Anti fraud - The 100 innocents released
Sharpjfa
by Dudley Sharp, Justice For All, updated 4/13/02
(contact info, below)
A thorough review finds that the risk of executing the innocent has been
significantly overstated by death penalty opponents, that such risk is
extraordinarily low and that the cessation of executions will put many more
innocents at risk.
Innocents Released from Death Row: A Critical Review of the Claims
Death penalty opponents claim that 100 inmates have been released from death
row after their innocence has been proven. It is a false claim.
The foundation for these claims begins in 1993, when a study, released by US
Rep. Don Edwards, purported to find that 48 innocents had been released from
death row since 1973 (1). Rep. Edwards concluded that "Under the law, there is
no distinction between definitively innocent and those found innocent after a
trial."
Although Rep. Edwards was free to make the obvious distinction between the
factually innocent (The truly "I had no connection to the murder" cases") and
the legally innocent (the "I got off because of legal error" cases), he chose
not to. In addition, Rep. Edwards selected an anti death penalty group, The
Death Penalty Information Center (the DPIC), to conduct the study, thereby
negating objective confidence in the results.
The source for the updated 100 innocent number is also the DPIC (2). Richard
Dieter, head of the DPIC, has confirmed, again, what their "innocent" means:
" . . . according to death penalty opponents, who say they make no distinction
between legal and factual innocence because there is no difference between the
two under the law and because there is no objective way to make such a
determination. 'They're innocent in the eyes of the law,' Dieter says. 'That's
the only objective standard we have.' " (3)
What nonsense. As this public policy debate is about the factually innocent, we
need not speculate as to why DPIC fails to make such an obvious distinction --
they wish to expand their "innocents" claims. Furthermore, for many years, the
US Supreme Court, has enforced the obvious distinction between the factually
innocent and the legally innocent. Mr. Dieter and all of those active in this
debate are well aware of this.
On the DPIC site, as of 4/10/02: "Since 1973, 100 people in 24 states have
been released from death row with evidence of their innocence." (4) Again,
Dieter is deceptive and inaccurate.
Most recently, death penalty opponents are giving much play to that 100th case
- Ray Krone. It is an instructive example. He was not on death row, at the time
he was found innocent via DNA testing. His death sentence was overturned in
1995. He was retried and given a life sentence in 1996 (5).Inmates released
from term sentences, because of innocence evidence, don't qualify as death row
"exonerations". Yet, there they are "released from death row with evidence of
their innocence." Death penalty opponents do what they can to fraudulently
raise the number.
And the "innocence" standards get worse. Death penalty opponents have " . . .
included supposedly innocent defendants who were still culpable as accomplices
to the actual triggerman." (6). The law often finds such criminal accomplices
legally guilty for their involvement in murders, even if they, themselves,
didn't "pull the trigger". But the DPIC, and other opponents, so devoted to
alleged legal standards, in one circumstance, abandons that standard when doing
so can further increase thier false "innocents" claims.
As Dieter and other death penalty opponents make no distinction between the
factualy innocent and the legally innocent, why don't they claim that some 2200
innocents have been released from death row? That is the number of legally
innocent and factually innocent released from death row on appeal since 1973.
The answer is obvious. They hoped that the media and others might just assume
that the 100 were factually innocent and not ask any questions. The 2200 number
is just too large for such blind acceptance. For many years, such opponents
have been very successful with this decepion.
A review of the DPIC 100 case descriptions finds that only about 32 claim
factual innocence, with alleged proof to support the claim. That is 32 cases
out of about 7000 death sentences since 1973, or 0.5%.
And, at least one "innocent", Clarence Smith, has since been removed from the
DPIC "innocents" released list because he was reconvicted for the relevant
murder. We say at least, becasue the DPIC did not publically acknowledge the
Smith case until after we had disclosed it. We simply don't know if there are
more such cases. Originally, the DPIC gave a descritpion of that case which
supported Smith's innocence. Obviously, their original discriptiion was
inaccurrate. That means that their presentation was either decepetive or
reflected poor fact checking. This is not surprising.
When reviewing various case descriptions by DPIC and then comparing them to the
actual record, there is an obvious pattern of inaccuracy (7). This, of course,
leaves considerable doubt as to how many of their remainging 32 claims are
accurrate. No responsible, objective party would depend on the DPIC case
descriptions.
Furthermore, Northwest U. Law Prof. Lawrence Marshall, a death penalty
opponent, who organized the National Conference on Wrongful Convictions and the
Death Penalty in Chicago in 1998, stated that, "In a good half of these 75 (now
100) cases, the exoneration is so complete that it erases any doubt
whatsoever." (8). Prof. Marshall's uncorroborated claims find proof of factual
innocence in 38 cases.
