THE CRUEL and UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS CLAUSE in the 21ST CENTURY ] Ohn D

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

THE CRUEL and UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS CLAUSE in the 21ST CENTURY ] Ohn D University of Baltimore Law ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law All Faculty Scholarship Faculty Scholarship 2013 The Anomaly of Executions: The rC uel and Unusual Punishments Clause in the 21st Century John Bessler University of Baltimore School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/all_fac Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Law Enforcement and Corrections Commons, and the Legal History Commons Recommended Citation The Anomaly of Executions: The rC uel and Unusual Punishments Clause in the 21st Century, 2 Brit. J. Am. Legal Stud. 297 (2013). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE ANOMALY OF EXECUTIONS: THE CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS CLAUSE IN THE 21ST CENTURY ] ohn D. Bessler* University of Baltimore School of Law ABSTRACT This Article describes the anomaly of executions in the context of the U.S. Supreme Court's Eighth Amendment jurisprudence. While the Supreme Court routinely reads the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause to pro­ tect prisoners from harm, the Court simultaneously interprets the Eighth Amendment to allow inmates to be executed. Corporal punishments short of death have long been abandoned in America's penal system, yet execu­ tions-at least in a few locales, heavily concentrated in the South-persist. This Article, which seeks a principled and much more consistent interpreta­ tion of the Eighth Amendment, argues that executions should be declared unconstitutional as "cruel and unusual punishments." In so doing, the Ar­ ticle explores the history of the "cruel and unusual" catchphrase in English and American law and critiques the Supreme Court's "evolving standards of decency" test. The Article also describes the abandonment of corporal punishments as penal sanctions and discusses existing Eighth Amendment jurisprudence on that topic. The Article explains how executions are cru­ el-and were thought to be so even by some of America's founders-and have, over time, become unusual. The Article further highlights how the U.S. Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment fundamentally transformed the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause calculus, making modern-day exe­ cutions unusual in the extreme because of the arbitrary and discriminatory way in which they are carried out. CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................ 299 II. "CRUEL AND UNUSUAL": A SHORT HISTORY ................... 312 A. The Origins of the Phrase .............................................. 312 B. Blackstone's Commentaries ............................................. 317 Associate Professor, University of Baltimore School of Law; Adjunct Professor, Georgetown University Law Center. 297 2 Br. ]. Am. Leg. Studies (2013) C. The Eighth Amendment and Its Equivalents ...................... 327 D. "Cruel" and "Unusual" Homicides and Beatings ................ 338 E. Early American Cases .......................................................... 345 i. An Overview: 1791 to 1830 ............................................. 345 ii. Early Jurists on Cruelty and Race ..................................... 349 iii. The Supreme Court's Pre-1900 Cases ................................ 366 III. THE STATE OF THE NATION ........................................... 381 A. The American Death Penalty ............................................... 381 B. The Supreme Court's Jurisprudence ..................................... 387 i. A "Progressive" Approach ............................................... 387 ii. The "Evolving Standards of Decency" Test ......................... 393 iii. Existing Eighth Amendment Case Law .............................. 397 iv. Excessive and Disproportionate Punishments ...................... 406 IV. THE TRANSFORMATION OF AMERICAN LAW .................. .415 A. The Fourteenth Amendment's Ratification ....................... .415 B. Due Process and Equal Protection .................................. .418 C. The Effect on What Is Considered "Cruel and Unusual" ..... 425 V. TOWARD A PRINCIPLED EIGHTH AMENDMENT ................ .428 A. The Punishment Continuum ............................................ 428 B. The Abandonment of Corporal Punishments ....................... 