A Hobson's Choice

SANTA FE How can political candidates cast so many horrible votes on issues dear to our hearts when they know it will damage their political careers?
How could people like U.S. Reps. Heather Wilson and Steve Pearce, with distinguished military service, cast votes that hurt our armed forces? And how could Richard Romero, a career educator, cast votes detrimental to our education system?
The answer is they really didn’t have a choice. Their predicament is commonly referred to as “Hobson’s Choice,” which really isn’t a choice at all.
Thomas Hobson was a 17th century English liveryman, who required every customer to take the horse nearest the door. The term has come to mean a situation in which a person with an apparently free choice actually has no alternative.
If every piece of legislation coming before Congress or a state legislature dealt with only one narrow issue, there would be no problem. But that’s not the way it works. The New Mexico Legislature requires that bills deal with only one subject. But within one subject can be many issues.
In Congress, its wide open. Omnibus bills deal with a variety of subjects. And then there is the favorite practice of tacking unrelated riders on a bill that is sure to pass. Those riders often are bills that already have failed or have never been debated. So members of Congress are faced with having to weigh the merits against the demerits of a great many bills before them.
That means the next time they run for office, their challengers can comb through their many votes and pick out distasteful features of otherwise meritorious bills. It is called opposition research and it has become quite a specialty in the political world.
A case in point took place in Congress last week. A bill authorizing the Pentagon to initiate another round of controversial military base closures was being pushed by the House leadership in order to avoid a pre-election showdown with President Bush over the issue. Many members of Congress had promised their constituents they would stall the process as much as they could lest a base in their district be closed.
But the bill also authorized an increase of 20,000 troops for the Army, 3,000 for the Marines, a pay hike for the troops and more body armor. With all the recent fuss on those issues, there wasn’t any choice but to let the Defense Department go ahead with preparing its list of recommend closures and realignments.
From listening to the ads on television, you may think you have little choice between equally distasteful candidates. But the next time you hear of a candidate casting some very suspicious votes, stop and think of whether they might have been faced with a Hobson’s choice.
Here in New Mexico, our battleground state status continues to attract presidential candidates like flypaper. President George Bush and Sen. John Kerry were both in New Mexico on Monday. Kerry stayed in Santa Fe another day to prepare for Wednesday’s debate.
President Bush has given quite a thrill to southern New Mexico with his many visits to towns that never have seen a presidential candidate before, much less a sitting president. The communities, such as Hobbs, probably already are firmly in his column, but the president is certainly energizing his base.
New Mexico isn’t new to hosting presidential candidates who want to escape for some quiet time to prepare for a debate. President Bill Clinton spent a few days in Albuquerque in 1996 to do a little prep work and play a lot of golf.
President Bush also escaped to Santa Fe a year or so ago, completely for a vacation at an old chum’s house in the Las Campanas gated community northwest of Santa Fe. He played two rounds of golf and drew some squawks from club members who had their reservations cancelled for security reasons.

