April 30
OHIO:
More reasons to abolish death penalty than to retain it
The New Hampshire legislature just voted to abolish capital punishment. While
the governor has promised to veto it, it passed with such a majority that it
may be veto-proof. New Hampshire may be about to join the community of
civilized states and nations and abolish this outdated penalty. Very few
democratic nations retain the death penalty and, because we do, we have a low
human rights rating, along with such countries as Saudi Arabia, Iran, North
Korea and China.
John Demakowski recently wrote a letter to The Sun arguing that abolition of
capital punishment is a moot issue since we have not hanged anyone since 1939.
He is correct. Since colonial times, New Hampshire has used the death penalty
only reluctantly. But, isn’t that really a good argument for getting rid of the
death penalty instead of retaining it?
Mr. Demakowski purports to be a “Christian” and says that, if we oppose capital
punishment, we have “blood on our hands.” Don’t we have blood on our hands when
we execute an innocent person? Is the death penalty “Christian?” When I read
the Gospels, I notice that Jesus stopped an execution. And, many people of
faith, including Christians of various traditions, oppose it.
I empathize with supporters of executions, especially the families of victims.
I do not feel particularly sorry for those executed since they have usually
committed horrendous murders. I would probably want revenge, too. The desire
for revenge is a very natural human emotion. But, that is the point. The only
valid reason for capital punishment is revenge and that degrades us all as a
culture. If the goal is justice, there are better ways to do it.
There are many more reasons to abolish it than to retain it. First, executions
create two grieving families. Second, there have been people wrongly executed.
You can let the innocent out of prison but you cannot bring them back to life.
Third, justice is not yet equal in the USA. Most of those on death row are poor
and had public defenders and/or are members of minorities.
Some say they do not want to support a murderer in prison but it has been shown
that it is cheaper to imprison someone for life than to execute them. Some
think we need the death penalty to protect society but we now have very secure
prisons to protect us. Mr. Demakowski thinks capital punishment is a deterrent
to violent crime but the best studies show that it really is not.
Finally, a death sentence gives a killer too much media attention. Would it not
be better if predatory murderers just anonymously disappeared into prison and
our attention was focused on the survivors?
(source: E. Scott Cracraft, Laconia Daily Sun)
KENTUCKY:
Prosecutor to seek death penalty against 2nd man in fatal shootings
Commonwealth's Attorney Bruce Kuegel announced Monday he plans to seek the
death penalty against Cylar L. Shemwell, the second man charged in January's
triple homicide on Audubon Avenue.
Kuegel informed Daviess Circuit Judge Jay Wethington and officially filed
notice to seek the death penalty against Shemwell, 32, of the 1600 block of
Wisteria Garden. Shemwell was charged with murder and 1st-degree assault in the
Jan. 17 shooting deaths of Jay Michael Sowders, Robert D. Smith and Christoper
Carie at Sowders' Audubon Avenue home.
All 3 were shot in the head. A 4th person, Carmen Vanegas, was also shot in the
head, but survived. 3 of the shootings were captured on a surveillance camera
inside the home.
Kuegel previously announced plans to seek the death penalty against Shemwell's
co-defendant, Arnett B. Baines, 31, of the 0-100 block of Dixiana Court.
"Reviewing the case in its entirety, I made the decision to give notice I'm
seeking the death penalty," Kuegel said Monday afternoon, citing the
"aggravating circumstances and multiple homicides" in the incident.
Attorneys at Monday's hearing also said a motion has been filed to determine
whether Shemwell is competent to stand trial.
"You're not premature are you, Mr. Kuegel?" in filing notice to seek the death
penalty, Wethington asked.
"No sir, not under the circumstances," Kuegel said.
Records in Shemwell's file say he was communicating with Smith the night of
Jan. 16. According to a search warrant filed by Owensboro Police Department
Detective Todd Wilkerson, the messages "deal with drug transactions." Wilkerson
also wrote the messages contained "threats of violence between Smith and 3rd
parties."
