Texas Judiciary to Review Death Penalty

[Jagger69]

The purpose of this thread is not to re-open the death-penalty debate but rather to discuss how both sides feel about this review that a Texas State District judge has called for regarding the possible lack of processes that are in place under the current state system to safeguard against the possibility that innocent people have been (and are currently scheduled to be) put to death for crimes they did not commit.

Stage is set for review of death penalty
Hearing in Houston murder case will zero in on safeguarding innocent
By BRIAN ROGERS
HOUSTON CHRONICLE
Dec. 3, 2010, 5:36AM

The state of Texas does not adequately safeguard against executing the innocent, national anti-death experts and defense lawyers are expected to argue next week in an effort to persuade a Houston judge to renew his declaration that the death penalty is unconstitutional.

The hearing, a rare judicial review of capital punishment in Texas, is expected to last two weeks and attract some of the biggest anti-death penalty gunslingers to town, including Barry Scheck of the Innocence Project. Scheck is expected to try to convince the judge that Texas executed two innocent men and has almost certainly executed others.

State District Judge Kevin Fine nine months ago declared the procedures surrounding the death penalty in Texas unconstitutional, then rescinded his ruling to gather more information.

The case before Fine involves John Edward Green, 25, who faces the death penalty in an alleged 2008 robbery and murder in southwest Houston.

Green's defense team appears to have found a sympathetic ear in Fine, who has said the state's procedures do not adequately protect a possibly innocent person from being executed. The hearing appears to be planned less to convince Fine, and more to create an extensive record destined for appellate review lasting months, if not years.

"We're not saying Texas can't have a death penalty," said defense attorney Casey Keirnan. "We're saying the system has flaws. Those flaws create an unacceptable risk that innocent people can, have been and will be executed in the future."

Andrea Keilen, executive director of Texas Defender Service, a nonprofit that represents death row inmates, said the hearing represents the first time a court will consider the constitutionality of the Texas death penalty in the context of analyzing whether there is a substantial risk of convicting the innocent.

She said the Texas death penalty is unreliable and unfair and allows innocent people to be executed.

"This sort of analysis is long overdue," she said.

A surprise ruling

Fine's wholly unexpected ruling during a routine hearing in Green's case in March brought criticism of "judicial activism" from Harris County District Attorney Pat Lykos, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott and Gov. Rick Perry.

The Harris County District Attorney's Office on Thursday declined comment until the hearing's conclusion. In March, Lykos said the constitutionality of the death penalty was well-settled law.

Prosecutors say Huong Thien Nguyen, 34, was robbed and shot to death on June 16, 2008. Her sister also was shot, but survived.

Three mainstays of criminal prosecution — fingerprints, eyewitnesses and snitches — aligned to put Green, 25, in jail, accused of capital murder. Those tools, and other issues involving death penalty procedures in Texas, are expected to be put to the test as Fine allows both sides to flesh out arguments.

An expert brought in by the Harris County's district attorney's office said a partial palm print found on Nguyen's car belongs to Green. Defense lawyers for Green counter that the print originally could not be identified by a Houston police technician.

Green's lawyers also question the credibility of a burglary suspect who told police he believed Green was involved in the shooting. The informant produced his own gun, the murder weapon, and said Green used it, attorneys for Green said.

Finally, Nguyen's sister gave police a description of the man who shot her and killed her sister. After Green was identified as a suspect she picked him out of a photo array, despite the fact that the description she gave did not match Green, Keirnan said.

Forensic experts, informants and eyewitness identification have been factors in convictions that became exonerations.

Since 1976, 138 death row inmates have been exonerated nationally, 11 of which were from Texas. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, for every nine people executed, one is exonerated.

Good system, good luck?

Death penalty supporters say exonerations prove that the system of appellate review work.

Opponents, however, say world-class lawyers and simple luck are the reasons behind exonerations.

They point to the case of Ernest Ray Willis, who was convicted of murder by arson in Pecos County in 1987 and sentenced to die. By chance, his case was taken up by a large law firm in New York that spent over a million dollars to investigate and ultimately exonerate him.

"Any fair reading of the cases vindicating death row inmates shows a common theme - most owe their freedom to Lady Luck," said researcher Michael Radelat, who is cited in court documents in Green's case.

