Jan. 22
MARYLAND:
On King's Birthday, Gov. O'Malley Calls for Md. Death Penalty Repeal
1 week ago today, on Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday, Maryland Gov. Martin
O'Malley (D) announced that he would introduce a bill calling upon the Maryland
legislature to abolish the death penalty in Maryland. O'Malley cited the death
penalty's high cost and ineffectiveness, and noted that its use puts the U.S.
in the company of Iran, China, Yemen and North Korea - some of the few
remaining bastions of government-sanctioned executions.
O'Malley hopes the time is ripe for change. At a news conference in Annapolis,
Md. organized by the NAACP, the governor borrowed a signature King phrase:
"Hate multiplies hate. Violence multiplies violence." In 2009, the governor
failed with a similar effort, leading to compromise legislation requiring an
increased standard of proof in capital punishment cases such as DNA evidence or
video evidence linking a defendant to a killing. Meant to be stringent and
fair, many think that effort merely exacerbated racial bias in sentencing, as
evidenced by O'Malley's renewed vigor on the issue and the NAACP's sponsorship
of Tuesday's event. If the governor's wish is fulfilled, Maryland will follow 5
other states that have removed the death penalty in recent years. NPQ noted the
repeal of the death penalty in Connecticut last year and Illinois, New Jersey,
New Mexico, and New York have also repealed capital punishment since 2007. 33
states maintain capital punishment laws.
To some extent, O'Malley's effort looks akin to putting a cap on an empty
bottle. Maryland has only executed 5 inmates since reinstatement of its death
penalty in 1978, and no one has been executed in the state since 2004. The last
death sentence in the state was issued in 2005. "If you look over 30 or 40
years, the death penalty was on the books and yet Baltimore still became the
most violent and addicted city in America," O'Malley said. "Having the death
penalty on the books did nothing to keep the homicides from rising." O'Malley
also stated, "We know what does not work. And we know that the way forward is
always found through greater respect for the human dignity of all."
Proponents of preserving the state's capital punishment program are equally
passionate, but appear short on statistics. "This governor's priorities are all
messed up," said Republican House of Delegates member Neil Parrott. "By
watering down punishments for violent crime, he's encouraging crime to happen
in Maryland rather than in Virginia or other states," Parrott pleaded. In the
Maryland State Senate, 24 of 47 votes will be required to move the legislation
on to the state House of Delegates, where its passage is, reportedly, nearly
guaranteed. State Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller, a Democrat, is
pro-death penalty but is said to promise to bring a vote to the full Senate if
24 votes are mustered in favor of repeal. Echoing Parrott, Miller said that he
would rather expand the death penalty than eliminate it.
According to a recent Gallup poll, 63 % of Americans support capital
punishment, down from a high of approximately 80 % in the early 1990s. Is this
controversy a moral question or should the death penalty's ability, or lack
thereof, to reduce killing be the only germane issue? And should governments
simply follow public opinion on issues of life and death? Where do you stand?
(source: Non Profit Quarterly)
KENTUCKY:
"We should not administer it," says a Kentucky lawmaker who supports the death
penalty
The recent introduction of legislation in Frankfort to abolish the death
penalty in Kentucky is generating a fair amount of discussion in the media.
Both sponsors, Rep. Carl Rollins II for House Bill 48 and Sen. Gerald Neal for
Senate Bill 45, have referred to the expense involved in maintaining a death
sentencing scheme. While cost is not the only reason lawmakers should be
discussing killing killers, it is certainly an important one. (See New York
Times: Group Gives Up Death Penalty Work.)
Measuring cost against effectiveness is something reasonable people do when
they plan and implement policies. The $700 toilet seat fiasco of a few years
ago reminds us that government doesn't always perform at a high level. Since
1976, Kentucky has spent millions of dollars prosecuting death sentences.
Results are dismal in terms of costs and outcomes: 3 executions, including 2
men who volunteered by giving up all appeals. Because of a variety of errors
and violations of the civil rights of defendants, less than half of those
sentenced to death remain on death row because courts ruled they could not be
executed. And that error rate will climb as these cases wend their way through
the court system.
In Montana, where the legislature is close to abolishing the death penalty, a
former Republican State Senator, Roy Brown, supported abolition and had this to
say during a public hearing in 2007:
It might be easier to allow the death penalty to continue if it were less
expensive than life in prison. If the courts treated rich and poor equally. If
it truly was a deterrent. If everyone that was executed was guilty.
