Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: The most overlooked story of the week
Next Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
* As you know by now, the House passed a death penalty abolition bill on the second try yesterday. Democratic state Rep. Pat Verschoore voted against the bill the first time, then changed his vote after the bill’s sponsor appealed to him…
“I’d been back and forth on this since they started talking about abolishing it,” Verschoore said. State Rep. Karen Yarbrough, D-Maywood, the proposal’s sponsor, asked him to reconsider his vote, he said.
“She’s helped me on some legislation I’ve had through the years, and so I said I’d give her the vote,” Verschoore said.
Verschoore added…
“I was on both sides of this issue. But then you think of the potential cost savings of this bill, and the state needs all of the savings we can get,” Verschoore said. “Besides, my wife was on me to vote for it.”
You just never know what’ll move a member sometimes. But a spouse with strong views on an issue can be a powerful force.
* And Verschoore wasn’t the only one…
During the second vote, several lawmakers either switched positions or failed to vote. But in the end, supporters collected the 60 votes they needed to pass the House. Fifty-four House members voted against it.
More…
But two retiring lawmakers, Republican Bob Biggins of Elmhurst and Democrat Mike Smith of Canton, changed their votes from no to yes, while Rep. Anthony DeLuca, D-Crete, switched from yes to not voting.
“I don’t think I was the convincing factor by any means,” said Sen. Kwame Raoul, D-Chicago, the Senate sponsor of the bill, who talked to both Biggins and Smith between votes. “I’d love to take credit and say I have these great persuasive abilities, but I don’t think that’s the case. A lot of people were conflicted, even people who voted no on the bill. It was a very difficult bill. It’s not an easy issue.’
* From the debate…
Republican Rep. Jim Sacia, a former FBI agent from Pecatonica, said threatening defendants with the death penalty often can make them talk to authorities to help solve crimes.
“Don’t take that tool from law enforcement,” Sacia said.
Others said they supported the idea of the death penalty, but couldn’t in good faith allow for executions when it has been proved that Illinois’ system is broken.
“I could administer the death penalty myself to a cop killer or a serial murder and sleep like a baby at night if I knew without a doubt of their guilt,” said Rep. Susana Mendoza, D-Chicago, who is running for city clerk. “(But) we’ve come horrifyingly close to executing innocent men, and it could happen again.”
* The bill now moves to the Senate, where its sponsor is predicting an easier time of it. Senate President Cullerton also supports the bill…
Senate President John Cullerton said Thursday night he supports the proposal and hopes it passes. But the Chicago Democrat stopped short of saying he would ask his members to back it.
“That’s a real personal decision,” Cullerton said of voting on abolition. “People vote their conscience on something like that and I’ll let them decide how to do that.”
* Zorn dug up Gov Pat Quinn’s response to the Tribune’s questionnaire which shows he supports the death penalty…
I support capital punishment when applied carefully and fairly… Although the moratorium gives the state of Illinois time to review all aspects of capital punishment, and makes it possible to put effective safeguards in place, the death penalty underscores our shared belief as a society that some crimes deserve the most severe punishment, when handed down fairly and justly.
Quinn has refused to say what he’ll do if this bill lands on his desk.
* Meanwhile, another bill which was thought to have enough votes failed on its second try yesterday…
Hopes for legalizing medicinal marijuana in Illinois were snuffed out Thursday.
Senate Bill 1381 failed in the Illinois House by a vote of 56 yes, 60 no. The legislation would have given patients with chronic conditions, such as cancer, glaucoma or multiple sclerosis, the right to possess up to two ounces of marijuana for their own use.
The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Lou Lang, D-Skokie, had previously said he had enough votes to pass the bill, if all his supporters showed up.
* But Lang isn’t giving up…
The sponsor of the bill, Rep. Lou Lang, D-Skokie, pledged to continue pushing toward legalizing the illicit herb. “I am going to continue to press on — on this particular piece of legislation, or some version of it — until I pass it,” Lang said. “Next year, the year after … I’m a young man. I’ll be here awhile.”
* Related…
* Illinois House reverses decision, votes to abolish death penalty
* On 2nd try, state House votes to abolish death penalty
* Ill. Death penalty repeal fails — then passes — in House
* Leitch, Umholtz disappointed by death penalty vote
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 7:21 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: The most overlooked story of the week
Next Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I don’t really feel bad about taking Sacia’s “we’ll kill you if you don’t confess” tool away from law enforcement. Especially since law enforcement is not who decides if “we’ll kill you”–the prosecutors are.
Comment by winco Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 8:22 am
–“I could administer the death penalty myself to a cop killer or a serial murder and sleep like a baby at night if I knew without a doubt of their guilt,” said Rep. Susana Mendoza, D-Chicago, who is running for city clerk. “(But) we’ve come horrifyingly close to executing innocent men, and it could happen again.”–
The pretty much sums up my position.
