May 5 MASSACHUSETTS: Still wrong----Mitt Romney's embrace of capital punishment - and Tom Reillys craven response - show why progressives must remain vigilant When Governor Mitt Romney filed legislation last week to bring back the death penalty, the progressive community reacted more with ennui than with revulsion. After all, Republican governors have been using capital punishment to score cheap political points for more than 14 years. Romney himself first unveiled his death-penalty plan about a year ago (see "Another Bright and Shining Lie," Editorial, May 7, 2004). It would be easy to dismiss the latest as an offensive but harmless publicity stunt aimed at boosting his nascent presidential campaign. No one has been executed in Massachusetts since 1947, and every effort to restore capital punishment in recent years has gone down to defeat. But even if the Romney bill is a long shot, this is no time to be complacent. The death penalty is a leading issue in the culture war waged by the national Republican Party in order to divide the country. As with reproductive choice, gay rights, and stem-cell research, opposition to capital punishment is held up as evidence that progressives are elitists who are out of touch with American values. With Romney gearing up for a possible national run, his embrace of the death penalty is, for him, a cant-lose issue: if the legislature refuses to go along, then he can make speeches lampooning the state he allegedly governs, as he has already done with gay marriage; and in the unlikely event that capital punishment becomes law, he can portray himself as a conquering hero. Moreover, last weeks announcement demonstrated that Romney and his most prominent gubernatorial rival, Democratic attorney general Tom Reilly, may seek to outdo each other when it comes to political cravenness. Reilly, a former death-penalty opponent who became a supporter during the 1990s, announced last week that he opposed Romneys bill - not on principle, but because the state is currently not investing enough money in the DNA-testing capabilities that the legislation would require. Then, when asked by the Boston Globe whether he would sign the bill if he were governor, Reilly replied, "Yeah, probably." It sounded for all the world as though the only reason Reilly could think of to oppose the bill was that it had been filed by his chief rival. Combined with his switch on same-sex marriage (he no longer opposes it, so at least thats progress; but wait a bit, and he may switch again), Reilly comes across as someone wholl say anything to get elected. If Romney seeks re-election in 2006 and if Reilly wins the Democratic nomination, the contest for governor will feature 2 major-party candidates who support capital punishment, bringing the death penalty closer to reality than it has been in many years. The standoff between Romney and Reilly may lead progressives to look more closely at Deval Patrick, an assistant attorney general in the Clinton administration who is running an intriguing outsider campaign for governor. Only Patrick made clear his opposition to capital punishment last week, saying, "The death penalty can never be made foolproof, it is not a deterrent, and the huge costs incurred in capital proceedings divert resources away from actually fighting and prosecuting crime." Combined with his staunch support for gay marriage and other progressive issues, as well as his refusal to join Romney and Reilly in pandering on taxes, Patrick may well be positioning himself as the most liberal Democrat in the race. (Secretary of State Bill Galvin, a more traditional Democrat whos making headlines with his investigation of Gillettes sellout to Procter & Gamble, is also said to be considering a run.) Make no mistake: with a death-penalty bill in play on Beacon Hill, there is no guarantee that some horrific crime wont be committed that would suddenly create a firestorm of public support. That happened most recently in 1997, following the brutal murder of Jeffrey Curley, a 10-year-old boy from Cambridge. The bill lost on a tie vote in the House; just one more vote, and it would have been sent to then-governor Paul Cellucci for his certain signature. Public opinion is easily manipulated in an emotionally charged political environment. And Romneys deceptive claims that his bill virtually guarantees that an innocent person cannot be executed would only add to the appeal. Despite Romneys purring reassurances, his legislation is at least as problematic on the specifics as it is in its embrace of an outmoded and barbaric practice. Romney seeks to impose capital punishment only on the so-called worst of the worst - terrorists, those who kill law-enforcement officers, and those who commit multiple murders. He is also calling for a "no doubt" standard of proof in death-penalty cases, mainly by relying on DNA or other scientific evidence. In so doing, the governor has failed the standard of justice. First, he has elevated the value of some lives over others. Second, by deviating from our long-established system of asking juries to convict or acquit a defendant on the basis of whether they have any reasonable doubt, Romney would create the distinct possibility