Report from Ohio and Other Places from DPIC

The Death Penalty Information Center is one of the most helpful, crucial and accurate resources we in the abolition movement have. Here are a few good reasons to go there more often. I decided to post these sample items after reminders from my co-blogger and notice from Rick Halperin.

So following are some reasons to go OFTEN here

STUDIES: Ohio Releases Annual Capital Crimes Report (Just out April 14-15 2010)

The Ohio Attorney General's Office recently released its annual Capital Crimes Report, analyzing the state's death penalty cases and death row population. In 2009, there was only one death sentence handed down in Ohio, mirroring a nationwide trend of declining death sentences. This was the fewest death sentences in a year since Ohio reinstated the death penalty. The report indicated that over half of the current death row population of 160 inmates are African-American (51%), while Caucasians make up roughly 44%. The average age of the death row inmates in Ohio is 45, and they have spent an average of 14 years on death row. In recent history, the majority of removals from death row have been for reasons other than execution. While there have been 33 executions (now 36) since 1981, 52 inmates received life sentences after appeal and remand, another 11 had their sentences commuted to life by the governor, and 7 were sentenced to life after a mental retardation determination. Another 20 inmates died of natural causes while they were on death row. View more at DPIC

CALIFORNIA: Homicide investigations put on hold (Recent Report):
In California, a state that is spending $137 million per year on the death penalty, many homicide investigations have been put on hold due to a budget crisis in Los Angeles. The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) is forcing officers to suspend work on their cases and take days or weeks off because of new overtime limits. One of the LAPD's most productive investigators sat idle for 6 weeks, unable to follow old leads or to pick up on new ones because he had accumulated overtime on cases. Homicide detectives have especially demanding work schedules that routinely require them to investigate a case through the nights and weekends. "The hours have to come from some place," LAPD Chief Charlie Beck said. "It has a serious impact on our ability to respond to some of the large, violent incidents we've been experiencing lately. That is especially true of homicide investigations because of the long hours they demand." In one region, Southeast L.A., 9 of the 14 killings this year remain unsolved. "That is horrible compared to our typical rates," said Det. Sal LaBarbera, a 24-year homicide veteran who supervises the Southeast squad. "All of those cases are solvable. None of them are mysteries. A few of them would likely already be solved, if I could just let my guys loose to work."

CSI Director Convicted of Planting Evidence in Murder Investigation (Recent):
David Kofoed, CSI Director of Douglas County, NEBRASKA was convicted last month of planting evidence during a murder investigation, casting doubts on the legitimacy of other cases on which he worked. Kofoed's work came into question after a 2006 investigation into the murder of Wayne and Sharmon Stock. The victims' nephew was one of the leading suspects in the murder, despite the lack of physical evidence tying him and an accomplice to the killing. The victims' nephew confessed to the police, but he retracted his confession the next day. A day later, Kofoed claimed to find a drop of blood from one of the victims in a car that was linked to the suspects, though it had already been examined by another forensic investigator. The two suspects were charged with murder but were released several months later when prosecutors determined the confession was unreliable and didn't fit the facts in the case. A man and woman from Wisconsin later pleaded guilty to the crimes and are now serving life sentences.

REPORT: the unreliability of Eyewitness Testimony (Recent):
Innocence groups from around the country, along with a group of eyewitness testimony experts, recently filed amicus briefs asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case of Kevin Keith, an Ohio man who is on death row for fatally shooting three people in 1994. The innocence groups stated that Keith's conviction was based on faulty eyewitness testimony that was improperly influenced by the police. In addition, Keith's counsel uncovered another possible suspect, a man with a violent criminal history, who told a confidential police informant that he was paid to "cripple" the person who was the target of the shooting. Defense lawyers asserted that the state withheld important information about the possible other suspect. Keith has an alibi for the time of the crime supported by four witnesses. No forensic evidence conclusively links him to the crime. Keith is scheduled for execution on September 15.

NEW VOICES: Chief of Police Says Death Penalty Does Not Serve Victims (April 07, 2010): James Abbott, Chief of Police of West Orange, NEW JERSEY, recently spoke at an international forum regarding his experience as a member of the New Jersey Death Penalty Study Commission. Chief Abbott, who was Governor Codey's Republican appointee to the Commission, said he did not anticipate changing his mind regarding capital punishment, but was greatly influenced by the stories of murder victims' famlies who testified during the commission's hearings. "I had no idea how much families suffer facing years of death penalty appeals and reversals....For every person that had been sentenced to death, there was a family waiting for the promised punishment to be delivered.... The reality is that there is no closure in capital cases, just more attention to the murderer and less to the victim. Unfortunately, it’s easier for most of U.S. citizens to name notorious killers than it is their victims." Abbott lamented the lack of support for murder victims' families: "I would want to know that the person who did it was behind bars for life, so they could never kill again, and that my family had the services they needed to heal and the financial support they needed to live without further sacrifice. Our Commission learned that those kinds of services were sorely lacking – and that they could be improved with the financial savings from ending the death penalty." Read Chief Abbott's full presentation at DPIC.

All at DPIC and much more...

NOTE THIS STRIKING QUOTE:

“After 20 years on (the) high court, I have to acknowledge that serious questions are being raised about whether the death penalty is being fairly administered in this country.” - Sandra Day O'Connor, retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice

Perhaps the most influential factor in determining whether a defendant will receive the death penalty is the quality of legal representation he or she receives. Almost all defendants in death penalty cases cannot afford their own attorneys, and are represented by a state-appointed attorney, some of whom are are overworked, underpaid, or lacking the trial experience necessary for death penalty cases. The right to an attorney is central to the American judicial system. Especially in capital cases, it is very important that the attorney be experienced in criminal and death penalty law, be adequately compensated, and have access to the resources needed to prepare a vigorous defense.

