Are You Sure?

Blop Post # 4
There are many arguments for and against the death penalty. Those who are against the death penalty have many reasons but the top three most often heard tend to be the following:  lack of deterrence, cost to tax payers, and wrongfully accusing the innocent. Anti capital punishment advocates believe that by killing a criminal we are not deterring crime any more than a life imprisonment sentence could. Criminologist William Bowers of Northeastern University believes that the death penalty brutalizes the society and this causes an increase in murders[1]. Contrary to beliefs, states that do not have the death penalty have lower rates of murder than states that do have the death penalty1.  Life imprisoment without the possibility of parole will deter a criminal from convicting murder again just as much as death.

                The death penalty cost tax payers $114 million a year (1).  The Attorney General devotes 15% of his budget ( $11 million) to death penalty cases.  In addition to this, the Surpeme Court appoints counsel for strictly death row cases and spends about $11.8 million on this annually (1). With California struggling to even pass a budget these numbers seem astronomical and give a liable justification to be against the death penalty.
     With the advancement in DNA and fingerprints, there have been numerous cases over the last 10-15 years where many inmates are found to be wrongfully convicted. Exonerations are no longer a rare event. In 2007 a study done by the United States Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics shows that 8%-12% of people in prison are factually innocent[2]. The Innocence Project is a national organization whose sole purpose is to help exonerate the wrongfully convicted through DNA. By doing this, they also strive to help reform the criminal justice system from future wrongful convictions. As of today, there have been 261 exonerations through this organization[3]. The following is a link from CNN from men who speak with Larry King about being wrongfully convicted of crimes they did not committ: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVQtFmR4pMk.

[1] "California Taxpayers Fund Executions." New York Times.March 6, 2005.

[2] Biggs, Chris and Cori. The Wrongful Conviction of Georgia Inmate Jerry Biggs, Jr. 2007. Accessed on December 3, 2010. http://www.truthandjusticedenied.com/Wrongful_Conviction_Statist.html

[3] The Innocence Project. Accessed on December 3, 2010. http://www.innocenceproject.org/fix/DNA-Testing-Access.php

Brown-Whitman Debate: Death Penalty

Elected Official Making Last Minute Promises

   Blog Post # 3      
    With elections just around the corner candidates are saying everything possible to win over the votes of the people.  Currently in the running for Governor of California are Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman.  Whitman, who has already spent more than $140 million of her own money on her own campaign[1], is trailing in the polls and now is speaking about her position on the death penalty. Of course, there will be bashing of the other candidate (Jerry Brown) and why his stance on the death penalty is the wrong one. The questions at hand are whether we want to elect a governor who is for or against the death penalty and are their reasons for taking their stance valid?

                When reviewing the LA times and The Sacramento Bee it was hard to find valid reasons as to why Meg Whitman was for the death penalty. It is obvious that when campaigning, the candidates often slander their opponent; however, while doing so, Whitman did not give enough reasons that would justify one to vote for her and be pro capital punishment.  On October 25, 2010 Whitman told supporters that they would only have to wait one more week until a governor would be elected that would “protect the rights of victims of crime in California1.” Whitman claims that Jerry Brown is “soft on crime” and has a “long history of judges that were very liberal[2].” Of course, people for the death penalty believe that Jerry Brown made a mistake when he appointed Rose Bird as chief justice back in the 1970’s. People believed that Bird was not experienced enough as a judge to be appointed.

                Jerry Brown was governor of California from 1975- 1983. During this time there were many changes occurring with the death penalty in California. In July 1975, the Supreme Court found the statues that allowed a jury to impose the death penalty after consideration of both aggravating and mitigating circumstances constitutional but later that year over turned this decision and ruled the statue unconstitutional[3].  In addition, life without the possibility of parole was added to all capital cases. During this time Jerry Brown vetoed the death penalty but it was overridden by the legislature in 1977[4].

                These facts are important to keep in mind because people worry about officials getting elected into office and not standing by their word. Whitman is trailing in the polls and is taking extra measures to reach the people and try to win their votes.  Jerry Brown was against the death penalty back in the 1970’s and took measure to get it abolished. This can give candidates peace of mind about him as an elected official and making promises that he intends to keep.

[1] Mehta, Seema. “Whitman Will Appoint Only Judges Who Support the Death Penalty.” Los Angeles Times. October 25, 2010. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/calif.htm Accessed on October 26, 2010.

[2] Siders, David. “Whitman Says Her Judicial Nominees Would Support Death Penalty.” The Sacramento Bee. October 25, 2010. http://www.sacbee.com/2010/10/26/2010.htm  Accessed on October 26, 2010.

[3] “California Death Penalty Rulings.” June 2009. Accessed on October 26, 2010. http://www.newsbatch.com/deathpenalty.htm

[4] “Governor.” Accessed on October 26, 2010. http://www.jerrybrownfactcheck.com/governor/

---

Who is on Death Row?

Blog Post # 2

Capital punishment is a nationwide problem. Many states have tried to get capital punishment abolished by taking their appeals to the Supreme Court. In 2008 the Court ruled that the three-drug lethal injection is not cruel and unusual punishment and is constitutional (1). This is the most common method of execution used by most states.  However, that same year the Court did rule that it is unconstitutional to impose death for child rape or any crime which was committed without the intention to inflict death and where death did not result (1).California seems to be the state with the most hype surrounding their death penalty, seeing how they are the state with the highest number of inmates on death row.The problem seems to be that California does not have enough resources in relation to the number of inmates on death row. California consistently sentences inmates to death, causing a backlog in death penalty cases in the California Supreme Court. At one point, Chief Justice George proposed a constitutional amendment to move some capital cases to the appellate courts (1). This was later withdrawn because of the budget concerns California faces. Studies show that prosecutors are more likely too seek the death penalty when the victim is white and less likely when the victim is black (2). As a result, in cases where the victim is white, African Americans are three times more likely to receive the death penalty in cases where the victim is white. It is no secret that the death penalty is not a fair process.

 (1) Colon, Sara. Capital Crime: How California’s Administration of the Death Penalty Violates the Eighth Amendment. California Law Review Inc. 2009. Page 1377-1381

2. “Amnesty International USA - Death Penalty Abolition Campaign.” August 2009. http://www.amnestyusa.org/abolish

  Millions Towards Death

Blog #1

The death penalty is a social problem that affects all of society. California’s death penalty is a social problem because in California, inmates can remain on death row for decades. This can be because of factors that extend the complex judicial process for capital cases.  Regardless if a person knows someone on death row or not, California tax payers pay for the death penalty. It is cheaper for us to incarcerate inmates for life than it is to execute them. Therefore, as a taxpayer of California, we should consider alternate forms of punishment for these felony offenders.

 According to the Los Angeles Times in 2005, California taxpayers pay more than $114 million each year post-trial seeking execution of the people currently on death row (1). Not only does the Attorney General devote 15% of his budget ($11 million) to death penalty cases annually, but also the Supreme Court spends about $11.8 million on appointed counsel for death row inmates (1). Another issue some of society has with the death penalty is that there is always the possibility that we may wrongfully convict a person. Since 1976, approximately eighty two inmates have been released from death row because they were found to be wrongfully convicted (2).

1. "California Taxpayers Fund Executions." New York Times. 2005.

2. "Reasons to be Against the Death Penalty." September 16, 2010. http//www.antideathpenalty.org/reasons.html