A study released Tuesday by the National Registry of Exonerations found that black Americans are more likely than white Americans to be wrongfully convicted of murder, sexual assault, and drug crimes.

The study  broke down the exonerations that are listed in the National Registry of Exonerations’ records by demographic. The results were striking: despite the fact that black people make up 13 percent of the population in the U.S., they make up 47 percent of innocent defendants convicted and then exonerated. You can read the full study here, but here are some of the other illuminating findings:

• Innocent black defendants are roughly seven times more likely to be convicted of murder than innocent white defendants. Black defendants are most likely to be wrongfully convicted if they are accused of killing white victims.
• Black prisoners are 3.5 times more likely to have been wrongfully convicted of sexual assault than white prisoners. The study attributes this disparity to issues with witness identification. According to the study: “Assaults on white women by African-American men are a small minority of all sexual assaults in the United States, but they constitute half of sexual assaults with eyewitness misidentifications that led to exoneration.”
• In regards to convictions of drug crimes, the study determined that black people were 12 times more likely to be wrongfully convicted than white people. The study notes that this disparity likely comes from the fact that “police enforce drug laws more vigorously against African Americans than against members of the white majority, despite strong evidence that both groups use drugs at equivalent rates.”

The study also concluded that innocent black people usually spend a longer period of time incarcerated than innocent white people before being exonerated.

This study obviously cannot account for innocent people who have not been exonerated, which is likely a fairly large population. We don’t know definitively what that population looks like. But this study does point to a troubling picture: almost across the board, it’s more likely that black Americans are wrongfully convicted of crimes than White Americans.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Study Finds Black Defendants More Likely to Be Wrongfully Convicted than White Defendants appeared first on Law Street.

Republican Vice Presidential nominee Mike Pence is being criticized for his response to a controversial case in which a man was wrongfully convicted. Now the man is asking to go back to court for another trial since Pence, as Indiana’s Governor, won’t grant him a pardon until he has tried all other judicial options.

Keith Cooper spent almost ten years in prison for armed robbery, a crime he didn’t commit but was wrongfully convicted for in 1996. During the robbery a teenager was shot in the stomach but survived. When another man involved in the case had his conviction overturned because of new evidence that surfaced in 2005, authorities offered Cooper a new trial, which could take at least two years–or the chance to go home to his family but have a felony conviction on his record.

After being locked up for a decade, Cooper chose the latter. He could finally see his wife and three children again. But since it’s been next to impossible to find a decent job as a convicted felon, he later sought a gubernatorial pardon. In the spring of 2014 the parole board in Indiana unanimously urged Pence to grant Cooper a pardon. This would likely have been the first pardon based on actual innocence in Indiana history.

Mike Pence refuses to pardon an innocent and wrongly convicted man, yet GOP runs a willie horton ad attacking Kaine https://t.co/389BIxtBcQ

— geokaren (@geokaren) October 4, 2016

And according to DNA evidence, Cooper is innocent. The victims and original prosecutor believe in Cooper’s innocence as well. But despite that fact, Pence’s office said in a September 20 letter that Cooper must first try all other judicial options. Basically that means Pence doesn’t have to make a decision about granting a pardon before he leaves office in January.

Many of Cooper’s supporters wanted the case to be brought up at the Vice Presidential debate on Tuesday.

Mike Pence should be asked why he has not pardoned Keith Cooper, an innocent man wrongly imprisoned for ten years. #VPDebate #KeithCooper

— Mike Williams (@drummike2012) October 4, 2016

Can’t believe @mike_pence said this during the #VPDebate Actions speak louder than words! #PardonKeithCooper @ElliotSlosar pic.twitter.com/5WHwWC7at4

— Pardon Keith Cooper (@PardonKeith) October 5, 2016

Cooper’s attorney Elliot Slosar said:

The lack of courage displayed by Gov. Pence is shocking. Instead of using his executive power to change the life of an innocent man, Gov. Pence has decided to punt this issue to the next governor of Indiana and inform Mr. Cooper that he needs to head back to the same court where he got wrongfully convicted in the first place.

But Pence’s deputy of staff chief Matthew Lloyd replied:

The governor’s office believes this is a necessary and proper approach that will produce information the governor will need as he considers a pardon for Mr. Cooper.

