[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----MICH., KAN., MO., ARIZ., CALIF., WASH., USA

[Rick Halperin]

Feb. 6


MICHIGAN:

State senator pushes death penalty for cop killers



A Senate Democrat faces an uphill battle in his quest to bring the death 
penalty to Michigan for people convicted of killing a police or correctional 
officer.

State Sen. Virgil Smith, D-Detroit, said he promised a constituent - James 
Bowens, father of Detroit Police Officer Matthew Bowens who was killed during a 
traffic stop in 2004 - that he would bring the issue up this year.

"If you kill a cop, you're the most egregious criminal out there," Smith said. 
"If you're willing to go that far, there's no telling what you're willing to 
do. There should be no mercy at that point.

He offered a resolution to change the state's constitution that would require a 
2/3 vote in both the House and Senate as well as statewide vote of the people. 
Michigan was the first state to officially abolish capital punishment in 1847. 
That ban was reinforced by the 1962 constitutional convention.

But there have been at least three efforts in recent years to bring back the 
death penalty. Former state Rep. Larry Julian, R-Lennon, a former state trooper 
tried in 1999 and 2004 to bring back the death penalty. He was bolstered in his 
2nd effort when the parents of the 2 slain Detroit Police officers - Bowens and 
his partner Officer Jennifer Fetig - signed on to the effort. But both efforts 
fell far short of the 2/3 vote needed to be place on the ballot.

Oakland County Sheriff Mike Bouchard also offered a resolution to bring the 
death penalty to Michigan in 1995 when he was a state Senator. He couldn't get 
enough co-sponsors to have the issue taken up for a vote. But the Birmingham 
Republican still believes in capital punishment.

"I'm supportive of it whether it's a soccer mom, a business owner or a police 
officer who is killed," he said. "I think a jury has the right to make that 
decision. It's a shame that the Legislature consistently refuses to let the 
people vote on it."

Michigan is 1 of 18 states to abolish the death penalty, including 6 states 
which have gotten rid of capital punishment in the last decade, according to 
the Death Penalty Information Center. The U.S. Supreme Court is also hearing 
challenges to Oklahoma's lethal injection policies after 3 botched executions. 
In 2014, 35 people were executed in 7 states. Another 7 inmates on death row 
were exonerated last year.

There still can be federal executions in Michigan, but the last person executed 
in the state was Anthony Chebatoris, who was hanged July 8, 1938, at the 
federal prison in Milan after he was convicted of killing a bystander during a 
bank robbery in Midland.

Bowens and Fettig, were killed during a traffic stop in southwest Detroit. Eric 
L. Marshall was convicted of the murders and sentenced to life in prison. He 
died in 2010.

Republican Sen. Rick Jones, R-Grand Ledge, is a former Sheriff and strong 
advocate for victims of crime. But even he said he's against the death penalty 
in all circumstances because the risk of making a mistake is just too high.

"Occasionally, the system makes a mistake," Jones said. "If a mistake is made, 
we can't dig somebody up and say we're sorry. If somebody's in prison, we can 
release them. I'm firmly against the death penalty."

The Michigan Catholic Conference is also a strong voice against bringing the 
death penalty back,saying the state should be proud of its anti-capital 
punishment tradition.

"We have structures in place that shield society from an aggressor who has 
committed such a heinous crime," said David Maluchnick, spokesman for the 
Conference. "We believe that a government with the power to kill is a 
government with too much power.

"At a time when so many states are moving away from the death penalty, it's 
quite surprising that Michigan is contemplating moving the other way," he 
added.

Smith acknowledged that passing his resolution won't be easy, "But it's only 
for police and correctional officers. These are the people at the front line 
trying to defend our public safety, so we need to protect them as much as we 
can."

The resolution has been assigned to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

(source: Detroit Free Press)

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

Legislator wants the death penalty in Michigan for anyone who kills a cop



A state senator from Detroit wants to authorize the death penalty in Michigan, 
but only for anyone who's convicted of killing a police officer, according to 
the Detroit Free Press.

