Recently the PBS program "Now" broadcast a quite comprehensive report on the debate over whether medical practitioners should participate in executions. The whole thing can be found here.
One section I found interesting, and at times chilling, was this interview with a nurse. She prepares people for execution in Georgia by inserting the IV:
"Nurse Karen"
Senior Correspondent Maria Hinojosa spoke with "Karen," a nurse, about her participation in 14 executions at a prison in Jackson, Georgia. Karen, who did not want her identity disclosed for fear of retribution, has worked as a nurse for 26 years.
HINOJOSA: What is it like in an execution chamber?
KAREN: It almost feels like an operating room because it kind of has a chill in the air. It's just a simple gurney in there, and there's a Plexiglas window where witnesses are on the other side of the window and benches that look like church pews. That's where the witnesses sit and can
actually look through the window and see the inmate on a gurney.
HINOJOSA: What exactly is your role in the execution?
KAREN: Once the inmate is actually brought in and strapped on a gurney then we go in and, just like you would do with any patient in the hospital, you treat them just like a patient. We've always addressed them and talked to them and told them exactly what we're going to do. You put the tourniquet on. You use your alcohol to help cleanse the area and insert the IV catheter
into the site ... tape it down and then hook up just regular IV fluids into the site. Then we leave them hooked up to regular IV fluids and then leave the area.
HINOJOSA: And in that moment when you're finding the vein, what are you
thinking?
KAREN: At that time, I'm just looking at it as an IV that needs to be started. We normally carry on a conversion with the inmate. And they have always been very nice. A lot of times some of them would even make a comment 'that didn't hurt like I thought it was going to.' So they're just like regular patients laying there. Even if you're putting somebody to death, you want it to go as quickly and as painlessly as possible because you're trying to show respect for that person still.
HINOJOSA: And where do you go at that point?
Even if you're putting somebody to death, you want it to go as quickly and as painlessly as possible...
KAREN: Just back behind the curtain. After, they get everything else set up, read the death order and bring in any witnesses. Then they start the injections ... and everybody from you prison officials, your state officials that are around, your officers that are there, everybody is very quiet throughout everything ... Death comes so quickly. You're talking about from the start of the injection until the end, six, eight minutes at most ... And then you just kind of leave and it's over ... You don't do a lot of thinking about it.
HINOJOSA: What are the conversations like among the medical personnel who are in the room before the injection and after?
KAREN: During the time when we're waiting we're actually talking about anything and everything else. You're not focusing on what's going to happen. You know, we may talk about what we just had for supper. Or you talk about what was going on at the job you just left, talk about your family. You just have normal conversations.
HINOJOSA: What about nurses or doctors who say the Hippocratic Oath says that medical professionals should never do any harm to any patient. And by participating in an execution of somebody who, perhaps, doesn't want to be killed, then you're doing harm to that person. You're not caring for the patient.
KAREN: I look at them at an execution as [going through] a terminal illness. At the time that they were sentenced, they were diagnosed with a terminal illness. When they go through all of their appeals and everything, that's just like going on any kind of chemotherapy, radiation, whatever. And if all their appeals fail, then basically it's their terminal illness coming to an
end. And therefore, I think it's with any patient, they need to have the dignity up until the very end. And I think that dignity is by having actual trained people to help them.
HINOJOSA: So would you have an issue if you didn't just have to insert the IV but if you had to push the button to get the poisons into their system? Would that be a problem for you?
KAREN: I would not want to actually do the injections.
HINOJOSA: Why?
KAREN: I guess it's very strange because I don't know what the real big difference is ... I don't mind actually inserting the lines because that is something that I have been trained to do. But as far as administering an overdose, I just wouldn't want to do that.
HINOJOSA: So for you, there are some ethical issues?
...as far as administering an overdose, I just wouldn't want to do that.
KAREN: Yes.
HINOJOSA: And how, when you're thinking about this, when you're alone and you're contemplating this, how do you figure it out in your mind.
KAREN: I believe in the death penalty and I do believe that by the time it comes time for somebody to actually have the injection, you know, they have been through all their appeals. But I think that that's something that should actually be done by someone in the prison system.
HINOJOSA: Because giving someone an overdose for you, as a nurse, means what?
KAREN: That's just not something you're supposed to knowingly do.
HINOJOSA: When people say to you, you know what, Karen, as a nurse, you have simply become an agent of the state. And the state is using your skills for the purpose of the state which is to kill someone. You say?
KAREN: Basically, I don't feel that way. And I'm a nurse in so many other ways. And even though, maybe, a couple of times a year I do work for the state and help them to carry out executions I don't feel that makes me any less a nurse or any less a person. I mean, somebody's got to do it. And I just believe that it's something that I'm almost called to do because I do
have the skills.
HINOJOSA: I know it's a difficult question, but do you consider yourself an executioner?
KAREN: No, I don't. I don't know that I consider anybody an executioner. Even the people that I know who push the drugs I don't consider them an executioner either. I look at it as the state is the executioner. We're just carrying out procedures.
HINOJOSA: Tell me about the one execution that was, in fact, difficult for you.
KAREN: There was one particular inmate who actually, after his crime, had been converted to Christianity and was very vocal about it. But, at the time of his execution, when he gave his last words, all of his last words were of compliments to the prison, to the officers who had been with him through the years and had treated him as a person. He went on to say that even though he
had been saved and he knew he was going to heaven that he did know that God expected him to take his punishment for the crime that he had done ... and that man's punishment for the murders that he committed was for him to be put to death. So he was willingly taking it. There were tears in everybody's eyes, even all the officers. You know, these big guys that you thought probably never would even think about crying and especially about an inmate. There wasn't a dry eye ... you felt good about it because he was so willing to accept his punishment ... it was just one that you'll always remember.
HINOJOSA: Have you been harassed because you've taken part in executions?
KAREN: My personal harassment has been minimal compared to other people that I actually worked with in the executions ... Some of the doctors actually had notes put on their cars, calls made to their office all different kind of calls calling them murderers. Most of it just went as far as phone calls and notes but you still don't know if people will go to that extent, what all else they will do.
HINOJOSA: We spoke to five of your former colleagues, doctors who took part in executions. None of them were willing to speak to us even if we gave them anonymity. Does that surprise you?
KAREN: Not really because of the harassment that some of them have gotten I can understand that they would be afraid that it would hurt their private practice. I think, more than anything, they are afraid of how some of their patients would respond to it. Not knowing how everybody feels that they would be afraid that some of their patients would be offended because of
some of the publicity that has been out there.
HINOJOSA: What is the thing that you ultimately would fear the most if you were talk about this publicly and show your face?
KAREN: That the people that I work with now as far as patients and patients' families and things like that, that there would be someone that would look on it that I was a killer. "How can you care for my family member and, you know, this is what you do." In the area that I live, the majority of people are very supportive but for that reason I just prefer not to be known to
people that really don't know me.
Tuesday, July 18, 2006
Friday, July 14, 2006
The Trials of Darryl Hunt: Two Perspectives
A group of NCADP interns recently viewed a special showing of The Trials of Darryl Hunt, which details the story of an innocent person who was convicted and sentenced to life in prison in North Carolina. Interns Y. Eugina Huang (who we call "Yuji") and Rachel Lawler (who we call "Rachel") shared their views afterwards.
Yuji writes:
Innocent until proven guilty?
Unfortunately, if you are a poor black man in a Southern state accused of raping and killing a “white rose,” it’s the other way around. The system needs a scapegoat, and one black man’s freedom means as much as the next one’s. This is the land of sweet tea and generous hospitality, but it is also the land of trees that once bore “strange fruit,” of de facto segregation and the Klan.
This is the subject of The Trials of Darryl Hunt, a powerful documentary about race, class, and how twenty years of a man’s life were stolen from him by a jury of his (white) peers. In 1984, a young white woman was killed in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. This was an era before reliable DNA testing, but positive identifications from a drug addict, a Klansman, and a convicted criminal led to the arrest of Darryl Hunt, a young black man. An all-white jury found him guilty, and he was sentenced to life in prison.
Well, at least he didn’t get the death penalty, right?
What’s the difference? In our moral system, we hold freedom as a paramount value. In other words, it’s all the way up there with life and the pursuit of happiness and all that jazz. To take away a man’s freedom is tantamount to taking his life, especially if this is wrongfully done in the name of justice for all.
How many other Darryl Hunts are out there, not just in the South but throughout the nation? We cannot ignore the fact that there are men and women wrongfully convicted, serving sentences they do not deserve. And this is not limited to those on death row—what about those serving life sentences, or even those unjustifiably serving lesser sentences? No matter how few, these human beings are a significant minimum.
Innocent until proven guilty. Right.
And Rachel writes:
On Tuesday evening several of us from NCADP viewed an advanced screening of the documentary “The Trials of Daryl Hunt”.
I think that a more apropos (and admittedly a bit lengthier) name for the film is: “The Indelible Spirit of an Amazingly Courageous and Inspirational Man Named Daryl Hunt”.
This film did a fantastic job of chronicling how a completely innocent man was twice convicted and sentenced to life. His case was riddled with prosecutorial misconduct, police misconduct, blatant racism within the community. Sounds like a real pick-me-up, right? But it was. This man never once faltered in his claim of innocence, even to the detriment of his freedom when he refused a plea bargain that would have set him free (on time served) if he plead to 2nd-degree manslaughter. He then went to trial and was found guilty for the 2nd time. Throughout the film the humanity, love, faith, and spirit within this man persevered and were what helped him to carry on when all odds were against him.
Afterwards, a panel discussion was held featuring Daryl, one of his lawyers, and a representative from Open Society Policy Center.
See this documentary!!!
Yuji writes:
Innocent until proven guilty?
Unfortunately, if you are a poor black man in a Southern state accused of raping and killing a “white rose,” it’s the other way around. The system needs a scapegoat, and one black man’s freedom means as much as the next one’s. This is the land of sweet tea and generous hospitality, but it is also the land of trees that once bore “strange fruit,” of de facto segregation and the Klan.
This is the subject of The Trials of Darryl Hunt, a powerful documentary about race, class, and how twenty years of a man’s life were stolen from him by a jury of his (white) peers. In 1984, a young white woman was killed in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. This was an era before reliable DNA testing, but positive identifications from a drug addict, a Klansman, and a convicted criminal led to the arrest of Darryl Hunt, a young black man. An all-white jury found him guilty, and he was sentenced to life in prison.
Well, at least he didn’t get the death penalty, right?
What’s the difference? In our moral system, we hold freedom as a paramount value. In other words, it’s all the way up there with life and the pursuit of happiness and all that jazz. To take away a man’s freedom is tantamount to taking his life, especially if this is wrongfully done in the name of justice for all.
How many other Darryl Hunts are out there, not just in the South but throughout the nation? We cannot ignore the fact that there are men and women wrongfully convicted, serving sentences they do not deserve. And this is not limited to those on death row—what about those serving life sentences, or even those unjustifiably serving lesser sentences? No matter how few, these human beings are a significant minimum.
Innocent until proven guilty. Right.
And Rachel writes:
On Tuesday evening several of us from NCADP viewed an advanced screening of the documentary “The Trials of Daryl Hunt”.
I think that a more apropos (and admittedly a bit lengthier) name for the film is: “The Indelible Spirit of an Amazingly Courageous and Inspirational Man Named Daryl Hunt”.
This film did a fantastic job of chronicling how a completely innocent man was twice convicted and sentenced to life. His case was riddled with prosecutorial misconduct, police misconduct, blatant racism within the community. Sounds like a real pick-me-up, right? But it was. This man never once faltered in his claim of innocence, even to the detriment of his freedom when he refused a plea bargain that would have set him free (on time served) if he plead to 2nd-degree manslaughter. He then went to trial and was found guilty for the 2nd time. Throughout the film the humanity, love, faith, and spirit within this man persevered and were what helped him to carry on when all odds were against him.
Afterwards, a panel discussion was held featuring Daryl, one of his lawyers, and a representative from Open Society Policy Center.
See this documentary!!!
Thursday, July 13, 2006
Remembering Carol Byars
Carol Byars, a member of the Journey of Hope family, passed away this week. She was a leaders in the victims' movement to abolish the death penalty and a powerful voice for the healing power of forgiveness.
Here is Carol's story:
When I met Jimmy, little did I know how knowing him would change my life. He was the love of my life. Although I was barely more than a child, I also knew I would marry him someday. And I did, at the age of eighteen. We had our first child less than a year after. At twenty-one I was pregnant with my second child. Even at so young of an age, I knew this kind of relationship was rare.
It was the Labor Day of that year when everything so drastically changed. Since I was pregnant and not up to the usual BBQ and such, I went to my mom's to rest and Jimmy went to his mom's to watch the game. Sometime during that day there was an argument with his mother's neighbors. I have had some conflicting stories through the years so there are details that I still don't know. But this is what happened as I know it.
When the altercation started, there was the usual anger and name calling. It was said, "Wait till John Earl gets home, and he will take care of this." When he arrived home, the argument started again. He got his gun and first shot Jimmy's ten year old brother Sonny. He then shot Jimmy's sixteen year old brother Bryan. I think there was a scuffle with his other brother Pete and he was beat with the butt of the shotgun. All of this happened very quickly. The gun had just been turned on Jimmy's mother when he ran and opened the front door and yelled to stop.
That's when John Earl turned and shot Jimmy. He was shot from twenty feet with a twelve gauge pump shotgun through a screen door. So he not only had all of the scatter from the shot gun, he also had a lot of screen from the door.They didn't think Jimmy would make it past the first night but he lived almost a year. He was awake and alert in ICU for most of that time, so he felt every pain and disappointment in his attempted recovery. But he was an amazing man.
During all those months in the hospital, he came to the realization that he had to let go of all of the anger he felt towards this man. Even with the knowledge that he would never see his daughters grow up, he let go. I know he did this for my benefit as well. It also gave me permission to let go, heal, and move on with my life, though it took me a little longer than it did Jimmy.
Now I have forgiven and moved on. For me it means trying to stop that circle of violence. That includes state executions. Healing will never happen by holding onto the pain of the past. That is where an execution holds us, focused on the pain of the past. I think it's time to find a new way of dealing with our crime problem. There has been enough pain to go around.
Carol was a member of the Journey of Hope...from Violence to Healing, Murder Victims Families for Reconciliation, Murder Victims Families for Human Rights, Citizens United for Alternatives to the Death penalty, Texas Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, and the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty. She will be greatly missed. We love you Carol.
Carol Byars Quotes:
"It is past time for being silent about the death penalty. In Texas, we’re executing record numbers each year. Things have gotten so bad because people have all been silent and let things get bad. We are told many times that we are not supposed to forgive – that when people do horrible things to us we should do something just as bad in retribution. Those of us who know better – those of us who know the power of forgiveness – need to speak up. Every chance we get, we need to challenge the mentality that compassion is a weakness. Compassion is the toughest thing of all, but it’s the only thing that works to restore peace in our live."
"When my husband was killed a piece of me died with him, but in time I discovered the only way to heal was to let go of the pain and anger. I chose to honor his memory through compassion and forgiveness, not by creating more victims."
Here is Carol's story:
When I met Jimmy, little did I know how knowing him would change my life. He was the love of my life. Although I was barely more than a child, I also knew I would marry him someday. And I did, at the age of eighteen. We had our first child less than a year after. At twenty-one I was pregnant with my second child. Even at so young of an age, I knew this kind of relationship was rare.
It was the Labor Day of that year when everything so drastically changed. Since I was pregnant and not up to the usual BBQ and such, I went to my mom's to rest and Jimmy went to his mom's to watch the game. Sometime during that day there was an argument with his mother's neighbors. I have had some conflicting stories through the years so there are details that I still don't know. But this is what happened as I know it.
When the altercation started, there was the usual anger and name calling. It was said, "Wait till John Earl gets home, and he will take care of this." When he arrived home, the argument started again. He got his gun and first shot Jimmy's ten year old brother Sonny. He then shot Jimmy's sixteen year old brother Bryan. I think there was a scuffle with his other brother Pete and he was beat with the butt of the shotgun. All of this happened very quickly. The gun had just been turned on Jimmy's mother when he ran and opened the front door and yelled to stop.
