Posted on 08/24/2020 11:56:42 AM PDT by NohSpinZone
As a former prosecutor and death penalty defense counsel...having handled about 50 death penalty cases in my career...this was the right decision legally. If the court excused jurors “For Cause” because they expressed reservations about the DP but said they would follow the courts instructions and the law, they should not have been excused. Now if the state excused them via their limited number of preemptory challenges...then it is the wrong decision. Preemptory challenges can be used for any reason other than to specifically exclude jurors based on race. But if it was “for cause” removal of jurors for expressing reservations, that is definitely improper.
This is California, the democraps have insured that 99.99999% of anyone sentenced to death will die of old age in prison. This ruling doesn’t change a damn thing about how or when Peterson will die.
Has an affair with some bimbo.
Murders his pregnant wife and unborn child.
On Christmas Eve.
Dumps their bodies in the harbor.
And the California Supreme Court doesn't think the death penalty is appropriate?
Why does this country even need California anymore? They are on another planet, in a different universe.
What different sentence are they going to give him? Life in prison and let the taxpayers support this less-than-human scumbag for the rest of his life?
Good Lord. What were they thinking?
This is not a hill to die on. The death penalty really lets them off the hook. They should be made to suffer for their crimes for the rest of their natural life.
Since your a former prosecutor, by excusing all jurors who had such reservations about the death penalty, didn’t they also create a jury that might have been slanted for the underlying decision, not just the penalty phase?
No question, a juror that expresses reservation could also have reservations about conviction...but not as a rule, most people have reservations about the death penalty before they hear the evidence. It’s hard to say you would definitely kill someone before you know all the facts. With that said, whenever a juror says...under oath that they will follow the judges instructions and the law...they cannot be excluded “for cause” for expressing a reservation. That is settled law in every jurisdiction.
There was plenty of evidence, plus why did he go to so much effort to change his appearance if he was innocent?
What I didn't know is, he had ALREADY met with police several times with his blonde hair etc. So the police already knew what his appearance was like, and they admitted it.
Also, the police had a tap on his phone. When their unmarked cars were following him, he called his family at the golf course and told them he wasn't coming because the media was following him. The police heard this on the tap so they knew he wasn't fleeing.
Also, they heard on the tap that he had $15k in cash to pay his mother back for something.
Were they excused for cause?
‘Don’t know about California but in many states if on death row you are isolated from GP. Now that he is off, maybe someone will see to it he gets justice.”
There a couple different reports that he requested to be in General population because he already had protection for sex.
It’s a shame for the victims family. Someone really needs to exercise prison justice.
I was a very strong supporter of the death penalty many years ago. I am no longer convinced the death penalty is appropriate in most "death penalty cases". Having had a few experiences with prosecutors and cops, I don't trust them to comply with Brady requirements.
Also don't trust that judges will allow certain defenses such as alternative suspect arguments and refusing to suppress evidence that shouldn't be suppressed.
Another big problem for me is the judicially created whole refusal to reconsider obvious problems with problem convictions because of the whole lending of a strong preference to "finality of a conviction". That is total bullshit. If there is strong evidence the convicted person didn't or couldn't have committed the crime, appellate courts should be quick to grant new trials no matter how long ago the case finished appeals. How is that justice? Judges and prosecutors are all to willing to allow an innocent person waste away in prison just to save themselves embarrassment of admitting they and the jury got it wrong.
What do you think?
Just skimmed the opinion...Yes...they were excused “For Cause” based solely on their responses in written juror questionnaires and not from oral voir dire. They were excused before voir dire. That was clearly improper and the death penalty was properly overturned.
Then I agree.
They should have been voir dired, and defense counsel given the opportunity to rehabilitate if necessary.
Stanley "Tookie" Williams, back in 2005.
I will answer your question this way...before I became a prosecutor,( which was before I later became a death penalty defense attorney)...I believed every murder deserved the death penalty. After a few years prosecuting cases, I pivoted in my opinion and settled on this position. Before I would pursue a death penalty, I had to answer two questions. If either was present, I would pursue the death penalty. The first question was...”was the crime so heinous as to shock one’s conscious, that any reasonable person would think the DP was warranted. The second question was...could the murder have happened to any citizen in similar circumstances? If either was a yes, I went for the DP. Now, this pretty much ruled out drug murders, gang murders, etc. Honestly, those were hard to convince a jury to impose death. Jurors looked at those cases and said...”the victim had it coming” or “It wouldn’t happen if the victim hadn’t been engaged in bad behavior” etc. But if it was like a case we had where a guy walked into a flower shop on Main Street in our town and robbed the place and made all the employees and one customer lay on the floor then he shot each in the head execution style...well that could have been anyone. And that one shocked the conscious. Or one where a pizza delivery guy was gunned down just doing his job. That could have been anyone. Now obviously there has to be evidence to support all this...but I was very careful to ensure that everything was disclosed and that my convictions were good.
