Sunday, December 22, 2013

Media Disaster: WHY FEWER DEATH SENTENCES AND EXECUTIONS?

Media Disaster: WHY FEWER DEATH SENTENCES AND EXECUTIONS?
Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom
update 2022

Countless media reports have stated that the death penalty is dying because of less public support, innocents at risk, the high costs, etc., etc., with the "facts" provided by the deceptive anti-death penalty folks, then, most often, parroted by the media.


Let's take a look.

SUMMARY


Death penalties/executions plummeted from 1991-2014 because 1) capital murders plummeted; 2) court decisions/activism, further limited or delayed death penalty application or executions, inclusive of appeal time tripling, from the 1980s to 2017; 3) Lethal injection challenges and drug restrictions limited executions; 4) DA's may have been more reluctant to seek death because of judicial obstructionism.

WHY FEWER DEATH SENTENCES


What's the most obvious reason for the drop in death sentences? Answer: Fewer capital murders.


The US has had double digit executions, annually, from 1984 - 2014. Murders are, now, at a 46 year low (1). Murder rates are, now, at a 57 year low (1).


It follows that death sentences are at a 42 year low.


In the US, from 1991-2014, there was 43% drop in murders (a 54% drop in murder rates) and a 53% drop in robberies (a 63% drop in rate) (1).


Murder/robbery is, by far, the most common death penalty crime.


The leading execution state (by number, not rate), Texas, had a 55% drop in murders (71% drop in rate),  37% drop in robberies (60% drop in rate), during the same period (1).


As robbery/murders are the most common death penalty eligible crimes, those may have dropped from 70-80%.


Based upon new case law and state death penalty repeals, such may account for an additional 10% reduction in death sentences (2).


Those two appear to account for the vast majority of death penalty reduction.


Other, minor additional factors are LWOP, up front costs, as others, some contributing to prosecutorial frustration/discretion, as a rule, caused or affected by . . . .


Judicial Roadblocks


Judges, some with responsibility, others with complete abandon. are the case managers, in control of both time and costs (3).


Because of judicial roadblocks and delays (3), some prosecutors may just get fed up, choosing to avoid the death penalty, seek a LWOP trial instead, or, better, a plea to LWOP, avoiding the huge costs and countless delays imposed by many judges in death penalty cases, at pretrial, in trial and within appeals.


In states like California, Kansas and Pennsylvania, judges are, very openly, killing the death penalty, as they did in New Jersey and Connecticut.


For example, in the modern era, post Gregg v Georgia (1976):


Virginia executed her first 113 murderers within 7 years of full appeals, on average (4), has executed 73% of those sent to death row and has an 11% overturning rate in appeals (5). Virginia's latest execution, 10/1/2015, occurred after 5 years of full appeals (4).


Contrast that to:


Pennsylvania has executed only 3 of the 417 sentenced to death, or 0.7%, and has a 45% overturning rate in appeals (5), likely to become 90%, if the judges will allow appeals to end.


Why?


Pa judges will only allow executions when the murderer "volunteers" and waives appeals, whereas Virginia judges are responsible and respect the law.

One might think that the Pa. statute states "only volunteers will be executed", as Pa judges seem to believe.

Pa judges are, quite obviously, obstructionists to the law, a common and obvious problem in many jurisdictions, . . .


and


". . . in California, appeals attorneys are not appointed (by judges) for three to five years. (Those attorneys, then, allowed by judges) to take four years to learn the case and file their appeal. Attorneys for habeas  appeal (through the federal courts) are not appointed (by the judges), on average, until eight to 10 years after the death sentence." (6).


A 7-10 year wait for the first appellate brief. 
Judges have, intentionally, destroyed the California system, as could not be more obvious.

For some, the judicial problems may be too much.


The entire media, completely, missed the judicial component, which is huge. How? As a rule, the media only cares what anti-death penalty folks have to say and that's not in their agenda, as neither fact checkng nor vetting is within the media's interest.


WHY FEWER EXECUTIONS?


Since 2006, executions have been affected by litigation related to the lethal injection method, as well as drug shortages, within that method, resulting in a "slowdown" of executions averaging 43 per year (2007-2013) (7a&b).


It is very rare to have executions over 60 per year, which has only occurred 7 times (1997-2003), or 18% of execution years (7a).


Excluding those exceptions, the average is 27 executions per year (1977-1996, 2004-2013), 82% of execution years,  and, if starting with double digit executions in 1984, the average is 36 executions per year (7a).


The "slowdown" period has averaged 43 executions/year and could get down to those 27-36 for those 9-20 year averages, if the actual execution problems are not corrected.


There were 35, 28, 20 and 23 executions, 2014-2017, an average of 24. In 1988-1991, there was a 16 execution average, in 91-94, a 23 execution average.

 A note on "Bloodthirsty" Texas


"Texas sentences murderers to death at a rate below the national mean." (8a).   

Since 1973, Texas has executed 0.73% of her murderers after 11 years of appeals, on average (8b).

Texas doesn't execute a lot of murderers per murder, it's just that most everywhere else, judges won't allow cases to proceed in a responsible time frame (3).

Appeals Time Nearly Tripled


Executions are, undoubtedly, much fewer than they would otherwise have been, because the time between sentencing and executions has risen by 2,3 times, from 6.6 years, the average time from 1984-1988, when double digit executions began, to 15 years, the average time from 2009-2013 (9).


The national average of appeals time for those executed in 2017 was 19 years - an increase of 2.88 times, over the 6.6 average.

This is the fault of the judges, again, (see JUDICIAL ROADBLOCKS) and is an intended killer of the death penalty, as virtually every hearing on the death penalty attests and it might be the greatest reducer of executions, but was, completely,  . . . missed by the media.


In 1996, the US Congress passed the Anti Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), part of which was supposed to quicken the federal section of death penalty appeals.


Every year since then, the average time of appeals, until execution, has been greater than in 1996 (10.4 years), with the longest being 19 years in 2017 (9).


Apparently, judges didn't like the AEDPA . The judicial move against the death penalty became even more obvious.


The tremendous increase in appeals times and the lethal injection issues are, almost exclusively, responsible for the reduction in executions.


REVEALING DECEPTIONS: Botched Executions, Innocents at Risk, Racism, High Cost & Lower Support


These are some of the more common, alleged and false reasons for the drop in death sentences, provided by anti death penalty sources.


