Race News and Developments: 2005

Maryland Race Study Author Finds Death Penalty Practices "Disturbing"

Professor Ray Paternoster of the Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice at the University of Maryland was the senior author of a 2003 state-commissioned review of the role that race and geography play in Maryland's death penalty practice. He recently wrote about the study's findings in the Baltimore Sun:

I headed the Maryland research team that studied the fairness of the administration of the death penalty in the state. We concluded that race and geography were factors in the decisions that lead to death row. Put another way, whom you kill and where in Maryland you commit the crime make a difference.

 

We concluded this by sifting data on all 1,311 cases between 1978 and 1999 in which prosecutors could have pursued a death sentence. The question was not just who ended up on death row but who did not and what differentiated these two groups.
. . .
After taking all these other factors into account, we found evidence that race mattered. We found even stronger evidence that the particular jurisdiction where the crime occurred mattered.
. . .

We found that both the race of the victim and, to a lesser extent, the race of the offender, make a difference:

 

Those who killed a white victim in Maryland were between two and three times more likely to be sentenced to death than those who killed a non-white.

 

Black offenders who killed white victims were nearly 2 1/2 times more likely to be sentenced to death than white offenders who killed white victims and nearly 3 1/2 times more likely to be sentenced to death than black offenders who killed black victims.

We found that these racial differences showed up early in the process, well before the case ever reached a courtroom, in the decisions made by the state's attorneys on whether to seek a death sentence. Further, these patterns held regardless of jurisdiction.
. . .
Whatever the reason, the data are clear and the relationships strong: the 21-year record of capital homicide prosecutions suggests that race and geography do play a role in prosecutors' decisions to pursue a death sentence in the state of Maryland.
. . .
We consider these findings disturbing. Maryland law spells out a series of aggravating and mitigating factors that alone are supposed to determine whether a convicted murderer gets a death sentence or life in prison. But our study indicated that race and jurisdiction also play a role, affecting cases long before juries ever get to vote - when prosecutors decide whether to pursue a death sentence.

("Misunderstandings Cloud Death Penatly Findings," Baltimore Sun, Dec. 20, 2005). See also Race.

New Voices: Former Maryland Governor Criticizes State's Racial Disparities

In a recent op-ed, former Maryland Governor Parris Glendening criticized the "troubling" racial and geographic disparities that plague the state's death penalty. Glendening, who served as Governor from 1995 to 2003, commissioned a study of Maryland's death penalty during his time in office and implemented a moratorium on executions during his second term to allow time for action to be taken to prevent these on-going problems. He wrote:

In the eight years I served as governor of Maryland, I found the power to decide which condemned prisoners would live and which would die the most awesome and emotionally grueling of all my duties. I faced this decision four times.

I believed in the death penalty when I became governor and took seriously my constitutional responsibility to uphold Maryland law. I presided over two executions, those of Flint Gregory Hunt and Tyrone Gilliam. Both were black men whose victims were white. I heard from many civil rights leaders who rightly pointed out that this racial combination dominated cases on our state's death row, even though African Americans were and continue to be the victims in nearly 80 percent of homicides.

So in 1999 I commissioned a study of race and death sentencing from the University of Maryland, believing it my responsibility to ensure that justice was truly blind when applying this ultimate punishment.

A few months later I faced yet another execution of a black man with a white victim -- that of Eugene Colvin-el. I was not yet convinced that a moratorium on executions was necessary. But I was also not 100 percent certain of Colvin-el's guilt, so I commuted his death sentence to life without the possibility of parole.

The last execution I faced was that of Wesley Baker -- whom Maryland ultimately executed on Dec. 5. His was the fourth case to come before me in which an African American man was condemned to die for the murder of a white Marylander. And as with two of the three condemned men before him, he had been sentenced to die in Baltimore County.

I could not, in good conscience, go forward with another execution of a black man for killing a white person. I stayed Baker's execution in May 2002 and imposed a moratorium on all executions pending the results of the University of Maryland study.

Days before I left office in January 2003, the study was released. Examining the records of more than 1,300 death-penalty-eligible cases between 1978 and 1999, criminologist Raymond Paternoster concluded that both geographic and racial disparities existed.

Baltimore County was singled out as having a significantly higher rate of death sentences than other jurisdictions in the state. Murderers in Baltimore County were 26 times more likely to be sentenced to death than killers in Baltimore City and 14 times more likely than murderers in Montgomery County.

