March 17


MASSACHUSETTS:

Festa: No place for the death penalty


The United States Supreme Court recently ruled that offenders under age 18
cannot be sentenced to death. It's about time. We were the last democracy
in the world to end this practice.

That said, many states continue to use the death penalty for 1st-degree
murderers, although here in Massachusetts we have not executed anyone
since 1947. Attempts to reinstate the death penalty have occurred every
legislative session, and most recently Governor Romney has filed a new
death penalty bill that purports to limit its application to only
"fool-proof" cases.

There is no such thing, and even if the criminal justice system were
flawless, I believe there are other compelling reasons not to use the
death penalty. As a former assistant district attorney and member of the
Joint Committee on Criminal Justice, I am convinced that despite our best
efforts and intentions, our judicial system is not perfect and no death
penalty statute would be "fool-proof".

The statistics on the rate of false convictions for death penalty cases
are simply staggering. Since 2000 alone, 36 death row inmates have been
exonerated, most often as the result of the discovery of new evidence.
Governor Mitt Romney formed the Council on Capital Punishment to come up
with a plan to reinstate a "fool-proof" death penalty. Romney has
repeatedly insisted on the Council's ability to create perfect
"evidentiary standards" to ensure the appropriate application of the death
penalty. But we cannot ignore the fact witnesses, juries, judges and
attorneys are all human and can and do make mistakes.

Adding to the issue of false convictions is the fact that the vast
majority of defendants who are sentenced to death are unable to hire their
own attorneys and are represented by overburdened and underpaid public
defenders who are often incapable of providing sufficient services for
their clients.

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg recently observed, "I have yet
to see...an eve-of-execution stay application in which the defendant was
well-represented at trial...People who are well represented at trial do
not get the death penalty." In the words of one Florida death row inmate,
"those without the capital receive the punishment."

What are the other reasons suggested by proponents of the death penalty?
Deterrence is one. Well, virtually every study conducted has indicated
that the presence of a death penalty statute does little, if anything, to
deter potential offenders from committing violent crimes. In fact, New
England, where there has not been a single execution for nearly a
half-century, has the lowest per capita rate of violent crime of any
region in the country. Can it be fairly said that Florida, Texas and other
states that are relentless in using the death penalty are safer and less
murderous places to live?

The death penalty is expensive. Sentencing an offender to death is at
least 3 times more expensive than life in prison without parole. In
Florida, for example, each execution costs the state $3.2 million -more
than five times the cost of life imprisonment. As taxpayers, we have to
ask ourselves: Is this the best use of our hard-earned tax dollars?

Lastly and most important, the issue of the death penalty for me is about
justice and basic human rights. I appreciate that some people want to seek
revenge against those who have committed brutal and despicable acts
against innocent victims, or believe in "an eye for an eye". But for the
state to cause another to die only reinforces that cycle of death, and by
such acts we demean all our lives.

The issue of the death penalty isn't going away. It divided our Supreme
Court and it will continue to divide our residents. But when the arguments
are thoughtfully considered, the case is clear that the death penalty has
no place in our society.

State Rep. Mike Festa, D-Melrose, represents the 35th Middlesex District,
which includes Wakefield precincts 3, 4, 5 and 6.

(source: Rep. Mike Festa, Wakefield Observer)

*********************

Author of 'Dead Man Walking' speaks at Northborough church


Sister Helen Prejean, the real woman behind "Dead Man Walking," will speak
at St. Rose of Lima Church, 244 West Main St., Northborough, Thursday,
March 17 (tonight), at 7 p.m.

The event is free and open to the public.

Prejean, who is often listed as "one of America's 50 most confident
women," has recently completed her latest book "The Death of Innocents."
In that book she escorts 2 men to their executions and she is certain they
are not guilty.

The book "Dead Man Walking" was made into a movie and an opera. It reached
number one on "The New York Times" Best Seller List. Susan Sarandon and
Sean Penn starred in the movie, which won an Academy Award and was
nominated for 4 Oscars.

