"The Death Penalty in Virginia and Catholic Social Teaching" Presentation Slides, St. Andrew's Catholic Church Roanoke, Final, 2016 October 15

Online content

Fullscreen
The Death Penalty
in Virginia and
Catholic Social Teaching
October 15, 2016

St. Andrew’s Catholic Church
Roanoke

Death Penalty in the United States

e U.S. Supreme Court outlawed capital
punishment in 1972 (Furman v. Georgia)
— Inconsistent application of the DP
— Racial disparities in the DP

¢ Revised state laws approved by the U.S.
Supreme Court in 1976 (Gregg v. Georgia)
— Implemented two stage trail process
— Aggravating & mitigating factors

Executions by State Since 1976
As of July 8, 2016

Mississippi 21
Indiana 20
Delaware 16
California 13
Illinois 12
Nevada 12
Utah i
Tennessee 6
Maryland 5
Washington 5
Nebraska 3
Pennsylvania 3
Kentucky 3

SOURCE: Death Penalty Information Center Web Site [July 8, 2018]

Death Row Prisoners by State
As of January 1, 2016

Oklahoma 49
Mississippi 48
South Carolina 43
Arkansas 36
Kentucky 34
Oregon 34
Missouri 28
Delaware 18
Indiana 13
Nebraska * 10
Kansas 10
Idaho 9

SOURCE: Death Penalty Information Center Web Site [July 8, 2016].

Geography of the Death Penalty

SOURCE: Death Penalty Information Center Fact Sheet [November 13, 2015]

m@ South

& Midwest
m West

= Northeast
BTX&VA

Virginia & the Death Penalty

¢ Virginia has executed 111
people since 1976, third most
in the United States.

e Virginia executes the highest percentage of
those sentenced to death (75%) in the U.S.

e Virginia is fastest in the nation from
sentencing to execution (7.1 years on
average).

The Hebrew Scripture

Whoever takes the life of any human being
shall be put to death;

whoever takes the life of an animal shall
make restitution of another animal. A life
for a life! Anyone who inflicts an injury on
his neighbor shall receive the same in
return.

Limb for limb, eye for eye, tooth for tooth!
The same injury that a man gives another
shall be inflicted on him in return.

- Leviticus 24: 17-19

The Hebrew Scripture

Despite the Law’s insistence on
“blood for blood,” God
allowed Cain to live after
killing Abel and chose two
killers to play prominent roles
in salvation history:

— Moses (Exodus 2:12)

—- David (2 Samuel 11: 14-15)

The New Testament

Then the scribes and the Pharisees brought a
woman who had been caught in adultery and
made her stand in the middle.

They said to him, “Teacher, this woman was
caught in the very act of committing adultery.
Now in the law, Moses commanded us to
stone such women. So what do you say?”

They said this to test him, so that they could
have some charge to bring against him. Jesus
bent down and began to write on the ground
with his finger.

But when they continued asking him, he
straightened up and said to them, “Let the
one among you who is without sin be the first
to throw a stone at her.”

— John 8: 3-9


The New Testament

When they came to the place
called the Skull, they
crucified him and the
criminals there, one on his
right, the other on his left.

Then Jesus said, “Father,
forgive them, they know not
what they do.”

— Luke 23: 33-34


The New Testament

Despite Saul’s murderous
persecution against the early
Christians, God chose him to
become the greatest
evangelist in church history,
St. Paul:

— Acts 22: 20
— Acts 26: 9-11
— Acts 9: 1-19


Church Teaching

¢ 1972: Catholic Bishops of Florida express
their opposition to the death penalty

¢ 1976: U.S. Catholic Conference declares its
opposition to capital punishment

¢ 1976: Pontifical Commission for Justice and
Peace opposes the death penalty

¢ 1980: U.S. Bishops adopt a Statement on
Capital Punishment

Pope John Paul Il,
Evangelium Vitae (1995)

Where life is involved, the service
of charity must be profoundly
consistent. It cannot tolerate
bias and discrimination, for
human life is sacred and
inviolable at every stage and
in every situation; it is an
indivisible good.

