Arguments Against Death Penalty

Summary

In the episode of 'Face the States,' Arianna Bennett discusses the debate surrounding the death penalty in Nevada. Nancy Hart, president of a Nevada coalition against the death penalty, argues for its abolition, citing the organization's 16-year educational mission to highlight flaws in capital punishment. Hart emphasizes the financial burden, inefficiency, and potential for racial and economic bias in its application. She also addresses victim families' perspectives, noting a growing number oppose the death penalty for its lack of healing. The conversation touches on the possibility of life without parole as an alternative and the changing public opinion in Nevada.

Takeaways

• 🗣️ The debate is about whether to abolish the death penalty in Nevada, with Nancy Hart representing the Nevada coalition against it.
• 📚 The Coalition has been active since 2002, focusing on educating the public and policymakers about the flaws of the death penalty.
• 🏛️ To abolish the death penalty, a legislative bill would be required to repeal Nevada's law, but there are also indirect ways such as juries being less inclined to impose death sentences.
• 📉 There is a national trend of a decline in the number of executions and new death sentences, which is also observed in Nevada.
• 🚫 The Coalition does not handle litigation but follows court cases related to the death penalty.
• 🏛️ The Supreme Court once ruled the death penalty unconstitutional in 1972, but later allowed it under certain circumstances; the Coalition hopes for a return to the original ruling.
• 🤔 The Coalition has diverse opinions on why the death penalty should be abolished, including moral, philosophical, and practical concerns such as racial and economic bias.
• 💰 The death penalty is financially costly, with Clark County in Nevada having a high number of pending death penalty cases, putting a significant burden on the state and county.
• 🔒 The Coalition does not prescribe an alternative punishment but acknowledges life without parole as a severe penalty available in Nevada.
• 🔄 Some victims' families seek closure through the death penalty, but there is a growing number who oppose it, believing it does not promote healing.
• 📊 Public opinion on the death penalty may be shifting, with comprehensive polling suggesting a decline in support when alternatives like life without parole are presented.

Q & A

What is the primary focus of the Nevada Coalition Against the Death Penalty?

The Nevada Coalition Against the Death Penalty primarily focuses on educating the public and policymakers about the flaws and bad public policy they believe the death penalty represents.

How long has the Nevada Coalition Against the Death Penalty been active?

The Coalition has been active since 2002, making it over 16 years old at the time of the interview.

What is the most direct way to abolish the death penalty in Nevada according to the script?

The most direct way to abolish the death penalty in Nevada is through a bill in the legislature to repeal Nevada's law regarding the death penalty.

What is a national trend mentioned in the script regarding juries and the death penalty?

A national trend mentioned is that juries are becoming less inclined to impose death sentences, which contributes to a decline in new death sentences.

Does the Nevada Coalition Against the Death Penalty handle any litigation related to the death penalty?

No, the Coalition is an educational organization and advocacy group and does not get involved in litigation.

What was the Supreme Court's stance on the death penalty in 1972 according to the script?

In 1972, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty was unconstitutional.

What is the Coalition's view on the current constitutionality of the death penalty?

The Coalition believes that the death penalty is still unconstitutional and would urge the Supreme Court to reaffirm this stance.

What are some of the troubling aspects of the death penalty implementation mentioned in the script?

Troubling aspects include racial and economic bias in the application of the death penalty, arbitrary and disproportionate sentencing, and the high financial cost to maintain the system.

What is the Coalition's position on the alternative penalty for murder if the death penalty is abolished?

The Coalition does not take a position on what the alternative penalty should be, but acknowledges that life without parole is a severe penalty currently on the books in Nevada.

How does the script address the issue of victim family members seeking closure through the death penalty?

The script suggests that not all victim family members believe the death penalty promotes healing, and an increasing number of them speak out against it for this reason.

What is the concern from the prosecuting side regarding the removal of the death penalty as a sentencing option?

The concern is that without the death penalty, the highest available punishment would be life without parole, which could lead to a shift downward in sentencing severity for all crimes.

Is there evidence to suggest that removing the death penalty would lead to fewer serious homicide prosecutions resulting in life without parole sentences?

The script indicates that there is no evidence to suggest that the removal of the death penalty would lead to fewer life without parole sentences, and it might actually result in those who would have been eligible for death being sentenced to life without parole instead.

What does the script suggest about public opinion on the death penalty in Nevada?

The script suggests that public opinion in Nevada may be shifting, with more comprehensive polling indicating a decline in support for the death penalty when alternatives like life without parole are presented.

What is the importance of transparency according to the script regarding the death penalty?

The script emphasizes the importance of maintaining transparency around the death penalty process because it is being done in the name of the public.

