YubaNet.com
Friday, May 25 2012

            We Deliver News to the Sierra
News Fire News spacer Latest News spacer Regional News spacer California News spacer USA News spacer World News spacer Op-Ed spacer Enviro News spacer Sci Tech News spacer Life spacer Odd News spacer Cartoons spacer
Features The Calendar features features Weather features Sierra NightSky features features YubaNet Horoscope features Road Conditions features Home spacer
US
 

On 35th Anniversary Of Death Penalty's Reinstatement, New Report Shows System Remains Arbitrary & Unfair
A Majority of Justices From 1976 Decision Agree: Death Penalty Experiment Has Failed


       

By: Death Penalty Information Center

Washington, D.C. June 22, 2011 - July 2, 2011 is the 35th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Gregg v. Georgia, where the Court approved sentencing schemes intended to make the death penalty less arbitrary and reinstated capital punishment after a four-year moratorium. In advance of this anniversary, the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) released a report today showing that race, geography, money, and other arbitrary factors continue to make receiving the death penalty as random as being "struck by lightning," as Justice Potter Stewart observed.

Read "Struck By Lightning: The Continuing Arbitrariness of the Death Penalty Thirty-Five Years After Its Re-instatement in 1976."

"Many of those who favored the death penalty in the abstract have come to view its practice very differently. They have reached the conclusion that if society's ultimate punishment cannot be applied fairly, it should not be applied at all," the report concludes.

A majority of the nine Justices who served on the Supreme Court in 1976 when the death penalty was reinstated eventually concluded the experiment had failed. Three of the justices in the Gregg majority (Justices Blackmun, Powell and Stevens) later changed their minds and would have joined Justices Marshall and Brennan in banning capital punishment as unconstitutional.

The report includes a side-by-side comparison entitled "Who is executed? Who is spared?" that shows the worst of the worst offenders often avoid the death penalty. For example, serial killer Gary Ridgway, who pled guilty to killing 48 people in Washington State, was spared the death penalty in exchange for detailed confessions about his victims. In contrast, the borderline mentally retarded Teresa Lewis, who stood by as co-defendants shot her husband, was executed in Virginia. Her co-defendants received life sentences.

National and state data show that the system is too random to be an effective deterrent or deliver retribution. For example, there are approximately 15,000 murders a year nationwide. In 2010, there were 46 executions. A ratio of one execution for every 326 murders suggests that the death penalty is still as unpredictable as being struck by lightning.

According to the report, variables that have nothing to do with the severity of the crime or the culpability of the defendant exert significant influence over capital sentencing and executions:

· Race: Study after study has shown that defendants who kill white victims are far more likely to receive the death penalty than those who kill black victims.

· Geography: Almost all of the death sentences in the country come from a relatively few counties and almost all of the executions occur in a handful of states.

· Costs: Money often plays a key role in the quality of defense a defendant receives and county budgets often dictate whether the district attorney will seek the death penalty.

· Uneven Appellate Review: In some states, almost all death sentences are affirmed in state court, while in others most are overturned. Nationwide, two-thirds of death sentences are overturned on appeal. When reconsidered, more than 80 percent receive a sentence less than death. The statistics call into question the reliability of the system in selecting the "worst of the worst" for the death penalty.

A national poll of registered voters conducted in 2010 by Lake Research Partners indicated that the problem of unfairness ranks as one of the top concerns among voters leading them to support replacing the death penalty with a sentence of life without parole.

Sixty-nine percent (69%) of respondents found it convincing that: "In reality, the death penalty is applied unevenly and unfairly, even for similar crimes. Some people are sentenced to die because they couldn't afford a better lawyer, or because they live in a county that seeks the death penalty a lot. A system that is so arbitrary should not be allowed to choose who lives and who dies."

Prominent legal organizations, such as the American Bar Association and the American Law Institute (ALI), agree that the system is extremely flawed. In 2009, the ALI voted to rescind parts of the Model Penal Code dealing with the death penalty citing the futility of trying to fix the system.


By submitting a comment you consent to our rules. Please use your real first and last name, not a nickname or alias. Thank you.

Comments powered by Disqus

 

Latest Headlines

US

UCLA Launches First Face Transplantation Program in Western U.S.

Former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell Supports Marriage Equality

Heat-Related U.S. Deaths Projected to Rise 150,000 by Century's End Due to Climate Change

Secret Documents Highlight Nuclear's Risk

Half of Americans with individual health plans could gain better coverage under the ACA

Hundreds of Elected Officials Speak Out for Protecting America's Waterways

New Guttmacher Report Finds Publicly Funded Family Planning Clinics Are Crucial Sources of Care

Dismal Civics Knowledge Linked to Decline in Voting, Volunteering Among Young

Ohio School Admits to Wrong-Doing: Student wins right to wear "Jesus Is Not a Homophobe" T-Shirt

New Analysis Details The Grade Level Decline of Congressional Speeches Since 2005


More

 
 
 

NEWS . Fire News . Latest . Regional . California . USA . World . Op-Ed . Enviro . Sci/Tech . Life . Odd News . Cartoons
FEATURES . The Calendar .Weather . Sierra NightSky . Horoscope . Road Conditions
YubaNet.com . Advertising. About Us . Support YubaNet . Contact Us . Terms of Use . Privacy

YubaNet.com © 2012
Nevada City, California (530) 478-9600