On Jaunary 9, 2010, beginning at 9:30 am at Seattle University Law School, the Coalition will host a workshop/event entitled: Accomplishing Abolition in Washington. Please save the date. More details to follow...........
Monday, December 14, 2009
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
A tribute to those who served us
Those of us who support abolition, do so because we want to live in safe communities.
Every day, brave men and women serving as police officers put their lives on the line to keep our communities safe.
Last weekend, four died serving us.
If you can, please make a donation in their memory at :
http://lpig.us/index.cfm
Thursday, September 24, 2009
The Death Penalty and War Veterans
Let me start with an old, but still relevant news account from the funeral of Manny Babbitt:
Manny Babbitt, the 50-year-old Wareham native, executed a week ago for the 1980 murder of an elderly Sacramento woman, was buried yesterday with military honors, including a flag-draped casket, a rifle salute and bugler playing "Taps." Nestled atop a grassy knoll and sandwiched between blossoming fruit trees and evergreens, Mr. Babbitt's final resting place is an oasis of tranquillity compared to the chaos of his tortured life. Mr. Babbitt was convicted of assaulting and killing Leah Schendel, a diminutive, 78-year-old Romanian grandmother whose South Sacramento apartment he broke into on the night of Dec. 18, 1980. A jury two years later sentenced him to death. Seeking a sense of closure on Mr. Babbitt's life, more than 300 people gathered yesterday for a memorial at St. Patrick's Catholic Church. It was followed by a graveside ceremony that included full military honors for the decorated Vietnam veteran.
Washington has at least two men on death row who served their country in violent conflicts.
More to follow.....
An account of the failed execution of Broom
For more than two hours, the team attempted to insert two shunts into a vein of the compliant Broom, who tried several times to assist his executioners by shifting positions, rubbing his arm and pointing out possible usable veins. * * *
At one point, Broom, 53, lay back on his bed, covered his face with his hands, and cried. Another time, while sitting up, he was seen grimacing as the execution team appeared to seek a vein around his ankles.
A reprieve at this stage of an execution has never happened since the death penalty was reinstated in 1999, said Terry Collins, director of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction. He said he called the governor and asked for the reprieve after it became clear the execution team was having trouble. "I could tell my team was becoming somewhat frustrated," Collins said. The reprieve extended only until Sept. 22 [until a federal judge granted a stay of execution to stop the expiration of the reprieve and prevent the execution from happening during the pendency of the court proceeding].
The drama played out before the family of Tryna Middleton . . . Tryna's mother and father, Bessye and David Middleton, were there to witness the execution, as was an aunt. They sat in front of a glass window through which they were expecting to see Broom die.
Instead, he never made it out of his nearby cell, where two shunts were to be installed in veins. The shunts allow three drugs to enter the veins and sedate, paralyze and kill the inmate. The family and others watched the preparation on closed-circuit monitors mounted in the witness area. A camera filmed Broom and captured much of the difficulty the execution team had, as well as Broom's frustration. Broom requested no witnesses initially, but about an hour into the process asked for his attorney, Adele Shank, to be present.
A visibly upset Shank appeared in the witness room not knowing of Broom's request but out of concern for the length of time for the execution. "The chief justice and the governor have been notified of what's going on," Shank said after the execution team spent 90 minutes trying to insert the shunts.
Collins said the execution team was able to access several veins but they collapsed once saline solution was administered. He defended the execution team and said: "They continued to do a job that most wouldn't do or couldn't do." . . .
Shank, Broom's lawyer, said she is considering additional appeals. "We don't want to see a repeat of this ever," she said.
At one point, Broom, 53, lay back on his bed, covered his face with his hands, and cried. Another time, while sitting up, he was seen grimacing as the execution team appeared to seek a vein around his ankles.
A reprieve at this stage of an execution has never happened since the death penalty was reinstated in 1999, said Terry Collins, director of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction. He said he called the governor and asked for the reprieve after it became clear the execution team was having trouble. "I could tell my team was becoming somewhat frustrated," Collins said. The reprieve extended only until Sept. 22 [until a federal judge granted a stay of execution to stop the expiration of the reprieve and prevent the execution from happening during the pendency of the court proceeding].
The drama played out before the family of Tryna Middleton . . . Tryna's mother and father, Bessye and David Middleton, were there to witness the execution, as was an aunt. They sat in front of a glass window through which they were expecting to see Broom die.
Instead, he never made it out of his nearby cell, where two shunts were to be installed in veins. The shunts allow three drugs to enter the veins and sedate, paralyze and kill the inmate. The family and others watched the preparation on closed-circuit monitors mounted in the witness area. A camera filmed Broom and captured much of the difficulty the execution team had, as well as Broom's frustration. Broom requested no witnesses initially, but about an hour into the process asked for his attorney, Adele Shank, to be present.
