thesis statements of death penalty

Arguments for and Against the Death Penalty

Click the buttons below to view arguments and testimony on each topic.

The death penalty deters future murders.

Society has always used punishment to discourage would-be criminals from unlawful action. Since society has the highest interest in preventing murder, it should use the strongest punishment available to deter murder, and that is the death penalty. If murderers are sentenced to death and executed, potential murderers will think twice before killing for fear of losing their own life.

For years, criminologists analyzed murder rates to see if they fluctuated with the likelihood of convicted murderers being executed, but the results were inconclusive. Then in 1973 Isaac Ehrlich employed a new kind of analysis which produced results showing that for every inmate who was executed, 7 lives were spared because others were deterred from committing murder. Similar results have been produced by disciples of Ehrlich in follow-up studies.

Moreover, even if some studies regarding deterrence are inconclusive, that is only because the death penalty is rarely used and takes years before an execution is actually carried out. Punishments which are swift and sure are the best deterrent. The fact that some states or countries which do not use the death penalty have lower murder rates than jurisdictions which do is not evidence of the failure of deterrence. States with high murder rates would have even higher rates if they did not use the death penalty.

Ernest van den Haag, a Professor of Jurisprudence at Fordham University who has studied the question of deterrence closely, wrote: “Even though statistical demonstrations are not conclusive, and perhaps cannot be, capital punishment is likely to deter more than other punishments because people fear death more than anything else. They fear most death deliberately inflicted by law and scheduled by the courts. Whatever people fear most is likely to deter most. Hence, the threat of the death penalty may deter some murderers who otherwise might not have been deterred. And surely the death penalty is the only penalty that could deter prisoners already serving a life sentence and tempted to kill a guard, or offenders about to be arrested and facing a life sentence. Perhaps they will not be deterred. But they would certainly not be deterred by anything else. We owe all the protection we can give to law enforcers exposed to special risks.”

Finally, the death penalty certainly “deters” the murderer who is executed. Strictly speaking, this is a form of incapacitation, similar to the way a robber put in prison is prevented from robbing on the streets. Vicious murderers must be killed to prevent them from murdering again, either in prison, or in society if they should get out. Both as a deterrent and as a form of permanent incapacitation, the death penalty helps to prevent future crime.

Those who believe that deterrence justifies the execution of certain offenders bear the burden of proving that the death penalty is a deterrent. The overwhelming conclusion from years of deterrence studies is that the death penalty is, at best, no more of a deterrent than a sentence of life in prison. The Ehrlich studies have been widely discredited. In fact, some criminologists, such as William Bowers of Northeastern University, maintain that the death penalty has the opposite effect: that is, society is brutalized by the use of the death penalty, and this increases the likelihood of more murder. Even most supporters of the death penalty now place little or no weight on deterrence as a serious justification for its continued use.

States in the United States that do not employ the death penalty generally have lower murder rates than states that do. The same is true when the U.S. is compared to countries similar to it. The U.S., with the death penalty, has a higher murder rate than the countries of Europe or Canada, which do not use the death penalty.

The death penalty is not a deterrent because most people who commit murders either do not expect to be caught or do not carefully weigh the differences between a possible execution and life in prison before they act. Frequently, murders are committed in moments of passion or anger, or by criminals who are substance abusers and acted impulsively. As someone who presided over many of Texas’s executions, former Texas Attorney General Jim Mattox has remarked, “It is my own experience that those executed in Texas were not deterred by the existence of the death penalty law. I think in most cases you’ll find that the murder was committed under severe drug and alcohol abuse.”

There is no conclusive proof that the death penalty acts as a better deterrent than the threat of life imprisonment. A 2012 report released by the prestigious National Research Council of the National Academies and based on a review of more than three decades of research, concluded that studies claiming a deterrent effect on murder rates from the death penalty are fundamentally flawed. A survey of the former and present presidents of the country’s top academic criminological societies found that 84% of these experts rejected the notion that research had demonstrated any deterrent effect from the death penalty .

Once in prison, those serving life sentences often settle into a routine and are less of a threat to commit violence than other prisoners. Moreover, most states now have a sentence of life without parole. Prisoners who are given this sentence will never be released. Thus, the safety of society can be assured without using the death penalty.

Ernest van den Haag Professor of Jurisprudence and Public Policy, Fordham University. Excerpts from ” The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense,” (Harvard Law Review Association, 1986)

“Execution of those who have committed heinous murders may deter only one murder per year. If it does, it seems quite warranted. It is also the only fitting retribution for murder I can think of.”

“Most abolitionists acknowledge that they would continue to favor abolition even if the death penalty were shown to deter more murders than alternatives could deter. Abolitionists appear to value the life of a convicted murderer or, at least, his non-execution, more highly than they value the lives of the innocent victims who might be spared by deterring prospective murderers.

Deterrence is not altogether decisive for me either. I would favor retention of the death penalty as retribution even if it were shown that the threat of execution could not deter prospective murderers not already deterred by the threat of imprisonment. Still, I believe the death penalty, because of its finality, is more feared than imprisonment, and deters some prospective murderers not deterred by the thought of imprisonment. Sparing the lives of even a few prospective victims by deterring their murderers is more important than preserving the lives of convicted murderers because of the possibility, or even the probability, that executing them would not deter others. Whereas the life of the victims who might be saved are valuable, that of the murderer has only negative value, because of his crime. Surely the criminal law is meant to protect the lives of potential victims in preference to those of actual murderers.”

“We threaten punishments in order to deter crime. We impose them not only to make the threats credible but also as retribution (justice) for the crimes that were not deterred. Threats and punishments are necessary to deter and deterrence is a sufficient practical justification for them. Retribution is an independent moral justification. Although penalties can be unwise, repulsive, or inappropriate, and those punished can be pitiable, in a sense the infliction of legal punishment on a guilty person cannot be unjust. By committing the crime, the criminal volunteered to assume the risk of receiving a legal punishment that he could have avoided by not committing the crime. The punishment he suffers is the punishment he voluntarily risked suffering and, therefore, it is no more unjust to him than any other event for which one knowingly volunteers to assume the risk. Thus, the death penalty cannot be unjust to the guilty criminal.”

Full text can be found at PBS.org .

“Persons who commit murder and other crimes of personal violence either may or may not premeditate their crimes.

When crime is planned, the criminal ordinarily concentrates on escaping detection, arrest, and conviction. The threat of even the severest punishment will not discourage those who expect to escape detection and arrest. It is impossible to imagine how the threat of any punishment could prevent a crime that is not premeditated….

Most capital crimes are committed in the heat of the moment. Most capital crimes are committed during moments of great emotional stress or under the influence of drugs or alcohol, when logical thinking has been suspended. In such cases, violence is inflicted by persons heedless of the consequences to themselves as well as to others….

If, however, severe punishment can deter crime, then long-term imprisonment is severe enough to deter any rational person from committing a violent crime.

On-duty police officers do not suffer a higher rate of criminal assault and homicide in abolitionist states than they do in death-penalty states. Between l973 and l984, for example, lethal assaults against police were not significantly more, or less, frequent in abolitionist states than in death-penalty states. There is ‘no support for the view that the death penalty provides a more effective deterrent to police homicides than alternative sanctions. Not for a single year was evidence found that police are safer in jurisdictions that provide for capital punishment.’ (Bailey and Peterson, Criminology (1987))

Prisoners and prison personnel do not suffer a higher rate of criminal assault and homicide from life-term prisoners in abolition states than they do in death-penalty states. Between 1992 and 1995, 176 inmates were murdered by other prisoners; the vast majority (84%) were killed in death penalty jurisdictions. During the same period about 2% of all assaults on prison staff were committed by inmates in abolition jurisdictions. Evidently, the threat of the death penalty ‘does not even exert an incremental deterrent effect over the threat of a lesser punishment in the abolitionist states.’ (Wolfson, in Bedau, ed., The Death Penalty in America, 3rd ed. (1982))

Actual experience thus establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the death penalty does not deter murder. No comparable body of evidence contradicts that conclusion.”

Click here for the full text from the ACLU website.

Retribution

A just society requires the taking of a life for a life.

When someone takes a life, the balance of justice is disturbed. Unless that balance is restored, society succumbs to a rule of violence. Only the taking of the murderer’s life restores the balance and allows society to show convincingly that murder is an intolerable crime which will be punished in kind.

Retribution has its basis in religious values, which have historically maintained that it is proper to take an “eye for an eye” and a life for a life.

Although the victim and the victim’s family cannot be restored to the status which preceded the murder, at least an execution brings closure to the murderer’s crime (and closure to the ordeal for the victim’s family) and ensures that the murderer will create no more victims.

For the most cruel and heinous crimes, the ones for which the death penalty is applied, offenders deserve the worst punishment under our system of law, and that is the death penalty. Any lesser punishment would undermine the value society places on protecting lives.

Robert Macy, District Attorney of Oklahoma City, described his concept of the need for retribution in one case: “In 1991, a young mother was rendered helpless and made to watch as her baby was executed. The mother was then mutilated and killed. The killer should not lie in some prison with three meals a day, clean sheets, cable TV, family visits and endless appeals. For justice to prevail, some killers just need to die.”

Retribution is another word for revenge. Although our first instinct may be to inflict immediate pain on someone who wrongs us, the standards of a mature society demand a more measured response.

The emotional impulse for revenge is not a sufficient justification for invoking a system of capital punishment, with all its accompanying problems and risks. Our laws and criminal justice system should lead us to higher principles that demonstrate a complete respect for life, even the life of a murderer. Encouraging our basest motives of revenge, which ends in another killing, extends the chain of violence. Allowing executions sanctions killing as a form of ‘pay-back.’

Many victims’ families denounce the use of the death penalty. Using an execution to try to right the wrong of their loss is an affront to them and only causes more pain. For example, Bud Welch’s daughter, Julie, was killed in the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. Although his first reaction was to wish that those who committed this terrible crime be killed, he ultimately realized that such killing “is simply vengeance; and it was vengeance that killed Julie…. Vengeance is a strong and natural emotion. But it has no place in our justice system.”

The notion of an eye for an eye, or a life for a life, is a simplistic one which our society has never endorsed. We do not allow torturing the torturer, or raping the rapist. Taking the life of a murderer is a similarly disproportionate punishment, especially in light of the fact that the U.S. executes only a small percentage of those convicted of murder, and these defendants are typically not the worst offenders but merely the ones with the fewest resources to defend themselves.

Louis P. Pojman Author and Professor of Philosophy, U.S. Military Academy. Excerpt from “The Death Penalty: For and Against,” (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 1998)

“[Opponents of the capital punishment often put forth the following argument:] Perhaps the murderer deserves to die, but what authority does the state have to execute him or her? Both the Old and New Testament says, “’Vengeance is mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord” (Prov. 25:21 and Romans 12:19). You need special authority to justify taking the life of a human being.

The objector fails to note that the New Testament passage continues with a support of the right of the state to execute criminals in the name of God: “Let every person be subjected to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment…. If you do wrong, be afraid, for [the authority] does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer” (Romans 13: 1-4). So, according to the Bible, the authority to punish, which presumably includes the death penalty, comes from God.

But we need not appeal to a religious justification for capital punishment. We can site the state’s role in dispensing justice. Just as the state has the authority (and duty) to act justly in allocating scarce resources, in meeting minimal needs of its (deserving) citizens, in defending its citizens from violence and crime, and in not waging unjust wars; so too does it have the authority, flowing from its mission to promote justice and the good of its people, to punish the criminal. If the criminal, as one who has forfeited a right to life, deserves to be executed, especially if it will likely deter would-be murderers, the state has a duty to execute those convicted of first-degree murder.”

National Council of Synagogues and the Bishops’ Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops Excerpts from “To End the Death Penalty: A Report of the National Jewish/Catholic Consultation” (December, 1999)

“Some would argue that the death penalty is needed as a means of retributive justice, to balance out the crime with the punishment. This reflects a natural concern of society, and especially of victims and their families. Yet we believe that we are called to seek a higher road even while punishing the guilty, for example through long and in some cases life-long incarceration, so that the healing of all can ultimately take place.

Some would argue that the death penalty will teach society at large the seriousness of crime. Yet we say that teaching people to respond to violence with violence will, again, only breed more violence.

The strongest argument of all [in favor of the death penalty] is the deep pain and grief of the families of victims, and their quite natural desire to see punishment meted out to those who have plunged them into such agony. Yet it is the clear teaching of our traditions that this pain and suffering cannot be healed simply through the retribution of capital punishment or by vengeance. It is a difficult and long process of healing which comes about through personal growth and God’s grace. We agree that much more must be done by the religious community and by society at large to solace and care for the grieving families of the victims of violent crime.

Recent statements of the Reform and Conservative movements in Judaism, and of the U.S. Catholic Conference sum up well the increasingly strong convictions shared by Jews and Catholics…:

‘Respect for all human life and opposition to the violence in our society are at the root of our long-standing opposition (as bishops) to the death penalty. We see the death penalty as perpetuating a cycle of violence and promoting a sense of vengeance in our culture. As we said in Confronting the Culture of Violence: ‘We cannot teach that killing is wrong by killing.’ We oppose capital punishment not just for what it does to those guilty of horrible crimes, but for what it does to all of us as a society. Increasing reliance on the death penalty diminishes all of us and is a sign of growing disrespect for human life. We cannot overcome crime by simply executing criminals, nor can we restore the lives of the innocent by ending the lives of those convicted of their murders. The death penalty offers the tragic illusion that we can defend life by taking life.’1

We affirm that we came to these conclusions because of our shared understanding of the sanctity of human life. We have committed ourselves to work together, and each within our own communities, toward ending the death penalty.” Endnote 1. Statement of the Administrative Committee of the United States Catholic Conference, March 24, 1999.

The risk of executing the innocent precludes the use of the death penalty.

The death penalty alone imposes an irrevocable sentence. Once an inmate is executed, nothing can be done to make amends if a mistake has been made. There is considerable evidence that many mistakes have been made in sentencing people to death. Since 1973, over 180 people have been released from death row after evidence of their innocence emerged. During the same period of time, over 1,500 people have been executed. Thus, for every 8.3 people executed, we have found one person on death row who never should have been convicted. These statistics represent an intolerable risk of executing the innocent. If an automobile manufacturer operated with similar failure rates, it would be run out of business.

Our capital punishment system is unreliable. A study by Columbia University Law School found that two thirds of all capital trials contained serious errors. When the cases were retried, over 80% of the defendants were not sentenced to death and 7% were completely acquitted.

Many of the releases of innocent defendants from death row came about as a result of factors outside of the justice system. Recently, journalism students in Illinois were assigned to investigate the case of a man who was scheduled to be executed, after the system of appeals had rejected his legal claims. The students discovered that one witness had lied at the original trial, and they were able to find another man, who confessed to the crime on videotape and was later convicted of the murder. The innocent man who was released was very fortunate, but he was spared because of the informal efforts of concerned citizens, not because of the justice system.

In other cases, DNA testing has exonerated death row inmates. Here, too, the justice system had concluded that these defendants were guilty and deserving of the death penalty. DNA testing became available only in the early 1990s, due to advancements in science. If this testing had not been discovered until ten years later, many of these inmates would have been executed. And if DNA testing had been applied to earlier cases where inmates were executed in the 1970s and 80s, the odds are high that it would have proven that some of them were innocent as well.

Society takes many risks in which innocent lives can be lost. We build bridges, knowing that statistically some workers will be killed during construction; we take great precautions to reduce the number of unintended fatalities. But wrongful executions are a preventable risk. By substituting a sentence of life without parole, we meet society’s needs of punishment and protection without running the risk of an erroneous and irrevocable punishment.

There is no proof that any innocent person has actually been executed since increased safeguards and appeals were added to our death penalty system in the 1970s. Even if such executions have occurred, they are very rare. Imprisoning innocent people is also wrong, but we cannot empty the prisons because of that minimal risk. If improvements are needed in the system of representation, or in the use of scientific evidence such as DNA testing, then those reforms should be instituted. However, the need for reform is not a reason to abolish the death penalty.

Besides, many of the claims of innocence by those who have been released from death row are actually based on legal technicalities. Just because someone’s conviction is overturned years later and the prosecutor decides not to retry him, does not mean he is actually innocent.

If it can be shown that someone is innocent, surely a governor would grant clemency and spare the person. Hypothetical claims of innocence are usually just delaying tactics to put off the execution as long as possible. Given our thorough system of appeals through numerous state and federal courts, the execution of an innocent individual today is almost impossible. Even the theoretical execution of an innocent person can be justified because the death penalty saves lives by deterring other killings.

Gerald Kogan, Former Florida Supreme Court Chief Justice Excerpts from a speech given in Orlando, Florida, October 23, 1999 “[T]here is no question in my mind, and I can tell you this having seen the dynamics of our criminal justice system over the many years that I have been associated with it, [as] prosecutor, defense attorney, trial judge and Supreme Court Justice, that convinces me that we certainly have, in the past, executed those people who either didn’t fit the criteria for execution in the State of Florida or who, in fact, were, factually, not guilty of the crime for which they have been executed.

“And you can make these statements when you understand the dynamics of the criminal justice system, when you understand how the State makes deals with more culpable defendants in a capital case, offers them light sentences in exchange for their testimony against another participant or, in some cases, in fact, gives them immunity from prosecution so that they can secure their testimony; the use of jailhouse confessions, like people who say, ‘I was in the cell with so-and-so and they confessed to me,’ or using those particular confessions, the validity of which there has been great doubt. And yet, you see the uneven application of the death penalty where, in many instances, those that are the most culpable escape death and those that are the least culpable are victims of the death penalty. These things begin to weigh very heavily upon you. And under our system, this is the system we have. And that is, we are human beings administering an imperfect system.”

“And how about those people who are still sitting on death row today, who may be factually innocent but cannot prove their particular case very simply because there is no DNA evidence in their case that can be used to exonerate them? Of course, in most cases, you’re not going to have that kind of DNA evidence, so there is no way and there is no hope for them to be saved from what may be one of the biggest mistakes that our society can make.”

The entire speech by Justice Kogan is available here.

Paul G. Cassell Associate Professor of Law, University of Utah, College of Law, and former law clerk to Chief Justice Warren E. Burger. Statement before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States House of Representatives, Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights Concerning Claims of Innocence in Capital Cases (July 23, 1993)

“Given the fallibility of human judgments, the possibility exists that the use of capital punishment may result in the execution of an innocent person. The Senate Judiciary Committee has previously found this risk to be ‘minimal,’ a view shared by numerous scholars. As Justice Powell has noted commenting on the numerous state capital cases that have come before the Supreme Court, the ‘unprecedented safeguards’ already inherent in capital sentencing statutes ‘ensure a degree of care in the imposition of the sentence of death that can only be described as unique.’”

“Our present system of capital punishment limits the ultimate penalty to certain specifically-defined crimes and even then, permit the penalty of death only when the jury finds that the aggravating circumstances in the case outweigh all mitigating circumstances. The system further provides judicial review of capital cases. Finally, before capital sentences are carried out, the governor or other executive official will review the sentence to insure that it is a just one, a determination that undoubtedly considers the evidence of the condemned defendant’s guilt. Once all of those decisionmakers have agreed that a death sentence is appropriate, innocent lives would be lost from failure to impose the sentence.”

“Capital sentences, when carried out, save innocent lives by permanently incapacitating murderers. Some persons who commit capital homicide will slay other innocent persons if given the opportunity to do so. The death penalty is the most effective means of preventing such killers from repeating their crimes. The next most serious penalty, life imprisonment without possibility of parole, prevents murderers from committing some crimes but does not prevent them from murdering in prison.”

“The mistaken release of guilty murderers should be of far greater concern than the speculative and heretofore nonexistent risk of the mistaken execution of an innocent person.”

Full text can be found here.

Arbitrariness & Discrimination

The death penalty is applied unfairly and should not be used.

In practice, the death penalty does not single out the worst offenders. Rather, it selects an arbitrary group based on such irrational factors as the quality of the defense counsel, the county in which the crime was committed, or the race of the defendant or victim.

Almost all defendants facing the death penalty cannot afford their own attorney. Hence, they are dependent on the quality of the lawyers assigned by the state, many of whom lack experience in capital cases or are so underpaid that they fail to investigate the case properly. A poorly represented defendant is much more likely to be convicted and given a death sentence.

With respect to race, studies have repeatedly shown that a death sentence is far more likely where a white person is murdered than where a Black person is murdered. The death penalty is racially divisive because it appears to count white lives as more valuable than Black lives. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, 296 Black defendants have been executed for the murder of a white victim, while only 31 white defendants have been executed for the murder of a Black victim. Such racial disparities have existed over the history of the death penalty and appear to be largely intractable.

It is arbitrary when someone in one county or state receives the death penalty, but someone who commits a comparable crime in another county or state is given a life sentence. Prosecutors have enormous discretion about when to seek the death penalty and when to settle for a plea bargain. Often those who can only afford a minimal defense are selected for the death penalty. Until race and other arbitrary factors, like economics and geography, can be eliminated as a determinant of who lives and who dies, the death penalty must not be used.

Discretion has always been an essential part of our system of justice. No one expects the prosecutor to pursue every possible offense or punishment, nor do we expect the same sentence to be imposed just because two crimes appear similar. Each crime is unique, both because the circumstances of each victim are different and because each defendant is different. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that a mandatory death penalty which applied to everyone convicted of first degree murder would be unconstitutional. Hence, we must give prosecutors and juries some discretion.

In fact, more white people are executed in this country than black people. And even if blacks are disproportionately represented on death row, proportionately blacks commit more murders than whites. Moreover, the Supreme Court has rejected the use of statistical studies which claim racial bias as the sole reason for overturning a death sentence.

Even if the death penalty punishes some while sparing others, it does not follow that everyone should be spared. The guilty should still be punished appropriately, even if some do escape proper punishment unfairly. The death penalty should apply to killers of black people as well as to killers of whites. High paid, skillful lawyers should not be able to get some defendants off on technicalities. The existence of some systemic problems is no reason to abandon the whole death penalty system.

Reverend Jesse L. Jackson, Sr. President and Chief Executive Officer, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, Inc. Excerpt from “Legal Lynching: Racism, Injustice & the Death Penalty,” (Marlowe & Company, 1996)

“Who receives the death penalty has less to do with the violence of the crime than with the color of the criminal’s skin, or more often, the color of the victim’s skin. Murder — always tragic — seems to be a more heinous and despicable crime in some states than in others. Women who kill and who are killed are judged by different standards than are men who are murderers and victims.

The death penalty is essentially an arbitrary punishment. There are no objective rules or guidelines for when a prosecutor should seek the death penalty, when a jury should recommend it, and when a judge should give it. This lack of objective, measurable standards ensures that the application of the death penalty will be discriminatory against racial, gender, and ethnic groups.

The majority of Americans who support the death penalty believe, or wish to believe, that legitimate factors such as the violence and cruelty with which the crime was committed, a defendant’s culpability or history of violence, and the number of victims involved determine who is sentenced to life in prison and who receives the ultimate punishment. The numbers, however, tell a different story. They confirm the terrible truth that bias and discrimination warp our nation’s judicial system at the very time it matters most — in matters of life and death. The factors that determine who will live and who will die — race, sex, and geography — are the very same ones that blind justice was meant to ignore. This prejudicial distribution should be a moral outrage to every American.”

Justice Lewis Powell United States Supreme Court Justice excerpts from McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (1987) (footnotes and citations omitted)

(Mr. McCleskey, a black man, was convicted and sentenced to death in 1978 for killing a white police officer while robbing a store. Mr. McCleskey appealed his conviction and death sentence, claiming racial discrimination in the application of Georgia’s death penalty. He presented statistical analysis showing a pattern of sentencing disparities based primarily on the race of the victim. The analysis indicated that black defendants who killed white victims had the greatest likelihood of receiving the death penalty. Writing the majority opinion for the Supreme Court, Justice Powell held that statistical studies on race by themselves were an insufficient basis for overturning the death penalty.)

“[T]he claim that [t]his sentence rests on the irrelevant factor of race easily could be extended to apply to claims based on unexplained discrepancies that correlate to membership in other minority groups, and even to gender. Similarly, since [this] claim relates to the race of his victim, other claims could apply with equally logical force to statistical disparities that correlate with the race or sex of other actors in the criminal justice system, such as defense attorneys or judges. Also, there is no logical reason that such a claim need be limited to racial or sexual bias. If arbitrary and capricious punishment is the touchstone under the Eighth Amendment, such a claim could — at least in theory — be based upon any arbitrary variable, such as the defendant’s facial characteristics, or the physical attractiveness of the defendant or the victim, that some statistical study indicates may be influential in jury decision making. As these examples illustrate, there is no limiting principle to the type of challenge brought by McCleskey. The Constitution does not require that a State eliminate any demonstrable disparity that correlates with a potentially irrelevant factor in order to operate a criminal justice system that includes capital punishment. As we have stated specifically in the context of capital punishment, the Constitution does not ‘plac[e] totally unrealistic conditions on its use.’ (Gregg v. Georgia)”

The entire decision can be found here.

Death Penalty - Essay Samples And Topic Ideas For Free

The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, remains a contentious issue in many societies. Essays on this topic could explore the moral, legal, and social arguments surrounding the practice, including discussions on retribution, deterrence, and justice. They might delve into historical trends in the application of the death penalty, the potential for judicial error, and the disparities in its application across different demographic groups. Discussions might also explore the psychological impact on inmates, the families involved, and the society at large. They could also analyze the global trends toward abolition or retention of the death penalty and the factors influencing these trends. A substantial compilation of free essay instances related to Death Penalty you can find at Papersowl. You can use our samples for inspiration to write your own essay, research paper, or just to explore a new topic for yourself.

Death Penalty and Justice

By now, many of us are familiar with the statement, "an eye for an eye," which came from the bible, so it should be followed as holy writ. Then there was Gandhi, who inspired thousands and said, "an eye for an eye will leave us all blind." This begs the question, which option do we pick to be a good moral agent, in the terms of justice that is. Some states in America practice the death penalty, where some states […]

The Controversy of Death Penalty

The death penalty is a very controversial topic in many states. Although the idea of the death penalty does sound terrifying, would you really want a murderer to be given food and shelter for free? Would you want a murderer to get out of jail and still end up killing another innocent person? Imagine if that murder gets out of jail and kills someone in your family; Wouldn’t you want that murderer to be killed as well? Murderers can kill […]

Stephen Nathanson’s “An Eye for an Eye”

According to Stephen Nathanson's "An Eye for an Eye?", he believes that capital punishment should be immediately abolished and that the principle of punishment, "lex talionis" which correlates to the classic saying "an eye for an eye" is not a valid reason for issuing the death penalty in any country, thus, abolishment of Capital Punishment should follow. Throughout the excerpt from his book, Nathanson argues against this principle believing that one, it forces us to "commit highly immoral actions”raping a […]

We will write an essay sample crafted to your needs.

Does the Death Penalty Effectively Deter Crime?

The death penalty in America has been effective since 1608. Throughout the years following the first execution, criminal behaviors have begun to deteriorate. Capital punishment was first formed to deter crime and treason. As a result, it increased the rate of crime, according to researchers. Punishing criminals by death does not effectively deter crime because criminals are not concerned with consequences, apprehension, and judges are not willing to pay the expenses. During the stage of mens rea, thoughts of committing […]

The Death Penalty: Right or Wrong?

The death penalty has been a controversial topic throughout the years and now more than ever, as we argue; Right or Wrong? Moral or Immoral? Constitutional or Unconstitutional? The death penalty also known as capital punishment is a legal process where the state justice sentences an individual to be executed as punishment for a crime committed. The death penalty sentence strongly depends on the severity of the crime, in the US there are 41 crimes that can lead to being […]

About Carlton Franklin

In most other situations, the long-unsolved Westfield Murder would have been a death penalty case. A 57-year-old legal secretary, Lena Triano, was found tied up, raped, beaten, and stabbed in her New Jersey home. A DNA sample from her undergarments connected Carlton Franklin to the scene of the crime. However, fortunately enough for Franklin, he was not convicted until almost four decades after the murder and, in an unusual turn of events, was tried in juvenile court. Franklin was fifteen […]

About the Death Penalty

The death penalty has been a method used as far back as the Eighteenth century B.C. The use of the death penalty was for punishing people for committing relentless crimes. The severity of the punishment were much more inferior in comparison to modern day. These inferior punishments included boiling live bodies, burning at the stake, hanging, and extensive use of the guillotine to decapitate criminals. In the ancient days no laws were established to dictate and regulate the type of […]

The Death Penalty should not be Legal

Imagine you hit your sibling and your mom hits you back to teach that you shouldn't be hitting anyone. Do you really learn not to be violent from that or instead do you learn how it is okay for moms or dads to hit their children in order to teach them something? This is exactly how the death penalty works. The death penalty has been a form of punishment for decades. There are several methods of execution and those are […]

Effectively Solving Society’s Criminality

Has one ever wondered if the person standing or sitting next to them has the potential to be a murderer or a rapist? What do those who are victimized personally or have suffered from a tragic event involving a loved-one or someone near and dear to their heart, expect from the government? Convicted felons of this nature and degree of unlawfulness should be sentenced to death. Psychotic killers and rapists need the ultimate consequences such as the death penalty for […]

Religious Values and Death Penalty

Religious and moral values tell us that killing is wrong. Thou shall not kill. To me, the death penalty is inhumane. Killing people makes us like the murderers that most of us despise. No imperfect system should have the right to decide who lives and who dies. The government is made up of imperfect humans, who make mistakes. The only person that should be able to take life, is god. "An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind". […]

Abolishment of the Death Penalty

Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to relate many different criminological theories in regard to capital punishment. We relate many criminological theories such as; cognitive theory, deviant place theory, latent trait theory, differential association theory, behavioral theory, attachment theory, lifestyle theory, and biosocial theory. This paper empirically analyzes the idea that capital punishment is inhumane and should be abolished. We analyze this by taking into consideration false convictions, deterrence of crime, attitudes towards capital punishment, mental illness and juvenile […]

Punishment and the Nature of the Crime

When an individual commits a crime then he/she is given punishment depending on the nature of the crime committed. The US's way of giving punishment to an offender has been criticized for many years. There are 2 types of cases; civil and criminal cases. In civil cases, most of the verdict comprises of jail time or fine amount to be paid. These are not as severe except the one related to money laundering and forgery. On the other hand, criminal […]

The Death Penalty and Juveniles

Introduction: In today's society, many juveniles are being sent to trial without having the chance of getting a fair trial as anyone else would. Many citizens would see juveniles as dangerous individuals, but in my opinion how a teenager acts at home starts at home. Punishing a child for something that could have been solved at home is something that should not have to get worse by giving them the death penalty. The death penalty should not be imposed on […]

Is the Death Penalty “Humane”

What’s the first thing that pops up in your mind when you hear the words Capital Punishment? I’m assuming for most people the first thing that pops up is a criminal sitting on a chair, with all limbs tied down, and some type of mechanism connected to their head. Even though this really isn't the way that it is done, I do not blame people for imagining that type of image because that is how movies usually portray capital punishment. […]

Euthanasia and Death Penalty

Euthanasia and death penalty are two controversy topics, that get a lot of attention in today's life. The subject itself has the roots deep in the beginning of the humankind. It is interesting and maybe useful to learn the answer and if there is right or wrong in those actions. The decision if a person should live or die depends on the state laws. There are both opponents and supporters of the subject. However different the opinions are, the state […]

The Death Penalty is not Worth the Cost

The death penalty is a government practice, used as a punishment for capital crimes such as treason, murder, and genocide to name a few. It has been a controversial topic for many years some countries still use it while others don't. In the United States, each state gets to choose whether they consider it to be legal or not. Which is why in this country 30 states allow it while 20 states have gotten rid of it. It is controversial […]

Ineffectiveness of Death Penalty

Death penalty as a means of punishing crime and discouraging wrong behaviour has suffered opposition from various fronts. Religious leaders argue that it is morally wrong to take someone's life while liberal thinkers claim that there are better ways to punish wrong behaviour other than the death penalty. This debate rages on while statistically, Texas executes more individuals than any other state in the United States of America. America itself also has the highest number of death penalty related deaths […]

Is the Death Penalty Morally Right?

There have been several disputes on whether the death penalty is morally right. Considering the ethical issues with this punishment can help distinguish if it should be denied or accepted. For example, it can be argued that a criminal of extreme offenses should be granted the same level of penance as their crime. During the duration of their sentencing they could repent on their actions and desire another opportunity of freedom. The death penalty should be outlawed because of too […]

Why the Death Penalty is Unjust

Capital punishment being either a justifiable law, or a horrendous, unjust act can be determined based on the perspective of different worldviews. In a traditional Christian perspective, the word of God given to the world in The Holy Bible should only be abided by. The Holy Bible states that no man (or woman) should shed the blood of another man (or woman). Christians are taught to teach a greater amount of sacrifice for the sake of the Lord. Social justice […]

The Death Penalty and People’s Opinions

The death penalty is a highly debated topic that often divided opinion amongst people all around the world. Firstly, let's take a look at our capital punishments, with certain crimes, come different serving times. Most crimes include treason, espionage, murder, large-scale drug trafficking, and murder towards a juror, witness, or a court officer in some cases. These are a few examples compared to the forty-one federal capital offenses to date. When it comes to the death penalty, there are certain […]

The Debate of the Death Penalty

Capital punishment is a moral issue that is often scrutinized due to the taking of someone’s life. This is in large part because of the views many have toward the rule of law or an acceptance to the status quo. In order to get a true scope of the death penalty, it is best to address potential biases from a particular ethical viewpoint. By looking at it from several theories of punishment, selecting the most viable theory makes it a […]

The History of the Death Penalty

The History of the death penalty goes as far back as ancient China and Babylon. However, the first recorded death sentence took place in 16th Century BC Egypt, where executions were carried out with an ax. Since the very beginning, people were treated according to their social status; those wealthy were rarely facing brutal executions; on the contrary, most of the population was facing cruel executions. For instance, in the 5th Century BC, the Roman Law of the Twelve Tablets […]

Death Penalty is Immoral

Let's say your child grabs a plate purposely. You see them grab the plate, smash it on the ground and look you straight in the eyes. Are they deserving of a punishment? Now what if I say your child is three years old. A three year old typically doesn't know they have done something wrong. But since your child broke that one plate, your kid is being put on death row. You may be thinking, that is too harsh of […]

The Death Penalty in the United States

The United States is the "land of the free, home of the brave" and the death penalty (American National Anthem). Globally, America stands number five in carrying executions (Lockie). Since its resurrection in 1976, the year in which the Supreme Court reestablished the constitutionality of the death penalty, more than 1,264 people have been executed, predominantly by the medium of lethal injection (The Guardian). Almost all death penalty cases entangle the execution of assassins; although, they may also be applied […]

Cost of the Death Penalty

The death penalty costs more than life in prison. According to Fox News correspondent Dan Springer, the State of California spent 4 billion dollars to execute 13 individuals, in addition to the net spend of an estimated $64,000 per prisoner every year. Springer (2011) documents how the death penalty convictions declined due to economic reasons. The state spends up to 3 times more when seeking a death penalty than when pursuing a life in prison without the possibility of parole. […]

The Solution to the Death Penalty

There has never been a time when the United States of America was free from criminals indulging in killing, stealing, exploiting people, and even selling illegal items. Naturally, America refuses to tolerate the crimes committed by those who view themselves as above the law. Once these convicts are apprehended, they are brought to justice. In the past, these criminals often faced an ultimate punishment: the death penalty. Mercy was a foreign concept due to their underdeveloped understanding of the value […]

Costs: Death Penalty Versus Prison Costs

The Conservatives Concerned Organization challenges the notion that the death penalty is more cost effective compared to prison housing and feeding costs. The organization argues that the death penalty is an expensive lengthy and complicated process concluding that it is not only a bloated program that delays justice and bogs down the enforcement of the law, it is also an inefficient justice process that diverts financial resources from law enforcement programs that could protect individuals and save lives. According to […]

Death Penalty as a Source of Constant Controversy

The death penalty has been a source of almost constant controversy for hundreds of years, splitting the population down the middle with people supporting the death penalty and people that think it is unnecessary. The amount of people that are been against the death penalty has grown in recent years, causing the amount of executions to dwindle down to where there is less than one hundred every year. This number will continue to lessen as more and more people decide […]

Death Penalty is Politically Just?

Being wrongfully accused is unimaginable, but think if you were wrongfully accused and the ultimate punishment was death. Death penalty is one of the most controversial issues in today's society, but what is politically just? When a crime is committed most assume that the only acceptable consequence is to be put to death rather than thinking of another form of punishment. Religiously the death penalty is unfair because the, "USCCB concludes prisoners can change and find redemption through ministry outreach, […]

George Walker Bush and Death Penalty

George Walker Bush, a former U.S. president, and governor of Texas, once spoke, "I don't think you should support the death penalty to seek revenge. I don't think that's right. I think the reason to support the death penalty is because it saves other people's lives." The death penalty, or capital punishment, refers to the execution of a criminal convicted of a capital offense. With many criminals awaiting execution on death row, the death penalty has been a debated topic […]

Additional Example Essays

Death Penalty Should be Abolished
Main Reasons of Seperation from Great Britain
Leadership and the Army Profession
Letter From Birmingham Jail Rhetorical Analysis
Why Abortion Should be Illegal
Logical Fallacies in Letter From Birmingham Jail
How the Roles of Women and Men Were Portrayed in "A Doll's House"
Ethical or Unethical Behavior in Business
Does Arrest Reduce Domestic Violence
Recycling Should be Mandatory
Why I Want to Be an US Army Officer

How To Write an Essay About Death Penalty

Understanding the topic.

When writing an essay about the death penalty, the first step is to understand the depth and complexities of the topic. The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is a legal process where a person is put to death by the state as a punishment for a crime. This topic is highly controversial and evokes strong emotions on both sides of the debate. It's crucial to approach this subject with sensitivity and a balanced perspective, acknowledging the moral, legal, and ethical considerations involved. Research is key in this initial phase, as it's important to gather facts, statistics, and viewpoints from various sources to have a well-rounded understanding of the topic. This foundation will set the tone for your essay, guiding your argument and supporting your thesis.

Structuring the Argument

The next step is structuring your argument. In an essay about the death penalty, it's vital to present a clear thesis statement that outlines your stance on the issue. Are you for or against it? What are the reasons behind your position? The body of your essay should then systematically support your thesis through well-structured arguments. Each paragraph should focus on a specific aspect of the death penalty, such as its ethical implications, its effectiveness as a deterrent to crime, or the risk of wrongful convictions. Ensure that each point is backed up by evidence and examples, and remember to address counterarguments. This not only shows that you have considered multiple viewpoints but also strengthens your position by demonstrating why these opposing arguments may be less valid.

Exploring Ethical and Moral Dimensions

An essential aspect of writing an essay on the death penalty is exploring its ethical and moral dimensions. This involves delving into philosophical debates about the value of human life, justice, and retribution. It's important to discuss the moral justifications that are often used to defend the death penalty, such as the idea of 'an eye for an eye,' and to critically evaluate these arguments. Equally important is exploring the ethical arguments against the death penalty, including the potential for innocent people to be executed and the question of whether the state should have the power to take a life. This section of the essay should challenge readers to think deeply about their values and the principles of a just society.

Concluding Thoughts

In conclusion, revisit your thesis and summarize the key points made in your essay. This is your final opportunity to reinforce your argument and leave a lasting impression on your readers. Discuss the broader implications of the death penalty in society and consider potential future developments in this area. You might also want to offer recommendations or pose questions that encourage further reflection on the topic. Remember, a strong conclusion doesn't just restate what has been said; it provides closure and offers new insights, prompting readers to continue thinking about the subject long after they have finished reading your essay.

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

5 Death Penalty Essays Everyone Should Know

Capital punishment is an ancient practice. It’s one that human rights defenders strongly oppose and consider as inhumane and cruel. In 2019, Amnesty International reported the lowest number of executions in about a decade. Most executions occurred in China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Egypt . The United States is the only developed western country still using capital punishment. What does this say about the US? Here are five essays about the death penalty everyone should read:

“When We Kill”

By: Nicholas Kristof | From: The New York Times 2019

In this excellent essay, Pulitizer-winner Nicholas Kristof explains how he first became interested in the death penalty. He failed to write about a man on death row in Texas. The man, Cameron Todd Willingham, was executed in 2004. Later evidence showed that the crime he supposedly committed – lighting his house on fire and killing his three kids – was more likely an accident. In “When We Kill,” Kristof puts preconceived notions about the death penalty under the microscope. These include opinions such as only guilty people are executed, that those guilty people “deserve” to die, and the death penalty deters crime and saves money. Based on his investigations, Kristof concludes that they are all wrong.

Nicholas Kristof has been a Times columnist since 2001. He’s the winner of two Pulitizer Prices for his coverage of China and the Darfur genocide.

“An Inhumane Way of Death”

By: Willie Jasper Darden, Jr.

Willie Jasper Darden, Jr. was on death row for 14 years. In his essay, he opens with the line, “Ironically, there is probably more hope on death row than would be found in most other places.” He states that everyone is capable of murder, questioning if people who support capital punishment are just as guilty as the people they execute. Darden goes on to say that if every murderer was executed, there would be 20,000 killed per day. Instead, a person is put on death row for something like flawed wording in an appeal. Darden feels like he was picked at random, like someone who gets a terminal illness. This essay is important to read as it gives readers a deeper, more personal insight into death row.

Willie Jasper Darden, Jr. was sentenced to death in 1974 for murder. During his time on death row, he advocated for his innocence and pointed out problems with his trial, such as the jury pool that excluded black people. Despite worldwide support for Darden from public figures like the Pope, Darden was executed in 1988.

“We Need To Talk About An Injustice”

By: Bryan Stevenson | From: TED 2012

This piece is a transcript of Bryan Stevenson’s 2012 TED talk, but we feel it’s important to include because of Stevenson’s contributions to criminal justice. In the talk, Stevenson discusses the death penalty at several points. He points out that for years, we’ve been taught to ask the question, “Do people deserve to die for their crimes?” Stevenson brings up another question we should ask: “Do we deserve to kill?” He also describes the American death penalty system as defined by “error.” Somehow, society has been able to disconnect itself from this problem even as minorities are disproportionately executed in a country with a history of slavery.

Bryan Stevenson is a lawyer, founder of the Equal Justice Initiative, and author. He’s argued in courts, including the Supreme Court, on behalf of the poor, minorities, and children. A film based on his book Just Mercy was released in 2019 starring Michael B. Jordan and Jamie Foxx.

“I Know What It’s Like To Carry Out Executions”

By: S. Frank Thompson | From: The Atlantic 2019

In the death penalty debate, we often hear from the family of the victims and sometimes from those on death row. What about those responsible for facilitating an execution? In this opinion piece, a former superintendent from the Oregon State Penitentiary outlines his background. He carried out the only two executions in Oregon in the past 55 years, describing it as having a “profound and traumatic effect” on him. In his decades working as a correctional officer, he concluded that the death penalty is not working . The United States should not enact federal capital punishment.

Frank Thompson served as the superintendent of OSP from 1994-1998. Before that, he served in the military and law enforcement. When he first started at OSP, he supported the death penalty. He changed his mind when he observed the protocols firsthand and then had to conduct an execution.

“There Is No Such Thing As Closure on Death Row”

By: Paul Brown | From: The Marshall Project 2019

This essay is from Paul Brown, a death row inmate in Raleigh, North Carolina. He recalls the moment of his sentencing in a cold courtroom in August. The prosecutor used the term “closure” when justifying a death sentence. Who is this closure for? Brown theorizes that the prosecutors are getting closure as they end another case, but even then, the cases are just a way to further their careers. Is it for victims’ families? Brown is doubtful, as the death sentence is pursued even when the families don’t support it. There is no closure for Brown or his family as they wait for his execution. Vivid and deeply-personal, this essay is a must-read for anyone who wonders what it’s like inside the mind of a death row inmate.

Paul Brown has been on death row since 2000 for a double murder. He is a contributing writer to Prison Writers and shares essays on topics such as his childhood, his life as a prisoner, and more.

11 Examples of Systemic Injustices in the US

Women’s Rights 101: History, Examples, Activists

What is Social Activism?

15 Inspiring Movies about Activism

15 Examples of Civil Disobedience

Academia in Times of Genocide: Why are Students Across the World Protesting?

Pinkwashing 101: Definition, History, Examples

15 Inspiring Quotes for Black History Month

10 Inspiring Ways Women Are Fighting for Equality

15 Trusted Charities Fighting for Clean Water

15 Trusted Charities Supporting Trans People

15 Political Issues We Must Address

About the author, emmaline soken-huberty.

Emmaline Soken-Huberty is a freelance writer based in Portland, Oregon. She started to become interested in human rights while attending college, eventually getting a concentration in human rights and humanitarianism. LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and climate change are of special concern to her. In her spare time, she can be found reading or enjoying Oregon’s natural beauty with her husband and dog.

Top 10 Pro & Con Arguments

Life without Parole

Retribution

Victims’ Families

Methods of Execution

Medical Professionals’ Participation

Federal Death Penalty

1. Legality

The United States is one of 55 countries globally with a legal death penalty, according to Amnesty International. As of Mar. 24, 2021, within the US, 27 states had a legal death penalty (though 3 of those states had a moratorium on the punishment’s use).

Proponents of the death penalty being legal argue that such a harsh penalty is needed for criminals who have committed the worst crimes, that the punishment deters crime, and that the US Supreme Court has upheld the death penalty as constitutional.

Opponents of the death penalty being legal argue that the punishment is cruel and unusual, and, thus, unconstitutional, that innocent people are put to death for crimes they did not commit, and that the penalty is disproportionately applied to people of color.

People who view this page may also like:

States with the Death Penalty and States with Death Penalty Bans
US Executions by Race, Crime, Method, Age, Gender, State, & Year
Should Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide Be Legal?

ProCon/Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. 325 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 200 Chicago, Illinois 60654 USA

Natalie Leppard Managing Editor [email protected]

History of the Death Penalty
Top Pro & Con Quotes
Historical Timeline
Did You Know?
States with the Death Penalty, Death Penalty Bans, and Death Penalty Moratoriums
The ESPY List: US Executions 1608-2002
Federal Capital Offenses
Death Row Inmates
Critical Thinking Video Series: Thomas Edison Electrocutes Topsy the Elephant, Jan. 4, 1903

Cite This Page

Artificial Intelligence
Private Prisons
Space Colonization
Social Media
Death Penalty
School Uniforms
Video Games
Animal Testing
Gun Control
Banned Books
Teachers’ Corner

ProCon.org is the institutional or organization author for all ProCon.org pages. Proper citation depends on your preferred or required style manual. Below are the proper citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order): the Modern Language Association Style Manual (MLA), the Chicago Manual of Style (Chicago), the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA), and Kate Turabian's A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations (Turabian). Here are the proper bibliographic citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order):

[Editor's Note: The APA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

[Editor’s Note: The MLA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

Finding Sources for Death Penalty Research

Barry Winiker/photolibrary/Getty Images

Writing Research Papers
Writing Essays
English Grammar
M.Ed., Education Administration, University of Georgia
B.A., History, Armstrong State University

One of the most popular topics for an argument essay is the death penalty . When researching a topic for an argumentative essay , accuracy is important, which means the quality of your sources is important.

If you're writing a paper about the death penalty, you can start with this list of sources, which provide arguments for all sides of the topic.

Amnesty International Site

Amnesty International views the death penalty as "the ultimate, irreversible denial of human rights." This website provides a gold mine of statistics and the latest breaking news on the subject.

Mental Illness on Death Row

Death Penalty Focus is an organization that aims to bring about the abolition of capital punishment and is a great resource for information. You will find evidence that many of the people executed over the past decades are affected by a form of mental illness or disability.

Pros and Cons of the Death Penalty

This extensive article provides an overview of arguments for and against the death penalty and offers a history of notable events that have shaped the discourse for activists and proponents.

Pro-Death Penalty Links

This page comes from ProDeathPenalty and contains a state-by-state guide to capital punishment resources. You'll also find a list of papers written by students on topics related to capital punishment.

Ethos, Logos, Pathos for Persuasion
5 Steps to Writing a Position Paper
Unreliable Sources for Your Research Project
Writing an Annotated Bibliography for a Paper
Research Note Cards
How to Develop a Research Paper Timeline
Finding Trustworthy Sources
How to Write a 10-Page Research Paper
When to Cite a Source in a Paper
How to Narrow the Research Topic for Your Paper
How to Find Trustworthy Sources
What Is a Senior Thesis?
Research Paper Writing Checklist
What Is a Bibliography?
How to Use Verbs Effectively in Your Research Paper
How to Write a Solid Thesis Statement

The Case Against the Death Penalty

The American Civil Liberties Union believes the death penalty inherently violates the constitutional ban against cruel and unusual punishment and the guarantees of due process of law and of equal protection under the law. Furthermore, we believe that the state should not give itself the right to kill human beings – especially when it kills with premeditation and ceremony, in the name of the law or in the name of its people, and when it does so in an arbitrary and discriminatory fashion.

Capital punishment is an intolerable denial of civil liberties and is inconsistent with the fundamental values of our democratic system. The death penalty is uncivilized in theory and unfair and inequitable in practice. Through litigation, legislation, and advocacy against this barbaric and brutal institution, we strive to prevent executions and seek the abolition of capital punishment.

The ACLU’s opposition to capital punishment incorporates the following fundamental concerns:

The death penalty system in the US is applied in an unfair and unjust manner against people, largely dependent on how much money they have, the skill of their attorneys, race of the victim and where the crime took place . People of color are far more likely to be executed than white people, especially if thevictim is white

The death penalty is a waste of taxpayer funds and has no public safety benefit. The vast majority of law enforcement professionals surveyed agree that capital punishment does not deter violent crime; a survey of police chiefs nationwide found they rank the death penalty lowest among ways to reduce violent crime. They ranked increasing the number of police officers, reducing drug abuse, and creating a better economy with more jobs higher than the death penalty as the best ways to reduce violence. The FBI has found the states with the death penalty have the highest murder rates.

Innocent people are too often sentenced to death. Since 1973, over 156 people have been released from death rows in 26 states because of innocence. Nationally, at least one person is exonerated for every 10 that are executed.

INTRODUCTION TO THE “MODERN ERA” OF THE DEATH PENALTY IN THE UNITED STATES

In 1972, the Supreme Court declared that under then-existing laws "the imposition and carrying out of the death penalty… constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments." ( Furman v. Georgia , 408 U.S. 238). The Court, concentrating its objections on the manner in which death penalty laws had been applied, found the result so "harsh, freakish, and arbitrary" as to be constitutionally unacceptable. Making the nationwide impact of its decision unmistakable, the Court summarily reversed death sentences in the many cases then before it, which involved a wide range of state statutes, crimes and factual situations.

But within four years after the Furman decision, several hundred persons had been sentenced to death under new state capital punishment statutes written to provide guidance to juries in sentencing. These statutes require a two-stage trial procedure, in which the jury first determines guilt or innocence and then chooses imprisonment or death in the light of aggravating or mitigating circumstances.

In 1976, the Supreme Court moved away from abolition, holding that "the punishment of death does not invariably violate the Constitution." The Court ruled that the new death penalty statutes contained "objective standards to guide, regularize, and make rationally reviewable the process for imposing the sentence of death." ( Gregg v. Georgia , 428 U.S. 153). Subsequently 38 state legislatures and the Federal government enacted death penalty statutes patterned after those the Court upheld in Gregg. Congress also enacted and expanded federal death penalty statutes for peacetime espionage by military personnel and for a vast range of categories of murder.

Executions resumed in 1977. In 2002, the Supreme Court held executions of mentally retarded criminals are “cruel and unusual punishments” prohibited by the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution. Since then, states have developed a range of processes to ensure that mentally retarded individuals are not executed. Many have elected to hold proceedings prior to the merits trial, many with juries, to determine whether an accused is mentally retarded. In 2005, the Supreme Court held that the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution forbid imposition of the death penalty on offenders who were under the age of 18 when their crimes were committed, resulting in commutation of death sentences to life for dozens of individuals across the country. As of August 2012, over 3,200 men and women are under a death sentence and more than 1,300 men, women and children (at the time of the crime) have been executed since 1976 .

ACLU OBJECTIONS TO THE DEATH PENALTY

Despite the Supreme Court's 1976 ruling in Gregg v. Georgia , et al, the ACLU continues to oppose capital punishment on moral, practical, and constitutional grounds:

Capital punishment is cruel and unusual . It is cruel because it is a relic of the earliest days of penology, when slavery, branding, and other corporal punishments were commonplace. Like those barbaric practices, executions have no place in a civilized society. It is unusual because only the United States of all the western industrialized nations engages in this punishment. It is also unusual because only a random sampling of convicted murderers in the United States receive a sentence of death.

Capital punishment denies due process of law. Its imposition is often arbitrary, and always irrevocable – forever depriving an individual of the opportunity to benefit from new evidence or new laws that might warrant the reversal of a conviction, or the setting aside of a death sentence.

The death penalty violates the constitutional guarantee of equal protection . It is applied randomly – and discriminatorily. It is imposed disproportionately upon those whose victims are white, offenders who are people of color, and on those who are poor and uneducated and concentrated in certain geographic regions of the country.

The death penalty is not a viable form of crime control. When police chiefs were asked to rank the factors that, in their judgment, reduce the rate of violent crime, they mentioned curbing drug use and putting more officers on the street, longer sentences and gun control. They ranked the death penalty as least effective . Politicians who preach the desirability of executions as a method of crime control deceive the public and mask their own failure to identify and confront the true causes of crime.

Capital punishment wastes limited resources . It squanders the time and energy of courts, prosecuting attorneys, defense counsel, juries, and courtroom and law enforcement personnel. It unduly burdens the criminal justice system, and it is thus counterproductive as an instrument for society's control of violent crime. Limited funds that could be used to prevent and solve crime (and provide education and jobs) are spent on capital punishment.

Opposing the death penalty does not indicate a lack of sympathy for murder victims . On the contrary, murder demonstrates a lack of respect for human life. Because life is precious and death irrevocable, murder is abhorrent, and a policy of state-authorized killings is immoral. It epitomizes the tragic inefficacy and brutality of violence, rather than reason, as the solution to difficult social problems. Many murder victims do not support state-sponsored violence to avenge the death of their loved one. Sadly, these victims have often been marginalized by politicians and prosecutors, who would rather publicize the opinions of pro-death penalty family members.