Pence has only pardoned three people during his three years as governor, while his predecessor Mitch Daniels pardoned 60 people during eight years in office. The Cooper case has gained serious support on social media as well as on an online petition–we’ll have to see if it has any effect on Pence’s numbers.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Innocent Man Seeks New Trial After Governor Mike Pence Declined Pardon appeared first on Law Street.

Brendan Dassey’s conviction was recently overturned. But Dassey, from the documentary series “Making a Murderer,” and his family were told to remain silent ahead of the new season of the show. The producers don’t want to risk information getting out beforehand, but also don’t want to risk Dassey’s release from prison in any way. His family and supporters are afraid he might have to spend several more years behind bars in case the state appeals the verdict and want him to keep a low profile. According to Express Online, his lawyers worry that the state will appeal and keep Dassey in jail during the whole process.

After the show aired, a lot of people became outraged over the seemingly unconstitutional way the case was handled. Many signed different petitions to free Steven Avery and Dassey and started campaigning for their exoneration. According to one of the most active campaigners, Shaun Attwood, the state and the original prosecutor will do everything they can to keep Brendan Dassey behind bars. He said:

This is not only a groundbreaking case in terms of the way it was handled but in the way the justice system is playing out. This is the first time a documentary like this has been able to expose major failings in the justice system.

He added, “The last thing they want is to destroy all of the hard work they’ve done by talking about it publicly.”

The series “Making a Murderer” that depicted the conviction of Dassey and his uncle, Avery, for the rape and murder of Teresa Halbach in October 2005 became incredibly popular last year. Many viewers believed it was clear early on that police officers persuaded Dassey, then only 16, to confess in exchange for prosecutorial leniency. The series showed how they basically put words in Dassey’s mouth during the interrogation and a passive Dassey afterwards asked if he could go back to class, not realizing the gravity of what he had just admitted to.

On Friday, Dassey’s murder conviction was overturned after a U.S. federal court found his interrogation to be unconstitutional. After spending over 10 years in prison he and his family, as well as outside supporters who learned about the case through the TV show, were jubilant.

ICYMI: The conviction of Brendan Dassey, a man who appeared in @MakingAMurderer, has been overturned pic.twitter.com/OwHpFkOXlj

— HLN (@HLNTV) August 15, 2016

But reactions have been mixed. TV anchor Nancy Grace, who originally covered the story, aired her anger and disgust with the verdict in an interview with a lawyer and the original prosecutor in the case. Grace stated that she still believes Dassey is guilty and that his conviction should stand. She also claimed that Dassey’s IQ of 70 is completely normal even though experts have called it “extremely low.”

Teresa Halbach’s former teacher told People that she was shocked to hear about Dassey’s overturned conviction. She said, “Everyone feels for Teresa […] She is the victim here.” She said she doesn’t think a TV show should be able to overturn things and that “they were tried and they were convicted, and end of story.”

At the same time, Steven Avery’s former lawyers Dean Strang and Jerry Buting were very pleased with the outcome. They said in a statement obtained by People:

Brendan’s statements were not only involuntary, they were completely contradicted by the lack of physical evidence. This shows the folly of coercing a statement from a vulnerable target. It also vindicates what we have said for years: that law enforcement in the Teresa Halbach investigation was willing to go to extreme lengths to convict Steven Avery, the only person they seriously considered to be a suspect.

State prosecutors now have 90 days to decide whether to appeal the verdict or release Brendan Dassey. Avery’s case is unchanged for now.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Brendan Dassey from “Making a Murderer” Told To Remain Silent appeared first on Law Street.

Capital punishment has long been a controversial practice in the United States. Some feel that society needs to rid the country of America’s most heinous criminals in order to make room for new prisoners or to save taxpayer money, while others point out that the U.S. has executed more than 150 innocent people and this punishment cannot be undone. But why do people feel so strongly about the death penalty, how have their feelings changed over time, and what does this mean for capital punishment moving forward?

The Death Penalty Today

Demographics of the Death Penalty

In 2013, of the 2,979 inmates on death row, roughly half of them were held in four states: California, Texas, Florida, and Pennsylvania. Divided by race, inmates were 56 percent white and 42 percent black. Along gender lines, men outnumbered women one to 49, with men comprising 98 percent of death-row inmates and women only two percent.

Which states still use the death penalty?

The following states still use capital punishment:

The federal government and military also use capital punishment.

