Death Penalty

"An eye for an eye, and soon the whole world is blind."  This vivid statement by Gandhi illustrates the cycle of violence perpetuated by the death penalty. Suffering does not end with the injection of three drugs.  Crime is not eradicated from society by a current of electricity.  Instead, the death penalty creates new victims, a child who will grow up without a father, parents who will mourn their daughter.  Capital punishment does not fill the hole left by the murder of someone's loved one, it just creates another hole.

It is often said that death penalty opponents either ignore the voices of the victims, or place the rights of prisoners well above those of the victims. For Amnesty International, this could not be further from the truth.  We hold the rights of every individual as equal- equally important and equally inherent. And with the death penalty, the rights of all involved are equally betrayed.

For the prisoner, his (and sometimes ‘her') right to life (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 3) is the most blatant denial (And, yes, prisoners still have rights.).  Entitlement to a fair trial and various other legal rights (Articles 7, 8, 10) are also often denied through inadequate legal counsel and a lack of access to forensic and other legal services necessary to address and counter the prosecution's sometimes erroneous and/or misleading arguments.  The death penalty also impedes rights against discrimination (Article 2), as poverty, race, and geography all influence who is executed and who is not.  And of course there is also the right to not be subjected to torture, or cruel and unusual punishment (Article 5).

For the victim and his/her family, again, the right to life has often been violently taken away.  In addition, the freedom from interference with family and home (UDHR Article 12) can be said to be violated by the murderer.  There are also rights of the victims and their families that do not fall under the UDHR: The right to enjoy the life and company of the loved one until separated by natural or accidental death; the right to never be faced by such violence; and the right to grieve and honor the lost life in one's own way. 

With capital trials, the families' grieving process is often interrupted and the pain resurfaced with each stage of the court process.  Brian's entry on this blog earlier today ("THE DEATH PENALTY JERKS FAMILIES AROUND AGAIN") highlights the anguish and trauma experienced by loved ones of the victim in death penalty cases.  The point must be made here again: Might these families be better served if a life sentence was handed out instead of another death? 

And what about the families of the prisoners?  They also face severe emotional losses and have their rights stripped away by the death penalty.  In fact, I can just take the paragraph above, beginning ‘For the victim and his/her family' and change a few phrases: ‘victim' to ‘prisoner' and ‘murderer' to ‘state' and the paragraph is still accurate.  Everybody loses with the death penalty.

Finally, let us not forget those families of victims who do not want the death penalty.  The blog for Murder Victims' Families for Human Rights (October 29, 2007 "What the World Expects") has a touching excerpt from a new book about the victims' perspectives on the death penalty.  The piece, written by a woman whose brother was murdered, explains:

"Most often, we are expected to keep our sense of injury and rage whipped into a constant call for retribution (putting many families who do not seek the execution of their loved one's killer "in the wrong"), as if the only decent way to honor loss is to take another life, to create more brokenhearted families, more fatherless children (it is mostly men who are executed), and to further assault communities already ravaged by violence, poverty, racism, and other problems.

The excerpt concludes with, and so shall I, a question that strikes at the very heart of the matter: "What if the town criers for retribution and punishment changed the question from: "Don't you want to kill the guy who did this to you?" to: "How can we heal this family, this community?" (A community, by the way, that often includes the killer's family.)"

The death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment ... and I'm not talking, in this case, about the punishment of the prisoner, I'm talking about the punishment of the victim's family.  For 20 years, the family of Mary Bounds has waited for an execution they have been promised will make things better.  Last night, they gathered in Parchman, Mississippi, to witness that execution. Yet, 18 minutes before the killing of Earl Wesley Berry was to occur, the US Supreme Court called it off, staying the execution for the same reason all the other executions have been stayed since they agreed to hear Baze v. Rees and consider the constitutionality of lethal injection. 

Why did the Court wait until the last minute to issue a short 88-word ruling?  We may never know the answer to that question ...

"Who are you to do this to us?" demanded Charles Bounds, Mary Bounds' husband, according to an AP story in today's Sun Herald.  Indeed, who are we to do this to victims' families, to promise them an execution that may never happen and, if it does, will not provide the promised "closure"? 

Another family member, Jena Watson, Mary Bounds' daughter, told the AP that she didn't expect "closure"; she was just looking forward to finally being free of the criminal justice system:  "An execution simply means that we do not have to deal with the justice system any longer."  And if the way the justice system treated them last night is any indication, her sentiments can hardly be surprising ...

