By Tanya Greene, Advocacy and Policy Counsel, ACLU at 2:13pm
After his sister's death in the September 11 attacks at the World Trade Center, once-avowed white supremacist Mark Stroman shot and killed Waqar Hasan, who was Pakistani, and Vasudev Patel, an Indian immigrant, during a series of convenience store and gas station rampages in Texas. Rais Bhuiyan, a Bangladeshi Muslim man, was also shot and partially blinded by Stroman, who shot the men to vent his anti-Arab sentiment. Stroman was convicted of murder and awaits his execution by the state of Texas, scheduled for next week, on July 20.
By Anna Arceneaux, Staff Attorney, ACLU Capital Punishment Project at 1:52pm
In Alabama, as we’ve discussed here before, elected judges have the authority to override the jury’s sentencing decision in death penalty cases – in other words, a judge can sentence a person to die even if a jury of his or her peers decides death is not the appropriate punishment.
Today, Texas executed Humberto Leal Garcia, a Mexican national who was tried, convicted and sentenced to die in the state of Texas without ever being given access to the Mexican consulate. Most agree his sentence would have been different if he had been given that access. It is certain that his lawyer would have been different – Mexico pays for experienced lawyers to defend against death penalty cases for its citizens.
Texas violated Leal’s rights under Vienna Convention on Consular Relations when it neglected to inform him of his right to consult the Mexican consulate upon his arrest. The Texas authorities don’t even deny that – they simply say, in legalese, “too bad.” Because of their ability to rely on the hypertechnical timing requirements of state and federal law, Texas prosecutors can afford to ignore a legitimate legal claim. Not deny the claim, mind you – just ignore it.
By James Clark, ACLU of Southern California at 5:39pm
The Los Angeles Times reports new data in a study to be released next week on California’s death penalty has revealed that the price tag for death is even higher than we thought: $4 billion since 1978. Put another way, we spend $184 million more per year for death penalty inmates than we do on those sentenced to life without the chance of parole. All told, California is on track to spend $1 billion on the death penalty over the next five years.
One familiar argument in the debate about the death penalty goes something like this: supporters of capital punishment say "defense attorneys just try to delay executions with endless appeals."
Opponents of the death penalty reply: "Give defendants quality lawyers — with reasonable caseloads and adequate resources and adequate compensation — and there won't be so much delay."
Under two Congressional statutes, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1995 and the Patriot Reauthorization, Congress tried to make a new bargain with death penalty states. If the states would give quality representation to death row defendants in state post-conviction proceedings, then the states could qualify for "fast track," abridged federal court review that could significantly expedite executions.
Yesterday, three different groups asked the Supreme Court to step in and restore fairness and reliability to death penalty trials involving so-called "expert" testimony about future dangerousness. For Texas juries, the "future danger" issue determines whether a defendant lives or dies: before the jury can return a death verdict, it must find that the defendant would pose a future danger if not executed.
By James Clark, ACLU of Southern California at 6:56pm
The ongoing debacle of California’s death penalty took a few dramatic turns last week: a new poll showed a dramatic shift in public opinion in favor of ending the death penalty; Gov. Jerry Brown took a step in the right direction by cutting plans for a new death row; and the Department of Corrections announced that the state’s hold on executions will last at least through this year, if not longer. At the same time, the California Democratic Party pushed even further in their advocacy against the death penalty. All told, it’s got people asking if California is finally ready to “cut” the death penalty.
Yesterday, Anna Arceneaux of the ACLU's Capital Punishment Project argued before the Louisiana Supreme Court that the confederate flag outside the Caddo County Courthouse in Shreveport injects inherent racial bias into all court proceedings and is especially damaging in death penalty cases. Anna told the court:
The Confederate flag is viewed by many people as a symbol of white supremacy and racism, and its presence outside the courthouse represents the legacy of lynching, terror and oppression of the African-American race. Flying the flag outside the courthouse risks diminishing the trust of African-Americans in the criminal justice system and priming white jurors to view African-American defendants and victims as second-class citizens.
Last night, Rachel Maddow featured a segment about the flag and Carl Staples, a black potential juror who objected to the presence of the flag out side of the courtroom because, he said, it symbolizes the inherent racism that plagues the capital punishment system in Louisiana and the United States.
Probably innocent — is that the standard we now use to justify executing people?
Last week, the United States Supreme Court ended any real chance Davis had that the courts would stop his execution. He is now at the end of the road, and the state of Georgia could set a new date for his execution at any moment. The last time he had an execution date, in a highly unusual move, the Supreme Court agreed to hear his case just two hours before the execution. But this time, if he gets two hours from execution again, there will probably be no stay.
Though death sentences and executions have declined in recent years in Texas, the state remains the national leader in executions. The Dallas County District Attorney's Office, under Craig Watkins's leadership, should be commended for taking a serious look at the questionable procedures and shoddy evidence routinely used in the past that have plagued former administrations and led to scores of wrongful convictions. But Dallas County still remains a leader among Texas counties in seeking and receiving death sentences and is on track to replace Harris County as the infamous "capital of capital punishment." Its recent handling of decades-old capital cases, including the resentencing trials of Ronald Chambers and Fernando Garcia and the retrial of Jonathan Bruce Reed now taking place, reveal serious shortcomings in its consideration of capital cases and decisions to seek death and its total unwillingness to review the unfair sentencing practices it inherited.
