DOCSLIB.ORG

A Cost and Lack-Of-Benefit Analysis of the Death Penalty

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Cost and Lack-Of-Benefit Analysis of the Death Penalty Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review Volume 23 Number 1 Symposium—The Death Penalty Article 5 Approaches the 1990s: Where Are We Now 11-1-1989 The Execution of Injustice: A Cost and Lack-of-Benefit Analysis of the Death Penalty Ronald J. Tabak J. Mark Lane Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/llr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Ronald J. Tabak & J. M. Lane, The Execution of Injustice: A Cost and Lack-of-Benefit Analysis of the Death Penalty, 23 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 59 (1989). Available at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/llr/vol23/iss1/5 This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE EXECUTION OF INJUSTICE: A COST AND LACK-OF-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF THE DEATH PENALTY* Ronald . Tabak** and J. Mark Lane*** TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ......................................... 61 II. THE DEATH PENALTY IS STILL ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS ............................................ 62 A. The CapitalPunishment System Does Not Rationally Select Those Who Shall Die ......................... 62 B. Overzealous ProsecutorsImproperly Seek and Obtain Death Sentences ..................................... 64 C Ineffective Defense Renders Capital Trials Unfair ..... 69 D. The Juq Selection Process Fails to Ensure Unbiased Juries .............................................. 75 E. Jurors in Capital Cases Are Often Misled, Misinstructed, or Incompletely Informed ............. 77 F. The Lack of Real ProportionalityReview Means that * This Article was prepared for New York Lawyers Against the Death Penalty, an organization of over 1,000 members of the New York Bar, as a memorandum in opposition to legislation which would restore the death penalty in New York State. That legislation was passed by both houses of the New York State Legislature in early 1989, but was vetoed by Governor Mario Cuomo. In June 1989, when it became apparent that the veto could not be overridden in the regular 1989 session, the legislature adjourned without a vote on the proposed override. The proposed legislation is expected to be reintroduced in the 1990 session. This memorandum has been updated and modified since its initial distribution in Spring 1989. The authors would like to thank the following people, all of whom provided substantial assistance in the preparation of tle memorandum upon which this Article is based: James Pitofsky, Martin I. Rosenbaum, Maura Barry, Tanya Coke, Jeffrey Trachtman, Jonathan E. Gradess, Stephen Gillers, Channing Kury, Jonathan Lang, Arthur C. Helton, Peter Neufeld, Howard Schrader, Stephen Latimer, Tom Terrizzi, Polly Passoneau, Holly Levine, Pamela Winnick, Leon Bijou, and Maureen O'Connor. ** Ronald J. Tabak, B.A. Yale University, J.D. Harvard University; Special Counsel and Coordinator of Pro Bono Work, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom; Chair, Death Penalty Committee, American Bar Association, Committee of Individual Rights and Responsibilities; President, New York Lawyers Against the Death Penalty. *** J. Mark Lane, B.A. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, J.D. candidate New York University School of Law, 1990. 60 LOYOLA OF LOS ANGELES LAW REVIEW [Vol. 23:59 the Arbitrary Imposition of Death Is Not Corrected on Appeal .............................................. 81 G. Lack of Qualified, Adequately Compensated Counsel for Post-Conviction Proceedings ...................... 83 H. Overly Strict ProceduralBar Rules Lead to Executions of People Unconstitutionally Convicted or Sentenced .......................................... 85 III. THE DEATH PENALTY OPERATES IN A RACIALLY DISCRIMINATORY MANNER ............................. 89 IV. MENTALLY RETARDED PEOPLE AND OTHERS NOT COMPETENT TO STAND TRIAL ARE BEING EXECUTED... 93 V. PEOPLE WHO NEITHER KILLED NOR INTENDED TO KILL ARE RECEIVING DEATH SENTENCES .............. 96 VI. INNOCENT PEOPLE ARE RECEIVING THE DEATH PENALTY AND SOME ARE BEING EXECUTED ............ 98 A. Innocent People Have Been Sentenced to Death in the 1970s and 1980s .................................... 99 B. Numerous Innocent People Have Been and Still Are Convicted in New York .............................. 108 C. Innocent People Are Still Being Executed ............. 