![]() |
![]() |
Death Penalty Debate |
Gallup Poll Reports: 74% Of Americans Support The Death Penalty - This Is In Spite Of The Steady Anti-Death Penalty Drumbeat Of The Main Stream Media |
| Gallup's
latest update on the death penalty shows a continued high level of public
support for the death penalty for those convicted of murder.
Americans say the death penalty is not imposed enough rather than imposed
too often. Support for the death penalty is high despite the belief
of most Americans that innocent people have been put to death in the past
five years, although most consider this a rare occurrence.
The poll, conducted May 5-7, finds 74% of Americans in favor of and 24% opposed to the "death penalty for a person convicted of murder." Gallup has asked this basic death-penalty-support question since the 1930's. Support has been above 70% over the last two years, after having been in the mid-to-high 60% range in 2000-2001. The current number is the highest support level Gallup has obtained on this measure since May 1995 when 77% supported the death penalty. The highest support level was 80% in 1994, and the lowest was 42% in 1966. In the last couple of years, there has been a growing belief that the death penalty is applied fairly in this country, despite news reports that some individuals were incorrectly given death sentences. 60% now say the death penalty is applied fairly, while 37% disagree. In 2000, 51% said it was applied fairly, and 41% said it was not. During that year, Illinois became the first state to institute a moratorium on the death penalty, and the use of the death penalty in Texas under then-Governor George W. Bush was a major issue in the 2000 presidential election campaign. Source: The Gallup Organization, May 19, 2003 |
The U. S. Supreme Court refused to consider the last appeal of condemned killer Kevin Stanford. Now 39, Stanford was 17 when he was charged with the 1981 robbery, sodomy and murder of 20-year-old Baerbel Poore, 20, who worked at a Checker Gas Station in Jefferson County, Kentucky. Stanford now faces execution. Poore's sister, Mona Mills, said the decision by the Supreme Court "was the best news I have had in 20 years." In response to a question about the age of killer Stanford at the time he viciously took the life of the young mother of an 11-month-old baby, Mills said, "When you did what he did, that is not the act of a child." Kentucky's Governor Paul Patton has been asked by the public defender to show mercy to Stanford and commute his sentence. They don't want Stanford treated the same way he treated Baerbel Poore.
|
Death Penalty Clemency Hearings Backfire On Death Penalty Opponents And Their Leader, Illinois Governor George Ryan |
|||||
The hearings have become story after story of the bloody horror of senseless and brutal murders by death row inmates. The pain and passion of the families of the victims is so intense and overwhelming that Illinois Governor George Ryan himself has become the target of bitter attacks by the relatives of the murder victims. So overwhelming is the brutality of the murders and intensity of the suffering and pain of the victims that even Chicago’s two major newspapers have urged Governor Ryan to halt the clemency hearings. "Halt the anguish, Gov. Ryan," implored the Chicago Tribune. "Ryan’s hearings cruel and unusual," headlined the Chicago Sun-Times. These liberal, anti-punishment newspapers who are so quick to condemn the death penalty and the court system apparently either can’t stand or are afraid of the real truth about what these condemned killers did to put themselves on death row. The juries knew and now the public is finding out, and the newspapers don’t like it. The public heard the often painful accounts of the brutal murders committed by these condemned killers. For example, they heard about:
"I can’t imagine the public has heard such a parade of horrors combined into such a short time period in American history," said John Gorman, a spokesman for the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office. Defense attorneys had hoped the hearings would focus on such problems as police brutality and unreliable jailhouse snitches. But it was clear almost from the beginning that the emphasis would be on the crimes themselves and the families they devastated. Family members have transformed the hearing rooms into photo galleries of the dead. They have pointed to the infants in the audience who would never know their grandfathers, the sons and daughters who grew up without parents. "You could not sit in that room without feeling human and without feeling how vulnerable it is to be human," said Arvin Boddie, a board member who was removed after criticizing the hearings and defense attorneys. Source: Associated Press |
|||||
Dick Devine's Letter To The Editor: Cook County State's Attorney Tells Gov. Ryan To Quit Blaming Victims |
|||||
Give him Hell, Dick!
