New Voices

VICTIMS' FAMILIES PERSPECTIVES: Families of Massachusetts Murder Victims Speak Out on Penalty for Tsarnaev

UPDATE:   "Family members of two Massachusetts murder victims, including the police officer who was killed by the Tsarnaevs, have spoken out concerning their views on the sentence they believe should be imposed on Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in the Boston Marathon bombing. Now Bill and Denise Richards, parents of 8-year-old Martin Richards, the youngest victim killed in the Boston Marathon bombing, have added their voices and called on federal prosecutors to drop the death penalty in exchange for termination of all appeals in the case.  In a statement in the Boston Globe, the Richards write:  "the story of Marathon Monday 2013 should not be defined by the actions or beliefs of the defendant, but by the resiliency of the human spirit and the rallying cries of this great city. We can never replace what was taken from us, but we can continue to get up every morning and fight another day. As long as the defendant is in the spotlight, we have no choice but to live a story told on his terms, not ours. The minute the defendant fades from our newspapers and TV screens is the minute we begin the process of rebuilding our lives and our family.

NEW VOICES: After 36 Executions, Former Virginia Attorney General Now Opposes Death Penalty

During his tenure as Attorney General of Virginia from 1998 to 2001, that state executed 36 people. Now Mark Earley opposes the death penalty. The former Attorney General recently discussed his change of opinion in an article for the University of Richmond Law Review. He wrote, “If you believe that the government always ‘gets it right,’ never makes serious mistakes, and is never tainted with corruption, then you can be comfortable supporting the death penalty.” He said, "Overseeing a legal system that put so many to death with such efficiency eroded me," but political concerns he had as Attorney General "walled off my doubts." Since leaving office, Early said he has "come to the conclusion that the death penalty is based on a false utopian premise. That false premise is that we have had, do have, and will have 100% accuracy in death penalty convictions and executions." He highlights two cases that raised significant concerns for him: the exoneration of Earl Washington, which took place during Earley's tenure as Attorney General, and the recent ruling vacating the conviction of George Stinney, who was executed in South Carolina in 1944 at the age of 14. Earley concludes, "I can no longer support the imposition of a penalty so final in nature, yet so fraught with failures."

NEW VOICES: Warden Says Death Penalty Imposes "Immeasurable Burden" on Correctional Officers

Former prison warden, Frank Thompson, has urged repeal of Delaware's death penalty.  In an op-ed for The News Journal of Delaware, the former warden, who has personally overseen two executions, describes "the immeasurable burden that th[e execution] process places on correctional officers" and the trauma experienced by correctional officers who must carry out executions. Thompson says, "Many of us who have taken part in this process live with nightmares, especially those of us who have participated in executions that did not go smoothly. Correctional officers who carry out execution can suffer from post-traumatic stress, drug and alcohol addiction, and depression." He explains that capital punishment does nothing to "increase the safety of prison staff or inmates." "Every warden in America knows the established protocols that effectively keep prisons safe for corrections staff and inmates," he says. "These include programs to treat inmates with alcohol and drug dependency or mental illnesses, appropriate inmate-to-staff ratios for the proper supervision of prisoners, adequate activities and work programs, and effective classification systems that provide guidance on how to properly house and program inmates...I am not aware of and have not heard of a single prison administrator who would trade any of these programs or resources in order to keep the death penalty." Thompson concludes by calling on the Delaware legislature to "repeal its death penalty and lead the way on smarter crime prevention policy by reinvesting the millions of dollars that the state currently spends on capital punishment into programs that will actually improve public safety." Read the full op-ed below.

American Pharmacists Association: Assisting Executions "Fundamentally Contrary to the Role of Pharmacists"

On March 30, the American Pharmacists Association (APhA) adopted a resolution discouraging pharmacist participation in executions. The House of Delegates of the 62,000 member organization passed the policy, which states, "The American Pharmacists Association discourages pharmacist participation in executions on the basis that such activities are fundamentally contrary to the role of pharmacists as providers of health care." William Fassett, professor emeritus of pharmacotherapy at Washington State University, drafted the policy and said that the policy only became necessary in the last few years as major pharmaceutical companies have blocked the use of their products in executions and states have turned to pharmacies to obtain lethal injection drugs. Fassett said, “It’s never been legal in the U.S. to write a prescription to execute a person. The basic federal law is that a prescription is to be used for medical proposes in the context of an established patient-physician relationship." Thomas E. Menighan, Executive Vice President and CEO of the APhA, said, "Pharmacists are health care providers and pharmacist participation in executions conflicts with the profession’s role on the patient health care team. This new policy aligns APhA with the execution policies of other major health care associations including the American Medical Association, the American Nurses Association and the American Board of Anesthesiology." The International Academy of Compounding Pharmacists adopted a similar resolution last week, stating, "While the pharmacy profession recognizes an individual practitioner’s right to determine whether to dispense a medication based upon his or her personal, ethical and religious beliefs, IACP discourages its members from participating in the preparation, dispensing, or distribution of compounded medications for use in legally authorized executions."

