Number of Innocents on Death Row Mandate Moratorium

Posted April 7, 2008 | 06:57 PM (EST)



Show your support.
Buzz this article up.
Like this story? Get Alerts of big news events. Enter your email address

Support for the death penalty in the U.S. is at its lowest point in many years. One of the primary reasons is the recent explosion in the number of death-row exonerations, which the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) now puts at 127. In response, some proponents of capital punishment have taken to arguing that many of the freed death-row prisoners are not in fact innocent. But their arguments do not hold up under the slightest of scrutiny.

For example, a March 25 New York Times story by Adam Liptak quotes Oregon prosecutor Joshua Marquis as saying that the number of "authentic" death row exonerations since 1973 is not DPIC's 127 but "more like 30." Mr. Marquis also makes this claim in his frequently-cited article, "The Myth of Innocence."

One problem with this claim is that few Americans would agree with Mr. Marquis's narrow understanding of what it means to be "innocent." In 2005 testimony before Congress, Mr. Marquis submitted a document [PDF ]which denied that my former client, Michael Ray Graham, and his co-defendant Albert Burrell were released from Louisiana's death row because they were innocent. The author of the document claimed that they were released "only because there was insufficient evidence of guilt." In fact, Graham and Burrell were released after the Louisiana Attorney General's Office informed a court that there was "a total lack of credible evidence linking Graham and/or Burrell to the crime."

If a finding of a "total lack of credible evidence" is not enough for Mr. Marquis to consider someone innocent, what is?

Another huge problem with Mr. Marquis' "more like 30" claim is that it is unsupportable. In "Myth of Innocence," he attempts to support the claim by citing both Wall Street Journal column that was critical of the abolition movement but made no attempt to calculate the number of innocent former death row inmates, as well as comments by U.S. District Court Judge Jed Rakoff at a February 2004 seminar held by the Federal Bar Counsel of New York.

Judge Rakoff's comments at the seminar apparently were not recorded. However, in two published opinions in 2002 in the federal death penalty case of United States v. Quinones, Judge Rakoff set forth his analysis of the number of freed death-row prisoners who were innocent. Using what he termed a "conservative" approach, the judge concluded that at least 32 and as many as 40 of the 58 death-row prisoners freed from 1991 through 2002 were factually innocent. What prosecutor Marquis fails either to either recognize or acknowledge is that Judge Rakoff's estimate was based on his review of only the death-row prisoners freed from 1991 through 2002, a number DPIC puts at 58. Judge Rakoff's analysis did not consider or include the 44 death-row prisoners freed before 1991, nor the 25 death-row prisoners freed after 2002.

In short, like the Wall Street Journal article, Judge Rakoff's analysis provides absolutely no support for prosecutor Marquis' claim that the number of "authentic" death row exonerations since 1973 is "more like 30."

Instead of denying the reality that many innocent men and women have been sent to death row, proponents of capital punishment would be wiser to, at the very least, join those who call for a death penalty moratorium while they study whether our broken criminal justice system can be fixed to ensure that only the guilty are sent to their deaths. And if they reach the same conclusion that many of us have -- that fallible human beings cannot create an infallible system of capital punishment -- then they should join those of us who advocate abolition of this barbaric punishment. The moral stakes are simply too high -- both for the innocent people wasting away on death row and for the society that put them there.

 

Comments
20
Pending Comments
0
Post a Comment

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

Hint sample
View Comments:

Mr. Holdridge

You may want to fact check cases no. 39 (Tim Hennis) and no. 128 (Chapman) on the Dieter/DPIC exonerated by innocence list.

Fact check the cases, thoroughly, outside of what Dieter/DPIC tells you. Tell the readers what you come up with.

a place to start:

for Hennis:
http://www.fayobserver.com/article?id=290860

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 01:35 PM on 04/11/2008

For fact checking.

1. "Case Histories: A Review of 24 Individuals Released from Death Row", Florida Commission on Capital Cases, 6/20/02, Revised 9/10/02 at http://www.floridacapitalcases.state.fl.us/Publications/innocentsproject.pdf

83% error rate in "innocent" claims.

