|
. . . Remember,
whether you are a prosecutor or a defender, that when you step
into a courtroom, you should be engaged in a passionate search
for the truth, rather than a zealous pursuit of a victory for
victory's sake. -- Gov. George Ryan's
advice to law students
DEATH PENALTY
For capital punishment,
more reforms necessary
By Thomas P. Sullivan. Thomas
P. Sullivan is a senior partner at Jenner and Block and was co-chairman
of former Gov. George Ryan's death-penalty-study commission
Chicago Tribune, January 4, 2004
Illinois is now a leader in
the arena of death-penalty reform, but calls for an end to the
moratorium on executions are premature.
After studying every death-penalty
case in this state and examining the system from all angles,
the Governor's Commission on Capital Punishment made 85 recommendations
directed to the Illinois legislature and Supreme Court to ensure
fair and impartial administration of the death penalty.
The General Assembly has enacted
a limited selection of them, but some of the most important recommendations
have yet to be adopted. Until these become law we will continue
to risk putting the wrong people on Death Row. When the sanction
of death is involved, we must strive for the highest standards
of fairness and accuracy. Examples of the commission's recommendations
that still should be implemented include:
- Recording by audio or video
tape of all questioning sessions of homicide suspects in order
to create a complete and accurate record of what is said. This
important reform would help convict the guilty, protect the innocent
and shield police from false claims of misconduct. It is unfortunate
that under the new law, mandatory recordings in Illinois police
stations will not be required for two years. Until then, judges
and juries will continue to be presented with dueling testimonial
versions of what happened at the police station.
- A new way of judging witnesses'
memories. Mistaken identification by witnesses has been the most
prevalent cause of wrongful convictions in Illinois and elsewhere.
One reason is the methods used: lineups and photo spreads, in
which the witness views all persons or pictures at the same time.
The commission recommended a procedure known as "double-blind
sequential." The persons in lineups or pictures are displayed
one at a time, and the witness is required to state whether he
believes that person is the perpetrator before going to the next.
Double-blind means that the person administering the lineup as
well as the witness is unaware which person or picture is the
one suspected of being the perpetrator, thus preventing overt
or inadvertent influencing of the witness. A great deal of research
has shown that this technique dramatically reduces error rates
because the witness is required to make an absolute judgment
as to each person or photo, rather than a relative judgment as
to which among those shown most resembles the witness' memory
of the perpetrator.
- People who are arrested and
taken into police custody must be told that they have a right
to a lawyer and, more important, must be allowed access to one.
People with financial means, of course, may hire lawyers to consult
with them at the police station. But the reality is different
for indigent suspects who request appointed counsel, because
the public defender may not act without being appointed by a
judge. This requires that the suspect appear in court, which
often does not occur until a day or two after arrest. The commission
recommended that, when a suspect requests an appointed lawyer,
the public defender be authorized to consult at the station.
- Narrow the parameters of
capital punishment to comply with U.S. Supreme Court rulings.
The high court has ruled that state capital-punishment systems
must narrow the class of persons eligible for the death penalty
and must reasonably justify the imposition of a more severe sentence
on the defendant compared with others found guilty of murder.
In other words, the death penalty should be reserved for those
who commit the most heinous homicides. But under present Illinois
law, virtually every murder is encompassed within the 21 factors
that make murders eligible.
- Establishment of a statewide
commission to review each death-penalty case and override the
prosecutor's decision if deemed appropriate. A commission study
revealed significant disparities: Murders committed in rural
counties and those involving white victims are much more likely
to result in death sentences than murders committed in urban
counties and those in which the victim was non-white. The makeup
of this panel would consist of the attorney general, three state's
attorneys and a retired judge. The commission also recommended
that if the legislature fails to act on this proposal, the governor
should set up a voluntary review process and commute death sentences
in cases in which the prosecutor has not obtained panel approval.
- Establishment of an independent
state forensic laboratory with civilian personnel and its own
budget to replace the lab operated by the Illinois State Police.
This would remove control of the lab from one of the two parties
to criminal cases and prevent the appearance of bias for the
prosecution.
