Study says Texas death penalty a homicide deterrent

[peejay 327]

Study says Texas death penalty a homicide deterrent

By MICHAEL GRACZYK

Associated Press

Jan. 6, 2010, 7:27PM

HUNTSVILLE — As many as 60 people may be alive today in Texas because two dozen convicted killers were executed last year in the nation's most active capital punishment state, according to a study of death penalty deterrence by researchers from Sam Houston State University and Duke University.

A review of executions and homicides in Texas by criminologist Raymond Teske at Sam Houston in Huntsville and Duke sociologists Kenneth Land and Hui Zheng concludes a monthly decline of between 0.5 to 2.5 homicides in Texas follows each execution.

“Evidence exists of modest, short-term reductions in the numbers of homicides in Texas in the month of or after executions,” the study published in a recent issue of Criminology, a journal of the American Society of Criminology, said.

The study adds to decades of academic dissection of the death penalty and deterrence. Results over the years vary from capital punishment saving more lives than suggested in this study to no conclusive effect.

Focuses on Texas

This study, however, is the first to focus on monthly data in Texas, where researchers said the number of executions — 447 since capital punishment resumed in 1982 — is statistically significant enough “to make possible relatively stable estimates of the homicide response to executions.” A national deterrent effect can't be determined because “most states ... have not engaged in a sufficient level or frequency of executions per year,” they said.

Kent Scheidegger, legal director of the California-based Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, which supports capital punishment, said the study “would be sufficient by itself to justify the death penalty.”

Execution foe skeptical

But Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, a Washington, D.C.-based organization opposed to capital punishment, said while he was not a statistics expert, “the large number of variables affecting these calculations and the relative rarity of executions make final conclusions about deterrence very suspect.”

The study analyzed data from January 1994 through December 2005, during which 284 lethal injections were carried out in Texas — about one-third of all death sentences carried out in the U.S.

The year 1994 was selected as the starting point because state and federal legislation and court rulings beginning then led to “an orgy of executions in Texas,” the researchers noted.

Of the years studied, four had more than 30 executions, including a record 40 carried out in 2000.

Researchers ran mathematical models that considered homicide figures from the Texas Department of Public Safety to see if month-to-month fluctuations in executions could be associated with subsequent month-to-month fluctuations in homicide counts.

Teske told The Associated Press that while the published study ended with results through 2005, the conclusions are valid for subsequent years.

Narrowing the focus

David McDowall, a professor at the State University of New York at Albany and an expert in statistical analysis of crime and violence patterns, said the study appeared solid and used standard accepted research methods.

“What the study does is try to control a constant variety of factors that vary over time by chance and then try to assess whether any decreases in homicides are large enough that chance can't account for them,” McDowall said.

He said additional research examining homicides in nearby states where the death penalty is less active could add to the Texas study's credibility.

The researchers said they did exactly that and found the frequent use of executions in Texas had a greater cumulative impact on homicides in Texas when compared to homicide numbers in Louisiana, New Mexico and Oklahoma. They didn't include those findings in the final paper because reviewers wanted them to narrow its focus.

Teske acknowledged some experts disliked the results. He speculated criticism came from peer reviewers opposed to capital punishment.

“I have a hard time getting people to understand that this reports a scientific analysis of an issue and is not a political statement,” Teske said.

Six Texas inmates are scheduled to die this year, including one today and another next week.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metrop...an/6802314.html

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

“Evidence exists of modest, short-term reductions in the numbers of homicides in Texas in the month of or after executions,” the study published in a recent issue of Criminology, a journal of the American Society of Criminology, said.

...

A national deterrent effect can't be determined because “most states ... have not engaged in a sufficient level or frequency of executions per year,” they said.

So the mere fact that a death penalty exists on the books isn't sufficient deterrent, there has to actually be an execution every month or else the bad guys forget? Wow, our bad guys have media-induced ADHD just like the rest of us, huh?

[Danno 1,228]

Sure it would be sweet if by hanging someone from the neck others would stop killing... but for me I just want to see them hang for the sake of Justice.

And let's do it fairly quickly.

