Wichita Jury Found Burnett Guilty of Capital Murder On May 23, 2008, a jury in Wichita brought in a verdict of guilty in the case of Ted Burnett. He was convicted of aggravated kidnapping and capital murder in the killing of 14-year-old Chelsea Brooks. Following the jury's decision, prosecutor Kevin O'Connor made a formal motion seeking a death sentence for Burnett.  The trial's penalty phase began on Tuesday, May 27. During that phase, the state is required to give reasons a crime rises to a capital offense. Aggravators which allow the state to ask for the death penalty include multiple murders or killing in a particularly cruel manner. The defense offers evidence that that life in prison, without parole, would be a more appropriate sentence.
	U.S. Supreme Court Okays Execution by Lethal Injection On April 16, the Court announced its decision that Kentucky's three-drug method of execution by lethal injection does not violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. In a 7-2 decision, the Court ruled in Baze v. Rees that lethal injection poses no risk of unnecessary pain and suffering. The majority opinion, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, cited a principle from an 1890 ruling that defines cruelty as limited to punishments that "involve torture or a lingering death." At the same time that the Baze decision was being announced, the Court was hearing arguments on another death penalty case, Kennedy v. Louisiana, which challenges that state's new law expanding the death penalty to crimes other than murder.
	U.S. Supreme Court Hears Case regarding Method of Execution On Monday January 7, the Supreme Court of the United States is hearing oral arguments about the constitutionality of executing people by lethal injection. Petitioners argue that the method constitutes cruel and unusual punishment because it may cause extreme pain and suffering. Most executions in the United States are currently on hold, pending the Court's decision, since lethal injection is the method employed by 35 of the 36 states that impose capital punishment. (Nebraska still relies on electrocution.) In a legal brief submitted to the Court, U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement said that "some risk of pain is inherent in any method of capital punishment." The Court previously has declared that the Eighth Amendment prohibits "unnecessary and wanton" infliction of pain.  The standard lethal injection involves three shots of different chemicals. One drug paralyzes the inmate, a second is an anesthetic now rarely used in hospitals, and a third stops the heart. Inmates' attorneys say that administered improperly, the drug combination can become tantamount to torture, paralyzing the subject and possibly subjecting him to searing pain or conscious suffocation. In December 2006, it took 34 minutes for a convicted murderer to die in Florida because of botched procedures. A state investigation concluded that it was impossible to know whether he was in pain, even though 12-inch chemical burns were found on both of his arms. In 1992, an inmate in Arkansas was heard moaning in apparent pain while a five-man execution team tried for 50 minutes to find a vein. This three-drug cocktail is the method prescribed for executions in Kansas, though it has not yet been used here. One possible reason for problems is lack of training of those administering the drugs. For ethical reasons, medical personnel do not perform the executions.
	New Jersey Ends Capital Punishment The New Jersey legislature passed legislation ending that state's use of the death penalty and the governor has signed it into law. Here is the Coordinator's statement: The governor and legislature in New Jersey indeed showed courage in abolishing the death penalty. They went beyond the rhetoric and grappled with the question of what truly serves public safety. Kansas needs to revisit its death penalty. A legislative post audit has noted it can cost up to 70 percent more than decades-long incarceration. Kansas has had jury misconduct, prosecutorial misconduct, and evidence withheld in death penalty cases tried so far. An error by a trial judge caused a capital murder conviction to be overturned. And the risk of getting a death sentence depends on where one is charged in Kansas. We have been throwing our resources into a broken system for over 13 years. In 1982, New Jersey state Sen. Raymond Lesniak voted to reinstate the death penalty. He now calls it a "false and ineffective choice for taxpayers and residents who have lost loved ones." Kansas' death penalty is a 'false and ineffective choice" like in New Jersey. It's fatally flawed and should be abolished.
	Jury Recommends Death for Scott Cheever The jury in the trial of Scott Cheever, convicted on Tuesday, October 30, of capital murder in the 2005 shooting death of Greenwood County Sheriff Matt Samuels, on November 1 made a recommendation of death. After hearing evidence in the penalty phase, the jury in deliberated for only two hours before making their recommendation. Aggravating circumstances which led to their decision include a previous assault conviction and the finding that he killed the sheriff to avoid arrest. A judge must now affirm the verdict; sentencing is set for January 23, 2008.
	Appearance in Wichita by Helen Prejean October 24 FDuring her visit to Wichita, Sister Helen Prejean made  a presentation to staff & students at Wichita State University and then met with KsCADP Board members and staff from WSU over lunch.  She then had an extended conversation with the cast of Dead Man Walking, the play based on her book about her experiences with a man on death row. Later in the day, she attended a reception with the College Fine Arts Advisory Board.  Between 250 and 300 people attended her lecture in the evening.  The excerpts of Dead Man Walking by the 2 actors playing Matthew Poncelot and Sr. Helen were quite impressive.
	Date Set for Arguments in Scott Case The Kansas Supreme Court will hear arguments in the Gavin Scott case on Tuesday, September 4. The case has been designated 30 minutes at 1:30 p.m. There are two other cases scheduled ahead of Scott, one for 15 minutes and one for 20 minutes. Rebecca E. Woodman, capital appellate defender, will appear on Scott's behalf.
	Sister Helen Prejean Will be in Kansas in October 2007 Mark your calendars now for the date when  Sister Helen Prejean, well-known speaker, author, and death penalty activist, will speak in Wichita, Kansas, on October 24, 2007, at the invitation of the Kansas Coalition Against the Death Penalty.  Prejean is the author of Dead Man Walking, which was made into a film starring Susan Sarandon and Sean Penn, and other books about the death penalty. She has been personally involved with a number of individuals on death row and is familiar with the emotions death penalty cases arouse in families of both victims and those convicted of capital crimes. Further details about her appearance will be announced later.
	National Weekend of Faith in Action on the Death Penalty National Weekend of Faith in Action on the Death Penalty,Oct 19-21, 2007, is a great opportunity for members of faith communities to engage in dialogue and education about capital punishment. For information about this event, see the web site http://www.amnestyusa.org/faithinaction
	New Poll: What Kansans Think about the Death Penalty A poll conducted in January 2007  for the Coalition reveals that while Kansans often say they support the death penalty, they have concerns about its fairness and a large majority wish for a better way to stop murderers. Fifty-seven percent agreed that "the death penalty is too arbitrary because some people are executed while others serve prison terms for the same crimes." Seventy percent agreed with the statement "I wish we had a better way than the death penalty of stopping murderers."  When given specific options, respondents selected long prison sentences (50 years) over the death penalty. The option that included life without parole coupled with an element of restitution (work in prison industries to compensate victims' families) registered an even higher percentage than the long sentence by itself--65% for this combination versus 51% for the 50-year minimum).  Given multiple options to choose from, almost six in ten (59%) chose something other than the death penalty. These questions were also asked in a 1994 poll; comparing the two polls shows decreased support for capital punishment among Kansans. The 2007 poll was conducted by Jayhawk Consulting Services, Inc. Five hundred Kansans who had voted in at least two of the past three general elections were polled by phone on January 20-21. The poll has a margin of error of approximately plus or minus four percent.
	Abolition Bills Introduced in 2007 Legislature On January 30th, SB 222 was introduced by Senator Haley. It provides for the abolition of the death penalty.  It has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.  No hearing date has been announced. A bill to abolish the death penalty, HB 2510,  was introduced in the House on February 13 . It has been assigned to the Committee on Federal and State Affairs.
	Event Celebrates 100th Anniversary of Abolition January 30, 2007 Kansas celebrated the 100th anniversary of the abolition of the death penalty.  On that day in 1907, Governor Hoch signed legislation which ended the death penalty.  That abolition period lasted until 1935 when Governor Landon signed legislation to reinstate.   To honor that occasion, KsCADP brought Ray Krone to Kansas to speak. Ray was the 100th person released from death row in the US since the 1970's because of innocence.  His story is powerful.     He was sentenced to death in Arizona for the stabbing death of a bar maid, Kim Ancona.   He spent over 3 years on death row.  Following a retrial ordered by the Arizona Supreme Court, he was again found guilty despite the fact that no fingerprint, footprint, or DNA evidence linked him to the crime.  That time he got 46 years in prison.  When Arizona passed a law allowing for DNA testing, his attorneys were able to get testing done on a clothing bloodspot not previously tested. The bloodspot did not match Ray or the victim, but it did match a man doing time for another sex offense.  Even when this info was presented to the State, they still refused to release him. It was only when a newspaper printed a front page story on his case that the State agreed to free him.  His total period in prison for a crime he did not commit was 10 years, 3 months, 8 days.  Since he was exonerated, another 23 persons have been freed from death row due to wrongful conviction.