A visibly upset Shank appeared in the witness room not knowing of Broom's request but out of concern for the length of time for the execution. "The chief justice and the governor have been notified of what's going on," Shank said after the execution team spent 90 minutes trying to insert the shunts.
Collins said the execution team was able to access several veins but they collapsed once saline solution was administered. He defended the execution team and said: "They continued to do a job that most wouldn't do or couldn't do." . . .
Shank, Broom's lawyer, said she is considering additional appeals. "We don't want to see a repeat of this ever," she said.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
It Can Happen Here, Too.
Many of you may have heard that the execution of Romell Broom, 53, in Ohio was postponed after technicians tried and failed for more than two hours to maintain an IV connection in order to inject him with lethal drugs.
Ohio wants to try to kill Mr. Broom, again. Further, they do not want to examine the process.
That does not mean there will be a review of the larger issue of lethal injections," a state official said last Wednesday. "That's been settled. Obviously yesterday demonstrated that we have a problem with this particular set of circumstances."
What the Ohio officials fail to recognize is that "this particular set of circumstances," is not something limited to one person. Instead, "this particular set of circumstances" is the act of killing another human being. This is only the last botched attempted execution if it is the last attempted execution.
It can happen here, too. In fact, it will unless we get out of the business of killing fellow humans.
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/romell-broom-execution-hold-over-unsuitable-veins
Ohio wants to try to kill Mr. Broom, again. Further, they do not want to examine the process.
That does not mean there will be a review of the larger issue of lethal injections," a state official said last Wednesday. "That's been settled. Obviously yesterday demonstrated that we have a problem with this particular set of circumstances."
What the Ohio officials fail to recognize is that "this particular set of circumstances," is not something limited to one person. Instead, "this particular set of circumstances" is the act of killing another human being. This is only the last botched attempted execution if it is the last attempted execution.
It can happen here, too. In fact, it will unless we get out of the business of killing fellow humans.
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/romell-broom-execution-hold-over-unsuitable-veins
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Executing the Severely Mentally Ill
Isn't it high time to have a thoughtful discussion on this issue, especially considering the fact that we have two men facing execution dates in this State in the near future?
Over the next few months this blog will focus on the sad intersection where the punishment we tell ourselves is reserved for the worst of the worst meets up with those among us who are least able to understand and control their actions.
Over the next few months this blog will focus on the sad intersection where the punishment we tell ourselves is reserved for the worst of the worst meets up with those among us who are least able to understand and control their actions.
Friday, July 17, 2009
Death Penalty and Mental Illness: Double Tragedies
For the first time, families of murder victims have joined with families of persons with mental illness who have been executed to speak out against the death penalty.
Double Tragedies, a report released on July 6th at a special session on the first day of the annual convention of the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI), calls the death penalty "inappropriate and unwarranted" for people with severe mental disorders and "a distraction from problems within the mental health system that contributed or even directly lead to tragic violence."
The report calls for treatment and prevention, not execution. It is available online at www.nami.org/doubletragedies.
The report, a joint project of NAMI and Murder Victims' Families for Human Rights (MVFHR), is based on extensive interviews with 21 family members from 10 states: California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas.
"Family opposition to the death penalty is grounded in personal tragedy," said MVFHR executive director Renny Cushing. "In the public debate about the death penalty and how to respond in the aftermath of violent crime, these are the voices that need to be heard."
"Most people with mental illness are not violent," said NAMI executive director Mike Fitzpatrick. "When violent tragedies occur they are exceptional, because something has gone terribly wrong, usually in the mental health care system. Tragedies are compounded and all our families suffer."
The report identifies an "intersection" of family concerns and makes four basic recommendations:
Ban the death penalty for people with severe mental illnesses.
Reform the mental health care system to focus on treatment.
Recognize the needs of families of murder victims through rights to information and participation in criminal or mental health proceedings.
Families of executed persons also should be recognized as victims and given the assistance due to any victims of traumatic loss.
At least 100 people with mental illness have been put to death in the United States and hundreds more are awaiting execution.
Other resources:
www.mvfhr.org
www.nami.org/grades09
The National Alliance on Mental Illness, www.nami.org, is the nation's largest grassroots mental health organization dedicated to improving the lives of individuals and families affected by mental illness.
Double Tragedies, a report released on July 6th at a special session on the first day of the annual convention of the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI), calls the death penalty "inappropriate and unwarranted" for people with severe mental disorders and "a distraction from problems within the mental health system that contributed or even directly lead to tragic violence."
The report calls for treatment and prevention, not execution. It is available online at www.nami.org/doubletragedies.