Changes in death sentencing have proved to be largely cosmetic. The defects in death-penalty laws, conceded by the Supreme Court in the early 1970s, have not been appreciably altered by the shift from unrestrained discretion to "guided discretion." Such so-called “reforms” in death sentencing merely mask the impermissible randomness of a process that results in an execution.

A society that respects life does not deliberately kill human beings . An execution is a violent public spectacle of official homicide, and one that endorses killing to solve social problems – the worst possible example to set for the citizenry, and especially children. Governments worldwide have often attempted to justify their lethal fury by extolling the purported benefits that such killing would bring to the rest of society. The benefits of capital punishment are illusory, but the bloodshed and the resulting destruction of community decency are real.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IS NOT A DETERRENT TO CAPITAL CRIMES

Deterrence is a function not only of a punishment's severity, but also of its certainty and frequency. The argument most often cited in support of capital punishment is that the threat of execution influences criminal behavior more effectively than imprisonment does. As plausible as this claim may sound, in actuality the death penalty fails as a deterrent for several reasons.

A punishment can be an effective deterrent only if it is consistently and promptly employed. Capital punishment cannot be administered to meet these conditions .

The proportion of first-degree murderers who are sentenced to death is small, and of this group, an even smaller proportion of people are executed. Although death sentences in the mid-1990s increased to about 300 per year , this is still only about one percent of all homicides known to the police . Of all those convicted on a charge of criminal homicide, only 3 percent – about 1 in 33 – are eventually sentenced to death. Between 2001-2009, the average number of death sentences per year dropped to 137 , reducing the percentage even more. This tiny fraction of convicted murderers do not represent the “worst of the worst”.

Mandatory death sentencing is unconstitutional. The possibility of increasing the number of convicted murderers sentenced to death and executed by enacting mandatory death penalty laws was ruled unconstitutional in 1976 ( Woodson v. North Carolina , 428 U.S. 280).

A considerable time between the imposition of the death sentence and the actual execution is unavoidable, given the procedural safeguards required by the courts in capital cases. Starting with selecting the trial jury, murder trials take far longer when the ultimate penalty is involved. Furthermore, post-conviction appeals in death-penalty cases are far more frequent than in other cases. These factors increase the time and cost of administering criminal justice.

We can reduce delay and costs only by abandoning the procedural safeguards and constitutional rights of suspects, defendants, and convicts – with the attendant high risk of convicting the wrong person and executing the innocent. This is not a realistic prospect: our legal system will never reverse itself to deny defendants the right to counsel, or the right to an appeal.

Persons who commit murder and other crimes of personal violence often do not premeditate their crimes.

Most capital crimes are committed in the heat of the moment. Most capital crimes are committed during moments of great emotional stress or under the influence of drugs or alcohol, when logical thinking has been suspended. Many capital crimes are committed by the badly emotionally-damaged or mentally ill. In such cases, violence is inflicted by persons unable to appreciate the consequences to themselves as well as to others.

Even when crime is planned, the criminal ordinarily concentrates on escaping detection, arrest, and conviction. The threat of even the severest punishment will not discourage those who expect to escape detection and arrest. It is impossible to imagine how the threat of any punishment could prevent a crime that is not premeditated. Furthermore, the death penalty is a futile threat for political terrorists, like Timothy McVeigh, because they usually act in the name of an ideology that honors its martyrs.

Capital punishment doesn't solve our society's crime problem. Threatening capital punishment leaves the underlying causes of crime unaddressed, and ignores the many political and diplomatic sanctions (such as treaties against asylum for international terrorists) that could appreciably lower the incidence of terrorism.

Capital punishment has been a useless weapon in the so-called "war on drugs." The attempt to reduce murders in the drug trade by threat of severe punishment ignores the fact that anyone trafficking in illegal drugs is already risking his life in violent competition with other dealers. It is irrational to think that the death penalty – a remote threat at best – will avert murders committed in drug turf wars or by street-level dealers.

If, however, severe punishment can deter crime, then permanent imprisonment is severe enough to deter any rational person from committing a violent crime.

The vast preponderance of the evidence shows that the death penalty is no more effective than imprisonment in deterring murder and that it may even be an incitement to criminal violence. Death-penalty states as a group do not have lower rates of criminal homicide than non-death-penalty states. Use of the death penalty in a given state may actually increase the subsequent rate of criminal homicide. Why? Perhaps because "a return to the exercise of the death penalty weakens socially based inhibitions against the use of lethal force to settle disputes…. "

In adjacent states – one with the death penalty and the other without it – the state that practices the death penalty does not always show a consistently lower rate of criminal homicide. For example, between l990 and l994, the homicide rates in Wisconsin and Iowa (non-death-penalty states) were half the rates of their neighbor, Illinois – which restored the death penalty in l973, and by 1994 had sentenced 223 persons to death and carried out two executions . Between 2000-2010, the murder rate in states with capital punishment was 25-46% higher than states without the death penalty.

On-duty police officers do not suffer a higher rate of criminal assault and homicide in abolitionist states than they do in death-penalty states. Between 1976 and 1989, for example, lethal assaults against police were not significantly more or less frequent in abolitionist states than in death-penalty states. Capital punishment did not appear to provide officers added protection during that time frame. In fact, the three leading states in law enforcement homicide in 1996 were also very active death penalty states : California (highest death row population), Texas (most executions since 1976), and Florida (third highest in executions and death row population). The South, which accounts for more than 80% of the country’s executions, also has the highest murder rate of any region in the country. If anything, the death penalty incited violence rather than curbed it.

Prisoners and prison personnel do not suffer a higher rate of criminal assault and homicide from life-term prisoners in abolition states than they do in death-penalty states. Between 1992 and 1995, 176 inmates were murdered by other prisoners. The vast majority of those inmates (84%) were killed in death penalty jurisdictions. During the same period, about 2% of all inmate assaults on prison staff were committed in abolition jurisdictions . Evidently, the threat of the death penalty "does not even exert an incremental deterrent effect over the threat of a lesser punishment in the abolitionist states." Furthermore, multiple studies have shown that prisoners sentenced to life without parole have equivalent rates of prison violence as compared to other inmates.

Actual experience thus establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the death penalty does not deter murder. No comparable body of evidence contradicts that conclusion.

Furthermore, there are documented cases in which the death penalty actually incited the capital crimes it was supposed to deter. These include instances of the so-called suicide-by-execution syndrome – persons who wanted to die but feared taking their own lives, and committed murder so that the state would kill them. For example, in 1996, Daniel Colwell , who suffered from mental illness, claimed that he killed a randomly-selected couple in a Georgia parking lot so that the state would kill him – he was sentenced to death and ultimately took his own life while on death row.

Although inflicting the death penalty guarantees that the condemned person will commit no further crimes, it does not have a demonstrable deterrent effect on other individuals. Further, it is a high price to pay when studies show that few convicted murderers commit further crimes of violence. Researchers examined the prison and post-release records of 533 prisoners on death row in 1972 whose sentences were reduced to incarceration for life by the Supreme Court's ruling in Furman. This research showed that seven had committed another murder. But the same study showed that in four other cases, an innocent man had been sentenced to death. (Marquart and Sorensen, in Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 1989)

Recidivism among murderers does occasionally happen, but it occurs less frequently than most people believe; the media rarely distinguish between a convicted offender who murders while on parole, and a paroled murderer who murders again. Government data show that about one in 12 death row prisoners had a prior homicide conviction . But as there is no way to predict reliably which convicted murderers will try to kill again, the only way to prevent all such recidivism is to execute every convicted murderer – a policy no one seriously advocates. Equally effective but far less inhumane is a policy of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IS UNFAIR

Constitutional due process and elementary justice both require that the judicial functions of trial and sentencing be conducted with fundamental fairness, especially where the irreversible sanction of the death penalty is involved. In murder cases (since 1930, 88 percent of all executions have been for this crime), there has been substantial evidence to show that courts have sentenced some persons to prison while putting others to death in a manner that has been arbitrary, racially biased, and unfair.

Racial Bias in Death Sentencing

Racial discrimination was one of the grounds on which the Supreme Court ruled the death penalty unconstitutional in Furman . Half a century ago, in his classic American Dilemma (1944), Gunnar Myrdal reported that "the South makes the widest application of the death penalty, and Negro criminals come in for much more than their share of the executions." A study of the death penalty in Texas shows that the current capital punishment system is an outgrowth of the racist "legacy of slavery." Between 1930 and the end of 1996, 4,220 prisoners were executed in the United States; more than half (53%) were black .

Our nation's death rows have always held a disproportionately large population of African Americans, relative to their percentage of the total population. Comparing black and white offenders over the past century, the former were often executed for what were considered less-than-capital offenses for whites, such as rape and burglary. (Between 1930 and 1976, 455 men were executed for rape, of whom 405 – 90 percent – were black.) A higher percentage of the blacks who were executed were juveniles; and the rate of execution without having one's conviction reviewed by any higher court was higher for blacks. (Bowers, Legal Homicide 1984; Streib, Death Penalty for Juveniles 1987)

In recent years, it has been argued that such flagrant racial discrimination is a thing of the past. However, since the revival of the death penalty in the mid-1970s, about half of those on death row at any given time have been black . More striking is the racial comparison of victims . Although approximately 49% of all homicide victims are white, 77% of capital homicide cases since 1976 have involved a white victim.

Between 1976 and 2005 , 86% of white victims were killed by whites (14% by other races) while 94% of black victims were killed by blacks (6% by other races). Blacks and whites are murder victims in almost equal numbers of crimes – which is a very high percentage given that the general US population is 13% black. African-Americans are six times as likely as white Americans to die at the hands of a murderer, and roughly seven times as likely to murder someone. Young black men are fifteen times as likely to be murdered as young white men.

So given this information, when those under death sentence are examined more closely, it turns out that race is a decisive factor after all.

Further, studies like that commissioned by the Governor of Maryland found that “black offenders who kill white victims are at greater risk of a death sentence than others, primarily because they are substantially more likely to be charged by the state’s attorney with a capital offense.”

The classic statistical study of racial discrimination in capital cases in Georgia presented in the McCleskey case showed that "the average odds of receiving a death sentence among all indicted cases were 4.3 times higher in cases with white victims." (David C. Baldus et al., Equal Justice and the Death Penalty 1990) In 1987 these data were placed before the Supreme Court in McCleskey v. Kemp and while the Court did not dispute the statistical evidence, it held that evidence of an overall pattern of racial bias was not sufficient. Mr. McCleskey would have to prove racial bias in his own case – a virtually impossible task. The Court also held that the evidence failed to show that there was "a constitutionally significant risk of racial bias...." (481 U.S. 279) Although the Supreme Court declared that the remedy sought by the plaintiff was "best presented to the legislative bodies," subsequent efforts to persuade Congress to remedy the problem by enacting the Racial Justice Act were not successful. (Don Edwards & John Conyers, Jr., The Racial Justice Act – A Simple Matter of Justice, in University of Dayton Law Review 1995)

In 1990, the U.S. General Accounting Office reported to the Congress the results of its review of empirical studies on racism and the death penalty. The GAO concluded : "Our synthesis of the 28 studies shows a pattern of evidence indicating racial disparities in the charging, sentencing, and imposition of the death penalty after the Furman decision" and that "race of victim influence was found at all stages of the criminal justice system process..."

Texas was prepared to execute Duane Buck on September 15, 2011. Mr. Buck was condemned to death by a jury that had been told by an expert psychologist that he was more likely to be dangerous because he was African American. The Supreme Court stayed the case, but Mr. Buck has not yet received the new sentencing hearing justice requires.

These results cannot be explained away by relevant non-racial factors, such as prior criminal record or type of crime, as these were factored for in the Baldus and GAO studies referred to above. They lead to a very unsavory conclusion: In the trial courts of this nation, even at the present time, the killing of a white person is treated much more severely than the killing of a black person . Of the 313 persons executed between January 1977 and the end of 1995, 36 had been convicted of killing a black person while 249 (80%) had killed a white person. Of the 178 white defendants executed, only three had been convicted of murdering people of color . Our criminal justice system essentially reserves the death penalty for murderers (regardless of their race) who kill white victims.

Another recent Louisiana study found that defendants with white victims were 97% more likely to receive death sentences than defendants with black victims. [1]

Both gender and socio-economic class also determine who receives a death sentence and who is executed. Women account for only two percent of all people sentenced to death , even though females commit about 11 percent of all criminal homicides. Many of the women under death sentence were guilty of killing men who had victimized them with years of violent abuse . Since 1900, only 51 women have been executed in the United States (15 of them black).

Discrimination against the poor (and in our society, racial minorities are disproportionately poor) is also well established. It is a prominent factor in the availability of counsel.

Fairness in capital cases requires, above all, competent counsel for the defendant. Yet "approximately 90 percent of those on death row could not afford to hire a lawyer when they were tried.") Common characteristics of death-row defendants are poverty, the lack of firm social roots in the community, and inadequate legal representation at trial or on appeal. As Justice William O. Douglas noted in Furman , "One searches our chronicles in vain for the execution of any member of the affluent strata in this society"(408 US 238).

Failure of Safeguards

The demonstrated inequities in the actual administration of capital punishment should tip the balance against it in the judgment of fair-minded and impartial observers. "Whatever else might be said for the use of death as a punishment, one lesson is clear from experience: this is a power that we cannot exercise fairly and without discrimination."(Gross and Mauro, Death and Discrimination 1989)

Justice John Marshall Harlan, writing for the Court in Furman , noted "… the history of capital punishment for homicides … reveals continual efforts, uniformly unsuccessful, to identify before the fact those homicides for which the slayer should die…. Those who have come to grips with the hard task of actually attempting to draft means of channeling capital sentencing discretion have confirmed the lesson taught by history…. To identify before the fact those characteristics of criminal homicides and their perpetrators which call for the death penalty, and to express these characteristics in language which can be fairly understood and applied by the sentencing authority, appear to be tasks which are beyond present human ability." (402 U.S. 183 (1971))

Yet in the Gregg decision, the majority of the Supreme Court abandoned the wisdom of Justice Harlan and ruled as though the new guided-discretion statutes could accomplish the impossible. The truth is that death statutes approved by the Court "do not effectively restrict the discretion of juries by any real standards, and they never will. No society is going to kill everybody who meets certain preset verbal requirements, put on the statute books without awareness of coverage of the infinity of special factors the real world can produce."

Evidence obtained by the Capital Jury Project has shown that jurors in capital trials generally do not understand the judge's instructions about the laws that govern the choice between imposing the death penalty and a life sentence. Even when they do comprehend, jurors often refuse to be guided by the law. "Juror comprehension of the law… is mediocre. The effect [of this relative lack of comprehension of the law]… is to reduce the likelihood that capital defendants will benefit from the safeguards against arbitrariness built into the… law."

Even if the jury's sentencing decision were strictly governed by the relevant legal criteria, there remains a vast reservoir of unfettered discretion: the prosecutor's decision to prosecute for a capital or lesser crime, the court's willingness to accept or reject a guilty plea, the jury's decision to convict for second-degree murder or manslaughter rather than capital murder, the determination of the defendant's sanity, and the governor's final clemency decision, among others.

Discretion in the criminal justice system is unavoidable. The history of capital punishment in America clearly demonstrates the social desire to mitigate the harshness of the death penalty by narrowing the scope of its application. Whether or not explicitly authorized by statutes, sentencing discretion has been the main vehicle to this end. But when sentencing discretion is used – as it too often has been – to doom the poor, the friendless, the uneducated, racial minorities, and the despised, it becomes injustice.

Mindful of such facts, the House of Delegates of the American Bar Association (including 20 out of 24 former presidents of the ABA) called for a moratorium on all executions by a vote of 280 to 119 in February 1997 . The House judged the current system to be "a haphazard maze of unfair practices."

In its 1996 survey of the death penalty in the United States, the International Commission of Jurists reinforced this point. Despite the efforts made over the past two decades since Gregg to protect the administration of the death penalty from abuses, the actual "constitutional errors committed in state courts have gravely undermined the legitimacy of the death penalty as a punishment for crime." (International Commission of Jurists, Administration of the Death Penalty in the United States 1996)

In 2009, the American Law Institute (ALI), the leading independent organization in the U.S. producing scholarly work to clarify, modernize and improve the law, removed capital punishment from its Model Penal Code. The ALI, which created the modern legal framework for the death penalty in 1962, indicated that the punishment is so arbitrary, fraught with racial and economic disparities, and unable to assure quality legal representation for indigent capital defendants, that it can never be administered fairly.

Thoughtful citizens, who might possibly support the abstract notion of capital punishment, are obliged to condemn it in actual practice.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IS IRREVERSIBLE

Unlike any other criminal punishments, the death penalty is irrevocable. Speaking to the French Chamber of Deputies in 1830, years after having witnessed the excesses of the French Revolution, the Marquis de Lafayette said, "I shall ask for the abolition of the punishment of death until I have the infallibility of human judgment demonstrated to me." Although some proponents of capital punishment would argue that its merits are worth the occasional execution of innocent people, most would hasten to insist that there is little likelihood of the innocent being executed.

Since 1900, in this country, there have been on the average more than four cases each year in which an entirely innocent person was convicted of murder. Scores of these individuals were sentenced to death. In many cases, a reprieve or commutation arrived just hours, or even minutes, before the scheduled execution. These erroneous convictions have occurred in virtually every jurisdiction from one end of the nation to the other. Nor have they declined in recent years, despite the new death penalty statutes approved by the Supreme Court.

Disturbingly, and increasingly, a large body of evidence from the modern era shows that innocent people are often convicted of crimes – including capital crimes – and that some have been executed.

In 2012, a new report in the Columbia Human Rights Law Review chronicled the horrifying case of Carlos DeLuna, a man executed in Texas in 1989 for a murder that it was “common knowledge” had been committed by another man. [2] DeLuna’s story demonstrates so many of the factors that can go wrong in a capital case: faulty eyewitness identification, prosecutorial misconduct, police misconduct, a botched crime scene, destroyed DNA evidence, a poor person represented by ineffective by an ineffective inexperienced defense attorney overmatched by a professional prosecutor, and insufficient oversight from the bench. [3] In its case against DeLuna, the State presented no blood or DNA evidence, no crime scene fingerprints, and no proof of hair or fibers from the victim having been found on the defendant. He was convicted largely based on eyewitness testimony made from the back of a police car in a dimly lit lot near the crime scene. Meanwhile, a violent criminal named Carlos Hernandez—a man who not only shared DeLuna’s name, but also looked like him—repeatedly boasted about how he had committed the murder and gotten away with it. [4] These disturbing facts about DeLuna’s case, brought to light more than two decades after his execution, refute the claim, made by some proponents of capital punishment, that the United States has never executed an innocent person. [5]

Consider this additional handful of cases of innocent people sentenced to die – some executed and some spared:

In 2011, the state of Georgia executed Troy Davis, a Black man who was almost certainly innocent of the murder of a white off-duty police officer. The circumstances of his execution raised an international outcry, for good reason. Davis was convicted based on eyewitness testimony, since there was no murder weapon or physical evidence presented by the prosecution. Seven of the nine eyewitnesses recanted or contradicted their trial testimony, many of them saying they were pressured or threatened by police at the time. Troy Davis came close to execution three previous times, because of the difficulty of getting any court to listen to new evidence casting doubt on his conviction. After passage of a federal law in 1996, petitioners are very limited in their ability to appeal death sentences, and courts routinely refuse to hear new testimony, even evidence of innocence. When Troy Davis finally did get a hearing on his evidence, the judge required “proof of innocence” – an impossibly high standard which he ruled that Mr. Davis did not meet. Despite the overwhelming call for clemency, supposed to be the “fail-safe” of the death penalty system, the Georgia Board of Pardons refused to commute the sentence to life and Mr. Davis was executed. Only one day after Troy Davis was executed, two men were freed by the special Innocence Commission of North Carolina after a decade apiece in prison. The two men had actually pled guilty to a crime they did not commit, because they were threatened with the death penalty.
In Texas in 2004, Cameron Todd Willingham was executed for the arson-murder of his three children. Independent investigations by a newspaper, a nonprofit organization using top experts in the field of fire science, and an independent expert hired by the State of Texas all found that accident, not arson was the cause of the fire. There simply was no reliable evidence that the children were murdered. Yet even with these reports in hand, the state of Texas executed Mr. Willingham. Earlier this year, the Texas Forensic Science Commission was poised to issue a report officially confirming these conclusions until Texas Governor Rick Perry replaced the Commission’s chair and some of its members. Cameron Todd Willingham, who claimed innocence all along, was executed for a crime he almost certainly did not commit. As an example of the arbitrariness of the death penalty, another man, Ernest Willis, also convicted of arson-murder on the same sort of flimsy and unscientific testimony, was freed from Texas death row six months after Willingham was executed.
In 1985, in Maryland, Kirk Bloodsworth was sentenced to death for rape and murder, despite the testimony of alibi witnesses. In 1986 his conviction was reversed on grounds of withheld evidence pointing to another suspect; he was retried, re-convicted, and sentenced to life in prison. In 1993, newly available DNA evidence proved he was not the rapist-killer, and he was released after the prosecution dismissed the case. A year later he was awarded $300,000 for wrongful punishment. Years later the DNA was matched to the real killer.
In Mississippi, in 1990, Sabrina Butler was sentenced to death for killing her baby boy. She claimed the child died after attempts at resuscitation failed. On technical grounds her conviction was reversed in 1992. At retrial, she was acquitted when a neighbor corroborated Butler's explanation of the child's cause of death and the physician who performed the autopsy admitted his work had not been thorough.
In 1990, Jesse Tafero was executed in Florida. He had been convicted in 1976 along with his wife, Sonia Jacobs, for murdering a state trooper. In 1981 Jacobs' death sentence was reduced on appeal to life imprisonment, and 11 years later her conviction was vacated by a federal court. The evidence on which Tafero and Jacobs had been convicted and sentenced was identical; it consisted mainly of the perjured testimony of an ex-convict who turned state's witness in order to avoid a death sentence. Had Tafero been alive in 1992, he no doubt would have been released along with Jacobs. Tafero’s execution went horribly wrong, and his head caught on fire during the electrocution.
In Alabama, Walter McMillian was convicted of murdering a white woman in 1988. Despite the jury's recommendation of a life sentence, the judge sentenced him to death. The sole evidence leading the police to arrest McMillian was testimony of an ex-convict seeking favor with the prosecution. A dozen alibi witnesses (all African Americans, like McMillian) testified on McMillian's behalf that they were together at a neighborhood gathering, to no avail. On appeal, after tireless efforts by his attorney Bryan Stevenson, McMillian's conviction was reversed by the Alabama Court of Appeals. Stevenson uncovered prosecutorial suppression of exculpatory evidence and perjury by prosecution witnesses, and the new district attorney joined the defense in seeking dismissal of the charges.
In 1985, in Illinois, Rolando Cruz and Alejandro Hernandez were convicted of abduction, rape, and murder of a young girl and were sentenced to death. Shortly after, another man serving a life term in prison for similar crimes confessed that he alone was guilty; but his confession was inadmissible because he refused to repeat it in court unless the state waived the death penalty against him. Awarded a new trial in 1988, Cruz was again convicted and sentenced to death; Hernandez was also re-convicted, and sentenced to 80 years in prison. In 1992 the assistant attorney general assigned to prosecute the case on appeal resigned after becoming convinced of the defendants' innocence. The convictions were again overturned on appeal after DNA tests exonerated Cruz and implicated the prisoner who had earlier confessed. In 1995 the court ordered a directed verdict of acquittal, and sharply criticized the police for their unprofessional handling of the case. Hernandez was released on bail and the prosecution dropped all charges.
In 1980 in Texas a black high school janitor, Clarence Brandley, and his white co-worker found the body of a missing 16-year-old white schoolgirl. Interrogated by the police, they were told, "One of you two is going to hang for this." Looking at Brandley, the officer said, "Since you're the nigger, you're elected." In a classic case of rush to judgment, Brandley was tried, convicted, and sentenced to death. The circumstantial evidence against him was thin, other leads were ignored by the police, and the courtroom atmosphere reeked of racism. In 1986, Centurion Ministries – a volunteer group devoted to freeing wrongly convicted prisoners – came to Brandley's aid. Evidence had meanwhile emerged that another man had committed the murder for which Brandley was awaiting execution. Brandley was not released until 1990. (Davies, White Lies 1991)

This sample of freakish and arbitrary innocence determinations also speaks directly to the unceasing concern that there are many more innocent people on death rows across the country – as well as who have been executed. Several factors seen in the above sample of cases help explain why the judicial system cannot guarantee that justice will never miscarry: overzealous prosecution, mistaken or perjured testimony, race, faulty police work, coerced confessions, the defendant's previous criminal record, inept and under-resourced defense counsel, seemingly conclusive circumstantial evidence, and community pressure for a conviction, among others. And when the system does go wrong, it is often volunteers from outside the criminal justice system – journalists, for example – who rectify the errors, not the police or prosecutors. To retain the death penalty in the face of the demonstrable failures of the system is unacceptable, especially since there are no strong overriding reasons to favor the death penalty.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IS BARBARIC

Prisoners are executed in the United States by any one of five methods; in a few jurisdictions the prisoner is allowed to choose which one he or she prefers:

The traditional mode of execution, hanging , is an option still available in Delaware, New Hampshire and Washington. Death on the gallows is easily bungled: If the drop is too short, there will be a slow and agonizing death by strangulation. If the drop is too long, the head will be torn off.

Two states, Idaho and Utah, still authorize the firing squad . The prisoner is strapped into a chair and hooded. A target is pinned to the chest. Five marksmen, one with blanks, take aim and fire.

Throughout the twentieth century, electrocution has been the most widely used form of execution in this country, and is still utilized in eleven states, although lethal injection is the primary method of execution. The condemned prisoner is led – or dragged – into the death chamber, strapped into the chair, and electrodes are fastened to head and legs. When the switch is thrown the body strains, jolting as the voltage is raised and lowered. Often smoke rises from the head. There is the awful odor of burning flesh. No one knows how long electrocuted individuals retain consciousness. In 1983, the electrocution of John Evans in Alabama was described by an eyewitness as follows:

"At 8:30 p.m. the first jolt of 1900 volts of electricity passed through Mr. Evans' body. It lasted thirty seconds. Sparks and flames erupted … from the electrode tied to Mr. Evans' left leg. His body slammed against the straps holding him in the electric chair and his fist clenched permanently. The electrode apparently burst from the strap holding it in place. A large puff of grayish smoke and sparks poured out from under the hood that covered Mr. Evans' face. An overpowering stench of burnt flesh and clothing began pervading the witness room. Two doctors examined Mr. Evans and declared that he was not dead.

"The electrode on the left leg was re-fastened. …Mr. Evans was administered a second thirty second jolt of electricity. The stench of burning flesh was nauseating. More smoke emanated from his leg and head. Again, the doctors examined Mr. Evans. [They] reported that his heart was still beating, and that he was still alive. At that time, I asked the prison commissioner, who was communicating on an open telephone line to Governor George Wallace, to grant clemency on the grounds that Mr. Evans was being subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. The request …was denied.

"At 8:40 p.m., a third charge of electricity, thirty seconds in duration, was passed through Mr. Evans' body. At 8:44, the doctors pronounced him dead. The execution of John Evans took fourteen minutes." Afterwards, officials were embarrassed by what one observer called the "barbaric ritual." The prison spokesman remarked, "This was supposed to be a very clean manner of administering death."

The introduction of the gas chamber was an attempt to improve on electrocution. In this method of execution the prisoner is strapped into a chair with a container of sulfuric acid underneath. The chamber is sealed, and cyanide is dropped into the acid to form a lethal gas. Execution by suffocation in the lethal gas chamber has not been abolished but lethal injection serves as the primary method in states which still authorize it. In 1996 a panel of judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in California (where the gas chamber has been used since 1933) ruled that this method is a "cruel and unusual punishment." Here is an account of the 1992 execution in Arizona of Don Harding, as reported in the dissent by U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens:

"When the fumes enveloped Don's head he took a quick breath. A few seconds later he again looked in my direction. His face was red and contorted as if he were attempting to fight through tremendous pain. His mouth was pursed shut and his jaw was clenched tight. Don then took several more quick gulps of the fumes.

"At this point Don's body started convulsing violently.... His face and body turned a deep red and the veins in his temple and neck began to bulge until I thought they might explode. After about a minute Don's face leaned partially forward, but he was still conscious. Every few seconds he continued to gulp in. He was shuddering uncontrollably and his body was racked with spasms. His head continued to snap back. His hands were clenched.

"After several more minutes, the most violent of the convulsions subsided. At this time the muscles along Don's left arm and back began twitching in a wavelike motion under his skin. Spittle drooled from his mouth.

"Don did not stop moving for approximately eight minutes, and after that he continued to twitch and jerk for another minute. Approximately two minutes later, we were told by a prison official that the execution was complete.

“Don Harding took ten minutes and thirty one seconds to die." ( Gomez v. U.S. District Court , 112 S.Ct. 1652)

The latest mode of inflicting the death penalty, enacted into law by more than 30 states, is lethal injection , first used in 1982 in Texas. It is easy to overstate the humaneness and efficacy of this method; one cannot know whether lethal injection is really painless and there is evidence that it is not. As the U.S. Court of Appeals observed, there is "substantial and uncontroverted evidence… that execution by lethal injection poses a serious risk of cruel, protracted death…. Even a slight error in dosage or administration can leave a prisoner conscious but paralyzed while dying, a sentient witness of his or her own asphyxiation." ( Chaney v. Heckler , 718 F.2d 1174, 1983).

Its veneer of decency and subtle analogy with life-saving medical practice no doubt makes killing by lethal injection more acceptable to the public. Journalist Susan Blaustein, reacting to having witnessed an execution in Texas, comments:

"The lethal injection method … has turned dying into a still life, thereby enabling the state to kill without anyone involved feeling anything…. Any remaining glimmers of doubt – about whether the man received due process, about his guilt, about our right to take life – cause us to rationalize these deaths with such catchwords as ‘heinous,’ ‘deserved,’ ‘deterrent,’ ‘justice,’ and ‘painless.’ We have perfected the art of institutional killing to the degree that it has deadened our natural, quintessentially human response to death."

Botched Lethal Injections

Nor does execution by lethal injection always proceed smoothly as planned. In 1985 "the authorities repeatedly jabbed needles into … Stephen Morin, when they had trouble finding a usable vein because he had been a drug abuser." In 1988, during the execution of Raymond Landry, "a tube attached to a needle inside the inmate's right arm began leaking, sending the lethal mixture shooting across the death chamber toward witnesses."

Although the U.S. Supreme Court has held that the current method of lethal injection used is constitutional, several people have suffered because of this form of execution. In Ohio, Rommel Broom was subjected to 18 attempts at finding a vein so that he could be killed by lethal injection. The process to try to execute him took over two hours. Finally, the governor had to stop the execution and grant the inmate a one week reprieve. Mr. Broom has not been executed because he is challenging the state’s right to hold a second execution attempt. Nor was he the only Ohio inmate so maltreated. During his 2006 execution Joseph Clark screamed, “it don’t work” and requested to take something by mouth so the torture would end when his executioners took thirty minutes to find a vein. Christopher Newton’s execution took over two hours – so long that he had to be given a bathroom break.

Lethal Injection Protocol Issues

Most lethal injections in the United States use a “cocktail” consisting of three drugs that sequentially render an inmate unconscious, cause paralysis and cease breathing, and stop an inmate’s heart. [6] But in 2011, the sole American manufacturer of sodium thiopental, a vital part of the three-drug cocktail, decided to discontinue production, forcing states to adapt their lethal injection methodology. [7] Some states have replaced the three-drug cocktail with a single substance, [8] while others have replaced thiopental in the three-drug sequence with another anesthetic. [9] Both three-drug and single-drug executions raise vital concerns: the three-drug cocktail’s paralyzing sedative may mask the inmate’s pain and suffering, while the single-drug method takes about 25 minutes to end a life (if there are no complications), compared with the ten-minute three-drug process. [10]

Although the Supreme Court held in 2008 that Kentucky’s three-drug lethal injection procedure did not violate the Constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment, [11] it is unclear whether states’ adapted procedures pass muster. Indeed, in February 2012, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals admonished the Arizona Department of Corrections, stating that its approach to execution “cannot continue” and questioning the “regularity and reliability” of protocols that give complete discretion to the corrections director to determine which and how many drugs will be used for each execution. [12] In Georgia, the state Supreme Court stayed the execution of Warren Hill hours before he was scheduled to die in July 2012 in order to review the Department of Corrections’ new single-drug lethal injection procedure. [13] The Missouri Supreme Court imposed a temporary moratorium on executions in August 2012, declaring that it would be “premature” to set execution dates for death row inmates given a pending lawsuit about whether the state’s lethal injection procedures are humane. The state had amended its injection protocol to use a single drug, propofol, which advocates say causes severe pain upon injection. [14]

Although similar suits are pending in other states, [15] not all protocol-based challenges have succeeded; in Texas and Oklahoma, executions have continued despite questions about the potential cruelty of lethal injection and the type or number of chemicals used. [16]

Regardless of whether states use one or three drugs for an execution, all of the major lethal injection drugs are in short supply due to manufacturers’ efforts to prevent the use of their products for executions [17] and European Union restrictions on the exportation of drugs that may be used to kill. [18] As a result, some state executioners have pursued questionable means of obtaining the deadly chemicals from other states and foreign companies, including a pharmaceutical wholesaler operating out of the back of a London driving school. [19] These backroom deals—which, astoundingly, have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)—are now the subject of federal litigation that could impact the legitimacy of the American death penalty system. In March 2012, six death row inmates argued that the FDA had shirked its duty to regulate lethal substances and raised concerns about the “very real risk that unapproved thiopental will not actually render a condemned prisoner unconscious.” [20] A federal district judge agreed and ordered the FDA to confiscate the imported thiopental, but the agency has appealed. [21]

Witnessing the Execution

Most people who have observed an execution are horrified and disgusted. "I was ashamed," writes sociologist Richard Moran, who witnessed an execution in Texas in 1985. "I was an intruder, the only member of the public who had trespassed on [the condemned man's] private moment of anguish. In my face he could see the horror of his own death."

Revulsion at the duty to supervise and witness executions is one reason why so many prison wardens – however unsentimental they are about crime and criminals – are opponents of capital punishment. Don Cabana, who supervised several executions in Missouri and Mississippi reflects on his mood just prior to witnessing an execution in the gas chamber:

"If [the condemned prisoner] was some awful monster deemed worthy of extermination, why did I feel so bad about it, I wondered. It has been said that men on death row are inhuman, cold-blooded killers. But as I stood and watched a grieving mother leave her son for the last time, I questioned how the sordid business of executions was supposed to be the great equalizer…. The 'last mile' seemed an eternity, every step a painful reminder of what waited at the end of the walk. Where was the cold-blooded murderer, I wondered, as we approached the door to the last-night cell. I had looked for that man before… and I still had not found him – I saw, in my grasp, only a frightened child. [Minutes after the execution and before] heading for the conference room and a waiting press corps, I… shook my head. 'No more. I don't want to do this anymore.'" 1996)

Recently, Allen Ault, former executioner for the State of Georgia, wrote , “The men and women who assist in executions are not psychopaths or sadists. They do their best to perform the impossible and inhumane job with which the state has charged them. Those of us who have participated in executions often suffer something very much like posttraumatic stress. Many turn to alcohol and drugs. For me, those nights that weren’t sleepless were plagued by nightmares.”

For some individuals, however, executions seem to appeal to strange, aberrant impulses and provide an outlet for sadistic urges. Warden Lewis Lawes of Sing Sing Prison in New York wrote of the many requests he received to watch electrocutions, and told that when the job of executioner became vacant. "I received more than seven hundred applications for the position, many of them offering cut-rate prices." (Life and Death in Sing Sing 1928)

Public executions were common in this country during the 19th and early 20th centuries. One of the last ones occurred in 1936 in Kentucky, when 20,000 people gathered to watch the hanging of a young African American male. (Teeters, in Journal of the Lancaster County Historical Society 1960)

Delight in brutality, pain, violence and death may always be with us. But surely we must conclude that it is best for the law not to encourage such impulses. When the government sanctions, commands, and ceremoniously carries out the execution of a prisoner, it lends support to this destructive side of human nature.

More than two centuries ago the Italian jurist Cesare Beccaria, in his highly influential treatise On Crimes and Punishment (1764), asserted: "The death penalty cannot be useful, because of the example of barbarity it gives men." Beccaria's words still ring true – even if the death penalty were a "useful" deterrent, it would still be an "example of barbarity." No society can safely entrust the enforcement of its laws to torture, brutality, or killing. Such methods are inherently cruel and will always mock the attempt to cloak them in justice. As Supreme Court Justice Arthur J. Goldberg wrote, "The deliberate institutionalized taking of human life by the state is the greatest conceivable degradation to the dignity of the human personality."(Boston Globe, August 16, 1976)

Death Row Syndrome

Capital appeals are not only costly; they are also time-consuming. The average death row inmate waits 12 years between sentencing and execution, and some sit in anticipation of their executions on death row for up to 30 years. [22] For these prisoners, most of whom are housed in solitary confinement, this wait period may cause “Death Row Phenomenon” or “Death Row Syndrome.” Although the terms are often used interchangeably, “Death Row Phenomenon” refers to the destructive consequences of long-term solitary confinement [23] and the inevitable anxiety that results from awaiting one’s own death, while “Death Row Syndrome” refers to the severe psychological illness that often results from Death Row Phenomenon. [24]

In solitary confinement, inmates are often isolated for 23 hours each day without access to training or educational programs, recreational activities, or regular visits. Such conditions have been demonstrated to provoke agitation, psychosis, delusions, paranoia, and self-destructive behavior. [25] To inflict this type of mental harm is inhumane, but it also may prove detrimental to public safety. When death row inmates successfully appeal their sentences, they are transferred into the general inmate population, and when death row inmates are exonerated, they are promptly released into the community. [26] Death Row Syndrome needlessly risks making these individuals dangerous to those around them.

Neither Death Row Syndrome nor Death Row Phenomenon has received formal recognition from the American Psychiatric Association or the American Psychological Association. [27] In 1995, however, Justices Stevens and Breyer, in a memorandum regarding the Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari to death row inmate Clarence Lackey, highlighted the “importance and novelty” of the question “whether executing a prisoner who has already spent some 17 years on death row violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.” [28] Further, as some scholars and advocates have noted, the mental deterioration symptomatic of Death Row Syndrome may render an inmate incompetent to participate in their own post-conviction proceedings. [29]

Death Row Syndrome gained international recognition during the 1989 extradition proceedings of Jens Soering, a German citizen arrested in England and charged with committing murder on American soil. [30] Soering argued, and the European Court of Human Rights agreed, that extraditing him to the United States would violate Article 3 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. [31] The Court explained that, in the United States, “the condemned prisoner has to endure for many years the conditions on death row and the anguish and mounting tension of living in the ever-present shadow of death” such that extraditing Soering would violate protections against “inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” [32] Similar conclusions have been reached by the United Kingdom’s Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, the United Nations Human Rights Committee, and the Canadian Supreme Court. [33]

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IS UNJUSTIFIED RETRIBUTION

Justice, it is often insisted, requires the death penalty as the only suitable retribution for heinous crimes. This claim does not bear scrutiny, however. By its nature, all punishment is retributive. Therefore, whatever legitimacy is to be found in punishment as just retribution can, in principle, be satisfied without recourse to executions.

Moreover, the death penalty could be defended on narrowly retributive grounds only for the crime of murder, and not for any of the many other crimes that have frequently been made subject to this mode of punishment (rape, kidnapping, espionage, treason, drug trafficking). Few defenders of the death penalty are willing to confine themselves consistently to the narrow scope afforded by retribution. In any case, execution is more than a punishment exacted in retribution for the taking of a life. As Nobel Laureate Albert Camus wrote, "For there to be equivalence, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months. Such a monster is not encountered in private life." (Reflections on the Guillotine, in Resistance, Rebellion, and Death 1960)

It is also often argued that death is what murderers deserve, and that those who oppose the death penalty violate the fundamental principle that criminals should be punished according to their just desserts – "making the punishment fit the crime." If this rule means punishments are unjust unless they are like the crime itself, then the principle is unacceptable: It would require us to rape rapists, torture torturers, and inflict other horrible and degrading punishments on offenders. It would require us to betray traitors and kill multiple murderers again and again – punishments that are, of course, impossible to inflict. Since we cannot reasonably aim to punish all crimes according to this principle, it is arbitrary to invoke it as a requirement of justice in the punishment of murder.

If, however, the principle of just deserts means the severity of punishments must be proportional to the gravity of the crime – and since murder is the gravest crime, it deserves the severest punishment – then the principle is no doubt sound. Nevertheless, this premise does not compel support for the death penalty; what it does require is that other crimes be punished with terms of imprisonment or other deprivations less severe than those used in the punishment of murder.

Criminals no doubt deserve to be punished, and the severity of the punishment should be appropriate to their culpability and the harm they have caused the innocent. But severity of punishment has its limits – imposed by both justice and our common human dignity. Governments that respect these limits do not use premeditated, violent homicide as an instrument of social policy.

Murder Victims Families Oppose the Death Penalty

Some people who have lost a loved one to murder believe that they cannot rest until the murderer is executed. But this sentiment is by no means universal. Coretta Scott King has observed, "As one whose husband and mother-in-law have died the victims of murder and assassination, I stand firmly and unequivocally opposed to the death penalty for those convicted of capital offenses. An evil deed is not redeemed by an evil deed of retaliation. Justice is never advanced in the taking of a human life. Morality is never upheld by a legalized murder." (Speech to National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, Washington, D.C., September 26, 1981)

Kerry Kennedy Cuomo, daughter of the slain Senator Robert Kennedy, has written:

"I was eight years old when my father was murdered. It is almost impossible to describe the pain of losing a parent to a senseless murder.…But even as a child one thing was clear to me: I didn't want the killer, in turn, to be killed. I remember lying in bed and praying, 'Please, God. Please don't take his life too.' I saw nothing that could be accomplished in the loss of one life being answered with the loss of another. And I knew, far too vividly, the anguish that would spread through another family – another set of parents, children, brothers, and sisters thrown into grief."(Foreword to Gray and Stanley, A Punishment in Search of A Crime 1989)

Across the nation, many who have survived the murder of a loved one have joined Murder Victims' Families for Reconciliation or Murder Victims Families for Human Rights, in the effort to replace anger and hate toward the criminal with a restorative approach to both the offender and the bereaved survivors.

Groups of murder victims family members have supported campaigns for abolition of the death penalty in Illinois, Connecticut, Montana and Maryland most recently.

Barbara Anderson Young, the sister of James Anderson, who was allegedly run over by a white teenager in Mississippi in 2011, who reportedly wanted to hurt him because he was Black, wrote a letter to the local prosecutor on behalf of their family indicating the family’s opposition to the death penalty, which is “deeply rooted in our religious faith, a faith that was central in James’ life as well.” The letter also eloquently asks that the defendant be spared execution because the death penalty “historically has been used in Mississippi and the South primarily against people of color for killing whites.” It continues, “[e]xecuting James' killers will not help balance the scales. But sparing them may help to spark a dialogue that one day will lead to the elimination of capital punishment."

Lawrence Brewer, convicted of the notorious dragging death of James Byrd in Texas, was executed in 2011. Members of Mr. Byrd’s family opposed the death penalty, despite the racist and vicious nature of the killing. Of Brewer’s remorseless – he said he had no regrets the day he was executed – Byrd’s sister, Betty Boatner, said, “If I could say something to him, I would let him know that I forgive him and then if he still has no remorse, I just feel sorry for him.” Byrd’s daughter shared that she didn’t want Brewer to die because “it’s easy . . .(a)ll he’s going to do it go to sleep” rather than live every day with what he did and perhaps one day recognize the humanity of his victim. James Byrd’s son, Ross, points out "You can't fight murder with murder . . .(l)ife in prison would have been fine. I know he can't hurt my daddy anymore. I wish the state would take in mind that this isn't what we want."

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT COSTS MORE THAN INCARCERATION

It is sometimes suggested that abolishing capital punishment is unfair to the taxpayer, on the assumption that life imprisonment is more expensive than execution. If one takes into account all the relevant costs, however, just the reverse is true. "The death penalty is not now, nor has it ever been, a more economical alternative to life imprisonment.") A murder trial normally takes much longer when the death penalty is at issue than when it is not. Litigation costs – including the time of judges, prosecutors, public defenders, and court reporters, and the high costs of briefs – are mostly borne by the taxpayer. The extra costs of separate death row housing and additional security in court and elsewhere also add to the cost. A 1982 study showed that were the death penalty to be reintroduced in New York, the cost of the capital trial alone would be more than double the cost of a life term in prison. (N.Y. State Defenders Assn., "Capital Losses" 1982)

The death penalty was eventually reintroduced in New York and then found unconstitutional and not reintroduced again, in part because of cost.

In Maryland, a comparison of capital trial costs with and without the death penalty for the years concluded that a death penalty case costs "approximately 42 percent more than a case resulting in a non-death sentence." In 1988 and 1989 the Kansas legislature voted against reinstating the death penalty after it was informed that reintroduction would involve a first-year cost of more than $11 million. 59 Florida, with one of the nation's most populous death rows, has estimated that the true cost of each execution is approximately $3.2 million, or approximately six times the cost of a life-imprisonment sentence." (David von Drehle, "Capital Punishment in Paralysis," Miami Herald, July 10, 1988)

A 1993 study of the costs of North Carolina's capital punishment system revealed that litigating a murder case from start to finish adds an extra $163,000 to what it would cost the state to keep the convicted offender in prison for 20 years. The extra cost goes up to $216,000 per case when all first-degree murder trials and their appeals are considered, many of which do not end with a death sentence and an execution.

In 2011 in California, a broad coalition of organizations called Taxpayers for Justice put repeal of the death penalty on the ballot for 2012 in part because of the high cost documented by a recent study that found the state has already spent $4 billion on capital punishment resulting in 13 executions. The group includes over 100 law enforcement leaders, in addition to crime-victim advocates and exonerated individuals. Among them is former Los Angeles County District Attorney Gil Garcetti, whose office pursued dozens of capital cases during his 32 years as a prosecutor. He said, "My frustration is more about the fact that the death penalty does not serve any useful purpose and it's very expensive." Don Heller, a Republican and former prosecutor, wrote "I am convinced that at least one innocent person may have been executed under the current death penalty law. It was not my intent nor do I believe that of the voters who overwhelmingly enacted the death penalty law in 1978. We did not consider that horrific possibility." Heller emphasized that he is not "soft on crime," but that "life without parole protects public safety better than a death sentence." Additionally, he said the money spent on the death penalty could be better used elsewhere, as California cuts funding for police officers and prosecutors. "Paradoxically, the cost of capital punishment takes away funds that could be used to enhance public safety." [34]

From one end of the country to the other public officials decry the additional cost of capital cases even when they support the death penalty system. "Wherever the death penalty is in place, it siphons off resources which could be going to the front line in the war against crime…. Politicians could address this crisis, but, for the most part they either endorse executions or remain silent." The only way to make the death penalty more "cost effective" than imprisonment is to weaken due process and curtail appellate review, which are the defendant's (and society's) only protection against the most aberrant miscarriages of justice. Any savings in dollars would, of course, be at the cost of justice : In nearly half of the death-penalty cases given review under federal habeas corpus provisions, the murder conviction or death sentence was overturned .

In 1996, in response to public clamor for accelerating executions, Congress imposed severe restrictions on access to federal habeas corpus and also ended all funding of the regional death penalty "resource centers" charged with providing counsel on appeal in the federal courts. (Carol Castenada, "Death Penalty Centers Losing Support Funds," USA Today, Oct. 24, 1995) These restrictions virtually guarantee that the number and variety of wrongful murder convictions and death sentences will increase. The savings in time and money will prove to be illusory.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IS LESS POPULAR THAN THE ALTERNATIVES

It is commonly reported that the American public overwhelmingly approves of the death penalty. More careful analysis of public attitudes, however, reveals that most Americans prefer an alternative; they would oppose the death penalty if convicted murderers were sentenced to life without parole and were required to make some form of financial restitution. In 2010, when California voters were asked which sentence they preferred for a first-degree murderer, 42% of registered voters said they preferred life without parole and 41% said they preferred the death penalty. In 2000, when voters were asked the same question, 37% chose life without parole while 44% chose the death penalty . A 1993 nationwide survey revealed that although 77% of the public approves of the death penalty, support drops to 56% if the alternative is punishment with no parole eligibility until 25 years in prison. Support drops even further, to 49%, if the alternative is no parole under any conditions. And if the alternative is no parole plus restitution, it drops still further, to 41% . Only a minority of the American public would favor the death penalty if offered such alternatives.

INTERNATIONALLY, CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IS WIDELY VIEWED AS INHUMANE AND ANACHRONISTIC

An international perspective on the death penalty helps us understand the peculiarity of its use in the United States. As long ago as 1962, it was reported to the Council of Europe that "the facts clearly show that the death penalty is regarded in Europe as something of an anachronism…." 1962)

Today, either by law or in practice, all of Western Europe has abolished the death penalty. In Great Britain, it was abolished (except for cases of treason) in 1971; France abolished it in 1981. Canada abolished it in 1976. The United Nations General Assembly affirmed in a formal resolution that throughout the world, it is desirable to "progressively restrict the number of offenses for which the death penalty might be imposed, with a view to the desirability of abolishing this punishment." By mid-1995, eighteen countries had ratified the Sixth Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights, outlawing the death penalty in peacetime.

Underscoring worldwide support for abolition was the action of the South African constitutional court in 1995, barring the death penalty as an "inhumane" punishment. Between 1989 and 1995, two dozen other countries abolished the death penalty for all crimes. Since 1995, 43 more abolished it. All told, 71% of the world’s nation’s have abolished the death penalty in law or practice; only 58 of 197 retain it .

International Law

A look at international trends and agreements sheds light on the peculiarity of the United States’ continued imposition of capital punishment. Today, over 140 nations have abolished the death penalty either by law or in practice and, of the 58 countries that have retained the death penalty, only 21 carried out known executions in 2011. [35] Furthermore, capital punishment has compelled the United States to abstain from signing or ratifying several major international treaties and perhaps to violate international agreements to which it is a party:

In 1989, the General Assembly adopted the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), one of the UN’s primary human rights treaties. [36] Parties to the Protocol must take all necessary measures to abolish the death penalty and protect their citizens’ right not to be executed, although signatories may reserve the right to apply the death penalty for serious military criminals during wartime. [37] The United States has yet to join the 35 signatories or 75 parties to the Protocol, trailing behind the world’s leading democracies in the protection of human rights.

Although the Second Protocol to the ICCPR is the only worldwide instrument calling for death penalty abolition, there are three such instruments with regional emphases. Adopted by the Council of Europe in 1982 and ratified by eighteen nations by mid-1995, the Sixth Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) provides for the abolition of capital punishment during peacetime. In 2002, the Council adopted the Thirteenth Protocol to the ECHR, which provides for the abolition of the death penalty in all circumstances, including times of war or imminent threat of war. In 1990, the Organization of American States adopted the Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights to Abolish the Death Penalty, which provides for total abolition but allows states to reserve the right to apply the death penalty during wartime. [38]

The United States has ratified the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR), an international treaty setting forth a framework for consular relations among independent countries. Under Article 36 of the VCCR, local authorities are obligated to inform all detained foreigners “without delay” of their right to request consular notification of their detention and their right to demand and access opportunities to communicate with their consular representatives. [39] Local authorities have repeatedly disregarded this obligation, resulting in the International Court of Justice holding in 2004 that states had violated the VCCR by failing to inform 51 named Mexican nationals of their rights. All 51 were sentenced to death. When the State of Texas refused to honor this judgment and provide relief for the 15 death-row inmates whose VCCR rights it had violated, President George W. Bush sought to intervene on the prisoners’ behalf, taking the case to the United States Supreme Court. The Court denied the President’s appeal, and Texas has gone on to execute inmates whose VCCR rights it had failed to honor.

In 1994, the United States signed the United Nations (UN) Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT). [40] The treaty, which has now been ratified or signed by 176 nations, outlaws the imposition of physical or psychological abuse on people in detention. While it does not explicitly prohibit capital punishment, the treaty does forbid the intentional infliction of pain. Since 1976, however, more than 20 executions in the United States have involved prolonged, painful, or shocking errors, such as an inmate’s head catching fire or a lengthy and torturous search for a vein suitable for lethal injection. Additionally, accidents aside, our methods of execution—lethal injection, electrocution, firing squad, gas chamber, and hanging—may be inherently painful. The CAT also forbids the infliction of pain and suffering “based on discrimination of any kind,” [41] yet racial inequality is endemic to our death rows .

Also in 1994, the United States ratified the International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), a treaty intended to protect against racial discrimination, whether intentional or resulting from seemingly neutral state policies. To meet its obligations as a party to ICERD, the United States must take steps to review and amend policies and procedures that create or perpetuate racial discrimination, including capital punishment. [42]

Once in use everywhere and for a wide variety of crimes, the death penalty today is generally forbidden by law and widely abandoned in practice, in most countries outside the United States. Indeed, the unmistakable worldwide trend is toward the complete abolition of capital punishment. In the United States, opposition to the death penalty is widespread and diverse. Catholic, Jewish, and Protestant religious groups are among the more than 50 national organizations that constitute the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty.

The Case Against the Death Penalty was first published by the ACLU as a pamphlet in 1973. The original text was written by Hugo Adam Bedau, Ph.D., who also contributed to several subsequent editions of the pamphlet. This version was most recently revised by the ACLU in 2012.

[1] Glenn L. Pierce & Michael L. Radelet, Death Sentencing in East Baton Rouge Parish, 1990-2008 , 71 La. L. Rev. 647, 671 (2011), available at http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/PierceRadeletStudy.pdf .

[2] Liebman et. al, Los Tocayos Carlos , 43 Colum. Hum. Rts. L. Rev. 711, 1104 (2012).

[3] See Andrew Cohen, Yes, America, We Have Executed an Innocent Man , Atlantic, May 14, 2012, http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/05/yes-america-we-have-executed-an-innocent-man/257106/ .

[4] See id.

[5] See id. ; Carlos DeLuna Case: The Fight to Prove an Innocent Man Was Executed , PBS Newshour, May 24, 2012, http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/law/jan-june12/deathpenalty_05-24.html .

[6] A Three-Drug Cocktail , WashingtonPost.com, Sep. 26, 2007, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2007/09/26/GR2007092600116.html ; see also Victoria Gill, The Search for a Humane Way to Kill , BBC News, Aug. 7, 2012, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19060961 .

