Media Disaster: Death Penalty:
Editor Jeff Gerritt Continues His Run of No Fact Checking
11/27/2021
To: LETTERS/ OP/ED Submission, CNHI
RE: Rebuttal of Editor Gerritt's Comments Inserted Into MY OP/ED:
News editor lied about capital punishment, Dudley Sharp, CNHI Newspapers, Oct 3, 2021, Updated Oct 5, 2021
From: Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom
Over and over, again, Gerritt refuses to fact check, as I have detailed, repeatedly, and there appears to be no end in sight. This is, just, another example.
These rebut the comments that Gerritt inserted into MY OP/ED (Re:).
1) The exonerated/innocent from death row:
Gerritt is, somehow, unaware that the debate is about provable, actual innocents on death row and the probability of one of those being executed (1). Gerritt thinks it is about legal innocence, whereby they cannot be executed. It is not (1). Gerritt, appears, willfully, clueless.
2) Deterrence:
Gerrit is unaware that there is factual evidence of death penalty/execution deterrence, with zero evidence that it deters none. Why? He refuses to fact check, vet or research (2).
Gerritt is, also, somehow, unaware that some death penalty states have lower crime rates than non-death penalty states, which is why his comparing state crime rates cannot be a way to determine deterrence (2), a fact that has been known for decades. Could he be that clueless, with his own example? He was . . . or he was, intentionally, deceptive. One or the other.
======
======
3) Innocents Executed:
IF Gerritt did fact the DPIC's "20 likely cases" of innocents executed, since 1976, Gerritt's fact checking somehow, missed that there is no official determination of actual innocence, in any of those cases, even though the states have the ability to make such determinations, and no families have been compensated, for wrongful deaths, as states have such ability . . . both, completely, left out by Gerritt. No surprise.
I fact checked a few of those "likely innocent" guilty murderers. You can see my fact checking, here (1).
I would like to see Gerritt's fact checking for all 20 cases? Mr. Gerritt, please forward. CNHI management should ask to see it, as well.
4) Cost:
Gerritt, somehow, missed the, obvious, point, again. He says death penalty cases cost $42,000/yr. in Pa, which, of course, is irrelevant, without equivalent, capital eligible, life without parole costs, with maximum security cells, 40-50 years of incarcerations, with huge geriatric costs (3).
I couldn't find max security costs/inmate/yr in Pa, but the "average" cell cost in New York is $69,300/inmate/yr, not max security. (4). California has max security up to $176,000/yr/inmate, with their medical unit at $80,000/yr/inmate, inclusive of geriatric care (3), meaning, of course, what if the death penalty is cheaper (3)? Gerritt? Clueless.
======
Media Disaster: The Death Penalty: How Bad Can The Media Be?
======
5) Innocents in prisons:
Somehow, again, Gerritt missed the obvious point. He repeats "Extrapolating from DNA exonerations and other evidence, criminologists and other experts estimate 2 percent to 5 percent of prisoners are innocent."
Gerritt "missed" that he left out fact checking and vetting, whereby he excluded "other experts" finding "a reasonable (and possibly overstated) calculation of the wrongful conviction (factually innocent) rate appears, tentatively, to be somewhere in the range of 0.016%–0.062%." (1), roughly a hundred times fewer and Gerritt leaves that out . . . no surprise, with Gerritt's fact checking and vetting.
6) DNA exonerations:
Gerritt, also, left out that there is, at least, one fraudulent "exonerated" from death row, by DNA case (1). Likely, Gerritt fact checked none of them. I've only fact checked one and it just so happens to be fraudulent. What are the odds? Gerritt?
7) Gerritt lied about me calling him a liar - title of article. I stated he did not fact check and he continues that run. With Gerritt, somehow, not knowing the difference? Did Gerrit think it beneficial to lie? Maybe a new run.
Summary
My educated opinion is that Gerritt researches, only, anti-death penalty information, because that is all his comments reflect and, then, refuses to fact check and vet it . . . the opposite of responsible journalism. Basic.
Footnotes
Every one of these, fully, confirm my comments, with sources that anyone can confirm, on their own, either in the body of the footnote or the references within the footnotes of the footnoted document. Very thorough and detailed.
1) The Death Row "Exonerated"/"Innocent" Frauds 71-83% Error Rate in Death Row "Innocent" Claims, Well Known Since 2000
2) Deterrence, Death Penalties & Executions
3) See California, Texas and Nevada, first. I doubt Gerritt cares, but I hope that others do.
Saving Costs with The Death Penalty
Partial CV, Dudley Sharp
