Saturday, February 23, 2013

BRUTALIZATION & THE DEATH PENALTY

Brutalization & The Death Penalty:
More Support for the Deterrent Effect
Dudley Sharp

 In an econometric study, Dr. Joanna Shepherd, an economist and law professor, found a net increase in murders or no effect in those states that execute less than 9 murderers in a 20 year period (FOOTNOTE).

 Yet, over the study period, with the use of the death penalty in the US, Prof. Shepherd found 1672 net innocent lives were saved by deterrence.

 The deterrent effect overwhelmed the brutalization effect.

 Prof. Shepherd finds that the number of lives saved would be dramatically higher with more executions.

 Prof. Shepherd finds for deterrence and that if we increase executions, in all states, to , at least, one execution every two years, we will have a huge increase in deterrence, with all states having a death penalty deterrent effect, thus saving many more innocent lives . . .  and the brutalization effect goes away.

 Those states which are concerned about saving more innocents from murder, will execute at least one murderer every two years, based upon this study.

 If states wish to sacrifice more innocents, they will execute at a lesser rate, knowingly resulting in more innocents murdered and the states would, thereby, also keep more murderers alive, thusly contributing to even more additional innocents harmed and/or murdered, because of lesser incapacitation - living murderers can and do harm and/or murder, again, executed ones do not.

 Prof. Shepherd presumes such increased murders, in those low execution states, reflects the "brutalization" effect, which is that potential murderers are so influenced by the brutality of the state, in executing murderers, that they are inspired to commit murder.

Prof. Shepherd finds that intuitive, even though her own evidence finds to the contrary.

 I find it counter intuitive, as the findings from her review confirm.

 I am unaware of any evidence or any study that finds academic support for the brutalization effect, based upon that cause, other than speculation. Are there any?

 After a thorough review of deterrence studies, Professor Samuel Cameron observed,

"The brutalization idea is not one the economists have given any credence." "We must conclude that the deterrence effect dominates the opposing brutalization effect." ("A Review of the Econometric Evidence on the Effects of Capital Punishment", The Journal of Socio-Economics, v23 n 1/2, p 197-214, 1994).

 By reason and the weight of the studies, his findings are confirmed, today.

 Prof. Shepherd also finds that "For the first few executions, however, the deterrent effect is small. Only if a state executes many people does deterrence grow;. . ."

 Even with small number of executions there is a deterrent effect. No surprise. Why she inserts "however" is a mystery. A "small" savings of innocent lives is always important, not a "however.".

 If one interprets that the brutalization effect, as described, we should conclude that as the sanction for murder becomes less severe or if there is no sanction for murders, at all, that the peace and tranquility of the state, toward murderers, will so influence potential murderers, that murders would become fewer, as those murderers and potential murderers become so influenced by the peace and tranquility of the state.

 Does anyone buy that?

 In jurisdictions where governments are especially cruel, there appears to be a brutalization effect, as described, such as by the Nazis in WWII, wherein executions were random, in the millions and targeted innocents. But, here, brutalization is based upon civilians, rightly, defending themselves against such slaughter, a very different circumstance than what is described by Shepherd.

 In the US, where the death penalty is sought very rarely, against guilty murderers and with due process protections being extraordinary, it is unreasonable to suggest a brutalization effect, based upon the states brutality so influencing potential murderers that they choose to murder, because of it.

 Texas, by far the execution leader in the US, has only executed 0.7% of their murderers since 1973. When Texas started executing, again, in 1982, that year's murder total was 2466, In 2011, it was 1126, a 54% reduction in murders. The murder rate dropped from 16.1  to 4.4, a 73% reduction.

 Dr. Shepherd's study confirms my conclusion - more executions equal greater deterrence, fewer executions results in lesser deterrence or, as she found, no deterrence or an increase in murders. The more merciful we are to murderers, the less merciful they are to the innocent -- the opposite of a brutalization effect and the opposite of Shepherd's intuition, which has no support.

 Econometric experts, that I consulted with, find that something other than brutalization is at work, in Shepherd's study. I shared those comments with Prof. Shepherd.

 We might ask: Why would potential and active murderers be so influenced by the state in such a deep philosophical manner, revealed by brutalization, but they wouldn't be more affected by the simple "you murder, we execute you?".

 Death penalty opponents, including academics, make an interesting about face on this issue, conflicting with their position that criminals are so thoughtless and impulsive that they can't be affected by the potential of negative consequences, such as executions and the deterrent effect of severe sanctions, but, then, those very same death penalty opponents see criminals as so contemplative that their criminal actions increase because those criminals are so influenced by the "brutality" of the state.

 In the context of the death penalty, as used in the US, it is absurd on its face.

