更新時(shí)間：2021-06-11 03:24:59作者：admin2
Barbara Graham was born in 1923 in Oakland California. She had a difficult and miserable childhood (a familiar story?) Her mother was sent to a reformatory when she was only 2 years old and thus Barbara was raised by neighbours and got little education. As a teenager she was promiscuous and in trouble with the law. She was sent to the reformatory where her mother had also been an inmate. She was released in 1939 and tried to make a new start for herself. She got married and enrolled in a business college and soon had her first child. The marriage was not a success and by 1941 she was divorced. Barbara liked nice things and also, perhaps surprisingly was said to enjoy classical music, but she also liked gambling and drugs. She was jailed for two months in San Diego for "lewd and disorderly conduct". She married again but this marriage lasted only a few months. In 1944 she served a jail term for prostitution. Her friends were mainly criminals who were involved in prostitution and gambling. Life was steadily going down hill for Barbara - she had a job as a waitress in a cocktail bar but soon went back to prostitution to earn a living. In another attempt to live a decent life she worked for a while as a nurse in Nevada. She married for the third time in 1951 but this didn't last and in 1953 she met and married Henry Graham. She had a another child by Graham, her third, a boy called Tommy, who was two years old at the time of his mother's execution. Graham involved Barbara with his criminal friends. She met Emmet Perkins and Jack Santo through her husband. They were involved in various nefarious activities. She had an affair with Perkins and agreed to help him rob an elderly widow called Mrs. Mabel Monohan who was thought to keep large sums of money and jewellery in her house. Perkins, Santo, Barbara and a fourth gang member called John True went to the old lady's house and demanded she hand it over to them. She either wouldn't or couldn't. So according to True, Barbara lost patience and began to pistol whip the old lady and then suffocated her with a pillow. Barbara, Perkins and Santo were soon arrested. True gave evidence against them in return for immunity from prosecution and they were all three convicted and sentenced to death. There is much disagreement as to whether Barbara was innocent or guilty or partially guilty by virtue of being involved in the murder. She did herself no favours in prison on remand by trying to bribe a fellow "inmate" to give her an alibi. The inmate was a "plant" - a police women. Barbara also tried to bribe another policeman to say she was with him on the night of the murder. This destroyed her credibility in court. When questioned about this at the trail she said "Oh, have you ever been desperate? Do you know what it means not to know what to do" Inevitably the jury found all three guilty and they were sentenced to death. Barbara was sent to the California Institute for Women at Corona from where she would be driven to St. Quentin to spend her final hours. The California state gas chamber is housed within St. Quentin and is a steel capsule painted pale green and containing two perforated metal chairs for the condemned. Her execution was originally scheduled for 10.00 a.m. on the 3rd of June 1955. She prepared herself and dressed in a beige wool suit and brown pumps. Her initial execution time was stayed until 10.45. At 10.43 she was being prepared when a second stay was granted - this time until 11.30 a.m. Barbara was very upset by these stays - she had prepared herself and could not understand "why do they torture me? I was ready to go at 10.00" At 11.28 a.m. the execution finally got under way. Barbara was led from the holding cell blindfolded and strapped into one of the two chairs in the gas chamber. She had requested the blindfold so she wouldn't have to see the witnesses. "In a situation like this you don't moan, you don't beg you don't plead - you try to be a woman" she was quoted as saying .Joe Feretti was in charge of Barbara's execution and it was his job to strap her into the chair. Once she was secure he said to her "Now take a deep breath and it won't bother you" to which Barbara retorted "How in the hell would you know?". She died easily unlike some gas chamber victims. Later that day the two men were executed. Barbara got lots of media attention and was dubbed "Bloody Babs" by the press. Whether she was really was we will never know. She never showed any remorse for the old lady's death and was hardly most peoples' idea of a "nice girl" but many still believe she was framed for a crime which she didn't commit. Two films were made about her both called "I want to live". One starred Susan Hayward and the other starred Lindsey Wagner and both are very moving. Interestingly when Barbara was interviewed on death row she told the reporter "If I have to spend the rest of my life in prison - if I have to serve more than seven years - I want it the way it is. I'll take the gas chamber. Maybe that will be better for my kids" (of which she had three). Barbara described herself as "paying for a life of little sins". Only one more woman was to go to California's gas chamber (Elizabeth Ann Duncan in 1962). Barbara was the third woman to be executed in California this century and one of nine prisoners to go to the gas chamber there in 1955. In Britain 6 weeks later another attractive young mother was executed amongst similar media attention - Ruth Ellis. Barbara's case is yet another of those difficult cases of what in Britain was known as common purpose. A group of people go out to commit a crime (a serious crime in this case) and as a result their victim is brutally murdered. All individually deny their guilt and blame the others but who is telling the truth? It may well be that Barbara did not pistol whip and suffocate Mrs. Monohan but one or more of the group did. Should we deem them all to be guilty and thus give them the same sentence, as they were all present and involved with the crime? The law in most countries has always argued that we should. Remember two of the men involved also went to the gas chamber on the same day as Barbara for their part in the crime. Had Barbara not been an attractive woman and a young mother the case would have been soon forgotten, as she was, there was intense media and therefore public interest in her fate. Opinions tend to become polarised and to this day there are those who maintain her innocence. Common purpose has always made hard law but what is the answer? It is often impossible to say who struck the fatal blow - should the court therefore not convict any of them for murder or should it convict all of them? Very few of the respondents to my survey feel that women should be treated more leniently in respect of the death penalty and it is difficult to see in the pursuit of justice any sensible reason why they should be, at least in theory. And yet there is a natural repugnance at the execution of (attractive) women. It is notable that there was huge interest in and protests over the execution of Karla Faye Tucker in Texas in 1998 who was attractive whilst hardly any interest in the execution of Judias Beunoano a month later who was 54 and unattractive. But that is the way of the world it seems.