2. "Is 'the innocence list' an appropriate name?", 1/19/03
FRANK GREEN, TIMES-DISPATCH STAFF WRITER
http://www.stopcapitalpunishment.org/coverage/106.html

Dieter admits they don't discern between legal innocence and actual innocence. One of Dieter's funnier quotes;"The prosecutor, perhaps, or Dudley Sharp, perhaps, thinks they're still guilty because there was evidence of their guilt, but that's a subjective judgment." Yep, "EVIDENCE OF GUILT", can't you see why Dieter would think they were innocent? And that's how the DPIC works.

3. CRITIQUE OF DPIC LIST ("INNOCENCE:FREED FROM DEATH ROW"), Ward Campbell, http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DPIC.htm

70% error rate in claims of innocence.

3. "The Death Penalty Debate in Illinois", JJKinsella,6/2000, http://www.dcba.org/brief/junissue/2000/art010600.htm

70% error rate in claims of innocence.

4.THE DEATH PENALTY - ALL INNOCENCE ISSUES, Dudley Sharp
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2006/03/20/all-innocence-issues--the-death-penalty.aspx

Origins of "innocence" fraud, and review of many innocence issues

5. "Bad List", Ramesh Ponnuru, National Review, 9/16/02
www.nationalreview.com/advance/advance091602.asp#title5

How bad is DPIC?

6. "Not so Innocent", By Ramesh Ponnuru,National Review, 10/1/02
www.nationalreview.com/ponnuru/ponnuru100102.asp

DPIC from bad to worse.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:25 PM on 04/08/2008

(Cont'd)

I have no confidence that had another overworked PD represented my client, or had we tried the case to a jury rather than the judge, the outcome would have been "not guilty," or that on appeal, a guilty verdict would have been reversed.��

The long and the short of it is that our criminal justice system is deeply flawed. It can be made better. It cannot be made perfect. If we are going to have a death penalty at all, better is not good enough.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:29 AM on 04/08/2008

I doubt the state's attorney's office jokes "anyone can convict a guilty man, it takes talent o convict an innocent one."

Sounds like a made up PD comment.

Yes, our criminal justice system is deeply flawed.

Thousands of innocents are harmed and murdered, every years, because the government cannot manage those on parole or probation.

The death penalty is about 99.7% accurate in convicting the actually guilty and those 0.3% actually innocent are released upon post conviction review.

Is there a more accurate sanction in the US?

There is no proof of an innocent executed in the US, at least since 1900, but, the proof is overhwelming, that living murderers harm and murder, again.

No knowledgeable and honest party questions that the death penalty has the most extensive due process protections in US criminal law.

Therefore, actual innocents are more likely to be sentenced to�life imprisonment�and more likely to die in prison serving under that sentence, that it is that an actual innocent will be executed.

That is. logically, conclusive.

16 recent studies, inclusive of their defenses,� find for death penalty deterrence.

A surprise? No.

Life is preferred over death. Death is feared more than life.

Studies which don't find for deterrence don't say no one is deterred, but that they couldn't measure those deterred.

What prospect of a negative outcome doesn't deter some? There isn't one . . . although committed anti death penalty folk may say the death penalty is the only one.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:48 PM on 04/08/2008

I practice law in Illinois, where a conservative Republican governor declared a moratorium on executions because of the shocking number of inmates on death row who were either "actually innocent" or "not guilty" under the legal standard. A common joke in the State's Attorney's office: "Anyone can convict a guilty man; it takes talent to convict an innocent one." ASAs too often forget their obligation to seek justice, as opposed to a conviction, because their professional advancement depends on winning convictions, and the ASA who tries a case is not the one who approves the charge(s). Both the ASAs and the PDs who try most murder cases are overworked and underpaid, and few graduated from top-tier law schools or at the top of their class. Many PDs have as jaundiced a view of the likelihood of their client's innocence as the ASA.. �

I tried a murder case representing one of three codefendants in which the PDs representing the other two defendants were unprepared to try the case. They didn't know the record, which included hundreds of pages of nearly indecipherable medical records that contained proof of the defendants' innocence. Their clients escaped guilty verdicts only because they adopted the testimony adduced on behalf of my client. It would have been a death penalty case had the ASA not agreed to drop an additional utterly bogus felony charge before trial because of our pre-trial motion, which the PDs were too overworked (or incompetent) to file.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:29 AM on 04/08/2008

Mr. Holdridge, did you fact check your polling data beyond the DPIC site?

