>> BRAUDE: TONIGHT ON "GREATER BOSTON," WHEN THE PARKLAND SCHOOL SHOOTER WAS SPARED THE DEATH PENALTY BY A JURY LAST WEEK, MANY FAMILIES OF THE VICTIMS WERE OUTRAGED.

THEIR ANGUISH REOPENED A DEBATE ABOUT CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN AMERICA.

I'M JOINED BY THE FATHER OF ONE OF THE PARKLAND VICTIMS, GINA MONTALTO, AND THE HEAD OF MASSACHUSETTS CITIZENS AGAINST THE DEATH PENALTY.

THEN TWO NEW DOCUMENTARIES EXPLORE THE LIVES OF FREDERICK DOUGLASS AND HARRIET TUBMAN, GIVING US A FULLER AND MORE INTIMATE PICTURE OF TWO FORMERLY ENSLAVED PEOPLE WHO DEDICATED THEIR LIVES TO ENDING THE GREATEST STAIN ON OUR COUNTRY'S HISTORY: SLAVERY.

>> BRAUDE: FOUR YEARS AFTER HE STOLE THE LIVES OF 17 STUDENTS AND STAFF AT MARJORIE STONEMAN DOUGLAS HIGH SCHOOL IN PARKLAND, FLORIDA, THE STATE WILL LIKELY SPARE THE LIFE OF NIKOLAS CRUZ, WHO PLED GUILTY TO THE MURDERS LAST YEAR.

A FEW DAYS BACK, THE JURY VOTED 9 TO 3 FOR THE DEATH PENALTY, BUT A 2016 FLORIDA LAW REQUIRES A UNANIMOUS VOTE TO IMPOSE CAPITOL PUNISHMENT, SO THE JURY RECOMMENDED THE JUDGE SENTENCE CRUZ TO LIFE IN PRISON WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF PAROLE, INSTEAD.

THE DECISION WAS MET WITH OUTRAGE FROM MANY, INCLUDING THE PARENTS OF MANY OF THE CHILDREN CRUZ EXECUTED.

>> I SENT MY DAUGHTER TO SCHOOL, AND SHE WAS SHOT EIGHT TIMES.

I AM SO BEYOND DISAPPOINTED AND FRUSTRATED WITH THIS OUTCOME.

>> I REJECT IT COMPLETELY.

HE IS AN EVIL PERSON WITH NO REDEEMABLE VALUE AND NO PURPOSE LEFT ON EARTH.

>> BRAUDE: BUT NOT EVERYONE IN THEIR POSITION FEELS THE SAME WAY, AS WE KNOW FROM EXPERIENCE HERE IN BOSTON.

BACK IN 2015, THE PARENTS OF MARTIN RICHARD, THE YOUNGEST VICTIM OF THE MARATHON BOMBINGS, URGED THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE TO DROP THE DEATH PENALTY FOR DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV IN A BOSTON GLOBE OP-ED, CITING THE ANGUISH THEY RELIVED EACH TIME THE SENTENCE WAS APPEALED.

OVERALL, MUCH OF THE COUNTRY IS SPLIT ON THE ISSUE OF THE DEATH PENALTY, A DEBATE RENEWED BY THE JURY'S DECISION IN FLORIDA.

I'M JOINED BY TONY MONTALTO, WHOSE DAUGHTER GINA WAS SHOT AND KILLED IN THE PARKLAND SHOOTING, AND WHO NOW LEADS THE GROUP STAND WITH PARKLAND.

AND JAMES ROONEY, PRESIDENT OF MASSACHUSETTS CITIZENS AGAINST THE DEATH PENALTY, WHOSE COUSIN DIED IN THE 9/11 TERROR ATTACKS, AND WHOSE BROTHER WAS HIT AND KILLED BY A DRIVER, WHILE HE WAS RIDING A BIKE.

THE DRIVER WAS NOT CRIMINALLY CHARGED.

GENTLEMEN, THANKS FOR BEING HERE, AND, TONY, I AM TRULY SORRY FOR THE LOSS OF YOUR DAUGHTER.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> Braude: YOU KNOW, TONY, I WATCH -- MY RADIO COLLEAGUE WATCHED THE SENTENCING WHILE WE WERE LIVE ON RADIO AND COULD SEE THE PAIN OF THE FAMILIES, PARTICULARLY YOURS.

WHAT WAS YOUR REACTION WHEN YOU HEARD THE SENTENCE VERDICT BEING READ?

>> WE WERE SHOCKED, ANGERED, FRUSTRATED AND CONFUSED.

WE -- VERY DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE JURY CAME BACK AND SAID THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL AGGRAVATOR WAS PROVEN BY THE STATE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, YET, SOMEHOW THEY FOUND A MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE IN THE SHOOTER'S LIFE TO EXCUSE THE ATTACK ON MY DAUGHTER, HER 13 CLASSMATES AND THEIR THREE TEACHERS.

THEY CALL IT A MITIGATOR, THAT'S JUST A FANCY WORD FOR AN EXCUSE, AND IT'S VERY INCONGRUOUS THAT THEY WOULD FIND, AGAIN, ALL THE AGGRAVATING FACTORS TO BE PROVEN BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, YET FIND SOMETHING IN THE SHOOTER'S LIFE THAT JUSTIFIED THAT MURDER.

