Recently in Death Penalty Category

SCOTUS Stays Missouri Execution

| 1 Comment
Last night the U.S. Supreme Court acted on two petitions from Missouri rapist and triple murderer Mark Christeson.  See description of the crime here.  There is no doubt about the justice in this case.  Guilt is conclusively proved by DNA, and the crime clearly warrants the penalty.  The Court is apparently satisfied that the lawyers purporting to represent Christeson actually do.  See prior post here.

In Supreme Court case 14-6878, the Supreme Court denied review of Eighth Circuit case 14-2220.  That case has to do with disclosure and compounded pentobarbital.

In Supreme Court case 14-6873, the Supreme Court granted a stay to allow it to decide whether to review Christeson's habeas petition, denied as untimely by the district court.  The Eighth Circuit denied a stay in case 14-3389. 

This case presents issues of representation of prisoners.  The Supreme Court opened a can of worms in its Martinez and Trevino decisions when it said that ineffectiveness of state collateral review counsel can be "good cause" for a federal court to consider a claim defaulted in state court.  If the same lawyer represents the prisoner in both proceedings, can he be expected to argue his own ineffectiveness?  But how many new lawyers are we going to appoint for one defendant?  We already say that trial counsel can't continue into habeas for this reason.  Is every defendant going to get another new lawyer for federal habeas, and will justice be delayed and denied in every capital case while that lawyer gets up to speed?  That could be some time, given how complex capital cases can be.

Note that this problem is not entirely limited to capital cases.  Martinez was not a capital case.  The problem of justice being delayed while the case is litigated is limited to capital cases, but the underlying conflict issues are not.

The Christeson case involves the related issue of appointed counsel missing the deadline to file the federal habeas petition, as distinguished from the state-court procedural defaults in Martinez and Trevino.

"He sat in a room, and he lied to me"

| No Comments
In practical terms, the most important outcome for the cause of justice next week is control of the U.S. Senate, but in terms of "just deserts," the outcome I most want to see is for the people of Colorado to toss their profoundly dishonest Governor John Hickenlooper out on his ear.  Dennis O'Connor, whose 17-year-old daughter was one of four people murdered by Nathan Dunlap, explains why in this 30-second ad now being run on television by the Republican Governors Association.

A longer version for the internet is here.

Guy Benson has this article at Town Hall.

Texas Execution

| No Comments
AP reports:

The U.S. Supreme Court denied the last-chance appeal of a former gang member scheduled for execution Tuesday evening after his defense attorneys argued that the man, who was convicted of killing three rivals 14 years ago in San Antonio, is mentally impaired.
The court denied a stay for Miguel Paredes in a brief order released Tuesday. Paredes, 32, was convicted along with two other men in the September 2000 shooting deaths of three people with ties to the Mexican Mafia. The victims' bodies were rolled up in a carpet, driven about 50 miles southwest, dumped and set on fire. A farmer investigating a grass fire found the remains.
*                                          *                                      *
Paredes' attorney, David Dow, said the execution should be stopped because Paredes had "a significant mental disease" that may have affected his judgment when he told his previous lawyer 10 years ago not to investigate his family background. Dow also told the Supreme Court that Paredes' previous lawyer was deficient for not investigating the inmate's medical history.

In a response filed Tuesday morning, state lawyers said Paredes "presented no evidence that he is or ever has been mentally ill or incompetent," and that his earlier attorney couldn't be considered deficient when he "abided by Paredes' explicit instructions." Lower courts have sided with the state, which also noted that the latest appeal was filed after a deadline.
Unfortunately, the news story does not say what this "significant mental disease" is.  Update:  The Fifth Circuit's opinion indicates it is Dysthymic Disorder, which is kind of junior varsity depression.  Sorry, that is nowhere near severe enough to warrant reopening proceedings at this late stage.

Justice Breyer was recused from the case.  No dissent is noted.

Update 2:  Michael Graczyk reports for AP that the execution has been completed.

Another Unauthorized Filing?

| 1 Comment
Here we go again.  Mark Christeson has a well deserved date with the Missouri execution team tomorrow.  See description of the crime here.  The usual last minute applications have been filed with the Supreme Court, but do the lawyers filing them really represent Christeson?  Justice Alito, the assigned Circuit Justice for the Eighth Circuit, including Missouri, wants to know.

See this post regarding the Ballard case in Pennsylvania last August.
One of the major themes of abolitionism is that because the death penalty unavoidably risks killing the innocent  --  and that sooner or later this is bound to happen  --  it must end.

The premise is right.  The conclusion is wrong.  It rests on the tacit view that the government's killing the innocent is an unacceptable price to pay, no matter how just the cause otherwise might be.

There are two problems.  One is that this view is false.  The other is that, not unrelatedly, almost no one believes it.

This was brought home to me graphically this weekend, when I read this article in the New York Review of Books.  As a nation, we killed thousands of innocents because, though it was a mind-bending moral price, it was worth it, given the stakes.

