Witnesses denounce capital punishment at Sacramento hearing

Death-penalty opponents dominated a debate over proposed new lethal-injection procedures today, turning what was intended to be a technical discussion into a platform for denouncing executions as barbaric, costly and so flawed that innocents are bound to be killed.

Only two of some 50 speakers at a hearing before officials of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation expressed support for resuming executions if and when the procedures earn state and federal approval.

The death penalty has been on hold in California since February 2006 out of concern that the former lethal-injection practices subjected some of those put to death to cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Constitution.

Religious leaders, teachers, medical professionals and relatives of both condemned prisoners and their victims called for an end to executions.

Gavin Lee, a doctoral candidate at UC Irvine who studies lethal injection, criticized the proposed procedural provisions as still insufficient to ensure that a condemned prisoner is unconscious by the time the last, painful and fatal dose in the three-injection practice is administered.

"We are not infallible. Innocent people get executed," said Marcine van Dierendonck of Silicon Valley.

Johanna Westerson, a Swedish human-rights lawyer living in San Francisco, urged state officials to "join the civilized nations of the world in abandoning this barbaric practice" and part company with renowned rights abusers like China, Iran and Saudi Arabia.

The mother of death-row inmate Keith Doolin, Donna Doolin-Larsen, opened the hearing with an appeal for humane treatment of the condemned prisoners' families. "We are not criminals - we are innocent people dragged into this dehumanizing system."

Actor and activist Mike Farrell reiterated many of the moral arguments against executions and, as did several speakers, said the state was "ludicrous" in its claim that resuming executions would incur no new costs to taxpayers.

Two members of the Los Angeles chapter of the American Civil Responsibilities Union spoke early and left.

"You people have misplaced compassion," said Howard Garber, denouncing judges who have acted to halt executions and the lengthy appeals accorded death-row inmates. "Our compassion is for the innocent victims.

-- Carol J. Williams in Sacramento

Comments

[aaron]

Misplaced compassion, inhumane treatmen, dehumanizing systems, yea right, so what these criminals have committed horrendous crimes, why should the taxpayers continue to pay for their maintaince at $90,000 yearly per inmate, they have done horrible crime!, why should my tax dollars be spent on keeping them alive, let the families of these death row inmates pay for the them.
California should approach the death penalty differant, a fast track six month trial, followed with a one month only appealy, currently its about 25years and cost $MILLIONS for the appeals process for a death row inmate in California. why should we pay for these losers.
well if found guilty on the eight month the prisoner should be executed, if his/her family wants to help the taxpayers, and doesnt want him executed, let them pay the full amount of incareration.
California is in mega trouble with the budget, we simply cannot afford to keep these highly priced expensive murderers/criminals alive at the taxpayer expense, let the condemned or his family pay, not us taxpayers and certainly not the victims.

[tony]

Fry e'm all

[2 cents]

shamelessly self-absorbed do-gooders on mission, they stroke their own egos at no cost whatsoever to themselves and yet at a staggering toll to those who have experienced the depraved barbarity of these foul murderers

[Jeff K.]

While I am an opponent of the death penalty on moral grounds, I am annoyed when the truth is set aside. Case in point:
""We are not infallible. Innocent people get executed," said Marcine van Dierendonck of Silicon Valley."

Not one in California, to my knowledge, and absolutely not since the reinstitution of the death penalty in the 1970's. If you want to make a moral argument, fine. It is troubling that we spend more on killing prisoners than keeping them in prison (and no, getting rid of due process to keep innocents from being executed is not a good solution), and equally troubling that the US is in the same camp as Saudi Arabia, China, and North Korea on this issue. We do not need to lie about the facts (nor insist that every man on death row is innocent, as Mr. Farrell tends to do). That only weakens the overall cause.

[Haroldt]

It is the desire of death penalty proponents to make the death penalty as expensive as possible. The agenda of death penalty proponents is not to provide true justice, but to bend the justice system to their own will. They genuinley do NOT care about justice to any victims. It is sad that they feel so little empathy or remorse for the dead victims, rather pander to horrendous murderers. They have no shame!

[Anu N.]

I completely agree with the comments posted by Aaron on 6/30/09. Lets elect this man..not only does he speak his mind, but if the families are assured their kin are innocent, they ought to foot the bill. Tax payers are in deep trouble in California. Schools are being subjected to deep cuts (layoffs, increased class size, reduction in music and arts; to name a few). I propose we rid ourselves of those imprisoned for acts they are on death row for and we can not only save money but also, alleviate the schools budget issues. $90,000 per year for an inmate who has been convicted is a LOT of money. We could hire 2 teachers per inmate on death row. The children are our future; convicted inmates are definitely not. Lets get our priorities in order- NOW!!!!