that someone could be executed not so much because of the awful nature of the crime but because of the quality of the evidence against him or her. For many years now, capital punishment has been slowly fading from the national stage. During the 1990s, advances in DNA evidence demonstrated that its not unusual for people on death row to be innocent of the crimes of which they had been convicted. Locally, in Suffolk County alone, 9 men convicted of serious violent crimes, including murder, have walked free since 1997 after newly discovered evidence revealed they were innocent. The death penalty is the one punishment that, once its carried out, cannot be revoked. More important, capital punishment conflicts with the values of a civilized society. There is no evidence that the death penalty deters would-be murderers. All it does is coarsen the rest of us. Life in prison without the possibility of parole offers society the protection it needs from the most dangerous among us, and it can be accomplished without years worth of expensive appeals and the brutalizing nature of the final act. The state does not kill people in Massachusetts. Thats one of the things that makes this a special place in which to live. Mitt Romney - and Tom Reilly, for that matter - should set aside their shameful posturing and show some respect for the people who elected them. (source: Editorial, Boston Phoenix) ARIZONA: Supreme Court upholds first jury death sentence The state Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the 1st death sentence imposed by an Arizona jury after the state switched from having judges decide whether a crime warranted execution. The justices unanimously upheld the convictions and death sentences of Frank Winfield Anderson, convicted in a triple-murder case from Mohave County. Anderson was convicted of killing 3 people at a Golden Valley residence so he and 2 conspirators could steal a pickup truck. The Legislature rewrote the state's sentencing law in 2002 after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional to have judges decide whether certain facts existed that would be used in weighing sentences in death penalty cases. Anderson had been convicted but not yet sentenced when the U.S. Supreme Court ruling was issued in 2002. After the Legislature rewrote the death-sentence law in response to the ruling, a new jury was impanelled to decide whether to impose a death sentence or life in prison. Anderson and two others were convicted in the killings of 3 Golden Valley residents - Leta Kagen, 30; Robert Delahunt, 15, and Roland Wear, 50. Robert Poyson also faces a death sentence. Kimberly Lane was sentenced to prison on reduced charges. Among other things argued in his appeal, Anderson contended his rights were violated because he was sentenced by a jury other than the one that convicted him. The Supreme Court said the U.S. Supreme Court's 2002 ruling specifically allowed separate juries for a trial's guilt phase and for sentencing. Any evidence first introduced in the guilty phase could be reintroduced in the sentencing phase, protecting his rights, the court said. The case is State vs. Anderson, CR-02-0402-AP. (source: Associated Press) KENTUCKY: Captured Kentuckian wouldn't be executed -- Man is charged with killing aunt Russell Winstead spent 2 years eluding Kentucky authorities who wanted him in the slaying of his aunt, but his luck ran out at a casino in Costa Rica. Winstead was arrested Tuesday in the Costa Rican capital of San Jose. "It's a day we've been waiting for," said Hopkins Commonwealth's Attorney David Massamore, who expects to try Winstead on charges of murder and 1st-degree robbery. Winstead, 40, fled in June 2003. A month later he was indicted in the death of 85-year-old Ann Branson, a Madisonville businesswoman. She was found beaten and stabbed in her basement in January 2003. Massamore said yesterday that it is unlikely that he will be able to seek the death penalty because of Costa Rica's unwillingness to extradite suspects if death or life in prison without parole are sentencing options. "Unless a miracle happens, the only way he can be extradited to the United States for trial on murder would require a waiver of those 2 options as punishment," Massamore said. "And I have been told by the (U.S.) Secretary of State's office that if I did not do that, then he would be in Costa Rica forever. They wouldn't return him." Massamore said he would like to seek the death penalty, but would agree to the Costa Rican officials' conditions in order to bring Winstead back. In such a case, Massamore said he would seek the toughest punishment still available -- life in prison without possibility of parole for 25 years. Authorities said they were pleased with the arrest and had never lost hope. "We knew we would get him, it was just a matter of time," said Madisonville police Capt. Marc Boggs. Winstead was arrested without incident Tuesday at the Horseshoe Casino in San Jose. A tip from someone who watched a segment featuring Winstead on the television show "America's Most Wanted" led authorities to him, according to the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, the law-enforcement arm of the State