Let's review.

Botched Executions


Truly "botched" executions, via lethal injection, occur about 1% of the time, not 7% (10).


For example, "Charles Warner, who was executed . . . for the killing of an 11-month-old girl in 1997, said during his last words: "It feels like acid." The comment came before any of the lethal drugs were administered and while he was only receiving a saline drip through an intravenous line." (11)


Most likely, Warner's exclamation was just invented to produce another false reason against the death penalty, as, allegedly, occurred in the Ohio execution of Dennis McGuire, below.


The highly publicized "botched" executions in Arizona and Ohio were not such thing (12) , as found by one (o-n-e) reporter, and those executions reflected, exactly, the type of slower time to death, the known, predicted outcome of using those drugs, which could not, pharmacologically, allow for consciousness or pain but, just the opposite (12).


Oklahoma was just one disaster after another, with their last two executions, Lockett (2014, bad procedure) and Warner (2015, wrong drug).  That was the fault of incompetent personnel, not the lethal injection protocol or the drugs used. Prior to that the state had a near perfect record, with many executions.


Its, widely, reported that Lockett died from a heart attack. The coroner ruled he died because of lethal injection.  

Innocents at Risk


The 160 "exonerated" from death row has been part of a very well known deception, for about 20 years, with a 70-83% error rate in the "exoneration" or "innocence" claims , as any fact checker knows, finding that anti death penalty folks had just redefined "exonerated", "innocent" and "wrongful conviction", as if they had redefined lie as truth and stuffed a bunch of cases into those fraudulent definitions (13).


There may be proof that there have been 0.4% actual innocents on death row, since 1976 -  a 99.6% accuracy rate in guilty findings, with a 100% rate in releasing those 0.4% actual innocents (13) -  very likely the most accurate of any government program, as prosecutors and penalty experts are aware.


As the death penalty and executions, respectively, have enhanced due process and enhanced incapacitation effects, over LWOP, we know the death penalty protects innocents to a higher degree than does LWOP (14).

'
Deterrence has never and can never be excluded from the death penalty/executions (or any sanction) (14) and history and reason tell us that the death penalty is an enhanced deterrent over LWOP, as life is preferred over death and death is feared more than life (14). What is preferred more deters less. What is feared more deters more.

All sanctions, all negative prospects, all potential negative outcomes and all negative incentives deter some.


Some 16,000 innocents have been murdered by those KNOWN murderers that we have allowed to murder, again - recidivist murderers - just since 1973 (14).


Up to 400,000 innocents have been murdered by those known criminals that we allowed to harm, again, recidivist criminals, also since 1973 (14).


The last credible claim for an innocent executed is from the 1930's.


Where is "the innocents at risk" problem?


Fear of Executing the Innocent


A Nov. 2010 Angus Reid poll found 83% death penalty support, 13% opposition when,with the same respondents, 81% believed that innocents have been executed (15), showing the opposite of a turning away from executions based upon the, largely, misleading innocence claims presented by anti death penalty folks.

A 2013 Angus Reid poll found 86% death penalty support in the US (16). No media outlet picked it up, as is their rule, which is to only use polls showing the lowest support (16).


So, of course, we have this: "Richard Dieter (Death Penalty Information Center - DPIC)  states: "I think the (death penalty and execution) decline begins with the revelations about mistakes in capital cases — that innocent people could get the penalty and almost be executed has shocked the public to the point where death sentences are harder to obtain." (17) - the opposite of the truth.


The evidence is that the death penalty is a greater protector of innocents, than is LWOP (14), which would result in even more support for the death penalty.


Racism



White murderers are twice as likely to be executed as are black murderers.

56% of those executed are white, 35% black.

White death row murderers have been executed at a rate 41% higher than are black death row murderers, 19.3% vs 13.7%, respectively.

"There is no race of the offender / victim effect at either the decision to advance a case to penalty hearing or the decision to sentence a defendant to death given a penalty hearing."

For the White–Black comparisons, the Black level is 12.7 times greater than the White level for homicide, 15.6 times greater for robbery, 6.7 times greater for rape. (8)


As robbery/murder is, by far, the most common death penalty eligible murder, the multiples may be even greater.

Higher Cost


Fact checking the cost studies reveals that the death penalty can and should save costs over LWOP as demonstrated by Virginia and, likely, North Carolina and Texas and others (18). In addition, virtually all of the costs studies are incomplete, inaccurate or fraudulent (19) or make no attempt at a true apples to apples comparison between the death penalty and LWOP costs (20), the only relevant cost review .


Lower Support


When polling asks "Do you support the death penalty for murder?" and the responses offered are - sometimes - always - or - never - death penalty support is in the 80% range, as per Gallup, Angus Reid and Quinnipiac polling (16).


A Nov. 2010 Angus Reid poll found 83% death penalty support, 13% opposition when,with the same respondents, 81% believe that innocents have been executed (15), showing the opposite of a turning away from executions based upon the, largely, misleading innocence claims presented by anti death penalty folks.


NOTE: The 6 states which have repealed the death penalty, since 2006, all had Democratic governors, with Democrat majority legislators, with the exception of Nebraska, which has no party affiliations within their unicameral legislature. A signature based referendum effort has, already, reinstated the death penalty, with the, likely, result that Nebraska's citizens will, also, reject the death penalty repeal in Nov. 2016.


They did.


In 2016, California, the bluest of blue states, had a voter referendum, which rejected death penalty repeal and supported speeding up executions - in California!

It was Califonia's third voter referendum, in recent years, supportive of the death penalty.

The 5 Governors who have stopped executions in their state by executive order or obstruction are all Democrats.


In those 11 states, the majority of the citizens support the death penalty, Not very democratic to repeal or stop the death penalty/executions, eh?


The evidence is that the death penalty is a greater protector of innocents, than is LWOP (14), which would result in even more support for the death penalty.


Adoption of Life Without Parole Caused the Death Penalty Drop in Texas

There was a 69% drop in death sentences, in Texas, from 48 in 1999 to 15 in 2005, PRIOR to LWOP having any effect on death sentences (21).

The first year that the LWOP law could have had any effect on death sentences was in 2006, with 11 death sentences (21).

In 2007, death sentences rose by 36%, to 15 (21).