Sacia’s argument is outrageous. The death penalty as a tool to coerce testimony? Is he from Pecatonica by way of Teheran? Not exactly a small government conservative.
Sacia presumes those folks would tell the truth. My guess is they would lie like a rug, say anything prosecutors wanted to hear.
Lest we forget, Robert Turner, who undoubtedly murdered and raped Bridget Drobney down in Macoupin County in the 80s, made a living as a Death Row snitch, and clearly lied in his testimony for the prosecution at Rolando Cruz’s second trial, in an effort to get out of his own death sentence.
Ol’ Bobby was released into the general population when Ryan cleared Death Row. Hope he made lots of new friends.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 8:57 am
Sacia’s comment is just more evidence of how false confessions occur. Another argument for abolition.
Comment by D.P. Gumby Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 9:31 am
I’m not sure how it it’s done in IL. Are death qualified juries selected when a prosecutor wants to go for the death penalty?
Comment by cermak_rd Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 9:38 am
There are approximately 500 people murdered each year in the City of Chicago alone. that is about 20,000 people in the last 40 years since the controversy over the death penalty began in earnest in the U.S. It would be nice if even half of the energy spent crying over violent individuals was spent on those who were wrongly killed.
Comment by amalia Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 9:39 am
==She’s helped me on some legislation I’ve had through the years, and so I said I’d give her the vote==
Rich you left out what he said right after that. On ABC 7 he finished that quote with “that’s just how things are done down here.” It was just something…
Comment by chuddery Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 9:42 am
@amalia - Where is your concern for those who could be “wrongly killed” by the state? Is your faith in government so boundless that you can’t imagine that an innocent person could be put to death?
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 9:49 am
- It would be nice if even half of the energy spent crying over violent individuals was spent on those who were wrongly killed. -
No one is crying over violent individuals. Do you even read what you post?
Comment by Small Town Liberal Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 9:54 am
“That’s just how things are done down here”. Very sad.
Comment by Skeptic Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 10:05 am
STL, Amalia doesn’t bother to make rational arguments or respond to reason. In her infinite self-righteousness, she’s convinced herself that she’s the only one left on the planet who has empathy for crime victims.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 10:06 am
I think there are more politicians who believe the death penalty is wrong, but are afraid to vote against it based on right/wrong than there are those who think it is right, but would vote against it for some other reason. So when I hear somewhat lame arguments, like cost, or my wife wanted me to, or I owed a legislator a favor, I figure I’m hearing someone who just didn’t have the political courage to say “it’s wrong.”
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 10:16 am
the most important fact is that thousands of people have been wrongly murdered and that is what should have our attention. don’t ignore that.
@ wordslinger, i’m surprised that someone who is usually responsible would make such a statement. I know lots of people who have empathy for crime victims, and I simply express the same sentiments that they do. how many police and prosecutors do you know? I am certainly not the only person who cries for victims, but sometimes it seems that way on this board. as for crying over violent individuals, I direct you to Andrea Lyon, Locke Bowman, and the others we see regularly in the press. they’ve been at it for years. no one questions how they benefit.
Comment by amalia Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 10:16 am
- the most important fact is that thousands of people have been wrongly murdered and that is what should have our attention. don’t ignore that. -
Again, who in the world is ignoring that? You speak as though everyone else wants murder to be legalized.
Comment by Small Town Liberal Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 10:22 am
This needs to be done. I am for the death penalty in some cases but it was never going to be used in Illinois again anyway and the cost involved in keeping it on the books is huge. From the money set aside for the defense in death penalty cases to the multiple appeals to the cost of special housing in prison. We were paying huge money for the illusion of a death penalty but the sentence was never going to be carried out in Illinois.
Comment by Fed up Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 10:28 am
Amalia, you spend a lot of time talking about your crying, yet you refuse to address the facts of Illinois history regarding the death penalty.
The had to cut loose more than a dozen men who were convicted and queued up to be executed because either DNA evidence later proved they couldn’t have committed the crimes or because of egregious prosecutorial misconduct.
Not that it matters, but I was a cop and courts reporter for 10 years, and I admire greatly the work of most cops and prosecutors. But I don’t stick my head in the sand and pretend that the system hasn’t failed or been abused when the evidence is staring me straight in the face.
And I don’t propose that opponents of the death penalty are bleeding hearts for murderers or callous toward crime victims. I covered Bobby Turner’s trial and would have flipped the switch myself. But there are others who would have done the same for Dugan and Cruz for the ultimate miscarriage of justice.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 10:33 am
Excuse me, not Dugan.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 10:34 am
I spent several years of my legal career as an assistant state’s attorney in Cook County and an assistant Illinois attorney general. NOT that that makes my opinion any more worthy than anyone elses. And I accept that people of good faith can reach different conclusions on issues like the death penalty. But I must say, I am taken aback by people who suggest that “abolitionists” are callous or “soft on crime”. When the death penalty is officially ended in Illinois (since it unofficially ended years ago), these “worst of the worst” will receive sentences of “LWOP”, life without parole. Society is still protected from the uncivilized–and in so doing, society gets a little more civilized. Good work, Illinois House.
