I believe it was Illinois were over 30% of convicts awaiting execution were found to be innocent, when the state allowed DNA testing to be introduced into evidence. A simple solution to the error prone current system would be to have the Supreme Court rule that executions are cruel and unusual punishment.
#------------------------------------ Publication: Nation's Cities Weekly <http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/browse_R_N034> Publication Date: 27-JAN-03 Format: Online - approximately 855 words Delivery: Immediate Online Access Author: Peirce, Neal Full Article: CHICAGO -- For years, I dodged the death penalty. I looked at America's mass incarceration figures, climbing rapidly to the 2 million mark--far past the rate of any other advanced nation. And I decided excessive imprisonment, as it tears apart families and communities, is a far greater threat to our society than relatively small numbers of executions occurring across the country. So in these columns I focused on alternative punishment forms, the potentials of rehabilitation and the broad benefits of treatment--rather than imprisonment--for minor drug offenders. Maybe I dodged a judgment on the death penalty because so clearly there were two sides--the distastefulness of state-imposed killings vs. crimes so heinous (Timothy McVeigh's bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, for example) that no punishment seemed too harsh. Now it's time to decide. And George Ryan has done it for me. I believe Ryan's personal journey, from a vote for Illinois' death penalty as a legislator in 1977 to his deepening doubts and dramatic pardons and commutations on the eve of leaving the governorship, represent a conclusive signal: America needs to renounce capital punishment. My Illinois friends tell me that Ryan was a politico who for years opposed progressive causes and rarely scored high on ethics. The current corruption case, chasing him as he's left office, is hardly a positive character reference. But history doesn't necessarily select saints to move us forward. And there's little doubt that Ryan was moved to action by hard research and harsh facts. Instead of brushing them off, he took seriously articles in The Chicago Tribune and exhaustive research by Northwestern University students and faculty proving that several of Illinois' death row inmates had been wrongly convicted by virtue of coerced confessions, poor quality counsel or inadequate investigations. While Illinois had executed 12 men since 1977, it had been obliged to free 13 from death row when their innocence was established. Nationally, more than 100 death row inmates have been exonerated and freed. Who can reasonably doubt that some innocent men have been executed--in fact, murdered--by our states? Ryan issued a moratorium on executions in January 2000. He appointed a state commission that conducted the most intensive review of capital punishment ever recorded. The commission's findings were astounding. Depending on pure whim of prosecutors, some defendants were selected for the death penalty, others not. People accused of killing black defendants were 60 percent less likely to be sentenced to death than those accused of killing whites. And if you committed a murder in Chicago, you were 84 percent less likely to receive the death penalty than if you lived in a rural area. In the wake of Ryan's startling commutation to life imprisonment for 167 death row inmates, the news media have aired the outrage and anger from the families and friends of the victims of the convicted rapists, attackers and murderers. The common theme: Ryan had stolen their right to the "closure" an execution would bring. But we have to ask: Should the state assure aggrieved people the satisfaction of such "closure" if the price is continuing a system that almost certainly executes some innocent persons? Studies indicate the failures of Illinois' death penalty are shared by many states across the United States. In Ryan's own words: "The system has proved itself to be wildly inaccurate, unjust and unable to separate the innocent from the guilty and, at times, a very racist system.... If we haven't got a (death penalty) system that works, we shouldn't have a system." Contrast that, if you will, with the statement of Cook County State's Attorney Richard Devine. Devine called Ryan's commutations "outrageous and unconscionable," asserting they "breach faith with the memory of the dead." To which one should reply: Should we then conclude there's not justice in states which have chosen not to have the death penalty, just life imprisonment? Can't we have justice without bloodlust? And if the object is to defend the public safety--stop ghastly crimes before they occur--does a death penalty deter? There's no evidence to prove it. We do know the death penalty is fading across the United States: Except in Texas and a few Southern states, it's now rarely imposed. Internationally, there's a wave of revulsion against executions--among the few nations that still perform them are Iraq, Iran and North Korea (didn't someone call them an "axis of evil?"). So the time to expunge life penalties from our statute books is clearly at hand. Concurrently, we need to review the quality of our trial and sentencing system in general. Marc Mauer of the Sentencing Project notes that if just 2 percent of the inmates now in state and federal prisons are actually innocent, that means 28,000 guiltless people are now sitting behind bars. We could--and need--to do a lot better. Neal Peirce's e-mail address is [EMAIL PROTECTED] [c] 2003, The Washington Post Writers Group The opinions expressed in this column are not necessarily those of Nation's Cities Weekly or the National League of Cities. http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-976652/Death-penalty-time-to-stop.html#abstract or http://tinyurl.com/62t977 #------------------------------------- Regards, LelandJ Carl Lindne wrote: > Leland, > > You said...................... > > Abolishing the death penalty; what a splendid idea, considering that it is > likely that greater than 30% of those put to death are innocent of the crime > for which they were convicted. That my position btw. I'm not sure about > Obama and the Democratic party platform position on this > issue........................... > > That is a crock. > > Years ago my next door neighbor was in charge of a federally supported group > whose sole objective was to provide legal help to those accused of capital > crimes. > > I asked him "when the cops get someone how often do they get the guy that > did it"? He answered "about 98%". > > Then he said "IT IS NOT A QUESTION OF IF THEY DID IT. IT IS A QUESTION > WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE GUILTY." Wonderful way to run the courts! > > If you closely follow those that get off capital punishment - the reasons > are not that they did not do it. Often the their lawyer did not do enough > to represent them properly, or should have done it differently, or evidence > was lost or they are not as sick as they used to be, or some other > technicality. > > They get off because of some fool liberal judge. It is seldom because they > are "innocent." > > To paraphrase an old joke, "I'd rather have my daughter marry an > accountant!" > > Carl > > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