The anguish on display last night in Parchman points to why we believe the death penalty is the wrong solution for victims' families.  After all, had Earl Wesley Berry been sentenced to life, the family would have been free of the criminal justice system 20 years ago, and nobody would have been forced to endure last night's ugly charade. 

Of course, the death penalty hurts everyone it touches. Not just victims' families, but, obviously, the family of the condemned, as well as the executioners themselves, prison guards and prison wardens.  In "Interview with an Executioner", Don Cabana, Parchman Penetentiary Superintendent, speaks at length about how the death penalty affects the people who actually have to carry it out.  Download the video here ...

Brian - PADP

After a three-year study on state capital punishment systems, the American Bar Association is calling for a nationwide moratorium on executions until an unfair and sometimes inaccurate application of the death penalty is corrected.

"The death penalty system is rife with irregularity-supporting the need for a moratorium until states can insure fairness and accuracy," says Stephen Hanlon, who chairs the ABA Death Penalty Moratorium Implementation Project. He also characterizes the system as "deeply flawed.

Hanlon further said that;

"In determining who gets the death penalty, all too frequently, it seems to be not the person who has committed the worst crime, but the person who has the worst lawyer."

Specific problems identified by the ABA study include, according to the release: "significant racial disparities" in how the death penalty is imposed; serious incidents of mistake or fraud in often-underfunded crime laboratories, as well as, frequently, a failure to use the most sophisticated testing procedures; a lack of needed policies, in many states, to insure that defendants who are mentally ill or mentally retarded are properly defended; and, throughout the system, a lack of specific standards to be used by those investigating, prosecuting, defending, deciding and reviewing death penalty cases.

The study also found that most states don't require biological evidence to be preserved until the defendant is released or executed, permitting the destruction of evidence that could potentially be used to prove a defendant's innocence, as scientific testing methods improve.

The ABA doesn't take a position on whether the death penalty itself should be abolished, but has since 1997 urged a moratorium on enforcing capital punishment in each state that permits execution until that state conducts, as the release puts it, "a thorough and exhaustive study to determine whether its system meets legal standards for fairness and due process."

The ABA study focused on eight sample states-Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Tennessee.

Needless to say, Governor George Ryan of Illinois heeded to a call for a moratorium on executions and in January 2000 declared a moratorium after discovering that 13 death row inmates had been wrongly convicted. Governor Parris Glendening of Maryland in May 2002 took a similar stance and  declared a moratorium on executions so that a Commission could study the racial bias in its application of the death penalty.

But, unsurprisingly, not everyone is supportive of the ABA's insights. One critic of the study is Joshua Marquis, district attorney in Clatsop County, Ore who told the Chicago Tribune that;

"There is no doubt the system can be improved, but the problems cited in the report "suggest epidemics when they aren't. I think the ABA should drop its pretense of being neutral on the death penalty. They are being disingenuous by simply declaring that they want a moratorium. The powers that be in the ABA want the death penalty abolished."

Serious flaws exist in the criminal justice system and innocent people are being sent to death row whether we want to admit it or not. Reference can be had to Anthony Porter, who 2 days away from being executed by lethal injection for the1982 murders of Jerry Hillard and Marilyn Green was granted a stay because of his limited mental capacity. Later, a Northwestern University Professor and a group of journalism students obtained a signed affidavit that implicated another man who later confessed to the crime.

With a moratorium in place, the US would examine the perceived effectiveness of the death penalty and save the lives of those on death row for as we all know death is irreversible and there is always room for human error.

I can only hope that a moratorium is put in place so that we can move away from the spiral of revenge and adopt life imprisonment as an alternative form of punishment. Therefore, I urge the states that still use capital punishment as a form of punishment to suspend all executions and impose a moratorium on the death penalty owing to grave flaws in the criminal justice system that need to be addressed.

Click here to read more of this story

Abolish Intern DC

Mali officially abolished the death penalty last week.  Woo Hoo!! The West African government passed a bill which replaces the sentence of capital punishment with life imprisonment. Though Mali has not executed anyone since 1980, this new legislation is a strong statement of Mali's respect for life and is the fulfillment of a promise made by the Mali President in September to do so. 

