October 25, 2017
The Commission on Offender Review
State of Florida
RE: — Inmate Michael Griffin
Dear Commissioners:
My name is David Gunn, Jr., and I am writing on bebalf of my family regarding the upcoming
parole hearing for inmate Michael Griffin who is currently serving a life sentence for first degree
murder in Blackwater River Correctional Facility. Mr. Griffin murdered my dad on March 10,
1993 outside of an abortion clinic in Pensacola, Florida. My dad Dr. David Gunn was the first
doctor killed in the United States for performing abortions.
1 appreciate those of you on the parole commission who will determine whether or not the state
of Florida grants clemency to inmate Michael Griffin. Honestly, it pains my family and I to write
to you, prepare for the hearing, and contemplate the outcome of your decision as once again we
must contemplate inmate Griffin, his actions, and the pain he caused our family. Preparing for
this hearing means we must confront our loved one’s murder with all the attendant emotional
trauma that accompanies tragic loss. For us, this ongoing and resurrected pain is a heavy and
‘ongoing burden placed on us by the horrendous actions of inmate Griffin. We write to request
your body deny the inmate any opportunity for parole. Continued incarceration does not reunite
our family. A refusal to grant parole does not yield anything but the guarantee inmate Griffin
remains an inmate, but that knowledge does provide us some level of solace and satisfaction as it
ensures an unrepentant and influential terrorist remains locked away where he cannot directly
hharm another person as he would surely do if granted parole and release.
‘We do not want and never sought a death sentence. I do not believe in the death penalty and do
not wish to see inmate Griffin executed by the state. We only ask that your body retum a
decision which allows conditions to persist as they are today. It is not often that the aggrieved
ask nothing more of the exploiter than to continue to exist in some acceptable state of
exploitation, but that is what we humbly request of your body: on the question of clemency or
parole for inmate Griffin, we ask that you simply vote no, We will settle for continued
incarceration and ask no more.
I recently had a conversation with Daphne Asbell of the Victims Liaison’s Office. Mrs. Asbell
has been kind enough to communicate with my family over the last year or so as we prepared for
this hearing. I understand you must weigh a number of factors when deciding if one deserves
parole and release. I was struck that each offense is scored and/or weighted differently and that
this score or weight is a factor in whether or not there is condition precedent for parole and
release. A simple murder, as if such a thing exists, may score one on the Parole WeightingEquation~for lack of a better term--whereas a murder committed during a robbery may score a
four. A higher score yields a higher and harsher sentence and also diminishes the possibility of
carly release. Acts of terrorism or assassination, if the assassin or terrorist simply murders one
person, may not be aggravating factors for your purposes meaning if one person assassinates
another with the intention of instilling fear and terror into the larger populace, that terrorist’s
action resulting in murder has the same score or weight as someone who murders a spouse “in
the heat of the moment” with no premeditation or planning,
To that point, then, I hope to contextualize inmate Griffin’s actions in hopes that your
commission understands the gravity and scope of your decision in this particular case with this
specific inmate; further, I respectfully request you extrapolate from this the implications your
decision has for, not only my family, but the state of Florida and the nation at large. I do not
mean to imply one murder is any more or less horrific than the next or that my family’s suffering
is in any way greater than the suffering of the next person who writes your body on behalf of
their murdered loved one. Each situation, though, is compounded by other factors. While, at face
value, inmate Griffin was convicted of one count of first degree murder, the aggravating factors
swirling about his one murder are blatant, real, and relevant. These factors present a clear and
present danger in light of ongoing events, and my family hopes you consider them when
deciding this case.
think it is important that you have a sense of who my father was before inmate Griffin shot him
in the back multiple times on March 10, 1993. My dad was born in Benton, Kentucky to Pete and
‘Mae Gunn on November 16, 1945. He and his twin sister Diane followed an older brother Pete
IM, and were, in tum, followed by a younger sister Lilith. He was part of a large family, and as
he did eventually, all the Gunn siblings married, had children of their own, and we spent a
considerable amount of time together as a family when Dad was alive. As it stands today, Dad
would be a grandfather five times over as I have four children and my sister Wendy has one. Dad
would have been a wonderful grandfather. Our children suffer from his absence.
Dad contracted polio as a child which left him with a severely disfigured leg, and he walked with
a limp his entire life. The impaired leg caused significant hip and back pain and stunted his
growth. He was a slight man in appearance but was full of intense courage and determination.