We need then to “show care” for
all life and for the life of
everyone.


Pope John Paul Il,
Evangelium Vitae (1995)

It is clear that, for these purposes to be
achieved, the nature and extent of the
punishment must be carefully
evaluated and decided upon, and ought
not go to the extreme of executing the
offender except in cases of absolute
necessity: in other words, when it
would not be possible otherwise to
defend society.

Today however, as a result of steady
improvements in the organization of
the penal system, such cases are very
rare, if not practically non-existent.


Catechism of the Catholic Church

Assuming that the guilty party's identity and
responsibility have been fully determined,
the traditional teaching of the Church does
not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if
this is the only possible way of effectively
defending human lives against the unjust
aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to
defend and protect people's safety from the
aggressor, authority will limit itself to such
means, as these are more in keeping with the
concrete conditions of the common good and
more in conformity with the dignity of the
human person.


Virginia Catholic Conference
http://www.vacatholic.org/

With Virginia’s life-without-parole
sentence and modern incarceration
system, that protection is provided.
The life-sentence alternative is
unique in its ability to protect state
residents while upholding the dignity
of every person, even the one
convicted of a brutal crime.

Accordingly, we are convinced that — in our time and place — the
death penalty is unnecessary and inappropriate, and that death
sentences should no longer be imposed or carried out in Virginia.

— Virginia Catholic Bishops (2007)

Conservative Arguments
Against the Death Penalty

Fi 1. Limited government,

‘PROUD | j ibili
CONSERVATIVE, 2. Fiscal responsibility,

3. The danger of executing
an innocent person, and

4. Collateral damage.

1. Limited Government

¢ The power to execute is
Vl A nu perhaps the greatest power
government could exercise over
IS NOT FREE its citizens.

U N LESS ° There is good reason to be

GOVERNMENT suspicious of this power.

Ey LIMITED ¢ Error or, even worse, abuse in

the exercise of this power leads
to deprivation of the very rights
government should protect —
life, liberty, and property.


Deterrence to Murder

STOP

e Areport by the National Research Council,
titled Deterrence and the Death Penalty,
stated 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
(2012).

SOURCE: Death Penalty Information Center Fact Sheet [October 16, 2012]

Public Safety

e Average murder rate in states with the death
penalty (2014): 4.75 per 100,000 people

e Average murder rate in states without the
death penalty (2014): 3.70 per 100,000 people

¢ In polls from 1995 and 2009, police chiefs
ranked the death penalty least effective
among ways to reduce violent crime.

SOURCE: Death Penalty Information Center Fact Sheet [October 16, 2012]

In Virginia it’s easier to take
a person's liberty or life
than their property:

¢ In civil lawsuits, both sides must turn over
virtually everything to the opponent and sit
for pretrial depositions.

Criminal defendants are not entitled to
the police reports in their case, the
witness statements against them or even
a witness list.

“Trial by ambush has
been the norm...”

¢ Retired Loudoun Circuit
Court Judge Thomas D.
Horne

Death Penalty
Disparities in Virginia:

¢ A person is over THREE times as likely to be
sentenced to death if the victim is white
than when the victim is black.

¢ Murder convictions in rural and
suburban areas are TWICE as likely to
end in the death penalty as those in
urban jurisdictions.

SOURCE: Virginia Joint Legislative and Review Commission of the Virginia General Assembly,
Review of Virginia’s System of Capital Punishment [2000]

Death Penalty
Disparities in Virginia:

65% of the 133 political jurisdictions in the
Commonwealth have NOT had an execution since 1976.

¢ Three jurisdictions [Chesterfield, Prince William, &
Virginia Beach] are responsible for 23% of executions.

