Jan. 23
TEXAS----impending execution
Kunkles 6th execution date looms
Victims family wont attend event Tuesday
Convicted killer Troy Kunkle will face the ultimate punishment for the
sixth time Tuesday when he is scheduled to die for the 1984 shooting death
of Steven Wayne Horton.
For those close to the case - the families, the lawyers and Kunkle himself
- the agonizing 20-year wait will continue until the moment he takes his
last breath in the Texas death chamber.
Kunkle has had his life spared 5 times. On 2 occasions, the U.S. Supreme
Court has stepped in on the day of his scheduled death so justices could
take time to consider his appeals. But the latest reprieve, issued Nov.
18, was lifted last month, allowing his execution to proceed.
Steven Hortons father, Nolan, said the worst part of the past 20 years has
been the discouragement he and his family have felt with each delay. It
would be a lot easier to handle, he said, if they knew there was a
resolution to the litigation.
"It would be peace of mind," he said. Meanwhile, Kunkle's lawyer, Danalynn
Recer, has not given up the fight to save his life and is making a final
appeal for clemency to the states Board of Pardons and Paroles. She said
the courts need time to fully consider litigation that could bear on the
constitutionality of Kunkles sentencing.
Recer said she realizes the anguish Hortons family has suffered but lays
the blame on overzealous prosecutors who immediately ask for a new
execution date each time Kunkle's death is delayed. Recer said she has
attempted to work with the Nueces County District Attorney's office to
make sure all litigation is resolved before a date is set, thereby
removing any questions about whether his death would be delayed.
Nueces County District Attorney Carlos Valdez could not be reached to
respond to those claims, but in the past, prosecutors have said they asked
for the dates because they believed Kunkle had exhausted all of his legal
options.
Recer said Kunkle is remorseful for the crime he committed.
"He is anguished by the effect this is having on his family, particularly
his mother. He's very concerned about how devastating it's going to be for
her. And he's scared."
Kunkle has turned down repeated requests for an interview by the
Caller-Times. His wife, Christa Haber, whom Kunkle recently married, also
turned down a request for an interview.
Kunkle, 18 at the time of the killing, and 3 friends were visiting Corpus
Christi from San Antonio on Aug. 12, 1984, when they decided to look for
someone to rob. Horton was walking on Paul Jones Avenue when the group
stopped and offered him a ride home. Once he was in the car, 1 of the 4
put a gun to Hortons head and demanded his wallet. Horton refused, and
Kunkle shot him in the back of the head with a .22-caliber pistol.
Kunkle's girlfriend then pushed Hortons body out of the car and took his
wallet, which contained $13.
After the killing, Kunkle reportedly recited lyrics from heavy metal band
Metallicas song "No Remorse," from the album "Kill 'em All," saying,
"Another day, another death, another sorrow, another breath." Later, he
reportedly said the killing was "beautiful," according to state reports.
Kunkle's attorneys have argued the jury that sentenced him to death did
not have the opportunity properly to consider his history of drug and
alcohol abuse as mitigating evidence at trial. That evidence, they said,
could spare his life.
"The repeated setting of execution dates has put him and his family on an
emotional roller-coaster that is akin to torture," Recer said.
Nolan Horton and his wife do not plan to attend Tuesday's execution. He
will spend the day working in his garage waiting with his family for a
phone call telling them of the outcome.
(source: Axis of Logic)
INDIANA:
The Issue: News series told of Donald Ray Wallace Jr.'s thoughts from
death row. Our View: In the end, he will be held responsible for his
actions.
Donald Ray Wallace Jr. is going to die by lethal injection, and he has no
one to blame but himself - not his divorced parents, not his troubled
childhood, not the criminal justice system - no one but himself.
And he is entitled to no sympathy from anyone for his cold-blooded Jan.
14, 1980, murder of the Gilligans - Patrick and Theresa and their 2 young
children, Lisa and Gregory.
Wallace was the subject this past week of a 5-part series, "Dead Man
Talking," based on more than 2 dozen letters he has sent from Indiana's
death row to Courier & Press staff writer Maureen Hayden. Some readers
have complained that they see the series as an attempt to build sympathy
for Wallace. We find it incomprehensible that anyone could read Hayden's
series and find any basis of sympathy for Wallace.
Once he pulled the trigger that horrid night, he gave up any claim to
sympathy. His troubled background no longer mattered.
If anything, the series stripped away any thread of credibility left to
Wallace's story that he was burglarizing a house next door while an
accomplice was executing the Gilligans.
But he wrote a series of letters in 1992 to Diana Harrington, sister of
Theresa Gilligan, describing in detail how he broke into the Gilligan home
and killed each member of the family. Now he denies, once again, that he
committed the crime. Who could believe him after reading Hayden's series?
The chilling detail of his writing exposes his guilt, and his history of
manipulation denies him now the right to be believed.
The series has value, as well, in demonstrating how a master manipulator
such as Wallace could work the criminal justice system for all these
years. Telling was the Tuesday installment, "Playing the Crazy Game."
Wallace admitted in one letter that his experience as a youth in
psychiatric facilities taught him how to play the system, when he saw it
necessary, as someone too mentally incompetent to stand trial. It didn't
work.
Wallace said in his letters that he wanted to give readers a view of what
the world looked like through his eyes. He says that what happened in the
years after his conviction is more important than details of the murders.
And he told us that he is a "sane and civilized human being now." Even if
anyone believes him, it in no way excuses his crimes.
In a Good Morning column published Friday, Hayden said that in his
letters, Wallace pleads now for sympathy and understanding. But those are
feelings reserved for the victims, their friends and families, and anyone
whose sense of civility was scarred by his crimes.
Sympathy also goes to Wallace's surviving sister, Kathleen Mason. Even
Harrington asked that the community show understanding to Kathleen. "I
would hope that during this time they would open their hearts to her,"
Harrington said. Our own objection to the death penalty is not based on
sympathy for people such as Wallace. As we have written in the past, in
Indiana the death penalty is expensive, unevenly administered and
needlessly prolongs the heartbreak of families of both victims and
offenders. In this case, Wallace has outlived some of the Gilligans'
closest relatives, who died waiting for his execution.
But now, his efforts at appeal have run their course, and an execution
date will soon be set.
In the end, he will be held responsible for his action. He will die for
what he did, and few people will be sorry.
