Preface
1) Gerritt: "(Ohio) can offer no rational defense for (the death penalty).".
Sharp: Gerritt, intentionally, evaded all the facts and reasoning, for death penalty support, as detailed, for every one of his topics/errors.
It appears that Gerritt got all of his material form the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC), strictly, an anti-death penalty group and, he refused to fact check/vet any of it. I did. All of it, as detailed and sourced.
2) Gerritt: Justice and the slaughter of the innocent murder victims
Sharp: There are no quotes, here, because, in this long article (1017 words), Gerritt found no use for justice or for the reason for the death penalty, which is for particular murders of the innocent, for which the death penalty is an option.
This is a constant and vile omission by anti-death penalty folks. It is startling in its complete lack of compassion and consideration.
Justice and compassion for the innocent victims have, both, been two of the primary and "rational defenses" for all sanctions, inclusive of the death penalty, for over 4000 years. Such would include Ohio's death penalty consideration.
Gerrit does not see those as supportive of sanction, even though they are the foundation for it.
Full article rebuttal, with sources
3) Gerritt: "Some people argue, without evidence, that capital punishment deters heinous crimes. In fact, according to FBI crime statistics, murder rates in death-penalty states are significantly higher than those in states without the death penalty, and they have been for decades."
Sharp: It has been known, for decades, that such is not how deterrence is measured (2, 3).
Let's count the 15 (now 16) plus ways:
1. Many death penalty states (and cities, towns and countries) have lower crime and murder rates than non-death penalty states (and cities, towns and countries) (2), as Gerritt, well, knows and failed to mention. And then, the reverse, is true, as well . . . which confirms why Gerritt's (DPIC's) method of measuring deterrence cannot be valid.
2. When both Delaware and New Hampshire had the death penalty, they, continuously, had some of the lowest crime and murder rates in the country, as is very easy to confirm. At one point, Delaware had the highest execution per murder rate in the US and among the lowest crime and murder rates. Gerritt? Look at Detroit and Washington DC, at the same times . . . similar in size to Delaware, all known, prior to Gerritt's article.
3. The evidence for death penalty/execution deterrence is very easy to find. Gerritt, simply, went with what the anti-death penalty folks (DPIC) presented to him and he didn't fact check nor vet, any of it, and, then failed to research further (2,3,4), as with all other subtopics/errors he presented, herein and elsewhere.
4. Since 1996, there have been, at least, 24 US based studies finding for death penalty/execution deterrence which were more credible than their detractors (3, 6,7) available for Gerritt and all.
5. Those recent studies found that executions deter "only" from 0.2%-5% of potential murders, that being a very important 33-900 innocents spared from murder, per year (4, 6, 7). Why didn't Gerritt include this? Either zero research or he, intentionally, left it out. One or the other.
6. Crimes are fewer with policing and sanction than without them. All know it. Why? Fear of sanction. Deterrence. Obvious.
7. Gerritt: "Nor does the deterrence argument make sense. Does anyone really believe that the difference between execution and life in prison would deter any murder, whether committed in passionate heat or cold-blooded calculation?"
Sharp: Well, yes. Specifically, one study did show passion murders were deterred. There are many reasons that most people, often, can and do, restrain their passionate impulses. Deterrence being one. Makes sense. How is Gerritt unaware? Ask him.
In addition, look at these.
8. Nobel Prize Laureate (Economics) Gary Becker:
“the evidence of a variety of types — not simply the quantitative evidence — has been enough to convince me that capital punishment does deter and is worth using for the worst sorts of offenses.” (NY Times, 11/18/07)
"(Becker) is the most important social scientist in the past 50 years (NY Times, 5/5/14)
9. The detractors found fault with the methodology, in some of the 24 studies, but did not state that death sentences/executions deter none. They cannot. Makes sense. The methodology of the 24 studies is common, revered and awarded, when used with other topics. The studies were much more credible than were their detractors.
10. The average age of those put on death row is 28. What we all know is that life is preferred over death and death is feared more than life. What we prefer more, deters less. What we fear more, deters more. Makes sense.