Each state determines which crimes are punishable by death. Crimes other than murder that can end in a death row sentence include rape of a child, weapons of mass destruction resulting in death, aggravated kidnapping, assault by an escaped capital felon, and aircraft hijacking.

The U.S. Federal Government uses the death penalty for 41 capital offenses including murder for hire, treason, terrorism, espionage, genocide, large-scale drug trafficking, and attempting to kill a witness, juror, or court officer in certain cases.

The following states abolished or no longer use capital punishment:

When the death penalty was removed or abolished in some states, lawmakers were faced with the question of what to do with those already on death row. Should those sentenced to death before the new law be allowed to live? In New Mexico and Connecticut, the answer was no. In 2009 when New Mexico eliminated the penalty, the law was not retroactive, which meant the two people on the state’s death row would still face execution. As of 2015, those two are still on death row. Also those who committed crimes worthy of the death penalty before 2009 could still face execution. The same ruling occurred in Connecticut, which had 11 people still on the state’s death row.

Arguments For and Against the Death Penalty

According to a 2014 Gallup poll, the most common justification for the death penalty is that the punishment fits the crime: an eye for an eye. This reasoning has dramatically decreased in the last 13 years, with 48 percent support in 2001, to 35 percent in 2014. Other reasons include a belief that the convicted person deserves it, that the death penalty can be used to set an example, and that it saves taxpayer money.

According to the same poll, the most popular reasons why people do not support capital punishment include a belief that it’s wrong to take a life at (40 percent), the fear of wrongful execution (17 percent), and religious purposes (17 percent). The fact that it costs more to keep prisoners on death row is very far down the list, polling at only two percent.

These are the various ways in which Americans perceive the death penalty, but are they correct?

The Cost of the Death Penalty

Despite 14 percent of Americans supporting the death penalty in order to save taxpayer dollars, it is actually more expensive to kill an inmate than to incarcerate him for the rest of his life. This revelation complicates the argument over whether or not it makes sense to employ the punishment.

A Los Angeles Times study found that the state of California spent more than $250 million per execution. California has executed 11 people over the course of 27 years and spends an average of $114 million per year on death row inmates. The state spends an additional $114 million per year on security and legal representation. The study also found that housing a death row inmate costs $90,000 more than non-death row inmates. Since reinstating the death penalty in 1978, California has spent more than $4 billion on executions. The reason why death row inmates are so costly is due to the complex and drawn out judicial process. Appeals cost the state and federal government time and money, and the concrete evidence needed, such as DNA testing, is costly. 

Other states have also found that the cost of the death penalty is higher than life sentence cases as well. A Seattle University study that examined death penalty cases in Washington state since 1997 concluded that on average capital punishment cases cost $1 million more than cases that did not seek the death penalty, with costs of $3.07 million and $2.01 million, respectively. Defense and prosecution costs were more than triple in death penalty cases. Since Washington reinstated the death penalty in 1981, the state has spent $120 million on five executions with an average of $24 million per execution.

In Nevada the cost of a capital punishment case is between $1.03 million and $1.3 million while a non-capital punishment case costs about $775,000. The reason for this difference is because death penalty cases are more lengthy and costly to make certain that the sentence is correct.

The average time a convict sits on death row has been increasing since the 1980s. In 1984 the average time between sentencing and execution was 74 months, or a little over six years. In 2012 it was 190 months, or nearly 16 years. That means the average inmate executed in 2015 was convicted in 1999.

In order to prove a fair sentence for execution all doubts must be erased. That is why death row inmates are given due process and appeals after their original sentences.

Concerns Over Wrongful Executions

Even today death row inmates are exonerated due to new evidence and doubts. As of May 2015 there have been 152 people exonerated from death row in United States history, leading to the concern that the justice system is far from infallible.

For example, in 2015 accused murderer Anthony Ray Hilton was freed after 30 years on death row in Alabama. His case made it to the Supreme Court and his defense attorney during his 1985 trial was found “constitutionally deficient” and ballistic evidence proved that he was not the murderer. The case was dropped by the Jefferson County district attorney’s office on April 1, 2015 and two days later his conviction was overturned. Because of his wrongful incarceration, Hilton missed the birth of his grandchild and the death of his mother.

So, is public opinion on the death penalty changing?