Although he was disabled, he never pictured himself as diminished or small; rather, he did all he
‘could to ensure his childhood was not marred and scarred by disability. He played baseball
though it pained him to run the bases. He was a Boy Scout attaining the rank of Life just shy of
‘making Eagle. He rode bikes, water skied, swam, and eventually drove a car (even going so far
as to master operating a vehicle with a manual transmission using one leg). Growing up in rural
southwest Kentucky, he hunted and loved fishing. Once he decided to reach a goal, he reached it.
Polio may have maimed him physically, but it did nothing but fire his spirit and determination.
Dad was an avid reader, did well in school, and had an incurable sense of curiosity. As a result of
his intelligence, and due to his caring disposition, Dad’s parents pushed him toward a career in
medicine. After high school, he attended and graduated from Vanderbilt University in Nashville,
Tennessee. While a student, Dad met my mom Reta and they married in January of 1968 before
relocating to Lexington, Kentucky so he could begin medical school. Mom and dad welcomed
their first son Charles Edward Gunn, Jr. into their lives on August 16, 1968. Unfortunately, theirbudding family was interrupted by its first tragedy when Chucky was killed in a car accident in
March of the following year. I was born in October, 1970. Dad graduated medical school in
1973, and the family relocated to Nashville where dad started his residency in obstetrics and
gynecology at Vanderbilt Hospital. While still a resident at Vanderbilt learning his craft, my
sister Wendy was born in April, 1975. Dad’s ability as a doctor was recognized quickly by the
physicians overseeing his residency. He received honors as a resident and was on the path toward
an enviable career as a doctor specializing in obstetrics and gynecology.
Dad was a generous and humble young doctor, and his desire to truly help and improve the lives
of his patients influenced his decision to move the family from the suburbs of Nashville to
Brewton, Alabama in 1977. Brewton is a tiny, poor, paper mill town with a population of about
6,000 people located just north of the Florida panhandle. When Dad and his would be partner
opted to open a practice in Brewton which was served by a hospital with no real obstetrics
facilities, I am sure many considered the decision ill advised. Why would two promising young
physicians leave cosmopolitan Nashville with its pre-eminent regional medical facilities for a
backwater town in southernmost Alabama, his peers and colleagues must have asked? Dad’s
answer was simple, he wanted to serve a community suffering from one of the highest infant
‘mortality rates in the country. He and his partner desired to serve the underserved. They wanted
to save lives.
Dr. Clay Newsome and Dr. David Gunn opened their OB/GYN practice in Brewton, Alabama in
1977. Both young doctors were dedicated to their patients, and they tirelessly served their
‘community. Dad was never one to shy away from engaging his patients, and I remember many
nights doing my homework while he returned patient calls from the dining room table. Patients
loved my dad not simply because he provided them excellent and quality care, they appreciated
his authenticity. As an obstetrician, he helped pioneer a technique for delivering breach babies
which significantly mitigated or eliminated the need for cesarean section deliveries. His
technique was published in medical journals and is still used to this day.
While pre-natal care and labor and delivery were his primary areas of practice, Dad was
dedicated to serving all of his patients’ health care needs. To that end, just four years after
abortion was legalized in the United States, with an understanding that patients in need of
abortion services deserve a compassionate, patient, understanding, non-judgmental, and
‘empathetic doctor as much as those who do not, Dad undertook to learn and develop the skills
needed to provide his patients that option. Eventually, he started secing patients at a clinic in
Pensacola, Florida due to a shortage of doctors willing to provide abortion services in the Deep
South.
During the late 70s and 80s, Dad’s practice was primarily obstetric in nature. He delivered
countless babies over almost 20 years in the field. My sister and I both accompanied him at
different times when he completed hospital rounds, and we each witnessed childbirth at an early
age. After moving from Brewton to Eufaula, Alabama in 1983, Dad continued to serve his
community via a successful OB/GYN practice. He also agreed to provide abortion services to a
clinic in Columbus, Georgia when the owner called and asked for his help. They had no shortage
of patients but lacked a committed doctor. As was his nature, dad answered the call for help andstarted commuting the 120 round trip miles to Columbus, Georgia and back on Saturdays-that is
after working a full schedule in labor and delivery--to serve a community in need.
was 14 or 15 when dad approached me one day and told me I would be driving him to work at a
clinic in Columbus the following Saturday. After years on his feet delivering babies with one
good leg, he suffered excruciating back pain which made driving long distances uncomfortable
especially following a full week of his normal duties. When we left for Columbus that Saturday,
Tam sure I asked why he was seeing patients on the weekend in another city. He must have
provided a satisfying, and long, answer. As we discussed abortion, I do not remember feeling
any sense of controversy or misgiving. I knew what abortion was, knew it was legal, knew
women needed access, knew girls who had them, and understood it was my dads job to serve his
patients’ needs without judgment. It never occurred to me that he was doing dangerous work or
that his decision to help his patients was one that would ultimately lead to his death. I was
familiar with abortion but was naively ignorant of any controversy.
