DOCSLIB.ORG

A Statistical Portrait of the Death Penalty

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Statistical Portrait of the Death Penalty A Statistical Portrait of the Death Penalty Frank R. Baumgartner and students in POLI 490, Fall 2015 Draft as of December 5, 2015 Chapters 1 Death Penalty Constitutionality, Kaneesha Johnson 2 The Capital Process, Emily Vaughn and Kaneesha Johnson 3 Characteristics of those Executed, Clarke Whitehead, Emma Johnson, and Elizabeth Grady 4 Characteristics of the Victims, Emily Williams and Colin Wilson 5 What Crimes Are Eligible For Capital Punishment, Arvind Krishnamurthy and Liz Schlemmer 6 Is the Death Penalty Reserved for the “Worst-of-the-Worst”? Sarah Tondreau 7 Which Jurisdictions Execute and Which Don’t? Kelsey Britton 8 How Long Does it Take? Chris Armistead 9 Death Sentence Reversals, Emily Vaughn and Kaneesha Johnson 10 How Often Are People Exonerated from Death Row? Sarah Tondreau, Lanie Phillips, and Candice Holmquist 11 Methods of Execution, Emma Johnson, Elizabeth Grady, Clarke Whitehead, and Ty Tran 12 Lethal Injection and Its Complications, Emma Johnson, Elizabeth Grady, Clarke Whitehead, and Ty Tran 13 Stays of Execution, Danielle Buso, Chandler Mason, Emily Vaughn, Colin Wilson 14 How Many Inmates Just Give Up? Marty Davidson and Caroline Lim 15 Mental Health, Betsy Neill, Chris Armistead, Caroline Lim, Lanie Phillips, Chandler Mason 16 Veterans on Death Row, Danielle Buso 17 Public Opinion, Caroline Lim, Emily Williams 18 Why Does the Death Penalty Cost So Much? Dean Murphy 19 The Decline of the Death Penalty, Kaneesha Johnson 20 Has The Modern Death Penalty Solved the Constitutional Issues Rejected by the US Supreme Court in Furman? Arvind Krishnamurthy and Brandon Morrissey Statistical Portrait December 5, 2015 1 Death Penalty Constitutionality Kaneesha Johnson The 1960s marked the beginning of multiple challenges brought against the constitutionality of capital punishment in the United States. Previously, the fifth, eighth, and fourteenth amendments have been interpreted as the death penalty being a form of valid constitutional punishment. In Trop v Dulles (1958) the Supreme Court questioned the extent to which the state can punish a person based on his or her crimes. The Court held that stripping someone of his or her citizenship was a punishment that outweighed the crime of desertion, and was so was considered “cruel and unusual”. Chief Justice Earl Warren, in his majority opinion, stated, “The Amendment must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society” (Trop v. Dulles (1958) 356 U.S. 86). It was not long before these themes emerged in the debate of the death penalty. In the late 1960s the court began to modify the nature in which the death penalty was administered. The first of the two cases that arose surrounding the procedural constitutionality of the death penalty was U.S. v. Jackson (390 U.S. 570), where the Supreme Court heard the arguments for the provision of the death penalty from a federal kidnapping statute only from the recommendation of a jury. The court found this unconstitutional due to encouragement of the 2 Statistical Portrait December 5, 2015 defendants to waive their right to a jury trial to ensure that they would not receive a death sentence1. The second case was Witherspoon v. Illinois (391 U.S. 510), which concerned an Illinois statute that provides grounds for dismissal for any juror with “conscientious scruples” against capital punishment. The Court held that a jurors “conscientious scruples” against capital punishment was in violation of the Sixth Amendment’s guarantee of an “impartial jury” and the Fourteenth Amendments guarantee of due process. Furman v. Georgia (1972) The issue of the arbitrary and capricious use of the death penalty was presented to the court four years later in the landmark decision of Furman v. Georgia (1972 408 U.S. 238). Furman was burglarizing a home when a family member discovered him. In an attempt to flee, Furman tripped and fell, during which the gun he was carrying discarded and killed a resident of the home. He was convicted of murder and sentenced to death. (describe why he was appealing) The court held, in a 5-4 decision in favor of Furman, that the Georgia death penalty statute, which gave jury’s complete discretion of imposing the death penalty, was “cruel and unusual” and therefore in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The decisions put forth by Supreme Court Justices in Furman are mostly directed to the procedural elements of capital punishment. The decision in Furman ruled that all existing forms of the death penalty were unconstitutional, thus placing a temporary hold on all death sentences across the United States. The Furman decision also established safeguards for states to follow in order to have a death 1 http://deathpenaltycurriculum.org/student/c/about/history/history-5.htm 3 Statistical Portrait December 5, 2015 penalty. Following this decision, 35 states changed the procedures of capital