"If you kill a cop, you're the most egregious criminal out there," Smith told 
the newspaper. "If you're willing to go that far, there's no telling what 
you're willing to do. There should be no mercy at that point."

Smith's effort won't be easy, per se: To overturn the constitutional ban on 
capital punishment in Michigan, his resolution would require the approval of 
2/3 of the members in the state House and Senate and an affirmative vote from 
voters.

If the state Legislature approves the resolution, it would go before voters in 
November 2016, according to the Associated Press.

(source: Detroit Metro Times)

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

Death Penalty Bill May Not Get Far



It looks unlikely that a proposal to allow the death penalty in Michigan will 
go anywhere this term.

A resolution in the state Senate would allow the death penalty for people 
convicted of murdering police officers in the line of duty.

But the Republican chair of the committee considering the measure - who also 
happens to be a former police officer - says he will not support the measure.

"If a mistake is made, we can't dig somebody up and say we're sorry," said 
Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Rick Jones, R-Grand Ledge.

"If somebody's in prison, we can release them - hopefully even compensate them 
for the miscarriage of justice. So, I'm firmly against the death penalty."

Jones is typically viewed as one of the more conservative members of the state 
Senate, and has built a reputation for subscribing to a "tough on crime" 
political philosophy. He says he will grant the resolution a committee hearing 
if there is significant support for it on the panel. But Jones says he will 
personally oppose it - and it is ultimately up to him to decide whether to hold 
a vote in committee.

Michigan became the 1st state - and possibly the 1st English-speaking territory 
in the world - to abolish capital punishment in 1847. Although it was 
technically allowed for a short time after statehood, the state has never 
performed an execution. Recent debates about whether to once again allow the 
death penalty have been infrequent and ill-fated.

Sen. Virgil Smith, D-Detroit, says he introduced the resolution on behalf of 
one constituent in a newly-added area of his district whose son was killed in 
the line of duty.

"If you kill a cop, you're the most egregious criminal out here," said Smith. 
"If you're willing to go that far, ain't no telling what you're willing to do. 
So, there's no mercy at that point."

Smith's resolution does have support from the 2 top Republicans in the state 
Senate, Majority Leader Arlan Meekhof, R-West Olive, and Majority Floor Leader 
Mike Kowall, R-White Lake Twp. Both are listed as cosponsors of the resolution.

The measure would need 2/3 support from both the state House and Senate. It 
would then need to be approved by Michigan voters.

The Michigan Catholic Conference issued a statement this week promising that it 
"will devote the full weight of its organization to oppose and defeat any 
effort to allow for state-sanctioned murder."

"The death penalty is an antiquated and inhumane method of punishment 
representing nothing more than retaliation and more violence," it said. "It has 
no place in a civilized society. The prohibition against capital punishment in 
the 1963 Michigan Constitution is clear: the state has no right to decide who 
lives and who dies."

(source: WMUK news)

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

The death penalty and the facts



State Senator Virgil Smith, a Detroit Democrat, wants Michigan to enact the 
death penalty for anyone who kills a police officer in the line of duty.

To quote the senator:

"If you kill a cop ... if you're willing to go that far, ain't no telling what 
you're willing to do."

He doesn't think such a person deserves to live. He's not alone in this: 2 
powerful Republican allies, Senate Majority leader Arlan Meekhof and Majority 
Floor Leader Mike Kowall are cosponsoring his resolution.

But it's already clear this isn't going anywhere. The Roman Catholic Church, 
which is otherwise stoutly conservative on social issues, is strongly against 
the death penalty.

Rick Jones, the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is opposed to it, and 
he is nobody's kale salad-eating liberal. He is a tough conservative, a career 
law enforcement officer, and a former sheriff. Senator Jones said he was 
opposed to capital punishment because, after all, mistakes are made.

But law enforcement officers and criminologists, also know two things about the 
death penalty. First, states that have the death penalty have significantly 
higher murder rates than those that don't have it. Second, there's no evidence 
that the death penalty deters crime. Nobody who kills somebody in a fit of 
passion sits down first with a legal pad and evaluates pros and cons.

