Sept. 28
USA:
All Executions Are Wrong
The morning after Troy Davis was executed, the state of Georgia set another
execution date. Marcus Ray Johnson is slated to be put to death on October 5.
The Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles should hear from us (fax:
404-651-6670; email: clemency_informat...@pap.state.ga.us) about this case too,
because all executions are wrong.
Even if there are no doubts about guilt (as there was in the case with Troy
Davis, and as there is in the case with Reggie Clemons), even if there are no
horrifying mitigating circumstances (like the ones that led Ohio’s Governor
John Kacich to commute another death sentence), and even if the crime is
particularly heinous (as was the case with the execution last week of Lawrence
Brewer in Texas) the deliberate putting to death of a human being is not
justice and is a fundamental violation of basic human rights.
It is also a power that no government, and no fallible, human-being-operated
justice system should be trusted with.<>P> The same night that Troy Davis and
Lawrence Brewer were put to death in the USA, a 17-year-old was hanged in Iran.
2 days earlier, a Sudanese man in Saudi Arabia was publicly beheaded for the
crime of “sorcery”. The day after Troy Davis’ execution, Alabama lethally
injected Derrick Mason, its 5th execution of the year. Tomorrow, Florida is
scheduled to execute Manuel Valle, who has been on death row for 33 years and
has received no meaningful clemency process.
The disturbing facts and stomach-churning drama surrounding Troy Davis’ case
resulted in a remarkable amount of attention. But all these executions are
wrong. The death penalty is wrong. It must be abolished.
(source: Amnesty International USA blog)
************
Drawing wrong lessons from the Troy Davis execution
Georgia's execution of Troy Davis last week was a poignant reminder of the
continued presence of capital punishment in the United States. The Davis
execution generated extraordinary interest because of troubling doubts about
his guilt. Some observers have already speculated that the Davis case might
serve as the spark that could reignite the movement to abolish the death
penalty. But lost in some of the attention that the execution has generated is
the death penalty's unmistakable and precipitous decline over the past decade.
If the battle has not been won by death penalty opponents, they are much closer
to their goal than they realize.
Death sentencing has dropped remarkably over the past 15 years, making what was
already a marginal practice (in terms of the frequency with which murder is
actually punished with death) an exceptionally rare one. Whereas over 300
defendants were condemned to die per year in the mid-1990s, the most recent
figures show a nationwide average closer to 115 per year--a more than 60 %
decline. Executions, too, have fallen significantly--by about 33 % if one
compares 1997-2003 (about 75 executions nationwide per year) and 2004-2010
(about 50 executions nationwide per year). As a matter of politics, the
momentum is clearly on the side of restriction rather than expansion. The past
four years have seen the legislative abolition of capital punishment in New
Jersey, New Mexico, and Illinois. Numerous other states have come close to
abolition or have adopted new limitations on the death penalty (such as
Maryland's requirement that death sentences rest on biological evidence or on a
videotaped recording of either the offense or a confession by the offender). As
a matter of law, the death penalty appears more fragile jurisprudentially than
at any other time in American history, save the brief period of judicial
invalidation in the early 1970s. U.S. executions, by the numbers
Indeed, and in addition to legislative action, several members of the U.S.
Supreme Court have expressed deep skepticism about the efforts to ensure
reliable and fair administration of the death penalty. Moreover, in its
decisions abolishing the death penalty as applied to juveniles, offenders with
mental retardation, and offenders convicted of raping children, the Court has
found those practices contrary to "evolving standards of decency" based on new
gauges of contemporary morality--such as elite and professional opinion,
international opinion, and polling data--in addition to legislative decisions
and jury verdicts. In the cases involving juveniles and offenders with mental
retardation, the Court declared the practices contrary to evolving standards
despite the fact that a majority of death penalty states did not (yet) prohibit
the challenged practice.