11. Both subconsciously and consciously, potential criminals are deterred by sanction, all the time, when they "case" potential crime scenes and decide not to commit crimes, because of police, cameras, witnesses, lighting and many other issues. Why? The deterrence of sanction. Makes sense. Obvious.
12. Has the deterrent effect of serious criminal sanctions and possible negative outcomes and negative incentives, ever, been negated? No. They cannot be (6). Just as positives affect behavior, so do negatives. 100% confirmed, with no dissent. Makes sense.
13. The honest folks in this debate, both pro and anti-death penalty, have conceded that all sanctions deter some and that the credible discussion within this debate is whether or not the death penalty/execution is more of a deterrent than a life sentence. As detailed, I find the proof of execution being more of a deterrent than life is overwhelming, both factually and rationally (2-7).
14. many instances of potential criminals confessing that the death penalty prevented them from committing death penalty eligible crimes (2-5), which is called individual deterrence, which . . .
15. cannot exist without general deterrence. Makes sense.
16. For criminals, the death penalty is the most serious sanction, the most negative outcome and the greatest negative incentive. Makes sense.
======
WHY DO ANTI DEATH PENALTY FOLKS FIGHT EXECUTION DETERRENCE SO MUCH, WHEN IT CANNOT BE NEGATED AND THERE IS SO MUCH EVIDENCE FOR IT?
Because they (and Gerritt) don't want to be known as the group that spares the lives of vile murderers which, then, as a result, causes the murders of more innocents. It's a horrible reflection on their position and they know it (7).
What many don't know is that the intellectual leaders of the anti-death penalty movement, actually, embrace that exact position (7).
Plus, the death penalty/executions spare innocents in two, additional, ways, better than does LWOP, and those are not, even, in dispute: Enhanced due process and enhanced incapacitation. (7).
Gerritt, of course, left all of that out. Makes sense, to Gerritt.
======
5) Gerritt: " . . . the legal expenses of prosecuting death-penalty cases and fighting appeals are far higher. Prisoners often remain on death row for decades, while they exhaust a constitutional appeals process that can tap taxpayers $10 million per case."
Sharp: Non death penalty criminal cases can cost $15 million. Gerritt, which state has spent $10 million on a death penalty case and what was the case? I can't find it. Can Gerritt? Everything I have asked Gerritt for, prior, he has failed to respond.
I, on the other hand, supplied all sources, without being asked.
The FEDERAL Timothy McVeigh/Oklahoma City bombing case is, very likely, the most expensive criminal, death penalty case, of all time, by a huge margin. I consider that it was an irresponsible waste of taxpayer money, on an open and shut case, whereby we could have spent $3 million and gotten the same result.
6) Gerritt: "A recent study in Colorado, published in the University of Denver Criminal Law review, found that capital proceedings require six times as many days in court as do life-without-parole cases. On average, death-penalty cases take almost four years longer to complete."
Sharp: Gerritt didn't consider how, completely, irresponsible Colorado judges are. Let's look:
John Allen Muhammad , the DC sniper, was arrested on October 24, 2002. His Virginia trial began on October 14, 2003, he was sentenced to death on November 24, 2003 and was executed in Virginia on November 10, 2009.
From arrest to sentence was, exactly, 13 months. The prosecution called more than 130 witnesses and introduced more than 400 pieces of evidence. It was 7 years from arrest to execution. (8,9). Gerritt?
Why didn't Gerritt cite Virginia? He only used anti-death penalty sources, so he was clueless.
Life without parole (LWOP) cases require 40-50 years of maximum security cells, with huge geriatric costs, with pre-trial, trial and appeals costs. We know that responsible death penalty pre-trial and trials can be completed within 1-2 years, on average, with death penalty appeals being completed within 7 years, on average (8,9), making the average death penalty case, likely, cheaper than the average LWOP case (10), with responsible management.
7) Gerritt: "In California, a 2008 report by the Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice estimated that the death penalty costs the state at least $137 million a year. Just confining a death-row inmate costs $90,000 a year more than holding a maximum-security prisoner. Another study, completed in 2011 and updated last year, concluded that the death penalty had cost California more than $4 billion since 1978, including $1.7 billion in legal expenses for state and federal appeals."
