The Yolo County District Attorney’s office has just spent three and a half years and unknown quantities of money to get the death penalty in what should have been a slam dunk case.
The amount of time, anguish and energy expended in this trial is particularly questionable, in light of the fact that Mr. Topete was far more likely to die of natural causes than to ever be executed by the state.
Not only have only 13 people been executed since legal executions resumed in 1978, but no one has been executed in the last five years and it will be far longer than that before they resume again, due to the order of Marin County Superior Court Judge Faye D’Opal.
According to the LA Times, “The action by Marin County Superior Court Judge Faye D’Opal sends the state back to square one in redrafting procedures for lethal-injection executions. The death penalty has been on hold for six years in California after a federal court ruling deemed the previously used three-drug method unconstitutional because it might inflict pain amounting to cruel and unusual punishment.”
Judge D’Opal said in her 22-page ruling that the state’s failure to consider replacing the former execution practice with a single-injection method violated state law and ignored the courts’ and public criticism of the previous protocols.
The ruling would be appealed by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, however experts believe this will further stall the federal court review of the new protocols and ensure that executions will not resume for a number of years.
“Today the court struck down California’s three-drug lethal injection protocol because it was enacted in violation of California law,” said Sara Eisenberg, an attorney for Mitchell Sims, the condemned inmate who filed the lawsuit challenging the new three-drug procedure.
Judge D’Opal, in her ruling, cited the CDCR for failure to disclose the costs of executions, noting that former San Quentin Prison Warden Jeanne Woodford said each execution costs the state between $70,000 and $200,000 in overtime for staff, crowd control, training, security and other expenses associated with carrying out lethal injections.
Judge D’Opal would conclude, “These defects infect the entire regulatory scheme, and the lethal injection administration and protocol, as a whole, is declared to be invalid.”
“The time has come to replace the death penalty with life in prison with no chance of parole,” said Natasha Minsker, an American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California lawyer and campaign manager for a voter initiative to repeal capital punishment. “Any attempt to devise new lethal-injection rules will take an enormous amount of public employee time and cost hundreds of millions of dollars.”
Meanwhile, the death penalty system is further stalled, eating up huge amounts of taxpayer money as the costs of the system remain in place while at the same time creating a further backlog.
Recent studies show that, while the majority still favor capital punishment, as least in theory and when not juxtaposed with life without parole, the percentage in favor has been steadily declining.
The LA Times hammered this point home with an editorial this Saturday.
The editorial hearkened back to the September GOP exchange in which the GOP voters expressed callousness toward the issue.
Wrote the Times, “Back in September, much was made of the crowd’s reaction at a GOP presidential debate after moderator Brian Williams noted that Texas Gov. Rick Perry had overseen more executions than any governor in modern times, and spectators burst into applause. Liberal pundits saw this as an example of the callousness of GOP voters, but we were more disturbed by the callousness on exhibit from Perry.”
“I’ve never struggled with that at all,” Governor Perry said in response to the question, despite the fact that under his watch, he oversaw the execution of a man who may well have been innocent, then quashed an investigation of the matter.
As the Times wrote, “Most people in such a situation would, we suspect, experience at least a twinge of conscience. Cameron Todd Willingham was convicted in 1992 of burning down his house and killing his three children inside, yet the forensic science and jailhouse testimony used to convict him were later discredited.”
Governor Perry would sign off on the execution back in 2004 despite serious questions about whether Mr. Willingham had committed the crime.
More seriously, he used his political power and influence to quash “an investigation of the evidence by replacing the members of a government commission just days before it was to consider a report about the shoddy science used to prosecute Willingham. The new committee chair, a close ally of Perry’s, quickly scuttled the inquiry.”
Wrote the Times, “We bring this up now, three months after the debate in question, because new data have emerged showing that despite a certain bloodthirsty element in some parts of the conservative base, support is steadily eroding for the ethical, legal and financial morass that is capital punishment.”
Recent data from the Death Penalty Information Center, shows that executions continued to drop in 2011 to 43, nearly half of what they were in 2000 and down slightly from 2010.
Wrote the Times, “More significantly, the number of death sentences across the country fell dramatically this year, to 78 from 112 in 2010.”
But Yolo County was the exception, as the prosecution took great pains to push through a capital punishment sentence that will most likely never be implemented.
