Justice not served by delaying death row inmate's execution

The Fresno Bee ^ | 10/25/2007

[backtothestreets]

Billy Ray Hamilton, who killed three people with a sawed-off shotgun inside Fran's Market in Fresno more than a quarter-century ago, has died in prison. We have to ask the same question asked by the parents of one of his victims: Why did Hamilton spend 27 years on death row?

His prison stay lasted more than one and a half times as long as his youngest victim's entire life. His victims were Douglas White, 18, Josephine Rocha, 17, and Bryon Schletewitz, 27.

We support the death penalty. At the same time, we believe those sentenced to death must have every opportunity to appeal their cases, and the state is obligated to ensure that justice is being served by carrying out the death sentence.

But this can be done in a few years. Justice is not served by delaying the death penalty 27 years.

[backtothestreets]

It took about a week, but my response was in the today's paper:

Timely Executions

The Bee editorial addressing timely capital punishment in California [Oct. 26] as an example of a broken legal process was needed. As Judge Arthur Alarcon stated, politicians have neglected the problem. The editorial could have noted that the problem of timely capital punishment greatly benefits a few well-connected interests.

Lawyers serving the defense, prosecution and on the bench, all know an execution kills a "cash cow." Prison administers and guards are similarly aware they owe a part of their livelihood to the allegedly "broken" legal system. As major contributors to, and beneficiaries of politicians, these interests are served by the apparent neglect of politicians.

These same political interests are, likewise, beneficiaries of life-sentencing in capital crimes. If not for politicians, lawyers and prisons, all of which are major business interests sapping taxpayer dollars, the punishment phase for capital offense trials would offer only two possible outcomes, execution or freedom.

Keeping convicted murderers alive to be "cash cows" for well-connected special interests is immoral, unconscionable and amounts to political slavery. Long sentences for manslaughter are worthy, as these involved unintentional deaths. Prison time for murder should be no more than two to three years to appeal the conviction.

Chuck Plante

Fresno

http://www.fresnobee.com/277/story/181576.html

[Shadowstrike]

Well done. Short, concise and to the point. And they won't "get" it. The only thing I admire about China is the fact that you get one appeal. After that they take you outside and blow you away. It makes me sick that in this, our beloved Country that murderers have more rights than those they kill. After all, as one lawyer once told a friend of mine. "They are dead, they have no rights now."

[rednesss]

Kirk Bloodsworth would disagree with your hastiness. The legal system that we have in America is not flawless, one needs to look no further than disbarred DA Nifong. The men and women who constructed our legal system drafted it in such a way that was meant to prevent a rush to judgment and in fact meant it to be a slow plodding progression. It is the "cooler heads" that are meant to dispense justice, not lynch mobs with pitchforks and torches. I suggest looking at the webpage for the Innocence Project. Hundreds of people have been exonerated by DNA evidence not available at the time of their trial. You can also read about Kirk.

Kirk Bloodsworth was sentenced to death for a 1984 rape-murder he didn't commit, it took nine years for DNA to exonerate him, and another decade for it to link another man to the crime.

http://www.law.northwestern.edu/depts/clinic/wrongful/exonerations/Bloodsworth_MD.htm

http://www.innocenceproject.org/know/Browse-Profiles.php

[backtothestreets]

As I recall that case, the prosecutor had purposely withheld information from the defense that would have exonerated the dependent. That act by the prosecutor, in and of itself, was a premeditated act. If Kirk Bloodsworth were executed due to a purposeful act by the prosecutor, the prosecutor should be tried for murder. As it was, the prosecutor should have been tried for attempted murder.

If any person is convicted and executed due to intentionally skewed testimony by, or for the prosecution, the person(s) responsible should be tried for murder, the same as if they had used a weapon to murder an innocent person. Just because so many such faulty convictions are the direct result of lawyers serving as prosecutors, is no excuse to give these lawyers an exemption from murder laws. Hold lawyers accountable to the same laws as the general population.

[singfreedom]

In most respects, you are correct, however, in California is now so seldom executed that it is, in most states, considered a joke. I rather imagine most of those on death row look at it similarly. When it takes over 25 years to carry out a sentence, most taxpayers would consider it “excessive”.

[backtothestreets]

One fellow objected to my position stating that it has never been proven that capital punishment has acted as a deterrent to murder. I asked him how many people executed had gone on to commit murder again. He was speechless, and never did get back to me with an answer.

Dang, I hate when debates end abruptly.

