Transcript The Death Penalty and the Victim’s Family

The Death Penalty and the
Victim’s Family
Brandon Crunkilton
Jim Rogowski
Organizations for the needs of
victims
• Murder Victims’ Families for Reconciliation (MVFR)
– Founded in 1976, Murder Victims' Families for Reconciliation is a national
organization of family members of both homicide and state killings who
oppose the death penalty in all cases. Their primary mission is to abolish
the death penalty. They support programs and policies that reduce the rate
of homicide and promote crime prevention and alternatives to violence.
They advocate for programs that address the needs of victims, helping
them to rebuild their lives.
• Murder Victim’s Families for Human Rights (MVFHR)
– An international, non-governmental organization of family members of
victims of criminal murder, terrorist killings, state executions, extrajudicial
assassinations, and “disappearances” working to oppose the death penalty
from a human rights perspective.
• Justice for All
– A Texas-based not-for-profit group advocating for criminal justice reform
with an emphasis on victim rights. Justice for All is a strong advocate of the
death penalty.
Victim Impact Statements
• What are they?
– Detailed accounts of the emotional, physical and financial
effects the crime has had on the victim/family members
• Who can submit them?
– Crime victims
– Close relatives of deceased victims and guardians of victims
– Close friends (depending on jurisdiction)
• What are the benefits?
– Helps victims/family members feel they are participating in
the justice system—gives them a feeling of “being heard”
– Allows judges to see the impact of crimes on victims’ families
States that allow VIS’s (2003—DPIC)
Undecided
Limited Use
Connecticut
Montana
New Hampshire
New York
Wyoming
Indiana
Mississippi
Admissible
Alabama
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maryland
Missouri
Nebraska
Nevada
New Jersey
New Mexico
North Carolina
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virginia
Washington
How the VIS is used (Texas)
Sample VIS (Mississippi)
Impact Statement for Family Members
or Friends of a Loved one
Mother of James Connor
• “May it please the Court. I represent my son, James
Patrick Connor, who is not here, and my husband,
and our daughters and our four grandchildren. More
than anything else, I do this to honor him, because
had the roles been reversed, he would be standing
here today. I also owe this to the other victims of
violent crime who either stand silently by, or who
speak and are not heard. I owe it to the public, I
owe it to Jeffrey St. Pierre, who may not yet
understand the magnitude of the loss he inflicted on
the night of August 23, 1998.”
Mother of Philip Ray Dover
• Court edited the VIS
• Defendant’s family was allowed to plead for
his life, despite the fact they had not seen him
for 4 years
• Family members of the 4 slain victims were
not allowed to address the jury with anything
but their edited VIS…they were not allowed to
inform them that they desired the death
penalty
• “When he can commit crimes like that and not
get the death penalty, it seems like they won,
not us.”
“Right to View”
Statutes
• Guaranteed right for family members:
– Oklahoma, Washington
• Administrative hearings in order to
determine who can attend:
– California, Florida, Louisiana, Montana, North
Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah,
Virginia, Illinois (may view through closed
circuit TV)
Right to View Statutes (Ohio)
• ORC 2949.25 Attendance at execution of death sentence.
•
•
•
•
•
•
(A) At the execution of a death sentence, only the following persons may be present:
(1) The warden of the state correctional institution in which the sentence is executed or a deputy
warden, any other person selected by the director of rehabilitation and correction to ensure that the
death sentence is executed, any persons necessary to execute the death sentence by lethal injection,
and the number of correction officers that the warden thinks necessary;
(2) The sheriff of the county in which the prisoner was tried and convicted;
(3) The director of rehabilitation and correction, or the director’s agent;
(4) Physicians of the state correctional institution in which the sentence is executed;
(5) The clergyperson in attendance upon the prisoner, and not more than three other persons, to be
designated by the prisoner, who are not confined in any state institution;
• (6) Not more than three persons to be designated by the immediate
family of the victim;
•
•
•
(7) Representatives of the news media as authorized by the director of rehabilitation and correction.
(B) The director shall authorize at least one representative of a newspaper, at least one representative
of a television station, and at least one representative of a radio station to be present at the execution
of the sentence under division (A)(7) of this section.
Effective Date: 11-21-2001
Victims’ Families Views
Pro-Death Penalty Family
Members
Pro-Death Penalty
• Opportunity for closure
• Final opportunity to represent their
murdered family members in the
criminal justice process
• Gives family members a sense of
justice, although many family members
express a desire for a more painful
execution method
Cary Ann Medlin
• 8 year old girl who was kidnapped, raped and
murdered in Tennessee
• Just before being killed, she looked up at her
murderer and said “Jesus loves you”
• Murderer (Robert Glen Coe) was sentenced to
death, but after 21 years, his sentence was
overturned by an anti-death penalty judge
• Cary’s mother had to go to Washington to appeal
to a subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee
Anti-Death Penalty Family
Members
Anti-Death Penalty
• No retaliatory death will compensate for the loss of a loved one
• Closure comes from forgiveness, not witnessing an execution
– A family needs compassion, not a grisly spectacle
• Victims often seek a meaning to their victimization, not
revenge—Some family members have found healing through
reconciliation
• Sometimes the prosecution will ignore the victim’s family
members’ wishes and seek the death penalty—will go as far as
attempting to prevent the impact statement from being
seen/heard
Anti-Death Penalty
• Right to View Statutes
– Adds another element to the already
arbitrary death penalty process by leaving
attendance decisions ot the discretion of
prison officials
– Additional problems arise if the prisoner
killed more than one victim (limited viewing
space)
Anti-Death Penalty
• States risk an emotional confrontation
between the family members of the
victim and the family members of the
prisoner if they both attend the
execution
Rickey Langley Case
• Murder of a six year old child
• Prosecutors seeking to bar the use of VIS,
since the mother of the victim has expressed
opposition to the death penalty
• “Too often, family members who oppose the
death penalty are silenced, marginalized and
abandoned, even by the people who are
theoretically charged with helping them”
Renny Cushing
• Head of MVFHR
• Three primary ways in which victims
who oppose the death penalty face
discrimination:
– Denial of the right to speak and be heard
– Denial of the right to information
– Denial of the right to assistance and
advocacy
Maria Chavez
• With the support of MVFR, California
became the second statewide campaign
to hire someone whose only job is to
reach out to murder victim’s family
members and families of the executed