The significant racial disparities are troubling. Cases in which the victim was white were almost twice as likely to result in the death penalty as cases in which the victim was black, and blacks who killed whites were 2 1/2 times more likely to be sentenced to death than whites who killed whites.

These results lead to the unfortunate conclusion that we value white life more than black life. Intentional or not -- and I believe it is not -- this is an indefensible and untenable position for the state. Whether one supports or opposes the death penalty in principle, all reasonable people understand that before we exercise the ultimate sanction, we must be confident that the system is, at a minimum, fair and accurate.

The University of Maryland study received a great deal of attention and should have been a call to action for state leaders, but no solutions have been implemented. The General Assembly, despite conducting hearings on the issue, never passed legislation to deal with the inequalities highlighted in the study.

Gov. Robert Ehrlich, who lifted my moratorium on executions after assuming office despite acknowledging that race "plays a part all the way through the process," named Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele as the new administration's point man on the issue. The lieutenant governor promised to conduct an assessment of our state's death penalty. To date, he has not.

Despite being ignored by the current administration, issues raised by the study remain. Maryland still faces serious questions about the impact of race and geography in capital sentencing.

I implemented the moratorium to allow for the thorough and fair study of our death penalty system and to allow for action to be taken to prevent racial and geographic discrimination. The study was completed, but the corrective action was not. It is time for our state to honestly and openly consider these findings and to find constructive remedies. To carry out executions under this scenario is simply wrong.

(Washington Post, December 18, 2005) (emphasis added). See Race and New Voices.

Pennsylvania Man Becomes the 122nd Inmate Freed From Death Row

More than 16 years after a Pennsylvania jury returned three death sentences against Harold Wilson (pictured), new DNA evidence has helped lead to his acquittal. Yesterday, Wilson became the nation’s 122nd person freed from death row according to the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC). During his 1989 capital trial, Wilson was prosecuted by former Philadelphia Assistant District Attorney Jack McMahon, a man best known for his role in a training video that advised new Philadelphia prosecutors on how to use race in selecting death penalty juries.

In 1999, Wilson’s death sentence was overturned when a court determined that his defense counsel had failed to investigate and present mitigating evidence during his original trial. A later appeal led the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to call for a new hearing because of evidence that McMahon used racially discriminatory practices in jury selection. In 2003, a trial court found that McMahon had improperly exercised his peremptory strikes to eliminate potential black jurors and granted Wilson a new trial, a decision that the District Attorney’s office did not appeal. The court stated that in the new trial the death penalty could not be sought. The jury in this most recent trial acquitted Wilson of all charges on November 15, 2005, after new DNA evidence revealed blood from the crime scene that did not come from Wilson or any of the victims, a finding suggesting the involvement of another assailant.

Wilson is the second person to be freed from death row this year, and the sixth Pennsylvania death row inmate to be freed since 1982. (Source: Federal Defender Association of Philadelphia, November 16, 2005). Read DPIC's Press Release. See Innocence. See also, "Blind Justice," DPIC's latest report that examines the problems of the death penalty from the perspective of jurors.

Racial Bias in Jury Selection Practices Leads to Vacated Murder Conviction

A prosecutor training videotape featuring former Philadelphia assistant district attorney Jack McMahon discussing techniques to keep African Americans off of juries has resulted in yet another murder conviction reversal. Noting that the tape is "compelling evidence" that McMahon "regularly acted with discriminatory animus toward African-American jurors," a practice made unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court's 1986 decision in Batson v. Kentucky, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit affirmed the reversal of the murder conviction of Zachary Wilson because McMahon improperly struck numerous African-Americans from Wilson's jury. The ruling upholds an April 2004 decision that found that McMahon used at least nine of his 16 peremptory challenges against African Americans and had discriminated on the basis of race for at least one of the jurors struck.

In the section of the tape involving death penalty cases, made one year after the Supreme Court's Batson decision, McMahon states, "Let's face it . . . the blacks from the low-income areas are less likely to convict. . . . There is a resentment for law enforcement, there's a resentment for authority and, as a result, you don't want those people on your jury. And it may appear as if you're being racist or whatnot, but, again, you are just being realistic. You're just trying to win the case." He also advised, "The best way to avoid any problems with it is to protect yourself. And my advice would be . . . when you do have a black jur[or], you question them at length. And on this little sheet that you have, mark something down that you can articulate at a later time if something happens."

