Feb. 6
MICHIGAN:
State senator pushes death penalty for cop killers
A Senate Democrat faces an uphill battle in his quest to bring the death
penalty to Michigan for people convicted of killing a police or correctional
officer.
State Sen. Virgil Smith, D-Detroit, said he promised a constituent - James
Bowens, father of Detroit Police Officer Matthew Bowens who was killed during a
traffic stop in 2004 - that he would bring the issue up this year.
"If you kill a cop, you're the most egregious criminal out there," Smith said.
"If you're willing to go that far, there's no telling what you're willing to
do. There should be no mercy at that point.
He offered a resolution to change the state's constitution that would require a
2/3 vote in both the House and Senate as well as statewide vote of the people.
Michigan was the first state to officially abolish capital punishment in 1847.
That ban was reinforced by the 1962 constitutional convention.
But there have been at least three efforts in recent years to bring back the
death penalty. Former state Rep. Larry Julian, R-Lennon, a former state trooper
tried in 1999 and 2004 to bring back the death penalty. He was bolstered in his
2nd effort when the parents of the 2 slain Detroit Police officers - Bowens and
his partner Officer Jennifer Fetig - signed on to the effort. But both efforts
fell far short of the 2/3 vote needed to be place on the ballot.
Oakland County Sheriff Mike Bouchard also offered a resolution to bring the
death penalty to Michigan in 1995 when he was a state Senator. He couldn't get
enough co-sponsors to have the issue taken up for a vote. But the Birmingham
Republican still believes in capital punishment.
"I'm supportive of it whether it's a soccer mom, a business owner or a police
officer who is killed," he said. "I think a jury has the right to make that
decision. It's a shame that the Legislature consistently refuses to let the
people vote on it."
Michigan is 1 of 18 states to abolish the death penalty, including 6 states
which have gotten rid of capital punishment in the last decade, according to
the Death Penalty Information Center. The U.S. Supreme Court is also hearing
challenges to Oklahoma's lethal injection policies after 3 botched executions.
In 2014, 35 people were executed in 7 states. Another 7 inmates on death row
were exonerated last year.
There still can be federal executions in Michigan, but the last person executed
in the state was Anthony Chebatoris, who was hanged July 8, 1938, at the
federal prison in Milan after he was convicted of killing a bystander during a
bank robbery in Midland.
Bowens and Fettig, were killed during a traffic stop in southwest Detroit. Eric
L. Marshall was convicted of the murders and sentenced to life in prison. He
died in 2010.
Republican Sen. Rick Jones, R-Grand Ledge, is a former Sheriff and strong
advocate for victims of crime. But even he said he's against the death penalty
in all circumstances because the risk of making a mistake is just too high.
"Occasionally, the system makes a mistake," Jones said. "If a mistake is made,
we can't dig somebody up and say we're sorry. If somebody's in prison, we can
release them. I'm firmly against the death penalty."
The Michigan Catholic Conference is also a strong voice against bringing the
death penalty back,saying the state should be proud of its anti-capital
punishment tradition.
"We have structures in place that shield society from an aggressor who has
committed such a heinous crime," said David Maluchnick, spokesman for the
Conference. "We believe that a government with the power to kill is a
government with too much power.
"At a time when so many states are moving away from the death penalty, it's
quite surprising that Michigan is contemplating moving the other way," he
added.
Smith acknowledged that passing his resolution won't be easy, "But it's only
for police and correctional officers. These are the people at the front line
trying to defend our public safety, so we need to protect them as much as we
can."
The resolution has been assigned to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
(source: Detroit Free Press)
**********************
Legislator wants the death penalty in Michigan for anyone who kills a cop
A state senator from Detroit wants to authorize the death penalty in Michigan,
but only for anyone who's convicted of killing a police officer, according to
the Detroit Free Press.
"If you kill a cop, you're the most egregious criminal out there," Smith told
the newspaper. "If you're willing to go that far, there's no telling what
you're willing to do. There should be no mercy at that point."
Smith's effort won't be easy, per se: To overturn the constitutional ban on
capital punishment in Michigan, his resolution would require the approval of
2/3 of the members in the state House and Senate and an affirmative vote from
voters.
If the state Legislature approves the resolution, it would go before voters in
November 2016, according to the Associated Press.
(source: Detroit Metro Times)
*************************
Death Penalty Bill May Not Get Far
It looks unlikely that a proposal to allow the death penalty in Michigan will
go anywhere this term.
A resolution in the state Senate would allow the death penalty for people
convicted of murdering police officers in the line of duty.