Unfortunately the sad truth about the death penalty is it is much more
expensive. The courts do not disperse justice equally. It is not a deterrent.
And sometimes, yes, sometimes they are innocent.
On its website the Department of Public Advocacy lists 19 reasons why killing
people is so expensive. But knowing why it is expensive and knowing how much it
actually costs us are 2 different matters. As noted on the site:
Estimating death penalty costs to Kentucky since 1976 is difficult. A proper
calculation of costs associated with the death penalty statewide would require
a formal study. Any references to costs outside the context of a completed
study can only be estimates. These estimates likely understate actual costs
because many of the costs of death penalty representation are hidden. The
majority of death penalty costs do not appear as line items in any budget.
Nevertheless, of the line items specifically set aside for death penalty
representation, DPA estimates that the Department currently spends
approximately $3 million a year on death penalty representation. This does not
include the additional spending by the judiciary, the prosecutors, and
Corrections.
In December 2011, a report - EVALUATING FAIRNESS AND ACCURACY IN STATE DEATH
PENALTY SYSTEMS: The Kentucky Death Penalty Assessment Report, An Analysis of
Kentucky's Death Penalty Laws, Procedures, and Practices - published by the
American Bar Association pointed out serious flaws in Kentucky's administration
of justice and the death penalty, including the 60% error rate referred to
earlier.
In response to these findings State Rep. Jessie Crenshaw introduced a
resolution in the 2012 session of the General Assembly to study the report and
find ways to correct these flaws. An AP story published Jan. 25, 2011 quoted
Rep. Brent Yonts on this point,
This is too...serious to have this many errors in it. You don't take people's
lives unless you know what you're doing.
Last week, Ryan Alessi at cn|2 News (at about 4:31 minutes into the interview)
reported that Rep. Yonts, vice- chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, is
now saying that Kentucky should stop using the death penalty because the
state's capital punishment process is such a mess and has allowed innocent
people to be put on death row:
I basically believe that the death penalty should not be abolished, but if we
cannot administer it fairly, humanely and according to the constitution, we
should not administer it.
To do it "fairly, humanely and according to the constitution," will mean
additional cost and expense. The ABA offered more than 50 recommendations
needed to "fix" it and these fixes won't come cheap.
Rep. Yonts is a perfect example of those who support the death penalty, but not
the one Kentucky has. No one should be executed who was sentenced to death
using this flawed scheme.
Perhaps Governor Beshear, like Rep. Yonts, will conclude that until it is
fairly administered, "we should not administer it" and refuse to sign any death
warrants at this time.
And maybe enough lawmakers will listen to Rep. Rollins who told the Public News
Service that while he has always objected to the death penalty on moral
grounds, the cost of appeals is another reason to ban executions:
They're basically in prison for life anyway, so why spend the extra money when
we have many other needs in the state of Kentucky?
Kentuckians agree. In polls conducted at various times since 1997 by both the
University of Kentucky and the University of Louisville, the majority of
Kentuckians supported life without parole instead of the death penalty. The
time has come to give the people of Kentucky what they prefer.
(source: Courier-Journal)
ARKANSAS:
More execution legislation to be filed in Arkansas
More execution legislation is expected to crop up in the coming weeks as
policymakers and lawmakers try to come up with a new lethal injection law after
the Arkansas Supreme Court struck down the one on the books last year.
Staffers with Attorney General Dustin McDaniel's office are working with the
Department of Correction on new execution legislation that could be filed later
this month or in early February.
Gov. Mike Beebe would sign such a proposal if it reaches his desk, spokesman
Matt DeCample said, even though the Democratic governor said last week that he
would also sign a bill outlawing capital punishment.
"We have a law on the books now and no legal mechanism to carry it out,"
DeCample said. "And that's the expected fix that we will see from the
Department of Correction working with the Legislature."
The Arkansas Supreme Court last year did not deem lethal injection or the death
penalty unconstitutional. Instead, the high court threw out a 2009 lethal
injection law, siding with a group of death row inmates who said it violated
part of the state's constitution that deals with separating the branches of
government.
That law said death sentences were to be carried out by lethal injection of one
or more chemicals that the director of the Department of Correction chooses.