Wrote the Times, “Perhaps most significant of all, the percentage of Americans who say they support the death penalty, which was 80% in 1994, fell to 61%, the lowest ever.”
The Times did not even take it to the next step, which shows that the number of supporters falls well under 50% when the public is given the choice between life without parole and death.
“In California, one number in particular stands out: There were only 10 people sentenced to death in the Golden State in 2011, compared with 29 last year,” they wrote.
Indeed, Mr. Topete is now one of ten people sentenced to death in California this year.
Wrote the Times, “That may be a statistical anomaly, or it may indicate that prosecutors and courts are finally concluding, correctly, that death sentences have become largely pointless; legal complications have prevented anyone from being executed here since 2006. A continuing conflict over the state’s method for lethal injection and a shortage of a key drug often used to perform it, mean this situation won’t be resolved any time soon.”
All of that may be true, but in the end, it seems likely that this is a trend and the trend is pushing the public away from capital punishment – if not with their ballots, with their feet.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Do you really think, in the light of the circumstances surrounding the Topete case, e.g. who was killed and how, the victim’s family, etc., that the DA as a practical matter could have asked for anything less than the death penalty? That is a rhetorical question, not really requiring an answer…
[quote]“But Yolo County was the exception, as the prosecution took great pains to push through a capital punishment sentence that will most likely never be implemented.”[/quote]The exception to what? How has the Yolo County death sentence history changed? Are the historic numbers adequate to be statistically significant with respect to trends? You report that Topete’s sentence is one of 78 so far this year, including 10 in California.
How is Yolo County’s record out of line? If Topete had committed his horrendous acts in another jurisdiction in California, are you suggesting the locals wouldn’t have considered the death penalty? (We certainly can expect any county that’s among those with the nine other death sentences this year would’t have had a problem increasing their rates by one more, even if that would have doubled their record.)
This incessant harping on Jeff Reisig’s death penalty and other chargings has gotten way past tiresome. No amount of apologizing for Topete’s unfortunate background or his state of mind or his gangster life changes the fact that he committed a capital crime.
The DA followed California laws; Topete did not. Is Topete innocent? Unfairly charged or tried? Free Topete? He certainly is an unsympathetic poster child for banning the death penalty.[quote]“…recent revelations by one of the jurors who indicated to the Davis Enterprise that there was more to the story than just this.”[/quote]Well, isn’t there always….Not that it has much to do with the point of this death penalty discussion. Remember, this is a slam-dunk case!
D.A. Reisig isn’t operating under Governor Perry’s influence. This is not Texas, and what’s happening there is not connected to decisions made in Yolo County under California’s laws. D.A. Reisig has nothing to do with how the State of California executes its citizens. Topete likely doesn’t blame Reisig for whether he faces one injection or three, so why should you conflate these issues?”[quote]The Yolo County District Attorney’s office has just spent three and a half years….time, anguish, and energy is particularly questionable….”[/quote]This tired “justification” for avoiding gang enhancements and other capital charges ignores the fact that the [u]defendant[/u] has the right to a speedy trial or the right to drag it out for years (as you know Topete did).
You propose to let the accused hold the D.A. for ransom:[quote]“Give me lesser charges than my crimes deserve or I’ll delay and delay and cost you untold time, anguish, energy and money.”[/quote]The majority of the people, those who vote with their votes, won’t be swayed by sympathetic stories about Topete or whether he was officially a gangster or just a vicious thug. They won’t be convinced by constant barrages of Reisig-bashing and second-guessing. Don’t waste any more time on these approaches. Just concentrate on getting the law changed. Basing criticisms on what [u]might[/u] happen–even if you think abolishment is a slam dunk–isn’t very productive.
[quote]The DA followed California laws; Topete did not. Is Topete innocent? Unfairly charged or tried? Free Topete? He certainly is an unsympathetic poster child for banning the death penalty.[/quote]
Amen!
“Do you really think, in the light of the circumstances surrounding the Topete case, e.g. who was killed and how, the victim’s family, etc., that the DA as a practical matter could have asked for anything less than the death penalty? “
The DA had the opportunity at the beginning to cut a deal for life without parole and I think after the way the case started, no one would have batted an eye.
JS: you’re missing that the taxpayers have the right not to have their tax dollars wasted on futile efforts. Yeah, he may have the legal right to do it, but commonsense has to enter play at some point.