Bottom Line: None of these offer any reason to reduce either the death penalty or executions.


======


1) United States and Texas


United States: I used national data, instead of only states with the death penalty, which should be the subject data. However, all the death penalty states did see significant drops in murderers, as well as in the secondary factors, which combined with murder, create capital, death eligible murders.


I use The Disaster Center because of their ease of use and accuracy, using FBI data


United States
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/txcrime.htm

MORE TEXAS DETAILS, here:

Texas: Why Fewer Death Sentences
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2018/05/texas-why-fewer-death-sentences.html


2) There are judicial decisions, within each state, as well as with SCOTUS, affecting all death penalty states, as with cases since 1991, Schlup, Ring, Atkins, Tennard, Roper, Hill, House, Medellin, Baze, Kennedy, Harbison and, now, Hurst and more. 6 states have repealed the death penalty, with 5 additional suspending executions, since 2007.


3)  Judges Responsible for Grossly Uneven Executions 
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/02/death-penalty-cost-saving-money.html

5)  Table 17, Prisoners sentenced to death and the outcome of the sentence, by jurisdiction, 1973–2013, Capital Punishment, 2013, US Bureau Of Justice Statistics, December 2014,  http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cp13st.pdf


6)  Three Major Steps to Reduce Death Penalty Delay in California, Crime and Consequences blog, Bill Otis, August 8, 2015,http://www.crimeandconsequences.com/crimblog/death-penalty/


7)  a) Table 11, Number of inmates executed, by race and Hispanic origin, 
1977–2013, Capital Punishment, 2013, US Bureau Of Justice Statistics, December 2014,  http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cp13st.pdf

b) The Death Penalty and Medical Ethics Revisited 
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2015/09/the-death-penalty-medical-ethics.html

8)
a) Blume, John H.; Eisenberg, Theodore; and Wells, Martin T., "Explaining Death Row's Population and Racial Composition" (2004), Cornell Law Faculty Publications,
http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/facpub/231)

   b) 508 executions with 69, 384 murders from 1974-2013.





9) Table 10, Average time between sentencing and execution,  1977–2013, Capital Punishment, 2013, US Bureau Of Justice Statistics, December 2014,  http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cp13st.pdf

for 2017, I had to look at each case and do the average myself.

10)  Rebuttal: Botched Executions

https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2017/01/rebuttal-botched-executions.html

11)  'It Feels Like Acid.' Charles 
Warner's Final Words Stir Execution Questions', Sean Murphy, AP, in Huffpost Crime,  Updated Jan 18, 2015


12)  No "Botched" Execution - Arizona or Ohio
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2014/08/no-botched-execution-arizona-or-ohio.html

13)  The Innocent Frauds: Standard Anti Death Penalty Strategy
READ SECTIONS 3&4 FIRSThttp://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-innocent-frauds-standard-anti-death.html

14)  The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives
16) 86% Death Penalty Support: Highest Ever - April 2013
World Support Remains High
95% of Murder Victim's Family Members Support Death Penalty
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/11/86-death-penalty-support-highest-ever.html

17)  "Executions in US drop close to 20-year low in 2013", Boston Globe, Pete Yost, AP,  12/19/2013


18)  RACE & THE DEATH PENALTY: A REBUTTAL TO THE RACISM CLAIMS 

http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/07/rebuttal-death-penalty-racism-claims.html

19) Saving Costs with The Death Penalty
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/02/death-penalty-cost-saving-money.html

20)   Death Penalty Costs vs Life Without Parole Costs: Study Protocol

Monday, December 16, 2013

THE DEATH PENALTY: FAIR & JUST

updated 3/2023

The Death Penalty: Fair & Just
Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom

The following addresses the most common fairness/justice issues within the death penalty debate.

The death penalty is given for the same reason all sanctions are, that is that it is deemed a just, appropriate and proportional sanction, in the context of the crime.


These topics reflect part of my moral journey from death penalty opponent to advocate, with the first two topics, by far, the most important.

1) 
600+ quotes from pro-death penalty murder victims' families

Unfortunately, I cannot find this site, below, anymore

Victim's Voices - These are the murder victims
https://murdervictims.com/category/voices 

"The bodies were very badly decomposed, even for four days in Houston's brutal summer heat and humidity, particularly in the head, neck and genital areas. The medical examiner later testified that this is how she could be sure as to the horrible brutality of the rapes, beatings and murders."

2) The Death Penalty: Do Innocents Matter?
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-death-penalty-do-innocents-matter.html


"Well known anti-death penalty scholars "(Charles) Black and (Hugo Adam ) Bedau said they would favor abolishing the death penalty even if they knew that doing so would increase the homicide rate by 1,000 percent." 

They would choose sparing the lives of 1500 guilty murderers (executed from 1973-2013) over saving an additional 7.2 million innocent lives, taken by murder.

Anti-death penalty. academic leaders make that argument.  Astounding."

The death penalty protects innocents, in three ways, more than does life without parole.

Justice plus saving more innocent lives - pro-death penalty folks make that argument.


3) The Death Penalty: Mercy, Expiation, Redemption & Salvation
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-death-penalty-mercy-expiation.html

Quaker biblical scholar Dr. Gervas A. Carey: “. . . a secondary measure of the love of God may be said to appear. For capital punishment provides the murderer with incentive to repentance which the ordinary man does not have, that is a definite date on which he is to meet his God. It is as if God thus providentially granted him a special inducement to repentance out of consideration of the enormity of his crime . . . the law grants to the condemned an opportunity which he did not grant to his victim, the opportunity to prepare to meet his God. Even divine justice here may be said to be tempered with mercy.” 


4) RACE & THE DEATH PENALTY: A REBUTTAL TO THE RACISM CLAIMS
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/07/rebuttal-death-penalty-racism-claims.html

White murderers are twice as likely to be executed as are black murderers 

From 1977-2012, white death row murderers have been executed at a rate 41% higher than are black death row murderers, 19.3% vs 13.7%, respectively.

"There is no race of the offender / victim effect at either the decision to advance a case to penalty hearing or the decision to sentence a defendant to death given a penalty hearing."

For the White–Black comparisons, the Black level is 12.7 times greater than the White level for homicide, 15.6 times greater for robbery, 6.7 times greater for rape, and 4.5 times greater for aggravated assault.