Why Women Should Vote

SANTA FE The polls are open. Go vote. The first Tuesday in November no longer is election day, it’s just your last chance to vote – and the day they count the votes.
This is why you see political ads in full swing already. Presidential candidates realize this. So do congressional candidates. But some local candidates are behind the curve, which can cause problems. Last minute blitzes don’t work well on an electorate that has already voted. And that is what is increasingly happening. The early birds are going to get the vote.
So does increased early voting mean heavier total turnouts. Unfortunately there isn’t much correlation. People who don’t want to stand in line on election day are either voting early or not at all. And too many are choosing the latter.
You’ve heard all the stories about how we should appreciate our right to vote, because not everyone has that right. Surprisingly, people who have lived under a dictatorship don’t always appreciate their newfound freedom either.
In Russia, officials are trying lotteries, with tickets given to voters with which they might win cars, TVs, VCRs, refrigerators, washing machines or baskets of food. Back in the good old days of communism, Soviet officials had much more effective means for compelling turnouts of 90 percent and better.
The English Parliament has toyed with the idea of levying a five-pound fine against anyone not voting. So we aren’t the only ones with problems.
In Mexico, the P.R.I., which dominated national politics for 72 years, did so with much help from women who often control local politics. But interest lagged badly enough in the last national election, won by Vicente Fox and the P.A.N., that some local P.R.I. groups hired male strippers to turn out the vote.
That may be good for some laughs, but a deadly serious new HBO movie tells the most compelling story I can imagine of why people should vote. It is a true story and it is about women, but the message should be the same for all of us.
It is the story of the “Night of Terror,” Nov. 15, 1917, when the warden of Occoquan Workhouse in Virginia ordered his guards to teach a lesson to the suffragists imprisoned there because they dared to picket Woodrow Wilson’s White House for the right to vote.
The movie is titled “Iron-Jawed Angels.” It is a graphic depiction of the battle these women waged so that women today can pull the curtain at the polling booth and have their say.
For weeks, the women’s only water came from an open pail. Their food was a colorless slop, infested with worms. Then on Nov. 15, 40 prison guards wielding clubs and their warden’s blessing went on a rampage against the 33 women, wrongly convicted of “obstructing sidewalk traffic.”
They beat some women almost to death. One was chained to cell bars high above her head and left hanging all night, gasping for enough breath to live. Other affidavits described guards grabbing, dragging, beating, choking, slamming and kicking the women.
After word finally reached the press and the women’s release was imminent, President Wilson and his cronies tried to persuade a psychiatrist to declare the women’s leader insane so she could be permanently institutionalized. The doctor’s answer, “Courage in women is often mistaken for insanity.”
So why aren’t you going to be able to vote this year? It’s raining? Gotta get to work? Have to drive the car pool? Ask yourself how you would explain that to these women.
Reports say HBO will run the movie periodically before releasing it on video and DVD. I haven’t seen it, but it sounds like something that should be required watching for everyone.

New Mexico Big X-Prize Winner?

SANTA FE Was New Mexico the big winner when SpaceShipOne soared 68 miles into space last Monday to capture the $10 million Ansari X-Prize?
We are, as far as Rick Homans and the state Economic Development Department are concerned. Companies such as Armadillo Aerospace, Pioneer and American Astronautics are poised to come test and develop their spacecraft at White Sands Missile Range, and later at the adjacent private spaceport as soon as it is finished and licensed.
They are coming here, we are told , because New Mexico has been awarded future X-Prize competitions. This year, competitors for the X-Prize could launch from anywhere. Burt Rutan and Paul Allen chose to launch SpaceShipOne from a private base in Mojave, California, which already is built and licensed.
Rutan hasn’t sounded particularly enthused about coming to New Mexico for future testing and launches, but Peter Diamandis, founder of the X-Prize, told a full house in Gov. Bill Richardson’s conference room last May that “Rutan will come.”
Evidently X-Prize officials had good information at the time that Rutan was in the lead to claim the prize. In fact, Diamandis flatly predicted that day that the X-Prize would be claimed within three to five months. It sounded like a wild prediction at the time, but less than four months later, the prize was claimed.
The Ansari family of Dallas, Texas, established the prize eight years ago to kick-start the development of privately built rocket ships that could make spaceflight available to the public. Earlier this year, it was announced that the offer would expire this coming January.
It sounded as though the Ansaris might be backing out, but it seems more likely now that it was an effort to move things along more quickly.
It wasn’t as though Rutan needed the money. Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen already had put up more than twice that amount and is good for much more. When Rutan received the prize, he announced he will split the $10 million among his employees.
And during the five days in between SpaceShipOne’s two flights, Richard Branson, the British airline mogul and adventurer, announced a $25 million deal to use Rutan’s technology to begin offering paying customers flights into space beginning in 2007. He says fares will start at just over $200,000.
Who would pay that much? Two people already have paid the Russian space program $20 million apiece for a trip to the international space station. Another race already is being organized with a $50 million prize for the first private company to put space tourists into orbit.
This is a huge victory for backyard science and entrepreneurship. None of the Boeings or Lockheeds were among the more than two dozen competitors. Apparently they are interested only when there is a huge government contract, not when they have to spend their own money.
The government claims to be happy, but its talk turned immediately to developing regulations to govern the new industry. That could easily stifle future creativity. So far, private space efforts have been safer than the government’s space program.
But did Rutan win too big? With secure financing and happy employees $10 million richer, the future seems very rosy. No other company is even close to a manned test. But several of them claim the Rutan success is attracting venture capital their way, hoping to hit it big, as Rutan’s company already has.
X-Prize officials likely have anticipated the situation. Next summer’s competition will be only an exhibition, held at White Sands Missile Range. Prizes won’t be awarded until 2006, when it is hoped the Southern New Mexico Spaceport will be ready.
By setting deadlines, as it successfully did this year, the X-Prize folks hope to have other companies ready for demonstrations in 2005 and competition in 2006. And it hopes to nudge New Mexico into speedy completion of its spaceport.