[mawilson 2,133]

So the mere fact that a death penalty exists on the books isn't sufficient deterrent, there has to actually be an execution every month or else the bad guys forget? Wow, our bad guys have media-induced ADHD just like the rest of us, huh?

[peejay 327]

Sure it would be sweet if by hanging someone from the neck others would stop killing... but for me I just want to see them hang for the sake of Justice.

And let's do it fairly quickly.

I'd be satisfied to lock 'em up forever and throw away the key, but you can never trust politicians or judges to honor a "life sentence". The only sentence that is certain is death. Kenneth Allen McDuff has the dubious distinction of being sentenced to die for murder in 1968, was commuted to "life" in 1972 after the death penalty was ruled unconstitutional, and was paroled from a so-called "life" sentence in 1989. He murdered again in 1992 and was again put on death row again. The state of TX finally got it right in 1998 and killed the ####### before someone could let him loose again.

There is no such thing as a life sentence as long as judges and politicians are willing to let convicted murderers loose on the streets for whatever f*cked up reason they see fit.

Edited January 7, 2010 by peejay

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

On the other hand, once executed, the wrong done to a wrongfully convicted person cannot be reversed. And there are plenty of stories out there of folks wrongfully convicted and put on death row. But hey, a bit of collateral damage is to be expected, yes?

[Peikko 1,575]

I understand PJ's concern but it works all ways around. The penal system should not be used for political purposes period but it so often is.

That said, I would rather work towards eliminating political influence on the penal system than get a hard on over criminals being executed, figuratively you understand

[peejay 327]

On the other hand, once executed, the wrong done to a wrongfully convicted person cannot be reversed. And there are plenty of stories out there of folks wrongfully convicted and put on death row. But hey, a bit of collateral damage is to be expected, yes?

Apparently so since hundreds if not thousands of innocent people have been murdered by criminals out on bail, released on parole, or given probation rather than prison. I'd say that happens mega more times than any supposed innocent put to death by the state. I can't recall any case in which it has been 100% verified that someone that was innocent was executed. In any case...it is not the goal or intent of the system for innocents to be executed or for criminals to be set free to murder. I'd say we know a lot more about innocent citizens killed by released criminals than we have knowledge of innocents on death row wrongfully executed.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Apparently so since hundreds if not thousands of innocent people have been murdered by criminals out on bail, released on parole, or given probation rather than prison.

That's not an argument for the death penalty but an argument against releasing those that shouldn't be released. When the people execute innocents - and they have - that makes the people murderers. It makes them no better than the scumbags they're longing to put down.

[peejay 327]

That's not an argument for the death penalty but an argument against releasing those that shouldn't be released. When the people execute innocents - and they have - that makes the people murderers. It makes them no better than the scumbags they're longing to put down.

The state maintains that it doesn't execute innocent people. They are convicted in open court by a jury of their peers, sentenced, and given access to appeals of their death sentence for years before actual execution.

I don't believe that "collateral damage" is even factored into the equation.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The state maintains that it doesn't execute innocent people. They are convicted in open court by a jury of their peers, sentenced, and given access to appeals of their death sentence for years before actual execution.

The state can maintain any god damn thing it wants - that doesn't make it any more true, though.

Executed and Innocent: Four Chapters in the Life of America's Death Penalty documents four such stories:

Ruben Cantu, a 26-year-old Latino man from San Antonio, was executed in August 1993 for a robbery-murder committed in 1985 when he was 17. The Houston Chronicle in November 2005 published an investigative series in which it reported that another defendant, who pleaded guilty to participating in the crime but did not testify at Cantu's trial, has signed an affidavit swearing that Cantu was not with him that night and had no role in the murder. The only witness who did testify? A second victim, who was shot nine times but survived now says that police pressured him to identify Cantu as the shooter, and that he did so even though Cantu was innocent.