My education in the inherent danger of women’s reproductive care started when we arrived at
the clinic for the first time, We were greeted by one lone protestor wearing a sandwich board of
offal masquerading as a fetus-a false image used to intimidate, shame, and torture the patients
who passed him on their way to and from the clinic. While Dad saw patients that day, I talked
with some of the staff and learned of acid attacks, clinic bombings, and other acts of terrorism
clinic staff and doctors encountered across the country on a regular basis. As we drove home that
first night, I was shaken but dad was calm and reasoned. He assured me he was safe and there
was nothing to fear.
He and I, sometimes accompanied by a sampling of my high school friends, made these weekly
drives throughout my time in high school. Our regular drive to Columbus soon evolved to
include trips to Montgomery, Alabama (another 180 mile round trip) on alternating weekends.
Dad liked to talk and the long drives provided him a captive audience and an ample platform.
‘Though sometimes tedious, confrontational, unpleasant, and/or stressful, these drives provided
‘me some of my fondest memories, and driving a car for any real distance invariably reminds me
of him and our road trips together.
Shortly after I moved to Birmingham for college, dad started to spend more time on the road. He
started each week from Eufaula, drove to Columbus, Georgia, then headed to Montgomery,
Alabama, drove down to Mobile, Alabama, and ended the week in Pensacola, Florida only to
start anew the next week. He logged approximately 1000 miles per week maintaining this
burdensome travel schedule. He was so committed to the job and his patients that he traveled six
days a week seeing patients in at least four different cities across three separate states. When I
asked why he maintained such a rigorous schedule, he told me women would suffer without care
if he refused as there was a shortage of doctors willing to work in the area. As the 80s
transitioned into the 90s, as the culture wars intensified, and as anti-abortion protests became
more aggressive and confrontational, providing abortion services to women in the thick of the
Bible-belt became dad’s sole occupation.
‘Though my dad was committed to his practice, there were others who were as equally committed
to ending it. In the last year of dad’s life, anti-abortion zealots started a campaign of harassmentand intimidation designed to drive him away from abortion services and out of their towns.
‘These terrorists, and they are terrorists by anyone's definition, circulated Wanted posters adomed
with my dad’s picture, his address, his phone numbers, and his work schedule, Anti-abortion
activists circulated these Wanted posters all over the region including his home town, offices,
and around my sister's high school. He feared he was being stalked and followed as he drove
alone city to city. I later leamed this fear drove him to take alternate routes as he traveled so as
not to follow a predictable route. This was before cell phones were widely available, Itis fairly
sparse and desolate between Eufaula and Montgomery from Pensacola to Mobile. Anything
could happen...
There were threats of violence phoned into the various clinics where he worked. He began to
carry guns in an attempt to regain some sense of safety and peace. He, and his patients, faced a
phalanx of hateful antagonists daily whose anger and hatred were inflamed by anti-abortion
organizations, leaders, and dehumanizing rhetoric. Groups such as Operation Rescue published
manuals instructing their adherents in surveillance techniques, offered advice on legal ways to
harass and intimidate, and organized clinic sieges in an effort to further their cause and incite
hatred and violence. Though these zealous terrorists attempted to stop his practice, Dad refused
to stop attending to patients who relied on him for their healthcare needs.
Dad lived under constant threat of violence for years. On January 22, 1993, roughly two months
before his assassination, Dad pulled into work confronted by another angry mob. Today, he must
have thought, I am going to protest back. Dad greeted protesters outside a clinic in Montgomery
with an impromptu solo performance of Happy Birthday to You celebrating the 20th anniversary
of the Roe v. Wade. Next, he produced a large boom box, adjusted the volume to 11, and played
‘Tom Petty’s “I Won’t Back Down” in their direction while he sang along. His protest generated
some local press, his ongoing dedication to women’s health began to draw national attention, and
the ire and desperation of his foes intensified.
