With over 500 people on Death Row, many of them at or near the end of the appellate process, California teeters on the threshold of an explosion of state-sanctioned killings. In his first month in office, Governor Gray Davis ignored the invitation to meet with religious leaders to discuss his process for evaluating clemency appeals, nor did he withdraw any of the unconfirmed appointments to the Board of Prison Terms made by his predecessor, Pete Wilson. The future looks backward.

The governor's Legal Affairs Secretary said that "the people of California have voted directly on the issue of capital punishment in two elections, and on both occasions they voted overwhelmingly in favor of the death penalty." He adds that Davis intends to "exercise his clemency powers only where necessary to avoid a miscarriage of justice in a particular case." Davis did not stay the February, 1999 execution of Jay Siripongs, in effect saying that failure to advise a Thai national of the right to consult with officials of his country, or that representation by an attorney who was running for public office did not interfere with the chance for the accused to obtain a just result.

If public sentiment is the foundation upon which the death penalty is to rest, then the task before death penalty opponents becomes clear: change public opinion.

Swaying public opinion demands more than moral argument; understanding the utter wrongness of the death penalty often comes only when the individual's interests are affected -- challenged.

Public attitudes are responsive to opinion leaders. A 1995 survey (see chart) indicates that chiefs of police hold the death penalty in low regard as a deterrent to violent crime. The huge costs that police departments must bear to investigate and try capital cases do grab their attention.

A detailed report released in September 1998 by the Federal Judicial Conference shows that defense costs in capital cases are five to twenty times higher than those expended in other serious murder cases. Many of these expenditures need to be incurred even before the prosecution has decided whether or not to seek the death penalty, and in a goodly number where the death penalty is actually sought, the jury ultimately decides that a lesser punishment fits the crime.

Death penalty hawks have attempted to trim costs by putting curbs on the appeals process. It is clear, however, that the high cost of capital punishment cannot be reduced by limiting appeals; the extravagent costs are built into the system from the outset. The meter starts running, full tilt, with the initial investigation.

Voters will confront the capital punishment issue again in the March, 2000 primary election, which will present two proposals to expand the death penalty. One proposal would make it easier to impose the death penalty in murder cases involving kidnaping, arson, or lying-in-wait; another would permit the death penalty in any gang-related murder.

Death penalty opponents have the next several months to devise and mount a vigorous fact-based campaign, one that encourages voters to think through the issue instead of reflexively voting against behavior they abhor. An effective campaign will need to make religious and civic leaders and local officials in every community aware that these proposals could cost their communities dearly.

Where do we start?

As individuals we can begin by increasing our understanding of the facts and the consequences of these measures and the larger issue of the death penalty. We can go on to inform law enforcement figures, religious leaders, community organizations, public interest groups, and local government officials, elected and appointed, about the economic, social, and moral issues that surround the death penalty. And we can ask the news media to look at the impact of enlarging the death penalty. By taking the initiative we can persuade them to consider the costs and the consequences of state-sanctioned killing and perhaps to exercise leadership in the crusade to change public opinion.

Changing public attitudes is a group effort. By reaching out aggressively in all directions, we can make changes. -Steve Birdlebough

Does an execution help the victim's family?

Many victims' families don't think so.

Families and friends of a murder victim often discover that it is a mistake to think an execution will "bring closure" to their loss. In the words of the parent of one victim, "its an impossible thing. Nothing can bring closure...." The circumstances of the crime, as well as a sense of loyalty may have encouraged them to seek vengeance, and to call out for the most extreme penalty. Prosecutors may recreate the earlier emotional climate at the trial in appealing for the death sentence. In the heat of these emotions, few seem to realize that a death sentence and the resulting appeal can simply divert the healing process for the victim's survivors. Media attention may often be directed to the murderer, and to the legal aspects of the case, leaving the victim's family feeling betrayed and neglected. Because efforts to prevent an execution may continue to the last minute, prosecutors may be tempted to promote a vengeful state of mind in family members. Many families of murder victims find too late that a vindictive attitude has only multiplied their wounds, and that the execution gave them nothing.

Does a death penalty improve morality?

Many religions say no.

Anger, vengeance, and retribution are not the best foundations of a moral culture, yet they seem to be driving forces behind the death penalty. Quakers, together with Catholics, Jews, Episcopalians, Congregationalists, Methodists, and Buddhists, among others, have taken strong stands against capital punishment, because it has a brutalizing effect on society as a whole. Rather than duplicating the act that society condemns, they urge that the government choose life as a way of setting an example for its citizens. They reject the idea that society honors the victim by killing the offender.

Does it reduce or increase crime?

Proof is lacking.

Because every person is different, a penalty that stops one person challenges another. As any parent knows, threats just make some kids more bold. A few individuals are drawn to death-defying activity. The quest for statistics showing that capital punishment deters more people than it incites to violence has failed repeatedly. Homicide rates in 1996 for states with the death penalty averaged 7.1 (per 100 thousand population), almost double the 3.6 average rate for those states that abolished it. Even those who favor the death penalty, such as the well-known scholar, Ernst van den Haag have agreed that "...one cannot claim...that it has been proved statistically...that the death penalty does deter more than alternative penalties."

Is the death penalty just?

Wealthy murderers are rarely executed.

The death penalty is a lethal lottery in which about one out of every 100 people arrested for murder is condemned to death row. Local politics, race, wealth, and social status of both offender and victim are more decisive than the circumstances of the crime in determining who is executed. Clearly, among those who face death, young men of color who were unemployed and minimally educated are grossly over-represented. Because the felony-murder rule makes unintentional killers and accomplices to murder death- eligible, those sophisticated enough to "turn state's evidence" can live, while less culpable people die. In recent years clemency has been rare. For these and other reasons, the American Bar Association has called for a moratorium on executions. In this century, at least 400 innocent people in the U.S. have been convicted and imprisoned for capital crimes they did not commit. Some spent as long as 25 years in prison before their innocence was established. Of them, 23 were executed.

