[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----NEB., NEV., CALIF., ORE.

[Rick Halperin]

Nov. 29




NEBRASKA:

Changes to death penalty protocol proposed


In an effort to overcome logistical issues that have prevented the state from 
obtaining the necessary drugs to follow the current death penalty protocol, 
officials have proposed a revised protocol.

The proposal announced Monday did not include a set method or list of 
substances to be used. Instead, it would allow the state corrections director 
to choose which drugs are used in an execution.

Condemned inmates would have to be told which drugs were chosen at least 60 
days before the Nebraska attorney general's office requests an execution 
warrant from the Nebraska Supreme Court.

A public hearing on the proposal will take place on Dec. 30 at the State Office 
Building.

Nebraska hasn't executed an inmate since 1997, when it used the electric chair. 
The state has never used its current three-drug protocol consisting of sodium 
thiopental, pancuronium bromide and potassium chloride.

Voters reinstated the death penalty earlier this month, overturning the 
Legislature's decision to get rid of it.

Danielle Conrad, Executive Director of the ACLU of Nebraska, has this reaction:

"The ACLU of Nebraska stands ready to fight against any effort to cloak 
Nebraska's broken death penalty in secrecy. Regardless of how people feel about 
the death penalty we should all agree that Nebraskans value government 
transparency and accountability in all matters. In fact, inscribed right on our 
state Capitol is 'the salvation of the state is the watchfulness of the 
citizens.' As citizens, we can't complete that duty if the government only 
offers us selective information, editing out all the ugly parts.

"Both death penalty supporters and opponents should be able to agree that the 
most extreme use of state power should absolutely not occur in the shadows. As 
the Supreme Court has said, 'the protection given speech and press was 
fashioned to assure unfettered interchange of ideas for the bringing about of 
political and social changes desired by the people.'

"Given the recent history of scandals within the Department of Corrections, 
this Department should be making extra efforts to be transparent and 
accountable to the people of Nebraska.

"Any ill-advised effort to limit the rights of citizens, journalists, and 
criminal defendants to know and understand this process would implicate grave 
constitutional, legal and policy questions that will come at the expense of the 
Nebraska taxpayer."

(source: nebraska.tv)

**************

Nebraska officials propose changes to death penalty protocol


Nebraska officials say they will try to change the state's death penalty 
protocol in an effort to get around the logistical problems that have prevented 
them from obtaining the necessary lethal injection drugs.

The proposal announced Monday would allow the state corrections director to 
choose which drugs are used in an execution. Condemned inmates would have to be 
told which drugs were chosen at least 60 days before the Nebraska attorney 
general's office requests an execution warrant from the Nebraska Supreme Court.

Nebraska hasn't executed an inmate since 1997, when it used the electric chair.

The state has never used its current 3-drug protocol consisting of sodium 
thiopental, pancuronium bromide and potassium chloride. Nebraska voters 
reinstated the death penalty earlier this month, overturning the Legislature's 
decision to abolish the punishment.

(source: Associated Press)

****************

New death penalty protocol proposed


The Nebraska Department of Correctional Services has proposed revisions to the 
state's execution protocol.

It plans a public hearing on Dec. 30 from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. at the State Office 
Building, 301 Centennial Mall, Lower Level Conference Room.

Nebraskans voted to keep the death penalty on Nov. 8.

The current protocol provides for a 3-drug combination. The proposed protocol 
does not identify the substances to be used or the detailed method in which 
they will be administered.

(source: Lincoln Journal Star)






NEVADA:

Court rejects man's appeal in death penalty case


The Nevada Supreme Court has rejected the appeal of Thomas Collman, sentenced 
to death for killing his girlfriend's 1-year-old son in January 1996 in Ely.

Collman, who was training to become a correctional officer at the state prison 
in Ely, argued in his petition that there were more than 30 instances of 
ineffective counsel and prosecutorial misconduct.

The Supreme Court, in a 5-1 opinion issued Wednesday and written by Chief 
Justice Ron Parraguirre, ruled that Collman's claims were without merit.

Justice Michael Cherry dissented, saying defense lawyers failed to strenuously 
object to evidence presented at trial. Cherry said the conviction was based in 
part on "junk" scientific evidence.

