Feb. 9
CALIFORNIA:
Man who raped and stabbed pregnant newlywed is sentenced to death
A man who raped and fatally stabbed a pregnant newlywed in her Orange County
apartment has been sentenced to death.
A district attorney's statement says 43-year-old Jason Balcom was sentenced
Friday for the 1988 attack that killed Malinda Gibbons.
Prosecutors say Gibbons and her husband had just moved from Utah to Costa Mesa
and she was unpacking when Balcom attacked her.
She was bound, gagged, raped, sodomized and stabbed.
Her husband found her body when he returned from work.
Authorities say 6 days later, Balcom raped another woman in Santa Ana at
gunpoint then fled to Michigan.
Balcom was sentenced for the Santa Ana rape and for another rape in Michigan.
He was serving a 50-year prison sentence in Michigan when DNA linked him to the
Gibbons killing.
(source: Sunday World)
USA:
Seeking death sentence in Boston bombing is dead wrong
For all of my critics who have wondered when I would ever disagree with,
challenge or outright defy U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, this might be
your day.
Then, again, it might not.
I have the utmost respect for the attorney general and deem him to be an
excellent student of the law, protector of the Constitution and a loyal
defender of the current administration's actions on many fronts, including the
Justice Department encouraging clemency for those sentenced under the harsh
crack cocaine laws.
But I strongly oppose his decision to seek the death penalty for the suspect in
the Boston Marathon bombing, 20-year-old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who is charged with
the deaths of three people and injuries to 260 others.
"The nature of the conduct at issue and the resultant harm compel this
decision," Holder said.
This is one instance when I believe he's wrong.
Dead wrong.
I've fought against capital punishment all my adult life and debated against it
from my high school years.
Yes, I've been challenged on it. Every time there is any heinous crime, locally
or nationally, I get the same question: "If anyone deserves the death penalty,
don't you think he/she does?"
Usually my answer is "Yes, but ... I don't think anyone deserves to be put to
death. A state or a country ought not be in the business of taking a life, no
matter what the crime is."
Every time someone is executed in this nation, it diminishes us as a people. I
honestly believe that, and I make no exceptions based on one's nationality or
the magnitude of the crime.
I'm on record opposing the execution of Timothy McVeigh, who killed 168 people
in the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.
There's a long list of other notorious killers for whom I've raised my voice,
objecting to the use of capital punishment in their cases. Among them are Nidal
Hasan, the Fort Hood shooter; John Allen Muhammad, the Washington-area sniper;
and Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.
Of course, in Texas, which has executed more than 500 people since capital
punishment was reinstated, I've cried out constantly against this barbaric act.
It is even more disturbing here because this is a state that has a long
reputation of convicting innocent people.
Although federal executions are much rarer, it is troubling every time the
government decides it will seek the ultimate punishment for an individual.
For the young Tsarnaev, the government cites the defendant's lack of remorse
and the fact that one of the victims was an 8-year-old boy as reasons that
qualify him for the death penalty.
Prosecutors also pointed out that he "received asylum from the United States;
obtained citizenship and enjoyed the freedoms of a United States citizen; and
then betrayed his allegiance to the United States by killing and maiming people
in the United States."
Terrible acts indeed.
The very thought of what happened near the finish line of the Boston Marathon
last year is painful. To see some of the victims who survived, minus some of
their limbs, is heartbreaking.
There's no way to comprehend how anyone could plan such an attack on innocent
people, but then, attacks on innocent people have become a common occurrence in
our country.
We don't know how to respond to them, except when the guilty parties are
apprehended we cry for vengeance, not justice.
So, in the eyes of the government - and I'm sure in the eyes of many
individuals - Tsarnaev, like many before him, "deserves" to die.
Holder and his prosecutors will make their case and, should Tsarnaev be found
guilty and be executed, they will declare that justice has been served.
And I will declare that once again the nation itself is a killer.
(source: Bob Ray Sanders is a columnist for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram)
************************
Is The Death Penalty Dying A Slow Death?
This week, the state of Louisiana delayed the execution of Christopher
Sepulvado, who was convicted of killing his 6-year-old stepson more than 2
decades ago.
Sepulvado's lawyers argued that the two drugs that Louisiana officials wanted
to use to put Sepulvado to death would violate his 8th amendment right against
cruel and unusual punishment.
There's a shortage of drugs used for capital punishment, and it's leading some
states to consider bringing back the electric chair or the firing squad.
