We Concur On Need For Compensation For Wrongful Convictions

The following letter to the editor from Michael J. Macchioni of South Hanover was published in yesterday's PennLive.com Mr. Macchioni writes about the need for compensation for the wrongfully convicted in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania has many examples of wrongful convictions, including six men that were exonerated after being sentenced to death. The full text of the report of the Advisory Commission on Wrongful Convictions can be found here.

I urge you to contact your PA State Representative expressing your support for the introduction of a bill dealing with this issue and asking that they consider working with Representative Marsico to draft such legislation.

"A commitment to equality for all citizens and to a fair justice system are hallmarks of our democracy. Pennsylvania, however, is one of 24 states having no wrongful conviction compensation statute. Advanced DNA testing has been used by the Innocence Law Project to exonerate those wrongfully convicted of crimes.

Michael Morton of Texas is an example of an exoneree helped by the Innocence Law Project. He spent nearly 25 years in prison for murdering his wife until DNA testing proved his innocence and implicated the real perpetrator. Since his exoneration, the Texas Supreme Court has ordered a court of inquiry to determine whether the prosecutor contributed to Morton’s wrongful conviction by concealing evidence of Morton’s innocence from the defense.

Even the conservative-leaning state of Texas has a comprehensive wrongful conviction compensation statute. Texas provides compensation for child-support payments, tuition for up to 120 hours at a career center or college and re-entry and reintegration services, including life skills, job and vocational training for as long as those services are beneficial. In addition, the state provides necessary documentation (i.e. a state ID card) and financial assistance to cover living expenses. Help also is provided to access medical and dental services.

I’ve asked Rep. Ron Marsico to introduce legislation to counter the injustice of wrongful convictions. I ask that other interested citizens join me in calling for this to be made right.

MICHAEL J. MACCHIONI
South Hanover Twp."

PA to follow NC in Addressing Racial Bias in Death Penalty

Racism has been a blemish on the record of the United States since the colonial era. Despite many laws, acts and movements to abolish racism, it unfortunately still remains prominent in society. Now, we claim that racial discrimination does not occur in our country, such as during a trial where a black male could be sentenced to death. However, many factors point to racist tendencies in the courtroom, but some states, such as North Carolina, are fighting back.

The first case involving North Carolina’s Racial Justice Act has concluded. It involves Marcus Robinson, who was convicted of murder in 1994. The RJA allows death row inmates to present evidence of racial bias to a judge, and if the judge rules that there was racial injustice present throughout the process that inmate’s sentence will be changed to life without parole. Robinson’s case is the first under the RJA that will hopefully set the bar for the 150 cases to follow.

Robinson’s defense is arguing that prosecutors did not allow African Americans to serve on the jury based on the color of their skin. A Michigan State University study showed that in more than 173 death penalty trials from 1990-2010 prosecutors struck black jurors more than twice as often as non-black jurors.

Philadelphia took a very proactive approach in preventing African Americans from serving on a jury. District Attorneys in Philadelphia underwent training sessions, during which they were taught how to effectively hide racial bias while eliminating blacks from the jury pool.  

Quotes from the tape include:

“Let’s face it, … there’s the blacks from the low-income areas[,] … you don’t want those people on your jury.”

And

“You know, in selecting blacks, you don’t want the real educated ones.”

Do you find it hard to believe that this sort of racism still exists in America? Watch the video for yourself: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5102834972975877286

Pennsylvania’s version of the Racial Justice Act, House Bill 1996, is scheduled to be introduced to the House next week. Although there is currently a study underway in PA regarding the death penalty, the House needs to pass HB1996 now to prevent anyone from being unjustly executed.

Justice and Victory

This week the nation saw unprecedented victories not just for the death penalty abolition movement but also for human rights and justice in the United States.

In Ohio, Supreme Court Justice Paul E. Pfeifer stood up against the death penalty calling it a "death lottery," stating to the House Criminal Justice Committee that the death penalty

"makes no sense when you can have life with out the possibility of parole. I don’t see what society gains."

This public statement adds much needed support to Ohio's House Bill 160 that would abolish the death penalty in the state if passed.

In North Carolina, governor Beverly Perdue vetoed Senate Bill 9 that would repeal the state's Racial Justice Act, which was put in place for prisoners sentenced to death. If a judge determines that race was a significant factor in a death penalty trial, the sentence must be reduced to life without parole. Governor Perdue said in a statement,

"it is simply unacceptable for racial prejudice to play a role in the imposition of the death penalty in North Carolina."

While the governor is a supporter of the death penalty, her veto of the bill represents a profound move towards greater social justice and equality in the country.