[backtothestreets]

Being here in California, I am too aware of the perversions involved with capital punishment. I really do see the condemned murderers as being “cash cows” for special interests.

I don’t mind saying that if the Thirteenth Amendment had not redefined slavery as a legal government institution, our penal system would not have changed much from the pre-Civil War days when justice was swift.

I am personally opposed to slavery. Changing the institution of slavery from private ownership to government ownership, often made available to private sector special interests, does not make slavery suddenly good. And making the government sanctioned slavery part of the penal system makes it ripe for corruption.

I also do not mind saying it is primarily lawyers that do not want issues involved with capital punishment resolved. Capital punishment is a big "cash crop" for lawyers so long as the issues are left unresolved, or opened anew.

[Does so]

"...Kirk Bloodsworth was sentenced to death for a 1984 rape-murder he didn't commit, it took nine years for DNA to exonerate him...,"

Exoneration is not "Found Not Guilty".

"...and another decade for it to link another man to the crime..."

"Link" implies an accomplice.

[Joe Boucher]

About a third of all judges should be placed in stocks in the village square and stoned.

[BuffaloJack]

There are always cases where 10 years after the sentence the condemned person is found not guilty by DNA evidence or other. There are also cases (the rapist-murderer of my cousin Charlott’s 8 year old daughter for example) where the murderer is caught, tried, convicted, has no remorse and even brags that he enjoyed killing the little girl and would do it again if he had the chance. This creep stayed on death row for 22 years before the killed him. What purpose was served by keeping him alive for an extra 22 years?

[Texas Termite]

Well written and I agree 100%.

My question is and always has been.... why is it the victims loose their rights when they are murdered? I recently served on a capitol murder trial. He was convicted and sentenced to death. During the process of choosing the jury, I noted before the judge, both sets of attorneys and the defendant that I found it amazing that no member of the victim’s family was privy to being present for the process. They had no idea what was going on, or when the jury pick would be finalized. This family was a victim of this crime. They lost a beautiful 18 year old daughter (she was kidnapped, raped and shot) at the hands of a creep!

My opinion... when these murder’s have their one appeal, it’s over. I’m sure their victims would have loved another appeal and another 27 years of life!

Nana

[backtothestreets]

"What purpose was served by keeping him alive for an extra 22 years?"

Lawyers and special interests weren't finished using him to get taxpayer dollars. That is exactly how it looks to me. I see no other purpose being served for the condemned to be kept alive.

As for false murder convictions, I honestly believe false convictions would diminish greatly IF prosecutors, and prosecution witnesses, could be tried for murder themselves for intentionally falsifying evidence to get a conviction. To me, an intentional act by another person, that leads to the death of a innocent person, is murder.

[backtothestreets]

And make certain the remaining two-thirds of judges are there to watch.

[phrogphlyer]

That’s been my argument for years - definitely discourages repeat offenses.

[tear gas]

Executing criminals is going to continue to take forever so long as we entertain a fetish for not executing an innocent person. Trying to avoid ANY mistaken executions results in endless appeals, etc.

The purpose of executing criminals is to administer justice and to serve warning on others not to engage in the conduct that warrants execution. Don't get me wrong, the death penalty works best when the person executed is guilty, but we should not overlook the fact that IT ALSO WORKS WHEN WE OCCASIONALLY MAKE A MISTAKE AND EXECUTE AN "INNOCENT" PERSON. So long as the public BELIEVES the person was guilty, actual guilt or innocence is more or less irrelevant.

[Joe Boucher]

Good idea.

[rednesss]

"Don't get me wrong, the death penalty works best when the person executed is guilty, but we should not overlook the fact that IT ALSO WORKS WHEN WE OCCASIONALLY MAKE A MISTAKE AND EXECUTE AN "INNOCENT" PERSON. So long as the public BELIEVES the person was guilty, actual guilt or innocence is more or less irrelevant."

Holy sh!t what an opinion. I nominate you to be the INNOCENT PERSON who gets executed to serve as a WARNING to others. You first since you obviously have such convictions on the issue.

[tear gas]

We cannot be held to the impossible standard of a "mistake-free" death penalty. There WILL be mistakes. A grownup who supports the death penalty must be willing to accept the inevitable mistakes. I ACCEPT that reality.

Having accepted that reality, I choose to view those who are mistakenly executed as having died for their country, JUST LIKE SOLDIERS.

It is probably also a mistake to refer to anyone as being "innocent" in any event. In fact, none of us are really very "innocent."