Studies show that most other murders are committed either under the influence 
of drugs and alcohol, or by those who are mentally ill. Having the death 
penalty for cop killers could in fact lead to more murdered cops. Police are 
all too familiar with the concept of "suicide by cop," in which someone 
attempts to provoke a policeman into killing them in a bizarre form of suicide.

Specifying the death penalty only for those who kill police could, in other 
words, have unintended and tragic consequences. Actually, if someone was 
rational about all this, they might well be more inclined to kill if they 
thought they would be put to sleep rather than spend life in prison, without 
hope of parole.

If you wonder why, watch the movie The Shawshank Redemption for a mild taste of 
what life behind bars is like.

There's 1 final reason the death penalty is a bad idea, one you might not 
suspect: Inflicting it is terribly expensive. The cost isn't in the execution 
itself. It is in the extra legal work and appeals surrounding any death penalty 
case.

An Urban Institute study found that in Maryland, where the death penalty was 
reinstated in 1978, the extra cost to the taxpayers was $186 million in the 
first 30 years.

That???s for 5 executions. In Washington State, each case where prosecutors 
have sought the death penalty has cost the state more than 1 million extra 
dollars.

Other states have similar stories.

James Abbott, a respected New Jersey police chief, said recently that we should 
forget about the death penalty, and instead give law enforcement officers the 
money we've been wasting on it to fight crime. He knows what he's talking 
about.

It may feel good to think about killing those we are most mad at. But like many 
fantasies, it doesn't make much sense.

(source: Jack Lessenberry is Michigan Radio's political analyst. Views 
expressed in his essays are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of 
Michigan Radio, its management or the station licensee, The University of 
Michigan----Michiganradio.org)








KANSAS:

Judge to Allow Death Penalty in Quadruple Homicide Case



A judge has ruled that prosecutors may seek the death penalty against a man 
accused in the deaths of 4 people at a Kansas farm, including an 18-month-old 
girl, in 2013.

Franklin County District Judge Eric Godderz ruled during a hearing Friday the 
death penalty will be allowed in the case against 29-year-old Kyle Flack of 
Ottawa. He is charged with murder and rape after 2 men, a woman and her 
daughter were found dead near Ottawa. Flack has pleaded not guilty.

The Lawrence Journal-World reports ( http://bit.ly/1C59xs5 ) Flack's attorney 
argued the death penalty should be banned because of "evolving standards of 
decency," noting that 120 countries have rejected the punishment.

Godderz said his court is bound to follow precedent in Kansas and the U.S., 
which allow the death penalty.

(source: Associated Press)






MISSOURI:

Republican lawmaker proposes repeal of death penalty



Legislation that would repeal the death penalty in Missouri has been offered 
again in the state legislature. Republican State Representative T.J. Berry has 
filed HB 772 and says when he first joined the legislature 4 years ago, he was 
a death penalty supporter.

"I didn't start out there until I really, really looked at the issue 
thoroughly," said Berry. "Being a representative made me look at the issue 
thoroughly."

Berry says it's cheaper for the state to sentence someone to life without 
parole than to give them a death sentence.

"When you look at all of the legal costs of doing a death penalty case, it 
becomes extremely expensive for the state to do," said Berry.

Many have said the goal of the death penalty is to serve as a deterrent, but 
Berry says it's no longer a deterrent when it takes an average of over 18 years 
to prosecute someone.

"If it was done the next day after the guilty verdict, and it was public, 
maybe, but that's not our system and that's not what we do," said Berry.

Last year, Republican representative Paul Wieland proposed a repeal of the 
death penalty and several Republicans, including Berry, were co-sponsors. Berry 
hopes to gain more support from fellow members of his caucus.

"The more you make this a fiscal responsibility discussion, I think the more 
Republicans that you will have on board," said Berry.

The state's next execution is set for Wednesday. Walter Storey is scheduled die 
by lethal injection for the 1990 murder of Jill Frey.

