In "Forced Medication of Legally Incompetent Prisoners: A Primer," Kathy Swedlow uses cases such as Singleton v. Norris to examine the legal background and heated debate surrounding the issue of involuntary treatment of death row prisoners to make them sane enough for execution. Swedlow notes that many of those who support capital punishment find the holding in Singleton (which allows forcible medication) unsettling. She concludes that "even assuming Singelton's guilt, the forcible medication and execution of an incompetent defendant . . . should no longer be permitted."
Dave Lindorff's article "Unjust Executions" goes beyond the issue of innocence and explores cases where guilty defendants may have been executed despite unconstitutional trials.
The Texas Senate passed legislation (S.B. 1045) to create a joint interim committee on post-conviction exonerations. The committee will study wrongful convictions in the state and identify appropriate improvements in the criminal justice system to prevent such errors in the future. The nine members of the committee will include a state's attoney, two members chosen from the Senate Criminal Justice Committee, two members of the House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee, a judge, and two law professors. (May 20, 2003). William Sessions, a former director of the FBI, recently endorsed the creation of the panel, which still must be approved by the Texas House.
Kentucky Governor Paul Patton said that he will commute the death sentence of Kevin Stanford, a juvenile offender whose 1989 case before the U.S. Supreme Court resulted in a ruling allowing the execution of those who were 16 or 17-years-old at the time of their crime. This will be the first time Patton has commuted a death sentence since he took office, and he noted in his announcement that the justice system "perpetuated an injustice" in Stanford's case. Stanford has been on Kentucky's death row for two decades for a murder he committed when he was 17. During that time, his case has served as a cornerstone in the national debate about the execution of juvenile offenders. Patton is still considering whether he will commute the sentence to life in prison without the possibility of parole or to a lesser sentence.
Juries in 15 of the last 16 federal capital trials have declined to impose the death penalty, despite a more aggressive pursuit of this punishment by the Justice Department. Since President George Bush took office, 15% of the capital trials have resulted in death sentences, compared to 46% of cases in which the death penalty was sought from 1988 to 2000. Legal experts believe that overreaching by prosecutors and some jurors' growing unease with the death penalty may account for the trend. Former U.S. Attorney Alan Vinegrad noted, "It reflects that the tide is turning in this country with regard to attitudes about the death penalty. There has been so much publicity about wrongfully convicted defendants on death row that people sitting on juries are reluctant to impose the ultimate sanction."
A recent editorial in The Beacon Journal notes that Ohio Supreme Court Justice Paul Pfeifer, who played a leading role in writing Ohio's death penalty statute 22 years ago when he was chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is now calling for passage of legislation to analyze the state's death penalty system. The review, which also has the endorsement of the Ohio State Bar Association, would create a Capital Case Commission to study the state's death penalty and make reform recommendations to ensure accuracy and fairness. The editorial concludes:
A Capital Case Commission would amount to a first step toward a thorough evaluation. Justice Pfeifer emphasized why the commission is "critically important." Ohio must have a system of the capital punishment that is "fair and just and equally applied to all" if it expects public confidence in criminal justice as a whole.
"Burden of Proof" is a 32-minute documentary detailing the need for a moratorium on executions in North Carolina. The video was prepared by New Context Video Productions and offers evidence to suggest that North Carolina's capital punishment system is badly broken and in need of a legislative review. (June 2003) Watch the video.
In a vote that will dramatically change the way murder investigations are conducted, the Illinois House has overwhelmingly approved legislation requiring audio-or videotaping of most homicide-related interrogations and confessions. The bill, which unanimously passed the Senate last month, now goes to Governor Rod Blagojevich for signature into law. The Governor has vowed to sign the legislation. Attorney Thomas Sullivan, who co-chaired the Illinois Commission on Capital Punishment that made more than 80 reform recommendations after a thorough review of the state's death penalty, noted, "It is extremely significant in that it will be a major step forward for law enforcement and for the entire criminal justice system in Illinois."
NEW VOICES: Former FBI Chief Sessions Calls for Innocence Commission in Texas In a recent op-ed, William Sessions called on state legislators in Texas to pass a measure to create an Innocence Commission. The Commission would examine the Texas criminal justice system in an effort to protect against wrongful convictions. Sessions, a former director of the FBI and federal judge, noted that numerous exonerations , recent crime lab scandals (see below) in the state, and other troubling events should prompt state leaders to take immediate action:
When we study our criminal justice system in Texas and make it better, we not only reduce the chances of convicting the innocent, we increase the chances of convicting the guilty. We also show that our system is strong enough to recognize and repair its own mistakes.
As investigators continue to scrutinize the Houston Crime Lab's history of shoddy practices and inaccurate test results, including evidence in capital cases, an op-ed in the Houston Chronicle called for District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal and Houston Police Chief Clarence Bradford to recuse themselves from the investigation to ensure a fair review:
To date, District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal has refused to recuse himself from the investigation, instead insisting that his office can impartially investigate the wrongdoing, even though it is possible that his office may have known about the wrongdoing.
Like Rosenthal, Chief Bradford has also obstinately refused to acknowledge that an outside, independent investigator is called for. However, there is a specific reason that Rosenthal should recuse himself regardless of the fate that befalls Bradford. The DA's office has a significant and unmistakable conflict of interest in the matter because that office defends the reliability of the convictions and death sentences of death row inmates from Harris County. As a result of what we have learned about the crime lab, many of those inmates now have new and viable legal claims that are predicated on the failures of that lab. The DA's office simply cannot perform an impartial investigation while simultaneously opposing the legal efforts of those death row inmates.