 One might ask death penalty opponents and other brutalization adherents: "Is there any other government action which influences criminals in such a fashion?" Do criminals kidnap more BECAUSE the state increases incarceration rates? Do criminals give money to potential victims BECAUSE the state provides welfare to the needy?

If Prof. Shepherd's study is academically sound, which I presume it is, something other than brutalization, as described, is at work, a conclusion shared by two other academics I consulted with and whose comments I shared with Prof. Shepherd.

 Prof. Shepherd calls executions revenge, when she, as well as all, should know that the death penalty is supported for the same reasons all sanctions are, which is that they are just, appropriate and proportional, in the context of the crimes, with the added protections for the death penalty of super due process at all levels, which defines the death penalty as even more distanced from revenge than other, lesser sanctions.

 Shepherd, calling the death penalty revenge is just a standard anti death penalty claim, which has no evidentiary support, based upon how the US enforces it, with unmatched due process protections and the fact finders, be they judges and/or juries, having no connection to the victims or the defendant.

 There are no rational or factual reasons to call the death penalty revenge.

 Conclusion

 Dr. Shepherd's report is a clarion call to increase the use of the death penalty, if we want to spare more innocent lives and a warning to those who want to reduce executions or end the death penalty, that they will be sacrificing more innocent lives.

 FOOTNOTE

 "DETERRENCE VERSUS BRUTALIZATION: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT’S DIFFERING
IMPACTS AMONG STATES", Joanna M. Shepherd,
http://www.michiganlawreview.org/assets/pdfs/104/2/Shepherd.pdf

 Related topics

 --  OF COURSE THE DEATH PENALTY DETERS
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/03/of-course-death-penalty-deters.html

-- LIFE: MUCH PREFERRED OVER EXECUTION:
99.7% of murderers tells us "Give me life, not execution"
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/1...execution.html

 -- See sections C and D within
The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/0...-innocent.html

 -- "DEATH PENALTY DETERRENCE CLARIFIED"
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/1...clarified.html

 -- DETERRENCE, THE DEATH PENALTY & MURDER RATES
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/1...der-rates.html

 -- Innocents More At Risk Without Death Penalty
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/0...out-death.html

 -- "Death Penalty, Deterrence & Murder Rates: Let's be clear"
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/0...der-rates.html

-- "Deterrence & the Death Penalty: A Reply to Radelet and Lacock"
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/02/deterrence-and-the-death-penalty-a-reply-to-radelet-and-lacock.aspx

 -- DEATH PENALTY DETERRENCE: Rebuttal to Donahue and Wolfers:
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/02/death-penalty-deterrence-rebuttal-to.html
======
Victim's Voices - These are the murder victims
http://www.murdervictims.com/Voices/voices.html

Posted by at

Sunday, February 10, 2013

Saving Costs with the Death Penalty

updated 4/2024

Saving Costs with The Death Penalty
Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom

Preface

 The death penalty debate is rife with horribly inaccurate and/or misleading death penalty costs studies, some intentionally and obviously fraudulent.

It doesn't get much worse than California, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina and Maryland. Read those first.
I encourage everyone to fact check them, something that none in the media has ever done. Instead, they just pass along the standard anti-death penalty line, as is so common with other topics in this debate (1), as well.

Could all jurisdictions save money by using the death penalty, as opposed to life without parole?

Of course.

Death Penalty Costs vs Life Without Parole Costs: Study Protocol

None of the studies reflect an apples-to-apples comparison of all death penalty costs to all life without parole costs . . .  not even close. 

This does. Use it.

Death Penalty Costs vs Life Without Parole Costs: Study Protocol


Life Without Parole Costs

Note that some of the cost studies will compare death row cell costs to general population cell costs - it is intentional deception. We all know it will be increased security or maximum-security cells.

 Most of the cost studies, intentionally, avoid both geriatric care and maximum-security cells for death penalty qualified LWOP cases (2).

 In California, the geriatric/medical care unit costs $80,000/yr/inmate, with the most secure maximum-security costing $176,000/inmate/yr (see California, below).

LWOP, death eligible crimes, can be incarcerated for 40-60 years, with geriatric care lasting from 20-49 years. Because of lifestyle, geriatric care can begin at age 50 for criminals.

 In current year dollars, they are, considerably, more expensive than what I stated.

 With 40-60 years of LWOP, inclusive of pre-trial, trial and appeals that would be way more expensive than the average death penalty case or any responsible death penalty protocol, as Virginia, below.

The Virginia Example

 Virginia executes within 7.1 years of sentencing, on average, with full appeals, and has executed 76% of those so sentenced (113 out of 149), within the modern death penalty era, post Gregg v Georgia (1976) (3,4).

 Virginia's October 1, 2015 execution occurred after exactly 5 years of full appeals.

 All states could do that, or similar, and save money over LWOP, with responsible management.

Cost studies

It doesn't get much worse than California, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina and Maryland. Read those first.

Texas

 Contrary to consistent urban legend, an academic review, by a neutral academic, found that the verifiable costs in the oft quoted "Texas cost study" actually found the death penalty was cheaper than a life sentence (5).

I have told the Dallas Morning News (DMN), for many years, to stop using their totally inaccurate cost review. They still use it. DMN found that it costs $2.3 million per average death penalty case (for 5 cases), more than 3 times more expensive than a $750,000 life sentence. (C. Hoppe, "Executions Cost Texas Millions," The Dallas Morning News, March 8, 1992, 1A)

 Problem is that DMN looked at the pre-trial, trial, incarceration and appellate costs of the death penalty, but only the incarceration costs of life WITH PAROLE ELIGIBILITY.

News irresponsibility, again.

 That study looked a 5 death row cases. Texas has had 1500 since 1973.

 North Carolina

Contrary to consistent media and academic misinformation, the 1993 Duke study actually finds that LWOP is more expensive that the death penalty (6a).

This is a perfect example of how bad things are in academia and media. This cost review has been quoted extensively, in academia, media and in anti-death penalty literature. Every time I have seen it cited, it has been, blatantly, misleading and in error. Not once have I found any correction from the authors, academia or media.

 An updated Duke study (2004) speculated that ending the death penalty might save each North Carolinian $0.003/day (6b).

 The FLORIDA Example

 What happens when an average of 29 years of appeals turns into 10 years for appeals?

 Florida Adjusted Total Costs
Death penalty cases $500,000
Life without parole cases $1,953, 000
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/12/blog-post.html

 This is only a review of three cases, but represents the only effort at truly evaluating individual case costs in Florida, as opposed to some nonsensical reviews.

 Note that a 10 year average for appeals, prior to execution, is 40% longer than the time in Virginia.


Nevada's Death Penalty Cost Study: How Bad Is It?


Death Penalty Costs: California


Ernie Goss' Nebraska Death Penalty Cost Study: How Bad Is It?
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2016/08/nebraskas-death-penalty-cost-study-how.html


 DEATH PENALTY COSTS: COLORADO
Cost, Deception & the Death Penalty: The Colorado Experience
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/05/cost-deception-death-penalty-colorado.html
Problems: Utah Death Penalty Cost Study
Kansas 

 Yes, the "study" found that death penalty cases cost 70%, or about $500,000 more, per median case cost than for the equivalent non death penalty murder case (7).

 However, the foundation was this: " . . .there was nothing we could look at to verify the accuracy of any of the data assembled for this report." (page 2) (7).

"Actual cost figures for death penalty and non-death penalty cases in Kansas don't exist." (page 10) (7).

 On pages 29 and 31 the study discussed methods of saving money.


New Mexico & New Jersey

 For anyone that paid any attention to New Jersey or New Mexico, you know that neither cost nor the truth played a role in either states abandonment of the death penalty.

New Mexico

New Mexico wrongly used the North Carolina cost study (6a) to determine that death penalty costs were more expensive, the opposite of the North Carolina's study's findings. Obviously, an exercise in inaccuracy. North Carolina's death penalty costs having nothing to do with New Mexico's. New Mexico didn't realize that cost study actually found life without parole to be more expensive (8). There was no effort in New Mexico (8) to fact check the NC study. 

 New Jersey

New Jersey conceded they could not, accurately, evaluate costs.

 Issue 2, page 39, NEW JERSEY DEATH PENALTY STUDY COMMISSION REPORT, JANUARY 2007, 
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/committees/dpsc_final.pdf

and

"DEAD WRONG: NJ Death Penalty Study Commission", Dudley Sharp, 2007,

"The New Jersey Death Penalty Commission made significant errors within their findings. The evidence, contrary to the Commission's findings, was so easy to obtain that it appears either willful ignorance and/or deception guided their report."

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

 "Death Penalty Cost Studies: Saving Costs over LWOP"
http://homicidesurvivors.candothathosting.com/2010/03/21/death-penalty-cost-studies-saving-costs-over-lwop/

 Cost Savings: The Death Penalty
http://homicidesurvivors.candothathosting.com/2009/05/07/cost-savings-the-death-penalty/
 
======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
http://prodpquotes.info/ 
====== 

1) 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 Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
7 pro death penalty experts included

 (2)  INCREDIBLE COSTS: LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/03/incredible-costs-life-without-parole.html

 (3) Path to execution swifter, more certain in Va., FRANK GREEN, Richmond Post-Dispatch, December 4, 2011 Page: A1 Section: News Edition: Final
http://www.timesdispatch.com/archive/path-to-execution-swifter-more-certain-in-va/article_6a4bf4fc-bff8-52b5-be5b-7d2598439957.html

 (4) Wikipeadia updates these executions. Be sure and fact check wikipedia. As of Dec 2015, the Virginia death execution information is accurate, Read the links for each murderer.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_executed_in_Virgina  

 (5) Lethal Injection: Capital Punishment in Texas During the Modern Era, By Jonathan Roger Sorensen, Rocky LeAnn Pilgrim, 2006, U of Texas Press, p154-156
http://books.google.com/books?id=IQJtCjhdGeUC&pg=PA154&lpg=PA154&ots=Mtji7SSu0v&dq=cost+%22death+penalty%22+Dallas+morning+news%22&ie=ISO-8859-1&output=html

 (6) (a) "Duke (North Carolina) Death Penalty Cost Study (1993): Let's be honest"
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/06/duke-north-carolina-death-penalty-cost.html
(7) "Performance Office Report: Costs Incurred for Death penalty Cases", A K-Goal Audit of the Department of Corrections, by the Legislative Division of Post Audit - A Report to the Legislative Post Audit Committee, December 2003

 (8) New Mexico Death Penalty Costs
"Rebuttal to Governor Richardson - Repeal of the Death Penalty in New Mexico"
http://homicidesurvivors.candothathosting.com/2009/03/20/rebuttal-to-governor-richardson-repeal-of-the-death-penalty-in-new-mexico/

"Why did Gov. Richardson repeal the death penalty? His legacy"
http://homicidesurvivors.candothathosting.com/2009/04/01/why-did-gov-richardson-repeal-the-death-penalty-his-legacy/

Posted by at

Thursday, February 07, 2013

DEATH PENALTY DETERRENCE: Rebuttal to Donahue and Wolfers

DEATH PENALTY DETERRENCE: Rebuttal to Donahue and Wolfers (D&W)
Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom

RE: Uses and Abuses of Empirical Evidence in the Death Penalty Debate, John J. Donohue & Justin Wolfers, Vol 58, Issue 3, Stan. L. Rev. 791 Article, Dec 2005

——–

“Had (D&W’s) paper been subjected to the normal blind peer review process in an authoritative economic journal it is highly unlikely that it would have survived intact , if at all. ”

“D&W’s unsupported claim that the appropriate variable in studies of deterrence using these borrowed tools from portfolio analysis is the amount or level of homicides in the respective jurisdictions. This claim is without theoretical basis or empirical precedent. ”

“With regard to DW’s specific comments on our two papers (Cloninger & Marchesini, 2001 & 2006) we find very little requiring defense. Implicit in their critique, and explicitly stated in private communications, DW were able to replicate our results based on data we furnished, at their request, as well as data they acquired independently. ”

“(D&W’s) Quibbling over numerous and sometimes meaningless statistical issues obscures the picture painted by the cumulative effect of the nearly dozen studies published since the turn of the 21st century.”

“Using differing methodologies and data sets at least five groups of scholars each working independently (and often without knowledge of the others) have arrived at the same conclusion, there is significant and robust evidence that executions deter some homicides. While there may be merit in some of (D&W’s) specific criticisms, none addresses the totality of the collection of studies. The probability that chance alone explains the coincidence of these virtually simultaneous conclusions is negligible.”

From: “Reflections on a Critique”, Dale O Cloninger and Roberto Marchesini, forthcoming Applied Economic Letters (likely 2007)

—–

(2006) ” . . . D&W do not even report Zimmerman’s “preferred” results correctly, and then proceed by carrying on this error throughout the remainder of their critique.”(pg8)

“It is shown that D&W made a number of serious misinterpretations in their review of Zimmerman’s study and that none of the analyses put forward by D&W (which ostensibly refute Zimmerman’s original results and conclusions) hold up under scrutiny. (pg8)

” . . . D&W’s method of interpreting their results is not consistent with that proscribed by the received econometric literature on randomized testing . . .”. “As such, D&W’s interpretation of their randomized test in itself does not (and cannot) reasonably lead one to conclude that Zimmerman’s estimates suggesting a deterrent effect of capital punishment are spurious.” (pg12)

” . . . D&W do not appear to have interpreted their randomization test in any meaningful fashion.” (pg14)

” . . . (Donohue and Wolfers’ “D&W”) criticisms of Zimmerman’s analysis are misrepresentative, moot or unsupportable in terms of the analyses they perform.” “It is shown that Zimmerman’s published empirical results, or the conclusions drawn from them, are not in any way refuted by D&W’s critique.” (pg 3)

“This later estimate suggests that each execution deters 14 murders on average . . .”. (pg 7)

“Of course, (D&W’s) omission tends to create a strong impression that Zimmerman’s analysis ‘purports to find reliable relationships between executions and homicides’, when his actual conclusions regarding the deterrent effect of capital punishment are far more agnostic.” (pg10)

” . . . the state clustering correction employed by D&W may not be producing statistically meaningful results.” (pg16)

“And while D&W once lamented that recent econometric studies purporting to demonstrate a deterrent effect of capital punishment yield ‘heat rather than light’, as shown herein, their criticisms of Zimmerman (2004) tend to yield ‘smoke rather than fire’.”(pg26)

From: Zimmerman, Paul R., “On the Uses and ‘Abuses’ of Empirical Evidence in
the Death Penalty Debate” (November 2006). ssrn(dot)com/abstract=948424

======
Death Penalty Deterrence: Defended & Advanced
=========

(2006) “(D&W’s) analysis shows that attempts to make the deterrence effect disappear are ineffective.” (p 16)

— The criticism of our studies is flawed and does not effect the strength of the measured deterrent effect.
— Existence of the death penalty, in law, has a statistically significant impact on reducing murders. (p 23)
— Execution rates show significant impact in reducing murders. (p 13 & 23)
— Death row commutations, and other removals, increase murders. (p13 & 23)

From: “The Impact of Incentives On Human Behavior: Can we Make It Disappear? The Case of the Death Penalty”, Naci H. Mocan, R. Kaj Grittings, NBER Working Paper, 10/06, www(dot)nber.org/papers/w12631

————–

Abstract: The academic debate over the deterrent effect of capital punishment has intensified again with a major policy outcome at stake. About two dozen empirical studies have recently emerged that explore the issue. Donohue and Wolfers (2005) claim to have examined the recent studies and shown the evidence is not robust to specification changes. We argue that the narrow scope of their study does not warrant this claim.

2007 – Hashem Dezhbakhsh & Paul H. Rubin
From the ‘Econometrics of Capital Punishment’ to the ‘Capital Punishment’ of Econometrics: On the Use and Abuse of Sensitivity Analysis (September 2007). Emory Law and Economics Research Paper No. 07-18, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1018533
2010 Applied Economics

“From the ‘econometrics of capital punishment’ to the ‘capital punishment’of econometrics: on the use and abuse of sensitivity analysis”

Hashem Dezhbakhsha; Paul H. Rubina, a Department of Economics, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA   First published on: 21 October 2010

Related Issues


======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
http://prodpquotes.info/ 
====== 
======
 
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
======
 
Partial CV
Posted by at

Friday, February 01, 2013

WOMEN & THE DEATH PENALTY

WOMEN & THE DEATH PENALTY: 

ARE WOMEN OVER-REPRESENTED ON DEATH ROW?
From:  Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom   
 
EXECUTIONS

8,218 men were sent to death row (1973-2010), with 1222 executed or 15% (1). 174 women were sent to death row since 1973, with 12 executed or 7% (1). 
 
If only 3.8% fewer of the total men and 4% more of the total women, sentenced to death were executed, that would be exactly the same execution rate - 11%.  A 3.8%-4% disparity rate is tiny, particularly, over the 37-year period, 1973-2010.
 
DEATH SENTENCES

Only 2% of the jurors' votes can change the sentence from death to life without parole (2).

Women are much less likely to commit all crimes, inclusive of murder, than are men. When combining murder, with the secondary aggravating circumstances, that create a death penalty offense, the disparity between men and women grows, tremendously.
 
In addition, both the higher aggravated level of the capital murder and the volume  of the criminal record, of the capital murderer, have well known effects upon increasing the probability of being given a death sentence, with women having lower levels, for both.

As a general and dominant rule, capital offences are murders plus secondary aggravating circumstances, such as rape, robbery and/or burglary.

Women committing rape/murders appears to be near 0%.

Men committed 476,937 rapes, robberies and burglaries, women 47,357 or a 10:1 ratio. From 1976-94, men committed 7 times as many murders as women, or 7:1. (BJS, Sourcebook ‘94, BJS ‘95, tb.4.9 and 3.22).

It may be, statistically, predictable that men are, by a 70:1 ratio (10:1 X 7:1), more likely to be on death row than are women. I multiplied the murder ratios with the secondary aggravating circumstance ratios to get the 70:1, This is not the proper way to come up with an accurate result.

However, it does provide a broad ballpark of what the ratio might be, if a detailed study was undertaken.

As of 12/31/10 (1): 3100 men and 58 women were on death row, or a ratio of 53:1, with woman making up 1.8% of the total.

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.

In fact, the ratio of 70:1 means that we would predict that men would be 98.6% of those on death row, women 1.4%, or a lower percentage than women, currently, on death row.

My analysis is much more proper than what anti-death penalty Prof. Victor Streib does, which is to, wrongly, make the comparison within the context of all murders, when he should be using only death penalty eligible murders, as he well knows.

Streib is the most noted expert on women and the death penalty and Streib is very aware of what murders should be used in this evaluation. He just doesn't use them.

Streib writes:

“while women comprise 13 percent of U.S. murder arrests, they account for only 2 percent of the death sentences, and make up only 1.5 percent of all persons presently on death row.” 
That 1.5% is nearly exact with the 1.4% I predict within that 70:1 ratio.

Strieb's “only 2 percent" is higher than we would predict.

Streib wrongly uses “murder” arrests, which are not “capital” murders, but all murders. He is not even speaking of the proper crimes for a death sentence. 
 
Strieb is aware of the intentional error he is presenting. He is anti-death penalty and is an accepted expert on women and the death penalty. 
 
Media, very likely, never questions nor corrects his obvious error. You might ask "How often does Strieb correct it?"

The correct context is capital murders, not all murders, as he and media well know.

I say that only about 10% of all murders are death penalty eligible. Some say 15-20%.

In other words, if women account for 13% of murder arrests, we would expect them to represent 1.3% of those on death row, nearly the exact percentage Streib states we should expect. Again, nearly exact with my 1.4% predicted with that 70:1 ratio.

When using capital murders, the number of women on death row are what we would expect, if not more than expected.

Currently, women make up 1.8% of those on death row, more that what we might predict.

That 70:1 ratio is looking pretty close, maybe just as it should.

Currently, there are about 58 women on death row, certainly within any reasonable margin of error, particularly given any random chance disparity in sentencing, as well as the crucial differences within and between all cases.

Streib was wrong as he knows, to use all murders. I was correct to look at capital murders.

Properly evaluating capital murders, it turns out that the 1.3%-2% of Streib is not only where the death row numbers should be, they also match up surprisingly well with my rough 70:1 ratio and the 53:1 ratio which we have, today (2010).

 
1) Capital Punishment, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2011
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cp10st.pdf

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

also review

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

======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
http://prodpquotes.info/ 
====== 
======
 
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
======
 
Partial CV
Posted by at

Monday, January 21, 2013

PRO LIFE: THE DEATH PENALTY

updated Oct 2024

PRO LIFE: THE DEATH PENALTY
From:  Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom   

The "pro-life" term was, originally, identified with the anti-abortion movement, which still seems the most appropriate context.

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

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

Death Penalty: Pro Life Since Genesis 9:6  
 
SUMMARY
 
There are two types of pro-life considerations. One is religious, the other secular and both support the other, in regard to the death penalty being pro-life. 
 
I.  Religious
 
For 4,500 years (biblical timeline), the death penalty has had a pro-life religious position (1), staring with Genesis 9:6. Anti-death penalty teachings did not occur, in major Christian denominations, until the 1950's, with the Roman Catholic Church not joining that chorus until 2018 (2).
 
Did the bible or basic theology, suddenly change? Of course not (3), as reviewed, in detail (3).
 
Through today and for more than 2000 years, there has been Christian New Testament support for the death penalty, from Genesis to Revelation, Jesus to St. Dismas, The Holy Ghost to Popes, Saints, Doctors and Fathers of the Church, church leadership, biblical scholars and theologians that, in breadth and depth, overwhelms any teachings to the contrary (2) particularly those wrongly dependent upon secular concerns such as defense of society, the poor standards of criminal justice systems in protecting the innocent and the alleged revelation of newly found dignity, which is 4500 years old.(2).

It must be noted that Pope Francis wants to end the death penalty, life imprisonment and solitary confinement, which means many more innocents will be harmed and murdered, by those known unjust aggressors, of which we are all, very, aware:
 
II. Secular
 
The death penalty/executions protect innocents, in six ways, better than does life without parole (LWOP) (4): enhanced due process, enhanced incapacitation, enhanced probability, in three ways, and enhanced deterrence (4):

a) Enhanced due process - No knowledgeable party disputes that the death penalty has the greatest of due process protections (5), what the US Supreme Court has called "super due process", meaning that actual innocents sentenced to LWOP are more likely to die as innocents in prison, by a huge margin, than are innocents likely to be executed. Even many death penalty opponents, publicly, agree. It is not, factually, disputed.
 
b) Enhanced incapacitation - Living murderers are, infinitely, more likely to harm and murder, again, than are executed murderers - No one disagrees.
       Since 1973, about 20,000 ADDITIONAL innocents have been murdered by those KNOWN murderers that we have allowed to murder, again - recidivist murderers. 
      We MIGHT have proof of factually innocents executed, as recently as 1915.

c) Enhanced  Probability: 
1) 4000-5000 persons die, annually, within US criminal custody. We execute about 30 murderers/yr. By numbers and by lesser due process, we know that many more innocents will die in non-death penalty custody, than by execution, by a huge margin, further supported:
       a) As some death penalty opponents, now, argue that LWOP is more cruel than execution, this takes on greater importance, as their position is to a) support the more cruel sanction, LWOP  and with 2) all non-death penalty, in custody deaths with much higher numbers than by execution, thereby preferring more innocent deaths;
       b) Since 1973, we have had about 500,000 ADDITIONAL innocents murdered by those KNOWN criminals that we have allowed to harm, again - recidivist criminals.
       . . . . and as rapes, robberies and other assaults are some 7 times greater than murders, such would equate to . . .
      c) Since 1973, 3.5 million ADDITIONAL innocents raped, robbed or otherwise assaulted by those KNOWN criminals that we have allowed to harm, again - recidivist criminals.
       d) We might, BIG MIGHT, have proof of innocents executed, as recently as 1915. 
      
Where are the innocents at risk, by the hugest of margins?

       e) Executed criminals do not harm/murder, again,

2)  Murderers have three choices: 
a) they can stay the same, very bad; 
b) they can become worse, very bad indeed; or 
c) they can become better, which can mean, still pretty bad, all the way to sainthood, 

. . . meaning the probability of remaining a danger is much higher than the probability of becoming much better, or a continuing threat while in prison, after escape or after release.

3) If the death penalty is abolished and murderers can, only, receive a maximum sentence of LWOP, then they can murder as many as they wish, with no additional punishment.
                  
Since 1973, for some perspective, we have had 900,000 murders and 60 million violent crimes, THAT WE KNOW OF. In the US, only 25% of crimes result in conviction.
 
It's not hard to see where the innocents are at risk, unless a fact avoiding anti-death penalty person.
 
d) Enhanced deterrence - All severe sanctions deter some. Never has the deterrent effect of the death penalty or any other severe sanction been negated. They cannot be.

The death penalty/execution is the most severe sanction. 
 
Why do nearly 100% of murderers do all they can to avoid the death penalty and get life, instead? No, those murderers were not deterred, at least not that time, but they reflect the same basic nature that potential murderers and the rest of us do, which is:

Life is preferred over death. Death is feared more than life. What we prefer more, deters less. What we fear more, deters more. Rationally, indisputable.

The death penalty/executions are an enhanced deterrent over LWOP. 
 
Nobel Prize Laureate 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.” (Does Death Penalty Save Lives? A New Debate, by Adam Liptak, NY Times, NOV. 18, 2007)

"(Becker) is the most important social scientist in the past 50 years (1964-2014) (The New York Times May 5, 2014). Becker was an economist, sociologist and empiricist at the U of Chicago.
 
Would you rather "risk" saving more innocent lives or risk sacrificing more innocent lives?  . . .  those are your two choices.
 
FN

1)  Pro Life: The Death Penalty
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/01/pro-life-death-penalty.html

2) a) The Catholic Church & The Death Penalty
13 (15) Factual Errors: 2018 CCC 2267 amendment
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2022/02/7-factual-errors-2018-ccc-2267-amendment.html 

  b)  Saint/Pope John Paul II marks the beginning of the Catholic Church's disastrous anti-death penalty run, 1995 forward, intentionally, avoiding the most basic of reason, research, fact checking and vetting, as detailed, throughout:

Pope John Paul II: His death penalty errors 
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2022/04/october-1997-pope-john-paul-ii-his.html 

3) Here are over 4000 pro death penalty philosophical, biblical and theological references, which either
a) support the death penalty or which
b) refute the biblical and theological objections to the death penalty.

Religion and The Death Penalty
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2022/03/religion-death-penalty.html 

4a) The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives

5)  a) Texas Death Penalty Procedures

b)  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

more
 
The Woman Caught in Adultery, the Death Penalty & John 8:2-11
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-woman-caught-in-adultery-death.html
 
Pre-Constantine Death Penalty Support
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2014/01/pre-constantine-death-penalty-support.html
 
Judaism & the Death Penalty
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2014/02/jews-israel-death-penalty.html
 
New Testament Death Penalty Support Overwhelming
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2014/01/new-testament-death-penalty-support.html
 
Quakers & The Death Penalty
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/10/quakers-death-penalty.html
 
A Refutation of the ELCA Social Statement on the Death Penalty
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/10/a-refutation-of-elca-social-statement.html
 
The Death Row "Exonerated"/"Innocent" Frauds 
 71-83% Error Rate in Death Row "Innocent" Claims, Well Known Since 2000 
 
 
======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victims' families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
http://prodpquotes.info/ 
====== 
======
 
Research, with sources, fact checking, vetting & critical thinking, as required of anyone within a public policy debate and which rebut all anti-death penalty claims.
 
Most will realize that the media has been using only anti-death penalty claims and , then, failed to fact check, vet, not use critical thinking, with that research, while avoiding all pro-death penalty research and experts, for decades. How do I know most will realize this? Because they wouldn't have seen any of this, prior:
 
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
(7 pro-death penalty experts listed)
Posted by at

Thursday, December 27, 2012

DEATH PENALTY COSTS: FLORIDA


Florida Adjusted Total Costs
Death penalty cases $500,000
Life without parole cases $1,953, 000

 As Virginia averages 7.1 years of appeals prior to execution, there is no doubt that Florida can do it within 10 years, unless all of the obstructionists are immovable.

 Let's presume Florida can be both accountable and responsible and can complete appeals by adding a whopping 41% more time than Virginia uses.

 That will save, on average $450,000/case on incarceration time/costs (1) and likely $50,000 or more to litigation time/costs, or a total of $500,000 per case, bringing the costs of the average death penalty case to $500,000, providing 5 1/2 years for state appeals and 4 1/2 years for federal appeals.

 Only obstructionists can fail to make this work.

 That would be considerably cheaper than lifers, who will cost about $1,953,000 total, or $1,453,000 more expensive than a death penalty case.

 LWOP cost calculations.

 Lifers would spend an average of 46 years in prison, at a cost of $1,104,000 at $24,000/yr, NOT including pre trial, trial, appeals or geriatric care costs.

 Presuming average incarceration at age 28, with an average 46 yr prison stay, dying at age 74 (2), geriatric care costs likely add $41, 000/yr (2) for 19 yrs., age 55-74 (1) ($779, 000 more), with all trial and appeals costs averaging at least $70,000/case (3).

 Of course, present valuing the cases will bring the costs closer together.

 These costs do not include a cost benefit of the death penalty, which is a plea bargain to a LWOP sentence, only possible with the presence of the death penalty. Therefore, if you save all trial and appeals cost in those plea bargained LWOP cases, it shows up as a credit to the death penalty side of the ledger, even more pronounced, if you present value the costs, which, at $70,000 per LWOP case, would equate to a full credit if present valued. a significant cost reduction for death penalty cases.

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

MANY ADDITIONAL STATE COST REVIEWS

DEATH PENALTY COST: SAVING MONEY
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/02/death-penalty-cost-saving-money.html

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

1) Treasure Coast Death Row: Special report: Cost of Florida's death row easily exceeds $1M per inmate, Melissa E. Holsman, October 7, 2012 at 4:05 am
http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2012/oct/07/newspaper-investigates-florida-death-row-cost/

These are only three cases, but this is the only cost review that I have seen, out of Florida, that attempted to get accurate costs, per case.

"Determining how much post-conviction death row appeals cost taxpayers is nearly impossible, especially in cases spanning decades. Scripps Treasure Coast Newspapers took an in-depth look at the available expenses in three cases and here’s what was found:

ALFONSO CAVE:
Sentenced to death in 1982 for the murder of Frances Julia Slater in the same year in Stuart.
$711,750: Estimated cost of housing Cave on Florida’s death row for 30 years
$348,000: Verified costs of post conviction appeals, which in part includes $163,025 in appellate attorneys fees; $27,904 in state attorney’s expenses; and $61,758 in costs for experts, witnesses and investigators

 J.B. “PIG" PARKER:
Sentenced to death in 1983 for the 1982 murder of Frances Julia Slater in Fort Pierce.
$688,025: Estimated cost of housing Parker on Florida’s death row for 29 years.
$296,000: Verified costs of post conviction appeals, which in part includes $31,016 in appellate attorneys fees (Parker also has received 29 years of free legal representation from a New York law firm); $3,020 in state attorney’s expenses; and $63,977 in costs for experts, witnesses and investigators.

DAVID ALAN GORE:
Executed April 12, after being sentenced to death in 1984 for the 1983 murder of Lynn Elliott in Vero Beach.
$664,300: Estimated cost of housing Gore on Florida’s death row for 28 years.
$210,000: Verified costs of post conviction appeals, which in part includes $149,489 in appellate attorneys fees; $7,442 in state attorney’s expenses; and $37,934 in costs for experts, witnesses and investigators.


(2) The Lives of Juvenile Lifers: Findings from a National Survey, p 33, March 2012, Ashley Nellis, Ph.D.
http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/publications/jj_The_Lives_of_Juvenile_Lifers.pdf

"The average cost of incarcerating a person is $22,000 annually. A life sentence that begins in one’s late teens can be expected to last at least 55 years. But with rising costs of older inmates, beginning at age 55, the annual cost is closer to $65,000."

3) The $70,000 assumes a 77% cost reduction in pre trial, trial and appeals going from a death penalty case ($300,000 average) down to $70,000 for a LWOP case.

======
Victim's Voices - These are the murder victims
http://www.murdervictims.com/Voices/voices.html


Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)