Recommended Justin Wolfe Talking Points - VA and National
Advocates
For use if the Fourth Circuit affirms the vacation of Justin’s conviction
and sentence
Background: The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed the
vacation of Mr. Wolfe’s capital conviction and death sentence by
the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Mr.
Wolfe was wrongfully convicted of murder-for-hire in 2002 and has
spent more than 11 years on Virginia’s death row for a crime he
did not commit. He survived two execution dates. If the district
court had not allowed discovery into the prosecutor’s illegal and
unethical withholding of evidence in this case, Mr. Wolfe would
probably be dead today.
Main Messages:
Justin Wolfe has spent 11 years in prison for a crime he did not commit.
It is time for this case to be over and for Justin to come home to his
family.
Two courts have now affirmed what we have known for more than a
decade: Justin should never have been convicted of this crime.
Commonwealth officials should do the right thing and let Justin return
home. They should not appeal the court’s sound ruling or waste any
more taxpayer dollars in a senseless pursuit of a wrongful conviction.
Virginia-Specific Messages (for advocates):
Mr. Wolfe’s case highlights what is wrong with the death penalty in
Virginia.
We came dangerously close to executing an innocent man. We can’t say
with confidence that we’ve never executed an innocent person before or
that it will never happen again.
Virginia is second only to Texas in total executions since 1976. The
Commonwealth executes its death row prisoners faster than other states
and is among the least likely to reverse a capital conviction or sentence.
In light of these facts, it is critical that Virginia prosecutors and law
enforcement officials act with the highest ethical standards. They must
do everything in their power to make sure death sentences are fair,
accurate, and reliable. They violated this duty and the public trust
in Justin Wolfe’s case.
The Commonwealth needs appropriate open records policies so that
prosecutors cannot hide evidence that points to a defendant’s
innocence.
In its decision, the Court of Appeals noted the serious Brady
violations committed by the Commonwealth, explained how the
district court “rightly lambasted that conduct” in its decision,
and expressed its “sincere[] hope that the Commonwealth’s
Attorney and his assistants have finally taken heed of those
rebukes.”
Background:
The district court decision affirmed by the court of appeals found that the
prosecutors in Mr. Wolfe’s case violated the Brady rule multiple times and
sent a potentially innocent 20 year-old man to death row. For example, the
prosecutors withheld evidence that Owen Barber, the admitted shooter in
the case, said he had carried out the murder on his own and without Wolfe’s
involvement. Mr. Barber implicated Mr. Wolfe only after the police
threatened him with the death penalty unless he cooperated and said Mr.
Wolfe was also involved. The prosecution admitted that Mr. Wolfe “probably
would not have been prosecuted” on the murder charge without Mr.
Barber's false testimony.
Broader Messages (for national advocates)
Growing numbers of people (courts, juries, legislators, governors, the public)
are becoming uncomfortable with the death penalty. This case illustrates the
risks of executing someone who is innocent. This case also highlights the
danger of the argument that prosecutors need the death penalty as a
“hammer” to get defendants to testify or confess.
All of the old arguments in favor of capital punishment have fallen away.
¢ For example, the National Research Council, which is affiliated with the
National Academy of Sciences, recently found that studies claiming that
the death penalty has a deterrent effect on murder rates are
“fundamentally flawed” and should not be used when making policy
decisions about capital punishment.
¢ Some of the states that have repealed the death penalty did so, in part,
based on high costs. Some people believe that the death penalty is less
expensive than life without parole, but this is not correct. A study in
California estimated that the additional expenses of capital trials,
enhanced security on death row, and other costs add $184 million to the
state budget each year. If they repeal capital punishment, California
taxpayers will save more than $100 million every year without releasing
a single prisoner.
e As we have seen in Mr. Wolfe’s case, using the death penalty as a tool to
secure convictions risks tragic results. In a 2009 poll of police chiefs, the
death penalty was ranked last when the chiefs were asked to name one
area as “most important for reducing violent crime,” with only one
percent listing it as the best way to reduce violence.
For these reasons and others, the country is moving away from the death
penalty.
¢ This year, Connecticut became the fifth state in five years to repeal
capital punishment.
¢ On the November ballot, California voters will have the opportunity to
end capital punishment, replace it with life without any chance of
parole, and divert the funds to solving cold-case rapes and murders.
By every measure, the death penalty is on the decline.
e Last year, the number of new death sentences dropped to 78, which was
a dramatic decline from 112 in 2010.
e It was the first time since capital punishment was reinstated in 1976
that juries imposed fewer than 100 death sentences in a single year.
e Executions have also steadily decreased nationwide, with 43 in 2011 and
46 in 2010, representing a 56 percent decline since 1999, when there
were 98.
HEF