(The Legal Intelligencer, October 15, 2005). See Race and DPIC's report, "The Death Penalty in Black and White."


RACE AND THE DEATH PENALTY IN CALIFORNIA

A recent study to be published in the Santa Clara Law Review found that the race of the victim in the underlying murder greatly affected whether a defendant would be sentenced to death.

Generally, there are more Hispanic and African American victims of murder in California:


--California Murder Victims 1990-1999 - Office of Vital Statistics; based on murders where race of victim was known; Whites, African American, and Other are non-Hispanic members of those races.

But in death penalty cases, there are many more white-victim cases than Hispanic or African-American-victim cases:

--Victims of murder in California where the defendant was sentenced to death 1990-1999; based on 263 death sentences where there was a single murder victim.

Conclusions from the study:
Although more Hispanics and African Americans are victims of murder in California, white-victim cases are the ones most likely to end in a death sentence:

• Those who kill non-Latino whites are over three times more likely to be sentenced to die as those who kill African-Americans.

• Those who kill non-Latino whites are over four times more likely to be sentenced to die as those who kill Latinos.

• A person convicted of the same crime is more than three times more likely to be sentenced to die simply because the crime was committed in a predominantly white, rural community rather than a diverse, urban area.

G. Pierce & M. Radelet, "The Impact of Legally Inappropriate Factors on Death Sentencing for California Homicides, 1990-1999," 46 Santa Clara Law Review ___ (2005 forthcoming)). See also Race and Arbitrariness.

Research Links Historical Lynchings to Modern Murder Rates and Capital Punishment

Recent research has revealed a close correlation between the U.S. states that historically carried out the most lynchings and the states that today have the highest homicide rates and most death sentences. In a study led by sociologist Steven Messner of the State University of New York at Albany, county data from 10 southern states where historically reliable information on vigilante lynchings between 1882 and 1930 is available were examined (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee). The study then compared this information to more recent homicide data compiled from 1986 to 1995 by the FBI and National Center for Health Statistics. The comparison revealed that the counties with the most lynchings had the highest homicide rates, and the counties with fewer lynchings had comparatively fewer murders, even when researchers controlled for factors such as population, poverty, low levels of education, the percentage of young people in the population, the unemployment rate, and the percentage of single-parent households. Messner noted that "lynching seems to matter and is relevant to our understanding of contemporary lethal violence" in the South. The latest issue of the American Sociological Review contains more information about this study.

In a second study conducted by sociologists David Jacobs and Jason T. Carmichael of Ohio State University and Stephanie L. Kent of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, research revealed that the number of death sentences for all criminals - black and white - was higher in states with a history of lynchings. The link was particularly strong when the researchers analyzed only death sentences for black defendants. The sociologists theorize that the death penalty became a legal replacement for the lynchings of the past, and that the number of death sentences in states with the most lynchings increased as the state's population of African Americans grew. The researchers noted that this trend suggests that "current racial threat and past vigilantism largely directed against newly freed slaves jointly contribute to current lethal but legal reactions to racial threat." This research will be published in an upcoming issue of the American Sociologial Review.

(Washington Post, September 25, 2005, Outlook section, p.B5). See Arbitrariness and Race.

Study Finds Race of Victim, Geography Are Key Factors In California Death Sentencing

According to a new study to be published in the Santa Clara Law Review, a defandant in California is more likely to be sentenced to death for killing a white person than for murdering a person of any other race, despite there being more black and Hispanic murder victims in the state. The research also shows that geography plays a key role in whether the death penalty will be sought in a particular case.

The study implies that the loss of white lives is considered more important in the justice system than the loss of black or Latino lives. Among the findings of the study were:

• Those who kill non-Latino whites are over three times more likely to be sentenced to die as those who kill African-Americans.

• Those who kill non-Latino whites are over four times more likely to be sentenced to die as those who kill Latinos.

• A person convicted of the same crime is more than three times more likely to be
  sentenced to die simply because the crime was committed in a predominantly
  white, rural community rather than a diverse, urban area.
  