>> Braude: YOU KNOW, TONY, THE SENSE I GOT, WHILE I DID READ THE COMMENTS OF ONE OF THE PASSPORTS FROM PARKLAND WHO DID NOT SUPPORT THE DEATH PENALTY, AM I RIGHT SAYING THE VAST MAJORITY OF PARENTS FELT THE WAY YOU DID?

>> YES, THE VAST MAJORITY OF PARENTS WANTED THIS ADMITTED MURDERER TO BE PUNISHED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT OF THE LAW, AND AS A SOCIETY, WE SHOULD WANT HIM PUNISHED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT OF THE LAW IN ORDER TO DISCOURAGE OTHERS THAT WOULD GO -- THAT WOULD THINK ABOUT ATTACKING OUR NATION'S FUTURE BY GOING INTO A SCHOOL, ATTACKING OUR MOST VULNERABLE STUDENTS AND TEACHERS.

I THINK THAT WE NEED AS MUCH DETERRENCE FOR THAT AS POSSIBLE, AND THAT'S WHY I STAND WITH PARKLAND TO WORK TO CHANGE AS MANY LAWS TO HELP PREVENT THIS SO NO OTHER FAMILY HAS TO GET TO THIS POINT.

>> Braude: JAMES, YOU DON'T AGREE THAT THE DEATH PENALTY IS AN APPROPRIATE SENTENCE EVEN FOR SOMEONE'S WHO'S DONE SOMETHING AS ATROCIOUS AS WHAT CRUZ DID.

WHY.

>> FIRST OF ALL, MR., I AM, MR. MONTALTO, I AM TRULY SORRY FOR YOUR LOSS AND ALL THE OTHERS.

I THINK THE IDEA THAT SENTENCING SOMEONE TO DEATH IS GOING TO HELP THE VICTIMS HEAL I DON'T THINK IS TRUE AND I DON'T THINK, IN PRACTICE, IN MOST SITUATIONS, EVEN -- WELL, A LOT OF DEATH PENALTY CASES, THE VERDICT DOESN'T COME BACK AS A DEATH SENTENCE, AND THE GENERAL REALM OF DEATH PENALTY CASES IN STATE COURT, ONE OUT OF FOUR CASES INVOLVING THE DEATH PENALTY COMES BACK WITH A DEATH SENTENCE.

IT'S ABOUT ONE OUT OF THREE IN THE CASE OF THE FEDERAL SYSTEM.

BUT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN HAVE SITUATIONS LIKE MINE IN WHICH MY COUSIN WAS KILLED IN 9/11, THINK OF HOW LONG AGO THAT IS, NOBODY HAS BEEN CHARGED FOR THAT AND WE KNOW THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS THE CHIEF PERPETRATOR IN GUANTANAMO.

WHO EVER KNOWS IF THAT WILL EVER HAPPEN.

>> Braude: IF THERE WAS A TRIAL, IF ONE OF THE PEOPLE ON THE PLANES HAD SURVIVED, YOU WOULD NOT -- JUST TO UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM, YOU WOULD NOT WANT TO SEE THEM PUT TO DEATH?

>> THE TROUBLE WITH A TERROR INCIDENT, I THINK PEOPLE WILL THINK, OH, MY GOD THIS IS SOME OF THE WORST THINGS THAT HAPPENED, YOU KILLED NOT ONE, TWO, BUT TENS, AND IN THE CASE OF 9/11, THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE.

BUT THE WHOLE POINT OF THESE THINGS FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE TERRORISTS IS THE DEATH ITSELF AND THEY WERE PERFECTLY WILLING TO DIE.

THAT'S WHY THEY ALL DIED IN 9/11, THEY WERE WILLING TO SACRIFICE THEMSELVES, AND MOST TO HAVE THE MASS SHOOTINGS INVOLVE PEOPLE WHO ARE ESSENTIALLY SUICIDAL.

MANY OF THEM KILL THEMSELVES AT THE SCENE AND MANY OTHER ARE SHOT TO DEATH BY THE POLICE.

SO A TRIAL IN ONE OF THESE MASS ATROCITIES IS RARE.

>> Braude: YOU KNOW, TONY, IF I CAN, LET ME RETURN TO TONY, IF I CAN, FOR A SECOND.

JAMES, YOU KNOW, THE ARGUMENT, I HAVE TO SAY, I SHOULD BE CANDID WITH YOU, I'M NOT A SUPPORTER OF THE DEATH PENALTY FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS, INCLUDING IF SOMETHING HORRIBLE HAPPENED TO ME LIKE HAPPENED TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILY, I'D LIKE TO SEE THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF SUFFERING.

I KNOW YOU HAVEN'T SAID THAT, AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMEONE WAKING UP EVERY DAY KNOWING THEY WOULD NEVER BE FREE FROM THE BOX THEY WOKE UP IN.

BUT YOU MENTIONED DETERRENCE AS THE TOP REASON.

