[Joint House and Senate Hearing, 112 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
JUSTICE IN THE INTERNATIONAL
EXTRADITION SYSTEM: THE CASE OF
GEORGE WRIGHT AND BEYOND
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JULY 11, 2012
__________
Printed for the use of the
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe
[CSCE 112-2-8]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via http://www.csce.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
94-519 PDF WASHINGTON : 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS
HOUSE
SENATE
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland,
Chairman Co-Chairman
JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island
ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama TOM UDALL, New Mexico
PHIL GINGREY, Georgia JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire
MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
ALCEE L. HASTINGS, Florida ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
LOUISE McINTOSH SLAUGHTER, SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia
New York MARCO RUBIO, Florida
MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire
STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
EXECUTIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS
MICHAEL H. POSNER, Department of State
MICHAEL C. CAMUNEZ, Department of Commerce
ALEXANDER VERSHBOW, Department of Defense
[ii]
JUSTICE IN THE INTERNATIONAL
EXTRADITION SYSTEM: THE CASE OF
GEORGE WRIGHT AND BEYOND
----------
July 11, 2012
COMMISSIONERS
Page
Hon. Christopher H. Smith, Chairman, Commission on Security and
Cooperation in Europe.......................................... 1
Hon. Steve Cohen, Commissioner, Commission on Security and
Cooperation in Europe.......................................... 3
WITNESSES
Ann Patterson, Daughter of Walter Patterson...................... 4
R.J. Gallagher, Retired FBI Special Agent........................ 7
Jonathan M. Winer, Senior Director, APCO Worldwide, Washington,
DC, and Former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for
International Law Enforcement.................................. 11
Granddaughter of Walter Patterson................................ 21
Granddaughter of Walter Patterson................................ 22
APPENDICES
Prepared statement of Hon. Christopher H. Smith.................. 28
Prepared statement of Hon. Benjamin L. Cardin.................... 29
Prepared statement of Ann Patterson.............................. 30
Prepared statement of R.J. Gallagher............................. 33
Prepared statement of Jonathan M. Winer.......................... 36
Materials for the Record......................................... 42
[iii]
JUSTICE IN THE INTERNATIONAL
EXTRADITION SYSTEM: THE CASE OF
GEORGE WRIGHT AND BEYOND
----------
July 11, 2012
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe
Washington, DC
The hearing was held at 2 p.m. in room 2203, Rayburn House
Office Building, Washington, DC, Hon. Christopher H. Smith,
Chairman, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe,
presiding.
Commissioners present: Hon. Christopher H. Smith, Chairman,
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe; and Hon.
Steve Cohen, Commissioner, Commission on Security and
Cooperation in Europe.
Witnesses present: Ann Patterson, Daughter of Walter
Patterson; R.J. Gallagher, Retired FBI Special Agent; Jonathan
M. Winer, Senior Director, APCO Worldwide, Washington, DC, and
Former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for
International Law Enforcement; Granddaughter of Walter
Patterson; and Granddaughter of Walter Patterson.
HON. CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, CHAIRMAN, COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND
COOPERATION IN EUROPE
Mr. Smith. The Commission will come to order. And I want to
thank and welcome all of you to this very important hearing of
the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe.
In September of 2011, hopes were raised high when the FBI
announced that George Wright, a fugitive for over 41 years, had
been located in Portugal and had been taken into custody
pursuant to a provisional arrest request from the United
States. There were hopes for accountability, some justice and,
for the family he murdered in Wall Township in 1962, for at
least some closure to a nightmare.
In 1963 George Wright was convicted in connection with a
gas station robbery, during which Walter Patterson, a decorated
World War II veteran and Bronze Star recipient--and that's him
in that picture, obviously--was beaten and shot to death.
Wright was subsequently sentenced to 15 to 30 years, but in
1970 escaped from Leesburg State Prison, now renamed Bayside
State Prison, located in New Jersey. In 1972 he and four other
men hijacked a Detroit-to-Miami flight. They flew the plane to
Algeria, where Algerian authorities allowed them to disappear.
In 1976 four of the hijackers were located and arrested in
France. France refused to extradite them to the United States,
but tried them in France instead. Following convictions, two of
the hijackers spent a mere three years in prison, and two
others spent two and a half years. George Wright, however, was
not among those caught. For 41 years George Wright's
whereabouts were unknown, and he built a life based on lies and
deception.
When George Wright was located in Portugal last year, the
Patterson family naturally thought that, as a convicted felon
and prison escapee, he would be speedily returned to the United
States to finish serving the sentence he received for the
murder of Walter Patterson. Portugal, after all, is a close
ally, committed to the rule of law and has a long-standing
extradition agreement with the United States. Shockingly, a
Portuguese court rejected the United States' extradition
request last November, and efforts to reverse that decision
have now apparently ceased. The Patterson family, so deeply
wounded by the murder of their beloved family member and then
by the murderer's escape--and now are bewildered and angry at
Portugal's refusal to extradite George Wright.
Today's hearing will examine what happened in this case--
and it is the first in a series--and what can be done to
promptly return Wright to an American prison and the broader
question it raises about the international extradition system.
On behalf of the Commission, I welcome Ann Patterson,
Walter Patterson's daughter, who along with her family have
suffered irreparable harm from the brutal violence committed
against her beloved father by George Wright. Words are
inadequate to convey my and the Commission's abiding respect,
empathy and condolences to you and your family on your
excruciating loss and my disappointment, which I share with
you, in Portugal.
Ann will testify in part that the $70 that George Wright
and Walter McGhee stole wasn't enough. They had to beat my
father, she says, beyond recognition. George Wright was
identified by the imprints of the stock of his gun on my
father's skin, she'll tell us. Her testimony is riveting. Her
testimony opens up and gives us an insight into the enormous
pain that she and the family have suffered.
The Commission will also hear from R.J. Gallagher, a
retired FBI agent who has done extensive work on the case,
breakthrough work on the case, and has had an extraordinary
career with the FBI. So we thank you, the Commission, for your
service on behalf of all Americans for the wonderful law
enforcement work you have done over the course of your
lifetime.
Finally, we will hear from Jonathan Winer, a senior
director of APCO Worldwide, Washington, D.C., and former U.S.
deputy assistant secretary of state for international law
enforcement. And also, he worked for 10 years for Senator
Currie and has been tenacious working on law enforcement
issues, particularly at State.
On George Wright, Mr. Winer exposes the utter
indefensibility of the Portuguese court's decision not to
extradite George Wright; why Portugal can still do the right
thing by revoking his citizenship, which he secured through
immigration fraud; and how the U.S. can and must pursue Wright
through INTERPOL, and many other very important recommendations
that I hope that the State Department, the Justice Department,
Congress, all of us take to heart.
Finally, let me note that the Commission had requested a
representative of the Obama Administration to be here to answer
questions of what has and what can be done to bring George
Wright to justice. The Commission was informed that Bruce
Swartz, Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the Criminal
Division of the Department of Justice, wasn't available for
today's hearing. So on behalf of the Commission, I will reissue
our request for Mr. Swartz or any other appropriate official
from the administration to testify at a subsequent hearing.
In like manner, the Commission invited the Portuguese
ambassador, Nuno Brito, who was also unavailable due to a
scheduling conflict. And like with Mr. Swartz or whoever the
administration would like to send, the Commission will request
Ambassador Brito's testimony at a follow-up hearing that will
be scheduled around his availability as well.
Again, I'd like to now turn to my good friend and colleague
Mr. Cohen and ask for any opening comments that he might have.
HON. STEVE COHEN, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND
COOPERATION IN EUROPE
Mr. Cohen. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm interested in hearing the testimony of the witnesses.
And to Ms. Patterson, I express my regrets. It's been a long
time, but to lose your husband--and the person who commits such
a crime should be held responsible. And what he did in escaping
and hijacking that plane is reprehensible as well.
Reading the record, there's obviously some positions that
the Portuguese government is taking that seems to be adverse to
what I think is common sense in international law and Helsinki
Commission accords. And I hope that we can get to the bottom of
the situation. But that what he did to your husband is an
offense, and air piracy and hijacking, all of which should be
extradition offenses. And the Portuguese government, I
believe--don't want to pre-judge it, but I believe--should
extradite him so that he answers for the crimes he has
committed and the harm that he's done.
So I look forward to the testimony and appreciate Mr. Smith
bringing this hearing, as he always does. And this is
bipartisanship. While the Obama Administration may not be here,
I assure you that it's not because they're not interested and
this is bipartisan and that we're concerned about it as well.
Thank you, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Smith. Thank you, Mr. Cohen, for your comments.
And I'd like to now introduce our witnesses, beginning
first with Ann Patterson. And you know, when we asked how she
would like to be described, she just said daughter of Walter
Patterson. And frankly, that is enough, you know, a woman who
has children and grandchildren, some of whom are with us today,
and a woman, like her family, has suffered irreparable harm.
We'll then hear from Mr. Gallagher, who I mentioned earlier
is a former FBI special agent from 1986 to 2011, retired just
short of the 25 years. And he also served as an officer for the
United States Navy for five years.
And then, Jonathan, you'll be next, if you would. And I
just would point out a couple of things from his resume. He
actually received a distinguished honor from the Secretary of
State, Madeline Albright, for his service in the State
Department. The award stated that he created the capacity of
the department and the U.S. government to deal with
international crime and criminal justice as important foreign
policy functions and that, quote, ``the scope and significance
of his achievements are virtually unprecedented for any single
official.''
So three very, very distinguished people.
And Ann, if you could proceed.
ANN PATTERSON, DAUGHTER OF WALTER PATTERSON
Ms. Patterson Mr. Chairman, my name is Ann Patterson, and I
am the daughter of Walter Patterson. My father was robbed,
brutally beaten, and shot in his gas station in Wall Township,
New Jersey, on November 23rd, 1962. He died of his injuries on
November 25th, 1962. I was 14 years old, and my sister Kaye was
13.
My father was a quiet, sensitive person. The gas station
was his American dream, and he was so happy to be able to have
his own business. He worked 16- to 18-hour days to support our
family. Daddy's name is also on the Patterson honor roll of
soldiers, part of a family that has fought in all our country's
wars. At age 21, he went to Europe and served our country for
four years during World War II. He was a TEC 5 and a truck
driver/mechanic and was awarded the Bronze Star for meritorious
service.
It was the day after Thanksgiving, and Daddy had come home
for supper. It was about 4:30 when he got into his truck to go
back to work. I stood at the kitchen window waving goodbye, and
that was the last time I saw him alive. About five hours later
the phone rang, and I answered it. Aunt Jennie said, Walt's
been shot, and I screamed, no, no, no, and called my mother to
the phone. I was crying, told my sister, and she started
crying.
My mother was not well. She called Uncle Charles to take
her to the hospital.
When she got there, she couldn't recognize my father. She
later told us they had beaten him to a pulp. The doctor
operated from about 10:30 p.m. to 6:30 a.m. and told my mother
he thought he had gotten all the bone fragments. When I asked
her what Daddy had to say, she told me that he couldn't talk
because his jaw was wired shut. He was wild with pain and could
not be given anything for it since he had head injuries. He had
to be restrained in the bed. The doctor told my mother that
seizures were to be expected with this type of injury, and
Daddy had a seizure on Saturday night.
Kaye and I had been scared to death to stay home alone on
Friday night, so we rode to the hospital with Uncle Dick and
Aunt Ginny as they took my mother to see Daddy on Saturday
night. Aunt Ginny asked my mother if she had told us what we
were going to see, but my mother did not allow us to see Daddy,
and we waited in the car. Daddy was in critical condition, and
no one except immediate family was allowed in. The doctor told
my mother that if Daddy came through this, he would be a
vegetable and need a lot of care.
On Sunday evening the doctor was talking to my mother in
the hallway about my father's condition when the nurse came to
them and told them he had passed away. They allowed my mother
to spend some time alone with him. When she came home, Uncle
Dick and Aunt Ginny were each holding her arms and helping her
to the house. I looked at Kaye, and I said, Daddy died.
The viewing was Tuesday, and the funeral home asked for a
photo of Daddy so they could make him look like the picture.
Does that sound odd to you? My father was unrecognizable in his
casket. His wavy black hair with a touch of gray was replaced
with straight black hair combed back. His face was all uneven
and caked with makeup. I knew he was my Daddy by looking at his
hands.
The $70 that George Wright and Walter McGhee stole wasn't
enough. They had to beat my father beyond recognition. George
Wright was identified by the imprints of the stock of his gun
on my father's skin. If there had not been such a beating, the
doctors could have operated on the bullet wound to the abdomen,
and it is quite possible that Daddy would still be with us
today.
For Kaye and me, the nightmare was just beginning. Since
our mother was not well, she could not take care of us. We were
told later that we would be sent to Clinton, a home for wayward
girls. I later found out that Clinton was in fact a prison for
girls. There is something wrong with sending the victims to
prison while the criminals do not have to be incarcerated for
their actions. I thank God that Uncle Dick stepped in to take
care of us.
Our mother was very ill with a heart condition, and her
death was hastened by losing Daddy. She passed away 15 months
later on February 26, 1964, leaving Kaye and me orphaned. In
our house lived my mother's aunt and uncle, both of whom passed
away during that 15-month period. In just over a year we
experienced the deaths of all four people we lived with and
lost our home. We were robbed of normal teenage years. There
was no counseling available in 1962. We were left to deal with
all this sorrow on our own. We tried to be strong for our
mother while she was still alive.
It has not been easy to relive all these events during the
past 10 months. The FBI victims specialist suggested I see a
counselor, which was beneficial to me. One of the problems that
came out was the nightmares that I suffered from for years
after my father's death. The counselor said that I had had
post-traumatic stress after I described the nightmares to her.
I also developed asthma and colitis within a few weeks of
Daddy's death.
The premeditated actions of the four individuals involved
in my father's murder have negatively impacted five generations
of the Patterson family. I have already spoken about my parents
and my sister and me. My mother's uncle who lived with us
refused food when he learned of this tragedy. He said, I don't
want to stay in a world where this is allowed to happen. And he
died four months later. My grandfather never spoke my father's
name again without crying and told me they didn't have to beat
him up so bad. My father's seven grandchildren were deprived of
a loving grandfather, and they are angry at the injustice
exhibited in the past 10 months.
But the saddest to me are the hurt reactions of my father's
14 great-grandchildren. One of them saw the clip on TV of the
capture and asked, what is wrong with people, not knowing it
was about her great-grandfather. Another one curled up in a
corner of the couch and, crying, asked if he could escape
again. Five generations of fear and hurt are five too many.
George Wright cannot erase his life of crime. He is
fraudulently a Portuguese citizen. Four aliases do not change
the fact that he was born George Edward Wright in the United
States of America and committed crimes during his years here.
When he chose the crime, he also chose the punishment, as they
go hand in hand. George Wright did not give my father a choice
on November 23rd, 1962, and so he should not have a choice
about not serving his sentence. He does not owe Portugal time;
he owes the United States.
George Wright is not sorry for what he did. There has been
no apology to the Patterson family. On the contrary, he has
made this all about himself and basked in the limelight. To
want to profit from a book and movie highlighting his heinous
acts against the Patterson family is a slap in the face. He is
not the victim here; we are. George Wright is a convicted
murderer who lived a life of violence, then fled and lived a
life of lies. Now his past has caught up with him, and he needs
to come back here and serve his sentence.
