As part of this newspaper’s endorsement process, we invited the candidates for Los Angeles District attorney to provide their written thoughts, only lightly edited for length, on major public policy matters.
Here we present their responses to the question: The death penalty, for all practical purposes, is not likely to ever be carried out in California. Should the Los Angeles County DA pursue death sentences, if only to send a message?
George Gascón: No, I strongly oppose the death penalty and don’t believe it should be pursued under any circumstances.
Craig Mitchell: No. I agree with your assessment. The millions and millions of dollars spent during the appellate phase of a death penalty conviction should be redirected to provide services to victims of crime.
Debra Archuleta: The LA County District attorney should seek the death penalty only in appropriate cases with a judicious and scrupulous review before the Special Circumstances Committee, as was customary in previous administrations. I have participated in this process previously and found it to be an effective tool in determining which cases, if any, should receive the ultimate penalty. The death penalty is the law in this state and therefore should be followed as it reflects the will of California voters.
Maria Ramirez: The death penalty is still the law in California despite numerous attempts to defeat it. As District attorney, I am committed to following all of the laws of the state when appropriate. I think that the District attorney should have a review process in place for cases that qualify for the death penalty and that legal option should be thoughtfully considered. A death sentence is still meaningful especially in the most horrendous and vicious of cases and is more than symbolic as it affects the availability of parole and housing for the most violent and callous offenders.
John McKinney: We should never prosecute cases to send a message. Never. We should only prosecute cases based on provable facts and the law. While I agree that it is unlikely that we will ever see an execution in California, the District attorney must apply the laws passed by the People. While I know that the death penalty is not a politically winning issue in Los Angeles County, As District attorney, I must have a meaningful process in place to evaluate whether certain first-degree murderers should face death. Given my fidelity to the law and commitment to operate within the bounds of the law, I could not override the will of the voters and nullify the death penalty. I think anyone running for DA who is not committed to upholding state law should be disqualified. Those who cheer the DA who nullifies the death penalty today should be mindful that the precedent is set for the next DA to nullify a law that he or she cares greatly about.
Eric Siddall: The death penalty doesn’t work. It doesn’t deter crime. It re-victimizes and retraumatizes victims. Therefore, it serves no purpose. For example, LAPD Officer Paul Verna was killed in the line of duty June 2, 1983. Because the District attorney’s office sought the death penalty in his case, his conviction was ultimately overturned on appeal — 35 years after his conviction and death sentence. Verna’s killer was retried, the death penalty was sought again, and his conviction was overturned a second time on technicalities. In the meantime, Verna’s family had to live through the trauma of the murder over and over and over, while justice was delayed for 40 years. Only when the case was finally tried a third time this year by myself and we sought life without parole, was Verna’s killer finally handed the justice he deserved — and Verna’s family afforded the closure they’d been seeking for 40 years. In the end, the result was the same: Verna’s killer will spend the rest of his life behind bars, but had the original prosecutors sought life without parole instead of the death penalty, Verna’s family would have been spared decades of trauma.
Dan Kapelovitz: First, I disagree the notion that the death penalty will never be carried out in California. A new governor can lift the moratorium at any time. Second, pursuing a death sentence just to send a message is completely insane. I am against the death penalty for so many different reasons: innocent people have been executed or sentenced to death, the death penalty is applied arbitrarily and in ways that discriminate against people of color, it is extremely costly to the taxpayers, it does not deter crime – the list goes on. So no, my office will not be pursuing death sentences to send a message – or for any other reason.
Jonathan Hatami: I believe in the process. I’ve been through the process. I believe in the law. Most importantly, I believe in discretion. The most heinous cases, with 100% evidence, going through this careful process is discretion. Never doing something is not discretion. That is a violation of the law, and the ultimate disrespect to the will of the voters. It is hubris,not justice. It takes both character and legitimate ability to be an effective DA. No matter what the punishment is, no one can bring back a murder victim. That is not our charge. Our charge is to pursue justice. People can disagree and we should have healthy debate. But it is not up to the DA to make the law. It is the DA’s responsibility to follow it. I would use my discretion as the elected DA of Los Angeles to follow the law and fairly seek justice for all.
Nathan Hochman: The death penalty should be subject to the highest level of scrutiny by the DA’s Office, a jury, and the courts and should only be used in the rarest of cases. However, there are such extreme cases – for example, where police officers are assassinated in cold blood, where mass shootings at a school occur, where terrorists kill hundreds through a bombing — when the death penalty should be on the table for consideration. I am well aware of the troubled history of the death penalty, of those who have later been vindicated, and of the philosophical issues concerning its implementation. However, as District attorney, I take an oath to uphold all the laws, not just the laws I like. There is no asterisk in this oath, and any candidate who cannot fully uphold this oath to enforce all laws should be disqualified from being the District attorney and should instead run for state legislator or governor to change the law. As long as the death penalty is the law of California – having prevailed on the ballot twice in the last 12 years – I will honor my oath and subject it to the highest level of review, considering its charging in the most heinous of cases to which it applies.
Jeff Chemerinsky: No
attorney-candidates-stand-on-the-death-penalty/”>Source link
Attorneys and law firms can elevate their online presence with professionally written content from SEO Content Writing Services monthly plan. Our team of experienced writers specializes in crafting blog posts, articles, and written content that accurately reflect the expertise and knowledge of our clients in the legal field. With a keen eye for detail and a thorough understanding of legal terminology, we provide high-quality writing that helps our clients stand out from their competition and engage with their target audience. Trust SEO Content Writing Services for one time article writing or monthly written content to handle all of your written content needs and showcase your law firm's expertise.
If you need written content, blog posts, or articles professionally written for your website, we can help. Go HERE to find out more.
or email us here: myseowritingservices@gmail.com
To find out more about our article writing or blog post services, fill out the form, thank you.