Source: Chicago Sun-Times, October 28, 2002. |
|||||
Louisville Courier-Journal Is Taken To Task For Errors & Faulty Liberal Logic In Its Latest Anti-Death Penalty Editorial |
|||||
|
Larry Osborne was originally
convicted and sentenced to death, largely on the sworn testimony of a
witness who died prior to the first trial. The case was overturned because
Osborne could not cross-examine the dead witness. Because the prosecution
could not use that evidence in the second trial, Osborne was found not
guilty.
The editorial writers for the Courier-Journal concluded, therefore, that Osborne was innocent. The C-J seem to conclude that legal innocence is the same as actual innocence. WRONG! Dudley Sharp, Resource Director for Justice For All, in Houston, Texas, points out the faulty logic of the C-J latest anti-death penalty editorial and all of their errors in their latest rant.
|
|||||
Even Death Penalty Opponents Think This Latest U.S. Supreme Court Opinion Is Weird |
|||||
"The Supremes ignored the
Constitution...," said death penalty opponent Prof. Richard W.
Garrett of Notre Dame Law School. "I oppose the death penalty.
. . but accept that the death penalty can serve as a deterrent; and that
retribution is the justification and proper purpose of punishment. . . .
but I can only shake my head at the Supreme Court’s decision outlawing
the execution of persons with severe developmental disabilities," he
added.
The slim majority of the U.S. Supreme Court simply ignored our constitution and law and did what they wanted. Is this the beginning of the end of the rule of law? We always thought we could count on the Supreme Court to uphold our Constitution. Not if they keep up these antics. |
How can it not be ! Almost no one wants to die. Guilty murderers do everything to avoid being executed. They appeal their cases endlessly, accept plea bargains for life in prison. Is there any reason to believe the death penalty deters murders? Just look at the facts. Before 1963, most states had capital punishment and used it. Executions tracked the murder rate fairly consistently. By the late 1950's, murders were declining and executions were rare, but focused public attention on particularly heinous murders. By the early 1960's, however, liberal criminal justice policy-makers began to argue that, because murder rates were so low, the death penalty was no longer needed. Executions ground to a halt until the Supreme Court abolished them altogether in 1972. Simultaneously, murders skyrocketed. In 1973, they reached their 1933 peak, and hit an all-time high in 1980. Not until executions of these murderers resumed in earnest after 1991, did the murder rates fall rapidly to the 1960's level. Today almost half of all homicides are committed by strangers to the victim, and most of those are committed during another crime. These zealots are always ready to accept the word of a killer. "It was just an accident," they say, or "we really didn’t mean to shoot the guy, we were just trying to rob him," and apologists believe them and argue that it is unfair to execute some unfortunate sole for such a "tragic mistake." Yes, these naive elitists are very good at this type of thinking. Just don’t confuse them with the facts or history. Source: Opinion Journal, The Wall Street Journal Editorial Page, June 21, 2002. |
Capital
Punishment Saves Lives! |
||||||
|
||||||
Maryland
Governor Glendening Halts Executions, Accused Of Playing Politics With
Death Penalty |
||||||
Baker was convicted of First Degree Murder in the robbery and shooting of Jane Tyson in front of her two grandchildren as they all sat in her car outside of a Baltimore Mall in 1991. Karen Sulewski, a daughter of the victim, is furious that the Governor refuses to meet with her to explain his decision. Sulewski accused Glendening of caving in to political pressure to help Lt. Governor Kennedy-Townsend in her effort to succeed him as Governor of Maryland. |
||||||
Baltimore Sun Opinion Blasts Maryland Governor's Political Motives In Death Penalty Halt |
||||||
Well, the cold-blooded killer, Wesley Baker won’t get the sympathy of the voting public, but he sure got the sympathy of Maryland’s Governor. No wonder the public has such a low opinion of elected officials. |
||||||
Governor Glendening's Maryland Is "Criminal-Friendly," According To Washington Times |
||||||
| Colorado woman raped and murdered by Maryland criminal who was released early from Maryland prison. Maryland Governor Glendening apologizes to Colorado Governor. Maryland pays $700,000 to the woman's family. | ||||||
The C/J Eight
(Louisville Courier-Journal Editorial Writers) Claim Cold-Blooded Killer