Collman said the boy died when he fell down a set of basement stairs, according 
to court documents.

The prosecution said there were bruises and bite marks on the child's body that 
were inflicted over a period of time, according to the documents.

(sourc: Las Vegas Sun)






CALIFORNIA:

Death penalty: Ron Briggs' odyssey


Ron Briggs was always an ardent supporter of the death penalty. His father John 
Briggs, former state assemblyman and senator, was a driving force behind a 1978 
initiative that expanded the list of special circumstances required for a death 
sentence.

But today, Ron Briggs is one the biggest opponents of capital punishment. He 
campaigned for Proposition 62, which would have ended the state's death penalty 
and was rejected by voters this month. The former El Dorado County supervisor 
is one of the petitioners in a lawsuit seeking to overturn Proposition 66, 
approved by voters instead, which would speed up the state's executions.

He eventually learned that the death penalty costs taxpayers 18 times more than 
a sentence of life in prison. He said that death row inmates are kept in 
private cells and don't have to work.

He now believes that the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime. He believes 
few murderers consider the potential punishment before they commit their 
horrible crimes. "It's more a social, mental health issue more than anything 
else," he said.

John Van de Kamp, the former state attorney general and a co-petitioner in the 
lawsuit to overturn Proposition 66, said Briggs' involvement in the issue makes 
a strong statement.

"There's a sense of irony in the fact that (Briggs and his dad) were so 
involved in the issue in the outset and they've seen it fail," he said. "It 
shows minds can change over time."

The reason for that dramatic shift had to do with religion, economics and 
victims' experiences with the court procedure, Briggs said.

Briggs, who is now a political consultant, said his Catholic faith was a major 
factor in the turnaround. After years of staying away from the pews, he 
returned to attending services around 2006-07 and was influenced by the 
church's teachings against capital punishment.

He said that in the 1970s, the church didn't provide much guidance about the 
death penalty. It wasn't until 1980 that the National Conference of Catholic 
Bishops published a negative statement about it. Now Pope Francis is very vocal 
about his desire to end capital punishment worldwide.

The economic impact of the death penalty was highlighted to him when he was 
serving on the El Dorado County Board of Supervisors during the financial 
crisis of 2007-08. He recalls sitting through meetings when the board had to 
discuss laying off employees, cutting library hours and trimming back veterans' 
services. At the same time, huge amounts of the budget were going to the 
district attorney's office. It was then that he decided to get more educated 
about where all the expenses went.

"I became a hard-core abolitionist in 2008," he said.

He eventually learned that the death penalty costs taxpayers 18 times more than 
a sentence of life in prison. He said that death row inmates are kept in 
private cells and don't have to work. They are guaranteed rights to appeal that 
other prisoners don't get.

According to deathpenaltyinfo.org, there are 741 prisoners on California's 
death row. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1977, only 13 people have 
been executed in the state.

The final factor that pushed him into opposing the death penalty was the plight 
of victims with the endless court appeals. Each time the defendants go to trial 
again, the victims of the crime and their families have to relive the anguish 
and torture of what happened. He realized that the death penalty doesn't in 
fact give closure to victims.

Briggs and Van de Kamp can refile once that happens, which will be by Dec. 16.

Briggs understands that some victims and their families do want the death 
penalty, but he doesn't think it serves justice. "To me, justice and vengeance 
are 2 different things," he said. "I think society's justice is to get these 
people out of our hair and let them rot in prison."

But some of Briggs' family members disagree with his stance. His father remains 
publicly supportive of the death penalty though he understands the arguments 
and his mother is angry with him for opposing it.

Briggs and Van de Kamp filed their lawsuit against Proposition 66 in the state 
supreme court the day after the election and expect to eventually prevail. The 
suit said Proposition 66 violates defendants' rights by imposing an unjust 
2-year time limit on the amount of time a judge has to hear the appeal. The 
suit also says the initiative violates state law because it doesn't address a 
single subject and includes several topics.

"It's wrong," he said. "In layman's terms, 66 aims to cut corners, tremendous 
corners."

