Sunday, November 6, 2016

BOB EVNEN – LIFE DOESN’T MEAN LIFE



Death penalty opponents would like us to think that a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole means that we lock the door and throw away the key. But that’s not what it means, and even if it did, life in prison is the next penalty that will come under attack by death penalty opponents.
I support the death penalty because it is a just punishment, sparingly applied, and reserved for the most egregious cases of first-degree murder. That’s as it should be.
--
Bob Evnen, Co-Founder
Nebraskans for the Death Penalty


Bob Evnen received the Rayner Goddard Act of Courage Award from the comrades of Unit 1012. He favors the use of the death penalty and is working to retain it in his state.

We have watched him fight for justice and the death penalty in Nebraska and want him to know that he has encouraged victims' families and leaders worldwide. We honor and respect him. We hope that more judges and government officials will follow their courageous character. 

            Please remember to save the death penalty in Nebraska by voting repeal (DO NOT vote Retain) to save the death penalty.

            In this article, he explains why LWOP is not honest at all.

  





Local View: Life doesn’t mean life
BY BOB EVNEN
Nov 1, 2016

Death penalty opponents would like us to think that a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole means that we lock the door and throw away the key. But that’s not what it means, and even if it did, life in prison is the next penalty that will come under attack by death penalty opponents.

I support the death penalty because it is a just punishment, sparingly applied, and reserved for the most egregious cases of first-degree murder. That’s as it should be.

For their part, death penalty opponents want us to believe that there is a suitable alternative to the death penalty – life in prison without parole. Is it?

First, as a matter of law, there is no such thing. The Nebraska Board of Pardons, which exercises the virtually unlimited power of executive clemency in Nebraska, has the power to pardon and to commute life sentences to a term of years, which makes the inmate eligible for parole.

This power is not just theoretical. Laddie Dittrich was one of three men convicted of first-degree murder in the beating and stabbing death of a man they ran off the Interstate in Omaha. Dittrich was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

But in 2013, the Pardons Board commuted his sentence to a term of years that made Dittrich immediately eligible for parole. Within a month he was out. The following year he was arrested and subsequently convicted of sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl. He’s back in prison.

That doesn’t happen very often, death penalty opponents respond. For the 10-year-old girl and her family it happened 100 percent of the time.

Just as concerning, many of those who are wooing the public with the claim that a life sentence is the alternative to the death penalty are themselves challenging the legitimacy of life imprisonment. This makes their argument disingenuous at best and very nearly fraudulent at worst.

Brian J. Adams was convicted of first-degree murder for shooting to death two men in two separate robberies. He was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. In 2014, Adams sued the state. His lawyers claimed that his life-without-parole sentence violated his Nebraska constitutional rights. This year the Nebraska Supreme Court ruled against him. Does anyone really believe there aren’t more such lawsuits awaiting us?

The ACLU’s opposition to the death penalty is a given. The ACLU opposed even putting the issue on the ballot. But the ACLU also is quietly working to end life without parole. For example, the ACLU filed a brief in a case last year before the U.S. Supreme Court involving juveniles sentenced to life without parole. In the brief, the ACLU directed the court to a study that is critical of life sentences altogether – not just for juveniles, but for adult criminals also. Ironically, such studies point to the growing number of life-without-parole sentences resulting in part from sentencing in states that used to have the death penalty but don’t any longer.

Getting rid of life without parole is quite plainly the next target. A well-funded national group called “The Sentencing Project” wrote a paper in 2013 essentially calling for the elimination of life without parole. Californians will be voting on the death penalty this year also. There, a proliferation of voices are arguing that life without parole should be abolished too. Law review articles abound. The ACLU is on board. You will not be surprised to learn that the challenges to life without parole are remarkably similar to the claims being raised against the death penalty.

Often quoted by death penalty opponents, former Nebraska District Court Judge Ron Reagan recently intoned, “Let me be perfectly clear about what happens when someone is sentenced to life in prison. They die in prison.”

But when he was a judge, and John Joubert, a slayer of young boys, stood before him for sentencing, then-Judge Reagan didn’t sentence Joubert to life in prison. Judge Reagan sentenced John Joubert to death.

Bob Evnen is a Lincoln attorney and a co-founder of Nebraskans for the Death Penalty.


OK, last thing, I promise. We need to look at the big picture when it comes to the REAL cost of doing away with the death penalty. And what the anti-death penalty people NEVER want people to know is how much the death penalty is used by prosecutors to induce people who are guilty ANYWAY to go ahead and plead guilty to the murder, and in exchange, the prosecutors will not press for the death penalty. this is a perfectly sensible and legal plea bargaining process. In Nebraska law, we have a set of aggravating circumstances (did the murder involve torture ? was the victim a child? etc.) and mitigating circumstances (was the murderer low IQ or drunk or did the victim ASK to be killed, etc.). Judges weigh these factors in deciding between a life sentence or a death sentence. Well, apparently, a very serious first-degree murder trial that could result in the death penalty costs a Nebraska prosecutor's office about $100,000 -- all the paperwork and attorney time, assembling the evidence, expert witnesses, etc. etc. So if a guy is guilty ANYWAY, and it's not THAT bad of a murder, though bad enough of course, but if you can get him to plead, you save taxpayers $100,000. Then the prosecutors will "drop" some of the aggravating circumstances in their sentencing pleadings before the judge. They would never plea-bargain an especially heinous case, like the guy who skinned his victim alive in Rulo, or the couple of guys who raped and killed children here in Nebraska. Anyhoo, here's a transcript of a hearing in the Legislature in which Douglas County Attorney Don Kleine talks about plea bargaining, and it'll give you a sense of how important it really is. Now, I think there are something like 50 bad murders in Nebraska every year, so if they take away the death penalty, nobody will plead out and avoid trial -- they'll all roll the dice and go to trial to try to get off -- even though in the vast majority of cases the prosecution has them dead to rights -- so that could cost us a potential $50 million additional in our criminal justice costs in a given year. NOT GOOD!!!!!!! Oh, and p.s., woman-to-woman -- if they take away the death penalty, then what is to keep a rapist from KILLING his victims, every time, to try to avoid capture, since if they are alive they can identify him, but if they are dead, they cannot -- and if there's no death penalty but the max is life in prison, why not just "off" the victim and try to get away with it? Ew, ew, ewww.
Anyway, here's the transcript:

No comments:

Post a Comment