"Too Young To Die" |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The C-J Eight (the Louisville Courier-Journal editorial board) are outraged that Napoleon Beazley was executed in Texas recently for the brutal murder of John Luttig eight years ago. The opinion of The C-J Eight, titled "Too young to die," reveals their anguish when Beazley was executed. Of course, they show no concerns for 63-year-old John Luttig who Beazley shot twice in the head with a .45-caliber gun, and whose pockets were rifled for keys to his car which he stole for a one-block joyride. Nope, the editorial tears of The C-J Eight are reserved for the killer, who was 3 months short of his 18th birthday.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gallup Poll Shows Support For Death Penalty Higher Than In Recent Years |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A recent Gallup poll shows Americans tend to believe the death penalty is applied fairly in the United States. 72% favor the death penalty for persons convicted of murder, while only 25% are opposed. Support has risen by almost 5%. A poll conducted by The Gallup Organization during May, 2002 shows that support for the death penalty is rising. Some of the significant findings include:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Death Penalty Abolitionists Seek State Funds For Study In Hopes Of Repealing Kentucky's Death Penalty Law |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
According to the April 26, 2002 edition of the Lexington Herald-Leader, Rep. Rob Wilkie, D-Franklin, and other death penalty abolitionists will seek funds from the Legislative Research Commission to help finance a study which they hope will lead to the repeal of Kentucky’s death penalty law. On April 22, 2002 The Lexington Herald-Leader reported:
The abolitionists hope to receive $25,000 in state funds to match $75,000 in grant funds for the study, which they say will determine whether death sentences are fairly given and carried out in Kentucky. Rep. Rob Wilkie said he hopes to tap the Legislative Research Commission, which regularly funds studies. Source: Article by John Cheves in the April 26, 2002 edition of the Lexington Herald-Leader. |
||
The
Public's Support For Capital Punishment Remains Strong |
America’s prosecutors feel that people who violate our laws should suffer the consequences of those acts, and they will continue to do all they can to see that law-breakers are held responsible for their criminal acts. The safety of the public is job # 1 for prosecutors. That is what the public expects and wants. |
Kentucky
Supreme Court Restores Death Sentence |
The Kentucky Supreme Court reinstated the murder convictions and death sentence of Eugene Frank Tamme in the slayings of two men in a Washington County marijuana field in 1983.
Tamme was first convicted of killing Harold Southerland and Neal Maddox in 1985, but that finding was set aside by the state Supreme Court. He was convicted again in 1994. Fayette Circuit Judge Mary C. Noble ruled in August, 2000 that Tamme's second conviction should be overturned, in part because of new evidence that defense lawyers said cast doubt on Tamme's guilt. On appeal, the lawyers argued that Tamme's trial lawyers weren't allowed to present evidence that two prosecution witnesses were involved in the drug trade with Tamme and that they had shot the victims during a drug deal gone bad. Noble sided with Tamme, but the state Supreme Court disagreed with her. In two separate opinions, all seven justices said Tamme's conviction should stand. Writing the majority decision, Justice Donald Wintersheimer said that Noble was not supported by case law when she ruled that the new evidence was sufficient to warrant a new trial. Noble ruled that the new evidence could "reasonably" result in a different verdict, but Wintersheimer noted that Kentucky appellate courts have held that judges could overturn convictions based on new evidence only if there is "reasonable certainty" that a jury would reach a different decision. "Such is a more liberal standard at variance with the requirements of this court," he said. Wintersheimer also said that Noble misapplied the law when she ruled that Tamme didn't get effective legal assistance and that he was barred from presenting a defense. Both arguments stemmed from Tamme not being allowed to present evidence of the drug trade. The Supreme Court overturned Tamme's first conviction after his lawyers agrued that allowing the jury to hear evidence of his involvement in drugs prejudiced jurors against him. Following the second trial, the lawyers argued just the opposite. "The argument that the original decision of this Court was intended to limit any inference to drug activities only to the prosecution, but permit the defense to impeach the credibility of the prosecution's witnesses with evidence of involvement in the drug operation is absurd," Wintersheimer wrote. The fact that Tamme's lawyers didn't push to introduce the drug evidence doesn't warrant a new trial, either, the court ruled. Wintersheimer quoted a decision from a 2000 case when he said a verdict should be overturned for ineffective legal help only when "counsel was so thoroughly ineffective that defeat was snatched from the hands of probable victory." |
Executions Deter Murders, According To Two Major University Studies |
||||||||||||
"The
execution of each offender seems to save, on the average, the lives of 18 potential
victims," according to Emory University researchers.