Department. Even with assurances that Winstead would not face the death penalty if convicted, the extradition process could take several months, the department said. Winstead fled Kentucky a month before his July 2003 indictment by a Hopkins County grand jury. "The timing would indicate that he may well have learned or suspected that the evidence we were waiting for was about to be received and he left about that time," Massamore said. Authorities had suspected for some time that Winstead had wound up in Costa Rica. Branson owned rental property and once owned the local Dairy Queen. Kentucky State Police Trooper Stu Recke, a spokesman for the Madisonville post, said Branson's records showed that Winstead owed her thousands of dollars. Winstead apparently borrowed the money to feed his gambling habit, Recke said. (source: Courier-Journal) UTAH: Prison Brides A criminal may not exactly seem like "Mr. Right." But many prison inmates apparently have no problem meeting, or marrying women. Already, convicted double murderer Scott Peterson has received dozens of phone calls from interested women, as well as a couple of marriage proposals. Infamous killers John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy, Jeffrey McDonald and Richard Ramirez also found wives. Single inmates can meet people on the internet, through friends or letters. If they fall in love, they can get married, right here at the prison. The prison has 19 housing buildings. Each facility has one day a month where they allow weddings. Couples in love look forward to the day they become husband and wife. Becky Brown, Married in 2002: "Randy was a lot more nervous, I think, than I was." But Becky Brown's wedding was different than most, because her fianc Randall was behind bars at the Utah State Prison. Becky Brown: "I just had done a lot of praying and had a lot of support from my family." Becky met Randy 14 years ago at work. When he was convicted of 3rd degree homicide, attempted burglary, and aggravated robbery, and the 2 started exchanging letters. Soon they'd forged a relationship. Becky Brown: "Yeah, there was a concern there. I think more of the concern was my attraction to him and his attraction to me. And if this went any further, where was that going to go?" But Becky says Randy had made important life changes. So they began planning a wedding. Joanne, Married to a Prisoner: "It's difficult and there is opposition and people that don't understand." Joanne, who prefers not to use her last name, was working as a prison volunteer when she met her future husband, Chris. Joanne: "He was so... Just real. No pretense, no games, no flirting." After Joanne got to know Chris, she learned he'd been convicted of first degree murder. Joanne: "That word has been so difficult for me, to not only say, but to even think." It's a label that is not appropriate for him. He is a man who took a life, but he's not a murderer, and I don't know if that makes sense." Joanne believes her husband never wanted to harm anyone. Joanne: "Hes very... Hurt by what he's done." But Joanne says they make the relationship work. And it's not as unusual as you might think. The Utah state prison averages about 2 weddings a month. The weddings typically take place in a visiting room. The prisoner will enter through a door, come in and meet his spouse-to-be, along with a justice of the peace or minister they've prearranged, and maybe at the podium, have a short 10-15 minute ceremony. They can exchange rings, maybe they'll have a short kiss, and the ceremony's over. Experts say women attracted to criminals don't fit one profile. Psychologist Janet Warburton says some become "groupies," falling for prisoners they've only seen on TV. Dr. Janet Warburton, Clinical Psychologist: "We kind of make these guys famous. They come into our homes night after night on the television. By the time they end up in prison, they have a fan following." Troy Kell is on death row in Utah for stabbing another inmate 67 times -- a crime featured on a television documentary. Jack Ford, Department of Corrections: "It runs every 6 months on HBO, and every time it runs, some women will start trying to write." But not all women are "groupies." Dr. Janet Warburton: "There are abused women who are attracted to these guys. I think there are women who are natural caretakers, they're rescuers." Warburton says some may be seeking excitement. Others want to "fix" the prisoner. And some simply fall in love. That's the category Becky Brown and Joanne say they belong to. Becky Brown: Its not something that we did to get notoriety." The 2 emphasize this is not the lifestyle they'd choose in a perfect world... but they're happy. Becky Brown: "Im very sure of what Ive done." Joanne: "I think we've blessed each others' lives. I wouldn't change anything about him except his address." Keep in mind Utah does not have conjugal visits, so physical intimacy is not a part of these relationships. As for longevity, Dr. Warburton say what little research there is on prison relationships suggest they don't usually last after a prisoner is released. Becky Brown's husband will be released sometime in the next 5 years... and she remains optimistic. (source: KSL News)