(source: Missourinet.com)








ARIZONA:

Psychologist Describes Arias as a 'Stalker' in Death Penalty Retrial



Lawyers in the Jodi Arias death penalty sentencing retrial wrapped up another 
intense day in court after a psychologist described the convicted boyfriend 
killer as a "stalker." Dr. Janine DeMarte, who was called to the witness stand 
on Wednesday by prosecutors, gave a testimony that contradicted the defense 
argument that Arias was emotionally abused by Travis Alexander, the man she 
murdered almost 7 years ago.

Dr. DeMarte described Arias as an extremely jealous stalker with borderline 
personality disorder and a fixation on Alexander, reports Fox 10 Phoenix. The 
psychologist also said that Arias refused to let him move on and resorted to 
spying on him and confronting other girls that he dated. She went on to say 
that Arias was prone to manic episodes of extreme happiness and despair and 
discredited defense arguments that Arias murdered Alexander as a result of 
abuse she endured by him and her own family in the past. The psychologist added 
that police interviews showed that Arias wasn't liked by some of her family 
members.

Dr. DeMarte is expected to be cross-examined by the defense starting on 
Thursday.

Earlier in the week, prosecutors presented the jury with sexually explicit text 
messages that Arias exchanged with Alexander to show that she was enthusiastic 
about their sex life. Prosecutors read some of the graphic messages aloud on 
Tuesday in effort to cast the convicted killer in a negative light.

Arias' former co-workers also said that she displayed inappropriate behavior 
with colleagues, while 1 witness said she that gave her number out to a man on 
the flight after leaving Alexander's memorial service, reports Fox 10 Phoenix.

Although Arias was found guilty of 1st-degree murder last May in the death of 
her ex-boyfriend, in her 1st trial, jurors failed to reach a unanimous decision 
on her sentencing. As a result, the retrial will determine whether she should 
be sentenced to death, life in prison or life with a chance of release after 
serving 25 years.

According to medical examiners, Arias stabbed Alexander 27 times, primarily in 
the back, torso and heart in his Phoenix home. She also slit Alexander's throat 
from ear to ear, nearly decapitating him, and she shot him in the face before 
she dragged his bloodied corpse to the shower and took pictures of him.

(source: Latin Post)

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

Sentencing retrial to take longer than expected



The sentencing retrial for the murder case against Jodi Arias seems to be 
dragging longer than expected, yet the end is still not in sight.

Arias' sentencing retrial was called after the set of jurors during the 1st 
trial failed to come up with a unified decision on the just punishment for the 
controversial crime 2 years ago. The 1st court proceedings lasted for 
approximately 5 months, and it became one of the major news items during that 
time. It was even broadcast live by several media outfits.

The present retrial began on Oct. 20 last year, and after more than 3 months, 
litigation is still ongoing. However, in the current proceedings, Superior 
Court Judge Sherry Stephens banned all live telecast of the trials, and the 
media can only release still photos from the court. But despite the lessened 
media attention, it seems to be taking longer than expected, and it is even 
perceived to last much longer than the first one.

On Tuesday, a psychologist as well as victim Travis Alexander's former Mormon 
bishop were called by the prosecution to prove that Arias deserves to be given 
a death penalty.

The prosecution team called psychologist Janeen Demarte to the stand to let the 
jury know that Arias was not a victim of domestic and sexual abuse as her 
defense team is trying to project. According to Demarte's testimony, the police 
interviews during the time of the murder investigation shows that Arias' own 
family do not like her very much. She also mentioned that Arias was known by 
her colleagues for constantly acting inappropriately, and 1 of the witnesses 
also said that she gave her contact number to a man while she was on the flight 
back after the memorial service for Alexander. Some of the very graphic and 
vulgar text exchanges between the victim and Arias were also read during 
Tuesday's court session, proving that she had a promiscuous relationship with 
Alexander.

Meanwhile, Mormon Bishop Vernon Parker also spoke about the time Alexander 
stayed in his house, and confirmed that the victim accessed pornography using 
his computer.

