Death penalty suspended in California

[MillCreek]

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article227489844.html

The Governor gave reprieves to all 737 people on California's death row.  A future governor could resume executions, however.

A similar thing happened in Washington in which our Governor said he would not allow any executions to proceed under his term, and then the State Supreme Court subsequently found the death penalty unconstitutional last year.

[Pb]

Gag.

[lee n. field]

737 people on death row?  Were they expecting to ever get to them all, or just let them die off?

[HankB]

737 people on death row?  Were they expecting to ever get to them all, or just let them die off?

Isn't there a lot of money to be made by keeping perps in jail?

[WLJ]

Isn't there a lot of money to be made by keeping perps in jail?

Lawyers seem to think so

[MillCreek]

^^^And in that regard, several states have ended the death penalty on financial grounds: it is cheaper to keep someone in prison for decades than executing them.  The cost of the capital case trial, several appeals and lawyer fees are what really drives up the cost of executions.

[Angel Eyes]

^^^And in that regard, several states have ended the death penalty on financial grounds: it is cheaper to keep someone in prison for decades than executing them.  The cost of the capital case trial, several appeals and lawyer fees are what really drives up the cost of executions.

See my signature.

[dogmush]

See my signature.

While your signature is true as far as it goes, I've seen no evidence that capitol trials in the US are so ironclad and free of error that we need to speed up the process of offing people.

As far as California goes, I can't bring myself to be too upset.  Has the CA.gov proven so reasonable and level headed that we rush to make them the arbiters of life and death?

[DittoHead]

As far as California goes, I can't bring myself to be too upset.  Has the CA.gov proven so reasonable and level headed that we rush to make them the arbiters of life and death?

I agree with this. The CA government can't be trusted with much of anything, and that certainly includes limiting executions to people that actually deserve it.

[MechAg94]

IMO, it would make more sense for them to just pass a law getting rid of it if that is what they want to do.  Better than the courts handing down a ruling or the Gov doing something equally temporary.

[230RN]

^^^And in that regard, several states have ended the death penalty on financial grounds: it is cheaper to keep someone in prison for decades than executing them.  The cost of the capital case trial, several appeals and lawyer fees are what really drives up the cost of executions.

Sounds to this jaundiced-ears old coot that someone is fudging the numbers.  

I'm sorta pretty much against the death penalty, but it's hard for me to believe that even on average, keeping someone in the pokey for half a lifetime must be more expensive for the State, with its salaried attorneys. (Last I heard, check me if I'm wrong, but I thought it cost over $40K a year per prisoner.)

Besides, the appeals will go on anyway anyhow, won't they?

Someone must be making agenda-driven adjustments to the data.  Not unheard of, doncha know.

Terry, 230RN

[MechAg94]

Part of it may be that there are groups that hire lawyers to endlessly file appeals for death row inmates.  From the interviews I have seen, it is typically not substantive, just excuses to delay the event.  And I have felt in the past that some appeals were saved until the day of the event to try to delay it.  From what I have seen in Texas, judges are under a lot of pressure to consider every appeal no matter what it is.

I don't know if that has been the case in California where they have rarely put anyone to death in recent years.

[MillCreek]

Be aware that generally speaking, the State is paying for both the prosecution and defense trial and appellate attorneys.  And even if the State attorneys are salaried, that is an accountable cost nonetheless that must be matched up with a budget.

[230RN]

"...the State is paying for both the prosecution and defense trial attorneys..."

Really?  I didn't realize that.

[cordex]

Sounds to this jaundiced-ears old coot that someone is fudging the numbers.  

I'm sorta pretty much against the death penalty, but it's hard for me to believe that even on average, keeping someone in the pokey for half a lifetime must be more expensive for the State, with its salaried attorneys. (Last I heard, check me if I'm wrong, but I thought it cost over $40K a year per prisoner.)

https://lao.ca.gov/policyareas/cj/6_cj_inmatecost
Annual cost of incarcerating an inmate:
Total $81,203

[Perd Hapley]

Someone on these pages suggested a sitting panel that worked on a set number of cases per year. Their only job, ever, would be to exculpate death row inmates. The idea was that the clock started ticking once a person was sentenced to death. If nothing exculpatory could be found in a year (or some, set reasonable amount of time), they would get what was coming to them. If we cared about justice in this country, we'd do something like that, instead of just folding our hands and giving up.

[HeroHog]

(looks up big words...)
(nods in agreement)

[230RN]

What do you mean by folding our hands and giving up?  The problem has received more and more attention in the last, say, ten years.  I like the time line idea, but that depends on how crowded court dockets are, doesn't it?

[MechAg94]

Someone on these pages suggested a sitting panel that worked on a set number of cases per year. Their only job, ever, would be to exculpate death row inmates. The idea was that the clock started ticking once a person was sentenced to death. If nothing exculpatory could be found in a year (or some, set reasonable amount of time), they would get what was coming to them. If we cared about justice in this country, we'd do something like that, instead of just folding our hands and giving up.

I might add some standards of evidence in the original trial that needed to be met before the death penalty was an option. 

[JN01]

Sounds to this jaundiced-ears old coot that someone is fudging the numbers.  

I'm sorta pretty much against the death penalty, but it's hard for me to believe that even on average, keeping someone in the pokey for half a lifetime must be more expensive for the State, with its salaried attorneys. (Last I heard, check me if I'm wrong, but I thought it cost over $40K a year per prisoner.)

Besides, the appeals will go on anyway anyhow, won't they?

Someone must be making agenda-driven adjustments to the data.  Not unheard of, doncha know.

Terry, 230RN

I agree.  Inmates doing life will not only continue with appeals, they will file numerous frivolous lawsuits because they can.  Inmates with health issues can also rack up huge medical expenses.  Inmates here in Ohio are often transported to Ohio State University Hospital for state of the art medical care.

[Perd Hapley]

I might add some standards of evidence in the original trial that needed to be met before the death penalty was an option.  

I wouldn't, unless you're also adding those to prison time, and other non-reversible sentences.