[7] See Carol J. Williams, Maker of Anesthetic Used in Executions is Discontinuing Drug, L.A. Times, Jan. 22, 2011, http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/22/local/la-me-execution-drug-20110122 ; John Schwartz, Death Penalty Drug Raises Legal Questions , N.Y. Times, Apr. 13, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/14/us/14lethal.html?pagewanted=all .

[8] See Brandi Grissom, Texas Will Change its Lethal Injection Protocol , Tex. Tribune, July 10, 2012, www.texastribune.org/texas-dept-criminal-justice/death-penalty/texas-changing-its-lethal-injection-protocol/ ; Rob Stein, Ohio Executes Inmate Using New, Single-Drug Method for Death Penalty , Wash. Post, Mar. 11, 2011, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/10/AR2011031006250.html ; David Beasley, Georgia Delays Execution Amid Drug Protocol Change , Reuters, July, 17, 2012, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/17/us-usa-execution-georgia-idUSBRE86G14L20120717 ; Rhonda Cook & Bill Rankin, State Changes Lethal Injection Protocol, Reschedules Execution , Atlanta Journal-Constitution, July 17, 2012, http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/state-changes-lethal-injection-1479424.html ; Steve Eder, A Texas First: Single-Drug Used to Execute Inmate , WSJ Law Blog, http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/07/19/a-texas-first-single-drug-used-to-execute-inmate/ ; Idaho Switches Execution Protocol to Single-Drug Lethal Injection , Spokesman.com, May 18, 2012, http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/boise/2012/may/18/idaho-switches-execution-protocol-single-drug-lethal-injection/ .

[9] See Carol J. Williams, California’s New Lethal Injection Protocol Tossed By Judge, L.A. Times, Dec. 17, 2011, http://articles.latimes.com/2011/dec/17/local/la-me-executions-20111217 ; Kathy Lohr, New Lethal Injection Drug Raises Concerns , NPR, Jan. 29, 2011, http://www.npr.org/2011/01/29/133302950/new-lethal-injection-drug-raises-concerns ; Steve Eder, Virginia Adds New Drug for Lethal Injections , WSJ Law Blog, July 27, 2012, http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/07/27/virginia-adds-new-drug-for-lethal-injections/ .

[10] Laura Vozzella, Virginia opts for One-Drug Lethal Injection Protocol , Wash. Post, July 27, 2012, http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/virginia-opts-for-one-drug-lethal-injection-protocol/2012/07/27/gJQA8jxiEX_story.html .

[11] See Linda Greenhouse, Supreme Court Allows Lethal Injection for Execution , N.Y. Times, Apr. 17, 2008, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/us/16cnd-scotus.html?pagewanted=all .

[12] See Michael Kiefer, State is Sued Again Over Its Lethal-Injection Procedure , USA Today, Feb. 7, 2012, http://www.usatoday.com/USCP/PNI/Valley%20&%20State/2012-02-07-PNI0207met--executionsART_ST_U.htm ; Court Gives Arizona Warning About Execution Protocol , Associated Press, Feb. 28, 2012, available at http://www.azcentral.com/community/pinal/articles/2012/02/28/20120228arizona-moorman-execution-death-row-inmate-lawyers-seek-stays.html . Notably, however, the panel did not halt Arizona’s scheduled executions. Id.

[13] David Beasley, Georgia Inmate Gets Stay Hours Before Scheduled Execution , Reuters, July 23, 2012, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/23/us-usa-execution-georgia-idUSBRE86M1F720120723 .

[14] Steve Eder, Missouri Executions on Hold Amid Concerns About New Drug , Aug. 15, 2012, WSJ Law Blog, http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/08/15/missouri-executions-on-hold-amid-concerns-about-new-drug/ .

[15] Melissa Anderson, ACLU Challenges Montana’s Lethal Injection Protocol , KXLH.com, Aug. 1, 2012, http://www.kxlh.com/news/aclu-challenges-montana-s-lethal-injection-protocol/ .

[16] See Eder, supra note 3; Steve Olfason, Oklahoma to Execute Man Who Killed Ex-Girlfriend and Her Two Kids , Chicago Tribune, Aug. 14, 2012, http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-08-14/news/sns-rt-us-usa-execution-oklahomabre87d0s8-20120814_1_jerry-massie-method-of-lethal-injection-three-drug-protocol ; Steve Eder, Oklahoma Execution Set After Lethal Injection Challenge Fails , Aug. 13, 2012, WSJ Law Blog, http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/08/13/oklahoman-set-for-executution-after-lethal-injection-challenge-fails/ .

[17] See Grissom, supra note 3; Ed Pilkington, Texas Executions Threatened As Stocks of Death Penalty Drug Run Low , Guardian, Feb. 14, 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/feb/14/texas-executions-threatened-stocks-run-low ; John Schwartz, Seeking Execution Drug, States Cut Legal Corners , N.Y. Times, Apr. 13, 2011,

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/14/us/14lethal.html?pagewanted=all ; Kiefer, supra note 7.

[18] EU Imposes Strict Controls on ‘Execution Drug’ Exports, BBC News, Dec. 20, 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16281016 ; Matt McGrath, FDA Goes to Court to Secure Drugs for Lethal Injections , BBC World, June 1, 2012, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18253578 .

[19] See Jeremy Pelofsky, U.S. Wants Lawsuit Over Execution Drug Dismissed , Reuters, Apr. 20, 2011, http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/20/us-usa-execution-lawsuit-idUSTRE73J7MH20110420 ; Michael Kiefer, Execution Drugs: Arizona Inmate Lawsuit Seeks FDA Policing , Ariz. Republic, Feb. 3, 2011, http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/02/02/20110202arizona-execution-drug-fda-lawsuit-brk02-ON.htm l; Kevin Johnson, Lawsuit Seeks to Block Imports of Key Execution Drug , USA Today, Feb. 2, 2011, http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2011/02/lawsuit-seeks-to-block-imports-of-key-execution-drug/1#.UA2pmKBCzGc ; Ryan Gabrielson, Lethal Injection Drug Tied to London Wholesaler , California Watch, Jan. 7, 2011, http://californiawatch.org/dailyreport/lethal-injection-drug-tied-london-wholesaler-7888 ; Ryan Gabrielson, California Lethal Injection: Prison Officials Refuse to Hand Over Lethal Injection Drug , California Watch, May 30, 2012, available at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/30/california-lethal-injection_n_1556155.html .

[20] Pelofsky, supra note 14.

[21] See Raymond Bonner, FDA’s Immoral Stance on Lethal Injection Drugs , Bloomberg, July 29, 2012, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-29/fda-s-immoral-stance-on-lethal-injection-drugs.html .

[22] See Elizabeth Rapaport , A Modest Proposal: The Aged of Death Row Should be Deemed Too Old to Execute, 77 Brook. L. Rev. 1089 (Spring 2012); Michael J. Carter, Wanting to Die: The Cruel Phenomenon of “Death Row Syndrome”, Alternet, Nov. 7, 2008, http://www.alternet.org/rights/106300/waiting_to_die%3A_the_cruel_phenomenon_of_%22death_row_syndrome%22/ ; Dr. Karen Harrison and Anouska Tamony, Death Row Phenomenon, Death Row Syndrome, and Their Affect [sic.] on Capital Cases in the U.S. , Internet Journal of Criminology 2010, available at http://www.internetjournalofcriminology.com/Harrison_Tamony_%20Death_Row_Syndrome%20_IJC_Nov_2010.pdf .

[23] See Stop Solitary – The Dangerous Overuse of Solitary Confinement in the United States, ACLU.org, https://www.aclu.org/stop-solitary-dangerous-overuse-solitary-confinement-united-states-0 .

[24] See Harrison and Tamony, supra note 25.

[25] See Carter, supra note 25; Death Penalty Information Center, Time on Death Row (2006), at http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/time-death-row .

[26] See id.

[27] Amy Smith, Not “Waiving” But Drowning: The Anatomy of Death Row Syndrome and Volunteering for Execution , 17 B.U. Pub. Int. L.J. 237, 243, available at http://www.bu.edu/law/central/jd/organizations/journals/pilj/vol17no2/documents/17-2SmithArticle.pdf .

[28] Lackey v. Texas, 115 S. Ct. 1421, 1421 (1995) (Stevens, J., concurring in the denial of certiorari).

[29] Stephen Blank, Killing Time: The Process of Waiving Appeal – The Michael Ross Death Penalty Cases , 14 J.L. & Pol’y 735, 738-39 (2006).

[30] Soering v. UK , App. No. 14038/88, 11 Eur. H.R. Rep. 439 (1989), available at http://eji.org/eji/files/Soering%20v.%20United%20Kingdom.pdf .

[31] See David Wallace-Wells, What is Death Row Syndrome? , Slate, Feb. 1, 2005, http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2005/02/what_is_death_row_syndrome.html ; Smith supra note 30.

[32] Smith supra note 30. (quoting Soering , 11 Eur. H. R. Rep. at 475-76).

[33] Id. at 239.

[34] Carol J. Williams, Death Penalty: Exhaustive Study Finds Death Penalty Costs California $184 Million a Year , L.A. Times, June 20, 2011, http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/20/local/la-me-adv-death-penalty-costs-20110620 .

[35] Figures on the Death Penalty , Amnesty International, http://www.amnesty.org/en/death-penalty/numbers .

[36] UN General Assembly, Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Aiming at the Abolition of the Death Penalty , Dec. 15, 1989, A/RES/44/128, available at: http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/3ae6b3a70.html [accessed 15 August 2012] [ hereinafter Second Optional Protocol].

[37] See Pierre Desert, Second Optional Protocol: Frequently Asked Questions , World Coalition Against the Death Penalty, June 27, 2008, http://www.worldcoalition.org/Second-Optional-Protocol-Frequently-Asked-Questions.html ; Pierre Desert, Second Optional Protocol: The Only Global Treaty Aiming at the Abolition of the Death Penalty , World Coalition Against the Death Penalty, June 24, 2008, www.worldcoalition.org/UN-Protocol-the-only-global-treaty-aiming-at-the-abolition-of-the-death-penalty.html ; Second Optional Protocol, supra note 21.

[38] Desert, Second Optional Protocol: Frequently Asked Questions , supra note 22.

[39] Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, Mar. 19, 1967, 596 U.N.T.S. 261, available at http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/9_2_1963.pdf .

[40] United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Dec. 10, 1984, 1465 U.N.T.S. 85, available at http://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/UNTS/Volume%201465/v1465.pdf .

[41] Richard C. Dieter, Introduction: Ford Foundation Symposium, Nov. 12, 1998, available at http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/us-death-penalty-and-international-law-us-compliance-torture-and-race-conventions .

[42] International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, Mar. 7, 1966, 660 U.N.T.S. 195, available at http://treaties.un.org/doc/publication/UNTS/Volume%20660/v660.pdf .

Related Issues

Capital Punishment

Stay Informed

By completing this form, I agree to receive occasional emails per the terms of the ACLU’s privacy statement.

Undergraduate Honors Thesis

Capital Punishment: A Philosophical Rejection of Punishment by Death Public Deposited

Experiencing ubiquitous contention, the correlation between execution as a form of legal punishment and morality pervades in the modern era to form a central concern for examination. Competing accounts of moral theories have provided dichotomous vindications for capital punishment, indicating a substantial strife in criminal justice morality. This thesis will examine these rival philosophies in order to assess the gravity of moral theories in Supreme Court decisions. In particular, both consequentialist and retributivist theories are analyzed with respect to their conceptualizations of punishment. After examining the death penalty’s legal history and the components of morality inherent in Supreme Court decisions, I assess that both consequentialist and retributive moral theories cannot account for the justification of the death penalty. Overall, an inherent association between morality and legal decisions is revealed that affirms that philosophy calls for the abolishment of capital punishment.
Mangan, Taylor
Bailey, Dominic
Donavan, Janet
Heathwood, Chris
University of Colorado Boulder
Consequentialism
Retributivism
In Copyright
English [eng]

Relationships

Arts and Sciences Honors Program

Thumbnail	Title	Date Uploaded	Visibility	Actions
		2019-12-02	Public	' $('.canonical-image').after(template) $('.canonical-image').remove() }

< Previous

Home > Student Scholarship > THESES > 1080

Senior Theses and Projects

A case for abolition: analyzing the death penalty in the united states.

Abigail E. Nick Follow

Date of Award

Spring 4-29-2024

Degree Name

Bachelor of Arts

Human Rights & Political Science

First Advisor

Professor Stefanie Chambers

Second Advisor

Professor Benjamin Carbonetti

This thesis delves into the multifaceted debate surrounding the death penalty in the United States, exploring its constitutionality, morality, and implications for the justice system. Drawing from legal, philosophical, and empirical analyses, it argues against the continued practice of capital punishment, contending that it violates fundamental human rights, inhibits rehabilitation efforts, and fails to align with evolving societal norms. The discussion navigates through historical contexts, international perspectives, and philosophical theories of punishment, examining the right to life, methods of punishment, and evolving standards of decency. It underscores the tension between retributive justice and the protection of human rights, highlighting the complexities inherent in the capital punishment debate. Empirical research comparing states with differing approaches to the death penalty sheds light on the impact abolition would have on crime rates, public sentiment, and the broader American justice system justice system. Despite complexities in data interpretation, the thesis emphasizes the need to prioritize ethical and moral considerations in shaping criminal justice policies. The thesis concludes with recommendations for advocacy and policy reform, advocating for federal abolition of the death penalty and empowering grassroots movements to drive change at the state level. It underscores the importance of public engagement and legislative action in shaping a justice system that prioritizes rehabilitation over punitive measures, projecting that if this path is followed abolition will be possible within the next 20 years. Ultimately, the thesis presents a compelling case for the abolition of the death penalty in the United States, calling for a shift towards a justice system that upholds human rights, promotes rehabilitation, and reflects evolving societal norms.

Recommended Citation

Nick, Abigail E., "A Case for Abolition: Analyzing the Death Penalty in the United States". Senior Theses, Trinity College, Hartford, CT 2024. Trinity College Digital Repository, https://digitalrepository.trincoll.edu/theses/1080

Since May 01, 2024

Included in

Constitutional Law Commons , Human Rights Law Commons , Philosophy Commons , Political Theory Commons

Advanced Search

Notify me via email or RSS
Collections
Disciplines

Author Corner

Submission Guidelines
Submit Research

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

< Previous

Home > Honors Theses, 1990-2015 > 1722

HIM 1990-2015

The death penalty debate: a critical examination of the moral justifications for capital punishment.

Whitley Mann , University of Central Florida

Capital punishment is a forceful moral issue that is frequently overlooked. This is possibly due to the reverence many have toward the rule of law or a passive acceptance of the status quo. In this thesis I will begin with a discussion of context to the topic of the death penalty in order to address potential biases. Then I examine not only the ethical merit of the death penalty but the foundational justifications for a system of criminal justice to show that the special relationship between the state and its citizens does not lend itself to or allow for the instantiation of the death penalty. I look first to several theories of punishment selecting the most viable theory in order to make the most plausible case in favor of the death penalty. From there I establish that there is some intuitive merit to the notion that the vicious deserve unhappiness and see how far that intuition might extend. In this section I examine the merits and demerits of Kantian retributivism in order to address the many intricate ethical and political issues involved in the death penalty debate. I’ve chosen the Kantian ethical framework because of the nuance with which many of the problems of retribution are solved. Kant insets the enlightenment principles into his moral framework and provides reasoned explanations for there insistence, as such his work provides a background from which I will work through details and resolve contradictions. I will then make an argument for the moral personhood of the state and sketch the special relationship it has to its citizens. Finally I will offer a system that incorporates the ideas developed in the previous sections and gives a practical answer to the death penalty debate. It is my ultimate argument that there is no absolute ban on the death penalty, possibly even some intuitive merit to the scheme, but ultimately many moral limitations on its implementation.

If this is your Honors thesis, and want to learn how to access it or for more information about readership statistics, contact us at [email protected]

Thesis Completion

Coverston, Harry

Bachelor of Arts (B.A.)

College of Arts and Humanities

Arts and Humanities -- Dissertations, Academic; Dissertations, Academic -- Arts and Humanities

Access Status

Open Access

Length of Campus-only Access

Document type.

Honors in the Major Thesis

Recommended Citation

Mann, Whitley, "The Death Penalty Debate: A Critical Examination of the Moral Justifications for Capital Punishment" (2015). HIM 1990-2015 . 1722. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/honorstheses1990-2015/1722

Since October 01, 2015

Included in

Philosophy Commons

Browse Advisors

Browse recent Advisors

Advanced Search

Notify me via email or RSS
Colleges & Departments
Disciplines
Expert Gallery
My STARS Account
Frequently Asked Questions
Follow STARS
About STARS

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

84 Capital Punishment Essay Topics & Examples

If you’ve looked for capital punishment essay topics, you’re in luck! Below, our experts have collected some death penalty title ideas and samples for your paper.

📝 Capital Punishment Essay Writing Tips

✔️ top death penalty title ideas, 🏆 best death penalty essay titles & examples, 💡 most interesting death penalty topics to write about, ❓ capital punishment research questions.

Capital punishment has been a debatable issue for decades. Some people believe that the death penalty plays a crucial role in the criminal justice system, while others think that this procedure is highly unethical.

An essay on capital punishment may be a challenging assignment because students should know much about the subject. Do not worry, we have got you covered! Read this article until the end and learn some important tips on writing capital punishment essays.

Start with choosing the subject for your paper. Here are some capital punishment essay topics that you can use:

Capital punishment in the media
Crime and punishment in today’s world: Death penalty
Capital punishment essay: Arguments against death penalty
The legal and ethical implications of capital punishment
Capital punishment should be forbidden: Anti-death penalty arguments
Why capital punishment may target the poor
Death penalty: An issue of life and death

Remember that these are just examples of topics and titles for your paper. You can choose any related capital punishment essay titles. Once you have selected a topic of your essay, you can start working on the assignment. Here are the key points you should use to write an outstanding essay:

Study the subject thoroughly. Use reliable sources to analyze the legal and ethical aspects of the death penalty. Select the sources you will use in the paper and remember that they should be credible.
A well-developed outline is key. Make sure that your paper includes an introduction, a conclusion, and several body paragraphs.
If you are not sure about the structure of your paper, check out essays online to see how they are organized. This step can also help you to see whether the selected problem is relevant. Remember that you should avoid copying the information you will find online. Plagiarism will make your essay look unreliable and get you a bad grade.
Remember that you should present your capital punishment essay thesis in the last sentence of your introductory paragraph. Hint: Start working on your introductory paragraph after you research the subject. It will help you to present the background information correctly.
Identify the goals of your paper clearly. Do you want to prove your point or provide insight on the issue? Answer these questions before starting to work on your assignment.
Define capital punishment. You can discuss its legal implications, its prevalence in different countries, and the offenses that can potentially lead to a death penalty.
When working on an opinion piece, state your viewpoint clearly. Do you think that all countries should legalize death penalties? Do you believe that capital punishment is unethical? Do some offenders deserve a death penalty more than others do? Answer these questions in detail.
Remember that the purpose of your paper should be to help the reader understand capital punishment better. Your essay should motivate the audience to develop an opinion about the subject.
Always support your arguments with evidence. Cite articles in an appropriate style (MLA, APA, Harvard, or other). The best type of sources for your paper is peer-reviewed articles and other scholarly publications.
Restate your arguments and the thesis in a concluding section. Provide a summary of your findings along with recommendations for future research.

Need more ideas for your essay? Check out our free samples on the website!

Why should the death penalty be abolished?
What are some unusual punishments for crimes?
Can the death penalty be compared to killing in cold blood?
Is life imprisonment more just than the death penalty?
Reasons to criticize capital punishment in China.
Analyzing A Descending Spiral by Marc Bookman.
What are the pros of capital punishment?
Executing the innocent people: the issue of mistake.
Abolishing the death penalty in Texas.
Serial killers sentenced to capital punishment.
Death Penalty: Utilitarian View on Capital Punishment Another significant benefit offered by the death penalty to the society is that it leads to the permanent incapacitation of the convicted person.
Capital Punishment in the UK Should be Reintroduced? ‘Capital Punishment’ or the ‘Death Penalty’ is the judicially ordered, lawful infliction of death as a punishment for a serious crime called a ‘capital offence’ or a ‘capital crime.
Capital Punishment and Deterrence of Crime For the case of murder or crimes that necessitate capital punishment, the incentive to commit murder is directly related to the uncertainties that punishments for the crime will generate.
Analysis: Speech In Favor of Capital Punishment by John Stuart Mills Mills rightly points out that the very grounds of humanity used to support the removal of the death penalty should also be the ones used to support retaining of the sentence.
Capital Punishment and the Death Penalty Furthermore, the defense and, in the United States, the prosecution has the right of vexatious challenge, which allows it to confront several participants without providing a reason.
Capital Punishment Is Morally and Legally Wrong The problem of the death penalty is complex and multifaceted. It affects the political, legal, moral, cultural, and other fields of life.
The Significance of Capital Punishment in the UAE Current analysis of the importance of the death penalty worldwide focuses on the advantages and disadvantages of the punishment. The UAE has a mandatory death penalty which is susceptible to the judgment of authorities and […]
Capital Punishment: Utilitarianism and Retributivism Theories However, to rule out chances of an innocent person being punished, the theory advocates for justice; before punishment is administered, the court should proof beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty.
Capital Punishment Interpretation and Exceptions Under custody, the law applies to cases in which the conditions of custody are compromised and to situations where the suspect is held unfairly. The suspect responded with a yes and this was used as […]
Capital Punishment Debates: Death Penalty The capital punishment has been practiced in almost all the societies and all epochs in the development of the mankind. The author educates the society as a whole on litigious issues of the death penalty […]
Capital Punishment: Term Definition In that regard, taking such issues such as euthanasia, abortion and capital punishment, the latter can be considered as the most delicate, especially considering many cases that represent exceptions that are feared to be repeated.
Capital Punishment – Moral or Immoral? It would not be a futile exercise to interpret capital punishment in the light of religion before proceeding to the subject of my argument. Countries that give importance to such punishments should tone down and […]
Capital Punishment in the US Analysis Capital Punishment is the lawful infliction of death as a punishment for a major crime. The first argument against Capital Punishment is that it is inhumane.
An Orwellian Look at Capital Punishment His reaction to the actual hanging of a puny Hindu man borders on a strategy of remaining as a detached viewer and subconsciously, his gorge rises at the thought of a human being with a […]
Capital Punishment in Melville’s “Billy Budd, Sailor” One of the reasons for the triumph of Billy Budd, Sailor in America and the United Kingdom, was the precision, with which the author portrayed the historical and cultural context, particularly Melville analyzed both issues […]
Capital Punishment in Indonesia The government is also known to safeguard the details of capital punishment in the country. The targeted prisoners are “executed in the middle of the night”.
Capital Punishment and Unusual Punishment The issue of capital punishment has always been on the radar of the Supreme Court of the United States. The key question that should be answered is the future of capital punishment and unusual punishment […]
Capital Punishment in United States The most compelling argument in support of capital punishment is that failing to execute murderers may in itself put more lives in danger.
Debates on Capital Punishment in the US For example, capital punishment is the best punishment for murder because it is equal to the crime. Thirdly, capital punishment is a violation of the human right to life.
The Ethical and Legal Standards of Capital Punishment This is one of the details that should be considered. This is one of the pitfalls that should be avoided.
Isolation and Capital Punishments On the other hand, capital punishments such as deaths deprives of people the freedom of life and goes against God’s command which disallows intentional killings of persons, or murder. Similarly, capital punishment in the form […]
Does the Death Sentence Offer Justice to the Criminal? It is not enough to be locked in prison for ending the life of a fellow human being. Revenge is one of the ways that can be used.
The Consequences of Capital Punishment The appeals in the death penalty cases are usually many and cause the social costs of the cases to be even more expensive.
Moral Issue of Capital Punishment Capital punishment is also a form of premeditated death as the action is planned for, does it mean that the state has the right to premeditate deaths for some of its citizens because they are […]
The Death Penalty Debate in the United States of America The punishment is believed to have been there even at the time of the earlier colonies of the United States; it as well continued to be in force within the states that came to form […]
Psychological Aspects of Capital Punishment According to research done by Freedman and Hemenway on a group of death row inmates, it was established that almost a two-thirds of the death row inmates are retarded.
Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages This paper examines death penalty from an impartial view by considering disadvantages and advantages of capital punishment in society. Thirdly, Teeters views that death penalty is a retribution action in which a victim is punished […]
The Death Penalty in the Modern Society The cost of maintenance of the convicted individuals is also one of the reasons that necessitate the death penalty. The reaffirmation of the death penalty is also attributed to the teachings portrayed by most religions.
Avoiding of Capital Punishment Capital punishment is also unnecessary since there are better ways of punishing criminals such as life imprisonment to keep the society in order and at peace.
The Economic Significance of Capital Punishment The survival of any civilization hinges on the establishment of laws and codes of conduct and the subsequent obeying of the same by the society’s members.
Capital Punishment in Modern American History: Lists of Capital Crimes That Varied From Region to Region Politicians are frequently trying to expand the scope of capital punishment by bringing in a host of crimes under it.”The US public has deep concern over violent crimes due to the cynical manipulation of capital […]
Analysis of Capital Punishment in the Films Those for the death penalty in the movie are represented by Ramunda who becomes a strong advocate for the death penalty and in many instances, is a counterpart of Cushing.
Capital Punishment Legislation The main reasons that opponents of the death penalty give for their position are, the fact that the death penalty is inhumane and cruel.
Capital Punishment Role in the World However, it is wrong and unjustified because it is inhuman, unfair, violates the human right to life, and it does not aid in reduction of crime.
Capital Punishment as an Option in Maryland Death penalty is the most serious punishment that can be used by the government against people; and even if it costs less then keeping a person in jail till the end of his/her life and […]
Capital Punishment in Political View This is because quiet a number of the abolitions have been associated with democratic developments in political systems of the countries that have abolished the penalties. Conservatives have in the United States been strongly opposed […]
Capital Punishment: A Critical Evaluation of Its Appropriateness in Modern Society In line with the above argument, supporters of capital punishment argue that the practice permanently removes thieves, murderers, rapists, and other criminals from the face of society, in the process making it safer for compliant […]
Capital Punishment: Proponents and Opponents Arguements The opponents of capital of capital punishment argue that it is not a just and humane way of punishing heinous criminals in the society because everybody has right to life.
What Does Capital Punishment Mean in History?
How Can Death Penalty Prevent Repeat Offenders?
Why Should Capital Punishment Be Reinstated in Australia?
How Objective and Justifiable Are Our Reasons for Enforcing the Death Penalty?
Does Capital Punishment Have a Deterrent Effect?
How Has the Death Penalty Changed Over Time?
What Is Wrong With Capital Punishment?
Should Federal Courts Review State Death Penalty Cases?
Can Capital Punishment Ever Be Justified?
Should the Death Penalty Apply to Juvenile Criminals?
Does the Death Penalty Breach Human Rights?
Can Capital Punishment Keep Us Safe?
Should the Death Penalty Be a Part of the System of Justice?
Does Capital Punishment Equate to Cruel and Unusual Punishment?
Should the Death Penalty Be Enforced?
How Does Capital Punishment Affirm Life?
Should the Death Penalty Be Imposed for Drug Offences?
Does Capital Punishment Have a Local Deterrent Effect on Homicides?
Should the Death Penalty Be Mandatory for Homicide?
How Does Capital Punishment Work in the United States?
Should the Death Penalty Be Morally Acceptable?
Does Race Affect the Way of Capital Punishment?
What Crimes Are Charged With Death Penalty?
Does the Capital Punishment Have a Role in Civilized Society?
Why Should Capital Punishment Be Abolished?
What Effects Does the Death Penalty Cause on Society?
How Does Legislation Help to Prevent Racial Bias in Death Penalty Convictions?
Is the Death Penalty Fair?
Does Jodi Arias Deserve the Death Penalty?
What Attitudes Might Christians Hold About Capital Punishment?
Constitution Research Ideas
Prison Paper Topics
Euthanasia Titles
Mass Incarceration Essay Topics
Crime Ideas
Murder Questions
Crime Prevention Research Topics
Serial Killer Paper Topics
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, February 22). 84 Capital Punishment Essay Topics & Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/capital-punishment-essay-examples/

"84 Capital Punishment Essay Topics & Examples." IvyPanda , 22 Feb. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/capital-punishment-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda . (2024) '84 Capital Punishment Essay Topics & Examples'. 22 February.

IvyPanda . 2024. "84 Capital Punishment Essay Topics & Examples." February 22, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/capital-punishment-essay-examples/.

1. IvyPanda . "84 Capital Punishment Essay Topics & Examples." February 22, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/capital-punishment-essay-examples/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "84 Capital Punishment Essay Topics & Examples." February 22, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/capital-punishment-essay-examples/.

AI Content Shield
AI KW Research
AI Assistant
SEO Optimizer
AI KW Clustering
Customer reviews
The NLO Revolution
Press Center
Help Center
Content Resources
Facebook Group

Death Penalty Essay Introduction — a Quick Guide

Table of Contents

The death penalty is a state-sanctioned practice where an individual is executed for an offense punishable through such means. Death penalty essay is a common topic given to students where the essay writer argues this controversial issue and takes a stand. The death penalty essay intro consists of the opening sentence, the background information, and the thesis statement.

Writing a compelling introduction isn’t easy. But with the tips and examples in this guide, you’ll be able to write a captivating introduction.

What Is a Death Penalty Essay?

The death penalty is the practice of executing a person guilty of capital murder, a crime in which the loss of life is intentional. This method of punishment has been around for as long as human civilization.

The death penalty has been controversial for a long time, with people on both sides of the fence. Supporters claim it works to deter crime, but there is no evidence to prove it. Opposers claim it is cruel and is not the best way to serve justice.

A death penalty essay argues for or against the death penalty. This essay topic is a typical assignment given to college students. Common death penalty essay topics are as follows:

About the Death Penalty
Does the Death Penalty effectively deter crime?
The Death Penalty should not be legal
The Death Penalty should be abolished.
Death Penalty and Justice
Pro-Death Penalty
Is the Death Penalty Morally Right?
Death Penalty is Immoral
Religious Values and Death Penalty
Ineffectiveness of Death Penalty
Punishment and the Nature of the Crime
The Death Penalty and Juveniles.
Is the Death Penalty Effective?
The Death Penalty is Politically Just
The Death Penalty: Right or Wrong?
Abolishment of the Death Penalty
The Death Penalty and People’s Opinions
Is Death Penalty Humane?

How to Write an Interesting Death Penalty Essay Intro

Like other essays, the death penalty essay intro comprises three parts. The hook, a strong opening sentence, grips the reader, sparks their curiosity, and compels them to read the rest of the piece.

Subsequent sentences provide background information on the topic and define the argument’s terms. The last part is the thesis statement, which summarizes the central focus of the essay.

1. the Opening Sentence/Hook

The hook is a statement that grips the reader’s attention and makes them want to read on . The hook should be an exciting statement that sparks the readers’ curiosity, and sets the tone for the essay. It should give an overview of the topic. You could begin with a thought-provoking question, an interesting quote, an exciting anecdote, or a shocking statistic or fact.

2. Background Information

Provide more information about the subject you are discussing. Create context and give background information on the topic. It could be a social or historical context. Define key terms that the reader might find confusing and clearly but concisely state why the issue is important.

3. Thesis Statement

The thesis statement is the overarching idea – the central focus of the essay. It summarizes the idea that you’ll be explaining throughout the entirety of the piece. Once this statement has been established, you’ll smoothly transition into the main body of your essay. Make the thesis clear and concise.

Death Penalty Essay Introduction Example

Does the death penalty deter crime, especially murder? The death penalty has been controversial for years. Over the years, public opinion about the death penalty seems to have changed. But there are still people who think it is a proper punishment. I have heard the phrase “An eye for an eye” most of my life. Most people firmly believe that if a criminal took someone’s life, their lives should be taken away too. But I don’t think that will discourage anyone from committing crimes. I believe that the criminal should be given a lighter punishment.

person writing on brown wooden table near white ceramic mug

The death penalty or capital punishment is the execution of a criminal by a government as punishment for a crime. In the United States, the death penalty is the most common form of sentence in murder cases.

A death penalty essay argues for or against the death penalty. The essay introduction begins with an attention-grabber , followed by background information on the topic and then the thesis statement.

Death Penalty Essay Introduction — a Quick Guide

Abir Ghenaiet

Abir is a data analyst and researcher. Among her interests are artificial intelligence, machine learning, and natural language processing. As a humanitarian and educator, she actively supports women in tech and promotes diversity.

Explore All Essay Intro Generator Articles

The different ways to start a comparative essay.

Some writers intend to compare two specific things or ideas through their articles. They write these essays to compare and…

Essay Intro Generator

Know The Best Way to Start an Expository Essay

Are you into writing essays that tackle a still-unknown fact? Do you know how to write an expository essay? Before…

Writing an Opinion Essay? Read This First!

Students are required to express their opinions on a topic in an opinion essay. Pertinent illustrations and explanations support their…

Identifying the Best Transitions to Start an Essay

A typical academic assignment is the essay, which must meet certain requirements in order to be written properly. Even students…

How to Write Introductions for Synthesis Essays

One of the most exciting assignments you could have is writing a synthesis essay. For a college or university student,…

How to Write Introductions for Music Essays

Music is food for the soul, or so they say. A music essay analyzes or describes a piece of music,…

Death Penalty News and Updates

Site maintained by Rick Halperin

August 24, 2024

AUGUST 24, 2024:

PENNSYLVANIA—-female to face death penalty

DA seeks death penalty against San Diego woman accused in Shadyside newborn’s death

The Allegheny County District Attorney’s Office will seek the death penalty against a California woman accused of killing her friend’s newborn son, marking a rare occasion in which the DA’s office has sought capital punishment against a woman.

Nicole Elizabeth Virzi, 30, is charged with homicide in the June 15 death of 6-week-old Leon Katz.

The San Diego woman was babysitting Leon while his parents took the newborn’s twin brother to the hospital for injuries police allege Ms. Virzi caused. She faces multiple counts of aggravated assault and child endangerment.

Ms. Virzi waived her preliminary hearing last month, and she was formally arraigned on the charges against her Friday. She was not in court for the arraignment. Several supporters of the Katz family were present.

The DA’s office this week filed notice that prosecutors will seek the death penalty. To do so, the office must cite so-called aggravating factors — circumstances that make the crime severe or heinous enough to warrant capital punishment.

Pennsylvania law includes 18 aggravating factors that prosecutors can cite in their pursuit of the death penalty. They range from the victim being a law enforcement officer or a judge to the crime involving kidnapping or torture.

In the case of Ms. Virzi, the DA’s office cited 4: the defendant committed the killing while in the perpetration of a felony; the offense was committed by means of torture; the victim was under 12 years old; and the defendant has a significant history of felony convictions involving the use or threat of violence.

Although Ms. Virzi does not have a criminal history, if a jury finds her guilty of the charges against her in this case, those convictions will count as a criminal history for the purpose of sentencing.

Ms. Virzi’s attorney, David Shrager, said last month that his client is a longtime friend of the infants’ parents and she was “absolutely devastated” by Leon’s death.

“If there was something that she would want to convey, it would just be the absolutely horrible pain that she’s feeling,” Mr. Shrager said after Ms. Virzi waived her July 24 preliminary hearing. “These were her close friends.”

There are currently no women on death row in Pennsylvania.

In 2016, the DA sought the death penalty against a McKeesport woman who police say recorded video images as she smothered her 1-year-old son and sent them to the boy’s father.

Christian Clark, 21, was spared the death penalty after she agreed to a plea deal and was sentenced to life in prison without parole in 2019.

In 2014, the state Supreme Court ordered Michelle Tharp, sentenced to death in Washington County in 2000, receive a new sentencing hearing. That case remains pending, court records show. In 2016, a Clinton County judge resentenced Shonda Walter to life in prison based on “totally incompetent counsel,” according to the Associated Press.

According to the criminal complaint filed June 16, Ms. Virzi was watching over the infant at the family’s Walnut Street apartment in Shadyside, though Ms. Virzi herself had been staying at an Airbnb about a mile away in Bloomfield. The San Diego Tribune reported she is a doctoral candidate at San Diego State University and UC San Diego.

Ms. Virzi called 911 around 11:15 p.m. June 15 to report that Leon had fallen from a bassinet, bumped his head, and was becoming unresponsive. Leon was taken to Children’s Hospital and pronounced dead the next morning. The medical examiner’s office said the child had suffered a severe skull fracture and multiple brain bleeds, according to the complaint.

Police said Ms. Virzi had no “plausible explanation” for the severity of Leon’s injuries. She told them he’d been acting normally and was sitting in his bouncer seat when she fell asleep for a time, according to the complaint. She awoke and went to the kitchen to get a bottle, she said, when she heard the baby screaming.

She said she found Leon lying on his left side on the floor with a large bump on his head. Detectives wrote in the complaint that it is about 18 inches from the tallest point of the bouncer seat to the floor.

Doctors told investigators the injured twin, Ari, had small scratches on both sides of his face, 2 bruises below his belly button and swelling, bruising, redness and scratches to his genitals, according to the complaint. Medical professionals said the injuries to both boys were unnatural and indicative of abuse.

Ms. Virzi told police she was the one who spotted the injuries to the other twin and alerted the parents. She said infant scratched his own face when he flailed as she was putting him in his car seat, according to the complaint. She was the only one watching over Leon once his parents left to take his brother to the hospital.

Pennsylvania has executed only three people since the death penalty was reinstated in 1978 and none since 1999. Former Gov. Tom Wolf in 2015 declared a moratorium on executions, and Gov. Josh Shapiro has pledged not to sign any death warrants during his tenure. Capital crimes continue to be prosecuted and death sentences issued.

Since the 1900s, the state has only ever executed 2 women: Irene Schroeder in 1931 and Corrine Sykes in 1946, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, a non-partisan nonprofit that collects data on capital punishment in the United States.

There are around 100 inmates on Pennsylvania’s death row, 6 of whom were prosecuted and sentenced in Allegheny County.

(source: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)

SOUTH CAROLINA—-new and impending execution date

South Carolina sets date for 1st execution in more than 13 years

South Carolina has set a Sept. 20 date to put inmate Freddie Eugene Owens to death in what would be the state’s 1st execution in more than 13 years.

South Carolina was once one of the busiest states for executions, but for years had had trouble obtaining lethal injection drugs due to pharmaceutical companies’ concerns that they would have to disclose that they had sold the drugs to officials.

The state Legislature has since passed a law allowing officials to keep lethal injection drug suppliers secret and, in July, the state Supreme Court cleared the way to restart executions.

Owens, who killed a store clerk in Greenville in 1997, will likely have the choice to die by lethal injection, electrocution or by the newly added option of a firing squad. A Utah inmate in 2010 was the last person to have been executed by a firing squad in the U.S., according to the nonprofit Death Penalty Information Center.

The prisons director has 5 days to confirm that all 3 execution methods will be available. He must also give Owens’ lawyers proof that the lethal injection drug is stable and correctly mixed, according to the high court’s 2023 interpretation of the state’s secrecy law on executions that helped reopen the door to South Carolina’s death chamber.

A lawyer for Owens didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment Friday.

Owens, 46, will then have about a week to let the state know how he wishes to be killed. If he makes no choice, the state will send him to the electric chair by default.

The justices didn’t specify how much information has to be released but they have promised a swift ruling if an inmate challenged the details in the disclosure.

South Carolina used to use a mix of 3 drugs, but now will use 1 drug, the sedative pentobarbital, for lethal injections in a protocol similar to executions carried out by the federal government.

Owens can ask Republican Gov. Henry McMaster for mercy and to reduce his sentence to life without parole. No South Carolina governor has ever granted clemency in the modern era of the death penalty.

South Carolina’s last execution was in May 2011. The state didn’t set out to pause executions, but its supply of lethal injection drugs expired and companies refused to sell the state more if the transaction was made public.

It took a decade of wrangling in the Legislature — first adding the firing squad as a method and later passing a shield law — to get capital punishment restarted.

South Carolina has put 43 inmates to death since the death penalty was restarted in the U.S. in 1976. In the early 2000s, it was carrying out an average of 3 executions a year. Only nine states have put more inmates to death.

But since the unintentional execution pause, South Carolina’s death row population has dwindled. The state had 63 condemned inmates in early 2011. It currently has 32. About 20 inmates have been taken off death row and received different prison sentences after successful appeals. Others have died of natural causes.

Along with Owens, at least 3 other inmates have exhausted their regular appeals and a few more are close, meaning the death chamber could be busy to close out 2024.

The recent state Supreme Court ruling that reopened the door for executions found that the state shield law was legal and both the electric chair and firing squad were not cruel punishments.

The South Carolina General Assembly authorized the state to create a firing squad in 2021 to give inmates a choice between it and the same electric chair the state bought in 1912.

Supporters of the firing squad, including some Democrats reluctant about the death penalty, said it appears to be the quickest and most painless way to kill an inmate.

Owens killed store clerk Irene Graves during a string of robberies in 1997. He has been sentenced to death 3 separate times during his appeals.

After being convicted of murder his initial trial in 1999 but before a jury determined his sentence, Owens killed his cellmate at the Greenville County jail.

Owens gave investigators a detailed account of how he killed his cellmate, stabbing and burning his eyes, choking him and stomping him while another prisoner was in the cell and stayed quietly in his bunk, according to trial testimony.

(source: Associated Press)

SC schedules Greenville Co. inmate to be 1st execution in 13 years

The 1st inmate to be executed in 13 years in South Carolina will be Greenville County’s Freddie Owens, convicted in 1999 of killing a convenience store clerk and, days after the verdict, his cellmate.

Owens’ execution date will be Sept. 20, the South Carolina Department of Corrections announced in a late August 23 news release.

The state Supreme Court sent the execution notice to the state’s prisons director earlier in the day, giving him 4 Fridays by law to execute Owens.

Owens will be asked to choose how he wants to be executed 2 weeks before execution day. After a recent state Supreme Court ruling, he can choose between lethal injection, the electric chair or a firing squad.

Owens, 46, was convicted of murder for fatally shooting Irene Graves, a convenience store clerk, on Nov. 1, 1997, while robbing the store with an accomplice during a Halloween night spree.

At his trial, Owens maintained he was at home when the robbery and shooting happened, counter to witness statements.

Post verdict, Owens killed his Greenville County jail cellmate Christopher Lee. Before being transferred from the jail to state prison, Lee taunted Owens by saying he would be joining him in prison soon because of his murder conviction, Owens confessed after the murder.

He was resentenced twice, the last of which took place in September 2006, after the Supreme Court reversed his 2 initial death sentences.

He was first scheduled for execution in 2021. He has had an ongoing lawsuit in the U.S. District Court of South Carolina challenging the constitutionality of execution by electrocution and firing squad under the federal Constitution.

However, because there is no stay of execution ordered by the federal court, Owens can be issued a death warrant.

5 other men on death row have exhausted all of their appeals and are likely to be scheduled for execution soon.

As of August 23, there are 32 inmates on death row in South Carolina. At least 18 death row inmates have been resentenced for a myriad of reasons since the last execution in 2011, ranging from an aggressive prosecutor to successful appeals.

(source: postandcourier.com)

FLORIDA—-impending execution

Florida Supreme Court Rejects Death Row Inmate’s Appeal, Execution Likely To Proceed

The Florida Supreme Court has unanimously denied an appeal by Loran Cole, a death row inmate convicted of murdering a Florida State University student in 1994.

This decision paves the way for his scheduled execution next week, though last-minute federal court appeals are anticipated.

Cole’s attorneys had argued that abuse he suffered as a teenager at the notorious Dozier School for Boys contributed to his criminal behavior. They also cited a recent law offering compensation to Dozier victims as new evidence warranting a review of his death sentence.

However, the court rejected these arguments, stating that the law doesn’t constitute new evidence and Cole’s claims about Dozier were raised too late.

The court also dismissed concerns about Cole’s Parkinson’s disease causing complications during lethal injection, stating that his claims were meritless and filed too late.

Cole’s execution is scheduled for next Thursday. Death penalty opponents argue that the trauma Cole experienced at Dozier should be reconsidered, while the court’s decision brings the state one step closer to carrying out the execution.

(source: tampafp.com)

Florida Supreme Court refuses to block execution of FSU student’s killer—-Loran Cole faces execution after Florida Supreme Court rejects appeal

The Florida Supreme Court on Friday unanimously rejected an appeal by a death row inmate convicted of killing a Florida State University student 3 decades ago in the Ocala National Forest, likely setting in motion last-minute federal court appeals before a scheduled execution next week.

Attorneys for Loran Cole launched state court appeals after Gov. Ron DeSantis in late July signed a death warrant that would lead to Cole’s execution Thursday at Florida State Prison.

The Supreme Court decision rejected a series of arguments, including claims related to abuse Cole suffered as a teenager at the state’s notorious Arthur G. Dozier School for Boys in Marianna.

Cole’s attorneys contended the abuse at the now-shuttered reform school contributed to his behavior. They also pointed to a recently passed law that set up a compensation program for people who were abused at the Jackson County school and the Okeechobee School in South Florida, saying the law constituted “newly discovered evidence” that warranted a fresh look at Cole’s death sentence.

The law, approved by the Republican-controlled Legislature and Gov. Ron DeSantis, set aside $20 million for people who attended the schools between 1940 and 1975. Cole, who was 17 when he was sent to Dozier in 1984, would not be eligible for the compensation.

The Supreme Court, upholding an Aug. 8 decision by Marion County Circuit Judge Robert Hodges, said the new law “does not amount to newly discovered evidence” that would require another review.

“Indeed, we have routinely held that resolutions, consensus opinions, articles, research, and the like do not satisfy the standard,” said the opinion shared by Chief Justice Carlos Muñiz and Justices Charles Canady, John Couriel, Renatha Francis Jamie Grosshans, Jorge Labarga and Meredith Sasso.

Cole’s lawyers for years have argued that his 6-month stint at Dozier played a role in the behavior that led to the 1994 murder of Florida State student John Edwards, who was on a camping trip in the Ocala National Forest.

But the 2024 law added a new twist to the legal pleadings, with Cole’s lawyers arguing the compensation program showed that the state admitted it was “complicit” in the mistreatment of students at the reform schools.

Cole said he was raped by a guard, beaten at least twice a week and had both of his legs broken after trying to escape during his 6-month stint at Dozier, court documents dating back more than a decade said.

“That horrible place helped create the Loran Cole who sits on death row today,” his lawyers argued in an appeal filed at the Supreme Court in 2011.

But Friday’s ruling said that Cole’s claims about the school were not new and were procedurally barred from being raised years after a court deadline for such arguments.

“The state of Florida’s decision to now compensate some of those individuals who attended the school does not revive Cole’s previously denied postconviction claims,” the opinion said.

Court filings contended Cole suppressed memories of his experiences at Dozier, with the memories resurfacing after he watched a documentary in 2009 about abuse at the school.

But Friday’s ruling disputed the suppressed memories argument, pointing to Hodges’ ruling, which found that the Dozier issue was raised in an “investigation report” before a jury’s unanimous death sentence recommendation in 1995.

Death penalty opponents, however, have said Cole’s trauma at Dozier deserves another look.

“It’s concerning that the state has recognized, through recent legislation, the horrors of what occurred at Dozier but, at the same time, seeks to proceed with executing Cole without allowing him an opportunity to litigate his claims based on the abuse he endured at Dozier. The court’s ruling today gets the state one step closer to being able to complete Cole’s execution,” Melanie Kalmanson, an attorney and author of the “Tracking Florida’s Death Penalty” blog, told the News Service of Florida on Friday.

Justices also rejected arguments related to Cole’s symptoms of Parkinson’s disease, which his lawyers said could lead to “needless pain and suffering” during the triple-drug lethal injection process.

“Cole’s Parkinson’s symptoms will make it impossible for Florida to safely and humanely carry out his execution because his involuntary body movements will affect the placement of the intravenous lines necessary to carry out an execution by lethal injection,” a brief filed by Cole’s lawyers said.

But the Supreme Court ruling said Cole, 57, who has suffered from Parkinson’s since at least 2017, “failed to raise any argument related to the method of execution until after the governor signed a death warrant” on July 29.

“Regardless, Cole’s claim is meritless,” the decision said.

Florida’s lethal injection protocol requires the intravenous administration of 3 drugs: a sedative, a paralytic and a drug that stops the heart from beating.

Cole’s appeal did not meet the threshold requirements of establishing “that the method of execution presents a substantial and imminent risk that is sure or very likely to cause serious illness and needless suffering,” the Supreme Court ruling said.

“We have already rejected challenges to the … protocol based upon the possibility of involuntary movements,” the ruling said. “And we have repeatedly recognized that the Department of Corrections is entitled to the presumption that it will comply with the lethal injection protocol. … That protocol includes safeguards to ensure the condemned is unconscious throughout the execution.”

Cole was sentenced to death in the February 1994 murder of Edwards, who went to the Ocala National Forest to camp with his sister, a student at Eckerd College, court records show.

Cole and another man, William Paul, joined the brother and sister at their campsite. After they decided to walk to a pond, Cole knocked Edwards’ sister to the ground and ultimately handcuffed her, the records said. Paul took the sister up a trail, and John Edwards died from a slashed throat and blows to the head that fractured his skull, according to the court records. Edwards’ sister was sexually assaulted and was tied to two trees the next morning before freeing herself. (In most cases, The News Service of Florida does not identify sexual assault victims by name.)

(source: WCJB news)

MISSOURI—-impending execution

Missouri Supreme Court blocks agreement that would have halted execution

The Missouri Supreme Court blocked an agreement that would spare the life of a man on death row. Instead, Marcellus Williams must now proceed with a hearing on his innocence claim, with a little over a month to go before his scheduled execution.

The ruling late Wednesday came hours after St. Louis County Circuit Judge Bruce Hilton approved a plan allowing Williams to enter a new no-contest plea to 1st-degree murder in the 1998 death of Lisha Gayle. Though Williams’ lawyers said he still maintains he is innocent, the plea would acknowledge evidence was sufficient for a conviction.

Williams, 55, would have been sentenced to life in prison without parole on Thursday. Instead the Sept. 24 execution date is still on, pending a hearing before Hilton on Williams’ innocence claim.

Here’s what there is to know about the case:

The killing

Lisha Gayle was a social worker and a former St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter. She was stabbed to death inside her home in University City on Aug. 11, 1998.

At the time, prosecutors said Williams broke into Gayle’s home and heard water running in the shower upstairs. They said he found a large butcher knife and waited for her to come down. When she did, Gayle was stabbed 43 times. Her purse and her husband’s laptop were stolen.

Authorities said Williams also stole a jacket to conceal blood on his shirt, and his girlfriend asked him why he was wearing it on a hot day. The girlfriend said she later saw the laptop in the car and that Williams sold it a day or two later.

Prosecutors also cited testimony from Henry Cole, who shared a St. Louis cell with Williams in 1999 while Williams was jailed on unrelated charges. Cole told prosecutors that Williams confessed to the killing and offered details about it.

Williams’ attorneys responded that the girlfriend and Cole, who were both convicted of felonies, wanted a $10,000 reward for information in the case.

Williams was found guilty in 2001 and sentenced to death, and the conviction was later upheld by the Missouri Supreme Court.

DNA evidence emerges

In 2017, Williams was hours away from execution — he’d already eaten his last meal. His lawyers made one final appeal citing DNA testing unavailable at the time of the original trial indicating that the DNA of someone other than Williams was found on the knife.

It was enough to persuade then-Gov. Eric Greitens to grant a stay of execution and appoint a board of inquiry made up of former judges.

But that board never issued a report or released findings. In 2023, Gov. Mike Parson — like Greitens, a Republican — dissolved the inquiry board. The Missouri Supreme Court ruled in June that Parson had the right to do so, and set the Sept. 24 execution date.

Prosecutor challenges the murder conviction

When Williams was convicted, St. Louis County’s prosecutor was Bob McCulloch, a tough-on-crime prosecutor who served 28 years before he was upset by Ferguson City Council member Wesley Bell in the 2018 Democratic primary. Bell, who made his name in Ferguson after Michael Brown’s death, pledged a more progressive approach to running the office.

That included taking a new look at potential wrongful convictions. In January, Bell announced that he would seek a hearing before a judge to vacate Williams’ murder conviction, citing the DNA testing. That hearing was set for Wednesday before Judge Hilton.

New DNA test results, released on Monday, changed everything.

They determined that the knife used in the killing was mishandled in the aftermath of the crime. DNA from Edward Magee, an investigator for the prosecutor’s office at the time, was found, and testing also couldn’t exclude the original prosecutor in the case, Keith Larner.

“Additional investigating and testing demonstrated that the evidence was not handled properly at the time of (Williams’) conviction,” Matthew Jacober, a special counsel for Bell’s office, told the judge. “As a result, DNA was likely removed and added between 1998 and 2001.”

Bell was not at the hearing because he was at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. Bell defeated incumbent Cori Bush in Missouri’s 1st Congressional District Democratic primary on Aug. 6 and will be heavily favored in November.

A consent judgment

While Williams still maintains his innocence, the contaminated DNA evidence was a gut-punch to his case. The finding prompted hours of negotiations between his lawyers and prosecutors.

By Wednesday afternoon, they reached an agreement: Williams would enter an Alford plea, which is not an admission of guilt but an acknowledgment that there is enough evidence for a conviction. In exchange, his death sentence would be commuted to life without parole.

Robin Maher, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, said that given the contaminated DNA evidence, the plea was Williams’ best option.

“Mr. Williams faced an impossible choice: with an execution date in just over a month, he could take a chance on a legal process that has never given him a fair shake and hope that things turn out differently — or he could take the deal that would save his life and bring the victim’s family the closure they sought,” Maher said in an email. “Anyone would take the deal.”

Peter Joy, a professor at the Washington University School of Law, said many aspects of the case are troubling, including the bungled DNA evidence and the setting of an execution date while an innocence claim was still being examined.

“I hope there’s not a rush to execution,” Joy said.

Supreme Court quickly overrules

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey immediately challenged the new plea and reduced penalty, contending that the lower court lacked the authority to essentially overrule the state’s Supreme Court. Within hours, the high court agreed.

Its order also required Hilton to hold the evidentiary hearing, scheduled for Aug. 28.

In a statement, Bailey said people too often “forget about all of the evidence that was used to convict the defendant — the evidence the jury relied on — and the victims.”

But Williams’ attorney, Tricia Bushnell, noted that Gayle’s family supported the new plea and penalty. She said in a statement that the Supreme Court ruling “directly contradicts the will of a duly elected prosecutor and the community he represents and the wishes of a family who has already lost so much.”