(source: Christian Today)








CALIFORNIA:

Death penalty sought in teen's hate crime murder



2 men, described as 'well-documented' gang members, could face the death 
penalty if they are convicted in the gunshot slaying of Poly High School 
freshman Lareanz Simmons.

Charges were filed this week against Cristian Velasquez, 23, and Manuel 
Barbarin, 24, after recent new leads surfaced in the 3-year-old homicide.

Simmons, 14, was confronted outside his Eastside home when a suspect got out of 
a vehicle and fired 6 shots. Authorities have not said which suspect was the 
actual gunman and added that a 3rd, unnamed suspect may be involved.

Simmons was described as a popular, caring kid who was active in his community 
and not affiliated with any gang.

Detectives said Thursday the incident was 'gang motivated and racially 
motivated'.

(source: Inland News Today)








WASHINGTON:

Carnation killer's confession played in court Thursday



In court Thursday, a jury heard accused killer Joe McEnroe confess to shooting 
his girlfriend's entire family.

Joe McEnroe is charged with 6 counts of aggravated 6st-degree murder for 
killing his girlfriend's family in Carnation on Christmas Eve in 2007.

His girlfriend, Michele K. Anderson is also charged with the murders.

The recording lasted about 3 hours.

For more than an hour and a half on the recordings, McEnroe stuck to his story 
about seeing Wayne and Judy Anderson on Christmas Eve 2007. He said he and 
Michele Anderson told her parents they were headed to Las Vegas to elope.

"They were, they were thrilled, you know. I mean yeah. I mean I was gonna be 
officially a part of the family now," said a relaxed, talkative McEnroe on the 
recording.

The conversation turned when detective Jake Pavlovich told McEnroe that Michele 
K. Anderson was telling another detective they were responsible for the 
murders.

"I basically told him, 'I know you were involved. Michele is telling us the 
truth. I would like to get the truth from you as well,'" Detective Jake 
Pavlovich told the court Thursday.

Then in the recording, McEnroe slowly revealed how he and Anderson shot her 
parents, Wayne and Judy Anderson, her brother Scott Anderson and his wife 
Erica, and the couples' 2 young children: Olivia, 5, and Nathan, 3.

"I remember telling Erica that I was sorry, and I remember, I remember Nathan, 
Nathan looked, Nathan looked like he understood," said McEnroe in the recorded 
confession, " ... like he didn't hate us for it."

Then McEnroe admitted he shot the 3-year-old: "I killed him with a single shot 
to the head. I didn't want him to suffer."

McEnroe went on: "I didn't want anybody to suffer, okay? I shot Erica in the 
head. I shot Olivia in the head."

Pam Mantle sat in the court room and shook her head - Erica Anderson was her 
daughter, Olivia and Nathan were her grandchildren.

When Detective Pavlovich asked McEnroe why he killed Erica, Olivia and Nathan, 
McEnroe replied, "They saw everything. We thought that if we left them alone, 
if we walked away, we'd be here telling you what I am now; the same reason we 
shot mom. That's the same."

Throughout the recorded interview McEnroe refers to Michelle Anderson's 
parents, Judy and Wayne, as mom and dad.

McEnroe told the detective he felt bad about the murders. "This, you know, of 
all the things that I've ever seen in my life, nothing is worse than then 
seeing, seeing somebody dead and knowing that it was my fault," said McEnroe 
2/3 of the way through his recorded confession.

Investigators say the motive was money. Anderson was upset her parents were 
going to ask her to start paying rent for the mobile home she and McEnroe 
shared on her parents' property.

Anderson believed her brother owed her money.

McEnroe's defense team said McEnroe did kill the Anderson family, but did so 
because he was under the control of Michele K. Anderson.

McEnroe's trial has been delayed by arguments over a possible death penalty and 
whether he can change his not guilty plea to not guilty by reason of insanity.

McEnroe tried to plead guilty to avoid the death penalty. The King County 
prosecutor wouldn't make a deal.