As robbery/murder and rape/murder are, by far, the most common death penalty eligible murders, the multiples will be even greater, as one would expect.

5) Is There Class Disparity with Executions?
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/03/is-there-class-disparity-with-executions.html

"99.8% of poor murderers have avoided execution.

It is, solely, dependent upon one's definitions of "wealthy" and "poor", as to whether "wealthy" murderers are any more or less likely than 0.2% to be executed, than are the "poor", based upon the vast minority of capital murders committed by the "wealthy", as compared to the vast majority committed by the "poor". By far, the greatest number of capital murder cases are robbery/murders, with nearly 0% of "wealthy" capital/death penalty eligible murders committed by the "wealthy", based upon any reasonable definition of wealthy. Obvious.


6) WOMEN & THE DEATH PENALTY:
ARE WOMEN OVER REPRESENTED ON DEATH ROW?

http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/02/women-death-penalty-are-women-over.html

"The 53:1 ratio indicates that women may be on death row in greater numbers than we would expect or similar to what we would predict."


7) GEOGRAPHIC DISPARITY

There are 3144 counties (aka as parishes & others). 

If we look at the 2% of the countieswith the highest number of death penalty convictions in death penalty states I suspect we will be in the ballpark of having a majority (51%) of the nation's capital murders, in death penalty states, - The most obvious, as detailed:

In 2002, the 75 largest counties had 51% of murders and non-negligent manslaughters, 61% of robberies and 36% of forcible rapes, nationally (3), which is in the ballpark of 60-70% of what we know as capital, death penalty eligible murders, with robbery/murders and rape/murders, police murders, multiple and serial murders, in death penalty eligible counties.

75 is nearly 2.4% of all counties, both death penalty eligible and not.

In other words, we should expect that 2% of US counties would account for 51% of the executions. 

8) THE DEATH PENALTY: LEAST ARBITRARY & CAPRICIOUS SANCTION
Both the guilty & the innocent have the greatest of protections
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-death-penalty-neither-arbitrary-nor.html


The facts tell us that the death penalty is the least arbitrary and capricious sanction in the US.

Protections for the guilty murderer and the actual innocent accused are unmatched by any other sanction protocol.

Nothing else comes close. 


9) Due Process

Texas Death Penalty Procedures
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/11/texas-death-penalty-procedures.html


100% of the 48 votes (4 voting issues for each of the 12 jurors), must be against the defendant/murderer, for a death sentence to be given. 2%, only 1 of those 48 votes, must be for the defendant/murderer, to remove the death penalty option.

Any juror can use anything they want, personally or subjectively, to spare the murderer a death sentence.


10) Judges Responsible for Grossly Uneven Executions
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/11/judges-responsible-for-grossly-uneven.html

Judges are responsible for grossly uneven executions, demonstrating dictatorial like contempt for the law in those states where it is, virtually, impossible to execute confirmed murderers.

If abortions had to be individually, approved or rejected, by judicial ruling, and some states approved them at a 50-70% rate and others at a 0-10% rate, do you think the media might notice?


11) Rebuttal: Botched Executions 

http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2017/01/rebuttal-botched-executions.html  

Possibly, lethal injection botched executions occur 1% of the time, not 7%, as simple fact checking/vetting find.


12) 
The Death Penalty is Not a Human Rights Violation

As all countries and laws tell us, human rights are not sacrosanct.

Those who say that the death penalty is a human rights violation have no solid moral or philosophical foundation for making such a statement.  What opponents of capital punishment really are saying is that they just don't approve of executions.

As a rule, fundamental human rights are defined as the right to life, to freedom, the pursuit of happiness and the ownership of property.
 
As every country and law tell us, when you violate the social contract, those rights are forfeit.
 
Every country and law allow for sanction that takes away freedom, with legal incarceration, takes away money and/or property, with legal fines and seizures, the taking of life, within self-defense, in defense of others, within a just war and, in about half of countries, the taking of life, via execution,  for murders, terrorism, rapes and other serious crimes, and, in every case, taking away the happiness of the guilty unjust aggressor.

Undisputed.

Also see:
Moral Hypocrisy: European Union & The US Death Penalty

Far from moral superiority, those who call capital punishment an expression of hatred and revenge are often exhibiting their contempt for those who believe differently than they do.  Instead, they might reflect on why others believe it is a just and deserved sanction for the crimes committed.

The pro death penalty position is based upon those who find that punishment just and appropriate under specific circumstances. Retributive justice as opposed to revenge.

Those opposed to execution cannot prove a foundation of hatred and revenge for the death penalty any more than they can for any other punishment sought within a system such as that observed within the US - unless such opponents find all punishments a product of hatred and revenge - an unreasonable, unfounded position.


14) Killing Equals Killing: The Amoral Confusion of Death Penalty Opponents
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2023/03/killing-equals-killing-amoral-confusion.html 

For such anti-death penalty folks to be consistent, they must also equate holding people against their will (illegal kidnapping) with the sanction for it, the holding people against their will (legal incarceration) or the taking money away from people (illegal robbery) with a sanction for that, taking money away from people (legal restitution).

Most folks understand the moral differences.

Some anti-death penalty folks are either incapable of knowing the moral differences between crime and punishment, guilty criminals and their innocent victims, or they are knowingly using a dishonest slogan by equating killing (murder) with killing (execution).


15) Murder Victims' Families Against The Death Penalty: 
More Hurt For Victims Families
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/04/victims-families-for-death-penalty.html

Instead of being divisive and hurtful, why can't MVFADP just say, "we oppose the death penalty, but respect your right to support the death penalty in your case."? MVFADP won't support other victims in that fashion because their sole goal is to get rid of the death penalty, not helping any victims who feel differently but, in fact, working against them.

Instead, the MVFADP are, actively, seeking to deny that right to those who find the death penalty just. Thus, the MVFADP are, intentionally hurtful and divisive, when they need not be.


16) 95% Death Penalty Support by Loved Ones of Capital Murder Victims
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2016/03/95-death-penalty-support-by-capital.html


17)  The Death Penalty: Pro Life

http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/01/pro-life-death-penalty.html

Based upon biblical and theological teachings, one can, reasonably and responsibly, find that an anti-death penalty view is not pro-life.

All sanctions are given because we value what is being taken away.