In light of this dramatic decline of the American death penalty in practice,
politics, and law, rather than portraying the Davis case as the "spark" that
could inspire a new generation of anti-death penalty activism, we perhaps
should view the Davis case as additional fuel on a fire that is already
burning. The difficult question for opponents is whether and how to focus this
renewed energy. On the one hand, the Supreme Court's new approach to gauging
"evolving standards of decency" offers a potentially powerful constitutional
litigation strategy. If the trend toward abolition and restriction on the state
legislative front continues along its current trajectory, it will become easier
for abolitionist litigators to marshal evidence of the death penalty's domestic
decline in support of a constitutional ban--and easier for courts to deem
capital punishment an outlier practice that falls outside of an emerging
constitutional consensus.
This approach is attractive for 2 reasons: It is likely the only way to uproot
capital punishment in certain entrenched jurisdictions (like Texas), and it
provides a "backstop" against legislative backsliding in the inevitable moments
of anger and fear that attend particularly heinous crimes--in much the same way
that the European Convention on Human Rights serves as a backstop against
backsliding for European countries, as reinstatement of capital punishment
precludes membership in the European Union.
However, constitutional litigation always carries with it the risk of backlash,
as a previous era's experience demonstrates. The movement to abolish American
capital punishment in the 1960s and 70s proved to be successful in the
short-term but tragic in the long-term. After bringing executions to a halt in
1967 and providing the 1st extended period in American history without
executions (almost a decade), the brief moratorium was followed by enormous
reaction. The dying practice of capital punishment returned with a vengeance
following the U.S. Supreme Court's invalidation of prevailing statutes in 1972.
Georgia's Lieutenant Governor Lester Maddox captured the moment by
characterizing the Supreme Court's intervention as a "license for anarchy, rape
and murder." The Supreme Court bowed to the prevailing fury and upheld a new
generation of death penalty statutes only 4 years after its constitutional
abolition. The nation's death row grew five-fold between the Court's decision
and the late 1990s--when it reached its all-time high of over 3,500
death-sentenced inmates.
Nonetheless, there are some reasons to think that court-driven abolition would
engender less opposition in the current moment than it did in the early 1970s.
The 3 major forces driving the contemporary decline in the American death
penalty are remarkably new to the debate surrounding capital punishment. The
first and likely most important precipitant of the recent decline has been the
discovery of wrongfully-condemned offenders, particularly the discovery of
numerous innocents on Illinois's death row in the late 1990s. Although concern
about executing the innocent is as old as the death penalty, the emergence of
sophisticated technology for revisiting past convictions (particularly DNA) has
highlighted to an unprecedented degree the extent to which our criminal justice
system is susceptible of error, even (and perhaps especially) in capital cases.
The 2nd major development is concern about excessive cost in capital cases.
Prior to the recent era, cost concerns were rarely cited as a reason to
withhold the death penalty, given the cost of long-term incarceration. But the
price of capital punishment has increased dramatically, in part because of the
heightened constitutional regulation of capital cases (including at trial and
in various appeals), and in part because of the difficulties in translating
capital sentences into actual executions. More than ever before, the decision
of whether to seek death is as much a financial one (even in high execution
states like Texas) as it is an abstract question of just punishment. Unlike the
Depression--which produced the most executions in our nation's history--the
recent (and continuing) financial downturn has produced a new reticence to seek
the death penalty.
And finally, the current era marks the 1st time in American history that states
have widely embraced life-without-possibility-of-parole (LWOP) as an
alternative to the death penalty. Much modern support for the death penalty is
rooted in fear of recidivism by offenders (Texas, for example, requires a jury
to find that a defendant constitutes a "future danger" to impose the death
penalty), and the introduction of LWOP has removed one of the most salient
"pro"-death penalty considerations. Indeed, despite continued high polling
support for capital punishment among Americans on the simple question of
whether murder should be punished by death, the level of support drops
significantly when the poll offers LWOP as a specific alternative. Moreover,
unlike in the 1970s, violent crime and homicide rates are not on the upswing,
despite the widespread unemployment that has attended the nation's economic
crises.