|
||||||||||||
Thomas Sowell Tells It Like It Is: The IQ Exemption For Killers |
||||||||||||
The never-ending battle of the left to keep people from being held responsible for their acts is now in the U. S. Supreme Court. The justices are being urged to exempt murderers from the death penalty if they score below some number on the IQ scale. Psychology and psychiatry are not sciences, though some courts pretend they are. Click here for story. |
||||||||||||
"Lexington Herald-Leader
Supports The Death Penalty," Says Editor Amanda Bennett |
||||||||||||
The Lexington Herald-Leader supports the death penalty. That's what Amanda Bennett, the newly appointed Editor of Lexington's daily newspaper, said while she was a guest on the February 5, 2002 Edition of WVLK radio program "Front-Page," hosted by Sue Wylie. Ms. Bennett's proclamation of support for the death penalty echoes the same position stated by her predecessor, Pam Luecke, who left the Lexington Herald-Leader to become a professor of journalism at Washington and Lee University in Lexington, Virginia. Before Luecke left the newspaper, she also stated, in an interview with Wood Simpson which appeared in the Chevy Chaser Magazine, that the Herald-Leader supported the death penalty. |
||||||||||||
Death Penalty Opponents Conspire Death penalty opponents voted overwhelmingly to abolish the death penalty for 16 and 17 year old killers who commit the most heinous murders. (621 against DP for juveniles - 120 for). However, thanks to good "cyber" citizens, we now know how they did it! Last weeks web question was:
Normally our web poll attracts between 100 - 200 Web-Voters. However, recently several hundred votes were cast in just one night. The next day we received several emails from good cyber-citizens from around the United States, reporting dirty tricks in last weeks web poll. One email read:
That good cyber-citizen forwarded the following emails which confirmed "the great browser-cookie conspiracy:"
After the secret instructions on how to "vote as many times as you want," were published by the anti-D/P bunch, the following emails were sent to other anti-death penalty conspirators throughout the United States: Email #1 From A Email #2 use this procedure to vote against the death penalty for juvenile offenders in Larsons pole (sic.)?? Please!" From E. Email #3 if you turn your cookies off, you will be able to vote more than once." Email #4 From Patrick Delahanty Email #5
It was just two months ago that the Louisville Courier-Journal reported that Catholic Priest, and head of the Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, Patrick Delahanty admitted he had done the very same thing earlier in an effort to rig the lexingtonprosecutor.com voter poll results by voting numerous times to try to skew the results. |
||||||||||||
Independent thinking John Malkovich recently gave the death penalty opponent, Chicago Tribune the benefit of his thoughts about our criminal justice system. "Americas left wing wants criminals coddled, and no one wants anyone punished," he said. "I would have no problem pushing the switch while having dinner." He further tweaked the anti-death penalty bunch by saying, "Were all going to die, so it should be called the early death penalty." |
||||||||||||
The Gallup Poll Reports: Support For The Death Penalty Has Increased Since The September 11th Terrorist Attack On The World Trade Center |
||||||||||||
The Gallup Organization asked adults the following question: a person convicted of murder? Editors comment: the question should have been: who has committed an aggravated murder?" Because not every murder is eligible for the death penalty, only the worst ones. Prior to the September 11th terrorist attack on New Yorks World Trade Center, 65 % of those polled said they favored the death penalty for a person convicted of murder. 27% said no, and 8% had no opinion. After the attack, support for the death penalty rose and opposition declined. 68% favored the death penalty, 26% opposed it, and those who had no opinion declined to 6%.
