capital punishment overturned / conviction stands

Death Sentence Is Voided for Killer of 2 N.Y.P.D. Officers
By MANNY FERNANDEZ and A. G. SULZBERGER


Published: June 30, 2010



[url=http:\/\/topics.nytimes.com\/top\/reference\/timestopics\/people\/s\/a_g_sulzberger\/index.html?inline=nyt-per]

• [/url]
  

An appeals court struck down the first successful federal capital-punishment prosecution in New York State in more than 50 years on Wednesday, overturning the death sentence given to a Staten Island man convicted of killing two undercover New York City police detectives in 2003.
The man, Ronell Wilson, was sentenced by a federal jury in January 2007 to die by lethal injection for killing the detectives. At the time, the verdict was praised by prosecutors and the president of the Detectives’ Endowment Association.
Relatives of the two detectives — each shot in the back of the head in a car on a dead-end street on Staten Island in March 2003 after posing as gun buyers — called out “God bless” after the jury foreman ordered sentences of death on five counts. No federal jury in New York had ordered a death sentence in half a century.
But, a little more than three years later, a three-judge panel of the federal appeals court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, overturned the death sentences by ruling that federal prosecutors violated Mr. Wilson’s constitutional rights.
The violations centered on two arguments prosecutors made to the jury about Mr. Wilson’s remorse and acceptance of responsibility for the crimes. The judges found that federal prosecutors used Mr. Wilson’s demand for a trial and failure to plead guilty as evidence of his lack of remorse and refusal to accept responsibility, and had argued to the jury that his statement of remorse should be discredited because he failed to testify.
“We’re reviewing the decision and considering our options,” said Robert Nardoza, a spokesman for the United States attorney’s office in Brooklyn.
The judges ruled that Mr. Wilson’s conviction still stands, and they rejected other elements of Mr. Wilson’s appeal.
The Detectives’ Endowment Association plans a news conference on Wednesday afternoon at their Manhattan offices.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/01/nyregion/01death.html?hp

I would like to refer to Claudia's response to the "Serial Killer's Secret Photos: New Victims? " thread because I think she nailed a very important point. If this killer had simply been sentenced to life without parole, no court would still be hearing arguments. He would have gone away to some prison that no one cares about and faded away. Making a case a capital matter makes it nearly certain that it will be debated and litigated and appealed endlessly. ........ and for what? Is anyone safer with Ronell Wilson dead than they would be with Ronell Wilson in prison? If the families are looking for closure then END the case. Convict the guilty party and send them to prison. Case closed.

Scott wrote:I would like to refer to Claudia's response to the "Serial Killer's Secret Photos: New Victims? " thread because I think she nailed a very important point. If this killer had simply been sentenced to life without parole, no court would still be hearing arguments. He would simply have gone away to some prison that no one cares about and faded away. Making a case a capital matter makes it nearly certain that it will be debated and litigated and appealed endlessly. ........ and for what? Is anyone safer with Ronell Wilson dead than they would be with Ronell Wilson in prison? If the families are looking for closure then END the case. Convict the guilty party and send them to prison. Case closed.

Not to mention that it costs more money to execute than it does to imprison for life.

Corrected my typo after I had been quoted. Damn the rotten luck. I get sloppy sometimes when I am pouring out thoughts quickly.
Indeed it does cost more to execute someone. That is probably IMO the biggest misconception about the death penalty. Why pay to keep someone in prison for life? Well from a simply economic standpoint becuase it costs less than the alternative.

That "fact" about death penalty costs vs. LWOP costs is cited often, but there's an aspect of it that is misleading. The death penalty costs more in part because of the many, many ways it can be delayed and appealed. An overhaul of the process in that area would return different numbers for the costs.

tapu wrote:That "fact" about death penalty costs vs. LWOP costs is cited often, but there's an aspect of it that is misleading. The death penalty costs more in part because of the many, many ways it can be delayed and appealed. An overhaul of the process in that area would return different numbers for the costs.

Very true. IF we cut out the appeals or limited the appeal process to perhaps 1 hearing the cost could be dramatically reduced. In the extreme we could be China and conclude capital cases in a matter of weeks or months rather than years. I think it would be a huge mistake to go there though. With all the measures currently in place here there is substantial evidence that people have been wrongfully convicted of capital crimes. ONE innocent person executed because the appeal process is too costly is too many.

Scott wrote:

tapu wrote:That "fact" about death penalty costs vs. LWOP costs is cited often, but there's an aspect of it that is misleading. The death penalty costs more in part because of the many, many ways it can be delayed and appealed. An overhaul of the process in that area would return different numbers for the costs.

Very true. IF we cut out the appeals or limited the appeal process to perhaps 1 hearing the cost could be dramatically reduced. In the extreme we could be China and conclude capital cases in a matter of weeks or months rather than years. I think it would be a huge mistake to go there though. With all the measures currently in place here there is substantial evidence that people have been wrongfully convicted of capital crimes. ONE innocent person executed because the appeal process is too costly is too many.

There is no way we can put any more limits on the DP appeal process than we already have. Our system is simply too flawed to not allow those sentenced to death to be able to appeal it until all issues under question are exhausted.
We shouldnt even have a death penalty to begin with in this country but since we do I would never support any more limits placed on the appellate process.



* Fixed your typo for you.

Fixed your typo for you
Thanks

Indeed! I don't think we should reduce recourse; rather, that we should overhaul the process. Right now the appeals process is more about delay than about thorough investigation, and the rulings on the appeals are most often political rather than empirically or judicially based.

tapu wrote:Indeed! I don't think we should reduce recourse; rather, that we should overhaul the process. Right now the appeals process is more about delay than about thorough investigation, and the rulings on the appeals are most often political rather than empirically or judicially based.

How would you overhaul the process?

tapu wrote:Indeed! I don't think we should reduce recourse; rather, that we should overhaul the process. Right now the appeals process is more about delay than about thorough investigation, and the rulings on the appeals are most often political rather than empirically or judicially based.

Yes, unfortunately that is true in many cases, the process is used to stall and delay, but I really dont know how we could overhaul it and make it more effective than it is now in ensuring that no innocent man is ever put to death for a crime he didnt commit, I am certainly open to discussing ideas about such an overhaul though, I think it is something that should be discussed and discussed again after that.