Tuesday, July 11, 2023
Media Disaster: East Idaho News & The Death Penalty
Please forward to the families of Kaylee, Madison, Xana and Ethan
Originally sent 3/24/2023
To: East Idaho News, Editors & Reporters
Law Professor Samuel Newton & U of Idaho Law School
Prof. Greg Hampikian, Innocence Project & the Biology and Criminal Justice Depts, & Administration, Boise State U.
Boise State U, The Blue Review, School of Public Service, Department of Criminal Justice, Communication & Media Depts. and many others
Students & Student Groups, at those and other Idaho universities
BCC: Moscow Police Dept, Latah County Sheriff's Dept., Idaho State Police
Idaho Prosecuting Attorneys Assoc.
Governor Brad Little and staff and cabinet
Attorney General Raul Labrador
Idaho Dept. of Corrections
Idaho House & Senate Members, State & Judiciary Committees
Editorial Board, Idaho Statesman, Mary Rohlfing, Boise State, community member of editorial board
Newspaper Assoc. of Idaho, Idaho Press Club and Media throughout Idaho
Subject: Media/Academic Disaster - Death Penalty - East Idaho News
RE: A closer look at the history of the Idaho death penalty, Kaitlyn Hart, EastIdahoNews.com, March 23, 2023
From: Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, Houston, Texas, CV at bottom
Preface
This is a, fairly, typical media/academic anti-death penalty disaster, with, only, anti-death penalty experts, with zero balance, with a non-fact checking/vetting, compliant reporter/editor, as detailed:
Format: The anti-death penalty position is quoted or paraphrased, then, my rebuttal.
1) Prof. Hampikian, Innocence Project, biology & criminal justice, Boise State: " . . .since 1973, at least 190 people who have been sentenced to death in the United States have been exonerated after proving their innocence."
Rebuttal: Absurd.
a) It has been very well known, since 2000, that the fraud rate, in the claims of the factually "innocent"/"exonerated" released from death row, ranges from 71-83%, depending upon review (1), meaning that in 50 years of intense scrutiny, we have a 99.6% accuracy rate in factually guilty findings, with the 0.4% factually innocent being released, likely, the most accurate of sanctions, as we would expect with the only sanction with super due process (1).
Death penalty opponents, simply, redefined both "innocent" and "exonerated" as if they had redefined lie as truth, then stuffed a bunch of cases into those fraudulent definitions.
This is not in dispute and is, very easily, fact checked/vetted (1), for those interested. Hart?
b) The death penalty/executions protect innocents, in three ways, better than does LWOP - enhanced due process and enhanced incapacitation, both of which are unchallenged. Enhanced deterrence is challenged, but survives thorough research, with fact checking and vetting, all with critical thinking (2).
2) Reporter Hart states that Furman v Georgia (1972) found the death penalty unconstitutional.
Rebuttal: Untrue.The death penalty has, never, been found unconstitutional. Furman found the statutory enforcement unconstitutional, not the death penalty, itself. Huge difference.
======
The Death Penalty: A Repudiation of Journalism, by Journalists?
======
3) Prof. Hampikian calls the death penalty revenge.
Rebuttal: Neither the judges nor jurors can have any connection to the individuals or circumstances of the murders, must presume the defendant innocent, until (or if) proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, with laws and sanctions that existed prior to the murders, laws outside the control of the judge or jurors, within a system that provides super due process, in pre trial, trial, appeals and executive consideration within pardons or commutation, offering greater protections and safeguards than with any other sanction, with the jury having to vote 48-0 (4 votes for the 12 jurors), 100%, against the defendant/murderer in order to get a death penalty, but only 1 out of that 48, or 2%, needed to be for the defendant/murderer, to evade the death penalty, all of which exclude a revenge component (3), as is obvious.
4) Prof. Hampikian appears to equate revenge and an eye for an eye.
