April 27 CALIFORNIA: Using software to model death row outcomes Convicts on death row can wait for years while appeals are filed and protests lodged. Many never get beyond this limbo. Others are executed. What determines the final outcome? That is the question two professors, one a criminologist, the other a computer scientist, asked as they took 28 years of data on prisoners facing the death sentence and fed it into a software program. What the software - known as an artificial neural network - managed to do was to predict with more than 90 percent accuracy who would be executed. The implication, says Dee Wood Harper, one of the researchers and a professor of criminal justice at Loyola University in New Orleans, is that "if this mindless software can determine who is going to die and who is not going to die, then there's some arbitrariness here in the [United States justice] system." The neural network, which learns by constantly scanning the data for patterns, was given 1,000 cases from 1973 to 2000 where the outcome was known. Once trained on that information, it was fed another 300 cases but without the outcome included. That's when its prediction proved highly accurate. What some observers find alarming about the outcome is that the 19 points of data supplied on each death-row inmate contained no details of the case. Only facts such as age, race, sex, and marital status were included, along with the date and type of offense. "That's what makes this important," Dr. Harper says. "We didn't look at the crime itself. We didn't look at whether the defendant had received a fair or unfair representation. We simply looked at characteristics of the inmate." Although the research is in its early stages, Harper and his colleague Stamos Karamouzis plan to refine the data group and gradually remove variables until the neural network loses its ability to predict and the most significant factors become apparent. The clues are already there, Harper says. For instance, the state where someone is convicted is key. California has the largest number of inmates on death row and has executed just 2 people in the last 38 years, whereas Texas has been "an execution machine," he says. The reason, in part, is the appeals process, he says, which in Texas, Virginia, and Florida is "short-circuited" compared with other states. "If you can die in Texas three times faster than you can die in Louisiana, or you happen to have committed a murder in one of the 38 states where the death penalty occurs, then that in itself is an arbitrary thing," Harper says. "You can be one foot over the line in the next state and not be subject to this kind of penalty." Arbitrary imposition of the death penalty has long been an argument used by those who oppose it. In a 1972 Supreme Court case Furman v. Georgia, the court found evidence of "arbitrary and discriminatory" sentencing, which violated the Constitution and its provision against "cruel and unusual treatment." As a result, states were forced to reexamine their statutes for capital offenses to ensure that they weren't capriciously applied. A later 1976 Supreme Court case, Gregg v. Georgia, set in motion a restructuring of capital trials to provide a separate phase for sentencing including guidelines for jurors, again to create more fairness. Since 1977, more than 900 executions have taken place in the US. "Despite all our efforts since the 1970s, who gets executed still appears to be random and arbitrary," says John Wright, a habeas corpus lawyer in Huntsville, home of Texas's execution facilities. He says it surprises him that the 19 factors used in the research could produce such accurate results. In response to Harper's comment that theoretically, "everybody who receives the same sentence for the same crime should receive the same punishment in the same period of time," Mr. Wright says, "it's a standard to which to hold the justice system, but it's not something we think about very much at all." The attitude and discretion of the judge and the effectiveness of the attorneys, he says, can have a major impact on the ultimate outcome of a trial. Harper and Professor Karamouzis are now working to further refine their software model to give the research greater impact. (source: Christian Science Monitor) CONNECTICUT: Arguments die slowly in death penalty case Convicted murderer Michael Ross is scheduled to die by lethal injection in the Osborn Correction Institution just over the state line in nearby Somers on May 11, the first execution in New England since 1960. Ross came within hours of execution in January, but appeals filed on his behalf led to postponements. Now, following a judge's ruling on Friday that Ross is mentally competent, it appears he will be executed. We have no sympathy for Ross. He admits he killed eight women in Connecticut and New York in the 1980s, and that he raped most of them. Our sympathy is for the families of his victims. They are also victims. If they wished Ross a slow, painful death, we would not judge them. After all, he will die, but their grief will live on. Yet, even as we condemn Michael Ross, we oppose the death penalty. Attitudes toward the death penalty have changed. The number of people sentenced to death last year fell to the lowest level since the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976. There were 125 people sent to death row in 2004, down from 144 in 2003, according to figures compiled by the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. One day, we hope the United States Supreme Court will declare the death penalty unconstitutional. Efforts to restore the death penalty in Massachusetts have failed. Still, as we've noted in this space, an execution in Somers, which borders the Massachusetts towns of East Longmeadow and Hampden, is too close to home. Will Connecticut be any safer on May 12, the day after his execution? Nearly 1,000 people have been executed in the United States since capital punishment was reinstated in 1976. There is no conclusive evidence that those executions have made us safer, prevented other acts of violence or spared the victims' families from further pain. In fact, according to FBI statistics, the South has accounted for 82 % of all executions since 1976; the Northeast accounts for less than 1 percent. Yet the murder rate is higher in the South than it is in the Northeast. The death penalty is not a deterrent. That argument should be put to rest. (source: Editorial, The Republican) ************************* Supreme Court Refuses To Hear Execution Appeal----Group Wants Rules Established Before Ross Is Put To Death The state Supreme Court decided Tuesday that it will not hear an appeal contending that no one in Connecticut, not even serial killer Michael Ross, should be executed until the state Board of Pardons and Paroles establishes specific regulations for commutation hearings for those about to be put to death. In a terse, one-sentence ruling, the high court said it "denied" the Missionary Society of Connecticut's