March 19
ILLINOIS:
Don't bring back death penalty to Illinois
We admire Rep. John Cabello, R-Machesney Park, who in just three years as a
legislator has proved to be a hard worker and a quick study.
Nevertheless, we respectfully disagree with Cabello's proposal, House Bill
4059, that would restore the death penalty in Illinois. With support for
capital punishment eroding in the aftermath of botched executions - and with
the U.S. Supreme Court scheduled to hear oral arguments next month in a case
that challenges the most widely used lethal injection protocol - it seems an
odd time to consider its return.
The most compelling argument against, of course, rests on the alarming number
of wrongful convictions that have sent to death row individuals later found to
be innocent.
Wrongful convictions, in fact, were what prompted Gov. George Ryan to impose a
moratorium on executions in 2000 after a parade of men were freed from death
row. Three years later, just before leaving office, Ryan cleared death row,
sparing 167 people from execution. Most of their sentences were commuted,
although a few received pardons.
Finally, in March 2011, Gov. Pat Quinn signed a bill abolishing capital
punishment in the state.
To the best of our knowledge, Illinois never executed an innocent man. But it
has happened elsewhere. In 2004, Texas executed Cameron Todd Willingham for the
arson deaths of his 3 children. Months after Willingham's death, a nationally
respected fire investigator concluded that the fire in which his children had
died was not arson.
More recently, a South Carolina judge threw out the conviction of George
Shinney, a black 12-year-old who was put to death in the state's electric chair
in 1944 for the murder of 2 white girls.
There are other examples.
That's not to say murderers should get a pass. Hardly. But the problem with the
death penalty is that you can't take it back. Better to throw the worst
evildoers in prison for the rest of their lives.
And this month, four diverse Catholic publications - America magazine, National
Catholic Reporter, National Catholic Register and Our Sunday Visitor -
published a joint editorial with a single message: "Capital punishment must
end."
We agree, and we trust that a majority of Illinois legislators do, too.
(source: Effingham Daily News)
WYOMING:
Death row inmate's federal appeal blocks state resentencing hearing
A new round of federal appeals from a Wyoming inmate convicted of killing a
Montana woman will block at least for now a new sentencing hearing on whether
the inmate should receive the death penalty.
Lawyers for inmate Dale Wayne Eaton this week filed an appeal of decisions by
U.S. District Judge Alan B. Johnson.
Johnson in November overturned Eaton's original death sentence, ruling he
didn't get an adequate defense at his state trial. The judge said prosecutors
could ask another jury to sentence him to death or send Eaton to prison for
life without parole.
Eaton's lawyers are appealing Johnson's ruling to an appeals court in Denver.
Eaton was convicted in 2004 of murdering 18-year-old Lisa Marie Kimmell of
Billings, Montana. Eaton's lawyers don't dispute he killed her.
(source: Associated Press)
UTAH:
Former death row inmate convicted for 2nd time in 30-year-old killing
A former death row inmate was convicted Wednesday for the 2nd time in a
30-year-old aggravated murder case after the Utah Supreme Court allowed him to
withdraw his initial guilty plea.
Lawyers for 57-year-old defendant Douglas Lovell didn't argue during the 2-day
trial that he was innocent and instead focused on trying to keep Lovell from
returning to death row when he is resentenced.
The Ogden jury of 9 men and 3 women deliberated for about 90 minutes before
convicting Lowell. The sentencing phase of the trial is expected to begin
Friday.
The last time a death sentence was imposed in Utah was in 2008.
Prosecutors say Lovell stalked victim Joyce Yost to her driveway and raped her
in 1985, then spent four months plotting to kill her to prevent her from
testifying against him. Lovell broke into her home with a knife after his plans
to hire a hit man fell through, Weber County Deputy Attorney Gary Heward said.
Lovell ignored her begging, drugged her and drove her to Ogden Canyon, where he
strangled her, stomped on her neck and buried her in leaves, Heward said.
Even though Yost was missing, prosecutors still convicted Lovell of the rape by
using Yost's testimony from a preliminary hearing. Lovell was serving 15 years
to life when prosecutors say he twice acknowledged his role in the killing in
recorded prison conversations with his estranged wife, who was secretly working
with police.