Sister Helen Prejean has been a member of the Sisters of Saint Joseph of
Medialle since 1957. Her ministry is to the death row inmates at Louisiana
State Penitentiary. She has accompanied five men to their executions. She
also works with murder victims' families and founded a group in New
Orleans called Survive.

Prejean is an honorary member of Murder Victims for Reconciliation. She
has been honored around the world for her strong faith and commitment to
the good news of the gospel. B.B.C. named her "Angel of Death Row." She
has received 37 honorary degrees.

Actress Sarandon says she is most impressed with "Sister Helen's genuine
humility."

"Sister Helen's example invites a movie-going audience to understand that
they, too, can deal with moral questions like poverty and capital
punishment," comments Sarandon. "Sister Helen's life is a sign that, 'you,
too, have the responsibility and the opportunity of finding your life,
finding your faith and applying it to the world around you.'"

Prejean's lecture tonight, March 17, will be followed by questions and
answers. Copies of both of her books will be available and a reception
will be held. The talk is free and open to the public. The Moratorium
Campaign, founded by Prejean is a worldwide coordination to end the death
penalty. Participants will have the opportunity to sign the petition both
before and after the lecture.

(source: Marlborough Enterprise)






ILLINOIS:

Tough execution rule gains----Illinois House OKs bill to raise standard
for the death penalty


The Illinois House voted Wednesday to raise the legal standard that courts
must apply before imposing the death penalty. But even traditional allies
in the capital-punishment debate are at odds over what effect the measure
would have on the state's moratorium on executions.

The measure would require judges and juries to find defendants guilty
"beyond all doubt" before sending them to death row, making Illinois the
first state to require more than the common standard of guilt "beyond a
reasonable doubt."

Some legislators voted for the measure because they think it would instill
more confidence in the death penalty and perhaps put it back in operation,
while others opposed it because they think it would throw up another
roadblock.

At the same time, opponents of capital punishment were split over whether
the measure would help or hurt their cause.

House Minority Leader Tom Cross (R-Oswego), sponsor of the measure, said
it would help prevent something no lawmaker wants on his or her
conscience: the execution of an innocent person.

"We have been wrong in the past, and this is an attempt to right that
wrong," said Cross, a supporter of the death penalty. "When it comes to
the death penalty, when it comes down to whether we are going to kill
somebody, we ought to be right."

The House passed the measure by a 66-49 vote and sent it to the Senate,
where President Emil Jones (D-Chicago), who opposes the death penalty,
supports the measure.

Jones also backs the moratorium on executions imposed in 2000 by former
Gov. George Ryan, who said his decision was inspired by wrongful
convictions of 13 inmates and by a Tribune investigative series revealing
error, bias and incompetence in the state's system of capital justice.

The legislature has since enacted reforms of the state's criminal justice
system to address the problems. But Gov. Rod Blagojevich has kept the
moratorium in place, saying he wants to give the reforms time to prove
their worth.

Aides to the governor say Blagojevich isn't sure yet if he supports Cross'
measure. A spokeswoman said the governor's concern is "balancing the
intentions of the bill with the concerns of law enforcement."

Meanwhile, lawmakers on all sides of the death-penalty debate sought to
predict how the measure might impact their cause.

Cross says he is not trying to lift or extend the moratorium. But Rep. Lee
Daniels (R-Elmhurst), a death-penalty supporter, said he agrees with
prosecutors that the higher standard would make it too hard to impose the
penalty.

"If you vote for this, you are voting to eliminate the death penalty,"
said Daniels, who voted against the measure.

But one of the House's leading death-penalty opponents, House Majority
Leader Barbara Flynn Currie (D-Chicago), also opposed the measure. She
said the bill wouldn't make much of a difference in a flawed system.

"It will make us feel good, that we can be more, not less certain, that
the individuals sent to Death Row actually belong there," Currie said.
"But it's impossible to be certain that you are never executing someone
who isn't guilty."

Rep. Robert Molaro (D-Chicago), also a death-penalty opponent, voted for
the bill because he thinks it highlights "how ridiculous" the whole idea
of capital punishment is.

