Hanging Mules in Singapore

The island republic's inflexible drug laws doom drug couriers.

He scrunches up his tear-streaked face, uses the back of his hand to rub his eyes. His anguish is palpable. "Please help. Please." Cheong is living a parent's worst nightmare. His 28-year-old son, Chun Yin, sits on death row in Singapore, convicted in 2010 of smuggling 2.7 kg of heroin into the country. It's a harsh punishment for a first offender. But under Singapore's laws, judges have little choice but to impose a mandatory death penalty. Anyone caught with more than 15g of heroin is presumed to be trafficking, and once found guilty, will almost certainly be hanged.

Chun Yin is not alone. A long string of drug mules have been strung up in the island republic The issue has come to the fore now in particular in the wake of the prosecution of a British author, Alan Shadrake, for allegedly insulting Singapore in his book Once a Jolly Hangman for its eager use of the hangman's noose in a way that casts doubt on its image as a strict but fair state.

Tough Stand

It's not clear how many drug mules Singapore sends to the gallows each year, since the government doesn't publish figures. But the city-state and neighboring Malaysia have some of the most draconian drug laws in the world. Supporters say they are necessary in order to prevent what Singapore's Law Minister K Shanmugum describes as an "unstoppable stream of people" from dealing drugs.

Opponents disagree. They say the law targets those low down in the supply chain – mules like Chun Yin who may or may not be aware of what they were carrying – while allowing the real culprits to go free. Cheong says Chun Yin was tricked by an acquaintance who had promised him a holiday in Burma and a nice bit of cash in exchange for carrying gold bars into Singapore. The father and son duo ran a small but profitable business selling DVDs across the strait in Johor Bahru and were not desperate for money. Cheong says he didn't want Chun Yin to go but relented in the end.

"I told him to come back soon. Come back because I can't run the business on my own."

Lawyer M Ravi, Singapore's leading anti-death penalty lawyer, calls the policy "unconscionable".

"It's a one-size-fits-all approach that doesn't take into account mitigating factors or the personal circumstances of the accused," he says. "What kind of law is this?"

Ravi looks exhausted when we meet. He's a somewhat controversial figure, even among anti-death penalty campaigners. Where some advocate taking a softer approach, Ravi doesn't shy away from a more confrontational stance. Earlier this year, the Court of Appeal rejected his request for a judicial review of the powers of Singapore's president in clemency proceedings, as well as of statements made by Shanmugum about the mandatory death penalty.

"These are important questions," Ravi says. "I know it might be unpopular to ask, but a life's at stake, I have to do my job."

Yong's Story

The life in question belongs to another former mule, a 23-year-old whose story has triggered an unprecedented wave of sympathy in Singapore and his native Malaysia. Not yet 19 when he was caught with 47.27g of heroin, Yong Vui Kong came from a broken home, grew up in extreme poverty and throughout his teens, struggled to care for a mother with a mental illness. He was also poorly educated and impressionable – a prime target for drug syndicates. Family members say he is now a changed person who doesn't deserve to die. More than 100,000 people agree and have signed a petition pleading for a second chance for him.

Singapore's Court of Appeal was unmoved. In a unanimous decision, it upheld Yong's sentence and disagreed with Ravi that the mandatory death penalty was unconstitutional. Yong is now preparing his petition for clemency.

"There's a possibility he's been wronged"

Singapore and Malaysia's tough stance on drugs has drawn flak from various human rights organizations. Amnesty International is a regular critic. In Kuala Lumpur recently, the organization's Nora Murat said there is no proof the mandatory death penalty acts as a deterrent against crime and together with Chun Yin's family, urged authorities to reexamine his case.

Unlike Yong, who has admitted his guilt and is seeking clemency on the basis of his youth, ignorance and willingness to change, Chun Yin maintains to this day, that he never intended to smuggle drugs. Cheong says Chun Yin was tricked by an acquaintance who had promised him a holiday in Burma and a nice bit of cash in exchange for carrying gold bars into Singapore.

Family members point to the fact that Chun Yin had even left a copy of his e-ticket and passport details inside the suitcase containing the heroin.

"Why would he do that and risk being caught?" Cheong asks.