DO YOU BELIEVE THERE'S EVIDENCE THAT SUGGESTS THAT SOMEONE LIKE CRUZ WHO IS HELL BENT ON KILLING PEOPLE FOR NO REASON WOULD BE STOPPED BECAUSE HE HEARD THAT A PRIOR CRUZ HAD GOTTEN THE DEATH SENTENCE?

>> FIRST OF ALL, I'D APPRECIATE IT IF YOU WOULD STOP USING HIS NAME.

WE HAVE WORKED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO COME UP WITH THE SCHOOL SAFETY REPORT WHICH CAME OUT IN 2018.

IN THERE, THERE'S A CHAPTER THAT -- CALLED NO NOTORIETY, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF ALL MEDIA WOULD STOP USING THE NAMES OF THESE MASS MURDERERS BECAUSE THAT GIVES THEM WHAT THEY WANT, IT GIVES THEM THE NOTORIETY.

>> Braude: OKAY.

SADLY, TODAY, WE STILL SEE PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, PAYING HOMAGE AND REMEMBERING THE COLUMBINE SHOOTERS.

SO WE HAVE TO START REDUCING THE NOTORIETY OF THESE SHOOTERS.

>> Braude: TOTALLY FAIR POINT.

TOTALLY FAIR POINT.

>> TO ADDRESS YOUR OTHER POINT -- >> Braude: YEAH.

-- I THINK THAT THE MORE THAT WE SHOW HOW HEINOUS THIS CRIME IS AND HOW IT WILL BE PUNISHED, IT MAY NOT BE THE SHOOTER HIMSELF OR HERSELF, BUT IT WILL BE THOSE WHO HEAR ABOUT WHAT THEY ARE PLANNING TO DO.

WE'VE WORKED AT THE U.S. SECRET SERVICE AND THE NATIONAL THREAT ASSESSMENT CENTER, AND WE KNOW THAT, IN MOST CASES, THERE IS LEAKAGE ABOUT WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

SO PEOPLE SHOULD KNOW THAT THE BEST WAY TO STOP THIS IS TO REPORT IT, AND I BELIEVE THAT, AS A DETERRENT, AGAIN, AS A SOCIETY, WE SHOULD WANT ANYONE WHO COMMITS A HEINOUS CRIME SUCH AS ATTACKING OUR SCHOOLS TO BE PUNISHED TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT OF THE LAW.

HERE IN FLORIDA, THAT'S THE DEATH PENALTY.

>> Braude: JAMES, WHAT'S YOUR RESPONSE TO WHAT TONY JUST HAD TO SAY ABOUT THE DETERRENT EFFECT?

>> WELL, I AGREE WITH MOST OF IT.

I AGREE WITH HIM THAT YOU LOOK AROUND AND YOU SEE MASS KILLINGS.

THE PERSON WHO GETS REMEMBERED OUT OF THE MASS KILLINGS TENDS TO BE THE SHOOTER.

THE NAMES OF THE VICTIMS GO BY THE WAYSIDE AND YOU HAVE PEOPLE, YEARS LATER, FOLLOWING IN THE FOOTSTEPS OF SOME OF THESE KILLERS.

WE SHOULD DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO AVOID DOING THAT.

IT'S HARD TO SEE HOW WE CAN DO IT.

IT'S HAD TO SAY HOW THE NEWS MEDIA CAN REPORT ON THESE THINGS WITHOUT DISCUSSING THE KILLER AT SOME LENGTH.

BUT IT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO FOCUS OBSERVE.

>> Braude: LET ME BE CLEAR IF I MAY, JUST FOR A SECOND, TONY, JUST SO THAT THAT'S SOME INSTRUCTION.

YOU'RE NOT SUGGESTING OR ARE YOU THAT WE SHOULDN'T TALK ABOUT THE SHOOTER AS LONG AS WE TALK ABOUT HIS OR HER VICTIMS.

YOU'RE SUGGESTING USING HIS NAME OR HER NAME, HIS NAME IN VIRTUALLY ALL CASES, IS THE TRIGGER THAT WE SHOULD AVOID.

IS THAT NOT CORRECT?

>> THAT IS WHAT YOU SHOULD DEFINITELY AVOID, AND YOU SHOULD ALWAYS REMEMBER THE VICTIMS.

>> Braude: OF COURSE.

SADLY, HOW DID WE GET TO THIS VERDICT?

BECAUSE THE COURT HANDCUFFED THE FAMILIES ON WHAT WE COULD DO TO HELP REMEMBER OUR VICTIMS.

YOU KNOW, WE WERE ABLE TO GIVE VICTIM IMPACT STATEMENTS, AND THEN THE JURY WAS INSTRUCTED NOT TO GIVE THEM ANY WEIGHT DURING THE DELIBERATION.

WE WEREN'T ALLOWED TO BRING PICTURES OF OUR CHILDREN OR OUR SPOUSES IN TO THE COURTROOM TO REPRESENT THEM, YET WE HAD TO LOOK AT ALMOST EVERY PICTURE IN EVERY SCHOOL SETTING OF THE SHOOTER.

THEY MANAGED TO TURN HIM INTO A SYMPATHETIC FIGURE, WHEREAS THE COUNTRY NEEDS TO START REMEMBERING NOT EVERYONE'S A VICTIM.