That's when John Earl turned and shot Jimmy. He was shot from twenty feet with a twelve gauge pump shotgun through a screen door. So he not only had all of the scatter from the shot gun, he also had a lot of screen from the door.They didn't think Jimmy would make it past the first night but he lived almost a year. He was awake and alert in ICU for most of that time, so he felt every pain and disappointment in his attempted recovery. But he was an amazing man.
During all those months in the hospital, he came to the realization that he had to let go of all of the anger he felt towards this man. Even with the knowledge that he would never see his daughters grow up, he let go. I know he did this for my benefit as well. It also gave me permission to let go, heal, and move on with my life, though it took me a little longer than it did Jimmy.
Now I have forgiven and moved on. For me it means trying to stop that circle of violence. That includes state executions. Healing will never happen by holding onto the pain of the past. That is where an execution holds us, focused on the pain of the past. I think it's time to find a new way of dealing with our crime problem. There has been enough pain to go around.
Carol was a member of the Journey of Hope...from Violence to Healing, Murder Victims Families for Reconciliation, Murder Victims Families for Human Rights, Citizens United for Alternatives to the Death penalty, Texas Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, and the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty. She will be greatly missed. We love you Carol.
Carol Byars Quotes:
"It is past time for being silent about the death penalty. In Texas, we’re executing record numbers each year. Things have gotten so bad because people have all been silent and let things get bad. We are told many times that we are not supposed to forgive – that when people do horrible things to us we should do something just as bad in retribution. Those of us who know better – those of us who know the power of forgiveness – need to speak up. Every chance we get, we need to challenge the mentality that compassion is a weakness. Compassion is the toughest thing of all, but it’s the only thing that works to restore peace in our live."
"When my husband was killed a piece of me died with him, but in time I discovered the only way to heal was to let go of the pain and anger. I chose to honor his memory through compassion and forgiveness, not by creating more victims."
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
at the intersection of homicide and suicide...
did you know that there are over 30,000 suicides each year in the united states???well, the amnesty international program to abolish the death penalty blog reported last week that 3 "volunteers" were scheduled for execution this week...fortunately one, bobby wilcher in mississippi, was stayed ...
but this question about "volunteering" for execution has had interesting light shed on it by professor john blume in his article killing the willing: "volunteers," suicide and competency ...
the lil' jesuit dude down in tennessee blogged about this phenomena yesterday with eloquence and you should check it out...
and then comment back here - this deserves your input in a conversation...
peace out - <3
Monday, July 10, 2006
uh, have you seen my backbone anywhere???
if you're in florida...or texas... you may think that your governor is pretty bad on the death penalty and for the most part you'd be pretty right on...but consider that tennessee had just it's second execution in 46 years ~ 2 weeks ago - in a case where dna testing was fought by the state and sedley alley was executed with uncertainty clouding the circus to the very end...
governor bredesen issued a 15 day reprieve on may 16th stopping the execution over the dna testing issue - but he did not order the testing, he gave the attorneys one last shot to get the courts to order the evidence released for testing ...
even jeb bush and his lil' brother (while governor of texas) took that wimpy lil' step ...
in spite of the best efforts of barry scheck and the innocence project no testing was ever done...
you can read our governor's thoughts on his role by clicking here ... but i warn you, if you have trouble with spinelessness tread carefully!!!
Sunday, July 09, 2006
go on ahead and throw some seeds of your own...
Into a dancer you have grownFrom a seed somebody else has thrown
Go on ahead and throw some seeds of your own
And somewhere between the time you arrive
And the time you go
May lie the reason you were alive
But you'll never know...
-Jackson Browne, 1974-
ever wonder if the work to educate people about the failure's of the death penalty system is bearing fruit??? the answer is yes - consider this note i received a couple of days after the june 28th execution in tennessee and my thanks to the writer for sharing it with me and permitting me to share it with you...
peace out...
"...my opinions about the death penalty have changed so much since meeting you. I was really never on one side or the other. But I feel completely against the death penalty now after talking to you ... and being able to see a different side to the situation.
I was watching the news last Tuesday night and my kids were with me. They asked me about what an execution was and how it happened. I explained it to them in very basic terms since they are 7 & 10. Wednesday morning ______ woke up and crawled into bed with me and said, "Mom, did they execute the man last night?", I said "yes" and he said he was thinking about it and was sad.
So, see how what you've shared with me has now affected a new generation. I just thought you should hear that story."
Friday, July 07, 2006
Monday, July 03, 2006
Next-to-last Fast and Vigil Update
(Almost) last but certainly not least, we now hear from NCADP intern and abolitionist Y. Eugina Huang. Eugina is a second-year student at Washington and Lee University in Lexington, Virginia, where she is a W&L Scholar. In the fall, she intends to declare a double-major in Politics and Philosophy, with dual concentrations in the Shepherd Poverty Program and the University Scholars Program. She enjoys music, Law & Order: Special Victims Unit, and people.
When my friends ask what I did for my birthday this year, I tell them, “I spent the day outside the Supreme Court at the 13th Annual Fast & Vigil to Abolish the Death Penalty.” Their usual response is, “Oh, so you didn’t get to celebrate your birthday?” Quite the contrary!
Upon arriving at the Fast & Vigil, I was able to interview David Plecenik, a soon-to-be college freshman from Pennsylvania. Raised Catholic, he tells me that he has always believed in the ethic of life and has just recently become involved in the movement. When asked how he has been faring with only water since Wednesday night, his response is simple—“It’s well worth it.”
The rally started then, with the camera rolling, the sun reflecting off the white marble of the Supreme Court steps, and the American flag flying high above us. And there, between the Supreme Court and the Capitol, everyone heard the voices of the movement—powerful voices, voices of the exonerated, beautiful voices, voices of murder victims’ family members, voices in song, voices of the crowd.
But from all of the voices we heard, one stands out in my mind. I found Luke, a fifth grader from Canada, sitting on the ground holding a sign. I asked him to tell me one interesting thing that he learned during the Fast & Vigil. His response?
“Umm… how to stop the death penalty. Yeah, that’s pretty much it.”
When my friends ask what I did for my birthday this year, I tell them, “I spent the day outside the Supreme Court at the 13th Annual Fast & Vigil to Abolish the Death Penalty.” Their usual response is, “Oh, so you didn’t get to celebrate your birthday?” Quite the contrary!
Upon arriving at the Fast & Vigil, I was able to interview David Plecenik, a soon-to-be college freshman from Pennsylvania. Raised Catholic, he tells me that he has always believed in the ethic of life and has just recently become involved in the movement. When asked how he has been faring with only water since Wednesday night, his response is simple—“It’s well worth it.”
The rally started then, with the camera rolling, the sun reflecting off the white marble of the Supreme Court steps, and the American flag flying high above us. And there, between the Supreme Court and the Capitol, everyone heard the voices of the movement—powerful voices, voices of the exonerated, beautiful voices, voices of murder victims’ family members, voices in song, voices of the crowd.
But from all of the voices we heard, one stands out in my mind. I found Luke, a fifth grader from Canada, sitting on the ground holding a sign. I asked him to tell me one interesting thing that he learned during the Fast & Vigil. His response?
“Umm… how to stop the death penalty. Yeah, that’s pretty much it.”
Still updating: Fast & Vigil to Abolish the Death Penalty
The Annual Fast & Vigil to Abolish the Death Penalty is over, but we still have a few more updates to bring you. This installment comes from NCADP intern Matthew Rankin, who is a student at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. Matthew, one of the latest additions to NCADP’s collection of abolitionist interns, is president of his campus fraternity, Gamma Lambda Chapter Phi Kappa Sigma.
In the abolitionist movement it can be easy to forget exactly what we are fighting for. Events like Starvin’ for Justice ‘06 put that into perspective for me. It reminded me exactly what we are fighting for: individuals. Our movement is not just a broad fight based on ideology but also a fight that if won will touch the lives of individual people across the country.
When I arrived at the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court to join the crowd of abolitionists, I was immediately welcomed by those who had enough energy to greet me. It was a very warm place and not just because of the sun; the hearts that stood at the vigil were filled with love.
As I walked around the event I could not stop myself from thinking, “this is why I am fighting the death penalty.” I also realized something else that day; that our fight is much bigger than just me or the organization that I work for. People like Bill Pelke, “Paul the Peace Walker,” Christine Lawson and many others helped me remember that our fight is not centered at the NCADP. Millions of people across the globe want to abolish the death penalty and if the NCADP is successful we will give a voice to those people.
As I began distributing literature to passers-by, I was reminded that not everyone wants to abolish capital punishment, which I can accept. What I can not accept is those who are not educated on the subject. People in our country cannot continue to support the death penalty without knowing the facts. Support for the death penalty, unfortunately, all too often is rooted in ignorance. It is this ignorance that we must fight.
Starvin’ for Justice ‘06 was a powerful experience for me and I was only out there a couple of hours. I have nothing but respect and love for the people who gathered below the steps of the Supreme Court to make their voices heard.
In the abolitionist movement it can be easy to forget exactly what we are fighting for. Events like Starvin’ for Justice ‘06 put that into perspective for me. It reminded me exactly what we are fighting for: individuals. Our movement is not just a broad fight based on ideology but also a fight that if won will touch the lives of individual people across the country.
When I arrived at the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court to join the crowd of abolitionists, I was immediately welcomed by those who had enough energy to greet me. It was a very warm place and not just because of the sun; the hearts that stood at the vigil were filled with love.
As I walked around the event I could not stop myself from thinking, “this is why I am fighting the death penalty.” I also realized something else that day; that our fight is much bigger than just me or the organization that I work for. People like Bill Pelke, “Paul the Peace Walker,” Christine Lawson and many others helped me remember that our fight is not centered at the NCADP. Millions of people across the globe want to abolish the death penalty and if the NCADP is successful we will give a voice to those people.
As I began distributing literature to passers-by, I was reminded that not everyone wants to abolish capital punishment, which I can accept. What I can not accept is those who are not educated on the subject. People in our country cannot continue to support the death penalty without knowing the facts. Support for the death penalty, unfortunately, all too often is rooted in ignorance. It is this ignorance that we must fight.
Starvin’ for Justice ‘06 was a powerful experience for me and I was only out there a couple of hours. I have nothing but respect and love for the people who gathered below the steps of the Supreme Court to make their voices heard.
Sunday, July 02, 2006
Day Four from the Fast & Vigil
This update comes from NCADP intern Rachel Lawler, who has now fasted for just about 84 hours as part of the ongoing Fast & Vigil to abolish the Death Penalty on the sidewalk in front of the U.S. Supreme Court. Arlene I will be heading out there shortly to join the folks for the annual rally:
Good morning all you abolitionists out there. Today marks the 30th anniversary of the Gregg decision -- a decision that promised to remedy a broken death penalty system that had been identified four years prior, in Furman. It promised to get rid of the imbued racism and arbitrariness. But I think we can all agree that the promises were not fulfilled. And it's time for all of us to speak to that point.
The third day of the Fast and Vigil to Abolish the Death Penalty was just as amazing as the first and second days. Aside from getting a funny looking tanline of the outline of my sunglasses (which was an added and unexpected bonus), I also got the chance to hear some amazing speakers. In the past three days I have been completely inspired and awed by the speakers who shared with us their amazing stories of hope, activism, and healing.
The first death penalty speaker I ever saw was a member of Murder Victims' Families for Reconciliation, Rev. Walter Everett. In this man I saw such capacity for forgiveness, such amazing spirit... it just blew me away. Hearing stories from Bill Pelke, Christina Lawson, George White, and so many others has been truly inspiring. No one should have to endure what they've been through, but to hear the strength in their voices as they help us understand (to the extent that we can) what it's like, has been an irreplacable, unforgettable experience. I hope to join them for part of their Journey of Hope in Virginia this fall. Everyone should hear their stories!
Mmm food... I'm excited to break the fast tonight. So. Very. Excited. Food..........
Good morning all you abolitionists out there. Today marks the 30th anniversary of the Gregg decision -- a decision that promised to remedy a broken death penalty system that had been identified four years prior, in Furman. It promised to get rid of the imbued racism and arbitrariness. But I think we can all agree that the promises were not fulfilled. And it's time for all of us to speak to that point.
The third day of the Fast and Vigil to Abolish the Death Penalty was just as amazing as the first and second days. Aside from getting a funny looking tanline of the outline of my sunglasses (which was an added and unexpected bonus), I also got the chance to hear some amazing speakers. In the past three days I have been completely inspired and awed by the speakers who shared with us their amazing stories of hope, activism, and healing.
The first death penalty speaker I ever saw was a member of Murder Victims' Families for Reconciliation, Rev. Walter Everett. In this man I saw such capacity for forgiveness, such amazing spirit... it just blew me away. Hearing stories from Bill Pelke, Christina Lawson, George White, and so many others has been truly inspiring. No one should have to endure what they've been through, but to hear the strength in their voices as they help us understand (to the extent that we can) what it's like, has been an irreplacable, unforgettable experience. I hope to join them for part of their Journey of Hope in Virginia this fall. Everyone should hear their stories!
Mmm food... I'm excited to break the fast tonight. So. Very. Excited. Food..........
Friday, June 30, 2006
Day Two update on the Fast & Vigil
Today’s blog entry comes from NCADP intern Jonathan Sheehan. This fall, Jonathan will be a high school senior at Landon School in Bethesda, Maryland. He enjoys playing baseball and soccer and one of his career goals is “someday to run for public office.”
Which is a good thing – can you imagine what the climate will be like for abolish the death penalty if more abolitionists entered politics?
Here is Jonathan’s report from the sidewalk in front of the U.S. Supreme Court:
“Equal Justice Under Law.”
These words are carved in the marble over the pillars that support our nation’s Supreme Court building. Just below the steps of this American landmark stood 30 or so protestors, holding signs and demonstrating their support for the abolition movement. Quotes from Justice Byron White, Coretta Scott King, and others could be seen on signs and t-shirts alike. As a man walked by the vigil, I heard him remark, “Take them executed people to your house and let them live with you.”
I just wish he had stayed the rest of the morning.
As I stood in the heat, I recognized death row exoneree Shujaa Graham standing in the shade listening to his walkman. Mr. Graham and I met this past week at the Death Penalty Information Center’s Thurgood Marshall awards. He gave me a big hug, and we started to discuss his many reasons for being at the vigil. Mr. Graham spent three years on California’s San Quentin death row, before being released in 1979. His experiences have prompted him to travel the country and speak to high school and university students. His message is clear and concise: “Learn what you can [about the death penalty] and understand the reality.”
Information is power. Shujaa Graham knows that if people learn all there is to learn, someday we will outlaw “the lynching that is the death penalty.”
As the morning drew on, guests spoke adamantly in favor of abolition. Kurt Rosenberg, director of the “Witness to Innocence” program, stood up with an unusual group of men behind him. They were a small fraction of the astounding 123 death row exonerees, people freed from death row since the 1970s after evidence emerged of their innocence. This lineup included Ray Krone (Arizona), Ronald Keine (New Mexico), Gary Beeman (Ohio), Harold Wilson (Pennsylvania) and Shujaa Graham (California). Harold Wilson was the 122nd person exonerated from death row, having been released on Nov. 15, 2005. He is sure his wrongful conviction was influenced by the all-white jury that convicted him.
As I stood and listened to these men give gut-wrenching accounts of the horrible injustices they faced, I couldn’t help looking repeatedly at those big marble words above the Supreme Court:
“Equal Justice Under Law.”
Indeed.
Which is a good thing – can you imagine what the climate will be like for abolish the death penalty if more abolitionists entered politics?
Here is Jonathan’s report from the sidewalk in front of the U.S. Supreme Court:
“Equal Justice Under Law.”