In light of all the recent media coverage, I have been
approached by many people who have expressed their disgust
toward this man and this situation. I feel it is a disgrace
that our justice system has failed in assuring a proper
punishment for this crime. This whole case sets a terrible
precedent for this country, both here and worldwide. It is a
negative towards decent citizens and a positive for criminals.
The failure of extradition has affected us in the following
ways: one, fear of a known criminal on the loose; two, fear of
reprisal from criminal--both of these fears are now 50 years
long--three, makes a mockery of the crime against my father--
did his life matter; four, has perpetuated our pain and loss;
five, loss of any kind of confidence in the criminal justice
system, from the local branch which gave too lenient a sentence
to the state branch that put a convicted murderer on a minimum
security work farm to the federal branch who have backed down
to Portugal in the matter of extradition. The case was dropped
before the final appeal was filed. It is one thing to do all
you can, another to give up before you exhaust all avenues.
I have asked if there are any other avenues of justice such
as withholding aid and have not been given an answer.
Don't we have a right to seek justice for our father? Our
family has been emotionally affected by injustice in the
following ways: One, no closure--this is still an emotionally
draining, open wound; two, we have family members and friends
across this entire nation who are appalled at the injustice of
trying to obtain justice; three, we are not happy that George
Wright wants to do a book and a movie and capitalize on his
inhumane treatment of our father; four, we were extremely upset
when we read in the newspaper that the final appeal had been
dropped--I was told that I would be notified of any decision so
that I wouldn't be blindsided upon learning something from the
media--five, on a personal level, this has split my family in
two. Some members support efforts to obtain justice, and some
cannot emotionally face the details of this crime to even talk
about it.
What can be done? Here are my suggestions: Number one,
reinstate the death penalty for criminals convicted of heinous
crimes. Such a strong penalty may act as a deterrent. Two, put
pressure on Portugal. I understand there is an extradition
treaty from 1907 to this effect. Three, do not send any
financial aid to Portugal. Four, form a committee at the state
level to double-check paper work so that errors like this can't
happen again. Five, support and pass Illinois Senator Richard
Durbin's Bringing Fugitives to Justice Act. And six, nothing
that any of us say or do will bring my father back, but if we
can look ahead and help the countless number of children who
are similarly affected or will be affected by senseless crimes,
then all of our efforts will not have been done in vain.
There is no conclusion to my story. It has not occurred
yet, for the conclusion now rests in the hands of the
politicians. The FBI and the U.S. Marshals have done their job
in locating this fugitive, and we thank them. I have done all I
can by telling about our family events from November 23rd to
November 25th, 1962, and the impact of this despicable crime.
On behalf of the Patterson family, I ask you to please bring
justice for the untimely death of my father, Walter Patterson.
Thank you.
Mr. Smith. Ms. Patterson, thank you very much for that
extraordinarily moving testimony and the tenacity that you have
brought to trying to bring this man to justice, and for
thanking the FBI and the marshal service for the extraordinary
work they've done in tracking him down. We need to do our job,
those of us in the executive as well as, in our case, the
legislative branch. And I thank you for that.
I'd like to now--we do have a vote on right now, but we do
have some time. Mr. Gallagher, if you could proceed with your
testimony and--thank you.
R.J. GALLAGHER, RETIRED FBI SPECIAL AGENT
Mr. Gallagher. Yes. Good afternoon. My name is R.J.
Gallagher. I'm a retired FBI agent. And at the risk of some
redundancy, I'd like to acquaint members with the background of
George Wright.
On Friday night of Thanksgiving weekend in 1962, George
Wright and two others robbed and mortally wounded Walter
Patterson, a service station proprietor in Wall Township, New
Jersey. That night, Wright and his co-defendants wore nylon
stockings over their faces and wore gloves on their hands.
Wright carried a sawed-off rifle, his co-defendant a cheap
handgun. They brought with them white adhesive tape for binding
of their victims. Earlier that same day, Wright and his co-
defendants had cut down the rifle, bought ammunition and had
test-fired the weapon. They also had driven around the Jersey
shore area looking for prospective places to rob.
At around 9:30 p.m. that night, when Wright and a co-
defendant entered Walt Patterson's Esso gas station on Route
33, they were committing their second armed robbery of the
night. This robbery, the one about to take place, unlike the
first did not go as planned. For it would appear that Walt
Patterson was not sufficiently compliant or quick enough to the
demands of the robbers, and a fight ensued.
Wright and his co-defendant repeatedly rained blows to the
head and shoulders of Walter Patterson with their weapons. At
some point the handgun carried by the co-defendant fired, and
Walter Patterson was struck in the abdomen. He fell to the
floor. The two robbers fled, taking with them about $70. Both
robbers were very aware that their victim was shot and wounded,
yet they left him alone on the floor of his gas station. They
did not place an anonymous call to anyone to get Walter
Patterson medical attention. Instead, using the money proceeds
from their two robberies that evening, they went out and
partied. They dined, they drank and they played pool until 2:00
or 3:00 in the morning.
Investigation over the next two days led to the
identification and arrest of the persons involved in the
robbery/murder. This included George Wright. All the physical
evidence was recovered: guns, stocking masks, gloves,
ammunition. All the arrested gave full confessions.
On January 28th, 1963, Wright pled ``non vult'' to a murder
indictment. By this plea Wright did not contest his guilt, and
he waived his right to trial. This plea allowed Wright to
receive a 30-year maximum sentence, as opposed to life had he
gone to trial and been convicted. On February 15th, 1963,
Wright was sentenced to a prison term of not less than 15 years
and not more than 30 years.
At this point I'd like to just take a break from Wright's
crime chronology and state that I have read in numerous media
accounts subsequent to Wright's arrest that Wright has stated
that since he did not fire the shot that killed Walter
Patterson, he is not guilty of the crime of murder. First, both
of Wright's co-defendants stated that in the immediate
aftermath of this crime, Wright told them he had fired. Nine
bullets from the sawed-off rifle Wright carried were found on
the floor of the service station.
The presiding judge at the time of Wright's sentencing went
on record stating that these nine rounds on the floor indicated
Wright's intentions to--Wright's intention and attempt to fire
his weapon but that the weapon had malfunctioned.
But regardless of Wright's intent, attempt or belief that
he had fired or that he had not fired, it was the law of the
state of New Jersey that if a person committing a robbery kills
another or death ensues during the robbery, that person is
guilty of murder.
I have also read that there is to be some mitigation for
the crime when considering the age of George Wright, as he was
19 years old at the time. Here it should be noted that Walter
Patterson, his victim, was barely a much riper 21 when he
entered the U.S. Army shortly after Pearl Harbor. Walter
Patterson then served in the Army for near four years until the
war was over. Of his time in the Army, 2 and a half years was
spent over in Europe in the eastern theater of operations.
Back to the Wright timeline: On August 22nd, 1970, Wright
and others escaped from the New Jersey State Prison. At this
time Wright had served seven years, seven months and 25 days.
Wright has remained a fugitive from U.S. justice since this
date.
On July 31st, 1972, Wright and four others, to include one
of the persons he escaped with, hijacked a Delta Airlines DC-8
en route from Detroit to Miami. The hijackers were accompanied
by three of their small children. Wright was dressed in the
garb of religious clergy. Wright was the eldest and the leader
of the hijackers. He wielded a handgun, gave the orders and
issued the threats. He pointed a cocked weapon to the head of
the airline pilot, Captain William May. Once landed in Miami,
Wright demanded $1 million and threatened that if his demands
were not met, he would toss bodies out of the plane.
Wright and his fellow hijackers received the million-dollar
ransom, and they released approximately 80 passengers. The
flight crew was not released and were forced to fly the plane
and the hijackers first to Boston and then on to Algiers,
Algeria. Algerian authorities seized the $1 million and the
plane, returning them both to the U.S. The hijackers, however,
were allowed their freedom and eventually made their way to
France.
Wright and the four other adults were all indicted for air
piracy in the United States on August 3rd, 1972. While in
Algeria, Wright and the other hijackers made a videoed press
statement, and as part of that statement the speaker stated,
among other things, that the hijackers were revolutionaries. In
May of 1976, four of the hijackers--the lone exception being
George Wright--were arrested by French authorities for the 1972
air piracy. In 1978, France tried these four for the air
piracy, and they were all convicted of same. And so to this
day, Wright has not served his sentence for his homicide
conviction, nor has he been tried for the indicted charge of
air piracy.
My involvement in this matter began in 1994 when I reopened
the New Jersey fugitive investigation regarding Wright. I
worked it until my retirement in July 2011. The United States
Marshals and the New Jersey Department of Corrections joined
the investigation in approximately 2003. Since the case was
reopened, most all the techniques used in fugitive
investigations were employed. These would include but not be
limited to: interviews, both domestic and abroad; notification
to national law--to international law enforcement; court
orders; human intelligence; cooperation of foreign law
enforcement. Specifically, fingerprints, age-enhanced sketches
and computer images were produced and distributed. The United
States Marshals commissioned the making of an age-enhanced
bust. All three agencies played a vital and significant part in
this investigation. And just as an aside, to my mind it was a
model of organic and ad hoc interagency cooperation.
In March of 2010 the Portuguese police notified the FBI
legal attache in Madrid that they had positively identified the
person living in Portugal under the name of Jose Luis Jorge dos
Santos as George Wright. This they did, unknown to Wright, by
comparison of photographs they had on file for Santos with
those of George Wright.
In September of 2010, six months after the positive
identification, myself and attorneys from the Department of
Justice Office of International Affairs met with Portuguese law
enforcement and prosecutors in Lisbon, Portugal. The purpose of
this meeting was for the United States to seek Portuguese legal
input and to work together so that the United States might
produce an extradition request with the greatest chance of
success.
I would characterize these meetings as both positive and
productive. All the parties agreed that extradition could
proceed for U.S. person George Wright. Further, there was
agreement that George Wright was using a made-up name of Jose
Santos and had in fact provided false pedigree information to
the Portuguese government as regards to his name, place of
birth and parentage.
One issue remained unresolved. Portugal saw as barrier to
extradition Wright's exposure to a 25-year sentence of
incarceration for an air piracy conviction. They viewed this as
the equivalent of a death sentence, and therefore that would
serve as basis for the denial.
Moving along, well over a year had passed since the
positive identification had been made, and this issue proved to
be intractable. And no extradition request had yet to be
submitted. In May of 2010, the decision was made to tender the
extradition request based solely on Wright's homicide
conviction. I participated in this decision and supported it
fully. In fact, it was probably done at my instigation; so if
hindsight determines this is a bad call, I am solely to blame.
Portuguese law enforcement arrested George Wright in
September of 2011. Since his arrest, the Portuguese courts have
denied the United States' extradition request for Wright. It is
my understanding they cited the following in their ruling: One,
too much time had passed, and there must be closure to criminal
cases. Two, Wright's integration into Portuguese society
demanded that extradition be denied on humanitarian grounds.
Both these two reasons cited per DOJ are not--per DOJ are just
not recognized as basis for denial of extradition per our
treaty with Portugal. And third, the court found that Wright is
a Portuguese citizen. This is where the matter now stands.
Looking forward and beyond George Wright, each nation is
free to choose its own criteria for citizenship. This is how it
is and how it should always be. But it would seem that each
nation would have self-interest in seeking an obligation from
prospective citizens seeking naturalization, for them to tell
the truth regarding their identity and any information they
give the government. This would obviously provide for the
safety and security of the nation's own security. George Wright
provided false information to Portuguese authorities, it would
seem, because if he provided his true identity, not only would
citizenship be denied but he would probably be arrested.
In August of 1972 George Wright was indicted on the
criminal charge of air piracy. If one looks at the elements of
the crime Wright committed, this same act committed today would
potentially be charged as an act of terrorism. And for such a
charge, the extradition treaty between U.S. and Portugal states
that Portuguese citizens can and will be extradited for
terrorism. I actually could not imagine that this crime, taking
place today, would not be charged as terrorism.
And specifically with return to George Wright, I've seen
numerous media accounts post-arrest that suggest for some time
he has led a good life and that he has in fact rehabilitated.
This is perhaps a valid argument, and he might have a case for
such. But there remains only one place that can decide if such
an argument is valid, and that is here in the United States
where he committed his crimes, in front of a court or a parole
board of proper jurisdiction. I would encourage George Wright
to come and make his argument. Thank you.
Mr. Smith. Mr. Gallagher, thank you so very much for that
very extensive background, as well as for your work dating back
to 1994. And thank you so much for that.
I'd like to now ask Mr. Winer, if you would proceed with
your testimony.
JONATHAN M. WINER, SENIOR DIRECTOR, APCO WORLDWIDE, WASHINGTON,
DC, AND FORMER U.S. DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR
INTERNATIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
Mr. Winer. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Cohen and honorable members of
the Commission: As former deputy assistant secretary of state
for international law enforcement, I'm honored to testify, to
share my views regarding the international extradition system
and options for the United States when a foreign legal system
frustrates justice. I ask that my full written statement be
placed in the record.
Mr. Smith. Without objection.
Mr. Winer. During my tenure in the State Department and
since, our government has worked to vindicate one underlying
goal with regard to fugitives: to secure their return to the
United States to provide justice regardless of the criminal's
location. I have 10 points to make about how to apply this
principle to the George Wright case and more generally.
First, the decision by the Portuguese judge to refuse
Wright's extradition to the United States is legally
indefensible under the
century-old U.S.-Portuguese extradition treaty and under the
principles of extradition law internationally. Neither the
passage of time nor Wright's citizenship through marriage
provide a legitimate basis for the Portuguese judge to deny
extradition, let alone humanitarian factors that have been
asserted. This is simply legally wrong.
The statute of limitations protects people from belated
prosecutions, not fugitive escapees from prison after their
convictions. It is also an abuse to refuse to extradite a
citizen of another country who's escaped prison and only later
becomes a citizen of the country to which he's fled. The
judge's decision on these two issues is legally wrong, morally
unjust and should be given no respect whatsoever by any
government beyond Portugal.
Two, Portuguese authorities can still do the right thing to
secure justice. Wright entered Portugal through immigration
fraud, using a false name and with a false history about his
citizenship and birth. It appears these true facts were not
known to Portuguese authorities until 2010 or so. If this is
correct, Portugal could revoke his citizenship and deport him,
putting him on a plane to the United States or to another
country which could turn him over to the United States.
Three, the U.S. can take further steps on its own to use
international institutions on this matter. George Wright is
currently listed by the United States on Interpol's public
wanted database as a fugitive. But the public notice is notably
out of date. It doesn't list his current name, address or other
current personal details. This was as of yesterday. This new
detailed data could all be provided to Interpol by the United
States and made publicly available to every citizen of the
world. The U.S. could ask Europol, Europe's police institution,
to track him down and to arrest him if he ventures beyond
Portugal. And FBI legal attaches could make the same request
with their EU counterparts.
Four, the U.S. has a reward program for the rendition of
important fugitives. One part of that's administered by my
former bureau, the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law
Enforcement. The State Department could issue a reward for
information or other assistance that secures the return of
Wright to the United States. A reward might lead to a citizen's
arrest in which people grab him and put Wright into U.S.
custody. This approach has been upheld by the Supreme Court.
Indeed, the Justice Department's internal procedures expressly
allow the use of bounty hunters and rewards.