Outlines

00:00

📜 Abolishing the Death Penalty in Nevada

In this segment, Arianna Bennett interviews Nancy Hart, president of a Nevada coalition against the death penalty. Nancy discusses the coalition's efforts since 2002 to educate the public and policymakers about the flaws in the death penalty system. She explains the legislative process required to repeal the death penalty in Nevada, which involves introducing a bill in the state legislature. Nancy also notes a national trend of juries being less inclined to impose death sentences, effectively reducing new death penalty cases. The coalition, however, does not engage in litigation but focuses on education and advocacy. The conversation highlights the historical context, including the Supreme Court's 1972 ruling that the death penalty was unconstitutional, and the coalition's hope for a similar ruling in the future.

05:01

🛡️ Life Without Parole as an Alternative to the Death Penalty

The discussion continues with the exploration of life without parole as a severe alternative to the death penalty in Nevada. Nancy Hart clarifies that while the coalition does not dictate what the highest penalty should be, life without parole is a severe punishment and is already an option in the state. She points out the irony that death penalty cases often result in life imprisonment due to the lengthy appeals process and the current inability to carry out executions. Nancy addresses the inefficiency and high costs associated with pursuing the death penalty, including the financial burden on counties like Clark County, which has a high number of pending death penalty cases. The conversation also touches on the varying opinions of victims' families, with some seeking closure through the death penalty and others finding the process does not promote healing.

10:03

🔍 Shifts in Public Opinion and the Impact on Sentencing

In the final paragraph, Nancy Hart discusses the potential impact of abolishing the death penalty on sentencing, refuting the idea that it would lead to more lenient sentences for murderers. She argues that there is no evidence to suggest that the absence of the death penalty would result in fewer life without parole sentences, as Nevada already has a significant number of such cases. Hart also addresses concerns that the death penalty serves as a deterrent for prosecutors, countering that comprehensive polling indicates a decline in public support for capital punishment when alternatives like life without parole are presented. She senses a shift in public opinion in Nevada and believes that more comprehensive polling would reflect a similar trend as seen nationally. The segment concludes with a call for public awareness and transparency in the state's use of the death penalty.

Keywords

💡Death Penalty

The death penalty refers to the legal process by which a person is sentenced to death for a crime, usually murder. In the video's theme, it is the central issue being debated, with arguments both for and against its retention in Nevada. The script discusses the efforts to abolish it, as well as the historical context of its constitutionality.

💡Abolition

Abolition, in this context, means the act of formally ending or abolishing a practice, specifically the death penalty. The script features Nancy Hart, who is part of a coalition working towards the abolition of the death penalty in Nevada, highlighting the educational and advocacy efforts of her organization.

💡Nevada Coalition Against the Death Penalty

This is the organization that Nancy Hart represents, which has been active since 2002. The coalition's primary focus is on educating the public and policymakers about the perceived flaws in the death penalty as a public policy. The script mentions this coalition as a key player in the movement to abolish the death penalty.

💡Legislature

The term 'legislature' refers to a governmental assembly with the authority to make laws. In the script, it is mentioned as the body that would need to pass a bill to repeal Nevada's death penalty law, illustrating the political process required to change such a law.

💡Juries

Juries are groups of people sworn to render a verdict in a trial, based on the evidence presented. The script discusses a trend where juries are less inclined to impose death sentences, which contributes to a decline in the use of the death penalty, even if it is not officially abolished.

💡Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is the highest court in a judicial system, with the power to make decisions that affect the entire legal system. The script refers to a historical Supreme Court decision in 1972 that ruled the death penalty unconstitutional, which is a key point in the argument for its abolition.

💡Constitutional

Constitutional refers to something that is consistent with, or in accordance with, a constitution or the principles on which it is based. The script discusses the belief of the coalition that the death penalty is still unconstitutional, despite the Supreme Court's later decision allowing it under certain conditions.

💡Racial Bias

Racial bias refers to the unfair treatment of individuals based on their race. The script mentions racial bias as one of the troubling aspects of the death penalty's implementation, suggesting that it is not applied equally across different racial groups.

💡Economic Bias

Economic bias denotes the preferential treatment or discrimination based on an individual's economic status. The script points out economic bias as another issue with the death penalty, implying that its application may be influenced by the wealth or poverty of the accused.

💡Life Without Parole

Life without parole is a sentence in which a person is imprisoned for the rest of their life without the possibility of release on parole. The script discusses this as an alternative to the death penalty, noting that it is already a severe punishment under Nevada law.