But the Republican chair of the committee considering the measure - who also
happens to be a former police officer - says he will not support the measure.
"If a mistake is made, we can't dig somebody up and say we're sorry," said
Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Rick Jones, R-Grand Ledge.
"If somebody's in prison, we can release them - hopefully even compensate them
for the miscarriage of justice. So, I'm firmly against the death penalty."
Jones is typically viewed as one of the more conservative members of the state
Senate, and has built a reputation for subscribing to a "tough on crime"
political philosophy. He says he will grant the resolution a committee hearing
if there is significant support for it on the panel. But Jones says he will
personally oppose it - and it is ultimately up to him to decide whether to hold
a vote in committee.
Michigan became the 1st state - and possibly the 1st English-speaking territory
in the world - to abolish capital punishment in 1847. Although it was
technically allowed for a short time after statehood, the state has never
performed an execution. Recent debates about whether to once again allow the
death penalty have been infrequent and ill-fated.
Sen. Virgil Smith, D-Detroit, says he introduced the resolution on behalf of
one constituent in a newly-added area of his district whose son was killed in
the line of duty.
"If you kill a cop, you're the most egregious criminal out here," said Smith.
"If you're willing to go that far, ain't no telling what you're willing to do.
So, there's no mercy at that point."
Smith's resolution does have support from the 2 top Republicans in the state
Senate, Majority Leader Arlan Meekhof, R-West Olive, and Majority Floor Leader
Mike Kowall, R-White Lake Twp. Both are listed as cosponsors of the resolution.
The measure would need 2/3 support from both the state House and Senate. It
would then need to be approved by Michigan voters.
The Michigan Catholic Conference issued a statement this week promising that it
"will devote the full weight of its organization to oppose and defeat any
effort to allow for state-sanctioned murder."
"The death penalty is an antiquated and inhumane method of punishment
representing nothing more than retaliation and more violence," it said. "It has
no place in a civilized society. The prohibition against capital punishment in
the 1963 Michigan Constitution is clear: the state has no right to decide who
lives and who dies."
(source: WMUK news)
*************************
The death penalty and the facts
State Senator Virgil Smith, a Detroit Democrat, wants Michigan to enact the
death penalty for anyone who kills a police officer in the line of duty.
To quote the senator:
"If you kill a cop ... if you're willing to go that far, ain't no telling what
you're willing to do."
He doesn't think such a person deserves to live. He's not alone in this: 2
powerful Republican allies, Senate Majority leader Arlan Meekhof and Majority
Floor Leader Mike Kowall are cosponsoring his resolution.
But it's already clear this isn't going anywhere. The Roman Catholic Church,
which is otherwise stoutly conservative on social issues, is strongly against
the death penalty.
Rick Jones, the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is opposed to it, and
he is nobody's kale salad-eating liberal. He is a tough conservative, a career
law enforcement officer, and a former sheriff. Senator Jones said he was
opposed to capital punishment because, after all, mistakes are made.
But law enforcement officers and criminologists, also know two things about the
death penalty. First, states that have the death penalty have significantly
higher murder rates than those that don't have it. Second, there's no evidence
that the death penalty deters crime. Nobody who kills somebody in a fit of
passion sits down first with a legal pad and evaluates pros and cons.
Studies show that most other murders are committed either under the influence
of drugs and alcohol, or by those who are mentally ill. Having the death
penalty for cop killers could in fact lead to more murdered cops. Police are
all too familiar with the concept of "suicide by cop," in which someone
attempts to provoke a policeman into killing them in a bizarre form of suicide.
Specifying the death penalty only for those who kill police could, in other
words, have unintended and tragic consequences. Actually, if someone was
rational about all this, they might well be more inclined to kill if they
thought they would be put to sleep rather than spend life in prison, without
hope of parole.
If you wonder why, watch the movie The Shawshank Redemption for a mild taste of
what life behind bars is like.
There's 1 final reason the death penalty is a bad idea, one you might not
suspect: Inflicting it is terribly expensive. The cost isn't in the execution
itself. It is in the extra legal work and appeals surrounding any death penalty
case.
An Urban Institute study found that in Maryland, where the death penalty was
reinstated in 1978, the extra cost to the taxpayers was $186 million in the
first 30 years.
That???s for 5 executions. In Washington State, each case where prosecutors
have sought the death penalty has cost the state more than 1 million extra
dollars.
Other states have similar stories.
James Abbott, a respected New Jersey police chief, said recently that we should
forget about the death penalty, and instead give law enforcement officers the
money we've been wasting on it to fight crime. He knows what he's talking
about.