Mali joins Albania and Rwanda as the countries that legislated abolition for all crimes in 2007 to date. Also this year: Kyrgyzstan abolished the death penalty for ordinary crimes and Italy abolished the very last reference to the death penalty from their constitution, making it impossible to reintroduce this ultimate sentence.

133 down, 64 to go... Will the USA be the last to abolish the death sentence?

PADP intern

You may have noticed that there is a huge world wide campaign regarding poverty right now.  Organizations such as Make Poverty History and DATA, highlight the link between poverty and a host of social and economic maladies experienced throughout the world and are mobilizing to end poverty (and therefore impact the maladies).

In the past, national poverty levels have been found to be correlated with government corruption, higher mortality rates, and the AIDS epidemic (please note I said correlated with and not ‘caused by'). On a more individualistic level, poverty has been linked with education (including both the highest level attained and the finding that poorer children often experience nutritional deficits which can affect one's thought processes and ability to concentrate, and this then affects one's school performance) and of course crime.

It should come as no surprise, then, that there are also links between poverty and capital punishment. It has already been pointed out on this blog and elsewhere that a high percentage of people on death row in the USA are those who could not afford their own attorney (known as indigent cases, so instead were assigned a court-appointed public defender (95 % of the 3,350 people currently on death row could not afford their own lawyer).  Indigent defense lawyers (aka public defenders)are almost always inexperienced in capital cases, and are underfunded and understaffed.  It is hard, then, to compete with the state funded prosecution team of lawyers, investigators, law clerks and so on. (Interestingly, and a little frighteningly, public defenders are also state funded, but the state has a much larger budget for catching, trying and sentencing (killing) individuals than for ensuring the defendant is well represented. Those defendants that can afford the best defense attorneys are more likely to avoid the death penalty (or any penalty for that matter, I'm thinking of OJ here...)

However, a recent article by IPS News made even more connections between capital punishment and poverty throughout the world.  Here is a sample of the findings:

• " ...many countries [lack] the technical resources to investigate serious crimes adequately and to ‘ensure that the innocent are not wrongly accused' said Mel James", policy director of Penal Reform International (PRI)
• In Pakistan, "Most of the convicts finally sent to the gallows are from poor families... The more affluent and influential use coercion to force the victims' family into a compromise and get off the hook," Mirza Tahir Hussain, a former death row inmate told Ebrahim.
• "Even in Japan, one of the world's richest nations, the relationship between poverty and death sentences can be seen in the high number of the 100 or so on death row who cannot afford their own defence and needed court-appointed lawyers, according to IPS correspondent Matsuko Murakami."
• "In Malaysia, it is estimated that nearly 90 percent of the 300 people on death row are poor."
• "In Arab and Muslim countries the death penalty is also linked to poverty. Since 2003, "all suicide bombers who were arrested by the police and later sentenced to death have been from poor areas and living in difficult conditions."
• According to Tahar Boumedra, PRI's Middle East and North Africa regional director, "the Islamic 'diyat' -- under which the accused can pay money to the family of the victim in exchange for freedom -- could be used to discriminate against the poor in capital punishment cases... "Those who cannot pay the 'diyat' have the death sentence applied against them."
• Refugees, poor migrant workers, and other foreign nationals are likely to experience a ‘double-whammy' against them if faced with a capital charge. Using Saudi Arabia as an example, this article explains: "Unfamiliar with the legal system, often not understanding the language in which they are questioned and put on trial, such workers are particularly vulnerable to capital punishment. Shockingly, almost half of all the executions in Saudi Arabia are foreign nationals," Bannister said." The second whammy is the inability to afford the appropriate help.
• This lack of providing adequate counsel for indigent defendants also occurs in sub-Saharan Africa, Malawi, Nigeria, (where "almost all the estimated 600 people on death row are poor and without adequate legal assistance") and elsewhere throughout the world.

The importance here is that the death penalty is touted by supporters as a necessary and accepted, no, wanted, act of justice; justice for the victim, the family of the victim and for society. Yet, there is no justice when a person's level of income and the abilities that wealth affords him or her, affect the process. It is the hallmark of the United States' justice system that all are equal under the eyes of the law; this is why Lady Justice is blindfolded.  As Bannister points out in the IPS article, "it is the right of everyone to stand equal before the legal systems of the world. Otherwise, there remains the ever-present reality that someone is put to death not for the crime they were convicted of... but because they were poor..."