In other Facebook messages sent that day, Smith told another person he believed
he was going to be murdered, according to records in Shemwell's and Baines'
files.
Public defender Heather Blackburn told Wethington she was unsure if the local
public defender's office would represent Shemwell or if the Department of
Public Advocacy's death penalty team would lead the defense.
"We'll (send) the request up to the death penalty team, and they'll decide
whether to take the case and at what capacity," Blackburn said.
Shemwell is next scheduled to appear in court on June 28.
(source: Messenger-Inquirer)
MISSOURI:
Bill would eliminate death sentence for people with mental illness
A bill before the Missouri House of Representatives on Monday could eliminate
the death sentence as a punishment for first-degree murder in the case of
certain mental illnesses.
House Bill 353 says the following diagnoses could qualify someone to be exempt
from receiving the death sentence:
Schizophrenia
Schizoaffective disorder
Bipolar disorder, with psychotic features
Major depressive disorder, with psychotic features
Traumatic brain injury
Posttraumatic stress disorder
The bill says these conditions can significantly impair a person’s ability to
“exercise rational judgement.”
Ric Doubet is a licensed professional counselor in Columbia. He said although
he doesn’t support the death penalty himself, he also sees problems with the
bill.
“This whole idea that we’re going to exonerate or reduce sentences for people
because of mental illness, I think it has its merits,” Doubet said. “But it’s
also got a lot of issues. Diagnosing is not a perfect science.”
Doubet said he often sees patients who have a variety of diagnoses from
previous counselors. He said this subjectivity could make things more complex
in court.
“When you start allowing people to be exonerated or to reduce their sentence
based on someone’s subjective opinion, that can get crazy,” Doubet said. “It
has all kinds of issues.”
Doubet previously worked as a psychotherapist in a prison. He said some
individuals commit crimes in a moment of mental instability, but might not have
a mental illness.
The bill specifies that the diagnosis of mental illness can be made before, on
or after the person committed the offense.
The hearing is scheduled for noon on Monday.
(source: KOMU news)
NEBRASKA:
Attorney Says Death Penalty May Be Sought For Jangir
An Otoe County judge ordered 36-year-old Brindar Jangir held without bond
Monday after lawyers from the state Attorney General’s Office described 1st
degree murder charges and mentioned special circumstances that may warrant the
state seeking the death penalty.
Jangir, who is charged in the shooting deaths of Randal and Annette Grimes of
Douglas, appeared on monitor screen from the Otoe County Detention Center.
Over 30 of the victims’ family members attended the hearing.
Corey O’Brien of the Attorney General’s Office asked the judge to hold Jangir
without bond. He said Jangir moved through several states while fleeing
authorities and entered Mexico. He said Mexican authorities forced Jangir back
across the border, where he was taken into custody near San Diego.
Public Defender Michael Ziskey asked that a bond be set, noting that Jangir was
not attempting to leave the country when he was arrested.
Jangir is also charged in Lancaster County with stealing a shotgun hours before
the double homicide in the village of Douglas.
(source: sandhillsexpress.com)
USA:
Lackey Calls for Feds to Pursue Death Penalty in Poway Synagogue Shooting
California Assembly Public Safety Committee Vice Chair Tom Lackey (R-Palmdale)
called on U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of California Robert S.
Brewer Jr. on Monday to file federal hate crimes charges and pursue the death
penalty against John T. Earnest, the suspect in the Chabad of Poway synagogue
attack.
Lackey cited California’s unwillingness to impose the death penalty and lax
sentencing laws for young offenders as reasons to pursue justice on the federal
level.
“We need to send a message – religiously motivated violence has no place in our
society,” Lackey said. “Unfortunately, ill-conceived laws to weaken sentences
for violent criminals do the exact opposite. If California won’t stand up
against this kind of violence, the federal government should.”