Upon his arrest, Chun Yin also gave officials at Singapore's Central Narcotics Bureau, or CNB, the telephone number and a detailed description of "Lau De," the man whom he said had arranged the trip to Burma. Investigators did not follow up on the lead. But in handing down the death sentence, High Court Judge Choo Han Teck described the CNB's lapse as "immaterial" to the case.

The judgment has triggered a minor uproar in Malaysia.

"How can they not investigate? There's a possibility he's been wronged," says human rights lawyer Ngeow Chow Ying. "We feel this young man deserves our help."

Activists say Chun Yin's case is a classic example of how drug laws, enacted to protect the general population, can lead to an injustice. The presumption of guilt is hard to rebut. Couple that with the fact that a judge's hands are tied when it comes to sentencing, and the odds are stacked against the mule. The intention to commit a crime might not be relevant so long as an accused person is caught with the requisite amount of drugs.

No Apologies

Singapore makes no apologies for its stand. In a written statement issued during the 2009 session of the UN Human Rights Council, it said:

"[W]e strongly disagree that States should refrain from using the death penalty in relation to drug-related offences. The death penalty has deterred major drug syndicates from establishing themselves in Singapore…"

Critics have been quick to point out a major inconsistency in the position.

"If the Singapore government is serious about tackling the scourge of drugs," says Rachel Zeng, who is a member of the Singapore Anti-death Penalty Campaign, "then it should take a good look at its cozy relations with Burma, which is a known heroin producer."

Malaysia, Ready for Change?

Over in Malaysia, there are signs change could be afoot. Yong Vui Kong's case has been a catalyst. "The support has been tremendous," says Ngeow. "His story has really struck a chord with many people."

The "Save Yong Vui Kong" Facebook group has drawn more than 23,000 fans. Several newspapers are now running a weekly column featuring letters from Yong to a friend outside prison. Last year, the Malaysian government even sent a letter, through its Foreign Ministry, pleading for mercy on his behalf.

Most telling perhaps are comments from the de facto Law Minister, Nazri Abdul Aziz, made during the height of the Save Yong Vui Kong campaign in 2010. Nazri was quoted as saying that it was time for Malaysia to abolish the death penalty. Among the reasons he cited – the fact that it did not seem to be deterring crimes like drug trafficking and murder. But he also added that the country lacked the political will to change things.

The Case of Noor Atiqah

Some activists are hoping that the case of a Singapore drug mule sentenced to death in Malaysia will bring about that transformation. Noor Atiqah M. Lasim, a 27-year-old single mother, was arrested at Kuala Lumpur's Low Cost Carrier Terminal on the 5th of January 2009. Immigration officials found 342.1g of heroin and 30.3g of monoacethymorphine hidden inside a bag she was carrying. Noor Atiqah's supporters say she had no idea she was transporting drugs. They say she was duped into becoming an unwitting mule by her Nigerian boyfriend.

Ravi, who has met Noor Atiqah's family, is cautiously optimistic about her case. Lawyers are still discussing the best course of action, but there is talk of a constitutional challenge to the mandatory death penalty in Malaysia. Activists hope that if that happens, and Noor Atiqah succeeds, Singapore's government might feel compelled to reconsider its position.

"Renew. Rehab. Restart."

There's a photo taken outside Changi Prison that's making its way around some circles on the Internet. The picture shows Yong's brother, Yun Leong, signing a piece of paper held up by Cheong.

Time is running out for Chun Yin and his family members are making a desperate last push to save his life. Over the past few weeks, they've collected thousands of signatures in support of a call for Singaporean authorities to stay his execution and reopen his case (petition can be signed here). His punishment, they say, should be for smuggling gold, not drugs.

It's a painstaking, heartbreaking exercise only someone like Yun Leong can understand. Just months ago, he too was out on the streets with his siblings, canvassing support for their own brother. Their campaign climaxed with a visit to the back entrance of Singapore's presidential palace, the Istana. There, they handed over files containing 109,346 signatures to a security guard who promptly told them to leave. The family's response was to get on their knees, begging Singapore to spare Yong's life.

Supporters who've seen the photo of Yun Leong and Cheong speak of how moved they are by the younger man's show of solidarity, his willingness to stand with those facing a similar plight. What they don't realize though is the awful irony of the situation. Had the photographer taken a wider angle, they would have seen some big, bold words behind the two Malaysians.

They form the prison's motto – Renew. Rehab. Restart.