110 VII. THE DEATH PENALTY IS NOT A DETERRENT ........... 114 A. The Death Penalty Is Not a General Deterrent........ 114 B. The Death Penalty Is Not Relevant to Arguments for Specific Deterrence .................................. 119 C. Currently Available Life Sentences for the Most Severe Murders Do Provide Effective Incapacitation.......... 125 VIII. THE DEATH PENALTY ACTUALLY EXACERBATES THE PROBLEMS OF VICTIMS' FAMILIES ....................... 129 A. Survivors of Murder Victims Often Oppose the Death Penalty ............................................. 129 B. Imposition of the Death Penalty Means Continued Victimization of Survivors ............................ 131 C. Executions Do Not Provide Satisfaction ............... 132 IX. A DEATH PENALTY SYSTEM IS MORE COSTLY THAN A SYSTEM IN WHICH LIFE IMPRISONMENT IS THE MOST SEVERE PUNISHMENT ................................... 133 A. There Are Many Reasons Why Death Penalty Cases Require Additional Expenditure of Tremendous Amounts of Taxpayers' Money ....................... 133 November 1989] THE EXECUTION OF INJUSTICE B. Numerous Studies Confirm that the Death Penalty Is More Expensive ..................................... 135 C The Death Penalty Diverts Resources Away from Fighting Crime ..................................... 136 X. THE DEATH PENALTY PLACES THE UNITED STATES IN ISOLATION FROM VIRTUALLY ALL DEMOCRATIC COUNTRIES AND IN THE COMPANY OF THE WORST DICTATORSHIPS ......................................... 138 XI. THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS HAVE BEEN GROSSLY DISTORTED AS A PURPORTED JUSTIFICATION FOR THE DEATH PENALTY ....................................... 142 XII. CONCLUSION ........................................... 146 I. INTRODUCTION As Virginia Assistant Attorney General Robert Harris recently ac- knowledged, the more educated the public becomes about capital punish- ment, the more the public will oppose it.' The facts, readily available after a decade and a half of trials under the modern death penalty stat- utes, simply lend no support to the use of capital punishment. The first six sections of this Article describe fundamental problems with the death penalty, problems that might be thought of as the social "costs" of the death penalty. Sections seven through nine correct com- mon misconceptions that underlie current support for the death penalty. These sections illustrate that there are no real "benefits" from the death penalty. Finally, section ten describes the growing international consen- sus against the use of the death penalty, a consensus that, as discussed in section eleven, reflects a moral judgment that capital punishment cannot be justified. The issues discussed herein are of national significance and the ma- terial presented covers a wide range of jurisdictions. Moreover, every problem which this memorandum describes would exist under the pro- posed death penalty legislation in New York if it were enacted.2 1. Makin, Killing the Killers" Part 6, Toronto Globe and Mail, June 12, 1987, at A3, col. 2. 2. This Article does not purport to be an exhaustive study of all the problems with the death penalty in other states. Such a study would necessarily include a variety of additional problems not discussed here because they would not arise under the death penalty bill pro- posed in New York. For example, this Article does not discuss judicial overrides of jury sen- tencing decisions. Such overrides are a serious problem in Florida, where judges frequently ignore jury recommendations of life imprisonment and impose the death penalty instead. See Tabak, The Death ofFairness: The Arbitrary and CapriciousImposition of the Death Penalty in the 1980s, 14 N.Y.U. REV. L. & Soc. CHANGE 797, 820-22 (1986). 62 LOYOLA OF LOS ANGELES LAW REVIEW [Vol. 23:59 II. THE DEATH PENALTY IS STILL ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS A. The CapitalPunishment System Does Not Rationally Select Those Who Shall Die The Supreme Court struck down all existing capital punishment schemes in 1972 because they allowed the "arbitrary and capricious" im- position of death.3 Four years later, the Court approved certain new cap- ital statutes which supposedly corrected that constitutional problem.4 However, after over a decade and a half of experience under the new statutes, as this Article demonstrates, the death penalty is still being ap- plied arbitrarily and capriciously. Of the approximately 20,000 homicide arrests in the United States each year, approximately 4,000 people are ultimately convicted of mur- der.5 Of those, approximately 250 are sentenced to death.6 If it could be shown that these 250 are the most heinous murderers, the most danger- ous criminals confronting the criminal justice system, and that they have repeatedly killed or are likely to repeatedly kill, then some degree of ra- tionality in imposing the death sentence might be argued. However, although the assumption that we are executing the worst killers clearly underlies public support for capital punishment, that assumption is baseless. The so-called "guided discretion"