Or, as we've quoted before on this blog (but it is a good quote): "The death penalty is too often reserved not for the "worst" offenders, but for those defendants with the worst lawyers" -Christopher Hill from the ACLU's Capital Punishment Project.

There have been a handful of death penalty states (the latest being Pennsylvania) that have studied the administration of this ultimate and irreversible sentence and have come up with recommendations to solve these glaring inadequacies.

Sadly, poverty bias (and racial bias, and a host of other flaws) are endemic in the entire justice system (and many of our other systems, but there is just not enough space in this blog...), not solely the property of death penalty cases. While recommendations can be made and fulfilled, we are a flawed species and our designs reflect those flaws.  No matter the safeguards created, we are infallible and therefore as long as race and economic status are issues in our society they will be issues in our justice system.  Therefore, the only true course of action to delete racism and poverty bias from the death penalty would be to abolish the death penalty itself.

That said, it is also important to take care of the flaws as best as possible in the entire system. To do so would be an amazing leap towards meeting human rights standards, and indeed the ideology of justice. At the very least we must ensure access to qualified lawyers and resources equal to those of the state, regardless of personal finance.

We call upon every state to make those changes.

PADP intern

Nevada joined the growing list of states which are staying executions until the US Supreme Court renders its verdict on lethal injection.  William Castillo was scheduled to be executed last night (Oct 15) but the Nevada Supreme Court "issued a stay of all warrants of execution pending the review of the constitutionality of lethal injection as the means of carrying out the death penalty."

There was concern that Nevada would go ahead with the execution despite the USSC's pending decison on lethal injection. In most cases, the lawyers of the prisoner file appeals in his/her name to stop the execution.  Lately, these appeals have argued that because the USSC thinks there is enough merit behind the contention that lethal injections are cruel and unusual punishment, the execution in question, which will use the very same, or very similar method of execution under review, should be stayed until the USSC makes a decision. However, Castillo is known as a 'volunteer', meaning he has given up his appeals and rights to challenge the sentence. (There is great controversy over the notion of 'volunteering' to be executed, here is one report.) Proponents argue that if the prisoner wishs the execution to go forward, then what does it matter that the procedure might be cruel and unusual.

Rather than wait and see whether the state would go through with the execution, the Nevada Coalition Against the Death Penalty and the Nevada branch of the American Civil Liberties Union took matters into their own hands and appealed Castillo's execution "on the grounds that Nevada uses the same method of execution that the Supreme Court is due to review" and "that all executions, whether "voluntary" or not, should be stopped pending the Court's decision, which will likely set the standard for states' lethal injection protocols" (AI Index: AMR 51/157/2007).  The Nevada Supreme Court made this decison to stay Castillo's execution by addressing the question "what harm would delaying the execution do to the state."

Their answer was obviously "less harm than to go forward with the execution."

...this message is a forward from Virginians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty (VADP)

Action Alert

October 11, 2007

Chris Scott Emmett to be Executed October 17^th

^{* Contact Governor Tim Kaine}

^{* Vigil in Protest}

Dear VADP Action Alert List Member,

The 99th Virginia execution is now set for Wednesday, October 17, 2007. At 9:00 pm Christopher Scott Emmett is scheduled to be lethally injected in the Death Chamber at the Greensville Correctional Center in Jarratt, VA.  Contrary to what you may be reading in news stories, there is no moratorium on lethal injection executions in effect. The Virginia Department of Corrections will move Chris Scott Emmet to the Death House at the Greensville Correctional Center in the next few days. This execution will proceed as scheduled barring a court intervention or a stay by the governor.

Once again we need to ask for your help to urge Governor Kaine to either stay this execution until the US Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of lethal injection or commute Chris Emmett's death sentence to life-in-prison-without-parole.

Remember the victim but not with more killing!

We join those who mourn the loss of John Langley and are determined to eliminate the violence that brought about his senseless murder. But execution is neither a solution to violence nor a comfort to mourners. It is part of the problem and increases the cycle of violence.

Inadequate Representation

The issue here is not guilt or innocence but the specter, once again of inadequate representation by his court appointed public defender and the fact that capital punishment as practiced in Virginia is not reserved for the "worst of the worst" crimes. Emmett is guilty of murder. Should he be executed for that murder is the question?

Jurors Were Not Told the Truth About Scott Emmett

Jurors asked to determine whether execution was the appropriate sentence for Emmett were not told the truth about his childhood history. This is unfair, not only to Emmett but to those expected to make life and death decisions in our names.