Fifth, the U.S. can itself use lures to entice a criminal
fugitive to leave a foreign country so he or she can be
arrested in international waters or airspace, or brought to the
United States or in a third country for subsequent extradition,
expulsion or deportation. There are a wide range of
possibilities for lures potentially applicable to Wright. How
will he know whether a book agent or movie agent is real and
intends to help him publicize his life, or is actually an agent
of the United States? I hope he has a lot of trouble making
that distinction in the days to come.
Sixth, the United States could undertake an extraordinary
rendition, in which U.S. government officials take direct
action to capture a terrorist--which Wright was--such as
snatching Wright as he's going about his day-to-day business,
smuggling him into a car and then to a boat, and then bringing
him to the United States to face justice. Notably, the use of
such techniques risks significant protests on the part of a
foreign government such as Portugal and can chill the bilateral
relationship. This happened when we did it in a very important
case in Mexico. We did the right thing. The Mexicans were
angry, but it was the right thing to do after they tortured and
killed a Drug Enforcement agent--Administration agent. And it
happened recently in Italy in connection with some renditions.
But we can still do it if we choose to.
Seven, the U.S. could apply terrorist economic sanctions to
Wright, prohibiting transactions with him by any U.S. person
and freezing any assets he may have in any U.S. financial
institution. Now, he may not have any in any U.S. financial
institution, but foreign financial institutions often then
apply these sanctions as well to protect themselves, and it
will certainly inhibit his ability to gain any economic
advantage from his life story.
As he stated publicly, he hopes to write a book about his
life and secure a film deal. U.S. imposition of terrorist
sanctions against him would make it much more difficult for him
to sell the book and to profit off his crimes, and might make
it possible for profits from any of these ventures could be
seized by the United States.
Eight, the U.S. could take steps to punish Portugal for its
court's unjust refusal to extradite Wright. Unfortunately, I
believe this approach almost certainly would be
counterproductive in practice. We have all kinds of security
arrangements with Portugal. The Portuguese government did not
do the wrong thing, as near as I can tell here: A Portuguese
judge did, a different part of the Portuguese government. And
for that reason, were I in the State Department, I would not
support sanctions against Portugal. Regardless, senior U.S.
officials can be directed to raise this issue with Portuguese
counterparts, inviting positive steps by Portugal, such as
denaturalization and deportation, to secure justice, and I
certainly hope they do that.
Nine, Congress could strengthen the executive branch's
ability to analyze and apply these tools in cases of failed
extraditions, such as this one. This could be facilitated
through a congressional mandate for an annual report on
extraditions to Congress covering such issues as total
extraditions by country, number of extraditions refused,
reasons for refusal of extraditions and steps taken by the
United States in response to a refused extradition. Such a
report might provide for further focused attention on these
issues by both the executive branch and by Congress, thereby
facilitating the goal of securing justice for all.
I understand any administration might resist putting such
information in one place publicly in order to protect
confidential intelligence, diplomatic and law enforcement
programs, activities and relationships. For this reason,
Congress may wish to consider structuring any such mandate to
provide for a public report that delivers statistical data and
information with a--in classified--publicly, with information
on certain matters in a classified appendix.
Finally--and I know you're facing a vote--we're OK? OK.
Finally, the U.S. should not give up on this case simply
because an extradition has failed. A fugitive may be able to
run, but should never be permitted to hide. George Wright has
expressed his relief at not being returned to the United States
to serve out his prison sentence, and being allowed to spend
the remainder of his life with his wife and his grown children,
while profiting off his crimes by writing a book about them and
seeking a film deal. Walter Patterson and his entire family
have been denied such pleasures and their fundamental human
rights by Wright and his own personally chosen criminal acts.
In this case, and in other cases like this, U.S. policy and
the actions our government takes must make sure that murderers
and terrorists, wherever located, can never breathe the sigh of
relief that they have reached safety as a result of outlasting
law and justice.
Which of the options I have outlined should be taken in
this case will depend on careful judgments by those in the U.S.
government with the most knowledge of the facts about what
steps will be mostly likely to actually succeed to secure
justice here. The Commission may contribute to that process
further through ongoing dialogue with those who have those
responsibilities, including sending specific questions to
relevant components of the U.S. government about their intended
actions on this case now that extradition has failed.
I am available to respond to any questions you may have,
and thank you.
Mr. Smith. Thank you so much, Mr. Winer. Let me just ask
you, if I could, first, of your 10 points, what points, if any,
have been pursued by the Justice Department or by State?
Mr. Winer. Based on the public record, it does not appear
any steps other than the extradition--Mr. Gallagher may have
more information than I do--and that's one reason why further
inquiry from the Commission may be of value.
Mr. Smith. Mr. Gallagher, are you aware of any other
efforts made besides extradition?
Mr. Gallagher. No, I am not. As of my retirement, I'm no
longer in the loop.
Mr. Smith. OK. Again, we had asked that the administration
be here. Due to a scheduling conflict they're not, but we will
ask that question and many others in open hearing, as well as
by way of letter.
Yes.
Mr. Winer. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Schwartz at the Justice
Department is a person I've worked with in the past for whom I
have the highest possible regard for his integrity, competence,
diligence, creativity, imagination, knowledge. And I think that
working with him on this matter would be as fruitful as it
could possibly be, in light of his institutional
responsibilities.
Mr. Smith. Knowing what you know, having worked as a DAS--
deputy assistant secretary--for law--international law
enforcement, is the decision made at his level, or would it be
made at a higher level?
Mr. Winer. I think the answer to that question is yes and
yes, which is to say Mr. Schwartz exercises a lot of
influence--and he should: He's a person of great judgment and
experience. In this matter and all of these kinds of matters,
the State Department has its equities; it wants to maintain a
good relationship with Portugal, which, as I said, this is a
judicial decision, not an executive branch decision; it's going
to want to think about precedent. The Justice Department has
had a lot of experience with such problems as extraordinary
rendition over the past decade, and so there will be more than
one component of a U.S. government that would likely be
involved in this kind of process.
Mr. Smith. We have heard that before. We've heard it
recently in the case of a child who was abducted to Brazil, and
the equities were such that very little was being done to bring
David Goldman's son, Sean, back. It was on a list of talking
points but hardly a priority. We hear it often.
It seems to me that from the Portuguese point of view,
there should at least be some consideration being given as to
what this does to the other side of that equation, and that is
what Americans--what the American government, what the Congress
and hopefully what the executive branch--thinks of what appears
to be a rogue court. As you said, I think, Mr. Gallagher, so
well, questions could be asked and--but the final adjudication
needs to be done here, where the crime and the conviction and
the sentencing and the incarceration were all done in a very
lawful manner and no one questions whether or not the rule of
law was followed in this case.
And yet some rogue--seemingly rogue--judge is able to do
this, and there will be repercussions, respectfully, I would
say, from this side, vis-a-vis Portugal.
Mr. Winer. Mr. Chairman, from my perspective, when Congress
takes an interest in an issue like this, it can motivate
elements of our government to do more. And the instincts of the
government ordinarily in the executive branch is to deal with
the crisis of the day and the underlying goals of maintaining
relationships and working problems. Making this a priority is
an important part of the congressional mission and does have an
impact--a positive impact--on executive branch functionality in
terms of protecting Americans. And it can make a very big
difference in strengthening the ability of the executive branch
to protect Americans, as is the case here.
Mr. Smith. And that is part of what the hope is here, that
this begins an introspection as to whether or not we're doing
all our due diligence to protect Americans everywhere.
I just came back from Bolivia just a few weeks ago on a
case of a man named Jacob Osstreicher, who has been charged
with nothing, languishes in Palmasola Prison with no charges
brought against him. The welfare and whereabouts aspect of what
State has done, by the consular affairs people, is tremendous,
but it has not been raised to the level of government to
government, in a way--has not gone to the undersecretary, has
not gone to the secretary or any higher. I asked that question
specifically. So we're making, hopefully, a big deal about
that, not just for Jacob--although that should be enough--but
for any other American who is improperly and unethically
incarcerated and is made to suffer.
And that, Ms. Patterson, is in part what we're trying to do
here.
One--and I think this is something that is often missed by
some in government --and that is the ongoing trauma that you
and your family has experienced. This is not over. And there
are three impact statements that some of the younger relatives,
the daughters, would submit--are going to submit for the
record. As you said, five generations of traumatizing, and for
this man to remain at liberty, thumbing his nose at the world,
especially at your family and at the United States, having been
incarcerated.
And all the good work that was done by the FBI--Mr.
Gallagher, thank you for that tremendous work taking this up in
1994. And I'm wondering, having worked with the Portuguese, is
this a pattern? Have you detected anything that would even
suggest that this is the way the Portuguese government acts, or
is this an aberration?
Mr. Gallagher. This was my lone attempt at extradition with
Portugal. But I can say that when we met with them in
Department of Justice, they were--the law enforcement, they
were the ones that, at our behest, made the positive
identification and were bending over backwards to help us, as
were the Portuguese prosecutors. And I would defer that it--to
me, it looks like a sole judge in the judiciary over there that
is--that has just made a bad call.
Mr. Smith. Now, is there a higher level of court that can
overrule him? Is that in the process? And did the United States
meet its timeline to appeal and to try to bring this to the
next level?
Mr. Winer. Mr. Chairman, I don't understand the final
moments of this case, in which we--the United States
Government--apparently did not do a final appeal.
I know that the Office of the Legal Counsel at the
Department of State and/or the Office of International Affairs
in the Department of Justice would most likely have been
involved in making a determination on that. Both of these
offices, in my experience, regardless of administration,
Republican, Democrat, over decades, are diligent and honorable
and pay attention, first and foremost, to the legal equities of
Americans--American citizens and the U.S. government.
And while other parts of the government may have other
equities, I want to maintain a great relationship with the
country of A, B or C, these offices are very focused on those
points. So it's a factual thing to clear up with them.
I can tell you point blank Portugal and the United States
have maintained over many decades close working law enforcement
as well as military security relations that have advanced U.S.
security and law enforcement goals over a long time. These are
not just valued allies in a cliched sense; they're valued
allies in a day-to-day operational sense. And I do not blame
the country for what this judge did, just as any number of
American judges have made decisions with which I vehemently
disagree and do not control.
Mr. Smith. You know, this hearing is not the beginning.
When Ms. Patterson came and asked me to look into this, I got
on the phone immediately and began the process, and then knew
in a timely fashion that an appeal had to be filed. And so, you
know, they certainly were on notice that something should have
been done sooner rather than let a deadline pass, which is
again why we had hoped the Justice Department would be here to
give us a--maybe we're missing something. I'd love to know.
Mr. Winer. Congress should have an explanation from the
executive branch on this.
Mr. Smith. Appreciate that, thank you.
Mr. Gallagher. Mr. Chairman, I'll give you my sense of it,
and that is as--I've been informed that the appeal could--the
department--or the Department of Justice hired private
attorneys in Portugal. And the Portuguese prosecutors, for
whatever reason--and the reason I don't know--chose not to go
ahead with the appeal on their side. The court ruled that the
private attorneys hired by Department of Justice could not go
forward on their own without a file of appeal by the
prosecutors, and that--that's what I know. I can't explain it,
but--
Mr. Smith. OK.
Mr. Winer.
Mr. Winer. Attorneys regularly, in this world, don't think
of all contingencies, or in the--to be more blunt, screw up.
And if Mr. Gallagher's account is correct, it may be that
inadequate consideration was given by the Justice Department to
this possibility. These things can happen, and in this case,
the result is a travesty. This is unjust, this is a travesty,
this is wrong, this should be turned around and the United
States Government should be taking whatever steps are
appropriate to get this turned around.
Mr. Smith. Your point number eight--and I thank you for
that emphatic statement--you mention that senior U.S. officials
can be directed to raise this issue with Portuguese
counterparts, inviting positive steps by Portugal such as
denaturalization and deportation to secure justice. Has that
been done?
Mr. Winer. I have no information as to whether it's been
done in this case. It may well be that because the extradition
process was going forward, this option was not previously
considered. It should be. If he, as every fact seems to
indicate, committed any form of fraud in Portugal that allowed
him to become a citizen, certainly under core principles of
immigration law, you can seek a denaturalization as a prelude
to deportation. And this is done, it can be done and it has
been done in other cases, and it certainly should be actively
explored in this case. If that doesn't work, you've got lures,
you've got extraordinary renditions, you've got bounty hunters
and rewards. Those are all options.
Mr. Smith. Mr. Gallagher, you--and it must have been
agonizing to recommend that the air piracy charges be dropped
so that this conviction and--it would--the way would be paved
to bring this man back to serve for having murdered Mr.
Patterson. Could you just elaborate a little bit on how hard
that had to have been? I mean, air piracy is an extraordinary,
an egregious crime, and yet you saw this, you know, garnering
justice in this case to trump that. You triaged it.
Mr. Gallagher. I can answer that in that it didn't seem
like we were getting anywhere with respect to submitting an
extradition request, and that it was going to be denied.
There's practical law enforcement reasons in that he's been
positively identified for close to a year and a half, and
sitting on a fugitive for a year and a half is interminable.
Just the chance that he finds out that somebody's looking at
him or for him, he could certainly pick up that information by
a chance visit to his local police station, where they've been
notified, hey, the guy down the road is really a U.S. fugitive,
or a chance traffic violation. So sitting a year and a half is
a very long time to do. So we sought resolution. I don't know
that the air piracy thing is dead, but at the time, it was
severed.
Mr. Smith. You--Mr. Winer pointed out that the INTERPOL
information was, to this--as of yesterday, I think you said--
was out of date. That's unconscionable. This man is a flight
risk this instant. Why couldn't that be corrected easily?
Mr. Winer. I was stunned to find it listed as George
Wright, without a pseudonym, to list the old information
without updates, and I do not understand it.
Mr. Smith. How hard, Mr. Gallagher, is that to update?
Mr. Gallagher. I know it can be updated. I hadn't queried
it recently, so--
Mr. Smith. Mr. Winer?
Mr. Winer. It can be updated in an hour. It can be updated
in two hours. It should not take more than 24 hours from this
hearing to be updated.
Mr. Smith. Now, is it possible that Mr. Wright, if he
thought that the Portuguese government might do something to
expedite the extradition, that he could, as we're talking, be a
flight risk or leave Portugal to go to a nonextradition
country?
Mr. Winer. There are any number of things that he could do.
He could go back to Algeria, I suppose, where apparently he
started out his adventure. He could go to--where was he was in
Africa, Mr. Gallagher?
Mr. Gallagher. Guinea-Bissau.
Mr. Winer. Guinea-Bissau and hang out in Guinea-Bissau, if
he wants to do that. The United States could then pursue him
throughout the world. Why not?
Mr. Smith. Mr. Cohen.
Mr. Cohen. Thank you. First of all, Ms. Patterson, I think
I errantly referred to you as the widow and you're obviously
the daughter, but, you know, it's just it's been such time and
I didn't--wasn't familiar with it. But I appreciate your
testimony. I'm sorry. Your father was a hero, and whether he
was or wasn't, his murderer should be apprehended, but
particularly in light of what he did in service to his country.
Has our State Department or anybody at the United States
Government contacted you? Have you had contact with anybody in
this matter recently?
Ms. Patterson. I had--besides Congressman Smith, I had
contacted Senator Lautenberg's office, and they had put in a
couple of requests for me, and I-- and they did request from
the State--the Department of Justice. And I have--I do have
copies of those letters that I will submit to the record, too.