More on the Gallup Death Penalty Poll

| No Comments
Yesterday we noted on this blog that the Gallup Poll found little change in Americans' views on the death penalty.  Well, "little change" isn't news.  It's dog bites man.  So Mark Berman in the WaPo has this story emphasizing the supposedly "botched" executions, plural, in the last year, and implying a sense of wonderment that this didn't change anything.  (Only one actually qualifies as "botched," IMHO.)

Well, why should it?  Do we change our views on any major issue because of isolated problems?  Do air bag recalls make us stop driving cars?  The problems with lethal injection are, for the most part, caused by the opponents of capital punishment, and our response should be to fix the problems, not to abandon a punishment that the vast majority of the American people believe to be the fundamentally right one for the worst murders.

Far worse than this, though, is a link at the bottom of the page, which takes the reader to a May 1 article titled "Everything you need to know about executions in the United States."  I hadn't seen this before.  Turns out that "everything" is the anti-death-penalty crowd's talking points straight down the line.  One misleading half-truth after another. Seriously, if anti-DP propagandist Richard Dieter had written this article himself, this is pretty much how he would write it.  Dieter is quoted twice in the article, without identifying him as an advocate for one side.  Ditto Denno.

It is disappointing to see such shamelessly one-sided coverage in the WaPo, which has generally been more balanced than certain other major newspapers.

Debating the Death Penalty

| 9 Comments
Kent noted that it's next to impossible to change someone's mind about the death penalty, because the most basic and controlling views are dug deeper than the place argument can reach.

I've had much that same experience.  In all the time I've been thinking about this issue, I have changed only two minds.  One belonged to my mother-in-law, a pretty much down the line liberal, but with an independent streak (she ran away from home as a teenager to join the Israeli army in its earliest days.  She was an ambulance driver on the battlefield).

She held the conventional wisdom in Upper East Side Manhattan, where she lived. We got to talking one day about capital punishment, and I brought up the question what we're supposed to do with a previously convicted, angry and unrepentant multiple killer serving LWOP, who then does it again in prison, and vows this won't be his last.

That stumped her.  (She's not the only one, of course).  So she came around.

She was very into Jewish causes (the Holocaust Museum among them).  I'm sure she knew that Israel had kidnapped and executed Adolph Eichmann, and thought that was the right thing to do.  I believe that set the stage for her having the sort of open mind that, while rare, is the essential precondition for coming around. 
Earlier today, I noted Gallup's most recent poll on people's attitudes on the death penalty.  That post was updated later with some further data.

Structured questions in polls can give useful numbers, but open-ended questions can tell us some interesting things also.  Art Swift of Gallup reported separately on an open-ended question that asked people for the reason behind their position on the main question.
Gallup has this report by Jeffrey Jones, with the above headline, on its last poll on the death penalty.

On the standard question, asked since the 30s and best used for trends over time, support is 63%, about where it's been for the last decade.  There is a strong difference by political party, but even among Democrats, the "yes" vote is a plurality, just shy of a majority.

On the very badly worded question that effectively asks people to specify a single punishment for all murders regardless of degree or circumstances, respondents chose the death penalty over life without parole by 50-45.  This is up in the last few years.  The LWOP choice was briefly a tick ahead, 48-47, in 2006.

The actual public policy question to be decided -- what punishment to impose on the very worst murderers -- was once again not asked.

My criticisms of poll wording on this topic are noted in this post last February.

Update:  Not mentioned in the report linked above, but found in the linked data report, is a better question, "In your opinion, is the death penalty imposed -- [ROTATED: too often, about the right amount, or not often enough]?"  This question is better because, unlike the other two, it at least partially addresses the fact that were are talking about a (small) subset of murders, not all murders.  The result is 40% Not Enough, 28% About Right, 24% Too Often, and 9% No Opinion. 

Support for capital punishment in its present scope or tougher is the sum of Not Enough and About Right, which comes to 68%.  That's down somewhat from the historical average ("only" 2/3, rather than 3/4), but it still swamps the Too Often vote by well over 2-to-1.
CBS4 in Denver has this story with the above title.

A victim of the Aurora theater massacre said he believes defense lawyers and anti-death penalty groups have tried to use him like a pawn.
The Heritage Foundation is no longer the devil it once was on the Left. Recently, Heritage has come out strongly for reforming mandatory sentences, and against over-criminalization and over-federalization of law.  

I am sympathetic to the latter and skeptical to the former, though I know sentencing reform is backed by very good people and friends like John Malcolm and Paul Larkin at Heritage and Sen. Ted Cruz.  Of course it also has the backing of George Soros, the NACDL and the SEIU, which you'd think would scare off anyone to the right of Valerie Jarrett.