punishment to be in line with those safeguards, some of who imposed mandatory death sentences for eligible crimes (see Woodson v. North Carolina and Roberts v. Louisiana). In over two hundred pages of concurrence and dissents, the Justices highlighted their views on the controversial subject. The major themes in the opinions given by the justices centered around the unconstitutionality of the death penalty due to capriciousness, inhuman nature, arbitrariness, lack of deterrence, the rejection of retribution by American society, and the excessive costs of capital punishment. Only Justice Thurgood Marshall and Justice William Brennan believed that the death penalty should be unconstitutional in all instances, which is further highlighted in the later decision of Gregg v. Georgia (1976). The main themes that the justices highlighted in their concerns of the constitutionality of the death penalty fall under five main themes; capriciousness, the inhumane nature, lack of deterrence, the question of retribution, and the biased nature of sentencing. Arbitrary and Capriciousness Perhaps the most important issues highlighted in Furman is the capricious and arbitrary nature in which the death penalty was being imposed. All five Justices voting in support of Furman found the death penalty to be capricious in its current form. Justice Douglass, in his concurrence, highlighted that the death penalty as unusual because it “discriminates against him by reason of his race, religion, wealth, social position, [and] class, [and] if it imposed under a procedure that gives room for the play of such prejudices” (Furman v. Georgia, 242). 4 Statistical Portrait December 5, 2015 The death penalty is arbitrary for many reasons. One reason highlighted by Justice Brennan is its application not determined by the extremity of the offence, but thee is a strong probability that it is inflicted arbitrarily (Furman v. Georgia 295, 305) Inhumane Nature Another major concern in the Furman majority opinion was the inhumane nature in which the death penalty was imposed. In his opinion, Brennan established a four-pronged test for whether or not a case is constitutional (what is this test?). The principles are to determine whether or not a punishment, “comports with human dignity” (305). Further, Justice Brennan highlighted that “if a punishment is unusually severe, if there is a strong probability that it is inflicted arbitrarily, if it is substantially rejected by contemporary society, and if there is no reason to believe that it serves any penal purpose more effectively than some less severe punishment, then the continued infliction of that punishment violates the command of the Clause that the State may not inflict inhuman and uncivilized punishments upon those convicted of crimes” (282) Deterrence The three Justices, who voiced opinions against the deterrent effect of capital punishment, including White, Marshall, and Brennan, found that there “is no reason to believe the assumption that the current way the death penalty is administered is a superior or more effective deterrent to long-term imprisonment” (Furman v. Georgia 302,303). There have since been numerous studies on the deterrent effect of the death penalty on murder rates in the United States. In 2012, the National Research Council of the National Academies published a study that reviewed over three decades of research and concluded that those studies that claimed a deterrent effect were fundamentally flawed (Nagin and Pepper, 5 Statistical Portrait December 5, 2015 2012). The committee further recommended that those studies should not be used to inform the deliberations in the judgment of the effects of the death penalty. Retribution Retribution, the idea that punishment should be inflicted on someone as vengeance for a criminal act, was also considered in the Furman case. Three of the concurring Justices found that retribution should not be used for support of capital punishment. In his opinion, Justice Brennan highlighted, “Society rejects the death penalty to the point that it serves no purpose. An examination of history of the American practice of punishing criminals by death is almost total rejected by contemporary society” (Furman v. Georgia, 305). Figure 1.1 Summaries of Majority Justices Reasons for Deeming Capital Punishment Unconstitutional Brennan Stewart White Marshall Douglas Capriciousness Racial Bias No Deterrence Cruel/inhumane Retribution Gregg v. Georgia (1972) Four years following the decision in Furman v. Georgia, the courts were faced with a case that could reinstate the death penalty. Gregg v. Georgia held that capital punishment did not violate the eighth and fourteenth amendment, provided that there are sufficient safe guards put into place to ensure that the sentencing authority had adequate information and guidance in reaching its decision. 6 Statistical Portrait December 5, 2015 Following the decision set forth in Furman, the main concerns from the justices was that the current form of the death penalty was arbitrary and capricious in its application. The Georgia legislature revised their death penalty statute so that no person could be found guilty and sentenced to death without the discovery of certain aggravating factors; this narrowed the class of murderers that the death penalty could be given to.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Year End Report