Source: Asia Sentinel, Lynn Lee, April 25, 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.

Mississippi: Faith leaders call to end death penalty

Leaders of Muslim, Jewish and Christian congregations gathered Thursday at the Capitol to call for an end to the death penalty in Mississippi.

Death penalty supporter Ann Pace of Jackson, meanwhile, held pictures of her daughter, who she said died at the hands of a serial killer.

The main point of contention between the Mississippi Religious Leadership Conference and Pace is whether the death penalty effectively deters crime, but the issue also hinges on inequity in the criminal justice system and religious principles.

“We face the real possibility of three state-sanctioned executions within the next month,” said the Episcopal Rev. Carol Borne Spencer. “The organization thus felt that the time was now for us to ask our state leaders to find new ways to deal with one of the largest societal dilemmas of our time, that is how to deal with heinous criminal actions of murder and violence and still hold people accountable in ways that do not require the killing of a person."

On Wednesday, the Mississippi Supreme Court set execution dates for 2 convicted killers, and Attorney General Jim Hood has requested an execution date for a 3rd.

The religious conference, which grew out of the 1960s civil rights movement, asked Thursday for crime victim support. But members said executions only create new victims — the families of executed criminals. Isolating criminals is better than condemning them to death, members said.

Pace, whose daughter Murray Pace was slain by reputed south Louisiana serial killer Derrick Todd Lee in May 2002, disagrees.

Lee, 43, sits on death row at the Louisiana State Penitentiary in Angola for Pace’s murder. Murray was killed at the age of 22, 1 week after graduating with an MBA from Louisiana State University.

Lee is suspected of killing 7 south Louisiana women between 1998 and 2003, but Pace said he has not yet been put to death because Louisiana state law allows too many appeals.

“Even though the case is a DNA case, his DNA in 7 murders, and it’s been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court twice, Louisiana still provides for a system called post-conviction relief that can go on for years and years and years, and it made sense before forensic science. It does not make sense now,” said Pace.

She cited a series of studies in the early 2000s finding that each execution prevents between 3 and 18 slayings. The studies have been widely disseminated by pro-death penalty advocates but widely criticized for technical and conceptual errors by those who oppose execution.

“I am here for those three to 18 additional victims,” Pace said. “I think abolishing the death penalty is idealistic, sounds good, feels good to support, but it does not protect life, it does not protect us, and I think our most important moral obligation in our life is to protect ourselves, our children, and our community, and I think that the death penalty does in fact do that."

In addition to the debate over deterrence, the Capitol press conference brought up issues of social equality and faith.

Okolo Rashid of Jackson's International Museum of Muslim Cultures signed the MRLC's call for a moratorium. She said her faith would allow her to support the death penalty if the system did not disproportionately execute black men.

Another MRLC member invoked the symbolism of the Christian day of Good Friday, which marks the day Jesus Christ was crucified.

“We know that Jesus Christ would not want the death penalty for anyone, having suffered himself at the hands of the state,” said the Catholic Bishop Joseph N. Latino of Jackson.

Set to be executed May 10 is Benny Joe Stevens, now 52, who was sentenced to death in 1999 for killing his ex-wife and her husband, his 11-year-old son and his son's 10-year-old friend.

Meanwhile, state officials have set a May 17 execution date for Rodney Gray, now 38, who was sentenced to death in 1996 for the 1994 rape and murder of 79-year-old Grace Blackwell of Louin. Blackwell, who had last been seen withdrawing a large amount of money from her bank, was found shot multiple times in Newton County.

Robert Simon Jr. was sentenced to death for the killings of 3 members of a Quitman County family, but his attorneys say a fall has rendered him incompetent for execution. Hood had earlier asked for an April 20 execution date.

Source: Associated Press, April 23, 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.

Repeal Capital Punishment in North Carolina, Says Study

BOONE, N.C. - "End the death penalty in North Carolina," suggests a recent study, which asserts that capital punishment is not a deterrent to criminals and costs the public more does than a sentence of life in prison. Another factor is the recent revelation that evidence has been mishandled by the state crime lab, possibly sending innocent people to death row, as study author Dr. Matthew Robinson, professor of government and justice studies at Appalachian State University, explains.

"It's not fixable. It's not something that we can make effective. It's not something that we can bring about justice with. It's not something we can guarantee won't be used against the innocent."