Rebuttal: Instead, biblicly and rationally. it is based upon fair and proportional sanctions, replacing the disproportionately severe sanctions of the past, making the sanctions not too harsh and not too lenient (4), as we would all like them to be - fair justice.
Reporter Hart agrees with the revenge moniker.
5) Law Professor Samuel Newton, U of Idaho: "There are different perspectives . . . people that will say justice, there are people that will say racist, rushed, superficial, vengeance, bloodthirsty."
Newton provides one - justice - for proponents, but 5 for death penalty opposition.
Rebuttal:
Racist:White murderers are twice as likely to be executed as are black murderers and are executed 41% more often than black death row inmates, with much more, here (5).
Rushed: Executions might occur within 20 years of appeals, on average, today. It was about 6.6 years in the mid 1980s. Neither, rushed. Obvious.
Superficial: Absurd, impossible, opposite the known facts, for any consideration.
Vengeance: Rebutted in para 3&4.
Bloodthirsty: We have executed some 1600 murderers, from 1973-2023, about 31/yr, during a period in which we have had about 900,000 murders, some 17,500 murders/yr. As in para 1, above, it is death penalty opponents who wish to guarantee more innocents murdered (2).
6) Sharp: Within criminal justice where are a) the most catastrophic errors committed? b) the innocents most at risk?
Since 1973, In the US, some
20,000 ADDITIONAL innocents were murdered by those KNOWN murderers that we allowed to murder, again - recidivist murderers (2);
500,000 ADDITIONAL innocents were murdered by those KNOWN criminals that we allowed to harm, again - recidivist criminals (2);
3.5 million ADDITIONAL innocents were raped, otherwise assaulted and/or robbed by those KNOWN criminals that we allowed to harm, again - recidivist criminals (2),
No Innocence Projects for them. Why?
Possibly, we MIGHT have proof of factually innocents executed, as recently as 1915.
5,000 persons die/yr within criminal custody, of which 31 (0.6%) are executions.
Conclusion
Do reporters/editors and professors care? Yes, they care, very, much, which is why pro death penalty experts (6) were excluded.
Bonus: Reporter Hart - ask the professors if they teach the SCOTUS case, McClesky vs Kemp, accurately, which will require research, fact checking and vetting, on your part.
======
FN
1) The Death Row "Exonerated"/"Innocent" Frauds
71-83% Error Rate in Death Row "Innocent" Claims,
Well Known Since 2000
2) The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives
Deterrence, Death Penalties & Executions
3) Texas Death Penalty Procedures
4) Religion and The Death Penalty
5) RACE & THE DEATH PENALTY: A REBUTTAL TO THE RACISM CLAIMS
6) Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
======
Victim Services
Victims' Voices
======
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 are included)
======
Partial CV
Thursday, June 29, 2023
Victim Survivors in Potential Death Penalty Cases
Some notes for the meeting with the prosecutor:
For Victim Survivors in Potential Death Penalty Cases
For Victim Survivors in Potential Death Penalty Cases
From: Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom
I have a pro death penalty bias and respect those who don't . . . but will assert my research is much more thorough. I was anti-death penalty until about 1997-98.
Some notes for the meeting with the prosecutor
The prosecutors will tell you the pluses and minuses of seeking the death penalty. Some of this, below, will be covered by the prosecutor, some may not be, which is why I provide this.
1) Death penalty appeals can last an, excruciatingly, long, cruel time.
True. But for the most part there is no valid reason for that to occur.
a) Since 1976, Virginia has executed 113 murderers, after 7 years of appeals, on average (1), prior to execution How? Responsible protocols and responsible judges.
The judges are the case managers and need to have responsible time goals and enforce them. There is no excuse not to, if they care about justice and not harming the victims' families, even more, which is what 10-30 years of appeals do, as do the huge delays prior to trial.
It is inexcusable and not legally nor rationally required (2), in most cases. It is, simply, wrongly, accepted by, way, too many.
Please read this victim survivor centered friend of the court brief for the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) (3).