Whether it be fines, freedom or lives, in every case we take things away, as legal sanction, because we value that which is taken away.

How can it be a sanction, if we do not value that which is taken away? It can't.

18)  Nitrogen Gas; Flawless, peaceful, unrestricted method of execution 
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2014/09/nitrogen-gas-flawless-peaceful.html

19)  86% Death Penalty Support: Highest Ever - April 2013
95% of Murder Victim's Family Members Support Death Penalty
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/11/86-death-penalty-support-highest-ever.html 

86% death penalty support (1), the highest I have ever located

22% of the 86% finding the death penalty "always appropriate", the highest I have ever located (2)
64% of the 86% finding the death penalty "sometimes appropriate"
9% finding the death penalty "never appropriate", the lowest I have ever located

Why didn't you hear of this poll? The media excluded it from coverage.

“If an offender has committed murder, he must die. In this case, no possible substitute can satisfy justice. For there is no parallel between death and even the most miserable life, so that there is no equality of crime and retribution unless the perpetrator is judicially put to death.”  Immanuel Kant
 
======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
 
 
Additional research,w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of everyone.  
 
1) The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
(7 pro-death penalty experts are included)
======
 
Partial CV

Friday, December 13, 2013

The Vienna Convention & The US Death Penalty

Published July 4, 2011

The Vienna Convention & The US Death Penalty
Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom   

Re: Leal & Vienna Convention

US SUPREME COURT

In June 2006, the United States Supreme Court ruled that foreign nationals who were not notified of their right to consular notification and access after an arrest may not use the treaty violation to suppress evidence obtained in police interrogation or belatedly raise legal challenges after trial (Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon.).

In March 2008, the Supreme Court further ruled that the decision of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) directing the United States to give "review and reconsideration" to the cases of 51 Mexican convicts on death row WAS NOT A BINDING DOMESTIC LAW (my emphasis) and therefore could not be used to overcome state procedural default rules that barred further post-conviction challenges (Medellín v. Texas).

REALITIES OF THE VIENNA CONVENTION (VC)

1. The violation of the VC is that the US did not inform arrested foreign nationals of their right to contact their own consulate, either by themselves or that the taking authorities contact their consulate.

The police/taking authorities didn't say:

"You have the right to contact your consulate, if you want to." (see footnote 2, below, Article 36. 1. b., VC)

That's it.

2. It is important to point out that:

a. all detainees could have contacted their consulates whenever they wanted to, absent that notification and 
b. all 51 detainees had attorneys who knew they could contact the consular offices, at any time, had they believed such contact could have been helpful. They didn't.
c. No one prevented anyone from contacting their consulate and no taking authority refused to contact the consulate for them.

The main issue of this International Court of Justice (ICJ) case (2) was not the violation of notification, which both parties had conceded to, but one of the remedies for such violation.

In the US, hearings are based upon meeting a threshold of evidence which can support the call for a hearing. If that threshold is not met, then the appellate courts will rule against a hearing.

Overwhelmingly, the VC issues have been reviewed by courts and the claims have been dismissed.

They have been barred because of time limitations on originating the appeal or not preserving it at trial, properly, or that the VC issue resulted in harmless error, meaning that neither the sentence nor the verdict would have changed, had the VC been properly administered.

Many, if not most, appellate claims for US citizens are denied in US courts for the exact same reasons.

Paragraph 2, Article 36 , VC states:

"2. The rights referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be exercised in conformity with the laws and regulations of the receiving State, subject to the proviso, however, that the said laws and regulations must enable full effect to be given to the purposes for which the rights accorded under this Article are intended."

The appeals, as reviewed above, have, already, fulfilled this requirement or will fulfill it. The notification issued had been reviewed by both state and federal courts.

Reuters: "The United States accepts that the original 2004 ruling places on it a binding legal obligation, said John Bellinger, legal adviser at the U.S. Department of State, adding it was disappointing the court had held that Medellin's execution violated international law. 'Mr. Medellin has had numerous reviews of his case ... It is worth noting that his absence of consular notification was in fact specifically reviewed by a number of state and federal courts,' Bellinger said. U.S. execution breached international law: World Court, BY NICLAS MIKA, Reuters, THE HAGUE Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:17pm EST

http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE50I44I20090119

In the overwhelming majority of the 51 Mexican detainee cases, there is little doubt that the detainees received super due process and other protectionwithin their cases.

Looking specifically at the dates of when these 51 detainees were originally arrested, and the history of Mexico's interest in Mexican nationals arrested in the US, at such times, there is very little to no supportive evidence that Mexico would have provided any additional assistance or any additional assistance which would have impacted the end result in these cases, had their consulates been notified at that time, which results in a harmless error ruling, leaving the verdict and sentence intact which is, precisely, what has occurred, in that circumstance.

ICJ PROBLEMS

1. The ICJ decision violates the specific, unequivocal directive of the VC that the Convention states:

"Realizing that the purpose of such privileges and immunities IS NOT TO BENEFIT INDIVIDUALS (my emphasis) but to ensure the efficient performance of functions by consular posts on behalf of their respective States" (Introduction, paragraph 6, VC)

2. This directive is given specific, additional support, within the subject Article 36 of the VC: within the opening and dominant directive of Paragraph 1, VC:
"With a view to facilitating the exercise of consular functions relating to nationals of the sending State"

3. The ICJ completely dismisses this unequivocal directive of the VC. Put bluntly, the ICJ has no respect for the spirit and specific directives of the VC, in this regard. Had the ICJ honored the specific directives of the VC, this case would have been dismissed.

From the ICJ decision, Press Release (1)

The ICJ: " - finds by fourteen votes to one that the appropriate reparation in this case consists in the obligation of the United States of America to provide, BY MEANS OF ITS OWN CHOOSING (my emphasis), review and reconsideration of the convictions and sentences of the Mexican nationals referred to . . .; and

"- unanimously finds that, should Mexican nationals nonetheless be sentenced to severe penalties, without their rights under Article 36, paragraph 1 (b), of the Convention having been respected, the United States of America shall provide, BY MEANS OF ITS OWN CHOOSING (my emphasis), review and reconsideration of the conviction and sentence, so as to allow full weight to be given to the violation of the rights set forth in the Convention, taking account of paragraphs 138 to 141 of this Judgment."