A VICTIM LOOKS LIKE THIS BEAUTIFUL YOUNG GIRL OVER MY SHOULDER.

THAT'S A VICTIM, A PERSON WHO DID ALL THE RIGHT THINGS, WHO ACTUALLY SAVED A LIFE, WHO JUST GOT UP ONE MORNING AND WENT TO SCHOOL AND, YET, WAS GUNNED DOWN IN A HEINOUS AND ATROCIOUS WAY AND NEVER RETURNED TO HER LOVING FAMILY.

>> Braude: JAMES, I'M SURE YOU KNOW AND I'M SURE TONY KNOWS, TOO, THE SUPPORT FOR THE DEATH PENALTY IN THIS COUNTRY PEAKED IN THE '90s, IN THE 80% RANGE, ACCORDING TO THE GAL RUN POLL, AND NOW IN THE LOW 50s.

WHAT DO YOU TRIBUTE THAT TO, JAMES?

>> THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS GOING ON.

PARTLY, I THINK THE RISE IN THE SUPPORT FOR THE DEATH PENALTY CAME AFTER A LONG-STANDING RISE IN CRIME.

CERTAINLY, WHEN I WAS A D.A.

IN BROOKLYN IN THE '80s, THERE WAS A LOT OF CRIME, AND A LOT OF MURDERS YOU WERE GOING TO SEE SUPPORT FOR THE DEATH PENALTY RISE.

AS THE CRIME LEVEL DROPPED, THAT HAS HELPED TO DROP THE SUPPORT FOR THE DEATH PENALTY.

I THINK THE OTHER THING IS PARTLY THE WORK OF THE NORTHWESTERN JOURNALISM SCHOOL AND THE LATE PROFESSOR FROM TUFTS WHO WAS ABLE TO FIND WHAT I THINK SURPRISED A LOT OF US, THAT THERE WERE A GOOD DEAL OF THE EVIDENCE THAT INNOCENT PEOPLE HAD BEEN EXECUTED OVER TIME IN THE UNITED STATES AND THAT THAT WAS THE SORT OF THING THAT YOU JUST WANT TO ABSOLUTELY AVOID.

>> Braude: YOU KNOW, ON THAT NOTE, TONY, IF I MAY, THERE WAS NO DOUBT WHO THE KILLER WAS IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE, BUT OBSERVE THIS SET WHERE I'M SITTING, I'VE HAD MEN WHO SPENT UP TO 40 YEARS IN JAIL FOR MURDER.

WE DON'T HAVE THE DEATH PENALTY IN MASSACHUSETTS, EVEN BASED ON EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY, WHO HAD TURNED OUT DIDN'T COMMIT THE CRIME.

DOES THE POTENTIAL FOR A MISTAKE CONCERN YOU?

>> WELL, I'LL SAY THAT THAT'S WHY THERE'S NUMEROUS APPEALS, WHY WE SHOULD BE CAREFUL IN THE APPLICATION OF THE DEATH PENALTY, AND WHY WE SHOULD, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, BE FAIR, BUT FAIRNESS GOES BOTH WAYS.

THE VICTIMS HAVE TO BE REMEMBERED, IT'S NOT FAIR TO THE VICTIMS, AND THE HYPOTHETICALS THAT PEOPLE FEEL WHEN THEY HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE DEATH PENALTY, I CAN TELL YOU, THEY SURE CHANGE WHEN YOU'RE DIRECTLY AFFECTED.

>> Braude: WELL, YOU ARE DIRECTLY AFFECTED.

COULD YOU SPEND THE LAST MINUTE TELLING US ABOUT GINA, FOR THOSE OF US WHO DIDN'T KNOW HER?

>> GINA WAS OUR FIRST BORN, SHE WAS A FANTASTIC KID.

HER SMILE AND LAUGHTER FILLED THE ROOM.

SHE WAS SMART AND BUBBLY.

SHE WAS KIND AND COMPASSIONATE.

SHE KNEW RIGHT FROM WRONG.

SHE WAS OFTEN THE FIRST ONE TO GO UP TO A NEW KID IN THE SCHOOL AND INTRODUCE HERSELF AND INVITE THEM TO BE FRIENDS.

SHE WAS A WONDERFUL DAUGHTER AND A FANTASTIC BIG SISTER TO HER BROTHER ANTHONY.

I THINK THAT, SADLY, TOO OFTEN, WE FORGET WHO A VICTIM, IS WHAT A VICTIM IS, AND LOOK AT HOW THE SYSTEM FAILED MY DAUGHTER, GINA, AS OPPOSED TO SOME OF THE HYPOTHETICAL FAILURES THAT SOME PEOPLE FEEL.

>> Braude: WELL, SHE SOUNDS LIKE AN AMAZING KID AND YOU SOUND LIKE A PRETTY AMAZING FATHER.

TONY, GOOD TO MEET YOU.

JAMES, THANKS FOR YOUR TIME AS WELL.

I APPRECIATE IT, GENTLEMEN, THANK YOU.

>> YOU'RE WELCOME.

THANK YOU.

SNOOD NEXT UP, MANY STUDENTS FIRST LEARN ABOUT HARRIET TUBMAN AND FREDERICK DOUGLASS IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AS TWO OF THE MOST CONSEQUENTIAL LEADERS IN THE COUNTRY'S ABOLITIONIST MOVEMENT.