Lethal Injection

Also at issue is Virginia's continuing use of a lethal injection protocol which is banned by the American Veterinary Medical Association for use on cats and dogs as being "cruel and inhumane." This same protocol has lead to the present halting of executions in at least 11 other death penalty states from Maryland to California. A recent study on lethal injection cited Virginia for using the smallest doses of any lethal injection state of thiopental as an anesthetic. Questions also need to be raised due to recent revelations that the execution team leader in Virginia has had no certifiable medical training.

On Oct 2, the US Supreme Court decided to review the case of two Kentucky death row prisoners who are challenging lethal injection. Oral arguments in this case, Baze v Rees will be heard in early 2008 with a decision expected by summer 2008. Virginia uses the same three drug protocol as Kentucky. In his previous statement staying Mr. Emmett's June execution because he still had an appeal pending before the Court, Gov. Kaine said:

"Basic fairness demands that condemned inmates be allowed the opportunity to complete legal appeals prior to execution. Allowing Emmett's execution to go forward would foreclose any additional review of his case. The irreversibility of an execution warrant my intervention in this case." Mr. Emmett's attorneys have requested a stay based upon the anticipated Baze v Rees ruling, common decency and justice require that Virginia delay any executions by lethal injection until the US Supreme Court hands down its ruling on the constitutionality of lethal injection.

Commute this sentence to Life without Parole

Please call, email and/or write Governor Tim Kaine asking him to stay this execution, address the questions of Virginia's lethal injection protocol, and commute Christopher Scott Emmett's sentence to life in prison without parole.

Messages requesting clemency for Mr. Emmett should be addressed to:

The Honorable Timothy M. Kaine

Office of the Governor

Patrick Henry Building, 3rd Floor

1111 East Broad Street

Richmond, Virginia 23219

Phone: (804) 786-2211

Fax: (804) 371-6351

Emails: click here

Protest state-killing on October 17, 2007:

4:00 to 6:00 PM in front of the Office of the Governor

1111 East Broad Street

Richmond, Virginia 23219

Execution Vigils: October 17th

* Fill-the-Field in front of the Death House

8:30 - 9:30 PM

Greensville Correctional Center

Jarratt, VA

* Vigils across the Commonwealth in 20+ locations

See here for a list of sites and contacts

For further information on the case of Christopher Scott Emmett go to our website:

* To reach a wider audience with this message, please also consider writing a Letter to the Editor either before or after the execution

* Contacting your media outlets asking them to cover this story. Listings can be found at the following site:

Once again, the American Bar Association (ABA) has uncovered fundamental flaws in the death penalty system of one state. The American Bar Association yesterday released a two-year study that claims there are "substantial shortcomings" in the way the state handles death penalty cases, a situation that could increase the chances of "not adequately protecting against the wrongful conviction of innocent people."

The 324-page report urged the state to preserve biological evidence for post-trial DNA tests, videotape homicide investigations and implement modern witness-lineup techniques - three procedures the ABA said would add accuracy, integrity and efficiency to a process long maligned both by proponents and opponents of the death penalty.

The ABA study, crafted by five legal professionals, including a judge and a prosecutor, also criticized the state for failing to provide adequate lawyers and investigators for poor defendants at trial.

The study also said that the state has failed to address long-alleged racial and geographic disparities between defendants sentenced for similar crimes. In 2003, a committee appointed by the state Supreme Court to study racial and gender bias found "strong indications" that Pennsylvania does not "operate in an even-handed manner."

ABA president William H. Neukom said it is "critical to correct" the problems because "it is important to have a fair and accurate process, not just for the accused but also for the victims and for the public."
.....
Villanova law professor Anne Bowen Poulin said, "It is important to understand that the shortcomings we identified operate with a cumulative effect. Fixing one or some of the problems will not make the system right, and it is absolutely vital to do the additional study of the system that our report calls for, so that reforms can be implemented that will provide us with real justice."

This report is similar to previous ABA assessments that found fundamental flaws in seven other states - Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Ohio and Tennessee. The problems inherent in each of the death penalty systems shows that the system fails to live up to the principles of fairness and justice which our criminal justice system is meant to be based on.

Although the ABA, the nation's largest lawyers' association does not have an official position on capital punishment, since 1997 it has called for a moratorium on executions "until fairness and accuracy - that is, due process - are assured in death penalty cases."