At this time, Pensacola, Florida became a hot bed of anti-abortion activity. A local self-styled
reverend and former Ku Klux Klan leader named John Burt headed the regional offices of
Rescue America. Burt purchased a small tract of land adjacent to one of Pensacola’s women’s
clinics where dad worked which was used to stage protests designed to intimidate and harass all
who visited, Burt went so far as to build scaffolding next to the clinic’s privacy fencing so his
follower and he could more easily confront the patients and staff. Burt knew of my dad and hated
his occupation. Dad remained undaunted.
last saw my dad on Monday, March 7, 1993. He spent the weekend with me in Birmingham
and enjoyed a rare weekend away from work. We grilled (he cooked a mean steak), drank some
beer, watched his beloved Kentucky Wildcats play a basketball game, and enjoyed our time
together. As we talked face to face for the last time that Monday morning, Dad told me a strange
‘man approached him the previous Thursday or Friday as he was leaving Pensacola to come visit
me. He said the man in question approached him and repeated dad’s name with an odd cadence,
“Dr. Gunn...Dr. Gunn...Dr. Gunn,” or something similar. I asked if he felt threatened and was he
answered in the negative. I asked if he was scared or feared someone would harm him. I was
genuinely concerned for his safety by this point. He made light of the situation, said something
flippant about the person confronting him, assured me there was no need to worry, and seemedsincere when he said those who oppose abortion would not actually harm him. I was not entirely
comforted, felt he was holding back, but understood his decision. He drove away. That was the
last time I saw him,
Meanwhile, inmate Griffin spent the weekend planning, I suppose.
I know very little of inmate Griffin other than what I read over the years. As 1992 wound down
and 1993 began, inmate Griffin was a married 31 or 32 year old father of two young girls. The
record indicates this inmate had a history of violent behavior, was terminated from one job due
to his ill temper, faced charges of spousal abuse, and his ongoing marital issues indicated he was
headed for divorce. In an attempt to save their marriage, the Griffins sought counseling services
from Burt, who was also a “lay” reverend. I do not know how anti-abortion activism figured into
Mr. Burt's marriage counseling services, but the record indicates Burt spent considerable time
preaching the sins of abortion to the Griffins and inundated the couple with anti-abortion.
propaganda. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Burt invited them into his organization.
Inmate Griffin became a regular at Rescue America meetings. Shortly before he heinously
‘murdered my father, he attended a funeral Burt organized for what he represented was an aborted
fetus. Mr. Burt, at this point, began carrying an effigy of my dad which was labeled Dr. Gunn
and was displayed prominently at his residence hanging from a noose. As Griffin’s traditional
family was disintegrating, a dark perversion of a family had its genesis.
Faced with a failing marriage, a violent past, and no reliable vocation of any sort, inmate Griffin
must have struggled with feelings of inadequacy and failure. ‘Though raised as part of an upper
middle class family, the son of a dentist, inmate Griffin had to come to terms with the fact the
privilege and power afforded one in similar circumstances and that he once enjoyed was rapidly
dissipating. Perhaps this struggle to regain relevance, importance, his marriage, and power drove
inmate Griffin to commit, in his mind anyway, one great act of sacrificial heroism that would
most assuredly grant him the respect, adoration, and significance he felt he deserved? Griffin's
statements seem to support this conclusion.
‘What is certain is on March 10, 1993, as my dad was walking toward the door of a Pensacola
‘women’s clinic, Michael Griffin emerged from a hedgerow where he was hiding with all the
discipline and cold calculation of a trained assassin, and pumped three pistol rounds into my
dad’s back at point blank range after yelling, “don’t kill any more babies.” Afterwards, Griffin
casually walked to the front of the clinic, approached a police officer who was breaking up a
John Burt/Rescue America led anti-abortion protest, and calmly said, “I shot a man back there,”
in reference to my dying dad. Applause erupted when the Rescue America crowd realized a
doctor was killed. Don Treshman, the national head of the organization, said of Griffin’s actions,
“While Gunn’s death is unfortunate, it’s also true that quite a number of babies’ lives will be
saved.” He, then, promptly organized a legal defense fund for the assassin.