A number of the commission's
recommendations are directed to the Supreme Court of Illinois
to improve the education and training of judges, certification
of those qualified to handle capital cases, and appointment of
a standing committee of experienced judges to provide resources
to fellow judges who try capital cases. These proposals await
the court's action.
The commission also proposed
that the state high court's pattern for instructions in criminal
cases should include cautions about the fallibility of eyewitness
identifications and the difficulties in making cross-racial identifications;
the dubious reliability of testimony from "jailhouse snitches";
and the greater reliability of electronically recorded statements
attributed to the defendant than those that are not recorded.
These proposals also await the court's action.
Under current law, trial judges
have no authority to override a jury's death sentence even if
they doubt the defendant's guilt or believe that capital punishment
is not warranted under the circumstances of the case. Though
the commission recommended that judges be empowered to do so,
the new statute specifically denies this power to trial judges.
Another problem lies with appeals,
which go directly from the trial court to the Illinois Supreme
Court.
The new statute authorizes
the court to overturn a death sentence and substitute a lesser
term "if the court finds that the death sentence is fundamentally
unjust as applied to the particular case."
But the General Assembly failed
to adopt the commission's recommendation that the Supreme Court
compare the circumstances and penalty in the case with similar
Illinois murder cases in which death was a potential punishment.
This would enable the court
to conduct a "proportionality" review and set aside
the death penalty if the court found it excessive or disproportionate.
Regardless of our positions on the morality, wisdom or economics
of capital punishment, we all should agree that the system ought
to contain fundamental safeguards needed to prevent more death
sentences' being imposed on innocent people and in circumstances
that do not call for the ultimate punishment.
The reforms recounted above
are designed to achieve those results. Unless and until they
are adopted as recommended by the Governor's Commission, we will
not be able to say with confidence that our seriously flawed
system has been repaired.
Copyright © 2003, Chicago Tribune
Text of Gov. George Ryan's
speech
January 10, 2003
The following are prepared
remarks delivered by Gov. George Ryan Friday at the DePaul University
College of Law:
Thank you very much Andrea
Lyon for that introduction and thank you Father Minogue for hosting
us today.
I want to acknowledge Larry
Marshall from Northwestern Law School who is here today. He has
long been a tireless advocate for justice for the hardest cases.
I want to welcome him.
I believe Paul Ciolino may
be here. Paul is a private investigator, and a pretty tenacious
one at that. He worked on several important cases of death row
inmates and he is known for teaching his tricks to law and journalism
students. I want to acknowledge him.
I want to thank you all for
joining us today.
It means a lot to be here.
Although Governors work all the time, this is my last full business
day in office. At noon on Monday, a new governor will be inaugurated
and my time in office will be completed. I'm glad I can spend
some time with law students, people who can make a difference
in the future.
I know Andrea is dedicated
to teaching the next generation of lawyers about the law and
about justice. She knows about both and I want to congratulate
her for starting an innocence project here, the Center for Justice
in Capital Cases.
As you know, I have been learning
about the Illinois capital punishment system. It has been an
arduous journey.
Four years ago I was taking
the oath of office. I had great ambitions for an agenda to build
a new Illinois.
We succeeded in most of those
goals: investing 51 percent of new revenues for education, developing
a program to invest in the schools, roads and transit systems
of this state--that program became Illinois FIRST.
There were many things we wanted
to do. But the death penalty was nowhere on the radar screen.
I had no intention of grappling with such a difficult topic.
As I have said, the death penalty was just one of those things
that was there, in the abstract.
Little did I know what lay
ahead.
Three years ago, I was faced
with startling information.
We had exonerated not one,
not two, but 13 men from death row.
They were found innocent. Innocent
of the charges for which they were sentenced to die.
Can you imagine?
The state nearly killed innocent
people, nearly injected them with a cocktail of deadly poisons
so that they could die in front of witnesses on a gurney in the
state's death chamber.
You have heard some of the
stories. I won't dwell on them today because I have so much to
report, but the exonerated included Anthony Porter, wrongfully
convicted and 48 hours away from being executed.
His lawyer Larry Marshall won
a stay of execution, so that journalism students led by their
professor David Protess (right) and Investigator Paul Ciolino
could prove his innocence.