This prelude is necessary to equip my friends at Heritage to duck the brickbats headed their way to the effect that, "I always knew you were fascists after all"  -- brickbats sure to blacken the sky when Heritage reports that its scholar's extensive study shows: 

Based on data from all 50 states from 1978 to 1997, each state execution deters...

Of course deterring the murder of innocent people by executing stone cold guilty ones has never been a big priority with the Left, which has preoccupied itself instead peddling the flabbergastingly false story that blacks are in mortal danger from rampaging whites.  They might want to try again, though self-correction  -- or any other kind for that matter  --  doesn't wear well with the pious (when not snarky) Mark Oslers of the world.  

Still, for those who haven't had their brains fried on critical legal studies and other forms of Amerika Stinks theory, the Heritage Study results showing the death penalty's deterrent value will be of more than a little interest.

NBC News reports:

An Oklahoma prosecutor filed notice Thursday to seek the death penalty against 30-year-old Alton Nolen, who's accused of decapitating one co-worker and stabbing another in a gruesome attack at a food-processing plant. The beheading of Colleen Hufford on Sept. 25 was "especially heinous, atrocious or cruel," Cleveland County District Attorney Greg Mashburn said in the filing. He added that "there exists a probability that the defendant will commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society."

Nolen, a convicted felon, faces a first-degree murder charge and two counts of assault for the stabbing rampage at Vaughan Foods in the Oklahoma City suburb of Moore. Authorities say he was on the warpath after getting suspended from his job at the plant. Earlier reports said he had been fired. The co-worker whom he allegedly stabbed, Traci Johnson, had earlier complained that she had an altercation with Nolen "about him not liking white people," Mashburn said. Nolen, who was injured by a plant executive's gun, was released from a hospital and transported to jail Wednesday.

It's hard to know where to start.  Why was this man out of prison?  Is Eric Holder going to send some of his staff to investigate the racial angle?  Are death penalty opponents going to publish a photograph of the headless victim along with their demands that we televise executions?

Good luck on getting answers.
David Muhlhausen, a Heritage Foundation research fellow for the Center for Data Analysis, has this article with the above title at U.S. News & World Report. He cites several of the studies noted on our deterrence page.  The full list of citations and abstracts is here.

The anti side is trying to create the impression that the deterrence debate is over and they have won.  They frequently cite a report by Nagin et al., funded in part by a government grant and published by a government agency, saying that the studies do not provide sufficient proof to base policy decisions. 

The paper clearly states in the front matter that it represents only the opinion of the named authors.  (It may not even represent that, as James Q. Wilson, by far the biggest name on the cover, died before the final report was issued.)  It is not any kind of official conclusion by the funding agency, but the other side tries to represent it as such. 

Opponents who are either especially mendacious or who have been misled by their own movement's cleverly worded half-truths will claim that deterrence has been affirmatively disproved.  No one who is both knowledgeable and honest claims that.

Nitrogen Executions Considered Seriously

| 1 Comment
We have mentioned several times on this blog the possibility of dumping lethal injection and returning to gas as a method of execution.  One possibility is to simply displace oxygen with a neutral gas, the cheapest and most readily available of which is nitrogen. Amy Jenson reports for KXII:

State Representative Mike Christian of Oklahoma City suggests using nitrogen gas for executions. Christian says it would be painless for inmates and affordable for Oklahoma.

Local State Representative Pat Ownbey says he's in favor of a more humane method, and wants to see more research on the gas.  Now, several professors at East Central University in Ada will take on the task.

*                                      *                                  *
Christian has organized a team of researchers at East Central University to study the gas and its effects. Professor Michael Copeland claims nitrogen hypoxia will make people feel euphoric or drunk. If a person inhales nitrogen gas, the person will quickly become unconscious and die within minutes.
As I noted on this blog over three years ago, I experienced hypoxia in the altitude chamber in Air Force flight training and know it to be painless from that personal experience.

The Oklahoman has this editorial, concluding "state lawmakers, Christian in particular, deserve credit for taking a serious, thoughtful approach to this ultimate application of government power."

Jury Tampering

| 1 Comment
In Seattle, jury selection has finally begun in the trial of a notorious case that has already been delayed far too long by bizarre rulings by the trial judge.  Here are links to prior posts in this case:

May 2013:  Strength of the Evidence
Sept. 2013: Wash. Sup. Ct. Overturns Bizarre Ruling on the Strength of Evidence
Oct. 2013:  Prosecutor's Discretion to Seek the Death Penalty
July 2014:  Washington Supreme Court Reverses Another Absurd Order in the McEnroe/Anderson Case

CarnationTrialJuryTampering.pngNow, I am informed, the Washington Coalition Against the Death Penalty is handing out flyers at the entrance to the courthouse.  Hundreds of persons have been summoned for the venire, so naturally a large portion of the people entering the courthouse on this day will be prospective jurors.

The flyer is here.

Coincidence that WCADP chose this day and this location to hand out flyers?  Of course not.  This is jury tampering, and it is a crime.

Monthly Archives