(source: Editorial, Courier & Press)
CONNECTICUT----impending execution
Execution puts penalty in spotlight
At 2:01 Wednesday morning, in the 1st execution in New England in nearly
45 years, serial killer Michael Ross is scheduled to be put to death just
over the Massachusetts border at Osborn Correctional Institution in
Somers.
The 45-year-old Ross, a Cornell University graduate who in 1984 confessed
to strangling 6 teenage girls and 2 young women, has waived his final
appeals. While others continue to seek a court ruling to stop the
execution, Ross has said he wants to die by lethal injection in the part
of America most opposed to state-sanctioned execution.
"When Michael Ross is killed, the people of Connecticut will, in their
name and with their tax money, have paid their neighbor to kill their
neighbor. That's basically what's going to happen," said death penalty
opponent Jo Comerford, program coordinator for the American Friends
Service Committee in Western Massachusetts.
"We consider this a very, very dark moment in the abolitionist movement,"
said Martina Jackson, executive director of Massachusetts Citizens Against
the Death Penalty. The group, founded in 1928 following the executions of
Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti in a Massachusetts case that remains
controversial to this day, is the oldest anti-death penalty organization
in the country.
4 of the 6 New England states, including Massachusetts, are among just a
dozen states that do not have capital punishment. A 5th, New Hampshire,
has the death penalty but currently has an empty death row and has not
executed anyone since 1939.
Gov. W. Mitt Romney wants a death penalty law on the books in
Massachusetts, and he has pledged to file a bill that will rely on
scientific evidence as part of the effort to remove any possibility the
innocent could be put to death.
Critics say such a guarantee is impossible, and that the governor is
simply posturing to improve his national status in advance of a possible
presidential run in 2008.
"As I have often said, this isn't about science, it's about politics. ...
I think the governor is really grandstanding with human life and that's
regrettable to me," Jackson said.
Massachusetts residents from Boston to the Pioneer Valley are expected to
be among those who stand vigil Tuesday night outside the prison, which is
slightly more than a mile from the Massachusetts border. Among the
protesters will be representatives of the American Civil Liberties Union,
Amnesty International and the Massachusetts Catholic Conference.
An interfaith prayer vigil is scheduled for 10:15 p.m. Tuesday at the
Somers Congregational Church. Many protesters plan to then carpool to an
area designated by state police and march single file about 1.5 miles in a
candlelight procession to the entrance of Osborn.
Members of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Springfield are planning to
participate earlier in the evening in an ecumenical prayer vigil at St.
Lawrence O'Toole Roman Catholic Church in Hartford. In addition, Sister
Roberta F. Mulcahy, a member of the Sisters of St. Joseph, said that as a
result of the execution, the bells will toll at the order's Mont Marie
complex in Holyoke at noon Wednesday.
The Most Rev. Timothy A. McDonnell, bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese
of Springfield, has also come out against Ross being put to death.
McDonnell issued a statement last week in support of the Connecticut
Catholic Conference's opposition to the execution.
Ross has been held at Osborn since Oct. 21. He was moved that day from
death row at the Northern Correctional Institution, located adjacent to
Osborn.
The last time a death sentence was carried out in New England was on May
17, 1960, when Joseph "Mad Dog" Taborsky died in the electric chair for a
series of murders and robberies he committed in Connecticut.
The last execution in Massachusetts took place in 1947, and the death
penalty was outlawed in the state in 1984. The Legislature nearly voted to
bring back capital punishment in 1997, but after the measure passed in the
Senate, it died in the House by a single vote. Since then, support for the
death penalty has been waning on Beacon Hill.
Romney said last year he would file a new death penalty bill this
legislative session. He said it would limit capital punishment to crimes
that include the murder of a police officer, murder involving torture and
the killing of witnesses.
The governor said that the bill, using evidence such as DNA testing to
protect the innocent, would be "as close to ideal" as possible. Romney
also said he wants a bill which is a national model that can be used by
the other states that do not have a death penalty.
"It's something he feels strongly about and would like to advance," said
Felix O. Browne, a spokesman for the governor. Brown declined last week to
say when the bill will be filed.
But Rep. Thomas M. Petrolati, D-Ludlow, an assistant House majority leader
who favors the death penalty and believes it is a deterrent to murder,
said there does not appear to be enough votes on Beacon Hill to pass the
bill.
"I'm not optimistic," Petrolati said.
Senate Minority Leader Brian P. Lees, R-East Longmeadow, has filed his own
death penalty bill. Lees said he is "100 %" behind Romney, and that the
governor's bill will replace his bill when filed.
Lees, who also believes capital punishment is a deterrent, said he is not
sure Romney's legislation is doomed.
"You never know until the votes are counted on any of the social issues,"
he said.
Rep. Benjamin Swan, D-Springfield, however, said the bill has no chance of
success and that Romney simply wants to show he is tough on crime so as to
look better for a possible presidential bid.
"It's strictly a political move on his part," Swan said. "It's politicking
at the lowest level."
Richard C. Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information
Center in Washington, D.C., said a foolproof death penalty statute is
impossible. He said that 117 death penalty cases have been reversed and
each defendant's conviction thrown out of court since 1973, and that
Romney certainly has to address the problem of the staggering number of
errors in crafting his legislation.
"I don't think it's honest to say, 'We're going to eliminate the problem.'
... I don't think it's possible," Dieter said.
(source: The Republican)
*********************
Release Execution Details
As Connecticut prepares to carry out its 1st execution in nearly a
half-century, there is a legitimate public interest in full disclosure
about the procedure.
But the Department of Correction is fighting a freedom of information
request from The Courant regarding some details of how it plans to execute
serial killer Michael Ross early Wednesday morning. If the courts or the
governor do not intervene, Ross will become the first prisoner to die in
Connecticut by lethal injection.
Questions have been raised about the procedure, which is said to cause
pain for several minutes if it is not administered properly.
The DOC has refused to name those who will carry out the death sentence or
provide any information about their qualifications and training. It also
has refused to provide the names or expertise of outsiders hired as part
of the execution team, or the name of the Connecticut physician who must
certify the executioner's training. The department offers the unpersuasive
excuse that it is trying to protect the team's safety and security.
Connecticut plans to use three drugs, one of which will paralyze the
convict and prevent him from crying out if he is in pain. A Columbia
University professor of anesthesiology who has studied autopsy results of
executed inmates says that many were not given enough drugs to keep them
anesthetized throughout the procedure.
Death penalty supporters and opponents alike can agree that if an
execution is to be carried out by the state, it ought to be done humanely.
Correction officials made one concession this week by agreeing to conduct
a search for all documents and computer files relating to the execution
and to release some documents by Monday. They should go one step further
by agreeing to release all requested information. No part of this exercise
of government power should be shrouded in secrecy.
(source: Editorial, Hartford Courant)
****************
Conn. execution in condemned's hands
The ultimate decision regarding the fate of Connecticut death-row prisoner
Michael Ross rests not with the courts, but with the convicted killer
himself.
Ross, scheduled to die at 2:01 a.m. Wednesday, was convicted of murdering
6 teenagers and 2 young women in the 1980s, the Boston Globe reported
Sunday.
Ross can appeal and stop the procedure, even after he is led into the
execution chamber, lawyers and legislators have said. Some believe that is
what Ross is likely to do, turning what had been intended to be society's
retribution into a moment in the spotlight.
Over 2 decades in prison, Ross has sought to attain celebrity status
through his infamy. He has written articles for psychiatric journals and
has granted dozens of interviews. He has distributed a newsletter from
prison that details his incarceration and his views about the death
penalty.
If it takes place, Ross' execution will be New England's 1st in 45 years.
(source: United Press International)
*********************
A Sentence Reluctantly Applied
In 1647, Alice Young of Windsor was convicted of witchcraft, and became
the 1st recorded person in the state to be executed. There are few
mentions of her execution in official records of the time, but if it were
like others from the mid-17th century, it took only weeks to carry out.
"The time between conviction and hanging, unless there were extraordinary
circumstances, was very swift," said Walter Woodward, Connecticut's state
historian and a professor at the University of Connecticut.
In Ludlow's Code, enacted in 1650 as Connecticut's most comprehensive
legal code to that date, the state classified all sorts of misdeeds as
capital offenses, including idolatry and blasphemy, and New Haven's Code
(New Haven was a separate colony then) imposed a death sentence for such
crimes as working on Sunday. But, even then, the state was reluctant to
tie the noose, Dr. Woodward said.
Connecticut Supreme Court Justice Joette Katz, in a speech on the death
penalty to the Connecticut Bar Association in 1994, noted that the
sentence was applied sparsely in colonial times, and never for idolatry,
blasphemy, kidnapping, or the cursing or smiting of parents by children.
She said the state administered its early capital laws mildly.
"They tended to use them more to ward off bad behavior than to actually
punish it," Dr. Woodward said.
Now, Connecticut is preparing to execute Michael Ross, the convicted
murderer, on Wednesday. It will be the 1st time the state has exercised
the death penalty in 45 years. Alice Young was executed within weeks of
her trial. Joseph Taborsky, known as Mad Dog, the last person executed in
the state, was put to death in 1960, 3 years after his conviction. Mr.
Ross was sentenced almost 18 years ago, and a handful of the 6 other death
row inmates have been there almost as long. And Mr. Ross would still be
waiting if he were not insisting he wanted to die.
Unlike a dozen other states, Connecticut has decided to keep the death
penalty on the books, but has shown little inclination to use it. For
various reasons, death penalty trials and appeals have lasted longer in
Connecticut than elsewhere in the country. The gravity of a death penalty
case keeps lawyers and judges from moving hastily and compels public
defenders to use every avenue to try to save their clients. But the length
of time between executions, experts on the death penalty said, also
reveals a deeper ambivalence in Connecticut and other states in the
Northeast about imposing the ultimate punishment.
"Over all, ambivalence does slow things down," said Richard Dieter, the
executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, a nonprofit
group in Washington, which is critical of the way the penalty is applied.
"There are ways this process can go slower if you're more deliberative."
Depending on where people stand on the death penalty debate, Connecticut's
history of deliberation is a good or bad thing. For relatives of victims,
it can be maddening.
"When it takes 20 and a half years, she did not receive justice," said
Raymond Roode, the stepfather of April Brunais, who was one of Mr. Ross's
eight murder victims.
"The way the state acts, they act like my daughter's life was a
throwaway," he said. "I think he should've been executed 10 years ago." he
said.
Mr. Ross himself said he was going forward with the executions to end the
pain for the families of victims.
"My execution will not heal the families of my victims, and it will not
bring back their daughters," he wrote in a letter to Gov. M. Jodi Rell.
"But it will bring about an end to the seemingly never-ending proceedings
whether it be future court appearances, or be the future filing of the
various post-conviction appeals."
Others were encouraged by the length of deliberations. Susan Omilian, a
lawyer from West Hartford who was on the Commission on the Death Penalty,
created by the Legislature in 2001 to review the capital punishment laws,
acknowledged in an interview that the lags can be difficult for the
families of victims. But, she added, they show that the deliberations are
taken seriously.
"It should be a long process, because this is a serious decision," she
said.
Mr. Roode said he understood and shared the concern many people have about
executing innocent people. But Mr. Ross, he said, is certainly guilty.
"There was no question of innocence here," he said. "This guy's guilty. He
would've been dead a long time ago in Florida or Texas or other states."
That may be true. The average amount of time nationally between the
imposition of a death sentence and execution was 10 years and 7 months as
of 2003, according to statistics from the federal Bureau of Justice
Statistics. In Connecticut, of the 7 men on death row, 2 were 1st
sentenced in 1989, 2 others in 1991.
Most discussions of the death penalty focus on the period after 1972, when
the United States Supreme Court declared that the death penalty as
administered was unconstitutional. Many states, including Connecticut,
rewrote their death penalty statutes to deal with the ruling. But since
1976, when the court upheld revised capital punishment laws, states in the
Northeast have been comparatively slow to put people to death. Only
Pennsylvania, which is included in the Northeast in federal statistics,
has executed anyone since the ruling and it has executed 3 people. Texas,
by contrast, has executed 337 in that same period.
In states like Texas, arguments and deliberations are often much shorter,
said Samuel R. Gross, a death penalty expert at the University of Michigan
Law School. Mr. Gross said he had been at entire trials in the South that
took just a few days. Texas death row inmates are executed in an average
of 10 years 5 months, according to 2003 statistics from the Texas
Department of Criminal Justice. One Texas inmate, Joe Gonzales, spent just
252 days on death row before being executed. In Southern states, there are
more people on death row, sent there by aggressive prosecutors, willing
juries and conservative appeals courts, Mr. Gross said.