¢ Six jurisdictions [Chesterfield, Fairfax, Hampton,
Pittsylvania, Portsmouth, Prince William, & Virginia
Beach] account for 41% of the state’s executions.

SOURCE: Death Penalty Information Center Web Site [May 19, 2016].

2. Fiscal Responsibility

Why the death penalty is so
expensive:

e Additional legal costs

¢ Complicated pretrial procedures
¢ Time consuming jury selection

¢ Separate sentencing trial

e Lengthy mandatory post-conviction
appeals in state & federal courts

¢ Higher incarceration costs for
death row


Death Penalty Costs in Kansas

Cost Items Capital Trials Non-Capital Trials
Defense $395,762 $98,963
Trial Court S 72,530 $21,554
Juries 40.13 days 16.79 days
Prison $49,380/year $24,690/year
Cases that did not
go to trial
Defense $130,595 $64,711
Trial Court S 16,263 S 7,384

e Justices of the Kansas Supreme Court assigned to write opinions
estimated they spent 20 times more hours on death penalty appeals

than on non-death appeals.

SOURCE: "Report of the Judicial Council Death Penalty Advisory Committee," Judicial Council,
Kansas Legislature, Feb. 13, 2014

County Level Death Penalty Costs

¢ In 1999 Jasper County (Texas) was
forced to raise property taxes by 7%
to pay for one death penalty trial that
cost over $1 million.

¢ In 2013 Clallam County (Washington)
spent $1 million on the retrial of
death-row inmate Darold Stenson,
who was first sent to death row in
1994. The retrial caused a “budget
emergency” that resulted in staff cuts
of more than 15 percent.


3. The Problem of Innocence

= 1 ¢ Since 1973, 156 people have
been released from death row
with evidence of their innocence.

¢ Many others have been executed
while serious doubts have been
raised regarding their verdict.

¢ Since 1976, there is a ratio of one
é 4 : innocent person freed from
eae ) death row for every 11

a executions!


Causes of Wrongful Capital Convictions

Number of Cases

45

4s .
Causes of Wrongful Convictions
sc in 86 Death Row Cases
35
29
30
25
20 17
15
10 8 9
Eyewitness Snitch Government False Junk Science Other
Error Misconduct Confession

Causes

SOURCE: 2001 study by the Center on Wrongful Convictions at
Northwestern Law School.

CSI Mythology

¢ DNA is a powerful tool,
C _ T * but such evidence is
es available in only 5-10%

of criminal cases.

CRIME SCENE INVESTIGATION

e Imperfect forensic analysis

¢ Crime lab scandals
(e.g., hair & bite mark analysis)

¢ Prosecutorial misconduct

4. Collateral Damage
Human cost of the death penalty

Few people consider the impact of capital punishment on
a wide range of people who are part of the system:
- Victim family members
- Prosecutors
-— Defense attorneys
— Judges and jurors
— Family members of death row inmates
- Wardens and corrections officers
- Executioners

Former Georgia death row guard reflects

[Death row inmate Roosevelt] Green
stuck his hand through the jail bars,
shook my hand and apologized for
any problems he’d caused during his
time at the prison. He looked right
in my eyes. ...

In many ways, we were the only
friends these men had in the end. ...

| will say this: | don’t believe that when
we execute a person that it’s the
same person who committed that
crime. | do believe people can
change.

Former Virginia Executioner

| worked as a prison guard saving lives most of
the time. But when | took on the role of
executioner, | had to become a killer. ...

The Earl Washington case [who was exonerated
by DNA evidence in 1993] shook my faith in
the justice system. | came within days of
putting an innocent man to death.

| still wonder whether there were any innocents among the 62 that |
executed. The only thing | can do is pray to God to forgive me if | did.

¢ “Ex-Virginia executioner becomes opponent of death
penalty,” Washington Post (February 10, 2013)

Six Former Executioners Speak Out

While most of the prisoners whose executions we
participated in accepted responsibility for the crimes
for which they were punished, some of us have also
executed prisoners who maintained their innocence
until the end. It is those cases that are most haunting
to an executioner.