A Casino on Every Corner?

SANTA FE “A casino in every county.” That’s what this column predicted six weeks ago when Jemez Pueblo announced a plan to open a casino almost 300 miles to the south on the Texas border.
I caught some static for that. Some readers called me an alarmist and named counties they thought would never would put up with such a thing. I’ll admit to some hyperbole in the statement, although another commentator has now gone me one better by predicting a casino on every corner.
There are many reasons that New Mexico can become oversaturated with casinos. The surest way is to let just one tribe or pueblo set up shop off its reservation. The U.S. secretary of the Interior has to approve the arrangement and has done so at times in the past. The Navajo Nation has outlying areas settled by members who did not make it all the way to the reservation during the long walk back following their imprisonment near Fort Sumner in the 1860s. And horse tracks are now in the casino business.
Longtime readers of this column will remember that I originally said even one casino was too many when the Indian gaming discussions first started as a result of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act passed by Congress in 1988.
But my argument did not prevail and now we are looking at 14 of the 19 pueblos with casinos, plus both Apache tribes. In addition, the Navajo Nation is trying it on a pilot basis, with the Route 66 Casino, just west of Albuquerque on Navajo trust land.
If that goes well, that field test could open up many locations on the sprawling Navajo Nation and in the scattered “checkerboard” areas to the east. The Navajos haven’t been anxious to open themselves to gambling, but the promise of economic opportunity for their many struggling outposts may appear their only way out.
And now the horse tracks have casinos so they won’t be destroyed by Indian gaming. Nothing could have renewed an interest in racing any more than letting tracks put in slot machines. Except that, for obvious reasons, the horse tracks are doing everything they can to cut back on racing days, because that’s not where they make their money.
That has horse breeders upset, but their problem is about to be solved by an explosion in the number of tracks. After hard times hit horse tracks in the 1980s and early 1990s, Sunland Park, Ruidoso Downs and Albuquerque Downs were the only tracks left standing. Then Sun Ray at Farmington came along to take advantage of visitors from the Four Corners area and the law that allowed them to put in slot machines.
Next came Zia Park at Hobbs, in the southeast corner of the state. Now we’re hearing about Racing at Raton reviving the old La Mesa Park tradition in the northeastern corner of New Mexico, pulling in money from four neighboring states in that area.
And of course, there is Santa Fe Downs, purchased by Pojoaque Pueblo in 1996 and closed the next year to eliminate competition with its Cities of Gold Casino. Pojoaque now has the money and inclination to reopen the track, with casino, naturally.
The only hitch is settling a court suit with Attorney General Patricia Madrid over outstanding revenue-sharing payments owed the state. And there’s the problem of getting state Racing Commission approval for another track.
At the moment there is support for waiting a year or two to see how the Hobbs track does, but that isn’t discouraging people in Pojoaque, Raton and even Tucumcari from some serious consideration.
Meanwhile Nambe Pueblo voted last week to snuggle a casino in between the nearby Pojoaque and Tesuque casinos. That’s three casinos in a six-mile stretch of US 84-285, between Santa Fe and Espanola. It soon may resemble the Las Vegas Strip.
And we don’t have room to talk about a fascinating new development not being discussed openly yet that could mushroom the number of Indian casinos even more.