It may feel good to think about killing those we are most mad at. But like many
fantasies, it doesn't make much sense.
(source: Jack Lessenberry is Michigan Radio's political analyst. Views
expressed in his essays are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of
Michigan Radio, its management or the station licensee, The University of
Michigan----Michiganradio.org)
KANSAS:
Judge to Allow Death Penalty in Quadruple Homicide Case
A judge has ruled that prosecutors may seek the death penalty against a man
accused in the deaths of 4 people at a Kansas farm, including an 18-month-old
girl, in 2013.
Franklin County District Judge Eric Godderz ruled during a hearing Friday the
death penalty will be allowed in the case against 29-year-old Kyle Flack of
Ottawa. He is charged with murder and rape after 2 men, a woman and her
daughter were found dead near Ottawa. Flack has pleaded not guilty.
The Lawrence Journal-World reports ( http://bit.ly/1C59xs5 ) Flack's attorney
argued the death penalty should be banned because of "evolving standards of
decency," noting that 120 countries have rejected the punishment.
Godderz said his court is bound to follow precedent in Kansas and the U.S.,
which allow the death penalty.
(source: Associated Press)
MISSOURI:
Republican lawmaker proposes repeal of death penalty
Legislation that would repeal the death penalty in Missouri has been offered
again in the state legislature. Republican State Representative T.J. Berry has
filed HB 772 and says when he first joined the legislature 4 years ago, he was
a death penalty supporter.
"I didn't start out there until I really, really looked at the issue
thoroughly," said Berry. "Being a representative made me look at the issue
thoroughly."
Berry says it's cheaper for the state to sentence someone to life without
parole than to give them a death sentence.
"When you look at all of the legal costs of doing a death penalty case, it
becomes extremely expensive for the state to do," said Berry.
Many have said the goal of the death penalty is to serve as a deterrent, but
Berry says it's no longer a deterrent when it takes an average of over 18 years
to prosecute someone.
"If it was done the next day after the guilty verdict, and it was public,
maybe, but that's not our system and that's not what we do," said Berry.
Last year, Republican representative Paul Wieland proposed a repeal of the
death penalty and several Republicans, including Berry, were co-sponsors. Berry
hopes to gain more support from fellow members of his caucus.
"The more you make this a fiscal responsibility discussion, I think the more
Republicans that you will have on board," said Berry.
The state's next execution is set for Wednesday. Walter Storey is scheduled die
by lethal injection for the 1990 murder of Jill Frey.
(source: Missourinet.com)
ARIZONA:
Psychologist Describes Arias as a 'Stalker' in Death Penalty Retrial
Lawyers in the Jodi Arias death penalty sentencing retrial wrapped up another
intense day in court after a psychologist described the convicted boyfriend
killer as a "stalker." Dr. Janine DeMarte, who was called to the witness stand
on Wednesday by prosecutors, gave a testimony that contradicted the defense
argument that Arias was emotionally abused by Travis Alexander, the man she
murdered almost 7 years ago.
Dr. DeMarte described Arias as an extremely jealous stalker with borderline
personality disorder and a fixation on Alexander, reports Fox 10 Phoenix. The
psychologist also said that Arias refused to let him move on and resorted to
spying on him and confronting other girls that he dated. She went on to say
that Arias was prone to manic episodes of extreme happiness and despair and
discredited defense arguments that Arias murdered Alexander as a result of
abuse she endured by him and her own family in the past. The psychologist added
that police interviews showed that Arias wasn't liked by some of her family
members.
Dr. DeMarte is expected to be cross-examined by the defense starting on
Thursday.
Earlier in the week, prosecutors presented the jury with sexually explicit text
messages that Arias exchanged with Alexander to show that she was enthusiastic
about their sex life. Prosecutors read some of the graphic messages aloud on
Tuesday in effort to cast the convicted killer in a negative light.
Arias' former co-workers also said that she displayed inappropriate behavior
with colleagues, while 1 witness said she that gave her number out to a man on
the flight after leaving Alexander's memorial service, reports Fox 10 Phoenix.
Although Arias was found guilty of 1st-degree murder last May in the death of
her ex-boyfriend, in her 1st trial, jurors failed to reach a unanimous decision
on her sentencing. As a result, the retrial will determine whether she should
be sentenced to death, life in prison or life with a chance of release after
serving 25 years.