And the US chose to provide super due process and no more, to these horrid murderers.

======

1) The International Court of Justice's (ICJ) decision. Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States of America), Press Release 2004/16, March 31, 2004,
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?pr=605&code=mus&p1=3&p2=3&p3=6&case=128&k=18

2) The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, 1963 (VC),
http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/9_2_1963.pdf

 
======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
====== 
======
 
Additional research, w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of everyone.  
 
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
(7 pro-death penalty experts listed)

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

Duane Buck & the False Claims of Racism

Duane Buck & the False Claims of Racism: 
More Deceptions by Death Penalty Opponents
Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom

"Duane Buck: Sentenced to Death Because He is Black" (NAACP - LDF) (1)


Falsely invoking racism, as with the Duane Buck case, is just another example of how death penalty opponents will apply any deception, no matter how vile, to achieve their ends (1).


Vicious double capital murderer Duane Buck, also a double attempted capital murderer, murdered his ex-girlfriend, in front of three children (2,3,4).


"Debra ran out into the street, where Buck followed after her with shotgun in hand. Debra fell to her knees and begged Buck to spare her life. The three children stood in the doorway of Debra's residence watching. Shennel, Debra's 13-year-old daughter, ran and jumped on Buck's back, clinging to his neck and shoulders and yelling for him not to shoot her mother.

Both mother and daughter cried and pleaded for Buck to stop. Shennel screamed, "Duane, don't shoot! Duane, don't shoot … don't kill my mama!" Buck gazed down at Debra, aimed his shotgun at Debra's chest and pulled the trigger. She fell back in a pool of her own blood, as the three children cried and screamed in shock. After he was arrested and in a police car, Buck smiled and joked, saying, 'The bitch got what she deserved.' " (4)

SCOTUS' Justice Sotomayor (2), "based" her racism dissent on an out of context presumption of an inference:

"After inquiring about the statistical factors of past crimes and age and how they might indicate future dangerousness in Buck’s case, the prosecutor said: “You have determined that the sex factor, that a male is more violent than a female because that’s just the way it is, and that the race factor, black, increases the future dangerousness for various complicated reasons; is that correct?” 
Quijano answered, “Yes.” 

After additional cross-examination and testimony from a subsequent witness, the prosecutor argued to the jury in summation that Quijano “told you that there was a probability that [Buck] would commit future acts of violence." (2)

As Sotomayor admits, these are two separate times and contexts. Yet, she improperly attempts to combine them.

Quijano and the other defense psychiatrist, both testifying on Buck's behalf, found that Buck was at reduced risk of future danger - reduced, not zero risk. So all the prosecutor is saying is that the defense psychiatrists' findings include that Buck "might" be at some risk of future danger, just as any murderer might be. Quijano's testimony was that Buck was at a reduced risk for future danger, as known to the jury and the opposite of death penalty opponents' claims.

The prosecutor had substantial evidence of Buck's future dangerousness, devoid of racial components (2.3.4).

Sotomayor, out of thin air, has fabricated her own perception of an inference that was the factual opposite of the testimony.

That is the basis for this newest anti-death penalty campaign - nonsense - just like so many others (1,5,6).

The prosecutors never said that "there was a probability that (Buck) would commit future acts of violence" because of race or gender. Never.

She couldn't, because that is never what Quijano said and the jury knew it.

That is the entire "racism" case. Zero.

The prosecutor had substantial evidence of Buck's future dangerousness (2,3,4), with zero racial components.

The odd thing is that Sotomayor admits that, exactly. From her opinion, she writes:

"The context in which Buck’s counsel addressed race differed markedly from how the prosecutor used it. On direct examination, Quijano referred to race as part of his overall opinion that Buck would pose a low threat to society were he imprisoned. This is exactly how the State has characterized Quijano’s testimony. . . . “In this case, first on direct examination by the defense, Dr. Quijano merely identified race as one statistical factor and pointed out that African-Americans were overrepresented in the criminal justice system; he did not state a causal relationship, nor did he link this statistic to Buck as an individual”.  

Sotomayor complains: " Buck did not argue that his race made him less dangerous, and the prosecutor had no need to revisit the issue. But (the prosecutor) did, in a question specifically designed to persuade the jury that Buck’s race made him more dangerous and that, in part on this basis, he should be sentenced to death."

No, the prosecutor never argued that. Sotomayor made it up, even pointing out the statements were at different times, within different contexts.

The problem for Buck and Sotomayor is that Quijano's entire testimony, with regard to Buck, specifically, was that he was at reduced risk of being a future danger, as the jury knew.

To repeat, from Sotomayor: 

“In this case, first on direct examination by the defense, Dr. Quijano merely identified race as one statistical factor and pointed out that African-Americans were overrepresented in the criminal justice system; he did not state a causal relationship, nor did he link this statistic to Buck as an individual”, as the jury knew.

This alleged racist component from the trial never existed.

It is despicable that so many death penalty opponents are libeling Quijano with the term "racist", which he certainly does not deserve. Such opponents will say anything to save murderers. 

Some see a perception of an inference. Odd how Sotomayor compounded it, then contradicted it, within her dissent:

"Moreover, the prosecutor did not revisit the race-related testimony in closing or ask the jury to find future dangerousness based on Buck’s race." (2).

Death penalty opponents manufactured racism in this case, as with so many others' (5).

The prosecutor had substantial evidence of Buck's future dangerousness (2,3,4), with zero racial components.

Texas Court Of Criminal Appeals (TCCA) Justice Alcala (3) , who dissented, IN FAVOR OF Buck:

Alcala writes: "As to (Buck's) second claim (based upon racism) , I conclude that (Buck) has failed to make out a prima facie case for discriminatory intent in the prosecution's decision to seek the death penalty in his case." (3).  


Not even "intent", much less an actual claim.

Alcala thought this such a minor issue that response was in a footnote (3).


Even though Alcala found no intent, in her opening paragraph, she stated, the integrity of the proceedings were "further called into question by the admission of racist and inflammatory testimony from an expert witness at the punishment phase."

Alcala, like Sotomayor, invents racism, here, for which there is zero evidence. The prosecutor asked Quijano about his research, finding that blacks were more likely to commit violence, to which Quijano responded that such was true. Not racism but, instead, a criminological fact (5b) . . . and not inflammatory, as both defense experts stated, throughout, that Buck was at a lesser risk of future danger, as the jury knew, just as the jury knew of all of the substantial proof of Buck's real future dangerousness (devoid of any racial components), as presented by the prosecutor (2,3,4).