"Let's get this straight," Molaro said. The system "is not infallible. It
is never going to be infallible. The judge and jury were not there.
They'll never know what happened."

(source: Chicago Tribune)






CALIFORNIA:

Barring Jewish jurors in death cases denied -- D.A. cites transcripts of 2
murder trials


Startling allegations by a former Alameda County prosecutor that he and
his then-colleagues systematically excluded Jews from juries in death
penalty cases were called into question Wednesday by the district
attorney, who cited newly released transcripts of jury selection in two
murder convictions that the state Supreme Court is reviewing.

"The allegations are completely without merit," Alameda County District
Attorney Tom Orloff said Wednesday. "That will come out next week in
court."

The transcripts of juror selection in two Alameda County murder trials
nearly two decades ago are the latest volley in the bitter legal battle
over the revelations in the summer by former prosecutor John Quatman, who
prosecuted one of the two cases under review. On Wednesday, the San
Francisco chapter of the Anti-Defamation League, a prominent Jewish civil
rights group, called for further public investigation into the
allegations.

On Tuesday, a judge in Santa Clara County will conduct a hearing, at the
behest of the California Supreme Court, on Quatman's allegations and
similar issues raised in another Alameda County murder case.

In a sworn declaration in the summer, Quatman said it was "standard
practice to exclude Jewish jurors in death case, as it was to exclude
African American women from capital juries."

In his declaration, Quatman said a Jewish judge, the late Stanley Golde,
once reminded the prosecutor of this practice during a break in jury
selection. Alameda County prosecutors said Wednesday that court
transcripts showed the conversation could not have happened.

Quatman, who worked 26 years as a deputy district attorney and is now a
defense attorney in Montana, has declined interview requests. He may
testify at Tuesday's hearing.

Quatman made the allegations in the petition of a man he helped put on San
Quentin's Death Row. Quatman prosecuted Fred Harlan Freeman, who was
convicted in 1987 of a killing and robbery at a Berkeley bar.

Golde, according to Quatman's declaration, called the prosecutor into his
chambers and said: "Quatman, what are you doing?" The judge then asked why
Quatman had not used a peremptory challenge to exclude a potential juror
who was Jewish.

"Judge Golde said no Jew would vote to send a defendant to the death
chamber," Quatman said. He said the judge noted the debate in Israel over
whether Adolf Eichmann, a Nazi leader instrumental in killing millions of
Jews, should be executed.

"I thanked Judge Golde for his advice, and thereafter excused any
prospective juror who was Jewish," Quatman said.

Under California law, it is illegal to exclude potential jurors on the
basis of race, religion or ethnicity. If the state's high court agrees
with Freeman's attorneys, the inmate could receive a new trial.

African American women, who are often considered reluctant to support the
death penalty for black defendants, also were excluded, Quatman said. But
that issue has not been a factor in the Freeman case, where a black woman
served as alternate juror.

In the other murder case, attorneys seeking to overturn the 1990 death
penalty conviction of Mark Schmeck compiled statistics showing that over a
10- year period all 12 "identified Jews" and 15 of 17 jurors with
"probable" Jewish surnames were struck from 22 Alameda County juries that
subsequently voted for capital punishment in murder cases.

Berkeley attorney Lawrence Gibbs said his study of Alameda County capital
convictions between 1984 and 1994 showed a pattern of bias far "beyond
Quatman."

"It was widespread," Gibbs said Wednesday.

But Angela Backers, head of the Alameda County district attorney's
homicide unit, cited transcripts Wednesday showing that 3 jurors with
probable Jewish surnames -- 1 excluded in the Freeman trial and 2
dismissed in the Schmeck case -- were all challenged because they made
comments very unfavorable to the prosecution.

California law allows prosecutors and defense attorneys to use a limited
number of challenges to exclude jurors without giving a reason. These are
usually used for tactical reasons.

2 of the jurors said they could probably vote for the death penalty only
in cases of mass murder, such as those committed by Charles Manson or
Richard Ramirez.