Executions in North Carolina haven't taken place since 2006, in part because of a dispute over the constitutionality of the lethal-injection process. Meanwhile, the murder rate declined by 19 percent from 2008 to 2009.

In March, Illinois became the fourth state in the last two years to repeal the death penalty. That state had halted executions in 2000 because of revelations of false convictions and evidence mishandling.

Robinson says changing the law will give the state more resources for victim services and law enforcement.

"The savings that they're going to retain in money from not having the death penalty, they're going to actually use to solve crimes and pursue violent crime."

Supporters of the death penalty say the punishment should still be available for the most violent crimes. Capital punishment is used in 34 states and in certain federal cases, but most western democracies no longer carry out executions.

The study is available at www.pscj.appstate.edu

Source: Public News Service, April 18, 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.

Book explores Iowa's 46 death-penalty hangings

After a gruesome murder in this state, politicians and the people they work for inevitably fire up the old debate.

Should Iowa restore the death penalty?

It happened again in November when Michael Swanson, 17, of Minnesota was charged with killing two northern Iowa convenience store clerks.

The online forums crackled with familiar questions and answers: Is the capital punishment really a deterrent? Is it applied equally to rich and poor? How many more innocent people must be killed? Which is more just, rehab or revenge? Which is more merciful?

It's been that way since 1965, when Gov. Harold Hughes and Iowa lawmakers - Republicans and Democrats alike - killed the death penalty. The law hasn't changed, and the debate hasn't stopped.

"I think we've had at least a dozen death penalty proposals since Iowa repealed capital punishment," says Dick Haws, who should know.

The retired Iowa State University journalism professor wrote the book - "Iowa and the Death Penalty. A Troubled Relationship. 1834-1965."*

Haws, 67, completed the project in 2002 but couldn't find a publisher. So he set the history of all 46 executions in his attic.

It stayed there until 2009 when an old Peace Corps friend gave him the encouragement he needed. Haws spent about $3,000 on two freelancers, an editor and a designer, and published the book himself.

He'll never say it's the last word on the subject, or the first. It's simply a thoroughly researched, lively telling of an issue that helps explain who we are. And it belongs in our libraries.

"One thing we need to understand," Haws says. "If someone is executed by the state, it is us doing the executing. We're responsible."

Who were these 46? Forty-three were murderers. Three were rapists. None was a woman. All were legally hanged in gallows.

The first execution occurred in Dubuque, the last in Fort Madison. The average age was 33. The youngest was 18, the oldest 72. Most were crimes of passion. Some were acts of disturbingly cold dispassion.

Many were mindless heat-of-the-moment acts that involved little forethought. One man killed a guard simply because he admired the guard's gun.

"A lot of these guys were cold-blooded killers," Haws says. "If these incidents happened today, a lot of those people would be sentenced to a lesser murder charge."

Or sent to psychiatric hospitals. An autopsy done on a killer with syphilis showed a profoundly diseased brain.

Haws had been interested in the issue since his teenage days in Beatrice, Neb., where he followed the bloody trail left by Charles Starkweather, the nation's first recognized mass murderer.

After Starkweather's rampage through Lincoln, only 40 miles from Beatrice, Haws' father took a shotgun to work. After touring the Badlands, Starkweather was arrested in Wyoming and showed up on the cover of Life magazine.

The images took hold. Haws earned his master's degree at Nebraska and worked 12 years in the newspaper business, much of if it covering crime.

"I came out of Nebraska thinking everyone had the death penalty," Haws says. "I was always intrigued by it."

When Haws joined the ISU faculty about 30 years ago, he was curious about Iowa. He went to the library looking for a comprehensive account and came up short.

That's when he decided he'd help fill history's vacuum. Haws picked up a Freedom Forum travel grant. He spent the next semester wandering the state, visiting state libraries, wading into court and newspaper reports, squinting at old microfilm, formulating a narrative.

In the book, Haws gets right to it. The first sentence: "Patrick O'Conner was the sort of fellow who was almost certain to be hanged."

He was a one-legged brawler, drinker and arsonist who shot a man dead for reasons that remain unclear.

After deciding not to lynch O'Conner — lynching was an accepted frontier practice — the settlers quickly threw together a makeshift hearing. Twelve jurors were plucked out of the crowd. Guilty.