NOW TWO NEW DOCUMENTARIES DIG DEEPER INTO THEIR LIVES AND WORK, SHINING A LIGHT ON LITTLE-KNOWN FACTS ABOUT THESE LEADERS, LIKE THE IMPRESSION TUBMAN MADE ON THEN MASSACHUSETTS GOVERNOR JOHN ANDREW.

>> WHEN THE WAR STARTED HE IMMEDIATELY THOUGHT OF TUBMAN AND THAT SHE NEEDED TO GO INTO THE SOUTH AND HELP THE U.S. ARMY SO HE MADE ARRANGEMENTS FOR HER TO GO TO SOUTH CAROLINA.

WITH ALL OF THAT INTERACTION WITH FORMERLY ENSLAVED PEOPLE SHE AS ABLE TO GET THE LAY OF THE LAND AND GET SPECIFIC INFO ABOUT WHERE THE CONFEDERATE RMY WAS STATIONED WHAT KINDS OF WEAPONS THAT THEY HAD.

SHE WAS GATHERING INTELLIGENCE AND SHE WOULD SHARE THAT WITH THESE UNION OFFICERS.

>> BRAUDE: THEN THERE WAS DOUGLASS, WHO PUT DOWN ROOTS IN MASSACHUSETTS AFTER ESCAPING SLAVERY, USING THE POWER OF HIS PHOTOGRAPH AND PUBLIC PERSONA TO SPREAD HIS MESSAGE.

>> DOUGLASS RECOGNIZED THE DEGREE TO WHICH REPRESENTATION ITSELF COULD BE A POWERFUL MECHANISM FOR ENDING SLAVERY FOR ACHIEVING UNIVERSAL FREEDOM AND EQUALITY.

DOUGLASS IN A SENSE WAS SO ELOQUENT AND ELEGANT AS A SPEAKER THAT SOME WHITES STARTED TO ACCUSE HIM OF BEING A FRAUD.

>> Braude: JOINED BY THE CO-PRODUCERS AND DIRECTORS OF THESE TWO SPECTACULAR FILMS, "BECOMING FREDERICK DOUGLASS" AND "HARRIET TUBMAN: VISIONS OF FREEDOM," AND OSCAR NOMINATED FILMMARK STANLEY NELSON.

IT'S GREAT TO HAVE YOU BOTH HERE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> THANK YOU.

SO MUCH FOR HAVING US.

>> Braude: I HAVE TO SAY I'M EMBARRASSED ABOUT HOW MUCH I DIDN'T KNOW BUT HOW THRILLED I AM ABOUT HOW MUCH I LEARNED.

STARTING WITH YOU NICOLE AND FOLLOWING UP ON THE GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS AND NORTH CAROLINA THING.

THERE IS FAR MORE TO THE STORY.

CAN YOU FILL IN THE BLANKS TO WHAT TUBMAN DID?

>> IN THE MANY INTERVIEWS WE'VE DONE IN THE FILM SINCE, I LIKE TO LIKEN HARRIET TUBMAN INTO A ONE-WOMAN SEAL TEAM SIX.

SHE WAS A RALE MILITARY STRATEGIST, SHE KNEW HOW TO GATHER SLAVES ESCAPING FROM THE SOUTH AND APPLY THAT TO IS IT STRATEGIES IN TERMS OF STRIKING BACK AT THE CONFEDERATE ENEMY.

SO SHE GATHERED INTELLIGENCE AND THEY SCOUTED AREAS THAT THE ESCAPED SLAVES HAD INFORMATION ON.

THEY KNEW HOW MANY TROOPS WERE STATIONED WHERE, WHAT KIND OF ARMAMENTS THEY HAD, HOW MANY MEN WERE AT EACH CAMP AND FROM THAT ADVISED A PLAN TO MAKE A STRIKE, SAILING UP THE RIVER WHICH HAD LAND MINUS IN IT.

THE SLAVES KNEW WHERE THESE LAND MINUS WERE KEPT.

SO THEY WERE ABLE TO NAVIGATE UP THE RIVER, AVOIDING ALL THE LAND MINUS AND BEING ABLE TO STRIKE A NUMBER OF PLANTATIONS IN SOUTH CAROLINA, FREEING HUNDREDS OF SLAVES, AND IT WAS THE FIRST MILITARY BATTLE LED BY A WOMAN, ESPECIALLY BY A BLACK WOMAN IN AMERICAN HISTORY.

SO IT'S AN INCREDIBLE CHAPTER THAT AMERICANS JUST DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT, BUT WE WERE HAPPY TO HIGHLIGHT IN THIS FILM.

>> Braude: WE DO KNOW NOW AND, STANLEY, I'M ASSUMING A DECENT NUMBERS OF VIEWERS OF YOUR FILM HAD HEARD THAT THE VOICE OF FREDERICK DOUGLASS MAY HAVE BEEN THE MOST LISTENED-TO VOICE IN AMERICA IN THE 19th CENTURY.

