Washington Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty Volume 25, Issue 1

Fall 2015

Greetings from our President

P. 1

Get Involved in Your Community!

P. 1

WCADP Attended the 22nd Annual Starvin’ for Justice: A Fast and Vigil in Washington, D.C.

P. 3

Join Us Dec. 9th for “An Evening with Exoneree Nate Fields and Musician Bradford Loomis”

P. 3

Lobby Day 2016 Is Just Around the Corner! Get Involved in Your Community! (Continued)

Cause for Guarded Optimism?

P. 6

Four Decades of a Failed Experiment is Enough

P. 7

P. 3

The National Landscape (Map)

P. 8

P. 4

A BIG Thank You to Our Donors!

P. 9

Greetings from our President Dear Friends, This year has been a significant one on the road to abolition. News has poured in from so many states that I thought to include a stateby-state rundown in this newsletter as an overview of how and where the machinery of death is slowing down - but I scratched that idea when I saw the amount of space that would require. We have boiled that info down to an essence with the map you'll find on Page 8. It is worth calling out that NEBRASKA, a conservative state, repealed the death penalty in May 2015 with strong bipartisan support. WASHINGTON and DELAWARE are close to repeal (we’re looking at you both for 2016!). And states where there are holds on executions include OKLAHOMA, ARIZONA, OHIO, MISSISSIPPI, LOUISIANA, and ARKANSAS. Read that last sentence again. It’s been quite a year! On June 28th the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a decision in Glossip v Gross, just as five Washingtonians landed in Washington D.C to join the Starvin’ for Justice Annual Fast and Vigil. On Page 6, you will find board member Jim Lobsenz’s analysis of why, in spite of an unfavorable decision in that case, there seems to be a shift in the court’s attitude toward the death penalty. Board member Mark Larranaga employs the concerns voiced in Justice Breyer’s dissent in the Glossip case to argue that Washington’s death penalty system is actually worse than in the United States as a whole. Continued on Page 2

Get Involved In Your Community! There are a lot of great ways to bring the abolition message into your community. This year, WCADP was able to work with the Seattle City Council to draft a letter that was signed by all 9 City Council members, Mayor Ed Murray, and City Attorney Pete Holmes. The letter was sent to the Seattle delegation of Representatives and Senators down in Olympia to make it clear that the Seattle community wants them to act on abolition! For more info and ideas, flip to Page 4!

WCADP Attended the 22nd Annual Starvin’ For Justice: A Fast and Vigil in Washington, D.C. Five members of the Washington Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty joined members of other groups from all over the country and from around the world for a four day fast and vigil in Washington, D.C. Dave Avolio, a longtime WCADP board member made his 5th trip to D.C. for the vigil and was joined by Sharon Avolio and James Basden, who have also made the trip before. First time attendees included Megan Miller, our wonderful Death Row Outreach volunteer, and our Program Director, Danielle Fulfs. The fast and vigil, organized by the Abolitionist Action Committee, is held from June 29th to July 2nd every year in order to signify the 4 years and 4 days that separated the death penalty cases that halted (Furman v Georgia) and then restarted (Gregg v Georgia) the death penalty in 1972 and 1976, respectively. Speakers from all backgrounds shared their stories, which ranged from being exonerated, to losing a loved one to the death penalty, to defending death row inmates. We were able to share the progress being made in Washington, and we had the opportunity to hear from others about the strategies they’re using to push repeal not only in their states but also throughout the entire country. Photo of WCADP’s Program Director outside the Supreme Court (AP Photo by Jacquelyn Martin)