Maher, of the Death Penalty Information Center, said there are also “credible claims of innocence” for men on death row in Texas, Oklahoma and Alabama.

“These cases create an impression that our legal system values process and ‘finality’ more than it values innocence and justice and explains why so many people are losing confidence in the death penalty,” Maher said.

Judge overrules murder suspect’s motion regarding death penalty constitutionality

A judge overruled a Jefferson City man’s motion to prevent the prosecution in his murder case from seeking the death penalty on Thursday.

Sergio Sayles faces 1st-degree murder charges for the April 2023 homicide of Jasmine King. Shortly after charges were filed against Sayles, Cole County prosecutor Locke Thompson said he plans to seek the death penalty if Sayles is convicted.

In July, Sayles’ attorney filed a motion to declare Missouri’s death penalty scheme unconstitutional and to bar prosecutors from pursuing it as a punishment. It cites racial biases as a factor that “in practice” prevents juries from constitutionally applying the death penalty as a punishment. The motion further states that the death penalty scheme in Missouri “lacks clear and objective standards.”

Judge Brouck Jacobs overruled the motion at a hearing on Thursday, but did sustain a motion to strike one of the aggravating factors in the state’s notice of intent to seek the death penalty. That motion relates to the state’s assertion that Sayles has prior convictions for serious assault.

The defense argued the conviction prosecutors referred to was from Illinois, and that Sayles was not convicted but rather received an adjudication since the case in question was a juvenile case.

Sayles’ case has its next hearing scheduled for October 10.

(source: KOMU news)

USA—-impending/scheduled executions

With the execution of Taberon Honie in Utah on August 8, the USA has now executed 1,594 condemned individuals since the death penalty was re-legalized on July 2, 1976 in the US Supreme Court Gregg v Georgia decision.

Gary Gilmore was the 1st person executed, in Utah, on January 17, 1977. Below is a list of further scheduled executions as the nation continues its shameful practice of state-sponsored killings.

NOTE: The list is likely to change over the coming months as new execution dates are added and possible stays of execution occur.

1595—–Aug. 29———–Loran Cole————–Florida

1596—–Sept. 20———-Freddie Owens———–South Carolina

1597—–Sept. 24———-Travis Mullis———–Texas

1598—–Sept. 24———-Marcellus Williams——Missouri

1599—–Sept. 26———-Alan Miller————-Alabama

1600—–Sept. 26———-Emmanual Littlejohn—–Oklahoma

1601—–Oct. 1————Garcia White————Texas

1602—–Oct. 17———–Robert Roberson———Texas

1603—–Nov. 21———–Corey Dale Grayson——Alabama

1604—–Dec. 4————Christopher Collings—-Missouri

(source: Rick Halperin)

Democrats Abandoned Their Anti-Death Penalty Stance. Those on Federal Death Row May Pay the Price.—-Witnesses to Trump’s execution spree are dismayed by Democrats’ decision to remove death penalty opposition from their party platform.

When the Rev. Al Sharpton took the stage to introduce members of the Exonerated 5 on the last night of the Democratic National Convention, it was, for the briefest moment, a nod toward a reality that the DNC had otherwise aggressively avoided: the myriad injustices of our criminal legal system.

“35 years ago my friends and I were in prison for crimes we didn’t commit,” Korey Wise said. As teenagers, Wise, Yusef Salaam, Kevin Richardson, Raymond Santana, and Antron McCray were wrongly arrested, brutally interrogated, and imprisoned for the rape of a jogger in Central Park. Donald Trump notoriously spent tens of thousands of dollars on full-page ads in the New York Times calling to bring back the death penalty. “Our youth was stolen from us,” Wise said. “Every day as we walked into courtroom, people screamed at us, threatened us because of Donald Trump.”

“He wanted us dead,” Salaam, now a New York City Council member, said. Now in their late 40s and early 50s, the men once known as the Central Park Five stood as a living testament both to Trump’s cruelty and the futures he sought to crush.

The moment was powerful. But it also exposed a tension that had been present throughout the entire convention. All week, the criminal justice system — and Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris’s role in it — had been cast as a force for good: a source of protection and justice for society’s vulnerable. Harris was praised by a parade of sheriffs, state attorneys general, and members of the U.S. security state as the leader who will keep Americans safe. “Crime will keep going down when we put a prosecutor in the White House instead of a convicted felon,” President Joe Biden said in his speech on Monday.

To anyone who has ever watched the Democrats maneuver in an election year, none of this was particularly surprising. The party’s belief that their candidates must adopt the mantle of law and order is a long-held tradition. Yet Wise, Salaam, Santana, Richardson, and McCray were once themselves demonized as looming threats to American society — branded not only as “felons” but also as “superpredators,” a racist and dehumanizing myth weaponized to give prosecutors the power to punish children as adults. Trump’s targeting of these teenagers was certainly repugnant and cruel. But their convictions came out of an era that saw politicians build careers on criminalizing and punishing young people like them. Few were more successful than Biden and Bill Clinton, both of whom were welcomed as heroes at the DNC.

For years, Harris has presented herself as an antidote to these bad old days: a prosecutor who believed in being “smart” rather than “tough” on crime. As a contender during the 2020 presidential primary, she promised a slew of criminal justice reforms, calling mass incarceration “the civil rights issue of our time.” As senator, she sponsored and co-sponsored legislation to make the system fairer and more humane, including a bill to abolish the federal death penalty and grant new sentences to everyone on federal death row. But now, with the presidency within reach, rather than seize the opportunity to follow through on such work, Harris and the Democratic Party have simply moved on from the discussion. The appearance of the Exonerated Five was bookended by yet another round of speeches elevating prosecutors and bashing criminals.

Unmet Promises

Salaam’s presence in particular was a reminder of a specific policy the Democratic National Committee has abandoned. In the years after his wrongful incarceration, he became an activist against the death penalty, telling his story to audiences around the country. (This is how I first got to know Salaam; for years we jointly served on the board of the Campaign to End the Death Penalty.) When the New York State Legislature debated fixing the state’s death penalty law, which had been invalidated by the state’s highest court, Salaam presented himself as a cautionary tale. Had capital punishment been the law of the land the year he was tried, he may well have been executed before proving his innocence.

Yet in the hours before Salaam spoke at the convention, many Americans were learning for the first time that the DNC had removed its goal of ending capital punishment from its official platform. The issue had previously been enshrined in the party platform for years, with the language in 2016 especially robust: “We will abolish the death penalty, which has proven to be a cruel and unusual form of punishment,” it read. “It has no place in the United States of America.”

As a document, the platform does not always reflect the priorities or beliefs of a presidential candidate. The 2016 language, for instance, was at odds with candidate Hillary Clinton’s support for capital punishment. But the decision to remove any reference to the death penalty was nonetheless alarming. At best, it raises questions about Harris’s stated commitment to ending capital punishment, something she not only claimed to want to do during the 2020 primary but took action on as senator. At worst, it signals something much darker, especially for the 40 men on federal death row.

The omission is especially worrisome to those who lived through Trump’s unprecedented federal execution spree, carried out in the waning months of his presidency. Under Trump and Attorney General Bill Barr, 13 people were executed at the federal penitentiary in Terre Haute. The last 3 executions were carried out back-to-back over the course of a week, just days before Biden’s inauguration. The cases were emblematic of the death penalty’s cruelty and unfairness. Lisa Montgomery, the only woman under a federal death sentence, had lived a life marked by extreme trauma and mental illness. Corey Johnson was killed despite a Supreme Court ban on executing people with intellectual disabilities. And Dustin Higgs, the last man to die, was executed for 3 murders carried out by another man, who had since said that the government’s case was “bullshit.”

Out for Blood

The horror of Trump’s executions made Biden’s 2020 campaign pledge to end the federal death penalty all the more urgent — and his victory over Trump cause for celebration and relief. In this light, the removal of the death penalty from the DNC platform feels like a stunning betrayal. “Biden’s promise 4 years ago created a set of expectations that his 4 years in office so far has not met,” said Robert Dunham, director of the Philadelphia-based Death Penalty Policy Project. “It’s those raised expectations that make the absence of reference to the death penalty so disappointing to people who want him to carry out that promise.”

Still, Dunham doesn’t believe the platform’s revision signals a change in policy. “It isn’t that they dropped their position on the death penalty. The issue here is, when you’re faced with an existential threat to democracy, what issues do you emphasize and what issues don’t you emphasize?”

Rendered Invisible

If relatively few Americans recall Trump’s execution spree, it is almost certainly because it was largely undiscussed by politicians on either side. The executions in Terre Haute were pushed through recklessly, in the earliest days of the Covid pandemic, in a manner that was shocking even to seasoned anti-death penalty activists, legal experts, and defense attorneys. If there was ever a year that presented the moral imperative to speak out against the death penalty, it was then. Instead, the federal executions were completely ignored at Democrats’ virtual convention 4 years ago.

In my correspondence with people on federal death row at the time, several criticized the Democrats for staying silent while Trump killed their friends and neighbors. “The Government is killing people in the name of the tax payers and it is not even a major story,” Christopher Vialva wrote to me before he was put to death in September 2020. He was acutely aware that Biden helped expand the federal death penalty in the first place and was skeptical of his vow to end executions. Those who survived the executions have expressed pessimism that anything will change.

With conservatives’ Project 2025 seeking to execute the rest of the men on federal death row, the stakes could not be higher. But for all their somber warnings of the Republicans’ terrifying blueprint for a second Trump administration, Democrats have been conspicuously silent about this part of the plan.

For those who witnessed the federal executions up close, news that the DNC platform no longer included opposition to the death penalty was dismaying but not reason to lose all hope. “It’s disappointing,” said activist Bill Breeden, who served as a spiritual adviser to Johnson, standing in the death chamber while he was killed by lethal injection. Breeden is certain that the very people who will power the Democrats to victory — especially women and young people — are opposed to capital punishment. But he also is adamant that Harris must win the election. “The opposite, Christian nationalism, is fascism,” he said. As a regular visitor to federal death row, Breeden is acutely aware of the danger posed by a 2nd Trump term. “There will be a serial killer in the White House.”

Yusuf Nur, who served as a spiritual adviser to Higgs and Orlando Hall, another man killed by the Trump administration, echoed Breeden’s sentiments. The federal executions were traumatic for both men. “It really changed my life,” Nur said.

Nur believes the silence about the death penalty evinces a lack of political courage. “They’re scared. They don’t want to bring up anything that they think could be used against them in this election cycle. That’s basically what it boils down to,” Nur said. He questioned how much direct involvement Harris had in the drafting of the platform. “I want to give her the benefit of the doubt,” he said, but he still found it disheartening and a bit ironic. “She wants to project strength and that she cannot be intimidated. But at the same time, this tells me that, yes, she can be intimidated.”

Nur saw a parallel with the campaign’s avoidance of Gaza and its refusal to allow a Palestinian American speaker at the DNC. “It’s the same basic reason,” he said. But whereas the scale and the images of Israel’s genocidal war have made the issue impossible to suppress, executions remain invisible to all but a small handful of Americans who see them up close.

This invisibility has undoubtedly made it easier for Biden to turn his back on his previous promises. So has the silence from Democrats. As Vialva said about the federal government before he was killed, “they want us quiet so they can operate without the public caring too much. They keep us secret.”

(source: Liliana Segura, theintercept.com)

Death penalty divide: Trump urges more capital punishment while Harris silent

Former President Donald Trump has signaled he will continue his administration’s aggressive pursuit of the death penalty if he is elected, while Vice President Kamala Harris has gone mum on the issue.

Trump made his most detailed comments yet on capital punishment since launching his campaign during remarks at the Arizona border on Thursday, at the same time that Harris has come under scrutiny for her silence on the matter.

As he was addressing punishments for illegal migrants who commit crimes, Trump said he would impose the death penalty “for anyone guilty of child or woman sex trafficking.”

Trump has also repeatedly suggested that a solution to the nation’s drug trafficking and addiction problems is to impose the death penalty on drug traffickers, citing countries such as China, which he has said successfully combats illegal drugs with a punishment of death. The former president reiterated those sentiments Thursday.

“We’ll also impose the death penalty on major drug dealers and traffickers,” Trump said. “In other countries on their immigration papers, there is a statement that says, ‘Death for drug traffickers.’ Big letters, big bold letters, 10 times the size of everything else on the page. I saw it this morning, and those are the countries where they have no problem with drugs.”

It is unclear which countries Trump was referring to, but Politifact found in 2018 that Trump accurately made similar comments about China and Singapore imposing the death penalty for drug trafficking. The outlet also noted, though, that there is little data to assess how effective the policy was in those countries.

Trump said his administration would also seek the death penalty for those who kill police, U.S. Border Patrol officers, or Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials.

Lastly, Trump addressed the protracted period of time that criminals wait on death row, saying his administration would seek a “quicker trial, not a trial that lasts 15 years and everybody gets exhausted.”

His comments align with the Trump administration’s historic use of the death penalty. 16 federal executions have been carried out since 1988, all by lethal injection. 13 of them were under Trump’s tenure, when Attorney General Bill Barr lifted an Obama-era freeze on them.

Harris, a former district attorney and California attorney general, has embraced a persona as “prosecutor” on the campaign trail, but she has a complicated history with the death penalty and has taken no position on it since she was chosen as Trump’s opponent.

During Harris’s tenure as vice president, the Department of Justice vowed to halt federal executions, but it did not entirely live up to that promise.

Attorney General Merrick Garland announced a moratorium on them in 2021 but changed gears in January when government prosecutors sought the death penalty for 20-year-old Payton Gendron. Gendron pleaded guilty to murdering 10 black people in a racially motivated attack at a Buffalo, New York, supermarket in 2022.

Prosecutors under Garland also asked for the death penalty in 2 cases brought by the Trump administration: Robert Bowers’s murder of 11 people at the Pittsburgh Tree of Life Synagogue and Islamic extremist Sayfullo Saipov’s murder of 8 people in a New York City bike path.

No federal executions have been carried out since Harris became vice president, but the DOJ’s authorization of the death penalty in rare cases upset opponents of it. Gendron is fighting his punishment in court, Bowers’s appeal is still playing out, and Saipov received a life sentence despite prosecutors asking for death. Bowers is among about 40 defendants currently sitting on death row.

20 years ago, Harris opposed the death penalty and received significant blowback when she announced as San Francisco district attorney that she would not seek it in the slaying of police officer Isaac Espinoza.

But later, when she campaigned for California attorney general, she said she would “enforce the death penalty as the law dictates.”

She once again flip-flopped on capital punishment when she unsuccessfully ran for president in 2019, saying she would institute a moratorium on it.

Now, amid a competitive campaign against Trump, Harris is facing a crossroads as she has embraced a tough-on-crime brand, at least when it comes to her opponent, whom she describes as a “convicted felon.” Her party has historically opposed the death penalty, but Trump has called for cracking down on crime with it.

In addition to Harris’s unclear stance on the topic, the newly released Democratic 2024 platform makes no mention of the death penalty, which the Huff Post observed was a first for the party since 2004.

A Harris campaign spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.

(source: Washington Examiner)

Exonerated members of Central Park 5 warn about Trump at Democratic convention—-The former president has never apologized to the group for taking out newspaper ads calling for the death penalty or for his public antagonism toward the teens in 1989.

4 of the exonerated members of the so-called Central Park 5 — a group of 5 teenagers wrongfully imprisoned for the 1989 rape of a jogger — appeared Thursday night at the Democratic National Convention, warning of what a second Donald Trump presidency could bring.

“35 years ago, my friends and I were in prison for a crime we did not commit,” one of them, Korey Wise, said Thursday. “Our youth was stolen from us. Every day, as we walked into a courtroom, people screamed at us, threatening us because of Donald Trump.”

Their concerns about the former president stemmed from personal experience and go back more than three decades: In 1989, 5 teenagers, all Black or Latino, were arrested after a jogger was found brutally sexually assaulted and tied up in Central Park.

One of them, then-15-year-old Yusef Salaam, would later recount how police used questionable methods, including depriving the teens of food and sleep, to get them to falsely confess to the crime “under duress.” Though all would later recant their confessions and there was no evidence linking them to the rape, the teens became publicly branded as the Central Park 5, were wrongfully convicted and spent years in prison.

During their trial, Trump, already a prominent figure in New York City for his real estate dealings, took out full-page ads in 4 newspapers calling for the death penalty to be reinstated.

“I want to hate these muggers and murderers. They should be forced to suffer and, when they kill, they should be executed for their crimes,” Trump stated in the ads. “They must serve as examples so that others will think long and hard before committing a crime or an act of violence.”

It wasn’t until 2002, when DNA evidence confirmed a different man’s confession that he had raped the Central Park jogger, that authorities dropped charges against the Central Park 5. The group became referred to as “the Exonerated 5” and in 2014 reached a $41 million wrongful-conviction settlement with New York City. Salaam, a Democrat, won election in November to the New York City Council.

But Trump would never apologize to the group for taking out the newspaper ads or for his public antagonism toward the teens in 1989. During his 2020 presidential campaign, 3 decades later, Trump continued to call into question the group’s innocence.

“You have people on both sides of that. They admitted their guilt … some of the prosecutors think the city should never have settled that case, and we’ll leave it at that,” Trump said in 2019.

On Thursday, the 4th and final night of the Democratic convention, Salaam and Wise stood on stage with 2 others of the Central Park 5 who had been exonerated: Raymond Santana and Kevin Richardson.

“He wanted us dead,” Salaam said, referring to Trump but avoiding using his name. “Today we are exonerated because the actual perpetrator confessed and DNA proved it. That guy says he still stands by the original guilty verdict. He dismisses the scientific evidence rather than admit he was wrong. He has never changed and he never will.”

It was not the 1st time Salaam has warned what a Trump presidency could mean. During the 2016 presidential campaign, Salaam publicly spoke out about his concerns that Trump had only doubled down on his actions toward the Central Park 5, even after the group was exonerated.

“For 27 years, I’ve been in Donald Trump’s crosshairs,” Salaam wrote in an October 2016 op-ed for The Washington Post, recounting the fear and confusion he felt in 1989 when he and his friends were wrongfully arrested in the case. Those terrified feelings were only magnified when they learned that Trump had called for them to face the death penalty in full-page newspaper ads.

“He called for blood in the most public way possible,” Salaam wrote then. “… I don’t know why the future Republican nominee bought those ads, but it seems part and parcel with his racist attitudes.”

Trump, he added, never apologized for calling for their deaths.

“In fact, he’s somehow still convinced that we belong in prison. When the Republican nominee was recently asked about the Central Park Five, he said, ‘They admitted they were guilty.’ … It’s further proof of Trump’s bias, racism and inability to admit that he’s wrong,” Salaam wrote.

On Thursday, Salaam urged the crowd to throw their support behind Vice President Kamala Harris and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz in November.

Trump “thinks that hate is the animating force in America. It is not,” Salaam said. “We have the constitutional right to vote. In fact, it is a human right. So let us use it … and together, on November 5, we will usher in Kamala Harris and Tim Walz into the White House.”

(source: Washington Post)

‘He’s never changed, he never will:’ Exonerated Central Park 5 warn against Trump after his death penalty crusade—-Wrongfully convicted men that Trump attacked in the 1980s took the stage at the DNC to back Kamala Harris

When 5 Black and Latino teenagers were wrongly convicted of the rape of a jogger in New York City’s Central Park in 1989, Donald Trump bought out full-page ads in all four major New York newspapers with a headline screaming to “BRING BACK THE DEATH PENALTY.”

“I want to hate these murderers and I always will,” Trump wrote. “I am not looking to psychoanalyze or understand them, I am looking to punish them.”

Their convictions were vacated in 2002, and the city paid $41m in 2014 to settle a civil rights lawsuit. Trump has refused to recant or apologize for those statements.

One of those teens, Yusef Salaam, now 50, spent nearly 7 years in prison for his wrongful conviction. Last year, he was elected to New York’s City Council, representing Harlem.

On August 22, Salaam stood on stage at the Democratic National Convention to endorse the woman running against the man who wanted him jailed.

Salaam was joined by 3 of the other exonerated men from the case — Korey Wise, Raymond Santana and Kevin Richardson — to support Kamala Harris and her running mate Tim Walz.

“45 wanted us unalive,” said Salaam, noting Trump’s nickname as the 45th president.

“He wanted us dead,” Salaam said. “Today, we are exonerated because the actual perpetrator confessed, and DNA proved it. … He dismisses the scientific evidence rather than admit he was wrong. He has never changed, and he never will.”

Their story has been the subject of a Ken Burns documentary and the acclaimed series When They See Us by Ava DuVernay, exploring a broken judicial system and the fog of racism and hate that Trump exploited.

“That man thinks that hate is the animating force in America. It is not,” Salaam said. “We have the constitutional right to vote. In fact, it is a human right. Let’s use it.”

Civil rights activist Al Sharpton, who advocated for the men in the 1980s, introduced them to the stage.

“I see a candidate who has sought to reform and uphold the law, and a man who wrongly assumes his mug shot appeals to Black Americans,” he said.

Wise spent the longest time in prison among the five of them. He was jailed for 13 years. The men spent a combined 41 years in prison among them.

Trump “called us animals,” Wise said. “He spent $85,000 on a full-page ad in The New York Times calling for our execution.”

Harris has “consistently committed to making government work for those of us who have been at a disadvantage,” Sharpton said.

Trump, meanwhile, has been “making himself richer and sowing division.”

(source: independent.co.uk)

Student Scholars: Moral Disengagement Theory and Support for Capital Punishment

In this new series, the Death Penalty Information Center will occasionally highlight student works on capital punishment, including master’s and PhD theses, and law review articles.

University of Alabama master’s degree candidate Christine Poole’s 2024 thesis explores the use of moral disengagement theory in justifying support for capital punishment. Using online surveys, she evaluated participants’ knowledge of the death penalty, support for the death penalty, and their use of moral disengagement techniques in approaching the issue.

“Moral disengagement is a preemptive cognitive process that justifies socially unacceptable behavior and reduces the associated guilt,” Ms. Poole explains. Her study found that many supporters of capital punishment distanced themselves ethically and morally from death row prisoners and used 3 elements of moral disengagement theory – euphemistic labeling, advantageous comparison, and dehumanization – to justify their views on the death penalty. “Euphemistic labeling is when language is sanitized to avoid the harsh realities of the action,” she wrote, and “advantageous comparison is where individuals compare their behaviors to those who have committed worse actions to appear more acceptable.”

For example, euphemistic labeling might use “capital punishment” or “justice being served” instead of “execution”; advantageous comparison might contrast the method of lethal injection with graphic details of crimes committed; and dehumanization is used to characterize death row prisoners as ‘monsters’ or ‘animals’. Ms. Poole found that 66.7% of supporters of the death penalty among the study participants adopted a mechanistic tone of dehumanization (p.31) — denying individuals “warmth, agency, emotionality, and the cognitive capacity for depth” (p.6).

Ms. Poole’s methods and findings present a new approach to understanding how opinions on capital punishment are shaped and defended.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

Return of death penalty not solution to Fiji’s fight against drugs, human rights chair and home affairs minister say

The chairperson of the Fiji Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Commission (FHRADC) shot down suggestion by a senior government minister to bring back the death penalty to deter international drug traffickers.

This week, Women and Children’s Minister, Lynda Tabuya, told local media that she wants “see the death penalty brought to Fiji for those who traffic large quantities of drugs”.

The minister said Fiji continues to be used as a transit point for drug traffickers.

“We are vulnerable, our borders are vulnerable, we need to explore the possibility of the death penalty to protect our people,” she said.

However, the FHARDC is calling for stronger policies, laws, and judicial processes to tackle the issue.

Fiji abolished the death penalty in 1979 and the country’s constitution ensure that every person has a right to life.

“The Commission is of the view that the death penalty is not the solution to the rising drugs problem,” FHARDC chairperson Pravesh Sharma said in statement on Thursday.

Sharma said capital punishment “is a serious violation of human rights”.

“Rather, the government should conduct baseline research to determine why our people are engaging in drugs, and then put in place measures to better address the issue,” he said.

Sharma called for “rehabilitation of addicted people; to prevent drugs from entering Fiji”.

“We need to strengthen out border security, raise awareness, and educate our people about the impacts of drugs.”

He added severe prison sentences for convicted drug offenders “will continue to have a deterrent effect”.

This follows Minister of Social Protection Lynda Tabuya’s suggestion of capital punishment for those who traffic large quantities of drugs.

Tabuya’s comments were met with mixed reactions from the Fijian public on social media, with comments including “this is a really dangerous rhetoric” to “a death penalty sentence will save our country”.

At least 2 MPs have voiced opposition to the suggestion.

Minister emphasises ‘humane strategies’

Home Affairs Minister, Pio Tikoduadua, who has been at the forefront of the fight against drugs, said the death penalty was not something that is part of their strategy.

He said the key to tackling the country’s drugs crisis “lies in comprehensive and humane strategies that address the underlying issues, while ensuring justice is served”.

Tikoduadua said the Fijian government’s recent initiatives, such as the National Countering Illicit Narcotics Strategy 2023-2028 and the ongoing Police Reset, were designed to tackle these complex issues more effectively.”

The Narcotics Strategy, launched in June, focuses on comprehensive measures, including demand and supply reduction, alternative development, and harm reduction strategies.

It also involves the establishment of a Counter Narcotics Bureau with a budget allocation of $2.5 million, tasked with leading enforcement operations and enhancing border control measures.

“In parallel, the Police Reset aims to modernise the police force through capacity building and cultural shifts, backed by partnerships like the MOU with the Australian Federal Police.” Tikoduadua said.

“These strategies represent a holistic approach to addressing drug trafficking and related crimes through stronger institutions, better resources, and international collaboration, which are likely to yield more sustainable results.

He added these were “crucial steps” taken by the government to address the problem.

“These efforts prioritise building a secure environment through robust law enforcement and community-based prevention strategies, avoiding the irreversible consequences associated with the death penalty.”

(source: rnz.co.na)

Death sentence for 3 men involved in drug trafficking from Laos to Vi?t Nam

3 men, including a Laotian national, were sentenced to death while 4 others, including 2 Laotian nationals, were sentenced to life imprisonment for illegally trafficking drugs from Laos into Vi?t Nam.

The People’s Court of the northern province of Hà Nam on Thursday sentenced 3 men, including a Laotian national, to death for illegally trafficking 23.5 kg of drugs from Laos to Vi?t Nam.

4 others, including 2 Laotian nationals, were sentenced to life imprisonment for the same crime.

According to the indictment, at 5.30pm on December 16, 2022, a task force led by the Ministry of Public Security’s Department of Drug Crime Investigation, in coordination with other units and the Hà Nam Provincial Police, caught several individuals red-handed using illegal drugs in Châu Son Ward, Ph? Lý City, Hà Nam Province.

The individuals involved were identified as Nguy?n Van Sáng, residing in Thanh Châu Ward, Ph? Lý, Xia Xiong, Toua Xiong and Chua Xong, all Laotian nationals.

The police seized numerous pieces of evidence, including 6 nylon bags containing various types of drugs and related items.

Further investigation led to the arrest of Nguy?n Tu?n Anh, residing in Phuong Canh Ward, Nam T? Liêm District, Hà N?i and Hoàng Phuong Th?o, residing in Nguy?n Du Ward, Hai Bà Trung District also in Hà N?i, on December 18, 2022, for drug trafficking.

The police also searched Tu?n Anh’s residence at Hoàng Van Th? Ward, Hoàng Mai District, Hà N?i, where they found and seized three packages of various drugs.

Tu?n Anh confessed to buying the drugs from Sáng and Hoàng Th? Khánh Ly, both residing in Thanh Tuy?n Ward, Ph? Lý, Hà Nam Province.

Sáng, Xia Xiong and Tu?n Anh were identified as the masterminds, while Th?o, Ly, Toua Xiong and Chua Xong were accomplices.

Xia Xiong purchased the drugs in Laos and assigned Toua Xiong to transport them to Vi?t Nam, where they were delivered to Sáng. Xia Xiong also tasked Chua Xong with travelling to Vi?t Nam to receive the drugs and stay at Sáng’s house to ensure the payment was made.

After receiving the drugs from Xia Xiong, Sáng sold them to Tu?n Anh and Th?o in Hà N?i.

Between September 2022 and December 16, 2022, the group trafficked a total of 23.56 kg of various drugs.

Sáng, Tu?n Anh, and Xia Xiong were given death sentences for illegal drug trafficking under Clause 4, Article 251 of the Penal Code. Additionally, Sáng received a two-year prison sentence for illegal possession of military weapons, with the final punishment being the death penalty.

Toua Xiong, Chua Xong, Th?o and Ly were sentenced to life imprisonment for illegal drug trafficking.

(source: vietnamnews.vn)

SAUDI ARABIA:

34 Egyptians among dozens facing execution for drug offences—-At least 50 people face the death penalty for drug offences in Tabuk prison, with many tortured while on death row, says a rights group

Dozens of prisoners in Saudi Arabia are facing the death penalty for drug offences, as rights groups warn of a surge in executions despite authorities’ pledges to stop the punishment.

The European Saudi Organisation for Human Rights (ESOHR) said on Thursday that there has been a sharp increase in the use of the death penalty between May and August, with executions reaching 30 by 22 August.

In Tabuk General Prison alone, at least 50 people are facing execution. According to ESOHR, 34 Egyptians are among those sentenced to death in the prison, along with other foreigners, including Jordanians and Syrians.

Two Egyptian nationals, Walid al-Baqi and Youssef Khudair, were executed on 13 August on charges of smuggling marijuana and amphetamines, the rights group said.

ESOHR also documented abuses faced by Egyptians on death row in Tabuk prison, including a lack from the Egyptian embassy in the kingdom, denial of their right to adequate defence, failure to appoint lawyers for them and instances of torture and ill-treatment.

Between 2020 and 2022, Saudi Arabia halted executions for drug offences. However, they resumed in December 2022, provoking an outcry from campaigners.

The kingdom has executed hundreds of people in recent years for various offences, including political dissent.

In 2023, a joint report by ESOHR and Reprieve revealed that Riyadh’s execution rate has almost doubled since King Salman and his son, Mohammed bin Salman, came to power in 2015. Between 2015 and 2022, executions surged by 82 %.

In February this year, seven Saudi men were killed in a mass execution, the highest number put to death in one day since 81 were killed in March 2022.

According to Reprieve, foreign nationals, including female domestic workers and drug offenders, are “disproportionately” targeted.

Despite the crown prince’s pledge in a 2018 interview to minimise executions, Saudi Arabia remains one of the world’s most prolific executioners.

(source: middleeasteye.net)

IRAN—-execution

Prisoner executed for drug-related charges in Tabriz

Iranian authorities executed Mohammad Khaled Jahangiri, a prisoner from Orumiyeh, West Azerbaijan Province, on drug-related charges in Tabriz Central Prison, East Azerbaijan Province, on 22 August.

The Kurdistan Human Rights Network (KHRN) has learned that Jahangiri was transferred to solitary confinement for execution the day before.

Jahangiri was a father of 2 from the village of Balu in Orumiyeh.

According to statistics compiled by the KHRN, at least 12 Kurdish prisoners have been executed in the past four weeks in various prisons across the country, including those in Orumiyeh, Kermanshah, Ghezel Hesar (Karaj), Khorramabad, Sanandaj, Sabzevar and Miandoab.

These prisoners had been convicted on charges ranging from drug offences to premeditated murder and “spreading corruption on earth” (efsad-e fel arz).

(source: kurdistanhumanrights.org)

UN warns of unfair detentions, death sentences for Iran’s minorities

The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) has raised concerns about ethnic and ethno-religious minorities in Iran facing disproportionate detentions and death sentences.

The statement released on Friday called on Iran “to review its legal framework, repeal vaguely worded criminal offenses punishable by death, ensure fair and due process for minority groups, and establish a moratorium on the death penalty with the goal of abolishing it.”

The Committee also expressed concern over reports of “grave human rights violations and abuses committed by law enforcement officers” against ethnic and ethno-religious minority protestors during the November 2019, July 2021, and September 2022 protests, particularly in regions with high minority populations. It called on Iran to conduct impartial investigations into these allegations and to provide reparations for the victims.

Amidst growing repression, rights groups warn that ethnic and religious minorities in Iran, particularly the Kurdish and Baluch communities, are facing escalating challenges, with the Islamic Republic’s actions being the root cause of their misery.

Iran’s leading Sunni cleric, Mowlavi Abdolhamid, voiced sharp criticism on Friday against the ruling establishment for its persecution of religious minorities. He emphasized that the pursuit of justice is the people’s paramount demand and urged the immediate release of political prisoners in Iran.

The outspoken Friday Imam of Sistan-Baluchestan Province stands as a prominent advocate for minority rights in Iran.

In Sistan-Baluchistan, a Sunni-majority Baluch province, the community has faced the highest execution rate in Iran over the past 44 years.

Last year, the former UN Special Rapporteur for Iran described the levels of killings, torture, and brutality against the Baluch minority as “shocking.”

Javaid Rehman reported that since the onset of the “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests, more than 1/2 of those killed were from Baluch and Kurdish provinces, with 63% of child victims hailing from these regions.

The protests were sparked by the death of a 22-year-old Kurdish-Iranian woman in Tehran while in the custody of the morality police. The authorities carried out a harsh crackdown that resulted in the deaths of approximately 550 individuals and the arrest of over 20,000 others, which was condemned as a crime against humanity by a UN fact-finding mission.

Rehman highlighted the disproportionate targeting and execution of Baluchis, who make up only 2-6% of Iran’s population but account for 30% of executions. He also noted that security forces have targeted them extrajudicially, with at least 90 extrajudicial killings, including 22 fuel carriers, in the first 9 months of 2023.

Amnesty International reports that Iran has the highest execution rate after China.

The former UN Special Rapporteur stated that Baluchis are “systematically undermined,” left in poverty, and politically, economically, and socially disempowered, calling this treatment a “systematic state policy.”

Amidst the diverse tapestry of Iran’s ethnic groups, the Kurds stand as another minority deeply impacted by systemic discrimination. According to Amnesty International, Kurds in Iran have long endured the repression of their social, political, and cultural rights. Kurdish activists are frequently subjected to arbitrary arrests, prosecution, and torture, facing grossly unfair trials in Revolutionary Courts, often culminating in death sentences.

(source: iranintl.com)

AUGUST 23, 2024:

PENNSYLVANIA:

Superior Court rules Allegheny County judge can’t bar death penalty in Bellevue murder trial

The Superior Court this week cleared the way for prosecutors to continue seeking the death penalty against a man accused of gunning down his ex-girlfriend on a Bellevue street in 2022, ruling the former judge in the case had no authority to bar capital punishment in the case.

Former Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Anthony Mariani, who retired earlier this year, had previously ruled prosecutors could no long seek the death penalty against 27-year-old Deangelo Zieglar, citing Gov. Josh Shapiro’s de facto moratorium on executions.

“As our review reveals,” President Judge Anne E. Lazarus wrote in the opinion, “the trial court has acted outside the parameters of the law.”

The ruling means Zieglar’s case will return to the trial court and proceed as a death penalty case. The public defender’s office could appeal the ruling.

Zieglar is charged with homicide in the fatal shooting of his ex-girlfriend, Rachel Dowden, in January 2022. Dowden had a protection from abuse order against Zieglar, who she’d alleged had a history of domestic violence. She’d legally bought a handgun for her own protection, which police say Zieglar later stole and used to kill her.

The opinion comes 5 months after a 3-judge panel heard arguments in the case and more than a year after Judge Mariani initially ruled that he would allow prosecutors to seat a death penalty jury in Zieglar’s case. He based his arguments in part on a 1986 case in which the defendant was given a new sentencing hearing after the judge in that case gave these instructions to the jury:

“Somewhere down the line, if you do impose the death penalty, the case will be reviewed thoroughly. And after thorough review the death penalty may be carried out.”

Judge Mariani had cited Gov. Shaprio’s pledge not to sign any death warrants, saying it would be “patently unreasonable and fundamentally unfair” to put jurors through the process necessary to decide a death penalty case “when the outcome has already been determined.”

Judges were skeptical during the brief oral arguments on the issue in March.

“The fact that Gov. Shapiro refuses to sign a death warrant doesn’t matter,” Judge Lazarus said at the time. “Even though Gov. Shapiro’s predecessor did the same thing, it’s still temporary because the legislature hasn’t ruled on this.”

In the Superior Court’s opinion, the judge said the sentencing procedure for 1st-degree murder is clear: “… there is nothing in [the sentencing statute], or any other law that we are aware of, that allows the trial court to deny the Commonwealth’s ability to seek the death penalty.”

NORTH CAROLINA:

NC man accused of killing mom, 2 kids

A Charlotte man accused of killing a woman and her 2 children will learn his fate Thursday on whether or not he’ll face the death penalty.

On March 15, Markayla Johnson, 22, and her 2 young children, Miracle Johnson, 4, and Messiah Johnson, 7 months, were found dead at an apartment on Orchard Trace Lane in Charlotte after they were reported missing on March 3. Family members had said they hadn’t seen Markayla in months.

MArkayla’s boyfriend Benjamin Taylor was captured hiding in a tent in California near the Mexico border on March 16th after a multi-agency manhunt led them to an area where they said criminals were known to try and flee to.

He is charged with 3 counts of 1st-degree murder and conceal/fail to report death. According to toxicology reports, both children had fentanyl in their systems, which is listed as what led to their deaths. 7-month-old Messiah also tested positive for cocaine and 4-ANPP, a chemical often used to illegally make fentanyl. 2 drugs used to sedate, diphenhydramine and melatonin, were also found in the infant’s system.

(source: WSPA news)

SOUTH CAROLINA:

South Carolina ACLU asks court to allow interview of death row inmate before execution

As a South Carolina man awaits execution on death row, lawyers at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) are asking a federal court to supersede prison policy and allow him to give media interviews to tell his story and make the case that his life should be spared.

Marion Bowman, 44, has sat on death row for more than 2 decades after being convicted for the 2001 murder of Kandee Martin — a 21-year-old woman whom he fatally shot over a monetary dispute when he was 20 years old. His execution has yet to be scheduled, but ACLU lawyers cautioned in a court filing that he “could be executed within weeks.”

Bowman is not seeking to be released from prison, but is petitioning Gov. Henry McMaster for executive clemency to commute his sentence to life in prison. However, efforts to publicize his case have proved difficult because of policies at the South Carolina Department of Corrections (SCDC) that prevent him — and all other inmates — from giving certain types of interviews to the media.

According to official policy, “personal contact interviews … will be prohibited.” The prohibition includes in-person interviews, telephone interviews, and any interviews conducted with audio or visual recording. The only means by which the media can interview an inmate is through written correspondence.

Lawyers at the ACLU already have in-person access to Bowman and communicate with him over the phone and in video calls through their roles as legal counsel — but are barred from making visual and audio recordings to provide to the public. According to a court filing the ACLU desires to make audio recordings to develop a podcast and video recordings to be published.

Although every state imposes restrictions on media access to inmates, South Carolina is “the only state that bans this category of speech outright,” South Carolina ACLU communications director Paul Bowers told CNA.

ACLU lawyers are asking the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina to rule that this practice violates the First Amendment because it “suppresses a substantial amount of protected speech.” They are also asking the court to expedite their request to block the department’s enforcement of the policy so they can interview Bowman and publish audio and visual of the interviews before he is executed by the state.

“A story about Marion Bowman — that is, a telling of his case and his life behind bars — is not functionally equivalent to a story by Marion Bowman,” the lawsuit argues. “A blog … about how great a loss it would be if South Carolina kills Marion Bowman is no substitute for the public hearing Marion’s own voice, his own laugh, his own anguish.”

South Carolina ACLU legal director Allen Chaney said in a statement that the restrictions on media interviews are also unfair to the public

“That South Carolina shrouds capital punishment in secrecy acknowledges a powerful truth: the death penalty is barbaric and unjust, and public scrutiny would end it for good,” Chaney said. “The public deserves a chance to meaningfully encounter the person being murdered on their behalf. We aim to give them that.”

Bowers told CNA that death row is “a very hidden away part of our state” and that “people don’t think very long and hard about the death penalty.” Yet, if given access to recorded interviews of someone who is awaiting execution, people would “have to be confronted with the faces and voices of the people we are preparing to kill.”

“We want people to think long and hard about what we’re preparing to do,” Bowers said.

“Many [death row inmates] have committed heinous crimes, but [Bowman is] an example of someone who has changed his life to the extent that he can while incarcerated — someone who has sought redemption while on death row,” Bowers added.

Krisanne Vaillancourt Murphy, executive director of Catholic Mobilizing Network, told CNA that Catholics, in particular, should oppose the death penalty and have a “responsibility to bring the inhumanity of the death penalty into the light.” She also criticized policies that prevent the public from learning about those who have been sentenced to death.

“Every effort to make secret the processes and procedures of capital punishment or to obscure the lived experiences of people on death row is a manifestation of this system of death,” Murphy said. “In the Gospel of Luke we are reminded, ‘whatever you have said in the darkness will be heard in the light, and what you have whispered behind closed doors will be proclaimed on the housetops.’”

The Catholic Mobilizing Network works closely with the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops on efforts to oppose the death penalty and uphold the human dignity of people who are incarcerated.

When reached by CNA, a spokesperson for SCDC provided the department’s filing with the court, which defends the policy against First Amendment objections.

The SCDC filing argues that other states impose restrictions on interviews and that journalists have “frequently interviewed inmates through the medium of written correspondence” in South Carolina.

It further asserts that the current policy is necessary to prevent security risks such as coded messages to criminal associates, to prevent a lack of sensitivity to crime victims, and to prevent a risk of institutional violence or the creation of celebrity status based on comments made by an inmate to the media, among other reasons.

The last execution in South Carolina occurred in May of 2011, after which executions were put on hold because drug companies would not sell the products required for lethal injection.

In 2021, however, South Carolina legalized executions by the electric chair and by firing squad. The state has also obtained the drugs necessary for lethal injection. After the South Carolina Supreme Court affirmed last month that the death penalty — and the methods permitted in state law — are permissible by the state constitution, the SCDC expressed its intent to resume executions.

(source: Tyler Arnold is a staff reporter for Catholic News Agency)

1st execution of 2024 deemed as ‘hypocrisy’

In its 111-year history, investigations and former students accounts have chronicled how the Arthur G. Dozier School for Boys both in Marianna and Okeechobee were not so much a reform school but rather a place where physical, sexual and mental abuse was rampant.

In June, Gov. Ron DeSantis quietly signed a bill — without any press present and with only a handful of Dozier survivors and three representatives who sponsored HB 21 — in which the state will divide $20 million in compensation between those who attended the Arthur G. Dozier School for Boys in North Florida between 1940 and 1975, as well as the Okeechobee School. This followed years of investigation, including in 2008 when then Gov. Charlie Crist in 2008 directed the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to investigate the Dozier School and the deaths alleged there, and a federal investigation that closed the school in 2011, which was under the control of the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice.

One moniker from the institution in Marianna was the “White House Boys,” which according to News Service of Florida derived from the white concrete building where boys were beaten and raped by school workers.

One of those boys is Loran Cole, who was housed at Dozier School for Boys for 5 1/2 months in 1984, at the age of 17.

And despite quietly signing that bill in June recognizing the brutality residents of the school faced, the governor signed a death warrant for the White House Boy in July. Cole is slated to be executed Aug. 29, 2024. It is the first execution warrant DeSantis has signed in 2024.

Cole was sentenced to death in 1995, for the murder of John Edwards, an 18-year-old Florida State University student. Cole was also convicted of robbing, raping and kidnapping of Edwards’ sister Pam, who was with her brother camping in the Ocala National Forest. Cole’s execution warrant comes nearly 10 months after Florida’s last execution, which was the last of the state’s 6 executions carried out in 2023.

In post-conviction appeals, Cole’s lawyers have chronicled the neglect, abuse and trauma Cole experienced — including daily beatings that resulted in 2 broken legs and being raped by guards — and argued it changed the entire trajectory of his life and led to the commission of his crime. Cole’s lawyers argued his “post-1984 criminal record also goes to show the effect that life in Dozier had on his psyche. That horrible place helped create the Loran Cole who sits on death row today.”

In a letter to DeSantis, Florida’s Catholic bishops implored DeSantis to stay Cole’s execution and commute his sentence to life without possibility of parole (the codefendant in murder of John Edwards was given life in prison).

“Mr. Cole himself was beaten, raped and tormented at Dozier,” said Michael Sheedy, executive director of the Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops, in an Aug. 14, 2024, letter to DeSantis on behalf of the bishops of Florida. “He witnessed torture and daily beatings of other students. He was once forced to clean up the remains of another student who died by suicide after jumping off a building. He had his legs broken after trying to escape. Mr. Cole’s jury never heard about the physical and mental abuse he endured at the hands of officers at Dozier.”

Survivors of Dozier tell stories of beatings with leather belts, students being tied to a bed, students being put in dryers, forced labor and rape. Various news reports indicate between 80 and 100 children died at Dozier, with the location of their remains is unknown. A graveyard near the school has several unmarked crosses, which survivors believe are boys killed by staffers.

In 2010, while on death row, Cole watched a documentary about Dozier and was flooded with memories of his time there. He shared his memories with a prison mental health counselor.

“Never having received mental health and trauma treatment until his arrival on death row in his late 20s, Mr. Cole, at age 57, is not the same person who committed the grave crimes for which he was convicted,” Sheedy stated in his letter.

The 2023 Florida Culture of Life Conference included several speakers, among them were Maria DeLiberato, executive director of Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty

Maria DeLiberato, executive director of Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, said there are a “half dozen other men Florida’s death row who survived the abuse at Dozier, as well as countless others in the Florida Department of Corrections.” She described the governor’s signing of a death warrant on a Dozier survivor as “hypocrisy,” and said the “state-sanctioned cycle of abuse” must stop.

“Horrifically, shortly before Loran was released from Dozier, he was forced to clean up a smattering of blood and brain matter from another child who had jumped off the roof of one of the cottages and died by suicide,” DeLiberato said. “In passing the compensation bill for Dozier survivors, the state of Florida recognized its direct responsibility for the profound and lifelong impact of the horrific torture and abuse those men suffered there. For the State of Florida to turn around less than a month later and say they are justified in killing one of those survivors is unconscionable.”

Prayer vigils

Prayer vigils are scheduled throughout the state of Florida for the day of the execution, Aug. 29, at local parishes. San Pedro Parish in North Port and Sacred Heart Parish in Punta Gorda (Diocese of Venice) will host vigils. In the Diocese of Palm Beach, a vigil will be held at the Cathedral of St. Ignatius Loyola in Palm Beach Gardens and at the corner of Military Trail and Holly Road. See the linked prayer vigil list here and above.

Tallahassee Citizens Against the Death Penalty will lead a candlelight vigil in front of the governor’s mansion in Tallahassee at the time of the 6 p.m. execution. Because fencing and metal barricades have been placed around the outside perimeter of the mansion, the vigil will take place outside the perimeter in the small parking area that faces the mansion.

If the execution takes place, the group will also lead a service of remembrance for Cole and victim John Edwards the following day, Aug. 30, at noon at the Capitol Rotunda.

Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty will be across the highway from the death chamber at Florida State Prison beginning 5 p.m. Aug. 29. In the Diocese of Orlando, buses will pick up passengers at Daytona Beach, Ormond Beach, and Palm Coast and transport them to vigil in Raiford. First stop is Our Lady of Lourdes Catholic Church, 201 University Blvd. in Daytona Beach at 1:30 followed by stops at Destination Daytona in Ormond Beach and a Winn Dixie on SR 100 and Old Kings Road in Palm Coast.

For those unable to attend a live vigil, Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty will also host a live, informative, and prayerful online vigil beginning at 5 p.m. It will include live on-the-ground coverage of the vigils at the prison. Register here, or watch on the Death Penalty Action Facebook Page.

(source: thefloridacatholic.org)

Cole Warrant: Briefing complete at Florida Supreme Court—-As of Monday this week, the briefing in Cole’s appeal pending at the Supreme Court of Florida is complete. When the Court will issue its decision is unclear.

Loran Cole’s execution is scheduled for August 29 at 6:00 p.m.

Shortly after Gov. DeSantis signed the warrant, Cole, through his attorneys, filed a successive motion for postconviction relief in the circuit court. (The Motion is covered here.) The court decided to not hold an evidentiary hearing on Cole’s claims.

After the circuit court issued an Order summarily denying Cole’s claims (covered here), Cole appealed the ruling to the Florida Supreme Court.

As of Monday this week, the briefing in Cole’s appeal pending at the Supreme Court of Florida is complete.

On August 15, the State filed its 69-page Answer Brief.

On Monday, Cole filed his Reply Brief.

Therefore, briefing is now complete. Oral argument has not been scheduled on Cole’s claims. In its Answer Brief, the State contends that oral argument is unnecessary.

When the Court will issue its decision is unclear. If the Court denies Cole’s claims, Cole will still have an opportunity to file a petition for writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, which also must be briefed and decided before the execution—unless a stay of execution is granted.

All of the briefing can be found on the Court’s docket here, at: https://acis.flcourts.gov/portal/court/68f021c4-6a44-4735-9a76-5360b2e8af13/case/3968b51f-1fb9-4967-b1a4-9c31f296fe90

(source: fladeathpenalty.substack.com)

After delay, convicted Florida killer Wade Wilson faces death sentence decision Tuesday

Wade Wilson, a Fort Myers, Florida man convicted of killing 2 Cape Coral women in 2019, is facing the death penalty at his sentencing scheduled for Tuesday, August 27.

Wilson’s legal team filed a motion on July 3 asking for a new trial or acquittal on the murder and several other charges. Trial judge Nicholas Thompson denied the motion on August 15.

A jury found Wilson, 30, guilty on June 12 of the murders of Kristine Melton, 35, and Diane Ruiz, 43, and after weighing aggravating and mitigating circumstances recommended the death penalty.

It will be up to Thompson to impose death sentences or life in prison without parole.

According to Florida law, Thompson will consider each aggravating factor found by the jury and all mitigating circumstances. He can impose a sentence of death only if the jury unanimously found at least one aggravating factor beyond a reasonable doubt.

Sentencing was initially scheduled for July 23 but a defense motion for a delay over scheduling conflicts for expert mental health witnesses was granted and sentencing delayed.

Here’s what to know about Wade Wilson’s crimes, trial, upcoming sentencing and Florida’s death row:

What crimes did Wade Wilson commit?

Wilson, then 25, met Kristine Melton, 35, and her friend Stephanie Sailors on Oct. 7, 2019, at Buddah LIVE, a Fort Myers bar.

After the bar closed, Wilson and the two women went to the home of Jayson Shepard where they stayed for several hours before leaving in the morning.

Wilson, Melton and Sailors then went Melton’s Cape Coral home. After Sailors left, Wilson strangled Melton to death as she slept in her bed and stole her car.

A short time later, Wilson saw 43-year-old Diane Ruiz walking along a Cape Coral street, asked her for directions to a nearby school and lured her into the car.

When Ruiz tried to exit the car, Wilson attacked her, beating and strangling her before pushing her out of the car and running her over 10 to 20 times.

After the murders, Wilson called his biological father Steven Testasecca several times confessing to and narrating the gruesome details of his crimes.

Wade Wilson victims Kristine Melton and Diane Ruiz

Kristine Melton, 35, of Cape Coral, was murdered Oct. 7, 2019, by Wade Wilson, 30.

Kristine Melton grew up in Illinois and moved with a friend to Cape Coral where she worked as a waitress.

She reportedly was godmother to her cousin Samantha Catomer’s child, owned a cat and lived in a Cape Coral duplex.

Melton loved to dress up and her favorite holiday was Halloween, Catomer testified during Wilson’s trial.

Melton had a quick wit, made everyone around her feel safe and understood and “was precious, not just to me, but to everyone who knew her,” Catomer said.

Melton was 35 years old when she met Wilson at Buddah LIVE, a Fort Myers bar. After leaving the bar and spending several hours at the home of Jayson Shepard, Melton, Sailors and Wilson went to Melton’s duplex.

After Sailors left, Wilson strangled her to death in her sleep.

Diane Ruiz’s body was found in a field in Cape Coral on Oct. 10, 2019, 4 days after she was reported missing.

Diane Ruiz, 43, a mother and engaged to be married, was described as caring and hardworking.

She worked as a bartender at the Moose Lodge in Cape Coral and never missed a shift in 5 years.

Ruiz was walking to work for her 10 a.m. shift when she encountered Wilson.

A short time after killing Melton, Wilson saw Ruiz walking along a Cape Coral street and lured her into the car after asking her for directions.

When she tried to leave, Wilson beat and strangled Ruiz, pushed her out of the car and ran her over repeatedly.

Her body was found in a field 3 days later.

Wade Wilson’s father Steven Testasecca was key to his arrest

After the murders, Wilson called his biological father, Steven Testasecca, several times confessing to the crimes in gruesome detail.

“I am a killer,” Wilson said, according to Testasecca’s testimony.

Testasecca said Wilson confessed to choking Melton after she went to sleep and stopping Ruiz for directions before she got into the car, choking her while he drove.

According to Testasecca’s testimony, Wilson said Ruiz was still breathing before he repeatedly ran her over.

After initially dismissing the calls and attributing the admissions to Wilson being a “good storyteller,” Testasecca, 46, put his phone on speaker with Wilson’s biological mother listening in and relaying information to police.

Testasecca asked Wilson for his location and told him he would send an Uber to him. Instead, his whereabouts were provided to police who arrested Wilson on Oct. 8, 2019.

What criminal charges was Wade Wilson convicted of?

Wilson, who shares his name with Marvel character Deadpool, was tried and found guilty of 6 charges:

2 counts of 1st-degree murder

1st-degree murder

Grand theft

Petty theft

Wilson also faces charges in unrelated crimes, including attempted escape from jail and drug charges.

Wade Wilson, cellmate Joseph Katz accused of escape attempt

Wilson racked up additional charges while awaiting his murder trial in the Lee County Jail.

In 2020, Wilson and his cellmate Joseph Katz were accused of tampering with a window in their cell in an attempt to escape.

Deputies searched the 10×10 cell Wilson and his cellmate were housed in and found the window tampered with. The metal frame holding the window had been removed and there were several cracks in the thick security glass.

Wilson, who was reportedly the primary planner and instigator of the escape effort, also tried to set up a getaway car.

Wade Wilson tied to white supremacy prison gang Unforgiven

Court records in the attempted escape case connect Wilson to the Unforgiven, a white supremacy prison gang.

Wilson sports several swastika tattoos, including on the right side of his head and below his right eye.