According to medical examiners, Arias stabbed Alexander 27 times, primarily in
the back, torso and heart in his Phoenix home. She also slit Alexander's throat
from ear to ear, nearly decapitating him, and she shot him in the face before
she dragged his bloodied corpse to the shower and took pictures of him.
(source: Latin Post)
**************************
Sentencing retrial to take longer than expected
The sentencing retrial for the murder case against Jodi Arias seems to be
dragging longer than expected, yet the end is still not in sight.
Arias' sentencing retrial was called after the set of jurors during the 1st
trial failed to come up with a unified decision on the just punishment for the
controversial crime 2 years ago. The 1st court proceedings lasted for
approximately 5 months, and it became one of the major news items during that
time. It was even broadcast live by several media outfits.
The present retrial began on Oct. 20 last year, and after more than 3 months,
litigation is still ongoing. However, in the current proceedings, Superior
Court Judge Sherry Stephens banned all live telecast of the trials, and the
media can only release still photos from the court. But despite the lessened
media attention, it seems to be taking longer than expected, and it is even
perceived to last much longer than the first one.
On Tuesday, a psychologist as well as victim Travis Alexander's former Mormon
bishop were called by the prosecution to prove that Arias deserves to be given
a death penalty.
The prosecution team called psychologist Janeen Demarte to the stand to let the
jury know that Arias was not a victim of domestic and sexual abuse as her
defense team is trying to project. According to Demarte's testimony, the police
interviews during the time of the murder investigation shows that Arias' own
family do not like her very much. She also mentioned that Arias was known by
her colleagues for constantly acting inappropriately, and 1 of the witnesses
also said that she gave her contact number to a man while she was on the flight
back after the memorial service for Alexander. Some of the very graphic and
vulgar text exchanges between the victim and Arias were also read during
Tuesday's court session, proving that she had a promiscuous relationship with
Alexander.
Meanwhile, Mormon Bishop Vernon Parker also spoke about the time Alexander
stayed in his house, and confirmed that the victim accessed pornography using
his computer.
(source: Christian Today)
CALIFORNIA:
Death penalty sought in teen's hate crime murder
2 men, described as 'well-documented' gang members, could face the death
penalty if they are convicted in the gunshot slaying of Poly High School
freshman Lareanz Simmons.
Charges were filed this week against Cristian Velasquez, 23, and Manuel
Barbarin, 24, after recent new leads surfaced in the 3-year-old homicide.
Simmons, 14, was confronted outside his Eastside home when a suspect got out of
a vehicle and fired 6 shots. Authorities have not said which suspect was the
actual gunman and added that a 3rd, unnamed suspect may be involved.
Simmons was described as a popular, caring kid who was active in his community
and not affiliated with any gang.
Detectives said Thursday the incident was 'gang motivated and racially
motivated'.
(source: Inland News Today)
WASHINGTON:
Carnation killer's confession played in court Thursday
In court Thursday, a jury heard accused killer Joe McEnroe confess to shooting
his girlfriend's entire family.
Joe McEnroe is charged with 6 counts of aggravated 6st-degree murder for
killing his girlfriend's family in Carnation on Christmas Eve in 2007.
His girlfriend, Michele K. Anderson is also charged with the murders.
The recording lasted about 3 hours.
For more than an hour and a half on the recordings, McEnroe stuck to his story
about seeing Wayne and Judy Anderson on Christmas Eve 2007. He said he and
Michele Anderson told her parents they were headed to Las Vegas to elope.
"They were, they were thrilled, you know. I mean yeah. I mean I was gonna be
officially a part of the family now," said a relaxed, talkative McEnroe on the
recording.
The conversation turned when detective Jake Pavlovich told McEnroe that Michele
K. Anderson was telling another detective they were responsible for the
murders.
"I basically told him, 'I know you were involved. Michele is telling us the
truth. I would like to get the truth from you as well,'" Detective Jake
Pavlovich told the court Thursday.
Then in the recording, McEnroe slowly revealed how he and Anderson shot her
parents, Wayne and Judy Anderson, her brother Scott Anderson and his wife
Erica, and the couples' 2 young children: Olivia, 5, and Nathan, 3.
"I remember telling Erica that I was sorry, and I remember, I remember Nathan,
Nathan looked, Nathan looked like he understood," said McEnroe in the recorded
confession, " ... like he didn't hate us for it."
Then McEnroe admitted he shot the 3-year-old: "I killed him with a single shot
to the head. I didn't want him to suffer."
McEnroe went on: "I didn't want anybody to suffer, okay? I shot Erica in the
head. I shot Olivia in the head."