"To put it bluntly, there's apparently different values being placed on victims from different racial and ethnic groups. That's what the pattern would suggest," said Northeastern University criminal justice professor Glenn Pierce, a co-author of the study. Santa Clara University professor Ellen Kreitzberg added, "This study force[s] the people in California to confront the unfairness of how the death penalty is applied in this state. The decision of who will live and who will die in California turns on arbitrary and unlawful factors such as the race and ethnicity of the murder victim or the location where the murder was committed."

(Associated Press, September 22, 2005; ACLU of Northern Calif. Press Release, Sept. 21, 2005; G. Pierce & M. Radelet, "The Impact of Legally Inappropriate Factors on Death Sentencing for California Homicides, 1990-1999," 46 Santa Clara Law Review ___ (forthcoming)). See Race and Arbitrariness.

RACE AND JURY SELECTION: Federal Judge Attempts to Seat a More Diverse Jury in Death Penalty Case

A federal judge in Boston presiding over the death penalty case of two black defendants has ordered a change in the process of summoning jurors in order to ensure a more diverse jury. U.S. District Judge Nancy Gertner wrote a 95-page opinion and noted that it would be "profoundly troubling" if the defendants, Darryl Green and Branden Morris, were to face an all-white jury in a trial for their lives. Gertner cited studies that showed that wealthier geographic areas keep more accurate jury rolls and hence have a higher response rate from summoning juries. Poorer areas, where more minorities live, require a follow-up process when summonses are returned unanswered in order to reach the intended person.

The prosecution has challenged the judge's order and the District Court's Chief Judge has appointed a committee of 5 judges, including Gertner, to review the "profound issues" raised. The Chief Judge has submitted his own brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals that is considering the prosecution's challenge. (Boston Globe, Sept. 16, 2005). See Race and Federal Death Penalty.

STUDIES: Blacks Struck from Juries at Twice the Rate of Whites

A two-year Dallas Morning News investigation of jury selection in Dallas County has revealed that prosecutors exclude blacks from juries at more than twice the rate they reject whites, and that race is the most important personal trait affecting which jurors prosecutors reject. The paper's review also found that when potential black and white jurors answered key questions about criminal justice issues the same way, blacks were rejected at a higher rate.

The study examined 108 (non-death penalty) felony cases tried in 2002. Among the findings revealed by the study were the following:

• Prosecutors rejected 79% of blacks who favored rehabilitation over punishment or deterence, but only 55% of the whites who gave the same answer.

• Prosecutors excluded 78% of the blacks who acknowledged that they or someone close to them had had contact with the criminal justice system, compared with only 39% of whites.

• Prosecutors rejected every black who said they or someone close to them had had a bad experience with police or the courts, compared with 39% of whites.

• Defense attorneys excluded white jurors at three times the rate they rejected blacks.

Texas District Judge Henry Wade Jr., whose father's office was cited repeatedly for race bias in jury selection, said, "I think informally prosecutors talk and say, you know, 'What can we do to get minorities off the jury panel?'" Wade added that when prosecutors ask jurors whether punishment, deterrence or rehabilitation is the main purpose of sentencing, the question is calculated to try to get blacks off juries. "That's just a taught question. A lot of minorities are going to say rehabilitation, so you strike everybody who says rehabilitation and you're covered under Batson. I think that's the only reason they ask it," stated Wade. (In Batson v. Kentucky (1986), the U.S. Supreme Court held that striking jurors on the basis of race was unconstitutional.) In the past six years, none of the thousands of cases brought to trial in the County has been reversed by Texas courts on a Batson challenge.

(Dallas Morning News, August 21, 2005). See Race and DPIC's page on Thomas Miller-El, a case in which the Supreme Court found racial bias in jury selection in Dallas.

Editorials from Around the Country Express Concerns About Texas Death Penalty

Newspaper editorials from papers in Texas and other areas of the country praised the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of Thomas Miller-El and criticized the way in which the death penalty has been implemented in Texas. Miller-El was granted a new trial in light of strong evidence of racial bias during jury selection at his original trial. Editorial excerpts follow:

New York Times

[Miller-El] is an important ruling that reiterates to all courts the importance of keeping discrimination out of jury selection.
...
In the landmark 1986 case Batson v. Kentucky, the Supreme Court set out guidelines for how courts should examine jury selection for evidence of discrimination. In yesterday's case [Miller-El v. Dretke], the court did just that, and found that race had repeatedly played an inappropriate role. The court found clear disparities in everything from how prospective jurors of different races were questioned to what factors the prosecution considered valid reasons for striking them. The court repeatedly rejected the prosecutors' race-neutral explanations for their actions.
...
 It is disturbing that before the Supreme Court heard Mr. Miller-El's claim, it was denied by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which covers Texas. The misconduct in this case was clear enough that the Supreme Court ruled 6 to 3 to reverse, with the centrist conservatives Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy joining the majority. It is a sign of how far the lower federal courts have drifted to the right that the Supreme Court had to correct this racially discriminatory prosecution. (New York Times, June 14, 2005).