Comment by Mike Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 11:13 am
I can’t stand the thought of some monster murderer drawing breath for years at state expense while the victims’ family grieves the loss of a loved one. Equally as horrid is the thought that the state would take the life of an innocent person in my name.
With some countys prosecutors rushing to judgement (Cruz, Fox, Hobbs) resulting in near executions (Cruz) we should be very wary of the death penalty. While it may stick in our collective craws the idea that some monster murderer can appear to enjoy life behind bars (remember the Speck video), we must balance the needs of all.
If we could be sure that the death penalty would only be used in cases where guilt is obvious, and the victims were most special (law enforcement, children, etc) maybe it could work. How often does that happen?
I don’t like using the fact that a LWOP sentence actually costs less than the death penalty. However, it is a reality that must be faced.
Let’s make sure LWOP means just that - no opportunity for clemency, etc. No discretion by anyone. If you get LWOP, you die in prison. Period. That’s what is promised when the sentence is imposed. That should be enough.
Comment by dupage dan Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 11:16 am
***AMALIA said, “as for crying over violent individuals, I direct you to Andrea Lyon, Locke Bowman, and the others we see regularly in the press. they’ve been at it for years. no one questions how they benefit.”***
I wasn’t going to reply to Amalia’s comments because it seemed pointless. But, it is really beyond the pale to specifically insult defense attorneys who have helped exonerate innocent people, instead of praising them. For decades, Chicago police tortured people into false confessions, but apparently she thinks state violence is okay? We have the highest rate of exonerated death row prisoners in the state.
It also might help Amalia to know that:
1. These victims that she purports to know and care so much about disproportionately end up in prison. Yes, they are prisoners! That is because poor people are much more likely to be victims of crime, and to be victimized in prison.
2. You can’t speak for all victims. Many family members of murder victims oppose the death penalty.
Comment by tired of press Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 11:51 am
So the fella changes his vote for all reasons that are not tied to any reasoning of the purpose of the bill? Wow, Democratic state Rep. Pat Verschoore, you scare me!
Comment by Justice Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 12:05 pm
For those who support the death penalty…. would you support executing the jury who sentenced someone to death if the jury got it wrong and the person was killed? After all the jury has just killed somone….
As n aside, a long time ago in far away england when you were accused of a crime by the king you could seek to be found innocent by having a group of peers vouch for you (your jury). However, if the king determined you were guilty the jury could be hanged ith you for vouvhing for you (hung jury).
The old ways are nest after all…keep the detah penalty but tell the jurors if they get it wrong they suffer the same retribubution for an innocent life taken… After all, if we have to consider the victims….like those wrongly convicted.
Comment by Ghost Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 12:08 pm
I am pro life.
Regardless of societal justfications used, governments should not be empowered to take your life.
From conception to death, life is more precious than any inconvenience or crime committed. You do not let others take it from you.
I know innocent former death row citizens. They are alive thanks to DNA. They lived for decades waiting to be killed for something they did not do.
Life in solitary.
Not death.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 12:26 pm
If you want to see an informed, serious debate about the death penalty (and forgive me, Rich, for directing folks to visit a site other than Capitol Fax for this), check out the streaming video program on the Illinois Channel website (www.illinoischannel.org) featuring Tom Sullivan, Chair of the Illinois General Assembly’s Capital Punishment Reform Study Committee; Dick Devine, former Cook County State’s Attorney; and Locke Bowman, Director of the MacArthur Justice Center at Northwestern University School of Law.
Comment by chicagodrummer Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 1:31 pm
I just finished reading an unbelievably thorough examination of the history of the death penalty: “A Peculiar Institution: America’s Death Penalty in an Age of Abolition” by David Garland. This is the book that John Paul Stevens wrote about in the New York Review of Books and talked about on 60 Minutes. If anybody wants to get up to speed on what should be a dying institution (pun intended), I highly recommend this book. Passing an abolition will be very tough because being tough on crime and being in favor of the death penalty for the most horrific cases is usually the way our local politicians help themselves get elected. Since local prosecutors decide whether to seek the death penalty, this seemingly national question (whether we should even have a death penalty) becomes a local question, with local political pressure being brought to bear upon those with the power to vote for something like an abolition. This vote calls for the type of political courage not easily found in a state legislature or in our Congress.
Comment by chiatty Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 2:26 pm
There’s some irony that posters who seem largely convinced that our government is wholly corrupt and incompetent argue that same government should be given the power of life and death over them.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Friday, Jan 7, 11 @ 4:47 pm