« Taking full stock of the Prez Clinton's punishment legacy by looking at PLRA (and AEDPA and ....) | Main | "Everybody Talks About Prosecutorial Conduct But Nobody Does Anything About It: A 25-Year Survey of Prosecutorial Misconduct and a Viable Solution" »

April 20, 2016

Your tax dollars at work?: cost accounting for Aurora theater shooter James Holmes' failed capital trial

As a matter of abstract philosophy, I have struggled for decades concerning my opinion on capital punishment.  But as a matter of modern public policy, I have generally concluded that the death penalty is not a great use of limited resources for most states.  This new Denver Post article, headlined "Aurora theater shooting trial cost taxpayers at least $3 million: Final cost of James Holmes' trial in the Aurora theater shooting likely won't ever be known," reinforces my perspectives in this regard. Here are the details:

Jailing, evaluating and prosecuting the man who committed the Aurora movie theater shooting cost taxpayers at least $3 million, but the final expense of one of the mostly closely watched court cases in Colorado history may never be known. The $3 million tab was compiled by The Denver Post following multiple open-records requests over the past year. It covers the amount spent from 2012 through 2015 specifically on preparing for and seeing through the trial of James Holmes.

Nearly $1.6 million of the cost was covered by federal grants. When including the salaries of judges, prosecutors, sheriff's deputies and other government employees who spent most or all of their time on the case — but who would have been paid regardless — the total cost rises to more than $7 million.

And there's still a big chunk of expense missing from that amount. The state's taxpayer-funded public defenders — who represented Holmes — are not required to disclose what they spend on a case. Doing so, they say, would violate ethics rules and subject poor defendants to lower standards of attorney-client confidentiality. Generally, the office of the state public defender reports having spent nearly $2 million on death-penalty and potential death-penalty cases since July 2002, not including staff salaries.

The theater shooting trial was one of the longest in state history. Prosecutors sought the death penalty, and Holmes, who pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, underwent two psychiatric evaluations by state-appointed experts — at a cost of more than $600,000 to the state Department of Human Services. Holmes ultimately was found guilty of murdering 12 people and trying to murder 70 more in the July 2012 attack on the Century Aurora 16 movie theater; he was sentenced to life in prison without parole in August.

While the case prompted public debates about the cost of the death penalty and mental health evaluations, the biggest expense that has been reported was for providing victims' assistance services. The Arapahoe County district attorney's office spent nearly $1.2 million on salaries for victims' advocates, travel expenses for victims to attend the trial and other costs. All of those costs were covered by a federal grant.

Arapahoe County District Attorney George Brauchler, whose office published its close-to-final cost figures last week, said the costs were about in line with what he expected. In addition to the federal grant, the state government appropriated about $500,000 to cover trial-related costs for the district attorney's office. He said more than half of what his office spent on the case was spent before the trial even began one year ago this month, and he rejected the criticism that seeking the death penalty ballooned the trial's price tag. Instead, Brauchler said the case was expensive because of the number of victims involved.

The county DA here make a reasonable point that the nature of the crime may be the reason for the considerable expense as much as the nature of the punishment sought. Nevertheless, I believe this case could and would have cost taxpayers a whole lot less if prosecutors had accepted the defense's early offer to plead guilty in exchange for an LWOP sentence. (That LWOP sentences was ultimately achieved in the end after a lengthy and costly capital trial.) Moreover, the costs here include the opportunity costs of having so many Colorado state justice officials (police, prosecutors, judges) working on this case so intensely when there surely were many other Colorado crime and criminals that might have otherwise gotten their attention.

Of course, and I think not to be overlooked in any accounting of general capital costs/benefits, Holmes' defense team likely was only willing to offer to plead guilty and take LWOP because Colorado has capital punishment on its books. Consequently, it would be unfair to suggest abolition of the death penalty will always produce massive savings in major murder cases. But, as regular readers should know, this kind of accounting leads me to suggest, yet again, that states ought to have ways to "delegate" major murders to the feds for more efficient and effective capital prosecutions.

A few (of many) older related posts (with lots of comments):

April 20, 2016 at 09:09 AM | Permalink

Comments

People think the effort to try the person and label him death penalty worthy (usually the sentence isn't carried out, so I choose that wording advisedly) is worth the time and effort. They will here feel cheated with a simple plea deal, especially given the particular heinous and horrible nature of the crime. This might not be a great thing, but that's the reality of the situation from my vantage point.

As to allowing them to delegate, I disagree with some "major" murder rule as a matter of proper division of state and federal power. Why stop at murder? Perhaps, major rapes, thefts, etc. without even the at times too slim federal hooks in place should are mere "major" effects should be delegated to the feds since they apparently are "more efficient and effective" at this. I'm unsure (given the limited number of federal capital trials, even less before recent expansion of death eligibles) though that the feds ARE really more so than each state. How does one determine such things?

As to the death penalty being a means to pressure pleas, I assume that is true, though at times that will be problematic & states/nations obtain pleas without a death penalty. As do states that have a death penalty on the book but who simply never execute anyone, a fact that perhaps does not influence the defendant, but you'd think it often would.

Posted by: Joe | Apr 20, 2016 10:50:44 AM

"states ought to have ways to "delegate" major murders to the feds for more efficient and effective capital prosecutions."

The last thing we need is to have intrastate homicide cases embroiled in Presidential and Congressional politics.

Posted by: ohwilleke | Apr 20, 2016 4:41:52 PM

Isn't the Charleston shootings an intrastate homicide?

Posted by: Doug B. | Apr 20, 2016 9:40:21 PM

"Charleston shootings"

One account spoke of "hate crime and as an act of domestic terrorism." Sounded fairly weak to me when it was brought up on this blog but if there is some sort of federal hook there like if some postal officer was killed or something, fine. "Major" still seems rather open-ended, moving the line between state and federal a bit too much.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/fbi-terrorism-charges-not-ruled-out-charleston-shooting

Posted by: Joe | Apr 20, 2016 10:20:19 PM

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