In Mr. Ross's case, the delay in moving from the sentence to the execution
was caused in part by the decision of the state's Supreme Court to grant
him a new hearing on whether he deserved the death penalty. Although Mr.
Ross was arrested in 1984 and his initial trial ended in 1987 with the
jury sentencing him to death, the Supreme Court reversed the sentence in
1994 because some evidence about the defendant's mental state wasn't
introduced. Mr. Ross's conviction stood, but he got a new trial on whether
he should be executed.
Before that trial, however, Mr. Ross asked to die to spare the families a
second penalty hearing. Arguments about his request went on for 2 more
years before the Supreme Court ruled that his appeal should continue.
The new jury, which heard evidence from psychiatrists about Mr. Ross's
sexual sadism, deliberated for nine days in 2000 before agreeing he should
die. The Supreme Court affirmed the sentences in May 2004, and again Mr.
Ross asked to die. Mr. Ross could still make various appeals to the state
and federal government that lawyers said could last at least 5 more years.
In its report issued in 2003, the Commission on the Death Penalty
calculated that it took Connecticut an average of 1 year 264 days to put
on trial the defendants who ended up on death row. After conviction, the
interval between the notice of appeal and the filing of the defendant's
appeal brief took 2 years 284 days. And the interval between the defense's
appeal brief and the prosecution's brief was 1 year and 125 days. Once the
Supreme Court hears oral arguments, it has taken an average of seven
months for it to issue a decision. And further delays can occur if a new
hearing must be scheduled, new evidence surfaces, laws change, or the
defendant makes a request that must be reviewed.
Lawyers who spoke to the commission said the delays are necessary to make
sure the state has put the right person on trial and imposed the right
sentence. Defense lawyers pore over transcripts to search for injustice
and prosecutors must address each challenge made by the defense. While
defense lawyers in a noncapital case might limit appeals to the strongest
points, they generally challenge all possible issues in death penalty
cases.
"The record of the trial that needs to be reviewed may be 10 or 20 times
longer," Mr. Gross said.
In one pending death penalty case in Connecticut, the defendant's appeals
brief cited nearly 300 other cases. The prosecution cited more than 350.
The appeals brief for the prosecution in Mr. Ross' case was more than 300
pages. The Office of the Chief Public Defender, which has 6 lawyers
working exclusively on capital cases, also employs 2 mitigation
specialists, whose job it is to go over a defendant's background and find
reasons why he should not be executed.
In addition, because the state hasn't tested its death penalty statute in
so long, many of the issues that often come up in death penalty cases have
not been litigated, so the case law is still thin.
When Mr. Ross asked to be executed after his 1st appeal, for instance,
courts spent years considering his request.
"That involved quite a bit of time to decide how to do it," said T. R.
Paulding, a lawyer Mr. Ross hired to expedite the process of putting him
to death.
The commission, however, found that the process was also slowed by an
attitude among the people involved.
"The commission's review found that the principal players in death penalty
appeals (defense counsel, the State, or the Courts) do not generally focus
upon expediting the death penalty appeals process," the commission wrote.
Mr. Dieter said a death penalty case can be delayed in a state like
Connecticut "if any actor along the way questions it."
"In places like Connecticut, sometimes it's the state court, sometimes
it's the federal court, sometimes it's the governor," he said. "Just in
being ambivalent, they might say, 'I'm just going to have that expert
testify or have that DNA tested.' Things do have a way of slowing down
when you look at things closely.
"You almost need all the elements to work well to move executions
forward," he said.
In interviews, commission members praised the work of the public
defender's office, saying it ensured that defendants receiver adequate
representation. The commission concluded that the state should not
expedite the trials if it risked harming the rights of the defendants,
though it did urge the state to increase the budgets for the offices
involved to speed the process. Officials at the public defender's and
state's attorney's offices said their budgets had not increased markedly
in response to the recommendation.
Garrett Flynn, a Farmington lawyer who was on the commission, also said he
thought some of the court battles over the death penalty were really
deliberations about whether the state should even have the death penalty.
Even when there was no question of innocence, people continue to fight, he
said.
"I think people still fight the imposition of the death penalty because
they're against the death penalty, not based exclusively on the facts of
the cases," he said. "In some ways, defense attorneys are fighting the
death penalty itself as much as the case in front of them. That can lead
to delays."
Patrick J. Culligan, the chief of trial services for the Office of the
Chief Public Defender, said the public defender's office was focused
specifically on Mr. Ross's case.
"Our belief is that he is not competent to make the decision to forgo
further legal proceedings available to him to fight for a life sentence,"
he said.
Mr. Ross has argued repeatedly that he was competent and that he was sure
that now is the time for him to die.
But before the lethal fluids are injected, state law still gives him the
chance to call it off because he still has appeals available. Some of
those awaiting his death doubt he will stick to his pledge to die.
"He's a real coward," Mr. Roode said. "I don't see him allowing himself to
be executed for us. I think he's going to blink."
(source: The New York Times)
************************
Death penalty foes mostly quiet at Capitol
If all goes as planned, Connecticut will execute its 1st inmate since 1960
early Wednesday morning.
It will be the 1st execution in New England in 45 years, attracting
attention from around the world.
Despite such notoriety, there has been little to no legislative debate on
the subject at the state Capitol, where lawmakers could vote to change the
state's capital punishment law and possibly save serial killer Michael
Ross' life in the process.
In fact, weeks before the execution, many of the death penalty opponents
within the Democratic-controlled legislature had given up on the idea of
passing a bill before Ross' execution.
Death penalty opponents give a couple reasons for the lack of debate.
First, there aren't enough votes to override a promised veto from
Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell. And 2nd, few people want to be seen as
attempting to save Ross' life.
The 45-year-old former insurance salesman has admitted killing 8 young
women in the early 1980s - 6 in eastern Connecticut and 2 in New York. He
raped most of his young victims.
"I have talked to people in eastern Connecticut who feel very strongly
that justice should be served. And they still feel very close to the
painful memories of losing those young women," said Secretary of the State
Susan Bysiewicz, a former state representative and a 2006 Democratic
gubernatorial candidate who opposes capital punishment.
"I don't think Michael Ross is the poster child for changing the death
penalty and I think the advocates recognize that," she said.
A recent Quinnipiac University Poll found most voters agree. About 70 % of
Connecticut residents support Ross' execution.
2 Democratic lawmakers, one senator and one representative, submitted
bills in the early days of the session, hoping the legislature would take
them up before Wednesday. But legislative leaders told both lawmakers not
to expect a debate on the bills.