Scheck, a New York lawyer and the co-director of the Innocence Project, is expected to elicit testimony regarding two men he says were wrongfully executed: Claude Jones and Cameron Todd Willingham.

Jones was executed for a 1989 San Jacinto County robbery-murder after being tied to the scene by a hair that was shown, after the execution, to belong to the victim.

Willingham maintained his innocence before being executed six years ago for the arson murder of his three children in 1991. The investigations surrounding the house fire have since come under intense scrutiny.

Source is here:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/facebook/7321850.html

What really disturbs me here are the comments and efforts being made and carried out by death-penalty proponents claiming that this whole thing is an attempt at "judicial activism" to have the death-penalty declared unconstitutional and that the review should not be carried out at all. Even if "judicial activism" (whatever that is ) was assumed to be the justification behind the calling of the review, why would such proponents be fearful of an examination of the level of fairness under which present procedures for sentencing people to death are conducted? Whether you are for or against capital punishment, I would certainly hope that everyone would want the process to be as fool-proof as possible....wouldn't we? :dunno:

That's what slays me about these hypocrites. They wrap themselves in the flag and then piss all over the constitution. Does our pledge of allegiance not contain the words "....and justice for all"?? Does everyone believe in this principle or is it all just meaningless rhetoric?

I'd be particularly interested to hear the views of death-penalty advocates as far as they relate to this review. I want to think that most are fair-minded enough to want to be sure that innocent people are not being put to death by the state. Or, is a 10% margin of error when it comes to killing innocent people simply the price of doing business and that these victims should be written off as collateral damage? After observing the actions and hearing the statements of Governor Perry and others who blindly support the present system no matter what, I'm not sure what to believe anymore.

Again, please don't hijack this into a death-penalty debate. I want this specific situation to be addressed and discussed by any and all who might be so inclined.

Anyone wanting to examine the notorious Willingham case that is cited in the article, more information is available here or by simply doing a Google search:

http://camerontoddwillingham.com/

 

[Hot Mega]

I wholeheartedly support any reviews that make the administering of the death penalty just.

After all, it is about justice to begin with...if the methods we have in place can't ensure justice then they should be reviewed in any and all ways possible to make certain those who are awarded it deserve it.

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

Have a referendum and put it on the ballot. That would be fair, right?

 

[shayd]

I see no problem with it whatsoever.

 

[Jagger69]

Have a referendum and put it on the ballot. That would be fair, right?

A referendum on what?

And I know 'Mega is pro-death. I would also think that Scott is. Are you as well, Shayd? Don't want to assume anyone who responds is one way or the other so any further respondents please state specifically if your are pro or anti death. Thanks.

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

A referendum on what?

.

Capital punishment.

 

[georges]

If a murder/rapist/arsonist/serial killer/canibal has been confirmed firmly as the author of the crime and that the dna belongs to him as well as the fingerprints, send him to the chair.

 

[Johan]

Have a referendum and put it on the ballot. That would be fair, right?

I bet around 80% in favor of death penalty...

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

I bet around 80% in favor of death penalty...

In Texas, yes.

 

[vodkazvictim]

The moment I saw this I knew it would be YOU who posted it. Not that I'm complaining. :hatsoff: godo post.

 

[Red Spyder]

Though I'm all in favor of the death penalty, particularly for the most gruesome of cases (or for any zetas or drug cartel hitmen coming to do their evil deeds over here in TX), I see nothing wrong with any review to make sure no innocents face execution. It's actually overdue and they should also do a review of our Law of Parties, which even to my hardline, iron fisted, anti-crime standards just seems a bit too much.

I guess that's because I agree more with "better that ten guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer" than with "better that ten innocent men suffer than one guilty man escape"

 

[Jagger69]

Capital punishment.

Capital punishment is already the law in Texas so a referendum on same is pointless. The purpose of the review is determine whether the way the current capital punishment process is carried out is constitutional and that is specifically a judicial matter and would have no relevance as part of a referendum.

If a murder/rapist/arsonist/serial killer/canibal has been confirmed firmly as the author of the crime and that the dna belongs to him as well as the fingerprints, send him to the chair.

