Radley Strikes Again

Score another one for Radley Balko, this time for his post on the increasing militarization of our police departments. He's getting letters from military personnel explaining that they (the military) are much more restrained in their search behavior than are SWAT teams.

It's a good read. Here's my takeaway quote: "A couple of years ago after I'd given a speech on this issue, a retired military officer and former instructor at West Point specifically asked me to stop using the term "militarization," because he thought comparing SWAT teams to the military reflected poorly on the military."

Hank Skinner Update: No Decision Today

The Supreme Court has handed down its rulings for today, 17 May 2010. There is no mention of Hank's petition for a writ of certiorari.  The next time the court will announce its rulings is next Monday, 24 May.

So that you understand how difficult it is to get the Supremes to grant the sort of relief requested by Hank Skinner, I counted the number of petitions for writ granted (2) and the number denied (228). That's less than one chance in 100.  (I have a math background. Don't try this at home.)

I've been anxiously awaiting word on Hank's petition. I guess I can take the tension I feel, multiply by infinity, then maybe have some sense of what Hank and Sandrine and Rob Owens and the others might feel. (Once again, do not try such emotional math at home.)

Those of you who wish to read of Supreme Court decisions as they are being announced, I recommend SCOTUSblog.  SCOTUS is the acronym for Supreme Court of The United States. Hopefully, that will make the name of the blog self-explanatory.

When the court hands down its decisions, usually Mondays beginning at 10 AM eastern time, SCOTUSblog has a reporter in the courtroom sending back information on the decisions as they are announced in open court. You can follow the live-blog of the court session from the SCOTUSblog home page. It's pretty cool, actually.

During that live-blog session today, the reporter provided the link to the written summary of decisions. There are far too many decisions to speak to each individually in court, so the court speaks briefly to just a few. I followed the link provided by the in-court reporter, searched that document for Skinner, and came up with zero hits. I then went line-by-line searching and counting, so you don't have to. Unless I'm missing something, no decision today. Maybe next Monday.

And by the way, I guess I was wrong yesterday when I predicted the court would have a decision today.

Hank Skinner Update: Tomorrow May Be the Day

Sunday, 16 May 2010

I think tomorrow is the day Hank Skinner will learn whether or not the Supreme Court will consider in full court his request for a writ of certiorari.

Seven weeks ago I predicted, based primarily upon my utter ignorance of Supreme Court procedures, that the Supremes would not respond to Hank Skinner's request for a writ in less than a month. (I also explained what a writ of certiorari was, and I seem to have gotten it correct. It was one of my more lucid moments.) Others were saying the Supreme Court might reply within days or weeks, but I was confident no bureaucracy could respond faster than Texas when it finally has the opportunity to execute someone.  Even in Texas, that process takes a month from signing the death warrant to pushing the needle.

One month after my uninformed prediction, the Supremes ruled against a bunch of appellants but postponed a decision on Hank's case for one week. That week passed, and the Supremes then ruled against another bunch of appellants but postponed a decision on Hank's case for two more weeks. It's now been seven weeks since Scalia put a hold on Hank Skinner's execution. That seven weeks works out to the "we-can-now-execute-him" Texas minimum, plus three weeks of announced delays.

I don't think there will be another delay. The Supremes met in conference Friday, and they will announce the results of that conference tomorrow. I think they will make known their decision regarding Hank Skinner. 

If they rule in his favor, they will be ruling only to consider his request in full court during their next term, which begins in October.

If they rule against him, that means there will be no more impediments to Texas executing him. Everyone will be back to asking Rick Perry to intervene. Unfortunately, I don't believe Rick Perry will do so. I can't get inside that man's head, but it sure seems as if he was going to remain mute last time, when Hank came within forty minutes of being executed. I'm not sure what calculations are going on inside that "I-am-destined-to-be-President" brain, but I suspect political variables are more common and more dominant that justice variables.

I think the die has been cast. Tomorrow, we shall see.

The Case of Ruben Cantu

Ruben Cantu is among the Pantheon of those wrongfully executed by Texas. His name appears frequently with the likes of Cameron Todd Willingham and Carlos DeLuna. His story is simple and compelling.

Two men were shot and robbed while guarding a house under construction. One of the victims, Juan Moreno, survived and identified Ruben Cantu as one of the two men who robbed and shot them. Moreno made that identification only after four previous interviews in which he was unable or unwilling to identify Cantu. Based exclusively on Moreno's testimony, and despite an alibi witness, Cantu was convicted and executed.

The State-Sponsored Criminalization of America

Radley Balko has a follow-up on the drug raid video I included as part of my recent post Arizona, Missouri, Pennsylvania: A Cautionary Tale. Lots of bloggers have linked to it (the YouTube video, not my post), and upwards of a million people have now viewed it.

According to Radley, that raid was just one of 100 to 150 conducted each day in America, mostly for  consenting crimes such as possession of marijuana. That's 35,000 to 55,000 such raids a year. 

Add to that the number of citizens who will be "detained" by the police due to Arizona's new illegal immigration bill. Consider as well that other states are considering similar "show us your papers" bills.

Add to that the number of people who will be pursued correctly or incorrectly by insatiable tax collection agencies. "Your name is Tom. You live just off of 5th Street. Nice car Tom. Nice house. What's not so nice is you owe Pennsylvania $4212 in back taxes. Listen Tom, we can make this easy ..."

Add to that the number of people who will have money and property confiscated by the government, without trial or court order, as part of drug forfeiture laws.

Add to that the number of criminals we will soon create because some of us will refuse or be unable to purchase health insurance.

Add to that the number of people who will be caught by the traffic cameras so beloved by cities. The cameras actually increase the number of accidents, but they are gold mines for cities always eager for more "revenue."

Add to that the number of returning vets that Janet Napolitano wants to keep a close eye on because she believes they are more likely to become domestic terrorists. 

Add to that the number of people wrongfully convicted. That number may be as high as 10%, a number which I will soon defend in this blog and elsewhere. Given that we now have 2,300,000 people in prison or jail, that means a quarter million of them may be wrongfully convicted.

Add to that the notice I received from my city that I was watering my lawn at the wrong time of day.

Okay, the last one is not as serious, but you get the idea. Welcome to the state-sponsored criminalization of America.

So again I ask the question: Have we reached the point where we now have more to fear from the State than from the criminals we hoped it would control?