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fictional Documentaries and Truthful Fictions: the Death Penalty in Recent American Film
    FICTIONAL DOCUMENTARIES AND TRUTHFUL FICTIONS: THE DEATH PENALTY IN RECENT AMERICAN FILM David R. Dow* When it comes to death, most Hollywood movies cheat. They cheat by tinkering with the truth, because the truth as it ac­ tually is is too complex or too disturbing to confront honestly. (The so-called happy ending is the most famous form of such cheating.) They cheat because people generally prefer happi­ ness and simplicity to darkness and complexity, especially where their entertainment is concerned, and filmmakers tend to give people what they want. Even great movies cheat. For example, last year's Oscar winner for best picture, American Beauty, cheats egregiously. The movie (for the one or two of you who have not seen it) deals with modern times: It is about suburbia, men and women who mindlessly pursue meaningless careers, bigotry, and finally, hope and redemption. In the end, the character played by Kevin Spacey is murdered. This is not a surprise ending because the Spacey character narrates the movie in a voice-over, and he tells us as the movie opens that in less than a year he will no longer be alive. We know at the beginning that 110 minutes later Kevin Spacey's character will be dead. Spacey plays a morally ambiguous character. He is in the midst of a full-blown mid-life crisis. He is a lousy husband and a worse father. For virtually the entire length of the film, he lusts after his daughter's high school classmate. In the end, however, he gently rebuffs a neighbor's homosexual advance and-again * George Butler Research Professor of Law, University of Houston Law Center.
    [Show full text]
  • Death Row U.S.A
    DEATH ROW U.S.A. Summer 2017 A quarterly report by the Criminal Justice Project of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Deborah Fins, Esq. Consultant to the Criminal Justice Project NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. Death Row U.S.A. Summer 2017 (As of July 1, 2017) TOTAL NUMBER OF DEATH ROW INMATES KNOWN TO LDF: 2,817 Race of Defendant: White 1,196 (42.46%) Black 1,168 (41.46%) Latino/Latina 373 (13.24%) Native American 26 (0.92%) Asian 53 (1.88%) Unknown at this issue 1 (0.04%) Gender: Male 2,764 (98.12%) Female 53 (1.88%) JURISDICTIONS WITH CURRENT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 33 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wyoming, U.S. Government, U.S. Military. JURISDICTIONS WITHOUT DEATH PENALTY STATUTES: 20 Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico [see note below], New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin. [NOTE: New Mexico repealed the death penalty prospectively. The men already sentenced remain under sentence of death.] Death Row U.S.A. Page 1 In the United States Supreme Court Update to Spring 2017 Issue of Significant Criminal, Habeas, & Other Pending Cases for Cases to Be Decided in October Term 2016 or 2017 1. CASES RAISING CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS First Amendment Packingham v. North Carolina, No. 15-1194 (Use of websites by sex offender) (decision below 777 S.E.2d 738 (N.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement of the ACLU Greater Philadelphia Chapter, ACLU Of
    Statement of the ACLU Greater Philadelphia Chapter, ACLU of Pennsylvania, Americans For Prosperity – Pennsylvania, The Center for Emerging Visual Artists, Commonwealth Foundation, French Heritage Society, Institute for Justice, Institute of Contemporary Art, Mural Arts Program, Painted Bride Art Center, Property Rights Alliance, Molly Dougherty, Professor Patricia M. Smith, and Rev. Dr. Mark K. Tyler in Opposition to the Condemnation of James Dupree’s Art Studio Dear Mayor and City Council: We write to urge this body not to proceed with the condemnation of James Dupree’s art studio at 3617 Haverford Avenue. Mr. Dupree’s case is straightforward: The city of Philadelphia is abusing its power of eminent domain. The city wants to