"When you put it all together the evidence is overwhelming," Heward said during
his closing argument in the current case.
Lovell had pleaded guilty in 1993 to avoid the death penalty, but a judge
imposed it anyway after Lovell couldn't fulfill a condition of the plea deal to
help investigators find the body of Yost. He cooperated, but the body was never
located.
He was sentenced then to die by lethal injection and sent to death row.
The Utah Supreme Court allowed him to withdraw his guilty plea in 2010, ruling
Lovell wasn't informed of his right to a presumption of innocence and a public
trial. He was removed from death row.
Lovell appeared Wednesday in court in a dark blue suit and had little visible
reaction to the verdict.
"What Doug Lovell did in 1985 is absolutely horrible. There's no excuse for
it," defense attorney Michael Bouwhuis told the jury. However, he asked the
panel to wait for more information during sentencing to make a decision on
whether Lovell should be put to death.
(source: Associated Press)
ARIZONA:
Arizona woman won't be tried again in son's killing
An Arizona woman who sat on death row for more than 2 decades will not be tried
again, meaning her case is closer to being permanently dismissed.
The Arizona Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that Debra Milke cannot be tried
again for murder because of double jeopardy. Milke was convicted of killing her
song Christopher in 1989. That conviction was thrown out two years ago because
prosecutors didn't disclose a history of misconduct by the case's investigator.
In a statement today, Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery said it was a
"...dark day for Arizona's criminal justice system." He went on to say the
state supreme court has deprived victims, in particular Christopher Milke of
their rights to a fair trial.
Meanwhile, a Tucson attorney says Milke never got a fair trial.
"It's a really sad and a travesty that she had to spend literally decades in
jail on a case that was tainted due to prosecutorial misconduct," said Michael
Piccerata.
Piccerata has followed Milke's case over the years. When he was initially on
trial, one key piece of evidence was unrecorded statements Milke made to a
police officer. Turns out that police officer had a history of being
untruthful, something Piccerata says the jury did know. The prosecution
withheld that piece of evidence, Piccerata said, and if the jury had known the
officer's past the outcome may have been different.
While Tuesday's ruling is a win for Milke, Piccerata says it's an example of
why the death penalty should be abolished.
"Without more safeguards and without abolishment, people like this in a
different time and without diligent lawyers which she finally had - there could
have been a different outcome," Milke said.
Milke filed a lawsuit last Friday against the city of Phoenix, Maricopa County
and others because she says she didn't get a fair trial.
(source: KGUN TV news)
USA:
Back to Firing Squads? Thank Death-Penalty Foes
For a nation that almost never puts murderers to death - there were 14,196
homicides in 2013, but only 39 executions - Americans spend an awful lot of
time debating whether and how to do it.
The Utah legislature last week passed a bill reinstating the firing squad to
execute death row inmates, as a back-up in case lethal-injection drugs aren't
available. It was in Utah five years ago that the last death by firing squad in
the United States took place, when Ronnie Lee Gardner paid with his life for
the courthouse murder of attorney Michael Burdell in 1985. Utah's governor
hasn't said yet if he will sign the bill into law - but his isn't the only
state grappling with the question of how capital punishment should be carried
out.
In Wyoming, a proposal to restore the firing squad won initial approval earlier
this year, though the state's legislative session expired before the law could
be finalized. The Alabama House voted last week torevive the electric chair if
lethal injection becomes untenable; in 2014, Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam
signed a comparable measure passed overwhelmingly by lawmakers in Nashville.
And in Oklahoma, the House and Senate have approved a return to the gas
chamber, using inert nitrogen gas to induce death painlessly.
This quest for substitutes to lethal injection is the result of a determined
campaign by death-penalty opponents to keep pharmaceutical companies from
selling the drugs used in executions to state prison systems. But it's one
thing, it turns out, to impede the use of a specific method of executing
murderers - even a method that had widely been regarded as the most humane
alternative to electrocution or hanging. It's something quite different,
something much more difficult, to overturn the longstanding American consensus
that in the most terrible cases of murder, killers should pay with their lives.