This is an annual event. We will be there next year, and we would love to have more members from Washington! Please check out www.abolition.org/fastandvigil for more information. (President’s Letter, Continued from Page 1) You may have noticed that we did not hold our usual annual meeting this past October. With bills being introduced in the Washington legislature the past several years we decided that the best time to bring on new board members and re-focus our efforts each year would be just after the legislative session ended. To that end, we will be holding our next annual meeting in May 2015, and plan to hold them each successive May. We still want you to join us for a big event this year though! On Wednesday December 9th we’ll gather at Ballard Beer Company to hear death row exoneree Nate Fields share his story, and local musician Bradford Loomis will be there to share his music. Find details for this event on page 3. The next time we’ll want to gather our supporters together will be for Lobby Day. Jan 26th 2016 we will flood legislators in Olympia with a coalition of voices all calling for the end of the death penalty in our state. You’ll also find all of the details on that on page 3. The abolition movement could succeed a few different ways in Washington. Our efforts continue for achieving abolition of the death penalty through legislative action. As you will read in Mark Larrañaga’s article, it may also be abolished through the courts as soon as 2016. Most recently in the news, the Washington Association of Prosecution Attorneys is said to be planning a request to the legislature to send a referendum on the death penalty to voters next year. Regardless of the route, we know that abolition in Washington is not a matter of IF. It’s a matter of WHEN. And all of these routes require grass roots organizing and the voices of passionate engaged citizens. Thank you for your commitment and engagement on this road toward abolition. Stefanie Anderson

2

WCADP and Witness to Innocence* will be co-hosting a friendraiser/fundraiser on December 9th! There are no tickets for this event. We’ll have some light snacks to share, and you can show your love to the Ballard Beer Company for donating their space to us by purchasing some of their great local beers. (Nonalcoholic beverages will be available too.) We’ll of course “pass the hat” for the fundraising part of the evening, and all donations will be equally shared between the two non-profit organizations. When: December 9th @ 7pm Where: Ballard Beer Company (2050 NW Market St, Seattle, WA 98107) To RSVP: Visit our Facebook page or visit http://goo.gl/forms/b8CQ6eaMH7

Upcoming Events

Join us On December 9th for an “Evening with Exoneree Nate Fields and Musician Bradford Loomis”

Who: We will be joined by exoneree Nate Fields, who became the 129th person to be exonerated from death row after spending 20 years—11 of those on death row—for a crime he did not commit. He will share with us the story of his journey to exoneration. We will also be joined by the Executive Director of Witness to Innocence, Magdaleno Rose-Avila, and Stefanie Anderson, WCADP’s Board President. Bradford Loomis, a wonderful local musician, will be there to share his music with us. There’s a rumor going around that Stefanie may have a musical surprise up her sleeve, so don’t miss it! *Witness to Innocence is a national organization that works to empower the men and women exonerated from death row and to lift up their voices within the abolition movement. The organization offers and invaluable support network for exonerees, who are often left with nothing after winning their freedom. We are honored to be co-hosting this event with them.

Lobby Day 2016 is just around the corner! We are gearing up for our 2016 Lobby Day, so mark your calendars early! A lot has changed since our 2015 Lobby Day, so we will be having some great conversations with our legislators. Make sure your voice is heard by signing up today! When: January 26th @ 8:30am Where: John A. Cherberg Building (304 15th Ave SW, Olympia, WA 98504) To Register: Visit http://goo.gl/forms/1OjBc9TS1g We will be updating this info on our website as Lobby Day gets closer, so be sure to check back in January.

3

Get Involved In Your Community! (Continued)

Here are 5 ways to get involved that can make a HUGE difference! 1. Ask your City Council to pass a resolution or a letter in opposition to the death penalty - Earlier this year, the Seattle City Council passed this letter:

To view the rest, visit http://www.seattle.gov/council/burgess/news/2015/1502.htm and click the link in the last paragraph

The letter not only gained attention and traction in the press, but was also received by every legislator who has constituents within Seattle city limits. To accomplish this, we scheduled meetings with every city council member individually. These can take time, but it is a great way to share with your council members why you oppose the death penalty. Seattle’s Council members admittedly did not take much convincing. This will likely not be the case in many parts of Washington State, so don’t be discouraged if it takes more than one meeting to make headway. If your local city council is not interested in pursuing a letter or a resolution, consider approaching your city’s Human Rights Commission (or Committee) or another relevant commission. The City of Spokane Human Rights Commission passed a resolution calling for the abolition of the death penalty. Please feel free to contact our Program Director, Danielle Fulfs, for more information on pursuing a letter or resolution with your local government officials. She can be reached at [email protected].