Kurtis at Annual Meeting November 9, 2006 KsCADP's annual meeting was held November 9 at 7:00 p.m. at the Hughs Metropolitan Complex at Wichita State University.  In addition to annual meeting business, including election of officers and approval of the budget for the next year, there was a program featuring speaker Bill Kurtis. The program was sponsored by Wichita State University, Fairmount College of Liberal Arts & Sciences, the School of Community Affairs, and the Kansas Coalition Against the Death Penalty.  Bill Kurtis is a native Kansan, lawyer, and journalist. His production company produces A&E's award-winning Investigative Reports and Cold Case Files. Mr. Kurtis anchors A&E's American Justice. A previous supporter of the death penalty, Mr. Kurtis now opposes it. He wrote the book The Death Penalty on Trial: Crisis in American Justice. The book highlights how seemingly simple little mistakes in a death case can send innocent people to death row.

	Murder Victim's Mother Says Death Penalty Isn't the Answer In a letter to the editor published in the July 18, 2006, issue of the Newton Kansan, Wilma Loganbill of Hesston told of her feelings on the death of her son and punishment for his killer. "Murder leaves a multitude of emotions and pain is the worst. A pain so deep, high and wide, no words are big enough to describe it. You can't get around or through it. And then there is the anger, anger at everything, wanting revenge, the knowledge everything is beyond your control and a feeling of total helplessness. How do I know this? My son was murdered in 1982. I wanted to hurt the person who murdered my son like he had hurt me, I wanted to poke his eyes out, among other things, but I never wanted him dead. I wanted him to wake up every day knowing he was in prison because of decisions he had made. I resented my taxes paying for his room and board. Strange as it seems, I learned it is cheaper to keep someone in prison for life than it is to put them to death. The cost of the legal procedures including the last-minute appeals to prevent capital punishment far exceeds paying for their room and board. However, there is a cost greater than money for family members and friends of the victim. And that is waiting for the legal procedures to be finished. It is hard to work at healing so long as there are court dates to cope with. Each date is like pouring salt in a wound. Once more you are forced to listen to all the legal words. Once more things you started to resolve are torn apart. I have heard victims express disappointment after the offender was put to death. They expected to feel better, but they didn't. I am grateful there was not a death penalty when my son was killed. I didn't have to deal with ongoing court appearances. I could put the offender out of my mind, start to work at healing, and go on with my life without more legal interruptions. It's very hard to do, but it can be done."
	No Death Penalty for Deputy's Killer A man convicted of killing a Harvey County sheriff's deputy last year will not receive the death penalty after jurors were unable to reach a unanimous verdict regarding his sentence. Greg Moore was found guilty on June 28, 2006, of capital murder and four counts of attempted capital murder, kidnapping, and illegal possession of a firearm in the killing of Harvey County deputy Kurt Ford and the wounding of a Hesston officer. (Venue was changed to Sedgwick County for this trial, though the crime occurred in Harvey County; Harvey County Attorney David Yoder prosecuted the case.) The sentencing hearing began the same day. On July 5, the jury came back after two hours of deliberation and announced they could not agree on whether Moore should be sentenced to death or life in prison. This marks the first time that a Sedgwick County jury has not recommended death when prosecutors sought it. Their lack of agreement means Moore cannot receive the death penalty.  Moore has since been sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for the shooting of Kurt Ford. He was also sentenced to more than 51 years in prison for attempted capital murder, almost 13 years on each of three other attempted capital murder charges, almost 13 years for aggravated kidnapping, and nine months for firearms possession.
	US Supreme Court Issues Ruling in Marsh Case: Kansas Death Penalty is Constitutional In a narrow, 5-4 decision made public on Monday, June 26, 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Kansas' death penalty law is constitutional. The ruling resulted from the case of Kansas v. Marsh. The opinion, written by Justice Thomas, says that Kansas' statute satisfies the constitutional mandates "because it rationally narrows the class of death-eligible defendants and permits a jury to consider any mitigating evidence relevant to its sentencing determination." His opinion was supported by Justices Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, and Alito. Just Stevens issued a dissenting opinion, in which he argued that the Court should not have granted the writ accepting the case. "The State of Kansas petitioned us to review a ruling of its own Supreme Court on the ground that the Kansas court had granted more protection to a Kansas litigant than the Federal Constitution required. A policy of judicial restraint would allow the highest court of the State to be the final decisionmaker in a case of this kind." Justice Souter also filed a dissenting opinion, with Justices Stevens, Ginsburg, and Breyer signing on. Referring to the law's requirement that when a jury finds aggravating and mitigating factors are equal it must bring a sentence of death, Souter said "A law that requires execution when the case for aggravation has failed to convince the sentencing jury is morally absurd, and the Court's holding that the Constitution tolerates this moral irrationality defies decades of precedent aimed at eliminating freakish capital sentencing in the United States." He referred to the many cases where people have been released from death row based on evidence of innocence, and stated "In the face of evidence of the hazards of capital prosecution, maintaining a sentencing system mandating death when the sentencer finds the evidence pro and con to be in equipoise is obtuse by any moral or social measure, and unless application of the Eighth Amendment no longer calls for reasoned moral judgment in substance as well as in form, the Kansas law is unconstitutional." To read the opinions, go to the Supreme Court's web site, www.supremecourtus.gov, click on "Recent Opinions" and scroll down to Marsh. Despite the Court's ruling, Michael Marsh will still get a new trial. In addition to striking down the death penalty statute, the Kansas Supreme Court had granted Marsh a new trial on the grounds that the trial judge erroneously excluded some evidence.
	Coalition's Response to the Supreme Court Ruling in Marsh The Coalition issued the following statement on June 26, 2006:  Although we are disappointed with today's decision, it is important to point out what the U.S. Supreme Court did not say. The court did not rule that the death penalty is good. It did not say that the death penalty is fair. It did not find that the death penalty saves tax dollars. It did not state that the death penalty deters others from killing. This death penalty case involved a highly technical issue. In their decision, the Supreme Court dealt with that single technical issue and avoided all substantive discussion of the death penalty. The comprehensive truth of Kansas' death penalty is this: It is mistake-prone and biased. It has cost Kansas taxpayers untold millions of dollars and we have had no executions. It subjects victim families to seemingly endless trips back to court. The eleven plus year experiment is a failure. We all want crime policies that are smart and that work to keep our communities and our families safer. The death penalty does neither. If anything it allows us to avoid discussing and debating what really works.
