Posted on 03/01/2006 3:36:37 PM PST by Former Military Chick
Anyone curious about the motives of the federal judge who has temporarily put the brakes on executions in California should know this: Jeremy Fogel comes with plenty of personal biases.
He leans decidedly toward the San Francisco Giants.
He would probably rule in favor of the jazz stylings of pianist Keith Jarrett.
And he's partial to the steam-poached salmon with Dijon beurre blanc when dining at Maddalena's in Palo Alto.
His true feelings about the death penalty, however, are not up for discussion.
``My feeling is that it's constitutional,'' Fogel said this week in an interview with the Mercury News. ``Until the Supreme Court says otherwise, it's the law, and my job is to enforce the law.''
After eight years on the U.S. District Court in San Jose, Fogel, a 56-year-old appointed by President Clinton, finds himself dead-center in one of the nation's most divisive and emotionally charged debates. When the state was unable to comply with his conditions for administering drugs to end the life of condemned killer Michael Morales last week, Fogel effectively shut down California's death chamber.
To help determine whether the death-by-injection method constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, he has ordered California's first-ever hearing on the process, putting it at the forefront of states re-evaluating how they carry out such executions -- and infuriating the family of the teenager Morales beat to death with a claw hammer.
``I think it's ridiculous what this judge has done,'' said Terri Winchell's brother, Brian Chalk. ``No one in his right mind would put Morales' chance of feeling 1 percent of the pain ahead of what my sister went through. . . . The problem with our country is that judges keep changing the law.''
Fogel bristles at the criticism.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
"My feeling is that it's constitutional"
If it were not, why would the 14th amendment state very clearly, "nor shall any State deprive any person of LIFE, liberty, or property, without due process of law"?
Emphasis on LIFE added by me.
I am far less interested in judges "feelings" than in their interpretations of the constitution.
It sounds as if, even though he is yet another clintonoid, he may actually not be a liberal fanatic. But he still managed to step in it. It was a dumb decision, and he deserves whatever flak he gets.
"appointed by President Clinton"
I agree I am currently trying to find a way to post the entire opinion on FR, it really gives you an eye into his decision and frankly well ... I will let others decide for themselves ....
FMC
http://www.ce9.uscourts.gov/ca9/Documents.nsf/54dbe3fb372dcb6c88256ce50065fcb8/e0489b00c2cb5906882571190006a91e/$FILE/en%20banc%20final.pdf
He suggests people read his 15-page opinion to understand his reasoning, which centers on the possibility that an inmate may still be conscious -- and therefore suffering -- well into the three-drug execution protocol. The drug-delivery system is intended to anesthetize the prisoner first, before death occurs. The hearing will focus on whether it actually works that way.
``Rather than block the execution,'' Fogel says, ``I was looking for a way for the case to proceed.''
While some see in Fogel a judge with an agenda jamming up a death-delivery system supported by case law and national polls, another Fogel can be found each day in Courtroom No. 3 at the federal courthouse. In interviews with friends, fellow judges and lawyers, a portrait emerges of a respected jurist who is by the book and also respectful of the lives affected by his rulings.
I am a lawyer and appeared before him many times when he sat on the Santa Clara County Superior Court. Despite the fact that he was appointed by Jerry Brown, and to the federal court by Clinton, he is a good and wise man, and not an iealogue of any kind.
I think he stepped in it on this one, though.
Yes, but does he drink wine spritzers?
FYI PING
I appreciate you adding your thoughts to this thread, it is helpful to have such insightful comments on such hot topics.
I had read somewhere that he was against the DP? Any first hand thoughts on that observation?
Yep, it's about the judges again.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
You are direct, to the point and of course RIGHT.
I had thought this was justice for the victim's, silly me.
Well, he's a Keith Jarrett fan so I'll grant him that positive (spoken by someone who's about worn out his copy of The Koln Concert, and is looking to buy Keith's latest solo concert CD sooner than later).
The way I also look at it is they worry about minor pain of the killer, so they leave the family who's kid they killed in agony.
I also agree, what about their pain? I hope that all comes down on that Judge.
I can be a rather sadistic S.O.B. when it comes to the method of execution. To me it should be as painful as possible. It's about punishment.
As always, thank you for the ping!
Thanks for the confirmation. You can't trust the media to present the facts fairly, but usually their distortions show, and reading this it did seem as if he must be a pretty decent guy.
If he believes the death penalty is constitutional where in the constitution is he basing his decision on what specifies the method? All his decision has done is promote him has an activist judge.
If you are covicted of heinous crimes I don't give a damn if your execution is painful.
ThanksChick.
What did you do in the military???
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.