Rolando Cruz and Alex Hernandez,
wrongly convicted for killing a little girl even as a convicted
child killer, Brian Dugan, offered to plead guilty to the horrible
crime. Prosecutors, who were zealously committed to sending Cruz
and Hernandez to death row, would not accept Dugan's offer of
a guilty plea in exchange for life. A courageous DuPage county
judge acquitted Cruz and Hernandez in 1995. Since then, DNA evidence
conclusively points to Dugan, who remains uncharged.
There were others Dennis Williams
and Verneal Jimerson, The case against them had hinged on the
testimony of a 17-year-old impoverished mentally challenged woman
who, according to her lawyers, was coerced at gunpoint by investigators
to testifying against four of her friends.
When she tried to come clean,
the state charged her with perjury, sent her off to prison where
she spent 8 years in hell. She finally got out when she agreed
to go back to her coerced testimony, even though it was false.
20 years later, the state's attorney was still fighting her effort
to clear her name of the perjury charge.
Another co-defendant, Kenny
Adams, was sentenced to prison for XXX. He was offered a get
out of jail free card if he would only testify against one of
his co-defendants during one of their retrials. He showed enormous
strength of character by refusing that bargain. Adams, Willie
Rainge, Williams and Patterson, the Ford Heights Four, were rescued
from their nightmare.
Finally Paul Ciolino and Dave
Protess and their students got the evidence to free the Ford
Heights Four. They found the witnesses who recanted their claims
and, with their lawyers, fought for DNA testing. It's a good
thing. The Ford Heights Four were cleared by DNA evidence after
an 18-year battle.
Gary Gauger was sentenced to
die for killing his parents. But there was no evidence, just
an alleged vision statement that was never committed to writing
by investigators. Federal Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms investigators
saved him by catching members of the Outlaw motorcycle gang on
tape confessing to killing Gauger's parents and laughing about
how Gary took the rap.
The category of horrors was
hard to believe. If I hadn't reviewed the cases myself, I wouldn't
believe it.
I've repeated many times the
findings of reporters Steve Mills and Ken Armstrong of the Chicago
Tribune who conducted an exhaustive investigation in the flaws
of the system in November of 1999.
Half of the nearly 300 capital
cases in Illinois had been reversed for a new trial or resentencing.
Nearly Half!
33 of the death row inmates
were represented at trial by an attorney who had later been disbarred
or at some point suspended from practicing law.
Of the more than 160 death
row inmates, 35 were African American defendants who had been
convicted or condemned to die by all-white juries.
More than two-thirds of the
inmates on death row are African-American.
46 inmates were convicted on
the basis of testimony from jailhouse informants.
I'm not a lawyer, but I don't
think you need to be one to be appalled by those statistics.
I have one question. How does
that happen?
We had executed 12 people since
capital punishment was reinstated here in Illinois in 1977. With
the 13th exonerated inmate in January of 2000, we had released
more innocent men from death row than those hopefully guilty
people we had executed.
Three years ago I described
it as a shameful scorecard. Truly shameful.
So I did the only thing I could,
I called for what is in effect a moratorium.
A lot of people called that
courageous.
It wasn't. It was just the
right thing to do. I have a feeling that's what Father Minogue,
Andrea Lyon and the other law professors here at DePaul are teaching
you to do.
I wish I had better news to
report to you today. But I don't.
In fact I must share with you
some startling information. There are more innocent people on
death.
Let me talk to you about Madison
Hobley.
In January, 1987, 16 years
ago, Madison Hobley lived with his wife and infant son in an
apartment building on Chicago's South Side where he worked for
a medical supply company. Madison had no previous convictions.
He had married his childhood sweetheart.
Madison had a steady job, installing
medical equipment in people's homes. He was studying to become
a medical technician. His only indiscretion was a brief extramarital
affair which he had ended and for which his wife and her parents
had forgiven him. By January they were back together, trying
to build their lives together as family.
On the sixth, Madison awoke
to the sound of a fire alarm. Dressed only in shorts and a T-shirt,
he went into the hall to investigate. The couple's apartment
was at the top of the stairway on the third floor, and he thought
he saw smoke coming from under the door of an apartment across
from his. Suddenly he heard a whoosh and a cracking noise. A
stairway door failed.