	League of Women Voters Supports Abolition of the Death Penalty The League of Women Voters of the United States has adopted an official national policy calling for abolition of the death penalty. During the organization's national convention in early June, 2006, delegates adopted a new policy stating, "The League of Women Voters of the United States supports the abolition of the death penalty." The League of Women Voters of Kansas has had a position in opposition to the death penalty for many years and supported adopting abolition as a national position.
	Reissue of Dead Man Walking Album and DVD of the Dead Man Walking Concert: A letter from Sr. Helen Prejean Dear Friends: We have an exciting opportunity to take advantage of and I want to invite your participation. The audio soundtrack to the film Dead Man Walking, featuring artists  Steve Earle, Tom Waits, Bruce Springsteen, Eddie Vedder, Mary Chapin Carpenter, Suzanne Vega, and others, is about to be reissued by Sony BMG. This CD will be packaged together with a feature-length documentary film on DVD of the "Not In Our Name Dead Man Walking The Concert" held at the Shring Auditorium in Los Angeles in March 1998. This DVD has never before been made available to the public and features extraordinary live performances by Lyle Lovett, Steve Earle, Ani DiFranco, Eddie Vedder, Jeff Ament, Rahat Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, Dildar Hussain, and David Robbins, along with speeches by myself and Tim Robbins. This CD/DVD is currently scheduled to hit stores on June 13. I am pleased to announce that Murder Victims Families for Reconciliation (MVFR) and Murder Victims Families for Human Rights (MVFHR) will each realize royalties from the sale of this package, which is expected to retail at about $30.00. The royalties of the first release of the CD generated well over $100,000 for MVFR, so there is a great deal of excitement and potential. There is also an opportunity for other groups in the movement to benefit by helping to generate sales through their web sites. I am very pleased to see the music industry assist our movement in this way, and I urge your participation. Yours in the struggle for abolition, Sr. Helen Prejean, CSJ
	Annual Tree of Healing Observance held April 23, 2006 April 23, 2006, marked the 12th anniversary of the death penalty’s re-enactment in Kansas. Between 35 and 40 abolitionists attended the annual Tree of Healing observance to re-dedicate themselves to the cause of opposing the death penalty. The tree was planted the day the death penalty law was enacted following the end of a 10-day fast that was implemented to help persuade then Governor Finney to veto the proposal. On April 23, 1994 when the bill became law without her signature, activists broke the fast and planted the tree of Healing, which is now approximately 40 feet high.
	Marsh reargued on April 25, 2006 The U.S. Supreme Court decided to rehear arguments before ruling on the constitutionality of the Kansas death penalty law. The original hearing was held when now-retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was still on the bench. The decision apparently indicates that the other eight justices are evenly split, so that a new hearing is required with Justice Alito present. An indication the court was deadlocked was that it ordered the same arguments presented and didn't request additional briefs. At the hearing on April 25, the justices posed sharp questions and argued among themselves. A ruling is expected before the Court adjourns for the summer recess. In a recent statement, KsCADP said "We appreciate the Justices struggling with the issue at the heart of this case. It is a serious matter in a death penalty case when the factors for life are equal to the factors calling for death." KsCADP issued the following statement on April 25: The case being argued before the United States Supreme Court raises a significant issue. We also believe it is important for Kansans to remember that the dilemma at the heart of this case is just one of several critical problems with our state's death penalty.   First, there is documented disparity in the application of our state's death penalty between various counties. Second, Kansas capital punishment cases have shown a repeated pattern of errors.  Third, Post Audit has indicated that the cost of a death penalty can be up to 70 percent more than decades of incarceration.   The reality is: the issue before the United States Supreme Court is only the tip of the iceberg of our state's death penalty flaws.
	Statement issued by KsCADP on December 7, 2005, re: Marsh case The issue in the Marsh case is a fundamental one. What will Kansas do when the scales of justice balance equal in death penalty cases? Will it favor life, as the 2004 State Supreme Court did? Or, will it seek death in a capricious use of state power? We find it appalling that this is even a question in a state that has seen prosecutorial misconduct, jury misconduct and judicial error already in our few cases.  "I believe that the U.S. Supreme Court may well dismiss this appeal, since the State failed to raise its objections to the Kleypas decision when it argued Marsh before the Kansas Supreme Court. In any event, I am confident that the Court will not conclude that it is permissible to execute someone when there is as much evidence arguing he should live as there is put him to death. Nor should we as a society want that to be the law," stated veteran attorney Richard Ney of Wichita.  Kansans believe in fairness and justice. The Kansas Coalition Against the Death Penalty believes that the US Supreme Court should uphold the 2004 Marsh decision, demonstrating respect for these principles.
	Kurtis at KsCADP Annual Meeting "The death penalty should be off the table," says Kurtis. As a law student at Washburn in the 1960's, Bill Kurtis supported the death penalty. He "believed in the system" and thought that it would be infallible when death was a possible punishment. On November 11, 2006, he told a crowd of 250 people at his alma mater that he now believes differently. "Because of too many mistakes, the death penalty should be off the table." Native Kansan Bill Kurtis was the keynote speaker at the Kansas Coalition Against the Death Penalty Annual Meeting on Friday, November 11, 2005, at 7:30 p.m. at Washburn University in Topeka. The title of his presentation was  "What I have Learned about the Death Penalty." Bill Kurtis told of watching as Illinois Governor Ryan began to grapple with the number of wrongfully convicted men on that state's death row. Kurtis, then still a death penalty supporter, began his own investigation of the system of capital punishment. Using his skills as a journalist and attorney, he sought to find out how mistakes were made in death penalty cases and missed by subsequent judges and attorneys. This study led to his book The Death Penalty on Trial: Crisis in American Justice. His investigation uncovered a variety of errors that put innocent people on death row. These critical mistakes included attorneys who clearly were not competent to do death penalty cases, exculpatory evidence withheld from the jury that could have cleared the defendant, mistakes by forensic experts, the use of snitch testimony. He talked about the pressure for conviction and how that sometimes influenced decisions by prosecutors. Kurtis related the story of how a seemingly small mistake by an inexperienced forensic expert in the Krone case became a key factor in Ray Krone's wrongful conviction in Arizona. Lest his listeners be complacent, Kurtis reminded his audience that Kansas's system is not immune from making mistakes. Having seen the fallibility of the system in its actual application, Kurtis is now a death penalty opponent. Near the end of his remarks, he recalled the eventual change of heart of another distinguished American, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun. Justice Blackmun had ruled on many capital punishment cases and upheld the death penalty many times. Kurtis recalled how, late in his life, Justice Blackmun changed his mind. Justice Blackmun acknowledged the cumulative weight of the evidence and concluded he was "obligated simply to concede that the death penalty experiment has failed."