18 months after inmate Griffin assassinated my dad, he was on trial for and convicted of first
degree murder. The prosecution did not seek the death penalty for Griffin stating the murder
lacked sufficient aggravating circumstances to warrant or justify a charge of death, I do not
support or believe in the death penalty as I stated earlier. never have. I did not want a deathsentence for this inmate; however, I have never understood how anyone can view the
circumstances leading to my father's death as somehow devoid of aggravating factors. Inmate
Griffin is nothing if not a religious terrorist who assassinated a doctor for providing a service the
inmate felt was immoral. By his action, inmate Griffin sought to intimidate and instill terror in
others who provide or seek this same service; moreover, this inmate sought to influence others to
follow his lead and take upon themselves the role of executioner of those who do not conform to
and whose points of view conflict with the suppressive, patriarchal, militantly theocratic world
view of Griffin and those who follow him. If the above are not aggravating factors, what are?
Griffin's action opened the door for others to come forward. Those who felt his act of terrorism
was justified. Shortly after my dad’s assassination, Paul Hill, a local Pensacola resident and
Presbyterian Minister, and other leaders in the anti-abortion movement issued a chilling
statement regarding, what they described as, Defensive Action:
We, the undersigned, declare the justice of taking all godly action necessary to defend
innocent human life including the use of force. We proclaim that whatever force is
legitimate to defend the life of a born child is legitimate to defend the life of an unborn
child. We assert that if Michael Griffin did in fact kill David Gunn, his use of lethal force
‘was justifiable provided it was carried out for the purpose of defending the lives of
unborn children. Therefore, he ought to be acquitted of the charges against him.
In the view of Paul Hill and the signatories of this statement, Mr. Griffin was not a murderer, an
assassin, a terrorist, or a threat; on the contrary, Mr. Griffin was a hero who saved innocent life
and for that he deserved acquittal.
Within a little over a year of issuing this statement, Paul Hill, a Griffin disciple and leader of the
Defensive Action cali to arms, made good on his word and killed Dr. John Bayard Britton who
was my dad’s replacement at another Pensacola area clinic. Hill also targeted Dr. Britton’s
companions Lt. Col. James Herman Barrett (ret.) and his wife June. Hill succeeded in killing Lt,
Col. Herman while Mrs. Herman survived after suffering serious gunshot wounds. The state of
Florida eventually executed Paul Hill for two counts of first degree murder among other charges.
Mr. Griffin should be considered an accomplice to these crimes in sprit given the reverence his
imitators bestowed upon him.
Griffin’s violent legacy spawned other progeny who followed their hero’s lead and eventually
took the lives of many other innocent people. Most recently, on November 27, 2015, Robert
Lewis Dear killed three and also wounded an additional nine people in an attack on a Colorado
Springs Planned Parenthood. Dear cites inmate Griffin and Paul Hill as his heroes and reveals
they influenced his decision to act violently in what he perceives is a war on abortion. Anti-
abortion terror organizations continue to lionize Griffin, and The Army of God encourage those
who share their hegemonic view to communicate with inmate Griffin to this day. Inmate Griffin
wrote a statement for The Army of God which is posted on their website. Given their stance on
and support of Paul Hill’s Defensive Action statement, it cannot be argued Mr. Griffin is
ashamed of or seeks forgiveness for his actions. He continues an active association with terror
organizations from prison. Inmate Griffin’s popularity with these groups has not diminished and
neither has his influence upon them.Chapter 947 of the Code of the State of Florida establishes the Florida Commission on Offender
Review. Section 947.18 of Chapter 947 outlines the Conditions of Parole as follows:
No person shall be placed on parole merely as a reward for good conduct or efficient
performance of duties assigned in prison. No person shall be placed on parole until and
unless the commission finds that there is reasonable probability that, if the person is
placed on parole, he or she will live and conduct himself or herself as a respectable and
law-abiding person and that the person’s release will be compatible with his or her own
welfare and the welfare of society.
Therefore, it seems important to not only consider the nature of the crime committed but to also
weigh whether or not the inmate demonstrates the characteristics of someone suited for release;
‘moreover, one must consider whether or not current conditions in society at large are markedly
different when compared to conditions the inmate experienced previously that were instrumental
in shaping and served as motivating factors for the crime which led to sentencing in the first
place. What I mean to say i, if the inmate is released, are conditions such, that all things being
equal, he is as likely as not to repeat the action that landed him in prison initially? If the answer
is yes, is that not a deciding factor against parole? The statute above indicates the answer is
clearly yes, and it would be illogical and folly to think otherwise. Lastly, itis germane to the
question of release, when considering whether or not a potential parolee’s release is compatible
with “his or her own welfare and the welfare of society,” to determine if granting parole to a
particular inmate has implications for others who may share the prospective parolee’s myopic
worldview thus influencing others to violence.