No sympathy for Topete here. But it is clear that he will die in prison before the State executes him. What ever the sentence, the outcome is the same.
[quote]“The DA had the opportunity at the beginning to cut a deal for life without parole…”[/quote]Sez who? You have absolutely no reason to know this to be true. Even if the DA made such an comment in open court, and you were there to observe it, he could have be been bluffing. What is your source for making this statement. Furthermore, even it he “had the opportunity”–what does that mean, anyway?–why would he have done such a thing in such a case?
Your “common sense” is another person’s crazy view. Other’s think that the job of the justice system is to capture criminals, convict the guilty and punish the convicted. Why can you not acknowledge the validity of anyone else’s view about this? You keep falling back on the “wasted dollars,” as though it’s a given. Justice costs money.
You say Reisig “may have have the legal right to do it,” but he shouldn’t have done it. Others would say he had the legal responsibility to do it. They would see him as derelict in his duties if he hadn’t tried to convict him to the maximum extent considering the maximum offenses Topete committed.
Are you really serious that “no one would have batted an eye” if Reisig would have plea-bargained this to lesser charges than what Topete “deserved.” You truly claim that his fellow law enforcement officers would have b been pleased with such a “common sense” decision in order “to save money and energy for taxpayers”? They’re not “no one,” and I suspect they’d been batting eyes for some time to come.
As an aside, I’d guess you don’t even believe in your own oft-repeated budget argument. If so, how much do you consider is a reasonable amount to spend on a capital murder case?
If you think Topete is innocent, say so. If you think the law is wrong, say so. Try to get it changed. But, why keep whining when our D.A. enforces the law?
I take solace in the fact that Topete will be on death row in San Quentin, rather than back at Pelican Bay. Topete was very effective at running gang activity and directing others from Pelican Bay, even while in the SHU. I hear that will be much more difficult at San Quentin. Even if he sits there for years instead of being executed, I feel better that he is there.
[quote]JS: you’re missing that the taxpayers have the right not to have their tax dollars wasted on futile efforts. Yeah, he may have the legal right to do it, but commonsense has to enter play at some point.[/quote]
But it is your view that it is a futile effort, and it is not a right. I believe the Ponzi Scheme that is Social Security is a futile effort and a waste of tax payer money, among many other federal programs. So, is it my right not to have my taxpayer dollars wasted on these programs?
How about locally? Spending my local tax payer dollars on an election to say that we support choice voting, even though we are not legally allowed to implement it, seemed like a colossal waste of money to me. Did I have a right to not have my taxpayer dollars wasted on it?
[quote]That explanation is complicated by recent revelations by another of the jurors, who indicated to the Davis Enterprise that there was more to the story than just this.[/quote]
This was just one person looking for his five minutes, and what he told the Enterprise is refuted by the other 11 jurors. Besides, what he said is not admissible in court.
“Sez who? You have absolutely no reason to know this to be true. “
Mrs. Topete has told me on numerous occasions that they would have taken LWOP.
“Your “common sense” is another person’s crazy view. Other’s think that the job of the justice system is to capture criminals, convict the guilty and punish the convicted. Why can you not acknowledge the validity of anyone else’s view about this? You keep falling back on the “wasted dollars,” as though it’s a given. Justice costs money.”
I guess I’m not following you here. I’m expressing my personal view on this – why is that view invalid because other people have differing views?
“You say Reisig “may have have the legal right to do it,” but he shouldn’t have done it. Others would say he had the legal responsibility to do it.”
So what? Again, do I not have the right to express my view here that the DA, during a time when he lacks resources, should save the more than $1 million he took to try and convict Mr. Topete of a death penalty offense and taken the LWOP he could have taken?
“I’d guess you don’t even believe in your own oft-repeated budget argument. If so, how much do you consider is a reasonable amount to spend on a capital murder case? “
I’m not following you here.
“If you think Topete is innocent, say so. If you think the law is wrong, say so. Try to get it changed. But, why keep whining when our D.A. enforces the law? “
I think Mr. Topete is guilty of first degree murder. I think the Death Penalty is immoral. But even if the death penalty is valid, given the current circumstances, it makes little sense to waste precious resources on obtaining that verdict when we all know Mr. Topete will never be executed – or do you dispute that.