There was a wall of fire and
smoke between him and his wife and young son. Shouting to them
to head for a window, he crawled down the hall to the back stairs.
He hoped he could rescue them. He prayed his wife could drop
the baby to him out the window.
But it was not to be. He never
saw his family again. Seven people died, including Madison's
wife and baby. Yet in the confusion of the inferno around him,
Madison helped to catch a neighbor's baby and save its life.
Because he survived and his
family did not, the police immediately focused on Madison Hobley
as a suspect, ignoring information about a disgruntled former
tenant evicted months before for selling drugs. The now infamous
Area 2 detectives, under the command of Lt. John Burge, grilled
Hobley, beat him, ``bagged'' him and tried to get him to confess.
Bagging involves taping a plastic
typewriter cover over a suspect's face and head until the suspect
loses consciousness from lack of oxygen. Burge and his men practiced
it regularly, we know this now from the Chicago Police Office
of Professional Standards.
The police said Madison confessed,
but the only writing that survived was his denial. A detective
said the purported confession got coffee spilled on it, was ``wet
and torn'' and so he threw it away.
Two men came forward to claim
they saw Madison purchase gasoline the night of the fire. One
could not be certain of his identification. The other, it turned
out, was being ``helped'' by Chicago police in his own criminal
problems, including an arson that had occurred six weeks later
and within a few blocks of the apartment building where Hobley
lived.
Madison's trial lawyers had
no idea that the testimony of this witness was tainted. Nor did
they know that a gasoline can introduced into evidence during
Madison's trial was not used to start the fatal fire but rather
had been seized earlier at another unrelated fire. That's because
his lawyer and investigator, Andrea Lyon and her team and Paul
Ciolino, uncovered this new evidence.
The gas can used to convict
Madison was in pristine condition, showing no signs that it had
``survived'' the blaze that killed his family. The defense also
did not receive a fingerprint report from the can that could
prove Madison's print were not on the can.
A Cook County Judge has refused
to acknowledge any of this new evidence in hearings ordered by
the state supreme court.
So Madison Hobley has sat on
death row and waited. Waited for justice.
Madison's troubles even spread
to the jury room. The foreman of the jury, a suburban police
officer, intimidated some jurors by laying his gun on the jury
table and announcing ``we'll reach a verdict.'' The jury finally
came back with a guilty verdict after four days of strained deliberations.
Madison Hobley was convicted
on the basis of flawed evidence. He was convicted because the
jury did not have the benefit of all existing evidence which
would have served to exonerate him.
The case against Madison evaporated
only after years of investigation by Professor Andrea Lyon, from
here at DePaul, and Attorney Kurt Feuer, a DePaul law alum, and
many of Professor Lyon's students.
Madison Hobley professed his
innocence from the first day that Chicago police arrested him.
Evidence uncovered after trial
similarly presents a compelling case that Stanley Howard did
not commit the crime for which he faces execution.
He was charged with coming
up to a man in a car, asking for a match, and then shooting the
man in a fit of temper when the man refused the request. However,
witnesses subsequently were located who heard the crime unfold
and whose testimony establishes that the shooter knew the victim
and his companion and that the shooter had been stalking them
so that he could, in his words, ``catch'' them.
There was no physical evidence
of any kind against Howard. The State's case consisted entirely
of two items of evidence. First, there was an alleged identification
by a single eyewitness, the victim's companion. Eyewitness identifications
are never very reliable, but here the identification was particularly
unreliable. The witness had been drinking heavily at the time
of the shooting. She also had a restricted ability and a limited
opportunity to see the shooter in the dark at night.
More importantly, she made
her identification of Howard six months after the shooting and
at the time was only able to make a tentative identification
that Howard looked similar to the shooter. Finally, her version
of what happened was directly contradicted by ballistics evidence
and the testimony of the witnesses who heard what happened that
night.
The only other evidence against
Howard was his so-called confession, which he has maintained
from the beginning was obtained by brutal torture. Like Madison
Hobley, Stanley Howard was suffocated with a plastic bag until
he confessed. There is strong evidence that corroborates his
account. His confession was obtained by Area 2 detectives. In
Howard's case, medical evidence uncovered after trial directly
establishes that Howard was physically harmed while in the custody
of the Area 2 detectives.
He called his father and said
these ``detectives are killing me.'' His father immediately called
OPS and the FBI.
In addition, witnesses have
come forward after trial who corroborate that Howard was in a
battered condition during his Area 2 interrogation. Having looked
at all of the evidence of torture, even an investigator for the
Chicago Police Department's own Office of Professional Standards
has concluded that Howard indeed was abused by Area 2 detectives
before he gave his so-called confession.
In April of 1986, Aaron Patterson
was tortured by Area 2 Violent Crimes detectives, under the direct
supervision and with the active participation of Commander Burge.
During the initial interrogation,
Patterson repeatedly denied his involvement in the murder of
a South Side couple who had allegedly been selling illegal weapons.
Detectives subsequently handcuffed
Patterson behind his back, turned out the lights, suffocated
him with a gray plastic typewriter cover over his head and struck
him in the chest.
When Patterson refused to confess,
he was suffocated and beaten about his body again. He was also
threatened with a gun by Burge himself.
When Patterson was left alone
in the interrogation room he scratched into a bench with a paper
clip that he was tortured and that his statements to the police
were false. Listen to these chilling words: ``I lie about murders,
police threaten me with violence, slapped and suffocated me with
plastic . . . signed false statement to murders.''
The record in Mr. Patterson's
case shows that he was one of the last of the approximately 60
known victims who have alleged torture by Chicago Police detectives
at Area 2 Police Headquarters from 1972 to 1986.
Mr. Patterson's father was
a Chicago Police Lieutenant, but perhaps he was the wrong color.
Despite repeatedly calling for his father, there was no mercy,
no benefit of a doubt. The beatings continued.
As a direct result of his torture,
the detectives claim to have obtained an oral confession which
was introduced at Patterson's trial and which is the only remaining
``evidence'' which supports his conviction.
There is no physical or forensic
evidence which links Patterson to the crimes. Further, Marva
Hall, a young girl who testified at trial that Patterson made
an admission to her, has recanted, and has accused the police
and a former Assistant Cook County State's Attorney of coercing
this false testimony from her.
In addition, there is an affidavit
that another man who was an acquaintance of the victims actually
committed the crimes. That suspect has subsequently committed
a very similar crime.
Finally, fingerprints from
the scene were previously tested and did not match Patterson's.
If tested today these fingerprints could help to identify the
real killer, but the State's Attorneys Office reports that this
evidence has been lost.
Unfortunately, much of the
evidence of this systematic Area 2 torture and abuse had not
emerged at the time of Mr. Patterson's trial in 1989. It was
on the basis of this evidence, as well as the incompetence of
his trial lawyers that the Illinois Supreme Court sent Mr. Patterson's
case back to the Cook County courts for a new hearing into whether
this evidence requires that Mr. Patterson receive a new trial
a year ago. There clearly has, however, been no rush to do justice.
Aaron's case is another one
in which Dave Protess, Paul Ciolino and the Northwestern students
have been investigating.
Leroy Orange was convicted
of murder and sentenced to death in 1985 based exclusively on
a confession obtained at Area 2 Police Headquarters. Orange consistently
maintained that his confession was false and that he gave it
only because he was tortured by Jon Burge. At his first court
appearance in 1984, Orange told his public defender and the judge
that he had been tortured by the police.
The lawyer who he retained
after his first court appearance told the press that the police
obtained a confession from Orange by electro-shocking him using
a black box.
The only evidence against Orange
was his confession. Ordinarily, the admissibility of a confession
would be challenged by a defense lawyer, especially when his
client claims that his confession was coerced. Coerced confessions
are notoriously unreliable. However, Orange's lawyer, who has
repeatedly been disciplined, never demanded a hearing to determine
the admissibility of Orange's confession. Thus Mr. Orange's confession
was introduced into evidence without being challenged by defense
counsel.
During the 17 years since his
conviction, Orange has sought a hearing to prove that his confession
was false. Despite the fact that during this time overwhelming
evidence of a pattern and practice of torture at Area 2 has emerged,
Illinois Courts have repeatedly denied Orange's request for a
hearing on his confession. The prosecution has opposed Orange's
repeated requests on procedural grounds and even seeks to bar
evidence of the torture that led to of Orange's.
In other words, the prosecution
intends to ask a jury to execute Orange based on his confession,
but the courts will not allow Orange to inform the jury about
the torture that led the confession.
I'm not a lawyer, I am a pharmacist.
But how does this happen? It appears to me, the system has failed
Orange by relying on procedural technicalities at the exclusion
of the quest for truth.
The system has failed all four
men. It has failed the people of this state.
In some way, I can see how
rogue cops, 20 years ago, can run wild. I can see how, in a different
time, they perhaps were able to manipulate the system.
What I can't understand is
why the courts can't find a way to act in the interest of justice.
Here we have four more men who were wrongfully convicted and
sentenced to die by the state for crimes the courts should have
seen they did not commit. We have evidence from four men who
did not know each other, all getting beaten and tortured and
convicted on the basis of the confessions they allegedly provide.
They are perfect examples of
what is so terribly broken about our system.
These cases call out for someone
to act. They call out for justice, they cry out for reform.
Their cries have fallen on
deaf ears, until now.
It reminds me of a story I
heard about President Lincoln, in Sen. Robert Dole's recent book.
As President Lincoln shouldered
the burden of trying to fight the bloody civil war and saving
our young republic, he often had to review individual cases of
men who were to face the firing squad.
These were young men who were
found guilty of crimes such as desertion while serving the Union
in battles in which brother fought brother spilling their blood
and dying on grisly battlefields.
President Lincoln reviewed
one such case with a senior army officer and noticed that there
were no letters or pleas for mercy or pardon from anyone on behalf
of the accused soldier. ``It's true,'' the officer said, ``He
has no friends.''
To that President Lincoln replied,
``Then I shall be his friend'' and signed the pardon request.
Today, I shall be a friend
to Madison Hobley, Stanley Howard, Aaron Patterson and LeRoy
Orange.
Today I am pardoning them of
the crimes for which they were wrongfully prosecuted and sentenced
to die.
I have reviewed these cases
and I believe a manifest injustice has occurred. I have reviewed
these cases and I believe these men are innocent. I still have
some faith in the system that eventually these men would have
received justice in our courts. But the old adage is true: justice
delayed is justice denied.
There is another tragedy here
because of the brutal police work of John Burge it almost ensures
that the truth will never really be found. The tragedy is compounded
and the families of the victims of these long ago murders may
never know what happened to their loved ones and why.
Stanley Howard will unfortunately
not be released from prison today. He will still need to serve
time for a robbery, kidnap, sex assault case.
However, the evidence in that
case is also very troubling. He has not yet petitioned for relief
in that case. I would recommend his lawyers do so, and I urge
the next administration pick up where I am leaving off. That
case may well be as tainted as his murder conviction. If so,
let us right those wrongs and quickly.
Let's promote justice.
A few weeks after I announced
the moratorium. I appointed the smartest, most dedicated citizens
I could find--prosecutors, defense lawyers, former elected officials
and business people--to a special commission. It was chaired
by former Federal Judge Frank McGarr and co-chaired by former
U.S. Attorney Thomas Sullivan and former U. S. Senator Paul Simon.
I asked them to do only one
thing: to study the system from top to bottom. I told them until
I can be sure with moral certainty that no innocent person will
be sent to death row and executed by the state, no one would
meet that fate.
They worked for more than two
years. They studied every aspect of the system, from the time
the police arrive at the scene of a murder, to the last ditch
appeals to the supreme court, and all points in between.
Over two years they reviewed
each and every case of the exonerated inmates, the inmates on
death row, and of the nearly 150 cases that had been reversed
or remanded. Every single case!
After all of that, they developed
85 recommendations. 85 ways to improve our badly broken system.
They acknowledged they could never make it perfect, but they
said their recommendations could dramatically reduce the chance
that we would wrongfully convict and execute an innocent person.