No intent, no racism, no inflammation.

What was inflammatory? Buck committed two capital murders, tried to commit two additional capital murders and did so in the presence of three children. Lots of intent, lots of inflammation, lots of destruction, all courtesy of Buck.

How bad was Justice Sotomayor's claim?

One might speculate, as did Sotomayor, that the prosecutor may have been attempting to infer that Buck was a future danger because of race, but the prosecutor never stated it and the jury knew that Quijano's testimony, as well as the other defense psychologist, was to the contrary. Alcala didn't even find intent, much less proof.

The prosecutor was inferring that, because Buck never argued that he was at zero probability of any future danger, that Buck might represent some future danger, just as any murderer might, statements, more truthfully, representing what Quijano or the prosecutor may have inferred, as that would be consistent with the defenses position that Buck represented a reduced risk of future danger, but not a zero risk, the only inference the prosecutor could make, based upon all the presented evidence, none of which found Buck a future danger based on race, the, completely, fabricated claim by death penalty opponents.

Buck's history supplied lots of evidence for future danger for the prosecutor to use (2,3,4), with zero racial components.

Not even the dissents FOR Buck, in SCOTUS and the TCCA, nor with Texas AG Cornyn's concerns did any of them make the mistake of saying that Quijano or the prosecutor stated that Buck was a future danger because of being black or male. Why? Because it never happened, as the jury knew.

There was a clear reason that Texas AG Cornyn did not pursue relief for Buck. He shouldn't have.


The testimony from the two defense witness psychologists, including Quijano, was that Buck was at reduced risk for future danger, not zero risk, as the jury knew.

The prosecutor never said what some may presume was her inference, which, of course, has no weight, in the context of all of Quijano's actual testimony on behalf of Buck, that Buck was at reduced risk of future danger, as the jury well knew.


If we, generously, presume a non-credible inference of racial bias, which is all Sotomayor and Buck's other supporters have, are left with: 

Presuming an inference of facts not in evidence, when both that presumption and inference are opposite the facts in evidence, is a prescription for a no win appellate argument, as it should be, just as it proves the lie, by death penalty opponents, who repeatedly claim that Buck was sentenced to death because of his race (1).


As Sotomayor repeated, within her same dissent, again:

“In this case, first on direct examination by the defense, Dr. Quijano merely identified race as one statistical factor and pointed out that African-Americans were overrepresented in the criminal justice system; (Quijano) did not state a causal relationship, nor did he link this statistic to Buck as an individual”. (bold my emphasis)

There is no smoke and no fire. It's a bogus claim and a bogus argument by Buck. Again, just another vile claim of racism, contrary to the facts, very common with 
anti -death penalty folk (1, 5, 6).

As a common rule, the media didn't just drop the ball, they parroted the anti-death penalty folks.

It is a, completely, invented race conflict, which so many seem so eager to embrace. Irresponsible and despicable.

1) No racial bias in Duane Buck's case: A Review 

BOLD my emphasis. "Quotes" from denial of certiorari, US Supreme Court:

"The witness, Dr. Walter Quijano, testified that (Buck), if given a noncapital sentence, WOULD NOT PRESENT A DANGER TO SOCIETY." (2).

Repeatedly, defense counsel and the two defense experts made it clear that BUCK DID NOT FIT INTO THE CATEGORY OF BLACK MALES THAT WERE MORE LIKELY TO RE OFFEND AND THAT BUCK WAS AT A REDUCED RISK TO RE OFFEND.


Never was it presented to the jury that because Buck was black and/or male, that he was more likely to re-offend because of that. All of the evidence, for Buck,  was to the contrary.

“In this case, first on direct examination by the defense, Dr. Quijano merely identified race as one statistical factor and pointed out that African-Americans were over represented in the criminal justice system; (Quijano) DID NOT STATE A CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP (BY RACE OR GENDER), NOR DID HE LINK THIS STATISTIC TO BUCK AS AN INDIVIDUAL."(2).


"On direct examination, Quijano referred to RACE AS PART OF HIS OVERALL OPINION THAT BUCK WOULD POSE A LOW THREAT TO SOCIETY WERE HE IMPRISONED." (2).

"Although (Sotomayor's) dissent suggests that the District Court may have been misled by the State’s inaccurate statements, the District Court, in denying petitioner’s motion under Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, was fully aware of what had occurred in all of these cases. It is for these reasons that I conclude that certiorari should be denied." (2).

There were six other death penalty cases, wherein Dr. Quijano testified, that some minorities and males were more likely to be a future danger.

It is extraordinarily difficult to get a death sentence (7), yet . . .


In those 6 re sentencing trials, all received the death penalty, again, a solid rebuttal to any claim that race/gender testimony, in any of the cases, was a factor in the prior jury decisions to give death.

Just as with Buck, it was the nature of the crimes and other non-racial/gender factors which convinced 156 jurors in those 13 trials to, unanimously, award the death penalty.

"Moreover, the prosecutor did not revisit the race-related testimony in closing or ask the jury to find future dangerousness based on Buck’s race." (2).

THE PROSECUTOR DID NOT ASK THE JURY TO FIND FUTURE DANGEROUSNESS BASED UPON BUCK'S RACE OR GENDER.


Quijano responded affirmatively and truthfully, to the prosecutor's question, regarding that both blacks and males were more likely to be violent and re offend.

"And, on redirect, defense counsel mentioned race ONLY TO MITIGATE the effect on the jury of Dr. Quijano’s prior identification of race as an immutable factor increasing a defendant’s likelihood of future dangerousness." (2).

When the prosecution presented Buck's probability of future dangerousness, IT WAS NEVER IN THE CONTEXT OF BUCK'S RACE OR GENDER.


2) No Racial Bias on Death Row

"White murderers are twice as likely to be executed as are black murderers.  (3)

"After accounting for some of the many factors that may influence penalty decisions, neither race of the defendant nor race of the victim appreciably improved prediction of who was sentenced to death . . . ". (3).

"There is no sustained, statistically significant evidence that white victim cases are more likely than minority victim cases to result in imposition of the death penalty." (3).
 