So I did hear from the State Department. I have written a
letter to Secretary of State Clinton, and I did get a letter
back from there about six months later. So I do have those two.
Mr. Cohen. And what was the response?
Ms. Patterson. From the State Department, they were aware
of it and they wanted justice also. And they were going to be
working on it. And from the Department of Justice, they said
that they had been advised by their lawyer not to go for the
last appeal because it wouldn't matter; they would still be
denied. So they would be looking at other avenues also.
Mr. Cohen. Mr. Winer--and I presume you'd be the right
person to ask this couple of questions. First, are there other
fugitives that Portugal has refused to extradite to our country
that you're familiar with?
Mr. Winer. No, the only case that I'm familiar with is the
case that's decades old which the U.S. refused to extradite
someone to Portugal, which went all the way up to the Supreme
Court, having to do with nationality exclusions and became a
big precedent in extradition law. But this is not a pattern, to
the best of my knowledge.
Mr. Cohen. And you don't think that the judge there would
have had that in the back of his mind?
Mr. Winer. No.
Mr. Cohen. It's not--it's not a case that's a burning issue
with people. Do you know anything about this judge and his or
her history and background and--
Mr. Winer. I do not, sir.
Mr. Cohen. No? And the judge is strictly--what type of
judge is it? Do you know?
Mr. Winer. I do not, no.
Mr. Cohen. The Portuguese judiciary, is it known to be
above board?
Mr. Winer. It's considered to be independent. And like most
Western European judiciaries, it's pretty good--imperfect, but
pretty good. And again, in the United States, there are any
number of decisions that judges make that I've disagreed with
over the years. It's difficult to enforce rule of law in a fair
and honorable way in all cases. Travesties occur. This is a
travesty and an outrage.
Mr. Cohen. Has anybody from the Portuguese government--I
know it's a separate branch and all that--expressed in any way
their concern about the decision of the judge or any action
that they might think was appropriate, or have they been pretty
moot on it?
Mr. Winer. That's a question that you would have to ask
United States government or Mrs. Patterson about.
Mr. Cohen. Do either Mrs. Patterson or Mr. Gallagher know
of any statement that the government might have made, any
concern or issue--
Mr. Gallagher. No, I'm not aware.
Mr. Cohen. None at all. Rendition's an interesting concept.
You brought it up, Mr. Winer. Who is the--which branch of our
government does this? Is it the--
Mr. Winer. Renditions have been done in recent years by
intelligence agencies with involvement under some certain
circumstances of the military or other security elements of the
United States Government. The law enforcement agencies take the
point of view that they do not ask how someone came under U.S.
jurisdiction. That's not important. Their role is to deal with
people once they're under U.S. jurisdiction.
Mr. Cohen. It's a results test.
Mr. Winer. Correct. Other components of the United States
government are involved in the rendition process or private
citizens in connection with rewards programs.
Mr. Cohen. It's rare that this is used, to the best of your
knowledge?
Mr. Winer. It was rare when I was in the government. My
understanding is it was less rare in the Bush administration
during the period post-9/11. And it appears the current
administration has moved more towards the use of other
mechanisms rather than renditions to deal with terrorists. The
drone program would be one example of that.
Mr. Cohen. Rendition to the--
Mr. Winer. Rendition to another place.
Mr. Cohen. Yes, yes. Indeed. Is Wright hiding out, or is he
pretty open and notorious in Portugal now? Do we know? Mr.
Gallagher, do you have any idea?
Mr. Gallagher. By all media, he's living in the same
residence and open.
Mr. Cohen. So somebody could go over there and bring him to
justice or whatever. And do you know how long he's been
married, how long he's had citizenship?
Mr. Gallagher. No, I do not.
Mr. Cohen. Yeah. This is--it's an amazing story. I
appreciate Mr. Smith bringing this to the Commission. It is a
terrorist act. I think I remember this. It's hard--it's '72--
I'm that old. And during that time, there were quite a few
hijackings, and we were all concerned about flying and would
you end up in Cuba. You know, a lot of them went to Cuba, but I
remember this Algeria thing and going to Miami and Boston and
the whole scene, so I guess I remember this case. And it did
make people leery of flying, and it's certainly a terrorist act
and something that shouldn't just be forgotten about.
I mean, we should find justice.
I've been in the--I'm proud to be a member of the Judiciary
Committee, as well as this Commission. But in the Judiciary
Committee under Chairman John Conyers we did a lot of
successful legislation to see that perpetrators of civil rights
crimes were brought to justice, even though the--many years had
transpired since the crime had been committed. And I think in
those--all those circumstances, the perpetrators should be
brought to justice, for the crime they did was against society.
And in this situation, it's the same. And I don't think--I
don't find the judge's decision that there's any kind of a
lapse, a breach--because a time should work, latches shouldn't
be applied, statute of limitations or anything like that. And
we should take a position that we get involved.
So I'd like to plan to join with Mr. Smith. I did not have
the opportunity to do it in the past. But if he does another
entreaty to the State Department--and I feel confident that he
will--I would like to join with him in that, and whatever
efforts we do so, it is bipartisan. And I believe that we
should continue action to see that this gentleman is brought to
justice, because what he's done was wrong to your family, it
was wrong to the United States of America and is wrong to the
justice system. So I appreciate the hearing, the testimony, and
I regret what you and I presume these--are these granddaughters
here?
Ms. Patterson. (Off mic.)
Mr. Cohen. Well, I'm sorry about--you had a great
grandfather, and your mother's doing a great job to remember
that legacy. We should never forget the legacy. We should
always remember and try to find justice. You know, in the
Jewish religion, the Holocaust, never forget, and you don't
forget your family.
Thank you.
Mr. Smith. Well, thank you. And we will work together on
requesting additional actions by the State Department and
Justice Department. Let me ask--we have three impact
statements, and I know--and without naming each person, because
I know that that's a concern--I would like if any of the
granddaughters--or daughters, I should say, would like to--and
granddaughter--say a word or two or a paragraph from their
impact statement. The entire statement will be put in the
record.
And while you're thinking about the--for a moment, Mr.
Winer, you made a very excellent point about Congress' strength
and the executive branch's ability to analyze and apply these
tools in cases of failed extraditions, and you proposed that we
get a report--and we will follow up with some legislation
pursuant to your excellent recommendation that would cover
total extraditions by countries, number of extraditions
refused, reason for refusal of extraditions and steps taken by
the U.S. in response. And that's the one that we would really
look forward to--in response to a refused extradition.
We don't have the data. We don't get the information.
There's a lack of compiling it, and I think your recommendation
is a good one. Thank you for that.
Would anyone like to say a word, please? No need to say
your name.
GRANDDAUGHTER OF WALTER PATTERSON
Granddaughter. Should I read the whole thing or--OK. I am
not sure I will ever know the full impact of never meeting my
grandfather Walter Patterson, but I can speculate how things
could have been. I imagine that he would have spent time with
his grandchildren as we grew up, visiting us, playing with us,
spending holidays with us or going to our weddings, meeting his
great-grandchildren. I am sure he would have told us his war
stories and life adventures, but we will never know his story
as told by Walter Patterson.
If my grandfather hadn't been murdered, I think my
grandmother would have lived longer to enjoy the abovementioned
activities with her grandchildren. George Wright took both of
them away from us.
Even though George Wright denies firing shots, it was not a
bullet that killed my grandfather. He died from severe head
trauma, trauma inflicted on my grandfather by George Wright.
Beating a man who was a decorated World War II veteran while he
was down is a cowardly act.
It's time for George Wright to grow up and be a man and
face punishment for the violent, disgusting crime he committed.
Wright chose his actions. Now he needs to pay the price for
them.
One of the biggest impacts of living without my grandfather
was financial hardship. He was a gas station owner who probably
would have had financial security to pass along to my mother.
Instead, she had her father and all that he had to offer taken
away. My mother had to start with nothing, therefore times were
extremely difficult for us as we grew up. I started babysitting
and taking care of neighbors' pets when I was in 5th grade to
earn some money. I used that money to buy a car. As soon as I
was old enough to drive, I went to work after school each day
and on weekends to pay for car insurance, gas and clothes. If I
needed something, I knew I had to pay for it.
After high school, I had to work two jobs while going to
college full-time. I had to pay my own tuition. I had to pay
for my own wedding. My parents simply didn't have the means to
help their children with these things. If my grandfather had
been alive, he could have watched us when we were little so my
mom could have gone to work to help out financially.
My parents did the best they could just to put food on the
table for us. My dad hunted, so we ate a lot of venison. There
were no extras or luxury items. We wore hand-me-downs and were
taught to be happy with what we had. My parents wouldn't have
needed to struggle if my grandfather had been there to help. My
grandfather wasn't here to help due to George Wright's
senseless crime.
Whatever happened in the hospital when my mom went to see
her father as he was dying caused her to not be able to go to
hospitals anymore. She has 11 grandchildren--12 now--that she
was unable to see when they were born, not until they came
home. My daughter was in a special care nursery for 10 days
when she was born. Luckily, she was OK, but my mom may have
never seen her granddaughter alive. I split my head open as a
child and had to wait for a ride to the hospital to get
stitches because my mom couldn't take me to the hospital and my
dad was at work. He worked as many hours as he could just to
make ends meet.
It is difficult to speculate how things would have been if
my grandfather hadn't been murdered, but his presence could
have only made life easier and better for all of us. George
Wright turned my mother's life upside down, and five
generations of the Patterson family have been negatively
affected. Wright has lived a full life, while my grandfather's
life was senselessly taken away.
Wright should be thankful for the time he has had with his
family. At least he has the opportunity to say goodbye to his
wife and kids as he leaves to serves his sentence. My
grandfather wasn't given that courtesy. George Wright's fate is
a result of his own choices and actions.
My grandfather was an innocent man trying to make an honest
living. He fought for our country and for our freedom. In
return, he was beaten to death by George Wright. Please provide
justice for my grandfather Walter Patterson, and extradite
George Wright to the United States to finish serving his
sentence for the brutal beating and murder of my grandfather.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
GRANDDAUGHTER OF WALTER PATTERSON
Granddaughter. Thank you. ``Get away with murder.'' To some
it's just an expression, but to others a reality. Forty-nine
years ago, a little girl of 14 years old received a horrifying
phone call. On the other end was a distraught family member
calling to notify a woman that her husband had been brutally
attacked and shot. The 14-year-old was the recipient of this
message and was told nothing except: Walt's been shot.
Walter was her father, who two days later had vanished from
her life forever. It sounds like a movie or storyline for a
perfect mystery book series. To my family and myself, it's the
harsh reality of the world we live in.
My mother is that 14-year-old girl, and Walter Patterson is
the grandfather I never met. From what I understand and
conclude from stories told, he was a hardworking family man. He
had risked his life in the U.S. Army fighting for the freedom
of the people and the country in which we reside.
Going to battle and sustaining injuries during combat isn't
what took him from his family. It was the appalling choice of
some of the very Americans he was fighting for. It was a moment
that would change the lives of many people.
On the night of November 23, 1962, Walter Patterson was
working at a gas station he ran. It was an innocent night's
work, and he was making a living to provide for his family who
consisted of a wife and two young daughters. When a car of four
individuals pulled around the back of the shop, an average
workday would soon take a turn for the worst. Little did my
grandfather known he'd soon be faced with individuals garbed
with stockings on their heads and equipped with guns in their
hands. What began as a robbery ended in murder. The individuals
who set out with the intentions of killing had succeeded.
Luckily, our justice system had been victorious in apprehending
these individuals and convicting them for the crime they
committed.
Walter Patterson can't be brought back to watch his two
daughters blow out their birthday candles, hang Christmas
lights with his family or carve the Thanksgiving turkey. He
would never be able to participate in daddy-daughter dances,
walk his daughters down the aisle on their wedding day or enjoy
the births of their children. But at least the creatures
responsible for this would pay for what they've done--or would
they?
Seven years of a prison sentence was apparently all that
one of these cowards, a man by the name of George Wright, could
handle. As if choosing to participate in a murder wasn't enough
of a poor choice, his life of crime wouldn't stop there. Mr.
Wright had the brilliant idea to steal the prison warden's car
to make his great escape. Being a criminal obviously came easy
to this individual, because his law-breaking actions didn't
stop there. What does a convicted murderer do after he breaks
out of prison?
Well, this particular criminal chose to expand his criminal
record by hijacking a passenger plane, putting yet more lives
at risk and making a mockery of the FBI. He managed to collect
$1 million in ransom money, which he demanded be delivered by
FBI agents in their underwear or swimsuits. One would think
that if this murderer were to be caught, he'd really be in
serious trouble with all these actions he carried out.
For many years George Wright lived his life. He even got
married and had a family of his own. Were the images of a
beaten and shot man ever present in his mind? Did he ever think
about the lives of those family members that were torn apart on
that day that he chose to act like a man of no feelings or
regard for human life? When he was counting his illegally
obtained million dollars, was he picturing two young girls
standing over a coffin painfully watching their young, brave
father be buried? Was he thinking of the young single mother
who was left to deal with her newly broken family? I doubt it.
And George Wright was actually running like a coward while
conspiring about how he would be able to live the good life
himself. No conscience, remorse or regret has ever been evident
by this individual's actions. He must have felt he had
something to hide, proven by the fact that he illegally and
unofficially changed his name and remained in a country half a
world away from where he destroyed Walter Patterson and his
family.
Forty-one years have passed by. After diligent searching
and a refusal to put this case file back in the file cabinet,
the FBI was hopeful that they had found this murderer and
fugitive. That 14-year-old girl who received that devastating
phone call is now 63 years old and has received yet another
phone call regarding the murder of her father. Only this time,
the phone call was of a positive nature. The news of this armed
robber, murderer, prison escapee, plane hijacker and fraud
being caught seemed surreal. After all these years, this man
will finally pay the price for the crimes he chose to commit.
The life of Walter Patterson can't be brought back. Knowing
that justice will be served and that George Wright literally
won't get away with murder will help to close the door on this
devastating chapter of Walter Patterson's family's lives.
Protecting and hiding a known convicted criminal is considered
a crime in itself. Portugal, the place in which George Wright
chose to flee to and hide out at, like the coward he is, chose
to protect him by refusing extradition.
How can an average individual be punished for hiding out a
criminal, yet here you have the government of a country
harboring this fugitive and getting away with it?
When this news hit our family, many emotions were felt. The
feelings of anger, sadness and frustration are overwhelming. A
convicted killer and fugitive has been caught but is being
protected from the law.
The rationale is now that he is a Portuguese citizen and
therefore they feel the need to protect him. Never mind the
fact that Walter Patterson had no protection from this
individual's hands, but in hindsight, is George Wright even a
legitimate Portuguese citizen? He used criminal acts to access
the country and used a fraudulent family background and name to
obtain his so-called citizenship. George Wright has not become
a Portuguese citizen, but rather the pseudo-individual he
created has.
One would think the government would want to rid their
country of crime and corruption, but Portugal is protecting an
individual who has brought these things to them. Portugal isn't
the only country to blame for this monster having the ability
to move on with his life as if his hands were not a murder
weapon at one time, as if his own mind didn't tell him to
commit the various crimes of a hateful, malicious monster.
