The letter Dennis sent to Trevor Maxwell follows:

Dear Trevor,

I have received the first series of articles you wrote, published July 4.

I was surprised that there was such an interest in making public my recent

hospitalization. The reason why I was hospitalized on April 5 is because

on the evening of April 4 I ingested a combination of prescription drugs

in an attempt to end my life.

I didn’t think I would ever have to explain myself, but since the state

now seems intent in charging me criminally, it appears that keeping this a

private matter is no longer a possibility. What drove me to suicide? A

combination of factors.

I have been imprisoned 22 years and the soul crushing monotony, boredom,

institutional food, pervasive violence, 24 hour lights, near constant

noise, harsh treatment, myriad petty rules, lack of resources, loss of

potential, separation from family and friends, along with a raft of other

negativity, simply conspired to erode my will to live.

Combined with the overwhelming oppression of prison were thoughts about my

case and my chances for justice. It seems that every time exculpatory

facts are revealed, state agents respond by digging their heels in with

greater resolve. The state, with its infinite resources, tilts the playing

field so precipitously that a defendant with limited resources doesn’t

stand a chance. All I ever wanted is the right to present all of the facts

in my case to a jury of my peers, something our constitution fundamentally

affords. Why can’t I do that in Maine?

Prosecutor Bill Stokes implied that I should not be allowed to continue

appealing my case because I failed to make my case in previous efforts.

That’s the sort of flawed reasoning that drives me to distraction. Stokes’

office first argued against DNA testing and now it’s arguing to keep a

jury from ever hearing the results of that testing. His office also fought

to keep any discussion of alternate suspects from a jury. One of his

colleagues had potentially crucial forensic evidence incinerated before

the value of that hair and fiber could be ascertained. Why would a

prosecutor want to make evidence disappear? Logically, anyone who destroys

evidence or sanctions its destruction, clearly isn’t interested in truth

or justice. That no jury will ever benefit from the knowledge inherent in

that evidence creates frustration that weighs heavily on me.

Another source of frustration was also alluded to in one of your articles,

which stated that no other case in Maine has ever been litigated for so

long. The vast majority of that time has been wasted waiting for the state

to respond to motions, and for the courts to schedule hearings or make

decisions. As time goes by the torment of waiting worsens, diminishing any

hope for a return to a meaningful and productive life.

In Maine, a life sentence is a cruel and lingering death sentence that

eventually breeds despair and hopelessness. I have watched men grow old in

prison and I have been horrified by the thought of it. This is no place

for men weakened by age or disability. Given my prison experience, the

lack of control over my own life, the sense of frustration where

prosecutors and courts are concerned, it takes no great effort to

understand why I tried to end it all. Is it unreasonable to believe that

suicide may very well be a reasonable response to an intolerable

situation?

Sincerely,

Dennis Dechaine