BUT WHAT I FOUND INTERESTING IS HIS PERSPECTIVE ON THE STRATEGIC USE OF THE GOAFT AS PART OF HIS HIS -- THE PHOTOGRAPH AT PART OF HIS SOCIAL JUSTICE EFFORT.

>> FREDERICK DOUGLASS RECOGNIZED EARLY ON, RIGHT AFTER THE INVENTION OF PHOTOGRAPHY, BUT HE REALLY REALIZED THE POWER OF THE PHOTO AND SEIZED ON IT, AND HE TOOK PICTURE AFTER PICTURE AND, YOU KNOW, HE ALWAYS LOOKED REALLY GOOD, AND HE'S SITTING UP STRAIGHT AND HE'S STARING INTO THE CAMERA, AND HIS LOOK IS DARING ANYBODY TO SAY THAT HE IS SOMEBODY THAT SHOULD BE ENSLAVED.

HE'S STARING ANYBODY TO SAY HE'S A LESS LESSER MAN THAN YOU ARE.

SO HE USED PHOTOGRAPHY IN THIS INCREDIBLE WAY.

>> Braude: STANLEY, ONE COMMON THREAT, TO ME, IN THE TWO FILMS IS BOTH HARRIET TUBMAN AND FREDERICK DOUGLASS WERE IN MARYLAND, WHICH IS AS IS SAID IN ONE OF THE FILMSICS NOT FAR FROM FREEDOM.

DID THAT MATAR IN TERMS OF THEIR -- MATTER IN TERMS OF THEIR LIFE AND WORK THAT THEY WERE ABOUT 100 MILES FROM THE MASON-DIXON LINE?

>> IT'S INSTRUMENTAL IN THEIR LIVES AND THE FILMS BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS WE THINK ABOUT WHEN WE THINK ABOUT ENSLAVEMENT IS PLANTATION SLAVERY OF THE DEEP SOUTH, THE COTTON PLANTATIONS WITH SOMETIMES HUNDREDS OF ENSLAVED PEOPLE.

BUT MARYLAND WAS A VERY DIFFERENT PLACE.

I THINK WE SAY, IN ONE PLACE IN THE FILM, THAT MARYLAND HAD 90,000 ENSLAVED AFRICAN-AMERICANS, BUT 60,000 FREE AFRICAN-AMERICANS.

SO, IN MARYLAND, THE FREE AFRICAN-AMERICANS WERE WORKING SIDE BY SIDE WITH ENSLAVED PEOPLE.

SO FREEDOM WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS TANGIBLE, THAT BOTH FREDERICK DOUGLASS AND HARRIET TUBMAN KNEW.

THEY BOTH MARRIED FREE PEOPLE WHILE THEY WERE ENSLAVED.

SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S A VERY DIFFERENT ENSLAVEMENT.

BUT IT'S STILL ENSLAVEMENT AND THAT THE AN IMPORTANT POINT WE MAKE.

>> Braude: WHO SAYS IN THE FILM, STANLEY, I'M SMILING, WHEN ONE OF THE SCHOLARS WITH WHOM YOU ARE SPEAKING SAY WHY WOULD A FREE PERSON MARRY AN ENSLAVED PERSON AND THERE WAS A PAUSE AND THE PERSON SAID LOVE, WHICH I THOUGHT WAS INCREDIBLE.

SPEAKING OF THE MARYLAND THING FOR A SECOND, ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS I LEARNED WHICH I HAD TO PLAY BACK BECAUSE I COULDN'T BELIEVE I HEARD IT RIGHT, WHICH IS WHEN A SLAVE, FOR EXAMPLE, IN MARYLAND, MIGHT BE SOLD INTO THE DEEP SOUTH.

AM I RIGHT THAT WHAT I HEARD THAT THE LIFE EXPECTSY FROM THAT POINT FORWARD WAS JUST SEVEN YEARS?

IS THAT RIGHT?

>> YEAH, SOMETHING THAT THE RECENT SCHOLARSHIP HAS COME FORWARD WITH IS THAT IT WAS ABOUT SEVEN YEARS FROM THE KIND OF, YOU KNOW, ENSLAVEMENT, LIKE STANLEY MENTIONED, IS STILL ENSLAVEMENT IN MARYLAND BUT IT WASN'T THE KIND OF HARDBACK-BREAKING LABOR THAT YOU COULD EXPECT WITH THE COTTON INDUSTRY.

THIS WAS -- YOU KNOW, THE INDUSTRY IN MARYLAND WAS MUCH MORE PASTORAL.

THERE WERE SMALLER NUMBERS OF SLAVES.

IT WAS STILL BACKBREAKING WORK.

BUT TO BE WORKED UNDER THE MILL, IF YOU WILL, IN THE COTTON INDUSTRY IN THE SOUTH, REALLY WAS, YOU KNOW, EXTRACTING EVERY BIT OF LABOR THEY COULD FROM A SLAVE.

SO IT WAS LIKE HARD, HARD, HARD LABOR AND, YOU KNOW, IT WAS HOTTER, OF COURSE, THE CONDITIONS WERE DIFFERENT.

SO, YEAH, IT WAS ABOUT SEVEN YEARS THAT, YOU KNOW, A SLAVE COULD EXPECT TO LIVE.