These words are carved in the marble over the pillars that support our nation’s Supreme Court building. Just below the steps of this American landmark stood 30 or so protestors, holding signs and demonstrating their support for the abolition movement. Quotes from Justice Byron White, Coretta Scott King, and others could be seen on signs and t-shirts alike. As a man walked by the vigil, I heard him remark, “Take them executed people to your house and let them live with you.”
I just wish he had stayed the rest of the morning.
As I stood in the heat, I recognized death row exoneree Shujaa Graham standing in the shade listening to his walkman. Mr. Graham and I met this past week at the Death Penalty Information Center’s Thurgood Marshall awards. He gave me a big hug, and we started to discuss his many reasons for being at the vigil. Mr. Graham spent three years on California’s San Quentin death row, before being released in 1979. His experiences have prompted him to travel the country and speak to high school and university students. His message is clear and concise: “Learn what you can [about the death penalty] and understand the reality.”
Information is power. Shujaa Graham knows that if people learn all there is to learn, someday we will outlaw “the lynching that is the death penalty.”
As the morning drew on, guests spoke adamantly in favor of abolition. Kurt Rosenberg, director of the “Witness to Innocence” program, stood up with an unusual group of men behind him. They were a small fraction of the astounding 123 death row exonerees, people freed from death row since the 1970s after evidence emerged of their innocence. This lineup included Ray Krone (Arizona), Ronald Keine (New Mexico), Gary Beeman (Ohio), Harold Wilson (Pennsylvania) and Shujaa Graham (California). Harold Wilson was the 122nd person exonerated from death row, having been released on Nov. 15, 2005. He is sure his wrongful conviction was influenced by the all-white jury that convicted him.
As I stood and listened to these men give gut-wrenching accounts of the horrible injustices they faced, I couldn’t help looking repeatedly at those big marble words above the Supreme Court:
“Equal Justice Under Law.”
Indeed.
Thursday, June 29, 2006
Day One update on the Fast & Vigil
This report from NCADP intern Rachel Lawler, who spent part of the day down at the U.S. Supreme Court:
Today is the first day of the annual Fast & Vigil at the Supreme Court of the United States. The event began last night with a “Last Supper” at a nice restaurant close to SCOTUS. Attendees were activists, murder victims’ family members, death row family members, and even baby Isaac. The food was delicious and the company was even better. We all laughed over George recounting stories of Mike’s mishaps, while munching on hummus. This is my first Fast & Vigil and also my first time fasting for more than one day. So far I’ve been able to stave off hunger pangs with Gatorade, water, caffeine gum, and Tabasco sauce. My food/beverage intake will be limited to these three things until July 3rd at midnight.
I just returned to the NCADP office after distributing literature about the death penalty to hundreds of Hill workers, tourists, and students. Spending several hours doing this may seem redundant, pointless, even a complete waste of time to some. However, I have always believed that one of the reasons why some people support the death penalty is because they simply don’t know the truth about it. I’d think to myself, “If only they knew the real facts, then perhaps they’d feel differently about it.” So today was the perfect opportunity for me to increase the public’s awareness of the flaws inherent in our death penalty. If I handed a flyer to even one person who after reading it, decides to reexamine their views and ends up opposing the death penalty, then the day was a success. And hey, I got to work on my tan too!
Today is the first day of the annual Fast & Vigil at the Supreme Court of the United States. The event began last night with a “Last Supper” at a nice restaurant close to SCOTUS. Attendees were activists, murder victims’ family members, death row family members, and even baby Isaac. The food was delicious and the company was even better. We all laughed over George recounting stories of Mike’s mishaps, while munching on hummus. This is my first Fast & Vigil and also my first time fasting for more than one day. So far I’ve been able to stave off hunger pangs with Gatorade, water, caffeine gum, and Tabasco sauce. My food/beverage intake will be limited to these three things until July 3rd at midnight.
I just returned to the NCADP office after distributing literature about the death penalty to hundreds of Hill workers, tourists, and students. Spending several hours doing this may seem redundant, pointless, even a complete waste of time to some. However, I have always believed that one of the reasons why some people support the death penalty is because they simply don’t know the truth about it. I’d think to myself, “If only they knew the real facts, then perhaps they’d feel differently about it.” So today was the perfect opportunity for me to increase the public’s awareness of the flaws inherent in our death penalty. If I handed a flyer to even one person who after reading it, decides to reexamine their views and ends up opposing the death penalty, then the day was a success. And hey, I got to work on my tan too!
The Fast and Vigil has begun!
The Annual Fast and Vigil Against the Death Penalty has begun. We will be blogging on this event and sharing our content with The Journey of Hope blog.
In addition, a brand new blog has been launched by the soon-to-be betrothed Beth and Abe. We'll be checking their site for updates -- you can see it here.
In addition, a brand new blog has been launched by the soon-to-be betrothed Beth and Abe. We'll be checking their site for updates -- you can see it here.
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
One that made me go "whoaaa."
Every now and again, when reading up on the death penalty news around the country, I stumble across a story that makes me sit up and go "whoa."
Here's a perfect example:
Dyslexic doctor stays secret: Testimony persuaded judge to halt Missouri executions
Officials said Tuesday that they would not disclose the name of the dyslexic surgeon in charge of Missouri's lethal injections, whose testimony that he sometimes confuses figures helped persuade a federal judge to halt the state's executions.
Officials want to protect the surgeon, called John Doe I in court documents, from "harassment of various sorts," said Brian Hauswirth, a spokesman for the Department of Corrections. He said he would not elaborate.
In October, a U.S. magistrate judge ordered the surgeon's identity concealed to protect the state's security interests and the doctor's privacy. Death penalty critics said the state had little justification to keep a lid on the surgeon's identity. "It's shameful that you would put someone who suffers from dyslexia in charge of administering chemicals that kill someone," said Gino F.Battisti, a lawyer from St. Louis who has represented death row inmates. "People have a right to know how the system works."
Kent Gipson, whose law firm Public Interest Law Center, based in Kansas City, has represented Missouri death row inmates, said he thought that the "state is worried that if this guy gets found out and gets his medical license jerked, they'll never find another doctor to help them execute people."
People...people, people, people. Can you say "Hippocratic Oath?" The one that includes the words "Do no harm."
Jeez.
Here's a perfect example:
Dyslexic doctor stays secret: Testimony persuaded judge to halt Missouri executions
Officials said Tuesday that they would not disclose the name of the dyslexic surgeon in charge of Missouri's lethal injections, whose testimony that he sometimes confuses figures helped persuade a federal judge to halt the state's executions.
Officials want to protect the surgeon, called John Doe I in court documents, from "harassment of various sorts," said Brian Hauswirth, a spokesman for the Department of Corrections. He said he would not elaborate.
In October, a U.S. magistrate judge ordered the surgeon's identity concealed to protect the state's security interests and the doctor's privacy. Death penalty critics said the state had little justification to keep a lid on the surgeon's identity. "It's shameful that you would put someone who suffers from dyslexia in charge of administering chemicals that kill someone," said Gino F.Battisti, a lawyer from St. Louis who has represented death row inmates. "People have a right to know how the system works."
Kent Gipson, whose law firm Public Interest Law Center, based in Kansas City, has represented Missouri death row inmates, said he thought that the "state is worried that if this guy gets found out and gets his medical license jerked, they'll never find another doctor to help them execute people."
People...people, people, people. Can you say "Hippocratic Oath?" The one that includes the words "Do no harm."
Jeez.
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Carlos De Luna, Part Three
The third and final installment of the Chicago Tribune's Carlos De Luna series can be found here. Meanwhile, the pro-death penalty crowd is crowing that the Tribune hasn't actually proven that an innocent person has been executed.
If ignorance is bliss, than the life of a retentionist must truly be joyous and carefree.
If ignorance is bliss, than the life of a retentionist must truly be joyous and carefree.
Monday, June 26, 2006
Part two, Carlos De Luna
You can read part two of the Chicago Tribune series regarding the wrongful execution of Carlos De Luna here.
Another new blog in town
Three days and a number of hours before the annual Fast & Vigil and we have a new blog that will be covering the events.
Of course, Abolish the Death Penalty and The Journey of Hope...From Violence to Healing blog also will be providing updated coverage. Stay tuned!
Of course, Abolish the Death Penalty and The Journey of Hope...From Violence to Healing blog also will be providing updated coverage. Stay tuned!
Sunday, June 25, 2006
Carlos De Luna update
As we wait for part two of the Chicago Tribune's three part series to be posted on their web site late tonight, we have this update.
The Associated Press has picked up part one of the series and moved this story:
Associated Press
CHICAGO - A newspaper investigation raises questions about the execution of a man for a 1983 slaying at a Corpus Christi service station.
Carlos De Luna was executed 16 years ago for the fatal stabbing of Wanda Lopez, a gas station clerk and a single mother. De Luna was swiftly convicted and sentenced to death even though the parolee proclaimed he was innocent. He identified another man as the killer.
The Chicago Tribune, in the first of a three-part series published Sunday, said it has uncovered evidence strongly suggesting that De Luna's acquaintance, Carlos Hernandez, was the one who killed Lopez. Hernandez died in 1999.
Hernandez's friends and relatives, ending years of silence, said the felon bragged that De Luna went to Death Row for a murder he committed.
The case was compromised by shaky eyewitness investigation, sloppy police work and a failure to thoroughly pursue Hernandez as a possible suspect, the newspaper reported.
De Luna's prosecutors maintain the right man was convicted, though the lead prosecutor acknowledged being troubled by some of the new information. A former police detective said he now thinks the wrong man was executed.
No DNA or other conclusive proof of De Luna's guilt or innocence is available. The store did not have a security camera.
The newspaper learned of the De Luna case from a Columbia University law professor who had begun to look into evidence pointing to Hernandez. De Luna was executed by lethal injection in 1989.
The Associated Press has picked up part one of the series and moved this story:
Associated Press
CHICAGO - A newspaper investigation raises questions about the execution of a man for a 1983 slaying at a Corpus Christi service station.
Carlos De Luna was executed 16 years ago for the fatal stabbing of Wanda Lopez, a gas station clerk and a single mother. De Luna was swiftly convicted and sentenced to death even though the parolee proclaimed he was innocent. He identified another man as the killer.
The Chicago Tribune, in the first of a three-part series published Sunday, said it has uncovered evidence strongly suggesting that De Luna's acquaintance, Carlos Hernandez, was the one who killed Lopez. Hernandez died in 1999.
Hernandez's friends and relatives, ending years of silence, said the felon bragged that De Luna went to Death Row for a murder he committed.
The case was compromised by shaky eyewitness investigation, sloppy police work and a failure to thoroughly pursue Hernandez as a possible suspect, the newspaper reported.
De Luna's prosecutors maintain the right man was convicted, though the lead prosecutor acknowledged being troubled by some of the new information. A former police detective said he now thinks the wrong man was executed.
No DNA or other conclusive proof of De Luna's guilt or innocence is available. The store did not have a security camera.
The newspaper learned of the De Luna case from a Columbia University law professor who had begun to look into evidence pointing to Hernandez. De Luna was executed by lethal injection in 1989.
Saturday, June 24, 2006
I read the news today, oh boy
The news we've been waiting for is out: Today the Chicago Tribune, in the first of a three-part investigative series, is reporting that Texas executed an innocent person.
You can see NCADP's press release by going here.
To read the Chicago Tribune series (and you really must) visit www.chicagotribune.com
You can see NCADP's press release by going here.
To read the Chicago Tribune series (and you really must) visit www.chicagotribune.com
Friday, June 23, 2006
Foreshadowing tomorrow's news...
Date of Execution:
December 7, 1989
Offender:
Carlos DeLuna #744
Last Statement:
"I want to say I hold no grudges. I hate no one. I love my family. Tell everyone on death row to keep the faith and don’t give up."
Source: Texas Department of Criminal Justice
December 7, 1989
Offender:
Carlos DeLuna #744
Last Statement:
"I want to say I hold no grudges. I hate no one. I love my family. Tell everyone on death row to keep the faith and don’t give up."
Source: Texas Department of Criminal Justice
Keep an eye on the blog
It's been a few days since we've updated. News sometimes feels like it moves slowly in the sweltering summer months.
That's about to change. Please keep an eye on the blog over the next 24 to 48 hours. Something significant this way comes...
That's about to change. Please keep an eye on the blog over the next 24 to 48 hours. Something significant this way comes...
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
There's a new blog in town
Everyone welcome The Journey of Hope...From Violence to Healing blog.
Run by Journey chairman Bill Pelke, with the backup and assistance of NCADP, the Journey blog will tell the stories of people whose lives have been touched with murder and forgiveness.
Run by Journey chairman Bill Pelke, with the backup and assistance of NCADP, the Journey blog will tell the stories of people whose lives have been touched with murder and forgiveness.
Monday, June 19, 2006
Part One: Words from Vermont
For the past few days, Rachel Lawler, an NCADP intern, has been up in her home state of Vermont, working to oppose a rare federal death penalty trial that has taken place up there. (Vermont has no state death penalty but in a case of John Ashcroft-induced federalism-in-reverse, the U.S. Justice Department has secured the first death sentence in modern Vermont history.)
Rachel is a pre-law student at Woodbury College in Vermont with aspirations of working as a public defender. She currently serves as Amnesty International USA’s State Death Penalty Abolition Coordinator (SDPAC) for Vermont, is a founding member of Vermonters Against the Death Penalty, and sat in on the entire US v. Fell trial during the summer of 2005. She loves hot sauce.
This is part one of Rachel's report:
On Friday, June 16th a man was sentenced to die in Vermont. The defendant and a now-deceased codefendant (who committed suicide while in prison) were charged with two death-eligible crimes: carjacking resulting in death and kidnapping resulting in death. The victim was a woman named Terry King.
You may be thinking to yourself, “What? A death sentence in Vermont?” But it’s the truth and it was made possible thanks to the Federal Death Penalty Act (FDPA) and in this case specifically, Fmr. Attorney General John Ashcroft. Back in 2001, the prosecutors drafted a plea bargain that would have sentenced the defendant to life without possible release in exchange for a guilty plea. But when that was submitted for Ashcroft’s approval, he decided to ignore the Government’s proffer that the defendant’s terrible childhood was enough to mitigate circumstances away from being a death penalty case. The defendant had a childhood that most of us cannot even begin to imagine living through. He suffered physical, sexual, and emotional abuse from practically everyone in his life, witnessed his parents stab each other during a drunken argument, he was abandoned by both of them by the time he was 13. Everyone in his life gave up on him. And then society did by condemning him to die.
Why did the Attorney General choose to dismiss this evidence? Perhaps it was because the case could have been tried in either New York or Vermont and at the time, New York’s death penalty statute had not yet been declared unconstitutional, whereas Vermont hadn’t had a death sentence handed down in its state since 1954. Perhaps it was because a report had just been released by the Department of Justice that cited disturbing statistics about the federal death row. Pursuing a death sentence in this case enabled him to even out some less-than-favorable statistics. Who knows.
Rachel is a pre-law student at Woodbury College in Vermont with aspirations of working as a public defender. She currently serves as Amnesty International USA’s State Death Penalty Abolition Coordinator (SDPAC) for Vermont, is a founding member of Vermonters Against the Death Penalty, and sat in on the entire US v. Fell trial during the summer of 2005. She loves hot sauce.
This is part one of Rachel's report:
On Friday, June 16th a man was sentenced to die in Vermont. The defendant and a now-deceased codefendant (who committed suicide while in prison) were charged with two death-eligible crimes: carjacking resulting in death and kidnapping resulting in death. The victim was a woman named Terry King.
You may be thinking to yourself, “What? A death sentence in Vermont?” But it’s the truth and it was made possible thanks to the Federal Death Penalty Act (FDPA) and in this case specifically, Fmr. Attorney General John Ashcroft. Back in 2001, the prosecutors drafted a plea bargain that would have sentenced the defendant to life without possible release in exchange for a guilty plea. But when that was submitted for Ashcroft’s approval, he decided to ignore the Government’s proffer that the defendant’s terrible childhood was enough to mitigate circumstances away from being a death penalty case. The defendant had a childhood that most of us cannot even begin to imagine living through. He suffered physical, sexual, and emotional abuse from practically everyone in his life, witnessed his parents stab each other during a drunken argument, he was abandoned by both of them by the time he was 13. Everyone in his life gave up on him. And then society did by condemning him to die.