Washington Post

The Supreme Court reined in racial manipulation in jury selection yesterday, throwing out the capital conviction of a Texas man named Thomas Joe Miller-El.
...
Mr. Miller-El's case confronted the court with the question of how blatantly jury selection may be guided by race before it runs afoul of the Constitution. Prosecutors in Dallas, where Mr. Miller-El was prosecuted for a vicious murder, had a history of trying to keep blacks from jury service. A training manual in the 1960s instructed them not to "take Jews, Negroes, Dagos, Mexicans or a member of any minority race on a jury, no matter how rich or how well educated." Such policies were no longer written down when Mr. Miller-El went on trial in 1986, but they lived on. ... The machinations in Mr. Miller-El's case, as the high court has now found, were obvious. Prosecutors, Justice David H. Souter writes, questioned black potential jurors differently from whites and shuffled the roster to push blacks further back in the line of eligibility. Of 11 who were nonetheless deemed qualified, prosecutors then struck 10 using peremptory challenges.
...
[T]his ruling sends a strong message to prosecutors and lower courts alike that such manipulations are not tolerable. (Washington Post, June 14, 2005).

Dallas Morning New

The record shows that Mr. Miller-El, who is black, got a raw deal at trial. Prosecutors used various tricks to effectively eliminate 91 percent of blacks in his jury pool.

District Attorney Bill Hill's office can't be surprised at the ruling, considering that the court had telegraphed this punch. In an earlier round on this case, the court branded the district attorney's office of 20 years ago as "suffused with bias."
...
[P]rotecting one man's right to trial by a jury of peers protects us all.
...
Their long wait for justice in the case is a result of prosecutorial shenanigans that were only shrewd in the short term. A solid justice system is built on a far broader foundation. (Dallas Morning News, June 14, 2005).
 
Houston Chronicle

In the manner of a long-suffering parent faced with a disingenuously obstreperous child, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday told the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals — one more time — how wrong it was in interpreting yet another major principle in capital-punishment cases.

Racial discrimination in jury selection, no matter how Texas prosecutors tried to hide the ugly practice, is unconstitutional, the court ruled, reversing an almost 20-year-old murder conviction from Dallas County.
...
"It blinks reality" to find that prospective black jurors were struck by prosecutors for any reason other than their race, the court said. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals' finding otherwise was "wrong to a clear and convincing degree." The state court's "conclusion was unreasonable as well as erroneous."
...
Texas' full-throated resort to the death penalty demands that all procedures pertaining to this maximum punishment be applied with the utmost, unquestioned prosecutorial integrity and that those operations are reviewed by courts that can acknowledge what may be going on. (Houston Chronicle, June 14, 2005).

Read the complete decision. See DPIC's page on the Miller-El case. See also Race. To view a video (need RealPlayer) about the Miller-El case, click here.

Supreme Court Overturns Texas Death Penalty Conviction Because of Racial Bias in Jury Selection

In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Thomas Miller-El, a Texas death row inmate, is entitled to a new trial in light of strong evidence of racial bias during jury selection at his original trial. In choosing a jury to try Miller-El, a black defendant, prosecutors struck 10 of the 11 qualified black panelists. The Supreme Court said that the decision by the Texas court finding no discrimination in the process “blinks reality” and was unreasonable and erroneous in light of the significant evidence of discrimination.

Justice Souter, writing for the majority, set out the evidence that race governed who was allowed on the jury, including: disparate questioning of white and black jurors, jury “shuffling,” a culture of bias within the prosecutor’s office, and the fact that the prosecutor’s race-neutral explanations for the strikes were so far at odds with the evidence that the explanations themselves indicate discriminatory intent.

