 |
| Debra J. Saunders |
INTERNET
SOURCE: http://spectator.org/dont-kill-the-death-penalty-in-california/
Letter From
San Francisco
Don’t Kill
the Death Penalty in California
August 28, 2016, 1:44 am
Those who have made it unworkable
intend to keep it that way.
Opponents of California’s death
penalty have been highly successful at thwarting executions since the state
resumed executions in 1992 after a 20-year hiatus. Their latest ploy is
Proposition 62, which would repeal the death penalty and resentence death row
inmates to life without parole. Measure sponsors argue that capital punishment
presents the risk of executing an innocent person, but also state that
California’s death penalty is “simply unworkable.”
That’s a cheeky stand, coming from the
corner that has been throwing monkey wrenches into the criminal justice system
to subvert death penalty law. Over the years, appellate attorneys have
introduced endless time-sucking, frivolous appeals that have jammed the courts,
largely on technical grounds that have nothing to do with guilt or innocence,
e.g., the trial lawyer wasn’t top-drawer; the defendant’s parents were abusive;
lethal injection may not be painless.
In 2006, lawyers argued that convicted
torturer-murderer Michael Morales might feel pain in his last moments because
of the state’s three-drug lethal injection protocol. A federal judge granted
their appeal and effectively froze the capital punishment pipeline for a
decade.
California Gov. Jerry Brown had
pledged to implement the death penalty, even though he personally opposes it,
yet his corrections department was happy to sit back and let the law not work
for years. In exasperation, the tough-on-crime Criminal Justice Legal
Foundation filed a lawsuit on behalf of the families of murder victims of two
death row inmates to prod the state into developing a drug protocol that should
pass muster with the U.S. Supreme Court. California Attorney General Kamala
Harris, who also said she would uphold California’s law despite her personal
objections, tried to block the suit on the dubious grounds that the victims’
families “lack standing.” She failed. The families won. Sacramento finally
devised a one-drug protocol, which should go into effect after a vetting period
expected to end soon.
So now, just as the obstructionists
are about to run out of string, they have put a measure on the November ballot
to end California’s death penalty.
Anti-death penalty activist Matt
Cherry of Death Penalty Focus told the San
Francisco Chronicle editorial board that capital punishment “has
failed in California.” Since 1992, he added, “just 13 people have been
executed,” which he noted constitutes about 1 percent of the 930 individuals
sentenced to death since 1978. It’s like an extorting mobster telling an honest
businessman that it no longer pays to work hard and follow the rules: “You
might as well just toss me the keys to the shop and save yourself some
heartache.”
In their ballot argument, Prop 62
supporters warn that when executions resume, California risks executing an
innocent person — someone like Carlos DeLuna, who was executed in 1989 before
an “independent investigation later proved his innocence.” Problem: Texas
executed DeLuna. Prop 62’s backers can’t name an exonerated individual from
California’s post-1978 death row because there aren’t any.
In 2012, I asked Gov. Brown whether he
had considered appointing a panel to recommend death row inmates deserving of a
commutation. Brown personally remains a death penalty opponent, so his answer
is instructive: “As attorney general, I think the representation was good. I
think people have gotten exquisite due process in the state of California. It
goes on for 20 or 25 years, and to think that they’ve missed anything like they
have in some other states, I have not seen any evidence of it. None. I know
people say, ‘Oh, there have been all these innocent people.’ Well, I have not
seen one name on death row that’s been told to me.”
At a different editorial board
meeting, former San Quentin State Prison Warden Jeanne Woodford, Ana Zamora of
Death Penalty Focus and Berkeley law professor Elisabeth Semel vigorously
defended all of the high jinks played by anti-death penalty lawyers. They
oppose both the death penalty and Prop 66, which is supposed to streamline
executions.
Why does it take a year to process an
appeal based on a convicted killer’s childhood? Why doesn’t the Habeas Corpus
Resource Center focus on worthy appeals and stop jamming up the courts with
frivolous paper — and then complain about court backlogs? Why have opponents
gone after the state for getting lethal injection drugs from compounding
pharmacies or other states, after opponents made it impossible to secure drugs
from once-legal sources? The answer to everything: Defense attorneys have to do
it because “it’s the law.”
Well, so is the death penalty.
If California voters should decide to
repeal capital punishment, do not believe for one minute they won’t use every
dirty trick to undermine life without parole. And they’ll tell you they have to
because “it’s the law.”