69% for the death penalty, 28% opposed� (Gallup, 10/07).

Specific Case Support is higher

81% supported the execution of Timothy McVeigh, with only 16% opposed. "(T)his view appears to be the consensus of all major groups in society, including men, women, whites, nonwhites, "liberals" and "conservatives."� (Gallup 5/2/01).

85% of pf the primarily liberal Connecticut respondents voiced support for serial/rapist murderer Michael Ross' "voluntary" execution.�(Quinnipiac University Poll, January 12, 2005).

79% support the death penalty for terrorists (Survey USA News Poll #12074, Sponsor: WABC-TV�� New York, 4/26/2007 New York State poll)

"78% of (Nebraska's) 3,232 respondents said they supported the death penalty for "heinous crimes." 16% opposed.� ". . . a nearly identical number (76%) said they opposed legislation that would abolish the death penalty.� ("Survey Shows Statewide Support for Death Penalty",� MPB Public Affairs Poll, 2/14/08)

73%�of Connecticut voters support the death penalty for the two parolees accused of the Cheshire (Ct) home invasion rape/murders of a mother and her two daughters. While 63% of Connecticut voters support the death penalty for murderers, in general, AT THE SAME TIME. �("Connecticut Voters Support Death Penalty 2-1", Quinnipiac University Poll, 11/7/07). NOTE: Support is more than 3 to 1. The poll showed 73% for execution, 23% opposed, for those parolees.� It was 63-27% for the general question.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:20 AM on 04/08/2008

Why do we in a "civilized" Nation Kill people to show them that killing people is wrong? We have a justice system which isn't. Our so called justice is not based on justice at all, it is based on revenge. As long as there is such blatant disparity between the justice served to those who have money and those who don't any thought of capital punishment is utterly repugnant. If OJ had been a poor black man he would by now be exhausting his last appeal and start thinking what to have for his last meal. Thankfully there are at least 127 human beings who are spared the ultimate injustice our justice system has to offer. How many more innocent souls are sitting on death row is anybody's guess. How many innocent human beings have been murdered by this country's Revenge system is also anybody's guess.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:56 PM on 04/07/2008

BusGrag:

We don't execute murderers to show that murder is wrong.

Most people know that murder is wrong even if they are not punished, at all.

Execution is a just and appropriate punishment for some horrible crimes.

A logical review finds that the death penalty's imposition is not based upon revenge, unless you view all sanctions as revenege, which would be improper.

The death penalty is given as a punishment option, just as all other options are, for any crime, and judges and/or juries make that decison based upon the law and the facts, with the only exception being that death penalty defendentsc get much more due process protections than other defendants.

Revenge? Of course not.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:36 AM on 04/08/2008

Living murderers, in prison, after release or escape, are more likely to harm and murder, again, than are executed murderers.

A truism.

No knowledgeable and honest party questions that the death penalty has the most extensive due process protections.

Therefore, actual innocents are more likely to be sentenced to life imprisonment and more likely to die in prison serving under that sentence, that it is that an actual innocent will be executed.

That is. logically, conclusive.

16 recent studies, inclusive of their defenses, find for death penalty deterrence.

A surprise? No.

Life is preferred over death. Death is feared more than life.

Some believe that all studies with contrary findings negate those 16 studies. They don't. Studies which don't find for deterrence don't say no one is deterred, but that they couldn't measure those deterred.

What prospect of a negative outcome doesn't deter some? There isn't one . . . although committed anti death penalty folk may say the death penalty is the only one.