There is no question that the flaws addressed by the ABA needs to be thoroughly addressed since six people who were sentenced to death in Pennsylvania have been exonerated and 225 inmates are sitting on Pennsylvania's death row. More specifically, Pennsylvania has carried out only three executions since it reinstated the death penalty in 1978 and the prisoners have all been ‘volunteers' who waived their appeals.

The state of Pennsylvania needs to embrace the sweeping changes recommended by the ABA and place a moratorium on executions. I dont know how many flaws we need to uncover before we realise that it would be unconscionable to continue with executions .

Click here to read more of this story

Abolish Intern DC

Today, October 10, is World Day Against the Death Penalty. The first one took place in 2003 thanks to the hard work and dedication of the World Coalition against the Death Penalty.

This year is particularily noteworthy as the United Nations General Assembly will vote on a proposal by the European Union which would, if accepted, establish a UN resolution for a universial moratorium on executions!

Please check out the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty's website for scheduled events around the world and call/fax/email/write your government to insist they support this resolution on your behalf.

Cheers,

PADP intern

 In 2001, when the new government in Afghanistan took over after Taliban-rule, the international community was promised an end to executions in that country.  In 2004, the moratorium was officially ended with the execution of Abdullah Shah in April 2004*. In 2006, a man came close to being executed for converting to Christianity. Yesterday, 3 years after the last man was executed in Afghanistan, 15 prisoners were executed by a firing squad at the Pul-i Charkhi high security prison outside Kabul. They had been charged with a variety of offenses including rape, murder, attacking security posts, robbery and looting.

Un High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour has said this may violate the various international standards of human rights which the government agreed to uphold and urges, along with Amnesty International and a multitude of other people, nations and groups, to refrain from future executions and abolish the death penalty.

However, "On Tuesday, Humayun Hamidzada, a presidential spokesman, said Afghanistan will continue with executions of inmates on death row, saying they will be a lesson "for those who are committing such crimes, as murder, kidnapping, adultery and rapes." (See here for more.) Yet study after study has shown that the death penalty does not deter others from committing crimes.  And in a country such as Afghanistan- war-torn, recovering from years under an oppressive regime- the state of the economy, political strife and other factors can have a strong impact on crime rates, executing people will not deter every father from stealing a loaf of bread to feed his hungry children, it will not deter politically motivated crime either.

What it has done is cause speculation on how Afghanistan's return to the death penalty will affect its relationships with other countries, see here for details.

Amnesty International calls on the Afghan government to join the world-wide momentum towards abolition by imposing state-wide laws that banish the use of executions by any method.

* There are news reports of another execution in 2004, when a woman was stoned to death for adultery (she was found in the company of a man who was not her husband, the article implies they were just talking.) I find it very interesting that none of the countless news articles I have read on the execution of these 15 people have mentioned this stoning of a woman for adultery.  Instead they write merely that it has been three years since the last execution, a reference to Abdullah Shah. Is it the case that the stoning of women are off the books, so to speak, and are not counted as state executions? This is very worrisome, if so- Is it the media who are ignoring this as an execution, or if it and others like it are not written down as a state sanctioned execution, is the community council who ordered her to be stoned in violation of the state's laws?  I do not know the answer, but either way, or if both are true, this is great cause for concern.

Some times it's a wonderful quality to be punctual.  I mean, if shops and banks and restaurants were to concede to every customer that wanted to walk in the door after hours, well chaos would surely ensue- Staff wouldn't be able to go home on time, no one would know if the store really closed when it said it did and as soon as you let that first one in late, then everyone would expect the same courtesy.  So some times you just have to say "We close at 5."

But there is a difference between needing a loaf of bread for dinner and appealing for someone's life.  It is shocking that the appeals court in Texas could not stay open long enough for the lawyers of Michael Richard to file their appeal after they experienced computer malfunctions, instead they were informed, "We close at 5".  And indeed, this story has been heard far beyond Texas.  The further insult is that the Judges responsible for this case were prepared to stay late as they were expecting a last minute appeal. However, this option was taken away by another judge, who was not connected to the case, when she refused the appeal to be filed after 5pm. (see here for more).