"It's clear we don't have the bodies in the legislature to change Jodi
Rell's mind," said Kim Harrison, a lobbyist for the Connecticut Church of
Christ, one of a handful of organizations that has called on legislators
to abolish capital punishment before Ross' execution.
Rell has been one of the few high-profile state politicians to take a
public stand on the Ross matter. In early December, she held a news
conference announcing she would not grant Ross a reprieve that could have
given lawmakers more time to debate the death penalty.
Rell said Friday she did not consider politics when making her decision to
forgo the reprieve.
"It isn't a political decision. The role of the governor is very, very
limited in that I can only delay, I cannot commute, I cannot change the
law," she said. "The legislative leaders, both publicly and privately,
have told me there are not enough votes to change it. It's frankly in the
court's hands now."
Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat, said he believes the
statehouse debate has been minimal because there is no question about
Ross' guilt or whether the process leading to his execution has been fair.
Also, he said Ross' crimes are so heinous that many people - including
Blumenthal - believe Ross should be executed.
"I think there are a number of extraordinary circumstances that undermine
any outrage or sympathy," he said.
Blumenthal said since becoming attorney general, he has come to believe
that capital punishment serves as "a very appropriate and necessary law
enforcement purpose in deterring and punishing for the most serious and
heinous crimes." The Ross matter, he said, fits that bill.
Back in 1981, however, Blumenthal defended a death row inmate while
working as a lawyer in private practice. The NAACP legal defense fund had
asked Blumenthal to represent Joseph Green Brown, a black man who was
wrongly convicted by an all-white jury in Florida.
The only eyewitness later admitted he had lied, hoping to get leniency
from a prosecutor in an unrelated matter.
Brown, within hours of his execution, his head shaved, his last meal
eaten, got an 11th-hour stay from a federal court judge. And eventually,
Blumenthal and his firm were able to convince the court that the verdict
was fatally flawed.
Blumenthal said that experience taught him that the death penalty system
needs to be improved.
"I continue to believe that is has to be made as accurate and reliable as
possible," he said.
That debate in Connecticut might still happen. Death penalty opponents say
they won't drop their opposition even if Ross dies. They claim
Connecticut's system is unconstitutionally arbitrary, capricious and
racially and geographically biased.
Rep. Michael Lawlor, D-East Haven, co-chairman of the legislature's
Judiciary Committee and a death penalty opponent, has said a debate on the
death penalty - ranging from abolition to various reforms - will take
place this year. But, he said, it's more likely to happen after Wednesday,
whether or not Ross' execution takes place.
After Ross' execution date, Lawlor said, the legislature would likely have
"a more enlightening debate."
Interestingly, Ross made that suggestion last month.
In a letter to Rell, asking her not to grant him a reprieve, Ross said a
true debate on the death penalty can only happen after he is dead.
Otherwise, said Ross, the debate will focus on him and his crimes, and not
capital punishment.
(source: Associated Press)
USA:
BRINGING TALES OF 'EXONERATED' TO BIGGER STAGE----DEATH-PENALTY PLAY COMES
TO COURT TV
Kerry Max Cook says he certainly would seem likely to support the death
penalty.
"I come from a pretty conservative family. My father was a career
soldier." And he knows there are "dangerous people" sitting in prison
awaiting execution.
His brother was a murder victim.
But Cook also spent 22 of his own 44 years on Texas' death row, after
being convicted of a rape-murder he had not committed. Only after years of
appeals and new DNA evidence was Cook -- now married and working as a
freelance writer in upstate New York -- exonerated and freed in 1999.
Cook's story is one of 6 told in "The Exonerated" (9 p.m. Thursday, Court
TV), the wrenching film version of Jessica Blank and Erik Jensen's
powerful stage play, which is based entirely on court testimony,
interviews and letters.
Directed by Bob Balaban ("Parents"), who also directed the national tour
of the play, the film was made on a limited budget but features a glittery
cast: Susan Sarandon, Brian Dennehy, Danny Glover, Delroy Lindo and Aidan
Quinn.
Most of the actors already had done "The Exonerated" on stage. None seemed
to mind that the TV version would not be the biggest payday of his or her
career.
"Without those money constraints, this probably never would have gotten
made," says Quinn, who plays Cook. "And this was clearly, for all of us,
not about making money."
The real payoff for the actors, Quinn says, was the chance to bring a play
and a subject that they feel passionately about to a bigger audience. On
stage, he says, "A lot of the time, we're preaching to the converted, the
liberal theater audience going, 'Oh, yes, we're all against the death
penalty.' What this show is going to do is give the play a chance to be in
everyone's living room."
And, says Sarandon, who appeared in the off-Broadway debut of the play, it
goes beyond the chance to play a juicy role. (In her case, it's Sonny
Jacobs, a young mother falsely convicted of killing a police officer.)
"It seems more of a testimonial to the people whose stories we tell,"
Sarandon says. The actors are merely getting those in the audience, "if
they are willing to make that leap, to really listen to the testimony of
the people." Balaban and his cast make their opposition to the death
penalty, as it currently is administered, very clear.
"The problem with the death penalty is that it's not and can't possibly be
administrated properly or fairly," says Dennehy. "What you've got to
understand about 'The Exonerated' is that these are miscarriages of
justice. And when you have the death penalty joined with a miscarriage of
justice, somebody pays the ultimate price that he or she shouldn't have
paid."
Dennehy, who has played the wrongly convicted Gary Gauger on stage in
cities across the country and repeats the role in the film, says he once
brought a friend who happened to be a Chicago police officer to the play.
"He said, 'I know exactly what happened in those cases. I can tell just by
listening to the stories: A cop decided this is the guy or this is the
woman and then made the case -- rightly or wrongly.'"
But those involved also insist that the play is not a polemic. "The film
speaks very eloquently on its own terms" without directly addressing the
politics of the death penalty, says Lindo. "The film doesn't proselytize.
It is just what it is. Quite simply, the words and the stories of these
individuals are far more eloquent than any kind of banner saying `Abolish
the death penalty.'"
Getting the play out to a wider audience through television wasn't easy --
partly, Balaban says, because those involved wanted to maintain the
unadorned stage presentation.
"I don't think selling a bunch of people sitting around talking against a
black background is ever going to be easy," says Balaban. "Nobody else
would go near this thing. Court TV was passionate, fully committed,
supported us in everything we wanted to do."