"This evidence greatly unsettles moral objections to the death penalty, because it suggests that a refusal to impose that penalty condemns numerous innocent people to death." (1)

" . . . a serious commitment to the sanctity of human life may well compel, rather than forbid, (capital) punishment." (1)

(1) Executive Summary
Is Capital Punishment Morally Required? The Relevance of Life-Life Tradeoffs, March 2005
Prof. Cass R. Sunstein, Cass_Sunstein(AT)law.uchicago.edu
Prof. Adrian Vermeule , avermeule(AT)law.harvard.edu
http://aei-brookings.org/admin/authorpdfs/page.php?id=1131

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:23 PM on 04/07/2008

There is one simple fact that irrefutably discredits your deterrence argument. The United States, being the only industrialized nation with a death penalty, has a murder rate significantly higher than countries without death penalties, many of which have the lowest murder rates.

"For example the western (post) industrial countries (USA, EU, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, Iceland, Monaco and Liechtenstein) have all abolished the death penalty, except USA, and still, for example, murder rates are much higher in USA than in any of these other, similar, countries. [�] There has been no remarkable increase in murder rates in those US states which have abolished death penalty. [�] FBI data show that 10 of the 12 states without capital punishment have homicide rates below the national average (source: Amnesty USA)."
http://www.indiatogether.org/combatlaw/vol2/issue2/deathmyth.htm

The fact is that social problems, which lead to murder, are not affected by the presence of a death penalty, and this fact is beyond refutation. You present two questionable studies to refute many studies from around that world, as well as statistics from law enforcement. That is weak. Basically, the death penalty debate is over, except in ignorant corners of the U.S. where revenge is still encouraged, and other parts of the world.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 11:35 PM on 04/07/2008

rixhex56 writes:

". . . The United States, being the only industrialized nation with a death penalty, . . . "

Japan? China? Not industrialized? hmmm. Rix, fact check.

Rix, do you have a bias against unindustrialized nations?

Many industrialized nations, which don't have the death penalty are just undemocratic on that issue.

In the European Union, for example, from the French daily Le Monde, December 2006 (1):

Percentage of respondents in favor of executing Saddam Hussein:��
Great Britain: 69%
France: 58%
Germany: 53%
Spain: 51%
Italy: 46%
USA: 82%

We are led to believe there isn't death penalty support in England or Europe. European governments won't allow executions when their populations support it: they're anti democratic. (2)


(1) The recent results of a poll conducted by Novatris/Harris for the French daily Le Monde on the death penalty shocked the editors and writers at Germany's left-leaning SPIEGEL ONLINE (Dec. 22, 2006). When asked whether they favored the death penalty for Saddam Hussein, a majority of respondents in Germany, France and Spain responded in the affirmative.

(2)An excellent article, "Death in Venice: Europe"s Death-penalty Elitism", details this anti democratic position (The New Republic,� by Joshua Micah Marshall, 7/31/2000).

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:21 AM on 04/08/2008

rixhex56, you have a total misunderstanding of how deterrence is measured.

Complete essay:
http://www.dpinfo.com/death_penalty_and_deterrence.htm

Short version:
Both high and low murder rates are found within death penalty and non death penalty jurisdictions, be it Singapore, South Africa, Sweden or Japan, or the US states of Michigan and Delaware.� Many factors are involved in such evaluations.� Reason and common sense tell us that it would be remarkable to find that the most severe criminal sanction -- execution -- deterred none.� No one is foolish enough to suggest that the potential for negative consequences does not deter the behavior of some.� Therefore, regardless of jurisdiction, having the death penalty will always be an added deterrent to murders, over and above any lesser punishments.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:40 AM on 04/08/2008

You forgot to leave out, dudleysharp, that those innocents executed, are the kind of people that you really don't care about. So, who cares.

So many well massaged "facts" and so much contorted logic just to get to a morally offensive point that could be summed up in three words; "I don't care."

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:16 PM on 04/07/2008

There is no proof of an innocent executed, at least since 1900.