Pam Mantle sat in the court room and shook her head - Erica Anderson was her
daughter, Olivia and Nathan were her grandchildren.
When Detective Pavlovich asked McEnroe why he killed Erica, Olivia and Nathan,
McEnroe replied, "They saw everything. We thought that if we left them alone,
if we walked away, we'd be here telling you what I am now; the same reason we
shot mom. That's the same."
Throughout the recorded interview McEnroe refers to Michelle Anderson's
parents, Judy and Wayne, as mom and dad.
McEnroe told the detective he felt bad about the murders. "This, you know, of
all the things that I've ever seen in my life, nothing is worse than then
seeing, seeing somebody dead and knowing that it was my fault," said McEnroe
2/3 of the way through his recorded confession.
Investigators say the motive was money. Anderson was upset her parents were
going to ask her to start paying rent for the mobile home she and McEnroe
shared on her parents' property.
Anderson believed her brother owed her money.
McEnroe's defense team said McEnroe did kill the Anderson family, but did so
because he was under the control of Michele K. Anderson.
McEnroe's trial has been delayed by arguments over a possible death penalty and
whether he can change his not guilty plea to not guilty by reason of insanity.
McEnroe tried to plead guilty to avoid the death penalty. The King County
prosecutor wouldn't make a deal.
The defense for McEnroe Anderson has topped $8 million, according to the King
County Department of Public Defense. The King County Prosecutor's staff said
they have spent just over $1 million.
The costs associated with investigations and work by the WSP Crime Lab are not
included in that figure.
Anderson's trial, delayed by questions of her mental competency, is scheduled
for the fall.
Prosecutors will play the rest of the confession in court on Monday.
(source: KIRO TV news)
USA:
Don't Expect Supreme Court's Latest Review of Lethal Injection to Kill Death
Penalty
Last week, the Supreme Court put 3 executions in Oklahoma on hold as it reviews
the constitutionality of the state's death penalty protocol.
If the nation's top court strikes down Oklahoma's lethal injection procedure,
what would it mean for the death penalty? We've asked the experts what you need
to know.
What exactly is the Supreme Court reviewing?
The court is assessing Oklahoma's use of the drug midazolam, a sedative used in
its 5-drug lethal injection protocol. According to the Death Penalty
Information Center, 5 states have used midazolam for their executions, and at
least 5 other states have proposed using it.
In the wake of several botched executions in 2014 involving the drug, a group
of death row inmates in Oklahoma filed a petition challenging the efficacy of
midazolam to mitigate pain, which they claim would render the state's
executions in violation of the Eighth Amendment's protection against "cruel and
unusual" punishment. (In Florida, death row inmate Jerry William Correll,
scheduled to be killed on Feb. 26, filed for a temporary block of the execution
pending the U.S. Supreme Court's review.)
"[Midazolam] doesn't guarantee that the prisoners will be insensate throughout
the execution," said Eighth Amendment expert Megan McCracken from U.C. Berkeley
School of Law's Death Penalty Clinic.
Legal experts are not the only ones with concerns about Oklahoma's drug
protocol. Several anesthesiologists have expressed concern about using
midazolam for executions. The drug is typically used in surgical procedures to
sedate patients before they receive anesthesia. To sedate an average adult in
surgery, a dose of midazolam is normally no more than 2 milligrams. State
executioners, however, administer the drug in much greater quantities. During
recent executions, about 500 milligrams have been used.
Many medical experts have noted that little is known about how the body reacts
at that dose.
"We don't know the effects of 500 milligrams of midazolam," said Dr. David
Waisel, an anesthesiologist at the Boston Children's Hospital, an affiliate of
Harvard Medical School. "We don't study it, and we don't use it clinically.
They are experimenting."
Why did the Supreme Court agree to consider a challenge to lethal injection
now?
The lethal injection landscape has been fraught with issues since 2011, when
Hospira, the only American manufacturer of a key lethal injection drug, stopped
its production in the midst of an international campaign by capital punishment
opponents. The company's decision set off a scramble to find another supplier
and ultimately another drug.
In late 2013, Florida became the 1st state to execute an individual using
midazolam, but it wasn't until April 2014 that concerns about midazolam became
widespread. That month, Oklahoma botched the execution of prisoner Clayton
Lockett. Despite receiving an injection of midazolam, Lockett groaned and
writhed on the gurney for about 40 minutes until his death, witnesses reported.
"I think the Supreme Court would prefer not to have to get involved in the
details of executions, but felt compelled to because of what happened last
year," said Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information
Center. "Something went really wrong, and somebody's got to monitor this thing
or states will keep repeating it."