AND, YOU KNOW, THIS WAS AN INCREDIBLE FEAR FOR, YOU KNOW, SLAVES IN THE MARYLAND AREA THAT, YOU KNOW, NOT ONLY WOULD THEY BE SEPARATED THERE THEIR FAMILY BUT LITERALLY BE WORKED TO DEATH.

>> Braude: STANLEY, I BELIEVE YOU SAID IN THE FILM THAT OCCASIONALLY HARRIET TUBMAN AND FREDERICK DOUGLASS CAME UPON EACH OTHER ON THE LECTURE CIRCUIT.

IS THAT -- THAT'S ACCURATE, RIGHT?

>> YEAH, MM-HMM.

>> Braude: AND THERE'S -- I WANT TO PLAY FOR PEOPLE THIS LETTER THAT LETTER FREDERICK DOUGLASS HONORED HARRIET TUBMAN IS CREDIBLY POWERFUL.

>> DEAR HARRIET, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN US IS VERY MARKED.

MOST THAT I HAVE DONE AND SUFFERED IN THE SERVICE OF OUR CAUSE HAS BEEN IN PUBLIC.

THE MOST YOU HAVE DONE IS BE WITNESSED BY A FEW TREMBLING, SCARED, AND FOOTSORE, BOND MEN AND WOMEN WHOM YOU HAVE LEAD OUT OF THE HOUSE OF BONDAGE AND WHOSE HEARTFELT 'GOD BLESS YOU' HAS BEEN YOUR ONLY REWARD.

THE MIDNIGHT SKY AND THE SILENT STARS HAVE BEEN WITNESS TO YOUR DEVOTION TO FREEDOM AND OF YOUR HEROISM.

>> Braude: YOU KNOW, STANLEY, DID YOU EVER STEP BACK FROM THIS WORK AND THINK ABOUT WHAT AMERICA WOULD BE LIKE HAD THERE NOT HAVE BEEN A HARRIET TUBMAN OR A FREDERICK DOUGLASS?

>> YEAH, I MEAN, YOU THINK ABOUT THAT ALL THE TIME.

I THINK THAT THEY'RE GREAT AMERICAN HEROES AND, YOU KNOW, FREDERICK DOUGLASS WAS JUST SO AHEAD OF HIS TIME IN EVERYTHING, YOU KNOW.

HE WAS JUST NOT ONLY IN ABOLITION BUT BOTH WERE INVOLVED IN THE WOMEN'S MOVEMENT.

THEY WERE JUST INCREDIBLE INDIVIDUALS.

YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO THINK, WHEN WE DO PROJECTS ON ENSLAVEMENT, THAT ENSLAVEMENT WAS SUPPOSED TO GO ON FOREVER.

I MEAN, IT WAS SUPPOSED TO GO ON FOREVER, YOU KNOW.

I MEAN, I WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A SLAVE, YOU KNOW, AND IT'S BECAUSE OF PEOPLE LIKE FREDERICK DOUGLASS AND HARRIET TUBMAN THAT THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN AND THAT AMERICA MADE A HARD TURN FOR THE BETTER.

>> Braude: YOU KNOW, NICOLE, I'M ASSUMING I'M LIKE EVERY VIEWER OF THESE TWO FILMS AND THEY WILL FINISH SAYING THEY LEARNED A LOT ABOUT OUR HISTORY, AND ANOTHER MOMENT OF EMBARRASSMENT FOR ME ON THE 100th ANNIVERSARY OF THE TULSA MASSACRES BUZZ THE FIRST TIME I LEARNED, FOR EXAMPLE, ABOUT THE TULSA MASSACRES.

A YOUNG BLACK MAN CALLED OUR RADIO SHOW WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING IT AND SAID HE GREW UP IN TULSA, HE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE TULSA MASSACRES.

ARE WE MOVING IN THE DIRECTION IN THIS COUNTRY WHERE BLACK HISTORY IS FINALLY SEEN AS AMERICAN HISTORY, OR THE CRITICAL RACE THEORY OPPONENT FRAUDS CARRYING THE DAY?

>> UNFORTUNATELY, I THINK WE'RE KIND OF ON TWO DIFFERENT TRACKS, ONE WHERE WE ARE MOVING FORWARD, PEOPLE ARE LEARNING, AND THERE'S MANY MORE RESOURCES THAN EVER TO LEARN ABOUT BLACK HISTORY, THEN THERE IS A PUSH TO WALK ALL OF THAT BACK, YOU KNOW, THE IDEA THAT THIS HISTORY IS MORE DIVISIVE THAN IT BRINGS PEOPLE TOGETHER AND, YOU KNOW, I CHALLENGE EVERYONE TO REFUTE THOSE CLAIMS AND TO LEARN AS MUCH AS THEY CAN ABOUT AMERICAN HISTORY BECAUSE AS MUCH AS WE CAN HONESTLY CONFRONT OUR HISTORY, THE MORE WE CAN ALL MOVE FORWARD TOGETHER.

>> Braude: STANLEY, ARE WE MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION ON THAT FRONT OR NO?

>> I AGREE WITH NICOLE, WE'RE ON TWO TRACKS.