The swastika was adopted in 1920 as the symbol of Adolf Hitler’s Nazi party, and since 1945 has “served as the most significant and notorious of hate symbols, anti-Semitism and white supremacy,” according to the Anti-Defamation League.

According to the Anti-Defamation League, the Unforgiven gang was founded in the Florida prison system in 1986 and is the largest white supremacist prison gang in the state.

Wade Wilson tattoos, before and after arrest

Wilson’s facial tattoos have gained widespread attention, including on social media.

While Wilson had neck tattoos at the time of his arrest in 2019, none were visible on his face in his booking photo and early court appearances.

At his 2024 murder trial, Wilson’s face was covered in tattoos, including a swastika below his right eye and stitches around his mouth.

Prior to the trial, Wilson’s attorneys were granted motions requesting he be allowed to wear street clothes and to cover tattoos “that might be objectionable to members of the potential jury pool” with makeup.

Wade Wilson sentencing

On June 25, 2024, the jury in Wilson’s trial recommended he receive the death penalty for each of the murders.

During the penalty phase of the trial, jurors had the option of recommending life in prison without parole or death.

Florida juries were required to vote unanimously for a death sentence recommendation until April 2023 when Gov. Ron DeSantis lowered the threshold by signing into law a bill allowing juries to recommend death with as few as 8 votes.

After considering aggravating and mitigating circumstances, the jury voted 9-3 and 10-2 for death.

Sentencing, originally scheduled for July 23, was delayed to August 27, 2024, and it will be up to Judge Thompson to decide whether death or life without parole sentences are imposed.

Where is Wade Wilson being held?

Wilson is housed at the Lee County Jail in Fort Myers. Once his sentencing and other unrelated charges, including an escape attempt, are resolved, he’ll be transferred into the Florida prison system.

If Judge Nicholas Thompson confirms Wilson’s death sentence, he will end up on Florida’s death row at Union Correctional Institution in a cell measuring 6x9x9.5 feet high.

Where is Florida death row?

Florida’s death row is inside Union Correctional Institution in Raiford, about 45 miles southwest of Jacksonville.

According to the Florida Department of Corrections, inmates on death row are allowed snacks, radios and 13” TVs, but do not have cable or air-conditioning. They wear orange T-shirts to set them apart from other inmates and the same blue pants worn by regular prisoners.

Death row inmates are served 3 meals a day – at 5 a.m., from 10:30 to 11 a.m. and from 4 to 4:30 p.m.. Food is prepared by prison staff and transported in insulated carts to the cells, where inmates are given sporks to eat from the provided trays.

They’re allowed showers every other day and any visitors must be preapproved. Inmates can receive mail.

Death row inmates are counted at least hourly. They wear handcuffs everywhere except in their cells, the exercise yard and shower. They are in their cells except for medical reasons, exercise, social or legal visits or media interviews.

Once a death warrant is signed by the governor, the inmate is put in a Death Watch cell and allowed a legal and social phone call.

A Death Watch cell is 12x7x8.5 feet high.

What are Florida’s methods of execution?

In 1923, the Legislature passed a law replacing hanging with the electric chair. An oak chair was built by prison inmates in that year.

Florida’s current 3-legged electric chair, nicknamed “Old Sparky,” was built of oak by Florida Department of Corrections staff and installed at Union Correctional Institution in 1999.

Legislation passed in 2000 allows for lethal injection as an alternative to the electric chair.

(source: Fort Myers News-Press)

Jury recommends death sentence for convicted Jacksonville triple murderer 20+ years after crimes—-Pinkney ‘Chip’ Carter was originally sentenced to death in 2002 murder of his ex-fiancée, her new boyfriend and her 16-year-old daughter

On his 70th, a jury on Thursday recommended Pinkney “Chip” Carter be resentenced to death for murdering 3 people more than 20 years ago.

The jury had been tasked with deciding whether Carter would spend the rest of his life in prison or be executed for the 2002 murder of his ex-fiancée, her new boyfriend and her 16-year-old daughter.

Carter, who was previously sentenced to death, was granted a resentencing trial after a 2017 ruling by the Florida Supreme Court prompted the Florida Legislature to change how the death penalty could be applied, requiring a death sentence be a unanimous decision by a jury and not just a majority, as it had been at the time of Carter’s conviction.

The Legislature changed the law again in 2023, requiring an 8-4 majority, but Carter’s case fell under the previous ruling, so his resentencing trial moved forward.

The jury’s decision Thursday was not unanimous. On 1 of the murder counts, 10 jurors recommended death with 2 recommended life in prison. On another count, 9 jurors recommended death and 3 recommended life in prison.

Below is a look back at how the resentencing trial unfolded over the last 2 weeks.

Wednesday testimony

“It felt safe in that home,” prosecutor Bernie De La Rionda explained as he delivered closing arguments Wednesday afternoon to jurors, describing what it was like for the four children who were sleeping inside their mother’s home early in the morning July 24, 2002. They were 16-year-old Courtney Smith, 14-year-old Rick Smith, 8-year-old Rebecca Reed and 6-year-old Bryan Smith.

“At approximately 12:30 a.m. the world as they knew it would be shattered,” he said about the moments Chip Carter entered their home and shot and killed their mother, Reed, her boyfriend, Glenn Pafford and Reed’s daughter, Smith.

“I’m asking you to go back in time and think about what this man did,” said De La Rionda as he detailed what he argues is proof that the murders were cold, calculated and premeditated murder.

De La Rionda reminded jurors about a neighbor of Reed’s who found Carter one night before the murders in his backyard, trying to peak into Reed’s home.

“He was trying to figure out how he could surprise them,” he said.

Carter knew Reed, who was his ex-fiancee, was dating someone new.

He still loved her and testified in 2005 that he went to her home that night with a loaded rifle, “to get some answers.”

He said he accidentally shot 16-year-old Courtney during a struggle with Reed, but De La Rionda contends that does not make sense, telling jurors unless it was a “magical” bullet, how would a bullet hit Courtney in the head, if the rifle was pointing down as Carter demonstrated about the struggle for the rifle.

“He was obsessed with her,” said De La Rionda about Carter’s feelings for Reed. “He was jealous, and he thinks he’s been played and that he had the right to go over there and get some answers,” he said, asking jurors to use common sense when deciding if Carter should return to death row or be sentenced instead to life in prison.

“The law says you can use that God-given common sense to evaluate the evidence,” he said.

Defense attorneys for a Jacksonville man convicted in a 2002 triple murder called witnesses Wednesday as they tried to convince jurors to sentence Pinkney “Chip” Carter to life in prison instead of sending him back to death row.

His convictions are not in question but because of changes to Florida law, Carter was granted a resentencing trial because the recommendation for the death penalty from his original jury was not unanimous.

Carter’s attorneys are trying to convince jurors that the combination of medication and alcohol Carter had the day of the murder and his troubled childhood should warrant a life sentence, not a death sentence.

Tuesday testimony

Chip Carter’s father was described as a “monster” by his former step-daughters in Duval County court Tuesday morning.

“He was very abusive to my mother,” Jill Larkin said about P.W. Carter. Larkin’s mother married P.W. Carter after he divorced Chip Carter’s mother.

“We lived in fear, in great fear,” described Larkin about the 6 years she and her 7 other siblings endured at the hands of P.W. Carter. “He got mad at my sister one time and he took off his belt and started beating her. She was on the floor bleeding and we were yelling and screaming.”

Carter did not live with his step-siblings during the abuse. But his brother and sister testified their father was violent.

Defense attorneys also called an expert in pharmacology and toxicology, who testified about how the combination of anti-depressant medication, Prozac, and alcohol can impact the human brain.

Carter testified during his 2005 trial that he had taken 2 anti-depressant pills and drank 4-5 alcoholic beverages within a few hours of confronting Reed and Pafford at Reed’s home in 2002. He testified that night he “was having thoughts I had never had before, I was confused, it was chaos.”

His testimony was read to jurors last week.

Pharmacologist Dr. Daniel Buffington, testified a combination of Prozac and alcohol can, “enhance the adverse side effects of both substances.”

Carter testified during his 1st-degree murder trial in 2005, that he went to Reed’s home to confront her about dating him and Pafford at the same time. He said during a struggle with Reed over the loaded rifle he brought with him to her home, “to get answers,” that he accidentally shot her teenaged daughter and then shot Reed as she went to help her child.

He then shot and killed Pafford. All 3 were shot in the head.

Prosecutors argue Carter had no trouble driving to Reed’s home that night despite having taken Prozac and drinking, and that he didn’t miss a single shot of the 6 he fired.

The murders sent shock waves through the entire community at that time 22 years ago. Pafford was a long-time, beloved manager at a local Publix store, Reed worked at the same store along with her 2 oldest children.

Monday testimony

Carter’s sister, Cindy Starling, testified for more than an hour Monday morning about her brother’s childhood. Marred by poverty and an absent father, Starling said, she, Carter and their 2 older brothers were raised by a single mother who struggled to provide financially for the children.

“We ate saltines that had been heated with butter on top, as a snack,” she told jurors.

She said their father lived with another woman and never provided any financial support to his children.

“He was physically violent with my brothers,” she explained during questioning by defense attorney Alan Chipperfield. She said her mother was so overwhelmed, and she tried to take her own life.

Starling’s son, Jacob Slotin, also testified Monday about his uncle’s arrest and conviction more than 2 decades ago.

“Absolute devastation to the family,” he described upon learning as a teenager that Carter had been arrested for murder.

Slotin said he visited Reed and her family often as a young child. He said he and Smith’s brother, Rick, were close. They vacationed together and Slotin remembers spending the night at Reed’s home, the same home where Reed, Smith and Pafford were killed.

“I love my uncle. I’m still upset about what happened. I love him very much, that doesn’t go away,” Slotin testified when asked what impact the murders and Carter’s death sentence have had on his life.

The resentencing trial started last week with emotional and gut-wrenching testimony from the family of the victims.

Rick Smith choked back tears on Thursday describing hearing what sounded like loud “slapping” noises coming from the living room where he had left his mother, Liz Reed, and Pafford.

His 16-year-old sister, Courtney Smith, ran out into the living room when she heard arguing.

Rick, then just 14 years old, emerged from his bedroom when he heard screaming and found his sister, mother and Pafford shot and dying.

His 8-year-old sister Rebecca and 6-year-old brother Bryan were sleeping in a back bedroom and were not physically injured.

Reed, Smith and Pafford all died in the shooting.

Chip Carter testimony

“I wasn’t angry, I was hurt,” said Chip Carter in 2005 when he testified during his triple murder trial. When asked why he went to his ex-fiancée’s house with a loaded rifle in his hand, he said, “I was upset about the whole relationship; I wanted to get back with her.”

Those words and the rest of Carter’s testimony nearly 20 years ago were read aloud in court Friday morning.

Carter sat quietly, listening as his testimony was read. Jurors heard him tell prosecutor Bernie De La Rionda why he went to Reed’s home shortly after midnight on July 24, 2002.

“I’m not leaving until you give me some answers,” he said he told the mother of four. “She didn’t show up for the date. I was upset. I was confused. I wanted some answers.”

Carter said the 2 were supposed to meet earlier in the evening, but Reed did not show up. Instead, Carter drove by her house and spotted her new boyfriend’s truck in the driveway.

Pafford, who was dating Reed, was just leaving her home when Carter walked up. It was dark and neither Reed nor Pafford saw the rifle Carter had concealed behind his leg. All 3 went inside.

Carter said he confronted Reed about why she was seeing him and dating Pafford at the same time. Reed then saw the rifle in his hand. He said she, “grabbed the gun and tried to pull it from me” and it went off.

A bullet hit Smith in the head. As Reed rushed to her daughter’s side, Carter admitted to shooting her twice in the head.

“I don’t know why I did it,” he testified in 2005. “I just lost it, is all I can tell you.”

Smith died 2 days after the shooting.

“Before you got into the house did you plan to kill anyone?” asked attorney Alan Chipperfield during the 2005 trial.

“No,” responded Carter.

“When you got inside the house did you have plans to kill anyone?” asked Chipperfield.

“No,” said Carter.

Carter described himself as an “excellent shot.”

How we got here

Carter was granted a resentencing trial after a 2017 ruling by the Florida Supreme Court prompted the Florida Legislature to change how the death penalty could be applied, requiring a death sentence be a unanimous decision by a jury and not just a majority, as it had been at the time of Carter’s conviction.

(NOTE: The Legislature changed the law again in 2023, requiring an 8-4 majority, but Carter’s case fell under the previous ruling, so his resentencing trial is moving forward.)

Carter’s attorneys insisted during opening statements Thursday morning that Carter will never get out of prison and should be allowed to die of natural causes in prison, and not be sentenced to death.

News4JAX has been following the case for 22 years, including finding the fugitive Carter locked up in Reynosa, Mexico, and trying to interview him there. He hid from our camera.

The case was profiled in People Magazine, and Carter was even featured on America’s Most Wanted. He paid off his jailers in Mexico, but was eventually caught by state police in Kentucky and returned to Jacksonville to face trial.

Carter was convicted in 2005 of 1st-degree murder. The same jury that found him guilty also recommended he be sentenced to death, and a judge upheld that recommendation.

Now a new jury must decide if that is still to be his fate.

During opening statements, prosecutors said the 3 victims never had a chance.

Smith was shot in the head with one bullet. She died 2 days later at the hospital.

Reed had 2 gunshot wounds to her head. She died in the living room.

Pafford, who was the store manager at the grocery store where Reed and her 2 oldest children worked, had 3 gunshot wounds to the head. One of them was fired at point-blank range after he had fallen to the floor.

After Rick Smith’s testimony Thursday, prosecutors called the 1st police officer who arrived on the scene to the stand. They also presented the testimony of the medical examiner who testified during Carter’s murder trial in 2005 and questioned the lead detective who investigated the triple murder case in 2002.

Assistant Chief Chuck Ford described where and how he found the rifle Carter used to commit the murder. It was discovered at the bottom of the Rio Grande River at the border of Texas and Mexico.

Carter had dated Liz Reed for 4 years, the 2 lived together on and off during that time with her 4 children. They had been engaged to be married, but Liz broke it off.

Carter’s crimes sent shockwaves through the quiet Arlington neighborhood where Reed lived. 3 dead, including a teenager, was not a common occurrence in Jacksonville at the time.

Now the victims’ families must relive the horrors of that day as a new jury weighs whether their loved ones’ killer should spend his life in prison or return to death ow.

(source: news4jax.com)

Alabama is getting ready to carry out its 2nd execution by nitrogen suffocation.

Call to Action

Alan Miller is scheduled to be executed by nitrogen suffocation on September 26. Thousands are now demanding that corporations stop supplying the necessary equipment. We have already garnered over 4,000 petition signatures demanding that Allegro Industries not provide the gas masks used to administer the lethal nitrogen. Alongside local faith leaders in South Carolina, we delivered these petitions to Allegro’s headquarters. In response to this peaceful action, Allegro executives called the police. Help us punch back and send 10,000 more petitions.

See: https://worthrises.org/gasexecutions?mc_cid=8015460008&mc_eid=569aa9ffb0

Earlier this year, on January 25, the state of Alabama carried out the nation’s 1st state-sanctioned execution by nitrogen suffocation to end the life of Kenneth Eugene Smith. It delivered on the torture that many feared and garnered international attention, including a condemnation from the United Nations as a human rights violation.

Since then, we’ve continued our yearslong effort to shine a light on the private sector’s involvement in death-dealing and to demand corporations divest altogether. Thankfully, we are continuing to make headway. Earlier this summer, after an episode of Last Week Tonight with John Oliver exposed Absolute Standards for supplying lethal injection drugs to the federal government, you answered our call to action and helped us secure a commitment from the corporation to stop.

We need your help again. Allegro Industries is choosing to continue profiting off of the death penalty with its silence around the use of its gas masks in Alabama for this next barbaric execution. The death penalty has no place in the United States, and corporations should not profit from it. Please help make that message loud and clear by taking action today.

TAKE ACTION NOW — see: https://worthrises.org/gasexecutions?mc_cid=8015460008&mc_eid=569aa9ffb0

With Gratitude,

The Worth Rises Team

(source: PHADP)

Lawyers for Alabama inmate seek to block his fall execution by nitrogen gas

Lawyers for an Alabama inmate, scheduled to be executed with nitrogen gas this fall, argued in a Tuesday court filing that the state has ignored problems with the method as it seeks to carry out more nitrogen executions.

Attorneys for Carey Dale Grayson asked a federal judge to block the state from using the same nitrogen protocol that Alabama used in January to execute Kenneth Smith. The court filing cited witness descriptions of the execution and the findings of an autopsy conducted on Smith.

Alabama, after becoming the 1st state to carry out a nitrogen execution, has scheduled 2 additional executions with the new method. A 2nd execution via nitrogen gas is set for Sept. 26 for Alan Eugene Miller. Grayson is scheduled to be executed Nov. 21.

“Rather than investigating what went wrong — as other states have done following issues with executions. Defendants have chosen to ignore clear and obvious signs the current protocol contains major problems that will result in more unconstitutionally torturous executions if it continues to be employed,” attorneys for Grayson wrote in the Tuesday night court filing.

The Alabama attorney general’s office declined to comment Wednesday on the court filing but has maintained that the method is constitutional. Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall previously described the execution as “textbook.” The state will file a response later to the request for a preliminary injunction.

Smith had blood and fluid in his lungs after his death, according to an autopsy conducted by the Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences. The state autopsy noted that his lungs when cut showed “marked congestion and edema with dark maroon blood.” It also noted that the tracheobronchial tree contained a “small amount of frothy fluid.”

An expert hired by Grayson’s legal team to review the autopsy wrote that the finding is “highly concerning.”

Dr. Brian McAlary, an anesthesiologist, wrote that it was the result of negative pressure pulmonary edema which occurs when drawing a breath is attempted against an upper airway obstruction, leading to fluid being drawn from blood vessels. He said it can also occur after strangulation or smothering with a plastic bag. He also wrote that the lack of a sedative given ahead of nitrogen gas increases the likelihood that the person will panic.

“Mr. Smith’s autopsy demonstrates what happens to the body when this panic response occurs. An individual experiencing panic and the sensation of the inability to breathe while also being denied oxygen will experience a constricted airway similar to an upper airway obstruction,” McAlary wrote.

Dr. Thomas Andrew, who retired after two decades as the chief medical examiner of New Hampshire, told The Associated Press that lung congestion is consistent with asphyxia as the mechanism of death. He said as the heart rapidly fails, “blood backs up and the lungs become quite congested.”

Andrew said he thought it was possibly a “bridge too far” to conclude there was an airway obstruction. However, he did agree that the lack of sedation could cause a person to panic.

“I think that’s a critical critique of the protocols used in this form of execution… You certainly will have a sense of the absence of oxygen, air hunger, and all of the panic and discomfort that is part and parcel of that way of dying,” Andrew said.

Alabama in 2018 authorized nitrogen gas as a new execution method. Grayson in 2018 selected it as his execution method but at the time the state had not developed a process for using it to carry out an execution.

Grayson was 1 of 4 teenagers convicted in the 1994 killing of 37-year-old Vickie Deblieux in Jefferson County. Prosecutors said Deblieux was hitchhiking from Tennessee to her mother’s home in Louisiana when 4 teenagers, including Grayson, offered her a ride. Prosecutors said they took her to a wooded area, attacked and beat her and threw her off a cliff. The teens later mutilated her body, prosecutors said.

Grayson is the only 1 of the 4 facing the death penalty because he was 19 at the time of the crime.

Attorney: Oak Ridge man sent to death row may die of natural causes before execution—-Sean Finnegan, 56, was sentenced to death this week for the 2019 rape, torture and killing of Jennifer Paxton.

Sean Finnegan, from Anderson County, was sentenced this week to death for the 2019 torture, rape and killing of Jennifer Paxton, but he could die of natural causes before ever getting executed.

Legal Aid of East Tennessee attorney Darrell Winfree said there are several factors surrounding death penalty cases that lead to a long legal process, and ultimately, to someone dying on death row.

Finnegan is 56 years old and Winfree said people can spend decades appealing their death sentences.

“The first thing that happens is there’s an automatic appeal that’s filed with the Supreme Court of the state of Tennessee,” Winfree said. “And they look at some pretty specific things, they look at whether the sentence was imposed arbitrarily, they look at whether the aggravating factors were met, and they are supposed to make sure everything was done correctly from that perspective.”

After that, Winfree said the state’s Supreme Court is able to either affirm the sentence of death, or modify it, and change it to life in prison.

Winfree said after that’s done, a convict can appeal at the trial court level, but that appeal must focus on things that happened in the trial, outside of the specific circumstances of the trial.

“So that’s when you get into things like ineffective assistance of counsel, or newly discovered evidence, things of that nature,” he said.

The case can then go to the Criminal Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court of the state of Tennessee, Winfree said.

“Throughout both of these steps, at the end of them, whichever side loses is able to take the case to the Supreme Court of the United States,” Winfree said. “Which is something that kind of slows things down, somewhat.”

Winfree said after that, people can appeal to federal courts, based on habeas corpus.

The appeals process can take decades, Winfree said, adding that healthcare on death row isn’t as good as it is in the outside world, which can also contribute to people dying of natural causes while waiting to be executed.

“It seems like it would be very easy to bring someone’s life to end,” Winfree said. “But it is a very extended process, a very expensive process, and a very complicated process.”

There are currently 45 people on Tennessee’s death row and the last time someone was sentenced to death, before Finnegan, was in 2021. There are 13 people on death row from East Tennessee, and the oldest person who’s waiting to be executed is 74 years old.

Larry McKay, of Shelby County, has been on death row the longest. State records show he was sentenced in 1983, but hasn’t been executed. McKay was convicted of two murders during a robbery in Memphis, that police said happened in the early 1980s.

Governor Bill Lee paused executions in Tennessee in 2022, citing issues with the lethal injection process. The Tennessee Department of Correction said that there’s no timeline on when executions would resume, and because of that, there’s no way to tell which death row inmate would be the next to be executed.

Death row inmates who were sentenced before 1999 have the option of taking the lethal injection or the electric chair, per Tennessee law.

A Sevier County man sent to death row by a Blount County jury in 1996 could be up next to die once executions resume. Gary Sutton and his uncle, James Dellinger, were convicted of killing Sevier County siblings Connie Branam and Tommy Griffin in 1992.

Dellinger and Sutton were sentenced to death, but Dellinger died of natural causes on death row in 2023.

Sutton maintains his innocence in his case, and his loved ones have hired a private investigator who said she has found evidence that proves Sutton didn’t kill anyone. Sutton’s loved ones are asking for him to be exonerated and for Lee to meet with them about his case. He hasn’t responded to that request.

Blount County District Attorney General Ryan Desmond also said he’s also considering the death penalty for Kenneth Wayne DeHart Jr., from Alcoa. He is charged with shooting and killing Blount County deputy Greg McCown and shooting deputy Shelby Eggers in February.

Other East Tennesseans on death row include people from Knox and Cocke counties. Lemaricus Davidson was sentenced to death for the 2007 killings of Chris Newsom and Channon Christian.

Terry King was sentenced to death for the 1983 killing of Diana Kay Smith. Christa Pike, the only woman on death row in Tennessee, was sentenced to death for the 1995 murder of Colleen Slemmer. Dennis Suttles was convicted in 1996 of killing Patricia Gail Rhodes, in the parking lot of a South Knoxville Taco Bell.

Jonathan Stephenson was convicted of hiring a hitman to kill his wife, Lisa, who was shot in the head with a high-powered rifle in Cocke County in 1989.

Oscar Smith was convicted in 1989 in the triple slayings of his estranged wife, Judy Lynn Smith, and her 2 sons, Chad and Jason Burnett, from a previous marriage in Nashville. He was just hours away from having his death sentence carried out 2 years ago before Lee abruptly intervened.

In April 2022, the governor halted all executions in Tennessee after launching an independent review of the state’s lethal injection preparation process following an unspecified “oversight” discovered just before Smith’s scheduled execution. The review finished in December 2022, and the Associated Press reported the Tennessee Department of Correction then fired its top attorney and inspector general for “incorrectly testifying” under oath that they were testing the lethal injection chemicals for bacterial contamination.

The independent report found Tennessee had never fully tested drugs for its executions since rewriting the state’s lethal injection protocol in 2018, according to the Associated Press.

Executions have not resumed in Tennessee since the investigation, however. Lee noted he did not wish to stop the administration of the death penalty altogether.

Tennessee has a secondary method of carrying out executions — the electric chair — and several death row inmates were put to death by that method between 2018 and 2020. However, the electric chair can’t be used as a primary means of execution and can only be used if inmates waive the right to lethal injection.

(source: WBIR news)

Attorney Statement: Missouri Supreme Court Blocks Agreement Between Prosecutor and Marcellus Williams to Prevent Execution—-A new evidentiary hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, Aug. 28.

Yesterday, Marcellus Williams, an innocent man scheduled to be executed in Missouri on September 24, entered an Alford plea in exchange for a sentence of life without parole. This resolution would have ensured that Mr. Williams is not executed for a crime he did not commit. Today, however, the Missouri Supreme Court granted Attorney General Andrew Bailey’s writ application and blocked the St. Louis County Circuit Court from resentencing Mr. Williams to life without parole (see Preliminary Writ here, at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qhrffnVLrqb2ug13pqN14j_cHMNZx_OS/view)

Mr. Williams has always maintained his innocence in the 1998 murder of Felicia Gayle. No physical or forensic evidence has ever linked Mr. Williams to the crime, and his conviction was based on the incentivized testimony of two unreliable witnesses.

Prosecuting Attorney Wesley Bell had moved to vacate Mr. Williams’ conviction after new DNA testing excluded him as the source of male DNA on the murder weapon. A hearing on this motion was scheduled for August 21, but after the parties learned that the prosecutor’s office had mishandled the knife, corrupting the DNA evidence, they reached an agreement to ensure that Mr. Williams is not executed as he continues to seek additional evidence of his innocence

Despite the fact that Ms. Gayle’s family does not support the death penalty in this case, Attorney General Bailey has vigorously opposed the motion to vacate and has pressed to execute Mr. Williams. After the circuit court accepted Mr. Williams’ Alford plea yesterday, AG Bailey filed a writ application to the Missouri Supreme Court, resulting in today’s decision.

Hon. Bruce F. Hilton of the St. Louis County Circuit Court has scheduled a new evidentiary hearing for Wednesday, August 28 (see Order here, at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wXO91WzQHZJ2wxvnb_B_iNHVv1q_Qccz/view).

Below is a statement from Tricia Rojo Bushnell, an attorney for Marcellus Williams:

“After careful consideration of the applicable law and facts, the circuit court accepted the consent judgment overturning Marcellus Williams’ conviction in exchange for Mr. William’s Alford plea and a subsequent sentence to life without parole. This agreement was made with the support of the very office that prosecuted Mr. Williams and secured his death sentence—and who now concedes constitutional error, and with the support of the victim’s family.

“Yet in spite of this, the Attorney General has fought to invalidate that agreement. It is impossible to understand who this decision serves or what justice it provides. This decision directly contradicts the will of a duly elected prosecutor and the community he represents and the wishes of a family who has already lost so much. That is not justice.

“We look forward to presenting the evidence that supports the circuit court’s decision at the hearing next week.”

Tricia Rojo Bushnell, attorney for Marcellus Williams

A Prosecutor Admits His Office’s Incompetence Cut Off an Innocent Man’s Path to Exoneration—-A Missouri prosecutor was set to argue that Marcellus Williams had been wrongly convicted. New evidence that prosecutors had mishandled the murder weapon got in the way.

Matthew Jacober stood to address the judge inside the small, packed courtroom on the third floor of the St. Louis County Courthouse in Clayton, Missouri. Jacober, a special counsel representing the county’s elected prosecutor, had a confession to make: The knife used to kill Felicia Anne Gayle Picus inside her home in August 1998 had been contaminated by the prosecution team that had tried Marcellus Williams for her murder.

Because prosecutors had mishandled and improperly stored the weapon, Jacober said, county prosecutor Wesley Bell had concluded that Williams’s rights had been violated. His conviction — and death sentence — could not stand. “The murder weapon was handled without the proper procedures then in place,” Jacober told Judge Bruce Hilton. “The St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office regrets its failure to maintain proper protocols surrounding key physical evidence in this heinous crime.”

It was a stunning admission on the day that Jacober had been slated to present the state’s case that Williams had been wrongly convicted of killing Picus. The fact that the state had so tragically mishandled the murder weapon, which had traces of unknown male DNA, meant that a key piece of evidence that would support Williams’s exoneration was no longer usable.

It was a bitter pill. The judge overseeing Williams’s 2001 trial had denied his request for DNA testing. It wasn’t until 2016 that testing ordered by the Missouri Supreme Court excluded Williams as the source of DNA found on the knife. In other words, he could not be linked to the weapon. Now, Jacober admitted, a new round of testing revealed that a prosecutor’s investigator could not be excluded as the source. Nor could the prosecutor who handled Williams’s trial. Whatever DNA evidence there was connecting the perpetrator to the murder had been irretrievably lost.

While Jacober conceded that Williams’s conviction could not stand, neither could the office point to the unknown DNA on the murder weapon to exonerate him. Instead, after hours negotiating behind closed doors with Williams’s attorneys as spectators waited in the courtroom, the county prosecutors offered Williams a deal: agree to a plea that would take the specter of execution off the table, replaced by a sentence of life without the possibility of parole.

Williams would have to accept the arrangement to avoid being executed for a crime he insists he did not commit. Wearing a silvery gray thobe and white skull cap, his beard flecked with white, the 55-year-old Williams was still as Jacober spoke. The judge asked Williams if he had agreed to the terms. “Yes,” he said.

Hilton said he agreed with the outcome, as did Picus’s husband, Dan Picus. The judge would formally re-sentence Williams to life in prison the following day.

Everyone, it seemed, was on the same page. Everyone, that is, except Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey. By Wednesday night, his office had successfully appealed to the state’s Supreme Court to block the deal. But Bell’s office was determined not to let Bailey have the final word.

“Inexorable Doubt”

Dan Picus came home from work on August 11, 1998, to find his wife dead. The former St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter had been stabbed repeatedly and the murder weapon, a knife from the couple’s kitchen, had been left lodged in her neck. Additionally, there were hairs found near Picus’s body, bloody fingerprints on a wall, and a trail of bloody shoeprints. Despite the wealth of physical evidence, the investigation stalled. It wasn’t until months later, after Picus’s family posted a $10,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of her killer, that a jailhouse informant came forward claiming his former cellmate, Marcellus Williams, had confessed to the murder. Police later secured a second informant, a former girlfriend of Williams’s, who also claimed he’d taken responsibility.

Notably, none of the physical evidence at the scene tied Williams to the killing. And there was good reason to question the accounts provided by the informants; both were facing prison time for unrelated crimes, and each had a history of ratting out others to save themselves from trouble. Many of the details they offered police shifted over time, while others did not match the murder. Nonetheless, Williams was tried and sentenced to death.

Each of Williams’s appeals were denied. He was on the eve of execution in January 2015 when the Missouri Supreme Court stepped in and ordered DNA testing on the murder weapon, which ultimately revealed unknown DNA. The court summarily dismissed Williams’s claims without considering those results and reset his execution for August 2017.

The Midwest Innocence Project, which represents Williams, turned to Missouri’s then-Gov. Eric Greitens, asking him to halt the execution and to convene what’s known as a board of inquiry to investigate the case. On the day Williams was set to die, Greitens issued an executive order convening a five-member board of retired judges to “assess the credibility and weight of all the evidence” in the case. The board was given subpoena power and, per state law, tasked with reporting back to the governor whether or not Williams should be executed or his sentence commuted.

That process was ongoing when the current governor, Mike Parson, issued his own executive order in June 2023, disbanding the board. It was time to “move forward,” he said. The Midwest Innocence Project sued, arguing that Parson had overstepped his authority by dissolving the panel before it had issued a report as the statute required it to do. The Missouri Supreme Court disagreed, ruling in June 2024 that Parson could do as he wished. The court reset Williams’s execution for September 24.

Meanwhile, the county court was considering a motion that Bell filed in January, seeking to vacate Williams’s conviction. In addition to the foreign DNA on the knife and the sketchiness of the snitch testimony, Bell cited poor defense lawyering at Williams’s trial and misconduct by prosecutors who struck qualified individuals from the jury pool because they were Black. These factors combined cast “inexorable doubt on Mr. Williams’s conviction and sentence,” the prosecutor argued.

Fast forward to this week: A court was finally slated to consider evidence of Williams’s innocence.

An Unexpected Twist

The rows of wooden benches inside the Division 13 courtroom were full by 8:30 a.m. on Wednesday, when the hearing was slated to begin. Forty-five minutes later, Hilton stepped into the room without his robes. He was there to explain the delay. The parties were talking, he said, discussing a way to “resolve” the case. Hilton joked that he wanted everyone to know they weren’t waiting around because the judge was late.

It wasn’t until after 1 p.m. that Hilton finally took to the bench and announced that Bell’s office and Williams’s lawyers had come to an agreement. There would be no hearing as had been planned. Instead, Jacober, the special prosecutor, admitted that the state had so mishandled the murder weapon that the physical evidence was no longer probative of Williams’s innocence — or of anyone else’s guilt.

While the state’s incompetence had violated Williams’s rights — prompting the prosecutors to say his current conviction and death sentence couldn’t stand — it also cut off the most tangible path to his exoneration.

Without the DNA evidence, what remains of the case against Williams is the questionable testimony of 2 snitches, who have both since died. Williams had previously raised the issue of their dubious credibility but was dismissed by the courts. The same is true of his claims about his defense lawyers’ failures at trial and about the prosecution’s striking of Black people from the jury pool. At each turn the courts have shrugged their shoulders. Still, Jacober indicated that Bell’s efforts to make a case for Williams’s innocence were hamstrung without the exculpatory DNA.

Jacober announced that the prosecutors’ office would admit that it had bungled the job and take the death penalty off the table. In exchange, Williams would enter what is known as an Alford plea, accepting a charge of first-degree murder.

Named for the U.S. Supreme Court case North Carolina v. Alford, it is a plea where a defendant maintains their innocence but agrees that the state has enough to convict them and thus pleads guilty to avoid a harsher sentence — in Williams’s case (as in Alford’s), the death penalty.

As part of the deal, Williams would have the right to appeal his sentence if new evidence of his innocence comes to light.

“Marcellus Williams is an innocent man, and nothing about today’s plea agreement changes that fact,” Tricia Rojo Bushnell, Williams’s lawyer and executive director of the Midwest Innocence Project, said in a statement. “The fact that there is DNA on the knife matching members of the trial prosecution team proves the State of Missouri disregarded critical protocols in the investigation of this case, including mishandling pivotal evidence.”

“That Is Not Justice”

During the hours of negotiations on Wednesday morning, Hilton had spoken to Dan Picus, who affirmed that he does not support the death penalty for Williams. Picus would be in court the following morning to testify at the sentencing hearing, the judge said.

Lawyers with the attorney general’s office were displeased. Andrew Clarke, an assistant attorney general, lodged an objection to the agreement, which Hilton overruled. Bailey, Missouri’s attorney general, then appealed to the state’s high court to intervene.

Since being appointed to his post in 2023, Bailey has spent a considerable amount of time attempting to thwart state courts from exonerating the wrongly convicted — or even from considering their claims. Bailey sought to block Williams from ever receiving a hearing, arguing to the state Supreme Court that, by granting a hearing, Hilton was challenging its authority as the highest court in the state. Last month, the court denied Bailey’s motion to scuttle the hearing and clear the way for Williams’s execution.

In a Wednesday evening court filing, the attorney general’s office again argued to the state’s high court that Hilton had overstepped his role by vacating Williams’s conviction and asked it to halt the planned resentencing. The court did just that, issuing an order requiring Hilton to hold the innocence hearing as planned and to issue a ruling by September 13, or to respond to the court explaining why he would not do so.

Picus joined the court session on Thursday morning via video call, but instead of attending Williams’s resentencing, he listened as Hilton responded to the high court’s order. The judge and attorneys had decided to move forward with a hearing on August 28, despite the lack of definitively exonerating DNA. Bell’s office indicated that it would seek to show, without the benefit of dispositive DNA evidence, that Williams’s case was too flawed to withstand scrutiny.

Rojo Bushnell of the Midwest Innocence Project said that evidence presented at next week’s hearing would affirm Hilton’s decision to accept the prosecutor’s confession that constitutional error had poisoned Williams’s case.

She also questioned the attorney general’s continued meddling, noting in a statement that the agreement to overturn Williams’s death sentence and to accept the Alford plea was made after careful consideration and with the support of Picus’s family.

“Yet in spite of this, the Attorney General has fought to invalidate that agreement. It is impossible to understand who this decision serves or what justice it provides,” she said. “This decision directly contradicts the will of a duly elected prosecutor and the community he represents, and the wishes of a family who has already lost so much. That is not justice.”

(source for both: innocenceproject.org)

Missouri Court Halts Deal to Spare Prisoner From Execution—-The State Supreme Court said the trial had to hold a hearing before accepting a deal that would give the man a sentence of life without parole.

In a suburban St. Louis courtroom on Wednesday, it appeared that Marcellus Williams would be spared execution after the local prosecutor’s office raised questions about his guilt and agreed to a prison sentence of life without parole.

Hours later, the Missouri Supreme Court halted the deal over concerns that a judge had overstepped his authority in approving the new plea and sentence.

The late-night order was the latest twist in Mr. Williams’s long-running effort to prove that he is innocent and avoid being executed. And it was the latest skirmish in a power struggle between the state attorney general and local prosecutors over who speaks for the state in wrongful conviction cases.

Mr. Williams, who is scheduled to be executed on Sept. 24, was convicted of killing Felicia Gayle, a well-known newspaper reporter, in her suburban St. Louis home in 1998. Mr. Williams, 55, has always maintained his innocence, but his appeals and post-conviction pleadings were unsuccessful.

In 2021, the Missouri legislature passed a law allowing a prosecutor to challenge old convictions “if he or she has information that the convicted person may be innocent or may have been erroneously convicted.” The law, a response to advances in forensic science and a growing awareness of the factors that can contribute to wrongful convictions, says that a hearing must be held on such a motion, and it permits the attorney general to participate.

The St. Louis County prosecuting attorney, Wesley Bell, filed a 63-page motion to overturn Mr. Williams’s conviction, saying that the two main witnesses against him had not been credible and that the prosecutor had improperly excluded prospective jurors who were Black. Mr. Williams, the motion said, was not the source of bloody shoe prints, fingerprints and hair found at the crime scene, and a DNA analysis showed that DNA found on the murder weapon, a kitchen knife, was not his.

An evidentiary hearing was set for this past Wednesday. But 2 days earlier, a private lab engaged by the prosecutor issued a report based on additional analysis. The lab said it had found that DNA on the knife matched that of an investigator and a prosecutor involved in the original trial.

The finding suggested that the investigator and the prosecutor had mishandled what might have been the most important piece of evidence, leaving their own DNA and perhaps eliminating DNA that had been left by the perpetrator. The surprise finding dashed the defense team’s hope that the DNA would point to an unknown perpetrator, which would bolster Mr. Williams’s claim of innocence.

Instead, Mr. Bell’s office backed away from its motion that sought exoneration and proposed an agreement that would change Mr. Williams’s sentence from death to life without parole. The judge accepted the agreement, but the attorney general, Andrew Bailey, objected, insisting that Mr. Williams was guilty of murder in the death of Ms. Gayle.

Mr. Bailey, who has routinely tried to block exonerations, asked the State Supreme Court to intervene, saying that the judge had not held the required hearing and that he had exceeded his power in accepting the agreement without the attorney general’s assent.

Mr. Bailey has maintained that his office represents the state and that the State Supreme Court has “exclusive authority” to review death penalty cases, positions that appear to be in direct conflict with the new law.

“Because the St. Louis County prosecuting attorney has expressly challenged Mr. Williams’s conviction, he has an inherent conflict of interest that cannot be reconciled with the state’s competing interest in enforcing a lawful, repeatedly affirmed criminal judgment,” Mr. Bailey wrote in a filing to the court on Wednesday.

In its ruling, the court said that the judge, Bruce F. Hilton, had to either hold the evidentiary hearing or make an argument as to why he should not have to. On Thursday morning, Judge Hilton scheduled the hearing for Aug. 28.

In a statement on Thursday, Mr. Bell said, “We still have concerns about the integrity of the conviction of Marcellus Williams as expressed in our motion that requested this hearing, particularly given that his conviction led to the irrevocable punishment of death.”

(source: Shaila Dewan, New York Times)

Missouri Supreme Court Blocks Marcellus Williams from Entering Plea to Avoid Execution After State Reveals Mishandled Evidence

Innocence Missouri

On August 21, 2024, Marcellus Williams, who is scheduled to be executed on September 24, 2024, agreed to enter an Alford plea in exchange for a sentence of life without parole. This agreement would have ensured that Mr. Williams, who has always maintained his innocence in the 1998 murder of Felicia Gayle, would not be executed. But hours after Judge Bruce F. Hilton accepted the plea agreement, Attorney General Andrew Bailey asked the Missouri Supreme Court to block the deal, claiming that Judge Hilton did not have the authority to resentence Mr. Williams. In response, the Missouri Supreme Court ordered the lower court to set aside the plea agreement and move forward with the scheduled evidentiary hearing. Judge Hilton has now rescheduled it for August 28, 2024.

In January 2024, Prosecuting Attorney Wesley Bell filed a motion to vacate Mr. Williams’ death sentence after DNA testing excluded him as the source of DNA on the murder weapon. A 2021 Missouri law allows prosecutors to challenge past convictions if they believe the individual is innocent or wrongfully convicted. Including Mr. Williams’ case, this law has been used 6 times, with varying degrees of success. AG Bailey has consistently opposed any effort by Mr. Williams to appeal his conviction and death sentence. The Missouri Attorney General’s office has a decades-long history of opposing relief in other innocence cases as well. In 2021 and 2023, respectively, Kevin Strickland and Lamar Johnson were exonerated despite the AG’s efforts to prevent their release.

Mr. Williams’ plea agreement was reached as both parties were scheduled to begin an evidentiary hearing on DA Bell’s motion to vacate Mr. Williams’ conviction and death sentence. In connection with the announcement of the plea deal, however, prosecutors unexpectedly announced that the murder weapon contained the DNA of members of the trial prosecution team. Consistent with his assertion of innocence, the murder weapon does not show any DNA from Mr. Williams, but now confirms that the crime scene evidence was mishandled by prosecutors. No physical or forensic evidence has ever connected Mr. Williams to the crime scene.

A new analysis of the murder weapon found that DNA present was consistent with that of an investigator and a prosecutor involved in the original trial. Matthew Jacober, with Mr. Bell’s office, told the court that the newly revealed DNA evidence, which was instrumental to Mr. Bell’s motion to vacate, “did not fully support our initial conclusions.” Mr. Jacober told the court that Mr. Bell’s office “deeply regrets its failure” to properly preserve the evidence.

Representatives of Mr. Bell’s office determined that the new DNA findings weakened Mr. Williams’ innocence claim, though the case has many other serious errors. His office proposed that Mr. Williams enter an Alford plea, which would have permitted Mr. Williams to maintain his innocence and avoid execution. After speaking with Daniel Picus, Ms. Gayle’s husband, who is opposed to executing Mr. Williams, Judge Hilton determined that the plea agreement is “a proper remedy” to the case. AG Bailey disagreement with this ruling resulted in the Missouri Supreme Court’s order resetting the evidentiary hearing. The lower court may seek a stay of execution for Mr. Williams while the lower court proceedings continue.

Death penalty trial begins for Mesa man accused of raping, killing teen

It was more than 10 years ago that 14-year-old girl Claudia Lucero was found strangled to death in a Mesa dumpster.

Thursday was the 1st day of the capital murder trial for Alex Madrid, the man accused of killing her.

Police said Madrid is the victim’s mom’s ex-boyfriend and they say Claudia was sexually assaulted before she was killed.

The death penalty is on the table for Madrid.

The prosecution has everything from DNA, cellphone location data, and physical evidence on their side, but the defense said there wasn’t enough time for Madrid to dispose of her body in the dumpster based on surveillance video.

“Sometimes the person that you want the most is the person that you can’t have. For Alex Madrid, 14-year-old Claudia Lucero was that person,” the prosecution began with.

In opening statements, the prosecution laid the groundwork for what happened to Claudia on Dec. 5, 2013.

According to police and the state, Claudia’s mother recently broke up with Madrid and made him move out of their apartment.

They said on that December morning, after Claudia’s mom and brothers left the house, Claudia was getting ready for school when Madrid came into the apartment, raped her, then took her life.

“Alex Madrid made the choice to get a ligature of some kind, wrap it around her neck, and at that point strangle her to death,” the prosecution said.

Police said he then put her in a gray tub wrapped in a comforter along with some of her belongings and disposed of her body in this blue dumpster at a nearby complex.

Claudia’s mother reported her as a missing person, thinking she may have run away, until the next morning when two women were searching for bottles and cans in that blue dumpster.

“At some point this female realized that what she was pulling on was a body, because the blanket came open and she saw there were two human legs underneath,” the prosecution said.

That body was identified as Claudia.

But the defense said in their opening statements surveillance footage shows an unlikely timeline that Madrid could have dumped the teen’s body.

Madrid’s attorney said, according to the video, that the dumpster was emptied at 7:18 am.

“There’s a window on those videos between 7:18-7:28 a.m.,” said the defense attorney.

He said the surveillance video picked back up at 7:28 a.m. and claimed that in that narrow window, Madrid would not have had time to commit this act.

“You are not going to see Mr. Madrid in that video. You are not going to see Mr. Madrid putting a body in the dumpster,” said the defense.

But the prosecution said in addition to Claudia’s belongings found in the dumpster with her body, she was also wrapped in a trunk floor mat that appeared to be missing from Madrid’s trunk with a tag that matched the same make and model as his car.

DNA results, including semen found on Claudia’s body, also matched Madrid, but his attorney claimed police had their minds made up and never looked at anyone else.

“Investigators in the case fail to investigate other possibilities,” said the defense attorney. “It was a rush of judgement.”

Claudia’s brother testified late Thursday afternoon; he was the last person to see her alive.

He said a blue necktie was missing from his tie rack and had an audibly surprised reaction in the courtroom when he was shown it for the 1st time as evidence.

The insinuation from the state was that it was likely the murder weapon.

This case was incredibly hard to choose a jury for.

This is a death penalty case, which is something people have harsh views for or against, so the court had to find open-minded people who won’t make a judgment until it’s time to decide a verdict.

Also, the judge told the jurors to expect to be here through the end of January.

Because this trial is so long, they were worried about having enough jurors.

There are 18 jurors sitting through the entire trial with 6 alternates, but nobody will know who the alternates are until they reach the end of the guilt phase.

(source: azfamily.com)

Democrats Scrub Death Penalty Opposition From Campaign Platform—-For the 1st time in more than a decade, the Democratic Party platform includes no mention of abolishing the death penalty.

In 2016, the Democratic Party became the country’s 1st major political party to formally call for abolishing the death penalty. The party’s platform that year, released in the aftermath of a high-profile botched execution, called the punishment “cruel and unusual,” “arbitrary and unjust,” expensive to taxpayers and ineffective in deterring crime. The document also nodded to the people exonerated from death row as evidence of the risk that the government will kill innocent people.

During the 2020 campaign, the Democratic platform reiterated support for abolishing the death penalty. When Joe Biden entered office the following year, he became the st president to publicly oppose capital punishment — a dramatic shift from his time in the Senate, when he once bragged that the sweeping crime bill he was pushing did “everything but hang people for jaywalking.”

However, as his term winds down, Biden has little to show for the party’s promise to abolish capital punishment. On Monday, the Democrats approved their 2024 platform, which includes no mention of the death penalty. This year’s platform marks the 1st time since 2004 the platform has not mentioned the death penalty (the 2008 and 2012 platforms called for making the punishment less arbitrary).

Public support for the death penalty has been gradually declining. A Gallup poll last year found that 65% of Democrats oppose the punishment.

The Democratic National Committee did not respond to an email asking if the party still supports abolishing the death penalty.

The outcome of this year’s presidential election has life-or-death stakes for the people on federal death row. During the last 6 months of Donald Trump’s presidency, his administration executed 13 people, ending a 17-year de facto moratorium on federal executions.

At the time, Biden’s campaign website pledged to work with Congress to abolish the federal death penalty and incentivize states to put an end to the practice. Once he entered office, the Justice Department reinstated the execution moratorium and launched a review into death penalty policies and procedures.

But little has come from that review, and the DOJ has continued to fight to maintain existing death sentences. In January, the DOJ announced it would pursue the death penalty against Payton Gendron, who has admitted in state court to killing 10 people in a Buffalo supermarket because they were Black.

For years, death penalty abolition bills in the House and Senate have languished. “I wouldn’t say that the White House has been actively engaging people to support the bill,” Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.), the sponsor of one of the death penalty bills, told HuffPost earlier this year.

Meanwhile, Republicans are gearing up for another execution spree if Trump wins reelection. Project 2025, an 887-page document outlining plans for a second Trump presidency released by a coalition of conservative groups, suggests that Trump execute every remaining prisoner on death row. The document also envisions pursuing the death penalty in cases involving violence and sexual abuse of children. In a footnote, the document notes that this would require convincing the Supreme Court to overrule its previous findings on when the death penalty is appropriate, but that “the [Justice] department should place a priority on doing so.”

Trump reportedly plans to announce his support for expanding the death penalty to non-homicide crimes.

The campaign for Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris did not respond to an email asking if she would specify her own position on the death penalty.

When Harris became San Francisco’s district attorney in 2004, she promised to “never charge the death penalty.” She upheld that promise, even under pressure to pursue capital punishment for a man accused of killing a police officer. When she ran for California attorney general, she said she would “enforce the death penalty as the law dictates.” After narrowly defeating her Republican opponent, her office defended use of the death penalty in court.

In addition to dropping any mention of the death penalty, this year’s Democratic platform noticeably backs away from several criminal justice reforms the party embraced in 2020, when the police killing of George Floyd prompted nationwide protests against police brutality. The criminal justice section of the 2020 platform opens by declaring that the system is “failing” to keep people safe and deliver justice. It contrasts the promise of America as the “land of the free” with the reality that the U.S. has the highest rate of incarceration in the world and calls for “dramatically” reducing the number of people held in prisons and jails.

The 2020 platform includes support for several specific policies that are either absent from the 2024 platform or have been considerably toned down, including: ending life-without-parole sentences for people under 21, banning police from using chokeholds, decriminalizing cannabis, eliminating cash bail and repealing mandatory minimum sentences.

This year’s platform makes no mention of mass incarceration. Instead, it describes the need to “fund the police” and touts DOJ funding for more police officers. The platform claims Biden “took action to enhance public trust” by signing a “historic” executive order directing federal law enforcement agencies to ban chokeholds “unless deadly force is authorized” — a move described by civil rights groups as only a first step on police reform.

Much of the criminal justice section focuses on the Biden administration’s modest reforms on cannabis. In 2022, Biden pardoned every person convicted of simple marijuana possession under federal law — which did not result in anyone being released from prison. The pardons did not apply to people convicted of selling or distributing marijuana, which accounts for the majority of people with federal cannabis-related convictions. And although the Justice Department has moved to reclassify marijuana as a less dangerous category of drug, it has stopped short of legalization.

(source: huffpost.com)

SOMALIA—-executions

UNICEF statement on execution of 4 youths in Puntland state, Somalia

UNICEF notes with deep regret the execution of 4 young people in the Somali state of Puntland this past weekend for offences committed as children when they were under the age of 18, while they were allegedly associated with Al Shabaab. The convictions and sentences were issued by military courts, which lack specialized child justice procedures and are no place for children.

UNICEF recalls that the Puntland Age Verification Committee including representatives from Puntland authorities met with the young people and concluded that they were minors at the time of arrest and that they should not face the death penalty.

UNICEF requests the Puntland authorities to prevent the imposition of death sentences and calls for the due process to be ensured for all young adults arrested for their association with armed groups when they were below the age of 18 years, in line with the Juvenile Law, endorsed by the Puntland authorities and the government’s obligation to international human rights obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

UNICEF urges the Puntland authorities to treat children associated with armed groups as victims and calls for a review of current judicial procedures to ensure that children are not tried by military courts, have access to appropriate judicial procedures, and are in line with definitions of a child contained in the Puntland Juvenile Justice Act and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which Somalia has ratified. The authorities are urged to take advantage of pathways for reintegrating children associated with armed groups, which already exist and have proven to be effective in upholding the rights of the child. As UN partners, we stand ready to work with the government to further implement these processes, including through the implementation of relevant government action plans to strengthen the protection of children in armed conflict.

(source: unicef.org)

The chairperson of the Fiji Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Commission (FHRADC) shot down a suggestion by a senior government minister to bring back the death penalty to deter international drug traffickers.

This week, Women and Children’s Minister Lynda Tabuya told local media she wanted to “see the death penalty brought to Fiji for those who traffic large quantities of drugs”.

The minister said Fiji continued to be used as a transit point for drug traffickers.

However, the FHRADC is calling for stronger policies, laws and judicial processes to tackle the issue.

Fiji abolished the death penalty in 1979 and the country’s constitution ensured that every person had a right to life.

“The commission is of the view that the death penalty is not the solution to the rising drugs problem,” FHRADC chairperson Pravesh Sharma said in a statement on Thursday.

“Rather, the government should conduct baseline research to determine why our people are engaging in drugs, and then put in place measures to better address the issue.”

Sharma called for “rehabilitation of addicted people to prevent drugs from entering Fiji”.

“We need to strengthen our border security, raise awareness, and educate our people about the impacts of drugs.”

This follows Tabuya’s suggestion of capital punishment for those who trafficked large quantities of drugs.

Home Affairs Minister Pio Tikoduadua, who had been at the forefront of the fight against drugs, said the death penalty was not something that was part of their strategy.

The Narcotics Strategy, launched in June, focused on comprehensive measures, including demand and supply reduction, alternative development, and harm reduction strategies.

It also involved the establishment of a Counter Narcotics Bureau with a budget allocation of $2.5 million, tasked with leading enforcement operations and enhancing border control measures.

(source: rnz.co.nz)

2 opposition Members of Parliament oppose the death penalty

2 Opposition Members of Parliament, Ketan Lal and Virendra Lal have opposed the statement made by the Minister for Women, Children, and Social Protection Lynda Tabuya that the Government should impose the death penalty for drug traffickers who traffic drugs in large quantities.

Ketan Lal says Fiji’s Constitution, particularly Articles (8) and (11), enshrines the right to life and the protection against cruel and degrading treatment.