Presidential Debates

SANTA FE Presidential debates were once something I’d skip. They aren’t debates. They’re just joint presentations and where’s the fun in that?
But as the candidates have become more sophisticated, so have the viewers. Neither candidate is likely to throw a knockout punch or make a major gaffe. Viewers now are learning to watch for nuances, such as demeanor and quality of responses.
Early polls indicate that viewers thought Sen. John Kerry won the first debate. He seemed composed, and even calculating, while the president appeared nervous and relied on a few stock answers to many questions.
But don’t take instant impressions too seriously. Overnight polls showed Vice President Gore winning the first debate four years ago. But Republicans did such an effective job of criticizing Gore’s minor gaffes over the next few days that later polls ended up showing a debate victory for Bush.
Should we count it a minor gaffe that both candidates got their colors mixed up? Kerry wore a red tie and Bush wore blue. A little more major gaffe was committed by the Associated Press. In the never ending battle to scoop the field, the AP accidentally released an article about the debate before the debate started. It was written in the past tense as though the debate already had occurred.
Actually, the debates are much easier to watch this year than the television ads. I am so tired of all the negativism that I’ve given up being a news junkie during September and October. ESPN is a refreshing retreat. And thank goodness for the baseball playoffs occurring at just the right time.
But we must remember, negative campaigning will be a part of our lives for the foreseeable future. Despite what we all say, it works. It is distasteful, but we probably do learn more from negative ads than we do from the positive fluff in the ads the candidates are willing to claim.
The trick is for viewers to sort out the overstatements and misstatements from the kernels of truth. It is something we may be getting better at as we become accustomed to negative campaigning. And the news media is helping with frequent analyses of campaign ads and debate statements.
Most states are not being subjected to the volume of negative ads we are experiencing in New Mexico. We are one of about 13 “battleground” states where polling indicates that neither candidate has as much as a five-point lead.
At this point New Mexico is in the “Barely Bush” category with about a four-point lead for the president. We are joined by Nevada, Missouri and Iowa. The “Barely Kerry” category has Maryland, Maine, Oregon, Minnesota, Washington and New Jersey. The candidates are exactly tied in Michigan, New Hampshire and Ohio.
Notice that the early primary states of Iowa and New Hampshire are both still battleground states, thereby enhancing their early presidential primary status.
This is being written the day following the debates. Anything can happen between then and the time you read this. But polling is an inexact science anyway, which is why all the battleground states are statistically tied, with polls disagreeing on whether some states are leaning one way or the other.
On the day of the first debate, former President Eisenhower’s son, John, a lifelong Republican, endorsed Kerry. He joins Ron Reagan, who spoke at the Democratic National Convention, as the second child of a former Republican president to defect.
So far Chelsea Clinton, Amy Carter, the Johnson daughters and Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg have not announced for Bush. But there is still time.
Polls often are denigrated as being inaccurate and taking attention away from substantive issues. But polling is getting more and more precise, and let’s face it, we love a horse race. If you want to follow the polls more closely, type “election polls” into your search engine and choose from several million.