Thus, although American history is replete with (over)confident predictions of
the death penalty's impending demise, the present moment brings the genuine
possibility of permanent abolition via judicial decision. The high drama of
particular executions makes the American death penalty appear more entrenched
and routine than it truly is, and obscures the broader trends and
transformations. Such executions can also accelerate the movement toward
abolition. And the execution of Troy Davis captures many of the vices--doubt,
unfairness, expense--that could well cost the death penalty its life.
(source: Commentary; Carol S. Steiker is the Henry J. Friendly Professor of Law
at Harvard Law School. Jordan M. Steiker is the Judge Robert M. Parker Endowed
Chair in Law at the University of Texas School of Law. The opinions expressed
in this commentary are solely those of the authors----CBS News)
***********************
Death penalty: A call to value life
As the execution chamber was prepared, Troy Davis shot one last solemn look at
his attorney.
After being convicted of the 1989 murder of Mark MacPhail, an off-duty Savannah
police officer, Troy Davis was about to face our nation's most serious
punishment: death.
Again, he refused to acknowledge his guilt, professing for the last time,
"Despite the situation you are in, I'm not the one who personally killed your
son, your father, your brother.
"I am innocent," he said.
On Sept. 23 at 11:08 p.m., Troy Davis was pronounced dead by the Georgia
Department of Corrections. The death penalty had claimed its 1,269th life since
1976 and its 36th life this year.
Whether Troy Davis was innocent is moot when it comes to the death penalty,
however. No one in America should ever be killed in the name of the law.
Opponents of the death penalty have rallied around the story of Troy Davis as
evidence that our nation's death penalty laws have major flaws. They argue that
Troy Davis was executed despite reasonable doubt regarding his guilt. They cite
the lack of a murder weapon and the fact that 7 witnesses recanted their
testimony as proof that Troy Davis should not have been executed.
Proponents of the death penalty contend that killing individuals convicted of
grotesque crimes by a jury of their peers is nothing but fair. It is a
deterrent, a stark reminder that if you commit an unthinkable crime you will be
forced to answer to the law.
A recent CBS News/New York Times poll showed that the death penalty was still a
non-issue in America. An overwhelming majority (60 percent) of those polled
said they support the measure. Only 27 % of Americans said they opposed the
death penalty.
As recently as last year, I would have counted myself within the group favoring
the death penalty. After all, are the grieving families of victims not allowed
closure by seeing the murderer of their beloved facing their just desserts?
Does a convicted murderer really deserve a more humane treatment than what they
showed their victim?
While there is merit to that argument, America's legal system should set the
highest standard, not aspire to imitate the savage acts of a convicted killer.
America is the only major Western nation to still practice the death penalty.
In fact, when it comes to the death penalty, we are in camp with dictatorial
regimes such as China, Iran, North Korea and Saudi Arabia.
We may pride ourselves on having a modern democratic system, but having a
primitive judicial system that condones the act of killing is neither honorable
nor something to be proud of. Killing a person to teach society that killing is
wrong is neither logical nor American.
Removing the death penalty does not imply that those who inflict pain and
suffering deserve to be let in the streets to commit more atrocities. It does,
however, enable our country to adhere to the principle that life is precious
while still imprisoning those who deserve to be punished.
This is the 21st century. We should not kill people just to prove a point that
killing is bad or to create a tough image. If we, as a society, truly claim to
honor the value and worth of human life, we must follow this standard for every
human life; even the lives of those convicted of having blood on their hands.
The death penalty must end, and now, or we will continue to kill our nation's
principles, one lethal injection at a time.
(source: Anthony Gonzalez is a political science major; The (Oklahoma State
University) Daily Collegian)
*****************
Views poll, executing innocent people, stir up the commenters and logic
This week's Views poll (here) and my accompanying blog on the state's death
penalty are stirring up some readers -- along with their logic.
I argue the state most likely has executed innocent people. The Views poll
wants to know if readers believe killing an innocent person is worth having the
death penalty for the truly guilty.