The defense for McEnroe Anderson has topped $8 million, according to the King 
County Department of Public Defense. The King County Prosecutor's staff said 
they have spent just over $1 million.

The costs associated with investigations and work by the WSP Crime Lab are not 
included in that figure.

Anderson's trial, delayed by questions of her mental competency, is scheduled 
for the fall.

Prosecutors will play the rest of the confession in court on Monday.

(source: KIRO TV news)








USA:

Don't Expect Supreme Court's Latest Review of Lethal Injection to Kill Death 
Penalty



Last week, the Supreme Court put 3 executions in Oklahoma on hold as it reviews 
the constitutionality of the state's death penalty protocol.

If the nation's top court strikes down Oklahoma's lethal injection procedure, 
what would it mean for the death penalty? We've asked the experts what you need 
to know.

What exactly is the Supreme Court reviewing?

The court is assessing Oklahoma's use of the drug midazolam, a sedative used in 
its 5-drug lethal injection protocol. According to the Death Penalty 
Information Center, 5 states have used midazolam for their executions, and at 
least 5 other states have proposed using it.

In the wake of several botched executions in 2014 involving the drug, a group 
of death row inmates in Oklahoma filed a petition challenging the efficacy of 
midazolam to mitigate pain, which they claim would render the state's 
executions in violation of the Eighth Amendment's protection against "cruel and 
unusual" punishment. (In Florida, death row inmate Jerry William Correll, 
scheduled to be killed on Feb. 26, filed for a temporary block of the execution 
pending the U.S. Supreme Court's review.)

"[Midazolam] doesn't guarantee that the prisoners will be insensate throughout 
the execution," said Eighth Amendment expert Megan McCracken from U.C. Berkeley 
School of Law's Death Penalty Clinic.

Legal experts are not the only ones with concerns about Oklahoma's drug 
protocol. Several anesthesiologists have expressed concern about using 
midazolam for executions. The drug is typically used in surgical procedures to 
sedate patients before they receive anesthesia. To sedate an average adult in 
surgery, a dose of midazolam is normally no more than 2 milligrams. State 
executioners, however, administer the drug in much greater quantities. During 
recent executions, about 500 milligrams have been used.

Many medical experts have noted that little is known about how the body reacts 
at that dose.

"We don't know the effects of 500 milligrams of midazolam," said Dr. David 
Waisel, an anesthesiologist at the Boston Children's Hospital, an affiliate of 
Harvard Medical School. "We don't study it, and we don't use it clinically. 
They are experimenting."

Why did the Supreme Court agree to consider a challenge to lethal injection 
now?

The lethal injection landscape has been fraught with issues since 2011, when 
Hospira, the only American manufacturer of a key lethal injection drug, stopped 
its production in the midst of an international campaign by capital punishment 
opponents. The company's decision set off a scramble to find another supplier 
and ultimately another drug.

In late 2013, Florida became the 1st state to execute an individual using 
midazolam, but it wasn't until April 2014 that concerns about midazolam became 
widespread. That month, Oklahoma botched the execution of prisoner Clayton 
Lockett. Despite receiving an injection of midazolam, Lockett groaned and 
writhed on the gurney for about 40 minutes until his death, witnesses reported.

"I think the Supreme Court would prefer not to have to get involved in the 
details of executions, but felt compelled to because of what happened last 
year," said Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information 
Center. "Something went really wrong, and somebody's got to monitor this thing 
or states will keep repeating it."

The Supreme Court is expected to hear the Oklahoma prisoners' case in April and 
make a final ruling by July. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, 
midazolam was used for at least 11 of 35 executions in 2014.

Is this the 1st time that the Supreme Court has weighed in on lethal injection?

No. The last time the court weighed in was seven years ago, when it upheld 
Kentucky's lethal injection protocol in the case Baze v. Rees.