Iceberg Billy

SANTA FE Like an iceberg, the Billy the Kid case may be just the tip of some strange political and legal maneuverings in the state.
The case is a criminal investigation into murder initiated in Lincoln County by Sheriff Tom Sullivan, who said he deputized Capitan Mayor Steve Sederwall to help him out. Then De Baca County Sheriff Gary Graves was recruited. That added up to considerable fire power to apprehend the dead murderer, Pat Garrett, for the supposed crime of blasting away someone other than the Kid. Lincoln County Commissioner Leo Martinez recently played spoil-sport by pointing out that Lincoln County had real murders that needed to be solved.
What has astounded people for the past year is that something this absurd and so consuming of resources of public officials in Lincoln, Grant, and De Baca Counties is still living and breathing.
The reason for this eternal life is that whenever the case starts to die a natural death, two Bills step in to resuscitate it. Gov. Bill Richardson keeps adding Houston, Texas, Attorney Bill Robins, partner in a $50 million a year law firm and one of the biggest contributors to his election campaign.
Robins’ original claim to odd fame, occurred last November when he was brought into the case when the attempt to dig up Billy’s mother’s bones in Silver City ran into trouble because it was opposed historically, legally, and forensically.
Unfazed by these hurdles of truth, he took seriously the claim of this being the Land of Enchantment, and began speaking for dead Billy as his “client,” saying Billy wanted his mother dug up.
Arguably, this put the judge’s life at risk, since he might have died laughing, but he saved himself by telling the bizarre group of one governor, a dead Billy, and three sheriffs to go to Fort Sumner after Billy’s bones to see what they found there.
On September 24, they gave up in Fort Sumner, realizing that even more obstacles existed. The opposing attorneys told them bluntly that dead Billy did not exist. It also appeared that Deputy Sederwall did not exist either, as a deputy at least. Also the case did not exist, since a criminal investigation needed a criminal and Garrett did not exist.
With no case, there was no right for law enforcement officers to be there as petitioners. That took care of Sullivan and Graves. You might have thought they would all slink back to their regular jobs. But no such luck.
It is now evident that Billy’s ghost may not be the only recipient of these two good Samaritan Bills. In August, forensic expert Dr. Henry Lee was hired to scrape an old table to find DNA to match with Billy’s mother.
Though other forensic DNA experts called the notion absurd, it was reported that trusty Attorney Bill Robins was prepared to take that “evidence” back to Silver City for the sheriffs to once again attempt to dig up Billy’s mother’s bones.
In September, a group of De Baca County citizens filed to recall Sheriff Gary Graves. He hadn’t endeared himself by signing onto the Billy the Kid case. Even he admitted that finding no DNA “could dry up a major source of tourism revenue for Fort Sumner.”
His arrest of only three DWI suspects in over two years in office also didn’t help. Things looked bleak until who should appear to represent him but high-powered attorney Bill Robins.
Immediately after the Fort Sumner Billy the Kid case withdrawal, Gov. Richardson went on television, saying the case would be continued. A pattern is emerging, and it isn’t that everyone is named Bill. Why are these two big Bills so interested in little Billy?
Should we worry about what’s behind this, or are we just witnessing the bulldog tenacity of a successful politician and a successful trial lawyer? Time will tell, because they are not shy about leaving tracks.

Iceberg Billy

SANTA FE Like an iceberg, the Billy the Kid case may be just the tip of some strange political and legal maneuverings in the state.
The case is a criminal investigation into murder initiated in Lincoln County by Sheriff Tom Sullivan, who said he deputized Capitan Mayor Steve Sederwall to help him out. Then De Baca County Sheriff Gary Graves was recruited. That added up to considerable fire power to apprehend the dead murderer, Pat Garrett, for the supposed crime of blasting away someone other than the Kid. Lincoln County Commissioner Leo Martinez recently played spoil-sport by pointing out that Lincoln County had real murders that needed to be solved.
What has astounded people for the past year is that something this absurd and so consuming of resources of public officials in Lincoln, Grant, and De Baca Counties is still living and breathing.
The reason for this eternal life is that whenever the case starts to die a natural death, two Bills step in to resuscitate it. Gov. Bill Richardson keeps adding Houston, Texas, Attorney Bill Robins, partner in a $50 million a year law firm and one of the biggest contributors to his election campaign.
Robins’ original claim to odd fame, occurred last November when he was brought into the case when the attempt to dig up Billy’s mother’s bones in Silver City ran into trouble because it was opposed historically, legally, and forensically.
Unfazed by these hurdles of truth, he took seriously the claim of this being the Land of Enchantment, and began speaking for dead Billy as his “client,” saying Billy wanted his mother dug up.
Arguably, this put the judge’s life at risk, since he might have died laughing, but he saved himself by telling the bizarre group of one governor, a dead Billy, and three sheriffs to go to Fort Sumner after Billy’s bones to see what they found there.
On September 24, they gave up in Fort Sumner, realizing that even more obstacles existed. The opposing attorneys told them bluntly that dead Billy did not exist. It also appeared that Deputy Sederwall did not exist either, as a deputy at least. Also the case did not exist, since a criminal investigation needed a criminal and Garrett did not exist.
With no case, there was no right for law enforcement officers to be there as petitioners. That took care of Sullivan and Graves. You might have thought they would all slink back to their regular jobs. But no such luck.
It is now evident that Billy’s ghost may not be the only recipient of these two good Samaritan Bills. In August, forensic expert Dr. Henry Lee was hired to scrape an old table to find DNA to match with Billy’s mother.
Though other forensic DNA experts called the notion absurd, it was reported that trusty Attorney Bill Robins was prepared to take that “evidence” back to Silver City for the sheriffs to once again attempt to dig up Billy’s mother’s bones.
In September, a group of De Baca County citizens filed to recall Sheriff Gary Graves. He hadn’t endeared himself by signing onto the Billy the Kid case. Even he admitted that finding no DNA “could dry up a major source of tourism revenue for Fort Sumner.”
His arrest of only three DWI suspects in over two years in office also didn’t help. Things looked bleak until who should appear to represent him but high-powered attorney Bill Robins.
Immediately after the Fort Sumner Billy the Kid case withdrawal, Gov. Richardson went on television, saying the case would be continued. A pattern is emerging, and it isn’t that everyone is named Bill. Why are these two big Bills so interested in little Billy?
Should we worry about what’s behind this, or are we just witnessing the bulldog tenacity of a successful politician and a successful trial lawyer? Time will tell, because they are not shy about leaving tracks.