The very country that Walter Patterson received numerous
medals for protecting, it's contributing to George Wright
literally getting away with murder. The country in which
immigrants travel far and wide to reach to obtain a better life
for themselves, our very own United States of America, has
given up on one of its own. The decision has been made that a
human life that was taken illegally by the hands of another
isn't worth pursuing justice for.
Members of our attorney general's office have decided that
no more appeals are necessary in the attempt to extradite this
convicted murderer so justice can be served. It would be very
interesting to see if the same decision would be made if the
individual who was prematurely buried carried one of their last
names.
This war veteran fought for the freedom of citizens of the
United States. The government was unable to protect him from
George Wright while he was still alive. The least that the
United States could do is return the fight that he gave and
express the need to have this man brought back to where this
crime was committed.
In public schools across the nation, hundreds of students
and staff proudly recite the Pledge of Allegiance. It would be
reassuring to know that these aren't just words but actually
have true meaning, and that our country stands by the last line
of this pledge. If nothing else, this country should have the
ambition to send a message that the United States is just that:
united.
Thank you.
Mr. Smith. Thank you. Remarkable words and convictions,
heart, courage from three remarkable women. Mr. Patterson would
be so proud. We will continue our efforts diligently. The
hearing's adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:20 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
=======================================================================
Prepared Statements
----------
Prepared Statement of Hon. Christopher H. Smith, Chairman, Commission
on Security and Cooperation in Europe
Good afternoon and welcome to everyone here for our hearing on
``Justice in the international extradition system: the case of George
Wright and beyond.''
In September 2011, hopes were raised high when the FBI announced
that George Wright, a fugitive for over 41 years, had been located in
Portugal and taken into custody pursuant to provisional arrest request
from the United States. These were hopes for accountability, justice,
and, for the family of the man he murdered in Wall Township in 1962,
for closure.
In 1963, George Wright was sentenced to 15 to 30 years in prison in
connection with a gas station robbery during which Walter Patterson, a
decorated World War II veteran and Bronze Star recipient, was shot to
death. He was subsequently sentenced to 15 to 30 years but escaped from
prison in 1970. In 1972, he and four other men hijacked a Detroit-to-
Miami flight--they flew the plane to Algeria, where Algerian
authorities allowed them to disappear.
In 1976, four of the hijackers were located and arrested in France.
They argued that they would not be able to get a fair trial in the
United States because of racism in the American legal system. France
invoked the ``political offense exception'' and refused to extradite
them to the United States, but tried them in France instead. Following
conviction, two of the hijackers spent a mere three years in prison and
two others spent 2 1/2 years. George Wright was not one of those
caught. For 41 years, George Wright's whereabouts were unknown, and he
built a life for himself that included a wife and children--a life that
he denied to Walter Patterson.
When George Wright was located in Portugal last year, the Patterson
family naturally thought that, as a prison escapee sought also for
hijacking, he would be returned to the United States to finish serving
the sentence he received for the murder of Walter Patterson. But
shockingly, a Portuguese court rejected the United States' extradition
request last November and efforts to reverse that decision were
exhausted without success earlier this year. The Patterson family, so
deeply wounded by the murder of Walter Patterson and then shocked by
the escape of a person sentenced in that crime was injured yet again by
Portugal's refusal to extradite George Wright.
Today's hearing will examine what happened in this case, what can
be done about it, and the broader questions it raises about the
international extradition system.
I welcome here Ann Patterson, Walter Patterson's daughter, who will
put human face on what some might otherwise appear to be abstract legal
issues and remind us what is really at stake when the extradition
process fails. We will also hear from R.J. Gallagher, a retired FBI
Special Agent who worked on the George Wright case. And finally, we
will hear from Jonathan Winer, Senior Director, APCO Worldwide,
Washington, DC, and former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for
International Law Enforcement.
Many thanks to all of you for being here today--above all to the
Patterson family. This can only be painful for them, but we honor their
willingness to speak out about how this injustice has affected their
family--they represent not only themselves but the families of
countless other crime victims, left in the lurch and prevented from
achieving closure on the death of a loved one by injustices in the
extradition system.
I would just share with you two more things before we begin.
We invited the Department of Justice to participate in
this hearing, but were unfortunately unable to coordinate the
scheduling of this event with their availability. I look forward to
covering this issue with them at a future hearing.
We also invited the Portuguese ambassador to participate,
but he had a scheduling conflict as well, and I will be meeting with
him personally in my office.
Prepared Statement of Hon. Benjamin L. Cardin, Co-Chairman, Commission
on Security and Cooperation in Europe
I thank the Chairman for convening this hearing about an important
aspect of international law which impacts citizens of the United States
and those of countries around the world, as well as our government's
relationships with other nations. This review of extradition will be
conducted through the prism of the heart wrenching experience of the
Patterson family.
The murder of Walter Patterson in 1962 devastated his wife and two
young teenage daughters, one of whom, Ann, will testify here today. The
late Mrs. Patterson died two years after her husband, leaving Ann and
her sister orphans. George Wright, who participated in the robbery that
resulted in Walter Patterson's death, was apprehended, convicted of
felony murder and sentenced to 15 to 30 years in prison, thereby
providing, I would hope, some modicum of relief for the family.
Certainly closure is another matter and the numbing grief of loss is
never ending.
I cannot begin to imagine the shock and apprehension endured by the
family when Wright escaped from prison seven years later and was then
reported to have participated in the hijacking of a Miami-bound plane
to Algeria--only to vanish from sight for the next 41 years. The FBI's
announcement last year that he had been discovered in Portugal and the
rigors of the extradition proceedings have, I am sure, regenerated the
cycle of grief once more for the family.
The Helsinki Final Act contains Ten Principles Guiding Relations
between Participating States. Principle Ten requires that the 56 OSCE
States ``fulfill in good faith their obligations under international
law, both those obligations arising from the generally recognized
principles and rules of international law and those obligations arising
from treaties or other agreements to which they are parties.'' The
United States has extradition treaties with the overwhelming majority
of the 56 OSCE participating States, including Portugal, as well as a
multilateral treaty with European Union countries. Exceptions are the
former Soviet Republics (Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan--the United States
never recognized the forcible incorporation of Latvia, Estonia and
Lithuania into the Soviet Union and those three Baltic States are
covered by the EU multilateral treaty.) The status of extradition
agreements with the successor states of the former Yugoslavia is in the
process of being regularized.
Extradition treaties can help the United States ensure that those
who have committed crimes here are brought to justice. But, as we have
seen, the implementation of extradition agreements among nations raises
challenges. Many treaties bar extradition based on exceptions carved
out for citizenship, statutes of limitation, military offenses,
political offenses or cases where the death penalty may be imposed. I
hope that the testimony to be presented here today will shed some light
on ways to address these challenges and ensure justice in the
international extradition process.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Prepared Statement of Ann Patterson
My name is Ann Patterson and I am the daughter of Walter Patterson.
My father was robbed, brutally beaten, and shot in his gas station in
Wall Township, New Jersey on November 23, 1962. He died of his Injuries
on November 25, 1962. I was 14 years old and my sister, Kaye, was 13.
My father was a quiet, sensitive person. The gas station was his
``American Dream'' and he was so happy to be able to have his own
business. He worked sixteen to eighteen hour days to support our
family.
Daddy's name is also on the Patterson ``Honor Roll'' of soldiers--
part of a family that has fought in all of our country's wars. At age
21, he went to Europe and served our country for four years during
World War II. He was a TEC 5 and a truck driver/mechanic and was
awarded the Bronze Star for meritorious service.
It was the day after Thanksgiving and Daddy had come home for
supper. It was about 4:30 when he got into his truck to go back to
work. I stood at the kitchen window waving good-bye and that was the
last time I saw him alive.
About five hours later, the phone rang and I answered it. Aunt
Jennie said ``Walt's been shot'' and I screamed ``No, no, no'' and
called my mother to the phone. I was crying, told my sister, and she
started crying.
My mother was not well. She called Uncle Charles to take her to the
hospital. When she got there, she couldn't recognize my father. She
later told us they had ``beaten him to a pulp.'' The doctor operated
from about 10:30 P.M. to 6:30 A.M. and told my mother he thought he had
``gotten all the bone fragments.'' When I asked her what Daddy had to
say, she told me that he couldn't talk because his jaw was wired shut.
He was wild with pain and could not be given anything for it because he
had head injuries. He had to be restrained in the bed. The doctor told
my mother that seizures were to be expected with this type of injury
and Daddy had a seizure Saturday night.
Kaye and I had been scared to death to stay home alone on Friday
night, so we rode to the hospital with Uncle Dick and Aunt Ginny as
they took my mother to see Daddy on Saturday night. Aunt Ginny asked my
mother if she had told us what we were going to see. But my mother did
not allow us to see Daddy and we waited in the car. Daddy was in
critical condition and no one except immediate family was allowed in.
The doctor told my mother that if Daddy came through this, he would be
a vegetable and need a lot of care.
On Sunday evening, the doctor was talking to my mother in the
hallway about my father's condition when the nurse came to them and
told them he had passed away. They allowed my mother to spend some time
alone with him. When she came home, Uncle Dick and Aunt Ginny were each
holding her arms and helping her to the house. I looked at Kay and said
``Daddy died.''
The viewing was Tuesday and the funeral home asked for a photo of
Daddy so they could make him look like the picture. Does that sound odd
to you? My father was unrecognizable in the casket. His wavy black hair
with a touch of gray was replaced with straight black hair combed back.
His face was all uneven and caked with make-up. I knew he was my Daddy
by looking at his hands.
The $70 that George Wright and Walter McGhee stole wasn't enough.
They had to beat my father beyond recognition. George Wright was
identified by the imprints of the stock of his gun on my father's skin.
If there had not been such a beating, the doctors could have operated
on the bullet wound to the abdomen and it is quite possible that Daddy
would still be with us today.
For Kay and me, the nightmare was just beginning. Since our mother
was not well, she could not take care of us. We were told that we would
be sent to ``Clinton, a home for wayward girls.'' Later, I found out
that Clinton was,in fact, a prison for girls. There is something wrong
with sending the victims to prison while the criminals do not have to
be incarcerated for their actions. I thank God that Uncle Dick stepped
in to take care of us.
Our mother was very ill with a heart condition and her death was
hastened by losing Daddy. She passed away fifteen months later on
February 26, 1964 leaving Kaye and me orphaned. In our house lived my
mother's aunt and uncle, both of whom passed away during that fifteen
month period. In just over a year, we experienced the deaths of all
four people we lived with and lost our home. We were robbed of normal
teenage years.
There was no counseling available in 1962. We were left to deal
with all this sorrow on our own. We tried to be strong for our mother
while she was still alive.
It has not been easy to relive all these events during the past ten
months. The FBI Victims Specialist suggested I see a counselor which
was beneficial to me. One of the problems that came out was the
nightmares that I suffered from for years after my father's death. The
counselor said that I had had post traumatic stress after I described
the nightmares to her. I also developed asthma and colitis within a few
weeks of Daddy's death.
The premeditated actions of the four individuals involved in my
father's murder have negatively impacted five generations of the
Patterson family. I have already spoken about my parents and my sister
and me. My mother's uncle who lived with us refused food when he
learned of this tragedy. He said ``I don't want to stay in a world
where this is allowed to happen'' and he died four months later. My
grandfather never spoke my father's name without crying and told me
``they didn't have to beat him up so bad.''
My father's seven grandchildren were deprived of a loving
grandfather and they are angry at the injustice exhibited in the past
ten months.
But the saddest to me are the hurt reactions of some of my father's
fourteen great-grandchildren. One ofthem saw the clip on TV of the
capture and asked ``What is wrong with people?'' not knowing it was
about her great-grandfather. Another one curled up in a corner of the
couch and, crying, asked if he could escape again. Five generations of
fear and hurt are five too many.
George Wright cannot erase his life of crime. He is fraudulently a
Portuguese citizen. Four aliases do not change the fact that he was
born George Edward Wright in the United States of America and committed
crimes during his years here. When he chose the crime, he also chose
the punishment as they go hand in hand.
George Wright did not give my father a choice on November 23, 1962
and so he should not have a choice about not serving his sentence. He
does not owe Portugal time; he owes the United States.
George Wright is not sorry for what he did. There has been no
apology to the Patterson Family. On the contrary, he has made this all
about himself and basked in the limelight. To want to profit from a
book and movie highlighting his heinous acts against the Patterson
family is a slap in the face. He is not the victim here--we are.
George Wright is a convicted murderer who lived a life of violence,
then fled and lived a life of lies. Now his past has caught up with him
and he needs to come back here and serve his sentence.
In light of all the recent media coverage, I have been approached
by many people who have expressed their disgust toward this man and
this situation. I feel it is a disgrace that our justice system has
failed in assuring a proper punishment for this crime. This whole case
sets a terrible precedent for this country both here and worldwide. It
is a negative toward decent citizens and a positive for criminals.
The failure of extradition has affected us in the following ways;
1) fear of a known criminal on the loose, 2) fear of reprisal from
criminal. Both of these fears are now 50 years long. 3) makes a mockery
of the crime against my father. Did his life matter? 4) has perpetuated
our pain and loss, 5) loss of any kind of confidence in the criminal
justice system from the local branch which gave too lenient a sentence
to the state branch that put a convicted murderer on a minimum security
work farm to the federal branch who have backed down to Portugal in the
matter of extradition. The case was dropped before the final appeal was
filed. It is one thing to do all you can, another to give up before you
exhaust all avenues.
I have asked if there are any other avenues of justice such as
withholding aid and have not been given any answer. Don't we have a
right to seek justice for our father?
Our family has been emotionally affected by injustice in the
following ways: 1) no closure, this is still an emotionally draining,
open wound, 2) we have family members and friends across this entire
nation who are.appalied at the injustice of trying to obtain justice,
3) we are not happy that George Wright wants to do a book and a movie
and capitalize on his inhumane treatment of our father, 4) we were
extremely upset when we read in the newspaper that the final appeal had
been dropped. I was told that I would be notified of any decision so
that I wouldn't be blindsided up learning something from the media, 5)
on a personal level, this has split my family in two. Some members
support efforts to obtain justice and some cannot emotionally face the
details of this crime to even talk about it.
What can be done? Here are my suggestions: 1) reinstate the death
penalty for criminals convicted of heinous crimes. Such a strong
penalty may act as a deterrent, 2) put pressure on Portugal. I
understand there is a treaty from 1907 to this effect, 3) do not send
any financial aid to Portugal, 4) form a committee at the state level
to double check paper work so that errors like this can't happen, 5)
support and pass Illinois Senator Richard Durbin's Bringing Fugitives
to Justice Act, and 6) nothing that any of us say or do will bring my
father back but if we can look ahead and help the countless number of
children who are similarly affected or will be affected by senseless
crimes, then all of our efforts will not have been done in vain.
There is no conclusion to my story. It has not occurred yet for the
Conclusion now rests in the hands of the politicians. The FBI and the
U.S. Marshals have done their job in locating this fugitive and we
thank them. I have done all I can by telling about our family events
from November 23 to November 25, 1962 and the impact of this despicable
crime. On behalf of the Patterson family, I ask you to please bring
justice for the untimely death of my father, Walter Patterson.
Thank you.
Prepared Statement of R.J. Gallagher, Retired FBI Special Agent
Good Afternoon. My name is R.J. Gallagher and I'm a retired FBI
Agent and I would like to begin by acquainting members with the
background of George Wright.