bulldoze Mr. Dupree’s 8,600-square-foot property and replace it with a grocery store and parking lot. Eminent domain is supposed to be used for “public use,” such as for roads and schools. A grocery store is not a public use. Additionally, the unreasonable valuation is not “just compensation,” which is another constitutional requirement, and thus is a denial of due process. Seizing James Dupree’s art studio is not only unconstitutional and a gross abuse of eminent domain, it is unconscionable. Dupree, a native son of Philadelphia, is one of the city’s most highly regarded artists. Five of his paintings are housed at the Philadelphia Museum of Art and numerous pieces of his are displayed throughout the city. Mr. Dupree turned a broken-down warehouse and garage into a unique art space where he works and has hosted art classes. He would like to start a mentorship program in Mantua so that inner-city kids can learn to appreciate art.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Health and Criminal Justice Approaches to Homicide Research
    The Relationship Between Non-Lethal and Lethal Violence Proceedings of the 2002 Meeting of the Homicide Research Working Group St. Louis, Missouri May 30 - June 2 Editors M. Dwayne Smith University of South Florida Paul H. Blackman National Rifle Association ii PREFACE In a number of ways, 2002 and 2003 represent transition years for the Homicide Research Working Group (HRWG), its annual meetings, variously referred to as symposia or workshops, and the Proceedings of those meetings. One major change, both in terms of the meetings and the Proceedings, deals with sponsorship. Traditionally, the HRWG’s annual meetings have been hosted by some institution, be it a university or group affiliated with a university, or a government agency devoted at least in part to the collection and/or analysis of data regarding homicides or other facets of homicide research. Prior to 2002, this generally meant at least two things: that the meetings would take place at the facilities of the hosting agency, and that attendees would be treated to something beyond ordinary panels related to the host agency. For example, in recent years, the FBI Academy provided an afternoon with tours of some of its facilities, Loyola University in Chicago arranged a field trip to the Medical Examiners’ office and a major hospital trauma center, and the University of Central Florida arranged a demonstration of forensic anthropology. More recently, however, the host has merely arranged for hotel facilities and meeting centers, and some of the panels, particularly the opening session. This has had the benefit of adding variety to the persons attracted to present at our symposia, but at the risk that they are unfamiliar with our traditional approach to preparing papers for the meetings and the Proceedings.
    [Show full text]
  • 108916NCJRS.Pdf
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. • ., CAlKli:'()RNKA C()RTI~IECTKOl\JAt SYSTEM'S POlITCH1E§ RIE:C;ARTI)KNG PAROLE RJE1L1EASE • AND l\1E Nl'A ttY D rrS()R[) JERE D () IF flE NIJ£ RS ., • • • ! ~!, ' •. I' ) \ 1) .\,' '/ ) \' ' I 1\1. " ll'\'" l,:...; .• I) . ( ..L\ I!'.,.!. \ ' (,.~, ,I. ' I I j l , :: • " . I • I • • • • • • • a)'i ilirt! i kl,itj~j)ns ficp • ":tcl tL·1 CdP'll to ~ 9 h1m, 94 ?tv/. !) S~rr~rn~nto, tA Y4249-noo1 • • t.. • 108'Qlh CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL SYSTEM'S POLICIES REGARDING I PAROLE RELEASE I~ AND MENTALLY DISORDERED OFFENDERS • • • • ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY • FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS I • LARRY STIRLING, Chair Robert Campbell Burt Margolin • Terry B. Friedman' Mike Roos Tim Lesl ie Paul E. Zeltner DeeDee D'Adamo 9 Counsel Laura Hankinss Consultant LARRY STIRLING CIIiEF COUNSEL CHAIR i\slltwbln SUSAN SHAW GOODMAN ROBERT CAMPBELL COUNSEL l'E~1RY B. FRIEDMAN LISA BURROUGHS WAGNER TIM LESLIE QtaUfnrnta 1JJegt111ature DEEDEE D'ADAMO BURr MARGOLIN MELISSA K NAPPAN MII<EROOS PAUL E ZELTNER CONSULTANT LAURA HANKINS COMMITTEE SECRETARY • DARLENE E. BLUE • 1100 ,) STREET SACRAMENTO. CA 95814 (916) 445,3268 • August 5~ 1987 Honorab 1e kJi 11 i e L. Brown 9 Jr. Speaker of the Assembly State Capitol~ Room 219 • Sacramento~ California 95814 Dear Mr. Speaker~ The attached documents represent the testimony presented to the Committee on Public Safety at the "Informational Hearing on Parole Release Policies and • Evaluations and Treatment of Mentally Disordered Offenders." Also included are the committee's findings and recommendations regarding these issues.