|
||||||||||||
"IQ
Testing In Death Penalty Cases Has Become A Charade. . . Honesty Went Out Of The Death
Penalty A Long Time Ago" |
Attention Death Row: Button up your shirt to the top, get those coke bottle glasses on the internet, you know, the ones with the black frames, and get a dorky haircut from Officer Bob. Retardation is in. In the continuing battleground over the death penalty, the ability to appear retarded has emerged as the most powerful weapon in the new psychiatric mitigation arsenal. The impact threatens the credibility of American neuropsychology. Several recent cases have highlighted the question of whether a mentally retarded person can be executed. John Paul Penry of Texas (now known as Johnny-the more juvenile appellation adopted for purposes of his makeover) reportedly has an IQ ranging from 51 to 63. Ernest McGarver, who killed his boss in North Carolina and whose case will be heard by the United States Supreme Court, recently dipped to 67 from an IQ ranging from 70 to 88 in earlier years. Seventy, by the way, is traditionally regarded as the IQ below which one can be possibly considered as retarded, depending on function. What the United States Supreme Court and other courts, and even prosecution agencies, have not yet factored in is the pervasiveness of professional expert witness malingering that infests capital defendant examinations today. IQ is but one component of the assessment of retardation; but the number continues to eclipse awareness that other important criteria must also be factored into whether a person is genuinely retarded. This becomes especially significant when one considers how easy it is to fake a bad performance on an IQ test. Can examiners pick up faking on an IQ test? Sure. But they have to want to know the truth of his idiocy or intelligence. How else to explain the curious phenomenon of how Mr. McGarver has lost IQ points, which defies understanding of IQ? Such shaving to get under the retardation Mendozaa Line to suit the adversarial system has as much credibility as the East German trainers who got jiggy with steroids to help their athletes win at the Olympics. Do the American people realize what a charade IQ testing in the capital-eligible has become? Regrettably, defense cases often attract examiners who are such zealots to "save the life" of the accused murderer that they toss all professional ethics to the wind like the therapist who falls in love and elopes with his patient. In our experience working on cases for both defense and prosecution, we too often see tests conducted for the purpose of distorting the incapacity of the examinee as much as possible. In one example, from a case recently referred to The Forensic Panel, a well-credentialed neuropsychologist, who has even written about testing the Spanish speaking, conducted tests on such a defendant even though those measures had not even been normed properly. One colleague familiar with his work asserts this examiner does not even speak Spanish fluently. Perhaps the retarded shouldn't be executed. That question absolutely deserves the consideration it gets. However, honesty went out of the death penalty debate a long time ago. Let the Supreme Court beware that the science they pass judgment on is all too often of the order of the medical disqualification from service in Vietnam. How sad that the professional's role in the death penalty debate has so degenerated, and that scientific colleagues are often responsible. A claim of retardation, for them, is no eligible defense. Source: The Forensic Panel Letter, http://echo.forensicpanel.com/ |
Commonwealth's Attorneys Association Supports Death Penalty Before Legislative Committee |
|||
| George
Moore, President of the Kentucky Commonwealth's Attorneys
Association, addressed the Joint Interim Judiciary Committee of the Kentucky General Assembly concerning the position of Kentucky's prosecutors on the death penalty.
The following are the remarks made by President Moore to the Joint Interim Judiciary Committee:
|