The report, a joint project of NAMI and Murder Victims' Families for Human Rights (MVFHR), is based on extensive interviews with 21 family members from 10 states: California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas.
"Family opposition to the death penalty is grounded in personal tragedy," said MVFHR executive director Renny Cushing. "In the public debate about the death penalty and how to respond in the aftermath of violent crime, these are the voices that need to be heard."
"Most people with mental illness are not violent," said NAMI executive director Mike Fitzpatrick. "When violent tragedies occur they are exceptional, because something has gone terribly wrong, usually in the mental health care system. Tragedies are compounded and all our families suffer."
The report identifies an "intersection" of family concerns and makes four basic recommendations:
Ban the death penalty for people with severe mental illnesses.
Reform the mental health care system to focus on treatment.
Recognize the needs of families of murder victims through rights to information and participation in criminal or mental health proceedings.
Families of executed persons also should be recognized as victims and given the assistance due to any victims of traumatic loss.
At least 100 people with mental illness have been put to death in the United States and hundreds more are awaiting execution.
Other resources:
www.mvfhr.org
www.nami.org/grades09
The National Alliance on Mental Illness, www.nami.org, is the nation's largest grassroots mental health organization dedicated to improving the lives of individuals and families affected by mental illness.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
A dispassionate, impartial review....
Judge Boyce Martin, the former Chief Judge of the Sixth Circuit, notes in concurrence today in Wiles v. Bagley, No. 05-371, his continued concern about capital punishment as a public policy issue, especially in lean economic times:
Now in my thirtieth year as a judge on this Court, I have had an inside view of our system of capital punishment almost since the death penalty was reintroduced in the wake of Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972). During that time, judges, lawyers, and elected officials have expended great time and resources attempting to ensure the fairness, proportionality, and accuracy that the Constitution demands of our system. But those efforts have utterly failed. Capital punishment in this country remains “arbitrary, biased, and so fundamentally flawed at its very core that it is beyond repair.” Moore v. Parker, 425 F.3d 250, 268 (6th Cir. 2005) (Martin, J., dissenting). At the same time, the system’s necessary emphasis on competent representation, sound trial procedure, and searching post-conviction review has made it exceedingly expensive to maintain.
The system’s deep flaws and high costs raise a simple but important question: is the death penalty worth what it costs us? In my view, this broken system would not justify its costs even if it saved money, but those who do not agree may want to consider just how expensive the death penalty really is. Accordingly, I join Justice Stevens in calling for “a dispassionate, impartial comparison of the enormous costs that death penalty litigation imposes on society with the benefits that it produces.” Baze v. Rees, ___ U.S. ___, 128 S.Ct. 1520, 1548-49 (2007) (Stevens, J., concurring). Such an evaluation, I believe, is particularly appropriate at a time when public funds are scarce and our state and federal governments are having to re-evaluate their fiscal priorities. Make no mistake: the choice to pay for the death penalty is a choice not to pay for other public goods like roads, schools, parks, public works, emergency services, public transportation, and law enforcement. So we need to ask whether the death penalty is worth what we are sacrificing to maintain it.
Now in my thirtieth year as a judge on this Court, I have had an inside view of our system of capital punishment almost since the death penalty was reintroduced in the wake of Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972). During that time, judges, lawyers, and elected officials have expended great time and resources attempting to ensure the fairness, proportionality, and accuracy that the Constitution demands of our system. But those efforts have utterly failed. Capital punishment in this country remains “arbitrary, biased, and so fundamentally flawed at its very core that it is beyond repair.” Moore v. Parker, 425 F.3d 250, 268 (6th Cir. 2005) (Martin, J., dissenting). At the same time, the system’s necessary emphasis on competent representation, sound trial procedure, and searching post-conviction review has made it exceedingly expensive to maintain.
The system’s deep flaws and high costs raise a simple but important question: is the death penalty worth what it costs us? In my view, this broken system would not justify its costs even if it saved money, but those who do not agree may want to consider just how expensive the death penalty really is. Accordingly, I join Justice Stevens in calling for “a dispassionate, impartial comparison of the enormous costs that death penalty litigation imposes on society with the benefits that it produces.” Baze v. Rees, ___ U.S. ___, 128 S.Ct. 1520, 1548-49 (2007) (Stevens, J., concurring). Such an evaluation, I believe, is particularly appropriate at a time when public funds are scarce and our state and federal governments are having to re-evaluate their fiscal priorities. Make no mistake: the choice to pay for the death penalty is a choice not to pay for other public goods like roads, schools, parks, public works, emergency services, public transportation, and law enforcement. So we need to ask whether the death penalty is worth what we are sacrificing to maintain it.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