According to McCracken, it's critical to look at what has changed since then. 
"In 2008, all of the states were using a very similar protocol - all the states 
were using the same 3 drugs," McCracken said. "Because some pharmaceutical 
companies have made their drugs unavailable for executions, the states have 
been changing their methods."

McCracken considers the botched executions a "consequence of using untested, 
untried combinations."

What happens if the court strikes down the lethal injection method? It's 
possible that midazolam would no longer be used. Other drugs might take its 
place or Oklahoma might decide to use a single-drug protocol in place of the 
current three-drug cocktail.

"I don't think that the death penalty is going anywhere," said Michael 
Rushford, president of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation.

Even if the court limits the use of lethal injection and states continue to 
face difficulty getting approved drugs, there are other methods that prisons 
could employ. Virginia lawmakers have already discussed bringing back the 
electric chair when the approved drugs are not readily available. Wyoming 
lawmakers have proposed allowing firing squads.

Death penalty experts doubt that such methods would become the primary protocol 
for execution. "States changed from hanging to electric chair because it was a 
modern, supposedly painless method of execution," said Dieter of the Death 
Penalty Information Center. "There has been a continuous attempt to make 
executions appear more palatable, humane, and modern."

Could this be the beginning of a larger trend moving away from the death 
penalty?

Not really. "The Supreme Court position is that if the death penalty is 
constitutional, some method of execution will be allowed," Dieter said. "But 
you have to try to do the best. You have to minimize the harm. You can't just 
use any drug that's on the shelf. It has to be something reputable that stands 
up to scrutiny. [The Supreme Court] is not going to narrow it so much that it 
makes it impossible."

The rate of executions across the United States, however, has decreased 
markedly over the past decade. 10 years ago 60 inmates were executed. In 2014, 
there were 35. Among the 32 states that allow the death penalty, only 7 had 
executions in the past year.

"In many places in the U.S., the death penalty is at best a symbolic gesture," 
said Austin Sarat, Amherst professor and author of "Gruesome Spectacles: 
Botched Executions and America's Death Penalty".

Regardless of this downward trend, more than 3,000 people remain on death row 
in the United States, including, as of today, 393 in Florida.

(source: Flaglerlive.com)






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

Society should decide on fate of death penalty



Erwin Chemerinsky believes that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment 
["Botched executions and ethical dilemmas," Opinion, Jan. 29] and would like 
the Supreme Court to so rule, even though it upheld the death penalty as late 
as 2008 in Baze v. Rees, with a vote of 7-2. Chemerinsky's arguments include 
the fact that innocent people sometimes are convicted and sentenced to death, 
and that there is no evidence that the death penalty deters crime.

Judicial cases invoking the death penalty are very emotional for all parties 
involved, usually due to outrageous crimes and aggravating factors of the case. 
So yes, mistakes are sometimes made.

However, in Baze v. Rees, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the plurality 
opinion, "An isolated mishap alone does not violate the Eighth Amendment." It's 
quite possible that more people are killed mistakenly by the police than are 
executed through the death penalty.

While there is no evidence that the death penalty deters crime, based on 
recidivism rates, one could also argue that incarceration does little to deter 
crime. However, the question remains as to what to do with individuals who have 
shown that they cannot live in society and are a serious threat. What do we do 
with the mass murderers, serial killers and rapists? What do we do with people 
like Timothy McVeigh, who killed 168 people, or Jack Graham, who killed 44 
people?

Even though the Supreme Court is unlikely to outlaw the death penalty on 
constitutional grounds, society can choose not to have or implement such 
punishment. It is up to society to determine the environment in which we live.

R.L. Figard

Fountain Valley

(source: Letter to the Editor, Orange County Register)

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

Americans Are Still Pro-Death Penalty



Support for capital punishment in America remains steady, despite concerns 
about wrongful executions and uncertainty as to whether such punishment deters 
crime.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% of American 
Adults favor the death penalty. Just 26% are opposed, while 17% are undecided.

The national survey of 800 American Adults was conducted on February 2-3, 2015 
by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3.5 percentage points 
with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is 
conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC.

(source: Rasmussen Reports)