Here in PA, great strides towards abolition are being made as Senate Resolution 6 passed this past Wednesday, December 14. The resolution, which can be read in full here, establishes a bipartisan task force and advisory committee that will conduct a study of the death penalty in Pennsylvania in collaboration with the Justice Center for Research at Penn State, the Pennsylvania Interbranch Commission on Gender, Racial, and Ethnic Fairness, and the Pennsylvania Joint State Government Commission.

We have gone without the death penalty in Pennsylvania before. From 1972 to 1978, Pennsylvania was without capital punishment after the Pennsylvania Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional based on the U.S. Supreme Court decision of Furman v. Georgia. Capital punishment was reinstated in 1978 and since that time Pennsylvanian has sentenced more than 350 people to death yet has executed only three.

This year, numerous studies have come out examining the issues surrounding Pennsylvania's capital punishment and criminal justice system, including one by the Pennsylvania Advisory Committee on Wrongful Convictions which can be found here or read PADP's analysis of it here, and examined the issues surrounding eye-witness identification, among other things. Another study released by the Philadelphia Inquirer found issues with Pennsylvania's defense lawyers and unfair trials.

Even more exciting for death penalty abolitionists everywhere is the Death Penalty Information Center's Year End Report, which was released this Thursday, December 15th. The report cited that death sentences have dropped significantly in recent years and noted a 75% drop since 1996. Richard Dieter, DPIC's Executive Director and author of the report said,

"Executions, death sentences, public support, the number of states with the death penalty all dropped from previous years. Whether it’s concerns about unfairness, executing the innocent, the high costs of the death penalty, or the general feeling that the government just can’t get it right, Americans moved further away from capital punishment in 2011.”

Each of these new developments represent a growing trend across the country in support of the abolition of capital punishment and a move towards greater justice, equality, and human rights for the nation. They symbolize the forward progression that the United States can accomplish if ordinary citizens are not silent and do not allow themselves to be complicit in the crimes of the government. Great figures like Martina Davis Correia, who passed away December 2, motivate and inspire us to act and to voice our dissent in the state sanctioned murder that is capital punishment. We must work in Martina's memory, and in honor of other great abolitionists like her, to end capital punishment in this country and not let these new opportunities and new cries of support for abolition go unnoticed.

NC Governor vetoes SB to repeal Racial Justice Act

A quick word of praise for North Carolina governor Beverly Perdue who vetoed a bill (SB 9) that would repeal the 2009 Racial Justice Act. The Racial Justice Act was put in place for prisoners sentenced to death. If a judge determines race was a significant factor used in a death penalty trial the sentence must be reduced to life without parole.

The governor said in a statement, "it is simply unacceptable for racial prejudice to play a role in the imposition of the death penalty in North Carolina."

North Carolina and Kentucky are the only states with laws like the Racial Justice Act.

Capital Punishment and the 8th Amendment

“Capital punishment is the most premeditated of murders.” This quote by Albert Camus is only the tip of the iceberg regarding how the death penalty is unconstitutional. One of the clauses that is broken by this irreversible punishment is the 8^th Amendment that states, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted”. Unfortunately in our American society, it seems as if this amendment is not being followed, specifically with regard to the death penalty. In the United States, 34 states are practicing inhumane punishment in the form of the death penalty, a system that is becoming considerably more unusual throughout the world. You can read which states have retained this punishment here.

The death penalty is inhumane because there is no way to know whether or not the alleged criminal is feeling pain while being executed. Since the first two chemical solutions injected into the person’s body are used to induce a coma and then to paralyze them, we can get no sense of the possible physical distress that the person being executed is feeling. The intention is for the person not to feel pain, but because we cannot ask them about their experience afterward, we can only speculate.

Additionally, the lethal injection process is certainly not foolproof. With any kind of medication, certain people require higher doses in order for the desired effect to take place. Lethal injection is no different. The coma may not be successfully induced, or the paralysis fully in effect before the final chemical is injected to stop the heart, making the execution all the more painful and inhumane. To read more about lethal injection, you can visit this article on deathpenalty.org.

Finally, capital punishment violates the 8^th Amendment by being unusual. Nearly half of all countries have completely abolished the death penalty, and an additional 17% have at least abolished it in practice. The United States stands as the only Westernized country that retains the death penalty and it is in the top five countries with the highest execution rates as shown by this chart. In 2010, the US only had fewer executions than China, Iran, North Korea, and Yemen. To be grouped with such countries, many of which the US criticizes for their disregard for human rights, shows the disgrace in our backward beliefs and policies.