4

2. Write a Letter to the Editor Many cities, towns, and communities around the state have wonderful local papers ranging from the Sno-Valley Star to the Yakima Herald to the Vancouver Sun. These papers need to hear from you! Here is an example written this year by Mike and Joanne Simmons from Richland, WA, who successfully penned a letter to the editor of the Tri-City Herald: Scrap the Death Penalty Obviously, murder is a terrible crime and our sympathy and prayers go out to the victims, their families and friends, but there is no justification for the death penalty in our state of Washington. Our prisons are extremely secure, but our justice system regarding the death penalty is not administered equally and fairly. It is also very expensive and should be scrapped! Cal Brown was on death row for 20 years and then he was executed. Gary Ridgeway, the Green River Killer, received life, not the death penalty, after killing more than the 40 or so he was convicted of. The three killers in the Wah Mee massacre in February 1983 did not get the death penalty after murdering 13 people. Most murderers are not given the death penalty. It is too expensive. Counties and the state can’t afford it and it’s not administered equally or fairly. I recommend prosecutors listen to the governor on this issue and forget the death penalty. If they don’t care to listen to the governor, how about God: ‘Thou shalt not kill.’ Seems pretty clear to me. We need to have letters lined up when the issue comes up in the legislature next year, because legislators need to know how their constituents feel. If you are interested in writing one, but don’t know where to start, email our program director, Danielle Fulfs, at [email protected].

3. Write a Letter to your Legislators Let your state legislators know you support an end to the death penalty in Washington. Contacting your legislators, either via phone or in writing, is crucial to achieving repeal. To find your legislator’s contact info, go to: http://app.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/ When you contact your legislator, make sure you underscore how important death penalty repeal is to you and your family. Remember, legislators work for you, so make sure you make your concerns heard! Go to our website to find examples and more tips about writing to your legislators: http://abolishdeathpenalty.org/take-action/contact-yourlegislators/

4. Host an event

Contacting your legislators is not the only thing you can do to get Washington closer to death penalty repeal! In order to build the grassroots momentum towards repeal, we need to make sure that Washingtonians across the state understand why the death penalty needs to be repealed. You can help build this grassroots movement by hosting a house party, happy hour, church discussion group, or similar event. If you are interested in hosting an event, please contact Danielle at [email protected]. We can give you materials, promote your event, and provide a speaker. Let’s make sure people in your community understand why Washington needs to repeal the death penalty!

5. Speak out! A huge number of people in our state don’t even know we have the death penalty. Maybe they haven’t considered it before, or maybe they live in a part of the state that hasn’t seen a death penalty case in decades. Regardless, educating our neighbors and loved ones is so important! So, forward our emails, share our Facebook posts, and encourage others to learn about this flawed system.