430 C. To Kill or Not to Kill? .................................................... 439 VI. Conclusion ......................................................................... 44 7 298 The Anomaly of Executions I. INTRODUCTION The Eighth Amendment, ratified in 1791/ contains just sixteen words: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."2 That amendment, however, has gen­ erated enormous controversy, spawning thousands of court cases3 and caustic reactions to U.S. Supreme Court decisions construing it.4 Courts have wrestled over the meaning of "excessive,"5 and jurists, lawyers, and scholars alike have spilled gallons of ink fiercely debating how to interpret the phrase "cruel and unusual punishments."6 There is relatively little legis­ lative history from the First Congress7 and the state ratification debates8 1 United States v. Austin, 614 F. Supp. 1208, 1212 (D. N.M. 1985) ("The eighth amendment ... was proposed in 1789 and ratified two years later in 1791."). 2 U.S. CONST., amend. VIII (ratified Dec. 15, 1791). 3 "ALLFEDS" and "ALLSTATES" Westlaw database searches for "Eighth Amendment" both yielded "10000 Documents"-the maximum retrievable number-as "Results." 4 In 2005, the Supreme Court held that the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments prohibit the execution of juvenile offenders. Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005). In 2008, the Court also held that those provisions prohibit the death penalty for non-homicidal child rape. Kennedy v. Louisiana, 128 S. Ct. 2641 (2008). Both decisions generated heated and sustained public debate. 5 E.g., United States v. Bajakajian, 524 U.S. 321, 335 (1998) ("Excessive means surpassing the usual, the proper, or a normal measure of proportion."); Alexander v. United States, 509 U.S. 544, 559 (1993) (commenting on "excessive" penalties within the meaning of the Eighth Amendment's Excessive Fines Clause); United States ex rel. Milwaukee Soc. Democratic Pub. Co. v. Burleson, 255 U.S. 407, 435 (1921) (Brandeis, J., dissenting) ("It was assumed in Waters-Pierce Oil Co. v. Texas (No. 1), 212 U.S. 86, Ill ... that an excessive fine, even if definite, would violate the Eighth Amendment."). 6 E.g., Michael J. Zydney Mannheirner, Cruel and Unusual Federal Punishments, 98 IowAL. REv. 69 (2012); Kevin White, The Constitutional Limits ofthe "National Consensus" Doctrine in Eighth Amendment Jurisprudence, 2012 B.Y.U. L. REv. 1371 (2012); John F. Stinneford, Rethinking Proportionality Under the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, 97 VA. L. REv. 899 (2011); Aimee Logan, Who Says So? Defining Cruel and Unusual Punishment by Science, Sentiment, and Consensus, 35 HASTINGS CONST. L.Q. 195 (2008); Michael J. Zydney Mannheimer, When the Federal Death Penalty Is "Cruel and Unusual," 74 U. CIN. L. REv. 819 (2006); Susan M. Raeker-Jordan, Parsing Personal Predilections: A Fresh Look at the Supreme Court's Cruel and Unusual Death Penalty Jurisprudence, 58 ME. L. REv. 99 (2006); Douglas L. Simon, Making Sense of Cruel and Unusual Punishment: A New Approach to Reconciling Military and Civilian Eighth Amendment Law, 184 MIL. L. REv. 66 (2005); Shannon D. Gilreath, Cruel and Unusual Punishment and the Eighth Amendment as a Mandate for Human Dignity: Another Look at Original intent, 25 T. JEFFERSON L. REv. 559 (2003); Stephen T. Parr, Symmetric Proportionality: A New Perspective on the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, 68 TENN. L. REv. 41 (2000). 7 JOHN D. BESSLER, CRUEL AND UNUSUAL: THE AMERICAN DEATH PENALTY AND THE FOUNDERS' EIGHTH AMENDMENT 186 (2012) (quoting the statements of Representatives William Loughton Smith and Samuel Livermore at the First Congress). 8 I d. at 186-87 (discussing the comments of Abraham Holmes at the Massachusetts convention and Patrick Henry's comments at Virginia's convention). 299 2 Br. ]. Am. Leg. Studies (2013) concerning the Eighth Amendment, further fueling the contentious public debate over the text.9 The Eighth Amendment-the subject of multiple books10 and count­ less law review articles11-has been described as "something of an enig­ ma.'m American judges rarely considered that amendment and state-law equivalents in the decades following the ratification of the U.S. Bill of Rights, so for generations the American people have wrestled mightily over the meaning of the bar on "cruel and unusual punishments.''13 Because what is "cruel and unusual" is largely a subjective determination, that long-standing debate is almost certain to continue.14 What is "cruel and 9 The death penalty itself has been a major focus of the Eighth Amendment debate. Compare John D. Bessler, Revisiting Beccaria's Vision: The Enlightenment, America's Death Penalty, and the Abolition Movement, 4 Nw. J. L. & Soc. POL'Y 195, 254 (2009) with RAOUL BERGER, DEATH PENALTIES: THE SUPREME COURT'S OBSTACLE COURSE (2001). 10 E.g., BESSLER, CRUEL AND UNUSUAL, supra note 7; MICHAEL MELTSNER, CRUEL AND UNUSUAL: THE SUPREME COURT AND CAPITAL PUNISHMENT (20 11) ( 1973 ); VINCENT