On the first and most important point, it is painfully obvious that inmate Griffin is devoid of any
and all remorse or contrition; rather, Mr. Griffin believes his actions delivered countless innocent
lives from a holocaust like fate at the hands of a wretched and depraved serial child murderer.
‘What is worse is he believes his actions were sanctioned by his great God almighty. These
beliefs enable Mr. Griffin to act with impunity and to completely absolve himself from any and
all guilt. He, then, is the misunderstood and aggrieved victim who did nothing but obey the
mandate bestowed upon him by his God to smite his unholy enemy. He stated as much to an
interviewer for an Australian television production a mere seven years ago. When asked if he
considered himself a domestic terrorist, Mr. Griffin replied, “I am not a domestic terrorist. The
only people who should be in fear and terror are the abortion doctors. Like I said, they have to
have a reckoning one day with God.” We know what type of reckoning Griffin has in mind. Itis
the same reckoning he delivered unto my dad. Griffin made this heinous remark 17 years into his.
prison sentence for first degree murder after having ample time to consider the harshness of his
actions. These are not the words of someone, then, who plans to “conduct himself or herself as a
respectable and law-abiding person” as required by Florida state law. Certainly, then, we can
conclude Mr. Griffin is ineligible for parole as he fails to meet these standards.
In this same interview, when asked why he had the right to assassinate my dad, Mr. Griffin said,
“um...well. We are all commanded to protect the innocent children. I just accepted that
responsibility, I guess.” Statements like these demonstrate how Griffin truly views his actionsand are clear indicators he remains a danger to himself and others and is just as likely to repeat
his crimes as upon release as he was the day he shot my dad in the back 24 years ago.
As to the second question, is Griffin, a remorseless assassin, likely to face markedly different
causes and conditions than those he experienced 24 years ago and which helped inform and
motivate his behavior? The answer is, in simplest terms, a resounding no. When Mr. Griffin
assassinated my dad 24 years ago, he lived in and interacted with a world that is just as polarized
and divided as it is today. In many respects, conditions today are more divisive and polarizing
than they were 24 years ago. We remain divided by class, race, and lifestyle. A large section of
the population still view abortion as immoral. Abortion services are more restricted and limited
than they were 24 years ago.
‘Though there have been significant advances in LGBTQ rights, many people, then as now,
wrongly consider those lifestyles aberrant and abhorrent. Sexism and misogyny are as rampant
today as they were 24 years ago. A cursory search of the internet illustrates people in Griffin’s
movement regard him as a hero, encourage others to follow his lead, and would celebrate his
release as an affirmation of their perverse ideology. Would Griffin spur this reverence, or would
he revel in and welcome it? In light of his remorseless comments and actions, it is impossible to
argue the former. Given the above, is it wrong to assume Mr. Griffin would be as likely as not to
act on behalf of his God upon release just as he did 24 years ago? If released today, itis
erroneous to conclude Mr. Griffin would encounter an anti-abortion movement any less hostile to
his past murderous actions. In fact, in light of the way he is deified by many in the anti-abortion
movement, it would be foolhardy to think he would not immediately undertake to assassinate
another abortion provider. Quite the contrary, it would be negligent to conclude otherwise.
If Griffin's lack of remorse, guilt, and contrition coupled with his release to and interaction with
a world in which current conditions indicate itis more likely than not that he kills again are
insufficient to support continued incarceration in and of themselves, then perhaps we look
concurrently at and reflect upon the effects of early release on society at large. If you parole the
first person to murder a doctor for providing his patients a legal service the assassin finds
morally reprehensible, are you setting a dangerous precedent? Are you proving to the world and
sending a strong message that the state of Florida will not tolerate acts of domestic terrorism?
Will paroling Griffin influence others to act similarly in hopes they too walk away after serving
only 24 years in prison? Is the lesson, then, to make sure you assassinate early, say by no later
than 24, knowing chances are you are more likely than not released at or around the tender age of
48? It is illogical to reach any other conclusion but that parole and clemency for this particular
inmate will have disastrous effects on the lives of countless people who engage in professions or
live lifestyles terrorists like inmate Griffin disagree with or find offensive. Any argument to the
contrary does not sufficiently apply the facts to current conditions.