COPYRIGHT 2016 CREATORS.COM
INTERNET
SOURCE: http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/saunders/article/Save-the-death-penalty-No-on-Prop-62-9185798.php
Save
the death penalty. No on Prop. 62
Updated 1:48 pm, Monday, August
29, 2016
Opponents of California’s death
penalty have been highly successful at thwarting executions since the state
resumed executions in 1992 after a 20-year hiatus. Their latest ploy is
Proposition 62, which would repeal the death penalty and re-sentence Death Row
inmates to life without parole. Measure sponsors argue that capital punishment
presents the risk of executing an innocent person, but also state California’s
death penalty is “simply unworkable.”
That’s a cheeky stand, coming from the
corner that has been throwing monkey wrenches into the criminal justice system
to subvert death penalty law. Over the years, appellate attorneys have
introduced endless time-sucking, frivolous appeals that have jammed the courts,
largely on technical grounds that have nothing to do with guilt or innocence,
e.g., the trial lawyer wasn’t top drawer; the defendant’s parents were abusive;
lethal injection may not be 100 percent painless.
In 2006, lawyers argued that convicted
torture-murderer Michael Morales might
feel pain in his last moments because of the state’s three-drug
lethal-injection protocol. A federal judge granted their appeal and effectively
froze the capital punishment pipeline for a decade.
Gov. Jerry Brown had pledged to implement
the death penalty, even though he personally opposes it. Yet his corrections
department was happy to sit back and let the law not work for years. In
exasperation, the tough-on-crime Criminal
Justice Legal Foundation filed a lawsuit on behalf of the families of
murder victims of two Death Row inmates to prod the state to develop a drug
protocol that should pass muster with the U.S. Supreme Court. State Attorney
General Kamala Harris, who also said she would uphold California’s law despite
her personal objections, tried to block the suit on the dubious grounds that
the victims’ families “lack
standing.” She failed. The families won. Sacramento
finally devised a one-drug protocol, which should go into effect after a vetting
period expected to end soon.
So now, just as the obstructionists
are about to run out of string, they have put a measure on the November ballot
to end California’s death penalty.
Opponent Matt Cherry of Death Penalty
Focus told The Chronicle editorial board that capital punishment “has failed in
California.” Since 1992, he added, “Just 13 people have been executed,” which
he noted constitutes about 1 percent of the 930 individuals sentenced to death
since 1978. It’s like an extorting mobster telling an honest businessman that
it no longer pays to work hard and follow the rules. You might as well just
toss him the keys to the shop and save yourself some heartache.
In their ballot argument, Prop. 62
supporters warn that when executions resume, California risks
executing an innocent person — like Carlos DeLuna who was executed in 1989
before an “independent investigation later proved his innocence.” Problem:
Texas executed DeLuna. Prop. 62’s backers can’t name an exonerated individual
from California’s post-1978 Death Row because there aren’t any.
In 2012, I asked Brown if he had
considered appointing a panel to recommend Death Row inmates deserving of a
commutation. Brown personally remains a death penalty opponent, so
his answer is instructive: “As attorney general, I think the representation
was good. I think people have gotten exquisite due process in the state of
California. It goes on for 20 or 25 years and to think that they’ve missed
anything like they have in some other states, I have not seen any evidence of
it. None. I know people say, ‘Oh, there have been all these innocent people.’
Well, I have not seen one name on Death Row that’s been told to me.”
At a different editorial board
meeting, former San Quentin State Prison Warden Jeanne Woodford, Ana Zamora of
the No on 66 campaign and Berkeley law Professor Elisabeth Semel vigorously
defended all of the hijinks played by anti-death-penalty lawyers. They oppose
both the death penalty and Prop. 66, which is supposed to streamline
executions.
Why does it take a year to process an
appeal based on a convicted killer’s childhood? Why doesn’t the Habeas Corpus Resource Center focus on worthy
appeals and stop jamming up the courts with frivolous paper — and then complain
about court backlogs? Why have opponents gone after the state for getting
lethal injection drugs from compounding pharmacies or other states, after
opponents made it impossible to secure drugs from once legal sources? The
answer to everything: Defense attorneys have to do it, because “it’s the law.”
Well, so is the death penalty.
If California voters should decide to
repeal capital punishment, do not believe for one minute they won’t use every
dirty trick to undermine life without parole. And they’ll tell you they have to
because, “it’s the law.”