On the day O'Conner was hanged, the stores and shops of Dubuque closed. Steamers filled with passengers arrived from nearby river towns. Bells rang, fifes played, drums banged, people lined the streets.

A thousand witnesses saw a horse-drawn wagon pull away from the gallows and a precedent was set. The early executions were colorful spectacles. Some had the feel and fanfare of a county fair.

In 1858, 15,000 people went to Appanoose County for William Hinkle's hanging. The Ottumwa Courier said it was the largest gathering for any event west of the Mississippi.

One of the book's most poignant tales features Polk County Sheriff William E. Robb, who was also the pastor of Urbandale Federated Church. As sheriff in the 1920s, Robb also played the role of executioner.

The man he was assigned to execute, Eugene Weeks, baited Robb in front of reporters the night before the hanging. How do you like this job? Do you have the guts to pull the lever?

"God will forgive me," Weeks said, "but how about you, Sheriff? Why, Robb, you don't want to knock me off. You kill me, and I'll return to haunt you all the days of your life."

Robb received letters from all over the country. The critics came at him from all sides. The hanging went poorly, as hangings often did. Whether it was rain or humidity, the rope stretched and Weeks' feet scraped the ground.

Robb and the warden quickly lifted Weeks and twisted the rope several times around the pole. Fourteen minutes later, he was pronounced dead.

Facing another execution soon after, Robb issued a statement: "Taking another's life, hurling someone over the precipice into eternity, is the most terrible of all tasks."

And "I would to God that there was some way out of it, but there is none that is honorable, and so I shall do my duty."

Robb served one term as sheriff. And, as Haws says now, "got the hell out of Dodge."

Source: desmoinesregister.com, March 10, 2011

*Link provided for information only and NOT for commercial purposes.

_________________________

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

St Kitts firm on retention of death penalty

The St Kitts and Nevis Government told the international community Monday that it has no intention of repealing the death penalty.

In a report submitted to the Tenth Session of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review, a new mechanism of the Human Right Council, the Government of Prime Minister Dr Denzil Douglas said that it would retain the death penalty for the offences of murder.

Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Delano Bart, acknowledged that although the issue is controversial, St Kitts and Nevis would continue to implement the death penalty.

"However, having considered the matter, the Government has decided to retain it as one of the sentences available to the Court that it can use within its discretion.

"We accept, from the outset that there may be some evidence that it is not necessarily a deterrent but within the context of our present society and the increasing crime rate, the Government would have great difficulty in justifying to its citizenry its decision to deprive the Court of this optional punishment," Bart, an attorney, said in presenting the national report.

He said that the jurisprudence surrounding the death penalty has been highly developed and refined by the courts to the extent that the courts themselves will not pass such a sentence except in the most heinous of crimes which have been further refined to being "the worst of the worst".

Bart said that although the death penalty remains as a punitive measure on the books, the evidence is clear that it is not frequently carried out.

"In the last 30 years there have only been three instances when the death penalty has been carried out. During that period of time, others have been sentenced to death but those sentences have either been commuted by the Court or by the Mercy Committee — a feature of the Constitution which intervenes when justice ends and mercy begins.

"In cases where it has been implemented, the legal procedure as set out in the Constitution has been duly followed. Where an accused is found guilty of a crime punishable by death, the penalty of death is no longer mandatory.

"There is a compulsory hearing dedicated solely to the question of sentence. This therefore means that the judge has before him an array of options in respect of sentence. The law requires that a social inquiry report along with a psychiatric report and any other report that the defence deems necessary be submitted to the Court for such a hearing," Bart said.

He told the meeting that the convicted person is allowed to call witnesses to speak on his behalf and his counsel is at liberty to try and persuade the court against the imposition of the death penalty.

Bart said that the convicted person still has the right to appeal against that sentence to the Court of Appeal of the Eastern Caribbean and ultimately to the Appellate Division of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

"If the convicted person fails to have his sentence commuted he can petition the Advisory Committee on the Prerogative of Mercy which was created by Section 67 of the Constitution. "In the earlier life of the committee there was no obligation for the committee to hear a matter if it were not petitioned.

"However, the law has since developed where, if the convicted person has not petitioned the Committee, the Committee is obliged to consider the matter and give him an opportunity to make representation before it as to why the sentence of death should not be carried out," Bart added.