Readers took after me for saying if one innocent person could be executed, then
we can't have a death penalty. Here's how I put it:
"If there is a chance of one innocent person being executed, we cannot condone
a death penalty. We can never take back a life that is taken. We can't undo the
wrong. And as citizens of Alabama, we're all accomplices in the death of an
innocent (and the guilty, for that matter). We allow the state to execute; we
are as involved as the person who starts the injection that leads to death." So
BroncDrywall puts on his thinking cap and comes up with this: "Using that
logic, then we can't have prisons or jails at all. Innocent people have been
incarcerated, sometimes for decades, and we can't undo that wrong. Even if
they're declared innocent, they've lost that part of their lives forever. So
jails and prisons have to be eliminated. We can't take the chance of one
innocent person being jailed."
BroncDrywall believes putting somebody in prison wrongly, then later having to
release the person, is the same as killing somebody (meaning: dead), then later
finding out he's not guilty.
If we learn we've made a mistake after an execution, we cannot bring back that
dead person. If we learn of our mistake after incarceration, even after a long
incarceration, we can release the person and provide some kind of compensation.
No, he can't get that lost time back (anymore than I can get back my lost time
for having to try to explain something as simple as this to BroncDrywall and
others), but he's not dead, murdered in cold blood by the hands of us all.
Then, after I attempt to explain this and said if "you can't see the
difference, you can't see," BroncDrywall accused me of committing "ad hominem.
Nothing buttresses your argument like attacking the person you disagree with,
rather than the position he takes. But I'm a big boy. I can handle it. Feel
free to call me ugly or stupid, too."
Stupid tempted me, but I resisted. I didn't commit ad hominem -- attacking the
man -- because there is no man named "BroncDrywall." We have no idea who this
dude is. At best, I committed "ad handlenem" -- attacking the handle -- but I
don't even think it rises to that level.
The only reason so many comments on our blogs and posts are nasty -- take a
look if you haven't; find a post that has anything to do with race -- is
because people don't have to be responsible for their words because most
posters write under these anonymous handles. They can throw grenades, take
personal shots against the writer and each other, be vulgar, and never be held
accountable. I'm up for a good rant every now and then, too, but I'll never
hide behind a fake name.
What do you think? Should we murder the innocent so we can execute the guilty?
Should readers be able to maintain their anonymity on these blogs, and does
that anonymity encourage readers toward uncivil discourse? <>P> We can discuss
these issues and more today during our weekly live chat. It goes from 1-2 p.m.
Join in by signing up below.
Follow Joey Kennedy on Twitter: @joeykennedy (source: Birmingham News blog)
***********
Death penalty is the ultimate justice for 'monsters'
While I usually find myself in agreement with Kathleen Parker, I wish to raise
several points in re+gards to her recent column (“Why Wasn’t Doubt Enough To
Save Davis?” Sept. 23) and her impassioned argument against the death penalty.
As to the late Troy Davis, it was noted by Parker that the appeals process is a
long and meticulous one. Indeed, the Davis case was reviewed by numerous courts
including our highest court that found no grounds to stay the execution. Had
there been such grounds the courts would have acted.
Setting aside the Davis case, Parker goes on to argue that the death penalty is
an immoral act carried out in our name by the state. This assertion could not
be more wrong.
The death penalty is the final stroke of justice, wielded by the state upon the
heads of the most dangerous elements that prey on our fellow citizens. The
penalty is not handed down lightly. It is the result of our society’s
conclusion that the crime committed was of such a heinous nature that no other
penalty other than death can equal its terrible nature.
This is not about deterring these crimes. It is about ridding ourselves of
monsters. The people in states that have the death penalty (and Iowa should as
well) have determined that the death penalty in not uncivilized, that it is the
ultimate justice for those who have forfeited their lives by committing
unthinkable crimes against us all.
