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.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
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
Monday, December 1, 2008
Report from Clemency Hearing
The case of condemned killer Darold Stenson is under consideration in two courts. Now a third venue is reviewing his case.
Washington State’s Clemency and Pardons Board took testimony Monday on Stenson who is scheduled to die Wednesday night in Walla Walla. But the execution won’t go forward unless two court stays are lifted.
Jeff Ellis is with the Washington Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty. He told the Clemency Board that Washington is acting like Texas in its push to execute Stenson before all DNA evidence has been tested.
Jeff Ellis: “I was comfortable in the belief that we did things differently here than in Texas. Five days ago that belief was shattered. The state seeks to kill Darold Stenson without testing DNA.”
Prosecutors responded that DNA testing previously showed that blood on Stenson’s pants belonged to one of the two victims he was convicted of murdering in 1993.
The Clemency Board delayed making a recommendation to the Governor pending the outcome of the two court cases
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Clemency Hrg 12/1 at 9 am?
A hrg has been set for 12/1, despite the two stays and an order directing the conduct of DNA tests. Watch for more here tomorrow.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Two stays of execution
Two judges have issued two separate stays of execution for Darold Ray Stenson, who was scheduled to be executed next week.
A judge in Clallam County granted the stay and ordered additional DNA testing in the case after a prison inmate came forward with new information indicating that Stenson may have been framed for the 1993 shooting deaths of his wife and a business partner.
Clallam County Prosecutor Deborah Kelly said she intends to appeal the judge's ruling, perhaps as early as today.
At the same time, a federal judge in Yakima has indefinitely delayed the execution during a conference call today with lawyers.
Assistant Attorney General Sara Olson, who is one of the attorneys handling the case for the state, said her office is filing an emergency motion asking an appeals court to vacate Suko's decision. Stenson, 55, was set to be executed Dec. 3.
Stenson was sentencing to death for killing his wife Denise and his business partner Frank Hoerner on March 25, 1993. Authorities say that Stenson staged the slaying inside his Sequim-area ranch to look like a murder- suicide so he could collect a $400,000 life insurance policy that he took out for his wife. Prosecutors say he killed Hoerner because he owed him $50,000.
Stenson's three young children — ages 6, 4 and 1 — were asleep in the house when their mother and Hoerner were slain.
He was convicted of aggravated murder deaths of his wife and a business partner while his three young children slept nearby in his Clallam County farmhouse.
Stenson would be the first inmate put to death since 2001 if none of his pending appeals is granted.
Seattle Times staff reporter Jennifer Sullivan and The Associated Press contributed to this report
Copyright © 2008 The Seattle Times Company
A judge in Clallam County granted the stay and ordered additional DNA testing in the case after a prison inmate came forward with new information indicating that Stenson may have been framed for the 1993 shooting deaths of his wife and a business partner.
Clallam County Prosecutor Deborah Kelly said she intends to appeal the judge's ruling, perhaps as early as today.
At the same time, a federal judge in Yakima has indefinitely delayed the execution during a conference call today with lawyers.
Assistant Attorney General Sara Olson, who is one of the attorneys handling the case for the state, said her office is filing an emergency motion asking an appeals court to vacate Suko's decision. Stenson, 55, was set to be executed Dec. 3.
Stenson was sentencing to death for killing his wife Denise and his business partner Frank Hoerner on March 25, 1993. Authorities say that Stenson staged the slaying inside his Sequim-area ranch to look like a murder- suicide so he could collect a $400,000 life insurance policy that he took out for his wife. Prosecutors say he killed Hoerner because he owed him $50,000.
Stenson's three young children — ages 6, 4 and 1 — were asleep in the house when their mother and Hoerner were slain.
He was convicted of aggravated murder deaths of his wife and a business partner while his three young children slept nearby in his Clallam County farmhouse.
Stenson would be the first inmate put to death since 2001 if none of his pending appeals is granted.
Seattle Times staff reporter Jennifer Sullivan and The Associated Press contributed to this report
Copyright © 2008 The Seattle Times Company
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