Sharp: Completely, utterly absurd, as basic fact checking establishes in both "studies" (9). Both studies are, obvious, frauds, as my fact checking found, within an hour of looking into it, as detailed (9). Gerritt . . . no fact checking, no vetting, of course.
8) Gerritt: "Small wonder a conservative Republican commentator in North Carolina called the death penalty 'the very epitome of a wasteful government program'.”
Sharp: Small wonder, not . . . the conservative Republican fact checked/vetted no better than Gerritt. If you vet the North Carolina study, it, actually, finds that the death penalty is less expensive than a life sentence (11). Gerritt and the conservative Republican? Why vet?
9) Gerritt: "Wrongly convicting anyone constitutes a horrible injustice, but executing the wrong person eliminates any chance of reversing the error. Nationwide, more than 140 people awaiting execution have been exonerated. Mistakes are far more likely in cases involving poor defendants, who usually don’t have adequate legal counsel."
Sharp: It has been well known, since 2000, that the "exonerated" and "innocent" from death row, as stated by several anti-death penalty groups, inclusive of DPIC, has been a fraud/deception (12).
Who fact checked and found fraud/deception? US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, New York Times justice (now Supreme Court) reporter Adam Liptak, Democratic District Attorney Josh Marquis, The Florida Commission on Capital Cases and many more (12), all prior to Gerritt's article. Gerritt either didn't know - no research or he, intentionally, left these out. One or the other.
Depending upon study, using only cases from the modern death penalty protocol, post Gregg v Georgia, we would be looking at about 32 proven actually innocent cases, not 140, and all of those had been released (12), with some commuted to a lesser sanction, prior to their being found factually innocent.
Gerritt, how many death penalty cases, post Gregg v Georgia, have been overturned, within the final ruling, based upon ineffective assistance of counsel? Never entered Gerritt's mind to look?
10) Gerritt: "Even before DNA technology became prevalent, a study conducted by the Stanford Law Review documented two dozen cases in 1987 of persons sentenced to death that later had been released because of doubts concerning guilt."
Sharp: That "study's" data findings were 50%, 60% and 100% in error, depending upon section (13), as revealed in a 1988 review, also, in the Stanford Law Review (13), 25 years prior to Gerritt's article.
11) Gerritt: "Conservatives, especially, don’t trust government to do anything. Why would they want to give it power over life and death?"
Sharp: With those who fact check, vet and research, be they conservatives, liberals and any others, the answer is quite easy. Since 1973:
a) Around 20,000 ADDITIONAL innocents have been murdered by those KNOWN murderers that our government allowed to murder, again - recidivist murderers (14)
b) Around 500,000 ADDITIONAL innocents have been murdered by those known criminals that our government allowed to harm, again - recidivist criminals (14)
c) We are looking at about 99.5% of death penalty cases, with our government, getting it right (Scalia), on actual guilt findings, with 100% of the 0.5% actual innocents being released . . . possibly the most accurate of any government program. That is why. Gerritt?
Where are the innocents at risk? Gerritt? Obviously, sometimes you can trust government, sometimes, not at all.
12) Gerritt: "Mandatory life sentences — the alternative penalty in the 18 states that have abolished capital punishment — negate any public safety arguments for the death penalty.
Sharp: Rebutted in paragraphs 3, 4, with items 1-15, therein, and in the BOLD section, after para 4, and para 11, and all their footnotes.
13) Gerritt: " . . . some people have argued against capital punishment solely because they believe life in prison inflicts more suffering."
Sharp: This is one of those absurd anti-death penalty arguments, that Gerritt could not resist. They can't believe such is true. It's just another lie to show that anti-death penalty folks are, really, tougher on crime.
Around 99.9% of all murderers, subject to the death penalty, do all they can to avoid the death penalty and execution - Gerritt and all are aware. It is not in dispute. Obviously, murderers were not deterred, at least not for those murders, but it is undeniable that . . .
Execution is feared more than life. Life is preferred over execution. What we fear more deters more. What we prefer more deters less. Basic.
If, only, 5% of potential murders are deterred, by execution, as found in one study, that is 900 innocent lives, saved from murder, every year. (6,7)
14) Gerritt: "Finally, the death penalty is criminally inequitable, disproportionately affecting African-Americans and other people of color."