Earlier this year, California Governor Gavin Newsom announced that he would
refuse to carry out death sentences for the more than 700 inmates currently on
death row. He has also indicated that he may prohibit California prosecutors
from pursuing the death penalty in state court.
Due to the shooter’s age, if he is convicted in state court and sentenced to
anything less than life without the possibility of parole, he will be eligible
for release after 25 years under the state’s “youthful offender parole hearing”
program.
A proposal currently before the Legislature, AB 965 (Stone), would allow the
shooter to earn early release credits off his sentence, creating the
possibility that he could be released after serving less than 12 years in
custody. That would result in the shooter returning to the streets before his
youngest victim graduates college.
A copy of Lackey’s letter to U.S. Attorney Brewer is available here [see:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fSSr_jcjFUEhlcJ3BhckyrxZ1_7USPBf/view]
Lackey represents the 36th Assembly District, which contains portions of Kern,
San Bernardino and Los Angeles counties, including the communities of
Lancaster, Palmdale, Quartz Hill, Acton, Littlerock, Lake Los Angeles,
Pearblossom, Mojave, Rosamond, California City, Phelan and Piñon Hills. He is a
28-year veteran of the California Highway Patrol.
(source: scvnews.com)
***************
Death penalty: Inhumane but necessary
Capital punishment is a contentious topic that permeates our justice system and
society. For thousands of years, criminals have been executed in various ways,
many by completely barbaric methods.
That is no longer the case in the U.S. Today, capital punishment (in more
left-leaning states, at least) has gone down significantly. When it is used,
however, it is done by lethal injection. Lethal injection is where a person is
strapped to a table and injected with various chemicals that first make them
unconscious and then stop their heart, ending their life.
It is the most common method of capital punishment now, due to it being seen as
the most humane method of execution. This may be true compared to older methods
like hanging, decapitation, firing squad (the last in the U.S. was in the
1970s) and, the most painful, the electric chair.
The question is: Should lethal injection be used at all? There has been
controversy over whether or not lethal injection is really that humane,
considering the possibility that the drug that paralyzes the body doesn’t
render one unconscious, and instead makes the victim more uncomfortable without
the ability to tell anybody they’re still aware.
Personally, I believe that the death penalty is a good thing for three reasons
The first is that life in prison (as a general punishment) for violent,
homicidal crimes can be expensive.
The 32nd is that many of these people don’t have much remorse despite the
severity of their crimes and are likely to reoffend if they are ever released
or escape.
The 3rd reason, more along the topic of humane treatment, is that today’s
for-profit prisons are overcrowded and solitary confinement is psychologically
cruel to inmates. When a criminal is on death row, they are put in solitary
confinement, awaiting death for decades. This could be considered
well-deserved, but if their punishment was death, and death alone, why extend
it? The wheels of prison bureaucracy should turn faster. Maybe I don’t
understand prison politics, but it seems obvious that this would be for the
greater good.
However, just because I said capital punishment is good, that doesn’t mean I am
enthusiastic about it or find it humane or practical. An execution by lethal
injection is extremely expensive to taxpayers. In places like China, a death
sentence is carried out via a single bullet to the head, and then that bullet
is mailed to the family of the executed. This may seem ugly to Americans, but
this quick, simple method is far better than executions that can last upward of
seven minutes. We don’t really understand the ethics of injection, despite it
being considered such a humane way to execute a person.
Either way, while I don’t really like the idea of killing or making someone
suffer, choosing between death or lifelong imprisonment is a nasty dilemma for
prisons with so many death row inmates. None of these options are humane at
all, to be honest, but something has to be done about violent criminals
incapable of being reintroduced to society. I guess, in the end, they have
already condemned themselves through their actions.
Reed McCoy
(source: Opinion, The Orion)
_______________________________________________
A service courtesy of Washburn University School of Law www.washburnlaw.edu
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Unsubscribe: http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/options/deathpenalty