Since the 1930s, statistics show that a majority of the U.S. population supports the death penalty. The public’s opinion has fluctuated slowly over time with approval increasing from 47 percent in 1967 to 80 percent in 1995 and decreasing to 63 percent in 2014.

One thing is clear: Americans are losing confidence in the death penalty. According to Gallup, since the late 1990s, support for the death penalty for a convicted killer has fall by 17 percent and opposition has increased by 17 percent.

Conclusion

Capital punishment is legally complicated in many states. Some have the death penalty but do not use it. Others have abolished it but can still sentence people to death. Americans have a lot of things to take into account when deciding what side of the debate they fall into–whether its ethics, costs, or the time it takes to enact capital punishment. The more than 150 confirmed wrongful executions in the United States show that trials and law are not infallible. While approval of the death penalty continues to decrease every year, it’s doubtful that the U.S. will be making a big change any time soon.

Resources

Primary

Bureau of Justice Statistics: Prisoners in 2013

U.S. Department of Justice: Capital Punishment

Additional

Gallup: Death Penalty

Death Penalty: The High Cost of the Death Penalty

Death Penalty: Cost of the Death Penalty

Guardian: Alabama Man Off Death Row After 28 Years

Death Penalty Info: States With and Without the Death Penalty

Mike Stankiewicz

Mike Stankiewicz came to Washington to follow his dream of becoming a journalist. The native New Yorker studied Broadcast Journalism and Law and Society at American University. In his leisure time he enjoys baseball, hiking, and classic American literature. Contact Mike at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Capital Punishment: Is American Opinion Changing? appeared first on Law Street.

A record 125 convicts were absolved of wrongdoing in 2014, according to a project conducted by the University of Michigan Law School to create exoneration statistics in the United States. This project was recently published in an annual report released by the National Registry of Exonerations, which releases statistics of this nature each year. This is the first time since the registry began tracking exonerations in 1989 that they have reported over 100 in one year.

According to the registry, the states with the most exonerations last year were Texas, New York, and Illinois. Thirty-three of Texas’ exonerations involved drug cases in Harris County, and used crime lab analysis conducted by a Conviction Integrity Unit. The tests showed that in many of those cases the “drugs” that the defendants were accused of possessing actually contained no illegal substances, despite the fact that the defendants had pled guilty to the offenses. These cases not only contributed to the record number of cases where the defendant pled guilty and was exonerated, but also contributed to the increase in the number of exonerations for drug crimes. There were 39 exonerations for drug cases in 2014, which is significantly higher than the 11 from the year before.

What’s the cause of this sudden increase in exonerations? According to Samual Gross, a Michigan Law professor and editor of the National Registry of Exonerations, there has been a steady change in the attitudes of prosecutors about wrongful convictions. He said:

I think prosecutors are much more willing to see identifying errors as a positive part of their job, rather than as a misfortune they have to endure.

Lake County State’s Attorney Michael Nerheim, who works in northern Chicago, started an independent panel made up of retired judges, defense, and civil rights attorneys to review cases. He believes that prosecutors should be leading the way to reduce the number of wrongful convictions. He said: “We’re all on the same side – no prosecutor wants to wrongfully convict somebody. We all want the truth.”

It’s no longer about just winning cases or solving them as quickly as possible. It’s about using all available resources to find out the truth. Of course, one of these resources is DNA testing. With increased technology, DNA testing can be used to show that the DNA of someone who was convicted does not match the DNA found at the crime scene.

More interestingly, many more of these exonerations are a result of finding evidence of perjury or coercion. For example, Ohio native Ricky Jackson spent 39 years in prison for murder, but was freed last November after a witness admitted that he hadn’t seen the crime. In another case, a Chicago judge dismissed charges against Alstory Simon, who had confessed, after 15 years in prison for double murder.

According to Gross, it’s likely that the number of exonerations could grow in 2015, with new districts following in the footsteps of Harris County and opening up their own Conviction Integrity Units. Despite the growing number of these units, exonerations are still extremely difficult to obtain. He said that “If we didn’t get it right the first time, it’s hard to be right the second time.” Even so, hopefully the new focus on past mistakes could help to prevent future errors.

Brittany Alzfan

Brittany Alzfan is a student at the George Washington University majoring in Criminal Justice. She was a member of Law Street’s founding Law School Rankings team during the summer of 2014. Contact Brittany at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post University of Michigan Law School Project Tracks Exonerations appeared first on Law Street.