Recommended publications
  • Settlers, Africans, and Inter-Personal Violence in Kenya, Ca. 1900-1920S
    International Journai of African Historicai studies Vol. 45, No. 1 (2012) 57 Settlers, Africans, and Inter-Personal Violence in Kenya, ca. 1900-1920s By Brett Shadle Virginia Tech ([email protected]) As Fanon noted, violence was inherent in inter-racial relations in settler colonies, and Ngugi reiterated this point specifically in regard to Kenya.' When attempting to write a cultural history of white settlers, Ngugi found nothing of value. He observed only garish paintings in upscale Nairobi bars featuring scenes of colonial life: scrawny Africans pulling whites in rickshaws, a "long bull-necked, bull-faced settler" holding a sjambock (Afrikaans: whip) and his loyal (and well-fed) dog at his side. It was just such a scene, Ngugi refiected, that summed up white settlement: "The rickshaw. The dog. The sjambock. The ubiquitous underfed, wide-eyed, uniformed native slave."2 In the end, as Ngugi put it, "Reactionary violence to instill fear and silence was the very essence of colonial settler culture."3 As is so often the case, Ngugi cut to the heart of the matter: one cannot envision the settler without the sjambock, or in Kenyan parlance, the kiboko (hippopotamus-hide vvhip).'^ Often settlers considered beatings as part and parcel of life in Africa, almost akin to milking the cows or cleaning the kitchen (if, in fact, Europeans ever performed such menial tasks). In the flrst several decades of colonial Kenya, settlers certainly did not hesitate to discuss their use of the lash. In a letter to the East African Standard in 1927, Frank Watkins bragged that, "I thrash my boys if they deserve it and I will let [African defender and settler critic] Archdeacon Owen or anyone else enquire into my methods of handling and working labour."5The Times of East Africa believed, "Probably there is not ' Franz Fanon, Wretched of the Earth (New York: Grove Weidenfeld, 1963); Ngugi wa Thiong'o, Detained: A Writer's Prison Diary (London: Heinemann, 1981), Chap.
    [Show full text]
  • Improving Recidivism As a Performance Measure Ryan King Brian Elderbroom Washington State Offender Accountability Act of 1999
    Improving Recidivism as a Performance Measure Ryan King Brian Elderbroom Washington State Offender Accountability Act of 1999 Goal: “reduce the risk of reoffending by offenders in the community” Legislation calls for Department of Corrections to: • Classify supervised individuals based on risk of reoffending and severity of prior criminal offending • Shift resources toward higher-risk persons Washington Recidivism Rates Source: Washington State Institute for Public Policy Establishing Metrics for Success and Assessing Results Why measure correctional performance? • Understand the outcomes of funding and policy decisions • Assess the effectiveness of justice agencies at reducing reoffending • Provide the best return on taxpayer investments Most Common Correctional Performance Measure: Recidivism The Good: • Correctional interventions (prison, community supervision) are supposed to reduce reoffending, so recidivism is a natural metric for success The Bad: • Frequently a single-indicator, which doesn’t allow for policy-relevant comparisons across groups • Irregularly collected • Presented absent context Four Steps to Make Recidivism a Meaningful Performance Measure Define Collect Analyze Disseminate Definition Use Multiple Measures of Success Desistance Severity Time to failure Behavior Change Time to Failure (Delaware) Percent Rearrested 2008 2009 2010 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 6 12 18 24 36 Months from prison release Collection Develop Protocols to Ensure Data Are Consistent, Accurate, and Timely Assign unique identifiers Develop long-term records Collect contextual information Update change in status Photo: Flickr/Kevin Dl Breaking Recidivism Down by Policy- Relevant Factors (Colorado) 3-year return to prison rates for 2010 release cohort Analysis Account for Underlying Composition of the Prison Population Photo: Flickr/Thomas Hawk Photo: Flickr/Thomas Hawk Remember that Washington Story from Earlier .