He said although this is the due process of law, the Douglas administration is amenable to open consultation with its citizenry on various issues including the death penalty.

Source: Jamaica Observer, Feb. 9, 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.

Former US attorneys, including Thompson and Webb, urge Quinn to abolish death penalty

A group of 65 people that includes some of Illinois’ best-known legal names has sent Gov. Quinn a letter urging him to sign legislation abolishing the death penalty.

Among those signing the letter were former governor and federal prosecutor James R. Thompson, former Illinois Supreme Court Chief Justice Mary Ann G. McMorrow and former U.S. attorneys Dan Webb, Scott Lassar, James B. Burns and Thomas P. Sullivan.

“We are deeply concerned, as we know you are, about public safety,” states the letter, which also was signed by former state prosecutors, judges, assistant Illinois attorneys general, assistant federal prosecutors and U.S. Justice Department lawyers. “But there simply is no credible evidence that the death penalty deters crime.”

The letter also says using the death penalty “as an instrument of coercion” to get guilty pleas has led to false convictions and that trying to limit capital punishment to exceptionally heinous crimes would not eliminate its underlying flaws.

The Legislature recently passed a bill that would abolish the death penalty on July 1, but Quinn hasn’t said whether he will sign it.

Illinois has executed 12 Death Row inmates since 1977, and 20 others have been freed because they were found innocent or the cases against them collapsed.

After the bill is certified in the General Assembly, the governor has 60 days to sign it, veto it or do nothing, in which case it would become law anyway.

Source: Chicago Sun-Times, January 22, 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.

Police officials argue death penalty doesn't make us safer

Over the past decade, executions have dropped by more than 50 percent and the number of death sentences has steadily declined, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. As police and law enforcement officers with decades of experience in fighting crime in the United States and Europe, we believe that societies are better off without the death penalty. We recently came together in Washington, D.C., for the 1st international dialogue among law enforcement professionals about the death penalty and found important areas of agreement.

Deterrence

Europe has abandoned the death penalty, but European countries have lower murder rates and higher rates of solving homicides than the United States. In the United States, states with the death penalty generally have higher murder rates than states without it. For example, southern states have the highest murder rates and account for 82 % of all U.S. executions. The deterrence argument is weak and it goes against our experience investigating serious crimes: the majority of offenders do not think through the consequences of their actions. In fact, they do not think they will ever be caught.

The death penalty, as it is applied, is too random to effectively deter potential offenders. If you execute a contract killer, for example, it would not deter a terrorist. If you execute a terrorist, it would not deter a young man who breaks into a house, gets startled, and shoots the owner.

Closure

U.S. politicians sometimes argue that the death penalty is needed to deter the killing of police officers. But if one of us were murdered, we would not want the perpetrator to receive the death penalty. The most important thing would be taking care of our families and helping them heal. We have seen how painful it is for families to go through years of death penalty trials and appeals and that would be the last thing we would want for our own families. The idea that the death penalty provides "closure" for victims' families is a myth.

Innocence

Another myth is that only the guilty are executed. We can tell stories about times experienced officers were certain they had the right guy, only to find out later they were wrong. Even when police do their jobs professionally and in good faith, mistakes will be made and innocent people will be convicted. It is hard to imagine a greater tragedy. At least with life without parole, there is a chance to reopen cases if new evidence becomes available. Death is irreversible.

Costs

Especially as budgets tighten in the United States and around the world, the death penalty may be a system governments can no longer afford. The death penalty costs far more than the alternatives. In California, for example, the death penalty costs $125 million more -- every year -- than life without parole, which also takes the offender off the streets permanently. All of the money that states spend on the death penalty could be used to hire more police officers, train them better, solve cold cases, and prevent crimes from occurring in the first place. We should spend our limited resources on programs that work.

Europe vs U.S.

Europe has the same violent offenses that the United States has, but has found ways to protect its citizens without capital punishment. For example, Portugal abolished the death penalty in 1864 and has never seriously considered reinstating it. Even when the country experienced political violence and organized terrorism during a revolution in 1974, the death penalty was not brought back. Had the terrorists been sentenced to death, they might have become martyrs and the violence might have continued.