He stresses that reintroducing the death penalty would not only violate these fundamental rights but also erode the very fabric of the justice system, which is grounded in the protection of human dignity and the rule of law.

He says any move to reinstate such a draconian measure would be a regressive step, undermining Fiji’s international standing and moral authority.

Tabuya says the death penalty will be a deterrence for the drug lords not to bring drugs into the country.

Virendra Lal says that even though these people are part of the social decay that is plaguing our nation, the reactionary comment by Tabuya begs the question, why only drug traffickers.

He says he is firmly against the recent call by Tabuya to reintroduce the penalty.

Lal also emphasized there are far darker and deeper issues that need rectifying and ensure that proper social protection is given to women and children.

(source: fijivillage.com)

Controversy Erupts after Tabuya Call for Death Penalty for Drug Traffickers

Minister for Women, Children, and Social Protection, Lynda Tabuya, has sparked controversy by advocating for the death penalty for drug traffickers.

Speaking at her ministry’s headquarters, Ms Tabuya argued Fiji’s role as a transit point for illicit drugs warrants the harshest penalties to deter traffickers.

However, her stance has been met with criticism from various quarters.

Ms Tabuya pointed out that Fiji is increasingly vulnerable because of its proximity to larger drug markets. Ms Tabuya said: “We’re a transit point for bigger developed countries.

What do we do to protect our borders and our people from these harmful drugs?”

Citing the example of Singapore, which imposes the death penalty for trafficking large quantities of drugs, she stressed the need for Fiji to consider similar measures.

“We need to claim our borders, our sovereignty, and send a message to all drug traffickers and lords,” the minister added.

Minister for Home Affairs and Immigration, Pio Tikoduadua, countered Ms Tabuya’s proposal, arguing for a more humane and comprehensive approach to combating drug trafficking.

He emphasised the importance of modernising the Police force and enhancing international cooperation.

He further noted that the death penalty could undermine these efforts by ignoring the root causes of drug trafficking.

Human rights activists also voiced opposition.

Dr Shaista Shameem, former Director of the Fiji Human Rights Commission, condemned the death penalty as a cruel and degrading punishment that denies individuals the opportunity for rehabilitation.

She recalled how Fiji abolished the death penalty for treason in 1979, following unanimous parliamentary support.

“The death penalty was abolished after parliamentarians, including religious groups, agreed it was not the solution to any crime, even treason,” Dr Shameem said, adding that any call for its reinstatement should be approached with sensitivity and compassion.

The Fiji Law Society also weighed in, pointing out that the death penalty is not included in the Constitution and that any move to reintroduce it would face significant legal hurdles.

The death penalty was outlawed for all crimes in Fiji in 2015, and the 2013 Constitution prohibits its use.

Fiji’s ratification of the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) in 2015 further complicates any attempt to reintroduce the death penalty.

UNCAT mandates a global prohibition on torture and related practices, and Fiji’s commitment to these principles has been reinforced through enhanced training programmes for its security forces.

(source: fijisun.com.fj)

IRAN—-executions

Iran executes every 7 hours despite international outcry

The Islamic Republic of Iran has averaged 1 execution every 7 hours over the past month, as a new president was forming his cabinet following elections that some expected to bring change.

Between July 22 and August 21 alone, at least 106 individuals were executed in Iranian prisons, a reminder of the brutal measures the Islamic government has used for 4 decades despite international criticism, reported the US-based HRANA news agency on Thursday.

“The total number of reported violations indicates a concerning situation and underscores the urgency for the international community and the Iranian government to address these issues,” added HRANA.

The executions have not been limited to those convicted of violent crimes. Many of those hanged were political prisoners, protesters, and individuals from ethnic and religious minority groups, often sentenced in sham trials that lack transparency and due process, the report said.

Among those executed were Kamran Sheikh, a Sunni Kurdish prisoner, and Reza Rasaei, a protester arrested during the 2022 nationwide uprising.

Adding to the toll, at least 10 new death sentences were handed down, and 10 existing ones were confirmed by the judiciary during this period.

HRANA has highlighted how this culture of state-sanctioned violence only fuels further aggression and resentment, laying the groundwork for a cycle of violence that threatens the very fabric of the nation.

According to reports from human rights organizations, since the beginning of the current Iranian year (March 21) more than 388 people, including 15 women, have been hanged in Iranian prisons.

The surge in executions has not gone unnoticed by the international community. Human rights organizations, including the Oslo-based Iran Human Rights, have raised alarms over the unprecedented pace of executions. They have called for immediate international intervention to halt what they describe as the “killing machine” of the Iranian government.

On August 12, 4 international human rights organizations appealed to the United Nations, urging the establishment of an independent investigative mechanism to hold the Islamic Republic accountable for its actions.

Despite these calls for action, the Islamic Republic remains defiant, continuing its executions unabated. Political prisoners like Golrokh Iraee, who remains incarcerated in Evin Prison, have spoken out against the death penalty, urging a united front against the regime’s use of capital punishment as a tool of oppression. Iraee’s plea for the abolition of the death penalty echoes the sentiments of many Iranians who see no hope for a better future under the current system.

Iran executes Orumiyeh man for drug-related charges

Iranian authorities executed Mohammad Daghestani, a prisoner from Orumiyeh, West Azerbaijan Province, on drug-related charges in Miandoab Prison early on 21 August.

The Kurdistan Human Rights Network (KHRN) has learned that Daghestani was transferred to solitary confinement on 20 August in preparation for execution.

Daghestani, a 49-year-old father of 2 from the village of Haki in Orumiyeh, was arrested several years ago on drug trafficking charges.

Fears grow for women’s rights activists jailed in Iran after 87 executions in 1 month—-Prisoners including Nobel prize winner Narges Mohammadi were reportedly beaten for protesting against a recent execution

There are fears for the fates of women’s rights activists imprisoned in Iran after a surge in executions since the election of Iran’s new president, Masoud Pezeshkian, in July.

At least 87 people were reportedly executed in July, with another 29 executed on 1 day this month. The mass executions included Reza Rasaei, a young man sentenced to death for his participation in the Woman, Life, Freedom protests.

Human rights organisations fear further executions in the lead-up the 2nd anniversary of Mahsa Amini’s death in custody and the unprecedented nationwide protests that followed. Amini, who was 22, had been arrested for allegedly violating Iran’s strict dress code before she died in September 2022.

About 70 women are now reported to be held as political prisoners in Iran’s notorious Evin prison, including 2 who have been given death sentences: the Iranian Kurdish journalist Pakhshan Azizi and the industrial engineer and women’s rights activist Sharifeh Mohammadi. A further 2 activists – Varisheh Moradi and Nasim Gholami Simiyari – have been given the same charges but are still to discover if they will be sentenced to death.

The Center for Human Rights in Iran (CHRI) said multiple female political prisoners are at risk of executions based on “sham charges”.

“Faced with a women’s movement in Iran that refuses to back down, Islamic Republic authorities are now trying to threaten these women with the gallows, in a desperate attempt to silence dissent,” said Hadi Ghaemi, the executive director of CHRI.

The family of Narges Mohammadi, the imprisoned Nobel peace prize winner and celebrated activist, say that she was among the women at Evin prison who were reportedly injured after being beaten by guards for staging a protest in the prison yard against the execution of Rasaei.

The family put out a statement saying that after the protests on 6 August, the women’s ward was flooded with prison guards and security agents, and an order was issued to assault the protesters. Several women who stood in front of the security forces were severely beaten. The family said they were told Narges had collapsed and fainted after being repeatedly punched by guards. UN human rights experts have condemned reports that the women had been denied access to timely and appropriate healthcare.

Azizi and Sharifeh Mohammadi were sentenced to death in July on charges of “armed rebellion against the state”.

Azizi, a 40-year-old Kurdish women’s rights activist and social worker, was reportedly subjected to torture during interrogations, including mock executions. In a letter written from the Evin prison by Azizi, titled Denying the Truth and Its Alternative and published by the Hengaw Organization for Human Rights NGO, she said she was tortured, subjected to mock executions and put in solitary confinement.

Zeinab Bayazidi, a former political prisoner and Azizi’s friend, told the Guardian that the death penalties against women and ethnic minorities were designed to dismantle the unified fight against the regime.

“The Islamic Republic is [retaliating against] the Woman, Life, Freedom revolution that spanned all borders from Kurdistan to Balochistan and Tehran, and caused solidarity and empathy and a revolution at this level, which has been unprecedented so far,” she said.

Sharifeh Mohammadi, 45, was arrested at her home in Rasht in December 2023, according to human rights activists.

Speaking to the Guardian on the condition of anonymity, a close family member said they were shocked and had “never imagined Sharifeh would be issued a death sentence”. They said Sharifeh was also “shocked” after being hopeful of bail.

“Women have been among the strongest individuals standing against the regime during the Woman, Life, Freedom movement. I believe by sentencing Sharifeh and others, they’re taking revenge.”

Sharifeh’s family said they had been reluctant to share the news of her death penalty with her 12-year-old son. “It is very difficult and we are trying to seek help from a child counsellor to break the news with the least amount of harm possible.”

A UN fact-finding mission on Iran this month said minorities in Iran had been disproportionately affected by a “striking surge in executions since the September 2022 protests”, with several death sentences rendered most recently against women of ethnic minority backgrounds.

Activists warned the repression on female activists was also evident through long-term prison sentences based on fabricated charges and forced confessions.

Soma Rostami from Hengaw Organization for Human Rights, said: “It is clear to all that the Islamic Republic of Iran’s only purpose for executions is to spread fear among the people. There has been a lot of pressure on women’s activists and all kinds of repressions have been carried out to prevent women-led demonstrations from happening again.”

(source: The Guardian)

AUGUST 22, 2024:

NC man fights death sentence; closing arguments today in racial justice case—-Hasson Bacote, a Black man from Johnston County, was sentenced to death in 2009. He is challenging his death sentence under the state’s Racial Justice Act, arguing that race played a role in jury selection.

Closing arguments are set to begin Wednesday in a case that could impact more than 100 death row inmates in North Carolina.

Hasson Bacote, a Black man from North Carolina, was sentenced to death following a murder in Johnston County in 2007 during a robbery. Bacote is challenging his death sentence under the state’s Racial Justice Act, arguing that race played a role in jury selection.

Bacote’s attorneys have argued his case was mishandled and tainted by racism in jury selection and training. Attorneys representing Bacote told WRAL News to expect compelling statements on Wednesday to back up evidence and testimonies from social scientists and historians presented throughout the 2-week hearing.

Bacote was sentenced to death in 2009 by 10 white jurors and 2 Black jurors after he was convicted of shooting an 18-year-old named Anthony Surles during a robbery. One of Bacote’s arguments is that he wasn’t convicted of 1st-degree murder, unlike almost everyone else on death row.

If the death penalty was lifted for Bacote, he would still face life in prison.

A ruling in Bacote’s favor on Wednesday could allow more than 100 other North Carolina death row inmates to appeal their cases under the Racial Justice Act.

The Racial Justice Act, a law that the legislature passed in 2009 — and then repealed in 2013 — that lets death row inmates appeal their sentence on the basis of racism in their prosecution. Although the law has been repealed, people who had started their appeals already were allowed to carry on those efforts due to a 2020 ruling by the state Supreme Court.

Grethecn Engel, the executive director at the Center for Death Penalty Litigation, a non-profit law firm that represents people on death row, said she is hopeful there will be a reckoning and that it will motivate Gov. Roy Cooper to grant reductions or even pardons before his term ends.

“That would be really compelling to Governor Cooper, [a] really strong message about the untenable nature of the death penalty and a call for him to exercise his unbridled power to grant commutations,” Engel said.

The closing arguments, held at the Johnston County Courthouse, will be livestreamed on WRAL.com at 10 a.m.

Bacote is represented by the Center for Death Penalty Litigation, the ACLU’s Capital Punishment Project, the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund and North Carolina Attorney Jay Ferguson.

(source: WRAL news)

Racial Justice Act case in Johnston County could affect every NC prisoner on death row

SA Superior Court judge is now considering a case that could impact every person sitting on death row in North Carolina.

Hassan Bacote’s team of lawyers are challenging his death sentence. He’s a Black man who was sentenced to death in Johnston County by a majority-white jury in 2009.

That same year, the Racial Justice Act was passed. The law allows capital defendants to challenge their death sentence on the basis that race played a significant factor in decisions to seek or impose the death penalty.

15 years later, the court is now looking at whether race played a role in Bacote being sentenced to death.

“This is a big deal. The issue of who gets the death penalty, of who sits in the room that decides who gets the death penalty is an issue that is roiled this nation since — you pick the date,” ACLU Senior Counsel Henderson Hill said during closing arguments.

The ACLU said during Bacote’s case, the prosecution removed Black jurors 3 times more often than white jurors.

“White jurors with this same perspective are seated in the box; Black jurors with that same background get shown the door,” Hill said.

The NAACP said Bacote’s white counterparts had a greater chance of being spared in sentencing.

“During the relevant time period for this case, 100% of Black individuals who are capitally prosecuted were sentenced to death, and if you were white, you had greater than 50% chance of getting a life sentence,” said Ashley Burrell from the NAACP Legal Defense Fund.

Lawyers representing the State are refuting those claims.

North Carolina Department of Justice Attorney Jonathan Babb, citing census data, said more white people were living in Johnston County at the time of the trial and the selected jurors were an accurate representation of the demographics.

“The state does not condone or defend some of the notes that were displayed by the defense,” said Babb.

The verdict in this case could ultimately impact 135 people on death row right now.

(source: WTVD news)

A call to commute North Carolina death sentences—-Billboards urging Gov. Roy Cooper to commute the sentences of inmates on death row were unveiled Aug. 19 in Raleigh.

Capital punishment opponents want Gov. Roy Cooper to commute death sentences before leaving office.

The NC Coalition for Alternatives to the Death Penalty hosted a rally on Aug. 18 in Raleigh with gun violence activist the Rev. Sharon Risher of Charlotte, whose mother and 2 cousins were killed in a racially motivated mass shooting at Mother Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina in 2015. Billboards went up the next day demanding Cooper commute death row inmates’ sentences.

The billboards, which will be moved around Raleigh for three months, were paid for by coalition supporters.

Risher joined capital punishment opponents, death row exonerees and friends and family of homicide victims and people who were executed in a symbolic march to the Governor’s Mansion to demand commutations.

“We are asking Gov. Cooper to hear our call for mercy, for justice, and for healing,” she said. “Executions will not bring back our murdered family members. They will only create more hate and suffering. We want no more executions in our names.”

The rally marked the 18th anniversary of North Carolina’s last execution, which was carried out on Aug. 18, 2006, at Central Prison. Samuel Flippen became the last of 43 people executed in the modern era.

North Carolina has 136 people on death row, with the longest tenured sentenced in 1985 – long before the launch of judicial reforms for fairer trials and proportionate sentencing. Many of those defendants were convicted by all-white juries, which research shows tend to lead to stiffer penalties against Black defendants.

“Our billboards use an image of North Carolina’s execution chamber because we want the governor to clearly understand the stakes,” said Noel Nickle, executive director of the Coalition. “If he doesn’t take action to commute these decades-old death sentences to prison terms, it’s extremely likely that North Carolina will return to executing people. We could go from no executions for two decades to a spree of state-sanctioned killing.”

(source: The Charlotte Post)

FLORIDA—-impending execution Catholic bishops urge Governor DeSantis to spare the life of Dozier School for Boys survivor

The Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops (FCCB) has implored Gov. Ron DeSantis to stay the execution of Loran Cole and commute his sentence to life without the possibility of parole. Cole is scheduled to be executed on August 29 for the 1994 murder of John Edwards. He was also convicted of robbing, kidnapping and assaulting Mr. Edwards’ sister.

From June 1, 1984 through November 14, 1984, 17-year-old Cole was housed at the notorious Arthur G. Dozier School in Marianna, Florida. Cole’s execution is scheduled on the heels of the governor’s approval of the Dozier School for Boys and Okeechobee School Victim Compensation Program, which will provide reparations for hundreds of men who endured the brutal abuse and torture at these state-based institutions.

“Mr. Cole himself was beaten, raped and tormented at Dozier,” said Michael Sheedy, FCCB executive director, in an August 14, 2024, letter to DeSantis on behalf of the bishops of Florida. “He witnessed torture and daily beatings of other students. He was once forced to clean up the remains of another student who died by suicide after jumping off a building. He had his legs broken after trying to escape. Mr. Cole’s jury never heard about the physical and mental abuse he endured at the hands of officers at Dozier.”

Sheedy also noted, “Never having received mental health and trauma treatment until his arrival on death row in his late 20s, Mr. Cole, at age 57, is not the same person who committed the grave crimes for which he was convicted.”

The Catholic Church teaches that all human life is sacred. Even people who have committed terrible acts and caused great harm possess a human dignity instilled by God, our Creator. The death penalty attacks the inviolability of the human person and perpetuates the cycle of violence that is prevalent in our culture. Given our modern penal system, executions are unnecessary. Life-long incarceration without the possibility of parole is a severe yet more humane punishment that ensures societal safety, allows the guilty the possibility of redemption, and offers closure for victims of crime and their families.

Before Cole’s scheduled execution, Floridians will gather across the state to pray for him and his victims, for DeSantis as he considers the request to stay the execution, and for an end to the death penalty and the cycle of violence in society.

(source: flaccb.org)

ALABAMA—-impending execution

Alabama’s nitrogen execution protocol falls short, attorneys say in seeking delay

Lawyers for an Alabama death row inmate set to be executed in November said the state’s process for nitrogen hypoxia executions “is a set of suggestions and customs, changeable at any time,” and asked a federal judge to halt an execution set for this fall.

Carey Dale Grayson, 49, will be put to death on Nov. 21 at William C. Holman Correctional Facility in Atmore. He’s set to be the 3rd execution this year using nitrogen gas.

The 1st was Kenneth Smith. Smith was executed in January and was the 1st nitrogen hypoxia execution in the country. The execution quickly became controversial, with Smith writhing on the gurney for several minutes.

In to court records filed late Tuesday, Grayson’s lawyers asked a federal judge for a preliminary injunction barring the state to execute Grayson.

“Rather than investigating what went wrong—as other states have done following issues with executions—(Alabama has) chosen to ignore clear and obvious signs the current protocol contains major problems that will result in more unconstitutionally torturous executions if it continues to be employed,” new court filings say.

“Alabama’s present method of using nitrogen for executions does not work the way (the state) claim(s), and carries an unacceptable risk of conscious suffocation, in violation of the Eighth Amendment.”

The lawyers said the state has made “unwritten alterations” to the heavily redacted protocol, doesn’t use qualified people throughout the procedure to monitor medical equipment, and haven’t revealed what they conceded in a confidential settlement with another prisoner earlier this month.

“In other words, this is hardly a protocol. It is a set of suggestions and customs, changeable at any time, and neither this Court nor Mr. Grayson knows exactly what Defendants will do when executing Mr. Grayson.”

Attorneys representing the state have said Smith held his breath for several minutes after the nitrogen began to flow through his gas mask, causing the physical reaction.

Grayson’s lawyers included Smith’s autopsy report in court filings. Their medical expert, a longtime anesthesiologist, read the autopsy and concluded Smith suffered from negative pressure pulmonary edema. According to the expert, that condition occurs when “inspiration is attempted against an upper airway obstruction, leading to fluid being drawn from blood vessels into the alveoli.”

That conclusion “support(s) the conclusion Mr. Smith was suffocated while conscious, in violation of the Eighth Amendment,” the lawsuit says. The state’s process for nitrogen executions “creates a risk of unconstitutional pain,” the expert said.

The autopsy notes Smith’s lungs did have evidence of fluid and blood.

Grayson’s lawyers, along with lawyers for Alan Miller– who is set to be executed using the same method in September– have argued Smith’s mask didn’t fit properly, allowing oxygen to seep in. Grayson’s lawyers said in court records the mask “did not work as (the state) represented…”

“It does not inherently produce an airtight seal,” said Grayson’s lawyers Tuesday. “It must be fitted to the person wearing the mask and tested as dictated by the manufacturer. That is critically important because, when oxygen leaks into the mask during the execution, breathing air comes into what is supposed to be a closed system, prolonging the execution, and suffocating the prisoner.”

Grayson was convicted with 3 other men for the brutal Feb. 22, 1994 slaying and mutilation of Vicki Lynn DeBlieux.

His medical expert said, in court records, that the state should do a physical examination of inmates prior to executions to identify any upper airway obstructions that could “inhibit his ability to breathe in the nitrogen gas.” He also said the state should provide some type of pre-hypoxia sedative.

The filing repeats earlier claims that Assistant Alabama Attorney General James Houts is involved in the training for prison officials on using masks. “In fact, the only person (Grayson’s lawyers are) aware that is involved in the training is Assistant Attorney General James Houts, a scuba hobbyist and private pilot employed by Defendant Marshall. His job, crucially, is related to the fit of the mask.”

(source: al.com)

TENNESSEE—-new death sentence

Sean Finnegan gets death penalty for murder of Jennifer Gail Paxton

An Anderson County jury returned Aug. 21 with the sentence for Sean Shannon Finnegan in the killing of Jennifer Gail Paxton of Knoxville: death by lethal injection.

On Aug. 19, the same 12 jurors found Finnegan, who had lived on Fairview Road in Oak Ridge for several years, guilty of:

Criminally negligent homicide (instead of another count of 1st-degree murder charge)

Attempted aggravated rape

Aggravated rape

Aggravated kidnapping

Especially aggravated kidnapping

Conspiracy to commit aggravated rape

Conspiracy to commit aggravated kidnapping

Abuse of a corpse

Tampering with evidence

He was found not guilty of conspiracy to commit 1st-degree murder and another count of aggravated rape.

A hearing will be held Nov. 7 to decide upon sentencing for the lesser charges – anything other than the murder charges – on which Finnegan was convicted.

Assistant District Attorneys Sarah Winningham Keith and Kevin Allen said Paxton’s body had been kept for about 8 months in a freezer in the bedroom, but was moved quickly by Finnegan to a place under his bed before police arrived to search for the body, which was found in early August 2020. They believe she was strangled to death in December 2019. Finnegan’s girlfriend or fiancee, 26-year-old Rebecca Dishman, told officers that Finnegan killed Paxton, strangling her with string over a lengthy period of time, taking breaks, and stopping to smoke.

Dishman reached a plea agreement with the district attorney general’s office last year, pleading guilty to 1st-degree murder and agreeing to testify against Finnegan in return for a life sentence. She testified against him last week.

The sentencing hearing for Finnegan began Aug. 20, with attorneys for both sides making opening and closing statements, allowing Paxton’s relatives to read statements on how her death had negatively impacted their family, and bringing in 2 character witnesses for Finnegan: a co-worker and his former sister-in-law, who painted a dark picture of his childhood.

Finnegan is never going to be free again, attorney Forrest Wallace assured Anderson County jurors on Aug. 20 at the beginning of the sentencing hearing. He said the minimum sentence they could give him for the 1st-degree murder of Jennifer Gail Paxton is 51 years. Finnegan turns 57 next month.

“Do the math,” he said.

Arguing for the death sentence, Anderson County Assistant District Attorney General Kevin Allen said, “Sean Finnegan must be given the same amount of mercy they (he and Rebecca Dishman) gave Jennifer Paxton.”

The early life of Sean Finnegan

Wallace brought 2 witnesses before the jurors, which he described as showing Finnegan’s humanity. The first was the manager who had worked with him at the bar in Knoxville, who testified during the trial he worked most of the time and was reliable.

His former sister-in-law painted a darker picture of Finnegan’s early life.

Roxanne Mundy of Indiana testified about his home life when she married into the family. Finnegan was in his early to middle teen years. He had 2 younger brothers and a sister, and 2 older brothers, including John Finnegan Jr., who Mundy married. They are now divorced.

“I was terrified of the man,” she said of her former father-in-law, Sean’s father. She described the man known as John Sr. or “Big John” as an abusive alcoholic and gambler who frequently abused his wife, Sean’s mother, both verbally and physically, including at least once “beyond recognition,” and causing the children to run for their rooms when he came home. The violence continued to the point that she got the wife to get an order of protection against him, she said, which he violated. She said she and John Jr. helped her get an apartment in their building for her, Sean and his younger brother and sister, the older brothers having moved out of the home in Florida by that time.

Mundy said before she met her husband, the family had fled Ohio, leaving behind their home and belongings, and were living in a car parked in a rest area in Florida until they had enough money for a home. Sean and one of the brothers were sent to live with uncles. She said she didn’t know if they were actually relatives or not. The younger siblings stayed with their mother in the car.

The subject of the uncles came up later. She said when a truancy officer showed up at the Finnegan home to report that Sean Finnegan and a brother weren’t coming to school, it was discovered that the uncles were picking them up. She recalled Sean coming home one day in a “hot mess,” very upset, and revealing he was being sexually and physically abused by the uncles and others.

As Mundy testified, Finnegan wiped tears from his eyes.

She said when the father found out Sean had been missing that much school, he beat him so bad that he was unable to go to school for about a week because of the bruises. Attorney Williams presented school records that he said indicated Sean essentially only went to school through the 8th grade.

The former sister-in-law jumped forward in the timeline to tell of an adult Sean Finnegan getting a job at a restaurant in Fort Lauderdale, where he was the master chef and general manager, enjoying the job that included dressing in a white coat and chef’s hat and mingling with the guests and food critics.

“He was a great cook,” she said.

That restaurant would eventually close and he’d go to another, she said. He moved to East Tennessee when the restaurant wanted to expand to Knoxville. When his siblings couldn’t take care of his mother, she said, he offered to allow her to come stay with him. During the trial it came out that she had been in hospice at the time the offenses occurred and has since died.

Mundy said she hadn’t seen him in about 34 years, but she had known the adult Sean Finnegan to be someone that no one would guess was different, with a beautiful wife, pet dogs he loved, nice homes and clothes, and cordial to people. In response to questions, she said she knew he drank alcohol at night and smoke pot, getting drunk a lot.

On the state’s side, Paxton’s cousins gave statements previously reported on about how her death had impacted their lives. A new statement was given from Paxton’s grandmother, who relatives said she called her mom. It was read on the stand by Paxton’s cousin Brittany Payne. In the printed statement, the grandmother said, “Losing her destroyed my heart. She was my everything.” She added that the nightmares she had on earth would never end and that she knew she’d be with her granddaughter again in Heaven.

(source: The Oak Ridger)

Ohio Republican Calls For End of Death Penalty

An Ohio Republican has renewed calls for her state to abolish the death penalty.

Lawmakers in Ohio last year introduced bipartisan legislation to end capital punishment in the state. However, the bills have not moved out of committee.

The state’s ongoing inability to obtain lethal injection drugs led to an unofficial moratorium on executions in the state, with Republican Gov. Mike DeWine instructing lawmakers to find an alternative method in 2020. He has delayed several executions since.

State Senator Michele Reynolds, a Republican, said now is the time to push forward with abolishing the death penalty in Ohio.

Reynolds said the she wants to end the death penalty in her state because she is “pro-life.”

“Being pro-life is really about life period, all life,” she said, according to WBNS-10TV.

Proponents of the death penalty often cite the families of victims, but Reynolds said executions do not necessarily bring them closure.

“There have been a lot of families who have spoken about the death penalty just saying that because of the appeals and them having to relive and not really getting justice,” she said.

Newsweek has contacted Reynolds for comment via email. DeWine and Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost’s offices have also been contacted for comment via email.

There are currently 119 inmates on the state’s death row, according to the 2023 Capital Crimes Report from Yost’s office. The cost of putting all of those inmates to death could cost between $121 million and $363 million, according to the report.

Ohio is 1 of 6 states where executions have been halted through executive action, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. The state last executed an inmate on July 18, 2018.

Ohio is among 27 states that still have the death penalty, while 23 states and Washington, D.C. have abolished it, including states in the Midwest: Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa and Minnesota.

“I just think at this point we can join other Midwestern states and move forward in this conversation, and I think it’s a conversation worth having,” Reynolds said.

Use of the death penalty and public support for it is declining, but the drive to end it in Ohio comes as other state lawmakers are pushing to restart executions in the state.

House Bill 392 would allow death row inmates to choose between lethal injection and nitrogen hypoxia as a method of execution and if lethal injection drugs are not available, nitrogen hypoxia would be used to put them to death.

Earlier this year, Alabama became the 1st state to put an inmate to death using the method, which critics have called cruel and experimental.

(source: newsweek.com)

Mishandled Evidence Scuttles Prisoner’s Bid to Prove Innocence—-Prosecutors in Missouri who sought to free Marcellus Williams faced a setback after DNA analysis did not turn out as they had expected.

The new DNA lab report came in two days before Marcellus Williams was supposed to have his day in a suburban St. Louis courtroom, and it was a problem.

Not because the report showed that Mr. Williams, who claimed that he was wrongfully convicted of murder and faced a looming execution date, had touched the murder weapon. It did not.

But the report indicated that the weapon, a kitchen knife, had been mishandled during his trial, dashing his hopes that it could be used to help exonerate him.

Instead of sitting through a daylong hearing that was supposed to be an opportunity to poke holes in his conviction, Mr. Williams found himself agreeing to a compromise that would spare him the death penalty but keep him in prison for life without parole.

It was a stunning turn in a case that has drawn considerable attention in Missouri, where the state’s attorney general has fought at least three exoneration efforts, including the bid by Mr. Williams.

He was just weeks from a scheduled execution date, and in agreeing to an unusual guilty plea — in which he did not admit to committing the crime — Mr. Williams, 55, lived to contest his conviction if new evidence were to emerge supporting his contention that he is innocent.

A statement by his legal team, led by the Midwest Innocence Project, stopped well short of exultant. “This resolution ensures that Mr. Williams will not be executed for a crime he did not commit.”

The statement went on to note that no physical or forensic evidence has ever linked Mr. Williams to the crime, and asserted that the key witness testimony came from two people with reason to implicate Mr. Williams.

The local prosecutor, Wesley Bell, a Democrat who rose to prominence following the police killing of Michael Brown, a Black man, in Ferguson, Mo., 10 years ago, supported Mr. Williams’s innocence claim, filing a 63-page motion to overturn the conviction.

The state attorney general, Andrew Bailey, a Republican, has routinely opposed wrongful conviction claims, going so far as to try to keep people in prison after they have been exonerated.

A judge was supposed to begin hearing evidence on Wednesday and weigh whether to grant the motion by Mr. Bell. Shortly before 8:30 a.m., representatives from the attorney general’s office wheeled in 11 large plastic bins of evidence.

Those bins were opened, and the hearing that was planned never happened.

Instead, as journalists and spectators filled the benches, all the lawyers left the room, engaging in hours of negotiations behind the scenes. A planned lunchtime rally in support of Mr. Williams at a nearby park went forward as planned. Still, the court did not come to order until around 2 p.m.

Matthew Jacober, representing Mr. Bell’s office, revealed that the new DNA evidence, which was expected to be instrumental in the innocence claim, “did not fully support our initial conclusions.”

Initial testing of the knife detected male DNA that excluded Mr. Williams, raising his legal team’s hopes that a different perpetrator could be identified. But a new analysis found that the DNA was consistent with that of an investigator and a prosecutor involved in the original trial in 2001.

That finding suggested that the investigator and the prosecutor had mishandled what might have been the most important piece of evidence, leaving their own DNA and perhaps eliminating DNA that had been left by the perpetrator.

“The murder weapon was handled without proper procedures then in place,” Mr. Jacober said. “As a result, DNA was likely removed and added during the investigation and prosecution of Mr. Williams.”

Mr. Williams was convicted of the 1998 killing of Felicia Gayle, who was stabbed to death during a burglary of her home in University City, a suburb of St. Louis.

In court, Mr. Jacober said that the office “deeply regrets its failure” to preserve the evidence properly and that the office still believed that Mr. Williams’s constitutional rights had been violated.

A new Missouri law allows prosecutors to challenge past convictions if they believe the person is innocent or was convicted in error. In his written motion, Mr. Bell argued that Mr. Williams was excluded as the source of shoe prints, fingerprints and hairs found at the scene, and that the prosecutor had improperly excluded prospective jurors who were Black.

Besides Mr. Williams’s case, the law has been used 5 times. 3 led to convictions being overturned, while one challenge was rejected, and another was dismissed for procedural reasons.

Mr. Bailey has filed motions to block the innocence hearings from taking place and tried to appeal the judge’s rulings in the cases, saying that the State Supreme Court has “exclusive authority to review death sentences.” His opponents maintain that the law allows him to participate in the hearings but not to appeal the results.

After the new DNA analysis came back in the Williams case, Mr. Bell’s office concluded that the new findings had weakened the claim of innocence, though the prosecutors maintained that the case was still riddled with problems. They included the reliance on 2 witnesses who had been motivated by reward money and other help from law enforcement, and who had told inconsistent stories that contradicted the crime scene evidence.

Mr. Bell’s office proposed a consent judgment, or settlement. Mr. Williams would take what is known as an Alford plea, in which the defendant maintains his innocence but concedes that the state has enough evidence to obtain a conviction. Mr. Bell would drop the death penalty, and Mr. Williams would waive his right to appeal except if new evidence is discovered or a new law passed that applies to his case.

The judge, Bruce F. Hilton, said that he had reviewed some 8,000 pages of records in the case and had spoken by telephone with the victim’s husband, Daniel Picus, who said he was opposed to executing Mr. Williams. “The court finds the consent judgment is a proper remedy in this case,” the judge said.

The attorney general’s office objected, saying that the judge had no authority to resentence Mr. Williams to life without parole. After the hearing, he asked the State Supreme Court to block the agreement, lawyers involved in the case said.

Judge Hilton said the sentencing would proceed on Thursday morning after Mr. Picus was given a chance to address the court.

Mr. Bell was not present at the hearing; he was attending the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. He recently defeated Representative Cori Bush in the Democratic primary for her House seat in a heavily Democratic district, so he will very likely be heading to Congress in January.

Mr. Bailey, who fended off a primary challenge this month and is also likely to win the general election in this deeply red state, was likewise absent but issued a statement. “Throughout all the legal games, the defense created a false narrative of innocence in order to get a convicted murderer off of death row and fulfill their political ends,” it said.

As the proposal was explained in court, Mr. Williams, who has taken the name Khalifah while in prison, listened wearing a white skull cap and silver-gray robe.

When questioned by the judge, he agreed that the arrangement was in his best interest. Asked how he pleaded to the charge of murdering Ms. Gayle, he answered, “No contest.”

(source: New York Times)

How Marcellus Khaliifah Williams’s Story Shines Light on the Injustices within the Legal System—-In response to the August 21 Consent Judgement, Kansas City’s Poet Laureate Melissa Ferrer Civil sheds light on the concept of justice in her op-ed, emphasizing a nurturing approach over punishment. Through Marcellus “Khaliifah” Williams’ story, she challenges the flaws in the current legal system and advocates for a more compassionate and dignified treatment of individuals.

From the roots of language and the heart of humanity, the word “Justice” blossoms, entwined with the essence of equity and equality. In its truest form, justice is the sacred act of restoring balance to the scales of life, tipping gently towards fairness where there is imbalance.

As an abolitionist, I envision a world where justice is not a weapon of punishment, but a tender hand that nurtures and heals our communities. When a pauper steals a loaf of bread, true justice does not confine him to a cell but sows the seeds of plenty so that hunger is but a distant memory.

In our misguided pursuit of retribution, we imprison the brightest lights of our generation.

These souls, forged into flints by the weight of oppression, hold the potential to ignite transformation. Yet, what does it say of our society when gentle genius and profound insight are shackled, hidden from the world behind bars?

Take, for example, Marcellus “Khaliifah” Williams. Having spent the past 24 years of his life on death row for a crime that bears no evidence of connection to him, Khaliifah faces an execution date set for September 24th.

Khaliifah is a father, prolific poet, devout muslim and serves as Imam at the Potosi Correctional Center. Over the past 24 years Khaliifah has served an immaculate sentence free from incident. During this time, Khaliifah has developed a practice of writing poetry that speaks deep into the human experience.

His poems are stark perspectives on his life, his relationships, and the world at large. Through his words, Khaliifah reminds us of the ways that incarceration can rob the world of genius and beauty.

When I was an educator, my children with the most disruptive behaviors, were children for whom the classroom model did not work. Each of them held a brilliant fire not often stoked or valued by the education system. What was seen as disruptive behavior was simply a child attempting to meet their own needs within a system that neglected them. The cost of trying to fend for themselves was often detention, displacement from the classroom and other punitive measures.

These responses taught our kids (because they’re really ours) that society was going to reject them for being themselves, that they were wrong for not fitting in and doing so loudly, and that they could not trust these institutions to hold them with the respect, attention, and tenderness that they deserved.

Those kids become adults who are continually making decisions for their survival in a world that does not value, honor, or believe in them. Some of them become artists, some of them don’t make it to the age of 30, and some of them move from confinement (detention) to confinement (prison).

And still, there are other adults who get caught up in the racial profiling of an institution that disproportionately criminalizes and penalizes Black men. In Khaliifah’s case, the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney reviewed the DNA results and filed a motion to vacate Williams’s conviction, asserting the DNA evidence clearly exonerates him. Despite this, Attorney General Andrew Bailey has remained unflinching in his judgment that the state should move forward with the execution.

The circuit court set a hearing for the morning of August 21 to examine this exculpatory evidence and address the motion. The evidentiary hearing was dismissed in lieu of a consent judgment. The judgment resulted in a nullification of the execution in exchange for an Alford plea in which Williams agreed to life without parole. It must be stated that this is not an admission of guilt.

To date, no evidence has been found that links Williams to the murder of Felicia Gayle in 1998 and Khaliifah maintains his innocence.

If anything Khaliifah’s story shows us that at its core, this system cannot provide true justice.

In a world that is quick to dehumanize the voices and perspectives of “undesirables,” organizations like MADP (Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty), Decarcerate KC and A Nation In Exile are fighting to uplift the voices, stories, and perspectives of those who have been banished into the shadows. These three organizations have gathered together local performance poets in our KC community to give a public reading of Marcellus “Khaliifah” Williams’ work.

If you would like to hear more about his story, how you can get involved, or about these organizations and the work they are doing in our community, you can attend the public reading at Turnsol Books, August 29th. The doors open at 7pm and the show starts at 8pm. This reading will be the closing night of an exhibit called CTRL + Burn, highlighting work from currently and formerly incarcerated artists.

(source: Melissa Ferrer Civil, The Kansas City Defender)

Missouri death row inmate expected to be resentenced to life without parole under new agreement

Missouri death row inmate Marcellus Williams is expected to be resentenced to life without parole under a consent judgment reached Wednesday, the St. Louis Prosecuting Attorney’s Office announced, just over a month before he was scheduled to be put to death for the 1998 murder of Felicia Gayle, a killing he denies committing.

The judgment dictates Williams enter an Alford plea, the office said in a news release, which allows a defendant to maintain their innocence while recognizing it is not in their interest to go to trial. On Wednesday, Williams entered the Alford plea of guilty to a charge of 1st-degree murder in Gayle’s death, the office said.

The judgment also vacates Williams’ death sentence.

“Under this agreement and in accordance with Missouri law, we anticipate Williams will be sentenced by the court to a term of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole,” the release said, adding Williams’ sentencing is scheduled for Thursday morning.

In a separate statement, Williams’ attorney reiterated her client’s innocence, saying “nothing about today’s plea agreement changes that fact.”

“By agreeing to an Alford plea, the parties will bring a measure of finality to Felicia Gayle’s family,” Tricia Rojo Bushnell said, “while ensuring that Mr. Williams will remain alive as we continue to pursue new evidence to prove, once and for all, that he is innocent.”

Lawyers from the St. Louis Prosecuting Attorney’s Office are due to present evidence in court Wednesday they say excludes a Missouri death row inmate as the perpetrator of a 1998 murder for which he’s scheduled to be executed next month.

Marcellus Williams, 55, is slated to be put to death September 24 for the fatal stabbing of 1-time St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter Felicia Gayle, though he has always maintained his innocence. Williams’ lawyers and St. Louis Prosecuting Attorney Wesley Bell cite 3 DNA experts who say testing of the murder weapon done in 2016 excludes Williams as Gayle’s killer – a contention they feel is further bolstered because he cannot be tied to other pieces of forensic evidence from the crime scene.

“Nothing puts Marcellus Williams at the crime scene,” Tricia Rojo Bushnell, 1 of Williams’ attorneys and the executive director of the Midwest Innocence Project, told CNN. “No one saw him there, none of the physical evidence puts him there … It was not him who wielded the knife. We already had this very unreliable evidence in the first place; now you tack on the DNA evidence and his innocence becomes even clearer.” With his execution looming, Williams’ claim he was wrongfully convicted highlights an inherent risk of capital punishment: a possibly innocent person could be put to death. Indeed, at least 200 people sentenced to death since 1973 have thereafter been exonerated, 4 of them in Missouri, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

Bell – who earlier this month defeated US Rep. Cori Bush in the Democratic primary for her seat – filed a motion to vacate the inmate’s conviction and death sentence in January, the result of an independent review by the office’s Conviction and Incident Review Unit, Rojo Bushnell said. While the St. Louis Prosecuting Attorney’s Office handled the 2001 trial against Williams, Bell did not take office until 2018.

The office of Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey fought the motion and last month sought to prevent the St. Louis County Circuit Court from holding Wednesday’s hearing and reviewing the evidence, arguing the state Supreme Court – which set Williams’ execution date in June – had already rejected the claims Bell’s office intends to make. That effort, however, was unsuccessful: The Missouri Supreme Court denied the request by Bailey, a Republican.

In its own filing seeking the dismissal of the prosecutor’s motion, Bailey’s office argued only the state Supreme Court has the authority to stay Williams’ execution.

But the prosecutor’s motion says the DNA evidence now in question “has never been considered by a court.”

“This never-before-considered evidence, when paired with the relative paucity of other, credible evidence supporting guilt, as well as additional considerations of ineffective assistance of counsel and racial discrimination in jury selection, casts inexorable doubt on Mr. Williams’s conviction and sentence.”

Williams was convicted mainly on the testimony of 2 unreliable informants, the motion claims, calling them “known liars” who faced their own legal troubles and were “incentivized” by a $10,000 reward offered by Gayle’s family.

Williams had been scheduled for execution in 2017, but former Gov. Eric Greitens, a Republican, stayed the execution and appointed a five-person board to review the new evidence in the case, including the DNA. Greitens, however, resigned about a year later, and last year GOP Gov. Mike Parson issued an executive order dissolving the board and lifting the stay, saying in a statement the delay had deferred justice and left Gayle’s family “in limbo.” A day later, Attorney General Bailey filed a motion with the state Supreme Court to set Williams’ execution date.

Reached for comment, a spokesperson for the St. Louis Prosecuting Attorney’s Office referred CNN to the motion to vacate Williams’ conviction. The Missouri Attorney General’s Office has not responded to a request for comment. CNN has also reached out to Daniel Picus, Gayle’s widower.

In a 2017 op-ed for the Post-Dispatch, Picus’ wife, Laura Friedman, said he and Gayle’s family had been victimized not only by her murder, but “by a justice system so excruciatingly slow that an end is elusive nearly two decades after the crime and now, by a media frenzy.”

“In addition, if the convicted killer is innocent, as some claim, that means there is a murderer yet to be apprehended – a scenario too terrifying to contemplate – and almost surely too late to seek or find justice,” Friedman wrote. “This is the necessary, but unspoken, corollary and the 1st thought of family members when a convicted killer’s innocence is resolutely asserted.”

The murder of Felicia Gayle

Gayle, 42, was killed in her home in the St. Louis suburb of University City on August 11, 1998, having been stabbed 43 times with a kitchen knife, the prosecutor’s motion and other court records state. She’d been a “kind and gentle woman who went out of her way to do nice things for people,” the Post-Dispatch’s Editorial Board in 2017 wrote, adding she’d left the paper six years before her death to volunteer full-time.

At the scene, investigators found hair, footprints and fingerprints that belonged to neither Gayle nor her husband. Missing from the home was Picus’ laptop and Gayle’s purse with several personal items.

But the investigation struggled, the motion says. In hopes of encouraging someone to come forward with information, Gayle’s family offered a $10,000 reward, which the motion says was “emphasized” in the “significant television and newspaper coverage of the case.”

The 1st informant emerged in June 1999, the motion says: Henry Cole called police and told them he’d been in prison with Williams, who was behind bars for an armed robbery committed the year prior. Cole – who acknowledged he came forward for the reward and struggled with drug addiction and mental illness, the motion says – alleged Williams confessed to Gayle’s murder, providing details of the crime he claimed Williams shared.

But Cole’s statements were inconsistent and at times contradicted evidence, the prosecuting attorney’s office says in its motion. Still, as investigators sought to corroborate his account, they turned to Williams’ former girlfriend, Laura Asaro, whom Cole had told them Williams had seen the day of the killing.

The woman at first denied having information about the crime, prosecutors’ motion states. But after meeting with police several times – and being promised charges she was facing would be dropped and told she would be eligible for the reward – Asaro eventually cooperated, telling police she had indeed seen Williams on the afternoon of the murder, the motion states.

Williams had blood on his shirt, scratches on his neck and a computer in his car, she said, according to the prosecutor’s motion. Williams later confessed to Gayle’s killing, she told investigators, according to the motion, which similarly notes inconsistencies between Asaro’s statements and Cole’s, as well as contradictions with known evidence in the case.

The next day, police seized Williams’ car and found inside a ruler from the Post-Dispatch, though the motion says it was never reported among Gayle’s missing belongings. Police did locate Picus’ missing laptop at the home of a man named Glenn Roberts, who said he’d received it from Williams.

DNA evidence has not previously been reviewed by a court

The prosecuting attorney’s motion contends Williams’ conviction “rested primarily” on Asaro’s and Cole’s testimony, because none of the evidence from the scene could be linked to Williams: The bloody footprints were not his, nor was the hair, the motion says. The fingerprints were never linked to Williams, either.

And though Picus’ laptop was recovered, the prosecuting attorney’s office says Roberts told investigators Williams said he’d gotten it from Asaro – a claim Roberts reiterated in an affidavit signed in 2020. Jurors at trial never heard this assertion, which the prosecutor’s motion says illustrates “the person with the most direct connection to the crime” was “Laura Asaro, and not Marcellus Williams.”

The DNA evidence now at the center of Williams’ innocence claim was not available at his trial. The state Supreme Court ordered the evidence tested in 2015, but 2 years later – after the testing had been done – it declined to halt the inmate’s execution without a hearing.

The prosecutor’s motion cites 3 DNA experts who determined the results exclude Williams as the source of male DNA found on the knife. “When you’re stabbing, DNA transfers because of restriction and force. If you’re stabbing anyone, you have a good chance of transferring your DNA because of that force,” one of those experts previously told CNN.

(source: CNN)

Missouri death row inmate agrees to new plea in deal that calls for a life sentence without parole

A Missouri death row inmate on Wednesday dropped his innocence claim and entered a new no-contest plea in an agreement that calls for a revised sentence of life in prison without parole.

But the Missouri Attorney General’s Office opposes the new consent judgment and will appeal in an effort to move ahead with the scheduled Sept. 24 execution of Marcellus Williams.

The complicated turn of events happened on the day that St. Louis County Circuit Judge Bruce Hinton was supposed to oversee a hearing requested by Prosecuting Attorney Wesley Bell aimed at vacating Williams’ f1t-degree murder conviction in the 1998 stabbing death of Lisha Gayle. Bell had cited DNA testing unavailable at the time of the crime that found someone else’s DNA — but not that of Williams — on the murder weapon.

After a lengthy delay with lawyers meeting behind closed doors, Matthew Jacober, a lawyer for the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office, announced that even newer DNA testing released on Monday found contamination due to handling of the weapon by a former assistant prosecutor and investigator. The contaminated evidence made it impossible to show that someone else may have been the killer.

“The murder weapon was handled without proper procedures in place,” Jacober said. The improper handling occurred several years before Bell took office.

Williams agreed to an Alford plea, which is not an admission of guilt but acknowledges that evidence is sufficient to convict him. Under an agreement reached with St. Louis County prosecutors, Williams entered that plea on Wednesday. He’ll be sentenced Thursday — the agreement calls for life in prison without parole. Williams also agreed not to appeal.

“Marcellus Williams is an innocent man, and nothing about today’s plea agreement changes that fact,” Williams’ attorney, Tricia Bushnell, said in a statement. She noted that Gayle’s family supports setting aside the death penalty, and the plea “brings a measure of finality” to the family.

But the plea doesn’t guarantee Williams won’t be executed. Republican Attorney General Andrew Bailey is appealing to the Missouri Supreme Court as he seeks to move ahead with the execution, arguing that a circuit court doesn’t have authority to overrule the state Supreme Court that set the execution date.

“Throughout all the legal games, the defense created a false narrative of innocence in order to get a convicted murderer off of death row and fulfill their political ends,” Bailey said in a statement. “Because of the defense’s failure to do their due diligence by testing the evidence that supposedly proved their point, the victims have been forced to relive their horrific loss for the last 6 years.”

Williams, 55, was hours away from execution in August 2017 when then-Gov. Eric Greitens, a Republican, granted a stay after DNA testing unavailable at the time of the killing showed that DNA on the knife matched someone else, not Williams.

That evidence prompted Bell to reexamine the case.

Williams, who is Black, was convicted and sentenced to death by a jury consisting of 11 white people and 1 Black person.

A 2021 Missouri law allows prosecuting attorneys to file a motion seeking to vacate a conviction they believe was unjust. The law has resulted in exonerations of 3 men who spent decades in prison, including Christopher Dunn last month

. The Missouri Supreme Court set the September execution date on June 4, hours after it ruled that Gov. Mike Parson, a Republican, was within his rights when he dissolved a board of inquiry convened by Greitens after he stopped the 2017 execution.

The inquiry board, consisting of 5 retired judges, never issued a ruling or reached a conclusion on whether the new DNA evidence exonerated Williams. Parson dissolved the board in June 2023, saying it was time to “move forward.”

In addition to Dunn, who spent 34 years behind bars for the death of a 15-year-old St. Louis boy, the Missouri law allowing prosecutors to challenge convictions led to freedom for two other men — Kevin Strickland and Lamar Johnson. Bailey was not attorney general when Strickland’s case went to a hearing, but his office opposed vacating the convictions of Dunn and Johnson.

Bailey also opposed efforts to overturn the conviction of Sandra Hemme, who spent 43 years in prison for murder, though that case was adjudicated through appeals, not a prosecutor’s motion. A judge ruled in June that Hemme should be freed. Bailey filed multiple appeals to try and keep her behind bars, but Hemme was released in July.

Strickland was freed in 2021 after serving more than 40 years for 3 killings in Kansas City after a judge ruled he had been wrongfully convicted in 1979. In 2023, a St. Louis judge overturned Johnson’s conviction. He served nearly 28 years for a killing he always said he didn’t commit.

Williams was the 1st death row inmate whose innocence claim went before a judge since passage of the 2021 law. Several other people who have been exonerated of crimes were in the courtroom to support him, including another former death row inmate. Joseph Amrine spent 17 years on death row before he was freed in 2003 after the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that no credible evidence linked him to the killing of another inmate.

Prosecutors at Williams’ trial said he broke into Gayle’s suburban St. Louis home on Aug. 11, 1998, heard water running in the shower, and found a large butcher knife. When Gayle came downstairs, she was stabbed 43 times. Her purse and her husband’s laptop were stolen. Gayle, who was white, was a social worker who previously worked as a reporter for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

Authorities said Williams stole a jacket to conceal blood on his shirt. Williams’ girlfriend asked him why he would wear a jacket on a hot day. The girlfriend said she later saw the laptop in the car and that Williams sold it a day or 2 later.

Prosecutors also cited testimony from Henry Cole, who shared a St. Louis cell with Williams in 1999 while Williams was jailed on unrelated charges. Cole told prosecutors Williams confessed to the killing and offered details about it.

Williams’ attorneys responded that the girlfriend and Cole were both convicted felons out for a $10,000 reward.

(source: newstalkkzrg.com)

City in Oklahoma Agrees to Pay $7.15 Million to Glynn Simmons, Exonerated After 48 Years in Prison

Costs Innocence Oklahoma

On August 14, the Associated Press reported that the city of Edmond, Oklahoma agreed to pay $7.15 million to Glynn Simmons, the longest-incarcerated innocent person in the United States. Mr. Simmons spent 48 years in prison, including 2 years on death row, before he was released last July. Mr. Simmons was officially exonerated by a judge in December 2023 and received $175,000 from the state of Oklahoma, the maximum amount allowed for wrongful convictions under state law. Officials have known since before Mr. Simmons’ 1975 trial that numerous witnesses saw him playing pool in Louisiana at the time he was accused of robbing and murdering a store clerk in Edmond. Mr. Simmons, now age 71, is fighting stage 4 liver cancer. His lawsuit claims against Oklahoma City and a retired city detective are still pending.

Mr. Simmons was featured in DPI’s recent analysis showing that the length of time before exoneration is increasing for death-sentenced prisoners due to factors such as official misconduct and strict procedural rules for appeals. For decades, Oklahoma prosecutors withheld records showing that the surviving witness, who had been shot in the head, identified at least 4 other men in lineups, not Mr. Simmons or his co-defendant Don Roberts. Mr. Roberts, who was also convicted and sentenced to death despite evidence showing he was in another state, was released on parole in 2008. Although District Attorney Vickie Behenna dismissed the charges against Mr. Simmons, she has denied Mr. Roberts’ requests for formal exoneration—blocking him from receiving payment from the state’s wrongful conviction statute. Many state wrongful conviction statutes have strict procedural requirements that prevent innocent people from accessing funds after release.

“Sometimes I build myself up to feeling free. Then I stumble out here to reality, to remember that, you’re not free. You can’t go out and get a job. I need a job now. But my convictions hold me back.” – Don Roberts

Studies consistently show that the death penalty is much more expensive than incarceration for natural life in prison, and wrongful conviction compensation is one of the death penalty’s many “hidden costs.” The federal government and states decide whether and how much they will pay prisoners for wrongful incarceration. Typically, the amounts increase depending on the type of penalty, the scope of official misconduct, and the length of time incarcerated, although there are often caps on the maximum amount of compensation. Our data show that 71% of death row exonerations involve official misconduct—including 95% of death row exonerations that took 30 years or longer. With the increasing length of time before exoneration, capital cases have resulted in some of the largest wrongful conviction payments. In February 2024, the city of Tampa, Florida agreed to pay $14 million to Robert DuBoise, who spent 37 years on death row before he was exonerated by DNA testing. “This is what happens when the police focus on the wrong person, make up evidence to fit their theory and don’t investigate to find the truth,” Mr. DuBoise said. “Lives are ruined and communities are less safe.”