Praise for Oregon

This Tuesday, November 22, Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber made a courageous move for justice and put a temporary reprieve on the execution of Gary Haugen for the remainder of his term as governor. Governor Kitzhaber’s decision was announced just weeks before Haugen was set to be executed after waiving his right to another round of appeals and volunteering for execution. Haugen would have been the third person executed in Oregon in the past 49 years since the death penalty was reinstated.

Governor Kitzhaber announced his decision stating that while he oversaw both executions during his term, one in 1996 and one in 1997, he made those decisions despite his deep personal convictions against the death penalty. He said,

“At the time I was torn between questions I have about the morality of capital punishment and my oath to uphold the Oregon constitution. Those were the most agonizing and difficult decisions I made as governor and I have revisited and questioned them over and over again for the past 14 years. I do not believe those executions made us safer. Certainly I don’t believe they made us more noble as a society. And I simply cannot participate once again in something that I believe to be a moral wrong.”

Kitzhaber cited a number of arguments used against death penalty, including the fact that it is not a deterrent to future crime, problems with inadequate defense, and the high costs of the death penalty. As Oregon has only executed two individuals since its reinstatement, both of whom volunteered, Kitzhaber called the death penalty in Oregon effectively an incredibly expensive life term, saying it is a perversion of justice that he would not participate in any longer.

“Oregonians have a fundamental belief in fairness and justice and justice that is swift and certain. But the death penalty as it is practiced in Oregon today is neither fair nor just and is neither swift nor certain and it is not applied equally to all. In my mind it is a perversion of justice.”

Finally, Kitzhaber called on the people of Oregon to re-evaluate the current system of capital punishment, one that he said, “fails to meet the basic standards of justice,” adding that it is not his decision alone to end the death penalty and that it is time for the state to have a debate on the issue.

“Today we can no longer avoid the question,” said Kitzhaber in his announcement regarding the efficacy and legitimacy of the capital punishment system, and this statement is true for all 34 states in the U.S. who still have the death penalty. It is time that we all, as a nation, engage in a serious debate on whether we want to be in the company of countries like China, Iran, North Korea, and Yemen, who are the four countries with the highest number of executions worldwide with the U.S. as the fifth highest.

It is time we ask ourselves whether we want to be known as a leader in human rights, or as a country that still employs a system that is highly expensive, that is racially and socio-economically skewed, and that is draconian and backwards. It is atrocious that a country that aims to lead the rest of the world in so many ways could allow itself to lag so far behind when it comes to capital punishment. We must follow the path that countries around the world have already paved and abolish the death penalty across the U.S. Governor Kitzhaber has already made a step in the right direction. It is time that the rest of the nation join in and end this barbaric system.

View Governor Kitzhaber’s announcement here:
Governor Kitzhaber issues reprieve – calls for action on capital punishment

Article also published at The Progressive Playbook.

Moving toward a Moratorium

A report released on The-News-Leader.com by Andrew Welsh-Huggins of the Associated Press today announced that Ohio’s 30-year-old death penalty law will be examined by a committee, which was convened by Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor. According to O’Connor, the purpose of the committee is not to decide if Ohio should have capital punishment, but rather to build a fair and impartial analysis of the law. During the time of the committee, which was given just over a year to complete the study, there will be an unofficial moratorium on the death penalty in the state, as three executions have already been postponed and another inmate has requested a postponement of his Nov. 15 execution date as well.

While this is not an end to the death penalty in Ohio by any means, it is a signal that dialogue has begun surrounding the issue, a dialogue that will hopefully spark debate among the additional 33 states in the U.S. that still have capital punishment on the books. After all, the systemic issues with Ohio’s capital punishment system are certainly not unique to the state. In fact, the issues with capital punishment go far deeper than simply a moral issue of whether it is permissible for the State to take the life of one of it’s citizens. The death penalty system is one that is clearly unbalanced in terms of race, class, and geography.

According to The Death Penalty Information Center, 96% of the states where the death penalty has been reviewed have shown a clear pattern of race-of-victim or race-of-defendant discrimination. Additionally, over 75% of the murder victims in cases that resulted in execution were white, despite the fact that only 50% of murder victims are white. In terms of socio-economic imbalance, nearly all the defendants in capital cases cannot afford their own attorneys and are given court-appointed attorneys, which, according to recent studies in states like Pennsylvania, such as this one, these court-appointed attorneys are often over-worked and under-paid, and many times lack the experience necessary to take on a capital case (read more here). Within states that allow the death penalty, the quality of representation or the likelihood that a court will pursue the death penalty often varies from county to county, making the system one that is not only rife with classism and racism, but also one that is arbitrary, based more on the color of the victim’s skin and on the county the crime was committed in then on the severity or proof of the crime.