Carlos De Luna, a young Latino man from Corpus Christi, Texas, was executed in December 1989 for stabbing a convenience store clerk to death in 1983. De Luna, who was convicted on the basis of a quick on-the-scene witness identification, claimed that the killer was a man named Carlos Hernandez. In June 2006, an investigative series published by the Chicago Tribune revealed that Hernandez had a long history of knife attacks similar to the convenience store killing and repeatedly confessed to friends and relatives that he committed the murder for which De Luna was executed. Although a prosecutor at De Luna's trial denied the existence of Hernandez, calling him a "phantom", the newspaper revealed that police and prosecutors knew who Hernandez was and had heard from their own informants that Hernandez was the killer. (Hernandez died in prison in 1999.)

Larry Griffin, a 40-year-old black man from St. Louis, was executed in Missouri in June 1995 for the drive-by shooting of a drug dealer in 1980. The only evidence against him was a witness who claimed to have seen Griffin at the crime scene. This witness was a white career criminal with several felony charges pending against him. In July 2005, the St. Louis Post Dispatch reported that the first police officer on the scene and the victim's sister both agreed that this supposed witness -- who would have stood out in the all-black neighborhood -- wasn't there when the shooting occurred. A second victim injured in the shooting knew Griffin and says that Griffin was not in the car from which the shots were fired, but he was not called to testify at Griffin's trial.

Cameron Todd Willingham, a 36-year-old white father of three from Corsicana, Texas, was executed in February 2004 for murder by arson. In December 2004, the Chicago Tribune reported that new scientific knowledge proves that the testimony by arson experts at Willingham?s trial was worthless, and that there is no evidence that the fire was caused by arson. A panel of the nation's leading arson experts confirmed that conclusion in the spring of 2006.

[peejay 327]

The state can maintain any god damn thing it wants - that doesn't make it any more true, though.

Have these people you noted been officially exonerate posthumously and have their families been compensated by the state for wrongful conviction / execution? Anybody can maintain anything they want to in print - that doesn't make it the truth.

I'm being more of a devil's advocate here than a cheerleader for the death penalty. I guess I have given more thought about it than others because I live in Harris county TX and have actually been in the jury pool for an actual capital murder case, but wasn't picked to serve. In the end it is the 12 unanimous votes of the people on the jury that determines the guilt of the murderer. Not the state. The state just carries out the verdict. I just don't see why any of the people involved would want to convict and execute an innocent person.

[_Simpson_ 250]

On the other hand, once executed, the wrong done to a wrongfully convicted person cannot be reversed. And there are plenty of stories out there of folks wrongfully convicted and put on death row. But hey, a bit of collateral damage is to be expected, yes?

well yes, thats the real world and were all living in it, besides your only looking at part of the equation. What about the people's life it saves because the death penalty acts as a deterrent? Often people hide behind the exception to the rule,like you when it comes to the death penalty(very few innocent are put to death) but we still have to come up with a real world answer and there is going to be winners and losers.

Edited January 8, 2010 by _Simpson_

[peejay 327]

well yes, thats the real world and were all living in it, besides your only looking at part of the equation. What about the people's life it saves because the death penalty acts as a deterrent? Often people hide behind the exception to the rule,like you when it comes to the death penalty(very few innocent are put to death) but we still have to come up with a real world answer and there is going to be winners and losers.

I personally don't believe the criminal justice system is based on x-number of innocent people being executed. I would hope it is based on no innocent people being executed.

Although lot of high minded people do put themselves up on some sort of self ordained moral pedestal by making proclamations that it is better to let 100 murderers free than to convict 1 innocent person. I'd rather do neither.

[_Simpson_ 250]

I personally don't believe the criminal justice system is based on x-number of innocent people being executed. I would hope it is based on no innocent people being executed.

Although lot of high minded people do put themselves up on some sort of self ordained moral pedestal by making proclamations that it is better to let 100 murderers free than to convict 1 innocent person. I'd rather do neither.

Well yes, same here but the reality of it is is that you cant have a perfect system and with Big Dog just pointing out the exception to the rule doesnt do no good and is attempt by him to look like the caring guy that doesnt what anyone innocent die... well we all want that but some of us are willing to take a real world solution approach to it and the fact that a innocent person could be put to death isnt enough for me, we do have safe guards to prevent this, appeals and whatnot. There also must be pretty solid evidence to get the death penalty, that and seeing where forensic science is going has put me on the keeping the death penalty legal side of the issue.