A 3rd juror who had a probable Jewish surname said he would view an
accused criminal with a prior history of killing a police officer more
sympathetically even though others would find such violence troubling.

"These jurors obviously were not going to for a death penalty in the end,"
Backers said. "There were all kinds of logical reasons to exclude these
three jurors for cause in a capital case. There were all kinds of red
flags raised by their comments."

************************

Peterson to begin life on death row


Scott Peterson, once an upwardly mobile fertilizer salesman in Modesto,
will move to Marin County by Friday night, where he is to live the rest of
his life in the downwardly mobile confines of San Quentin State Prison's
death row.

He will spend much of the day in an 8-by-6-foot cell containing a steel
bed frame bolted to the floor, with a sheet of steel lying on it. On top
of that is a mattress. There used to be bedsprings, but guards found that
prisoners tended to make weapons out of them.

On Wednesday, Sgt. Eric Messick, a spokesman for San Quentin, described
what is in store for the soon-to-be newest resident of California's death
row.

Once the 32-year-old Peterson arrives at San Quentin, Messick said, "he
will be taken directly to the Adjustment Center, a 102-man cell-block
reception center" for newly arrived condemned men. Messick said 97 of the
102 prisoners now living in the reception center are men who have been in
trouble in prison and are classified Grade B inmates, as opposed to the
Grade A prisoners who are better behaved.

Peterson will go through 45 days of interviews, in which his "social
factors and educational background will be assessed by an institutional
classification committee," Messick said.

"He'll have medical and psychological evaluations and then, because he's
not from a criminal background, he will probably be sent to East Block,"
which houses 450 of San Quentin's 615 condemned men. Twenty-five condemned
inmates are at other prisons. "There, he will be segregated with Death Row
inmates for the rest of his life."

And how will he spend his time, given that it takes about 17 years to move
from East Block into the death chamber?

Most of his time will be spent in the cell, which, in addition to the
steel bed, has a sink, a commode and a wall locker. He may have records,
tapes and CDs, a television set and books. He will also have two sheets, a
blanket, a pillow, a pillowcase, two towels, boxer shorts, T-shirts,
socks, blue denim pants and light-blue shirts.

All meals will be served in Peterson's cell, and it won't be like much of
the highfalutin chow available down the road in Mill Valley or Sausalito.

A hot breakfast, at 6 a.m., will be something like a sausage patty, two
hard-boiled eggs, a square of hash brown potatoes, and "the next day it
might be coffee cake with hot cereal," Messick said.

Lunch, delivered in a sack, comes around 10:30 a.m. and consists of bread,
lunch meat or peanut butter and jelly or tuna salad, along with cookies,
chips, fruit and sugar-free Kool-Aid.

Dinner, at 5 p.m., is usually meat, potatoes and a vegetable, or various
ethnic meals. After dinner, Peterson can watch TV, but can receive only
local channels. If that gets boring, he can read until he falls asleep, no
matter how late -- each cell has individually controlled light switches,
Messick said.

Like all death row inmates in their windowless cells, Peterson won't be
able to see or hear the bay, into which he dumped the body of his pregnant
wife, Laci.

Peterson can exercise up to about 5 hours a day, 6 days a week. Whether he
exercises communally or by himself is up to the classification committee.
He may also have 3 showers a week.

His attorney can visit 5 times each week and Peterson can have two
personal visits a week. Each visit can last up to 90 minutes. Should he
manage to find a wife while on death row, no conjugal visits will be
allowed.

As for the possibility that Peterson might be harmed by a publicity-
seeking prison colleague (it happens), Messick said, "We have built-in
procedures -- no double-celling, no contact with any inmates. If he's out
of his cell block, he's under escort of three officers. Inmates on the
general population main line, when they hear them coming, have to find the
nearest wall and face it."

By the time his execution date comes around -- if ever -- Peterson will
probably be nearing his 50th birthday. In the meantime, however, if he
keeps out of trouble, he may be upgraded to a special unit called North
Seg.