Why did the Attorney General choose to dismiss this evidence? Perhaps it was because the case could have been tried in either New York or Vermont and at the time, New York’s death penalty statute had not yet been declared unconstitutional, whereas Vermont hadn’t had a death sentence handed down in its state since 1954. Perhaps it was because a report had just been released by the Department of Justice that cited disturbing statistics about the federal death row. Pursuing a death sentence in this case enabled him to even out some less-than-favorable statistics. Who knows.
Part Two: Words from Vermont
This is part two of NCADP intern Rachel Lawler's report on recent events in Vermont:
Two events were organized by a group I belong to, known as Vermonters Against the Death Penalty (VTADP). The first event was a vigil on Thursday evening to remember victims of homicide. We thought that framing the vigil around this subject was especially important given the fact that revictimization of the victims family members is one of the most disturbing consequences of our broken death penalty system. We were able to draw a modest crowd of 50 people to City Hall Park in Burlington. A notable fact, however, is that we were joined by people from all throughout the Northeast: New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Connecticut.
The same group of people was featured in the 2nd event, a press conference held on Friday after the sentencing. Each speaker addressed a different aspect within the abolitionist movement including regional trends, their own state’s struggle against the death penalty, and two speakers addressed their own personal experiences with losing a loved one to homicide – refuting the misconception that the death penalty system will help them heal.
The revictimization that VTADP wanted to bring to the public’s attention was glaringly obvious in the victims’ family members’ statements in Friday’s court proceedings. Many, if not all of them cited how grueling the past six years were for them, how they had to endure litigation, uncertainty, compounded with the immense and unimaginable pain of losing someone they loved so dearly. If anyone spoke to the fact that the death penalty system does not provide healing, it was the family members. With every motion that was filed, with every media story, the family was forced to defend the memory of the one they lost. Had the plea bargain been accepted six years ago, they could have been on their way to healing. But we as a society have forced them to endure additional pain, pain that will continue for the next decade as the appeals process begins.
The defendant’s speech was short and almost inaudible over the hum of the air conditioning system. He apologized for what he did and accepted his punishment as “no less than what [he] deserved”. The response of the family members was that it didn’t matter to them; nothing he could say or do would ever elicit forgiveness from them. It is terrible to think that they had to endure losing someone so close to them, and their hearts remain so hardened by the experience. No one should ever have to feel this way.
I can’t imagine having society judge and condemn me based only upon one thing that I’ve done in my lifetime. Can you imagine it? I, myself, along with many reading this have probably done something in their lifetime that they deeply regret doing. I know that I certainly have learned from my mistakes and have allowed such experiences to change me for the better, and I have gained insight from them. Who are we to say that others are incapable of this same process? Does a person’s worst action negate the humanness within them? Their capacity for redemption? The death penalty system wants to convince us that it does.
Well, I’m back in Washington, DC now. Away from the reporters, away from the court room that made me physically ill. Yet, the struggle towards abolition continues. My work with this one case has taught me so much about the death penalty, our legal system, and the injustices that are perpetuated by both. Ever since I became aware of these things, I’ve been unable to cease in my abolition work. I encourage everyone reading this to learn everything they can about the death penalty, because knowledge is empowering. This trial was just one amongst so many with similar, pervasive injustices. This work is disheartening, frustrating, and disappointing. But let me be clear in saying that it is worth it. Nationwide abolition will happen. But only if we persist in our efforts and do not falter. We must never let this be simply work. It must remain our passion, as we continue putting our heart into what we do. It is that which will keep us going when all odds are against us.
Two events were organized by a group I belong to, known as Vermonters Against the Death Penalty (VTADP). The first event was a vigil on Thursday evening to remember victims of homicide. We thought that framing the vigil around this subject was especially important given the fact that revictimization of the victims family members is one of the most disturbing consequences of our broken death penalty system. We were able to draw a modest crowd of 50 people to City Hall Park in Burlington. A notable fact, however, is that we were joined by people from all throughout the Northeast: New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Connecticut.
The same group of people was featured in the 2nd event, a press conference held on Friday after the sentencing. Each speaker addressed a different aspect within the abolitionist movement including regional trends, their own state’s struggle against the death penalty, and two speakers addressed their own personal experiences with losing a loved one to homicide – refuting the misconception that the death penalty system will help them heal.
The revictimization that VTADP wanted to bring to the public’s attention was glaringly obvious in the victims’ family members’ statements in Friday’s court proceedings. Many, if not all of them cited how grueling the past six years were for them, how they had to endure litigation, uncertainty, compounded with the immense and unimaginable pain of losing someone they loved so dearly. If anyone spoke to the fact that the death penalty system does not provide healing, it was the family members. With every motion that was filed, with every media story, the family was forced to defend the memory of the one they lost. Had the plea bargain been accepted six years ago, they could have been on their way to healing. But we as a society have forced them to endure additional pain, pain that will continue for the next decade as the appeals process begins.
The defendant’s speech was short and almost inaudible over the hum of the air conditioning system. He apologized for what he did and accepted his punishment as “no less than what [he] deserved”. The response of the family members was that it didn’t matter to them; nothing he could say or do would ever elicit forgiveness from them. It is terrible to think that they had to endure losing someone so close to them, and their hearts remain so hardened by the experience. No one should ever have to feel this way.
I can’t imagine having society judge and condemn me based only upon one thing that I’ve done in my lifetime. Can you imagine it? I, myself, along with many reading this have probably done something in their lifetime that they deeply regret doing. I know that I certainly have learned from my mistakes and have allowed such experiences to change me for the better, and I have gained insight from them. Who are we to say that others are incapable of this same process? Does a person’s worst action negate the humanness within them? Their capacity for redemption? The death penalty system wants to convince us that it does.
Well, I’m back in Washington, DC now. Away from the reporters, away from the court room that made me physically ill. Yet, the struggle towards abolition continues. My work with this one case has taught me so much about the death penalty, our legal system, and the injustices that are perpetuated by both. Ever since I became aware of these things, I’ve been unable to cease in my abolition work. I encourage everyone reading this to learn everything they can about the death penalty, because knowledge is empowering. This trial was just one amongst so many with similar, pervasive injustices. This work is disheartening, frustrating, and disappointing. But let me be clear in saying that it is worth it. Nationwide abolition will happen. But only if we persist in our efforts and do not falter. We must never let this be simply work. It must remain our passion, as we continue putting our heart into what we do. It is that which will keep us going when all odds are against us.
Friday, June 16, 2006
"Human Kind"
In Gloucester, Massachusetts, high school students have written and are performing an original play based in part on the true story of NCADP board member Bud Welch, whose daughter, Julie, died in the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City:
Death penalty foe flying in to see play
By Douglas A. Moser, Staff writer
Gloucester Daily Times
Bud Welch has gotten phone calls from students before, he said Wednesday, mostly college students researching term papers.
But the Oklahoma City man said he got his first call from actors inspired by his story in March, when members of the Gloucester High Drama Club contacted him about his daughter Julie. The call led Welsh to fly to Boston yesterday afternoon to visit Gloucester for an encore performance of the club's original production, "Human kind," tonight at 7 in the high school auditorium.
The students called him because their play about the compassion of a murder victim's family and their reconciliation with the murderer echoes Welch's experience. Julie Welch died in the domestic terror attack that destroyed a federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995. Bud Welch had been a death penalty opponent but had a quick change of heart after the attack. "There were a couple months when I wanted the (bomber) fried, no question about that," he said in a telephone interview. But after the heat of the tragedy cooled, Welch said, he believed Timothy McVeigh, the man convicted of engineering and conducting the attack, should not be put to death.
"I was finally able to recognize that taking somebody out of a cage and killing them doesn't help the healing process," he said. "In fact, it retards it. It revictimizes the family members and creates a whole new set of victims" in the family of the condemned.
"Human kind," collectively written over the winter by members of the Drama Club, is about the family of a murder victim, the murderer on death row and the murderer's family. After the play was written, cast members researched the death penalty and came across the story of Welch, who campaigned against the death penalty during the trial, conviction and condemnation of McVeigh. The bomber was executed June 11, 2001, the first prisoner executed by the federal government since 1963.
Welch, who cofounded the Cambridge-based organization Murder Victims Families for Human Rights, which opposes the death penalty and counsels the families of victims, said he was honored to have inspired the Gloucester students. He said he had been invited to a show earlier in the year he could not make.
Members of the cast said they were thrilled to have Welch fly east to see the play. "We wanted him to come for so long, and we didn't think it was possible," said Willie Norris, a cast member. Director Christine de Lima, a Gloucester High alumna and veteran of the Drama Club, said she talked to Welch while the cast was performing the play in a state competition. "He contacted us the day after the preliminary round" March 4, she said. "We actually kept it a secret, which was really hard to do. When we sat them down and told them, some of them cried. It was an awesome moment."
Death penalty foe flying in to see play
By Douglas A. Moser, Staff writer
Gloucester Daily Times
Bud Welch has gotten phone calls from students before, he said Wednesday, mostly college students researching term papers.
But the Oklahoma City man said he got his first call from actors inspired by his story in March, when members of the Gloucester High Drama Club contacted him about his daughter Julie. The call led Welsh to fly to Boston yesterday afternoon to visit Gloucester for an encore performance of the club's original production, "Human kind," tonight at 7 in the high school auditorium.
The students called him because their play about the compassion of a murder victim's family and their reconciliation with the murderer echoes Welch's experience. Julie Welch died in the domestic terror attack that destroyed a federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995. Bud Welch had been a death penalty opponent but had a quick change of heart after the attack. "There were a couple months when I wanted the (bomber) fried, no question about that," he said in a telephone interview. But after the heat of the tragedy cooled, Welch said, he believed Timothy McVeigh, the man convicted of engineering and conducting the attack, should not be put to death.
"I was finally able to recognize that taking somebody out of a cage and killing them doesn't help the healing process," he said. "In fact, it retards it. It revictimizes the family members and creates a whole new set of victims" in the family of the condemned.
"Human kind," collectively written over the winter by members of the Drama Club, is about the family of a murder victim, the murderer on death row and the murderer's family. After the play was written, cast members researched the death penalty and came across the story of Welch, who campaigned against the death penalty during the trial, conviction and condemnation of McVeigh. The bomber was executed June 11, 2001, the first prisoner executed by the federal government since 1963.
Welch, who cofounded the Cambridge-based organization Murder Victims Families for Human Rights, which opposes the death penalty and counsels the families of victims, said he was honored to have inspired the Gloucester students. He said he had been invited to a show earlier in the year he could not make.
Members of the cast said they were thrilled to have Welch fly east to see the play. "We wanted him to come for so long, and we didn't think it was possible," said Willie Norris, a cast member. Director Christine de Lima, a Gloucester High alumna and veteran of the Drama Club, said she talked to Welch while the cast was performing the play in a state competition. "He contacted us the day after the preliminary round" March 4, she said. "We actually kept it a secret, which was really hard to do. When we sat them down and told them, some of them cried. It was an awesome moment."
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
In Texas, the stonewall continues
From today's Houston Chronicle:
Conflict of interest
San Antonio district attorney should step aside and allow an independent probe of Cantu's execution.
When she was a judge more than a decade ago, Bexar County District Attorney Susan Reed reviewed the appeal and then scheduled the execution of Ruben Cantu, whose guilt has been cast in doubt by an extensive Houston Chronicle investigation. In response, Reed re-opened the case but declined to recuse herself from the probe, even though she is an elected official who has a clear interest in its outcome.
Cantu was executed in 1993 for a murder he allegedly committed in San Antonio as a teen-ager. Since then a key eyewitness, Juan Moreno, has recanted his testimony, claiming he was pressured by police. Another person corroborates Cantu's claim that he was out of the city when the crime was committed. Cantu's co-defendant, David Garza, who has changed his account, now claims Cantu was innocent.
Last week a San Antonio judge ruled he had no authority to grant Garza's request that he replace Reed with a special prosecutor. During the hearing Reed testified as a witness and demonstrated why she should step down and allow an independent investigation.
Asked by Garza's lawyer, Keith Hampton, if investigators should examine her role in the case, Reed snapped, "I didn't do anything criminal in this case. Don't look at me like that, counsel." Reed referred to Moreno by saying, "I didn't sit in the witness chair and lie." Such statements indicate Reed has strong personal feelings about the Cantu case that might color the outcome of an investigation.
Attorney Hampton attempted to present a letter signed by 22 law professors and other legal experts who contend that Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct prohibit lawyers from participating in cases in which they had ruled as judges. One of them, University of Houston Law Center Professor Robert P. Schuwerk, told the Houston Chronicle that if Reed was exposed as a person who had made a fatal error as a judge, it would clearly conflict with her interests.
District attorneys are elected officials. If Reed runs again, she would have to appeal to a heavily Hispanic electorate. It clearly would not be to her advantage as a San Antonio politician to be known as the person who wrongly sent a Hispanic teenager to his execution. Even if she were able to conduct an impeccable and impartial re-examination of the Cantu case, the district attorney's history would create the appearance of conflict and taint the eventual findings.
Reed apparently is unable to apply a fairly straightforward principle of jurisprudence, avoidance of conflict of interest, to herself. Perhaps that is the most potent argument for her removal from the investigation.
Conflict of interest
San Antonio district attorney should step aside and allow an independent probe of Cantu's execution.
When she was a judge more than a decade ago, Bexar County District Attorney Susan Reed reviewed the appeal and then scheduled the execution of Ruben Cantu, whose guilt has been cast in doubt by an extensive Houston Chronicle investigation. In response, Reed re-opened the case but declined to recuse herself from the probe, even though she is an elected official who has a clear interest in its outcome.
Cantu was executed in 1993 for a murder he allegedly committed in San Antonio as a teen-ager. Since then a key eyewitness, Juan Moreno, has recanted his testimony, claiming he was pressured by police. Another person corroborates Cantu's claim that he was out of the city when the crime was committed. Cantu's co-defendant, David Garza, who has changed his account, now claims Cantu was innocent.
Last week a San Antonio judge ruled he had no authority to grant Garza's request that he replace Reed with a special prosecutor. During the hearing Reed testified as a witness and demonstrated why she should step down and allow an independent investigation.
Asked by Garza's lawyer, Keith Hampton, if investigators should examine her role in the case, Reed snapped, "I didn't do anything criminal in this case. Don't look at me like that, counsel." Reed referred to Moreno by saying, "I didn't sit in the witness chair and lie." Such statements indicate Reed has strong personal feelings about the Cantu case that might color the outcome of an investigation.
Attorney Hampton attempted to present a letter signed by 22 law professors and other legal experts who contend that Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct prohibit lawyers from participating in cases in which they had ruled as judges. One of them, University of Houston Law Center Professor Robert P. Schuwerk, told the Houston Chronicle that if Reed was exposed as a person who had made a fatal error as a judge, it would clearly conflict with her interests.
District attorneys are elected officials. If Reed runs again, she would have to appeal to a heavily Hispanic electorate. It clearly would not be to her advantage as a San Antonio politician to be known as the person who wrongly sent a Hispanic teenager to his execution. Even if she were able to conduct an impeccable and impartial re-examination of the Cantu case, the district attorney's history would create the appearance of conflict and taint the eventual findings.
Reed apparently is unable to apply a fairly straightforward principle of jurisprudence, avoidance of conflict of interest, to herself. Perhaps that is the most potent argument for her removal from the investigation.
Friday, June 09, 2006
Kaine did it.
He did it. He stayed Walton's execution for six months, pending an independent review of Walton's mental capacity.
Which is exactly and precisely as it should be. Which is exactly and precisely what has been called for all along.
When the state and the courts cannot or will not do their jobs, executive clemency is the proper and just course.
Of course, some folks in the right-wing blogosphere are going nuts. And Kaine is taking major hits for this, with opportunistic politicians (excuse the oxymoron!) taking potshots.