And not only is this system a gross violation of human rights in this country, it is also costs more than life without parole. The Death Penalty Information Center notes that in Kansas, capital cases are 70% more expensive than cases of life without parole. In Florida, it costs the state $51 million a year over what it would cost to give all first degree murder cases life without parole. This trend is similar across all 34 states with the death penalty still in place. In such difficult economic times, it is hard to imagine why a system which has been proven to be a failure in terms of deterrence of future crimes and which is clearly racially skewed, geographically skewed, and socio-economically skewed, is allowed to continue in this country. With fewer and fewer people in support of the death penalty every year, it is time that we have some serious debate about our criminal justice system and our medieval capital punishment system. Ohio has begun the discussion. Now it is time for the remaining 33 states to do the same.

Article also published at The Progressive Playbook.

The Case for Hank Skinner

On March 18, 1995, Henry Watkins "Hank" Skinner was convicted of murdering his girlfriend, Twila Busby, and her two adult sons, Randy Busby and Elwin Caler. The three individuals were brutally murdered on December 31, 1993 in Pampa, Texas, as Twila was bludgeoned to death and the two sons were stabbed.

It has been fifteen years since Skinner's conviction, and in March, 2010, just thirty five minutes before Hank was scheduled to be executed, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a stay of execution in order to consider Skinner's request for DNA testing, something that was not done during his trial in 1994. Ultimately, while the Supreme Court ruled in Skinner's favor, it did not grant Skinner the actual DNA testing, instead, under the Civil Rights Act of 1871, the Supreme Court ruled that Skinner could sue the county D.A.

It is not as if there wasn't any DNA evidence to test. In fact, there were many DNA samples taken from the crime scene, including a rape kit, blood samples, samples of biological material from underneath Twila Busby's fingernails, suggesting that she fought back at her assailant, and a windbreaker with more blood samples, human hairs, and perspiration stains. There is also evidence that another man, Twila's uncle, had been stalking her the night of the murder and had a violent past with Twila.

Despite the plethora of DNA evidence and the pleas of seven of the 12 jurors on the case to test the DNA, the state of Texas has refused to test the samples in the Skinner case. Skinner is set to be executed on November 9th, and judging by the actions of Georgia in killing Troy Davis this past September despite so much doubt, we cannot assume that justice will be paid by our failing court system. We need to act now and prevent Texas from executing what may very well be an innocent man. Texas has done it before in 2004 when they executed Cameron Todd Willingham, despite expert arson evidence that could have exonerated him.

We need to act now. Please contact Gray County (TX) District Attorney Lynn Switzer and Governor Rick Perry and urge Texas to test Hank Skinner's DNA and not to execute another man. You can also sign this petition and show your support.

Photo credit: Amnesty International

Article also published at The Progressive Playbook

A Failed System

As Pennsylvania's courts gain more and more national attention, it is time we ask ourselves if we want to continue to be known for having one of the most ineffective and unjust criminal justice systems in the country.

Recently, a study released by the Pennsylvania Advisory Committee on Wrongful Convictions found the state's criminal justice system is in need of serious reforms due to, among other things, inadequate funding for defense, the inefficacy of eye-witness testimonies, and inadequate or inaccurate scientific evidence.

Additionally, a Philadelphia Inquirer study that examined the past three decades of death penalty appeals in PA found that 125 out of 391 capital cases, nearly one-third, have been reversed since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976 due, for the most part, to mistakes by defense lawyers that deprived the defendant of a fair trial. These mistakes are oftentimes due to the fact that defense lawyers in PA are paid very little and are given little time and little resources to make their case. According to the Inquirer study, court-appointed lawyers in Philadelphia are paid $2,000 for trial preparation and a mere $400 per day in court while a "veteran defense attorney said required a minimum outlay of $35,000 to $40,000.

Following on the heels of these two studies, the New York Times released an editorial stating that the death penalty simply must go in the state. The editorial notes that while Pennsylvania is one of the states that most imposes the death penalty, it is the lowest among those who carry out the death sentence with 208 men and women on death row and no one executed since 1999. Since 1976, when the death penalty was reinstated in the United States, Pennsylvania has executed only three individuals. The editorial notes that this low number of executions cannot take away from the extreme failings of the justice system in the state, saying,

"These abysmal facts vividly show that the death penalty cannot meet constitutional standards. Among the state’s egregious failures is not providing adequate defense counsel in capital cases."

The editorial goes on to note that of the bar's 13,000 lawyers, less than 30 are willing to take on these capital cases, and it is no surprise given the appalling work load and the inadequate pay allotted to them.