"Up there," Messick said, "you have your most senior, best-behaved death
row inmates. They get 'tier time,' which means the tiers are cleared of
all (prison) staff, the cells are unlocked and the inmates can come out
and play pinochle and take showers."

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The death penalty in California


Here's a look at the process and number of executions in the state, which
has the largest death row in the nation with 640 inmates, including 15
women.

The executed

Name, year executed and time spent on death row:

Robert Alton Harris (1992; 13 years, 1 month)

Keith Daniel Williams (1996; 17 years)

Robert Lee Massie (2001; 21 years, 10 months)

Darrell Keith Rich (2000; 19 years, 1 month)

Stephen Wayne Anderson (2002; 20 years, 6 months)

Donald Beardslee (2005; 20 years, 10 months)

William George Bonin (1996; 13 years, 1 month)

Manuel Babbitt (1999; 16 years, 10 months)

Jaturun Siripongs (1999; 15 years, 9 months)

David Edwin Mason (1993; 9 years, 7 months)

Thomas M. Thompson (1998; 14 years, 1 month).

Average length of stay

California: 16 to 17 years

Florida: 11.8 years

Texas: 10.4 years.

Inmates on death row

By ethnicity/race (Number and percent of total)

White: 252 (39.3%)

Black: 228 (35.6%)

Hispanic: 121 (18.9%)

Other: 39 (6%).

By age (Number and percent of total)

0 to 19: 0

20 to 29: 30 (4.7%)

30 to 39: 192 (30%)

40 to 49: 238 (37.2%)

50 to 59: 138 (21.6%)

60 to 69: 37 (5.8%)

70 to 79: 5 (0.8%)

(source: California Department of Corrections, Death Penalty Information
Center; Bureau of Justice Statistics, Chroncile research by Johnny Miller
/ Chronicle Research Librarian)

(source for both: San Francisco Chronicle)

***************

A sampling of reaction to Scott Peterson's death sentence:


"The court is satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant,
Scott Lee Peterson, is guilty of first-degree murder. ... The factors in
aggravation are so substantial when compared to the factors of mitigation
that death is warranted." - Superior Court Judge Alfred A. Delucchi, in
handing down the sentence.

---

"How could you kill your own son? What kind of person are you? You're
going to burn in hell for this." - Dennis Rocha, Laci's father, speaking
to Scott Peterson.

---

"Did you look her in the eyes, Scott, as you killed her? Was she alive
when you put her in the bay?" - Laci's mother Sharon Rocha.

---

"The fact that you no longer wanted Laci did not give you the right to
murder her. She was my daughter. I trusted you and you betrayed me ... you
betrayed everybody." - Sharon Rocha.

---

"I chose not to kill you myself for one reason - so you would have to
sweat it out and not take the easy way out." - Laci's brother, Brent
Rocha, telling the court that he contemplated killing Scott Peterson at
one point.

---

"What a liar!" - Scott Peterson's father, Lee Peterson, yelling at Brent
Rocha from the audience before the judge admonished him and he left court.

---

"No punishment you receive on earth will compare to the punishment that
God will give you when you die." - Laci's sister, Amy Rocha.

---

"We wanted to see it all the way through to the end. Closure." - Juror
Richelle Nice, speaking to reporters outside the courthouse following
sentencing.

***************************

Peterson becomes 644th prisoner on death row


Scott Peterson has become the 644th prisoner awaiting death in the
execution chamber of San Quentin State Prison, the infamous lockup that
overlooks the same bay where the body of his pregnant wife, Laci, was
discarded.

Peterson, who was sentenced to death Wednesday, left the San Mateo County
jail to San Quentin at 3:10 a.m. today. Secured with leg irons and
shackles around his wrists and waist, Peterson was led away in a white,
unmarked van for drive from Redwood City, south of San Francisco, to the
prison, about 20 miles north of the city.

The 32-year-old former fertilizer salesman entered San Quentin shortly
after 4 a.m.