The court threw the lawsuit out because the election has not been certified yet 
but said Briggs and Van de Kamp can refile once that happens, which will be by 
Dec. 16.

Kent Scheidegger, one of the authors of Proposition 66 and legal director of 
Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, called the lawsuit "a desperation shot." He 
said decades of court precedent show that the initiative is sound. "It's a big 
waste of the court's time."

He is unmoved by Briggs' change of heart on the death penalty. "That is father 
sponsored an initiative on the death penalty doesn't give him any special 
standing," he said. "I suspect that he sees this as a way to get attention."

Briggs said his involvement to abolish the death penalty has nothing to do with 
any future political goals, though he doesn't rule them out. He said he might 
run for a political office again.

"I'd like to take [Republican Congressman] Tom McClintock on but I don't know 
if I have enough money to do that," he said.

He said he was surprised that Californians didn't vote to abolish the death 
penalty because the polls showed a sizable number wanted that. He thinks 
Proposition 66 confused voters. "People were ready to chuck the death penalty 
but Proposition 66 gave them a way out," he said.

(source: Capitol Weekly)






OREGON:

Abolish the death penalty in Oregon


As a former prosecutor and public defender, I recognize that mistakes are made 
in the criminal courts, and national studies confirm the point. Since 1976, 
1,440 individuals nationwide have been executed since the U.S. Supreme Court 
reinstituted the death penalty, according to the Death Penalty Information 
Center.

Much has been said in recent weeks about the high financial cost of prosecuting 
death penalty cases in Oregon, and the cost of the imposition of such 
sentences. While these are valid considerations, the cost of death penalty 
cases has minor import compared to what the institution of death penalty cases 
says about Oregon and the rest of the states that allow for it.

The fact is the taking of a life by any government is cruel, and with the 
growing number of nations that have abolished the death penalty, the practice 
is becoming unusual. Many nations (such as Iran and North Korea) and a 
caliphate (ISIS) still impose the death penalty. We should not look to them for 
justification for the practice. Rather, we should look to our own criminal 
system, and what we aspire to be as a state and nation.

As a former prosecutor and public defender, I recognize that mistakes are made 
in the criminal courts, and national studies confirm the point. Since 1976, 
1,440 individuals nationwide have been executed since the U.S. Supreme Court 
reinstituted the death penalty, according to the Death Penalty Information 
Center.

Since 1973, 156 individuals on death row have been exonerated and released, 
according to the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty. How many of 
the more than 1,400 inmates who have been executed since 1976 were innocent 
probably will never be known.

One study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 
2014 suggests that 4.1 % (or about 57 people) of the 1,440 who have been 
executed (up to 2014) were innocent. Their families likely will never know 
justice should it be deserved, even posthumously. The courts do not usually 
spend time with post-conviction relief for the dead. The undeniable fact is the 
criminal system is not perfect; no human system can ever hope to be.

It has been advocated by Oregon prosecutors that Oregon's death row contains 
only guilty individuals, that Oregon does a better job. Oregon has been lucky, 
not better. According to The National Registry of Exonerations, seven people 
convicted of murder and serving life terms in Oregon have been exonerated. How 
lucky those 7 are that they were not sentenced to death and executed before 
their innocence was determined.

The fact is that Oregon's criminal court system, as well as the system in every 
other state, is fallible. Sooner or later an Oregon prosecutor, and jury, is 
going to make a big mistake that cannot be corrected. Not even one mistaken 
death is worth the policy of imposing the death penalty. Given the system's 
fallibility, the last thing we should allow the state of Oregon to do is take 
the life of anyone.

Justice Anthony Kennedy once wrote: "When the law punishes by death, it risks 
its own sudden descent into brutality, transgressing the constitutional 
commitment to decency and restraint." It is time for Oregon to split ranks with 
ISIS, Iran and North Korea on this issue, adopt the decent and restrained 
approach, and abolish the death penalty.

(source: Opinion; David L. Jorling of Lake Oswego is a retired attorney who 
spent his last 23 years of practice in the city attorney office of Portland. He 
also was a deputy district attorney in Multnomah County for about 3 
years----Portland Tribune)