U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Kansas Case

	Kansas Supreme Court Refuses to Reconsider The Kansas Supreme Court has declined to consider its ruling that the capital punishment law is unconstitutional. Attorney General Kline will now seek review by the U.S. Supreme Court. If the U.S. Court declines to hear the case, or they uphold the Kansas Supreme Court, then all current death sentences would be vacated as the law was deemed invalid at the time of their crime/trial. The only way those who have been under sentence of death in Kansas could remain so is if the U.S. Supreme Court rules that the Kansas Court made a mistake in ruling the law unconstitutional. If the legislature rewrites the statute, the "fix" would have no effect on Kleypas, Marsh, the Carr Brothers, Robinson, or Belt. A fix could only be prospective, that is dealing with future cases that occur after the effective date of the new law. The doctrine of ex post facto means you can't retroactively apply the amended law to past cases that were tried under the law with the unconstitutional section.
	Death Penalty Debated in Kansas Senate During the week of February 21--25,2005, the Kansas Senate debated the death penalty for the first time since 1994. They considered three pieces of legislation: SB 6, abolition of the death penalty; SB 238, a "fix" of the language ruled unconstitutional by the State Supreme Court in the Marsh case; and SR 1820, a resolution calling upon the United States Supreme Court to grant review of the Marsh appeal being filed by Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline. After a series of procedural votes, the end result was that SB 6 and 28 were sent back to the Judiciary Committee, and SR 1820 was passed. A number of Senators simply did not want to make any decision on the death penalty until the appeal to the US Supreme Court has been completed. Initial briefing is under way in that appeal. If the Court does not take up the case, we may find that out near the end of the US Supreme Court's current term in June. If they take up the case, arguments would be heard and a decision rendered in their next term, October 2005--June 2006. We are grateful that the Senate did actually debate the repeal bill. When it was last discussed in 1994, the death penalty was a concept. Now it is a public policy with an actual track record that should be reviewed as decisions are made about its retention or abolition. We thank Senator Haley for introducing the abolition bill, and Senator Vratil for the thoughtful overview of the bill as he explained it to the full Senate. We encourage you to thank your own Senator as well as Senators Haley and Vratil for helping the Kansas Senate take up this vital public policy issue. How to reach Senators:     e-mail: http://www.kslegislature.org/legsrv-senate/searchSenate.do     mail: State Capitol, Topeka, KS 66612     phone: 1-785-296-0111 At the end of the week, the House "fix" bill, HB 2061, remained in the House Corrections and Juvenile Justice Committee without any action since hearings earlier this month.
	Court Stays Ruling -- Death Penalty Remains in Effect The Kansas Supreme Court agreed on December 20 to stay its ruling that the state's death penalty law is unconstitutional. This means the law will remain in effect, and six men will remain under sentence of death, while Attorney General Phill Kline pursues an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The ruling initially invalidated the death sentences for six convicted murderers; the seventh capital murder defendant, Gary Kleypas, had his sentence overturned in 2001 and is still awaiting resentencing. Of the remaining six, one (Elms) has reached an agreement with prosecutors to accept a lesser sentence, and one (Marsh) has had his conviction overturned and a new trial ordered. If the U.S. Supreme Court declines to review the case, or agrees with the decision of the Kansas Court, the ruling that the Kansas law is unconstitutional will stand. Regardless of the federal court's action, legislators will probably attempt to rewrite the capital punishment law during the next session to fix the flaw identified by the Court.