Prison officials had Peterson remove his clothing and a bulletproof vest
supplied by the sheriff for his safety, San Quentin spokesman Lt. Vernell
Crittendon said on NBC's "Today" show. A body search, medical exam and DNA
test were conducted, and a photo was taken for identification.

"During the process, there were moments where he would give that nervous
smile," Crittendon said, adding that Peterson was. "extremely polite."

He told ABC's "Good Morning America" that a staffer suggested to Peterson
that he would take a nap and Peterson replied, "No, I'm just too jazzed."

Peterson was to get a shower, a haircut and state-issued clothing and will
be assigned an identification number. Then, a counselor will classify him
according to his criminal, educational, medical and psychological
histories - a process that could take several weeks.

"Grade B" prisoners, deemed a threat to themselves or others, get limited
privileges - just 10 hours a week of outdoor exercise, alone in a small
cage.

"From what I hear, he hasn't given the staff (at the jail in Redwood City)
any problems," Corrections Department spokeswoman Terry Thornton said, so
this classification may be unlikely for Peterson.

"Grade A" inmates are allowed to spend 5 hours a day outside in a common
yard, where they can exercise and play chess. They can have showers 3
times a week, attend religious services and receive mail, phone calls and
visitors. The prisoners also may keep a television - which they pay for
themselves - in their cells.

Most of the state's condemned prisoners are housed at San Quentin. San
Quentin also houses 5,300 other prisoners, but they don't interact with
the condemned inmates. 15 condemned women are at the Central California
Women's Facility in Chowchilla, but they would be brought to San Quentin
to be executed.

Death row, built in 1934 and designed to handle 68 inmates, is actually
three buildings. In the original death row, now reserved for the most
senior and well-behaved men, inmates walk around a small common area
secured by bars and doors. Amenities include a tiled shower room.

In one of the makeshift death rows - a building known as East Block, where
Peterson will most likely live - inmates stay locked in their 5-by-9-foot
cells, except when they are outside. There are no common areas; the cells
are stacked in tiers fronted by narrow walkways.

There also is no shower room, so two regular cells on each tier have been
converted into showers. Plastic sheeting taped to the bars keeps most of
the water from spraying onto the tiers below, but a steady stream of water
slides down nonetheless.

Peterson received his death sentence more than two years after his
eight-months-pregnant wife disappeared on Christmas Eve 2002. Prosecutors
said Peterson killed her and then dumped her body in San Francisco Bay.
The badly decomposed bodies of Laci and her fetus washed ashore 4 months
later.

Still, there is no telling whether Peterson will ever receive a lethal
injection. Of the 38 states with the death penalty, California moves the
slowest toward executions. As a result, condemned inmates here are more
likely to die in prison.

Peterson likely will sit for more than 5 years before he is appointed an
attorney for his 1st, mandatory appeal to the California Supreme Court.

A big reason for the delays is that there are too many inmates with too
few lawyers willing to volunteer for the relatively low-paying job.
Peterson joins about 120 others who do not yet have lawyers. And even when
an attorney is appointed, there are no deadlines for California's high
court to act.

(source for both: Associated Press)






NEW YORK:

Advocates Call for Statewide Public Defense


On one of the biggest lobbying days of the year, defense advocates
converged on the Capitol Tuesday hoping to garner legislative attention
for a statewide independent public defense system.

The advocates are seeking legislation that would establish a state
overseer of indigent defense programs to ensure that standards are met and
that defenders are adequately supported. It has been their goal for
several years.

Although the proposal has majority sponsorship in both houses, advocates
find themselves in the familiar position of attempting to stand out in the
crowd of lobbyists.

Tuesday is traditionally lobby day at the Capitol, and this Tuesday was
even busier than usual with the April 1 budget deadline looming and myriad
groups lobbying for resources and/or legislation.

Providing services for criminal defendants is always a particularly tough
sell at the Capitol even if, as the advocates maintain, their proposal
would result in a more efficient and ultimately less costly way of meeting
the mandate of Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 US 335 (1963), the landmark U.S.
Supreme Court decision that recognized a constitutional right to counsel
in felony prosecutions.