Is Saving Taxpayer Money Always Good?

SANTA FE Is saving taxpayer money always a good idea? Apparently not, judging from reactions to two of Gov. Bill Richardson’s recent money-saving initiatives.
The most recent gubernatorial initiative to run into trouble is Save Smart, a statewide central purchasing collaboration among all state agencies under the governor’s jurisdiction. Other governmental agencies, especially public schools and higher education, are being encouraged to participate.
Gov. Richardson expects the program to save millions of dollars that can be redirected to education, economic development and tax cuts. He says it is the same thing a family or business would do to save money.
But many family businesses and small communities don’t see it that way. They see Save Smart as a cavalier approach that ignores its economic effects on small businesses and rural communities. More and more I’m hearing Richardson referred to around the state as “the governor of Albuquerque” and that this may be part of a pattern of disregard for small-town and rural New Mexico.
In Roswell, Ruth Ann Speth of Cobean Stationery Co. says she will lose 10-15 percent of her business now that the state offices in town no longer can buy from her. She says she received a form to bid on a statewide contract for office supplies, but that her firm isn’t equipped to handle out of town business.
State officials say they have created 12 zones around the state to eliminate the problem of handling out of town business, but Speth says the spread-out zone that includes Roswell is still too big for her company. It would necessitate putting in a shipping department.
The company that won the statewide bid for office supplies is in Albuquerque, which means there will be no personalized service. And what about the need for maintenance and repair of office machines when they go down? It appears outlying communities can forget about speedy delivery or service.
But Gov. Richardson’s idea, nevertheless is a legitimate one. “I have pledged to be vigilant and fiscally responsible with taxpayer money,” says Richardson. “I want to deliver taxpayers the best value for their money.”
Another of the governor’s controversial money-saving initiatives is an electronic government plan to revamp the state’s Web site into a convenient, one-stop shopping center for New Mexico citizens. Richardson plans to finance the effort by charging companies that want to buy large amounts of data, such as statewide lists from the Motor Vehicle Division, a fee commensurate with the value of the information to the companies.
Motor vehicle data is reformatted and resold by these companies to insurance carriers and for other purposes for many millions of dollars. But the state currently charges only about $70,000 to provide this data, even though collection of the basic data costs the state millions.
It all sounds fair enough, but the company profiting the most from the sweetheart deal negotiated under a previous administration, convinced the 2004 Legislature to kill Richardson’s proposed legislation.
Also opposing the legislation were the New Mexico Press Association and the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government, because of possible first amendment rights violations caused by having to pay for public data.
In both of these instances, Save Smart and e-government, the state saves or recoups money for which taxpayers otherwise would have to foot the bill. But both have been unpopular. In one case small businesses and rural communities suffer. In the other, a big business gets hit and a possible first amendment right may be weakened.
So what responsibilities does government have when it saves taxpayer money at the expense of the private sector? Are the economies of scale introduced by Save Smart any different than those of Wal-Mart, which also undermines small businesses? Does government also have a responsibility to control the growth of big box stores or is that just a reality of free enterprise?
It appears the public is saying that government at least should be a good neighbor.