Until a few years ago, lethal injection had gained broad acceptance as the
safest, least brutal means of putting a murderer to death. Of the 1,403
executions carried out in the United States since 1976, more than 85 % were by
this method. The standard injection protocol used sodium thiopental or
pentobarbital, powerful barbiturates frequently used to put down suffering
animals and in cases of assisted suicide.
But the last American manufacturer of the drug halted production in 2011, and a
European embargo on exporting the needed drugs for use in executions made it
impossible to get the drugs from overseas. Some states, forced to improvise as
their inventory dwindled, turned to unnamed compounding pharmacies, or they
formulated new and largely untested lethal-injection protocols. In some
instances, such as the bungled execution of Oklahoma murderer-rapist Clayton
Lockett last year, the results have been gruesome and disturbing.
Perversely, death-penalty foes have succeeded only in making lethal injections
less safe. "In pushing for outright abolition of capital punishment, we have
undermined the countervailing effort to make it as clean and painless as
possible," acknowledged Boer Deng and Dahlia Lithwick in an essay in Slate
shortly after the Lockett fiasco. The upshot: "What was, until pretty recently,
a fairly standard national method of lethal injection has been driven
underground and into the dark by efforts in both the United States and Europe
to end capital punishment altogether."
If anything, the prospects for lethal injection are even dimmer now. Ohio has
postponed all executions for the rest of the year, in order to give authorities
time to find new drugs. Pennsylvania and South Carolina have depleted their
supplies of pentobarbital, the primary lethal-injection drug. Even Texas, the
state with the most experience in administering the death penalty, is about to
run dry.
But while lethal injection may become unworkable, strong support for the death
penalty endures.
Behind the legislation in Utah, Tennessee, Oklahoma and other states to
authorize other execution methods as alternatives to lethal injection is not a
primitive hankering to kill, but a civilized commitment to justice. However
unfashionable it may be in some precincts to say so, most Americans intuitively
understand that the death penalty is not only lawful but enlightened. Everyone
knows that few murderers will ever face execution. But that no murderer should
ever face execution? That would be intolerable.
Society's attitude toward evil is revealed in how it penalizes those who commit
evil. For greater crime there must be greater punishment; with the very worst
punishment, death, reserved for the very worst crime: cruel and premeditated
murder. There are some offenses so monstrous that those who perpetrate them
forfeit their right to live. Justice requires a death penalty, even if we must
debate how best to carry it out.
(source: townhall.com)
***********************
Faith of Jeb Bush: Aligned with Catholic hierarchy on most issues, but not on
death penalty
He arrived a few minutes early - no entourage, just his wife and daughter -
and, sweating through a polo shirt in the hot morning sun, settled quietly into
the 14th row at the Church of the Little Flower.
A bit of a murmur, and the occasional "Morning, Governor," passed through the
Spanish Renaissance-style church, with its manicured grounds and towering
palms, as worshipers recognized their most famous neighbor, Jeb Bush. He held
hands with the other worshipers during the Lord's Prayer, sang along to "I Am
the Bread of Life" and knelt after receiving communion.
"It gives me a serenity, and allows me to think clearer," Mr. Bush said as he
exited the tile-roof church here on a recent Sunday, exchanging greetings and,
with the ease of a longtime politician, acquiescing to the occasional photo.
"It's made me a better person."
20 years after Mr. Bush converted to Catholicism, the religion of his wife,
following a difficult and unsuccessful political campaign that had put a strain
on his marriage, his faith has become a central element of the way he shapes
his life and frames his views on public policy. And now, as he explores a bid
for the presidency, his religion has become a focal point of early appeals to
evangelical activists, who are particularly important in a Republican primary
that is often dominated by religious voters.
Holy ghosts have haunted some newspaper profiles of George W. Bush's younger
brother, including an in-depth Tampa Bay Times piece back in January:
The Times story mixes fresh reporting - including the scene at Bush's church
and emailed responses to questions by the former governor ??? with excellent
research on what Bush has said in the past about his religion:
Many of his priorities during his 2 terms as governor of Florida aligned with
those of the Catholic Church - including his extraordinary, and unsuccessful,
effort to force a hospital to keep Terri Schiavo on life support, as well as
less well-known, and also unsuccessful, efforts to appoint a guardian for the
fetus of a developmentally disabled rape victim and to prevent a 13-year-old
girl from having an abortion. He even, during his first year in office in 1999,
signed a law creating a "Choose Life" license plate.