Kansas Statute Ruled Unconstitutional On December 19, the Kansas Supreme Court published its ruling in the Marsh case, saying that Michael Marsh should receive a new trial. The Court also ruled that the Kansas death penalty law is "unconstitutional on its face" because it states that if the jury finds during the sentencing phase of the trial that mitigating and aggravating factors are equal, a verdict of death should be rendered; this is contrary to rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court that such a law violates the 8th and 14th amendments of the U.S. Constitution. The December 19 ruling invalidates the sentences of the other men on death row--Gavin Scott, Reginald Carr, Jonathan Carr, and John Robinson.  The Court had previously ruled that Gary Kleypas should have a new sentencing trial. In that ruling, the justices found the same section to be unconstitutional, but salvaged the law by claiming to interpret legislative intent (saying they believed the Legislature intended to pass a constitutional law). That Court gave guidance on how to deal with this section so that the weighting problem was resolved. In the Marsh ruling, however, the Court said the Kleypas Court erred in their decision because it violated the separation of powers when the justices rewrote the section of the law in their attempt to salvage it. The Kansas Coalition Against the Death Penalty issued the following statement: The Kansas Coalition Against the Death Penalty applauds the ruling by the State Supreme Court today that the current death penalty statute is unconstitutional. It is reported that some in the legislature are talking of "fixing" the language of the statute. That would be a serious public policy mistake. Kansas has had the death penalty for ten years. It has been shown to have significant problems: disparity in application, extremely high cost, prosecutorial misconduct, and juror misconduct, to name a few. Any other public policy or business program that was fraught with such problems would have been ended a long time ago. At the time of the Kleypas decision, KsCADP cited four reasons why Kansas needed to end the death penalty. Those reasons remain every bit as valid today: 1.    Sufficient alternatives exist to protect public safety. 2.    There is a growing body of fiscal evidence that the death penalty is a huge drain on state resources. Any resources wasted in death penalty cases are not available for crime prevention or other life-enhancing programs. Legislative Post Audit and Judicial Council have documented Kansas' own high cost for death penalty cases. 3.    There is a growing understanding in many of the major faith traditions that the death penalty is not an appropriate response to crime. 4.    Executions continue the cycle of violence and foster revenge and retaliation. We have a choice whether we continue to kill as the murderer has done or witness to a higher standard of behavior. As people of good will who value life, let us not create another grieving family. The people of Kansas can be safe without a death penalty. It would be a colossal mistake for the Legislature to "fix" this massively broken public policy. It would be like fixing one problem on a twenty-five-year-old car and having four other major problems not even addressed. Kansans would be harmed if such a "fix" were done.

Elms's Death Sentence Cut to Hard 40 On November 20, 2004, Stanley Elms, convicted of the 1998 rape and murder of Regina Gray, was re-sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole for 40 years. Elms was originally sentenced to die and spent the intervening years on death row, but his sentenced was affected by the Kansas Supreme Court's ruling in the Kleypas case which would have called for a re-sentencing trial if his conviction were upheld. The new sentence resulted from an agreement with the Sedgwick County District Attorney's office to drop the death penalty if Elms would not pursue an appeal accusing prosecutors of misconduct during the case. Prosecutor Kim Parker said her office agreed to the new sentence knowing that the earlier case [Kleypas] still hadn't been decided and that appeals could take many more years. "The agreement is about finality, and finality only," she said, denying media suggestions that her office wanted to hide prosecutorial misconduct.