request to appeal a lower court's ruling. No further explanation was given. Earlier this month, Hartford Superior Court Judge Robert E. Beach Jr. dismissed the society's lawsuit on the grounds that they have no legal standing to bring the challenge because it had no direct interest in Ross' case. The group asked the court to force the state agency to put regulations in place before it goes ahead with the state's first execution in 45 years. "The Missionary Society is not trying to stay the execution of Michael Ross," the society's appeal said. "Rather, the Missionary Society's position is that, if the State of Connecticut is going to kill people, it must make sure that all applicable laws and proper regulations are followed before doing so." Ross is scheduled to die May 11 for the kidnapping and murder of Leslie Shelley and April Brunais, both 14, Robin Stavinsky, 19, and Wendy Baribeault, 17, the last 3 of whom he raped. He is serving 2 life sentences for the rapes and murders of 2 other young women in Windham County. He also confessed to killing 2 young women in New York, one of them a fellow student at Cornell University. The group also claims that the board's current policies do not address possible commutation of a death sentence to life imprisonment. "If Connecticut is going to entrust significant responsibilities, such as commutation of death sentences, to administrative agencies, it has a duty to ensure that these responsibilities are being carried out to the letter of the law," the appeal said. The Missionary Society of Connecticut is the corporate arm of the Connecticut Conference of the United Church of Christ. The conference comprises 253 churches with 97,000 members. Officials from the church organization could not be reached to comment. The society contacted the Board of Pardons and Paroles on Feb. 7 and asked it to adopt regulations and submitted its own regulations for the agency's consideration. On Feb. 17, the society made a follow-up request. Initially, the board responded that it was not required to adopt regulations. On March 9, the board responded again and formally denied the society's request. State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal represented the Board of Pardons and Paroles during the court hearing. He told Beach that the parole board already has rules and policies in place for commutation hearings. The person aggrieved, or his or her legal representative, may ask for a hearing, he said. Blumenthal Tuesday praised the high court's denial of the society's case. "This denial of an expedited appeal is eminently correct and appropriate, in light of the trial court's very persuasive and well-reasoned decision," said Blumenthal. "The Missionary Society has no legal or factual basis to challenge existing policies relating to death sentences. We will continue to oppose actively any claim that might delay or block the Ross execution. All citizens of our state - most especially the victims' families -- have a right to the legal process reaching finality." When Ross was scheduled to die by lethal injection in January the Missionary Society of Connecticut asked for a stay of Ross' execution until the regulations were in place. Both Beach and the state Supreme Court said that the society did not have any legal standing to make a request to stop the execution on Ross' behalf. The U.S. Supreme Court also refused to hear the society's case." (source: The Day) OREGON: No decision on death penalty in case of man allegedly killing wife The prosecutor pursuing an aggravated murder charge against Paul D. Fahey Jr. said Monday he has not yet decided whether to seek the death penalty. Rick Wesenberg said he is still considering whether to ask for a death sentence or life imprisonment if Fahey is convicted of the Sept. 20 death of his estranged wife, Brenda Iverson-Fahey. Iverson-Fahey was killed after Fahey allegedly set her home on Bodie Street in Roseburg on fire. She died after being taken to Mercy Medical Center. Fahey was also injured in the blaze. On Monday, Douglas County Circuit Judge Randy Garrison set a trial date of June 14, 2006. Fahey is charged with aggravated murder, 2 counts of murder and 3 counts of 1st-degree arson. Fahey is represented by Corvallis attorney Michael Barker. Barker told Garrison that Portland attorney Marc Sussman has agreed to assist him. Fahey is next scheduled to appear in court on June 13. The attorneys for both sides will meet to discuss pre-trial motions. (source: The News-Review) ARIZONA: >From death row to court; local man gets new trial A Superior Court judge tentatively set a new trial Tuesday for a Fort Mojave death row inmate, whose conviction he overturned 11 days ago. Clarence David Hill, 56, was convicted in 1989 of 1st-degree murder and sentenced to death for the burning death of his landlord, Dale Edmundson of Mohave Valley. Judge Richard Weiss threw out Hill's conviction April 14 based on DNA testing completed several months ago. Weiss ruled in his order that in light of the recent DNA evidence, a new jury may not convict Hill. The tests show that Edmundson's blood was not present on Hill's clothing or on his bed sheet, refuting the prosecution's main arguments. Williams said blood found on Hill's clothes was probably his own and blood found on his bed sheets was from an unknown female. Hill was living on Edmundson's property in a trailer. He paid no rent in exchange for doing odd jobs for Edmundson. Assistant Arizona Attorney General J.D. Nielsen said he will appeal Weiss's ruling to the state Supreme Court. Weiss scheduled Hill's new trial date for June 9 with a pre-trial date set for May 26. Both attorneys expect the trial to last about 8 days. Mohave County Attorney Matt Smith asked to allow Edmundson's family members to attend the hearing to hear arguments on a defense motion to release Hill on his own recognizance. Weiss postponed part of Tuesday's hearing until Friday afternoon in Bullhead City to hear arguments on that motion. Hill's attorney Rick Williams argued that his client should be released on his own recognizance or at least on bail as soon as possible since his conviction was overturned. "There is no legal rational to hold Mr. Hill on death row," Williams said. Another issue is whether Williams or the public defender's office will be assigned to Hill's defense at his new trial. Williams was assigned to handle the appeal process. Smith said it will be up to the state's appeal to the Supreme Court and a motion to review Weiss's ruling whether the case will go to trial. Smith said he is not sure if he will pursue the death penalty against Hill if it goes to trial. Hill, who is in a wheelchair on oxygen, is suffering from scleroderma and other diseases. Hill was original convicted of beating Edmundson in the victim's home, wrapped him in a bed sheet, took him out into the desert in a pickup truck and burned him to death. Former Superior Court Judge Leonard Langford sentenced Hill to death in 1990. (source: Mohave Daily News)