    THE DEATH PENALTY IN 2015: YEAR END REPORT DEATH PENALTY USE IN 2015 DECLINES SHARPLY FEWEST EXECUTIONS, FEWEST DEATH SENTENCES, AND FEWEST STATES EMPLOYING THE DEATH PENALTY IN DECADES KEY FINDINGS Executions By Year • There were 28 100 executions in 6 Peak: 98 in 1999 states, the fewest 80 since 1991. ⬇70 60 • There were 49 death sentences in 40 2015, 33% below the modern death 20 28 in 2015 penalty low set last year. 0 • New death 1976 1979 1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 sentences in the past decade are lower than in the Death Sentences By Year decade preceding 350 Peak: 315 in 1996 the Supreme 300 Court’s invalidation of capital 250 ⬇266 punishment in 200 1972. 150 • Six more former 100 death row inmates 49 in 2015 (projected) were exonerated of 50 all charges. 1974 1977 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013 2015 THE DEATH PENALTY IN 2015: YEAR END REPORT U.S. DEATH PENALTY DECLINE ACCELERATES IN 2015 By all measures, use of and support for the death penalty Executions by continued its steady decline in the United States in 2015. The 2015 2014 State number of new death sentences imposed in the U.S. fell sharply from already historic lows, executions dropped to Texas 13 10 their lowest levels in 24 years, and public opinion polls revealed that a majority of Americans preferred life without Missouri 6 10 parole to the death penalty. Opposition to capital punishment polled higher than any time since 1972.
    [Show full text]
  • Here Is a “Policy” Or “Custom” When There Was Significant Evidence of Brady Violations by the Orleans Parish District Attorney in This and Many Other Cases
    No. _________ ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- EARL TRUVIA; GREGORY BRIGHT, Petitioners, v. HARRY F. CONNICK, in his capacity as District Attorney for the Parish of Orleans; GEORGE HEATH, Detective, Individually and in his official capacity as Officer of the City of New Orleans Police Department; JOSEPH MICELI, Individually and in his official capacity as Officer of the City of New Orleans Police Department; THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS; EDDIE JORDAN, Respondents. --------------------------------- --------------------------------- On Petition For Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Fifth Circuit --------------------------------- --------------------------------- PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI --------------------------------- --------------------------------- ERWIN CHEMERINSKY PHILLIP E. FRIDUSS Counsel of Record LANDRUM, FRIDUSS UNIVERSITY OF & ASH, LLC CALIFORNIA, IRVINE 8681 Highway 92 SCHOOL OF LAW Suite 400 401 E. Peltason Woodstock, Georgia 30189 Irvine, California 92697-8000 (678) 384-3012 (949) 824-7722 [email protected] [email protected] ROBIN BRYAN CHEATHAM WILLIAM T. MITCHELL ADAMS & REESE, LLP MICHAEL HOFFER One Shell Square CRUSER & MITCHELL, LLP 701 Poydras St., Suite 4500 275 Scientific Dr. New Orleans, Louisiana 70139 Suite 2000 (504) 581-3234 Norcross, Georgia 30092 [email protected] (404) 881-2622 [email protected] [email protected]
    [Show full text]
  • America's Fascination with Multiple Murder
    CHAPTER ONE AMERICA’S FASCINATION WITH MULTIPLE MURDER he break of dawn on November 16, 1957, heralded the start of deer hunting T season in rural Waushara County, Wisconsin. The men of Plainfield went off with their hunting rifles and knives but without any clue of what Edward Gein would do that day. Gein was known to the 647 residents of Plainfield as a quiet man who kept to himself in his aging, dilapidated farmhouse. But when the men of the vil- lage returned from hunting that evening, they learned the awful truth about their 51-year-old neighbor and the atrocities that he had ritualized within the walls of his farmhouse. The first in a series of discoveries that would disrupt the usually tranquil town occurred when Frank Worden arrived at his hardware store after hunting all day. Frank’s mother, Bernice Worden, who had been minding the store, was missing and so was Frank’s truck. But there was a pool of blood on the floor and a trail of blood leading toward the place where the truck had been garaged. The investigation of Bernice’s disappearance and possible homicide led police to the farm of Ed Gein. Because the farm had no electricity, the investigators con- ducted a slow and ominous search with flashlights, methodically scanning the barn for clues. The sheriff’s light suddenly exposed a hanging figure, apparently Mrs. Worden. As Captain Schoephoerster later described in court: Mrs. Worden had been completely dressed out like a deer with her head cut off at the shoulders.