Sharp: White murderers are twice as likely to be executed, as are black murderers and are executed at a rate 41% higher than black death row inmates (14).
15) Gerritt: " In Ohio, for example, more than half of the death-sentenced defendants since 1981 have been African-Americans, even though African-Americans make up less than 13 percent of the population. Eighteen African-Americans have been executed in Ohio under the 1981 law — 35 percent of the total."
Sharp: Gerritt is unaware that people are put on death row because of committing capital murders, not based upon their general population counts. Women make up 50% of the general population, yet only 10% of the prison population. Gerritt would have us release a huge percentage of the criminal male prison population, down to 50%, from 90%, so that we could then add a lot of non-criminal women to increase their prison population to 50%, to match their general population, or some other solution, to make sure that the prison population matches the general population of gender, race and ethnicity.
Gerritt's "reasoning" is that bad. Very clear.
Gerritt is unaware that:
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. (14).
For the Hispanic- White comparison, the Hispanic level is 4.0 times greater than the White level for homicide, 3.8 times greater for robbery, 2.8 times greater for rape, and 2.3 times greater for aggravated assault. (14)
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. (14)
Robbery/murders and rape/murders are,by far, the greatest number of death eligible crimes.
Gerritt's position. . . let's make sure that we base death row and prison populations upon general population counts, instead of criminal activity. Historically, like genocide or today, as in China.
16) Gerritt: "Nationwide, African-Americans who kill whites are far more likely to get the death penalty than those who kill African-Americans."
Sharp: That is because black on white murders are much more likely to be capital, death penalty eligible murders than are black on black murders (14, 15). Capital, death eligible murders are a unique, very small group, when compared to all murders. Only 0.9%, of all murders receive the death penalty, with robbery/murders and rape/murders making up the majority, as detailed, elsewhere, herein.
17) Gerritt: "Sentencing reforms cannot remedy deep-seated biases in the criminal justice system. They affect the quality of defendants’ legal counsel, police patrolling, arrest procedures, jury panels, and judges."
Sharp: Deep-seated biases, probably not. But most biases have been minimized within criminal justice, as detailed within para 14, 15 and 16, above, and their footnotes.
No one doubts that biases exist. But bias is not the same as racism. A bias against rapists, child molesters, robbers, mass, serial and most other murderers is the norm, showing no racist component. As we all know, police patrolling is going to be at a much higher rate in black and brown minority areas, because of more crime, as detailed in para 15 and fn 14 and we all want more police and patrolling where violent crime is greater, as polling agrees Arrest procedures are the same for all peoples.
We know that some polls find that blacks oppose the death penalty at three times the rate of whites and potential jurors cannot serve, on any jury, when they oppose any section of the sentencing, in that case. Basic.
The quality of defense counsel is most related to money, not race. Yet it is hard to make a distinction, as 99.8% of poor murderers have escaped execution.
Yet, as I have asked Gerritt, prior, what number of death penalty cases, upon final appellate review, had the case overturned because of ineffective assistance of counsel. Gerrit had no factual reply, nor sources, as is his mo.
18) Gerritt: "In truth, retribution is the only solid argument for capital punishment. It has driven the death penalty for more than 4,000 years, starting with stoning."
Sharp: Gerritt, finally, gets something right.
Within the criminal justice system, just retribution is how we attempt to bring justice into each case, which means a sanction not too harsh and not too lenient, with justice being the primary reason for sanction, with saving innocent lives being an outcome of sanction, but not the reason for it. Justice, or just retribution, must be primary.
The earliest death penalty references are the biblical timeline, with Genesis 9:5-6, at about 4000 BC, and Sumerian law, 2700 BC - 2300 BC (https://faq-law.com/sumerian-laws-and-punishments/#4), without mention of the method of execution.
19) Gerritt: "No doubt, the thirst for vengeance is almost universal. Victims of a brutal crime may feel it most of all."
Sharp: The death penalty and all sanctions, within a system, such as that within the US, cannot be vengeance. Why?