The recommendations included
the creation of a statewide panel to review prosecutors' request
for the death penalty; banning death sentences on the mentally
retarded; significantly reducing the number of death eligibility
factors; videotaping interrogations of homicide suspects; and
controlling the use of testimony by jail house informants.
I mention it now so that you
will understand the thoroughness of our review. And that was
only the beginning.
We took the commission's recommendations
and drafted legislation. It was a damn good package would have
dramatically improved our state's capital punishment system.
We introduced that bill three
times last spring and this fall. Three times. And each time,
the legislature punted.
I do not understand that. 13
innocent men were nearly executed. Countless flaws are highlighted.
The system has proved itself to be wildly inaccurate, unjust,
unable to separate the innocent from the guilty and, at times,
racist. And yet we couldn't pass a package in Springfield.
What does it take. Now that
we can say the number of wrongfully convicted men is 17, will
that be enough?
Last spring there was talk
of what to do with the inmates currently on death row convicted
in our deeply flawed system. I was challenged by a young prosecutor
at a conference in Oregon who asked me why, if I was so concerned
about the state of our capital punishment system, I didn't just
commute the cases of all inmates on death row. I said that was
something we would have to look at.
In fact, defense lawyers, like
Andrea and Larry, had long planned to petition the prisoner review
board to do just that, to fight for clemency for their clients
because they could not obtain justice in any other way.
My power to grant these pardons
is constitutionally provided. The state Supreme Court has cited
the Governor's power in explaining their restraint in acting
in some death penalty cases they review.
What has been most troubling
is that this is most clearly not limited to our capital cases.
They only have received the most attention.
There have been at least 33
inmates, convicted of murder and serving sentences other than
the sentence of death, who have been found innocent and released
from prison since 1977.
We are adding to that number
today, with other cases that we have reviewed, through the normal
cases we review from the Prisoner Review Board.
There is the case of Miguel
Castillo who spent 11 years behind bars for murder. A Cuban immigrant,
Mr. Castillo was arrested for the murder of another Cuban DemigrDe.
He was charged, convicted and sentenced to 48 years in prison.
There is only one problem.
Mr. Castillo was in jail the night of the murder, serving a 60
day sentence for breaking into a store.
Mr. Castillo said nothing will
bring back the 11 years of his life he lost. It seems a travesty
to me that is should take so long. But a pardon will at least
acknowledge the state made a mistake.
And finally there is the landmark
case of Gary Dotson, the first real DNA case in Illinois. My
friend, who I served under, Gov. James R. Thompson, released
Gary Dotson from prison after the rape victim, Cathy Crowell
Webb, recanted her testimony and said she made up the story of
being raped by Gary Dotson while she was a teenager in order
to cover her relationship with her then boyfriend.
Gary served 12 years in prison.
After the recantation, Gov. Thompson held clemency hearings.
It was before the advent of reliable DNA evidence, so Gary was
never pardoned. He has struggled to rebuild his life ever since.
Now we have the DNA evidence that proves Gary is innocent. We
will clear Gary's name once and for all.
I have acted today in what
I believe is the interest of justice. It is not only the right
thing to do, I believe it is on the only thing to do.
If you learn nothing else,
follow the example of your teacher, Andrea Lyon or of Larry Marshall,
or Dave Protess. Realize the tremendous opportunity it is to
be allowed to practice law. Realize the tremendous power that
you have to do good. Remember, whether you are a prosecutor,
a defender, that when you step into a courtroom, you should be
engaged in a passionate search for the truth, rather than a zealous
pursuit of a victory for victory's sake.
Lives hang in the balance.
I have finished my review of
the capital cases. It has been a thorough, exhaustive process.
We have gone over cases again and again, each and every case.
At stake is whether some, all
or none of these inmates on death row will have their sentences
commuted from death to life without parole.
One of the things discussed
with family members. life without parole was seen as a life filled
with perks and benefits.
But I would point out for you
a suit in Livingston County where a judge ruled the state corrections
department cannot force feed two corrections inmates who are
on a hunger strike. The judge ruled that suicide by hunger strike
was not an irrational action by the inmates, given what their
future holds.
