejected.

“The judge’s decision in part said, ‘I commend you for the things you have accomplished. Your rehabilitation is remarkable, and your remorse, heartfelt. However, this does not negate the crime,’” Felipe read on behalf of Ames. The statement Felipe read was slightly different than the written testimony submitted directly to the General Assembly. “Short of bringing back the life lost at my hands, something I’d give my own life to do, what then, should be the criteria for modifying the original sentence? If rehabilitation service and the kind of remorse that is life changing are not the objective, what is?”

Most of the testimonies shared were from people serving sentencing for murder or manslaughter. In Connecticut, people convicted of murder or sexual assault are not eligible for parole—unless they committed the crime when they were minors.

This press event comes just weeks after Ronnie Hinton was arrested by the Norwich Police Department and charged with assault, home invasion, kidnapping and violating his parole.

Hinton murdered three people when he was 17 years old, in 1989. He was granted parole in 2023, despite an officer saying there was a “moderate” risk he would commit another offense. Then, on Oct. 19, he was accused of cutting two men in the throat after they tried to pay him with counterfeit bills for crack cocaine which Hinton was selling. Then, in February, Hinton allegedly slashed another man’s neck.

In a written testimony submitted to the Judiciary Committee in March, for the public hearing over this bill, the Connecticut Division of Criminal Justice opposed this bill. While the division supported a change in 2023 supported a bill that would allow people to reapply for sentence modification after only three years if part of the application was granted.

“Now, a mere two years later, we are again revisiting this statute without any objective evidence to support an assertion that such change is needed,” the testimony states. “The Division is particularly concerned that the proposed changes, particularly regarding the refiling of applications within a two-year period, undermine the rights of victims, reduce offender accountability, and negatively impact community trust in the criminal justice system.”

Republish This Story

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.