Do executions save money?

Lawyers don't come cheap.

A death penalty trial normally costs four to six times more than one involving a life sentence. Studies in various states show proceedings to bring about an execution cost several million dollars-- many times the cost of keeping someone in prison for life. The enormous costs of the death penalty to the criminal justice system are leading many who have supported capital punishment to reconsider.

THE DEATH PENALTY -- TO WHAT END?

When people reject life imprisonment without the possibility of parole as an alternative to the death penalty, it appears that what they want is more than protection; they want vengeance. But vengeance does not heal; it only widens the circle of violence and tragedy, drawing in the offender's family and friends.

ALTERNATIVES

We must disavow the illusion that enforcing the death penalty is an answer to violent crime. As a people, we need to prevent violence by strengthening families, limiting youth access to guns, delivering mental health services for the emotionally disturbed, acting effectively against substance abuse, enacting widespread penal and parole reforms, and providing enough jobs for young adults. Effective crime prevention does much more to reduce the incidence of violence than do executions.

-Steve Birdlebough Legislative Advocate Friends Committee on Legislation

I, ___________________________, being of sound mind, do hereby make this Declaration of Life.

1. Concerned for public safety, the suffering of crime victims and for all involved in violence and crime, I hereby declare my opposition to the death penalty because:

A. The death penalty has never been shown to deter others from using violence.

B. The death penalty impacts the poor and racial minorities in great disproportion to their numbers in the population. There are clear pattems of racism in its implementation.

C. The death penalty sends our children a terrible message: that revenge is righteous and killing fellow human beings is justified.

D. The death penalty creates more victims: the children, parents and loved ones of the condemned.

E. The death penalty is permanent. If we execute by mistake, we can never correct that tragedy.

F. The ongoing legal costs of a death penalty case are far more expensive than those of life imprisonment without parole. If we are serious about reducing crime, we must invest our resources in programs that prevent violence and deal with the causes of crime.

G. Incarceration for life is all that is required to protect society from further harm.

2. During my life, I want to feel confident that under no circumstances whatsoever will my death result in the execution of another human being. If I should become the victim of murder, I urge that the person(s) charged with my homicide not be charged with capital murder. No matter what the circumstances of the crime, imposing the death penalty would only multiply the suffering.

Should the death penalty be sought against my wishes, I ask that this declaration be read at the defendant(s) trial in the presence of the jury. I further request that should any person(s) found guilty of my homicide be sentenced to death despite my urging against it, the Governor grant clemency to them.

3. If I am murdered, I ask that this declaration be delivered to all newspapers, television and radio stations of general circulation in the county in which my homicide took place. Finally, I urge my family and friends to take whatever steps are necessary to see that my wishes are carried out.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Signature:

Date:

Address:

City/ZIP:

Phone:

In this issue of the Newsletter we profile Quin Denvir who is to be the honored guest at the FCL annual dinner on May 18. He will speak on "The Death Penalty at the Millenium."

As the son of an Illinois trial lawyer, Quin Denvir grew up hearing much about the art of persuasion. One of his father's clients was the much-maligned Chicago Transit Authority, and the father needed every bit of his great skill to convince jurors to follow the law, rather than to let frustration over tardy trains creep into their verdict. Today, Denvir applies lessons learned at home to aid hundreds of destitute individuals prosecuted by the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of California.

Within weeks of his being appointed Federal Defender, Denvir's skills were tested when he took on the defense of Ted Kaczynski. Kaczynski, indicted as the elusive and long-sought "Unabomber," was responsible for the deaths of three people including two Sacramentans. It is a tribute to Denvir's calm and effective leadership, careful selection of the trial team, and shrewd planning that the case concluded without a death sentence.

Denvir's appointment as Federal Defender was predicated on his years of diverse legal experience, which included service with the Washington D.C. law firm, Covington &Burling, with California Rural Legal Assistance, and with the State of Californias as State Public Defender. He has defended numerous clients at the trial level, and is one of California's most respected appellate lawyers.

The insert in this issue of the Newsletter contains camera-ready copy that you can use to inform your friends about the importance of ending capital punishment in California. One side of the insert is a flyer containing Questions About the Death Penalty -- and answers to those questions. This handout can be used at vigils and educational events. It addresses some of the most commonly-held misconceptions about state-sponsored killing.

On the reverse side of the insert is a Declaration of Life, which gives everyone a place to start in their journey toward abolition of capital punishment. Each person who signs a declaration should find an opportunity to inform family members and friends about his or her decision. Copies may be given to others, and the original kept with important personal papers.

Amnesty International has published 40 pages of resource materials: Faith in Action. It contains step-by-step organizing suggestions, fact sheets, and reprints of sermons. Amnesty International, USA 600 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20003 (800)AMNESTY, Ext. 508 (202) 544-0200 www.amnesty-usa.org

A handy summary of the facts and arguments concerning the death penalty is This Life We Take, published by the FCL Education Fund, and available from the FCL office at $1 per copy, plus $2 postage and handling. If your congregation, Friends Meeting, or organization library does not have several copies on its bookshelf, we recommend that you order a supply.

If you have internet access, we also recommend that you consult the FCL web page on capital punishment at: http://www.webcom.com/~peace/PEACTREE/fcl/fcl-capital-p.html