« A final take on a record-setting federal corruption sentence | Main | Another US Sentencing Commission regional hearing on tap for this week in Austin »

November 16, 2009

Some notable death penalty headlines from across the pond

The start of a new week brings these interesting new pieces about the death penalty from our friends in the UK and Ireland:

November 16, 2009 at 09:40 AM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e20120a6a5f0c5970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Some notable death penalty headlines from across the pond:

» Blog Scan from Crime and Consequences Blog
Foreign Coverage of U.S. Death Penalty: At Sentencing Law and Policy, Doug Berman posts a few articles from "across the pond" reporting on the state of the death penalty in the United States and abroad. Chris McGreal reports for the... [Read More]

Tracked on Nov 16, 2009 6:10:40 PM

Comments

My understanding is that the DP is forbidden by European treaty law, so the Irish judge is more or less blowing smoke. Even if as a nation they wished to bring it back they no longer have the soverign ability to do so.

Posted by: Soronel Haetir | Nov 16, 2009 12:56:58 PM

I proposed the sole cruelty of the death penalty is the set date. Not even terminal patients have to face such dates. In Japan, the date is random, and unknown until the day of the execution. Relatives then have to rush to the prison.

The death penalty appellate boss (Cali) said, that had never been argued. This is the same boss that opened her arm to me and showed me huge black and blue areas where technicians had rummaged, looking for a thin vein. Those techinicians had not violated her rights. The SC went on to agree in Baze. Those Cali lawyers had made a huge big deal, despite the irony of her enduring the same treatment.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Nov 16, 2009 7:08:31 PM

I have no idea what that Guardian writer is talking about. Texas is NOT, repeat NOT reconsidering the death penalty. In the current election cycle it's a third rail - candidates must support it to be viable and generally compete over who will make it easiest to kill the most people. It's mendacious or delusional to say the state has "doubts over death row." Last poll I saw, 70% overall supported the DP in Texas. Of those who believe Texas has already convicted an innocent person (Todd Willingham or someone else), 57% still supported continuing executions. The death penalty in Texas is going nowhwere anytime soon.

Posted by: Gritsforbreakfast | Nov 17, 2009 2:48:18 PM

Grits, you frogot to identify all of the other blatant errors in the article. Why was that?

The Guardian could not have been more in error.

There is nowhere near 140 DNA exonerations from death row.

9 inmates have been removed from death rows because of DNA exclusion.

The near 140 (really 139) is a blatant anti death penalty fraud whereby they claim 139 exonerated from death row because of innocence (DNA & other).

Death penalty opponents make up their own, deceptive definition of exonerated.

The reality, based upon a number of published reviews, is in the 25-35 range. I combined three of the studies and found that 25 would be the realistic number of actual innocents released from death row, because of an 83% error rate in the death penalty opponents "exonerated" or "innocence" claims.

It is impossible to get most of the media to fact check, clarify or correct this, as with the Guardian.

Interestingly, the New York Times recognized this blatant deception and found about a 75% error rate in these fraudulent anti death penalty claims.

There is no growing evidence of an innocent executed in Texas. The reality is that all of the reports critical of the trial forensics in the Willingham case concluded that the origin of the fire was undetermined. However, that is without the full rebuttals of various state agencies, all of which are pending.

The reality is, based upon all of the facts that are known, today, the fire may have been arson and it may have been an accident, based upon the most critical reports.

No evidence of an innocent executed exists with Willingham, nor is it growing or pending.

Based upon all we know, today, that case cannot "become the first officially acknowledged miscarriage of justice which led to a man being executed." At worse, it will remain in the undetermined category. However, there is much additional evidence for guilt in the case.

Again, reality intervenes. The New Mexico Governor conceded that he may be wrong on the facts he gave to justify repeal. He was. He also conceded that the death penalty may actually save innocent lives. The anti death penalty leadership in New Mexico admitted that the reason the repeal passed was because more Democrats were elected in the last voting cycle.

Why did Gov. Richardson repeal the death penalty? His legacy.
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/03/31/why-did-gov-richardson-repeal-the-death-penalty-his-legacy.aspx


Rebuttal to Governor Richardson - Repeal of the Death Penalty in New Mexico
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/03/19/rebuttal-to-governor-richardson--repeal-of-the-death-penalty-in-new-mexico.aspx


Regarding Illinois, first, I suspect most state death rows have released more from death row than they have executed. Nationally, 34% of death penalty cases are overturned on appeal. 15% result in execution.

Secondly, in Illinois, the claim was that 13 actual innocents had been freed from death row, while there had been a total of 12 executions. This goes to anti death penalty deceptions and the lack of fact checking.

"The Death Penalty Debate in Illinois", JJKinsella,6/2000, http://www.dcba.org/brief/junissue/2000/art010600.htm

This article was not accurate in all of their case reviews, as we now know, but it makes the point that a number of the innocence claims were either false or there was no evidence for such claims, just like the 139 fraud.

I was not a founder of Justice For All and have not been with them for many years.

Yes, the death penalty is a greater protector of innocents.

"The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents"
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/05/the-death-penalty-more-protection-for-innocents.aspx

Posted by: Dudley Sharp | Nov 18, 2009 6:38:58 AM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB