Friday, June 26, 2009

Studies Author Mum: Phillip Cook, Prof., U of North Carolina (Chapel Hill)

To: Prof. Phillip Cook, Professor, U of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

I hope you find this of interest.

From:  Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom   

Cost Savings: The Death Penalty
Dudley Sharp, contact info below

Reasonable and responsible protocols, currently in use, will produce a death penalty which costs no more, or will cost less, than Life Without Parole (LWOP).

States could better implement justice, as given by jurors, and save taxpayers money, currently wasted by irresponsible state systems.


1) Obvious solution: Improve the system

Virginia executes in 5-7 years. 65% of those sentenced to death have been executed. Only 15% of their death penalty cases are overturned. The national averages are 11 years, 14% and 36%, respectively.

With the high costs of long term imprisonment, a true life sentence will be more expensive than such a death penalty protocol.



2) Current cost study problems

a) Geriatric care: Most, if not all, cost studies exclude geriatric care, recently found to be $60,000-$90,000/inmate/yr., a significant omission from life sentence costs. Prisoners are often found to be geriatric at relatively young ages, 50-55, because of lifestyle.

b) Plea Bargain to life: ONLY the presence of the death penalty allows for a plea bargain to a maximum life sentence. Such plea cost benefit, estimated at $300,000 to $1 million/case, accrues as a cost benefit/credit to the death penalty. I am aware of no study which includes this. They all must, for a relevant cost analysis.

c) The cost of death row: There need not be any additional cost for death row. Missouri and Kansas don't have one.

NOTE: Depending upon jurisdiction, the inclusion of only 2a and 2b will result in a minimal cost differential between the two sanctions or an actual net cost benefit to the death penalty.

Adding (1) would, very likely, mean that all death penalty jurisdictions would see a cost savings with the death penalty as compared to a true life sentence.


3) The Disinformation problem: The pure deception in some cost "studies" is overt.

a) Some studies compare the cost of a death penalty case, including pre trial, trial, appeals and incarceration, to only the cost of incarceration for 40 years, excluding all trial costs and appeals, and geriatric care for a life sentence. The much cited, highly misleading Texas "study" does this.
b) It has been claimed that it costs $3.2 million/execution in Florida. That "study" decided to add the cost of the entire death penalty system in Florida ($57 million), which included all of the death penalty cases and dividing that number by only the number of executions (18). It is the same as stating that the cost of LWOP is $15 million/case, based upon all costs of 2000 LWOP cases being placed into the 40 lifers to have died (given an average cost of $300, 000/LWOP case, so far, for those 2000 cases.). The much cited and misused Duke University death penalty cost analysis for North Carolina does the same thing.
c) Many of the "studies", such as Maryland's (2008), suffer from similar or worse problems.


4) Deterrence "value": FCC economist Dr. Paul Zimmerman finds that executions result in a huge cost benefit to society. "Specifically, it is estimated that each state execution deters somewhere between 3 and 25 murders per year (14 being the average). Assuming that the value of human life is approximately $5 million {i.e. the average of the range estimates provided by Viscussi (1993)}, our estimates imply that society avoids losing approximately $70 million per year on average at the current rate of execution all else equal." The study used state level data from 1978 to 1997 for all 50 states (excluding Washington D.C.). (1)

That is a cost benefit of $70 million per execution. 15 additional recent studies, inclusive of their defenses, support the deterrent effect.

No cost study has included such calculations.

Although many will find it inappropriate to put a dollar value on life, evidently this is not uncommon for economists, insurers, etc.

The death penalty provides greater protections for innocents than life sentences. (2).

What value do you put on the lives saved? Certainly not less than $5 million.


5) Justice: The main reason sentences are given is because jurors find that it is the most just punishment available. No state, concerned with justice, will base a decision on cost, alone. If they did, all cases would be plea bargained and every crime would have a probation option.

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

MANY ADDITIONAL STATE COST REVIEWS

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

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

1) "State Executions, Deterrence and the Incidence of Murder", Paul R. Zimmerman (zimmy@att.net), March 3. 2003, Social Science Research Network, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID354680_code021216500.pdf?abstractid=354680

2) "The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents"
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/01/30/the-death-penalty-provides-more-protection-for-innocents---new-mexico.aspx


copyright 2003-2013 Dudley Sharp
Permission for distribution of this document, in whole or in part, is approved with proper attribution.
 
======
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, May 07, 2009

DEATH PENALTY COSTS: COLORADO

Cost, Deception & the Death Penalty: The Colorado Experience
 
From:  Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom   

Death penalty opponents fashioned this argument:

End the death penalty, they said, and we can use the $380,000/year (1), the alleged net cost excess of the death penalty, to fund cold case investigations, for over 1400 Colorado unsolved murders.

From the beginning, this was, only, another anti death penalty effort/deception. Plea bargains to a life sentence, only possible because of the presence of the death penalty, likely, save more money (1), thus, ending the death penalty in Colorado may end up costing Coloradans even more.

By the end of the Colorado Legislative session, even for the most naive, all doubt was removed.

Some Senators had re written bill 1274, taken out the death penalty repeal and introduced constant funding for cold case investigations. This revived bill came "up with as much money for cold-case investigations as the bill originally would have" by establishing "a $2.50 surcharge on all traffic tickets and criminal convictions in the state." (2)

Anti death penalty legislators said no. They re instated the death penalty repeal, in conference committee, even though they already had the cold case funds.

The last day of the session, the reconstituted anti death penalty bill failed, just as death penalty opponents knew that it could, thus gutting the additional cold case funding, also part of bill 1274.

This was never about cold case funds. Had it been, death penalty opponents would have secured the funding, in conference committee, then voted for that funding, alone and jubilantly.

This was, only, about repealing the death penalty, whose adherents knowingly sacrificed cold case funding, which, certainly, would have passed, absent the death penalty repeal re introduction.

How cynical did anti death penalty legislators get?

Death penalty opponent and Senate President Peter Groff stated "We've put some nice garnish (cold case funding) around it, but really what this is about is whether government should kill or not kill." (3)

"nice garnish." That is all cold case funding meant to the anti death penalty crowd.

Nationwide strategy

Every few years, death penalty opponents create a new crisis, because their previous one failed. Thus, the cost issue and, in Colorado, its coupling with cold case funding.

This year, there were, at least, 10 states, wherein death penalty opponents were using cost as their main repeal issue.

New Mexico will, likely, be the only state to repeal this year (2009) and started out, strong, with the cost mantra. Cost soon died, as an issue, because it was, blatantly, false.

The NM repeal succeeded only because more anti death penalty democrats were elected.

The ". . . Senate vote to repeal the death penalty in New Mexico was a direct result of November's election of several new lawmakers." The repeal bill's sponsor, Rep. Gail Chase said she was able to get the bill through because the 2008 election added three more senators to the Democratic majority. District Attorney Lem Martinez, who had spoken against the repeal bill, said "the Senate vote was the result of Obama's coattails." ("Senate backs death-penalty repeal", Steve Terrell, The (Santa Fe) New Mexican, 3/13/09). (4)

So goes death penalty opponents machinery of deception, until the next session.

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

MANY ADDITIONAL STATE COST REVIEWS

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

=========

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)



(1) A few months later, the cost savings of ending the death penalty rose to $1 million/year, the newest alleged net cost excess. A complete cost review, which was not done, may have found little to no cost savings.

See "Cost Savings: The Death Penalty"
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/05/07/cost-savings-the-death-penalty.aspx

" . . . the actual amount of money that would have been saved if there were no death penalty was a subject of considerable dispute." ("Death penalty may live on", The Daily Sentinel, May 05, 2009)

(2) "Death penalty may live on", The Daily Sentinel, May 05, 2009


(3) "Senators vote to keep executions", The Durango Herald, May 07, 2009


(4) See "Why did Gov. Richardson repeal the death penalty? His legacy"
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/03/31/why-did-gov-richardson-repeal-the-death-penalty-his-legacy.aspx

"Rebuttal to Governor Richardson - Repeal of the Death Penalty in New Mexico"
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/03/19/rebuttal-to-governor-richardson--repeal-of-the-death-penalty-in-new-mexico.aspx

and,

on the New Jersey death penalty repeal, see my four responses to New Jersey Assembly Speaker Roberts' article, after his article. Starting with:

DEAD WRONG: NJ Death Penalty Study Commission
Posted by at

Wednesday, April 01, 2009

Sister Catherine Nichol (Billings), Letter: Death penalty isn't the Christian way, Billings Gazette, April 01, 2009

To: Montana Legislators and Media

Re: Sister Catherine Nichol (Billings), Letter: Death penalty isn't the Christian way, Billings Gazette, April 01, 2009

From:  Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom   

The Sister made a number of errors common to anti-death penalty folks. With many of the religious, they only review the anti-death penalty literature and refuse to fact check it. For Church leadership and for this debate, that represents a disservice to the truth, as well as to their flock.

1) The Sister contends that those Christians who support the death penalty are "people (that are) stalled in the Old Testament." "We read in the Bible, 'Jesus said, You have heard it said, 'An eye for an eye,' etc., 'but I say to you ...' " No! In effect, "Love one another" can't be kill one another."

REPLY: There is almost no end to the Saints, Popes, biblical and theological scholars who find New Testament support for the death penalty - Saints Thomas Aquinas and Augustine, for two.

Review: (updated Nov. 2023)
Religion and The Death Penalty

2) The Sister claims: "There's a much better option - life imprisonment with no parole. Many outstanding members of the clergy have already testified to this."

REPLY: There is no "better" about life without parole. It is a decidedly different sanction than the death penalty. Juries have the option, between those two sanctions, thereby allowing them to choose what they find as the better of the two, for the crime before them. Neither the Sister nor those clergymen have expressed why locking up one another for life so expresses "love one another". Biblically, there is a well known distinction between how we, personally, respond to those who harm us and how the government should respond to those criminals who harm the innocent.

3) The Sister states: "That no mistakes have been made is a mistake to claim. Other states have discovered their fatal errors."

REPLY: Which states, Sister? There is no proof of an innocent executed in the US, at least since 1900. The evidence is that the death penalty is a superior protector of innocents, over a life sentence.

Review:  updated Nov 2023
and 
Deterrence, Death Penalties & Executions

4) The Sister states: "As to economics, it simply doesn't hold water to claim that a life sentence is more expensive than a death sentence. Researched data has disproved that position."

REPLY: Well, no. Some studies are simply horrible in their lack of thoroughness. And, if all states imposed the death penalty as does Virginia, then true life cases would, almost always, be more expensive than the death penalty.

Review: "Cost Savings: The Death Penalty" first comment at

http://www.flatheadbeacon.com/articles/article/governor_keeping_close_eye_on_death_penalty_debate/8764/

5) Let us hope and pray that Montana can join the "leadership" in our country on this issue with abolishment of the death penalty!

REPLY: It is very likely that the Sister has no clue as to what horrid "leadership" that has been.

Please review:

"Rebuttal to Governor Richardson - Repeal of the Death Penalty in New Mexico"

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/03/19/rebuttal-to-governor-richardson--repeal-of-the-death-penalty-in-new-mexico.aspx

"Why did Gov. Richardson repeal the death penalty? His legacy"

http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/03/31/why-did-gov-richardson-repeal-the-death-penalty-his-legacy.aspx

"DEAD WRONG: NJ Death Penalty Study Commission"

Response, at bottom. One of four response to New Jersey Assembly Speaker Roberts.

http://hallnj.blogspot.com/2007/12/case-for-repealing-death-penalty.html

======
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

Monday, March 23, 2009

Death Penalty, Deterrence & Murder Rates: Let's be clear

Death Penalty, Deterrence & Murder Rates: Let's be clear

by Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom

updated 11/2021

There is a constant within all jurisdictions -- negative consequences will always deter some. Whether a jurisdiction with high murder rates or low ones, rather rising or lowering rates, the presence of the death penalty will produce fewer net murders, the absence of the death penalty will produce more net murders.

In their story, "States With No Death Penalty Share Lower Homicide Rates", The New York Times did their best to illustrate that the death penalty was not a deterrent, by showing that the average murder rate in death penalty states was higher than the average rate in non death penalty states and, it is. (1)

What the Times failed to observe is that their own study confirmed that you can't simply compare those averages to make that determination regarding deterrence.

As one observer stated: 

"The Times story does nothing more than repeat the dumbest of all dumb mistakes — taking the murder rate in a traditionally high-homicide state with capital punishment (like Texas) and comparing it to a traditionally low-homicide state with no death penalty (like North Dakota) and concluding that the death penalty doesn't work at all. Even this comparison doesn't work so well. The Times own graph shows Texas, where murder rates were 40 percent above Michigan's in 1991, has now fallen below Michigan . . .". (2)

Within the Times article, Michigan Governor John Engler states, "I think Michigan made a wise decision 150 years ago," referring to the state's abolition of the death penalty in 1846. "We're pretty proud of the fact that we don't have the death penalty."(3)

Even though easily observed on the Times' own graphics, they failed to mention the obvious:

Michigan's murder rate is near or above that of 31 of the US's 38 death penalty states. And then, it should be recognized that Washington, DC (not found within the Times study) and Detroit, Michigan, two non death penalty jurisdictions, have been perennial leaders in murder and violent crime rates for the past 30 years and . . .

Delaware, a jurisdiction similar in size to them, leads the nation in executions per murder, but has significantly lower rates of murders and violent crime than do either DC or Detroit, during that same period.

Obviously, the Times study and any other simple comparison of jurisdictions with and without the death penalty, means little, with regard to deterrence.

Also revealed within the Times study, but not pointed out by them,: 

"One-third of the nation's executions take place in Texas—and the steepest decline in homicides has occurred in Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana and Arkansas, which together account for nearly half the nation's executions." (4)

And, the Times also failed to mention that the major US jurisdiction with the most executions is Harris County (Houston, Texas), which has seen a 73% decrease in murder rates since resuming executions in 1982 -- possibly the largest reduction for a major metropolitan area since that time.

Also omitted from the Times review, although they had the data, is that during a virtual cessation of executions, from 1966-1980, that murders more than doubled in the US. Any other rise and fall in murders, after that time, has been only a fraction of that change, indicating a strong and direct correlation between the lack of executions and the dramatic increase in murders, if that is specifically what you are looking for.

If deterrence was measured by direct correlation's between execution, or the lack thereof, and murder rates, as implied by the Times article, and as wrongly assumed by those blindly accepting that model, then there would be no debate, only more confusion. Which may have been the Times' goal.

Let's take a look at the science.

Some non death penalty jurisdictions, such as South Africa and Mexico lead the world in murder and violent crime rates. But then some non death penalty jurisdictions, such as Sweden, have quite low rates. Then there are such death penalty jurisdictions as Japan and Singapore which have low rates of such crime. But then other death penalty jurisdictions, such as Rwanda and Louisiana, that have high rates.

To which an astute observer will respond: 

But socially, culturally, geographically, legally, historically and in many other ways, all of those jurisdictions are very different. Exactly, a simple comparison of only execution rates and murder rates cannot tell the tale of deterrence. And within the US, between states, there exist many variables which will effect the rates of homicides.

See REVIEW, below

And, as so well illustrated by the Times graphics, a non death penalty state, such as Michigan has high murder rates and another non death penalty state, such as North Dakota, has low murder rates and then there are death penalty states, such as Louisiana, with high murder rates and death penalty states, such South Dakota, with low rates. 

Apparently, unbeknownst to the Times, within their own study, but quite obvious to any neutral observer, there are other factors at play here, not just the presence or absence of the death penalty. Most thinking folks already knew that . . . but, not the Times.

As Economics Professor Ehrlich stated in the Times piece and, as accepted by all knowledgeable parties, there are many factors involved in such evaluations. That is why there is a wide variation of crime rates both within and between some death penalty and non death penalty jurisdictions, and small variations within and between others. Any direct comparison of only execution rates and only murder rates, to determine deterrence, would reflect either ignorance or deception.

Ehrlich called the Times study 

"a throwback to the vintage 1960s statistical analyses done by criminologists who compared murder rates in neighboring states where capital punishment was either legal or illegal." "The statistics involved in such comparisons have long been recognized as devoid of scientific merit." He called the Times story a "one sided affair" devoid of merit. 

Most interesting is that Ehrlich was interviewed by the Time's writer, Fessenden, who asked Ehrlich to comment on the results before the story was published. Somehow Ehrlich's overwhelming criticisms were left out of the article.

Ehrlich also referred Fessenden to some professors who produced the recently released Emory study. Emory Economics department head, Prof. Deshbakhsh "says he was contacted by Fessenden, and he indicated to the Times reporter that the study suggested a very strong deterrent effect of capital punishment." 

Somehow, Fessenden's left that out of the Times story, as well. (5).

An analogy. Consider smoking. Whether a jurisdiction has high smoking rates or low ones, rather rising or lowering rates, the knowledge of medical problems from smoking will produce fewer net smokers, the absence of any medical problems from smoking would produce more net smokers.

It is the same for all prospects of a negative outcome - they all deter some.

Maybe the Times will be a bit more thoughtful, next time.

REVIEW

"The List: Murder Capitals of the World", 09/08, Foreign Policy Magazine
Capital punishment (cp) or not (ncp)
murder rates/100,000 population

4 out of the top 5 do not have the death penalty

1. Caracas (ncp), Venezuela 130-160
Bad policing.
2. New Orleans (cp), La, USA 69-95
Variable because of different counts in surging population. Drug related.
Nos 2 & 3 in US, Detroit (ncp), 46 and Baltimore (cp), 45.
3. Cape Town (ncp), South Africa 62
Most crimes with people who know each other.
4. Port Mores (ncp), Papua New Guinea 54
Chinese gangs, corrupt policing
5. Moscow (ncp), Russia 9.6
various

Of the Top 10 Countries With Lowest Murder Rates (1), 7 have the death penalty

O f the Top 10 Countries With Highest Murder Rates (2), 5 have the death penalty

Top 10 Countries With Lowest Murder Rates
Iceland 0.00 ncp
Senegal 0.33 ncp
Burkina Faso 0.38 cp
Cameroon 0.38 cp
Finland 0.71 ncp
Gambia 0.71 cp
Mali 0.71 cp
Saudi Arabia 0.71 cp
Mauritania 0.76 cp
Oman cp


Top 10 Countries With Highest Murder Rates
Honduras 154.02 ncp
South Africa 121.91 ncp
Swaziland 93.32 cp
Colombia 69.98 ncp
Lesotho 50.41 cp
Rwanda 45.08 ncp
Jamaica 37.21 cp
El. Salvador 36.88 cp
Venezuela 33.20 ncp
Bolivia 31.98 cp

(1) http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/countries-with-lowest-murder-rates.html no date

(2) http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/countries-with-highest-murder-rates.html no date


======
3300+ pro death penalty quotes, from some of the greatest thinkers in history, inclusive of 600+ quotes from victim's families
http://prodpquotes.info/ 
====== 

FOOTNOTES

1) "States With No Death Penalty Share Lower Homicide Rates", The New
York Times 9/22/00 located at
www.nytimes.com/2000/09/22/national/22STUD.html and
www.nytimes.com/2000/09/22/national/22DEAT.html

2) “Don't Know Much About Calculus: The (New York) Times flunks high-school
math in death-penalty piece", William Tucker, National Review, 9/22/00, located
at www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment092200c.shtml

3) ibid, see footnote 11

4) "The Death Penalty Saves Lives", AIM Report, August 2000, located atwww (dot) aim.org/publications/aim_report/2000/08a.html

5) "NEW YORK TIMES UNDER FIRE AGAIN", Accuracy in Media, 10/16/00, go to
www.aim.org/

copyright 2000-2012 Dudley Sharp: Permission for distribution of this document, in whole or in part, is approved with proper attribution.

Related Issues:

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/2012/11/life-much-preferred-over-execution.html

See sections C and D within
The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/03/death-penalty-saving-more-innocent.html

"DEATH PENALTY DETERRENCE CLARIFIED"
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/12/death-penalty-deterrence-clarified.html

DETERRENCE, THE DEATH PENALTY & MURDER RATES
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/12/deterrence-death-penalty-murder-rates.html


The Death Penalty: Do Innocents Matter?


Innocents More At Risk Without Death Penalty
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/03/innocents-more-at-risk-without-death.html 
 
======
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, March 19, 2009

Repeal of the Death Penalty in New Mexico

SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT: A Rebuttal to Governor Richardson
Repeal of the Death Penalty in New Mexico

From:  Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom   

1) Gov. Bill Richardson states: "Faced with the reality that our system for imposing the death penalty can never be perfect, my conscience compels me to replace the death penalty with a solution that keeps society safe." (1)

REBUTTAL: There is no proof of an innocent executed in the US since 1900. There is overwhelming proof that many thousands of innocents have been murdered because of the lack of perfection in parole, probation, early release, prison/jail management etc.

Why did the Governor choose to end that criminal justice practice - the death penalty - which may be the least likely to result in innocent deaths?

Lack of perfection had nothing to do with his decision.

In addition, the death penalty protects innocents at a higher level than does a life sentence. (FOOTNOTE: "Death penalty repeal arguments are false" paragraph 2 & 3).

No one disputes that the death penalty has greater due process than lesser sentences - meaning that actual innocents, serving life, are more likely to die in prison than are actual innocents likely to be executed.

2) Governor Richardson stated: "The bill I am signing today .. . replaces the death penalty with true life without the possibility of parole – a sentence that ensures violent criminals are locked away from society forever .. . ." . (1)

REBUTTAL: Governor Richardson knows that there is no such thing as true life without "possibility" of parole.

The only absolute with sentencing is that the executive branch, a Governor or President, can commute any sentence and release criminals, early - as Governor Richardson did, in Nov. 2004, when he commuted Janet Vigil's "life" case. (2)

How quickly he "forgot".

Gov. Richardson's buddy, former New Mexico Gov. Toney Anaya, commuted William Wayne Gilbert's death sentence in 1986.

Gilbert led a 7 inmate prison escape, a few months later, where Gilbert shot a guard. (3)

Gilbert had previously murdered " . . . his wife, Carol; a newlywed couple, Kenn and Noel Johnson, and a young model, Barbara McMullen. He bragged of other murders, as well. 'It was very easy to kill," he said. "It's almost like it's the night before Christmas when you're 5 years old.' "

Hardly a great candidate for commutation. But, this commutation wasn't about the criminal or about the citizens of New Mexico. It was all about Gov. Anaya. His commutations of all death row, had nothing to do with allegations of protecting innocents - it did just the opposite, of course - he just didn't like the death penalty and he takes no responsibility for the outcome.

In addition, legislatures can write new laws which, retroactively, reduce sentences already given.

Gov. Richardson is aware that states around the US are, now, doing just that, as more consider reducing life sentences to save money by releasing lifers, early.

3) The Governor stated: "More than 130 death row inmates have been exonerated in the past 10 years in this country, including four New Mexicans – a fact I cannot ignore." (1)

REBUTTAL: The Governor has been informed, repeatedly, that the 130 exonerated is a complete fraud, as has been well documented by many and presented to the Governor, often (FOOTNOTE, paragraph 3). Not only is he not ignoring this deception, he is advancing it, even when it is so easy to disprove. Governor, how many innocents were harmed and murdered because of the lack of perfection in parole, probation, early release, prison/jail management etc.?
---------

4) What about law enforcements' concerns?

"The New Mexico Sheriffs' and Police Association opposed repeal, saying capital punishment deters violence against police officers, jailers and prison guards. District attorneys also opposed the legislation, arguing that the death penalty was a useful prosecutorial tool." (4)

They told the Governor that the death penalty saves lives and helped solve cases.

The Governor conceded that "the death penalty may be a deterrent"(1), thereby telling us that the death penalty is more likely to save innocent lives than it is to take them.

He also conceded that by repealing the death penalty he was taken away a tool for law enforcement. (1) He didn't speculate how many innocent lives he was sacrificing by ending that tool.

We may never know why he really ended the death penalty. We do know that it had nothing to do with saving innocent lives.

"Bernalillo County Sheriff Darren White said law enforcement officers have 'lost a layer of protection and it's a sad day in New Mexico.' " (4)

(1) Gov. Bill Richardson's statement on signing the repeal of New Mexico's death penalty (3/18/09)

(2) " In Loving Memory of Estevan Vigil", http://www.nmsoh.org/vigil_estevan_mem.htm

(3) "Let Loose by the Governor", The Justice Story, The New York Daily News, 3/11/07
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2007/03/11/2007-03-11_let_loose_by_the_governor.html

(4) "New Mexico governor signs measure to abolish death penalty"
DEBORAH BAKER, Associated Press Writer, Originally published Wednesday, March 18, 2009 at 5:21 PM

-----------------------------------------

FOOTNOTE: "Death penalty repeal arguments are false"

In a message dated 3/17/2009 4:37:39 P.M. Central Daylight Time, Sharpjfa writes:

To: Governor Richardson, staff and cabinet and
Corrections Department and Police Agencies and media throughout New Mexico

From: Dudley Sharp, contact info, below

Dear Honorable Governor Richardson:

In addition to all of the pro-repeal arguments being weak or false (see below), the death penalty should remain as the just sanction for some of the worst crimes.

JUSTICE: The death penalty should remain in New Mexico because of justice. New Mexico is currently investigating serial murders which, to date, have reached 14 victims. Leave the death penalty option up to New Mexico jurors, for such cases as this, as well as the rape/murder of children and the murder of police officers and correction workers and other crimes.

1) COST SAVINGS

The LFC fiscal evaluation wrongly found the North Carolina death penalty more expensive than a 20 year "life" sentence. It wasn't. The was the only study cited (1)

Reasonable and responsible protocols, currently in use, will produce a death penalty which will cost less or no more than LWOP. (2)

Example: Virginia executes in 5-7 years; 65% of those sentenced to death have been executed; 15% of their death penalty cases are overturned. With the high costs of long term imprisonment, a true life sentence will be more expensive than such a death penalty protocol. (2)

Most cost studies suffer from major problems, such as a) not crediting the death penalty for allowing plea bargains to a true life sentence ( $300,000 to $1 million savings or more, for each plea); 2) not including geriatric care for life sentences (cost of $60,000-$90, 000/year/inmate); c) deceptively inflating costs of executions, based upon putting all the costs of every death penalty case into those executed (see Florida); d) many more such problems, or even worse. (2)


2) MORE PROTECTION FOR INNOCENTS

Of all the government programs in the world, that put innocents at risk, is there one with a safer record and with greater protections than the US death penalty? Unlikely.

Innocents are more protected because of enhanced due process, enhanced incapacitation and enhanced deterrence. (3)

Anti death penalty folks claim that 130 "innocents" have been released from death row, nationally. Fact checking easily uncovers this as a scam. Study reviews have found that 70-83% of those claims are not credible. Possibly 25 "actual" innocents have been identified and released from death row. (4)

There is no proof of an innocent executed in the US, at least since 1900.

There is overwhelming proof that living murderers harm and murder, again. Executed ones don't.

3) 16 recent studies find for DETERRENCE

16 recent studies, inclusive of their defenses, find for death penalty deterrence. No surprise. Life is preferred over death, death is feared more than life. (5)

There is a constant within all jurisdictions -- negative consequences will always deter some - a truism.

NOTE: Repeal proponents bring up that many death penalty states have higher murder rates than non death penalty states. That has nothing to do with the deterrent effect failing, as fully explained to them and you in a previous email. (6)

Whether a jurisdiction has high murder rates or low ones, rather rising or lowering rates, the presence of the death penalty will produce fewer net murders, the absence of the death penalty will produce more net murders.

An analogy. Consider smoking. Whether a jurisdiction has high smoking rates or low ones, or rising or lowering rates, the knowledge of medical problems from smoking will produce fewer net smokers, the absence of any medical problems from smoking would produce more net smokers.


4. STRONG PUBLIC SUPPORT

80% death penalty support, for specific capital murders, such as mass murder, serial murders, rape/murders, terrorism, etc. (6)

-- 82% in the US favor executing Saddam Hussein, In Great Britain: 69%, France: 58%, Germany: 53%, Spain: 51%, Italy: 46%. , Le Monde (France) , 12/06
-- 81% support Timothy McVeigh's execution - "the consensus of all major groups, including men, women, whites, nonwhites, "liberals" and "conservatives." 16% oppose (Gallup 5/2/01).
-- 85% of liberal Connecticut supported serial/rapist murderer Michael Ross' "voluntary" execution. (Quinnipiac 1/12/05)
-- 79% support death penalty for terrorists (4/26/2007 New York State poll)
-- 78% of Nebraskans support death penalty for “heinous crimes.” 16% opposed. 76% opposed legislation to abolish. MPB Public Affairs Poll, 2/14/08)

Most quoted polls wrongly poll for murder, not capital murders. The death penalty is only an option in capital cases. Possibly, 10% of all murder cases are death eligible. Those are the only cases relevant to death penalty polling.


5) THE LEAST ARBITARY PUNISHMENT

The US death penalty is likely the least arbitrary and capricious criminal sanctions in the US. About 60,000 murders qualified for a death penalty eligible trial, since 1973. 8000 murderers were so sentenced or 13% of those eligible. Based upon pre trial, trial, appellate and clemency/commutation realities and that high percentage (13%) of receiving the maximum sentence (absent mandatory sentences) the death penalty must be the least arbitrary and capricious sanction.

-----------------------

Permission for distribution of this document, in whole or in part, is approved with proper attribution.

Respectfully submitted, Dudley Sharp, Justice Matters
e-mail sharpjfa@aol.com, 713-622-5491,
Houston, Texas

Mr. Sharp has appeared on ABC, BBC, CBC, CBS, CNN, C-SPAN, FOX, NBC, NPR, PBS , VOA and many other TV and radio networks, on such programs as Nightline, The News Hour with Jim Lehrer, The O'Reilly Factor, etc., has been quoted in newspapers throughout the world and is a published author.

A former opponent of capital punishment, he has written and granted interviews about, testified on and debated the subject of the death penalty, extensively and internationally

1) "LFC Fiscal Error: Death Penalty Repeal - For Senate Judiciary Committee Record"
email to Senate, 3/9/2009 6:11:28 P.M. Central Daylight Time
2) "Cost Savings: The Death Penalty: For Senate Judiciary Committee Record", email to Senate, 3/9/2009 4:45:21 P.M. Central Daylight Time
3) "Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents" NM, email to Governor Richardson, legislature and media, 3/4/2009 2:49:23 P.M. Central Daylight Time
4) "The death row 130 "innocents" scam" NM, email to Governor Richardson, legislature and media, 3/4/2009 1:36:11 P.M. Central Standard Time
5) "The Death Penalty is a Deterrent - 16 Recent Studies", NM, email to Governor Richardson, legislature and media on 3/4/2009 1:31:35 P.M. Central Daylight Time
6) "Death Penalty and Deterrence: Let's be clear" NM, email to Governor Richardson, legislators and media on 3/4/2009 1:52:09 P.M. Central Standard Time
 
======
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

Sunday, March 15, 2009

Incredible Costs: Life Without Parole

Incredible Costs: Life Without Parole (LWOP)
LWOP Capital Murder Cases, Maximum Security & Geriatric Care

From:  Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom   


 1. " . . .state officials estimate that an average prisoner costs California about $35,000 a year and that elderly inmates, who require more care, cost an average of $70,000."

 or $89,000/elderly inmate/yr in 2019 dollars, excluding maximum security cell costs, for LWOP capital murder cases. Maximum security cells, in Ca, are as high as $170,000/inmate/yr., as opposed to average cell costs, which do not apply to maximum security.

 using Inflation Calculator
https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

 "The price of punishment" SCOTT SMITH. The Record, Jan 29, 2006
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060129/NEWS01/601290307/1001/ARCHIVE
2. "A California study found that annual medical costs for prison inmates 55 and older are $60,000 to $80,000."

or $104,000 average in 2019 dollars, excluding maximum security cell costs, for LWOP capital murder cases. Maximum security cells, in Ca, are as high as $170,000/inmate/yr.

 "Robbing Ourselves Blind: The Economics of Getting Tough on Crime, Hary Merriman, Sociology of Law, 9/30/00.
http://www.oberlin.edu/news-info/01may/robbingblind.pdf

3. Older prisoners  (2005 and 2011) cost 3-9 times more than younger prisoners, from: Human Rights Watch. Old Behind Bars: The Aging Prison Population in the United States.Human Rights Watch; Jan 27, 2012 & American Civil Liberties Union. At America's Expense: The Mass Incarceration of the Elderly. American Civil Liberties Union; New York, NY: Jun, 2012
4. "The National Center on Institutions and Alternatives, an Alexandria-based organization that advocates alternatives to incarceration, estimates the average yearly cost of confining an elderly prisoner at $69,000 -- more than three times the $22,000 spent on ordinary inmates.

 which is  $103,000 in 2019 dollars, excluding maximum security cell costs, for LWOP capital murder cases.

 " Cost of Housing Older Inmates Goes Up As Risk Goes Down"
Bill Sizemore, The Virginian-Pilot, 3/7/00,
http://p199.ezboard.com/fdrugpolicytalkseriesnewsarticles.showMessage?topicID=10.topic

5. "Young prisoners cost the system $21,000 per year on average while older prisoners cost $60,000. And for those over age 60 the average cost is $69,000 per year -- twice the cost of a nursing home." "The situation will get worse as our prison population continues to age. In 1998 7.2 percent of the 1.8 million prisoners in federal, state and local prisons were over age 50, up from 4.9 percent in 1990 And the numbers will increase to as much as 10 percent over the next few years."

 or $92,000 - $106,000/inmate/yr, excluding maximum security cell costs, for LWOP capital murder cases.

 "Release of older prisoners could save taxpayers money, Bernard Starr, News Chief, 9/13/99
http://www.polkonline.com/stories/091399/opi_oldprisner.shtml

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

 MANY ADDITIONAL STATE COST REVIEWS

 DEATH PENALTY COST: SAVING MONEY
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/02/death-penalty-cost-saving-money.html
======
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
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)