    [Show full text]
  • William Newsom POLITICS, LAW, and HUMAN RIGHTS
    Regional Oral History Office University of California The Bancroft Library Berkeley, California William Newsom POLITICS, LAW, AND HUMAN RIGHTS Interviews conducted by Martin Meeker in 2008-2009 Copyright © 2009 by The Regents of the University of California Since 1954 the Regional Oral History Office has been interviewing leading participants in or well-placed witnesses to major events in the development of Northern California, the West, and the nation. Oral History is a method of collecting historical information through tape-recorded interviews between a narrator with firsthand knowledge of historically significant events and a well-informed interviewer, with the goal of preserving substantive additions to the historical record. The tape recording is transcribed, lightly edited for continuity and clarity, and reviewed by the interviewee. The corrected manuscript is bound with photographs and illustrative materials and placed in The Bancroft Library at the University of California, Berkeley, and in other research collections for scholarly use. Because it is primary material, oral history is not intended to present the final, verified, or complete narrative of events. It is a spoken account, offered by the interviewee in response to questioning, and as such it is reflective, partisan, deeply involved, and irreplaceable. ********************************* All uses of this manuscript are covered by a legal agreement between The Regents of the University of California and William Newsom, dated August 7, 2009, and Barbara Newsom, dated September 22, 2009 (by her executor), and Brennan Newsom, dated November 12, 2009. The manuscript is thereby made available for research purposes. All literary rights in the manuscript, including the right to publish, are reserved to The Bancroft Library of the University of California, Berkeley.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2018
    2018 Annual Report 4 A Message from the Chair 5 A Message from the Director & President 6 Remembering Keith L. Sachs 10 Collecting 16 Exhibiting & Conserving 22 Learning & Interpreting 26 Connecting & Collaborating 30 Building 34 Supporting 38 Volunteering & Staffing 42 Report of the Chief Financial Officer Front cover: The Philadelphia Assembled exhibition joined art and civic engagement. Initiated by artist Jeanne van Heeswijk and shaped by hundreds of collaborators, it told a story of radical community building and active resistance; this spread, clockwise from top left: 6 Keith L. Sachs (photograph by Elizabeth Leitzell); Blocks, Strips, Strings, and Half Squares, 2005, by Mary Lee Bendolph (Purchased with the Phoebe W. Haas fund for Costume and Textiles, and gift of the Souls Grown Deep Foundation from the William S. Arnett Collection, 2017-229-23); Delphi Art Club students at Traction Company; Rubens Peale’s From Nature in the Garden (1856) was among the works displayed at the 2018 Philadelphia Antiques and Art Show; the North Vaulted Walkway will open in spring 2019 (architectural rendering by Gehry Partners, LLP and KXL); back cover: Schleissheim (detail), 1881, by J. Frank Currier (Purchased with funds contributed by Dr. Salvatore 10 22 M. Valenti, 2017-151-1) 30 34 A Message from the Chair A Message from the As I observe the progress of our Core Project, I am keenly aware of the enormity of the undertaking and its importance to the Museum’s future. Director & President It will be transformative. It will not only expand our exhibition space, but also enhance our opportunities for community outreach.