    [Show full text]
  • Frequencies Between Serial Killer Typology And
    FREQUENCIES BETWEEN SERIAL KILLER TYPOLOGY AND THEORIZED ETIOLOGICAL FACTORS A dissertation presented to the faculty of ANTIOCH UNIVERSITY SANTA BARBARA in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PSYCHOLOGY in CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY By Leryn Rose-Doggett Messori March 2016 FREQUENCIES BETWEEN SERIAL KILLER TYPOLOGY AND THEORIZED ETIOLOGICAL FACTORS This dissertation, by Leryn Rose-Doggett Messori, has been approved by the committee members signed below who recommend that it be accepted by the faculty of Antioch University Santa Barbara in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PSYCHOLOGY Dissertation Committee: _______________________________ Ron Pilato, Psy.D. Chairperson _______________________________ Brett Kia-Keating, Ed.D. Second Faculty _______________________________ Maxann Shwartz, Ph.D. External Expert ii © Copyright by Leryn Rose-Doggett Messori, 2016 All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT FREQUENCIES BETWEEN SERIAL KILLER TYPOLOGY AND THEORIZED ETIOLOGICAL FACTORS LERYN ROSE-DOGGETT MESSORI Antioch University Santa Barbara Santa Barbara, CA This study examined the association between serial killer typologies and previously proposed etiological factors within serial killer case histories. Stratified sampling based on race and gender was used to identify thirty-six serial killers for this study. The percentage of serial killers within each race and gender category included in the study was taken from current serial killer demographic statistics between 1950 and 2010. Detailed data
    [Show full text]
  • Prosecutors' Perspective on California's Death Penalty
    California District Attorneys Association Prosecutors' Perspective on California's Death Penalty Produced in collaboration with the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation MARCH 2003 GILBERT G. OTERO LAWRENCE G. BROWN President Executive Director Prosecutors' Perspective on California's Death Penalty MARCH 2003 CDAA BOARD OF DIRECTORS OFFICERS DIRECTORS PRESIDENT John Paul Bernardi, Los Angeles County Gilbert G. Otero Imperial County Cregor G. Datig, Riverside County SECOND VICE-PRESIDENT Bradford Fenocchio, Placer County David W. Paulson Solano County James P. Fox, San Mateo County SECRETARY-TREASURER Ed Jagels, Kern County Jan Scully Sacramento County Ernest J. LiCalsi, Madera County SERGEANT-AT-ARMS Martin T. Murray, San Mateo County Gerald Shea San Luis Obispo County Rolanda Pierre Dixon, Santa Clara County PAST PRESIDENT Frank J. Vanella, San Bernardino County Gordon Spencer Merced County Terry Wiley, Alameda County Acknowledgments The research and preparation of this document required the effort, skill, and collaboration of some of California’s most experienced capital-case prosecutors and talented administration- of-justice attorneys. Deep gratitude is extended to all who assisted. Special recognition is also deserved by CDAA’s Projects Editor, Kaye Bassett, Esq. This paper would not have been possible without the hard work and dedication of the California District Attorneys Association’s Death Penalty White Paper Ad Hoc Committee. CALIFORNIA DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION DEATH PENALTY WHITE PAPER AD HOC COMMITTEE JIM ANDERSON ALAMEDA COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE TAMI R. BOGERT CALIFORNIA DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION SUSAN BLAKE CRIMINAL JUSTICE LEGAL FOUNDATION LAWRENCE G. BROWN CALIFORNIA DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION WARD A. CAMPBELL CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE BRENDA DALY SAN DIEGO COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE DANE GILLETTE CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE DAVID R.