I believe that in todays day and age, with the advances in science, we need to be for sure that we get the right guy. As we all know, there are no “do-overs” once we kill the guy. A good example is the case of Cameron Todd Willingham. I had prosecuted him at one time in our state, then he moved to Texas. Now, he was a turd, no question, but he was most likely wrongfully convicted and executed. In fact, it has been pretty convincingly established that he was not guilty, but it was too late...he had already been executed. The prosecutor was disbarred and may have been prosecuted himself (that I cannot remember). But Cameron Todd Willingham is the post child for doing away with the death penalty. Just google that case and read some about it. It will blow your mind. It is disgraceful.
With that said...I still support the DP (in theory) in limited circumstances. My biggest problem is that the rationale for the DP is mostly flawed. As a deterrent...that is bogus. I have represented over 50 people charged with murder in my career. I can tell you to a man and woman...none of them ever thought about that issue. Because out of those 50 or so, only 4-5 were planned, thought out murders. The rest were “spur of the moment” killings. Those folks Never gave it a thought. The second argument is...it saves money. That too is bogus. With the system we have where a DP defendant has so many appeals...by the time we get to the point of executing them, we have spent several million dollars handling the case. Whereas the cost of incarcerating them for 30-50 years is less than half the cost. The other argument is it gives the family of the victim “closure.” This too is crap. I accompanied a man to the execution of the guy that murdered the man’s wife. Te appeals took about 20 years. After the execution, I was with the husband at the press conference and a reporter asked him...”now that X is dead, do you finally have closure?’ The husband, with tears in his eyes said “No, I’m still going home to an empty house.” So that is crap. The only reason for the DP is “a pound of flesh.” Retaliation.
I do think to more fully answer your question is...appeals courts are more willing than ever to reconsider problems in cases. This Peterson case is a prime example. Now as to the length of time it takes to get to that point...I can only say...it is what it is. These cases take a lot of time. The bigger the case, the longer it takes. And...sometimes appellate counsel does not do a good job.
Finally, I would say...I believe we are moving in the direction of very few, or no death penalty sentences in the very near future. People are just losing interest. It takes too long. There is no real connection to the crime and the imposition of the sentence anymore.
Thanks for responding. I may have heard of the Cameron Todd Willingham case, but I will look it up now.
If a prosecutor, like you were, is adamant about making sure you got the right person, I’m fine with a lot of death penalties.
I have learned of way too many prosecutors who are more interested in getting a conviction than making sure they got the right guy; and, will hide evidence in violation of Brady. Many of them will send an innocent man to death row for political reasons; but hey, they got a guilty verdict.
Did you ever watch the NetFlix “Making of a Murderer”? What has been done to Steven Avery and the retarded kid is a black eye to the system of justice.
15 years - That is what happens when you let lawyers play with a murderer for 15 years. The lawyers play with his sentence until they get some addle-brained judges to do what has been done here. Why did this man sit there for 15 years when everyone knew he was guilty? The California Supreme Court is disgraceful!
Just finished reading the order exonerating and declaring Willingham to be actually innocent. Pretty remarkable that the judge accepted some blame for the execution because he was part of the appellate panel that denied Willingham a review.
The Washington State Supreme Court is at least as disgraceful. I’l be filing a civil rights and civil RICO lawsuit against many bad actors in the State of Washington, including current and prior governors, AGs, Washington State Patrol Chiefs, etc.
My post #78 was meant for you.
...that one shocked the conscious.
conscious = an adjective, describing an awakened state of brain activity or awareness; i.e. “He was conscious for ten minutes before he passed out”, or
”He was conscious of a woman who was reaching for the gun”
conscience = a noun, denoting a person’s inner sense of right and wrong; i.e. “Knowing she shot the gun but not admitting it weighed on his conscience.”
The only reason for the DP is “a pound of flesh.” Retaliation.
The “only” reason—really? How about keeping those individuals from murdering again, and making our communities safer? How about the victims of rape, attepted murder, torture or the rape/torture/murder of a spouse, child, parent or sibling having to go back to parole board hearings year after year to keep the person who did such grievous injury to themslves from being freed after doing half a sentence, and/or retaliating against them? The family of murdered police officer Daniel Faulkner have been going through this for decades.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.