Tuesday, December 2, 2008

Time to end the death penalty in Maryland


I spent 10 years as a law enforcement officer, including 7 in the Baltimore Police Department. So I am no stranger to violence.

Indeed, my years surrounded by senseless crime filled me with outrage and the desire for revenge including the death penalty.

But I have learned a lot since then, including the scary fact that a single mistake could be mean the execution of an innocent person.

As someone who has dedicated my life to enforcing the law, I can't live with that. I testified before the Maryland Commission on Capital Punishment this fall, sharing my journey from death penalty supporter to a supporter of repeal. And last month the Commission validated my experience by voting for the same - the repeal of Maryland's death penalty. It was a smart decision and I hope the legislature will move quickly to enact it.

As I said, my opposition to the death penalty evolved. During my years in Vietnam and later as a military policeman in Louisiana, I was exposed to violence as a matter of routine. My anger at those who would harm innocent people boiled over. Then, working in some of the poorest and crime-ridden neighborhoods of Baltimore only strengthened my feeling that some people were simply beyond redemption. It was a fairly simple conclusion for me to think that the most evil people in our society deserved the death penalty. In my view, those who opposed it were muddleheaded, knee-jerk liberals who were just plain wrong.

I felt that way until about ten years ago. The last decade has seen a broad shift in public opinion on the death penalty, and I was not immune to the new information that was coming out about innocent people being sentenced to death. I was also struck by a talk on the death penalty by then Archbishop of Baltimore, William Cardinal Keeler, when he spoke at a mass at my parish in Towson. I realized then that I had to learn more.

I read about Kirk Noble Bloodsworth a man sentenced to die in Maryland for a crime he did not commit. I could not begin to imagine the absolute horror of languishing on death row an innocent man. I could not imagine the anticipation of being lifted onto a gurney, strapped down and injected with a combination of lethal drugs by an incompetent nurse's aide knowing all the time that I had done nothing wrong.

As I read about Mr. Bloodsworth and other innocent people that came close to execution, my doubts about the death penalty grew. Human beings are simply not right 100 percent of the time. No amount of reforms, technological advances, or legal procedures can undo that fact. If the death penalty remains, some state, perhaps even our state, will kill an innocent person. Can we live with that?

Like many people, I have struggled to make sense of this issue. The death penalty seems like a proportionate punishment for a grievous crime. At least it brings justice to victims in the face of evil. But does it? My religion teaches that the path to true peace is through forgiveness. John Paul II traveled to an Italian prison to forgive the man who shot him. The death penalty keeps us from following that noble example. It certainly does not bring back or even honor the dead. It also does not ennoble the living. It does nothing to assuage the sorrow of the victim's loved ones. In fact, as I sat through the commission hearings waiting to testify, I heard from victims' families who said the opposite that the death penalty's uncertainty only brought them more grief.

The closer you look at it, the less the death penalty makes any sense. As the Maryland commission found, the risk of executing an innocent person is just too high to justify maintaining a punishment that does not deter, costs too much, and harms victims' families.

And as a former police officer, I would add that the death penalty is not needed to protect the public. It is time for Maryland to make the common-sense choice and replace the death penalty with life without parole.

Source: Opinion, Michael May, of Rodgers Forge, is an attorney and formerly served as a Baltimore City police officer and a military police officer----Baltimore Examiner

Iraq: Ali Hassan al-Majid, known as "Chemical Ali", receives a second death sentence

December 2, 2008: Ali Hassan al-Majid, known as "Chemical Ali", received a second death sentence for the mass killing of Shia Muslims during an uprising in southern Iraq after the 1991 Gulf war.

Majid had already been condemned to death by hanging for his role in the killing of tens of thousands of Kurds, but has not yet been executed.

He served as Iraq's intelligence chief and defence minister. He was one of three former officials sentenced to death in June after being convicted of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity for their part in the 1988 Anfal (Spoils) campaign, which killed 180,000 Kurdish civilians and guerrillas.

Source: Guardian.co.uk, 02/12/2008

Seven hanged in Afghan capital

November 29, 2008: seven men were hanged in Kabul, Afghanistan, according to the National Afghanistan TV.

It was announced that the seven “committed shocking crimes and violent activities to achieve their personal interests and inhumane objectives by disrupting public order and violating religious and ethical standards in society.”

“These criminals had been sentenced to death by three courts” (primary court, court of appeals and Supreme Court).

Source: BBC, 30/11/2008

China executes two convicted of spying

November 28, 2008: despite pleas for clemency from the Bush administration and European officials, a biomedical researcher convicted of espionage by a Chinese court was executed, according to family members and American Embassy officials.

The researcher, Wo Weihan, 59, was a scientist and owner of medical supply company. He was convicted last May of passing military documents and classified information about an unidentified Chinese leader to Taiwan.

A distant relative of Mr. Wo, Guo Wanjun, 66, was convicted as a conspirator and also put to death, family members said.

The U.S. State Department said it was "deeply disturbed" by news of Wo's execution and that his arrest and trial "fell far short of international standards for due process."