I THINK MANY PEOPLE ARE MOVING FORWARD AND HOPEFULLY THEY'LL ONEWIN THE DAY, BUT ALSO WE HEAR ABOUT BOOKS BEING BANNED.

WHOEVER WOULD HAVE THOUGHT IN OUR LIFETIME WE WOULD HAVE HEARD OF TONEY MORRISON BEING BANNED AND HISTORY NOT BEING TAUGHT BECAUSE IT MAKES PEOPLE FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE.

SO WE'RE ON TWO TRACKS.

HOPEFULLY THE TRACK OF REASON AND KNOWLEDGE WILL WIN.

>> Braude: WELL, YOU BOTH ARE ON THAT TRACK, AND I HAVE TO SAY EVERYBODY SHOULD RIDE IT WITH YOU.

THE FILMS ARE SPECTACULAR AND I THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME TO THE BOTH YOU HAVE.

>> THANK YOU.

>> Braude: HARRIET TUBMAN, -- "HARRIET TUBMAN: VISIONS OF FREEDOM" AND "BECOMING FREDERICK DOUGLASS" ARE BOTH AVAILABLE TO STREAM ON PBS.ORG AND THE PBS APP.

FINALLY TONIGHT, WITH ELECTION DAY JUST A FEW WEEKS AWAY AND EARLY VOTING KICKING OFF THIS WEEKEND, GBH NEWS IS BREAKING DOWN THE INS AND THE OUTS OF THE INITIATIVES YOU'LL SEE ON YOUR BALLOT.

FIRST UP-- QUESTION 1.

>> WHAT WOULD QUESTION 1 ON THE MASSACHUSETTS BALLOT DO?

QUESTION 1 SOMETIMES REFERRED AS THE FAIR SHARE AMENDMENT OR MILLIONAIRES TAX WOULD AMEND THE STATE CONSTITUTION TO ADD A NEW 4% SURTAX ON A PERSON'S ANNUAL INCOME OVER ONE DOLLAR MILLION.

CURRENTLY EVERYONE WHO MAKES MORE THAN $8,000 $8,000 A YEAR IN MASSACHUSETTS MAS A 5% TAX ON THEIR INCOME.

A YES VOTE ON QUESTION ONE WOULD KEEP THAT PLUS TACK ON AN ADDITIONAL 4% TAX ON EVERY DOLLAR OVER THAT 1 MILLION INCOME THRESHOLD.

A NO VOTE WOULD KEEP THE SYSTEM EXACTLY AS IT IS NOW.

IF PASSED THE AMENDMENT IS POSED TO GENERATE MORE THAN A BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR IN REVENUE STEERING THAT MONEY TOWARDS EDUCATION AND TRANSPORTATION BUT LEAVES IT TO LAWMAKERS TO DECIDE HOW TO SPEND IT.

SUPPORTERS SAY THE CHANGE WOULD MAKE THE STATE'S TAX SYSTEM AND ECONOMY MORE EQUITABLE AND HELP FUND MORE WET BETTER SCHOOLS AND NEEDED ROAD, BRIDGE AND TRANSIT MOVEMENTS WITHOUT REACHING INTO MOST PEOPLE'S POCKETBOOKS.

CRITICS SAY THE EXTRA TAX IS A BLANK CHECK AND NO GUARANTEE THE LAWMAKERS WOULD USE THE MONEY TO BOOST EDUCATION AND TRANSPORTATION SPENDING.

THEY WARN WEALTHIER PEOPLE COULD LEAVE MASSACHUSETTS AND TAKE THEIR BUSINESSES WITH THEM.

THE QUESTION COPS TO VOTERS AS INFLATION IS MAKING IT HARDER FOR TOWNS TO INVASE IN ROADS AND SCHOOLS AND AS AN ESTIMATED THREE DOLLARS BILLION IS BEING RETURNED TO TAXPAYERS BECAUSE THE STATE TOOK IN MORE THAN ALLOWED UNDER CURRENT LAW.

WHETHER QUESTION 1 PASSES OR FAILS IT WILL BE HARD TO CHANGE THE TAX SETUP DOWN THE ROAD, LIKE REQUIRING ANOTHER MULTI-YEAR PROCESS TO ADD ANOTHER AMENDMENT TO THE STATE'S CONSTITUTION.

SO IF YOU WANT THE ADDITIONAL 4% SURTAX ON TOP OF THE EXISTING 5% RATE FOR INCOME OVER ONE DOLLAR MILLION, VOTE YES ON QUESTION 1.

IF YOU WANT TO KEEP THE CURRENT TAX SETUP AND THE 5% FLAT RATE, VOTE NO.

>> BRAUDE: THAT WAS GBH NEWS STATE HOUSE REPORTER KATIE LANNAN REPORTING.

STAY TUNED, WE'LL HAVE MORE ON THE OTHER 2022 BALLOT QUESTIONS HERE ON GBH-2 AND ON GBHNEWS.ORG IN THE COMING DAYS.

THAT'S IT FOR TONIGHT.

WE'LL BE BACK TOMORROW.

THANKS FOR WATCHING, AND PLEASE DON'T FORGET UKRAINE.

Captioned by Media Access Group at WGBH access.wgbh.org