CALIFORNIA:

Kevin Cooper’s Letter on Kamala Harris and His Wrongful Conviction

In a country where the criminal justice system for the most part is anything but just, I speak to you from experience of 40-plus years of being denied constitutional rights that I, as an American citizen, am told on paper I am entitled to receive but was denied. This includes being denied DNA testing from former California Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris, to being the victim of a sham “innocence investigation” ordered by current California Gov. Gavin Newsom and many of his associates.

At this point in time, my legal team and I are more concerned with what Newsom is doing to me than what Harris once didn’t do for me.

I find myself having to make a statement against what certain Republicans are trying to do. They are trying to hurt Vice President Kamala Harris’s chances to become the first woman – woman of color – president of the Divided States of America.

I cannot allow the Republicans to misuse my case against her. So therefore, I Kevin Cooper am forgiving Kamala Harris for once denying me DNA testing. If I can find it within my heart to forgive her, as I am still sentenced to death for murders that I did not commit, then how can the Republicans, who do not care about me, hold or use what she didn’t do as attorney general against her now?

In all honesty, I did not come to this conclusion easily. I came to it after listening to and believing what a few very important Californians in my life had to say on this subject. These Californians, by the way, happen to be a diverse group of women.

My spiritual friend Zanetta, who is proudly Christian, explained to me about the power of real forgiveness and how itis a constructive thing, while hatred and dwelling on negative things in the past can lead to destructive things.

My kindred spirit Zoe, who is raising her daughter to think and believe that she can be anything in this world that she wants to be, even president of the United States, helped to make me see the historical reality of this country having for the very first time, a woman as president and the powerful impact it will have on future generations of girls like her daughter.

Then there’s my conscience, Gavrilah, who expressed her fears of what we ALL have to lose if Trump becomes president again. His ongoing commitment to the racist and classist death penalty, the criminalization of poor people, specifically people of color, and filling up the courts with conservative judges are just a few of her very real fears.

The earth will be in even more danger than it already is, because it appears that many Republicans are more concerned with making money from the earth than saving the earth from human greed and destruction.

I was the one wronged by then Atty. Gen Kamala Harris, yet I am forgiving her. If I can do so, how dare a political party who doesn’t give a damn about poor people, especially Black and brown people, try to help themselves by using me to hurt her. If a Republican had been the attorney general at the time I requested DNA testing, they would have done the same thing to me – or worse. In fact, they already did, and that is why I am in the current position I am in.

In Solidarity and struggle while still sentenced to death,

Kevin Cooper

(source: davisvanguard.org)

Defense attorneys for Boston Marathon bomber seek recusal of judge overseeing case

Attorneys for Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev are seeking to remove the judge overseeing the protracted legal battle over Tsarnaev’s death sentence.

Tsarnaev’s lawyers said during a hearing in federal court in Boston on Wednesday that U.S. District Court Judge George O’Toole should be recused from the case, pointing to what they said were comments O’Toole made about the case on podcasts and at public events during the appeals process.

Prosecutors said they are not opposed to a hearing on the issue, but they said they believe the motion is meritless.

O’Toole scheduled a hearing on the recusal request for next month. Tsarnaev was not in court.

“I want to dispose of that issue immediately, one way or another,” O’Toole said.

During the hearing, O’Toole also said all future filings connected to the case are to be done under seal to protect the integrity of the process.

A victim of the bombing, Mikey Borgard, attended Wednesday’s hearing.

Borgard said he was walking home from work on the day of the marathon when the bombs exploded. He suffered hearing loss and from post-traumatic stress disorder.

“I was 21 when the marathon happened. I’m 33 now. This has been a very, very long process and I really kind of wish it was over,” said Borgard, who wear hearing aides. Despite his injuries, Borgard said opposes capital punishment.

“I very strongly oppose the death penalty and that’s across the board. It does not matter who you are, I think the death penalty is inhumane,” he said. “That is essentially an eye for an eye, and that is very old way of looking at things.”

A federal appeals court in March ordered O’Toole to investigate the defense’s claims of juror bias and to determine whether Tsarnaev’s death sentence should stand following his conviction for his role in the bombing that killed three people and injured hundreds near the marathon’s finish line in 2013.

If O’Toole finds jurors should have been disqualified, he should vacate Tsarnaev’s sentence and hold a new penalty-phase trial to determine if Tsarnaev should be sentenced to death, the appeals court said.

In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death sentence imposed on Tsarnaev after the 1st Circuit threw out the sentence in 2020. The circuit court found then that the trial judge did not sufficiently question jurors about their exposure to extensive news coverage of the bombing. The Supreme Court justices voted 6-3 in 2022 when they ruled that the 1st Circuit’s decision was wrong.

The 1st Circuit took another look at the case after Tsarnaev’s lawyers urged it to examine issues the Supreme Court didn’t consider. Among them was whether the trial judge wrongly forced the trial to be held in Boston and wrongly denied defense challenges to seating 2 jurors they say lied during questioning.

Tsarnaev’s guilt in the deaths of those killed in the bombing was not at issue in the appeal. Defense lawyers have argued that Tsarnaev had fallen under the influence of his older brother, Tamerlan, who died in a gun battle with police a few days after the April 15, 2013, bombing.

Tsarnaev was convicted of all 30 charges against him, including conspiracy and use of a weapon of mass destruction and the killing of Massachusetts Institute of Technology Police Officer Sean Collier during the Tsarnaev brothers’ getaway attempt.

EX-SPECIAL BRANCH OFFICER’S DEATH PENALTY COMMUTED TO 38 YEARS IN PRISON

(see: https://www.bernama.com/tv/news.php?id=2331743)

Fiji minister wants to ‘explore the possibility of death penalty’ to tackle drug crisis

A Cabinet minister in Fiji has floated the idea of bringing back the death penalty, hoping it will send a warning to international drug traffickers using the island nation as a transit point – a call that has attracted mixed reactions from the public.

Fijian law enforcement agencies have been found wanting to tackle the rapid spread of the sale and consumption of hard drugs trafficked into the country by international drug cartels and criminal networks.

But the Minister for Women and Children, Lynda Tabuya, believes capital punishment as a “deterrence” can be the solution to protect the community.

“I would like to see the death penalty brought to Fiji for those who traffic large quantities of drugs,” she told local media at a news conference on Wednesday.

“We need to do this as a deterrence because as Fiji continues to be used as a transit point.

We are vulnerable, our borders are vulnerable, we need to explore the possibility of the death penalty to protect our people.”

Fiji is in the company of about 170 nations that have abolished the death penalty.

“There is growing consensus for universal abolition of the death penalty,” according to the UN Human Rights Office.

“Despite this abolitionist trend, the death penalty is still employed in small number of countries, largely because of the myth that it deters crime.”

While the Fijian government has not previously hinted at such a move, Tabuya said Fiji needed to send a message “to all the drug lords”, according to local media reports.

However, Minister’s comments have divided the ordinary Fijians, who took to social media to express either their support or opposition to the suggestion.

“We can all have our beliefs & ideas about this but there are hundreds of studies that show that harsh sentences do little to deter crime (sic),” wrote one user on X (formerly Twitter), who was against the idea.

“This is really dangerous rhetoric,” wrote another, calling on the Minister to “Please stop”.

One person posted that Tabuya “needs to go immediately”.

“The poor iTaukei youths will be impacted by this the most,” they wrote, adding “This women is advocating for state-sponsored execution that could breach the rights of indigenous peoples (sic).”

But others on Facebook reacted with a more positively, saying the death penalty had worked for South East Asian nations, such as Singapore and Philippines, and could also work for Fiji.

“Totally agreed [to the death penalty brought back],” said one Facebook user.

“Fiji is a beautiful and peaceful country. But Drug peddlers has ruined the culture and the future of this nation. A death penalty sentence will save our country (sic).

Another Facebook user added: “100% agreed. Fiji needs harsh penalties for drugs. There’s no other way. We must learn from Singapore, no drugs in that country.”

“DEATH PENALITY SHOULD ALSO BE LEGALISED FOR RAPE AND MURDER..(sic),” a 3rd added.

RNZ Pacific has contacted the Fijian government for comment.

‘Cruel torture’: Drug convicts await execution in Saudi

The 2 Egyptian inmates ate a routine final dinner in a prison in northern Saudi Arabia, not knowing they would be put to death for drug crimes the next morning.

Their abrupt killing this month extended a recent spree of drug-related executions in Saudi Arabia, after officials ended a moratorium on the death penalty for such crimes less than 2 years ago.

The cases have spurred outcry from human rights groups and spread fear in Tabuk prison, near the Jordanian border, where inmates told AFP more than 50 defendants have been sentenced to die over drug smuggling and worry their executions could come at any moment.

“We don’t know whose turn it is. Maybe it’s me or my closest friend,” said Mohammed, a 40-year-old Egyptian who ran a hotel in Riyadh before his arrest in 2015 for receiving a shipment of furniture that turned out to be stuffed with drugs.

“We are not notified in advance to say goodbye to our loved ones or even prepare ourselves psychologically,” Mohammed, in tears, told AFP by phone from the Tabuk facility.

He agreed to be identified by his 1st name only to avoid repercussions.

Since May, Saudi Arabia has executed 28 people on drug-related charges, according to an AFP tally based on official statements, up from just 2 in all of 2023.

This year’s toll includes the 2 Egyptians killed last week in Tabuk: Walid Farouk and Youssef Kleib, who the official Saudi Press Agency (SPA) said were guilty of smuggling hashish and amphetamines.

All told, Saudi Arabia executed at least 170 people last year, more than any other country besides China and Iran. It is on course to exceed that figure this year.

The authorities deem the executions to be compatible with Sharia law — the Islamic legal code based on the teachings of the Koran — and necessary to “maintain public order”.

Though state media reports do not specify how executions are carried out, Saudi Arabia is notorious for beheadings, contributing to its forbidding reputation.

Short-lived moratorium –

As de facto ruler Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman tries to transform Saudi Arabia into a business and entertainment hub, he has hinted at a softening of its approach to capital punishment.

In a transcript of an interview with The Atlantic magazine published by state media in March 2022, Prince Mohammed said the kingdom had “got rid of” the death penalty except for cases of murder or when someone “threatens the lives of many people”.

However, in November 2022 the authorities announced the 1st executions for drug crimes in nearly 3 years, trampling on a moratorium announced by the kingdom’s official human rights commission.

“We were relieved and very happy when we heard about the moratorium on executions in drug cases. I felt that life had given me a 2nd chance,” said Mohammed, the Egyptian inmate in Tabuk.

Now that the executions have resumed, those hopes have been dashed, he said.

State media reported 19 drug-related executions in late 2022 before the pace slowed considerably, only to pick up again this past July.

‘Execute me now’ –

Saudi Arabia is a major market for the addictive amphetamine captagon, which floods in from Lebanon and war-torn Syria, prompting the authorities to launch a high-profile crackdown last year involving a flurry of raids and arrests.

Duaa Dhainy, a researcher for the Berlin-based European-Saudi Organisation for Human Rights (ESOHR), sees a link between that operation and the latest executions.

“We believe the campaign made prisons more crowded, and it seems that the recent executions are an attempt to close some pending cases,” she said.

The Saudi government did not respond to AFP’s request for comment.

Human rights groups like ESOHR, Amnesty and Reprieve say executions are all the more unacceptable because of problems with Saudi Arabia’s justice system.

These “general flaws” include defendants’ “exposure to torture and ill-treatment and their lack of the right to adequate self-defence,” Dhainy said.

That rings true for one 34-year-old Egyptian death row inmate who, fearing retribution from prison authorities, asked to be identified only as Shadi, a pseudonym.

A taxi driver in the coastal city of Jeddah, Shadi was arrested in 2018 and sentenced to death the following year for drug trafficking, which he denies.

“I was wronged, I never got a fair trial and I didn’t have a lawyer to defend me,” said Shadi, who has a 10-year-old son back in Egypt.

As the executions tick up, Shadi told AFP he found the years spent behind bars awaiting his own death to be unbearable.

“Waiting for the death sentence is cruel torture,” he said.

“If you are going to execute me eventually, execute me now.”

(source: france24.com)

Amid Rising Executions, Iran Puts 3 More to Death

The Islamic Republic of Iran has carried out the executions of 3 more prisoners amid a rise in the use of the death penalty.

A prisoner previously sentenced to death on drug-related charges was executed in Urmia Prison on Wednesday morning.

Human rights groups identified the prisoner as Mohammad Daghestani, who was arrested on drug charges and later sentenced to death by the Islamic Republic’s judiciary.

On Tuesday, the death sentences of 2 prisoners, Mohammad Karamizadeh and Esmail Javadi, were carried out at Ghezel Hesar Prison.

Each had been sentenced to death for separate cases of premeditated murder.

According to a report by Amnesty International, Iran has reached its highest level of death sentence executions in the last 8 years, with the judiciary of the Islamic Republic executing 853 people in 2023 alone.

The report indicates that 481 executions, more than 1/2 of the total, were related to drug crimes.

This marks an 89 % rise in death penalties for drug-related offenses compared to 2022 when 255 people were executed.

The latest numbers also show a staggering 264 % increase compared to 2021, when 132 individuals faced execution on similar charges.

(source: iranwire.com)

Iranian Political Prisoners Mark 30th Week of Hunger Strike in ‘No to Executions’ Campaign

The 30th week of the hunger strike by political prisoners in Iran, part of the “No to Executions on Tuesdays” campaign, took place on Tuesday, August 20th, 2024. This campaign, which began in February, has seen hundreds of prisoners from 18 prisons across the country joining in to protest against the death penalty, which they regard as an inhumane and irreversible form of punishment.

The “No to Executions on Tuesdays” campaign has grown steadily, with more and more prisoners participating each week. The campaign’s aim is clear: to oppose the death penalty as an inhumane form of punishment and to call for its abolition. This stance is independent of the charges, motives, or beliefs of those condemned to death, focusing solely on the inhumanity of capital punishment itself.

The continuation and expansion of this campaign occur against the backdrop of the Iranian judiciary and security forces intensifying their use of the death penalty. Since the beginning of the Persian year 1403, which started on March 21, 2024, more than 310 individuals, including 16 women, have been executed in Iran. The regime has further accelerated its execution rate, with 118 people hanged in August alone.

The regime’s extensive use of the death penalty in recent times suggests a systematic approach as if those in power believe that the solution to all crises lies in the gallows. In this context, the death penalty is seen as a form of “hard revenge” against the people of Iran.

Among those affected by this brutal crackdown are women, who have long been the driving force for fundamental changes in Iran. The execution of 16 female prisoners in the past 5 months, coupled with widespread arrests and violence against women in the streets under the pretext of enforcing the government’s mandatory hijab policy, highlights the regime’s violent confrontation with women. This oppressive approach has even led to deaths and serious health consequences for many women and girls in Iran.

The Iranian regime does not execute groups of 100 or 120 people at once. Instead, it executes 120 individuals, each in isolation, leaving thousands of other prisoners in solitary confinement, awaiting their turn for execution. As prisoners in Evin and Lakan Rasht prisons have rightly pointed out, stopping this killing machine requires collective and nationwide actions and protests. Since the death penalty is a social issue implemented by the government, confronting it also requires a social response, which can only be achieved through unity and collective action.

The necessity for unity and solidarity in opposing the death penalty has been emphasized repeatedly by the prisoners participating in the “No to Executions on Tuesdays” campaign. They have called on everyone to rise however they can and support this resistance that has started within the prison walls.

According to reliable sources, the prisoners on hunger strike in the “No to Executions on Tuesdays” campaign have continued their protest for the 30th consecutive week in various prisons across the country. These include Evin Prison (Women’s Ward, Ward 4, Ward 6, and Ward 8), Ghezel Hesar Prison (Units 3 and 4), Karaj Central Prison, Khorramabad Prison, Shiraz Military Prison, Mashhad Prison, Qaem Shahr Prison, Lakan Rasht Prison (Women’s and Men’s Wards), Tabriz Prison, Ardabil Prison, Khoy Prison, Naqadeh Prison, Urmia Prison, Salmas Prison, Saqqez Prison, Baneh Prison, Mariwan Prison, and Kamyaran Prison. The strikers have appealed to the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights, Mrs. Mai Sato, to pay special attention to these inhumane actions, particularly the executions in Iran, and to work tirelessly to stop them and end this brutal situation in the country.

Elisabetta Zamparutti, a former member of the Italian Parliament and an official of the human rights organization ‘Hands Off Cain,’ announced on August 19th her solidarity with the ‘No to Executions on Tuesdays’ campaign. She stated on her Facebook and Instagram accounts that the number of executions in Iran is continuously and dramatically increasing and that nothing changes in Iran under the rule of the Supreme Leader, regardless of who holds the presidency. Consequently, she pledged to join the hunger strike every Tuesday alongside the Iranian prisoners to protest against the executions.

(source: ncr-iran.org)

AUGUST 21, 2024:

Support bill abolishing PA’s death penalty

Editor: To protect our individual rights as Americans we need to prevent any one self-serving party from dominating the legal system. Our Founding Fathers knew this. Enshrined in the Constitution are strict definitions of the government’s responsibilities and its limitations. When the law is strong, so is our Constitution. When it is vague, individuals are allowed to make legal decisions that should be controlled by our legislators.

Right now, Pennsylvania’s death penalty is wide open to interpretation by every prosecutor with a God complex. This puts our Constitution at risk.

Let me explain. There are few strict guidelines about what makes a case eligible for the death penalty. This leaves it up to prosecutors to decide who will face the death penalty and who will not, even when people have committed the same crime. This hit home for me recently, hearing that the U.S. has just exonerated the 200th person from death row. Who is one man to decide who lives or dies in Pennsylvania? Death penalty sentences are spiking in counties depending on who they get as a district attorney, not based on their crime rates.

I’m not saying all prosecutors are bad, but this law is. The Constitution gave the responsibility of making laws strictly to the legislators. The death penalty should be the law we treat the strictest. Yet it is so unclear that district attorneys are unsure what they should use the death penalty for, if anything. People are awaiting death as we speak, and the system doesn’t give me confidence that they belong there. It is frightening to me that the law allows this and an insult to the Constitution. Join me in asking our legislators to prove their loyalty to the constitution by supporting House Bill 999 to end the death penalty.

Nancy Hardy, Albrightsville

(source: Letter to the Editor, Republican Herald)

Death penalty to be sought for mass-murder suspect caught in Burke County

Prosecutors will seek the death penalty against a mass-murder suspect who was captured in Burke County after he went on the run.

James Douglas Drayton, 26, was arrested nearly 2 years ago on suspicion of fatally shooting 5 people.

Authorities say he tried to rob a convenience store and kidnap a clerk in the early morning before he was captured.

The robber entered the Taylor Bros. X-Press on U.S. 25 north of Waynesboro, sought out the clerk at gunpoint, and took her from the kitchen to the cash register while demanding money. He made off with an undisclosed amount of money, authorities said.

Even with a mass murder suspect behind bars, a store clerk in Burke County was haunted by how close she came to dying during an encounter with him.

Officers spotted the car and chased until it wrecked near South Liberty and Manau streets and the driver fled on foot. Drayton was caught while jumping a fence during a lengthy foot chase.

The 7th Circuit Solicitor’s Office filed a motion last week expressing its plans to seek capital punishment for Drayton, according to news reports.

No trial date has been set.

Drayton was arrested in October 2022 and charged with 5 counts of murder and 5 counts of possession of a weapon during a violent crime. The victims were found in a home in Inman, about 13 miles northwest of Spartanburg. Four were dead at the scene: Thomas Ellis Anderson, 37; James Derek Baldwin, 49; Mark Allen Hewitt, 59; and Adam Daniel Morley, 32. The 5th person shot, Roman Christean Megael Rocha, 19, died later at a hospital.

Drayton’s attorney, public defender Michael David Morin, declined to comment, citing the ongoing case.

At the time of Drayton’s arrest, Spartanburg County Sheriff Chuck Wright said that Drayton had confessed to the killings, telling police that he was high on methamphetamine and hadn’t slept for four days. Drayton handed over the gun he said he used to kill everyone in the home where he was also staying, a place people went frequently to use drugs, Wright said.

South Carolina, 1 of 27 states that allow the death penalty, hasn’t performed an execution since 2011. A recent ruling by the South Carolina Supreme Court upholding the use of the firing squad, lethal injection or the electric chair, opened the door to restart executions in the state.

(source: WRDW news)

FLORIDA—-female may face death penalty

Woman indicted in fatal ambush of Fla. deputies, may face death penalty—-Julie Ann Sulpizio, 48, was charged by a grand jury with being a principal to the 1st-degree murder of a law enforcement officer, which is punishable by execution

The mother arrested in the horrific ambush that killed a Lake County Sheriff’s deputy was indicted Monday on multiple charges and may face the death penalty.

Julie Ann Sulpizio, 48, was charged by a grand jury with being a principal to the 1st-degree murder of a law enforcement officer, which is punishable by execution. Under Florida law, principals to a crime are people who aided or abetted in its commission and can be punished as if they committed the crime themselves.

Prosecutors have not yet decided whether to seek the death penalty, according to a press release from the Lake County Sheriff’s Office.

On Aug. 2, Sulpizio, who claimed to be inspired by God, attempted to lure several residents of her Eustis neighborhood whom she considered sinners into her family’s home so her husband, Michael, and daughters Cheyenne and Savannah could kill them, as she later admitted to deputies.

She attacked several neighbors at their own homes nearby, choking one and intending that they would follow her back to the Sulpizio home. When the neighbors called deputies, Julie Ann Sulpizio attempted to lure both the neighbors and deputies into her home, police say, but instead she was arrested and taken to a hospital for a mental health evaluation.

Late, when the deputies went into the Sulpizio home to check on the family, Michael Sulpizio and the daughters opened fire, leading to a standoff before eventually killing themselves. Deputy Bradley Michael Link was killed and deputies Harold Howell and Stefano Gargano were wounded.

In her later interview, Julie Ann made additional disturbing revelations. She told deputies she shot and killed her 2 dogs because they were vessels for “Lucy,” short for Lucifer, the devil; said she believes her husband is the biblical angel Michael; and claimed God is speaking through her.

Police found conspiracy theory-related materials in the Sulpizio home, they said.

In addition to the murder charge, Julie Ann Sulpizio has also been charged with 3 counts of being a principal to the attempted 1st-degree murder of a law enforcement officer, conspiracy to commit murder in the 1st-degree, battery on a law enforcement officer and 3 counts of battery.

(source: police1.com)

Gov. Ivey sets date for 5th execution this year—-Ivey has set the date of Nov. 21 for Carey Grayson’s execution, the state’s 3rd execution using nitrogen hypoxia

Governor Kay Ivey has set a Nov. 21 execution date for Carey Dale Grayson, the nation’s 3rd death sentence to use nitrogen hypoxia as the method.

Ivey announced that Grayson is scheduled for execution between midnight on Thursday, Nov. 21, and 6 a.m. on Friday, Nov. 22. Grayson, 49, will be executed by nitrogen hypoxia, a method that uses nitrogen gas administered via a gas mask, causing suffocation. This will be the 3rd nitrogen hypoxia execution planned for this year and the 5th execution overall.

Gov. Kay Ivey set the execution date for Grayson after the Alabama Supreme Court ruled last week that it could take place. Grayson was one of four teenagers convicted in the killing of Vickie Deblieux in Jefferson County.

DeBlieux was kidnapped while hitchhiking. She accepted a ride from Grayson, Kenny Loggins, Trace Duncan, and Louis Mangione on Feb. 22, 1994.

Grayson, Loggins and Duncan were sentenced to death. Mangione was sentenced to life in prison without parole. Loggins and Duncan had their sentences changed to life in prison after the 2003 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that says juveniles cannot be sentenced to death.

Duncan and Magione will be eligible for parole in 2029.

While lethal injection remains the state’s primary execution method, inmates can request to be put to death by nitrogen gas or the electric chair. After testing nitrogen gas as a method to execute Smith in January, the state began seeking execution dates for the dozens of inmates who requested nitrogen as their preferred execution method.

Grayson has an ongoing lawsuit to halt the use of this protocol based on the premise that it inflicts unconstitutional levels of pain. While he did opt to use nitrogen hypoxia as his preferred method, the controversy surrounding the state’s first execution using this method raised concerns.

In January, Alabama carried out the nation’s 1st execution using nitrogen gas, resulting in Kenneth Smith’s death. A 2nd execution using nitrogen hypoxia is scheduled for Sept. 26 for Alan Eugene Miller, who recently settled a similar lawsuit with the state concerning the execution protocol.

Despite the upcoming executions, controversy over Smith’s execution is still rampant. Smith appeared to shake for several minutes on the death chamber gurney before his death on Jan. 25, contradicting the state’s claim that nitrogen gas would ensure an effective and humane death.

(source: alreporter.com)

Oak Ridge trial could mark 1st death sentence since 2022 pause on Tennessee executions—-If sentenced to death, Sean Finnegan would join 45 people on death row during paused executions.

An Anderson County jury is currently deciding whether or not an Oak Ridge man will face death for the rape and murder of a 36-year-old woman. If the jury calls for the death penalty, Sean Finnegan will be the 1st person sentenced to death in Tennessee since 2021.

Even if sentenced to death, though, there’s no word on when Finnegan would face state-sanctioned execution. This is because executions are currently on hold in the Volunteer State.

Pausing executions for those on death row

The state paused executions in 2022, ordering an independent investigation that found the drugs used in lethal injections hadn’t been appropriately tested. That pause came shortly after another pause during the COVID-19 pandemic, and has since left more than 40 people on death row with no idea when their executions could come.

If Finnegan faces the death penalty, he’ll be the 46th person on death row in Tennessee. He’d also be the 1st person sentenced to death since the pause was implemented, following Steven Wiggins, who was sentenced in August of 2021 for 1st-degree murder.

On the other end of the spectrum, there’s Larry McKay, who was sentenced to death at the beginning of 1983 for murder. He’s been on death row for more than 41 years and has yet to be executed.

Life on death row

McKay, Wiggins and the other 43 people on death row live under maximum-security designation. More specifically, death row offenders live under 3 levels of supervision: A, B and C.

Offenders begin at Level C, and based on behavior, they are allowed to move to Level B after 18 months. They can also move up to Level A.

Moving up the levels offers those on death row more freedoms and privileges. For example, only Level A inmates are allowed to work the few jobs available to them. Moving up in the levels also gives inmates things like phone and visitation allowances.

According to state policy, all death row inmates wake up at 5:30 a.m. They’re offered three meals a day during the week and two meals a day on weekends and holidays.

All death row inmates are housed at the Riverbed Maximum Security Institution, except the state’s 1 woman who is on death row; she is housed at the Debra K. Johnson Rehabilitation Center in Nashville.

(source: WVLT news)

State senator renews call to end the death penalty in Ohio—-According to this year’s “Capital Crimes Report,” 119 inmates are sitting on Ohio’s death row. The state last carried out an execution in 2018.

Republican State Senator Michele Reynolds (R- Canal Winchester) is renewing the call to end the death penalty in Ohio. She says the time is right to have the conversation because there has been a pause on executions under Gov. Mike DeWine.

Senator Reynolds says the main reason she wants to abolish the death penalty is her belief that life is from the womb to the tomb.

“I don’t think it necessarily matters being pro-life just when we’re talking about babies,” Reynolds said. “I think being pro-life is really about life period, all life.”

Reynolds also says the death penalty does not necessarily mean closure for victims’ families.

“There have been a lot of families who have spoken about the death penalty just saying that because of the appeals and them having to relive and not really getting justice,” Reynolds said.

Companion bills in the Ohio House and Senate would abolish the death penalty and require life sentences for those convicted of aggravated murder. Just this past June, the Ohio Legislative Black Caucus pushed for them to be passed.

The bills have bi-partisan support but have not moved out of committee since being introduced in 2023.

Reynolds and House Minority Leader Allison Russo (D- Upper Arlington) say bi-partisan support continues to grow, but believe it could take a long time to make a major policy change on the death penalty.

“Based on, I think what I’ve seen and the priorities of the majority party in this state, I suspect that this is something that is going to take a number of years,” Russo said. “It’s an opportunity to have ongoing conversations, to build support in our communities because these types of efforts do require broad coalitions to get behind them.”

According to this year’s “Capital Crimes Report,” 119 inmates are sitting on Ohio’s death row. The state last carried out an execution in 2018.

DeWine has instituted an unofficial moratorium on executions citing the lack of lethal injection drugs, and has said there will be no executions while he is in office.

“Even if it takes a while for us to get this right, I mean it just seems like there’s been this stay, and we’re in limbo and I think that’s the closure we need to move this forward,” Reynolds said.

According to the Death Penalty Information Center, 21 states still have the death penalty. Ohio is one of 6 states that have paused executions by executive action. 23 states have no death penalty, including the Midwestern states of Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa and Minnesota. Washington, Colorado and Virginia abolished their death penalties within the last 6 years.

Reynolds believes it’s time to be in the latter group.

Alternative method of execution

The push to end the death penalty in Ohio comes at a time when other state lawmakers are pushing to end the unofficial moratorium on executions. One of the officials calling for nitrogen hypoxia to be used as an alternative method when lethal injection drugs are not available is Republican Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost.

“This is not something to be taken lightly,” Yost said about the death penalty in January. “At the same time, there are crimes so heinous and against humanity that they deserve the ultimate punishment.”

The push to restart the death penalty is happening in the General Assembly. House Bill 392 is currently in the House Government Oversight Committee.

This bill would allow inmates to choose to have either lethal injection or nitrogen hypoxia for their executions. If the injection drugs are not available, then nitrogen would be used.

The method suffocates the inmate by replacing the air they breathe with pure nitrogen.

(source: WBNS TV news)

Man freed from death row for ‘railroad spike’ murder after out-of-town judge upends notorious case

An Ohio death row inmate was released on house arrest while he awaits a new trial for killing a pregnant teenage mother in 1988 with a railroad spike through her head after his conviction and sentence were vacated when his lawyers said DNA in the case was not his.

David Lee Myers, 60, was released on Monday from the Greene County Courthouse with conditions that he wear a GPS monitor, not leave the state and refrain from drinking alcohol or using drugs as he awaits another trial in the killing of Amanda Jo Maher in 1988.

The victim’s daughter, Sarah Sparkman, who was 8 months old when her mother was killed, urged the judge to keep him locked up, local CBS affiliate WHIO reported.

“Why risk it? I have experienced a lifetime of emotional and psychological turmoil due to my mother’s death,” Sparkman said, the outlet reported.

Prosecutors argued to keep him in custody, citing a 1986 forgery conviction and saying at the time Maher was killed, Myers was on probation for sexual battery, the Dayton Daily News reported.

Myers’ defense attorney, Elizabeth Smith, said he’s entitled to be released in light of new evidence that she says clears him, local NBC affiliate WDTN reported. “He is entitled to the presumption of innocence,” she said, the network reported. “There’s no direct evidence here. All of the things that the state has said have been thrown out.”

Amanda Jo Maher was found by passersby fatally wounded near abandoned railroad tracks in Xenia, Ohio, at 3 a.m. on Aug. 4, 1988, according to Ohio Supreme Court documents that outline the case. She was nude except for a shirt pulled up around her neck, and she had a railroad spike through her temple. She was flown to a hospital, where she died of severe head trauma from the railroad spike and attempted strangulation, court documents said. A 23-year-old Myers, who had been seen walking with Maher in the direction of the railroad tracks shortly before her body was found, was arrested. Charges were dropped in 1991, but he was indicted again in 1993. In 1996, he was found guilty of aggravated murder and sentenced to death in 1996.

He appealed. His attorneys successfully argued in an evidentiary hearing earlier this month that DNA on the railroad spike used to kill Maher and a rock used in the attack did not match Myers’ DNA. His lawyers said in a statement he has maintained his innocence for more than 35 years and was finally granted access to DNA testing in 2020, the Dayton Daily News reported.

“The testing revealed male DNA on the railroad spike used to kill the victim and a rock used in the assault, and importantly, the results excluded Mr. Myers as the source of that DNA,” according to a statement from his lawyers in July. “Because of this newly discovered exculpatory DNA evidence, and because his conviction and death sentence were based on false, misleading and unreliable forensic science that has since been debunked by the scientific community, Mr. Myers deserves a fair, new trial where a jury can hear all of the evidence.”

Visiting Greene County Common Pleas Court Judge Jonathan Hein, a retired judge from Darke County, agreed.

“Based upon the evidence presented at the hearing, and based upon the reasonable inferences drawn therefrom, the Court finds that the Defendant’s new evidence is sufficiently reliable — in both theory and in reality — to undermine the integrity of the trial verdict,” Hein wrote in his ruling on Aug. 6, the Xenia Gazette reported.

Prosecutors have said they are appealing the judge’s ruling.

“While we respect the Court’s decision, we are deeply disappointed and disagree with the granting of a new trial in this case in addition to the Court’s decision to vacate the conviction,” Greene County Prosecuting Attorney David D. Hayes said, the newspaper reported. “Our appellate counsel is reviewing the decisions and preparing an appeal.”

(source: lawandcrime.com)

The Exonerated: Meet Two Chicago Men Wrongly Imprisoned for Decades, on Police Torture, Death Row & More

“Tortured by Blue: The Chicago Police Torture Story”

As Chicago hosts the 2024 Democratic National Convention, we look at the city’s long history of police misconduct, including the use of torture under police commander Jon Burge, accused of leading a torture ring that interrogated more than 100 African American men in Chicago in the 1970s and 1980s using electric shocks and suffocation, among other methods, to extract false confessions from men who were later exonerated. Illinois has one of the highest rates of wrongful convictions in the United States, and a disproportionate number of the wrongfully convicted are Black or Brown people. For more, we speak with 2 men from Chicago who were exonerated after serving decades in prison: Stanley Howard spent 16 years of his life on death row for a 1984 murder that he confessed to after being tortured; Jimmy Soto was released from an Illinois prison in December after a 42-year fight to prove his innocence.

AMY GOODMAN: “All the King’s Horses,” Aretha Franklin, here on Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, “War, Peace and the Presidency: Breaking with Convention.” I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González, as we broadcast from here in Chicago at CAN TV.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Well, we look now at how the city has a long history of police torture under police commander Jon Burge, who is accused of leading a torture ring that interrogated more than 100 African American men in Chicago in the 1970s and 1980s. They routinely used electric shock and suffocation with plastic bags and typewriter covers, among other methods, to extract confessions from men who were later shown to be innocent. This comes as Illinois has one of the highest rates of wrongful convictions in the United States, and a disproportionate number of the wrongly convicted are Black or Brown people.

AMY GOODMAN: For more, we’re joined by 2 men from right here in Chicago who were exonerated after serving decades in prison.

Stanley Howard spent 16 years of his life on death row for a 1984 murder that evidence would later show he did not commit. He says he was tortured until he confessed to the crime. He’s the co-founder of the Death Row 10, a group of Black men on Illinois’s death row who were tortured by the notorious Chicago police commander Jon Burge and his detectives. Howard was pardoned by Governor George Ryan in 2003. He co-authored the book Tortured by Blue: The Chicago Police Torture Story.

We’re also joined by Jimmy Soto, who was released from an Illinois prison just this past December 14th, after a 42-year fight to prove his innocence. At the time of his release, Jimmy Soto was the longest-serving exonerated prisoner in Illinois history. Now he’s working on getting a law degree to help others like him.

We welcome you both to Democracy Now! It’s an honor to have you with us, as you both actually just recently got out. I don’t know if people remember what happened in the exposé, and he even went to court and was convicted of perjury, lying about the cover-up of torture of Black men in Chicago, Jon Burge. But you were one of those victims. If you can talk about what happened to you and what it meant to serve more than 40 years [sic] in prison, Stanley Howard?

STANLEY HOWARD: Well, what happened to me was a crime. I was tortured on November the 1st, November the 2nd of 1984. What I mean by “torture,” I was handcuffed with my hands behind my back, and that set of cuffs was cuffed to a ring on the wall. And these 3 detectives literally beat the heck out of me. When I refused to sign a confession to a crime I did not commit, they suffocated me with a plastic bag, and later a typewriter cover. I thought these three white detectives were actually trying to kill me. Mind you, I was 21 years old. Scared half to death and in fear of losing my life inside this interview room at 3:30, 4:00 in the morning, I actually agreed to sign a confession to a crime I did not commit.

I later discovered, when evidence started coming out, that I was not the only one. And at that time, I was assured that justice was going to prevail. I did not know that all three branches of government was either complicit in this scandal or worked to cover it up or just simply turned a blind eye to what was going on, maybe because they didn’t care. As long as they was obtaining convictions, that’s all it was about.

I end up on death row. And the courts kept seeing cases after cases after cases of these same officers’ names and the same techniques, but they kept denying all of the appeals. So, I wanted to take the argument from behind the closed doors of death row, and I wanted to take it to the streets. I wanted the people. If the people was willing to hear our stories and allow the state of Illinois to execute us, so be it. So I started the Death Row 10. And that campaign, we reached out to the Campaign to End the Death Penalty, and they helped us facilitate a public fight, if you will. And based on that, we started getting more movement, more movement, especially with Anthony Porter, who was released from death row after spending years and years on death row and was 30-some hours away from being executed. This is the time that we started the Death Row 10, along with the time that LaTanya Haggerty, a young girl that was killed by Chicago police because she had a cellphone in her hands.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And you, actually, while the time you were in prison, you became a jailhouse lawyer, helping so many other inmates. Can you talk about the experiences that you had there, helping to mount the legal arguments and the basis for yourself and others eventually being freed?

STANLEY HOWARD: Well, I had the experience of working with my appellate lawyer, who was horrible, so I started studying criminal law myself. I didn’t get any formal education, but I trained, and I studied, and I studied, and I studied. And I got to the point to where I wanted to have a say in my life, my appeals. And I believe I got to the point to where I wanted to help other guys on death row also, which is why I started the law class, so-called law class.

And based on the law class, we was able to get together, formulate arguments, organize, and push our fight, not just for the Death Row 10, but to counter the claims of the death penalty here in Illinois. At one point, we had 12, 13 guys executed, but we had 12, 13 guys released from death row. So, that tells you something is wrong. And through my advocacy, it wasn’t just simply about me. I wanted to help the other guys that I was there with, to help save their lives also, because I believe a government like this government should not be in the business of executing people, under any circumstances.

AMY GOODMAN: You were on death row for how many years?

STANLEY HOWARD: 16 years.

AMY GOODMAN: 16 years.

STANLEY HOWARD: Locked inside of a cell 23, 24 hours a day, every day, tortured. So, I was tortured by cops. Then I was tortured by the state of Illinois.

AMY GOODMAN: And now you’re free. Former Republican Governor George Ryan, governor of Illinois, commuted 167 prisoners on death row to life in prison. And then you have, before that, the — after that, in 2011, Democratic Governor Pat Quinn signed legislation that made Illinois the 16th state to abolish the death penalty. Jimmy Soto, I want to turn to you. Congratulations on being out, but the horror that you were in for over 40 years, the longest-held prisoner — exonerated prisoner in this country. Tell us your story.

JIMMY SOTO: Well, you know, it happened in 1981 on the Southwest Side of Chicago in an area called Little Village. A tragic shooting occurred. And I gave it no thought that it would ever come on my doorstep. Unfortunately, the police, as Stanley was pointing out, in that time period, used tactics in which they wanted to just close the case. And so, being pressured by those in authority in the city of Chicago, they set out to try to just solve the case in a way that skirted any legal methods that they should have done. They rounded up approximately 25 people from that area, 20 of which were under the age of 17. So, just think of that. These are juveniles. Held them for 3 days and got them to make false statements on me. They took them to the grand jury, and, yeah, they put the case on me. There was no evidence, physical, forensic, no eyewitnesses. They managed to get one individual to stand up and be, what they say, quote-unquote, an “accomplice witness.”

And at years of fighting, like Stanley, I was self-taught prison litigator. Over the course of that time, I managed to get two people fully exonerated. And I was able to get over 300 sentence reductions and 14 new trials. But, you know, the actual fight was to get me out. And eventually that happened. It wasn’t easy. It wasn’t an easy task. And I never want to see anybody go through that.

Unfortunately, like as you indicated, Juan, at the beginning of the show, that Illinois has some of the highest numbers of exonerations. I went to an exoneration conference in Louisiana shortly after I was released. And by far, Illinois, in just a year, one year, exceeded any other state for exonerations. And when I looked at the whole room and seen those thousands of people that have been exonerated over the years, it’s a clear red flag that there’s something seriously wrong with our criminal justice system.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And also, Illinois is a state that does not have parole for folks who are in prison. Can you talk about that and what that does —

JIMMY SOTO: Yeah.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: — in terms of people staying in longer?

JIMMY SOTO: Yes, yes. I was sentenced to natural life without parole, which is a slow death by incarceration. And during that time in there, we started — I was going to school. I went to the Northwestern Prison Education Program, but I also joined PNAP, the Prison Neighborhood Arts Project. And there, there was a think tank. And in that think tank, individuals said, “Hey, there is no parole in Illinois. We need to do something about it.” And right there, there was an effort birthed, which we wanted to have, ParoleIllinois.org. And we formed a nonprofit organization to bring back parole. There’s been no parole in Illinois since 1978. And there’s a lot of people who have, quote-unquote, “been rehabilitated,” yet they linger for decades in the most horrible conditions. Because it’s not only the fact that I did 42 years, two months, two days; it’s the conditions in which I did it. As Stanley indicated, it is really slow torture every day.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And you mentioned also, in the discussions we had yesterday, that you also were organizing within the prison in terms of the Latino prisoners. For a while you spent time with some of the FALN pro-independence folks that were in prison, as well?

JIMMY SOTO: That’s correct. You know, Luis Rosa, in particular. As I said, there was programs giving you higher education, but they had nothing to show to give us an education about our history, Latinos. And so, we decided to formulate the Latino Cultural Exchange Committee, which was an independent program, which we now started to bring in the history of Puerto Rico, Mexico, Central America, South America, and bringing it to those and to awaken within them some dignity and some pride in their heritage.

AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about the case of 51-year-old Michael Broadway, who died just this past June in Stateville prison? Just the year before, he was one of your classmates who were among the first group of incarcerated men to receive a bachelor’s degree from a top 10 university, Northwestern?

JIMMY SOTO: Yeah. Well, Michael was not only a cohort, but a friend. And when I learned about his death in June, it really hit me hard, because it shouldn’t have happened. The conditions there were [un]inhabitable. An independent engineering report, that the IDOC was aware of, said that 6 of the prisons in Illinois were not fit to have human beings in there. And so, Michael was in one of those prisons, Stateville. He was on one of the highest galleries, and it was very warm. It was hot. I was over 100 degrees, no circulation, windows sealed shut. Michael had an asthma attack and, unfortunately, died.

And when I learned that that happened, I held a town hall meeting here in Chicago. And there was — another organization was born. A movement was birthed in that. I said, “I’m going to do something about this and bring awareness of what’s going on.” And I called it Building Communities Not Prisons, to not let Michael’s death be in vain. And so, we pushed really hard to get Stateville closed. And I’m glad to say that, finally, a federal court judge ordered Stateville closed by September 30th.

But it doesn’t end there. The women in Logan are also subjected to horrible conditions. And we’re pushing to get that closed, and all of those prisons closed. The IDOC is operating at only 60%. That means they’ve got 40% room. But yet they want to knock down Stateville and Logan and rebuild a new prison at a cost of $900 million. And my question is: Why can’t we take that $900 million and put it at the front end to prevent people coming to prison, as opposed to investing in the future that we’re saying we’re going to continue this nightmare of mass incarceration?

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And when you talk about conditions, could you talk about what those conditions are? Even the water supply in many of these prisons is toxic?

JIMMY SOTO: Yes, yes. It’s been really noted that they know, that these antiquated prisons, for one, the plumbing, the piping has got lead pipes, so that means the lead is going to be in the water. But even the sources, the sources like the aquifers that are there in Will County, in Joliet, the sources where they get the water that is ran to the prison, it also has heavy metals, other toxins which is in the water, which is causing it. I personally had my blood tested, and I had elevated levels of lead, caused by drinking that water in Stateville.

AMY GOODMAN: So, you’ve been invited to the Democratic National Convention Tuesday night?

JIMMY SOTO: Yes, by a group called FWD.us. And I’m going to go there and meet some people. And they are a group who wants to show how immigration right now, which is a hot-topic issue, and carceral systems are intertwined, you know, because now they want to criminalize. They want to criminalize Black and Brown bodies. And this is a way to further criminalize through saying these migrants that are coming in are, quote-unquote, “bad hombres,” bad people.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Stanley, I wanted to ask you — the Democratic National Convention is about to nominate a former prosecutor, Kamala Harris, as the Democratic candidate for president. Your sense of the continued emphasis, even among the Democrats, on punishment and incarceration as a means of dealing with crime?

STANLEY HOWARD: Well, I’d like to also say that the mental health service inside the prison is terrible. The healthcare is terrible. And all the buildings are crazy. I did a protest out in front of Cook County Jail a couple of weeks ago. And I looked at this building, where the prosecutor’s office was at. Mind you, when you say that Cook County is the wrongful conviction capital of the world, somebody had to be involved in that. It was the prosecutors. They all got away with it, and still getting away with it.

Kamala Harris, I do not know much about her history as a prosecutor, but knowing that there is a prosecutor at the helm of our government, and she is going to reach back and tell these prosecutors their number one job is to seek justice and not convictions, I don’t know about that. I have many questions for her about her life as a prosecutor.

But I also would like to know what she’s going to do to reform this system. From the time when they used to call, quote-unquote, the “war on drugs,” the “war on crime,” and this “get tough on crime,” to where, as we know, the crime has continued to falling, and all these dramatic rulings and bills that they put in place, what about rolling those back now? What is she going to do for that effort?

And that’s why I’m here now. Since I’ve been out, I’m working at Uptown People’s Law Center, who does great work for those on the inside. And I receive telephone calls from family members. I answer the guys on the inside’s mail also. And to know that prosecutors are at the helm of this mass incarceration — Jimmy said there was thousands of people that was wrongly convicted at this convention that he was at. Prosecutors prosecuted their cases. And like I said in my book, Tortured by Blue, the problem with prosecutors is that it takes a prosecutor to prosecute a prosecutor, but prosecutors are not in the business of prosecuting prosecutors.

AMY GOODMAN: 24 states allow the death penalty. 23 states have abolished capital punishment altogether. 3 states — California, Oregon and Pennsylvania — have governor-issued moratoriums in place halting executions in the state. We’re almost at the point where more than 1/2 of the states in this country will have abolished the death penalty. And then the argument will be, overall, in terms of getting rid of it, that it is cruel and unusual punishment. The U.S. is very rare in the industrialized world in continuing with the death penalty. Your thoughts on this, Stanley, as a man who might have been executed, if it weren’t for your activism and your community that fought for you until ultimately you were exonerated?

STANLEY HOWARD: Well, it’s kind of ironic that the conservative party is for life on the front end, but they are for death on the back end. I do not understand that philosophy. But we have a guy by the name of Murray Hooper, who was transferred from Illinois’s death row to Arizona. It’s amazing that half of Arizonans do not trust their government, so much so they don’t even trust the election. But he was executed last year. So, the government is in the business of executing people but can’t get their elections right. I believe that a country that executes its citizens really do not have the moral compass to tell another country nowhere around this planet what to do. It was once said that if you wanted to know what is going on in a country, all you had to do is look inside the prisons and look inside of the death row. And we have to end this death penalty in this country, and we have to end life without the possibility of parole also.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you both for being with us. It has been so important. Do you think, when it comes to the Democratic and Republican leaders of this country, that it makes a difference who is in power? I’ll end with you, Jimmy.

JIMMY SOTO: Absolutely, it does. I mean, we have to get a Democrat in there. Kamala may not be the best candidate, but we need to get out there and vote, because the only other alternative is Trump. And I think Trump will turn this country upside down to where we’re going to probably go back 10, 15 years of progress that we’ve made, not only economically, but even within our carceral system. There needs to be a change. There needs to be a change now.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank both of you again. Jimmy Soto, longest-serving exonerated prisoner in Illinois history. Since his release in December, he’s been working on going to law school, getting a law degree to help others like him. And Stanley Howard, co-founder of Death Row 10, spent 16 years of his life on death row for a 1984 murder that evidence would later show he did not commit.

(source: democracynow.org)

Ex-Barry County sheriff says death penalty justified for Rowan Ford’s killer

Throughout his law enforcement career, former Barry County Sheriff Mick Epperly says there’s only 1 case that stands apart from the others.

Crime Traveler: What happened to Rowan Ford?

The 2007 kidnapping and murder of 9-year-old Rowan Ford.

The state announced that Rowan’s killer, Christopher Collings, will face the death penalty on December 3, 2024.

“It’s one of those cases that you never forget,” Epperly said.

In November 2007, Rowan went missing from her home in the middle of the night in Newton County.

She was raped and strangled, then her body was left in a cave in McDonald County. She was found nearly a week after she was killed.

“It was terrible,” Epperly said. “And for someone to take a life and throw them down into a cave, like a piece of dirt, it’s terrible.”

Collings admitted to local police he was drinking heavily the night he went into Rowan’s room and took her back to his trailer.

Court documents show in his confession, he said he raped her and was going to take her home, when she saw his face. That’s when he decided to use a rope and strangle her.

Epperly tells OzarksFirst he feels justice has been served.

In 2012, the case went to trial, where the jury found Collings guilty of 1st-degree murder.

“Nothing is going to bring that little sweet little girl back,” Epperly said. “And she didn’t deserve any of this.”

Rowan would be 26 years old if she were alive today.

“It’ll give some satisfaction to that family that maybe he got what he deserved,” Epperly said.

(source: ozarksfirst.com)

Honie execution cost Utah Department of Corrections over $280,000

It cost over $280,000 for the Utah Department of Corrections to execute Taberon Dave Honie, according to a cost breakdown released Tuesday.

Corrections officials executed Honie by lethal injection Aug. 8 at the Utah State Correctional Facility in Salt Lake City.

“Medical services and supplies” cost an estimated $260,906.58. The vast majority of that — as well as the biggest overall cost of the execution — came from the purchase of pentobarbital. In July, the department indicated in court documents that it was abandoning its original plan to execute Honie using an experimental cocktail consisting of ketamine, fentanyl, and potassium chloride, and instead had purchased doses of pentobarbital for an estimated $200,000.

Other medical supply expenses included IV lines, an EKG monitor and the execution team itself, according to a corrections spokesman.

In addition to medical services and supplies, personnel and overtime for corrections employees cost $10,973.86, while “event expenses” which are described as “supplies and equipment,” cost $16,804.85, bringing the total to $288,685.29. Other event expenses included lights and port-a-potties at the free speech zone, road signs, roadblocks and food for officers.

The funds to pay for the execution come from the Utah Department of Corrections general budget. The department does not receive any special additional funds to carry out a death sentence.

The total price released Tuesday does not include the numerous years of appeals and legal costs associated with a death sentence. According to the Death Penalty Information Center: “The death penalty is far more expensive than a system utilizing life-without-parole sentences as an alternative punishment.”

(source: kslnewsradio.com)

New Analysis from The Appeal Finds Anti-LGBTQ+ Bias Affects the Fate of Defendants in Death Penalty Cases

LGBTQ+ People Prosecutorial Accountability

An analysis from The Appeal of more than 2 dozen cases in which LGBTQ+ defendants faced the death penalty found evidence that anti-LGBTQ+ bias affected case outcomes. After an examination of media reports, academic journals, and legal documents, The Appeal determined that these cases are likely a significant undercount of the number of LGBTQ+ people sentenced to death. “These capital cases illustrate the ingrained anti-LGBTQ+ bias endemic to the U.S. legal system—from sodomy laws that punished same-sex activity to those that now criminalize gender-affirming care for trans people,” according to the report. Not only do these cases exemplify the impact of anti-LGBTQ+ bias, but also show “the ways the legal system often bends over backward to avoid scrutiny of accountability.”

The Appeal notes the case of Calvin Burdine—a gay man tried in Texas in 1984 for the murder of his male partner. Though Mr. Burdine’s case is better known as the “sleeping lawyer” case because his trial attorney slept through much of the trial, Mr. Burdine’s case featured repeated instances of homophobia and anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric. Mr. Burdine’s court-appointed attorney used anti-gay slurs about his own client, and Ned Morris, the prosecutor, also made several troubling statements regarding Mr. Burdine’s sexuality. In urging the jury to sentence Mr. Burdine to death, Mr. Morris argued against an alternate sentence of a term in prison because “sending a homosexual to the penitentiary certainly isn’t a very bad punishment for a homosexual,” adding that it would be a “paradise” for Mr. Burdine and “like setting a kid loose in a candy store.” Mr. Burdine was convicted and sentenced to death. In 2003, nearly 20 years after his initial conviction, Mr. Burdine reached an agreement with the state to remove his death sentence in exchange for pleading guilty to other charges. He received multiple life sentences and is still incarcerated.

Mr. Burdine’s case bears an unfortunate resemblance to other cases of death-sentenced LGBTQ+ people. In South Dakota in 1993, Charles Rhines was sentenced to death, and jurors later told defense attorneys they expressed “a lot of disgust” during deliberations about the fact that Mr. Rhines was gay. Some jurors wondered whether Mr. Rhines would enjoy being in prison with other men because he was gay and sent questions to the judge on this subject that the judge refused to answer. Mr. Rhines raised the evidence of anti-LBGTQ+ bias in his case in multiple appeals. Ethan Rice, an attorney with Lambda Legal, filed an amicus brief in support of Mr. Rhines, urging appellate courts to allow for investigation into claims of juror anti-LGBTQ+ bias, as they do for claims of juror racial bias, but Mr. Rhines was executed in November 2019.

The bias of judges has also affected the fairness of court proceedings for LGBTQ+ people. In Gregory Dickens’ case, the judge’s bigotry was personal. Mr. Dickens, who was gay, was tried for the murder of a couple, yet it was acknowledged that Mr. Dickens’ 16-year-old companion pulled the trigger. Judge Tom Cole sentenced Mr. Dickens to death under Arizona’s law at the time that allowed for judges, not juries, to issue death sentences. Evidence emerged that Judge Cole regularly wrote “violent” and hateful letters to his son Scott, who was also gay. In one letter, Judge Cole wrote to his son, “I hope you die in prison like all the rest of your f—got friends.” It was not until after Mr. Dickens was sentenced to death that his attorneys learned about Judge Cole’s bias. Attorneys for Mr. Dickens urged a court to review whether another judge should have overseen post-conviction proceedings. A state court judge rejected Mr. Dickens’ arguments, writing that “Dickens offers no evidence that begins to suggest, much less constitute a colorable claim, that the judge in this case was biased against him.” Superior Court Judge Michael Cruikshank wrote that “the affidavits suggest, at most, that the judge may have had a difficult relationship with his son.” In January 2014, a federal appellate court granted Mr. Dickens a new hearing to raise ineffective assistance of counsel claims, but days later, Mr. Dickens died on death row of apparent suicide.