Balaban made only a few changes to the stage play, the biggest being to
increase the number of actors involved.
"The play was performed by 10 people," says Balaban. "6 of them were the
exonerated characters, and they only played those parts. The other 4
people played 35 parts. Well, we couldn't do that on film; it would be
confusing to people. It was even confusing to people who saw the play
sometimes. So we had to cast 43 people."
Because of budget constraints, filming had to be done quickly and in bits
and pieces.
"We couldn't really get the cast in the same room at the same time even if
we wanted to. The logistics prevented that," says Balaban. "So we ended up
working with everybody alone -- except, of course, the minor characters
who related directly.
"Every person came in for one day. It was 18 pages a day, which -- even if
it's pretty simple -- is a lot to experience, go through and deal with in
one day."
The result, though, is a potent piece of television with moving
performances by the central cast. (Dennehy and Quinn are particularly
good.) And Balaban managed to give the film visual energy through shifting
camera angles and lighting changes.
He also made sure to retain, as often as possible, an element of the stage
productions: the introduction of some of those whose lives are portrayed
in "The Exonerated."
That, says Quinn, was always the most powerful moment on stage.
"At the end of the play, we would sometimes introduce Kerry Max Cook and
his wife and his son and Kerry would always challenge the audience," Quinn
says.
"He would say, 'If you know anyone out there who is strongly for the death
penalty, all I want is for them to see this play. All I want to do is give
them a chance to see the possibility that, maybe, we should look at the
justice of the death penalty.'"
'The Exonerated'
****
Airing: 9 p.m. Thursday, Court TV
Cast: Susan Sarandon, Danny Glover, Aidan Quinn, Brian Dennehy, Delroy
Lindo, David Brown Jr.
Writers: Jessica Blank, Erik Jensen
Director: Bob Balaban
(source: Mercury News)
****************
Founding Fathers Saw Death Penalty As Just
Letters To The Editor:
There have been numerous letters and articles concerning the upcoming
execution of Michael Ross, both for and against. Many say that it is
unconstitutional because it violates the cruel and unusual clause. This
indeed would be news to the Founding Fathers, the actual authors of the
Constitution. During their lifetimes, both before and after the
Constitution, the death penalty was routinely carried out on those guilty
of heinous crimes.
Don't you think the authors would have noticed if this was against the
Constitution they wrote and which was ratified by the states? "Cruel and
unusual punishment," as defined by the times, referred to torture. The
imposition of the death penalty meant precisely then what it means today.
It is a classic example of legislating from the bench when judges
"interpret" or misinterpret clear meanings to suit their own political
views.
The imposition of the death penalty should never be carried out lightly.
Michael Ross brutally raped and murdered 8 young women and children and
deserves the sentence he was given. The execution of Michael Ross by the
state does not make us all guilty of murder, as argued by some. It is not
revenge or retribution, but simply justice, the kind of justice understood
and approved by the Founding Fathers.
Michael Poling----Norwich
(source: Letter to the Editor, The Day)
*********************
Zen on Death Row
Susan Sarandon won an Oscar for her performance as Sister Helen Prejean in
1995s "Dead Man Walking," in which Sean Penn played the doomed Death Row
inmate of the title. In her latest role, Sarandon plays a "dead woman
walking."
But one whos walking free.
Sarandon gives a heart-wrenching performance in "The Exonerated," a TV
movie premiering on Court TV on Thursday at 9 p.m. Based on the
Off-Broadway play by Jessica Blank and Erik Jensen and directed by Bob
Balaban, its right out of the stars political wheelhouse.
"The Exonerated" interweaves real-life stories about wrongly convicted
Death Row inmates portrayed by Brian Dennehy, Aidan Quinn, Danny Glover,
Delroy Lindo, David Brown Jr. and Sarandon. The actors, photographed
against a black background, deliver their powerful stories to the camera
in the actual words of the condemned people.
"Tim [Robbins, Sarandons longtime partner] and I did the original play
together in New York," she says. "So I really wanted to do the film
version. But on TV there is such an expectation of car chases and
something major happening every couple of minutes that viewers will have
to surrender to listening to peoples stories. Its somewhere between a play
and a reality show."
The film offers a scorching indictment of capital punishment, as the 6
inmates are exonerated after years of unjust incarceration.
"The death penalty never made sense to me in the practical way," Sarandon
says, "because of how much it cost and how badly its applied and because
its just not a deterrent.
"But then people would say, 'Hey, what if someone did something to one of
your kids? And I've met people whose kids have been murdered and who did
not ask for the death penalty, which is a remarkable thing. I always
thought I couldnt possibly do that. Im sure Id want revenge."
Sarandon says that after making "Dead Man Walking," it became clear to her
that because she had kids she was against the death penalty.
"What an individual will feel or want to do is different from the rules
you want your government to apply," she says, "and how you treat your
prisoners and how you apply your justice is one of the main tenets of
society. Its a very mixed message to teach your kids to use words to work
things out and then have a government that so blithely and capriciously
doles out the death penalty. Its a completely corrupt system."
In "The Exonerated," Sarandon plays Sunny Jacobs. In 1976, Jacobs, a
mother of 2, and her common-law husband, Jessie Tafero, were convicted of
killing 2 police officers in Florida. The death sentence against Jacobs
was overturned in 1982 and she was released in 1992 after the charge
against her was reduced to 2nd-degree murder. Tafero, though, was executed
in 1990.
During her 5 years on death row, Jacobs somehow found a Zen-like peace
that helped her survive.
"When I took the part, I'd never met Sunny," Sarandon says. "I was just
blown away by the power of her words. That she lost so much of her life
and so much time in her kids lives, and somehow still managed to make
death row a haven instead of a torturous place - and did it all from
inside of herself - just amazed me.
"Sunny's concept that nobody can take away your inner freedom, even under
those dire circumstances, is a lesson for everybody even beyond the
specifics of the death penalty question."
Jacobs now spends her time teaching yoga in prisons. "She's totally
unbitter," Sarandon says.
The 58-year-old actress believes that finding the right dramatic vehicles
with which to articulate her political views is a powerful way to effect
change.
"It reminds me of Sister Helen's book 'Dead Man Walking,'" she says. "It
takes what is very much a visceral issue and makes it specific. Then youre
able to experience it in more than just a theoretical, knee-jerk way. We
all thought the film of 'Dead Man Walking' would go directly to video.