None of those conditions are currently part of the conviction process in Texas so I would assume that you would be therefore be in favor of the review and would support its conclusion if it were to find the current process to be unconstitutional.

The moment I saw this I knew it would be YOU who posted it.

Good guess, VV. What was your first clue? :1orglaugh

 

[Facetious]

What really disturbs me here are the comments and efforts being made and carried out by death-penalty proponents claiming that this whole thing is an attempt at "judicial activism" to have the death-penalty declared unconstitutional and that the review should not be carried out at all.

I have to agree with the proponents

why would such proponents be fearful of an examination of the level of fairness under which present procedures for sentencing people to death are conducted?

Are you pulling our legs? Repealing the death penalty in this country has long been a liberal activist ambition, you know damn well what's going on here . . . . This judiciary review has all to do with getting the discussion started and eventually toppling the death penalty altogether, IMO.

Whether you are for or against capital punishment, I would certainly hope that everyone would want the process to be as fool-proof as possible....wouldn't we?

Sure, but again, that's not what this is about, it's about repealing the death penalty and nothing but repealing the death penalty.

That's what slays me about these hypocrites. They wrap themselves in the flag and then piss all over the constitution. Does our pledge of allegiance not contain the words "....and justice for all"?

Whose pledge of allegiance, Jagger? The Pledge of Allegiance was banned from the public school arena about 30 -35 years ago because it contains the words 'god' and 'republic'. Yea, they probably had a judicial review on that as well.

Does everyone believe in this principle or is it all just meaningless rhetoric?

The latter unfortunately. It's gone. . . .a non existent artifact.

 

[Jagger69]

Are you pulling our legs? Repealing the death penalty in this country has long been a liberal activist ambition, you know damn well what's going on here . . . . This judiciary review has all to do with getting the discussion started and eventually toppling the death penalty altogether, IMO.

No leg pulling going on Facetious. I'm not questioning the motive of Barry Scheck and Project Innocence. That's not who's ordering the review though. It's a duly-elected district judge right here in rock-solid right-wing Harris County. Besides, you can make the same argument that the motives of the proponents of the status quo (I mean, the Texas death penalty is working pretty damn good just the way it is....why fuck with it, right? :dunno like Rick Perry are just as politically oriented as those of Project Innocence. What's wrong with reviewing a process that may be flawed in its veracity regarding the absolute guilt or innocence of people who are being condemned to death? And, if it is indeed found to be flawed and declared unconstitutional (you know, that pesky Bill of Rights thing), being rescinded as a result??

 

[Boothbabe]

The thing with the death penalty is that it doesn't reflect on the one who commited the crime. It reflects on those who order and carry out the sentence. Just because the killing is done by the state doesn't mean it isn't murder. There is no honour or justice to be found in ordering someone to be killed.

 

[Hot Mega]

The thing with the death penalty is that it doesn't reflect on the one who commited the crime. It reflects on those who order and carry out the sentence. Just because the killing is done by the state doesn't mean it isn't murder. There is no honour or justice to be found in ordering someone to be killed.

:nono: Rules of the thread as laid down by it's author...no debating the merits of the policy.

 

[itcouldbeme]

I see it as an admission that the trial system may in fact be flawed...

They should concern themselves with the root cause...

Prosecutors are typically not qualified to do what they do, as are not jurors for that matter...

 

[Jagger69]

:nono: Rules of the thread as laid down by it's author...no debating the merits of the policy.

Yes. Resurrect one of the infinite threads on this subject if that's the aim of the poster (please do, Boothbabe!). Not here to debate that issue in this thread. Thanks 'Mega.

 

[Crazy4theBrat]

Personally, I really can't decide what to think of the death penalty. I can think of reasons for it, but I can also think of reasons against it.

Either way, is there any reasonable person out there who doesn't want justice to be served through the process of capital punishment? I don't want to see innocent people executed, but then again, who does???

This is kind of like the left saying that they are the ones who want old people to have adequate health care and kids to have a decent education. What a joke. Everyone wants these things! It's just a question of how to go about accomplishing these goals.

Having said this, I see no reason why there shouldn't be any discourse that could possibly make the process more reliable.

 

[shayd]

Are you as well, Shayd?

Nope. I should have been clearer before. I meant to say, I see nothing wrong with the review.