[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----WYO., MONT., IDAHO, WASH.

[Rick Halperin]

February 7



WYOMING:

Death penalty vote a proud moment for Wyoming House



“Riveting.” It’s not a word I’ve ever used before in connection with the 
Wyoming Legislature, and I’ve covered about 20 sessions over the past four 
decades.

But it’s the best descriptor I can think of for the debate in the House last 
Wednesday over the proposed repeal of the state’s death penalty. It was an 
emotional, thoughtful and somber discussion of a topic I never thought would 
make it to the floor, much less pass the House 36-21 on final reading Friday.

I’ve covered capital murder cases and read a ton of books about serial killers 
and other heinous criminals, but my basic belief on the matter hasn’t wavered: 
The death penalty is wrong, for many reasons.

The state should not have the right to take a person’s life. Most of the world 
agrees with me; 142 nations have abolished the death penalty either in statute 
or practice, while the 56 that still have capital punishment — China, Pakistan, 
Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan etc. — aren’t exactly the beacons of 
civic virtue we should hope to emulate.

The ultimate penalty is applied unevenly in America, with a highly 
disproportionate number of minorities on death row. Far too many people have 
been executed in this country who were later found to be innocent, and hundreds 
of the convicted killers have languished on death row for an average of 17 
years.

The huge fiscal impact of the appeals process drains states’ budgets as 
taxpayers must cover the costs incurred by both the state and defense for 
convicted murderers who cannot afford attorneys.

But that doesn’t mean I haven’t wrestled with the thought, deep inside, that 
some crimes are so horrific that a justly convicted killer doesn’t deserve to 
live.

So I listened intently as Rep. Jared Olsen (R-Cheyenne), the young attorney who 
sponsored the death penalty repeal bill, explained his reasoning in his opening 
statement to his House colleagues. Olsen said that when he circulated a draft 
of what became House Bill 145-Death Penalty Repeal 2 among potential 
co-sponsors, he was asked how he would feel if the murder victim was a member 
of his family.

“My gut actually said, ‘Yeah, I would want that person put to death,” Olsen 
said. “But you know what? That’s what’s wrong with the system. My gut is wrong. 
It’s not based on reason.

“Ask yourself if it’s reason, or it’s blind [justice], or if it’s nothing but 
fear and anger,” he said.

My anti death penalty convictions might also be erased in seconds if a member 
of my family was the victim. But Olsen has it right. It’s not the state’s 
responsibility to seek revenge for crimes. It must punish the guilty, but not 
solely for the sake of retribution.

Olsen asked a fundamental question: “How much authority do we want to rest in 
our government?” He noted that since 1973, 150 former death row inmates have 
been exonerated in the U.S.

“Some say we need a swifter justice system,” the attorney said. “But what if we 
had one? There’s far too great a risk for imperfect people managing a [criminal 
justice] system.”

The last person the state of Wyoming executed was Mark Hopkinson in 1992. I 
covered the small protest on the front lawn of the Capitol when he was put to 
death at the Wyoming State Penitentiary in Rawlins. It was a frigid night, and 
I remember looking at the light in then Gov. Mike Sullivan’s office window and 
hoping he would stop the damn thing from happening.

Hopkinson was convicted of ordering the murders of Evanston attorney Vincent 
Vehar, his wife Beverly and son John, and was sentenced to 3 consecutive life 
terms. He was sentenced to death for ordering the murder of Jeffrey Green while 
Hopkinson was in prison for hiring Green to kill an Arizona attorney in an 
unsuccessful bombing plot.

I don’t doubt his guilt in any of the four murders, but I could not see the 
point of the state taking his life, and I still don’t. Nothing would bring the 
Vehars or Green back. I think life without the possibility of parole is a just 
sentence, and arguably one that is even tougher on an inmate than lying on a 
gurney and being given a lethal dose of chemicals.

Knowing that one is going to spend the rest of his or her life locked up 
without any hope of ever getting out would be a living hell on earth.

During the House debate the thoughts of Rep. Danny Eyre (R-Lyman) also turned 
to Hopkinson. Eyre noted that he grew up with the murderer and also knew 
Hopkinson’s victims.

“He did some terrible things,” said Eyre, who had been a death penalty 
supporter. “When that actual execution took place, I knew he was guilty and 
he’d ruined many lives, but it was a dark and sad day.”

Rep. Art Washut (R-Casper) is a retired police officer. You could have heard a 
pin drop on the House floor as he recalled having to tell three young children 
that their mother had been killed and their father was probably going to 
prison, perhaps forever. At a glance he fits the profile of an ardent death 
penalty backer.

Yet Washut favors taking capital punishment off the books. “I’ve thought about 
it long and hard and I think conservatives can get behind this abolition of the 
death penalty in good conscience,” he said.