On Friday night of Thanksgiving weekend in 1962, George Wright and
two others robbed and mortally wounded Walter Patterson, a service
station proprietor in Wall Township, New Jersey. That night Wright and
his codefendants wore nylon stockings over their faces, and wore gloves
on their hands. Wright carried a sawed off rifle, his codefendant a
cheap handgun. They brought with them white adhesive tape for binding
their victims. Earlier that same day, Wright and his codefendants cut
the rifle down, bought ammunition and test fired the weapon. They had
also driven around the Jersey shore area looking for prospective places
to rob.
At 9:30 P.M. when Wright and a codefendant entered Walt Patterson's
ESSO Gas Station on Route 33 they were committing their second armed
robbery of the night. This robbery, unlike the first did not go as
planned. For it would appear Walt Patterson was not sufficiently
compliant or quick enough to meet the demands of the robbers and a
fight ensued. Wright and his codefendant repeatedly rained blows to the
head and shoulders of Walter Patterson with their weapons. At some
point the handgun carried by the codefendant fired and Walter Patterson
was struck in the abdomen. He fell to the floor. The two robbers fled
taking with them about $70. Both robbers were very aware that their
victim was shot and wounded yet they left him, alone, on the floor of
his gas station. They did not place an anonymous call to anyone to get
Walt Patterson medical attention. Instead, using the money proceeds
from their two robberies that evening, they went out and partied. They
dined, they drank and they played pool till 2 or 3 in the morning.
Investigation over the next two days led to the identification and
arrest of the persons involved in the robbery murder. This included
George Wright. All physical evidence was recovered: guns, stocking
masks, gloves, ammunition. All the arrested gave full confessions.
On January 28, 1963, Wright pled ``non vult'' to a murder
indictment. By this plea Wright did not contest his guilt and he waived
his right to a trial. This plea allowed Wright to receive a 30 year
maximum sentence as opposed to a life sentence, had he gone to trial
and been convicted. On February 15, 1963, Wright was sentenced to a
prison term of not less than 15 years and not more than 30 years.
At this point I'd like to take a break from Wright's crime
chronology. I have read in numerous media accounts subsequent to
Wright's arrest that Wright has stated that since he did not fire the
shot that killed Walter Patterson he is not guilty of the crime of
murder. Both of Wright's codefendants stated that in the immediate
aftermath of this crime, Wright told them he had fired. Nine bullets
from the sawed off rifle Wright carried were found on the floor of the
service station
The presiding judge at the time of Wright's sentencing went on the
record stating that these nine bullets indicated Wright's intention and
attempt to fire the weapon but that the weapon had malfunctioned. But
regardless of Wright's intent, attempt, or belief that he had fired or
that he had not fired it was the law of the State of New Jersey that if
a person committing a robbery kills another or death ensues during the
robbery that person is guilty of murder.
I have also read that there should be some consideration as to the
age of George Wright as he was but 19 years old at the time. Here it
should be noted that Walter Patterson was barely a much riper 21 when
he entered the US Army shortly after Pearl Harbor. Walter Patterson
then served in the Army for 3 years and 7 months until after the war
was over. Of his time in the Army, 2 and a half years was spent
overseas in Europe.
Let me return to the Wright time line. On August 22, 1970, Wright
and others escaped from the New Jersey State Prison. At this time
Wright had served 7 years, 7 months and 25 days. Wright has remained a
fugitive from U.S. justice since this date.
On July 31, 1972, Wright and 4 other adults (to include one of the
persons who escaped prison with Wright) hijacked a Delta Airlines DC 8
en route from Detroit to Miami. The hijackers were accompanied by 3 of
their small children. Wright was dressed in the garb of religious
clergy. Wright was the eldest and the leader of the hijackers. He
wielded a handgun, gave the orders and issued the threats. He pointed a
cocked weapon to the head of the airplane pilot, Captain William May.
In Miami, Wright demanded one million dollars and threatened that if
his demands were not met that he would toss bodies out of the plane.
Wright and his fellow hijackers received the one million dollar
ransom and they released approximately 80 passengers. The flight crew,
however, was not released and they were forced to fly the plane and the
hijackers first to Boston then on to Algiers, Algeria. Algerian
authorities seized the one million dollars and the plane, returning
them to the U.S. The hijackers however were allowed their freedom and
eventually made their way to France. Wright and the other 4 adults were
all indicted for Air Piracy in the United States on August 3, 1972.
While in Algeria, Wright and the other hijackers made a videoed press
statement and as part of the statement the speaker stated that they
were revolutionaries. In May of 1976, 4 of the 5 hijackers, the lone
exception being George Wright, were arrested by French authorities for
the 1972 Air Piracy. In 1978, France tried these four for the Air
Piracy and they were all convicted of the charge.
And so to this day, Wright has not served his sentence for his
homicide conviction nor has he been tried for the indicted charge of
Air Piracy.
My involvement in this matter began in 1994 when I reopened the New
Jersey fugitive investigation regarding Wright. I worked it until my
retirement in July, 2011. The United States Marshals and the New Jersey
Department of Corrections joined the investigation in approximately
2003. Since the case was reopened most all the techniques used in
fugitive investigations were employed. These would include but not
limited to interviews, both domestic and abroad, notification to
international law enforcement, court orders, human intelligence,
cooperation of foreign law enforcement, fingerprints and age enhanced
images of George Wright were produced and disseminated worldwide. The
United States Marshals commissioned the making of an age enhanced bust.
All three agencies played a vital and significant part in the
investigation and to my mind it was a model of organic, ad hoc
interagency cooperation.
In March of 2010, the Portuguese police notified the FBI legal
attache in Madrid that they had positively identified the person living
in Portugal under the name of Jose Louis Jorge dos Santos as George
Wright. This they did unknown to Wright by the comparison of
fingerprints they had on file for Santos with those of George Wright.
In September of 2010, six months after a positive identification I,
along with attorneys from the Department of Justice-Office of
International Affairs met with Portuguese law enforcement and
prosecutors in Lisbon, Portugal. The purpose of this meeting was for
the United States to seek Portuguese legal input and to work together
within the framework of the US-Portugal extradition treaty so that the
United States might produce an extradition request with the greatest
chance of success. I would characterize the meetings as both positive
and productive. All parties agreed that the extradition could proceed
for U.S. person George Wright. Further there was agreement that George
Wright was using the made up name of Jose Santos and had provided false
pedigree information to the Portuguese government as regards to his
name, place of birth and parents. One issue remained unresolved.
Portugal saw as a barrier to extradition Wright's exposure to a 25 year
sentence of incarceration for an Air Piracy conviction. This they
viewed as the equivalent of a death sentence and would therefore serve
as a basis for denial of extradition.
Well over a year passed since the positive identification had been
made and this issue still proved intractable and no extradition request
had been submitted to Portugal. In May of 2011, the decision was made
to tender the extradition request to Portugal based solely on Wright's
homicide conviction. I participated in this decision and supported it
fully. This course of action was probably done at my instigation.
Should it prove to be a bad call the fault is entirely my own.
Portuguese law enforcement arrested George Wright in September of
2011.
Since his arrest, the Portuguese courts have denied the United
States extradition request for George Wright. It is my understanding
that the Court cited the following in their ruling:
1.) Too much time had passed and that there must be a closure
to criminal cases
2.) Wright's integration into Portuguese society demanded that
extradition be denied on humanitarian grounds. (Per DOJ, these
two reasons are not recognized as basis for denial of
extradition per the United States Portugal Extradition Treaty.)
3.) The court ruled that Wright is a Portuguese citizen.
Looking forward I would like to note the following.
Each nation is free to choose its own criteria for citizenship.
This is how it is and always should be. But it would also seem that
each nation would have as its own self interest imposing the obligation
upon those seeking naturalized citizenship to provide a true identity
and true information. This obviously provides for the safety and
security of a nation's citizens. George Wright provided false
information to Portuguese authorities it would seem because he
suspected that if he provided his true identity not only would
citizenship not be conferred but that he would in all likelihood be
arrested.
In August 1972, George Wright was indicted on the criminal charge
of Air Piracy. If one looks at the elements of the crime Wright
committed, this same act committed today might be potentially charged
as an act of terrorism, and for such a charge the United States-
Portugal Extradition Treaty provides for the extradition of one of it's
citizens. It is in my opinion hard to imagine that it would be charged
otherwise.
Specifically with respect to George Wright, I've seen media
accounts post arrest that suggest he has for some time led a good life
and that he is in fact rehabilitated. This is perhaps a valid argument
and he might have a case for such but there remains only one place that
can decide if such an argument is valid and that is here in the United
States where he committed his crimes in front of a court or parole
board of proper jurisdiction. I would encourage George Wright to come
and make his argument.
Prepared Statement of Jonathan M. Winer, Senior Director, APCO
Worldwide, Former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State
Mr. Chairman and Honorable Members of the Committee:
As former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Law
Enforcement, I am honored to testify today to share my views regarding
the international extradition system, and the options for the United
States when the legal systems of other countries fail to meet the
requirements of justice in connection with a legally proper extradition
request from our country.
During my tenure in the State Department, I had to deal with U.S.
policies relating to extradition on many occasions, with regard always
to one underlying goal--that the United States work always to secure
justice regardless of the location of a criminal, and to do our best to
prevent impunity for criminals anywhere, with a special focus on
criminals whose victims were in the United States.
I would like to begin my testimony with my assessment of the George
Wright extradition case from a legal perspective.
1. The Portuguese Decision To Refuse Extradition Was Legally
Indefensible Under Our Bilateral Treaty and Under International Law
In brief, the reported decision by the Portuguese judge to refuse
Wright's extradition to the U.S. is legally indefensible under the
century-old U.S.-Portuguese Extradition Treaty, and under the
principals of extradition law that apply internationally. Neither of
the reported grounds for refusal--on statute of limitations ground and
on the ground that he had later become a Portuguese citizen by
marriage--are legally legitimate under such principles. Before escaping
from prison and from the U.S. through a terrorist hijacking of an
airplane, Wright had already been convicted of the murder of Walter
Patterson in a trial that was full and fair. The statute of limitations
does not run once one has been convicted of a crime--only when a
country has failed to try a case while the facts are fresh. Similarly,
a U.S. citizen such as Wright cannot legitimately be protected from
extradition by claiming to be a citizen of another country. Some
country's do limit extradition of natural-born citizens to another
country, although the U.S. discourages this principle and does not
apply it itself. But applying this principle to someone who has lied
about their past, lied about their name, and arrived in a country such
as Portugal as a fugitive is a fraud on all involved. The judge's
decision on these two issues is legally wrong, morally unjust, and
should be given no respect whatsoever by any government beyond that of
Portugal.
This analysis takes us to the core question you have asked me to
consider--exploring the U.S. government's options for response. I would
like to consider each in turn.
2. Get Portugal To Do the Right Thing
Portugal could still take action to meet its obligations to the
United States and to secure justice in this case. Wright entered
Portugal through fraud. He had no right under the country's immigration
laws to enter the country under a false name, with a false nationality,
as appears to have been the case. Based on the facts known, he engaged
in immigration fraud to enter Portugal and to stay there. His marriage
to a Portuguese woman was carried out fraudulently, under a false name,
and with false information about his citizenship and birth. It appears
that these facts were not known to Portuguese authorities until 2011.
In such cases, under the principles of universally applicable
immigration law, Portugal appears to have the right to revoke his
citizenship, and to deport him. Were Portugal to take these steps, they
could put him on a plane to the U.S. Or, even if Portugal simply
dropped him on a train to somewhere else, the United States could
secure his extradition from essentially any other country that received
him, even ones with whom we do not have bilateral extradition
relationships, under applicable multilateral agreements, such as the
Palermo Transnational Organized Crime Convention.
3. Use Interpol, Europol, and Other International Institutions
Aggressively
George Wright is currently listed by the United States on
INTERPOL's public wanted database as a fugitive. There is therefore a
public ``Red Notice'' on him. However, the public notice notably is out
of date and provides little information for others to use to arrest
him. It does not state that he is living in Portugal, does not state
his Portuguese name, Jose Luis Jorge dos Santos, does not list his
current residence, the village of Casas Novas, just 25 miles from
Portugal's capital. It also does not list any identity information,
such as a passport, that he may be using for travel in the European
Union or elsewhere. Every biographical detail that the U.S. government
has on Wright should be provided to INTERPOL, with those necessary to
help police and others track him down made publically available.
The U.S. could also alert EU bodies, such as EUROPOL, about its
goal of having Wright extradited. EUROPOL has the job of tracking down
fugitives within the European Union, and while it is directly
responsible to its EU members, it has capacities to track down people
throughout the European Union.
The FBI has a network of legal attaches throughout Europe, and
these attaches, known as LEGATS, could also advise their counterparts
of the U.S.'s current interest in Wright, with the goal of intensifying
focus on him in the event he considers leaving Portugal.
4. Use the State Department Reward Program To Secure Private Assistance
in Rendering Wright From Portugal
The United States has had reward programs in place for the
rendition of important fugitives back to the United States. When I was
at the State Department, these reward programs focused on two principle
types of defendants--major drug traffickers, and major terrorists. In
some cases, we put their photographs and names on books of matches and
distributed them in the countries where we knew they were located, on
the belief that the rewards would motivate people who lived nearby to
provide information to the United States on their whereabouts.
Alternatively, a reward might lead to a citizen's arrest, in which the
person making the detention would take actions to get the wanted person
to U.S. authorities in a location where the U.S. officials could hold
the fugitive and get them into U.S. custody.
During the Clinton Administration, in which I served, this was
known as a ``special rendition,'' and it was authorized under a number
of circumstances, especially involving terrorists and murderers. The
Justice Department policy for many years under a succession of
Administrations has been to take the view that we will not inquire into
the circumstances of a fugitive's rendition to the United States.
This approach has been upheld by the Supreme Court. In United
States v.
Alvarez-Machain, 504 U.S. 655 (1992), the Supreme Court ruled that a
court has jurisdiction to try a criminal defendant even if the
defendant was abducted from a foreign country against his or her will
by United States agents.
I note that hijacking an airplane and holding a gun to the head of
a flight attendant, as Wright has confessed to doing to effectuate his
escape from the United States, is a terrorist offense under multiple
relevant international conventions of essentially global applicability,
including an offense recognized by Portugal.
The Justice Department's internal procedures expressly allow the
use of bounty-hunters and rewards. As stated in the US Attorneys'
Manual:
Due to the sensitivity of abducting defendants from a foreign
country, prosecutors may not take steps to secure custody over
persons outside the United States (by government agents or the
use of private persons, like bounty hunters or private
investigators) by means of Alvarez-Machain type renditions
without advance approval by the Department of Justice.
Prosecutors must notify the Office of International Affairs
before they undertake any such operation. If a prosecutor
anticipates the return of a defendant, with the cooperation of
the sending State and by a means other than an Alvarez-Machain
type rendition, and that the defendant may claim that his
return was illegal, the prosecutor should consult with OIA
before such return.
5. Use a Lure To Get Wright To Leave Portugal
The United States government is authorized to use lures against
foreign fugitives. A lure is a subterfuge to entice a criminal
defendant to leave a foreign country so that he or she can be arrested
in the United States, in international waters or airspace, or in a
third country for subsequent extradition, expulsion, or deportation to
the United States. As the Justice Department Attorney Manual explains,
``lures can be complicated schemes or they can be as simple as inviting
a fugitive by telephone to a party in the United States.''