Victory in Fort Sumner

SANTA FE Instead of a court hearing, Fort Sumner held a victory celebration on Sept. 27 to mark the dismissal of proceedings to exhume Billy the Kid.
Three days earlier, attorneys for the sheriffs agreed to dismissal of the case, with prejudice, meaning it can’t be refilled. Fort Sumner officials consider it a total victory, ending the effort to dig up Billy’s bones.
A big party was held at City Hall, complete with a banquet of cold cuts, fruit punch and chocolate chip cookies. It doesn’t get much better than that.
Beforehand, Mayor Raymond Lopez presented certificates of honorary citizenship in the Village of Fort Sumner to visiting dignitaries from as far away as England. The world’s preeminent authority on the Lincoln County War, Frederick Nolan, of Chalfont, St. Giles, England, made a special trip for the event.
Also present were Silver City Mayor Terry Fortenberry and Chamber of Commerce executive director Cissy McAndrew. Last January Fort Sumner officials attended Catherine Antrim’s exhumation hearing in Silver City. Since then, the two communities have provided mutual support to each other in a joint effort to protect their cemeteries and tourism produced by the Billy the Kid and Pat Garrett history and legend.
Following the banquet lunch, participants made the five-mile trip south to Billy’s gravesite, where Nolan placed a bouquet of flowers in front of the gravestone of Billy and his pals, Tom O’Folliard and Charlie Bowdre. Nolan declared the day a victory for truth.
Adam Baker, lead attorney for the Village of Fort Sumner, stated that he is not sure why attorneys for the sheriffs were willing to dismiss the case with prejudice. But there are some telltale signs that the battle may not be over.
The sheriffs are declining to comment about whether they plan to renew their attempt to retrieve DNA from the remains of Billy’s mother, whose grave is in Silver City.
But Gov. Bill Richardson has been more forthcoming. It is time the truth is known now that DNA technology is available, said Richardson spokesman Billy Sparks, following dismissal of the Fort Sumner court case. Richardson has consistently maintained that he wants “that DNA” even though his own Office of the Medical Investigator has filed legal papers saying DNA from Catherine Antrim is useless since the location of her remains is uncertain.
“I have a sinking feeling that we haven’t heard the last from these three sheriffs,” Baker says. He notes that Henry Lee, a forensic expert who is working with the sheriffs, has recovered some samples from a bench said to be stained with Billy the Kid’s blood.
Baker speculates that legal action in Silver City focusing on the Kid’s mother may be renewed soon. This should create some fireworks since forensic experts around the nation acknowledge Lee’s claims can never be substantiated.
Another reason the sheriffs may have backed off the dig for Billy’s bones was a spirited attack against the two sheriffs from Lincoln County by County Commissioner Leo Martinez three nights before the sheriffs threw in the towel on the Fort Sumner case.
At a commission meeting, Martinez demanded that Sheriff Tom Sullivan immediately cease his investigation of the 123 year old murders and concentrate on more recent murders that remain unsolved.
A lengthy and heated discussion ensued over how much public money was used for the investigation, the origin of the private money used, whether Capitan Mayor Steve Sederwall’s “reserve deputy” status qualified him to sign legal documents that are part of the investigation and whether the county is liable for their actions.
Next door in DeBaca County, Sheriff Gary Graves is having to defend himself against recall charges that include failing to maintain proper records relating to this case and others. Representing Graves against the recall is attorney Bill Robins, the lawyer Bill Richardson brought into the case a year ago to represent (and speak for) dead Billy.
More on this later.