Debra J. Saunders is a San Francisco
Chronicle columnist. Email: dsaunders@sfchronicle.com
Twitter: @DebraJSaunders
930 individuals sentenced to death since 1978
13 Death Row inmates executed
2 inmates sentenced in California were executed in other states, Missouri and Virginia
71 Death Row inmates died of natural causes
25 Death Row inmates killed themselves
8 Death Row inmates died of other causes
Source: California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
INTERNET
SOURCE: http://www.montereyherald.com/article/NF/20160917/LOCAL1/160919756?utm_content=buffer7dab7&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Michele Hanisee: A yes vote on Prop. 66 is a vote for justice
By Michele Hanisee, Guest commentary
Posted: 09/17/16, 3:32 PM PDT
 |
| Michele Hanisee |
This is in response to your editorial (Sept. 9, Herald) urging a no vote on Proposition
66.
Those in support of abolishing the
death penalty point to the possibility of an innocent person being executed. In
California this couldn’t be further from the truth. Those who commit a capital
punishment-related crime will be prosecuted to full extent of the law. The
innocent can take solace in knowing that a unanimous jury of 12 citizens must
render the death verdict after an exhaustive trial where the accused murderer
is represented by two highly competent attorneys and overseen by an independent
judge who ensures a fair trial.
The death penalty is reserved for the
worst of the worst offenders in California. These people have committed
unspeakable atrocities against the citizens of California. People like Lonnie
Franklin Jr. (the Grim Sleeper), who was just recently sentenced to death in
Los Angeles for the killing of 10 young African-American women. Or Tiequon Cox,
who was hired by an imprisoned Rolling 60s Crips gang member to kill. Cox
entered the wrong home and murdered four people, including an 8-year-old and a
12-year-old. Then there’s Charles Ng, who was convicted of brutally murdering
11 people and most likely murdered 25 more. There’s also Lawrence Bittaker, who
killed five young women after he raped and tortured them. The list goes on and
on. To make matters worse, these horrific individuals, excluding Franklin Jr.,
have been sitting on death row for decades, costing California millions of
dollars to house, feed, clothe, guard and provide health care to them.
There are 746 killers sitting on
California’s death row. These inmates have murdered over 1,000 victims,
including 226 children and 43 police officers; 294 victims were raped and/or
tortured. These killers and their repetitive appeals are the reasons why a vote
of No on Prop. 62 and Yes on Prop. 66 is recommended.
California’s death penalty is a
dysfunctional mess that doesn’t bring justice to victims’ family members.
However, by mending, not ending, the death penalty, we can change that.
Prop. 66 was written by legal scholars
who know the ins and outs of the death penalty system. They have written Prop.
66 so that it speeds up the appeals process by eliminating legal and procedural
delaying tactics while assuring due process protections for those sentenced to
death. It ensures criminals sentenced to death are assigned a special appeals
lawyer immediately by expanding the availability of lawyers to handle these
appeals. Prop. 66 limits state appeals to five years instead of allowing for
these convicted criminals to file appeal after appeal. However, the initiative
does not impose a rigid deadline that must be met in every case as
extraordinary cases may take longer. However, five years is generally
sufficient to get through state appeals, even in the most complex cases.
While many point to the “exorbitant
costs” associated with the death penalty, they forget how expensive it is to
giving life without parole to these criminals. It’s estimated that it costs at
least $50,000 per year to house, feed, guard and provide health care to someone
in prison, and that it averages between 20 and 25 years from a jury’s sentence
of death to an actual execution date. There are 746 inmates on death row, with
an average age of 27, and average life expectancy of 74. Reducing someone’s
punishment to life without parole will cost taxpayers $1.8 billion in housing
costs alone.
What I along with other district
attorneys, law enforcement officials and families of victims want is justice.
Justice to impose a lawful sentence recommended by juries and imposed by judges
across California. Some deem the death penalty as cruel and unusual punishment;
however, most Californians disagree and believe that those convicted of these
horrible crimes are depraved. In fact, any time we are asked to vote on whether
or not to abolish the death penalty, Californians repeatedly vote to keep the
death penalty intact. This year seems no different. A recent poll conducted by
the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley found that 75.7 percent of
Californians surveyed support Prop. 66.
Voters understand that the criminals
on death row have been convicted of the most heinous crimes. Voters also
realize that those left behind, grieving families throughout California and
their loved ones, don’t deserve anything less than justice.
Justice is a reformed, not eliminated
death penalty. I urge a NO vote on Proposition 62 and YES on Proposition 66.
Michele Hanisee is a deputy district
attorney for Los Angeles County and is president of the Association of Deputy
District Attorneys — Los Angeles.
No comments:
Post a Comment