There are a wide range of possibilities with a lure, which in light
of Portugal's location could involve the cooperation of officials in
nearby jurisdictions, and could involve lures on land or sea, as well
as in airspace. In order not to give Wright further clues about how the
U.S. might go about this, I will provide no further details on these
possibilities, other than to note that for the rest of his life, he
will need to suspect absolutely everyone of being a potential lure,
ready to betray him to justice in the United States.
6. Undertake an Extraordinary Rendition
In responding to terrorism, the United States has long been willing
to undertake extra-judicial measures on its own, as it did decades ago
against the Achille Lauro hijackers who murdered Leon Klinghoffer by
throwing him into the ocean from his wheel-chair.
Such actions, in which U.S. government officials authorize direct
action to capture a terrorist, can involve many different mechanisms.
In some cases, such as the US Navy Seal operation that killed Osama bin
Laden, the authorization may be to capture or kill the terrorist, as
circumstances dictate. In other cases, the authorization may only
extend to a capture of the wanted person. In principle, the U.S.
government could choose to undertake a covert operation to snatch
Wright as he is going about his day-to-day business, and to bring him
to the United States to serve out his murder sentence, and if the law
permits, to try him on his terrorist hijacking.
Notably, the use of bounty-hunters, lures, and extraordinary
rendition could well provoke significant protests on the part of the
government of Portugal. There are precedents for those involved in
these types of activities to become subject to criminal investigations
and indictments in the country in which the fugitive is living. A
successful extra-judicial rendition can also spark direct government-
to-government protests which can chill a bilateral relationship for
years, as happened between Mexico and the U.S. in connection with the
Alvarez-Machain case.
Such risks must be taken into account by private persons involved
in an extra-legal ``snatch'' of a fugitive and by U.S. officials when a
rendition is the result of directed U.S. policy and activities.
7. Apply Treasury OFAC Sanctions to Wright and Those Who Assist Him
The United States has active economic sanctions against terrorists,
administered through the Office of Foreign Asset Control (``OFAC'') at
the U.S. Department of the Treasury. These sanctions are imposed
against foreign threats who engage in activities, such as terrorism,
that pose serious threats to U.S. national security. While Wright is a
U.S. citizen, he is now located in Portugal and for the time being, is
viewed by Portugal as a Portuguese citizen. Accordingly, the U.S. could
designate Wright as a terrorist under OFAC sanctions, making it illegal
for any U.S. person to engage in any transaction with him, and freezing
any assets that he may have in any U.S. financial institution.
Although other countries need not apply such sanctions to a person
designated as a terrorist by the U.S. by OFAC, in practice, sanctioned
persons face difficulty in undertaking financial transactions at any
major financial institution, anywhere, due to automatic OFAC screening
put into place by any bank that has contacts with U.S. financial
institutions. Sanctions may be particularly appropriate in this case,
as Wright has stated publicly that he hopes to write a book about his
life. U.S. imposition of terrorist sanctions against him would make it
much more difficult for him to sell the book and to profit off his
crimes, and might make it possible for profits from the book to be
seized by the U.S.
8. Put Bilateral Pressure on Portugal Through Limitations on Other
Bilateral Programs and Activities, Such As in the Law Enforcement or
Security Sphere
In principle, the U.S. could undertake steps to punish Portugal for
its court's unjust refusal to extradite Wright. However, in the case of
Portugal, such steps would likely frustrate rather than facilitate
justice. To begin with, it would appear to be fundamentally unfair. The
failure to extradite Wright was the decision of an independent local
judge, not Portugal's government as a whole, its justice ministry, or
its other law enforcement components. The U.S. and Portugal work
closely on military issues, which include support for U.S. forces
deployed throughout Europe, the Middle East, Asia, and Africa, as well
as counterterrorism, humanitarian, and combat operations in Afghanistan
and Iraq. U.S. law enforcement work daily with Portuguese counterparts
on a range of activities of deep importance to the security of both
countries. It would almost surely be counterproductive to place this
cooperation at risk through generalized sanctions, restrictions, or
constraints against directed at Portugal to apply pressure to secure
Wright's return to the United States.
That said, our Ambassador to Portugal, our law enforcement and
intelligence agencies, and the State Department and Justice Department
generally, can continue to raise this issue as one that needs to be
resolved, inviting positive steps by Portugal, such as denaturalization
and deportation, with the goal of securing justice for Walter
Patterson, and for all of those victimized by Wright's criminal and
terrorist activities.
9. Beyond George Wright--Securing Justice Globally
For many decades, the U.S. government has worked to build a global
array of tools to extradite or otherwise secure the return to the U.S.
of fugitives, regardless of their location. These policies are
sensible, and broadly serve the interests of the American people and of
justice. There is nothing wrong with the international instruments and
mechanisms we have in place. However, it is inevitable that in some
particular cases, an extradition will fail and justice will be denied.
In such cases, as my testimony highlights, the U.S. has a set of
graduated tools it can use to secure justice regardless.
Which of these tools will be most applicable in any particular case
depends on the circumstances of the case, the governments involved, the
attitude of the foreign government to the case, and a host of important
institutional equities, such as bilateral cooperation on other security
and law enforcement matters.
The Congress could strengthen the Executive Branch's ability to
analyze and apply these tools and to consider whether it has other ones
through encouraging ongoing interagency consideration of the problems
of failed extraditions. It was my experience that interagency
discussions of such issues tended only to arise in an ad hoc fashion,
relating to particular cases or particular bilateral relationships. A
Congressional mandate that the President, in consultation with the
Secretary of State and Attorney General, provide an annual report on
extraditions to Congress covering such issues as total extraditions,
number of extraditions refused, reasons for refusal of extraditions,
and steps taken by the U.S. in response to a refused extradition, might
provide for further focused attention on these issues by both the
Executive Branch and by Congress, thereby facilitating and vindicating
the goal of securing justice for all. I understand that any
Administration might resist putting such information in one place due
to its desire to protect confidential intelligence, diplomatic and law
enforcement programs, activities, and relationships. For that reason,
the Committee may wish to consider structuring any such reporting
mandate to provide for a public report that provides statistical data
and information on completed matters, with a classified appendix to
cover matters that are ongoing or otherwise necessarily secret.
10. Conclusion: A Fugitive Can Run, But Cannot Hide, From Justice
George Wright has expressed his relief at not being returned to the
United States to serve out his prison sentence, and being allowed to
spend the remainder of his life with his wife and his grown children,
while profiting off his crimes by writing a book about them.
Walter Patterson and his family have been denied such pleasures by
Wright due to decisions he took of his own volition, without regard for
the consequences to anyone else.
In this case, and in other cases like this, it should be the policy
of the United States to take appropriate steps to make sure that
murderers and terrorists, wherever located, can never breathe the sigh
of relief that they have reached safety as a result of out-lasting law
and justice.
Which of those steps should be taken in this case will depend on
the consideration by those in the U.S. government with the most
knowledge of the facts about what will best secure justice here. The
Committee may contribute to that process through ongoing dialogue with
those who have those current responsibilities.
I am available to respond to any questions you may have.
For the Committee's background, I am currently a Senior Director at
the Washington strategic communications firm of APCO Worldwide, where I
provide strategic advice on a range of issues from financial services
regulation to foreign investment and trade, consumer regulations,
congressional investigations, data protection, foreign corrupt
practices, energy policy, information security, money laundering,
national security and sanctions. At the State Department, I was one of
the architects of U.S. international policies and strategies on
promoting and harmonizing financial transparency, as well as on cross-
border law enforcement issues. I led negotiations on these and related
issues with the European Union and the Organization of American States,
as well as bilaterally with China, Cyprus, Hungary, Israel, Lebanon,
Nigeria, Poland, Russia, Thailand and numerous other countries in
Europe, Latin America, Southeast Asia and Africa. I previously served
for 10 years as chief counsel and principal legislative assistant to
U.S. Senator John F. Kerry, handling and drafting legislation
pertaining to financial regulation and working with the Senate
committees on foreign relations and banking. During that time, I helped
conduct a series of congressional investigations, including the
investigation of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International from
1989-1992. In November 1999, I received a distinguished honor award
from Secretary of State Madeleine Albright for my service at the State
Department. The award stated that I ``created the capacity of the
Department and the U.S. government to deal with international crime and
criminal justice as important foreign policy functions,'' and that
``the scope and significance of his achievements are virtually
unprecedented for any single official.''
M A T E R I A L F O R
T H E R E C O R D
=======================================================================
Table of Contents
Photograph of Walter Patterson
DD-214/Honorable Discharge Certificate (copies)
Statements for the Record
Statement 1: Granddaughter 12/28/2011
Statement 2: Granddaughter (no date)
Statement 3: Granddaughter (no date)
Statement 4: Granddaughter (no date)
Impact Statement sent to Portuguese Judge from Ann
Patterson--Includes ``Impact of Crime on my teen and adult years'' list
Letter from The Honorable Frank R. Lautenberg (NJ) to The
Honorable Pedro Passos Coelho, Prime Minister of the Portuguese
Republic (12/05/2011)
Letter from Ann Patterson to Secretary Clinton (01/10/
2012)
Response letter from Department of State (Thomas
Heinemann) to Ann Patterson (06/19/2012)
Letter from Ann Patterson to Attorney General Holder (03/
06/2012)--with attached article from the Asbury Park Press ``Instead of
Extradition, possible movie deal''
Response letter from DOJ (Ronald Welch) to Sen.
Lautenberg/Ann Patterson
Article: ``Aren't They Cute?: America and some special
criminals'' National Review
Newspaper Coverage List
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Prepared Statement of Walter Patterson's Granddaughter
December 28, 2011
To whom it may Concern:
I am not sure I will ever know the full impact of never meeting my
grandfather, Walter Patterson, but, I can speculate how things could
have been. I imagine that he would have spent time with his
grandchildren as we grew up; visiting us, playing with us, spending
holidays with us, going to our weddings, and meeting his great-
grandchildren. I am sure he would have told us his war stories and life
adventures, but we will never know his story as told by Walter
Patterson.
If my grandfather hadn't been murdered, I think my grandmother
would have lived longer to enjoy the above mentioned activities with
her grandchildren. George Wright took both of them away from us. Even
though George Wright denies firing shots, it was not a bullet that
killed my grandfather. He died from severe head trauma--trauma
inflicted on my grandfather by George Wright. Beating a man who was a
decorated World War II veteran while he was down is a cowardly act.
It's time for George Wright to grow up and be a man and face punishment
for the violent, disgusting crime he committed. Wright chose his
actions, now he needs to pay the price for them.
One of the biggest impacts of living without my grandfather was
financial hardship. He was a gas station owner who probably would have
had financial security to pass along to my mother. Instead, she had her
father and all that he had to offer taken away. My mother had to start
with nothing; therefore times were extremely difficult for us as we
grew up. I started babysitting and taking care of neighbors' pets when
I was in 5th grade to earn some money. I used that money to buy a car.
As soon as I was old enough to drive, I went to work after school each
day and on weekends to pay for car insurance, gas and clothes. If I
needed something, I knew I had to pay for it. After high school, I had
to work two jobs while going to college full time. I had to pay my own
tuition. I had to pay for my own wedding. My parents simply didn't have
the means to help their children with these things.
If my grandfather had been alive, he could have watched us when we
were little so my mom could have gone to work to help out financially.
My parents did the best they could just to put food on the table for
us. My dad hunted so we ate a lot of venison. There were no ``extras''
or luxury items. We wore hand-me-downs and were taught to be happy with
what we had. My parents wouldn't have needed to struggle if my
grandfather had been here to help. My grandfather wasn't here to help
due to George Wright's senseless crime.
Whatever happened in the hospital when my mom went to see her
father as he was dying caused her to not be able to go to hospitals
anymore. She has eleven grandchildren that she was unable to see when
they were born--not until they came home. My daughter was in the
special care nursery for ten days when she was born. Luckily she was
ok, but my mom may have never seen her granddaughter alive. I split my
head open as a child, and had to wait for a ride to the hospital to get
stitches because my mom couldn't take me to the hospital and my dad was
at work. He worked as many hours as he could just to make ends meet.
It is difficult to speculate how things would have been if my
grandfather hadn't been murdered, but his presence could have only made
life easier and better for all of us. George Wright turned my mother's
life upside down, and five generations of the Patterson family have
been negatively affected. Wright has lived a full life while my
grandfather's life was senselessly taken away. Wright should be
thankful for the time he has had with his family. At least he has the
opportunity to say goodbye to his wife and kids as he leaves to serve
his sentence. My grandfather wasn't given that courtesy. George
Wright's fate is a result of his own choices and actions. My
grandfather was an innocent man trying to make an honest living. He
fought for our country and for our freedom. In return, he was beaten to
death by George Wright. Please provide justice for my grandfather,
Walter Patterson, and extradite George Wright to the United States to
finish serving his sentence for the brutal beating and murder of my
grandfather. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely, Walter Patterson's granddaughter
Prepared Statement of Walter Patterson's Granddaughter
I have been asked to describe how George Wright's crime in 1962 has
affected my life.
George Wright and his accomplices robbed, beat, and murdered my
grandfather, Walter Patterson, in November 1962. My mother and her
sister were young teenagers at that time and were completely devastated
by the loss of their beloved father. My grandmother had to go forward
to raise them, alone, and never recovered from her broken heart. She
died in 1964.
The family could take small comfort in the fact that Wright was
convicted and sentenced for this heinous crime. While it did not bring
my grandfather back, knowing his murderer would be imprisoned surely
brought relief, even though it could not bring closure. My mother and
her sister nevertheless went ahead with their lives, getting married
and starting their own families, but there was always something dark
and secret about the family history. They preferred not to speak of
their pain and of the hole their father's death left in their lives,
but they had to confront their grief all over again when Wright escaped
jail, hijacked a plane, and fled the country. The family lived in fear
that he would be back to seek revenge. My cousins and I were very young
children at this time; my sister and two cousins had not yet been born.
We were fortunate to not know what was going on while the media
followed Wright's plane hijacking, but my. mother and her sister were
reminded of this man who had taken their happiness from them, and the
cycle of grief started all over again.
Years passed and what had happened to Grandfather Patterson and how
he suffered was never spoken of. We knew it was not a topic open for
discussion, and lived up until October 2011 knowing only that he had
been robbed and died of his gunshot wounds. Imagine the horror and fear
when seven grandchildren, now all grown with children of their own,
learned the shocking details. My cousins, sister and I grieved this man
we never knew like the death had just occurred. And because it remains
a raw nerve for my mother and her sister, we still do not discuss it to
spare their feelings.
Each grandchild has wondered what life would have been like had our
grandfather lived. No doubt many of our life circumstances would have
been different if we'd had his guidance and support. There was no
grandpa to spend time with, learn from, love. Not knowing this
important member of our family has been hard enough, but knowing he was
murdered and that his murderer walks free in Portugal brings feelings
that are difficult to describe. There is the sense that justice has
failed us, that justice has forgotten the gentle, hardworking, World
War II veteran, husband and father, respected member of the community,
and we would like to respectfully remind justice that we will not and
cannot forget George Wright's crime against our family. We respectfully
demand that he be brought back to the United States to serve the
remainder of his sentence. My grandfather's life is worth that.