In 2019, the average time of appeals, for those executed, was 22 years. From 1984-1988, it averaged under 7 years (4).
b) The majority of delays are, solely, because of irresponsible and/or unethical judges (2), not defense counsel. My opinion is that it is the way the judiciary is trying, unethically, to kill the death penalty (2), with retired US Supreme Court Justice Breyer being a prime example (5).
c) Most appeals can be handled, responsibly: 2-3 years in the state supreme court, 1-2 years in federal district court and 2-3 years, in federal circuit courts, with direct appeals and the write moving at the same time. Cases are, rarely, heard at SCOTUS.
Obvious, as with Virginia.
d) Delays, because of the difficulty in getting lethal injection drugs, are not necessary and are a lying deceit.
Fentanyl is widely and freely available, in police evidence rooms. with not all needed for trial, with only a tiny amount needed for executions and, only, testing needed, prior to use. Nevada and Nebraska, already, have fentanyl in their protocols.
The Glossip v. Gross, 576 U.S. 863 (2015) SCOTUS decision confirms fentanyl would pass constitutional muster.
2) It's expensive.
a) Yes, it is, but in many or most cases there is no need for it to be more expensive than life without parole (LWOP), for death penalty equivalent cases.
I have fact checked many of the cost studies (1). I am, unaware, of anyone else that has. As an ironclad rule, the studies are a mess, incomplete and/or fraudulent, as detailed (1).
b) Properly, do an apples-to-apples comparison (6), which has never been done (6), inclusive of LWOP cost of 40-60 years of maximum-security cells, with the cost of 20-40 years of geriatric care, which is enormous. For example, for LWOP, the highest max security cost in California is $176,000/inmate/yr, with their geriatric/medical unit at $80,000/inmate/yr (see California, fn 1) - much higher in today's dollars.
I am unaware of any such complete cost study (6), in any jurisdiction.
c) the pre-trial, trial and appeal costs can be exorbitant for some counties, which is why the state of Texas will provide additional funds for some of these cases and counties. Other states may do so, as well. In state and federal budgets, the death penalty is, in totality, by far, the cheapest of all the other criminal justice practices: incarceration, parole and probations.
3) What are the chances?
a) It only takes one juror to defeat a death penalty, 1 vote (8%) vs 11 (92%), likely the most undemocratic system in a constitutional republic. But it is much more than that.
In most jurisdictions, there have to be four votes per juror, for the death penalty to be given: one is the verdict trial, guilty or not guilty, the other, the sentencing trial, with three various conditions which must be met for a death sentence. With a guilty verdict, that means all 36 votes (3 times 12 jurors) must be against the murderer, for there to be a death sentence, meaning only 1 vote (3%) can overrule 35 votes (97%), inclusive of the verdict stage, prosecutors must win all 48 out of 48 votes, in order for the death penalty to prevail, with only 1 vote (2%) prevailing over 47 (98%) to deny the death penalty.
There is a reason the death penalty is so, rarely, sought. Why do they seek it? When justice demands it and the evidence supports it.
See Texas Death Penalty Procedures (7).
b) This is why I have advocated for a 9-3 vote to qualify for death. The guilty verdict, still, must be unanimous. I consider the sanction to be, somewhat, opinion, not fact and that it is not difficult to get 1 anti-death penalty person, lying to get onto a jury, or 1-3 rational outliers, which is why I prefer 9-3. Florida has an 8-4 juror vote to be sentenced to death with, again, the guilty finding must be unanimous, with the 8-4 or greater (9-3 to 12-0), against the convicted murderer, for a death sentence.
c) Nationally, nearly 43% of death row cases are removed from death row by appeals or other removals. which goes to 49%, if including deaths that are not by execution. (8). If you review Pennsylvania, California, Connecticut, Kansas and New Jersey, you can see how the judiciary kills the death penalty.