There does not appear to be any documentation, produced by either Mr. Dieter or
Prof. Marshall, or anyone else, that objectively establishes factual innocence
in those cases where "it erases any doubt whatsoever".
Assuming that some death penalty opponents continue a standard of allegedly
having proof for 50% of their "innocent" claims, that would be 50 out of
those100 "innocent" cases, or about 0.7% of all death penalty cases since 1973.
These two anti-death penalty sources make uncorroberated claims that 32-50
factually innocent inmates have been released from death row because of
innocence.
Yet, at least 11 of the cases were not even on death row at the time of their
"exoneration". 6 of the DPIC listed cases were not on death row when released,
were prosecuted prior to 1973, in the pre Furman v Georgia (1972) era and,
therefore, have no place in a modern era discussion of "innocents" released
from death row. Another case, James Creamer was not sentenced to death (9).
And, at least four of the post 1973 convictions, Henry Drake, Jay Smith, Kirk
Bloodsworth and Ray Krone, were not on death row when they won their freedom.
They were all serving term sentences and were thus term "exonerations".
Therefore, the 32-50 cases become the 21--39 "released from death row with
evidence of their innocence." And we cannot depend on the DPIC case
descriptions regarding how many more of the 100 cases were not on death row at
the time of their "exoneration".
There is no independent, objective study which reveals how many of those 21-39
cases may have a consensus of opinion, whereby the evidence, the prosecutors,
defense counsel and the appellate courts agree on the factual innocence issue.
How many of those sentenced to death since 1973 have subsequently been released
from death row because of factual innocence? Based upon the claims if death
penalty opponents, it is likely between 15 and 39. In other words, the 100
number means nothing, except as a ruse to fool the press and the public.
How about asking a few questions?
With remarkably few exceptions, neither the media nor public policy makers have
required death penalty opponents to support their claims or to define their
standards. Possibly, in the future, both the media and policy makers may
inquire:
-- For how many of these claims is there proof of factual innocence?
---What level of proof supports those assertions and will you provide us with
confirmable, independent corroberation?
---Were those innocents completely unconnected to the murder?
---Were they on death row at the time their innocents was proven?
-- How many of those factual innocence claims do the appellate courts and the
district attorneys agree with? (10)
All reasonable and necessary questions to ascertain the veracity of the claims.
sharp Justice For All http://www.jfa.net/
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/ http://www.murdervictims.com/
Overwhelmingly, the US criminal justice system benefits criminals, dishonors
victims and contributes to future victimizations.
dirtdog
<snipped green baby poo>
Sharp, writing a hopelessly one sided article which contains a few
selective cites does not an 'essay' make.
w00f
Jürgen
Sharpjfa schrieb in Nachricht
<20020414073754...@mb-dd.aol.com>...
<Since Sir Sharp feels it appropriate to put the same stuff twice within 2
days, my reply copied and pasted, too>
<snip>
>First, the 100th case Ray Krone, was not even on death row, at the time he
was
>declared innocent via DNA testing. His death sentence was overturned in
1995,
>for reasons unrelated to innocence. He was retried and given a life
sentence in
>1996 (11). How many of those 100 cases were not on death row at the time of
>their "exoneration" .........?
Not bad...then it perhaps were a viable solution firstly to commute *any*
death sentences to a prison term whenever innocence is proven, and then, in
follow, to release the prisoner, hmm? Then null people were released from DR
according to you, hmmm?
Fact is, your fine system sentenced one more time an innocent to death, and
should his time on DR have been one single day. The consequences for the
original trial, court and jury are all the same.
J.
Spot
>by Dudley Sharp, Justice For All, updated 4/13/02
>(contact info, below)
>
>A thorough review finds that the risk of executing the innocent has been
>significantly overstated by death penalty opponents, that such risk is
>extraordinarily low and that the cessation of executions will put many more
>innocents at risk.
>
>Innocents Released from Death Row: A Critical Review of the Claims
>
>Death penalty opponents claim that 100 inmates have been released from death
>row after their innocence has been proven. It is a false claim.
>
>The foundation for these claims begins in 1993, when a study, released by US
>Rep. Don Edwards, purported to find that 48 innocents had been released from
>death row since 1973 (1). Rep. Edwards concluded that "Under the law, there
>is
>no distinction between definitively innocent and those found innocent after a
>trial."
Someone remind Dudley of this the next time he post his "mere legal
innocence" propoganda.
>
>Although Rep. Edwards was free to make the obvious distinction between the
>factually innocent (The truly "I had no connection to the murder" cases") and
>the legally innocent (the "I got off because of legal error" cases), he chose
>not to.
Sounds like this Rep. knows more about the law than Dudley.