He differed from his church, significantly and openly, over capital punishment;
the state executed 21 prisoners on his watch, the most under any Florida
governor since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. But he has won praise
from Catholic officials for his welcoming tone toward immigrants and his
relatively centrist positions on education - 2 issues in which he is at odds
with the right wing of his party.
"As a public leader, one's faith should guide you," Mr. Bush said in Italy in
2009, explaining his attitude about the relationship between religion and
politics at a conference associated with Communion and Liberation, a
conservative Catholic lay movement.
Along with Bush's own words, the newspaper provides insight from Catholic
clergy familiar with him ??? from the priest who officiated at his wedding to
Florida bishops who recall his time as governor:
The bishops who led Florida's 7 Catholic dioceses met annually with Mr. Bush,
often opening their gatherings with prayer. Each year, the bishops would try to
convince Mr. Bush that the death penalty should be ended in Florida, and each
year they failed.
"Anybody could see he was a devout Catholic - he was new to the Catholic faith
and took his faith seriously," said Bishop John H. Ricard, who oversaw the
Pensacola-Tallahassee Diocese when Mr. Bush was governor. "He approached the
whole thing, especially the death penalty, with seriousness and respect, but we
just agreed we would disagree. We were firm in our position, but I think he was
sincere about his."
But there is one significant journalism hole here. I wish that the Times had
made clearer that the church hierarchy views the death penalty differently
than, say, abortion or euthanasia. As I understand it, there are 2 levels of
church doctrine and authority here. While recent popes have stated their
opposition to the death penalty, as practiced in most modern societies, a
Catholic's position on capital punishment is more of a matter of individual
conscience. Opposition to abortion, however, is a matter of firmly stated
doctrine. Thus, a Catholic politician who publicly opposes church teachings on
abortion might be denied Holy Communion.
That point aside, this story is must reading for anyone interested in faith's
role in Jeb Bush's life and political career.
(source: getreligion.org)
***********************
Is Hillary Still Pro-Lethal Injection?
It's not wildly popular anymore, and there's no real political imperative for a
Democrat to back it. Are you listening, Madame Secretary?
Michael Cavadias is a writer and Democratic Party activist in New York City. He
has worked for and organized fundraisers for The Campaign to End the Death
Penalty and New Yorkers Against The Death Penalty.
Hillary Clinton is running for president. She's hired a lot of very important
people. They've raised a lot of money for her. Everyone knows she's running,
including Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, Vermont Senator Bernie
Sanders, and former Maryland Governor Martin O???Malley, each of whom is making
political gesticulations to her left, most notably on economic policy.
Democratic primary voters will be paying excruciatingly close attention to
whatever economic moves Clinton might make in the populist direction. There is,
however, another issue dividing the progressive wing of the Democratic Party
from the centrist Clintonian wing, which so far is getting no attention:
capital punishment. The base is ambivalent, and has been for decades.
Abolitionists were ascendant in the 1960s and 1970s; proponents made a
significant comeback in the 1990s. Today, support for executions among the
Democratic base is dwindling, verging on outright revulsion, in the shadow of
several highly publicized botched executions.
Hillary's record of support for capital punishment is long, and it's something
she's used as a political wedge. But next year could get complicated for her if
other candidates decide to make an issue of her position.
In the final hours of his governorship, O'Malley commuted the sentences of the
last 4 death row inmates in Maryland to life without parole, which followed his
signing of a bill to repeal the state's death penalty, on May 2, 2013 -
something he worked for years to pass into law. These actions reflected his
personal convictions, and were also deliberate preparation for a possible run
for the Democratic nomination for President next year.