Walter Patterson's Granddaughter
Prepared Statement of Walter Patterson's Granddaughter
November 23, 1962 changed the lives of many people, as the result
of the actions of a few. A brave, hardworking World War II veteran was
gunned down for $70.00. Such a senseless murder! The result of this
incident has had an incredible impact on many people. His children were
left fatherless, his wife became a widow and his grandchildren only
knew him by a picture that hung in a dining room. He never met his
seven grandchildren or his fourteen greatgrandchildren.
What is the true impact of his death? No one really knows because
the option of having him around was taken away. What would be different
had Walter been around to oversee things and help make decisions? These
questions can be asked over and over and no one will ever know the
answer. Perhaps George Wright would know the answers to these
questions. After all, he was responsible for that tragic night in
November. George is still here, alive and breathing, spending time with
his family, sharing holidays and laughs. Does he ever think about his
actions on that fateful night? Does he ever regret the crime, or just
regret getting caught? Does he care at all about the people who will
never hear Walter speak, ask him for advise or see him smile?
Walter Patterson was my Grandfather. I never had the benefit of
spending even one minute with him. He was killed seven years before I
was born. What I have experienced is: a mother who lost her father way
too young, a mother whose father wasn't at her high school graduation
and a mother who had no one to walk her down the aisle. There is a huge
void where my grandfather should be. What exactly is that void? I don't
know--and I will never know. So much time has gone by, full of so much
pain. Thank you.
Walter Patterson's Granddaughter
Prepared Statement of Walter Patterson's Granddaughter
``Get away with murder''. To some it's just an expression, but to
others a reality. Forty-nine years ago, a little girl of 14 years old
received a horrifying phone call. On the other end was a distratight
family member calling to notify a woman that her husband had been
brutally attacked and shot. The 14 year old was the recipient of this
message, and was told nothing except ``Walt's been shot''. Walter was
her father, who, 2 days later had vanished from her life forever.
It sounds like a movie or story line for a perfect mystery book
series. To my family and myself it's the harsh reality of the world we
live in. My mother is that 14 year old girl, and Walter Patterson is
the grandfather I never met. From what I understand and conclude from
stories told, he was a hard working family man. He had risked his life
in the U.S. Army, fighting for the freedom of the people in the country
in which we reside. Going to battle and sustaining injuries during
combat isn't what took him from his family. It was the appalling choice
of some of the very Americans he was fighting for. It was a moment that
would change the lives of many people.
On the night of November 23, 1962, Walter Patterson was working at
a gas station he ran. It was an innocent night's work, and he was
making a living to provide for his family, who consisted of a wife and
two young daughters. When a car of 4 individuals pulled around the back
of the shop, an average workday would soon take a turn for the worse.
Little did my grandfather know, he'd soon be faced with individuals
garbed with stockings on their heads, and equipped with guns in their
hands. What began as a robbery ended in murder. The individuals who set
out with the intentions of killing had succeeded. Luckily, our justice
system had been victorious in apprehending these individuals, and
convicting them for the crime they committed.
Walter Patterson can't be brought back to watch his two daughters
blow out their birthday candles, hang Christmas lights with his family,
or carve the Thanksgiving turkey. He would never be able to participate
in daddy-daughter dances, walk his daughters down the aisle on their
wedding day, or enjoy the births of their children, but at least the
creatures responsible for this would pay for what they've done ... or
would they?
Seven years of a prison sentence was apparently all that one of
these cowards, a man by the name of George Wright, could handle. As if
choosing to participate in a murder wasn't enough of a poor choice, his
life of crime wouldn't stop there. Mr. Wright had the brilliant idea to
steal the prison warden's car to make his great escape. Being a
criminal obviously came easy to this individual, because his law
breaking actions didn't stop there. What does a convicted murderer do
after he breaks out of prison? Well, this particular criminal chose to
expand his criminal record by hijacking a passenger plane, putting yet
more lives at risk, and making a mockery of the F.B.I. He managed to
collect one million dollars in ransom money, which he demanded be
delivered by F.B.I. agents in their underwear or swimsuits. One would
think if this murderer were to be caught, he'd really be in serious
trouble with all the law breaking actions he carried out.
For many years, George Wright lived his life. He even got married
and had a family of his own. Were the images of a beaten and shot man
ever present in his mind? Did he ever think about the lives of those
family members that were torn apart on that day that he chose to act
like a man of no feeling or regard for human life? When he was counting
his illegally obtained million dollars was he picturing 2 young girls
standing over a coffin painfully watching their young, brave father be
buried?. Was he thinking of the young single mother who was left to
deal with her newly broken family? I doubt it, and George Wright was
actually running like a coward while conspiring about how he would be
able to live the good life himself. No conscience, remorse, or regret
has ever been evident by this individual's actions. He must have felt
he had something to hide, proven by the fact that he illegally and
unofficially changed his name and remained in a country half a world
away from where he destroyed Walter Patterson and his family.
Forty-one years have passed by. After diligent searching and a
refusal to put this case file back in the file cabinet, the F.B.I. was
hopeful that they had found this murderer and fugitive. That 14 year
old girl who received that devastating phone call is now 63 years old
and has received yet another phone call regarding the murder of her
father. Only this time, the phone call is of a positive nature. The
news of this armed robber, murderer, prison escapee, plane hi-jacker,
and fraud being caught seems surreal. After all these years, this man
will finally pay the price for the crimes he chose to commit. The life
of Walter Patterson can't be brought back. Knowing that justice will be
served and that George Wright literally won't get away with murder,
will help to close the door on the devastating chapter of Walter
Patterson's families lives.
Protecting and hiding a known, convicted criminal is considered a
crime in itself. Portugal, the place in which George Wright chose to
flee to and hide out at, like the coward he is, chose to protect him by
refusing extradition. How can an average individual be punished for
hiding out a criminal, yet here you have the government of a country
harboring this fugitive and getting away with it? When this news hit
our family, many emotions were felt. The feelings of anger, sadness,
and frustration are overwhelming. A convicted killer and fugitive has
been caught, but is being protected from the law. The rationale is that
he is now a Portuguese citizen, and therefore they feel the need to
protect him. Never mind the fact that Walter Patterson had no
protection from this individual's hands, but in hindsight, is George
Wright even a legitimate Portuguese citizen? He used criminal acts to
access the country, and used a fraudulent family background and name to
obtain his so-called citizenship. George Wright has not become a
Portuguese citizen but rather the pseudo-individual he created has. One
would think a government would want to rid their country of crime and
corruption, but Portugal is protecting an individual who has brought
these things to them.
Portugal isn't the only country to blame for this monster having
the ability to move on with his life, as if his hands were not a murder
weapon at one time, as if his own mind didn't tell him to conunit the
various crimes of a hateful, malicious monster. The very country that
Walter Patterson received numerous medals for protecting is
contributing to George Wright literally getting away with murder. The
country in which immigrants travel far and wide to reach to obtain a
``better'' life for themselves, our very own United States of America,
has given up on one of its own. The decision has been made that a human
life that was taken illegally by the hands of another isn't worth
pursuing justice for. Members of our Attorney General's office have
decided that no more appeals are necessary in the attempt to extradite
this convicted murderer so justice can be served. It would be very
interesting to see if this same decision would be made if the
individual who was prematurely buried carried one of their last names.
This war veteran fought for the freedom of citizens of the United
States. The government was unable to protect him from George Wright
while he was still alive. The least that the United States could do is
return the fight that he gave and express the need to have this man
brought back to where this crime was committed. In public schools
across the nation, hundreds of students and staff proudly recite the
Pledge of Allegiance. It would be reassuring to know that these
aren'tjust words, but actually have true meaning and that our country
stands by the last line of this pledge. If nothing else, this country
should have the ambition to send the message that the United States is
just that--UNITED.
Thank you for your time.
Walter Patterson's Granddaughter
Impact Statement Sent to Portuguese Judge from Ann Patterson
December 27, 2011
Your Honor,
My name is Ann Patterson, and I am the daughter of Walter
Patterson, who was robbed, beaten, shot, and left for dead at his gas
station on November 23, 1962. He succumbed to these injuries on
November 25, 1962.
George Wright is one of the men involved in this crime. This has
impacted my life twice--once when I was a child of 14 and then again
this year as we have had to relive these events all over again.
In 1962, there was no counseling. The world suddenly became a scary
place. My mother was not well and could not take care of us. We did not
know how we were going to get food, pay the bills, or get anywhere
except for school. The custody services wanted to remove us from our
home. My mother's brother told them that he would look in on us every
day and we were allowed to stay with our mother until school was out.
On the last day of school, we took our clothes and moved in with our
uncle and aunt. My mother passed away fifteen months after my father.
I never did get over the fear of being out in the world. I have
ever worked a full time job, I did not want to work where there was a
possibility of being robbed and hurt. I do not stop at the gas station
to put gas in the car. My husband has to do that. I do not go far from
home and do not travel alone. These are real fears for me.
Going through this again has opened up the wound and brought up all
those old feelings, but worse than before. I can't sleep; I relive the
crime itself and cannot get the image out of my mind of my father lying
on the floor of his gas station with three men standing over him
beating him up. The image of George Wright hitting him with the stock
of his gun so hard that they can identify Wright by these marks left on
my father is particularly distressing.
My stomach is constantly upset and I have lost ten pounds. I try to
eat one good meal a day even though I feel nauseous.
This has all taken its toll on my family as well, not just with the
time involved with the media but also that I cannot keep up my duties
as a wife, mother, grandmother, and babysitter.
My life has been derailed twice because of this crime and now it
will take some time to get over the effect of it yet again. I am now
seeing a counselor.
I was only 14 when my father was taken from us. I was the last one
in our house to tell him ``goodbye'' and wave to him as he drove off to
work. It was the day after Thanksgiving. Every year, the calendar
reminds me of losing Daddy when we get near Thanksgiving.
When the phone rang that night and I answered, my aunt said,
``Walt's been shot'', I started crying as my mother took the phone. She
got a ride to the hospital while we (my sister and I) stayed home -
afraid to be alone. When my mother got home the next morning, she said
that she couldn't recognize Daddy; that they had beat him up very
badly. The doctors operated for eight hours that night on Daddy's head
and one of them told my mother that he ``thought he had gotten out all
of the bone fragments''. They also had to wire his jaw shut. They could
not give him anything for pain due to the head trauma and had to tie
him down in the bed. The doctor told my mother that Daddy would
probably have a seizure from this head trauma and he did the next
night. He would also never see again. The doctor said that if he
survived, he would be a vegetable and need a lot of care.
My father was unrecognizable in his casket. I knew it was him by
looking at his hands. Everyone said now he wouldn't suffer any longer
and that he wouldn't have any more pain.
George Wright has said that he was not the shooter. He has taken
responsibility for the beating, it was brutal and unnecessary beating
that killed Daddy. If there had not been a beating, then the doctors
could have operated on the bullet wound and Daddy would have recovered.
George Wright has a dark past and hidden his life from a lot of
people, living a life of lies. He is a convicted murderer and now his
past has caught up with him. It is time for him to come back to the
United States and face the justice he has managed to escape from for so
long. I was disappointed at the first and second ruling, but I am
hopeful that the Portuguese government will be helpful in achieving
justice for Daddy.
Sincerely, Ann Patterson
Impact of Crime of My Teen Years and Young Adult Years
1) No Daddy at high school graduation.
2) Had to walk 2 miles to work packing eggs and babysitting.
3) Worked 30 hours a week during senior year in high school to earn
enough money to buy a car and insurance. Took the bus, then walked the
rest of the way.
4) Went without the encouragement and support a father gives.
5) Got first asthma attack 6 weeks after Daddy's death when I was
upset thinking about his death.
6) No Daddy to walk me down the aisle at my wedding.
7) My 5 children were deprived of the kind, loving, smiling
grandfather that makes a child's life more complete.
8) Hastened my mother's death.
9) Almost had to live in a state institution.
10) Watched my great uncle starve himself to death. He lived in our
house and, when told about Daddy's death, said, "I don't want to stay
in a world where this is allowed to happen". He never ate another
morsel of food and died a couple of months later. His wife died 5
months after he did.
11) In 15 months, we experienced the deaths of all 4 adults we
lived with and lost our home.
12) Could not grieve Daddy's death as we had to be strong for our
mother. Stoically went through teen years emotionally numb.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Letter From Ann Patterson to Secretary Clinton
Jan. 10, 2002
Dear Mrs. Clinton,
My name is Ann Patterson and I am the daughter of Walter Patterson.
My father was beaten, robbed and shot at his gas station in Wall
Township, New Jersey on November 23, 1962. He died of his injuries on
November 25, 1962. One of the men responsible, George Wright, escaped
from prison in 1970 and he jacked a plane in 1972. The FBI and U.S.
Marshals recently found him in Portugal and then requested his
extradition to the U.S. to serve out the rest of his 15-30 year
sentence. The extradition was denied and the U.S. is appealing that
decision. I understand that the U.S. has an extradition treaty with
Portugal.
I was just 14 when I lost my father. He was a decorated World War
II veteran who just wanted to earn a living and support his family. He
worked 10-15 hour days at his gas station. My mother, already ill with
a heart condition, passed away 15 months later leaving my sister and me
orphaned.
Just as I felt helpless in 1962, I feel that way now after the
extradition was de4nied. Can you do something for the Patterson family
to bring about justice for my father?
Thank you for your consideration.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Newspaper Coverage List
Ashbury Park Press
Wed. Sept. 28, 2011 p.1
Thurs. Sept. 29, 2011 p. A15
Fri. Sept 30, 2011 p. A8
Sat. Oct. 1, 2011 p.1
Sun. Oct. 15, 2011 p. A4
Fri. Nov. 18, 2011 p.A5
Sat. Nov. 26, 2011 p. A1
Wed. Nov. 30, 2011 p. A12
Fri. Nov. 31, 2011
Sat. Dec. 31, 2011 p. A13
Tues. Jan. 17, 2012
Thurs. Feb. 2, 2012 p. B 4
Sun. Feb. 5, 2011
Thurs. Mar. 1, 2012 p. 13
Fri. Mar. 2, 1012 p. A14
Sun. Mar. 11, 2012 letter to the editor
Thur. Mar. 15, 2012 p. A17
Wed. Mar. 28, 2012 p. A 16
Community Report
Thurs. Dec. 1, 2011 p. 1
Daily News
Wed. Sept. 28, 2011 p. 12
New York Times
Thurs. Sept. 29, 2011 p. 1
Star Ledger
Wed. Sept 29, 2011 p. 1
Tues. Nov. 22, 2011 p. 1
Sun. Mar. 11, 2012 Sec. II p. 1
Gentleman's Quarterly,
May, 2012 p. 134
National Review
May 14, 2012 p. 22
[all]
This is an official publication of the
Commission on Security and
Cooperation in Europe.
< < <
This publication is intended to document
developments and trends in participating
States of the Organization for Security
and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
< < <
All Commission publications may be freely
reproduced, in any form, with appropriate
credit. The Commission encourages
the widest possible dissemination
of its publications.
< < <
http://www.csce.gov @HelsinkiComm
The Commission's Web site provides
access to the latest press releases
and reports, as well as hearings and
briefings. Using the Commission's electronic
subscription service, readers are able
to receive press releases, articles,
and other materials by topic or countries
of particular interest.
Please subscribe today.