The testimony of Rep. Andrea Clifford (D-Riverton) was heart-wrenching. Her 
18-year-old aunt was raped and murdered.

“I was raised with my cultural beliefs that we shouldn’t live with anger and 
being bitter,” Clifford, who is Native American said. “It’s not good for humans 
and not good for the family. It’s not good for the tribe. … It’s for the 
Creator to decide. We’re not here to judge anyone. We’re humans; we make 
mistakes.”

Making one of the most pointed, succinct fiscal arguments I’ve ever heard 
against the death penalty was Rep. Tyler Lindholm (R-Sundance). Support Drake’s 
Take with a tax deductible donation

“For every dollar we spend on a broken death penalty system, we are taking 
money away from programs that would actually prevent crimes, keep us safer and 
restore the lives of homicide victims’ [families],” Lindholm said.

He rattled off a list of things the state could pay for if it didn’t have to 
maintain a penalty option that it has used once in the past 50 years: proven 
gang prevention programs, desperately needed grief counseling, financial 
assistance for families of murder victims, training and better equipment that 
would keep police officers and neighborhoods safer.

Olsen delivered the perfect closer to his argument: “If you keep the death 
penalty, Wyoming will use it. No one can guarantee an innocent person will not 
be sent to death.”

After seeing other bills repealing the death penalty quickly tossed out by 
legislative committees over the years, I had given up all hope that our 
lawmakers would ever enact one. I am amazed but gratified that Wyoming is 
genuinely considering HB145.

I don’t know what the Senate will do this session, but I do know three things. 
First, the days of capital punishment are numbered in the state.

Second, moving, unforgettable and rational debates like the one the House just 
had will bring about the change.

And finally, that Wyoming should thank Olsen for bringing this debate to the 
forefront of state politics and the attention of the public. When our officials 
have the courage of their convictions and aren’t afraid to do what they believe 
is right, we all benefit.

(source: Opinion; Veteran Wyoming journalist Kerry Drake has covered Wyoming 
for more than four decades, previously as a reporter and editor for the Wyoming 
Tribune-Eagle and Casper Star-Tribune----wyofile.com)








MONTANA:

66 Session in 60 Seconds – Revising laws to death penalty



Montana is the only state among the 30 others to have the death penalty that 
hasn’t handed down the death sentence in the 21st Century. 1996 was the last 
time someone was sentenced to death row and convicting someone might become 
even more rare.

The changes under this bill would only allow someone to be sentenced to the 
death penalty if DNA or biological evidence links the defendant to the crime. 
This evidence must be admitted during the trail and the judge must determine if 
the DNA evidence makes the defendant guilty.

Things such as blood, hair, saliva, skin tissue, fingernail scrapings, bone, 
bodily fluids or other identifiable biological material would be allowed in 
court to convict the defendant, but this would be the only way to get a guilty 
verdict that would result in the death penalty. Efforts were made in 2009 and 
2011 to abolish the death penalty and both times those bills passed in the 
Senate but were defeated in the House Judiciary Committee.

(source: abcfoxmontana.com)








IDAHO:

Execution Records Trial Reveals False Statements, Questionable Practices by 
Idaho Officials



Idaho officials deliberately misled the public about the costs and application 
of the state’s death penalty and prison officials’ questionable efforts at 
obtaining execution drugs, according to evidence presented in week-long court 
hearings on the state’s execution secrecy practices. Testimony from January 28 
through February 1, 2019 in an open-records lawsuit against the Idaho 
Department of Corrections has revealed that Idaho paid $10,000 in cash to an 
undisclosed drug supplier, maintained a set of fraudulent financial records 
related to execution expenses, falsely denied having records documenting 
contacts with a disreputable drug supplier in India, and hid from the public 
information as mundane as the hairdressers who give prisoners their final 
haircuts. The lawsuit was brought by the ACLU of Idaho on behalf of University 
of Idaho law professor Aliza Cover after the IDOC refused to turn over numerous 
execution-related records to her in response to a 2017 public records request.

Relying on Idaho’s Public Records Act, Cover had sought copies of receipts, 
purchase orders, and other information related to the drugs Idaho used in its 
last two executions in 2011 and 2012 and those it expects to use in future 
executions. The department disclosed only a copy of the state’s execution 
policy manual, but claimed the remaining documents were exempt from public 
scrutiny. Cover, who studies the death penalty and its application, sued, 
asking the court to order the records disclosed. Even then, IDOC resisted. In 
actions ACLU attorney Molly Kafka characterized as “relying on speculation and 
fear rather than data,” IDOC redacted dozens of items from execution records, 
including not only the names of prison staff who participated in executions, 
but their handwriting, and the names of people only tangentially involved in 
executions, such as clergy who counsel death-row prisoners and hairdressers who 
give prisoners their final haircuts. The state claimed, without evidence, that 
the redactions were necessary to protect those individuals from protest, 
harassment, or violence. Similar claims of threats against execution team 
members in other states have been found to be unsubstantiated. Idaho officials 
also withheld information on the source of execution drugs used in the past, 
claiming that suppliers would no longer provide the drugs if their identities 
were revealed. IDOC falsely told investigative reporter Chris McDaniel that 
records he had requested did not exist. In fact, records showed that Idaho had 
contact with Chris Harris—a drug supplier in India who had obtained drugs from 
a European pharmaceutical company for medical use in Africa and then 
misappropriated them instead for sale for executions in the United States.