Do some murderers deserve the death penalty? Maybe so, but that is an emotional reaction. It is not the basis for creating public policy or finding the best ways to keep citizens safe. More states should follow New Jersey's lead, and the example of 15 U.S. states, repeal the death penalty, and adopt life without parole in its place. As a growing number of Americans recognize, life without parole is a harsh punishment, protects the public, and eliminates the risk of an irreversible mistake, while freeing up funds for more effective crime-fighting programs. This is a better way to serve victims' families and prevent violence.

Source: James Abbott is the police chief of West Orange, N.J., and served on the state's Death Penalty Study Commission. António Cluny is the senior attorney general and public prosecutor in Portugal. Bob Denmark is a 30-year veteran of the British police force and a former detective superintendent of Lancashire Constabulary, England. Ronald Hampton is the executive director of the National Black Police Association International Leadership Institute and a 23-year veteran of the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department, Opinion, Mercury News, January 9, 2011

Illinois: New House Vote OKs Repeal Of Death Penalty

Less than 2 hours after their 1st vote failed, Illinois House members voted Thursday evening to abolish the death penalty in Illinois.

Late Thursday afternoon, the House voted 59-58 to abolish the death penalty, 1 vote short of passing the proposal. 1 representative, Rosemary Mulligan (R-Des Plaines) did not vote at the time.

But the chief sponsor, Rep. Karen Yarbrough (D-Maywood) used a parliamentary maneuver to pull the bill from the House floor to allow for a second vote and less than two hours later, the House approved the measure 60-54.

The measure now goes to the Senate for a vote.

During a lengthy debate on the House floor, supporters said the death penalty needs to be abolished because too many innocent people have been sent to death row.

Former Gov. George Ryan instituted a moratorium on executions in Illinois in 2000 after 13 Death Row inmates were exonerated and no death row inmates have been executed since then.

Rep. Susana Mendoza (D-Chicago), who said she has long been a staunch supporter of capital punishment, said she believes the death penalty should end because courts cannot correct a mistake if an innocent person is put to death.

"I could administer the death penalty myself to a cop killer or a baby killer without remorse," Mendoza said. "But this debate for me is no longer about whether guilty killers deserve to die for their crimes. They do deserve to die."

However, Mendoza added that, "we must accept the possibility of executing an innocent person and I'm not okay with that. None of us should be okay with that. … I can no longer stomach the idea of executing a potentially innocent person in order to make sure the guilty pay for their crimes."

But opponents said lawmakers have already taken many steps in the past decade to reform the state's death penalty system and ensure it is applied fairly. They pointed to reforms such as a law requiring videotaping of all interrogations in murder cases.

Rep. Jim Durkin (R-Western Springs), a former prosecutor, said he believes death penalty reforms have worked to ensure a fair trial in capital cases.

"I am confident that these individuals were given more than due process. They were given super-process," Durkin said. "We need to let this process work its way through the course."

But supporters of repealing capital punishment said that numerous studies have showed that the death penalty is applied randomly across the state and that minorities and poor defendants are more likely to be sentenced to death than whites and the affluent. "The decision to have the death penalty in one case and not another, that is a random decision in the state of Illinois," House Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie (D-Chicago) said. "That is no way to run a criminal justice system."

Currie also noted that studies have shown that the death penalty has not served as a deterrent to violent crime.

Death penalty opponents questioned the findings of some of those studies.

"The death penalty is not random," Rep. Dennis Reboletti (R-Elmhurst) said. "[Prosecutors] have to sit down with their office to decide what to do. It isn't random, it isn't willy-nilly. … They take great pride in their work … they review the case, they spend time with lifetime prosecutors … to determine if the evidence meets the criteria."

Surprisingly, one lawmaker invoked Ryan's own legal troubles during the debate, without mentioning his name.

Rep. Monique Davis (D-Chicago) said that the death penalty is not necessarily the worst punishment a criminal can face.

"Being kept from a loved one who’s dying while you sit in a federal prison" might be considered a worse punishment than the death penalty, Davis said.

Ryan is serving a 6-1/2 year sentence in federal prison for corruption charges and is trying to get an early release or temporary furlough in order to visit his wife, Lura Lynn Ryan, who has been hospitalized with a severe infection. Doctors have said she likely has, at best, 2 weeks to live.

Source: CBS News, January 6, 2011