I will tell you there are prisons
where there is no air conditioning and the conditions are pretty
stark. And in every prison, the inmates are told what to do at
all times. They have no freedom. Let's keep things in perspective.
Today I have taken extraordinary
action to correct manifest wrongs. As we speak, letters are being
prepared and sent for overnight delivery to the survivors of
victims and relatives of inmates, to inform them first of my
decision in the mass petitions for commutation. Tomorrow, after
families have received those letters, I will make my decision
public.
Four years ago, I never would
have guessed the road would lead me here today: to championing
reforms of our capital punishment system, to intervening in the
effort to help four death row inmates and four other men find
justice where the courts would not grant relief.
You too will see many twists
and turns in the road ahead of you. I can't say that I would
wish upon you the experience such as the burdens I have faced
in this process. But remember that each day you live, your experience
will prepare you for a challenge you may not foresee. Grab it
with gusto. And fight for justice.
Thank you and God bless you.
Thank you.
END
Ryan
unlikely backer of reform of death penalty
Eric Slater, Los Angeles
Times, January 12, 2003
Chicago -- A plainspoken conservative
in a plain suit from a Plains state, Illinois Gov. George Ryan
is a most unlikely champion for death penalty reform. He hardly
gave capital punishment any thought at all, save for a brief
period in 1977 when, as a young state legislator, he voted to
reinstate it.
Executions were, before and
after his vote, one of those faraway facts of justice in the
United States, he said in a recent interview, a punishment for
the worst criminals. It didn't have much to do with a pharmacist
from the town of Kankakee.
Then, in 1999, Ryan, famously
gruff, even surly, became governor. And even as he was moving
into the governor's mansion in Springfield, the death penalty
system began crumbling around him.
An old-style Illinois politician
adept at the art of the backroom deal, he wanted to pay attention
to the state's crumbling bridges, to early-childhood education,
to doing away with tollbooths. By March 1999, however, four Death
Row inmates had been freed since he had taken office, 13 since
he had helped restart executions in the state.
Ryan, now 68, was being pulled
into the mess. And then, in the early hours of March 17, he presided
over the execution of Andrew Kokoraleis, a mutilation murderer.
"It was a very painful,
soul-searching journey in wrestling with the decision that meant
a man's life," said Jeremy Margolis, a Chicago attorney
and Ryan confidant who sat with the governor during the execution.
"By the time the next case was on its way, he was pretty
much determined that the system was so flawed that, sooner or
later, he was likely to get a case that was flawed."
So, in the simple, grammatically
complicated language that is his style, Ryan called a moratorium
on executions. And he appointed a panel to investigate Illinois'
process for meting out death. A supporter of the penalty for
his entire adult life, he was inundated with calls and letters
of support, from across the country and around the world.
On Friday, he pardoned four
men from Death Row, and on Saturday, he granted clemency to all
167 condemned inmates, reducing most of their sentences to life
in prison without parole and three of them to 40 years.
George Ryan was born in Iowa
and moved as a small boy with his father, a pharmacist, and mother
to the blue-collar town of Kankakee, about 60 miles south of
Chicago, "but a thousand miles away in a lot of ways,"
he said.
He served two years in the
Army in Korea, moved home and went to pharmacy school. He married
his high-school sweetheart, Lura Lynn Ryan, with whom he now
has six children and 14 grandchildren.
After school, he began working
in the family pharmacy. But politics soon pulled at him -- conservative
Midwestern politics.
In 1972, he won a seat in the
Illinois General Assembly. In 1977, he pushed a green button
to vote yes on the issue of reinstating the death penalty.
He became speaker of the House,
then lieutenant governor, then secretary of state in 1991. As
secretary, he lowered the legal limit for drunk driving, required
school bus drivers to undergo background checks and otherwise
continued his career as a straight-ahead, law-and-order man,
a solid Midwest conservative.
He is still just that, Ryan
said recently. The search for justice should not be the domain
of one political party or school of thought.
"I never intended to be
an activist on this issue," he said Friday. He just didn't
want his state to execute an innocent person.
©2003 San Francisco
Chronicle
|
Truth can never be
told so as to be understood, and not be believ'd. William Blake, The Proverbs of Hell