	Progress of Current Legislation regarding Cognitive Disability Senate Bill 355, the Cognitive Disability Bill, was voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on February 17, 2004. It now will be placed on the calendar for action by the full Senate. The Senate must act on this bill by February 28 in order to meet a legislative deadline for bills to move out of their chamber of origin. This bill was a product of a study by the Judicial Council last summer and fall. Both proponents and opponents of the death penalty served on the study committee. One of their tasks was to review Kansas law for compliance with the U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Atkins case, in which the Court banned the execution of the mentally retarded. In that ruling, the Court indicated that states must define mental retardation according to the national consensus definition. The language in our current Kansas law regarding the mentally retarded and the death penalty does not meet the Atkins criteria. As the Council reviewed the Atkins case and our current legal language, the committee members recognized that the question of disability doesn't apply just to the mentally retarded (disability with onset before age 18), but also to people who have disabilities that began after age 18. In the end, the committee agreed to write a bill that banned the execution of people with cognitive disability regardless of age of onset. S.B. 355 exempts from the death penalty anyone with a disability caused by mental retardation, whether discovered before or after the age of 18, or by traumatic brain injury, organic causes such as stroke or Alzheimer's Disease, and or extensive exposure to lead or other toxic material. To meet the criteria, the person would have to have an IQ of less than 70 AND show the deficits in his or her adaptive behavior and functioning. In testimony before the legislative committee, Jim Clark, Legislative Counsel for the Kansas Bar Association asked the question, "As a matter of policy or basic fairness, is there a difference between a person with an IQ of 60 who is mentally retarded and a person with an IQ of 60 who suffered a brain injury while riding a motorcycle on his or her 18th birthday?" However, in recent days prosecutors in Kansas have been increasingly vocal in opposition to this definition of cognitive disability and have been urging senators not to provide equal coverage for all people with cognitive disability. Please call, write, or e-mail your senators today and urge them to support the ban on execution of anyone with a cognitive disability regardless of the age of onset.
	Legislation regarding Life Without Parole On Wednesday, February 18, 2004, the Senate Judiciary Committee advanced legislation making life without parole an alternative to the death sentence. The bill will now go to the full Senate for debate. Supporters think the bill will decrease the overall cost of capital murder cases for the state by encouraging some defendants to plea bargain for the life sentence and giving juries the option to recommend it instead of death by lethal injection. This bill appears does away with the existing "hard 50" sentence which is the current alternative to capital punishment for those convicted of capital murder or premeditated first degree murder and is, for most people, the equivalent of a life sentence.
	Kansas Coalition Against the Death Penalty believes that the Post Audit report gives even more evidence as to why the Kansas death penalty should be ended In the report, released December 19, 2003, the Division of Legislative Post Audit reported that the average cost of a death penalty case is 70% more than that of a non death penalty homicide case. This study compared the cost of a case taken to execution and a case taken to through decades of incarceration to the end of a prison sentence.      This added cost of a death penalty law brings with it no benefit to society. We are not safer as we can see by the many homicides that have occurred in our state since the law was reinstated.      Since Kansas reinstated the death penalty in 1994, there have been over 80 potentially capital cases. Capital charges have been filed in over 50 cases in 18 counties. There have been 15 trials. Seven men have been sentenced to death.      In these cases with actual capital charges, there have been the following problems:          1) Flaw in the Law causing Reversals of Death Sentence: In the very first case to reach the State Supreme Court, the Court invalidated the death sentence of Gary Kleypas and remanded his case back to Crawford Co. for resentencing. The reason for the Court's decision was a flaw in the law, a flaw that will send back at least the next 3 cases also. Thus, over 50% of our current death sentenced cases will already have been remanded for a new sentencing hearing.          2) Capital Lottery: There appears to be geographic disparity in how cases are handled. The two counties with the most capital cases are Sedgwick and Wyandotte. Sedgwick has filed 9 cases and Wyandotte has filed 15 capital cases. Sedgwick has taken 6 cases to trial, while Wyandotte has only taken 3 as of January 1, 2004.          3) Information Withheld from Juries: When a jury is faced with the penalty phase decision of life or death, there is no provision in the Kansas law to require their instruction automatically on what the non death sentence terms would be in the given case. In the Kleypas case the Kansas Supreme Court said "In the absence of a request, the trial court has no duty to inform the jury in a capital-murder case of the term of imprisonment to which a defendant would be sentenced if death were not imposed." State v. Kleypas, 272 Kan. 1081, 40 P.3d 139, 270 (2001)          4.) Finances Impact Prosecutor Decisions: The Great Bend Tribune reported in July 1998 that finances were a factor in the decision of the Ellsworth County Attorney to not seek capital charges in a case there.          5) Misconduct by Prosecutor and Jury: In the 15 cases that have gone to trial, the Courts have found prosecutorial misconduct and juror misconduct. The prosecutorial misconduct was found by the State Supreme Court in the Kleypas case. Juror misconduct was found in the case of Gavin Scott, Sedgwick Co. by the trial judge. To Sum it Up:  uOver 50% of our cases will have to be redone in terms of sentencing at the least. u There appears to be a Capital Lottery in the disposition of capital cases  uInformation is withheld from juries uFinances Impact Prosecutor Choices in Case disposition uProsecutorial and Juror misconduct have occurred uAnd, a death penalty case costs far more than a regular first degree homicide case. All these facts call for the abolition of the death penalty in Kansas!

 

Coalition Annual Meeting The 2003 Annual Meeting of the Kansas Coalition Against the Death Penalty will be held on Saturday, November 8, at 7:15 p.m. at the Washburn University Student Union in Topeka. This year's meeting will consist of a very brief business meeting for election of officers, followed by a keynote address by Joe Amrine and Sean O'Brien. Our keynote address will be held jointly with the Washburn Law School Capital Defense and Mitigation Skills Training Conference. This is a unique opportunity for attorneys, mitigation specialists, and concerned Kansans to hear first hand how mistakes do happen and innocent people can and do end upon death row. You can find further information on the Amrine case below on this web page. Joe Amrine spent 17 years on death row in Missouri. He was released this year, thanks to the efforts of his attorney Sean O'Brien and many others.

 

Amrine To Be Retried The state of Missouri had until Monday, June 16, to decide whether to retry Joe Amrine after the Missouri Supreme Court overturned his conviction. He and his family were hoping he'd walk free on Monday, but they learned on Thursday, June 12, that the state refused to drop the murder charge against Amrine, pending results of new DNA tests on the pants Amrine wore on the day of the killing. Amrine has been released from the Missouri Department of Corrections and will be held in the Cole County Jail until the August 12 court date. DNA tests done previously did not show traces of blood, but the technology has improved in 17 years; Cole County Prosecutor Bill Tackett says preliminary results from new testing procedures indicated the presence of blood. Tackett said, "This is not about trying to get Joe Amrine. This is about trying to find out the truth of what happened. If this blood comes back and it's not Gary Barber's [the murder victim], that's great."

 

Amrine Conviction Overturned The Missouri Supreme Court recently overturned the capital conviction of Joseph Amrine, a death row inmate of accused of killing a fellow prisoner 17 years ago.  The Court found "clear and convincing evidence of actual innocence that undermines confidence" in Amrine's conviction. The State had argued before the Supreme Court that new evidence of Amrine's innocence should have no bearing on his conviction. The decision ordered that he be released from prison within 30 days. (See paragraph below about KsCADP's November 2002 annual meeting for more about the case.)