The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund recently released its Fall 2009 edition of Death Row USA, a report detailing death row populations across the United States. According to the report, California, Florida and Texas continue to lead the nation in the number of death row inmates, with California (694) having a death row population almost twice as large as either Florida (395) or Texas (339). In addition, while Florida's and Texas' death row populations have declined in the last decade, California's population has grown steadily, from 551 inmates in 1999 to 694 in 2009. California has not had an execution since 2006. Overall, the country's death row population decreased since Death Row USA's report of July 1, 2009--from 3,279 to 3,263 as of Oct. 1. View the full report at DPIC

Former Death Row Inmate Acquitted in One Court, Now Convicted in Another (Recent):
Timothy Hennis was convicted in 1986 of murdering three people in NORTH CAROLINA was tried in state court. However, his conviction was overturned because of weak evidence and improper statements by the prosecution. He was re-tried, and the jury voted unanimously for his acquittal in 1989. The evidence from the crime scene was preserved and, when DNA testing became available, a re-evaluation of the evidence pointed to the possibility that Hennis was indeed guilty of the murders. Although the constitutional protection against double jeopardy prevented his being re-tried
in North Carolina's court, military courts have separate jurisdiction and can try ... military laws, allowing a retrial even after an acquittal in state court. Hennis, who had left the service, was recalled to active duty in the military and then recently tried for the third time for the triple murder--of a woman and two children. A military jury convicted Hennis of murder on April 8. The prosecution is seeking the death penalty, and a sentencing hearing will begin soon. Hennis was previously included on DPIC's list of exonerated individuals.

A Report released by the ACLU of Northern CALIFORNIA reveals that only three counties–Los Angeles, Orange, and Riverside–accounted for 83% of the state's death sentences in 2009. Los Angeles County, with 13 death sentences, was the leading death penalty county in the entire country last year. According to the report, California, with the largest death row in the country, spends $137 million annually on the death penalty, while the state is cutting back on many vital services. The report also indicated an increase in the Latino population of California's death row in recent years; 50% of the death sentences in 2007 were for Latinos even though they comprised only 36% of the state's population.

The executive summary of the report concluded, "A shift to permanent imprisonment would mean significant savings in a time of fiscal crisis, would eliminate the risk of executing the innocent, and would lead to more consistent policies across all California counties. California is on track to spend $1 billion on the death penalty in the next five years, though even more funds are required to protect the innocent from wrongful conviction and to ensure timely review of lengthy death penalty cases. For all the money dedicated to the death penalty in California, only 1 out of 100 people sentenced to death has actually been executed during the last thirty years."

A recent editorial in the Philadelphia Inquirer cited the high costs of PENNSYLVANIA's death penalty as a key reason for supporting an abolition bill that was proposed last month by a state senator. According to the editorial, the state could significantly cut spending by eliminating the death penalty and the lengthy court proceedings that accompany it. Taxpayers would also save by not having to maintain the state's high-security death row, which currently houses 220 inmates. According to the editorial, "Pennsylvania has reached the point where the right moral course - ending capital punishment - coincides more than ever with the need to get the state's fiscal house in order. The state has not had an execution since 1999 and has had six exonerations since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. The paper suggested that "A useful step toward scrapping the flawed capital punishment system would be to impose a moratorium on executions."

NEW VOICES: Former TEXAS Governor Says Death Penalty Trial "Breached Every Standard of Fairness" Posted: April 02, 2010
Mark White, former governor of Texas and a death penalty supporter, recently wrote an op-ed in the National Law Journal calling for a new trial for Charles Hood, a Texas death row inmate whose trial was compromised by the fact that the prosecutor and the trial judge had been in an intimate relationship prior to the trial. As former Gov. White explained, "The judge and the prosecutor at Hood's trial had a long-term secret affair prior to the trial and concealed the relationship for 20 years. This was a secret that the pair kept even when they knew Hood was on the brink of execution and was trying to verify the rumors of the relationship." The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted a new sentencing hearing for Hood on grounds of improper jury instructions, but refused to address the conflict of interest caused by the long-term, extra-marital affair. White writes, "The trial judge and the prosecuting attorney's affair breaches every standard of fairness that you would expect a defendant to receive during a capital case or, for that matter, a non-capital case. Hood could not have gotten a fair trial under these circumstances." The former governor also voiced his concern about the fallibility of this system: "Hood's case shows, at the most basic level, that there are huge flaws in our procedures and human frailties in the people who administer them."

REPRESENTATION AND THE DEATH PENALTY

“After 20 years on (the) high court, I have to acknowledge that serious questions are being raised about whether the death penalty is being fairly administered in this country.” - Sandra Day O'Connor, retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice

Perhaps the most influential factor in determining whether a defendant will receive the death penalty is the quality of legal representation he or she receives. Almost all defendants in death penalty cases cannot afford their own attorneys, and are represented by a state-appointed attorney, some of whom are are overworked, underpaid, or lacking the trial experience necessary for death penalty cases. The right to an attorney is central to the American judicial system. Especially in capital cases, it is very important that the attorney be experienced in criminal and death penalty law, be adequately compensated, and have access to the resources needed to prepare a vigorous defense.