James Bradley Robinson III, Des Moines
(source: Letter to the Editor, Des Moines Register)
MISSOURI:
Another Troy Davis in Missouri
Reggie Clemons faces execution in Missouri with no more evidence of wrong doing
than Troy Davis. Like Davis, there is no physical evidence; there are police
coercion allegations and a stacked jury in the Clemons case according to
Amnesty International that called for public Tuesday to stop this execution.
Clemons, who has been on death row for 18 years, was sentenced to death in St.
Louis as an accomplice to a 1991 murder.
"There was no physical evidence and since allegations have arisen of police
coercion, prosecutorial misconduct, and a ‘stacked’ jury in the Clemons case,"
reported Amnesty International Tuesday.
"Despite so many lingering questions, Missouri is still planning to execute
Reggie Clemons."
The Clemons is yet another case illustrating the many flaws of the United
States death penalty system.
"Of the 4 co-defendents, Marlin Gray and Reggie Clemons were sentenced to
death, and Antonio Richardson was sentenced to life," the St. Louis American
had reported in 2009 when Clemmons execution date had been set for that summer.
"Daniel Winfrey – the only defendant who is not black – made a plea bargain,
was sentenced to 30 years and was freed on parole on June 4, 2007, according to
the Missouri Department of Corrections." Soon after the 2009 execution date was
stayed, the Missouri Supreme Court assigned a judge (a "Special Master") to
investigate reliability of his conviction and proportionality of his sentence
according to Amnesty International.
Amnesty International is urging the state of Missouri to "recognize the serious
problems with Reggie Clemons' case and to commute his death sentence."
The human rights organization is also urging the public to join the campaign to
urge Missouri Governor Jay Nixon to stop the execution. Amnesty's petition to
Governor Nixon explains the case:
"In the interest of justice, I urge you to grant Reggie Clemons clemency. Mr.
Clemons was sentenced to death in St. Louis as an accomplice in the 1991 murder
of 2 young white women, Julie and Robin Kerry. 2 other black youths were also
convicted, including Marlin Gray (executed in 2005). Clemons has consistently
maintained his innocence, and his case illustrates many of the flaws in the
U.S. death penalty system.
While I have tremendous sympathy for the family and friends of Julie and Robin
Kerry, and am mindful of the pain and grief that they have experienced, I
believe capital punishment only perpetuates a harmful cycle of violence.
I am particularly troubled by the lack of physical evidence in this case,
allegations of police coercion and prosecutorial misconduct, questions of
inadequate legal representation and questions of race, and finally, what
appears to have been a "stacked" jury.
At the time of the trial, the prosecution conceded that Clemons neither killed
the victims nor planned the crime because there was no physical evidence that
tied him to the crime itself or the events leading up to it. The two main
witnesses were a former suspect and a co-defendant.
Clemons alleges that under the pressure of police brutality he confessed to
raping one of the victims, though never to murder. Four federal judges have
agreed that the prosecutor's conduct during the trial was 'abusive and
boorish.' And Clemons' lawyer had a full-time job in another state during her
representation of Mr. Clemons, resulting in poor preparation for the trial.
The final issue when considering the case of Mr. Clemons is that of race. Not
only were the murder victims white, but the two crucial witnesses were as well.
The three convicted defendants were black, and during the jury selection,
blacks were disproportionately dismissed, resulting in an unrepresentative jury
given the sizable black population of St. Louis. The jury's flaws were also
noted in 2002 by a U.S. District Court judge who ruled that Clemons' death
sentence should not stand because six prospective jurors had been improperly
excluded at the jury selection. Later a high court overturned this ruling on
technical grounds.
While I am sympathetic to the pain and suffering caused by this terrible crime,
I feel that executing Reggie Clemons would be unfair and unjust. It is clear
that Mr. Clemons' trial was flawed in numerous regards and that serious
questions persist regarding the reliability of his conviction and the
proportionality of his sentence. I hope that you will follow this
recommendation and commute the death sentence of Reggie Clemons. Troy Davis was
executed September 21, 2011, a deep human rights abuse scar on the United
States, one unlikely to heal until the nation's death penalty and solitary
confinement units are abolished.