I don't want any innocents convicted or imprisoned or executed. Does anyone.

But, the fact remains, that the innocents sentenced to death is a very small percentage, thankfully, and, so far, all the ones we know of have all been released.

I think we all agree that is a good thing

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:32 AM on 04/08/2008

Possibly we have sentenced 20-25 actually innocent people to death since 1973, or 0.3% of those so sentenced. Those have all been released upon post conviction review.

Anti death penalty claims, that the numbers are significantly higher, say 127, are a fraud, easily discoverable by fact checking.

The innocents deception of death penalty opponents has been getting exposure for many years. Even the behemoth of anti death penalty newspapers -- The New York Times -- has recognized that deception.

"To be sure, 30 or 40 categorically innocent people have been released from death row . . . ". ' (2) This when death penalty opponents were claiming the release of 119 "innocents" from death row. Death penalty opponents never required actual innocence in order for cases to be added to their "exonerated" or "innocents" list.

They simply invented their own definitions for exonerated and innocent and deceptively shoe horned large numbers of inmates into those definitions - something easily discovered with fact checking.

There is no proof of an innocent executed in the US, at least since 1900.

Of all the government programs in the world, that put innocents at risk, is there one with a safer record and with greater protections than the US death penalty?

Unlikely.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 08:12 PM on 04/07/2008

Richard Dieter, head of the DPIC: defining those 127

". . . they make no distinction between legal and factual innocence. " 'They're innocent in the eyes of the law,' Dieter says. 'That's the only objective standard we have.' "

Dieter "clarifies" the three ways that former death row inmates get onto their "exonerated" by "innocence" list.

"A defendant whose conviction is overturned by a judge must be further exonerated in one of three ways: he must be acquitted at a new trial, or the prosecutor must drop the charges against him, or a governor must grant an absolute pardon."

None establishes actual innocence.

They have " . . . included supposedly innocent defendants who were still culpable as accomplices to the actual triggerman."

DPIC: "There may be guilty persons among the innocents, but that includes all of us."

Good grief. DPIC wishes to apply collective guilt of capital murder to all of us.

Dieter states: "I don't think anybody can know about a person's absolute innocence." (Green). Dieter said he could not pinpoint how many are "actually innocent" -- only the defendants themselves truly know that, he said." (Erickson)

Or Dieter won't assert actual innocence in 1, 102 or 350 cases. He doesn't want to clarify a real number with proof of actual innocence, that would blow his entire deception.

Or, Dieter declare all innocent: "If you are not proven guilty in a court of law, you're innocent." (Green)

Dieter would call Hitler and Stalin innocent.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:03 PM on 04/07/2008

You refute the facts presented in this article with the very arguments those facts debunked. How is that an argument?

Your view on this matter is repugnant. In defending the death penalty, you argue that there is only a small percentage of wrongly convicted. Of course, the logical flaw in that argument, aside from the fact that your presented percentage is inaccurate to begin with, is that this small percentage represents only the ones we know about, having been proven.

You state, "Death penalty opponents never required actual innocence in order for cases to be added to their 'exonerated' or 'innocents' list." I can only speculate as to how you see this as supportive of your position. But since defendants are "considered innocent until proven guilty", the lack of evidence of guilt is what is required for an "innocent" verdict. When defendants are found guilty through prosecutorial misconduct, police misconduct, mistaken identity, and without solid evidence of guilt, and those shortcomings are overturned, it is as if, due to LACK OF EVIDENCE, the trial never occurred, thus the defendant RETAINS said innocence, it is not granted.

Your statement that there is "no proof of an innocent executed in the US, at least since 1900" is an absurd argument here, as well, as no attempts to prove innocence occur after someone is executed. Considering fallibility of our system, any penalty depriving someone of life, is a risk not worth taking.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 09:01 PM on 04/07/2008

"To be sure, 30 or 40 categorically innocent people have been released from death row . . .".

"Sister Prejean and other abolitionists are stretching the facts.''