    [Show full text]
  • The Needle Lives to See Another Day! Three-Drug Protocol Ruled Constitutional in Glossip V. Gross
    Valparaiso University Law Review Volume 51 Number 3 Spring 2017 pp.881-890 Spring 2017 The Needle Lives to See Another Day! Three-Drug Protocol Ruled Constitutional in Glossip v. Gross Steven Paku Valparaiso University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Steven Paku, The Needle Lives to See Another Day! Three-Drug Protocol Ruled Constitutional in Glossip v. Gross, 51 Val. U. L. Rev. 881 (2017). Available at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr/vol51/iss3/10 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Valparaiso University Law School at ValpoScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Valparaiso University Law Review by an authorized administrator of ValpoScholar. For more information, please contact a ValpoScholar staff member at [email protected]. Paku: The Needle Lives to See Another Day! Three-Drug Protocol Ruled Co Comment THE NEEDLE LIVES TO SEE ANOTHER DAY! THREE-DRUG PROTOCOL RULED CONSTITUTIONAL IN GLOSSIP V. GROSS I. INTRODUCTION The Eighth Amendment provides one of the most important protections for citizens—prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment.1 Since the founding of the United States, the death penalty has been left to the states to implement, so long as it does not violate the Eighth Amendment.2 As a result, states have ratified their criminal codes and constitutions to keep their method of capital punishment within the constitutional limits.3 Challenges to states’ methods of execution began as early as the mid-1800s.4 In one such case from 2015, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Glossip v.
    [Show full text]
  • APPROVAL SHEET This [Thesis] [Dissertation] [Case Study
    RUNNING HEAD: DETERMINING A CORRELATION BETWEEN CHILDHOOD TRAUMA & VIOLENT ACTS 1 APPROVAL SHEET This [thesis] [dissertation] [case study] [independent study] is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of [example degree designation: Master of Science] [Student Name] Approved: [Example date: March 15, 2019] Committee Chair / Advisor Committee Member 1 Committee Member 2 Committee Member 3 Outside FGCU Committee Member The final copy of this thesis [dissertation] has been examined by the signatories, and we find that both the content and the form meet acceptable presentation standards of scholarly work in the above mentioned discipline. RUNNING HEAD: DETERMINING A CORRELATION BETWEEN CHILDHOOD TRAUMA & VIOLENT ACTS 2 Identifying Patterns Between the Sexual Serial Killer & Pedophile: Is There a Correlation Between their Violent Acts and Childhood Trauma? ______________________________________________________________________________ A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences Florida Gulf Coast University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree of Master of Science _____________________________________________________________________________ By Alexis Droomer 2020 RUNNING HEAD: DETERMINING A CORRELATION BETWEEN CHILDHOOD TRAUMA & VIOLENT ACTS 3 Abstract Studies have been conducted to determine if a sexual serial killer and pedophile are similar and/or different to one another. Despite the difference in their criminal acts, sexual serial killers and pedophiles have similar characteristics. Biological, environmental and psychological theories of criminal behavior were studied which illustrated their significance to how a person can choose to commit a crime. The purpose of this study is to determine if there is a presence or absence within multiple forms of childhood trauma experienced between the sexual serial killer and pedophile.