A vote for parole, then, is a vote for open ended attacks against others who work in the same
field as my dad. One unambiguous fact is glaringly obvious, Griffin’s assassination of my dad
proved to be highly motivational and influential to others who mimicked his behavior and killed
more doctors, nurses, staff, and patients.‘When my dad was killed 24 years ago, it was fairly shocking news, especially to those outside
the abortion rights and provider communities, to see just how violent and volatile the anti-
abortion movement had become of late. Now, when someone influenced by Griffin, assassinates,
another doctor or attacks another clinic, it is as if itis an expected outcome. Itis as though
doctors, nurses, clinic owners, and patients must alter their expectations of civility and liberty
and simply get used to living in terror under fear of their lives and the lives of their families. A
vote for parole for Griffin only hastens our collective acceptance of life under threat of domestic
terrorism on the one hand while simultaneously telling anyone associated with abortion services
their lives are of less import than those who intend to, and in Griffin’s case did, do them harm.
In light of the above, considering the grave nature of inmate Griffin’s actions compounded by the
aggravating factors surrounding this case, and, finally, since inmate Griffin's current attitudes,
actions, and behaviors land far outside Florida’s conditions of parole (Section 947.18), Ihave to
say I found it quite distressing to lear the initial interviewer recommended parole for the inmate
and that he begin the process of conditional release as early as January, 2018. What is more, I
was shocked that the interviewer abjectly failed to accurately describe the basic facts of the
assassination. The interviewer's report states the following:
The victim parked his vehicle next to the employee entrance and exited his vehicle. At
that time, the subject approached the victim, produced a handgun, pointed the gun at
close range, and shot the victim in the chest approximately three times.
Inmate Griffin shot my dad in the back three times, not in the chest as the interview summary
states, Perhaps the interviewer relied on the inmate’s account for purposes of reporting only?
Regardless, when deciding whether or not to release a murderer, it occurs to me that a thorough
understanding of the facts is required in order to determine if all conditions required for parole
exist. At the very least one should not rely on the assassin to provide accurate details of
assassination that, if reported accurately, are detrimental to his cause of clemency and early
release
Aside from a brief and inaccurate description of the events of that day in the initial interview, I
do not see any mention or description of the inmate’s demeanor, his current thoughts on his role
in the crime, nor does the interviewer describe any displays of remorse, contrition, guilt, or regret
on the inmate’s part. Nowhere does it address whether or not the interviewer and the inmate
discussed the murder other than a brief, and inaccurate, recounting of the fact Griffin shot
someone. There is no consideration given to the fact Griffin completed a text book act of
domestic terrorism. The interview is bereft of any and all content on which the interviewer can
conclude Griffin meets the requirements of someone seeking parole as per current Florida law. In
short, I saw no demonstrable proof of any kind that any discussions with the inmate can support
the conclusion “there is reasonable probability that, ifthe person is placed on parole, he or she
will live and conduct himself or herself as a respectable and law-abiding person and that the
person’s release will be compatible with his or her own welfare and the welfare of society.” If
the interviewer lacks this evidence supporting an argument of reasonable probability, how can he
suggest a January, 2018 release? I hate to belabor this point, but I do not understand how one can
advocate for parole and release of a prisoner who lacks contrition, guilt, and/or remorse.The interviewer further notes the inmate completed a number of classes, received good reviews
regarding his work detail, and has not received any disciplinary reports over the past 24 years.
‘The interview reads as if, ater one takes another person’s life, simply completing
correspondence courses, avoiding prison discipline, and participating in a work detail are the
only requirements for early release. This assumption, though, directly contradicts the Conditions
of Parole which read as follows:
No person shall be placed on parole merely as a reward for good conduct or efficient
performance of duties assigned in prison.
It is insulting to read the interview’s conclusion and recommendation that inmate Griffin be
considered for parole in 2018 when the inmate has met not one condition of parole as outlined in
Florida law.
When I contemplate all that has transpired over the past 24 years, the first thing that strikes me is
how much has happened over what seems a short period of time. In my experience, as I get
older, I notice I fee! time passes by faster with every year with each subsequent year passing
faster than the previous. I have no comfort knowing inmate Griffin must share this same
experience. I look at what my family lost and the real pain inflicted on us by this inmate’s
actions. I wrestle with the fact Mr. Griffin could be free by the time he reaches 56, and that
‘means he could reasonably expect to have another 20 years to experience life on the outside with
his family which is just four years shy of how much time my family lost with Dad as of this
writing which seems to me to be a patently unjust outcome. While Griffin could watch from afar
as his children grew, while he could enjoy their company these past 24 years, while he could
write to them on birthdays and other milestones like graduations, weddings, and births, our
family was robbed of all those kindnesses by his callous actions.