    [Show full text]
  • 249 Subpart C—Director, Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards and President Naval Discharge Review Board; Re- Sponsib
    Department of the Navy, DoD § 724.302 § 724.223 NDRB support and aug- can presume the truth of such facts, mentation by regular and reserve unless there is a substantial credible activities. evidence to rebut this presumption; or (a) When an NDRB Panel travels for (2) If the discharge in lieu of court- the purpose of conducting hearings, it martial only required a valid preferral, shall normally select Navy or Marine the NDRB may presume that the signer Corps installations in the area visited either had personal knowledge of, or as review sites. had investigated the matters set forth, (b) The NDRB Traveling Board shall and that the charges were true in fact normally consist of members from the to the best of the signer’s knowledge NCPB and augmentees from regular and belief. 1 The weight to be given this and reserve Navy and Marine Corps presumption in determining whether sources, as required. the facts stated in the charge sheet are (c) Navy and Marine Corps activities true is a matter to be determined by in the geographical vicinity of selected the NDRB. To the extent that the dis- review sites shall provide administra- charge proceeding reflects an official tive support and augmentation to an determination that the facts stated in NDRB Panel during its visit where the charge sheet are true; that the ap- such assistance can be undertaken plicant/accused admitted the facts without interference with mission ac- stated in the charge sheet; or that the complishment. The NDRB shall coordi- applicant/accused admitted guilt of the nate requests for augmentees and ad- offense(s), then the presumption is ministrative support through Com- strengthened.
    [Show full text]
  • Lexington Phases Mastermap RH HR 3-24-17
    ELDORADO PARKWAY MAMMOTH CAVE LANE CAVE MAMMOTH *ZONED FUTURE LIGHT RETAIL MASTER PLANNED GATED COMMUNITY *ZONED FUTURE RETAIL/MULTI-FAMILY MAJESTIC PRINCE CIRCLE MAMMOTH CAVE LANE T IN O P L I A R E N O D ORB DRIVE ARISTIDES DRIVE MACBETH AVENUE MANUEL STREETMANUEL SPOKANE WAY DARK STAR LANE STAR DARK GIACOMO LANE CARRY BACK LANE 7 8 NORTHERN DANCER WAY GALLAHADION WAY GRINDSTONE MANOR GRINDSTONE FUNNY CIDE COURT FUNNY THUNDER GULCH WAY BROKERS TIP LANE MANUEL STREETMANUEL E PLAC RAL DMI WAR A DAY STAR WAY *ZONED FUTURE 3 LIGHT COMMERCIAL BOLD FORBES STREET FERDINAND TRAIL LEONATUS LANE LEONATUS PONDER LANE SEATTLE SLEW STREET GRAHAM AVENUE WINTERGREEN DRIVE COIT ROAD COIT SECRETARIAT BOULEVARD COUNT TURF COUNT DRIVE AMENITY SMARTY JONES STREET CENTER STRIKE GOLD BOULEVARD 2 DEBONAIR LANE LUCKY 5 CAVALCADE DRIVE CAVALCADE 1 Yucca Ridge *ZONED FUTURE FLYING EBONY STREET LIGHT RETAIL Park AFFIRMED AVENUE Independence High School SUTHERLAND LANE AZRA TRAIL OMAHA DRIVE BOLD VENTURE AVENUE CONQUISTADOR COURT CONQUISTADOR LUCKY DEBONAIR LANE LUCKY OXBOW AVENUE OXBOW CAVALCADE DRIVE CAVALCADE 4 WHIRLAWAY DRIVE 9 IRON LIEGE DRIVE *ZONED FUTURE IRON LIEGE DRIVE LIGHT COMMERCIAL 6 A M EMPIRE MAKER ROAD E RISEN STAR ROAD R I BUBBLING OVER ROAD C WAR EMBLEM PLACE WAR A N Future P H City A R O Park A H D R I V E 14DUST COMMANDER COURT CIRCLE PASS FORWARD DETERMINE DRIVE SPECTACULAR BID STREET REAL QUIET RD. TIM TAM CIRCLE EASY GOER AVENUE LEGEND PILLORY DRIVE PILLORY BY PHASES HALMA HALMA TRAIL 11 PHASE 1 A PROUD CLAIRON STREET M E MIDDLEGROUND PLACE
    [Show full text]
  • (Libby, Mont.), 1936-06-04
    Thursday, June 4, 1936. THE WESTERN NEWS, LIBBY, MONTANA Page Seven ■■ the present attempt to get legislation DREAKNESS Picking*: should fall altogether. Their thought * Bold Venture Joined an lliuetrlous M vlround la that if no new law results from the company of ponle* Including Sir Bar­ s efforts of the present congress. It wlU ton, Gallant Fox, Burgoo King and BRISBANE N Omaha that have won both the Ken­ an be much easier to get a real law, with sharp teeth, through the next session. tucky Derby and the Preaknea*. Twen­ THIS WEEK âe House ty Grand and Cavalcade, Derby win­ Whereas, If a law should be put If liquid In which olives are bot­ through at this session, In some weak ner*, were second when they tried tled Is thrown away when bottle Is H form, It might be next to Impossible their luck at the Preakne**. The Big “Black