Living with the nightmares is something that we know from experience. No one
has the right to ask a public servant to take on a lifelong sentence of nagging
doubt, and for some of us, shame and guilt.

Should our justice system be causing so much harm to so many people when
there is an alternative?

— Allen Ault - Retired Warden, Georgia Diagnostic & Classifications Prison

— Terry Collins — Retired Director, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction

— Ron McAndrew - Retired Warden, Florida State Prison

— Dennis O’Neill - Retired Warden, Florida State Prison

— Reginald Wilkinson — Retired Director, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction

— Jeanne Woodford — Retired Warden, San Quentin State Prison

Daughter of a slain state trooper

Having spent my entire life without my
dad, | was angry and had wanted his
killers executed.

But over time, after | saw how the death
penalty system actually works, my
feelings on the issue changed.

| believed that the death penalty would
benefit people like my mother and me,
but in reality nothing could be further
from the truth.

— Neely Goen, Op-Ed in Wichita Eagle
(February 6, 2013)

Problems with the death penalty
KILLERS AS STARS

¢ Capital cases put the focus on killers instead of
the friends & family members of their victims

¢ The mandatory appeals keep the killer’s photo
and story in front of the public for many years.

¢ The many appeals force family members of
victims to relive the trauma over & over again.

But the tide is
turning against
the death
penalty.


20 States have abolished
the death penalty

Michigan 1846 | lowa 1965 New York 2007
Wisconsin | 1853 1965 New Mexico | 2009
Maine 1887 | North Dakota 1973 Illinois 2011
Minnesota 1911 | District of Columbia 1981 Connecticut. = 2012_—~
Alaska 1957 | Massachusetts 1984 Maryland 2013
Hawaii 1957 | Rhodelslan Nebraska 2015
Vermont 1964 New Jersey Delaware 2016

SOURCE: Death Penalty Information Center Web Site [October 1, 2016].

11 more states have had no
executions in the past nine years

Arkansas 2005 Nevada 2006
California 2006 New Hampshire 1939
Colorado 1997 North Carolina 2006
Kansas 1965 Oregon 1997
Montana 2006 Pennsylvania 1999

Wyoming 1992

SOURCE: Death Penalty Information Center Web Site [July 8, 2016].


Conservative Voices Against
the Death Penalty

“1 supported the death penalty for all of my
public life — as a Virginia State Senator, Attorney
General, and Republican candidate for governor.
Today, | can still make a conceptual argument as
to why it should be a tool in the arsenal of a
prosecutor — but it is just an argument. And, to
me, the argument is tired, strained, and no
longer defensible.”

=" Mark Earley, a Republican former Virginia
General who oversaw 36 executions

Others Conservatives Opposed
to the Death Penalty

Edward Crane | Founder & President of | Oliver North Columnist & former U.S.

The CATO Institute Counter-Terrorism
Coordinator

Senior Editor at The Bill O'Reilly Fox television host &
American Conservative political commentator

Jeff Frazee Founder of Young Dr. Ron Paul Former Congressman &
Americans for Liberty Presidential candidate

Drew Johnson | Fellow at the Taxpayers | Ramesh Senior Editor for
Protection Alliance Ponnuru National Review

Jack Kemp Former Republican Lawrence President of the
Congressman & Vice Reed Foundation for
Presidential Candidate Economic Education
Founder of Judicial George Will Columnist

Watch


Red States Close to Abolition

e 2016: Utah Senate votes to end
the DP & a key House committee
agrees, but the bill fell a few votes
short on the House floor.

2015: Montana Senate votes for abolition, but
failed in the House on a 50-50 tie vote.

2014: New Hampshire House voted 225-104 to
end the DP, but failed in Senate on tie vote.