It wasn't so long ago that actions like these would have been seen as
disqualifying. Sure, one could win Democratic primary votes being opposed to
the death penalty, but it was considered general election suicide, especially
after Michael Dukakis's disastrous answer to Bernard Shaw's question about
capital punishment in a 1988 debate.
Dukakis was the last Democratic nominee to oppose capital punishment Only a few
years after Dukakis' run, executions were once again in vogue among the party's
leaders. Dukakis became a cautionary tale of what happens to Democrats who
can't prove they are as tough as Republicans on crime. But was it really that
Dukakis opposed executions, or that he simply gave a tone-deaf answer to a
question that required a deft show of compassion, outrage, and ultimately
reason? Whatever the answer, Dukakis' misstep proved influential on Bill
Clinton's 1992 campaign, in which he highlighted his support of capital
punishment, as did Hillary.
The 2016 primary campaign could be the first opportunity in a generation for
progressives to make support for capital punishment an issue.
Politics is full of craven politicians who toss aside principles in favor of
expediency. But Bill Clinton's behavior in the case of Ricky Ray Rector is
particularly disturbing. Everyone remembers - how Clinton decided to approve
the execution during the heat of the New Hampshire primary as the Gennifer
Flowers scandal was brewing around him, how the brain-damaged Rector left his
dessert in his cell as he was taken to his death, telling the guards that he
was "saving it for later." Later, as president, Clinton went on to sign the
"Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996," which severely
restricted death row inmates' access to habeas corpus proceedings. This
augmented the 1994 crime bill, which expanded the list of federal death penalty
crimes from only a handful to over 60, contributing to the highest execution
rate in the modern era of American capital punishment.
Perhaps because of this ambitious slate of executions, Democratic support of
capital punishment abated, slowly, near the end of the decade, particularly in
light of the release of several death row inmates who were proven innocent by
exculpatory evidence, such as DNA testing. The most famous of these cases was
Anthony Porter, who was set for execution in 1999, but who was exonerated just
over 48 hours before his sentence was carried out. This prompted Illinois
Governor, George Ryan - notably a Republican - to issue a state moratorium on
executions. He eventually commuted the sentences of everyone on Illinois death
row to life in prison. Six more states abolished capital punishment between
2007 and 2013.
All these changes in public perceptions of the death penalty took place against
the backdrop of a sustained, national drop in crime. In 2004, John Kerry was
the first nominee since Dukakis to oppose the death penalty. In fact, during
one of the debates Kerry proudly voiced his opposition to executions, citing
his experience in Vietman, saying "I know something about killing. I don't like
killing. I don't think a state honors life by turning around and sanctioning
killing." Kerry lost of course, but his opposition to the death penalty was
barely mentioned by the Bush campaign and was not seen as a contributing factor
in his defeat. And although Barack Obama supports executions in very limited
circumstances, he does so to a much lesser extent than most recent Democratic
standard-bearers have, and it's barely been an issue.
Where does this leave Hillary Clinton? Her publicly stated position is
unchanged. She supports the death penalty. But a candidate like O'Malley, who's
running as a strong anti-death penalty campaign, might prompt voters to
question her commitment to human rights. In the past, Democrats have given
pro-death penalty candidates a pass on the grounds that it's a necessary
position to win general elections. But with low crime rates and ever-declining
support for capital punishment, that should be less true in 2016.
Thus, the 2016 primary campaign could be the 1st opportunity in a generation
for progressives to make support for capital punishment an issue. And thanks to
Elizabeth Warren, who has rattled the Clinton camp with her economic populism,
the Democratic base is now emboldened and willing to demand more of their
candidates.
It's understandable that the base has largely ignored capital punishment in
recent presidential cycles. They want to win elections, and are therefore
pragmatic. However, the current political landscape is one in which a candidate
can be both pragmatic and oppose the death penalty.
Make no mistake, the Democratic base does care about the death penalty. It
might have been put on the back burner for practical reasons in the past. But
with issues around police brutality, mass incarceration, sentencing reform, and
social justice motivating activists around the country, it's becoming more and
more of a risk for candidates like Clinton to ignore this, and riskier still if
candidates and interest groups actually stand
up to hold her accountable.
(source: The Daily Beast)
_______________________________________________
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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