4) Death sentences/executions protect and save innocent lives, in six ways, better than does LWOP.
a) Five ways: Enhanced due process, enhanced incapacitation and enhanced probability (in three ways), save additional innocents, over LWOP (9). Not, rationally nor factually disputed.
b) Enhanced deterrence is challenged, but prevails with fact checking, vetting and critical thinking, as detailed (9,10).
Depending upon all of the circumstances, I consider 1 capital murder, with solid evidence, a go for a death penalty trial. Why? I find it the only just outcome, for some cases.
======
The Catholic Church & The Death Penalty
13 (15) Factual Errors: 2018 CCC 2267 amendment
30 Examples: How Death Penalty Abolitionists Value Murderers More Than Their Innocent Victims:
AKA - Full Rebuttal of Sir Richard Branson & His Death Penalty Comments
======
5) How Badly Can Some Prosecutors Treat Victim Survivors
There may be worse cases but, for me, it could, hardly, get worse.
There have been, at least two, high profile death penalty cases, in Texas, serial and mass murders, where the prosecutors told the victim survivors, the media and all of us that they would fail with a death penalty case because they could not prove the "future dangerousness" of that murderer. What they, intentionally, left out is that, by case law, the crimes, by themselves, can prove that future danger, which, in both of those cases, it was, easily, proven. Despicable.
Adding insult to injury, all death penalty reporters in Texas know that and none of them reported it, joining in the betrayal. Why? Saving murderers lives is more important than ethics.
There is no other reason.
6) Justice and Mercy
In a system, such as that in the US, the death penalty cannot be sought for hatred or revenge (11), but, instead, for the most just sanction.
In the religious sphere, there are these:
The Death Penalty: Mercy, Expiation, Redemption & Salvation
Romano Amerio: Some opposing capital punishment ". . . go on to assert that a life should not be ended because that would remove the possibility of making expiation, is to ignore the great truth that capital punishment is itself expiatory."
and
7b) "Judaism's Pro-Death Penalty Tradition", Steven Plaut, PhD, Haifa University, Apr. 23, 2004 article for JewishPress.com
"It is for this moral reason that traditional Judaism unambiguously endorses the death penalty for premeditated murder ."
In Closing
When judges, prosecutors and defense counsel work in a responsible, timely, fashion, pre trial, trial and within appeals, it adds a tiny bit of mercy for the loved ones of those innocents murdered.
It is so little to ask for, with far too little delivered, on purpose. Do better.
By actions (12), the anti-death penalty mantra is:
"We are so cruel to murder victim survivors, you must end the death penalty"
I hope this will be helpful in your meetings with the prosecutors.
======
The "Research" (12) rebuts all major anti-death penalty claims. If you have any questions, I am at your service.
May God bless all of you. I am so sorry that your loved one(s) were taken from you.
If you wish to speak to some fellow survivors who have been through this process, just let me know.
Most sincerely, Dudley Sharp
FN
1) See Virginia within
Saving Costs with The Death Penalty
The 113 executions is an update
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/02/death-penalty-cost-saving-money.html
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/02/death-penalty-cost-saving-money.html
2) JUDGES AS JACKASSES: DEATH PENALTY
Judges Responsible For Grossly Uneven Executions
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/11/judges-responsible-for-grossly-uneven.html
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/11/judges-responsible-for-grossly-uneven.html
3) The two scholars, Scheidegger and Cassell, who wrote this, could not be more accomplished in law and with their concern for innocent victims and their survivors (section III, in the brief). I have known them for many years and have trusted their knowledge and wisdom, which have never failed.
NOTE: They are representing the family members of the murder victim and the Oklahoma District Attorneys Assoc. AGAINST Oklahoma's Attorney General.
