Compensating the innocent

Small price to pay; As the number of exonerees grows, so does the question of compensation

IN OCTOBER 2010 Anthony Graves was released from death row in Texas. He had spent nearly 20 years in prison, having been charged, in 1992, with helping another man murder a family of six. That man had sworn that Mr Graves was his accomplice, but later had a change of heart. “I lied on him in court,” he said just before he was executed in 2000. That sent the wheels of justice turning, albeit slowly and creakily. In 2006 a circuit court overturned the conviction. Prosecutors began to reassemble the case, and realised that without the false statement, there essentially was none. The district attorney filed a motion to dismiss the charges. On that basis an innocent man was finally exonerated.

This sad story raises a number of troubling issues. Among them is the fact that Mr Graves has been denied any compensation from the state for his long years in prison. Under the state’s 2009 Timothy Cole Compensation Act—an older law which was updated and renamed for another exoneree, who died in prison while serving 25 years for a rape that another inmate subsequently confessed to having committed—people who are wrongfully committed of crimes may collect $80,000 from the state for each year they were imprisoned.

More than half of America’s states have similar laws, and they are being put to use. It is good news, albeit troubling, that hundreds of people have been exonerated in America in the past 20 years. The New York-based Innocence Project, which provides free legal representation to people who it hopes can be exculpated on the basis of DNA evidence, counts no fewer than 268 such exonerations since 1989. That figure partly reflects improved forensic technology, and does not include people such as Mr Graves, who are the victims of perjury or procedural errors and misconduct.

Financial compensation may be only a small response after the gross injustice that exonerees have suffered. But it can help the wrongly accused to rebuild their shattered lives and is a lot better than nothing, which is what some exonerees in some cases receive. Another egregious example comes from Louisiana. In 1985 a man named John Thompson was convicted of murder after prosecutors hid a blood test that would have cleared him of a prior conviction, for armed robbery. That conviction contributed to the murder charge, because in the light of it, Mr Thompson was advised not to testify in court; and, eventually, that led to a capital sentence. The concealed blood test led to another deathbed confession—this time from one of the prosecutors involved. After the confession came to light, both of the convictions were overturned.

Louisiana state law provides a measly compensation of $15,000 a year, up to a maximum of $150,000. Mr Thompson, who had spent 14 years on death row and was within weeks of being executed, sued the district-attorney. In addition to being unjust, it is illegal for prosecutors to withhold exculpatory evidence; they are obligated to turn it over to the defence. A circuit court awarded Mr Thompson $14m, but last month the Louisiana Supreme Court overturned that decision. The majority opinion acknowledged the violation, but held that there was no proof of “deliberate indifference” to civil rights. That is, at best, a technicality.

Anthony Graves:
"Not eligible for compensation"

As for Mr Graves, the holdup in his case rests on another technicality: the state comptroller’s office, which controls the money, noted that Mr Graves had not actually been declared innocent. That, of course, reflects the peculiarities of the case. The charges against Mr Graves were dismissed, per the order, because there was “no credible evidence” against him. The district-attorney decided that since he was obviously innocent, there was no need to go to the trouble of asking a court about it. Last month, Mr Graves sued—not directly to get the money, but to be officially declared innocent so he can be eligible for it. His lawsuit specifies that he “holds no grudge” against the state, and adds that he believes the comptroller “made an honest error” in denying his claim. If only all of America’s states could manage to be so fair-minded.

Source: The Economist, April 13, 2011

_________________________

Use the tags below or the search engine at the top of this page to find updates, older or related articles on this Website.

University forum speaker: ‘Dead Man Walking’ author learned from victims’ families

Sr. Helen Prejean

Sister Helen Prejean, by her own admission, met Lloyd LeBlanc at the worst possible time. But what he taught her made LeBlanc the hero, she says, of the story that made Prejean possibly the best-known opponent of the death penalty in America.

In 1982, the New Orleans nun became a pen pal with, and then spiritual advisor to, Patrick Sonnier, an inmate on Louisiana’s death row for the 1977 murders of teenagers Loretta Bourque and David LeBlanc. Familiarizing herself with the graphic details of the case, Prejean both questioned her relationship with Sonnier and received a “nudge” to contact the victims’ families—a prod she didn’t heed, she recalled March 1 at Bluffton University.

As a result, she had no contact with the families until a Louisiana Pardon Board hearing, the last legal hurdle to the execution that she was there to oppose. Meeting outside while the board was voting, the outraged Bourque family avoided her. She was prepared for the same response from the LeBlancs, but what came next surprised, and instructed, her.

Telling Prejean that the family name died with his only son, Lloyd LeBlanc reminded her that “you never once came to us” and added that she couldn’t imagine the pressure on the families due to the death penalty. Shocked, she thought to herself, “What does he mean, ‘pressure,’?” she remembered.

LeBlanc told Prejean she needed to pray with him and, as they knelt in a chapel, he prayed for everyone involved, including Sonnier’s mother, on whom a town’s hatred was also being poured, Prejean related.

As she and LeBlanc became friends, he took her through his journey of trying to follow the Gospel after being “thrown into the fire” by his son’s murder. He felt he had to be in favor of the death penalty or it would appear he didn’t love his son, he explained. “That’s what he meant by the ‘pressure,’” Prejean said.

LeBlanc acquiesced to the pro-death penalty voices at first, he admitted to her. But the hatred connected with wanting to see someone suffer and die “gets inside you,” he added, and “I didn’t like the way it made me feel.” He decided he wouldn’t let the state kill him, and the person he was, too, Prejean said, quoting LeBlanc as saying “I’m gonna do what Jesus said to do” and forgive.