The decision serves as a model for the lower courts in applying the Supreme Court's opinion in Batson v. Kentucky, where it held it is unconstitutional to strike jurors solely on the basis of race. Today's decison found that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit should have overturned the Texas court’s denial of relief. Miller-el will be granted a new trial. The case is Miller-El v. Dretke, No. 03-9659. (Associated Press, June 13, 2005). Read the complete decision. See DPIC's page on the Miller-El case. See also Race. To view a video (need RealPlayer) about the Miller-El case, click here.

In a related case, Johnson v. California, the Court today struck down California’s standard for reviewing Batson v. Kentucky challenges as too demanding. California required a defendant to present not merely enough evidence to permit an inference that discrimination has occurred, but sufficiently strong evidence to establish that the challenges, if not explained, were more likely than not based on race. The case is Johnson v. California, No. 04-6964.

Ohio AP Study THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LIFE AND DEATH:

Comprehensive Ohio Study Concludes That Who Lives and Who Dies Depends On Race, Geography and Plea Bargains
In a major study of 1,936 indictments reported to the Ohio Supreme Court by Ohio counties with capital cases from October 1981 through 2002, the Associated Press found that capital punishment has been applied in an uneven and often arbitrary fashion.

• Defendants facing a death penalty charge for killing a white person were twice as likely to be sentenced to death than defendants charged with killing a black person. This gross disparity in capital sentencing sends a message that the taking of a white life is more serious than the taking of a black life.
  

Rate Of Death Sentencing For Defendants Charged With Killing White Versus Black Victims

  

• Defendants most likely to get the death penalty were those who killed white victims, regardless of the race of the defendant:

•  
  • Of 693 white victim cases with white defendants:
    • 127 were given the death penalty (18.3%)

•  
  • Of 353 white victim cases with black defendants
    • 62 were sentenced to death (17.6%).
      

BUT

• Defendants who killed black victims were the least likely to get the death penalty, regardless of the race of the defendant

•  
  • Of 752 black victim cases with black defendants
    • 63 were sentenced to death (8.4%)

•  
  • Of 46 black victim cases with white defendants
    
  •  
    • 4 were sentenced to death (8.7%).

Death Sentencing Rates Comparing Race of Victims and Defendants


Nearly half of the cases in which the state said it was seeking the death penalty ended with a plea bargain and a sentence less than death. Many of these were among the most serious crimes, including 31 cases in which the crime involved two or more victims, and 25 cases in which the crime involved at least three victims.


  Plea Bargaining in Capital Cases

Geography appeared to play a major role in who was sentenced to death. For example, in Cuyahoga County (including the city of Cleveland) 8.5% of capitally charged defendants received a death sentence but in Hamilton County (including the city of Cincinnati), 43% received a death sentence. 



Rate of Death Sentencing For Defendants Charged With Capital Crimes in Cuyahoga Versus Hamilton County

The Associated Press reported the findings of its detailed study in a three-part series, noting that:

1. Capital punishment is applied unequally in Ohio, with race-of-victim, geography, and plea-bargains affecting death sentencing;

2. Capital cases are expensive and are squeezing budgets in smaller counties; and

3. Disparities exist in the resolution of death penalty cases in Ohio, when three-judge panels spare the life of only one of two defendants convicted of strikingly similar crimes.

(Associated Press, May 5, 2005).

See the full series: 
Andrew Welsh-Huggins, "Death Penalty Unequal," Associated Press, May 7, 2005. 
Kate Roberts, "Capital Cases Hard for Smaller Counties," Associated Press, May 8, 2005 
John Seewer, "Two Killers; One Spared," Associated Press, May 9, 2005.

See Race and Studies.

MAJOR STUDY Finds Arbitrary Application of the Death Penalty

In a comprehensive study covering 20 years and thousands of capital cases in Ohio, the Associated Press found that the death penalty has been applied in an uneven and often arbitrary fashion. Among the conclusions of the study that analyzed 1,936 indictments reported to the Ohio Supreme Court by counties with capital cases from October 1981 through 2002 were:

• Offenders facing a death penalty charge for killing a white person were twice as likely to go to death row than if they had killed a black victim. Death sentences were handed down in 18% of cases where the victims were white, compared with 8.5% of cases where victims were black.

• Nearly 1/2 of the 1,936 capital punishment cases ended with a plea bargain. That includes 131 cases in which the crime involved two or more victims; 25 people had killed at least 3 victims.