Legion” opened, olives may be kept Indefinite­ to get through the kind of law they Only two fillies have reached the win­ around the More and Better Babies ly If olive oil Is poured over them want at the next session. ners’ circle. They were Rhine Maiden A Worried Empire aftftr they are put back Into bottle. NATIONAL p* In 1915 and Nellie Mor»e In 1924. Fight Complicated Tom Healey ha* been the mo*t *uo- U. S. Dollars Emigrate A paste made of scouring powder Complicating tbe fight Is a bitter dif­ Î ce»sful of the modern trainer* In the The “ritual” of the murderous secret moistened with ammonia will remove JC API TAL ference between advocates of new leg- $25,000 classic.
    [Show full text]
  • Commitment After Acquittal on Grounds of Insanity M
    Maryland Law Review Volume 22 | Issue 4 Article 3 Commitment After Acquittal On Grounds of Insanity M. Albert Figinski Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/mlr Part of the Criminal Procedure Commons Recommended Citation M. A. Figinski, Commitment After Acquittal On Grounds of Insanity, 22 Md. L. Rev. 293 (1962) Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/mlr/vol22/iss4/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Academic Journals at DigitalCommons@UM Carey Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Maryland Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UM Carey Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 1962] COMMITMENT AFTER ACQUITTAL 293 COMMITMENT AFTER ACQUITIAL ON GROUJND'S OF INS'ANITYt By M. ALBERT FIGINsKI* I. THE PROCEDURES OF CRIMINAL COMMITMENT GENERALLY "Jurors, in common with people in general, are aware of the meanings of verdicts of guilty and not guilty. It is common knowledge that a verdict of not guilty means that the prisoner goes free and that a verdict of guilty means that he is subject to such punishment as the court may impose. But a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity has no such commonly understood meaning."' This lack of knowledge can logically result from two factors. One, the verdict is a rare one in our society, given the state of extreme dementation required by the "right and wrong test" to acquit. Second, unlike the verdicts of guilty and not guilty which have the same meaning and effect throughout Anglo-American jurisprudence, the meaning and effect of a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity are dependent upon statutes and vary among the states.
    [Show full text]
  • Prisons and Punishments in Late Medieval London
    Prisons and Punishments in Late Medieval London Christine Winter Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the University of London Royal Holloway, University of London, 2012 2 Declaration I, Christine Winter, hereby declare that this thesis and the work presented in it is entirely my own. Where I have consulted the work of others, this is always clearly stated. Signed: Date: 3 Abstract In the history of crime and punishment the prisons of medieval London have generally been overlooked. This may have been because none of the prison records have survived for this period, yet there is enough information in civic and royal documents, and through archaeological evidence, to allow a reassessment of London’s prisons in the later middle ages. This thesis begins with an analysis of the purpose of imprisonment, which was not merely custodial and was undoubtedly punitive in the medieval period. Having established that incarceration was employed for a variety of purposes the physicality of prison buildings and the conditions in which prisoners were kept are considered. This research suggests that the periodic complaints that London’s medieval prisons, particularly Newgate, were ‘foul’ with ‘noxious air’ were the result of external, rather than internal, factors. Using both civic and royal sources the management of prisons and the abuses inflicted by some keepers have been analysed. This has revealed that there were very few differences in the way civic and royal prisons were administered; however, there were distinct advantages to being either the keeper or a prisoner of the Fleet prison. Because incarceration was not the only penalty available in the enforcement of law and order, this thesis also considers the offences that constituted a misdemeanour and the various punishments employed by the authorities.
