Talk:Michael Bruce Ross

Deletion proposal

This article was proposed for deletion January 2005. The discussion is archived at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Michael Ross. Joyous 17:27, Feb 5, 2005 (UTC)

Citations

It would be nice to have some citation Naysie 10:38, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Rape of Vivian Dobson

How can we state as fact that he raped Vivian Dobson if the police rejected this idea, no charges were brought and he never confessed? Where does this info come from? Leonurus 09:31, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

That’s a great question, and I was thinking the very same thing myself. This is what I came up with. This is all conjecture on my part, but I think it's a reasonable scenario. (1) Ross never confessed to the Dobson rape. Why? I figure either of two reasons. One is that, since Ross "wanted" to get executed, he did not want to give the defense lawyers another reason to delay his execution (that is, by forcing some legal action to dispose of the rape case). Or, two, Dobson had the "upper hand" in the rape scenario. Since rape is a crime of power and control, perhaps Ross did not want to admit defeat at the hands of one of his rape victims (i.e., surrendering up his control and power to her). (2) Police did not pursue the matter. Why? They probably figured that they already had great cases on 8 rape/murders and Ross was going to Death Row and he was getting executed. They might have figured: why bother with a trial in a rape case, under these circumstances? There is nothing to be gained legally, as Ross already received the highest punishment possible. The rape trial would be a waste of time, money, resources, etc. And it would have zero net effect, legally. So ... if Ross never confessed ... and the police did not pursue the rape allegation ... how do we know that it ever even happened? I guess the only answer is because Vivian Dobson herself says that it happened. Her account must have been pretty convincing, because they had her testify at several hearings in the Ross cases. I guess that she was his only surviving victim. As such, she could add testimony about the manner in which Ross committed the crime with her (she could testify to his "m.o.", she could I.D. him) ... to show the similarity with the crimes of the 8 dead victims who could not testify to such details. This (above) is all my best guess. But it does seem to make sense. There is a good article at this website: [1]. By the way, I think that Vivian Dobson's case was an attempted rape ... not an actual rape. When Ross attacked her, she happened to be carrying a knife ... and she pulled it on him. I can't imagine that a woman with a knife would "allow" the rapist to continue. So, perhaps her case was only an attempted rape. That is all the more reason that the police would not pursue it, if no actual rape occurred.

Here is the account. (This account was written before Ross was actually executed.) One of Ross' early victims, Vivian Dobson, was called before a House committee to testify in favor of the abolition of the death penalty. Dobson was able to escape Ross early on in his career as a mass murderer because she had been packing a knife. Only a few feet from her home, she was accosted by Ross and dragged into the bushes, where he had intended to rape and strangle her. But Ross had not yet perfected his craft and ran into some unforeseen difficulties. When Dobson pressed her knife to his chest, he challenged her. "Go 'head," he said. Recently Dobson told a columnist, "All I had to do was just shove it right into his chest. That's all I had to do. And I didn't do it. I didn't do it and those other girls died." This was a terrible burden to have carried all these years. Dobson confessed to the columnist that she could not move out of her private nightmare unless she forgave Ross. But it is unclear why her forgiveness should take the form of agitating against the death penalty? Surely she does not wish to forgive Ross for failing to kill her, and it is not possible for her to forgive Ross for killing other women. The family members of other victims prevailed on Dobson to testify against Ross, and she did – which took a great deal of courage. After exhaustive trials and hearings, Ross finally is facing his just punishment, the knife now pointed at his chest. And Ross clearly is challenging the state: "Go 'head." Dobson told the committee she did not want to accept responsibility for Ross' execution. When Dobson testified against Ross at his trial, she thought justice would come quickly. She would testify; he would be found guilty; he would be sentenced to death, and execution would follow in a reasonable course of time. But it has taken much too long. "The parents are dwindling away," Ms. Dobson told the columnist. "People who wanted this so bad are dead. And Ross sits there, waiting." But surely Ross will be sitting there waiting a much longer time if the death penalty abolitionists prevail and he is spared his punishment. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 13:23, 31 May 2009 (UTC))

Fought death penalty?

For a period of time, he wanted the death penalty and those around him fought it against his wishes. Geraldo Rivera had a show (late '80s?) discussing how he wanted the death penalty but couldn't get it. I found that somewhat curious. I couldn't find a reference to this battle in the NY Times.

Ross flip-flopped on the issue. Remember that he sat on Death Row for some 20 years. At first, he did not want the death penalty. Thus, he pursued all of his appeals. Then, later on, he did want the death penalty ... or, at least, he claimed that he wanted to be executed. (Maybe it was some reverse psychology on his part, to be deemed "crazy"?) When Ross himself dropped all of his appeals, others then stepped in ... his lawyers, his parents, probably some anti-death penalty advocates, etc. I think that ultimately the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that all of those other people had no say-so in the matter ... and that it was Ross' decision alone to make. This is all well documented. You can find many articles on this legal see-saw. This Wikipedia article also mentions some of these legal tug-of-war games. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 13:33, 31 May 2009 (UTC))

He obviously had incompetent lawyers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.206.50.21 (talk) 21:05, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Personal account in article

This was added in a series of edits by 198.181.163.145 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Fails WP:RS but placing here for comment: Spokoyni (talk) 15:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Ross was repeatedly attacked by fellow inmates while in prison. They feared him and the statements of his crimes. He was stabbed several times while on death row at CCIS Somers Maximum prison. He was not a mentor, as stated here. He did not have contact with the general population as he spent his entire time in prison on death row. His cell was the last one on death row next to the door that contained the electric chair, that was last used in 1960 on Joseph "Mad Dog" Taborsky (March 23, 1924 – May 17, 1960). Taborsky was executed by electric chair at the age of 36. His execution in 1960 was the last in Connecticut (and in New England) until that of Michael Bruce Ross in 2005. Ross was incarcerated 23 hours a day. After several attacks by other inmates he was only allowed out to shower and exercise while other inmates were locked in their cells. (Michael CCIS Corrections Officer who worked on death row the years Ross was imprisoned at CCIS.)(April 4, 2020).