    [Show full text]
  • 1372 Swimming Guide.Indd
    • • • • • • • • • • • the huskers coaching staff season review athletic administration THIS IS NEBRASKA Table of Contents Nebraska Swimming & Diving 2010-11 Media Guide ThisIsNebraska ..............................1-21 Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................................1 Athletic Department Directory ...............................................................................................................................................2 Media Information and Services ...........................................................................................................................................3 This Is Nebraska ................................................................................................................................................................4-5 Sports Facilities .................................................................................................................................................................6-7 Husker Power ....................................................................................................................................................................8-9 Athletic Medicine and Nutrition ......................................................................................................................................10-11
    [Show full text]
  • Spring 2008 Rick Halperin, President Friends-- I Would Like to Thank Everyone Who Helped Make Our Recent Annual Conference Held in Houston on January 26 a Big Success
    Seeking Justice IN TEXAS TEXASCOALITIONTOA BOLISHTHEDEATHPENALTY WORKINGTHROUGHEDUC ATIONANDACTION S P R I N G 2 0 0 8 2008 Off to a Great Start with More to Come! Inside This Issue: Music for Life in Beaumont, El Paso, and maybe Denton! From the Chair 2 The Sara Hickman concert series continues to roll through Texas cities with Mental Health Campaign 3 concerts in Corpus Christi, and Houston so far this year. Each concert has helped raise awareness of the death penalty, reached new audiences, and pro- Music for Life Tour 4 vided new contacts to help TCADP generate dialogue on the issue throughout the state. In March, Sara will be in Beaumont at Lamar University working with our Beaumont Chapter Updates 5, 6 chapter. El Paso Mayor John Cooke will sing and play guitar with Sara in El Paso at Club Member Spotlight 7 101. We want to be in Denton in May but are looking for a venue. (Let us know if you have a possible location.) Check page 4 for tour locations and dates. Spread the word Annual Award Winners 8 and come out for some great music with a message! TCADP Conference 9 At the Death House Door Panel Discussion and World Premier New Board Members 10 Don’t miss March 5 at the Texas Capitol, a panel discussion with clips from the movie. Ways You Can Help! 11 The panel discussion will include lots of great speakers. The film which features the Carlos Deluna case and the story of Rev. Carroll Mistaken Identity: Carlos Deluna Impending Executions Pickett will be debuting at the South by Southwest Film Festival (SXSW) on Sunday, March 9 at 4:00pm at The Paramount Impending Executions Theatre in Austin, TX.
    [Show full text]
  • The Chair, the Needle, and the Damage Done: What the Electric Chair and the Rebirth of the Method-Of-Execution Challenge Could M
    Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy Volume 15 Article 5 Issue 1 Fall 2005 The hC air, the Needle, and the Damage Done: What the Electric Chair and the Rebirth of the Method-of-Execution Challenge Could Mean for the Future of the Eighth Amendment Timothy S. Kearns Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cjlpp Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Kearns, Timothy S. (2005) "The hC air, the Needle, and the Damage Done: What the Electric Chair and the Rebirth of the Method-of- Execution Challenge Could Mean for the Future of the Eighth Amendment," Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy: Vol. 15: Iss. 1, Article 5. Available at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cjlpp/vol15/iss1/5 This Note 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 Journal of Law and Public Policy by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE CHAIR, THE NEEDLE, AND THE DAMAGE DONE: WHAT THE ELECTRIC CHAIR AND THE REBIRTH OF THE METHOD-OF-EXECUTION CHALLENGE COULD MEAN FOR THE FUTURE OF THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT Timothy S. Kearnst INTRODUCTION ............................................. 197 I. THE ELECTROCUTION CASES ....................... 201 A. THE KEMMLER DECISION ............................ 201 B. THE KEMMLER EXECUTION ........................... 202 C. FROM IN RE KMMLER to "Evolving Standards" ..... 204 II. THE LOWER COURTS ................................ 206 A. THE CIRCUIT COURTS ................................. 206 B. THE STATE COURTS .................................. 211 C. NEBRASKA - THE LAST HOLDOUT ..................
    [Show full text]
  • The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area: Background Paper 2013
    This paper was prepared by the OSCE’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR). Every effort has been made to ensure that the information contained in this paper is accurate and impartial. This paper updates The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area: Background Paper 2013. It is intended to provide a concise update to highlight changes in the status of the death penalty in OSCE participating States since the previous publication and to promote constructive discussion of this issue. It covers the period from 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2014. All comments or suggestions should be addressed to ODIHR’s Human Rights Department at [email protected]. Published by the OSCE’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) Miodowa 10 00-557 Warsaw Poland www.osce.org/odihr The© OSCE/ODIHR Death 2014 Penalty inISBN the ________ OSCE Area All rights reserved. The contents of this publication may be freely used and copied for educational and other non-commercial purposes, provided that any such reproduction is accompanied by an acknowledgement of ODIHR as the source. Designed by Nona Reuter Background Paper 2014 ODIHR This paper was prepared by the OSCE’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR). Every effort has been made to ensure that the information contained in this paper is accurate and impartial. This paper updates The Death Penalty in the OSCE Area: Background Paper 2013. It is intended to provide a concise update to highlight changes in the status of the death penalty in OSCE participating States since the previous publication and to promote constructive discussion of this issue.
    [Show full text]