    [Show full text]
  • Penal Code Offenses by Punishment Range Office of the Attorney General 2
    PENAL CODE BYOFFENSES PUNISHMENT RANGE Including Updates From the 85th Legislative Session REV 3/18 Table of Contents PUNISHMENT BY OFFENSE CLASSIFICATION ........................................................................... 2 PENALTIES FOR REPEAT AND HABITUAL OFFENDERS .......................................................... 4 EXCEPTIONAL SENTENCES ................................................................................................... 7 CLASSIFICATION OF TITLE 4 ................................................................................................. 8 INCHOATE OFFENSES ........................................................................................................... 8 CLASSIFICATION OF TITLE 5 ............................................................................................... 11 OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSON ....................................................................................... 11 CLASSIFICATION OF TITLE 6 ............................................................................................... 18 OFFENSES AGAINST THE FAMILY ......................................................................................... 18 CLASSIFICATION OF TITLE 7 ............................................................................................... 20 OFFENSES AGAINST PROPERTY .......................................................................................... 20 CLASSIFICATION OF TITLE 8 ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Capital Punishment in Illinois in the Aftermath of the Ryan Commutations
    Northwestern University School of Law Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons Faculty Working Papers 2010 CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN ILLINOIS IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE RYAN COMMUTATIONS: REFORMS, ECONOMIC REALITIES, AND A NEW SALIENCY FOR ISSUES OF COST Leigh Buchanan Bienen Northwestern University School of Law, [email protected] Repository Citation Bienen, Leigh Buchanan, "CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN ILLINOIS IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE RYAN COMMUTATIONS: REFORMS, ECONOMIC REALITIES, AND A NEW SALIENCY FOR ISSUES OF COST" (2010). Faculty Working Papers. Paper 118. http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/facultyworkingpapers/118 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Working Papers by an authorized administrator of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. 0091-4169/10/10004-0001 THE JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW & CRIMINOLOGY Vol. 100, No. 4 Copyright © 2010 by Northwestern University, School of Law Printed in U.S.A. CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN ILLINOIS IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE RYAN COMMUTATIONS: REFORMS, ECONOMIC REALITIES, AND A NEW SALIENCY FOR ISSUES OF COST LEIGH B. BIENEN Perhaps most telling is the view of Professor Joseph Hoffman, someone who has devoted enormous time and energy to death penalty reform, spearheading death penalty reform efforts in both Illinois and Indiana and serving as Co-Chair and Reporter for the Massachusetts Governor‘s Council on Capital Punishment. Hoffman served as a member of an advisory group to discuss an earlier draft of this paper, and he strongly expressed the view that seeking reform of capital punishment in the political realm is futile.
    [Show full text]
  • Setting the Standard
    SETTING THE STANDARD A century ago a colt bred by Hamburg Place won a trio of races that became known as the Triple Crown, a feat only 12 others have matched By Edward L. Bowen COOK/KEENELAND LIBRARY Sir Barton’s exploits added luster to America’s classic races. 102 SPRING 2019 K KEENELAND.COM SirBarton_Spring2019.indd 102 3/8/19 3:50 PM BLACK YELLOWMAGENTACYAN KM1-102.pgs 03.08.2019 15:55 Keeneland Sir Barton, with trainer H. Guy Bedwell and jockey John Loftus, BLOODHORSE LIBRARY wears the blanket of roses after winning the 1919 Kentucky Derby. KEENELAND.COM K SPRING 2019 103 SirBarton_Spring2019.indd 103 3/8/19 3:50 PM BLACK YELLOWMAGENTACYAN KM1-103.pgs 03.08.2019 15:55 Keeneland SETTING THE STANDARD ir Barton is renowned around the sports world as the rst Triple Crown winner, and 2019 marks the 100th an- niversary of his pivotal achievement in SAmerican horse racing history. For res- idents of Lexington, Kentucky — even those not closely attuned to racing — the name Sir Barton has an addition- al connotation, and a local one. The street Sir Barton Way is prominent in a section of the city known as Hamburg. Therein lies an additional link with history, for Sir Barton sprung from the famed Thoroughbred farm also known as Hamburg Place, which occupied the same land a century ago. The colt Sir Barton was one of four Kentucky Derby winners bred at Hamburg Place by a master of the Turf, one John E. Madden. Like the horse’s name, the name Madden also has come down through the years in a milieu of lasting and regen- erating fame.