 

Kansas Officials Voice Concern about Cost of Death Penalty u In her annual report on the activities of the Kansas Supreme Court, Chief Justice Kay McFarland said: "The Court also faces hearing three more death penalty appeals, which will severely strain our limited resources. So far only one such appeal has come through our Court since the reinstatement of the death penalty. This was State v. Kleypas, 272 Kan. 894, 40 P.3rd 139 (2001). This case was orally argued on December 6, 2000. Prior to that, our limited research staff had spent months doing research on the issues presented taking time away from their regular work. Even with this advance preparation, a great deal more work was required. Thousands of pages of transcripts and other documents from the record were before us for review. The Kleypas opinion was filed on December 28, 2001, over a year after the case was argued before us. I have been on the Court since 1977, and no other case is even a close second to the amount of time spent on that one case. Now the Court is faced with three more death penalty appeals within the next few months. We have no record of how much time was spent on the Kleypas case by the Court, research staff, and clerical staff. Some indications of the increased complexity of such cases are the following figures from the Board of Indigent Defense Services (BIDS). The average non-death penalty case costs BIDS between $10,000 and $12,000. The last two death penalty cases cost BIDS over $1 million each. u Damien C. Lewis will be tried for the July 10 slayings of an elderly couple in their Lawrence home. As residents of Douglas County face a $1.7 million budget deficit that has already forced Commissioners to support $1.5 million in budget cuts, local leaders are questioning the wisdom of financing a capital trial that could cost as much as $2 million. Commissioner Charles Jones said that focusing the county's resources on a single case will shortchange other criminal proceedings and law enforcement efforts. "That extra measure of justice or vengeance -- however you want to call it -- is not worth all the sacrifices you'll have to make," Jones said. Commissioner Bob Johnson echoed concerns voiced by Jones, noting that county reserves can be used to cover the trial's high price tag, but that future decisions about seeking the death penalty could be ruled by dollars and cents. "We will provide the money we can," Johnson said. "And then, clearly, when it becomes a case where they don't have enough money to prosecute all cases, somebody's going to have to decide: Can we afford to do this? That's a tough issue."  [Note: On March 14, 2003, Lewis entered a guilty plea to this and several other crimes. The prosecution agreed not to seek the death penalty in the case. Sentencing will take place in June 2003.]

 

Moratorium Bill Introduced in Kansas Senate A bill that would impose a two-year moratorium on the death penalty and appoint a commission to study the state's capital punishment law was introduced on Monday, February 3. The Senate Judiciary Committee voted to introduce the measure after being requested to do so by KsCADP. Judiciary Chairman John Vratil, R-Leawood, said he didn't know when a hearing would be scheduled. He also said some lawmakers have expressed concern about the cost of death penalty trials. The cases are costing the state about $1 million each to provide counsel for indigent defendants, and the cost of prosecutions is straining local budgets. The Lawrence Journal-World speculated that Douglas County taxpayers could spend more than a million dollars to try Damien Lewis, who has been charged with capital murder for a double homicide last year. The bill before the committee would prohibit any executions or sentences of death for two years. A study commission would be formed to analyze whether the race of the victim or defendant plays a role in bringing capital murder charges; whether there are disparities across the state in the way capital murder cases are handled; what the total cost to state and local governments is; and whether changes are needed in the law to ensure that no innocent person is condemned. The commission would report to next year's Legislature. SB 158, the bill to enact a moratorium on death penalty sentencing as well as on executions, remains in the Senate Judiciary Committee. The Chair of the Committee has indicated that he does not plan to hold hearings or work the bill this session. The volume of legislation is one factor, and some Senators seem reluctant to take on this volatile political issue.

 

Bill Concerning Execution of the Mentally Retarded HB 2349 is an attempt to make Kansas' death penalty law conform to what is required under the Atkins decision by the United States Supreme Court in 2002. In Atkins, the Court ruled that mentally retarded people cannot be executed. Kansas' current death penalty law has a ban on execution of the mentally retarded; however, a review of the Kansas statutory definition of who is mentally retarded and components of Kansas' process of determining mental retardation raised real questions about whether or not Kansas was in total compliance with Atkins. This bill would address those problematic areas; it contains a revised definition of mental retardation and provides for legal avenues to raise this issue in capital cases. This bill was not heard prior to first deadline, but it was reintroduced by the House Appropriations Committee, an exempt committee and given a new number, HB 2439. The bill was referred to the Federal and State Affairs Committee on March 13 and then to the Calendar and Printing Committee on March 14. Nothing further has occurred with this bill in the 2003 session.

            

Kansas Reaction to Illinois Commutations

The Wichita Eagle questioned the blanket nature of Gov. Ryan's action, but stated in a January 15 editorial that "Mr. Ryan's action was politically courageous in acknowledging the growing body of evidence—confirmed by his own experience—that the death-penalty system is deeply flawed and in need of fundamental reform. ...Kansas is one of 14 states were the governor bears sole responsibility for granting clemency in death-penalty cases. We don't expect Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to follow Mr. Ryan's example—the evidence against those currently sitting on Kansas' death row is overwhelming. But Kansas should consider whether the death penalty is fairly applied and cost-effective. ...The qualifying standard also could be set higher for capital cases. ...We hope Mr. Ryan's action leads to further national debate about how to ensure fairness and justice in the death-penalty system. He's right: The current system is broken, and it either needs to be fixed or scrapped." 

The Topeka Capital Journal editorialized on January 14, "It has been obvious for some time that the death penalty is often unevenly applied, plus DNA testing has identified numerous wrong convictions, not just in Illinois but around the country. ...Ryan stunned the country with his actions last week, but the questions he raised shouldn't be forgotten—in Illinois or elsewhere. At both state and federal levels, the judicial system should be looked at and evaluated. If this nation wants to put criminals to death, it needs to be absolutely certain it hasn't convicted an innocent person. That assurance isn't there now."

The Kansas City Star reported that while opponents of capital punishment hoped Missouri and Kansas would re-examine death-penalty laws, state officials weren't of the same view. The new governor of Kansas, Kathleen Sebelius, said during her campaign that she was satisfied with the current law. Kansas' newly-installed Attorney General Phill Kline favors significantly expanding the law. Missouri Governor Bob Holden said that Illinois' capital punishment system had "significant problems" that did not exist in Missouri, while the state's Attorney General, Jay Nixon, issued a news release that said "Missouri's system is not broken" and asserted that he did not support blanket commutations of death sentences. In an editorial published on January 13, the Star cited a new study which indicates the state of Missouri does apply the death penalty unfairly. The Star called the situation "indefensible" and said the Assembly should end Missouri's flawed capital punishment system by passing a bill introduced by Sen. Ed Quick. The bill would abolish the death penalty and require people convicted of first-degree murder to be punished with life in prison without probation or parole except by an act of the governor.