Although forgiveness is often equated with weakness, it actually “preserves love and integrity,” she told her Bluffton audience, calling LeBlanc the first of many victims’ family members who have taught her lessons on her journey with the death penalty.

Prejean’s experience with the Sonnier case became her best-selling, Pulitzer Prize-nominated book, “Dead Man Walking: An Eyewitness Account of the Death Penalty in the United States.” The 1995 film adaptation of the book starred Academy Award-winner Susan Sarandon as Prejean, who spoke at Bluffton as part of the Smucker Distinguished Lectureship Series.

She advocated for restorative justice—which she credited the Mennonite community for helping implement in many places—and for greater support for murder victims’ families, rather than redemptive violence. She had been stunned to learn, she said, how victims’ families are left alone because others don’t know how to deal with their pain. Thus, she continued, they become pariahs along with the murderers. “Do we have to have another death?” she asked. “We have life without parole in every state."

Prejean, who began her prison ministry in 1981, acknowledged that it took her a while to come to an understanding about Jesus siding with outcasts in the Gospel. “For a long time, I didn’t get it,” said the Baton Rouge, La., native, who admittedly grew up in privilege and with black servants in a segregated society.

Moving into the St. Thomas Housing Project in New Orleans, where she saw black people struggling for their lives, changed her heart, Prejean said. “Seeing people suffering—that’s what changed me,” she added.

“Racism is integral in the application of the death penalty,” she argued, citing statistics that 80 % of U.S. death-row prison cells hold people who have killed whites, while half of all American murder victims are people of color. She said, too, that less than 1 percent of convicted murders are ultimately executed, and they tend to fit a profile of being poor and killing white people. The system is “so filled with fluke,” she continued, noting that the state where the crime is committed is also a prime factor in determining whether capital punishment will be applied.

“Consciousness triggers conscience,” said Prejean, who has accompanied six men to the execution chambers of Louisiana and Texas and also wrote “The Death of Innocents: An Eyewitness Account of Wrongful Executions,” in 2004. “We have a lot of reasons not to think of people in prisons,” she said, but when people become aware, “consciousness brings with it a responsibility."

“We need to end this government killing of people."

The Smucker series, which brings significant contributors to the field of social work to the Bluffton campus, is named for Carl Smucker, who taught social work at Bluffton for 34 years beginning in 1944.

Source: Bluffton Icon, March 2, 2011

_________________________

Use the tags below or the search engine at the top of this page to find updates, older or related articles on this Website.

Executions decline by 12 percent in US

Washington D.C. - The number of executions carried out in the United States dropped by 12 percent in 2010. Commentators attributed the decline to changing attitudes on the practice but also cited problems with the availability of lethal injection chemicals and lengthy appeals processes.

The anti-execution Death Penalty Information Center has issued a report counting 46 executions in Texas, Ohio, Alabama, Virginia, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, Arizona, Utah and Washington in 2010.

In 2009 there were 52 executions in 16 states.

Richard Dieter, executive director of the organization, told the Associated Press that the nation “continued to move away from the death penalty in 2010.” He noted concerns about the high financial costs of the death penalty at a time of budget cuts, concerns about executing the innocent and concerns about unfairness in application.

Scott Burns, executive director of the National Association of District Attorneys, said that appeals have added so much time between sentence and execution that some families are asking prosecutors to accept life in prison without parole. The certainty of that sentence is “sometimes more palpable to them,” he told the AP.

Lengthy sentences for violent criminals and programs to reduce recidivism could also have contributed to a decline in death sentences.

Thirty-five U.S. states have the death penalty. Texas had 17 executions in 2010, the most of any state. However, this figure was a drop from the state’s 24 executions in 2009. The Death Penalty Information Center attributed this drop to the state’s adoption of a sentence of life without parole in 2005, new district attorneys in prominent jurisdictions like Houston and Dallas, and “the ongoing residue of past mistakes.”

Twelve death row inmates in Texas have been exonerated since 1978.

About 114 new inmates will be added to death row in 2010, slightly above last year’s post-1976 record low of 112.

More than 3,000 criminals are on death row in the U.S.

Source: CNA, December 22, 2010

Poll: Americans Ready to Deep Six the Death Penalty?

LEXINGTON, Ky. - A recent poll by the Washington, D.C.-based Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) suggests voters prefer that murderers serve a life sentence rather than idle on death row. The nationwide survey of 1,500 registered voters found most prefer life without parole over the death penalty for murderers.

DPIC Executive Director Richard Dieter says concerns about fairness, executing the innocent and cost are changing minds.

"About 60 percent of the public is ready. They may still support the death penalty, but they are willing to replace it because of the problems that exist with capital punishment."

Dieter says voters ranked capital punishment the lowest among budget priorities. And, a majority of those polled favor replacing the death penalty with life without parole, if the money saved were used to fund crime-prevention programs.

"What we are finding is that people may support the death penalty in theory, but they are willing to support their legislator if he or she votes against the death penalty. They have high concerns about the cost, which is a particular concern in states facing budget crises this year."

A global movement against the death penalty is growing, according to Dieter. And, as capital punishment is exercised less and less in the U.S., Dieter sees a repeal of the practice looming.

"For some people this is a moral issue. But the majority of people have other concerns, like innocence and fairness, and even that it doesn't serve victims very well."

Dieter says of the 35 states with the death penalty, 12 carried out executions in 2010, and 82 percent of those executions were in the South. Dieter says a death penalty case carries a $3 million price tag, compared to imposing a life sentence, which costs $1 million.

The entire DPIC poll results are available at www.deathpenaltyinfo.org.

Source: Public News Service, December 22, 2010