5

Cause for Guarded Optimism? A National Perspective

Bob Dylan wrote “The times, they are achanging,” and there appears to be good reason to think that is an appropriate assessment of judicial attitudes towards the death penalty. When the U.S. Supreme Court wound up its 201415 Term in June it issued one unfortunate decision that nevertheless contains the seeds of hope. In Glossip v. Gross, 192 L.Ed.2d 761 (2015), a bare majority of the justices rejected the arguments of three Oklahoma death-row inmates that Oklahoma’s method of execution was cruel and unusual. Largely because abolitionists have succeeded in persuading pharmaceutical companies not to make or supply the drugs that have traditionally been used to execute people, Oklahoma recently began using a drug called midazolam to kill people. The prisoners argued that midazolam doesn’t reliably knock people out, and consequently when the killing drugs are administered the prisoner feels excruciating pain. Five justices rejected the prisoners’ argument that the use of midazolam amounted to cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Perhaps this loss was to be expected, since the Supreme Court has put so many procedural obstacles in the way of a successful challenge to a method of execution. The majority held that the prisoners’ challenge failed because (1) they did not prove that Oklahoma’s use of midazolam created substantial risk of severe pain, and (2) because they failed to identify a known and available alternative method of execution that entailed a lesser risk of pain. Justice Sotomayor, joined by three other justices, disagreed. They had a different view of the evidence, and they concluded that the prisoners had shown that the use of midazolam presented an intolerable risk of severe pain. The dissenters also blasted the majority for ruling that the prisoners bore the burden of proving that a preferable and more humane way of executing them was readily available:

“[U]nder the Court’s new rule, it would not matter whether the State intended to use midazolam, or instead to have the [prisoners] drawn and quartered, slowly tortured to death, or actually burned at the stake: because [the prisoners] failed to prove the availability of sodium thiopental or pentobarbital, the State could execute them using whatever means it designated.” The prisoners did not raise any challenges to the death penalty itself. And yet Justice Breyer wrote a stirring dissent, joined by Justice Ginsburg, which he ended with an express call for the Court to reconsider whether

the death penalty itself was simply unconstitutional: “[R]ather than try to patch up the death penalty’s legal wounds one at a time, I would ask for full briefing on a more basic q3uestion: whether the death penalty violates the Constitution.” Justice Breyer presented all the arguments against the death penalty: (1) lack of reliability in determining guilt and the consequent occasional execution of the innocent; (2) the arbitrariness of who receives the death penalty and who doesn’t; (3) the geographic disparity of the penalty (fewer than 1% of the counties in the entire country accounted for over 50% of the death sentences imposed nationwide); (4) excessive delay in carrying out the penalty; (5) the decline in the number of cases where a death sentence is imposed, making the sentence highly “unusual”; and (6) the growing number of states and countries that have decided to abandon the death penalty. He acknowledged that roughly forty years ago the Supreme Court threw out the mandatory death sentence statutes that existed in most States, and insisted that new and “fairer” death penalty laws be enacted. Noting that the attempts by the state legislatures to fashion “fairer” laws had failed, he concluded that the time for a legislative solution had expired: “The legislatures responded. But in the last four decades, considerable evidence has accumulated that those responses have not worked. Thus we are left with a judicial responsibility. The Eighth Amendment sets forth the relevant law, and we must interpret that law… That exercise of independent judgment is the Court’s duty… I believe it highly likely that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment. At the very least, the Court should call for full briefing on the basic question.” Justice Breyer’s call for reconsideration of abolition underscores the significance of who is picked to serve on the Supreme Court. Although Justice Ginsberg has said he is not considering retiring any time soon, that could always change. For the moment, however, it seems we may be a step or two closer to ending the death penalty. Undoubtedly there are plenty of abolitionist lawyers out there looking for the right case to present to the Court in response to Justice Breyer’s invitation to reconsider “the basic question.” By, Jim Lobsenz, Esq.