While some LGBTQ+ men are wrongfully portrayed as “sexual deviants,” LGBTQ+ women have been criminalized for their perceived violation of gender norms. Hugh Ryan, a queer historian and author, told The Appeal that “when we get into the 19th century, and we start to see these laws appearing that criminalize homosexuality, they focus on men. But what we’re actually seeing is that women had been already criminalized much more extensively for their queerness than men had been, just earlier, without using that language.” Prosecutors often portray LGBTQ+ “women as masculine, violent, and aggressive to secure death sentences.” For LGBTQ+ women of color, these biases often intersect with racist tropes. In 1989, Wanda Jean Allen was accused of killing her girlfriend Gloria Leathers in Oklahoma. At trial, the state told the jury that Ms. Allen was the “man” and “wore the pants” in her relationship with Ms. Leathers, who they portrayed as “passive and submissive.” Ms. Allen was sentenced to death without the jury hearing important mitigating evidence surrounding severe head trauma and intellectual disability. Activists launched a campaign to free Ms. Allen, but she was executed in 2001—the 1st Black woman put to death in nearly 50 years.

The Appeal believes that these cases “illuminate a fundamental flaw—or feature—of the U.S. death penalty system.” Mr. Rice, of Lambda Legal, said that “it shows we don’t have enough safeguards to ensure that everyone actually has an opportunity to have a fair trial.” As written in Queer (In)Justice, a book that examines how LGBTQ+ people are criminalized, “the process of dehumanization required to obtain a death sentence is easier when the defendant is of a different race, class, sexual orientation, and/or gender identity than the jurors or judge.” The authors add that “the prosecutor’s task is also greatly facilitated when the accused belongs to a class of people stigmatized as abnormal, violent, sexually degenerate and pathological.” Because of this, many LGBTQ+ advocates have continuously called for the abolition of the death penalty. Mr. Rice says that “in every case of an LGBTQ+ person, there is such a high risk of getting it wrong that there’s no way to support the death penalty.”

BANGLADESH:

Man awarded death penalty for killing woman, her son

A man was awarded the death sentence by a court here today for killing a woman and her 10-year old son in the town in 2012.

Additional District and Sessions Judge Md Moklesur Rahman handed down the verdict to Sumon Sarker alias Titu, an inhabitant of Narayanganj district.

According to the prosecution story, in brief, the convict Sumon Sarker killed the woman Nita Sarker Pinki, 25, and her son Joytu Sarker Turja, 10, by a sharper weapon over previous enmity on December 17 in 2012.

Following the murder, Pinki’s husband, who was a bank employee, filed a case with Naogaon Sadar Model Thana the next day. Sumon Sarker was a relative of Joyonto Kumar Sarker.

On June 15 in 2013, police pressed the charge sheet accusing Sumon Sarker.

Testifying witnesses and evidence, the court gave the verdict, said Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Md Samsur Rahman.

(source: bssnews.net)

Slogans for death penalty resonate in court corridors as Dipu Moni weeps—-Pro-BNP lawyers chant for execution as former ministers appear in court

Former social welfare minister Dipu Moni and former deputy youth and sports minister Arif Khan Joy have appeared in court amidst chants from pro-BNP lawyers demanding their execution, with Dipu breaking down in tears during the remand hearing.

The 2 were presented in court on Tuesday after their arrest in connection with the murder of grocery shop owner Abu Sayed.

Inspector Tofazzal Hossain of Mohammadpur Police Station requested a 10-day remand for both.

Dhaka Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Sultan Shohag Uddin granted a four-day remand for Dipu and a 5-day remand for Joy.

No lawyers appeared for the defendants, and no bail was requested.

However, a pro-BNP lawyer advocated for their release ar the hearing.

The courtroom was packed with pro-BNP lawyers and some outsiders.

Dipu and Joy were brought to the Magistrates Court at 3:25pm and placed in the court’s lockup.

Later, they were presented in courtroom number 28 on the second floor of the Dhaka Chief Metropolitan Magistrates Court.

Pro-BNP lawyers shouted slogans demanding the death penalty for the accused.

They also pleaded for a 10-day remand and shouted “killer” during the hearing, applying pressure on the court to handcuff Dipu in the dock.

Omar Farook Farooki, the leader of the BNP lawyers’ organisation, said into the courtroom microphone: “The male accused has handcuffs. Please remain calm.”

The investigating officer, Tofazzal, argued for a 10-day remand, citing the accused’s alleged involvement in the quota protest killings and the need to uncover further details and connections.

The judge asked if there were any representatives for the defence, but no Awami League lawyer was present.

Pro-BNP lawyer Ataur Rahman then spoke, requesting bail for both defendants.

During the hearing, Dipu continued to weep, and while Joy tried to speak with the court’s permission, his words were drowned by the uproar from BNP supporters.

After another round of protests, the judge granted remand, swiftly leaving the courtroom amid the ongoing outcry.

After the judge’s departure, a female lawyer attempted to attack Dipu in the dock, but police intervened.

Pro-BNP lawyers continued their protests from the court benches.

After being trapped in the dock for nearly 15 minutes, police escorted Dipu and Joy to the court’s detention facility under tight security.

Their arrest came amid a series of cases and arrests involving Awami League ministers and MPs following the government’s fall.

The case was filed on Aug 13 by Amir Hamza Shatil, listing former prime minister Sheikh Hasina and five others as defendants.

It includes Awami League General Secretary Obaidul Quader, former home minister Asaduzzaman Khan, former inspector general of police Chowdhury Abdullah Al-Mamun, and others.

In addition, several unnamed high-ranking police officers and other government officials are implicated.

The case dossier said police fired on protesters during the Anti-discrimination Student Movement on Jul 19, leading to the death of Sayed.

(source: bdnews24.com)

9 get death sentence for killing Saidar in Pabna

A Rajshahi court today sentenced 9 people to death and 5 others to life imprisonment for killing Awami League leader Saidar Malitha in Pabna. The court also acquitted 7 people in the same case.

Judge Mahiduzzaman of the Rajshahi Speedy Trial Tribunal announced this verdict on Tuesday (August 20) at noon.

The death sentence awardees are former chairman of Hemayetpur Union Parishad and vice president of Sadar Upazila Awami League Alauddin Malitha, Swapan Malitha, Ripon Khan, Ashiq Malitha, Rakib Malitha, Yasin Arafat Isti, Ranju Malitha, Johnny Malitha and Alif Malitha. All of them are from Pabna district.

The life sentence awardees are Dulal Malitha, Ruju Malitha, Ayanal Malitha, Sanju Malitha and Belal Hossain Ujjal.

Rajshahi speedy trial tribunal court lawyer Entazul Haque Babu confirmed this information.

He said, Saidar Malitha and Alauddin Malitha are two brothers. They quarrel with each other over money. Later the elder brother gave a slap to the younger brother. Following this dispute, the younger brother plans to kill him. On September 9, 2022, at around 1 pm, Saidar Malitha was having tea at Najur intersection of Char Bangabaria, Hemayetpur Union of Pabna Sadar Upazila. At that time 6-7 terrorists cordoned him and shot and hacked him to death. The deceased Saidar Malitha is the son of Haran Malitha of Char Pratappur Kablipara of Hemayetpur. He was an active member of the Pabna Municipal Awami League.

Later, a case was filed in that incident. The court announced the verdict in that case on Tuesday. The accused were present in the court when the verdict was announced.

(source: daily-bangladesh.com)

Unemployed man charged in Muar with murder of parents, niece in Pagoh; faces death penalty if convicted

An unemployed man was charged in the Magistrates’ Court today with the murder of his elderly parents and a niece in a house in Kampung Paya Redan, Pagoh, on August 9.

Azman Mohamed Nor, 48, nodded in acknowledgement after the 3 charges were read separately before Magistrate Suzana Mokhtar.

However, no plea was recorded as murder cases fall under the jurisdiction of the High Court.

He is accused of murdering his mother, Ara Ab Hamit, 76; his father, Mohamed Nor Mohamed Yassin, 82; and his niece, Noradriana Nor Hasyim, 11, between 1am and 3am on August 9.

The charges are framed under Section 302 of the Penal Code, which carries the death penalty, which can be commuted to a jail term between 30 and 40 years, and whipping of no fewer than 20 strokes of the cane.

The court has set October 24 for the re-mention of the case to obtain forensic, post-mortem, and chemical reports.

Meanwhile, at the Sessions Court here, Azman pleaded guilty to the charge of intentionally causing serious injury to his 14-year-old niece, Norazmina Mohd Razi, by using a wooden stick as a weapon capable of causing death.

The incident is alleged to have occurred at the same location, time, and day as the murders. The charge is framed under Section 326 of the Penal Code, which carries a penalty of up to 20 years in prison, along with fines or whipping, upon conviction.

Judge Nariman Badruddin set September 12 for sentencing while awaiting the prosecution to finalise the case facts.

Azman was denied bail due to his involvement in the 3 murder charges.

Deputy public prosecutors Mohamad Arif Marzuki and Danial Munir appeared for the prosecution while Azman was unrepresented.

Previously, the media reported that an elderly couple, Mohamed Nor and Ara, together with their granddaughter, Noradriana, died in a fire in a house in Kampung Paya Redan, Pagoh at about 1.30 that morning, while another victim, Norazmina, was seriously injured in the incident and receiving treatment at the Sultanah Fatimah Specialist Hospital (HPSF) here.

Muar district police chief ACP Raiz Mukhliz Azman Aziz reportedly said that the police were tracking down the main witness known as Azman who is also the son of the elderly couple who is said to be living with the victims after he was believed to have disappeared after the incident.

(source: malaymail.com)

85+ Executions in 20 Days; IHRNGO Urges International Solidarity With “No Death Penalty Tuesdays“ Movement

At least 85 people were executed in the last 20 days in Iran. As execution numbers continue to rise, the weekly mass hunger strikes by political prisoners against the death penalty which have been ongoing for 30 weeks and continue to spread to different prisons. Various forms of civil protests against the death penalty have also continued throughout Iran.

Expressing its support for “No Death Penalty Tuesdays,” Iran Human Rights urges mass support for the campaign to stop the Islamic Republic’s killing machine.

IHRNGO Director, Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam said: “A sustained campaign and public mass movement against the death penalty is the only way to stop the Islamic Republic’s execution machine and abolish this inhumane punishment. Now, prisoners who are witnesses to their fellow inmates’ executions, are leading this movement from behind bars.” He added: “The Islamic Republic is the world’s largest executioner per capita, and the 30 weeks of anti-death penalty strikes have put Iran in the frontline of the struggle against the death penalty! We call on the public and abolitionist organisations around the world to support the brave activists by showing solidarity to the “No Death Penalty Tuesday” strikes.”

According to data collected by IHRNGO researchers, the Islamic Republic has executed at least 85 people including a “Woman, Life, Freedom” protester and 8 Afghan nationals in August in Ghezlhesar, Karaj, Yasuj, Minab, Zahedan, Mashhad, Gorgan, Kerman, Bam, Rafsanjan, Arak, Sabzevar, Zahedan, Tabriz, Isfahan, Khorramabad, Bushehr, Kermanshah, Shiraz, Qazvin, Bandarabbas, Zanjan and Khaf prisons.

The ”No Death Penalty Tuesdays” movement was started by Ghezelhesar political prisoners. The 1st hunger strike took place on 30 January 2024 in what became known as “Black Tuesdays” after prison officials cracked down on protests against the execution of political prisoners at the prison. 30 weeks later, the strikes now take place in 18 Iranian prisons including Ghezelhesar, Evin, Karaj Penitentiary, Shiraz, Khoy, Tabriz, Khorramabad, Lakan, Naghdeh, Marivan, Ardabil, Salmas, Baneh, Ghaemshahr, Saqqez and Mashhad prisons on a weekly basis.

In a statement issued to mark the 30th week of strikes, the political prisoners called on the public inside and outside Iran to stand against the death penalty and support the “No Death Penalty Tuesdays” campaign in any way they can.

As well as the Tuesday strikes, another wave of anti-death penalty protests took place after the execution of Kurdish protester Reza Rasayi in Kermanshah Central Prison on 6 August. On the same day, the women political prisoners in Evin Prison joined the weekly strikes by gathering in the prison yard and chanting against Reza Rasayi’s execution. They called for the abolition of the death penalty and for the death sentences against political prisoners to be overturned. Prison guards violently attacked the women’s gathering, injuring Narges Mohammadi, Nasrin Javadi, Sarvenaz Ahmadi, Samaneh Asghari, Varshieh Moradi and Reyhaneh Ansarinejad.

On 19 August, 43 human rights activists and human rights and women’s rights organisation heads signed a joint statement in solidarity with the women political prisoners in Tehran’s Evin Prison whose protest against the execution of protester Reza Rasaei was brutally repressed.

Furthermore, the women prisoners in Rasht Central Prison have joined the anti-death penalty campaign.

Mehdi Piri and Mazaher Ayouzi Executed in Zanjan

Mehdi Piri and Mazaher Ayouzi were executed for drug-related and murder charges in Zanjan Central Prison.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, 2 men were executed in Zanjan Central Prison on 19 August. Their identities have been established as 31-year-old Mehdi Piri (photo) from Shirvan and 35-year-old Mazaher Ayouzi, a father of 1.

Mehdi Piri was arrested for drug-related offences around 2 years ago and sentenced to death by the Revolutionary Court. Mazaher Ayouzi was arrested for murder charges around 3 years ago and sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) by the Criminal Court.

At the time of writing, their executions have not been reported by domestic media or officials in Iran.

Drug-related executions have continuously risen every year since 2021. According to IHRNGO’s 2023 Annual Report on the Death Penalty, at least 471 people were executed for drug-related charges, an 84% increase compared to 2022 (256) and about 18 times the average of drug-related executions in 2018-2020. In the first 6 months of 2024, at least 147 people were executed for the charges.

3 Men Executed in Shiraz; Fourth Man Obtained Last Minute Extension

Yousef Kazemzadeh, Ali Salimi and Heydar Arab were executed for drug-related and murder charges in Shiraz Central Prison.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, 3 men were executed in Shiraz (Adel Abad) Central Prison on 17 August. 2 of the men who were on death row for drug-related charges have been identified as Yousef Kazemzaedeh and Ali Salimi. The other man who was sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder, was identified as Heydar Arab.

They were transferred to solitary confinement in preparation for their executions in a group of 4 on 14 August. The 4th man, Morteza Ardakani was returned to his cell after obtaining a two-month extension from the plaintiffs in his murder case.

An informed source told IHRNGO: “Ali Salimi and Yousef Kazemzadeh were transferred to Shiraz Central Prison for their execution from Pirbanu Prison. Ali had been arrested for carrying 100 kg of heroine around 2 years ago. Yousef was also arrested for drug offences around 4 years ago.”

“Heidar Arab was arrested for murder during a street group fight 3 years ago,” the source added.

2 Afghans and 2 Baluch Executed in Yazd

2 Afghan nationals named Ansar Eftekhareddin and Mahmoud Salim, and two Baluch minorities named Abdolraouf Shehbakhsh and Abdolrahman Damani were executed for drug-related and murder charges in Yazd Central Prison.

According to information obtained by Iran Human Rights, 4 men were executed in Yazd Central Prison on 19 August. 2 of the men who were Afghan nationals and sentenced to qisas (retribution-in-kind) for murder, have been identified as Ansar Eftekhareddin and Mahmoud Salim.

The other 2 men who were Baluch minorities and on death row for drug-related charges have been identified as 33-year-old Abdolraouf Shehbakhsh (Dahmardeh) and 34-year-old Abdolrahman Damani (Gorgij).

Statement by 43 Human Rights Organisations Against Brutal Crackdown in Evin Prison

43 human rights activists and human rights and women’s rights organisation heads have signed a joint statement in solidarity with the women political prisoners in Tehran’s Evin Prison whose protest against the execution of protester Reza Rasaei was brutally repressed. “As human rights activists, we stand in solidarity with the women of Iran and demand an independent international investigation!”

“Political prisoners are being brutally repressed in the women’s ward of Iran’s Evin Prison. As human rights activists, we stand in solidarity with the women of Iran and demand an independent international investigation!

We the undersigned, as human rights activists dedicated to gender equality and the rule of law, are deeply alarmed by the reports now emerging from the women’s ward of Iran’s Evin Prison.

Around 70 women of all different beliefs, affiliations, and generations are currently being held as political prisoners in Evin, Iran’s most notorious prison. These women have been arrested and unjustly detained solely because they have fought for freedom and human rights in Iran. The prisoners being held in the women’s ward have now come forward with accounts of brutal violence meted out by their jailers and by Iranian security forces, who stormed the ward on August 6th. We see no reason to doubt their version of events, and we and our organizations stand in unwavering solidarity with these women, alongside the activists and ordinary citizens who tirelessly champion their cause.

According to the information we have received, which has been duly verified and corroborated by several independent media outlets, several political prisoners were violently assaulted and beaten by guards and security agents as they protested the execution of Reza (Gholamreza) Rasaei that morning. Rasaei, a protestor during the “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement, was put to death in secret at dawn on August 6th, without his family or his lawyer being notified. His execution came after he had already been subjected to torture in order to extract forced confessions.

This unprecedented act of repression occurred while the women were peacefully gathered in the prison courtyard, exercising their freedom of expression by chanting slogans demanding the abolition of the death penalty and an immediate halt to executions.

The women’s gathering that day followed a series of prior demonstrations by the women of the ward, sometimes at their own initiative and sometimes in support of other efforts to mobilize, to demand the annulment of the death sentences handed down to their fellow inmate Pakhshan Azizi – an Iranian Kurdish journalist – as well as three other women: labor activist Sharifeh Mohammadi, women’s rights activist Varisheh Moradi, and Nassim Gholami Simiari.

Due to the severity of the attack and the injuries inflicted, several of these prisoners lost consciousness during the assault, while others were placed in splints after a summary examination by the prison doctor but were denied adequate care. Even in the most severe cases, the authorities prevented any transfer of prisoners to an external hospital, depriving these women of the appropriate medical treatments they urgently needed.

Upon regaining consciousness, these female prisoners – no less determined and resolute – immediately declared their intention to file legal complaints against their jailers, thus seeking to ensure that no abuse would go unpunished.

In a context of intensified internal repression targeting Iranian human rights activists and political dissidents, we are alarmed by the acceleration of executions, which reached their gruesome peak when 29 people were killed on August 7th – including 26 in a collective execution at Gesel Hasar Prison in the city of Karaj.

Out of the public eye, and while media attention focuses on the talk of war and the escalating tensions in the Middle East, the Islamic Republic of Iran continues its main war, one it launched decades ago: the war against its opponents and on Iranian women writ large.

As human rights activists, we express our full solidarity with all the women who put their lives on the line in the fight for peace, democracy, and the rule of law in Iran.

Now more than ever, the women’s ward at Evin has asserted itself as the bastion of resistance in Iran’s struggle for freedom. The women unjustly and illegally held as political prisoners in Iran command our admiration, and it is incumbent on us to mobilize on their behalf.

As such, and in solidarity with all the women and men who continue to risk their lives to fight for the rule of law and for peace and democracy in Iran, we and our organizations demand:

An immediate stop to Iran’s use of the death penalty, which is an inhuman and degrading punishment, in line with our commitment to the universal abolition of the death penalty;
The release of all arbitrarily detained political prisoners and prisoners of conscience, and the cessation of judicial proceedings which violate their rights to legal defense and to a fair trial;
The immediate implementation of measures by the Iranian state to guarantee the physical and psychological safety of detainees under its custody throughout the country, particularly in the women’s ward at Evin Prison; and
The implementation of an independent, international criminal investigation to fully uncover the truth about the acts of violence committed against the political prisoners in Evin Prison; these charges must be duly received by the Iranian authorities.”

Signatories:

Narges Foundation (France), Shirin Ebadi, prix Nobel de la paix (Royaume-Uni) ; Pierre Haski, Reporters sans frontières (France) ; Vibe Klarup, Amnesty international Denmark (Danemark) ; Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO) (Norvège) ; Chirinne Ardakani, Iran Justice (France) ; Düzen Tekkal et Mariam Claren, Hawar Help (Germany) ; Rose Parris Richter, Impact Iran (Suisse) ; Hadi Ghaemi, Center for Human Rights in Iran (CHRI) (Etats-Unis) ; Pen international (Royaume-Uni) ; Stefan Löfven, The Olof Palme Memorial Fund, Olof Palmes Minnesfond (Suède) ; Raphaël Chenuil-Hazan, Ensemble contre la peine de mort (ECPM) (France) ; Hamid Cyrus, Médecins sans frontières (Autriche) ; Karim Lahidji, Fédération internationale des droits de l’homme (FIDH) (France) ; End Gender apartheid Campaign (Etats-Unis) ; Maria Søndergaard, Danish Women’s Society (Danemark) ; Christine Stufferin, Alexander Langer Foundation (Italie) ; Elisabeth Nicoli, Alliance des femmes pour la démocratie (AFD) (France) ; Roya Boroumand, Abdorrahman Boroumand Center for Human Rights in Iran (Etats-Unis) ; Rebin Rahmani, Kurdistan Human Rights Network (France) ; Fariba Ehsan, Asociación Irani Pro Derechos Humanos (Espagne) ; Rezvan Moghadam, Stop honor killings (Etats-Unis) ; Shahin Helali Khyavi, Association for the Human Rights of the Azerbaijani People in Iran (AHRAZ) (Norvège) ; Gabriele Nissim, Gariwo (Italie) ; Darya Djavahery-Farsi, Neda d’Iran(France) ; Negin Khazaee and Rene Kassie, Queers and Feminists for Iran Liberation (France et Canada) ; Karin Deutsch Karlekar, Pen American (Etats-Unis) ; Moein Arjomand, Baloch Activists Campaign (Royaume-Uni) ; Taimoor Aliassi, Kurdistan Human Rights Association-Geneva (KMMK-G) (Suisse) ; Emma Dinparast, Azadi 4 Iran (France) ; Reza Ghazinouri, United for Iran (Etats-Unis) ; Hassan Nayeb Hashem, All Human Rights for All in Iran (Suisse) ; Shima Silavi, Ahwaz Human Rights Organization (Belgique) ; Hirbod Deghani-Azar, Norouz(France) ; Balochistan Human rights group (Suède) ; Faramarz Bahar, Comité indépendant contre la répression des citoyens iraniens Paris (France) ; Collectif Alborz FVL(France) ; Collectif Phénix (France) ; PEN Sweden (Suède) ; Jaleh Tabrizi, Association for human rights of azerbaijanis in Iran (Arcdh) (France) ; Aban families for justice ; Masoud Raeisi, Rasank ; Zohreh Habibmohammadi, Collectif BA MA (France).

(source for all: iranhr.net)

Alarming Surge in Executions—-87 Executions Reported after June Elections, including 29 in 1 Day

Iranian authorities have reportedly executed at least 87 people in the month after the presidential elections in late June, 2024, Human Rights Watch said today. Among those executed was Reza (Gholamreza) Rasaei, a Kurdish man arrested during the 2022 nationwide “Women, Life, Freedom” protests that followed the death of 22-year-old Mahsa Jina Amini in custody.

The nongovernmental group Iran Human Rights reported that in addition to the spate of post-election executions, on the morning of August 7 the authorities carried out mass executions of 29 prisoners at 2 prisons. 26 people were executed at Ghezel Hesar Prison and 3 people at Karaj Central Prison. Those executed included 17 people sentenced for “premeditated murder,” 7 convicted on drug-related charges, and 2 Afghan nationals sentenced for “rape.” Human Rights Watch has for many years documented serious due process violations and unfair trials in Iranian courts.

“The Iranian authorities are carrying out an egregious execution spree while trumpeting their recent presidential elections as evidence of genuine change,” said Nahid Naghshbandi, acting Iran researcher at Human Rights Watch. “For those campaign slogans to be meaningful, Iran’s new president, Masoud Pezeshkian, should urgently intervene to overturn existing death sentences, place a moratorium on capital punishment, and take steps to reform the judiciary.”

The Iranian government has long made extensive use of the death penalty, including in response to protests in which those prosecuted and executed were exercising their fundamental rights to free expression and peaceful assembly. Human Rights Watch opposes the use of the death penalty in all circumstances because of its inherent cruelty. The Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA) reported that the authorities executed Rasaei on August 6 at Dizelabad prison in Kermanshah without prior notice to his family or a final meeting with them. Rasaei, 34, was a member of the Yarsan religious minority group from Sahneh in Kermanshah province. Rasaei was arrested on November 24, 2022, in Shahriar, Tehran, and transferred to Dizelabad prison after his interrogation.

He was sentenced to death for his alleged role in the “premeditated murder” of Nader Birami, head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Intelligence Organization in Sahneh. The sentence was confirmed on October 7, 2023, after the Supreme Court rejected Rasaei’s request for a retrial.

On August 6, the women’s ward of Evin prison, which has been taking part in the “No to Executions” protest campaign for months, held further demonstrations following Rasaei’s execution, BBC Persian reported. Prison security personnel responded assaulting the protesting women, with reports indicating that the security personnel beat and injured many of the prisoners, some of whom suffered mental health effects. Among those injured was the Nobel Peace Prize laureate Narges Mohammadi, whom security personnel struck several times in the chest, the group said. Mohammadi suffered a respiratory attack and severe chest pain, causing her to collapse in the prison yard.

Iranian authorities have sentenced to death many ethnic and religious minorities in recent months. HRANA reported on August 8 that the Supreme Court confirmed the death sentences of 6 political prisoners in Vakilabad prison, in the city of Mashhad. HRANA said that the Mashhad Revolutionary Court in July 2023 convicted Malek Ali Fadaei-Nasab, Farhad Shakeri, Isa Eidmohammadi, Abdolhakim Azim Gorgij, Abdolrahman Gorgij, and Taj Mohammad Khormali of “armed rebellion” for their alleged membership in the Salafi group Hizb al-Furqan and the National Solidarity Front of Iranian Sunnis. On July 4, Iran’s Revolutionary Court sentenced a labor activist, Sharifeh Mohammadi, to death on a charge of “armed rebellion against the state,” based on an alleged membership in an opposition group. HRANA reported that on July 23, Branch 26 of the Tehran Revolutionary Court sentenced Pakhshan Azizi, a Kurdish political prisoner, to death for alleged membership in opposition groups.

The authorities had arrested Azizi, originally from Mahabad, in Tehran on August 4, 2023, and held her in Ward 209 of Evin prison, HRANA reported. They denied her access to a lawyer and family visits for four months before transferring her to the women’s ward. Azizi, who has a history of arrests, was previously detained in 2009 for 4 months before being released on bail. Another Kurdish political activist, Warisha Moradi, who faces charges of “armed rebellion against the state,” did not attend her own trial on August 4, Radio Zamaneh reported. In a letter from Evin prison, she said that she would not participate in the court proceedings in solidarity with death row prisoners Mohammadi and Azizi. She said, “I do not recognize a court that fails to deliver fair judgments. I have been accused of armed rebellion simply for being a woman, a Kurd, and a seeker of a free life.”

The Kurdistan Human Rights Network said that intelligence agents arrested Moradi, a member of the East Kurdistan Free Women Society, on August 1, 2023, in Kermanshah. The network said that she faced pressure and threats to make forced confessions. On December 26, 2023, after 5 months in solitary confinement, she was moved to the women’s ward of Evin prison. She continues to be denied her right to make phone calls and meet with her family, the network said.

Iran Human Rights reported that Iranian authorities executed 249 people in the first 6 months of 2024, with 147 of them sentenced to death on drug-related charges. Amnesty International also reported that Iran was responsible for 74 % of all recorded executions worldwide in 2023, with a total of 853 executions. These executions have disproportionately targeted Iran’s Baluch ethnic minority, who make up only about 5 % of the population but account for 20 % of the recorded executions. Additionally, at least 24 women and 5 people who were children at the time of their alleged crimes were among those executed.

“Iran’s use of the death penalty as a tool of intimidation following unfair trials, particularly against those seeking government reform, reveals a chilling abuse of power,” Naghshbandi said. “Other countries, especially those that engage with Iran, should condemn this inhumane practice and call for an immediate halt to executions.”

(source: Human Rights Watch)

11 Executed in Yazd and Qazvin: Urgent Call to Save Death Row Inmates in Iran

Mrs. Maryam Rajavi: Khamenei seeks to prevent an uprising, but the collapse of this religious fascism by the hands of rebellious youth, and the establishment of democracy, popular sovereignty, and justice, will end these pains and sufferings.

With the inauguration of Khamenei’s new president and the introduction of his cabinet, the regime’s execution machine has intensified. On Monday, August 19, 2024, five prisoners, including Abdulrahman Damani Gorgij and Abdolraouf Shahbakhsh, both Baluch compatriots, were hanged in Yazd Central Prison. On Sunday, August 18, Abbas Aalaei was hanged in Tabriz Central Prison, and on Saturday, August 17, Yousef Kazemzadeh, Ali Salimi, and Haidar Arab were hanged in Adel Abad Prison in Shiraz. Earlier, on Thursday, August 15, Peyman Allah Veisi was hanged in Sanandaj Central Prison. Additionally, 6 prisoners, including two women, were executed in Chubindar Prison in Qazvin in August. Among them were Vahid Ebrahimzadeh, Vahid Sultanabadi, Amirhossein Bagherieh, and Hamid Behmazak.

Mrs. Maryam Rajavi, President-elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, expressed deep sympathy with the victims’ families and added that the two-headed serpent Zahak (a figure from Persian mythology symbolizing tyranny and evil) continues his disgraceful reign, causing more mothers, fathers, wives, and children to mourn each day. The introduction of his new president’s cabinet has only intensified these crimes. However, despite his attempts to prevent an uprising through repression, terrorism, and warmongering, his efforts will fail. The collapse of religious fascism, led by rebellious youth, will bring democracy, popular sovereignty, and justice, ending this suffering.

The Iranian Resistance urgently calls on the UN Human Rights Council and High Commissioner, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Iran, and all human rights advocates to take immediate action to save the lives of prisoners sentenced to death. It also calls for the referral of Iran’s human rights violations to the Security Council and bringing Ali Khamenei and other regime leaders to justice.

(source: Secretariat of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) )

Hunger Strike by Hundreds of Prisoners in 18 Prisons in the Campaign ‘Tuesdays Against Execution’

On Tuesday, August 20, 2024, hundreds of prisoners in 18 prisons across Iran went on a hunger strike in protest against execution as an inhumane punishment. This comes as the judiciary in Iran has executed over 400 prisoners in Iranian prisons since the beginning of the year 2024. In just the first 15 days of August, 70 prisoners have been hanged in Iranian prisons.

The protest strike of prisoners in Iranian prisons under the campaign ‘Tuesdays Against Execution’ has been ongoing since February 2024. According to a statement released today by participating prisoners, this campaign has entered its thirtieth consecutive week starting this Tyesday, August 20, in prisons such as Evin (Wards 3, 4, 6, and 8), Ghezel hesar (Units 3 and 4), Karaj Central, Khorramabad, Nezam Shiraz, Mashhad, Qaemshahr, Lakan Rasht (female and male wards), Tabriz, Ardabil, Khoy, Naqadeh, Urmia, Salmas, Saqqez, Baneh, Marivan, and Kamyaran.

The campaign ‘Tuesdays Against Execution’ in prisons, which today is accompanied by a hunger strike by hundreds of prisoners in Iranian prisons, has been from the beginning in opposition and protest against the death penalty as an inhumane punishment, independent of the type of accusation or the motives and beliefs of the condemned, and has set as its goal the abolition of this inhumane punishment.

Excerpt from the statement of the striking prisoners on August 20, 2024: The continuous and expanding nature of this campaign is occurring while the judicial and security authorities of the “execution government” have hanged more than 310 individuals from the beginning of the Iranian year 1403 until now.

“This indicates that the agents of despotism have systematically found their solution to all crises within the confines of the gallows, carrying out their ‘harsh revenge’ by ‘execution’ on the sons and daughters of this land. The additional statement from the striking prisoners reads: “To confront and prevent the continuation of executions, we urge everyone to stand up in any way possible and support the prisoners in this struggle and resistance that has begun from within the prisons.”

The striking prisoners have called for special attention from the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights, Ms. My Satu, to the inhumane actions, especially executions, in Iran and efforts towards stopping executions and ending this inhumane situation in Iran. The judiciary in Iran continues to extensively employ execution as the most ruthless and inhumane form of punishment. The number of executions in the past calendar year in Iran reached 850 individuals.

(source: iran-hrm.com)

In support and solidarity with “No Death Penalty Tuesdays” abolitionist movement in Iran Statement By World Coalition Against the Death Penalty, on 28 August 2024

Every six hours, one person was executed in Iranian prisons in the first 20 days of August. Execution numbers have been rising every year since 2021, with at least 834 people executed in 2023, and 395 executions recorded by Iran Human Rights as of 26th August 2024.

Drug-related executions remain the charges that account for more than half of the executions in Iran. Marginalised groups of society and ethnic minorities, in particular the Kurdish and Baluch, are overrepresented among those executed.

The Islamic Republic uses the death penalty as a tool of political repression and death sentences are issued after unfair trials without the minimal standards of due process.

After bearing witness to months of weekly group executions in Karaj and the execution of several political prisoners in January 2024, a group of brave political prisoners* in Ghezelhesar Prison in Karaj staged a protest which was violently suppressed. The diverse group of political prisoners from different backgrounds and beliefs thus began a weekly hunger strike on 30th January that became known as “ Black Tuesdays ” and “ No Death Penalty Tuesdays .” They chose Tuesdays for that is the day death row inmates are typically transferred to solitary confinement in preparation for the gallows in Ghezelhesar Prison.

The weekly mass hunger strikes are now in their 31st week and the movement has spread to 17 other prisons across Iran. The participants remain resolute in their demands against the death penalty despite violent crackdowns .

We, the undersigned organisations, declare our solidarity and support for the “No Death Penalty Tuesdays” movement in Iranian prisons. We call for an immediate halt on all executions with a view to abolish the death penalty in Iran and urge the international community to support the growing abolition movement in Iran.

* The “No Death Penalty Tuesdays” hunger strikes were started by Ghezelhesar political prisoners Zartosht Ahmadi Ragheb, Loghman Aminpour, Meisam Dahbanzadeh, Jafar Ebrahimi, Sepehr Emam Jomeh, Ahmadreza Haeri, Reza Mohammad Hosseini, Saeed Masouri, Reza Salmanzadeh and Hamzeh Savari in alphabetical order .

Signatories:

Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO)
World Coalition Against the Death Penalty (WCADP)
Impact Iran
Together Against the Death Penalty (ECPM)
Defenders of Human Rights Center (Shirin Ebadi)
Harm Reduction International
World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT)
Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN)
International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute
Justice for Iran
6Rang (Iranian Lesbian and Transgender Network)
Kurdistan Human Rights Association-Geneva (KMMK-G)
International Educational Development, Inc (IED)
Abdorrahman Boroumand Center for Human Rights in Iran
Kurdistan Human Rights Network
Center for Human Rights in Iran
Balochistan Human Right group
Iran Human Rights Documentation Center
United for Iran
Kurdpa Human Rights Organization
HANA Human Rights Organization
Siamak Pourzand Foundation
Ahwaz Human Rights Organisation
Baloch Activists Campaign
Association for the human rights of the Azerbaijani people in Iran (Ahraz)
Hengaw Organization for Human Rights
Hands off Cain
The Advocates for Human Rights, USA
Justice Project Pakistan
European Saudi Organization for Human Rights (ESOHR)
Odhikar, Bangladesh
Cornell Center on the Death Penalty, USA
PEN America
German Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty (GCADP)
The Italian Federation for Human Rights (FIDU)
Death Penalty Focus, USA
The Christian Union for Progress and Human Rights, DRC
Capital Punishment Justice Project, Australia
Amnesty International (Group 205), Dallas
Human Rights Dallas
Southern Methodist University Human Rights Program, USA
Transitional Justice Working Group (TJWG), South Korea
Witness to Innocence, USA
Human Rights Association (İnsan Hakları Derneği – İHD), Türkiye
Redemption Pakistan
ACAT, Ghana
French Collective Free Mumia, France
Function 8, Singapore
Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Masyarakat, Indonesia
International Committee Against Execution (ICAE)
Campaign to Free Political Prisoners in Iran (CFPPI)
United Against Gender Apartheid
Global Campaign to Stop Executions In Iran
All Human Rights for All in Iran
Defence of Human Rights in Iran (LDDHI)
Iranian Citizens’ Initiative Saar (IRBIS)
Parsi Law Collective
NIKA, Network of Iranians for Liberty and Democracy
Iranian’s Socio-Cultural Center of Quebec Simorgh
Global Network to Free Political Prisoners in Iran
Free Iran Switzerland
Solidarity with the women’s revolution of Freedom Life Frankfurt Mainz and Wiesbaden
Alliance for Freedom, Washington DC
Iranian Medical Society for Human Rights and Democracy (Berlin MED)

Iran (Islamic Republic of)

Retentionist Death penalty legal status

22nd World Day Against the Death Penalty – The death penalty protects no one.

Observed every 10 October, the World Day Against the Death Penalty unifies the global abolitionist movement and mobilizes civil society, political leaders, lawyers, public opinion and more to support the call for the universal abolition of capital punishment.

Helping the World Achieve a Moratorium on Executions

In 2007, the World Coalition made one of the most important decisions in its young history: to support the Resolution of the United Nations General Assembly for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty as a step towards universal abolition. A moratorium is temporary suspension of executions and, more rarely, of death sentences. […]

Ways to Restrict the Use of the Death Penalty in Iran

Call for joint action to stop drug-related executions in Iran

World Coalition members call for increased scrutiny of Iran

Iran executes four juvenile offenders in one week

Trump Wants Death Penalty for Child Rapists and Traffickers

The former president said he’d like to see law enforcement agencies re-instate stop-and-frisk policies.

Josh Fiallo

Breaking News Reporter

Rebecca Cook/Reuters

Donald Trump wants no mercy for convicted child rapists and traffickers.

The former president is expected to announce at a campaign stop Tuesday night that he’d like to see the death penalty be applied to criminals who fit that bill, the New York Post reported.

The paper acquired an advanced copy of his prepared remarks, which begin, “I am announcing today that I will be asking for the DEATH PENALTY for child rapists and child traffickers.”

Trump is also reportedly set to announce in Michigan that, if elected, he’ll push for legislation that would make it a felony for any medical professional to “perform surgery on a minor without parental consent.”

The Post reported he’ll also urge law enforcement agencies to return to “stop and frisk” policing.

Stricter sentencing of those who sexually abuse children—or are complicit in that abuse—has grown in popularity among conservatives in recent years, with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis leading the charge.

Ron DeSantis bowed out of the presidential race in January. He’s since stumped for Donald Trump’s campaign, including a speech at last month’s RNC.

Jeenah Moon/Reuters

DeSantis signed a bill last spring that makes sexual battery of a person under 12 a capital crime eligible for the death penalty.

A capital sentence for anything other than murder would likely land in front of the Supreme Court, legal experts have said.

Joseph Andrew Giampa, 36, may be the first person to face such a sentence should he be convicted. The Florida man was indicted in December on six counts of sexual battery upon a person under 12 years old and three counts of promoting a sexual performance by a child.

Prosecutors said Giampa filmed himself sexually abusing a boy.

State Attorney William Gladson said his office will pursue the death penalty given the “severity of the crime and its impact on the community.”

Got a tip? Send it to The Daily Beast here .

READ THIS LIST

Americans Abroad
Concacaf Champions Cup
Premier League
Champions League
USA TODAY Sports

Delay requested on life or death decision of Florida killer Wade Wilson

It is the second time wade wilson's defense requests a delay since his trial began in june..

Counsel for a man convicted of brutally murdering two Cape Coral women in 2019 is requesting a delay in his sentencing scheduled next week, citing scheduling complications.

A jury recommended on June 25 in 9-3 and 10-2 votes for each of the victims that Wade Wilson, 30, receive the death penalty . The same jury convicted him June 12 of the slayings of Kristine Melton , 35, and Diane Ruiz , 43, and other charges linked to the crimes.

According to the latest motion, filed Wednesday, Kevin Shirley — who has represented Wilson along with Lee Hollander — said the court has appointed four mental health experts to assist the defense.

Shirley indicated two of the experts did not have "sufficient advance warning so as to modify their respective schedules" to attempt to conduct examinations, interviews and tests of Wilson. He later added that the other two potential witnesses have been provided materials given to the testifying experts, but they have insufficient information to provide opinions at the July 23 Spencer hearing to assist without personal contact with Wilson.

A Spencer hearing allows the judge to hear arguments and witness statements ahead of sentencing.

Shirley said one of the doctors is committed to testifying in two capital murder cases during the time interval surrounding Wilson’s hearings and is unavailable July 23. He added both doctors are able to schedule examinations if Lee Circuit Judge Nicholas Thompson resets the sentencing date.

"Without their potential testimony, the defense has little evidence to present for the Court’s consideration at the Spencer hearing," the motion reads in part.

In a motion filed July 10, Hollander requested that Wilson be allowed to attend the Spencer hearing, as well as his afternoon sentencing hearing, dressed in civilian clothing instead of his orange Lee County Jail uniform.

It is the second time Wilson's counsel requested a delay since the trial began.

Penalty phase delayed due to illness

The penalty phase, which began after the jury convicted Wilson and concluded with the death recommendations, was expected to begin June 20, but Thompson on June 19 OK'd a motion filed by the defense that argued Hollander had been unavailable for three days, citing illness.

The penalty phase ultimately began June 24.

As of Thursday morning, Thompson had not ruled on Shirley's request to delay Wilson's sentencing.

Thompson has received at least three letters from community members who asked that he sentence Wilson to life without parole. The letters condemned the capital punishment.

An online petition that seeks to "prevent the death penalty for Wade Wilson" as of Thursday morning collected more than 8,600 signatures toward its 10,000 goal.

Tomas Rodriguez is a Breaking/Live News Reporter for the Naples Daily News and The News-Press. You can reach Tomas at [email protected] or 772-333-5501. Connect with him on Threads @tomasfrobeltran , Instagram @tomasfrobeltran and Facebook @tomasrodrigueznews .

IMAGES

Writing a Thesis Statement
Death Penalty Argumentative Essay
😂 Death penalty thesis. Thesis Statement Of Death Penalty Free Essays
The Death Penalty and Emile Durkheim Thesis Example
Expository Essay On The Death Penalty
💄 Argument essay against death penalty. Against the Death Penalty

VIDEO

TRAILER || "O' DEATH" Thesis Film
death penalty essay finished
Secrets Revealed: Famous Last Words Before Execution

COMMENTS

What's a good thesis statement for an essay on capital punishment
A good thesis statement for an essay on capital punishment could be that the death penalty poses a complex and unresolved question, requiring an exploration of both arguments for and against it ...
Arguments for and Against the Death Penalty
The death penalty is racially divisive because it appears to count white lives as more valuable than Black lives. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, 296 Black defendants have been executed for the murder of a white victim, while only 31 white defendants have been executed for the murder of a Black victim.
Understanding Death Penalty Support and Opposition Among Criminal
The reasons to support the death penalty included statements related to deterrence, retribution, law and order, and incapacitation, and the reasons to oppose the death penalty included statements related to morality, unfair application, the brutalization effect, mercy, and innocence. When multivariate models were run controlling for race ...
Death Penalty Free Essay Examples And Topic Ideas
Words: 1093 Pages: 4 19245. The death penalty in America has been effective since 1608. Throughout the years following the first execution, criminal behaviors have begun to deteriorate. Capital punishment was first formed to deter crime and treason. As a result, it increased the rate of crime, according to researchers.
5 Death Penalty Essays Everyone Should Know
5 Death Penalty Essays Everyone Should Know. Capital punishment is an ancient practice. It's one that human rights defenders strongly oppose and consider as inhumane and cruel. In 2019, Amnesty International reported the lowest number of executions in about a decade. Most executions occurred in China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Egypt.
Death Penalty: Arguments For and Against
Arguments against Death Penalty. The first argument against the lethal sentence is a lack of deterrence among criminals. According to Amnesty International Australia (2019), there is no evidence that the prospect of death prevents potential perpetrators. Furthermore, some authorities state that the lethal sentence does not decline the number of ...
The Death Penalty Debate: A Critical Examination of the Moral
greatest punishment a state can implement is assigned to the worst crimes that can be. committed and adjusted for each crime, for example, a judicial system that had the death. penalty for those who are most repugnant, life in prison for those who commit heinous. murder, 25 year for man slaughter and so on.
Top 10 Pro & Con Arguments
Top 10 Pro & Con Arguments. 1. Legality. The United States is one of 55 countries globally with a legal death penalty, according to Amnesty International. As of Mar. 24, 2021, within the US, 27 states had a legal death penalty (though 3 of those states had a moratorium on the punishment's use).
Death Penalty Research Paper: Sources for Arguments
When researching a topic for an argumentative essay, accuracy is important, which means the quality of your sources is important. If you're writing a paper about the death penalty, you can start with this list of sources, which provide arguments for all sides of the topic. Amnesty International views the death penalty as "the ultimate ...
The Case Against the Death Penalty
The American Civil Liberties Union believes the death penalty inherently violates the constitutional ban against cruel and unusual punishment and the guarantees of due process of law and of equal protection under the law. Furthermore, we believe that the state should not give itself the right to kill human beings - especially when it kills with premeditation and ceremony, in the name of the ...
Undergraduate Honors Thesis
This thesis will examine these rival philosophies in order to assess the gravity of moral theories in Supreme Court decisions. In particular, both consequentialist and retributivist theories are analyzed with respect to their conceptualizations of punishment. ... After examining the death penalty's legal history and the components of morality ...
"A Case for Abolition: Analyzing the Death Penalty in the United State
This thesis delves into the multifaceted debate surrounding the death penalty in the United States, exploring its constitutionality, morality, and implications for the justice system. Drawing from legal, philosophical, and empirical analyses, it argues against the continued practice of capital punishment, contending that it violates fundamental human rights, inhibits rehabilitation efforts ...
Thesis Statements On Death Penalty
The document discusses crafting a thesis statement on the complex and multifaceted topic of the death penalty. It notes that formulating a well-informed thesis requires thorough research, understanding various perspectives on legal, ethical, social and philosophical issues, and the ability to synthesize disparate views into a coherent argument. The challenges of addressing this contentious ...
Thesis Statements About The Death Penalty
This document discusses the challenges of writing a thesis statement about the death penalty. It notes that crafting an effective thesis statement on this complex topic requires extensive research, critical analysis, and understanding of moral, ethical and legal arguments. The thesis must take a clear position and encapsulate the main argument to be explored. Many students seek help from ...
The Death Penalty Debate: A Critical Examination of the Moral
Capital punishment is a forceful moral issue that is frequently overlooked. This is possibly due to the reverence many have toward the rule of law or a passive acceptance of the status quo. In this thesis I will begin with a discussion of context to the topic of the death penalty in order to address potential biases. Then I examine not only the ethical merit of the death penalty but the ...
84 Death Penalty Title Ideas & Essay Samples
Capital punishment has been a debatable issue for decades. Some people believe that the death penalty plays a crucial role in the criminal justice system, while others think that this procedure is highly unethical. We will write a custom essay specifically for you by our professional experts. 184 writers online.
A Thesis Statement For Death Penalty
1. The death penalty deters individuals from committing crimes; therefore, the crime rates decrease. 2. As a respond to society's demands for justice, the death penalty as a form of retribution is justified because the criminal deserves the punishment fitted to the severity of the crime he or she committed. 3.
Thesis Statement Examples About The Death Penalty
The document discusses the challenges of writing a thesis statement about the controversial topic of the death penalty. There are numerous factors to consider from legal precedents to moral implications, and vast information available can be overwhelming. Additionally, strong opinions on both sides of the issue make it difficult to develop a clear thesis. However, the document offers a ...
Death Penalty Essay Introduction
The death penalty is a state-sanctioned practice where an individual is executed for an offense punishable through such means. Death penalty essay is a common. ... The thesis statement is the overarching idea - the central focus of the essay. It summarizes the idea that you'll be explaining throughout the entirety of the piece.
Democratic Party platform signals centrist shift in criminal justice policy
A federal appeals court reversed the ruling and kept the death penalty in effect, although California, with more than 630 prisoners sentenced to death, has not executed anyone since 2006.
Deliberations to Start in Penalty Trial of Duo Who Killed Woman ...
The prosecution and defense delivered closing statements Thursday in the penalty trial of a Jurupa Valley man and his nephew who killed the man's estranged wife, setting the stage for jury ...
Singapore: Authorities must end executions and stop targeting anti
We call on the authorities to refrain from ignoring these standards when issuing statements on the death penalty and to recognize that respect of human rights is a corollary pillar of the rule of law. Pending full abolition of the death penalty, we call on the Government to immediately establish a moratorium on executions and review national ...
Man convicted of murder and rape executed in Florida
He was given the death penalty for killing18-year-old John Edwards in 1994, and was also serving two life sentences for rape. ... had prison officials read a statement after the execution on Thursday.
Death Penalty Thesis Statement
Death Penalty Thesis Statement - Free download as PDF File (.pdf), Text File (.txt) or read online for free. This document discusses the challenges of crafting an effective thesis statement on the controversial topic of the death penalty. It notes that the issue involves complex legal, ethical, social and psychological dimensions. One challenge is navigating conflicting evidence and opinions ...
August 24, 2024
PENNSYLVANIA—-female to face death penalty. ... "In other countries on their immigration papers, there is a statement that says, 'Death for drug traffickers.' Big letters, big bold letters, 10 times the size of everything else on the page. ... University of Alabama master's degree candidate Christine Poole's 2024 thesis explores the ...
In support and solidarity with "No Death Penalty Tuesdays" abolitionist
World Day. 22nd World Day Against the Death Penalty - The death penalty protects no one. Observed every 10 October, the World Day Against the Death Penalty unifies the global abolitionist movement and mobilizes civil society, political leaders, lawyers, public opinion and more to support the call for the universal abolition of capital punishment.
Trump Wants Death Penalty for Child Rapists and Traffickers
DeSantis signed a bill last spring that makes sexual battery of a person under 12 a capital crime eligible for the death penalty. A capital sentence for anything other than murder would likely ...
Thesis Statements Against The Death Penalty
The document discusses the challenges of writing a thesis statement arguing against the death penalty, including conducting thorough research, analyzing the complex legal, ethical and philosophical aspects, and presenting a well-supported argument. It states that seeking assistance from expert writing services can help alleviate the burden of this challenging assignment and ensure delivery of ...
Delay requested on life or death decision of Florida killer Wade Wilson
Counsel for a man convicted of brutally murdering two Cape Coral women in 2019 is requesting a delay in his sentencing scheduled next week, citing scheduling complications.. A jury recommended on June 25 in 9-3 and 10-2 votes for each of the victims that Wade Wilson, 30, receive the death penalty.The same jury convicted him June 12 of the slayings of Kristine Melton, 35, and Diane Ruiz, 43 ...
Trial of YNW Melly
State of Florida v. Jamell Demons is an ongoing American criminal case in Florida's 17th Judicial Circuit in which rapper Jamell Demons, commonly known by his stage name YNW Melly, was accused of murdering his two friends, Anthony D'Andre Williams (YNW Sakchaser) and Christopher Jermaine Thomas Jr. (YNW Juvy) in October 2018.If convicted, he faces either life in prison without the possibility ...

Arguments for and Against the Death Penalty

Retribution

Arbitrariness & Discrimination

Death Penalty - Essay Samples And Topic Ideas For Free

Death Penalty and Justice

The Controversy of Death Penalty

Stephen Nathanson’s “An Eye for an Eye”

Does the Death Penalty Effectively Deter Crime?

The Death Penalty: Right or Wrong?

About Carlton Franklin

About the Death Penalty

The Death Penalty should not be Legal

Effectively Solving Society’s Criminality

Religious Values and Death Penalty

Abolishment of the Death Penalty

Punishment and the Nature of the Crime

The Death Penalty and Juveniles

Is the Death Penalty “Humane”

Euthanasia and Death Penalty

The Death Penalty is not Worth the Cost

Ineffectiveness of Death Penalty

Is the Death Penalty Morally Right?

Why the Death Penalty is Unjust

The Death Penalty and People’s Opinions

The Debate of the Death Penalty

The History of the Death Penalty

Death Penalty is Immoral

The Death Penalty in the United States

Cost of the Death Penalty

The Solution to the Death Penalty

Costs: Death Penalty Versus Prison Costs

Death Penalty as a Source of Constant Controversy

Death Penalty is Politically Just?

George Walker Bush and Death Penalty

Additional Example Essays

How To Write an Essay About Death Penalty

Structuring the Argument

Exploring Ethical and Moral Dimensions

Concluding Thoughts

5 Death Penalty Essays Everyone Should Know

“When We Kill”

“An Inhumane Way of Death”

“We Need To Talk About An Injustice”

“I Know What It’s Like To Carry Out Executions”

“There Is No Such Thing As Closure on Death Row”

You may also like

11 Examples of Systemic Injustices in the US

Women’s Rights 101: History, Examples, Activists

What is Social Activism?

15 Inspiring Movies about Activism

15 Examples of Civil Disobedience

Academia in Times of Genocide: Why are Students Across the World Protesting?

Pinkwashing 101: Definition, History, Examples

15 Inspiring Quotes for Black History Month

10 Inspiring Ways Women Are Fighting for Equality

15 Trusted Charities Fighting for Clean Water

15 Trusted Charities Supporting Trans People

15 Political Issues We Must Address

Top 10 Pro & Con Arguments

People who view this page may also like:

Cite This Page

Finding Sources for Death Penalty Research

Amnesty International Site

Mental Illness on Death Row

Pros and Cons of the Death Penalty

Pro-Death Penalty Links

The Case Against the Death Penalty

Related Issues

Stay Informed

Capital Punishment: A Philosophical Rejection of Punishment by Death Public Deposited

Relationships

Senior Theses and Projects

Date of Award

Degree Name

First Advisor

Second Advisor

Recommended Citation

Included in

Author Corner

HIM 1990-2015