No. 22-7466, IN THE Supreme Court of the United States RICHARD GLOSSIP, Petitioner, vs. STATE OF OKLAHOMA, Respondents. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE OF VICTIM FAMILY MEMBERS DEREK VAN TREESE, DONNA VAN TREESE, AND ALANA MILETO, AND THE OKLAHOMA DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION IN OPPOSITION TO THE PETITION
4) Table 12, page 17, Capital Punishment, 2020, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Dec 2021
5) Justice Breyer's Errors in Death Penalty Assessment
6) Death Penalty Costs vs Life Without Parole Costs: Study Protocol
7) Texas Death Penalty Procedures
8) Table 4, page 20, Capital Punishment, 2013, Bureau of Justice Statistics, revised Dec 2014,
9) The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives
10) Deterrence, Death Penalties & Executions
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2019/04/deterrence-death-penalties-executions.html
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2019/04/deterrence-death-penalties-executions.html
11) The Death Penalty: Neither Hatred nor Revenge
12) Anti Victim/Anti Death Penalty Movement
and
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.
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
7 pro death penalty experts are detailed
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
======
Victim Services
Victims' Voices
======
Partial CV
Saturday, June 24, 2023
Sam Bassett – Cameron Todd Willingham
originally published 10/17/2009 (1)
To: Sam Bassett, Former Chairman, Texas Forensic Science Commission
Reply to Sam Bassett – Cameron Todd Willingham – MSNBC’s HARDBALL (below)
From: Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom
Dear Mr. Bassett:
Thank you for your reply (below).
It would have been simple and important for you to say that there is already a contradictory report to Beyler, from the Corsicana FD.
It would have been simple and important for you to say that Beyler never said the Willingham fire wasn’t arson and never said it was accidental.
Based upon worldwide media reports, that would have cleared up much confusion.
Many, like you, are sick of the vitriol over the guilt and innocence arguments. It would have been the ideal time for you to correct Barry Scheck, publicly, for his blatantly unsupported claim that ‘There can no longer be any doubt that an innocent person (Willingham) has been executed.” Innocence Project Co-Director Barry Scheck says. (1)
In the spirit of clarity, will you, now, issue a statement covering those three issues?
You are, now, in a unique position to bring more reason to this discussion. I hope you choose to do so.
Later note: No surprise, as of March 2024, he has not, which should tell you all you need to know, as to why Gov. Perry took him off the board.
Sincerely, Dudley Sharp
(1) The Innocence Project, http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/2149.php Also see: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barry-scheck/innocent-but-executed_b_272327.html
======
A Complete Compilation:
Cameron Todd Willingham: Media Meltdown & the Death Penalty
When Media & Anti-death Penalty Advocates Are the Same
and
A Repudiation of Journalism, by Journalists?
The Society of Professional Journalists & The Sigma Delta Chi Award:
======
In a message dated 10/15/2009 10:00:05 P.M. Central Daylight Time, SBassett@mbfc.com writes:
Dear Mr. Sharp:
Thank you for your comments. Unlike you, I am a novice to these shows and must say that I’m not used to the back and forth format of having to try to deal with a complex topic in a 3-6 minute window.
Most of my trial work involves several hours and/or days of testimony, cross examination, arguments and the like so I hope you’ll give me some latitude in this= new arena.
Having said that, I appreciate your comments and you should know that I am not an opponent of the death penalty and I represent criminal defendants in my criminal law practice and often represent victims of crime in my family law practice.
One of my great disappointments about recent developments in the Forensic Science Commission is the vitriolic arguments in the case about guilt or innocence as well as the death penalty.
The Commission was committed to findings relating only to the forensic science in the case.
Unfortunately, that good work has been interrupted and/or stopped by recent actions taken by the Governor.
We had only begun our work and had solicited input from the State Fire Marshall’s Office as well as other law enforcement entities who certainly would have held different perspectives than Dr. Beyler.
It was only after a full consideration of same that we were going to render our final report, if I had been permitted to continue.
I was fully aware that the criminal case involved evidence having nothing to do with forensic science and that was one of many reasons I stood for the proposition that the commission would not comment on innocent or guilt issues.