NEW VOICES: Lead Prosecutor Apologizes to Death Row Exoneree, Urges State to Offer Compensation

UPDATE: After Louisiana denied compensation to Mr. Ford — who is in hospice care, dying from Stage 4 cancer — Stroud gave an interview to the Huffington Post in which he says "death penalty prosecutions are a badge of showing how out-of-touch we are with other civilized societies. . . . We can’t trust the government to fix potholes. Why should we believe they can design a death penalty system that's fair?" PREVIOUSLY: In a letter to the Shreveport (Louisiana) Times, attorney A.M. "Marty" Stroud III (pictured), the lead prosecutor in the 1984 trial that sent Glenn Ford to death row until he was exonerated in 2014, offered his apologies to Ford, "for all the misery I have caused him and his family." Stroud voiced his full belief in Ford's innocence, saying "There was no technicality here. Crafty lawyering did not secure the release of a criminal...Pursuant to the review and investigation of cold homicide cases, investigators uncovered evidence that exonerated Mr. Ford. Indeed, this evidence was so strong that had it been disclosed during of the investigation there would not have been sufficient evidence to even arrest Mr. Ford!" Stroud takes responsibility for being "too passive" in prosecuting the case. "I did not hide evidence, I simply did not seriously consider that sufficient information may have been out there that could have led to a different conclusion," he said. "I was arrogant, judgmental, narcissistic and very full of myself. I was not as interested in justice as I was in winning." Now he is calling for compensation for Ford -- who is dying of stage 4 cancer that was untreated while he was in prison -- and a reconsideration of the death penalty. "Glenn Ford deserves every penny owed to him under the compensation statute. This case is another example of the arbitrariness of the death penalty.... No one should be given the ability to impose a sentence of death in any criminal proceeding. We are simply incapable of devising a system that can fairly and impartially impose a sentence of death because we are all fallible human beings."

Pope Francis Calls Death Penalty Inappropriate "No Matter How Serious the Crime"

In a letter to the President of the International Commission Against the Death Penalty, Pope Francis expressed the Catholic Church's opposition to the death penalty, calling it "inadmissible, no matter how serious the crime committed." He continued, "It is an offence against the inviolability of life and the dignity of the human person, which contradicts God's plan for man and society, and his merciful justice, and impedes the penalty from fulfilling any just objective. It does not render justice to the victims, but rather fosters vengeance." He acknowledged society's need to protect itself from aggressors, but said, "When the death penalty is applied, it is not for a current act of aggression, but rather for an act committed in the past. It is also applied to persons whose current ability to cause harm is not current, as it has been neutralized -- they are already deprived of their liberty." He also addressed questions of methods of execution, saying, “There is discussion in some quarters about the method of killing, as if it were possible to find ways of 'getting it right'. … But there is no humane way of killing another person.” The pope had previously offered remarks in opposition to the death penalty when he spoke to the International Association on Penal Law in October 2014.

NEW VOICES: Murder Victim's Widow Supports Clemency for Husband's Killer

Mamie Norwood, whose husband, Amos, was killed by Pennsylvania death row inmate Terry Williams (pictured), recently wrote a letter to two state officials asking them to, "stop trying to execute Terry Williams." Norwood's letter was addressed to Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams and State Representative Mike Vereb, who oppose the death penalty moratorium imposed by Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf. Vereb recently introduced a legislative resolution stating that the moratorium "exhibits astounding disregard for the additional and unnecessary heartache he has now caused to the family and loved ones of Terrance Williams' victims." Norwood said, "I have forgiven Terry Williams and I don't want him executed and I have said this many times...[Y]ou have never spoken to me and you do not speak for me." In 2012, Norwood joined dozens of child advocates, former prosecutors and judges, mental health professionals, and five of Williams' jurors in calling for clemency. She concluded her recent letter by saying, "I am asking that you please stop trying to execute Terry Williams. And please don't use me for your own political gain or to get your name in the news. You should be truly ashamed of yourselves." Read the full text of Mamie Norwood's letter here. UPDATE: Family members of other victims have also publicly responded to statements by other Pennsylvania prosecutors in opposition to Governor Wolf’s moratorium that falsely suggested that they supported seeking the death penalty for their family member’s murder.

Interested Parties Weigh in on Constitutionality of California's Death Penalty

On March 6, several stakeholders in California's death penalty system filed supportive briefs urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to uphold a District Court ruling that the state's death penalty is unconstitutional. The 9th Circuit is considering the state's appeal in the case of Ernest Jones, whose death sentence was overturned by Judge Cormac Carney (pictured). In an amicus brief on behalf of Jones, Bethany Webb, whose sister was murdered in 2011, said, "California's death penalty is a charade. My sister’s killer is going to die of old age before an execution will ever be carried out. The death penalty retraumatizes families like mine and forces them to endure a decades-long cycle of waiting, court hearings, and uncertainty. It is cruel to continue propping up a system that encourages victims’ families to wait decades for an execution that may never come." State legislators and legal scholars also filed briefs in the case. Senator Mark Leno, joined by other state legislators, wrote, "The facts are overwhelmingly clear: California’s death penalty system is broken and clearly there’s no political will to try to address the many flaws that plague the system. The death penalty is exorbitantly costly, arbitrarily applied, and serves no legitimate purpose whatsoever in its current condition. The only reasonable solution is to replace the death penalty with life in prison without the possibility of parole."

Pages