    [Show full text]
  • Notable Southern Families Vol II
    NOTABLE SOUTHERN FAMILIES VOLUME II (MISSING PHOTO) Page 1 of 327 NOTABLE SOUTHERN FAMILIES VOLUME II JEFFERSON DAVIS PRESIDENT OF THE CONFEDERATE STATES OF AMERICA Page 2 of 327 NOTABLE SOUTHERN FAMILIES VOLUME II Copyright 1922 By ZELLA ARMSTRONG Page 3 of 327 NOTABLE SOUTHERN FAMILIES VOLUME II NOTABLE SOUTHERN FAMILIES VOLUME II COMPILED BY ZELLA ARMSTRONG Member of the Tennessee Historical Commission PRICE $4.00 PUBLISHED BY THE LOOKOUT PUBLISHING CO. CHATTANOOGA, TENN. Page 4 of 327 NOTABLE SOUTHERN FAMILIES VOLUME II Table of Contents FOREWORD....................................................................10 BEAN........................................................................11 BOONE.......................................................................19 I GEORGE BOONE...........................................................20 II SARAH BOONE...........................................................20 III SQUIRE BOONE.........................................................20 VI DANIEL BOONE..........................................................21 BORDEN......................................................................23 COAT OF ARMS.............................................................29 BRIAN.......................................................................30 THIRD GENERATION.........................................................31 WILLIAM BRYAN AND MARY BOONE BRYAN.......................................33 WILLIAM BRYAN LINE.......................................................36 FIRST GENERATION
    [Show full text]
  • How Empirical Studies Can Affect Positively the Politics of the Death Penalty Ronald J
    Cornell Law Review Volume 83 Article 1 Issue 6 September 1998 How Empirical Studies Can Affect Positively the Politics of the Death Penalty Ronald J. Tabak Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Ronald J. Tabak, How Empirical Studies Can Affect Positively the Politics of the Death Penalty, 83 Cornell L. Rev. 1431 (1998) Available at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol83/iss6/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell Law Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. HOW EMPIRICAL STUDIES CAN AFFECT POSITIVELY THE POLITICS OF THE DEATH PENALTY RonaldJ Tabakj INTRODUCTION Empirical studies concerning the death penalty can play an im- portant role in public discourse on capital punishment and can affect our political system's handling of this issue. But constructive dis- course will occur only if opponents of the death penalty educate themselves about what the empirical studies show. Abolitionists then can include these studies in their arsenal along with other arguments against state-implemented killings. The discussion below exemplifies how death penalty opponents can use empirical studies to make effec- tive arguments against capital punishment. I DETERRENCE Death penalty proponents persistently make the argument that capital punishment deters killing. This argument takes a variety of forms, none of which withstands analysis. A. Reputable Studies Fail to Find a Deterrent Effect Scholars conducting valid studies on the subject of deterrence have failed to find any deterrent effect from capital punishment.' This proposition holds true whether one looks just at the states with the death penalty or whether one compares death penalty states with non-death penalty states.
    [Show full text]
  • ANNUAL REPORT 2013 BOARD of TRUSTEES 5 Letter from the Chair
    BOARD OF TRUSTEES 2 LETTER FROM THE CHAIR 4 A STRATEGIC VISION FOR THE 6 PHILADELPHIA MUSEUM OF ART A YEAR AT THE MUSEUM 8 Collecting 10 Exhibiting 20 Learning 30 Connecting and Collaborating 38 Building 48 Conserving 54 Supporting 60 Staffing and Volunteering 70 A CALENDAR OF EXHIBITIONS AND EVENTS 75 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 80 COMMIttEES OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES 86 SUPPORT GROUPS 88 VOLUNTEERS 91 MUSEUM STAFF 94 BOARD OF TRUSTEES TRUSTEES EMERITI TRUSTEES EX OFFICIO OFFICERS Peter A. Benoliel Hon. Tom Corbett Constance H. Williams Jack R Bershad Governor, Commonwealth Chair, Board of Trustees Dr. Luther W. Brady, Jr. of Pennsylvania and Chair of the Executive Committee Helen McCloskey Carabasi Hon. Michael A. Nutter Mayor, City of Philadelphia H. F. (Gerry) Lenfest Hon. William T. Raymond G. Perelman Coleman, Jr. Hon. Darrell L. Clarke Chairs Emeriti Ruth M. Colket President, City Council Edith Robb Dixon Dennis Alter Hannah L. Henderson Timothy Rub Barbara B. Aronson Julian A. Brodsky B. Herbert Lee The George D. Widener Director and Chief David Haas H. F. (Gerry) Lenfest Executive Officer Lynne Honickman Charles E. Mather III TRUSTEES Victoria McNeil Le Vine Donald W. McPhail Gail Harrity Vice Chairs Marta Adelson Joan M. Johnson David William Seltzer Harvey S. Shipley Miller President and Chief Operating Officer Timothy Rub John R. Alchin Kenneth S. Kaiserman* Martha McGeary Snider Theodore T. Newbold The George D. Widener Dennis Alter James Nelson Kise* Marion Stroud Swingle Lisa S. Roberts Charles J. Ingersoll Director and Chief Barbara B. Aronson Berton E. Korman Joan F. Thalheimer Joan S.