Just as I believe it is legal for the city of Davis to pay employees 3% at 50, does not mean it is the right move and I will criticize the 2000 council for implementing the enhanced benefits.
[quote]“Mrs. Topete has told me on numerous occasions that they would have taken LWOP.”[/quote]Her testimony under oath was not believable and was designed to provide her husband a defense against first degree intentions. In spite of your reporting about Topete’s “Wife’s Honest and Revealing Testimony,” not many others found it so.
Mrs. Topete’s numerous comments that “they would have taken LWOP” doesn’t translate into your oft-repeated contention that the DA had the “opportunity” to cut the deal with him, even if the DA wanted to.
Just remember how erratic Topete was in his handling of his defense. He was his own worst [s]enemy[/s] defense, and there’s no reason to think he would have been logical in looking at LWOP vs. fighting against conviction.[quote]“I’m not following you here.”[/quote]I think you are. Just because I disagree doesn’t mean I’m claiming your view isn’t permitted. I’m just saying the same thing you are, that other opinions are valid.
I’m also questioning the cost rationale you keep offering–we agree that the death penalty is wrong, regardless of whether the prosecution could be done in an economic manner. [quote]“…it makes little sense to waste precious resources on obtaining that verdict when we all know Mr. Topete will never be executed – or do you dispute that.”[/quote]You’re probably more sure than I am that no one ever again will be executed in California–voters are fickle, given public passions.
I guess I’m just getting tired of the harping about the DA’s office and the decisions made there. Your analogy confirms that you’re not following me on this part of the issue. It is the DA’s responsibility, his duty, to prosecute criminals to the full extent of the law. It is not the city’s responsibility to give employees overly generous retirement deals.
Just Saying
“Just concentrate on getting the law changed.”
There are many different ways of working towards this goal. Some people may be swayed by a moral argument against the death penalty. Others may be convinced by evidence that with changes in scientific methods of investigation, the innocent may be executed and find that unacceptable. Still others may be convinced by a financial argument or by the feeling that as Rich once posted, life without possibility of parole may be equally or more punishing than the death penalty.
What is certain is that to change a law, enough people’s opinion must be changed to make that happen.
Story telling is probably the most effective way to change opinion. In medicine we know that for most people, telling a story about someone with whom they can relate, and describing their choices and the outcome of their decision is more powerful than statistics in affecting their opinion. Some stories of course, will be better illustrators of a point than others. That does not necessarily mean there is no point in giving a less than perfect example.
David’s job is essentially story telling. The Vanguard is, amongst other things, his way of swaying opinion.
Sometimes we will agree with him viewpoint. Sometimes not. But the Vanguard is indeed one tool in an attempt to “get the law changed”.
[quote]David’s job is essentially story telling. The Vanguard is, amongst other things, his way of swaying opinion. [/quote]
Using the Topete case to try and argue against the death penalty is not particularly persuasive is the idea some of us are trying to get across. In fact all it (using the Topete case to argue against the death penalty) does is harm the credibility of the Vanguard, making it look as if the real reason for using the Topete case is the Vanguard’s vendetta against DA Reisig…
Just curious – do you find the Topete case a particularly persuasive argument against the death penalty?
[quote]“David’s job is essentially story telling. The Vanguard is, amongst other things, his way of swaying opinion. Sometimes we will agree with [s]him[/s] his viewpoint. Sometimes not. But the Vanguard is indeed one tool in an attempt to ‘get the law changed’.”[/quote]You may be correct that David has decided that his job is “essentially story telling.” On the other hand, he presents himself as a journalist (who also offers commentary based on a point of view that doesn’t try to hide).
My problem almost never is with the [u]Vanguard[/u]’s viewpoint. My concern is with the lackadaisical approach to providing compete and truthful reports. “Story telling” doesn’t have to be fiction; the [u]Vanguard[/u] would more effective as a tool for change if its reporting could be depended upon for some degree of objectivity.
Furthermore, it seem clears that many stories are told to discredit specific people, rather than to sway readers toward various social changes. I think this approach to story telling wastes David’s efforts and his readers’ time.
ERM
I find any case that involves the death penalty persuasive since I oppose the death penalty on moral grounds.