But today, Virginia has a governor it can be proud of.
A governor with guts. A governor who did the right thing.
Which is exactly and precisely as it should be. Which is exactly and precisely what has been called for all along.
When the state and the courts cannot or will not do their jobs, executive clemency is the proper and just course.
Of course, some folks in the right-wing blogosphere are going nuts. And Kaine is taking major hits for this, with opportunistic politicians (excuse the oxymoron!) taking potshots.
But today, Virginia has a governor it can be proud of.
A governor with guts. A governor who did the right thing.
Kaine did it.
He did it. He stayed Walton's execution for six months, pending an independent review of Walton's mental capacity.
Which is exactly and precisely as it should be. Which is exactly and precisely what has been called for all along.
When the state and the courts cannot or will not do their jobs, executive clemency is the proper and just course.
Of course, some folks in the right-wing blogosphere are going nuts. And Kaine is taking major hits for this, with opportunistic politicians (excuse the oxymoron!) taking potshots.
But today, Virginia has a governor it can be proud of.
A governor with guts. A governor who did the right thing.
Which is exactly and precisely as it should be. Which is exactly and precisely what has been called for all along.
When the state and the courts cannot or will not do their jobs, executive clemency is the proper and just course.
Of course, some folks in the right-wing blogosphere are going nuts. And Kaine is taking major hits for this, with opportunistic politicians (excuse the oxymoron!) taking potshots.
But today, Virginia has a governor it can be proud of.
A governor with guts. A governor who did the right thing.
Thursday, June 08, 2006
Regarding Percy Walton
Tonight at 9 p.m. EST the state of Virginia is scheduled to execute Percy Walton.
There is no doubt that Walton committed the crimes for which he was convicted -- he pleaded guilty in 1997 to shooting Jessie and Elizabeth Kendrick, an elderly couple, and later killing his neighbor, Archie Moore, stuffing his body in a closet and sprinkling it with cologne.
There is also no doubt that Walton is profoundly mentally ill and possibly mentally retarded. His attorneys say he believes that his execution not only will bring his victims back to life (if only!) but it might also secure him a spot on national television, raise his grandfather from the dead and earn him a trip to Burger King on a motorcycle.
Walton's attorneys say that Walton, 27, who experts have testified is mentally retarded and schizophrenic, has spent most of his time on death row pacing his cell, collecting piles of salt and pepper packets and babbling nonsensically to himself.
As has been frequentally noted on this blog, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in Ford v. Wainwright that in order to be executed, one simply must understand that one is being executed and why one is being executed.
This bar is too high. But that notwithstanding, Walton would appear to not wholly grasp the concept of execution (unless there is some religion out there that I am unaware of that says when you die, you go to Burger King on a motorcycle).
There is also the question of mental retardation. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2002 in Atkins v. Virginia that states can't execute mentally retarded people. Unfortunately, the Court left it to the states to define mental retardation -- and all of a sudden, lo and behold, there was hardly a single mentally retarded person among the nation's approximately 3,400 people on death row.
(Two interesting side notes. First, the state of Virginia continues to try to execute Atkins. Remember: the Supreme Court did not say that Atkins is mentally retarded. They simply said you can't execute mentally retarded people. Second, the state of Texas decades ago tried to argue "future dangerousness" in the case of one person facing a death sentence by pointing out that he was mentally retarded. Then, after Atkins v. Virginia came down the state reversed itself and argued that the inmate was not mentally retarded, even though the state had used this very argument to secure a death sentence! I'm not sure what word I'm looking for here, but perhaps "dissembling" comes to mind.)
Anyway, back to Walton. He has been measured with an IQ of 66, but according to the courts he has not proved he is mentally retarded.
Severe mental illness, and an argument for mental retardation, and yet in less than 12 hours, this execution is scheduled to go forward.
You know what? If I were a supporter of the death penalty, I would be fighting with every bit of power in me to stop this execution. It plainly demonstrates what a mockery the death penalty system (and appellate system) is.
We're really about to execute someone who thinks that after the execution he is going to ride to Burger King on a motorcycle?
Come now.
Governor Kaine, are you listening? You now have 11 hours to stop this madness.
There is no doubt that Walton committed the crimes for which he was convicted -- he pleaded guilty in 1997 to shooting Jessie and Elizabeth Kendrick, an elderly couple, and later killing his neighbor, Archie Moore, stuffing his body in a closet and sprinkling it with cologne.
There is also no doubt that Walton is profoundly mentally ill and possibly mentally retarded. His attorneys say he believes that his execution not only will bring his victims back to life (if only!) but it might also secure him a spot on national television, raise his grandfather from the dead and earn him a trip to Burger King on a motorcycle.
Walton's attorneys say that Walton, 27, who experts have testified is mentally retarded and schizophrenic, has spent most of his time on death row pacing his cell, collecting piles of salt and pepper packets and babbling nonsensically to himself.
As has been frequentally noted on this blog, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in Ford v. Wainwright that in order to be executed, one simply must understand that one is being executed and why one is being executed.
This bar is too high. But that notwithstanding, Walton would appear to not wholly grasp the concept of execution (unless there is some religion out there that I am unaware of that says when you die, you go to Burger King on a motorcycle).
There is also the question of mental retardation. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2002 in Atkins v. Virginia that states can't execute mentally retarded people. Unfortunately, the Court left it to the states to define mental retardation -- and all of a sudden, lo and behold, there was hardly a single mentally retarded person among the nation's approximately 3,400 people on death row.
(Two interesting side notes. First, the state of Virginia continues to try to execute Atkins. Remember: the Supreme Court did not say that Atkins is mentally retarded. They simply said you can't execute mentally retarded people. Second, the state of Texas decades ago tried to argue "future dangerousness" in the case of one person facing a death sentence by pointing out that he was mentally retarded. Then, after Atkins v. Virginia came down the state reversed itself and argued that the inmate was not mentally retarded, even though the state had used this very argument to secure a death sentence! I'm not sure what word I'm looking for here, but perhaps "dissembling" comes to mind.)
Anyway, back to Walton. He has been measured with an IQ of 66, but according to the courts he has not proved he is mentally retarded.
Severe mental illness, and an argument for mental retardation, and yet in less than 12 hours, this execution is scheduled to go forward.
You know what? If I were a supporter of the death penalty, I would be fighting with every bit of power in me to stop this execution. It plainly demonstrates what a mockery the death penalty system (and appellate system) is.
We're really about to execute someone who thinks that after the execution he is going to ride to Burger King on a motorcycle?
Come now.
Governor Kaine, are you listening? You now have 11 hours to stop this madness.
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
Happy birthday to Blog
Somehow we missed the blog's birthday last Friday -- must be all the excitement we're having around here!
This blog was born on June 2, 2004. Since then, a little more than 67,000 of you have stopped by for a visit.
We appreciate it, and we'll try to keep the blog interesting, fresh and vital.
This blog was born on June 2, 2004. Since then, a little more than 67,000 of you have stopped by for a visit.
We appreciate it, and we'll try to keep the blog interesting, fresh and vital.
Saturday, June 03, 2006
A third way on the death penalty?
This week Gallup released new poll numbers on the death penalty. A plurality of Americans now prefer life sentences (48%) over the death penalty (47%), even though 65% of Americans do not oppose the death penalty in the abstract. The difference between these two numbers is arguably the most important statistic in the Gallup poll and in the current discussion on the death penalty, the growing number of Americans who favor the death penalty in the abstract but would not themselves impose it and do not believe it is necessarily good policy.
The coordinating efforts by such groups as NCADP, Equal Justice USA, and their financial backers, have helped grow this new demographic by opening up dialogue between groups who have historically opposed the death penalty and others such that may share a common interest, such as pro-life groups, evangelicals and libertarians. Gallup's questions indicate that this group of "morally support but in practice favor life" consists of approximately 1 in 6 Americans. This numbers has been growing every year. Perhaps the Gallup poll's findings could be best summed up in the words of the Cato Institute's founder, Edward H. Crane, "[m]y own view on capital punishment is that it is morally justified, but that the government is often so inept and corrupt that innocent people might die as a result. Thus, I personally oppose capital punishment."
The results of this outreach are being felt beyond polls like Gallup. Death row today is almost 10% lower than it was at the turn of the millennia due chiefly to a lower number of new death sentences. While part of that reduction may be due to other factors, the decline in death sentences seemingly buttress Gallup's findings, a third way on the death penalty, those who are not opposed morally to the death penalty but think that there is a better way than governments killing what they deem to be its worst miscreants.
The coordinating efforts by such groups as NCADP, Equal Justice USA, and their financial backers, have helped grow this new demographic by opening up dialogue between groups who have historically opposed the death penalty and others such that may share a common interest, such as pro-life groups, evangelicals and libertarians. Gallup's questions indicate that this group of "morally support but in practice favor life" consists of approximately 1 in 6 Americans. This numbers has been growing every year. Perhaps the Gallup poll's findings could be best summed up in the words of the Cato Institute's founder, Edward H. Crane, "[m]y own view on capital punishment is that it is morally justified, but that the government is often so inept and corrupt that innocent people might die as a result. Thus, I personally oppose capital punishment."
The results of this outreach are being felt beyond polls like Gallup. Death row today is almost 10% lower than it was at the turn of the millennia due chiefly to a lower number of new death sentences. While part of that reduction may be due to other factors, the decline in death sentences seemingly buttress Gallup's findings, a third way on the death penalty, those who are not opposed morally to the death penalty but think that there is a better way than governments killing what they deem to be its worst miscreants.
DPIC, the Travelling Jesuit over at the TCASK & my own blog have more.
Friday, June 02, 2006
What do Tennessee, Texas and Virginia have in common?
Each state is preparing to execute a severely mentally ill person. We're not talking about run-of-the-mill mental illness. We're talking totally whacked.
Okay, so "totally whacked" isn't a medical or scientific term. But consider:
believes that he is the target of surveillance and abuse by the “military government” which has manipulated his life and decisions since the 1980s. Reid writes that since 1985, “most every person who has any type of association or contact with me, usually first has to go through the military government.”
This includes, according to Reid, his attorneys, who he believes are under the control of the military government, and nearly every other person he has ever met. He believes that the “military government” has been using him as a lab rat, denying him success to try to force him to commit crimes. Without this interference, Reid says, he would have several law degrees, practice in a huge Houston firm, have a beautiful wife, and be rich. He even believes that the government possesses surveillance tapes that would exonerate him, but that it refuses to release them.
While awaiting trial, Walton expressed his belief that he could not be seen if he had his eyes closed. He also told his relatives he was Jesus Christ and that he was a millionaire. He told others he looked forward to his execution because then he would be able to return to life immediately and resurrect his dead family members. In 1999, a psychiatrist, a neuropsychologist and a neurologist assessed Walton's mental health for his appeals and found that he suffers from severe chronic schizophrenia.
Years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Ford v. Wainwright that a person could be executed as long as he understands that is being executed and why he is being executed. Putting aside for a moment the fact that all three of these men should be spared under the Ford v. Wainwright standard, the bar set by the U.S. Supreme Court for establishing mental illness is simply too high.
Culpability is a cornerstone of our criminal justice system. If I commit murder, I am much more culpable for my actions than a person who is severely mentally ill, severely mentally retarded, etc. Put another way, an 8-year-old who does something wrong is less culpable than an adult who does something wrong -- that is why we do not send 8-year-olds to prison.
Many people don't realize that of the 3,300-plus people on death rows across the country, hundreds of people are severely mentally ill. The New York Times has a front-page story that examines this issue. It's worth a read. You can find it here.
Okay, so "totally whacked" isn't a medical or scientific term. But consider:
- In Tennessee, Paul Dennis Reid faces a June 28 execution date despite the fact that a neurologist found that Reed has a "chronic, schizophrenia-like psychosis which has severely impaired his ability to weigh, deliberate, inform, and cooperate.”
believes that he is the target of surveillance and abuse by the “military government” which has manipulated his life and decisions since the 1980s. Reid writes that since 1985, “most every person who has any type of association or contact with me, usually first has to go through the military government.”
This includes, according to Reid, his attorneys, who he believes are under the control of the military government, and nearly every other person he has ever met. He believes that the “military government” has been using him as a lab rat, denying him success to try to force him to commit crimes. Without this interference, Reid says, he would have several law degrees, practice in a huge Houston firm, have a beautiful wife, and be rich. He even believes that the government possesses surveillance tapes that would exonerate him, but that it refuses to release them.
- In Texas, Scott Panetti is down to his final appeals and an execution date could be set soon. Panetti represented himself at trial and wore cowboy costumes to court, delivered rambling monologues, put himself on the witness stand and sought to subpoena the pope, Jesus and John F. Kennedy. David R. Dow, a law professor at the University of Houston who has met more than 75 death row inmates, visited Panetti at his lawyers' request. "Of all the people I have met on death row, he's the gold-medal-crazy winner," Professor Dow said.
- In Virginia, Percy Walton faces a June 8 execution date despite the fact that, according to his lawyers, he is a shell of a human being, severely mentally ill and cognitively impaired and completely unaware that he faces imminent execution.
While awaiting trial, Walton expressed his belief that he could not be seen if he had his eyes closed. He also told his relatives he was Jesus Christ and that he was a millionaire. He told others he looked forward to his execution because then he would be able to return to life immediately and resurrect his dead family members. In 1999, a psychiatrist, a neuropsychologist and a neurologist assessed Walton's mental health for his appeals and found that he suffers from severe chronic schizophrenia.
Years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Ford v. Wainwright that a person could be executed as long as he understands that is being executed and why he is being executed. Putting aside for a moment the fact that all three of these men should be spared under the Ford v. Wainwright standard, the bar set by the U.S. Supreme Court for establishing mental illness is simply too high.
Culpability is a cornerstone of our criminal justice system. If I commit murder, I am much more culpable for my actions than a person who is severely mentally ill, severely mentally retarded, etc. Put another way, an 8-year-old who does something wrong is less culpable than an adult who does something wrong -- that is why we do not send 8-year-olds to prison.
Many people don't realize that of the 3,300-plus people on death rows across the country, hundreds of people are severely mentally ill. The New York Times has a front-page story that examines this issue. It's worth a read. You can find it here.
Wednesday, May 31, 2006
Irony alert
The Czech Health Minister supports reinstating the death penalty:
'Nuff said.
Health Minister Rath supports death penalty
Health Minister David Rath who is the election leader of the senior
governing Social Democrats (CSSD) in Prague supports the reintroduction of death
penalty in the Czech Republic, the daily Mlada fronta Dnes writes in its Prague
edition today.
Before the June 2-3 elections to the Chamber of Deputies, the daily put ten
questions to each of the Prague election leaders of the five parties that have a
chance of entering the lower parliamentary house, with one of the questions
concerning the death penalty.
Rath was the only of the 5 election leaders to answer affirmatively when
asked whether the death penalty should be reintroduced in the CzechRepublic due
to such people as the perpetrator of a recent series of murders without motives
in Czech forests that stirred the public opinion.
The Prague election leaders of the senior opposition Civic Democrats (ODS),
the Communists (KSCM), the Greens and the Christian Democrats (KDU-CSL) answered negatively.
The death penalty was abolished in the former Czechoslovakia in 1990.
Sentences of 15 to 25 years in prison and life imprisonment are considered
exceptional punishments. The Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms that is
part of the Czech Constitution bans the reinstallation of the death
penalty.
(source: Czech Happenings)
'Nuff said.
Friday, May 26, 2006
A couple of things to highlight...
...before we make our escape into the wilderness of West Virginia for a long holiday weekend:
1. The bloggers over at Tennessee Coalition to Abolish State Killing have won an award for their blogging activities. You can read about it here.
2. The weather's warming up, so it's that time of year again when we start thinking about "Starvin' For Justice: The Annual Fast & Vigil to Abolish the Death Penalty" in front of the U.S. Supreme Court.
The event runs from June 29 to July 2. June 29 is the anniversary of Furman v. Georgia, the Supreme Court ruling that temporarily halted the death penalty in the U.S. in 1972, and July 2 is the anniversary of Gregg v. Georgia, the Supreme Court ruling that allowed executions to resume.