"Indeed, there is no proof that anyone surely innocent has been executed in the modern history of the death penalty in America. "

quotes from, Adam Liptak, national legal correspondent for The NY Times

"The Death of Innocents': A Reasonable Doubt", by Helen Prejean

New York Times Book Review, p 29, 1/23/05,

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 12:39 PM on 04/08/2008

rixhex56 states:
"Your statement that there is "no proof of an innocent executed in the US, at least since 1900" is an absurd argument here, as well, as no attempts to prove innocence occur after someone is executed."

Evidently, you are totally ignorant of those many efforts that havve alwys been occurring. The Rosenburg case, as well as a slew of others over the past hundred years.

More recently, Roger Coleman was an "innocent executed" case pushed for about a decade by anti death penalty folks, recent guilt confirmed by DNA.

A Georgia case resulted in exhumation.

Dieter list a few absurd cases on his DPIC website of "possible" innocents executed, many of which hurt his credibility even more.

There are others, always, with ongoing investigations by anti death penalty folks. How can you not be aware of this? Because you make claims without fact checking, maybe?

Furthermore, if any of these cases had merit would family members file wrongful death suits, where only a preponderence of evidence standard is needed? Well, yes, they would, if such a case could win.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:48 AM on 04/08/2008

No, they haven't been proven. That's the point.

As I stated and is obvious, Dieter's standards have no reflection on actual innocence.

Hey, I have a good idea, why don't you fact check?

Ask Dieter of DPIC, what number of actual innocents have you PROVEN have been released from death row, of those sentenced to death after 1973, and what is that PROOF?

We await that which you should have done PRIOR to writing your story.

Evidently you are unaware that "innocent until proven guilty" is a LEGAL standard which exists in trial only.

What you are discussing is a public policy debate, based upon a 127 "innocents" number, whereby an anti death penalty group made up their own definition of "exonerated" and "innocent" and just shoe horned those 127 into it.

DPIC admits that what they did. Don't run from it.

The ONLY issue is how many TRUE actual innocents do we have real PROOF
have been released from death row and what does that say about the probability of executing an actual innocent.

That's it. Get on it.

favoriteFavorite Flag as abusive Posted 07:28 AM on 04/08/2008

Comments are closed for this entry.

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in

 

Popular Stories on HuffPost
Wall Street Journal Parody — With A Topless Ann Coulter — Rankles Murdoch In Real Life And On YouTube

My Wall Street Journal,...

Bill Clinton Flashback: "All These Economically Insecure White People...Are Scared To Death"

As the rumination continues over...

Obama Would "Immediately Review" Potential Of Crimes In Bush White House

Attytood's Will Bunch has a new interview with Barack Obama: Tonight...

Clinton Heckled, Obama Cheered Over 'Bitter' Remarks

The Clinton and Obama campaigns clearly have one thing in common in the wake of...

Clinton Becomes A Gun Lover

CNN reported Saturday that Democratic Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton touted her experience with...

Hillary Clinton On Southern Working Class Whites In 1995: "Screw 'Em"

During the past week, Sen. Hillary Clinton has presented herself as...

David Weiner McCain "Family Recipes" Lifted from the Food Network

UPDATE, 1pm EST, 4-15: It took less than 12 hours from the...

Will Ferrell Brings Back Bush Impersonation, Slams Jon Stewart

Will Ferrell dusted off his George W. Bush impersonation...

David Coleman I Was There: What Obama Really Said About Pennsylvania

Last Sunday evening I attended the San Francisco fundraiser...

Tim Russert Nails Hillary Clinton Over Bosnia Trip Falsehoods

Tim Russert, host of Meet the Press, nailed Hillary Clinton over her repeated falsehoods regarding...

Arianna Huffington John McCain Should Go on Vacation, Hillary Clinton is Doing His Job for Him

Clinton supporters say the darndest...

Jay Rosen The Uncharted: From Off The Bus to Meet the Press

When a story goes from OffTheBus to Meet the Press in two days...

Related Tags
 

 Site  Web ASK_logo