6

Four Decades of a Failed Experiment is Enough: A Local Perspective In a recent capital case, Glossip v. Gross, United States Supreme Court Justice Breyer questioned the continued validity of the death penalty. Joined by Justice Ginsberg, Justice Breyer concluded that in light of “almost 40 years of studies, surveys, and experience,” all of which strongly indicate that the experiment to administer the death penalty in a constitutionally permissible manner has failed. Next year, Justice Breyer’s observation will be brought closer to home, when the Washington Supreme Court will hear two death penalty appeals and be asked whether Washington’s death penalty system has produced the same results after nearly four decades. Applying the concerns expressed by Justice Breyer to Washington’s death penalty history, the only conclusion reached is that Washington’s system is worse. Justice Breyer pointed to the unreliability in death sentences. He noted, for instance, that between 1973 and 1995 courts identified prejudicial error in 68% of the capital cases. Washington’s history is more egregious. Since 1981, the year Washington’s current death penalty took effect, there have been thirty-three death sentences imposed. Of these cases, nine are currently on appeal, one suicide while on appeal, and twenty-four have concluded the appellate process - with eighteen resulting in a reversal. Thus, under Washington’s death penalty system, 75% of all death sentences imposed have been reversed due to prejudicial error. These errors are not the result of an isolated situation that with focus and resources can be fixed. Instead, the prejudicial error has seeped throughout the entire death penalty process caused by prosecutorial misconduct, ineffective counsel, judge and jury error, and changes in the law. As such, the errors inherent in death penalty cases will not go away anytime soon. Justice Breyer, referring to the evolving standards of decency, also noted that in more than 60% of the States there is effectively no death penalty and only three States account for 80% of all executions; concluding that “[j]udged in that way [consistency of direction of change] capital punishment has indeed become unusual.” The “consistency of direction of change” in Washington has been constant and swift. From 1981- 1985, fifteen of Washington’s thirty-nine counties never sought the death penalty. Thus, the death penalty was effectively non-existent in roughly 38% of Washington counties. The number of counties with effectively no death penalty has climbed to 95% over the last five years. Presently not a single county is seeking the death penalty. And in the unusual situation when the death penalty is being sought, it is not being imposed. Take the last three death penalty cases for example. All three death penalty cases took place in King County, and none resulted in a sentence of death. A split jury imposed life sentences in State v. McEnroe. A few months later, a jury deliberated for less than an hour and returned a unanimous sentence of life in prison without parole in State v. Monfort. In the third case, after initially seeking the death penalty against McEnroe’s co-defendant, Michele Anderson, Dan Satterberg withdrew it after the jury rejected the death penalty in the other two cases. Finally, Justice Breyer concluded that despite court’s hope and legislative tinkering, it is increasingly clear that the death penalty continues to be imposed arbitrarily. Washington’s death penalty experience demonstrates the same results. A recent study of Washington’s death penalty system by University of Washington Professor Katherine Beckett and Ph.D. candidate, Heather Evans, concluded characteristics other than the case - like county - may dictate whether the death penalty is sought or imposed. The University of Washington report is not alone. In 2007, the Washington State Bar Association reviewed the administration of Washington’ death penalty and reached similar conclusions. This year a study conducted by Seattle University on the costs associated with Washington’s capital punishment also raised questions about its fairness. In 2012, Washington State Supreme Court Justice Wiggins expressed a “deep concern” over the apparent racial bias aspect of Washington’s death penalty. Justice Wiggins noted that in light of the history of Washington’s death penalty, the Washington Supreme Court’s examination of the impact of race has on the administration of Washington’s death penalty is “inescapable”, but noted being judges – and not statisticians – competent experts were needed to thoroughly evaluate the significance. The University of Washington study responded to this invitation and studied the role race plays in Washington’s death penalty system. The report found that racial bias plagues Washington’s death penalty, concluding that “a comparatively large proportion of black defendants were sentenced to death.” In fact, it determined that black defendants are 4.5 times as likely to be sentenced to death than white defendants.

7

At first glace, this map may not inspire optimism. There are still 31 states holding onto the death penalty. But we are seeing more and more states each year that have done away with it. Since 2000, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, New Mexico, and New York have abolished the death penalty. The most recent addition to that list, as of this year, is Nebraska, which became the 19th state without capital punishment. What is so important about this is the fact that Nebraska is a conservative state. When we got this wonderful news this May, the initial reaction was “YES!” followed by “If Nebraska can do it, any state can.” This was GREAT news! As of this writing, there are four states with moratoria on the death penalty: Washington, Oregon, Colorado, and Pennsylvania. Many other states have “holds” on their death penalty systems due to issues ascertaining the drugs needed to carry out an execution or legal challenges to the practice itself. Despite there still being a majority of states with the death penalty, the entire country is moving toward abolition. Many people are realizing that they are concerned about the issue. One voice that is quickly emerging is the conservative one. If you are a conservative who opposes the death penalty, please let us know! Visit http://goo.gl/forms/cKWcCkH9qM