Here & Now's Jeremy Hobson to discusses this with Richard Dieter of the Death
Penalty Information Center and Rick Brattin, a Missouri state representative
who is sponsoring a bill to make the firing squad an alternative to lethal
injection.
Interview Highlights
Richard Dieter on executions in the U.S.
"There's been a 75 % drop in death sentences since the 1990s. Really
extraordinary numbers, a 60 % drop in executions. The number of states with the
death penalty has declined, death row has declined and even public support is
at a 40-year low, so we're certainly at a crossroads here with the death
penalty here compared to where we were 15 years ago."
"States are finding these drugs from compounding pharmacies. A lot of the legal
debate about this is that states don't want to reveal where they're getting
them from. They don't want to name the compounding pharmacy, or the pharmacist
who put the drugs together, or what company is testing the purity of these. And
so the suits have to do with not saying lethal injection is unconstitutional,
but rather that this secrecy deprives the defendant of elementary due process,
and deprives the people of knowing what the state is doing."
Dieter on bringing back old execution methods
"I think certainly it's possible for some of these laws to get passed, but as I
say, I don't think they're going to become our method of execution. States
voluntarily got rid of those things. Utah was the state that used the firing
squad, and they want to get as far away from that. Every time they used it,
even for people who volunteered, it was a spectacle. The inmate got all the
attention, and of course, it was a bloody way of killing people, and for people
who had to witness that, including the victim's families, you know, that
doesn't serve well. So I don't think that's where we're going. But if a system,
if a program, a government program, is having problems, we either mend it or we
end it. I think it would be refreshing to have a review of: why are we doing
it? Why are we picking 39 people out of the 14,000 murders that occur in a year
and carrying of those 39, 82 % of which are in the south? The country isn't
using the death penalty. We don't need it. The worst crimes aren't being
punished with the death penalty."
Rick Brattin on his bill to bring back the firing squad
"The reason why I have introduced this is was to have an alternative plan, just
in case this is held up in a court appeal for a long period of time. That way,
we, the state, would still carry out sentencing for these victims and their
families."
"It would be a voluntary list of law enforcement officers, and out of a 5-man
squad, 4 of the 5 would have a live round and one would have a blank round, so
they could, you know, go home believing they had that blank round, at least
that's the way it's viewed. I know a lot of people who say that is, you know,
warping back to 1850, but, you know, executions are not fun, and, you know, we
don't have medical doctors administering this lethal injection and putting the
needles in and anything like that. These are orderlies and less than qualified
people a lot of the time. So these people sit here and suffer and die."
Brattin on critics of the firing squad
"I believe it is a viable means of punishment. You know, a lot of these people
who are against it don't really research how these victims die. These people
are dying the most humane death possible compared to their victims. You know,
the people who are on death row aren't the guys who were just robbing a bank
and happened to misfire and kill somebody. These people did, you know, I mean,
the most extreme, heinous things to an innocent human being, or multiple
innocent human beings. So that's where I come from, is that I believe the
victims and their families want the rest to be put to these cases, and in this
case, that's what I'm trying to do."
Guests
--Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center.
--Rick Brattin, Missouri state representative.
Copyright 2014 WBUR-FM. To see more, visit http://www.wbur.org.
Transcript
JEREMY HOBSON, HOST:
It's HERE AND NOW. This week the state of Louisiana delayed the execution of a
convicted killer in part because of a shortage of drugs that since 1977 have
been used in lethal injections. Companies that make the drugs have been
refusing to supply them. So states that still have the death penalty are
considering other options, including the electric chair or even the firing
squad.
In a minute we'll hear from a Missouri lawmaker who is in favor of that, but
first let's get the big picture on the death penalty from Richard Dieter. He
heads the Death Penalty Information Center, which collects statistics on
capital punishment. He joins us from Washington. Richard, welcome.
RICHARD DIETER: Thank you.
HOBSON: Well, how widely used is the death penalty in the United States right
now? I see that there were only 39 executions last year.
DIETER: Yes, there's been a 75 % drop in death sentences since the 1990s, 60 %
drop in executions. The number of states with the death penalty has declined,
death row has declined, and even public support is at a 40-year low. So we're
certainly at a crossroads here with the death penalty here compared to where we
were 15 years ago.
HOBSON: How many states are still using the death penalty, and of those, are
they mostly using lethal injection?
DIETER: Well, there's 32 states that have the death penalty law on the books.