Testimony at the trial also revealed that IDOC’s secrecy efforts extended to 
fraudulent recordkeeping practices. According to a former Idaho Department of 
Corrections employee, IDOC kept three sets of financial books because the 
department “did not want to show a tremendous amount of money being spent for 
the execution as well as for the anonymity for those involved in it.” When a 
person would ask the IDOC for execution-related data, the first set of books 
would be given out. A second set of books would be provided if the person 
persisted. “So, the first set would be a lower amount to not represent the 
total of what was being spent, and the second one had a little higher amount 
just to show due diligence — that there was work being done to capture all the 
amounts,” the official said. According to the official, “the third was the 
actual set of books that would actually represent the expenses.”

Testifying during the trial, Cover said: “If the public is not able to have 
this information about those issues, [it] cannot come to a decision on its 
moral view about the punishment that is occurring.” In closing statements 
Monday, February 4, 2019, one of her lawyers said: “[IDOC’s] argument at this 
point is crystal clear — this information is so important that we can’t release 
it, because it would change the way we do things.” An editorial by the Idaho 
Press urged the state to end the secrecy: “In the end, the state of Idaho needs 
to be transparent about the drugs it’s using for lethal injections and about 
where they’re getting those drugs. We see no exemption in the public records 
law for protecting a relationship with a drug provider.”

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)








WASHINGTON:

Washington Death Penalty Slated for Execution



Legislators propose replacing the moribund death penalty with the mandatory 
imposition of life imprisonment without parole.

The Senate Law and Justice committee heard public testimony on Senate Bill 5339 
sponsored by Senator Reuven Carlyle, D-Seattle.

“It’s been a long public discourse the last 10 to 15 years in our state and in 
our country about this issue,” said Carlyle. “I think the result of that civic 
discourse in the last number of years has been a growing recognition that the 
data shows that the death penalty is applied in a way that is not consistent.”

In October 2018, the Washington State Supreme Court ruled that the death 
penalty was being applied in an arbitrary and racially biased manner. The court 
converted all death penalty sentences to life in prison without parole. 
Governor Jay Inslee signed a moratorium on imposing the death penalty in 2014.

“I respectfully suggest that closing the books on this chapter is a responsible 
public policy step given where the courts and our state have come and that it 
really solidifies our statute in a way that makes it clear and unequivocal for 
years to come,” said Carlyle.

District 4 Senator Mike Padden, R-Spokane Valley noted that Washington 
effectively no longer has a death penalty and given the reasoning behind the 
Supreme Court’s ruling last year it would be difficult to craft death penalty 
legislation that would satisfy the court.

Former state Secretary of the Department of Corrections Dick Morgan testified 
in support of the bill, speaking on behalf of several other previous DOC 
secretaries. Morgan said hundreds of prisoners have committed similar crimes 
and were sentenced to life without parole yet from a management viewpoint they 
pose no greater risk than those on death row.

“They are from a managerial standpoint indistinguishable from one another, yet 
the cost of managing those sentenced to death is extraordinarily high for the 
department,” said Morgan.

Preparing for an execution takes significant additional personnel and is done 
on a voluntary basis. Morgan noted that it’s common for personnel who have 
participated in an execution to not wish to do so again.

Since 1904, 78 people have been executed in Washington state, according to the 
Department of Corrections. The last execution took place in 2010. Cal Brown, 
convicted of strangling and stabbing a woman to death in 1991, was executed by 
lethal injection.

A house bill proposed by Representative Carolyn Eslick, R-Sultan, would allow 
the death penalty to continue in specific circumstances. HB 1709 would ensure 
the imposition of the death penalty on inmates charged with 1st degree murder 
committed while serving a prison term. This legislation is in response to the 
murder of correctional officer Jayme Biendl in 2011 by an inmate serving life 
in prison, according to Padden.

Companion bill to remove the death penalty, HB 1488, which would also eliminate 
the death penalty, is not currently scheduled for public testimony and is 
sponsored by Dist. 33 Representative Tina Orwall, D-Des Moines. SB 5339 is 
scheduled for executive action by the law and justice committee on Thursday.

(source: The Daily Chronicle)