1) Neither the victims nor their survivors can be fact finders in their cases, 2) the fact finders, in the case, judge or jury, can have no connections to the crimes, 3) all the applicable laws/sanctions are in place, prior to the crime being committed, 4) the fact finders are bound by that law and cannot go outside of it, 5) must presume the defendant to be innocent, 6) must find, beyond a reasonable doubt , to reach a finding of guilty and, in death penalty cases 7) the fact finders must find against the defendant within 4 separate sections of the charging instructions, unanimously, that being 48-0 (12 jurors times 4) in order to give a sentence of death and 8) it is very well known that we provide the greatest of due process protection, for the defendant/convicted party, in death penalty cases, within investigations, pre trial, trial, appeals and executive considerations . . . such is not in dispute, as Gerritt knows. 9) If only one of those jurors votes for the defendant /convicted party, 1 in 48, or 2%, they will get life . . . with the 1 vote ruling over the other 47 (98%), likely, the most undemocratic system in US law.
both systemically and individually, all of which are counter to vengeance, as is obvious.
20) Gerritt: "Reason and redemption are also part of the human condition. Society, and the laws that uphold it, shouldn’t codify and cultivate people’s most atavistic impulses."
Sharp: see para 11 & 19. Judges and jurors, as all of us, are aware of reason and redemption and we all know that people can stay the same, get worse or get better, which for murderers can mean very bad, indeed, even more horrendous, or from still quite bad to a saint, respectively.
21) Gerritt: "If anything, state-sponsored executions exacerbate violence and diminish respect for life. It’s as much about what it does to us as to the condemned."
Sharp: The evidence is the opposite of both "exacerbat(ing) violence" and " diminish(ed) respect for life ", as detailed, throughout, as here:
"The normal moral reason for upholding capital punishment is reverence for life itself. Indeed, this is the reason why scripture and Christian tradition have upheld it, a fact which suggests that, if anything, it may be the abolition of capital punishment which threatens to cheapen life, not its retention." J. Budziszewski, Pew Forum,"A Call for Reckoning: Religion and the Death Penalty". Much more fn 16.
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.” synopsis: “A Bible Study”, from Essays on the Death Penalty, Carey was a Professor of Bible and past President of George Fox College (16).
"It is because humans are created in the image of God that capital punishment for premeditated murder was a perpetual obligation. The full range of biblical data weighs in its favor. This is the one crime in the Bible for which no restitution was possible (Numbers 35:31,33). The Noahic covenant recorded in Genesis 9 ("Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed. "Gen 9:6) antedates Israel and the Mosaic code; it transcends Old Testament Law, per se, and mirrors ethical legislation that is binding for all cultures and eras. The sanctity of human life is rooted in the universal creation ethic and thus retains its force in society. The Christian community is called upon to articulate standards of biblical justice, even when this may be unpopular. Capital justice is part of that non-negotiable standard. Society should execute capital offenders to balance the scales of moral judgement." From "Capital Punishment: A Personal Statement", by Charles W. Colson., a former opponent. He is spiritual advisor and friend to numerous death row inmates and the Founder of Prison Fellowship, the largest Christian ministry serving incarcerated prisoners.
A sanction can, only, be a sanction if we take away that which is valued . . . freedom with incarceration, money with fines, time and labor with community service and life with executions. The 4000 year old foundation for the death penalty is based within reverence for innocent life (16).
22) Gerritt: "Nationwide, capital punishment is becoming increasingly unusual, as defined by the Eighth Amendment’s cruel and unusual standard. Last year, the nation carried out 43 executions — including three in Ohio — compared to 85 in 2000 and 98 in 1999, reports the Death Penalty Information Center."
Sharp: 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 (17, 18), reflecting the 21013 of Gerritt's article.
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). It is very rare to have executions over 60 per year, which has only occurred 7 times (1997-2003), or 18% of execution years. 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. (17,18)
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. (17,18)
It is, very, possible, that judicial irresponsibility has played an important role, as I have detailed in para 6 and fn 8, 17, 18
Gerritt? Clueless.
In addition, in 2013, the time of the article, murders were at, at least, at a 53 year low, rapes, a 40 year low and robberies , a 46 year low. My data check, only, goes back to 1960.