(source: National Human Rights Examiner)
OHIO:
Sen. Edna Brown: Abolish OH death penalty
One day after Ohio Governor John Kasich commuted the death sentence of a
convicted killer, State Senator Edna Brown plans to introduce legislation to
abolish the death penalty in the Buckeye State.
She calls the death penalty an archaic practice, and she's encouraging Kasich
to place a moratorium on all executions while the procedure is studied and her
legislation is considered.
A news release by Senator Brown
State Senator Edna Brown (D-Toledo) announced (Tuesday) that she will soon
introduce legislation to abolish the death penalty in Ohio. Senator Brown's
announcement comes on the heels of Governor Kasich's decision to not execute
convicted killer Joseph Murphy.
"Despite the Parole Board and the Governor's decision, I plan to introduce
legislation that will abolish the death penalty in Ohio," said Senator Brown.
"The timing is right to end this archaic practice, especially after watching
the controversial execution of Troy Davis in Georgia."
Last week in an 8-0 vote, the Ohio Parole Board recommended that Joseph Murphy
should not be executed and instead, spend the rest of his life in jail without
parole. Murphy was convicted of murdering a 72-year old woman in Marion, Ohio
in 1987. The board's decision was based on Murphy's traumatic childhood and
history of sexual abuse.
"Mr. Murphy should be punished for his heinous acts," said Senator Brown. "But
his punishment should be spending the rest of his life in jail, and not by
execution."
Governor Kasich's concurrence with the parole board marks the fourth time since
July that an execution in Ohio has been postponed or called off. The Governor's
decision is also in line with former Ohio Supreme Court Judge Thomas J. Moyer,
who also agreed that Murphy's life should be spared in 1992.
While her legislation is being considered, Senator Brown is also urging the
Governor to place a moratorium on all executions until a study, commissioned by
Ohio Chief Justice Maureen O'Connor is completed. The study will not decide on
whether or not Ohio should have the death penalty, but rather study the overall
procedure. The study will be done by a task force through the Ohio Bar
Association.
Senator Brown's legislation will mirror HB 160, which is sponsored by Reps.
Celeste (D-Grandview Heights) and Antonio (D-Lakewood).
(source: WTOL News)
***************
Sen. Brown to announce bill to abolish Ohio's death penalty
State Sen. Edna Brown (D., Toledo) said Tuesday she plans to introduce a bill
this week that seeks to abolish the death penalty in Ohio.
Ms. Brown said her measure would be a companion legislation to a House bill
proposed by Rep. Ted Celeste (D. Granville Heights) earlier this year.
“I have long opposed the death penalty,” Ms. Brown said. She noted the timing
of the recent execution in Georgia and Monday’s commutation of the death
sentence of Joseph Murphy by Gov. John Kasich moved her to ask lawmakers to
abolish capital punishment.
“I felt the time was right for us to take a look at it in Ohio,” she said.
Ms. Brown said she doesn’t recall similar legislation in her nine years in the
Ohio Senate.
She also plans to learn the governor stance on capital punishment, saying that
his support for abolishing the death penalty would be important to her bill’s
success. At the least, she said she want the governor to impose a moratorium on
further executions.
(source: Toledo Blade)
FLORIDA----impending execution
Firm to Fla.: Don't use drug in execution
A drugmaker has told Florida Gov. Rick Scott using one of its untested products
in an execution "contradicts everything" the company is in business to do.
Pentobarbital -- the barbiturate Georgia used last week as part of the lethal
drug-mix injection that killed convicted killer Troy Davis -- has not been
proven in clinical tests to produce the desired result or effect "outside of
the approved labeling," Lundbeck Inc. President Staffan Schuberg said in a
letter to Scott.
He expressed his "adamant" opposition to using the sedative and anti-seizure
medicine in Wednesday's scheduled 4 p.m. EDT execution of Manuel Valle, 61,
convicted of killing Coral Gables, Fla., police officer Louis Pena 33 years
ago.