…Continued from Page 7 Perhaps realizing the same concerns expressed by Justice Breyer, a wide coalition has questioned the continued validity of Washington’s death penalty. In 2006, four Washington Supreme Court justices likened Washington’s death penalty to randomly and arbitrarily being struck by lightning. In 2012, three justices found the administration of Washington’s death penalty defied rationality and is akin to flipping a coin. Thus, since 2006, there have been seven justices who have concluded that the administration of Washington’s death penalty failed for similar reasons expressed by Justice Breyer. Expressing similar concerns, editorial boards of the Seattle Times, Everett Herald, Spokesman-Review and Tacoma Tribune, newspapers of Washington’s four largest counties – counties which historically have made up the largest percentage of death penalty cases - have all called for the end of the death penalty in Washington State. Next year the Washington Supreme Court will be asked whether Washington’s death penalty system should continue or conclude, as Justice Breyer observed and history has undoubtedly demonstrated that the experiment to administer the death penalty in a constitutionally permissible manner in Washington has failed.

8

Glen Anderson Stefanie M Anderson Melinda and Walter Andrews Dave and Chari Avolio James Basden Winnie Becker Judith & Arnold Bendich Richard & Elizabeth Blakney Jennifer Bright Peter Byers MD Brenda Collier Jack and Angela Connelly Valerie Costa Don Crevie Alfred and Dorothy Dale Roberta Deboard and Tedd Judd Shulamit Decktor Wendy Dubinsky Nancy Ellingham Judith and Richard Englund Mary Estelle Amy Fields Tucker Fitzgerald Lisa Fuller Robert Gombiner and Ester Greenfield Sarah Grow Rev Sanford Z Hampton Phyllis J. Hatfield Linda Heidenreich Kyle Johnson Mary Lou Johnson Gloria T Jones The Junat Fund Mel Kang Judith Kay Dale Kelley Benita Ki Keri L Knudsen Hans Landig Margaret Lemberg Rachael and Phillip Levine Ref Lindmark James E. Lobsenz Esq Marian Malonson William and Judith Matchett Elaine L. Mathies Shirley G. Mathis

Mary Helene Mele Patricia Michl Lisa Mulligan Marcia Mullins & Robert Dunshee Laura Neuchterlein Glenette Olvera Deborah Pedersen Kathy and Clarence Pugh Bruce Radtke Claudia Roberts Michael Ruby Irene E Scheck Michael Simmons Rosalind Singer Carl H Spitzer Jay Stansell and Dori Cahn Eric and K. Terry Thorsos Dorothy Van Soest Colleen Waterhouse Law Office of David Zuckerman This year we received several anonymous donations, as well as Matching gift donations through the Microsoft Matching Gift Program and the State of Washington’s Matching Gift Program. To figure out how to donate through your workplace, visit your HR department or reach out to WCADP’s Program Director, Danielle, and [email protected]. Thank you to the following organizations for supporting our work: American Friends Service Committee Amnesty International Puget Sound Bellingham Friends Meeting Shalom Church (UCC, Mennonite) University Unitarian Church University Christian Church Network for Good Tides Foundation To make a tax-deductible donation to the Washington Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, visit www.abolishdeathpenalty.org/donate today!

9

Non-Profit Org U.S. Postage Paid Seattle, WA Permit No: 1893

Washington Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty 4759 15th Ave NE #309 Seattle, WA 98105

www.abolishdeathpenalty.org [email protected] 206-622-8952 The Washington Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty (WCADP is a grassroots, volunteer-driven, statewide non-profit dedicated to the abolition of the death penalty.