We'll be providing continuous (or near continuous coverage) of the activity here at Abolish the Death Penalty. Meanwhile, if you are interested in participating or just want more information, go here.
1. The bloggers over at Tennessee Coalition to Abolish State Killing have won an award for their blogging activities. You can read about it here.
2. The weather's warming up, so it's that time of year again when we start thinking about "Starvin' For Justice: The Annual Fast & Vigil to Abolish the Death Penalty" in front of the U.S. Supreme Court.
The event runs from June 29 to July 2. June 29 is the anniversary of Furman v. Georgia, the Supreme Court ruling that temporarily halted the death penalty in the U.S. in 1972, and July 2 is the anniversary of Gregg v. Georgia, the Supreme Court ruling that allowed executions to resume.
We'll be providing continuous (or near continuous coverage) of the activity here at Abolish the Death Penalty. Meanwhile, if you are interested in participating or just want more information, go here.
Wednesday, May 24, 2006
Quote of the day
In Wisconsin, Republican operatives, frightened perhaps by the coming election, have placed the issues of banning same-sex marriage and the death penalty on the November ballot. The Republican legislative leadership could have tried to pass a death penalty bill if it wanted to, but GOP leaders knew they didn't have the votes.
So why not put these hot potato issues on the November ballot to try to drive up conservative turnout?
Says Sen. Jon Erpenbach, a Democratfrom the Madison area:
"The only thing missing from the ballot this fall is flag desecration and guns. It's the political equivalent of a Hail Mary."
So why not put these hot potato issues on the November ballot to try to drive up conservative turnout?
Says Sen. Jon Erpenbach, a Democratfrom the Madison area:
"The only thing missing from the ballot this fall is flag desecration and guns. It's the political equivalent of a Hail Mary."
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
Cory Maye update
Those who follow this blog are perhaps familiar with the case of Cory Maye, the wrongfully convicted person on Mississippi's death row.
Radley Balko, the friendly Libertarian dude who broke the Maye story in the blogosphere (well, not just in the blogosphere; he broke the Maye story period) has an update here.
Bottom line: Kicking and screaming, this time the Mississippi criminal justice system is going to have to admit that it made one whopper of a mistake.
Radley Balko, the friendly Libertarian dude who broke the Maye story in the blogosphere (well, not just in the blogosphere; he broke the Maye story period) has an update here.
Bottom line: Kicking and screaming, this time the Mississippi criminal justice system is going to have to admit that it made one whopper of a mistake.
Monday, May 22, 2006
Tested on death penalty
Betsey Wright is someone I admire and is a former board member of NCADP. She also served as a former chief of staff under then-Gov. Bill Clinton. The woman knows all there is to know about local politicking and grassroots organizing -- she really, really gets it.
So when this article from the Arkansas Times showed up in my email box, it definitely hit home:
Tested on death penalty
When I give talks about my opposition to the death penalty, somebody always declares that I wouldn't feel this way if somebody I loved had been murdered. Unfortunately, I got put to the test.
In February 2005, in Texas, my precious 21-year-old niece, Heather, was tortured, raped, mutilated and murdered. Somebody destroyed her dreams and her life, and destroyed our family's hopes for her. I am desperate for justice. I want the Texas Rangers to find the man who committed this horror. I want him caught so he won't do such a thing to anybody else. I want him found so that Heather's mother can sleep again instead of worrying about her other daughters. I find myself praying that he will just plead guilty because I don't want the hideous things he did to Heather talked about in a public trial.
But I don't want him executed. That would be revenge, not justice. I believe the words of the Bible that say revenge is God's, not ours. I shudder at the idea of government imitating this killer by killing him. All the talk about the "closure" given by an execution is a myth. Heather is gone. Her chair is forever empty, and killing her murderer will not change that. The closure I want is his incarceration. I don't want to be jolted back into horrible memories whenever there is an appeal to a death sentence And I don't want his family to be forced into grief and sorrow. Why create another family of another slaying victim? Executions are the most premeditated of all killings, and shamefully, they are legal in 38 states.
I know firsthand from my work with death row inmates that a family can maintain a loving connection with a prisoner. A child can bond with, and love, a parent or grandparent who is in prison. As a Christian, I am facing one of the hardest challenges of my life to forgive the man who took Heather from us. I know I must forgive, and I know it can be done, but it is going to be unimaginably difficult. I keep remembering when I bought Heather her computer for college. I remember showing her the sights in Washington, D.C. I remember how adored she was by her younger sisters. Oh my - it is going to be so hard to forgive.
And as a Christian, I want the man who took our Heather to be redeemed. He is a child of God and God loves him as much as He loves me. My church, the United Methodist Church, begins its statement of opposition to the death penalty with this sentence: "We believe the death penalty denies the power of Christ to redeem, restore and transform all human beings." I can't say it better than that.
My opposition to the death penalty has not wavered because of this horrible murder. I have joined 2 associations of families of murder victims that oppose the death penalty. And it is now common, when I am speaking about the death penalty in Arkansas, for a family member of a murder victim to identify himself or herself, also stating opposition to the death penalty.
So when this article from the Arkansas Times showed up in my email box, it definitely hit home:
Tested on death penalty
When I give talks about my opposition to the death penalty, somebody always declares that I wouldn't feel this way if somebody I loved had been murdered. Unfortunately, I got put to the test.
In February 2005, in Texas, my precious 21-year-old niece, Heather, was tortured, raped, mutilated and murdered. Somebody destroyed her dreams and her life, and destroyed our family's hopes for her. I am desperate for justice. I want the Texas Rangers to find the man who committed this horror. I want him caught so he won't do such a thing to anybody else. I want him found so that Heather's mother can sleep again instead of worrying about her other daughters. I find myself praying that he will just plead guilty because I don't want the hideous things he did to Heather talked about in a public trial.
But I don't want him executed. That would be revenge, not justice. I believe the words of the Bible that say revenge is God's, not ours. I shudder at the idea of government imitating this killer by killing him. All the talk about the "closure" given by an execution is a myth. Heather is gone. Her chair is forever empty, and killing her murderer will not change that. The closure I want is his incarceration. I don't want to be jolted back into horrible memories whenever there is an appeal to a death sentence And I don't want his family to be forced into grief and sorrow. Why create another family of another slaying victim? Executions are the most premeditated of all killings, and shamefully, they are legal in 38 states.
I know firsthand from my work with death row inmates that a family can maintain a loving connection with a prisoner. A child can bond with, and love, a parent or grandparent who is in prison. As a Christian, I am facing one of the hardest challenges of my life to forgive the man who took Heather from us. I know I must forgive, and I know it can be done, but it is going to be unimaginably difficult. I keep remembering when I bought Heather her computer for college. I remember showing her the sights in Washington, D.C. I remember how adored she was by her younger sisters. Oh my - it is going to be so hard to forgive.
And as a Christian, I want the man who took our Heather to be redeemed. He is a child of God and God loves him as much as He loves me. My church, the United Methodist Church, begins its statement of opposition to the death penalty with this sentence: "We believe the death penalty denies the power of Christ to redeem, restore and transform all human beings." I can't say it better than that.
My opposition to the death penalty has not wavered because of this horrible murder. I have joined 2 associations of families of murder victims that oppose the death penalty. And it is now common, when I am speaking about the death penalty in Arkansas, for a family member of a murder victim to identify himself or herself, also stating opposition to the death penalty.
Thursday, May 18, 2006
The myth of prison as country club
Argument No. 28 for the death penalty is that if we simply imprison people for life, they will live out their years with all manner of creature comforts, color TV, air conditioning, three meals a day, etc., at taxpayer expense.
Today a visitor to our blog writes:
Today a visitor to our blog writes:
My only response to any liberal that opposes the death penalty is... put your self in the place of a victims family member... How would you feel if you knew that the murderer of your son or daughter was sitting comfortably in prison... I mean... sure they have to stay there for the rest of their life, but when you think about it... they get fed every day, they got a bed to sleep in... NO!! Murders and Traitors, and (i think the death penalty should include rapests as weel), there punishments are just. And for those who say their human rights are taken away... They forfeighted their rights when they took their victims if you read this... feel free to tell me how you feel. if respect the oppinions of others permanent link posted by Tyler Roznos : 1:54 PMIn response, I am going to once again offer words from our Indiana affiliate, which wrote the following about prison conditions:
Being in prison is not some kind of easy life. It is brutal. It is living every minute of every hour of every day of the rest of your life by someone else's rules. Rules that are intended to inculcate in you that what you are allowed to do at any given moment depends entirely on the whim of prison guards, many of whom are just one step away from being on the other side of the bars. Rules governing every minute aspect of your life: when you can take a shower, when you eat, when you go to the bathroom. If you manage to figure out how to handle the guards, you then have to figure out how to handle the other inmates, some of whom are true predators. Then there's the bad food, lack of any real health care, even if you have a chronic debilitating disease...In short, it ain't a frigging spa.
That deterrence thing
Reason No. 37 to support the death penalty: It's a deterrent, right?
Well, maybe. Maybe not.
Let's leave behind the deterrence studies and the statistics for a moment. As Mark Twain said, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
The truth of the matter is, every study that has been done on deterrence gets twisted and contorted into support for the death penalty or opposition to the death penalty when in point of fact the statistics don't seem to show anything, one way or another.
Let's think about this from a common sense perspective. I recently was pleasantly surprised to see this commentary filter in to my email box from our Indiana affiliate:
Well, maybe. Maybe not.
Let's leave behind the deterrence studies and the statistics for a moment. As Mark Twain said, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
The truth of the matter is, every study that has been done on deterrence gets twisted and contorted into support for the death penalty or opposition to the death penalty when in point of fact the statistics don't seem to show anything, one way or another.
Let's think about this from a common sense perspective. I recently was pleasantly surprised to see this commentary filter in to my email box from our Indiana affiliate:
The next time there's an execution in your state, ask 10 average people you know (who aren't abolitionists or death penalty promoters) the name of the person executed and what their crime was. In my experience, even educated, supposedly "engaged" people can't answer correctly. If folks like that don't know the reasons why someone was executed, then how in the world can the death penalty deter a drug addict robbing the local 7-11 for money for more drugs? People who commit murder simply do not make the fine calculations that death penalty supporters claim they do.
Wednesday, May 17, 2006
When a jury of one's peers, well, isn't so much
The U.S. Constitution guarantees us the right to be tried before our peers.
Or does it?
I have often wondered why people who are strongly opposed to the death penalty are automatically precluded from service in capital murder trials. Various surveys show more than 30 percent of the American public opposes the death penalty. Some of us -- for various reasons -- are adamantly opposed. When you take this population out of the potential pool of jurors, you are inherently giving the remaining pool a certain slant. Indeed, studies have confirmed that so-called "death-qualified juries" (that's the legal phrase that is used) are more conservative and conviction-prone than non-death-qualified juries.
All of this serves as the lead-in to an op-ed from today's Philadelphia Inquirer written by Bernard S. Brown. I don't 100 percent agree with it -- I'm not so much into civil disobediance, and that seems to be what the author is advocating.
However, it is interesting food for thought and definitely worth sharing:
Taking a reasoned stand on death and justice
A friend told me about his recent trip to the Philadelphia Criminal Justice Center for jury duty. He had been drawn for a jury pool for a murder case. The prosecutor had asked him if he could carry out the law and vote to sentence someone to death. My friend had said no and was promptly sent home.
I was outraged. My friend is one of the most thoughtful and intelligent people I know. By eliminating him from the jury pool, they had deprived our community of exactly the sort of person who should be serving on a jury, and I was furious that he had been discriminated against for opposing a policy that should be opposed.
I believe taking life is only justified by saving life. Any other intentional killing is murder. If executing a murderer would deter would-be killers or protect the public better than life in prison, I would support it. The death penalty does not deter other murderers, though, and a prisoner behind bars is generally not a threat to others. Add in the racism, classism, and human errors that plague our criminal justice system, and I remain opposed.
What made my friend's story especially troubling was that I had just gotten a jury duty notice myself saying, "It's your turn!" So, what was I going to do?
I try to be an honest person, and if asked if I could uphold the law and put someone to death, I would have to say no. My commitment to life is stronger than my commitment to the law. When the state murders, I am bound to oppose the state.
That was a very unsettling conclusion. I could not convince myself to lie, so I devised a plan to mount a protest during jury selection: I would stand up, start reciting reasons to oppose the death penalty, and I wouldn't stop until they dragged me out. I figured it might cause a delay and a hassle, which, if multiplied by enough like-minded people, might make prosecutors hesitate before bringing capital charges. If I kept calm and polite, maybe I could sway others. I would just need to make one juror think twice in the penalty phase.
In the end, I was drawn for a jury pool in a civil case that was settled before trial. I was powerfully relieved and let down at the same time. I had been saved from having to be courageous, but all that preparation had been for nothing.
So what about next time? Since my big letdown, friends who are lawyers have told me that standing up and making a scene during jury selection would probably have little impact on the prosecutors or the judge. If I want to do something to make it harder for the state to take a life, they said, I should try to find some way to honestly answer the questions so that I can get onto a death-penalty jury.
Maybe there is enough wiggle room in my stance for me to honestly make it. If life in prison without parole would not protect others' lives as well as the death penalty, I could vote for death. Given, this stance pretty much limits the death penalty to prisoners who kill from within prisons -the Aryan Brotherhood, notorious for murdering from within maximum-security prisons, comes to mind - but it might put me in the position to argue for someone's life. And if that doesn't work, at least I can try out my speech.
About 30 % of Americans oppose capital punishment. I won't tell anyone to lie, but if there's some way we can find to honestly give the "right"answer to get onto death-penalty juries, that could amount to 3 or 4 people per jury. Those not selected can stand up and explain to the remaining juror candidates why they shouldn't support the death penalty, either.
Whatever we do, we can't be quietly swept out of the process. If we believe in life, we need to do something to defend it.
Or does it?
I have often wondered why people who are strongly opposed to the death penalty are automatically precluded from service in capital murder trials. Various surveys show more than 30 percent of the American public opposes the death penalty. Some of us -- for various reasons -- are adamantly opposed. When you take this population out of the potential pool of jurors, you are inherently giving the remaining pool a certain slant. Indeed, studies have confirmed that so-called "death-qualified juries" (that's the legal phrase that is used) are more conservative and conviction-prone than non-death-qualified juries.
All of this serves as the lead-in to an op-ed from today's Philadelphia Inquirer written by Bernard S. Brown. I don't 100 percent agree with it -- I'm not so much into civil disobediance, and that seems to be what the author is advocating.
However, it is interesting food for thought and definitely worth sharing:
Taking a reasoned stand on death and justice
A friend told me about his recent trip to the Philadelphia Criminal Justice Center for jury duty. He had been drawn for a jury pool for a murder case. The prosecutor had asked him if he could carry out the law and vote to sentence someone to death. My friend had said no and was promptly sent home.
I was outraged. My friend is one of the most thoughtful and intelligent people I know. By eliminating him from the jury pool, they had deprived our community of exactly the sort of person who should be serving on a jury, and I was furious that he had been discriminated against for opposing a policy that should be opposed.
I believe taking life is only justified by saving life. Any other intentional killing is murder. If executing a murderer would deter would-be killers or protect the public better than life in prison, I would support it. The death penalty does not deter other murderers, though, and a prisoner behind bars is generally not a threat to others. Add in the racism, classism, and human errors that plague our criminal justice system, and I remain opposed.
What made my friend's story especially troubling was that I had just gotten a jury duty notice myself saying, "It's your turn!" So, what was I going to do?
I try to be an honest person, and if asked if I could uphold the law and put someone to death, I would have to say no. My commitment to life is stronger than my commitment to the law. When the state murders, I am bound to oppose the state.
