Terry Kinney of AP has this story on Judge Boyce Martin of the Sixth Circuit. Most interesting to me is this quote:
"We are the most cautious of all the circuits, even the (San Francisco-based) 9th Circuit, in applying the death penalty," Martin said in an interview. "They are much more deferential to state law than we are. I am very proud that we have progressed in the fashion we have."
Given that deference is required by law, is he saying he is proud to violate the law more often than the notorious Ninth?
Here's another gem from the story, from current Chief Judge Boggs:
Upset by delays the court granted to one convicted murderer in 2001, when Martin was chief judge, Boggs wrote that "a majority of the active members of this court would grant a stay based on a hot dog menu."
The arrogance of Martin is remarkable. The Supreme Court should remove him from all death penalty cases.
The timing of the article could be seen as a blatant manipulation of the new political leadership in Ohio with respect to death penalty issues. Judge Martin issued his dissenting opinion in Moore v. Parker, 425 F. 3d 250 on October 4, 2005.
The Kinney article is an opinion piece in the guise of a news story. It seems that the only "news event" being reported is Mr. Kinney's interview with Richard Dieter of DPIC. Mr. Kinney is entitled to his opinion, but he might be skirting journalistic ethics issues by creating the "news" he is reporting.