23) Gerritt: "Most of the U.S. death-penalty cases have come from only 2 percent of the nation’s counties, many of them in Texas and California, another sign that death sentences are inequitable and arbitrary."
Sharp: Did Gerrit consider the obvious . . . that 2% of the counties may contain our most populous cities and that those have most of our crimes (18)? No.
In 2002, the 75 largest counties had 51% of murders and non-negligent manslaughters, 61% of robberies and 36% of forcible rapes, nationally, which is in the ballpark of 60-70% of what we know as capital, death penalty eligible murders, inclusive of robbery/murders, rape/murders, police murders, multiple and serial murders, in death penalty eligible counties (17,18).
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 death penalties (17,18).
24) Gerritt: "Former death-penalty supporter Edwin J. Peterson, who served as chief justice of Oregon’s Supreme Court, called the death penalty “dysfunctional, expensive, unworkable, and unfair.”
Sharp: Somehow, the judge and Gerritt are unaware that those are all the fault of management, not the death penalty. The judge may have learned something by observing states that had better management than Oregon, as I have, already detailed. He could care less.
25) Gerritt: "Former President Jimmy Carter last week became another voice calling for the end of the death penalty, saying governments too often impose it on the poor, minorities, and those with diminished capacities."
Sharp: Carter is a wonderful guy, a horrible president and knows as much about the death penalty as Gerritt.
26) Gerritt: "1972, when the U.S. Supreme Court declared the death penalty unconstitutional".
Sharp: The death penalty has, never, been declared unconstitutional. It was the statutory framework, the laws, which guided death penalty cases, which were found unconstitutional - a huge difference.
27) Gerritt: "Now, a nationwide shortage of lethal drugs has triggered another national debate on the death penalty. The evidence points to one verdict: Capital punishment should die in Ohio."
Sharp: How fentanyl could be in short supply, in 2013 or 2021, is hard to fathom. It was not. Not obvious enough?
Fortunately, some folks fact check, vet and research "evidence" to determine if it is nonsense or true.
Gerritt did not.
1) Media Disaster: Editor Jeff Gerritt Continues His Run of No Fact Checking https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2021/12/media-disaster-editor-jeff-gerritt.html
2) a) "DEATH PENALTY DETERRENCE CLARIFIED"
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/12/death-penalty-deterrence-clarified.html
3) a) DEATH PENALTY DETERRENCE: Rebuttal to Donahue and Wolfers, http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/02/death-penalty-deterrence-rebuttal-to.html
b) Death Penalty Deterrence: Defended & Advanced
c) "Deterrence & the Death Penalty: A Reply to Radelet and Lacock"
4) a) Deterrence, Death Penalties & Executions
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2019/04/deterrence-death-penalties-executions.html
b) OF COURSE THE DEATH PENALTY DETERS: A review of the debate
5) The Death of Punishment, Robert Blecker, 2014
8) a) JUDGES AS JACKASSES: THE DEATH PENALTY
b) Judges Responsible For Grossly Uneven Executions
9) a) Read California, Nevada and Texas, first
10) Death Penalty Costs vs Life Without Parole Costs: Study Protocol
11) Duke (North Carolina) Death Penalty Cost Study (1993): Let's be honest
12) The Death Row "Exonerated"/"Innocent" Frauds 71-83% Error Rate in Death Row "Innocent" Claims, Well Known Since 2000
13) See Para A. THE RISK OF EXECUTING THE INNOCENT
read from
The Bedau-Radelet Study, "Miscarriages of Justice in Potentially Capital Cases," 40, 1 Stanford Law Review, 11/87
to B&R END
within
DEATH PENALTY AND SENTENCING INFORMATION, In the United States, 10/1/97,
14) RACE & THE DEATH PENALTY: A REBUTTAL TO THE RACISM CLAIMS
15) C. RACE, SENTENCING AND THE DEATH PENALTY , within
DEATH PENALTY AND SENTENCING INFORMATION, In the United States, 10/1/97
17) WHY FEWER DEATH SENTENCES AND EXECUTIONS?
Dudley Sharp, updated 12/2017
18) a) Judges Responsible For Grossly Uneven Executions
======