3) Redemption and Death Row - an additional reply to the many ministers supporting Buck

Only God and the individual know of their transformation, if any (8).

 ". . . a secondary measure of the love of God may be said to appear. For capital punishment provides the murderer with incentive to repentance which the ordinary man does not have, that is a definite date on which he is to meet his God. It is as if God thus providentially granted him a special inducement to repentance out of consideration of the enormity of his crime . . . the law grants to the condemned an opportunity which he did not grant to his victim, the opportunity to prepare to meet his God. Even divine justice here may be said to be tempered with mercy." Carey agrees with Saints Augustine and Aquinas, that executions represent mercy to the wrongdoer: (p. 116). Quaker biblical scholar Dr. Gervas A. Carey. A Professor of Bible and past President of George Fox College, Essays on the Death Penalty, T. Robert Ingram, ed., St. Thomas Press, Houston, 1963, 1992 (8).

St. Thomas Aquinas: "The fact that the evil, as long as they live, can be corrected from their errors does not prohibit the fact that they may be justly executed, for the danger which threatens from their way of life is greater and more certain than the good which may be expected from their improvement. They also have at that critical point of death the opportunity to be converted to God through repentance. And if they are so stubborn that even at the point of death their heart does not draw back from evil, it is possible to make a highly probable judgement that they would never come away from evil to the right use of their powers." Summa Contra Gentiles, Book III, 146. (8).


======


FOOTNOTES

1)  a) With liberal ant- death penalty group Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty showing the way, http://conservativesconcerned.org/27-evangelical-leaders-call-for-a-new-fair-sentencing-hearing-for-death-row-prisoner-duane-buck/
      b)  Conservatives Concerned About The Death Penalty:   Just another dishonest anti death penalty group (A Young Americans for Liberty partner) 
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/11/concerned-conservatives-about-death.html

      c) Duane Buck: Sentenced to Death Because He is Black, NAACP-LDF, 12/5/12

and many, many others.

2) From the denial of certiorari, US Supreme Court

DUANE EDWARD BUCK v. RICK THALER, SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, No. 11–6391. Decided November 7, 2011
majority  http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-6391alito.pdf
dissent  http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-6391Sotomayor.pdf


3) Dissent, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Footnote 8, http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/HTMLOPINIONINFO.ASP?OPINIONID=24847

4) Smith: "Justice is served in case of Duane Buck", By Accie Smith, Houston Chronicle, July 13, 2013

Smith is Debra Gardner's sister
http://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/Smith-Justice-is-served-in-case-of-Duane-Buck-4663725.php

5) a) RACE & THE DEATH PENALTY: A REBUTTAL TO THE RACISM CLAIMS
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/07/rebuttal-death-penalty-racism-claims.html

b)  Race, ethnicity and crime statistics

For the White–Black comparisons, the Black level is 12.7 times greater than the White level for homicide, 15.6 times greater for robbery, 6.7 times greater for rape, and 4.5 times greater for aggravated assault.

For the Hispanic–Black comparison, the Black level is 3.1 times greater than the Hispanic level for homicide, 4.1 times greater for robbery, 2.4 times greater for rape, and 1.9 times greater for aggravated assault.

From

REASSESSING TRENDS IN BLACK VIOLENT CRIME, 1980.2008: SORTING OUT THE "HISPANIC EFFECT" IN UNIFORM CRIME REPORTS ARRESTS, NATIONAL CRIME VICTIMIZATION SURVEY OFFENDER ESTIMATES, AND U.S. PRISONER COUNTS, DARRELL STEFFENSMEIER, BEN FELDMEYER, CASEY T. HARRIS, JEFFERY T. ULMER, Criminology, Volume 49, Issue 1, Article first published online: 24 FEB 2011

6)  The Innocent Frauds: Standard Anti Death Penalty Strategy

8) The Death Penalty: Mercy, Expiation, Redemption & Salvation
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-death-penalty-mercy-expiation.html

some others:

"All interpretations, contrary to the biblical support of capital punishment, are false. Interpreters ought to listen to the Bible’s own agenda, rather than to squeeze from it implications for their own agenda. As the ancient rabbis taught, “Do not seek to be more righteous than your Creator.” (Ecclesiastes Rabbah 7.33.). Part of Synopsis of Professor Lloyd R. Bailey’s book Capital Punishment: What the Bible Says, Abingdon Press, 1987.

Saint (& Pope) Pius V, "The just use of (executions), far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this (Fifth) Commandment which prohibits murder." "The Roman Catechism of the Council of Trent" (1566).
 
Pope Pius XII: "When it is a question of the execution of a man condemned to death it is then reserved to the public power to deprive the condemned of the benefit of life, in expiation of his fault, when already, by his fault, he has dispossessed himself of the right to live." 9/14/52.
 
"Moral/ethical Death Penalty Support: Modern Catholic Scholars"
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/07/death-penalty-support-modern-catholic.html
 
Christianity and the death penalty.
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html#F.Christianity
 
Catholic and other Christian References: Support for the Death Penalty,
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2006/10/12/catholic-and-other-christian-references-support-for-the-death-penalty.aspx


======

Some related topics

The Death Penalty: Not a Human Rights Violation

86% Death Penalty Support: Highest Ever - April 2013
    World Support Remains High
    95% of Murder Victim's Family Members Support Death Penalty

http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/11/86-death-penalty-support-highest-ever.html

The Death Penalty: Neither Hatred nor Revenge
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/20/the-death-penalty-neither-hatred-nor-revenge.aspx

The Death Penalty: Mercy, Expiation, Redemption & Salvation
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-death-penalty-mercy-expiation.html

Few Conservatives Embrace Anti Death Penalty Deceptions

Conservatives Concerned About The Death Penalty:
Just another dishonest anti death penalty group

DEAD WRONG: (Montana) Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty (MCCATDP)

Rebuttal to Richard A. Viguerie's "A conservative argues for abolishing the death penalty"

===============

Research, w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of anyone within a public policy debate and which rebut all anti-death penalty claims. 
 
The media/academic norm is to use anti-death penalty material, refuse to fact check or vet it and avoid all pro-death penalty research and experts. How will you know that is true? You haven't seen this material, prior.
 
a) The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
b) Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
(7 pro-death penalty experts are included)
 
======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
======
======
 
Partial CV