The execution would be Florida's first use of the drug as the first of three
drugs administered during a lethal injection.
Some doctors and legal experts say pentobarbital could inflict extreme
suffering on prisoners as they die.
"Use of our products to end lives contradicts everything we're in business to
do, which is to provide therapies that improve people's lives," Schuberg's
letter said.
Scott and his press office had no immediate response to a United Press
International phone message and e-mail seeking a comment on the letter.
A British doctor sought Monday to stop the execution, filing a petition with
Florida's Supreme Court, but the court rejected his petition Tuesday.
A Miami-Dade Circuit judge ruled Aug. 3 pentobarbital was suitable to render a
condemned inmate unconscious before two other fatal drugs were administered.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not approved the drug for use in
executions but has declined to enforce a ban against states using it.
Pentobarbital, marketed under the name Nembutal, is increasingly used by some
of the 35 states with the death penalty as an alternative to the anesthetic
sodium thiopental, better known as Sodium Pentothal, whose only U.S. producer,
Hospira Inc., stopped making it in January to protest its use in capital
punishment.
Lundbeck, the U.S. subsidiary of Denmark's H. Lundbeck A/S, announced July 1 it
would no longer sell Nembutal to prisons in states that carry out executions.
Florida and other states already had stockpiles, allowing them to keep using it
unless ordered by U.S. courts to stop.
Valle was convicted in the 1978 killing of Pena, who stopped Valle for a
traffic violation in a stolen car. He has been sentenced to death and
re-sentenced three times in legal wrangling that reached the U.S. Supreme
Court, which overturned his death penalty in 1987.
Courts later reaffirmed his death penalty conviction. He had an appeal pending
before the U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday morning.
(source: United Press International)
GEORGIA:
White House: No Troy Davis Call By President Obama, Despite Blogger's Claim
A radio host and blogger who claimed that President Barack Obama made a
last-ditch effort to save death row inmate Troy Davis on the eve of his
execution last week in Georgia has since retracted parts of his story, as White
House officials came out today to refute the claims.
Rob Redding Jr., the blogger, sent The Huffington Post's Black Voices the
following statement, standing by his reporting:
Redding News Review was asked to add a line to its story, because some members
of the press were trying to "spin" the report. Our source told us, that the
"press" had started saying that Obama would not help a white man on death row.
We added a line about the president himself not making calls about Davis to
clear up any confusion. In the Politico report, even April D Ryan says that the
death penalty was mentioned at the meeting. She is clearly not the source of
our story. We stand by the story, as posted on our websites. Previously:
The radio host, Rob Redding Jr., wrote on The Redding News Review yesterday
that two sources confirmed that the Obama White House spent "3 days" looking at
ways it could legally get involved in the case and even called state officials
to urge clemency.
"The Obama administration even called the state of Georgia about getting
involved and were told 'No,'" Redding wrote.
The story continued:
"We looked at every possible avenue legally," Redding's alleged source reported
Obama as saying. "There was not one there." And, "It was a state case and I
could not intervene because it wasn't federal," Redding's other unidentified
source attributed to Obama, according to Redding's published article.
But about 3 p.m. on Tuesday his story carried an update: "The source said the
president never called and was only concerned about an injustice, as he would
do for any American."
White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer told Politico that the report
was completely untrue. According to Politico, a number of black radio hosts
attended an off-the-record meeting with the president, and that while Obama was
pressed on the Davis issue, he told the group that his hands were tied.
"That article was completely, 100 % wrong," American Urban Radio Networks radio
host April Ryan told Politico. Obama, she told the website, was "unequivocal"
that there was "nothing he could do" in the case, adding that Obama did tell
the group that in general, he had concerns about innocent death row inmates.
(source: Huffington Post)
_______________________________________________
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Search the Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/deathpenalty@lists.washlaw.edu/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A free service of WashLaw
http://washlaw.edu
(785)670.1088
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