    [Show full text]
  • California Correctional System's Policies Regarding Parole Release and Mentally Disordered Offenders Assembly Committee on Public Safety
    Golden Gate University School of Law GGU Law Digital Commons California Assembly California Documents 1987 California Correctional System's Policies Regarding Parole Release and Mentally Disordered Offenders Assembly Committee on Public Safety Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/caldocs_assembly Part of the Criminal Law Commons, and the Legislation Commons Recommended Citation Assembly Committee on Public Safety, "California Correctional System's Policies Regarding Parole Release and Mentally Disordered Offenders" (1987). California Assembly. Paper 282. http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/caldocs_assembly/282 This Committee Report is brought to you for free and open access by the California Documents at GGU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in California Assembly by an authorized administrator of GGU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. KFC - 22 .L500 P871 1987 no .1 CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL SYSTEM 1 S POLICIES REGARDING PAROLE RELEASE AND MENTALLY DISORDERED OFFENDERS ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS LARRY STIRLING, Chair Robert Campbell Burt Margolin Terry B. Friedman Mike Roos Tim Leslie Paul E. Zeltner DeeOee D1 Adamo, Counsel Laura Hankins, Consultant LARRY STIRLING CHIEF COUNSEl CHAiR SUSAN SHAW GOODMAN COUNSEL LISA BURROUGHS WAGNER 1Il.egislaturt DEEDEE D'ADAMO MELISSA K. CONSULTANT PAUL E. ZELTNER LAURA HANKINS COMMITTEE SECRETARY DARLENE E. BLUE 11 00 J STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 (916) 445-3268 testimony presented to the Committee on ng on Parole Release Policies Disordered Offenders." Also incl are ons regarding these issues. regarding the recent release of leton, and regarding several rel ease and post-release programming ly disordered offenders.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2012
    BOARD OF TRUSTEES 4 LETTER FROM THE CHAIR 6 A YEAR AT THE MUSEUM 8 Collecting 10 Exhibiting 20 Teaching and Learning 30 Connecting and Collaborating 38 Building 44 Conserving 50 Supporting 54 Staffing and Volunteering 62 CALENDAR OF EXHIBITIONS AND EVENTS 68 FINANCIAL StATEMENTS 72 COMMIttEES OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES 78 SUPPORT GROUPS 80 VOLUNTEERS 83 MUSEUM StAFF 86 A REPORT LIKE THIS IS, IN ESSENCE, A SNAPSHOT. Like a snapshot it captures a moment in time, one that tells a compelling story that is rich in detail and resonates with meaning about the subject it represents. With this analogy in mind, we hope that as you read this account of our operations during fiscal year 2012 you will not only appreciate all that has been accomplished at the Philadelphia Museum of Art, but also see how this work has served to fulfill the mission of this institution through the continued development and care of our collection, the presentation of a broad range of exhibitions and programs, and the strengthening of our relationship to the com- munity through education and outreach. In this regard, continuity is vitally important. In other words, what the Museum was founded to do in 1876 is as essential today as it was then. Fostering the understanding and appreciation of the work of great artists and nurturing the spirit of creativity in all of us are enduring values without which we, individually and collectively, would be greatly diminished. If continuity—the responsibility for sustaining the things that we value most—is impor- tant, then so, too, is a commitment to change.
    [Show full text]