1) http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/10/17/re-reply-to-sam-bassett-cameron-todd-willingham-msnbcs-hardball/
======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
======
Victim Services
Victims' Voices
======
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, herein
======
Partial CV
Willingham: Have you read the Beyler report? It could, hardly, be worse.
Originally published 10/3/2009 (1)
Cameron Todd Willingham:
Have you read the Beyler report? (2) It could, hardly, be worse.
Have you read the Beyler report? (2) It could, hardly, be worse.
From: Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom
Here is an, almost, unbelievable example of how bad it can be:
p 46 “The appearance of brown stain on the porch at the front door was taken as an indicator of an accelerant spill which was ignited to start the fire. “AC Fogg did not consider or explain how this could be true in light of the early eyewitnesses who saw no fire on the porch or at the front door.”
Dr. Beyler, try this. There could have been multiple locations where the fire was started, not just one. Willingham lit the fire from the porch, as the fire traveled inside, the fire died down on the porch, as the accelerant was consumed. The fire travels down the hall into the children’s room, the fire expands in the bedroom as it ignites all of the flammables.
Thereby none of the early witnesses saw the fire on the porch.
The brown stains on the porch had nothing to do with arson, but are representative of formerly spilled lighter fluid, which would be consistent with the number of lighter fluid containers found on the porch.
The fire was started inside the house, in the hallway and burned toward the twins and away from the front of the house.
All the early witnesses said there was little visible smoke and no visible fire.
How is Beyler unaware of that?
Everyone who has used lighter fluid in grilling, knows that if you spill some on concrete or wood and it becomes ignited, it’ll burn for a few seconds and is all but invisible and then it just goes out when the source is burned away.
Beyler is well aware of all those possibilities, as to why none of the early witnesses saw any fire.
Beyler really is THAT bad.
======
A Complete Compilation:
Cameron Todd Willingham: Media Meltdown & the Death Penalty
When Media & Anti-death Penalty Advocates Are the Same
and
A Repudiation of Journalism, by Journalists?
The Society of Professional Journalists & The Sigma Delta Chi Award:
======
Secondly, Beyler has no idea how long the fire had been burning, prior to the “early witnesses”, yet, Beyler presumes, with NO evidence, that these eyewitnesses should have seen fire on the porch or doorway.
Dr. Beyler, just because they didn’t see a fire, doesn’t mean there wasn’t one, set on the porch, earlier, when Willingham lit it.
Reread the above.
Beyler appears to be creating alleged evidence to exonerate Willingham.
It makes no reasonable sense and conflicts with any notion of a scientific method.
Then, Beyler presents this:
p46 “The only basis proffered for Willingham as the fire setter was that had the hallway been subjected to an accelerant spill, he could not have escaped without serious lower body injuries.”
If Willingham was on the porch when he lit the fire, how and why would he have serious lower body injuries going through the hallway?
If Willingham decided to stay in the house and travel through the hallway, after he lit the fire, the fire could have remained very small in the hallway, when only a small amount of accelerant was used.
There would be no reason for him to suffer any lower body burns.
Willingham had several options to leave the house without coming near to the fire.
Beyler is aware of all of those options, but failed to mention them.
Is Beyler a moronic defense attorney or an arson expert?
As I have stated, repeatedly, depend on more evidence not less and wait upon rebuttals, prior to reaching a final conclusion.
Read everything available.
======
Texas State Fire Marshall's Response to Dr. Beyler's Report
Exhibit 12, computer counter 218-226 out of 934
Exhibit 13, computer counter 227-242 out of 934
Texas State Fire Marshall's Response to TFSC
Exhibit 28, computer counter 457-465 out of 934
======
FN
1) http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/10/03/have-you-read-the-beyler-report-from-dudley-sharp-contact-at-bottom/
2) Beyler Report http://www.docstoc.com/docs/document-preview.aspx?doc_id=10401390
======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
======
Victim Services
Victims' Voices
======
Additional research, w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of everyone in a public policy debate
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
7 pro-death penalty experts, herein
======
Partial CV
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)