SOMERVILLE – A Somerville man who killed his best friend’s mother as a teenager nearly 30 years ago has asked for parole.
On Tuesday, the Parole Board questioned Edward O’Brien for more than four hours about the horrific crime and his steadfast claim that he is innocent.
“I will not be a threat to any community. I intend to be a positive influence wherever I end up in my life,” O’Brien told the panel.
The murder of Janet Downing in 1995
O’Brien was 15 years old when prosecutors say he killed Janet Downing in the summer of 1995. The single mother was stabbed 97 times and dismembered. The grandson of former Somerville police chief O’Brien was an altar boy and lived across the street from the Downings. He became a suspect after the police doubted his story that he had been robbed the same evening as the murder.
O’Brien has always maintained his innocence. In 1997, a jury found him guilty and he was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Years later, the Supreme Court ruled that life without parole for juveniles is unconstitutional, making O’Brien eligible for release.
Tuesday was the first time the now 44-year-old appeared before the parole board. The panel questioned him about the evidence, the witnesses and his continued claim that he is innocent of the crime.
Parole for Edward O’Brien?
“My time in prison has not turned me into a negative, bitter or violent person. I have promised myself to be the best person I can be, regardless of my environment,” O’Brien said.
Supporters of O’Brien and members of the Downing family filled the hearing room. Janet Downing’s daughter Erin begged the board to keep O’Brien behind bars.
“He never showed remorse; he never took responsibility for brutally taking the life of a good and innocent woman,” she said. The Downing family started an online petition against O’Brien’s release.
The seven-member panel took the matter into consideration and a decision could take months. O’Brien is also appealing his conviction. His family recently started a website detailing what they say are deficiencies in the evidence presented at his trial.