I would like to add my own thoughts to the following discussion.  The question is why  there are more innocent citizens sitting on death row lately.  Although it is not mentioned in the article, I blame much of it on the drug war and the tremendous burden the sheer numbers put on the enforcers: Cops, Clerks, attorneys, prosecutors, and courts are overloaded and backlogged.  In order to have 'justice' in a timely manner, everyone's become careless and rushed, mistakes happen, and one case becomes the same as the next. 

Of course, more innocents are going to prison, not just on death row either.  That is why I firmly believe if society insists on turning their backs on inmates, and especially if a person is to be murdered by the state, a DNA test ought to be mandatory in every case where it could determine innocence or guilt scientifically.   I just want to know why so many people, legislators, and administrators resist this no-brainer.

Email Kay Lee

Video- "Walk with Me" - Kenneth Foster, innocent on Texas DR
www.redseascuba.net/music (play the second video)  or the direct link to the video
http://www.xs4all.nl/~vercathe/redsea/music/Javlin-WalkWithMe2.avi

Reasons for Increased Risk of Error

The most obvious reason for the increase in the number of innocent cases being discovered among those on death row is the overall expansion of the death penalty. The number of people on death row has been increasing, and this expansion is likely to continue as states and the federal government broaden the death penalty to new crimes, and new states such as New York and Kansas begin sentencing people to death. With the greater use of the death penalty, there is a greater likelihood of mistakes.

Secondly, the death penalty has become even more political as legislators, prosecutors, and even judges promote the death penalty in their campaigns(7). This results in the expansion of death penalty crimes and a shorter and narrower appeal process.

Prosecutors, with virtually unbridled discretion to seek the death penalty, may pursue a death sentence even when the evidence is weak, and they may be reluctant to change course when contradictory evidence later arises.(8) Even judges, many of whom are also subject to elections, can be influenced in their decisions to ignore evidence of innocence unless it is absolutely irrefutable. And recent changes in the appeals process, especially in federal courts, have made it more likely that executions will proceed even in the face of evidence raising doubts about a defendant's guilt.(9)

For many years, the ABA has conducted studies, held educational programs, and produced studies and law review articles about the administration of the death penalty. As a result of that work, the Association has identified numerous, critical flaws in current practices. Those flaws have not been redressed, indeed, they have become more severe in recent years, and the new federal habeas law and the defunding of the [resource centers] have compounded these problems. This situation requires the specific conclusion of the ABA that executions cease, unless and until greater fairness and due process prevail in death penalty implementation. [-Report in support of American Bar Association]

¥Resolution, 199710

Professor Samuel Gross, a noted author and researcher at the University of Michigan Law School who has written extensively about capital punishment, recently explored the reasons why mistakes are more likely in capital cases than in other criminal matters.(11) Among the reasons he gave in support of this thesis are:

¥ The great pressure on police and prosecutors to "solve" the most notorious murders in a community

When a police officer is killed or a child brutally raped and murdered, the public is watching every day until a suspect is produced. The terrible murder of 10-year-old Jeanine Nicarico in a Chicago suburb in 1983 at first resulted in months of frustration with no indictments. Eventually, the police and prosecutors settled on the wrong suspects: Rolando Cruz and Alejandro Hernandez. Even though their convictions and death sentences were repeatedly overturned on appeal, the prosecutors continued to retry them. They were not officially cleared and released until 1995. Now three prosecutors and four police officers have been indicted for obstruction of justice in this prosecution.(12)

¥Lack of eyewitness testimony

When someone is murdered by a stranger, which is often the case in death penalty crimes, there is rarely an eyewitness to the killing. Thus, in prosecuting the case the state relies more heavily on less reliable sources of evidence such as accomplices, jail-house snitches, and pressured confessions from the defendant. The real killer has a strong motivation in a capital case to divert attention from himself and to put the onus, in whole or in part, on another individual who may be completely innocent.

Randall Dale Adams, whose saga was portrayed in the documentary, The Thin Blue Line, faced execution in Texas because the real killer, a young man with good family connections in Texas, was able to convince authorities that the outsider, Adams, must have been the killer.

A confession by the defendant is not a dependable indicator of guilt.(13) Manipulation and pressure by the police, or the presence of mental retardation or mental illness on the part of the defendant can lead an innocent suspect to be overly cooperative with the authorities by supplying information the police obviously want to hear.

¥Heightened publicity

At trial, the heightened publicity surrounding capital cases can influence jurors by supplying them with information that may be inadmissible, misleading, and inflammatory. Such jurors may be swept up in the communal outrage about the crime as conveyed by the media, making them more likely to ignore legitimate doubts raised by the defense.

¥Death qualified juries

Juries in death penalty cases are always quizzed about their attitudes on capital punishment before the start of the trial. Those who could not impose a death verdict are eliminated from the jury pool. According to many studies, the resulting "death-qualified" jury is not only prepared to return a death sentence, but is more likely to erroneously convict the defendant in the first place.(14) The very raising of the issue of what the punishment will be before the trial can send a signal to prospective jurors that the issue of guilt is in little doubt.

¥Limited resources of the defense attorney

Defense counsel in a capital case must not only prepare for the guilt/innocence phase of the trial, but also simultaneously ready themselves for the sentencing phase. Since the defense's resources are often severely curbed by state spending limits, the attorney must decide whether it would be better to risk the client's conviction but save his life by spending more time preparing for the sentencing phase. If this preparation occurs at the expense of investigating evidence which might produce an acquittal, it heightens the chance that a mistaken conviction will result.

Verneal Jimerson (IL), released 1996; photo: Loren Santow

¥Heinousness of death penalty cases

Related to the problem of pre-trial publicity is the heinousness of the typical death penalty case. Regardless of whether the jurors heard such evidence before the trial, they will certainly be exposed to it during the trial. The heinousness of the facts alone can make it more likely that the jury will ignore reasonable doubts and return a guilty verdict. Releasing a defendant who is probably guilty (but not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt) of a brutal slaying is much more difficult than releasing someone who is probably guilty of only a misdemeanor. Professor Gross acknowledges that there are countervailing pressures which may make a mistake less likely in a capital case, such as more thorough representation by the defense and more careful review of the case on appeal. But, he notes, these measures are unevenly applied. In many states, the amount of money offered for defending a capital case is totally inadequate and requests for co-counsel, expert testimony and pre-trial investigations are routinely turned down. Similarly, the appeals process is being sharply curtailed, meaning that adequate time will not be available to discover mistakes. Thus, Professor Gross concludes:

"The steady stream of errors that we see in cases in which defendants are sentenced to death is a predictable consequence of our system of investigating and prosecuting capital murder. . . . At best, we could do an imperfect job of catching errors after they occur, and in many cases we don't really try. As a result, most miscarriages of justice in capital cases never come to light."(15)

THE GOOD OLD BOYS

Lee/Lee W. Gaylord/Eazy Lee/The Crazy Old White Man
http://castleofhope.bluemoondomain.com/allsitesmap.html is the site map for Castle of Hope for Lost Souls Group of sites  with links to the other sites that are her children.  The Injustice System, Castle of Hope, LASTCHANCE, Stairway  Outreach and The Crazy Old White Man From The Hood.
 

INNOCENT'S COMPENSATION
State By State

RESOURCES FOR INNOCENT PRISONERS