A proposal being drafted by the attorney general's office is expected to call
for using 1 drug in lethal injections instead of a 3-drug cocktail.
"By narrowing that drug protocol, we're hoping that would take care of the
court's concern that the direction had too much discretion," correction
department spokeswoman Shea Wilson said.
Several other states have moved away from the 3-drug cocktail, in part because
there's of a shortage of drugs used in it.
It's not clear which Arkansas lawmaker will file the bill being drafted by the
state attorney general's office, but it won't be the 1st proposal about
executions to come up this legislative session.
Sen. Bart Hester, R-Cave Springs, has already taken a crack at solving the
execution law, though Wilson said his proposal didn't address the drug
shortage.
"That bill does not take into account that we can't acquire the drugs defined
in that piece of legislation," Wilson said.
Hester, who also filed another bill to allow some relatives of victims to
attend executions, said he's willing to work with the attorney general's office
and others if there's an objection.
"I just thought, 'Well, if I'm already filing one execution bill, I might as
well just be the person that addresses the Supreme Court's concerns as well,'"
Hester said.
Arkansas hasn't put anyone to death since 2005 - in part because of legal
challenges like the one the state Supreme Court ruled on in June. There are 37
inmates on death row, according to online prison records.
(source: Associated Press)
ILLINOIS:
Winnetka Murder Victim's Sister Turns Gun Control Activist ; In the 22 years
since Nancy Bishop Langert's murder, her sister Jennifer Bishop- Jenkins has
become a passionate control advocate.
In 1990, Nancy Bishop Langert, who was three months pregnant, was shot to death
along with her husband, Richard Langert, in their Winnetka townhome. 22 years
later, her legacy continues to inspire others - demonstrated by the fact that
she used her last few minutes of life to spell out 1 last message of love.
"She dragged herself to her husband and drew a heart and 'U' in her own blood,"
Jennifer Bishop-Jenkins, Nancy's sister, explained at a New Trier Democrats
panel on gun control held Sunday.
The Langerts had been shot with a .357 Magnum in the basement of their Winnetka
home by David Biro, a New Trier High School senior, according to an April 9,
1992 Chicago Reader article. Biro, who was sentenced to life in prison without
the possibility of parole, never gave a clear reason for why he killed the
Langerts.
However, the Reader article states, Biro was "notorious within the police
department," and in the past had attempted to poison the milk in his family's
refrigerator, shot a 7 year old with a BB gun, set another child's clothing on
fire and fired a BB gun at a woman in a car, shattering her windows.
Bishop-Jenkins, a former high school teacher, has actively sought to end gun
violence since her sister's murder. She has served on the board of the Illinois
Coalition Against the Death Penalty, as the state president for the Million
Moms March/Brady Campaign and is a volunteer with the Illinois Council Against
Handgun Violence.
"That event changed my life," Bishop-Jenkins said about the murders. "That
event helped me to understand that there are so many people that have suffered
because of gun violence."
Her dedication to preventing other families from having to experience what she
went through, as well as the countless hours that she's spent counseling
families of murder victims, made her especially upset by the Illinois State
Rifle Association (ISRA) email sent out to get pro-gun advocates to attend the
New Trier Democrat's panel.
In the email, Bishop-Jenkins - as well as the other panelists - are described
as "the people who don't care if you or your family members are raped, robbed
and murdered by violent criminals. They only care about 1 thing - disarming
you."
"There are no words," Bishop-Jenkins said of the email, as she choked back her
tears. "I've spent the last 22 years working every day with the victims of
violent crime, and I've never received a penny. This is a horrible thing to
say."
She continued, noting that the line in the email about wanting to disarm gun
owners wasn't true.
"Disarming you - that's not true," she said. "We do not support bans. We only
support 3 things - uniformed background checks, no military-style assault
weapons in the hands of citizens and regulating the traffic of guns."
"You cannot address the problem of guns with more guns," she continued. "We
have to prevent guns from getting into the wrong hands. It's not a threat to
their interpretation of the second amendment....They're paranoid."
(source: Winnetka Patch)
CALIFORNIA:
see:
http://californiainnocenceproject.org/blog/2012/12/18/death-penalty-infographic/
(source: California Innocence Project)
_______________________________________________
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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