Thus my point about different stories being persuasive to different people. If the question is “do i believe that Topete is innocent ? ” Or do i find him a sympathetic character ?” the answer is an enphatic “no”. But for me, that is not the point. I know that my own biases, emotions, prejudices and world view will necessarily color my opinions. I believe that anyone who believes that they can remain completely objective after seeing the footage that apparently was introduced into evidence in this trial, is either delusional, out for revenge, or not being honest with themselves about the power of their own emotions. The basis for my opposition to the death penalty is exactly the same whether the decision for death is being made by one or more people outside of our legal system or by 12 people (not randomly, but deliberately selected because they believe in the death penalty). The decision to take another human life, in anything except immediate defense of ones self or others, is in my opinion morally wrong. Therefore,any story about the death penalty will be enough to renew my interest in seeing it overturned. If my actions in anyway help to overturn the death penalty, then David’s coverage will have served its purpose.
JustSaying
“it seem clears that many stories are told to discredit specific people, rather than to sway readers toward various social changes. I think this approach to story telling wastes David’s efforts and his readers’ time”
I am not quite clear on your point here.
I agree with you that it would be more informative, and sometimes less confusing if David were always very clear in separating his factual reporting from his opinion. It seems, from my brief experience with the Vangard that he makes a genuine effort to separate the two when pointed out, and then tends to backslide a bit over time.
As for telling a story “to discredit specific people” I am not clear what you think he should be doing differently. I am making the assumption that your primary reference would be to the DA. If David writes a story in which he simply states the facts as he knows them and then editorialized against the DAs position, is that enough in your view to represent “trying to discredit”? If he emphasizes what he considers to be the “at fault behaviors while downplaying mitigating factors, is that enough ? If he truly believes the DA, or anyone else for that matter is acting incorrectly,
Is it not his responsibility to report and comment so as to “discredit” what he sees as wrong ?
Just Saying makes some interesting points…
For one thing he writes: “it seem clears that many stories are told to discredit specific people, rather than to sway readers toward various social changes. I think this approach to story telling wastes David’s efforts and his readers’ time”
I think it is difficult to separate social change from the political actors who put policies in place and implement them. Along those lines, there are really several issues at play simultaneously.
1. The Death Penalty
2. Prosecutorial Discretion
3. Budget Crisis
Would anyone use the Topete case as a template against the death penalty? It is certainly not a close case in terms of innocence/ guilt. Topete has killed a law enforcement officers. And Topete is not a sympathetic figure – although the people who worked closely with him tended to like him and found him highly intelligent. But no he’s not the poster boy for banning the death penalty unless you take into account one key factor…
Cost…
In a budget crisis we have limited resources, we are talking of letting people go because we cannot afford to house them, we are hearing talking of not pursuing prosecution of minor crimes due to these problems.
The Death Penalty is not only extremely costly but it essentially has not been used – only 13 people in the last 33 years and none in six – and none in the foreseeable future.
It’s easy to say, hey he’s following the state law and he is, no one is claiming otherwise, but he also has discretion to say that since the costs of trying a death penalty case are likely to be well over $1 million and given our limited budget and given the likelihood he will never be out of prison, does it really not make more sense to take a plea agreement for LWOP if you have it? It’s better for everyone involved – he would be in protective custody in solitary at the Shue and a threat to almost no one.
If that criticism really amounts to effort to get Reisig, that’s dumb, and insulting because I’m not stupid enough to believe that this is an issue that will resonate with people, but I can raise the issue when other stories come up to demonstrate that this was not a necessary decision that was made locally and it costs us money that could have been better spent elsewhere.
The differences between LWOP and the Death Penalty are HUGE…even if the person sentenced to death is not executed for 20 years. LWOP allows a prisoner to become part of the “Prison Population”…Inmates sentenced to death go to San Quentin and are housed on Death Row…Considerably less contact with other prisoners and many, many more hours on lock down…DAILY.
Topete should have never been allowed to take a plea to LWOP…To think that no one would have batted an eye is a remarakable mis-statement in my opinion.
If Topete was allowed to plead to LWOP he hould have returned to the prison population as not only a hero in the eyes of his fellow prison gang members for murdering a cop but also as a hero for manipulating the system so that he could hang with his homeboys and call shots in the prison gang.
The Yolo County DA’s office made sure that the only thing Topete is going to get is a very lonely cell and a very long wait for his eventual meeting with his maker…I say Good Job!