The death-penalty debate is not just about questions of fairness and morality. The state's budget woes and the costs of death-penalty trials in Kansas also raise the issue of economic costs. These cases are budget-busters that suck money from needed programs at a time when the state is scrambling to pay for basic services. Some lawmakers and state officials are calling for an assessment of the costs of seeking the death penalty versus the cost of life in prison. The trial of Reginald and Jonathan Carr in Wichita has cost the State Board of Indigents' Defense $1.3 million, and the trial of John E. Robinson Sr. in Johnson County cost $1.1 million. Neither case has even started what is likely to be years of court appeals. And these amounts don't include the costs for prosecuting these two cases.  Appeals are now proceeding in the cases of Scott, Marsh, Elms, and the Carr brothers. The retrial of Gary Kleypas has had to be postponed until October 2003 due to the budget crunch, and it's been announced that private attorneys who do defense work for the state won't be paid until May or June. Failure to provide adequate funds for the indigent defense agency could result in weaker defenses, which would lead to more appeals, and there will always remain the possibility that an innocent person will slip through the cracks and be executed. 

Legislators in Kansas don't think the system here has as many problems as Illinois, though State Senator Ed Pugh, vice chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, conceded that the state's death-penalty statute is complicated to the point of being "almost unusable." KsCADP Coordinator Donna Schneweis says "It's a myth in the minds of Kansas lawmakers that we're not like other states," pointing out that since reinstatement of capital punishment in 1994, courts have found prosecutorial misconduct in one case and jury misconduct in another. 

 

KsCADP Annual Meeting  November 2002

The Kansas Coalition Against the Death Penalty held its annual meeting in Lawrence November 17, 2002. 

Program: "Unreasonable Doubt: The Real Risk of Executing the Innocent"
Speaker: Sean O'Brien, defense attorney

The program included  a showing of the video, "Unreasonable Doubt," which tells the story of Joe Amrine, who is currently held under sentence of death in Missouri despite the total collapse of the state's case against him.  Mr. Amrine's attorney, Sean O'Brien, a well-known capital defense attorney practicing in the Kansas City area,  spoke about the case and what it can teach us in Kansas about "the real risk of executing the innocent."  Some think that Kansas won't end up like other states with innocent people sentenced to death, but Mr. O'Brien's presentation about this current case shows how easily it can still happen.

O'Brien began his talk by saying "the system is broken." He said the death penalty, rather than making all concerned more careful to ensure that the right person is charged and that everything is done fairly and properly, simply raises the stakes for everyone, including police and prosecutors.

It was recently reported that Joseph Amrine, who is under a death sentence for the stabbing of another inmate 17 years ago, is getting another chance to argue his case. The state supreme court will hold a hearing February 4th, a rare proceeding because the court usually only takes oral arguments once on death penalty cases—and did so in 1989. But three inmates who identified Amrine as the killer of the other inmate have since recanted their testimony in a documentary film made by a University of Missouri student in Columbia. Now Amrine will get a chance to present this evidence in court.

Prejean Delivered Landon Lecture September 9

	KsCADP Members Toured El Dorado in June Last April a group of KsCADP Board members met with Secretary of Corrections Chuck Simmons to express concerns about the way people sentenced to death were being confined. The meeting resulted in an invitation from the Secretary to visit the El Dorado Correctional Facility where death-sentenced prisoners are held. The group received a briefing from several management personnel and then toured the segregation units which house the four men sentenced to death in Kansas. The group stepped into an empty cell and saw the non-contact visiting area and the caged outdoor individual recreation space used by death-sentenced inmates. The visit concluded with a discussion of concerns the Board has for corrections officers directly impacted by offenders who will be put to death—both those who care for offenders over many years and those who are part of the execution team.
	Statement issued by KsCADP following the Kansas Supreme Court's ruling in the Kleypas case December 28, 2001— The experience of Kansas' use of the death penalty these past seven years shows that we are no different than other states. Today's court decision verifies what opponents of the death penalty have said in the past twenty plus years of death penalty debate in our state: Our criminal justice system makes mistakes. The Coalition regrets that the Court did not find the entire law unconstitutional. The Court's decision places upon the Legislature the burden of revisiting the death penalty with regard to at least one section of the law. As the Legislature prepares to revisit the law, we believe it must look beyond that one section to the following fundamental facts: 1) Sufficient alternatives exist to protect public safety. Courts have the option for long term incarceration that would keep the public safe. The hard 50 gives juries and judges the option they need for dealing with capital murderers. Only after fifty years will the question of parole even be considered. For most murderers, this will be equivalent to spending the rest of their life behind bars. 2) There is a growing body of fiscal evidence that the death penalty is a huge drain on state resources. Any resources wasted in death penalty cases are not available for crime prevention or other life-enhancing programs. Such a prevention focus holds the potential of sparing other families what Carrie Williams' family has gone through. Kansas has spent many dollars these past seven years and we have a flawed death penalty system to show for it. 3) There is a growing understanding in many of the major faith traditions, that the death penalty is not an appropriate response to crime. In addition, there is an evolving practice among the nations of the world to also choose punishments other than death. 4) Executions continue the cycle of violence and foster revenge and retaliation. We have a choice whether we continue to kill as the murderer has done, or whether we witness to a higher standard of behavior. As people of good will who value life, let us not create another grieving family. More and more Kansans are recognizing these fundamental facts and saying "Not in MY Name!" We believe the time is now for a fundamental examination of Kansas' death penalty. We call upon the Legislature to go beyond simple technical considerations and really look at whether the death penalty makes sense in 2001 and the years to come.
	To read the text of Mike Farrell's remarks when he spoke at the KsCADP Annual Meeting on November 10, 2001, click here.