Jonathan Gradess, executive director of the New York State Defenders
Association, said the situation was actually worsened when, after years of
lobbying by him and others, the Legislature voted in 2003 to increase
assigned counsel rates. He notes that while the state mandated the higher
rates, the pledged funding will not become available until the end of this
month - which means the counties have been paying for the increase even
though the state promised not to impose an unfunded mandate on localities.

Mr. Gradess said roughly half the counties have consequently changed the
way they provide indigent legal services to criminal defenders. Some, he
said, are contracting with not-for-profit organizations, others have set
up conflict defender offices and some rely more heavily on their own
public defenders. The result, he said, is a largely unregulated
hodge-podge of defense programs that are underfunded and which operate
without the benefit of anystandards or guidelines. "It's been a rather
large abomination," Mr. Gradess said. "The consequence mean in effect
clients today, in some places, are in worse shape than they were before
the assigned fee crisis was allegedly solved."

Marion Hathaway, chairwoman of the Client Advisory Board of the New York
State Defenders Association, said a series of hearings held around the
state revealed that the "client population" remains highly skeptical of
the legal representation available to them. "Clients feel alone and lost
in our state's public defense system," she said. "They simply do not feel
the protection of lawyers or the 'guiding hand of counsel'" mandated in
Gideon.

Part of problem, advocates said, is the lack of a statewide umbrella to
set quality of representation guidelines and to ensure they are met.

Malia Brink, indigent defense counsel for the National Association of
Criminal Defense Lawyers, said the state should pay the entire cost of
indigent defense. Now, the counties are largely responsible, with the
state paying about 10 percent of the total cost of indigent counsel
services statewide. "When you have a system that is dually funded by the
counties and the state, there is a constant war for who should pick up the
amount of funding that's needed," Ms. Brink said.

While advocates disagree on the exact mechanics of a statewide defender
office, they agree that the current system is woefully inadequate and
unlikely to reform without leadership from Albany.

Raymond A. Kelly Jr., an Albany attorney and president-elect of the New
York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, said New York should
have a defender general just as it has an attorney general. "Why are there
no standards for the defense?" he asked. "Why are there no [continuing
legal education] requirements in the field of criminal law?"

Mr. Kelly suggested that instead of disbanding the Capital Defender Office
this year unless the death penalty statute is redrawn, as Governor George
E. Pataki has recommended, the state should convert the office into a
statewide defender.

Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union,
said her group is considering filing suit to force New York to reform its
indigent defense system. She said a commission appointed by Chief Judge
Judith S. Kaye to examine the public defense system will at best come up
with "aspirational" goals. "While we are willing and eager to work with
the commission, we are at least a little bit skeptical of their ability to
do the kind of offensive that is necessary, and more than a little bit
skeptical of the willingness of the Legislature and governor to do their
part," Ms. Lieberman said.

(source: New York Law Journal)



KENTUCKY:

State Supreme Court Says Death Row Inmate Not Retarded


The Kentucky Supreme Court says condemned inmate Thomas Clyde Bowling is
not retarded and cannot claim so 15 years after his murder convictions to
avoid execution.

Bowling was within days of his scheduled execution in November when the
high court agreed to consider his claim of mental incompetency.

Bowling was convicted of murdering Edward and Tina Earley and shooting
their two-year-old son outside the couple's Lexington dry-cleaning
business in 1990. No motive for the crime has ever been clear.

Kentucky law prohibits the execution of anyone whose IQ is 70 or less. Two
intelligence tests administered prior to Bowling's trial estimated his IQ
in the mid-80 range.

Bowling's lawyers said a margin of error should be taken into account to
determine that he was mentally retarded.

Justice William Cooper said mental retardation is ordinarily a condition
that becomes manifest before the age of 18.

Cooper wrote the opinion for the 5-to-2 majority. Bowling, now 52, made no
claim of mental retardation at his trial.

(source: Associated Press)



Reply via email to