Wo was sentenced to death by the Beijing court in May 2007 and his final appeal was denied on Feb. 29. The sentence was automatically forwarded to the supreme court for approval.

Human rights groups and diplomats from the EU, Austria and the United States had appealed to China on Wo's behalf, contending that he did not receive a fair trial and was given an overly harsh sentence.

Sources: Ap, New York Times, 29/11/2008

Washington State Corrections Dept. cancels execution date

The state Department of Corrections has canceled Wednesday's scheduled execution of Darold Ray Stenson following the state Supreme Court's refusal to lift his stay of execution.

The department said Monday evening that a new execution date will not be set for at least 90 days.

Judges in 2 separate courts have imposed stays of execution for Stenson, 56, who was convicted of 2 counts of aggravated murder for the 1993 slaying of his wife, Denise, and a business partner, Frank Hoerner, at Stenson's Clallam County exotic bird farm.

In a unanimous ruling Monday, the high court denied the county's request to vacate the stay of execution, but allowed the county to renew its effort before a trial court in 3 months.

Source: Seattle Times, December 2, 2008

Monday, December 1, 2008

Denying us official information


The Office of the Ombudsman has released its annual report and has noted that some public servants are playing games and using stalling tactics to delay requests under the Official Information Act.

Since April this year Beverley Wakem has been the Chief Ombudsman and she is taking a harder line on those who purposely stall OIA requests, particularly when the Ombudsman is involved. Although she hasn't named the Government departments concerned, next year she may. She will take a harder line and audit those departments and ministerial offices, such as Police, Social Development and Health, probably ACC too; and possibly naming them. One of them took a whole year to answer an OIA after it was referred to the Ombudsman. The statutory time limit is 20 working days.

From the archives: when World AIDS Day was about the penis


Yesterday was World Aids Day. A few years ago the AIDS Foundation called it National Penis Day. I blogged on National Penis day about the AIDS Foundation gimmick, and gave them some suggestions on how to make the day stick out as one to remember. Taking the piss, if you will. This is from the archives.

Who was the “dickhead” that organised tomorrow’s National Penis Day? An AIDS Foundation gimmick, the point of it all is to provide a fun way to promote a serious issue, men’s health - particularly men’s sexual health according to AIDS Foundation Executive Director Kevin Hague. A nationwide discussion of men’s health issues is noble, but it won’t happen as a result of a day promoting the penis. But will National Penis day achieve its aim?

Depending on how you aim. NPD did not get off to a good start when billboards featuring a non erect penis or two (perhaps belonging to “members” of the AIDS Foundation?) were deemed to risque for erecting, and the penises (or more correctly, penes) were ordered back in their respective Y-fronts.

Mind you, driving past a penis billboard may have caused a few accidents. Due to the small size of the member, drivers may have been laughing so much. Why couldn’t they have an erect penis on the billboard, its bigger and can take up more space. The AIDS foundation will just have to email a penis with their media releases to “get the penis out there”.

Now that the billboard idea is canned, will the penis day organiser take the approach of the red nose day, or daffodil day – get collectors with buckets full of penes, charge a couple of dollars, and that will include the women in the event. Both sexes can have a penis for the day – and men can have two. The money could go to the AIDS Foundation and Richard and Judy could wear theirs on One Network News.

Another idea is to get a penis and wrap a condom around it and exhibit it at Te Papa. We could call the exhibition “Penis in a condom” and it could open a debate on monogamous relationships and contraception. It could lead to a debate on the definition of the family unit, and how sex was designed for procreation as well as pleasure. Of course the “Puppetry of the Penis” show would never be allowed as that is abuse of the penis.

But why have a penis day to promote men’s health? Why not have a men’s sexual heath day? Do members of the AIDS Foundation have a fixation on the penis or a concern for men’s sexual health? When did you last go to the doctor because you had a problem with your penis. “Doctor, doctor, I can’t seem to get to grips with this problem, do you think you could get a handle on the issue?”

It gets worse. The AIDS Foundation, in a media release said the penis is “something shared by every man”. I will admit to sharing mine. Maybe they should have said, “the penis is something all men have”. At least they didn’t say the penis is shared with every man. That would penis owners in great risk of catching STD’s.

Do you have a problem with your penis? “Let’s face facts, ignoring a problem and hoping it will go away is just plain dumb,” the media release said. What’s not so clear is whether the penis or the problem will go away. Gangrene anyone?

So will you be involved in a penis show-and-tell or discussion workshop this week, or are you content to have a laugh about the fact that it is national penis day and leave it at that? Since when would a national penis day – or a national scrotum day for that matter – assist in discussing such issues? One NZAF media release actually highlighted the dilemma of testicular cancer in great length, so why not call it a testicle day? After all most men have two testicles – but only one penis, and testicular cancer is a real issue in men’s sexual health.

Sexual health is not just about the penis - that’s just the member that sticks out the most – and its used more frequently for urinating than for sex.