What is most striking about the editorial outside of these appalling facts about the failings in Pennsylvania's justice system, is that most of the death penalty cases in the state are more than a decade old. This means that fewer and fewer juries are seeking the death penalty in recent years, thus showing that support for capital punishment, at least in Pennsylvania, seems to be shrinking.

Given the clear failures of the justice system in Pennsylvania and the fact that fewer and fewer of the state's citizens are actually in support of capital punishment, it seems necessary that this unjust system should be put to an end. Senate Bill 423, if passed, would prohibit the use of the death penalty in Pennsylvania. It is imperative that we petition our senators and urge them to co-sponsor this bill. As the New York Times editorial said

"There is no argument in favor of maintaining a barbaric, arbitrary and expensive system of capital punishment."

It's time to end this thing.

The United States of America: A Beacon for Civil Rights

Amnesty International released this map in March, 2011: http://blog.amnestyusa.org/deathpenalty/u-s-in-top-5-for-executions-worldwide/. The map shows which countries have abolished the death penalty world-wide. According to Amnesty, more than 2/3rds of the countries of the world have either abolished the death penalty or have not executed anyone within the past decade. In the U.S., 1/3 of the states have also elected to abolish the death penalty. This past year, 2010, however, the U.S. has ranked top five for the MOST executions carried out across the planet, only surpassed by China, Iran, North Korea, and Yemen, as illustrated by this graph from Amnesty International:



It is troubling to see that the U.S., which holds itself in high esteem for its human rights strides over the past century or so, has managed to retain a policy of such a draconian and barbaric nature. All across the world, the U.S. condemns the leaders of other countries for not allowing a basic level of human rights that we in the U.S. consider to be fundamental. These include such great ideals as in our first amendment: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, the right to assembly, and the right to petition the government. These basic rights we allow our citizens and demand from other countries, and yet, something that seems so obviously unjust and uncivilized, such as capital punishment, has still managed to continue in this country, meanwhile other nations surpass us by abolishing this abhorrent system.

It is atrocious that a country that aims to lead the rest of the world in so many ways could allow itself to lag so far behind when it comes to capital punishment. Not only is capital punishment detestable on a moral level, it is also ineffective, as there is no evidence that it deters future crime, racially imbalanced, with a statistically higher number of minorities on death row (most especially when the victim is white), socio-economically imbalanced, with more lower-class individuals on death row, and it is far more expensive than sentencing someone to life without parole.

What is obvious is that the death penalty cannot continue in this country if we wish to maintain our standing in the world as a leader in human rights. We must follow the path that countries around the world have already paved and abolish the death penalty across the U.S. In order to end on a positive note, the following list is from Amnesty International's web page of countries that have abolished the Death Penalty since 1961:

Abolitionist for all crimes:

• Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Honduras, Iceland, Panama, San Marino, Uruguay, Venezuela
Abolitionist for ordinary crimes:
• Austria, Denmark, Finland, Israel, Italy, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland
No Executions in the Past 10 Years and A Policy Not to Carry Out executions
• Andorra, Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Cape Verde, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Monaco, Nicaragua, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay

The Fight Continues

I watched dumbfounded last night as the state of Georgia and the U.S. Supreme Court decided to murder Troy Davis at 11:08 p.m. It is disgusting, it is disappointing, and yes, it is even discouraging to see that all of the work that so many people did to try to save Troy ended with his death. Yet, it is important that we all remember the words that Troy himself said,

he struggle for justice doesn't end with me. This struggle is for all the Troy Davises who came before me and all the ones who will come after me. I'm in good spirits and I'm prayerful and at peace. But I will not stop fighting until I've taken my last breath."

We need to take a lesson from Troy today and understand that while we may not have been able to spare Troy last night, while the government may have ignored our cries to spare him and to end these unjust, state-sanctioned murders, while it may seem bleak and hopeless now, we must not stop our fight to end the death penalty in the United States. We must, as Troy said, not stop fighting until we take our last breath. We must not let Troy's death be in vain. Today, as we mourn Troy's death we must also be revitalized, and know that the fight is not over, and, if nothing else can come of this, there is at least fuel to our fire to end capital punishment in this country. Troy will not die for nothing. When the day comes that the government finally listens to our cries and sees that the death penalty is arbitrary, racially skewed, and socio-economically skewed, and when they decide to put a moratorium on the death penalty, then we will thank Troy for the terrible sacrifice that he made so bravely in the name of justice.

Don't give up the fight. Stand tall against the death penalty and do not be discouraged. Today, our thoughts are with Troy's family in mourning. Tomorrow, our thoughts will be focused on ending this injustice in our country.