Never in our wildest imaginations did we think it would be so successful
and reach so many people."
She feels that "The Exonerated" will similarly explore what it really
means to sentence an innocent human being to die.
"I think it's great that Court TV is airing a film like this," she says.
"These 6 cases are just the tip of the iceberg of those unjustly
incarcerated, and probably already executed, which is what Sister Helens
next book is about."
(source: Axis of Logic)
**********************
Waiting for Roper v. Simmons
Among other crucial matters this session, the US Supreme Court is expected
to determine the legality of executing juvenile offenders with its
decision in the Roper v. Simmons case.
Since the reinstatement of capital punishment in 1976, seven states have
executed a combined 22 juvenile offenders nationwide. In recent years,
however, the juvenile death penalty has met growing resistance, and polls
consistently show that roughly 70 percent of the US population opposes the
practice.
Internationally, juvenile executions are even more reviled. According to
Amnesty International, Iran and the Democratic Republic of the Congo are
the only other countries in the world that still sanction the execution of
juvenile offenders. Moreover, the practice directly violates numerous
international human rights agreements, including the United Nations
Convention on the Rights of the Child, which has been ratified by every
member of the UN General Assembly except for the United States and
Somalia.
The US Supreme Court last reviewed the issue in 1989, when its decision in
Stanford v. Kentucky set the minimum eligibility age for the death penalty
at 16. But since then, 8 states have established a minimum age of
18--raising the total number of states that ban juvenile executions to
thirty-one; the District of Columbia, the federal government, and the US
military also use 18 as the minimum age.
In October 2002 four Supreme Court Justices expressed their opposition to
executing juvenile offenders in a dissent with the majority over the
taking of a case that would have allowed them to review the issue. "The
practice of executing [juvenile] offenders is a relic of the past and is
inconsistent with evolving standards of decency in a civilized society,"
Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the 4. "We should put an end to this
shameful practice." However, at least 1 more vote is needed for a decision
in favor of Christopher Simmons, the juvenile offender whose case made its
way to the High Court after the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the
juvenile death penalty violates the US Constitution's ban on cruel and
unusual punishment.
In anticipation of the Court's decision in Roper v. Simmons, The Nation
asked 4 people deeply involved in the fight against juvenile executions in
the United States to share their thoughts on the issue. Those 4 people are
Nanon Williams, a writer and death-row inmate in Texas, convicted and
sentenced for a crime committed when he was 17 years old; Bill Pelke, a
retired steelworker whose grandmother was murdered in Indiana in 1985 by a
15-year-old girl who later received a death sentence; Diann Rust-Tierney,
the executive director of the National Coalition to Abolish the Death
Penalty; and Steve Presson, an Oklahoma lawyer who represented both Sean
Sellers and Scott Hain, juvenile offenders who were executed in 1999 and
2003, respectively.
Although statistics and DNA data have been crucial in the efforts to
abolish the juvenile death penalty, the personal side of an issue like
this can sometimes be more illuminating. Do any particular experiences
stand out in your mind that highlight the urgent need for reform?
Williams: Having stood by as numerous people I knew personally were
executed, I have many experiences that stand out in my mind. I often think
about Napoleon Beazley. He and I both knew that when we entered the death
house as juvenile offenders, there was no room left for the boys within
us. Napoleon knew that he woke up every day in a place where men were
mysteriously hung in their cells after searches by guards, where other
prisoners killed each other, where guards and prisoners alike endured and
gave beatings, and where chaos ruled every moment. Yet Napoleon, who
confessed his guilt, was a perfect prisoner with extraordinary strength.
He could smile and light up the room, say something to make one pause and
think, and even shed a tear around men who wore faces of stone to hide
their own fear. Napoleon helped men much older than he to reach their own
potential, yet he was killed and couldn't reach his own. When I spoke to
Napoleon's little brother moments before they took Napoleon to the
execution gurney, I realized his brother became another victim. I saw his
anger, his hurt and his pain so bare and so raw. I wonder what he will
become. I saw Napoleon's mother and father, and I saw more victims. I saw
a cycle that would create more and more victims regardless of innocence or
guilt. We could stop this but we haven't.
Pelke: Paula Cooper, a 15-year-old girl, was sentenced to die in the
electric chair for the murder of my grandmother. [Her sentence was later
commuted to 60 years in prison, in large part due to Pelke's efforts to
prevent her execution.] The idea that executing this girl would have
brought justice, healing or even closure to our family is absurd. And the
family members of the condemned are often forgotten. In the courtroom
after the trial, I saw the tears and heard the groans of Paula Cooper's
grandfather. To me, it is barbarity to make someone go through the process
of watching the state execute his granddaughter. I know my grandmother
would have been opposed to that; she would have had love and compassion
for him.
Rust-Tierney: One person who stands out is Ryan Matthews. This past fall,
Ryan was freed from death row in Louisiana, where he had spent 5 years. He
was arrested and tried for capital murder just after he turned 17 and was
subsequently sentenced to death. Witnesses said they saw the perpetrator
of the crime wearing a ski mask, and prosecutors said the mask belonged to
Ryan. But this year, DNA testing found that evidence taken from the mask
matched another man--who was already serving time for another killing. Had
it not been for DNA technology, Ryan eventually would have been executed.
And yet, in a vast majority of these death-penalty cases, whether they
involve juvenile offenders or not, there is no DNA evidence. It makes you
wonder how many other wrongful convictions are out there.
Presson: I represented the nation's only 16-year-old offender who was
executed for his crimes in the "modern era" of capital punishment. I also
represented a 17-year-old offender who was executed in 2003, and may end
up being the last juvenile offender executed in the United States. At the
time of their executions, neither of these boys were anything like the
kids they were when their crimes were committed. They had both grown up
and matured. One had a serious mental illness that was not discovered
until after trial. The other grew up in complete poverty and an
environment of physical, emotional and sexual abuse.
Since Stanford, 8 states have passed legislation establishing 18 as the
minimum eligibility age for the death penalty. During that same time
period, no states have lowered the minimum age or set a new age any lower
than 18. How do you account for this seemingly positive trend?
Williams: I know about the trend and that in the past 15 years the
legislative consensus throughout the country has been to set a minimum age
for capital punishment at 18. But from what I see, in the South the death
penalty is still widely popular, whether it's for a child, mentally
retarded person or whatever. And sadly, many things in this country are
based on what is popular, not what is right. The death penalty has become
a stage for aspiring politicians. Look at George W. Bush: He's presided
over more executions and killed more kids on death row than anyone--and it
certainly hasn't hurt him.