But when you say using, I point out that, like, last year only nine states
carried out an execution. Only 15 states had even one death sentence. All of
the states and the federal government and the military, doesn't have any
executions, but if it did, they would all be by lethal injection at this point.
HOBSON: But now it is getting much more difficult to get the drugs that are
needed for lethal injection. What are the alternatives? Because I know that
some states like Virginia are looking at using the electric chair.
DIETER: Well, states are carrying out these. We've had 7 executions this year,
which was far more than we had last year at this time. So states are finding
these drugs from compounding pharmacies. A lot of the legal debate about this
is that states don't want to reveal where they're getting them from.
They don't want to name the compounding pharmacy or the pharmacist who put the
drugs together or what company is testing the purity of these. And so the suits
have to do with not saying lethal injection is unconstitutional but rather that
this secrecy deprives the defendant of elementary due process and deprives the
people of knowing what the state is doing.
HOBSON: But what about the idea of using the electric chair? Is that a real
possibility, that states are going to go back to that?
DIETER: Well, I doubt it. I mean, I think in America we don't go backwards.
When, you know, cars are having problems, we don't go back to the horse and
buggy. Even in Texas the electric chair is in a museum. The problem, as I say,
with lethal injection is not that it's totally painful or something but that
it's sometimes misapplied, or things go wrong, and certainly that would be true
of the electric chair or any other of the older methods that used to have
problems, as well.
HOBSON: Well, speaking of older methods, let's bring in Rick Brattin, who is a
Missouri legislator. He is the vice chair of the Corrections Committee. And
Rick, you want to bring back the firing squad in Missouri.
STATE REPRESENTATIVE RICK BRATTIN: Yes, and it's all due to the fact of what we
just heard on the problems with the compounds and having to go behind closed
doors and find ways to obtain these drugs and hide where we're getting them.
And we just executed a man last week, you know, that was - went to the highest
court in the land due to the fact of the drug. It wasn't for the, you know, the
crime that was committed or anything like that.
And the reason why I have introduced this is was to have an alternative plan,
just in case this is held up in a court appeal for a long period of time. That
way, we, the state, would still carry out sentencing for these victims and
their families.
HOBSON: But are people going to want to be the ones in the firing squad? I know
that's one of the big problems with the firing squad is nobody wants to be the
one whose bullet actually kills the prisoner.
DIETER: Right, and it would be a voluntary list of law enforcement officers,
and out of a five-man squad, you know, four of the five would have a live
round, and one would have a blank round, so they could, you know, go home
believing they had that blank round, and at least that's the way it's viewed.
BRATTIN: I know a lot of people who say that is, you know, warping back to
1850, but, you know, executions are not fun, and, you know, we don't have
medical doctors, you know, administering this lethal injection and putting the
needles in and anything like that. These are orderlies and less than qualified
people a lot of the time. So these people sit here and suffer and die.
And, you know, I have studied, you know, the methods which we have used and
utilized. We also have in Missouri the gas chamber. Well, it's also a museum
item here in the state, as well. So I'm just trying to come up with an
alternative solution to - you know, I believe in the death penalty. I believe
that's something that if you commit the ultimate crime that you pay the
ultimate sacrifice for that crime. And, you know, we've just got to come up
with a way.
HOBSON: Although there are a lot of people who, after hearing you go through
that list, are wondering whether you just should give up on the death penalty
altogether.
BRATTIN: Well, I disagree. You know, it's - a lot of these people that are
against it really don't research how these victims died. These people are dying
the most humane death possible compared to their victims. You know, the people
who are on death row aren't the guys who just were robbing a bank and just
happened to misfire and kill somebody. These people, you know, did the most
extreme, heinous things to an innocent human being or multiple innocent human
beings.
HOBSON: Although what about the argument that, you know, many times people who
have been executed, we later find out they didn't commit the crime?
BRATTIN: Well, I think which today an appeals process and DNA and all these
other forensic things that we now have at our disposal. They have 21 appeals
that they're allowed to go through. I believe there's an extreme vetting
process now. To say that we're not human, and we're perfect, no, absolutely
not, but I guess it's no different than if somebody's guilty and is thrown in a
cell and di naturally in a prison after sitting there for 60 years.
I mean, which is worse? They would be dead regardless.
HOBSON: Richard Dieter, back to you. After hearing that, do you see states -
because it's not only Missouri. Wyoming is also considering going back to the
firing squad. Do you see that happening around the country, or do you see the
death penalty itself going away at any point?