To further the controversy of this case and bring Texas' reputation into further disrepair by illustrating the stereotypical belief of Texas and its executions (out of the 1099 executions that have taken place in the USA since 1976, 405 were in Texas), Richard was executed the same day the US Supreme Court announced its decision to hear the lethal injection cases.  Richard's execution came across as a message that Texas will continue to do as it pleases, regardless of the Nation's actions.  The US Supreme Court responded by halting the next Texas execution, and this week Texas seemed to have got the message and stayed the execution of Heliberto Chi.

There has been plenty of speculation that Chi's stay meant that Texas would join many other death penalty states in a moratorium until the nation's Supreme Court rendered its decision on the constitutionality of lethal injections.  However, Texas, along with Georgia and Arkansas, just announced new upcoming execution dates.  In Texas these are on October 19 and Oct 23.  That is just two weeks from today... Everyone in the legal death penalty corner (both for and against) knows the US Supreme Court case will not be heard until 2008...

So, my question is this:  why schedule executions when you know there is a high chance they will be appealed on the basis that the highest court of the country will be making a decision on lethal injection? Recent history has shown there is a good chance they will be stayed.  Why create the unnecessary paperwork and waste tax payer's money?  Why torment the victims' families and the inmates and their families knowing that this issue is up in the air? 

Come on Texas, Come on USA; just announce a moratorium at least until the Court renders its decision and the outcome is resolved (new method, better method, old method, life in prison...)

Concerned individuals should contact their state's governors and demand abolition or at least a moratorium.

PADP Intern

Attorney General Drew Edmondson urged the state Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday to postpone scheduling executions in Oklahoma based on the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to review lethal injection as a form of execution in Kentucky.

He asked for the scheduling delay in a petition informing the Court of Criminal Appeals that Oklahoma death row inmate Terry Lyn Short, convicted of killing a 22-year-old man in 1995, has exhausted all his appeals. Short was convicted of killing Ken Yamamoto in Oklahoma City.

 According to the state Department of Corrections, there are 80 inmates on death row in Oklahoma, but no executions have been scheduled.

 "The Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment," Edmondson said. "The issue before the Supreme Court is what standard defines 'cruel and unusual.' In Oklahoma, our standard prohibits the wanton infliction of pain. In the Kentucky case, the defendant is asking the court to set the standard at unnecessary risk of pain."

 He further said that;

"The constitutionality of our lethal injection protocol has withstood prior challenges in federal and state courts, but the Baze case poses a unique question." "We have reviewed the issues in the Baze case and relevant Oklahoma law, and believe our procedure will be upheld." However, we think it is prudent and in the states best interests to ask our court to delay the setting of an execution date until the Supreme Court issues its ruling."

Edmondson expects the case filed by the Kentucky death row inmates, Ralph Baze and Thomas Clyde Bowling Jr. to set a US standard.

Suggesting for a delay in executions is not too much to ask for in a civilised society and I am glad that at least someone is willing to slow the machinery of death until the U.S. Supreme Court settles the issue of what is cruel and unusual punishment.

 Click here to read more of the story.

 Abolish Intern DC

So things are getting more and more interesting since the Supreme Court announced its decision to hear the lethal injection cases, lawyers everywhere are appealing for stays for their clients until the Court announces its findings. And a Texas District Attorney has said that he will not seek the death penalty for capital cases until the US Supreme Court has rendered its decision.  Instead, he will seek life without parole.  Now if only the rest of Texas (and the US) would follow his decision.

 Well, in truth, it would just be easier to abolish the death penalty in its entirety for all the usual arguments (right to life, not a deterrent, racial, economic and geographic biases, costly, potential for killing an innocent individual, etc), however, if for nothing else but practical reasons, a country-wide moratorium is needed until the Supreme Court rules.  As this Nueces County DA reasons, "His new policy is a precaution to avoid cases being returned for new punishment hearings."  In other words, it is cheaper to just ask for life in prison. Cheaper and less time consuming.  If things proceed as normal and DA's ask for death sentences, if the Court then rules that lethal injections are unconstitutional, there will be more appeals, new punishment hearings and so on.  Why add to an already over-burdened court system, just have a moratorium now (better yet, ABOLISH).

Same for death sentences that have already been granted, commute them to life. Save time and money (and maybe save some people from excruciating pain while we are at it).  After all, aren't there better things we could do with tax payers' money?  Build more schools? Hospitals? Clean up the streets? Invest in the arts? So, please please let's have a moratorium while the Supreme Court investigates and makes a decision. Better yet, ABOLISH!

PADP Intern (formerly known as The New One, Newbie, etc)