Pelke: The movement away from juvenile executions is an echo of the
international community--which for years has held the position that the
juvenile death penalty is a violation of human rights. People in the
United States have begun to realize that if someone is not old enough to
vote, sign legal contracts or buy alcohol, he or she is too young to be
sentenced to death.
Rust-Tierney: The public has become increasingly aware that children are
different from adults. We once thought that a person's brain is fully
developed by the age of 14. Now we know that it continues to undergo
development up to, and perhaps beyond, the age of 21. So the public has
recognized that adolescents, by their nature, are less mature than adults,
and that the impulsiveness and poor judgment of youth are mitigating
factors that should exempt teenagers from the ultimate punishment.
Presson: Those states that established the age at 18 were putting into
statutory place what their practice had been, and what their sense of
morality was. With Stanford seeming to give a green light to states to
execute 16- and 17-year-olds, the seven states that raised or clarified
their minimum age did so to repudiate Stanford, and perhaps to tell the
rest of the country that executing children is outrageous.
Anti-death penalty activists often frame the debate over juvenile
executions broadly, focusing not just on the minimum age but also on a
number of other socioeconomic factors. Do you think the juvenile
death-penalty issue speaks to more extensive social problems?
Williams: Yes. In Texas the last 6 juvenile offenders executed were people
of color. Our judicial system is racist and discriminatory. Black men make
up almost 50 % of America's prison population. Is that because of a cycle
of violence or racism? The answer is both. With so many black men
incarcerated, many black children and other young people of color grow up
poor and in single-parent households. And those social hurdles are
showcased in our courtrooms. Rich people don't get the death penalty.
Justice is about how much a person can afford! That's why so many people
of color are in America's prisons and being executed, especially kids.
Pelke: The juvenile death penalty is a sign that we have given up on our
young people. It highlights the fact that our system operates with the
philosophy that we must react to violence with more violence. And it also
reflects a broader set of problems: It highlights the fact that we have a
legal system that is discriminatory with regard to race and class, a
system in which there is justice only for some.
Rust-Tierney: States are increasing spending on prison systems even as
they cut spending on public education. Moreover, public education spending
is uneven; just look at the amount of money spent per child in affluent
school districts compared with the amount spent in less affluent ones. At
the same time, the kids who fail--who we fail--in poorer school districts
are more likely to end up somewhere in the criminal justice system, be it
on parole or probation, incarcerated or even on death row. So there is a
link between how we support our children in their formative years and what
ends up happening to them later. The cycle of violence begins with the
onset of poverty, and economic and educational deprivation.
Presson: I believe the juvenile death penalty, especially in the South,
speaks to society's knee-jerk reaction to violent crime and desire to
extract revenge. Moreover, it speaks to society's schizophrenic attitude
toward juveniles: We enact more and more legal protections for them--like
limiting driving privileges, enforcing anti-tobacco legislation and making
parents criminally liable for their children's truancy--but at the same
time, when it comes to violent crime, we hold juveniles accountable as
adults.
What do you think Roper v. Simmons means for the future of the anti-death
penalty movement?
Williams: If the Supreme Court rules against the execution of juvenile
offenders, the problem with the death penalty itself will largely remain.
Poor people will still have poor representation. Blacks will still get
executed at a higher rate than whites. Prosecutors and judges will still
hold ex parte meetings to decide who will face the death penalty. And how
many will be executed? How many more families will be a part of the cycle?
How many more innocent people will be killed? One can hope a victory in
Roper v. Simmons would put a spark into the anti-death penalty movement. I
guess time will tell. But during that time executions will still proceed.
In fact, one will soon happen yet again right here in Texas.
Pelke: When I became convinced that executing juveniles was wrong, it was
not that big of a step to conclude that executing anyone was wrong. If the
Supreme Court makes the correct ruling in Roper v. Simmons, I think the
American public will eventually make the same step I made. I think when
people really look at this issue and study it, they will come to believe
that as a civilized society we can do better than killing our children.
But if we cannot convince the Supreme Court and the American people that
the juvenile death penalty is wrong, then the abolition movement is in
deep trouble.
Rust-Tierney: A victory in this case would signify the Supreme Court's
acknowledgment that the American public does not want the death penalty
applied broadly. The public doesn't want it applied for people with mental
retardation, doesn't want it applied for adolescent offenders. So I think
we're seeing a scaling back of the death penalty in this country.
Hopefully this will continue with the Court's ruling in Roper v. Simmons.
Presson: It is sad that the Supreme Court did not take up this issue until
Missouri's highest court based its decision in Simmons's case on the US
Constitution. It is sad because at the time Scott Hain was executed by the
state of Oklahoma in 2003, we had essentially the same data and arguments
Simmons has, but the Supreme Court turned away our challenge and allowed
Hain to be killed. If the Supreme Court rules in Simmons's favor, it would
only remove a very small segment of offenders from death eligibility. But
it would be another step on the road toward abolition. If the Supreme
Court rules against Simmons, it would be a signal that the Court very much
favors capital punishment, wishes to ignore the social trends and the
science that favor Simmons's position and wants to send a message to the
states that they are free to execute almost anyone they wish. That would
be a setback to the abolition movement.
(source: The Nation)
****************
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT----It's still rooted in red states
38 U.S. states and the federal government have the death penalty on the
books, but 85 % of American executions last year were carried out in the
south and southwest.
Texas again led the nation, executing 23 prisoners last year - and 337
since the Supreme Court reaffirmed capital punishment in 1976.
No other state is even close. Runner-up Virginia has executed 94 inmates
in the last 28 years.
"So many of the executions occur in the south," says Richard Dieter,
director of the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington.
"It is still more than 80 % - in some years, it tops 85 % - making the
region even more isolated or marginalized.
"They tend to be more conservative voters. It's partly history. It's
partly religion."
Dieter says the Southern Baptist religion's view of executions the Old
Testament "eye-for-an-eye" dictum - is much different from the stance
taken by the Catholic and mainline Protestant churches of the north and
northeast.
"There are definite religious roots to this."
In the Nov. 2 election, 27 of the 38 states that have the death penalty
went to the Republicans.
Only 4 of the 12 states that do not allow capital punishment followed suit
- with the remaining 8, and the District of Columbia, going to Democrat
John Kerry.
(source: Toronto Star)