    [Show full text]
  • The Triple Crown (1867-2019)
    The Triple Crown (1867-2019) Kentucky Derby Winner Preakness Stakes Winner Belmont Stakes Winner Horse of the Year Jockey Jockey Jockey Champion 3yo Trainer Trainer Trainer Year Owner Owner Owner 2019 Country House War of Will Sir Winston Bricks and Mortar Flavien Prat Tyler Gaffalione Joel Rosario Maximum Security Bill Mott Mark Casse Mark Casse Mrs. J.V. Shields Jr., E.J.M. McFadden Jr. & LNJ Foxwoods Gary Barber Tracy Farmer 2018 Justify Justify Justify Justify Mike Smith Mike Smith Mike Smith Justify Bob Baffert Bob Baffert Bob Baffert WinStar Farm LLC, China Horse Club, Starlight Racing & Head of Plains Partners LLC WinStar Farm LLC, China Horse Club, Starlight Racing & Head of Plains Partners LLC WinStar Farm LLC, China Horse Club, Starlight Racing & Head of Plains Partners LLC 2017 Always Dreaming Cloud Computing Tapwrit Gun Runner John Velazquez Javier Castellano Joel Ortiz West Coast Todd Pletcher Chad Brown Todd Pletcher MeB Racing, Brooklyn Boyz, Teresa Viola, St. Elias, Siena Farm & West Point Thoroughbreds Bridlewood Farm, Eclipse Thoroughbred Partners & Robert V. LaPenta Klaravich Stables Inc. & William H. Lawrence 2016 Nyquist Exaggerator Creator California Chrome Mario Gutierrez Kent Desormeaux Irad Ortiz Jr. Arrogate Doug O’Neill Keith Desormeaux Steve Asmussen Big Chief Racing, Head of Plains Partners, Rocker O Ranch, Keith Desormeaux Reddam Racing LLC (J. Paul Reddam) WinStar Farm LLC & Bobby Flay 2015 American Pharoah American Pharoah American Pharoah American Pharoah Victor Espinoza Victor Espinoza Victor Espinoza American Pharoah Bob Baffert Bob Baffert Bob Baffert Zayat Stables LLC (Ahmed Zayat) Zayat Stables LLC (Ahmed Zayat) Zayat Stables LLC (Ahmed Zayat) 2014 California Chrome California Chrome Tonalist California Chrome Victor Espinoza Victor Espinoza Joel Rosario California Chrome Art Sherman Art Sherman Christophe Clement Steve Coburn & Perry Martin Steve Coburn & Perry Martin Robert S.
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Justice: Capital Punishment Focus
    Criminal Justice: Capital Punishment Focus Background The formal execution of criminals has been used in nearly all societies since the beginning of recorded history. Before the beginning of humane capital punishment used in today’s society, penalties included boiling to death, flaying, slow slicing, crucifixion, impalement, crushing, disembowelment, stoning, burning, decapitation, dismemberment and scaphism. In earlier times, the death penalty was used for a variety of reasons that today would seem barbaric. Today, execution in the US is used primarily for murder, espionage and treason. The Death Debate Those in support of capital punishment believe it deters crimes and, more often than not believe that certain crimes eliminate one’s right to life. Those who oppose capital punishment believe, first and foremost, that any person, including the government, has no right to take a life for any reason. They often believe that living with one’s crimes is a worse punishment than dying for them, and that the threat of capital punishment will not deter a person from committing a crime. Costs and Procedures On average, it costs $620,932 per trial in federal death cases, which is 8x higher than that of a case where the death penalty is not sought. When including appeals, incarceration times and the execution in a death penalty case, the cost is closer to $3 million per inmate. However, court costs, attorney fees and incarceration for life only totals a little over $1 million. Recent studies have also found that the higher the cost of legal counsel in a death penalty case the less likely the defendant is to receive the death penalty, which calls the fairness of the process into question.
    [Show full text]