That was a very unsettling conclusion. I could not convince myself to lie, so I devised a plan to mount a protest during jury selection: I would stand up, start reciting reasons to oppose the death penalty, and I wouldn't stop until they dragged me out. I figured it might cause a delay and a hassle, which, if multiplied by enough like-minded people, might make prosecutors hesitate before bringing capital charges. If I kept calm and polite, maybe I could sway others. I would just need to make one juror think twice in the penalty phase.
In the end, I was drawn for a jury pool in a civil case that was settled before trial. I was powerfully relieved and let down at the same time. I had been saved from having to be courageous, but all that preparation had been for nothing.
So what about next time? Since my big letdown, friends who are lawyers have told me that standing up and making a scene during jury selection would probably have little impact on the prosecutors or the judge. If I want to do something to make it harder for the state to take a life, they said, I should try to find some way to honestly answer the questions so that I can get onto a death-penalty jury.
Maybe there is enough wiggle room in my stance for me to honestly make it. If life in prison without parole would not protect others' lives as well as the death penalty, I could vote for death. Given, this stance pretty much limits the death penalty to prisoners who kill from within prisons -the Aryan Brotherhood, notorious for murdering from within maximum-security prisons, comes to mind - but it might put me in the position to argue for someone's life. And if that doesn't work, at least I can try out my speech.
About 30 % of Americans oppose capital punishment. I won't tell anyone to lie, but if there's some way we can find to honestly give the "right"answer to get onto death-penalty juries, that could amount to 3 or 4 people per jury. Those not selected can stand up and explain to the remaining juror candidates why they shouldn't support the death penalty, either.
Whatever we do, we can't be quietly swept out of the process. If we believe in life, we need to do something to defend it.
Wisconsin update
By now many of you know that we lost the vote in Wisconsin. The Senate voted 18 to 15 to put a nonbinding referendum on the death penalty on the November election ballot. Here's a story from the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel that sums things up pretty accurately:
Death penalty on ballot
Senate agrees to advisory referendum in November
By STACY FORSTER
sforster@journalsentinel.com
Madison - Voters in the November election will be asked whether Wisconsin should reinstate the death penalty, after action Tuesday by the state Senate.
The Senate voted 18-15 to agree with changes made by the Assembly earlier this month and send the issue to voters on Nov. 7, rather than the September primary as called for in an earlier version of the measure.
Those who backed the resolution to ask voters about capital punishment for certain crimes said it is important to allow residents a chance to weigh in on an important issue at a time when there is likely to be the greatest turnout. But opponents dismissed the resolution as a political ploy.
The advisory referendum question will be on ballots along with races for governor, attorney general and other state officials, as well as a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage and substantially similar relationships, such as civil unions.
Because of the large number of important races and issues, voters won't have a chance to participate in a full debate on the death penalty, said Sen. Jon Erpenbach (D-Middleton).
"The only thing missing from the ballot this fall is flag desecration and guns," Erpenbach said. "It's the political equivalent of a Hail Mary."
The death penalty vote also will play out at the same time as the trial of Steven Avery, scheduled to begin Oct. 16. In 2003, Avery was released from prison after being wrongfully convicted of a sexual assault but has since been charged in the death of Teresa Halbach.
But Sen. Alan Lasee (R-De Pere), who has been pushing for the death penalty for more than 30 years, said he drafted the advisory referendum proposal in early 2005 with the intent of getting input from constituents. "It's time for people to have their say on this important issue," Lasee said.
The question, which won't be binding, will read: "Should the death penalty be enacted in the State of Wisconsin for cases involving a person who is convicted of first-degree intentional homicide, if the conviction is supported by DNA evidence?"
The referendum question wouldn't affect Avery because the harshest penalty Wisconsin defendants now face is life in prison.
Wisconsin has not had capital punishment since 1853.
The Senate initially passed a similar resolution in March on a 20-13 vote, but that version would have put the question on September primary election ballots.
Earlier this month, the Assembly voted 47-45 to put the question to voters, but shifted the referendum to the November ballot and eliminated the word "vicious" to describe crimes eligible for the death penalty.
Senators engaged in a three-hour debate Tuesday about the application and cost of the death penalty. "All we're trying to do is give people the opportunity to tell us what they believe," said Sen. Cathy Stepp (R-Sturtevant). "What are we so afraid of?"
But by leaving tough issues to a referendum, lawmakers aren't taking care of their responsibilities, some opponents said. "They spoke when they sent us here," Sen. Lena Taylor (D-Milwaukee) said of voters. "We represent them."
Opponents also questioned how much lawmakers would learn from such an advisory referendum.
"It would only serve as an emotional diversion from some of the other important issues people are talking about," said Senate Democratic Leader Judy Robson of Beloit. "The referendum is less about learning about the will of the people and more about the desire to inflame."
Opponents also questioned such reliance on DNA evidence. If tainted or mishandled, it could result in a wrongful conviction and execution, said Sen. Dave Hansen (D-Green Bay).
Sen. Dave Zien (R-Eau Claire) said it is important to get voters'
opinions on record to provide better information on the issue if lawmakers ever decide to introduce legislation on the death penalty.
"I want to know what parts of the state are going to be very much in favor and which won't," Zien said, adding that he believes the death penalty is a deterrent to those who might commit a violent crime.
Polls show the idea has popularity among Wisconsin residents. A March
29 to April 7 survey by the St. Norbert College Survey Center and Wisconsin Public Radio asked 400 respondents whether they favored language similar - but not identical - to what would be in the referendum.
Nearly two-thirds - 61% - said they supported it, while 33% were opposed, 5% were not sure and 1% refused to answer the question. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points.
Death penalty on ballot
Senate agrees to advisory referendum in November
By STACY FORSTER
sforster@journalsentinel.com
Madison - Voters in the November election will be asked whether Wisconsin should reinstate the death penalty, after action Tuesday by the state Senate.
The Senate voted 18-15 to agree with changes made by the Assembly earlier this month and send the issue to voters on Nov. 7, rather than the September primary as called for in an earlier version of the measure.
Those who backed the resolution to ask voters about capital punishment for certain crimes said it is important to allow residents a chance to weigh in on an important issue at a time when there is likely to be the greatest turnout. But opponents dismissed the resolution as a political ploy.
The advisory referendum question will be on ballots along with races for governor, attorney general and other state officials, as well as a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage and substantially similar relationships, such as civil unions.
Because of the large number of important races and issues, voters won't have a chance to participate in a full debate on the death penalty, said Sen. Jon Erpenbach (D-Middleton).
"The only thing missing from the ballot this fall is flag desecration and guns," Erpenbach said. "It's the political equivalent of a Hail Mary."
The death penalty vote also will play out at the same time as the trial of Steven Avery, scheduled to begin Oct. 16. In 2003, Avery was released from prison after being wrongfully convicted of a sexual assault but has since been charged in the death of Teresa Halbach.
But Sen. Alan Lasee (R-De Pere), who has been pushing for the death penalty for more than 30 years, said he drafted the advisory referendum proposal in early 2005 with the intent of getting input from constituents. "It's time for people to have their say on this important issue," Lasee said.
The question, which won't be binding, will read: "Should the death penalty be enacted in the State of Wisconsin for cases involving a person who is convicted of first-degree intentional homicide, if the conviction is supported by DNA evidence?"
The referendum question wouldn't affect Avery because the harshest penalty Wisconsin defendants now face is life in prison.
Wisconsin has not had capital punishment since 1853.
The Senate initially passed a similar resolution in March on a 20-13 vote, but that version would have put the question on September primary election ballots.
Earlier this month, the Assembly voted 47-45 to put the question to voters, but shifted the referendum to the November ballot and eliminated the word "vicious" to describe crimes eligible for the death penalty.
Senators engaged in a three-hour debate Tuesday about the application and cost of the death penalty. "All we're trying to do is give people the opportunity to tell us what they believe," said Sen. Cathy Stepp (R-Sturtevant). "What are we so afraid of?"
But by leaving tough issues to a referendum, lawmakers aren't taking care of their responsibilities, some opponents said. "They spoke when they sent us here," Sen. Lena Taylor (D-Milwaukee) said of voters. "We represent them."
Opponents also questioned how much lawmakers would learn from such an advisory referendum.
"It would only serve as an emotional diversion from some of the other important issues people are talking about," said Senate Democratic Leader Judy Robson of Beloit. "The referendum is less about learning about the will of the people and more about the desire to inflame."
Opponents also questioned such reliance on DNA evidence. If tainted or mishandled, it could result in a wrongful conviction and execution, said Sen. Dave Hansen (D-Green Bay).
Sen. Dave Zien (R-Eau Claire) said it is important to get voters'
opinions on record to provide better information on the issue if lawmakers ever decide to introduce legislation on the death penalty.
"I want to know what parts of the state are going to be very much in favor and which won't," Zien said, adding that he believes the death penalty is a deterrent to those who might commit a violent crime.
Polls show the idea has popularity among Wisconsin residents. A March
29 to April 7 survey by the St. Norbert College Survey Center and Wisconsin Public Radio asked 400 respondents whether they favored language similar - but not identical - to what would be in the referendum.
Nearly two-thirds - 61% - said they supported it, while 33% were opposed, 5% were not sure and 1% refused to answer the question. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points.
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
Drama in Wisconsin
Sometime today the Wisconsin Senate is expected to vote on whether to place a nonbinding referendum on the death penalty on the November election ballot. The vote will be close.
Among those watching from the visitors' gallery in Madison will be Chris Ochoa.
Ochoa was convicted of the 1988 rape and murder of Nancy DePriest at a Pizza Hut in Austin, Texas. After police threatened him with the death penalty, Ochoa confessed to the murder and sentenced to life in prison.
Later, DNA evidence exonerated Ochoa and implicated another man (in prison for another crime) who already had confessed to the crime. (His confessions were ignored and Ochoa basically was rotting away in prison until the Wisconsin Innocence Project took his case.)
Last week, Ochoa graduated from law school -- from the University of Wisconsin Law School.
The Milwaukee Sentinel-Journal did a big story on him. You can read it here. Then Associated Press picked the story up and put it on their national wire. Then local TV aired the story. Then, on Friday of last week, ABC World News Tonight made Ochoa their "person of the week." You can read their story here.
Ochoa's case raises many interesting questions. It paints a picture of how a wrongful confession can occur -- and raises the frightening possibility that this sort of thing happens more often than any of us would care to admit.
And consider one thing: Unlike most crimes, including most murders, there was DNA evidence in Ochoa's case. Yet he nonetheless was convicted and sentenced to life.
That's an important distinction because the death penalty reinstatement proposal that is up for debate in Wisconsin includes a DNA requirement. Yet we know, CSI notwithstanding, that DNA is not a cure-all that prevents fundamental miscarriages of justice from occuring.
Yes, Ochoa will be in the visitors' gallery when the Wisconsin Senate votes later today. Under his watchful eye we all can hope the Senate does the right thing.
Among those watching from the visitors' gallery in Madison will be Chris Ochoa.
Ochoa was convicted of the 1988 rape and murder of Nancy DePriest at a Pizza Hut in Austin, Texas. After police threatened him with the death penalty, Ochoa confessed to the murder and sentenced to life in prison.
Later, DNA evidence exonerated Ochoa and implicated another man (in prison for another crime) who already had confessed to the crime. (His confessions were ignored and Ochoa basically was rotting away in prison until the Wisconsin Innocence Project took his case.)
Last week, Ochoa graduated from law school -- from the University of Wisconsin Law School.
The Milwaukee Sentinel-Journal did a big story on him. You can read it here. Then Associated Press picked the story up and put it on their national wire. Then local TV aired the story. Then, on Friday of last week, ABC World News Tonight made Ochoa their "person of the week." You can read their story here.
Ochoa's case raises many interesting questions. It paints a picture of how a wrongful confession can occur -- and raises the frightening possibility that this sort of thing happens more often than any of us would care to admit.
And consider one thing: Unlike most crimes, including most murders, there was DNA evidence in Ochoa's case. Yet he nonetheless was convicted and sentenced to life.
That's an important distinction because the death penalty reinstatement proposal that is up for debate in Wisconsin includes a DNA requirement. Yet we know, CSI notwithstanding, that DNA is not a cure-all that prevents fundamental miscarriages of justice from occuring.
Yes, Ochoa will be in the visitors' gallery when the Wisconsin Senate votes later today. Under his watchful eye we all can hope the Senate does the right thing.
Monday, May 15, 2006
Gone but not forgotten....
Many thanks to Karl and Tennessee Dude for keeping the blog going while I have been concentrating on....something.
Meanwhile, I would like to point everyone's attention to this interesting debate going on between Karl and Doug Berman, law professor, who maintains this blog over the importance of the Hill case, which is currently pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Meanwhile, I would like to point everyone's attention to this interesting debate going on between Karl and Doug Berman, law professor, who maintains this blog over the importance of the Hill case, which is currently pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.
Thursday, May 11, 2006
Less than a handful remain unfettered in the business of lethal injection
Random capital punishment factoid: Texas, Virginia, & Oklahoma are top three killers in the USA when it comes to implementing capital punishment. The three states account for over 50% of the executions in the USA since 1976. As of Thursday night, the three are also the only jurisdictions where contested execution dates have not been stayed due to concerns over lethal injection.
Reports from Harvard
We didn't write this, the Harvard U. Gazette did:
The prophets of the "new abolitionism" met in Austin Hall over the weekend, and one of them, Barry Scheck of the Innocence Project at the Cardozo School of Law in New York, predicted "the end of the death penalty within our lifetimes." Considering the unanimity of opinion on this one main point - that capital punishment is a bad idea - the gathering was in some ways more a revival meeting for activists than a debate. But, the devil's in the details and so the conference didn't lack for pyrotechnics.
Scheck cited two "heartening" currents that he said were leading toward the abolition of capital punishment in the United States: reversal of convictions of the innocent through new DNA evidence, and the trend to life sentences, as in the case of Zacarias Moussaoui, whom a federal jury declined last week to sentence to death for his role in the 9/11 attacks.. . .
The occasion was a national conference, "Race and the Death Penalty," convened to consider what Tufts philosopher Hugo Bedau, one of the nation's leading opponents of capital punishment, called in his keynote address, "the twin evils" of the current system: racial bias and the conviction of the innocent.
"If we are to believe the friends of the death penalty," he said, "the risk of these two evils must be borne patiently in the confidence that the benefits of a death penalty system - even a flawed system such as ours - outweigh the harms. Those of us who have looked with care at our death penalty system may be excused if we are unpersuaded."
The conference convened Friday afternoon (May 5) just hours after another bit of good news for death penalty opponents, the announcement of a federal jury award of $2.25 million to Earl Washington Jr., a Virginia man who at one point had come within nine days of being executed for rape and murder on the basis of a confession fabricated by a police investigator.
Washington was pardoned in 2000 after sophisticated DNA testing proved his innocence. His lawyers, who include Scheck and co-founder of the Innocence Project Peter Neufeld, believe the jury award to be the largest ever in a civil rights case in the history of Virginia.
The conference was the official launch of a new book, "From Lynch Mobs to the Killing State: Race and the Death Penalty in America" (New York University Press), edited by Charles J. Ogletree Jr., Jesse Climenko Professor of Law and director of the new Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice, and by Austin Sarat of Amherst College. And filmmakers Rachel Lyon and Jim Lopes gave the conferees the first glimpse anyone has had outside PBS of their new film, "Race to Execution," inspired by the work of Lyon's sister, Andrea Lyon, of DePaul University College of Law, as a public defender.. . .
[Stephen Bright, of the Southern Center for Human Rights] lamented the fact that in the state court systems judges and prosecutors are elected, not appointed. This, he suggested, leads to a politicized buddy system in which it can be hard to keep prosecutors from challenging African Americans off juries - even though the United State Supreme Court has ruled, in the Batson case of 1986, that using peremptory challenges on the basis of race was unconstitutional.
He also charged that by failing to fund public defenders adequately, states have turned the guarantee of court-appointed counsel - as established by the landmark Supreme Court case of Gideon v. Wainwright in 1963 - into "an illusory constitutional right."
George Kendall, a senior counsel at Holland & Knight LLP in New York, insisted, though, "These are not problems without solutions. This is not rocket science."