Executions Since 1976

90

80

70

40

30

20

961 }°
164

81610
66

x

0961 | o

Executions by Year Since 1976

98
8S
74
71
68
66 6S
59 60
56
45
38
31 31
25
23
21
18 18
16
14
"
5

1
eee-e#zazwwawswaswswaswt sete st Bt NAOO BON BRPRD
B8S8s888 888 882 888 8BSBEBBEESESEEBESS
SS Sk GSN SB SSEASRSE ESSE SF SSSESEGS

SOURCE: Death Penalty Information Center Fact Sheet [October 16, 2012]

53

9008
L002
8002,
6002
010g
1102

37

52

46


Number of Death Sentences
By Year

Death Sentences in the U.S.

SOURCE: Death Penalty Information Center Fact Sheet [October 16, 2012] based on data
from the Bureau of Justice Statistics: Capital Punishment, 2010” plus DPIC research.

Number of Death Sentences

10

te)

Virginia Death Sentences, 1977 - 2015

¥

MV A > BP? OP O_O 9? 7 OO MPO VP VO SO
BSE SP PP IP GP OP PP? PG FP? AP” AP AS

SOURCE: Death Penalty Information Center Fact Sheet [October 1, 2016].

¥
\
a

ar aD

5
“
*”

Public Opinion on the Death Penalty

A 2010 poll by Lake Research Partners found that
a clear majority of voters (61%) would choose a punishment
other than the death penalty for murder.

u Life without parole plus
restitution

& Death penalty

@ Life without parole

§ Life with parole

m@ No opinion

SOURCE: Death Penalty Information Center Fact Sheet [October 16, 2012]

Latest Public Opinion Data

Support for death penalty continues to fall

% who the death penalty for persons convicted of murder

A September 2016 poll by the Pew Research Center
found that only half of Americans (49%) now favor
the death penalty, while 42% oppose it.

Opposition to the death penalty is now the highest
that it has been since 1972.

SOURCE: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/09/29/support-for-death-penalty-lowest-in-
more-than-four-decades/

A New Era in Virginia

** Virginia used to sentence 5-10 people to death and
execute as many as 14 people in one year.

=" Only three executions in the past five years.
=" No new death sentence in over 4% years.

“* The last death sentence was in September 2011.

=" There have been over 1,200 murders in Virginia
since then.

= No jury has imposed a death sentence in any of
those cases.

Virginians for Alternatives

to the Death Penalty
http://www.vadp.org/

Ending the Death
/ Penalty through
Education,

Organizing &

VIRGINIANS FOR
ALTERNATIVES

TO THE DEATH PENALTY Advocacy

VADP leaders work closely with the
Virginia Catholic Conference

Metadata

Resource Type:
Document
Rights:
Date Uploaded:
December 23, 2025

Using these materials

Access:
The archives are open to the public and anyone is welcome to visit and view the collections.
Collection restrictions:
Access to this collection is unrestricted with the exception of select items noted in Series 5.
Collection terms of access:
This page may contain links to digital objects. Access to these images and the technical capacity to download them does not imply permission for re-use. Digital objects may be used freely for personal reference use, referred to, or linked to from other web sites. Researchers do not have permission to publish or disseminate material from these collections without permission from an archivist and/or the copyright holder. The researcher assumes full responsibility for conforming to the laws of copyright. Some materials in these collections may be protected by the U.S. Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.) and/or by the copyright or neighboring-rights laws of other nations. More information about U.S. Copyright is provided by the Copyright Office. Additionally, re-use may be restricted by terms of University Libraries gift or purchase agreements, donor restrictions, privacy and publicity rights, licensing and trademarks. The Department of Special Collections and Archives is eager to hear from any copyright owners who are not properly identified so that appropriate information may be provided in the future.

Access options

Ask an Archivist

Ask a question or schedule an individualized meeting to discuss archival materials and potential research needs.

Schedule a Visit

Archival materials can be viewed in-person in our reading room. We recommend making an appointment to ensure materials are available when you arrive.