My dad missed his daughter’s graduation from high school and culinary school, her marriage,
and the birth of his youngest grandson. He never knew of my graduations, marriage, the birth of
his first grandson, the birth of his only granddaughter, was unaware of divorce, and has not met,
my current wife nor any of our children, He has not seen any of us grow; we missed growing
with him. Dad never knew the fate of his parents who outlived a son and grandson before they
died, and they lost his care and company in their final days. He does not know who in his
expanded family joined him in untimely death and who survives into old age. My sons had the
opportunity to know the love of one grandfather. My daughter has no concept of what that is and
how much it means.
‘A tragic and untimely death brings with it a lifetime of second guessing and regret for the
survivors. You are haunted by what if and if only. You are left with vague and temporary
reminders which fade slowly over time until all that remains are shadows of cherished memory.
‘You wonder if you remember things as they were. You lose the person once on the day they die.
You lose them a thousand times more as days become years and recollection fades or becomes
suspect. What is more, you never fully overcome grief as you are constantly faced with
reminders of one of the worst days of your life.Resurrected grief’s impact is unrelenting as a result of the public and “controversial” elements of
the case. The fact ours is a loss connected to a “controversial” subject, and the fact we are
constantly confronted with inmate Griffin and will be regardless of this body's decision only
serves to ensure concentric circles of grief. We lost our father in public, grieved on camera, and
‘we must constantly relive the event when, invariably, others lose someone to anti-abortion
terrorism. What is worse, we have lived the past 24 years knowing we would one day, in the not
too distant future, be forced to reckon with and advocate for justice for our murdered father and
punishment for his cowardly assassin yet again. Certainly, if you decide in our favor, we will
likely do it all over again. I cannot adequately express the burden, shame, and pain it causes to
wish suffering on another person no matter how much they deserve it. It is karmic suicide. It is
draining. It affects all relationships and reactions to others. You become hardened, cynical, and
can succumb to misery and hate if the grief is not tempered.
All of this pain and anger is amplified by the fact a small portion of the country believes it was
morally just for inmate Griffin to murder a member of our family and who actively supported,
and continue to support, his actions. I doubt many people can understand how isolating it is
endure conversations where the person begins, “I’m sorry your father was murdered, but he was
killing babies...” I listened as a soon-to-be murderer compared my dad to Dr. Josef Mengele two
days after his funeral. We attended memorial services for our family member that were picketed
and protested by a soon-to-be murderer. We have been at services where we received FBI
‘warnings conceming potential threats on the lives of attendees. I have received death threats for
speaking on behalf of an assassinated family member. We have seen gravesite vandalism. Each
indignity is another instance of inmate Griffin haunting us daily. It is a second death and an
ongoing murder we endure at the hands of inmate Griffin every single day. He metaphorically
murders us every day.
1 fear somewhere in this letter I lost the spirit of my dad to biography, polemics, and digressions.
I was 22 when he died. My sister was 17. He, like us all, was a complicated person with an
abundance of good qualities as well as his share of personal demons. He was human, a good son,
brother, father, friend and fisherman, He had a keen sense of humor and loved to laugh. He
introduced me to all the Saturday afternoon dad movies, the music of Bob Dylan, Buddy Holly,
and others, and made sure I never wanted for anything much as a kid. He was a good teacher, a
somewhat skilled listener, and was truly interested in the wellbeing of his children.
Overall, though, he was an excellent and compassionate doctor who cared deeply for his patients,
and he never missed an opportunity to help those in need. At a time when odds are one out of
three women will likely receive an abortion during her lifetime, it is imperative to have doctors
like my dad who have the courage to persist under threat of death while never allowing the
patient to see anything other than compassion absent of shame. There is no way to account for
the people whose lives he impacted for the better just as there is no way to estimate the lives he
could have helped had he lived. Dad wanted to leave the world a better place than he found it.
He served the women of Alabama, Georgia, and Florida dutifully and never tumed away a
patient away who needed his services even if two days prior they were protesting him in front of
the clinic, It happened in every city, and it took generosity to serve those who would have spit
‘on, or pethaps harmed, him on any other day but the day they needed his help. It is the loss ofthat unconditional tolerance that troubles me the most. It is what people like inmate Griffin want
to kill in everyone as it strengthens their perverse reverence of fear, hate and dominance. It is for
Griffin's assassination of tolerance alone he should be refused consideration for parole. It is for
my dad’s assassination and for the threat of assassinations to come that he must stay
David Guna, Jr.