As a workable mechanism to enforce Batson's requirement of racial fairness in the use of peremptory challenges of jurors, he suggested a system of "inclusion": Once jurors were initially qualified, prosecution and defense would each get to list the jurors they most want to serve, and the two lists could be reconciled to empanel a jury.
[In an email today from David, who was writing from a bunker near Dick Cheney's cave, David wants to say thanks for reading and thanks for those, like Tennessee Dude, who sent him & his unindicted co-conspirators nourishment to keep up the fight while he is temporarily assigned elsewhere.]
Jerry Conner's execution in North Carolina put on hold
The North Carolina Supreme Court has stayed Friday's scheduled execution of Jerry Conner. Supreme Court ruled he deserved a new DNA test that could back up his claim of innocence. From the Guardian:
Defense lawyers argued for a new DNA test, saying current procedures are better than those available at the time of trial. The defense also has pointed to another man seen near the store the night of the slayings as a possible suspect.
"As we have said from the beginning, we believe that a DNA test is the only way that the state of North Carolina can be confident that the right person is being punished for these crimes,'' said defense lawyer Mark Kleinschmidt.
[David is, unfortunately, working on a super-duper top secret project that is consuming almost all of his waking moments and has been, understandably, unavailable for the last few days. A few of us "second lights" will be pinch-hitting until David returns. Any errors, blunders, typos, mistakes are all our fault, and not those of David.]
Monday, May 08, 2006
That Texas governor's race
Last Friday we put up a "quote of the day" from Kinky Friedman, an independent candidate who is running for Texas governor. A couple of folks weighed in with their opinions, and they're interesting enough to elevate into a post.
(Two disclosures here. First, I used to cover politics as a newspaper reporter in Texas, so I'm interested in this sort of thing. Second, neither this blog nor NCADP endorses candidates in partisan elections. NCADP isn't allowed to because of our tax status, and this blog is an extension of NCADP. So, we play by the rules. However, we are allowed to educate the public as to candidates' positions on issues such as the death penalty.)
In response to the post below, "Stop Kinky" wrote:
Kinky has been a disappointment on the death penalty. I thought he'd be promising, but his website now brags "Kinky is not anti-death-penalty."
In response to "Stop Kinky," "Persian Cowboy" wrote:
Dear Stop Kinky,I think I have enough information to comment on Kinky’s view about the death penalty. I have talked to him a few times since last year and every time the Kinkster said that his main concern was to focus and to be "Damn sure we won't execute the wrong guy." Mr. Friedman went so far as to boldly state he would find an alternative to Texas' "Eject 'em or inject 'em" policy on death row legislation. However as you said he would always say that “He is not against the death penalty, but he is against killing the wrong guy.” He signed TSADP’s Moratorium petition last year and said that he would support a moratorium on executions in Texas. Also if you read his last book, he talks about it too. He changed his position from moratorium to abolition when he testified on Soffar’s case. He said, “The (criminal justice) system is not perfect,” he said. “Until it’s perfect, let’s do away with the death penalty.”
Then, some anonymous person posted this (s/he is referring to Democrat Chris Bell, Republican incumbent Rick Perry and independent candidate Carole Keeton Strayhorn):
Thank God Kinky has come out against killing the wrong guy! I've tried to find Perry's, Strayhorn's, and Bell's position on killing the wrong guy, but they all appear to have ducked this important issue. I suppose we can assume Strayhorn is in favor of killing the wrong guy because she's one tough grandma, but I really want to know where Perry and Bell stand on the critical question of executing innocent people who have been wrongly convicted. If Kinky changed his position from moratorium on the death penalty to abolition when he testified in Soffar’s case, someone ought to tell those folks who are running Kinky's campaign website because they are actively soliciting support for Kinky's campaign based on a position which you say he has now rejected. Between your conversations with Kinky and his own website, I'm betting that you have the more accurate information because the website also contains conflicting information about Kinky's views on reproductive freedoms, Kinky's voting history, and Kinky's views on immigration.
Then Persian Cowboy concluded the discussion (for now at least) with this remark:
Do you have the link to his website about the death penalty? I can call them and ask them to correct it in their website. If they don't do it, then it means that his campaign is not against the death penalty. I asked Chris Bell to sign our moratorium petition. He said that he is for the death penalty and he is still thinking (whether he) should support a moratorium on executions or no. So I guess he would not be much help to the (anti) Death Penalty movement in Texas.
(Two disclosures here. First, I used to cover politics as a newspaper reporter in Texas, so I'm interested in this sort of thing. Second, neither this blog nor NCADP endorses candidates in partisan elections. NCADP isn't allowed to because of our tax status, and this blog is an extension of NCADP. So, we play by the rules. However, we are allowed to educate the public as to candidates' positions on issues such as the death penalty.)
In response to the post below, "Stop Kinky" wrote:
Kinky has been a disappointment on the death penalty. I thought he'd be promising, but his website now brags "Kinky is not anti-death-penalty."
In response to "Stop Kinky," "Persian Cowboy" wrote:
Dear Stop Kinky,I think I have enough information to comment on Kinky’s view about the death penalty. I have talked to him a few times since last year and every time the Kinkster said that his main concern was to focus and to be "Damn sure we won't execute the wrong guy." Mr. Friedman went so far as to boldly state he would find an alternative to Texas' "Eject 'em or inject 'em" policy on death row legislation. However as you said he would always say that “He is not against the death penalty, but he is against killing the wrong guy.” He signed TSADP’s Moratorium petition last year and said that he would support a moratorium on executions in Texas. Also if you read his last book, he talks about it too. He changed his position from moratorium to abolition when he testified on Soffar’s case. He said, “The (criminal justice) system is not perfect,” he said. “Until it’s perfect, let’s do away with the death penalty.”
Then, some anonymous person posted this (s/he is referring to Democrat Chris Bell, Republican incumbent Rick Perry and independent candidate Carole Keeton Strayhorn):
Thank God Kinky has come out against killing the wrong guy! I've tried to find Perry's, Strayhorn's, and Bell's position on killing the wrong guy, but they all appear to have ducked this important issue. I suppose we can assume Strayhorn is in favor of killing the wrong guy because she's one tough grandma, but I really want to know where Perry and Bell stand on the critical question of executing innocent people who have been wrongly convicted. If Kinky changed his position from moratorium on the death penalty to abolition when he testified in Soffar’s case, someone ought to tell those folks who are running Kinky's campaign website because they are actively soliciting support for Kinky's campaign based on a position which you say he has now rejected. Between your conversations with Kinky and his own website, I'm betting that you have the more accurate information because the website also contains conflicting information about Kinky's views on reproductive freedoms, Kinky's voting history, and Kinky's views on immigration.
Then Persian Cowboy concluded the discussion (for now at least) with this remark:
Do you have the link to his website about the death penalty? I can call them and ask them to correct it in their website. If they don't do it, then it means that his campaign is not against the death penalty. I asked Chris Bell to sign our moratorium petition. He said that he is for the death penalty and he is still thinking (whether he) should support a moratorium on executions or no. So I guess he would not be much help to the (anti) Death Penalty movement in Texas.
Friday, May 05, 2006
Quote of the day
...comes from Kinky Friedman, independent candidate for Texas governor:
"Texas: 50th in education, first in executions... how's that working for you?"
"Texas: 50th in education, first in executions... how's that working for you?"
Thursday, May 04, 2006
Daily Kos blogs on Willingham
We've blogged on the case of Cameron Todd Willingham, who was executed in Texas despite the fact that he may well have been innocent.
Today the well-read Daily Kos has a posting about the case. This is important because Daily Kos may be the highest-trafficked blog in the entire blogosphere (I forget the exact statistic, but he does get hundreds of thousands of readers a day.)
You can read the post here.
Today the well-read Daily Kos has a posting about the case. This is important because Daily Kos may be the highest-trafficked blog in the entire blogosphere (I forget the exact statistic, but he does get hundreds of thousands of readers a day.)
You can read the post here.
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Some 9/11 family members opposed death sentence
One of the common misconceptions that we in the abolition movement try to fight is that family members of murder victims invariably favor a death sentence for those who killed their loved ones.
Leaving aside for the moment the fact that Moussaoui was locked up in jail more than 1,200 miles away when the planes hit the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on that fateful day, many 9/11 family members simply opposed a death sentence on principle.
Here are some of their comments:
Leaving aside for the moment the fact that Moussaoui was locked up in jail more than 1,200 miles away when the planes hit the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on that fateful day, many 9/11 family members simply opposed a death sentence on principle.
Here are some of their comments:
Family members of those killed in the attacks of September 11, 2001 expressed relief at the jury’s decision not to sentence Zacarias Moussaoui to death today. “More than anyone, we understand why the jury chose the sentence they did,” said Terry Rockefeller, whose sister Laura Rockefeller was in the North Tower of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.
“As a long-time opponent of the death penalty, a belief even this devastating personal tragedy has not altered, I am relieved by the jury’s decision not to sentence Zacarias Moussaoui to death.”
Rockefeller, a member of the Board of Directors of Murder Victims’ Families for Reconciliation, was among the dozen 9/11 family members to testify for the defense in the punishment phase of the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui. The federal rules regarding victim statements significantly restricted what Terry and others could say on the stand, and the attorneys for the defense asked Terry and others not to speak to the press until after the jury returned their verdict.
This is the first time victim family members who oppose capital punishment have ever testified in a federal death penalty trial. Such testimony is becoming more common at the state level where increasing numbers of murder victim family members who oppose the death penalty are making their feelings known.
“Mr. Moussaoui's trial has been an expensive diversion in the struggle against terrorism. His alleged crime of conspiracy could have been quickly disposed if the option of execution were not possible,” said Patricia Perry, whose son John William Perry, was a member of the New York Police Department who died at the World Trade Center. “Beyond the verdict in this trial, I oppose using the death penalty to demonstrate to citizens that murder is so wrong that we will kill to prove it wrong. State killing teaches our children that we do not mean what we say and inures us as a society to the horror of killing.”
"My husband and I both opposed the death penalty in general. For me, now, this particular case is no exception,” said Andrea LeBlanc, whose husband Robert was a passenger on United Flight 175, the second plane that crashed into the World Trade Center, hitting the South Tower.
“Violence takes many forms and killing another human being will never undo the harm that has been done. Killing Zacarius Moussaoui would not have helped us understand those things that lead to 9/11. Nor would it have helped create the kind of compassionate world I want to live in."
For Loretta Filipov, whose husband Al was on American Flight 11 from Boston, the first plane to hit the World Trade Center, crashing into the North Tower, said, “Killing Zacarius Moussaoui will not bring my husband back. It will not change the life my family and I now have without my husband and their father. But what killing will do is to continue the cycle of violence, hate and revenge. This is not the face we want for our future, for our children and grandchildren.”
Family member Antonio Aversano, who testified for the defense and whose father Louis Aversano, Jr., was a World Trade Center victim, believes “that our best personal defense against terrorism is to not let the fear and hatred of terror consume our lives but to take whatever steps are necessary to reclaim our hearts, to honor each other and to live life well.”
“A number of us have tried to turn our anger and pain into solutions,” said Rockefeller. “For many who lost loved ones that Tuesday morning the answer is not more killing to attempt to solve the past, but rather steps to a future in which all killing is condemned and terrorists cannot find purchase.”
Today, a two-fer
Two stories dominate today's death penalty news.
First, there are a number of articles out there about a report issued by the Innocence Project regarding the execution of a Texas man who was probably innocent. No, we're not talking about Ruben Cantu. We're talking about Cameron Todd Willingham.
Stand Down Texas has all of the stories conveniently stored in one place. Go here.
And there's the botched execution of Joseph Clark, which we blogged on yesterday. Ohio Death Penalty Information has the greatest collection of links.
Both stories, by the way, made national news. Not a good day for death penalty supporters.
First, there are a number of articles out there about a report issued by the Innocence Project regarding the execution of a Texas man who was probably innocent. No, we're not talking about Ruben Cantu. We're talking about Cameron Todd Willingham.
Stand Down Texas has all of the stories conveniently stored in one place. Go here.
And there's the botched execution of Joseph Clark, which we blogged on yesterday. Ohio Death Penalty Information has the greatest collection of links.
Both stories, by the way, made national news. Not a good day for death penalty supporters.
Tuesday, May 02, 2006
Botched execution in Ohio
This morning -- just as we were posting the tongue-in-cheek entry about bringing back the firing squad and televising executions -- a botched execution was occuring in Ohio:
Clark executed after vein collapse causes lengthy delay
By Alan Johnson
The Columbus Dispatch
Tuesday, May 2, 2006 12:50 PM
LUCASVILLE, Ohio - "It don't work. It don't work," Joseph Clark said repeatedly in what he thought were his last moments alive as he lay on the lethal injection table.But he didn't die -- not right away.
For the first time since Ohio resumed capital punishment in 1999, problems with lethal injection delayed the execution of the Toledo murderer by an hour. Clark's vein collapsed or "blew out" after the process had started this morning at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility near Lucasville.
Clark, 57, was eventually executed at 11:26 a.m., but only after medical technicians struggled behind a closed curtain for about a half hour to find suitable veins to inject the deadly drugs.
Terry Collins, who took over Monday as director of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, said he ordered the curtain closed to shield victim family witnesses and his staff from being watched while they tried to get the IV lines going.
"I absolutely believe I made the right call closing the curtain and I would do it again," Collins said later. However, he said the whole process will be reviewed.
Media witnesses heard what they described as "moaning, crying out and guttural noises" while technicians worked on Clark behind the closed curtain.
However, prison officials said he was not in any pain and eventually went to sleep just before the execution resumed.
Collins said he was in touch with Gov. Bob Taft's office several times during the delay. He also summoned Greg Trout, the department's chief legal counsel, to the Death House to confer with George Pappas, Clark's attorney.
The trio of drugs -- sodium pentothal, an anesthetic, pancuronium bromide, a muscle paralyzer, and potassium chloride, which stops respiration and the heart -- has been used in Ohio and 35 other states for several years.
However, legal challenges to the lethal injection process are pending in several states, as well as at the U.S. Supreme Court.
Opponents argue the drugs can leave a prisoner paralyzed, but suffering great pain as they are executed. They say that violates the U.S. Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
Clark executed after vein collapse causes lengthy delay
By Alan Johnson
The Columbus Dispatch
Tuesday, May 2, 2006 12:50 PM
LUCASVILLE, Ohio - "It don't work. It don't work," Joseph Clark said repeatedly in what he thought were his last moments alive as he lay on the lethal injection table.But he didn't die -- not right away.
For the first time since Ohio resumed capital punishment in 1999, problems with lethal injection delayed the execution of the Toledo murderer by an hour. Clark's vein collapsed or "blew out" after the process had started this morning at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility near Lucasville.
Clark, 57, was eventually executed at 11:26 a.m., but only after medical technicians struggled behind a closed curtain for about a half hour to find suitable veins to inject the deadly drugs.
Terry Collins, who took over Monday as director of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, said he ordered the curtain closed to shield victim family witnesses and his staff from being watched while they tried to get the IV lines going.
"I absolutely believe I made the right call closing the curtain and I would do it again," Collins said later. However, he said the whole process will be reviewed.
Media witnesses heard what they described as "moaning, crying out and guttural noises" while technicians worked on Clark behind the closed curtain.
However, prison officials said he was not in any pain and eventually went to sleep just before the execution resumed.
Collins said he was in touch with Gov. Bob Taft's office several times during the delay. He also summoned Greg Trout, the department's chief legal counsel, to the Death House to confer with George Pappas, Clark's attorney.
The trio of drugs -- sodium pentothal, an anesthetic, pancuronium bromide, a muscle paralyzer, and potassium chloride, which stops respiration and the heart -- has been used in Ohio and 35 other states for several years.
However, legal challenges to the lethal injection process are pending in several states, as well as at the U.S. Supreme Court.
Opponents argue the drugs can leave a prisoner paralyzed, but suffering great pain as they are executed. They say that violates the U.S. Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)