The Supreme Court is expected to hear the Oklahoma prisoners' case in April and
make a final ruling by July. According to the Death Penalty Information Center,
midazolam was used for at least 11 of 35 executions in 2014.
Is this the 1st time that the Supreme Court has weighed in on lethal injection?
No. The last time the court weighed in was seven years ago, when it upheld
Kentucky's lethal injection protocol in the case Baze v. Rees.
According to McCracken, it's critical to look at what has changed since then.
"In 2008, all of the states were using a very similar protocol - all the states
were using the same 3 drugs," McCracken said. "Because some pharmaceutical
companies have made their drugs unavailable for executions, the states have
been changing their methods."
McCracken considers the botched executions a "consequence of using untested,
untried combinations."
What happens if the court strikes down the lethal injection method? It's
possible that midazolam would no longer be used. Other drugs might take its
place or Oklahoma might decide to use a single-drug protocol in place of the
current three-drug cocktail.
"I don't think that the death penalty is going anywhere," said Michael
Rushford, president of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation.
Even if the court limits the use of lethal injection and states continue to
face difficulty getting approved drugs, there are other methods that prisons
could employ. Virginia lawmakers have already discussed bringing back the
electric chair when the approved drugs are not readily available. Wyoming
lawmakers have proposed allowing firing squads.
Death penalty experts doubt that such methods would become the primary protocol
for execution. "States changed from hanging to electric chair because it was a
modern, supposedly painless method of execution," said Dieter of the Death
Penalty Information Center. "There has been a continuous attempt to make
executions appear more palatable, humane, and modern."
Could this be the beginning of a larger trend moving away from the death
penalty?
Not really. "The Supreme Court position is that if the death penalty is
constitutional, some method of execution will be allowed," Dieter said. "But
you have to try to do the best. You have to minimize the harm. You can't just
use any drug that's on the shelf. It has to be something reputable that stands
up to scrutiny. [The Supreme Court] is not going to narrow it so much that it
makes it impossible."
The rate of executions across the United States, however, has decreased
markedly over the past decade. 10 years ago 60 inmates were executed. In 2014,
there were 35. Among the 32 states that allow the death penalty, only 7 had
executions in the past year.
"In many places in the U.S., the death penalty is at best a symbolic gesture,"
said Austin Sarat, Amherst professor and author of "Gruesome Spectacles:
Botched Executions and America's Death Penalty".
Regardless of this downward trend, more than 3,000 people remain on death row
in the United States, including, as of today, 393 in Florida.
(source: Flaglerlive.com)
********************************
Society should decide on fate of death penalty
Erwin Chemerinsky believes that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment
["Botched executions and ethical dilemmas," Opinion, Jan. 29] and would like
the Supreme Court to so rule, even though it upheld the death penalty as late
as 2008 in Baze v. Rees, with a vote of 7-2. Chemerinsky's arguments include
the fact that innocent people sometimes are convicted and sentenced to death,
and that there is no evidence that the death penalty deters crime.
Judicial cases invoking the death penalty are very emotional for all parties
involved, usually due to outrageous crimes and aggravating factors of the case.
So yes, mistakes are sometimes made.
However, in Baze v. Rees, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the plurality
opinion, "An isolated mishap alone does not violate the Eighth Amendment." It's
quite possible that more people are killed mistakenly by the police than are
executed through the death penalty.
While there is no evidence that the death penalty deters crime, based on
recidivism rates, one could also argue that incarceration does little to deter
crime. However, the question remains as to what to do with individuals who have
shown that they cannot live in society and are a serious threat. What do we do
with the mass murderers, serial killers and rapists? What do we do with people
like Timothy McVeigh, who killed 168 people, or Jack Graham, who killed 44
people?
Even though the Supreme Court is unlikely to outlaw the death penalty on
constitutional grounds, society can choose not to have or implement such
punishment. It is up to society to determine the environment in which we live.
R.L. Figard
Fountain Valley
(source: Letter to the Editor, Orange County Register)
*************************
Americans Are Still Pro-Death Penalty
Support for capital punishment in America remains steady, despite concerns
about wrongful executions and uncertainty as to whether such punishment deters
crime.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% of American
Adults favor the death penalty. Just 26% are opposed, while 17% are undecided.
The national survey of 800 American Adults was conducted on February 2-3, 2015
by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3.5 percentage points
with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is
conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC.
(source: Rasmussen Reports)
_______________________________________________
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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