DIETER: No, I think certainly it's possible for some of these laws to get
passed, but as I say, I don't think they're going to become our method of
execution. States voluntarily got rid of those things. Utah was the state that
used the firing squad, and they want to get as far away from that. Every time
they used it, even for people who volunteered, it was a spectacle.
If a system, if a program, a government program, is having problems, we either
mend it, or we end it. I think it would be refreshing to have a review of why
are we doing this. Why are we picking 39 people out of the 14,000 murders that
occur in a year and carrying out an execution of those 39, 82 % of which are in
the South? The country isn't using the death penalty. We don't need it. The
worst crimes aren't being punished with the death penalty.
You know, you could name all kinds of people who have avoided the death
penalty. It needs a refreshing look. It doesn't need to, you know, go back 100
years.
HOBSON: Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information
Center. We've also been speaking with Missouri lawmaker Rick Brattin. Thanks to
both of you.
DIETER: Thank you.
BRATTIN: Thank you very much.
HOBSON: And a lot to think about there. If you've got thoughts on the death
penalty, should there be a death penalty in the United States? And if there is,
should states like Missouri be considering going back to the firing squad? You
can let us know your thoughts at hereandnow.org This is HERE AND NOW.
Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
(source: WRKF)
*************************
Does the death penalty deter would-be killers?
The Times' editorial Sunday opposing the death penalty for accused Boston
Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev prompted Robert S. Henry, a retired capital
case coordinator with the California attorney general's office, to write a
letter defending capital punishment:
"The Times says that life imprisonment without parole is sufficient for
Tsarnaev because it 'punishes the criminal while protecting society from future
acts of violence.' This limits the purpose of capital punishment.
"The death penalty is also there to deter others from committing murder. The
prospect of having lifetime room and board for those contemplating murder is
not much of a deterrent. Moreover, providing those benefits hardly seems to
balance the moral scale when the victims have lost their lives."
Editorial writer Scott Martelle responds:
On the surface, the deterrence argument seems logical and defensible. Who would
commit a crime knowing that to get caught means your own death?
The reality: Studies have not shown a connection between awareness of the death
penalty and a decision to act. In fact, given the simultaneous existence of the
death penalty in the United States and our high murder rates (compared with
other developed nations), it's hard to see a correlation. The Death Penalty
Information Center reports a general decline in executions from 98 in 1999 to
39 in 2013, a time frame over which the national murder rate dropped roughly
from 5.6 per 100,000 to 4.7. Yet no one argues that reducing the execution rate
reduces the murder rate.
When it comes to the death penalty, deterrence is a nonissue. People who are
enraged, under the influence of drugs, suffering from mental illness or who, in
some cases, lack the mental capacity to understand their actions usually do not
stop to think of the consequences. And while some who premeditate murder might,
on reflection, abandon the plan (an immeasurable occurrence), enough alleged
murderers are accused of premeditation to suggest that the death penalty is
considered and then discarded.
The more fundamental issue here is a moral one: Should we grant our government
the power to execute people? No, we shouldn't; a premeditated killing by the
state is still a premeditated killing. And it's striking that many of the same
people who don't think the government can get anything right believe it can get
the death penalty right. As we've seen from the Innocence Project and other
activist groups, there is sufficient error and manipulation in the judicial
system to raise serious questions about whether all of the people executed in
our names were, in fact, guilty. The dead have no right of appeal.
That isn't the issue in the Tsarnaev case. There are no arguments (yet) over
proper identification, coerced witnesses or access to capable legal
representation. If Tsarnaev is found guilty, he should face the harshest
morally defensible punishment we can exact: life without a chance of parole.
More broadly, as a nation we should end this embrace of barbaric blood-thirst
for revenge and join the two-thirds of the world's nations that do not use
capital punishment. Because it is the moral thing to do.
(source: Opinion, Los Anngeles Times)
*****************
Worldmeets.US Radio News: Death Penalty Abolitionist Sandrine Ageorges-Skinner
Listen to our talk with Sandrine Ageorges-Skinner, one of the world's leading
advocates for the abolition of the death penalty. Sandrine has dedicated
decades fighting state execution, both in her native France, in the United
States, and around the world. Sandrine explains why we should be concerned
about state-imposed death, and explains where she draws her inspiration.
(source: http://worldmeets.us/WorldmeetsUSradionews000001.shtml#.UveD9s4-dac)
_______________________________________________
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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