• In Cuyahoga County, a Democratic stronghold, just 8% of offenders charged with a capital crime received a death sentence. In conservative Hamilton County, 43% of capital offenders ended up on death row.

State Supreme Court Justice Paul Pfeifer, who co-sponsored the death penalty law in 1981 when he was a member of Ohio's Legislature, said the findings are disturbing and confirmed his fears that race would be a contributing factor: "That has to be very disconcerting and alarming to all of us," he said. (Associated Press, May 5, 2005). See Race and Studies.

Judge and Prosecutor Agreed on Keeping Jewish People Off Juries

The capital convictions of dozens of people from Alameda County, California are coming under legal scrutiny because of an accusation that Jews and black women were excluded from juries in capital trials in the county as "standard practice." The practice was revealed in a sworn declaration by former Alameda prosecutor John R. Quatman in the habeas corpus proceedings of Fred Freeman, a man on California's death row who is seeking to have his conviction overturned. Quatman noted that the judge at Freeman's trial, Stanley Golde (pictured), advised him during jury selection that "no Jew would vote to send a defendant to the gas chamber." Quatman stated that the practice of excluding such jurors also extended to black women. Judge Golde, who died in 1998, presided over more death penalty cases in Alameda County than any other judge. There are 44 people from Alameda County on California's death row.

Attorneys representing Freeman on appeal reviewed the jury selection in 25 of Golde's capital trials from 1984-1994. Their research found that 12 people who identified themselves as Jews were called to the jury box and that the prosecution rejected all 12. In addition, the review revealed that 17 people who had surnames perceived as Jewish were also called, with the prosecution excluding 15. Overall, the jury selection examination found non-Jews excluded at a rate of 49.97%, and Jews and people with Jewish surnames excluded at a rate of 93.10%. "It is highly likely that this is going to be a recurring problem for Alameda County cases, and it could show up elsewhere. Legal arguments are not a fad for capital defendants. They are used until the law is settled," said Nathan Barankin, a spokesman for the state attorney general's office. (New York Times, March 15, 2005). See Race.

Kansas Death Penalty Advisory Committee Releases Report

A recent report issued by the Kansas Judicial Council Death Penalty Advisory Committee examines the state's application of capital punishment and the hefty price tag of seeking the death penalty. The Committee found that since Kansas reinstated the death penalty in 1994 there were 44 potential capital cases involving minority victims. However, none of these cases resulted in a death sentence. Of the eight defendants in Kansas who did receive death sentences, all of their victims were white. Of those eight cases, six originated in Sedgwick County and only two cases were from the entire rest of the state.

This disparity may be partially due to the high costs associated with capital punishment. The report noted that the cost of prosecuting a death penalty case is generally quite high because each side is more likely to employ costly expert witnesses and subsequent appeals are financially draining. The Committee concluded that larger and more populous counties in Kansas - such as Sedgwick County - can more readily absorb the cost of death penalty litigation because of a larger tax base.

In addition to the issues of race, costs, and geographic disparity, the panel also examined issues such as innocence, deterrence, and the state's ability to meet the needs of all murder victims' family members. (Report of the Kansas Judicial Council Death Penalty Advisory Committee on Certain Issues Related to the Death Penalty, November 2004) Read the Report. See also, Race and Costs.

Former Death Row Inmate Wilbert Rideau Freed After 44 Years

Following a manslaughter conviction for a crime committed when he was 19 years old in Louisiana in 1961, Wilbert Rideau, the acclaimed prison journalist, was set free by the trial judge on Saturday, January 15. His conviction carries a maximum sentence of 21 years and Rideau has already served 44 years in prison, primarily in Angola. Rideau, who is black, was originally convicted and sentenced to death by an all-white, all-male jury for killing a white woman. His death sentence was overturned when the U.S. Supreme Court found that the death penalty was being applied in an arbitrary manner in 1972. He has had three previous trials. In 2000, a federal appeals court granted him a new trial because blacks had been excluded from the original grand jury that indicted him in 1961. In his current trial, he faced a mixed-race jury for the first time.

During his years in Angola, Rideau served as the editor of the prize-winning publication, The Angolite, and has received numerous awards for his writing and his part in producing the documentary "The Farm" about life in the prison. (Washington Post-AP, Jan. 16, 2005).