💡Victims' Families

Victims' families are the relatives or loved ones of individuals who have been killed. The script explores the idea that not all victims' families support the death penalty, with some believing it does not promote healing and may not bring the closure they seek.

💡Public Opinion

Public opinion refers to the collective views of the public on a particular matter. The script suggests that public opinion on the death penalty in Nevada may be changing, with more people potentially opposing it when given more information about alternatives like life without parole.

Highlights

Introduction of Nancy Hart, president of a Nevada coalition against the death penalty.

The Coalition has been active since 2002, focusing on educating the public and policymakers about the flaws of the death penalty.

Process to abolish the death penalty in Nevada involves legislative action, including a bill to repeal the law.

A decline in death sentences and executions is observed nationally and in Nevada, indicating a shift in attitudes.

The Coalition does not handle litigation but follows court cases related to the death penalty.

Historical context provided on the Supreme Court's rulings regarding the constitutionality of the death penalty.

The Coalition advocates for the Supreme Court to reconsider its stance on the death penalty's constitutionality.

Diverse opinions within the Coalition, ranging from moral to practical concerns about the death penalty.

Concerns about racial and economic biases in the application of the death penalty.

Disproportionate sentencing and the burden on the state and county from a cost perspective.

The inefficiency of the death penalty system, with many cases pending and few executions carried out.

The Coalition does not prescribe an alternative to the death penalty but acknowledges life without parole as a severe penalty.

The financial cost of pursuing the death penalty, with Clark County spending millions on pending cases.

Victim family members' perspectives on the death penalty are not uniform, with some opposing it for lack of closure.

The potential impact of abolishing the death penalty on the severity of other sentences is discussed.

Public opinion on the death penalty in Nevada is suggested to be shifting, with more comprehensive polling indicating a decline in support.

The importance of transparency and public awareness in the application of the death penalty.

Transcripts

[Music]

welcome back to face the states I'm

Arianna Bennett thank you for staying

with us well in the last segment you

heard the arguments for keeping the best

of the death penalty in Nevada now we'll

switch to the other side of the issue

those working to have it abolished Nancy

Hart president of a Nevada coalition

against the death penalty is here for

that Nancy thank you so much for coming

on the show

my pleasure so your Coalition is

actively working to get this abolished

how long have you been working on that

the Coalition has existed since 2002 so

we've been around for 16 years a little

more than 16 years and have been

educating about the issue and and for a

nonprofit organization that seeks

primarily to educate members of the

public and others policy makers around

the flaws and and bad public policy that

we believe the death penalty is so if it

were to happen how how would the process

work to get it abolished well the the

it's provide abort for in Nevada law so

in order to repeal that law you would

have to have a bill in the legislature

to repeal Nevada's law as a practical

matter that's the the most direct way of

getting rid of the death penalty but in

reality there are other ways in which

the death penalty shows a decline and

that's true around the country but it's

also true in in Nevada that you can have

juries who are less inclined to impose

death sentences and that's part of a

national trend that we're finding you

can also have a decline in the number of

executions that are carried out and of

course if juries are imposing it less

than you have a decline in new death

sentences so that's not necessarily

getting rid of the death penalty but it

does effectively get you know it lowers

the amount of cases that are subject to

the death penalty and then there's also

going through the court system is that

something that you guys do we do not

handle any litigation no we are as I say

an educational organization and advocacy

group we don't get involved in

litigation other than to follow it yeah

now at one point the Supreme Court did

rule that the death penalty was

unconstitutional

and then you know it went back on that

decision do you see the

swinging back in the other direction

well certainly that's one of the things

that we would hope for is a that was the

United States Supreme Court as you're

mentioning back in 1972 they ruled that

it was unconstitutional and you know we

hold that that decision is still correct

and although the Supreme Court a few

years later said that it was okay under

certain circumstances in certain you

know certain procedural limitations we

believe that it still is

unconstitutional and we would urge the

supreme court to find that it can also

be found by state supreme courts to be

unconstitutional under state law and

again you can have legislators repealing

it so there are some avenues through the

courts as well as through the

legislature for getting rid of it so

what's your group's primary argument for

why this should go away I'm not sure

that we have a primary argument you know

we're a group of people that and and

organizations that have a range of

opinions all of us are opposed to that

probably obviously that's our name but

some come from a moral standpoint or a

philosophical standpoint of being

opposed under any circumstances and I

think we also have members who approach

this on the fact that there might be an

issue that they have learned about

there's many ways in which the death

penalty is implemented that are quite

troubling everything from racial bias

and economic bias in the application of

the death penalty to arbitrary and

disproportionate sentencing that happens

even from among counties for example in

Nevada Clark County has an enormous

number of filings and no other county in

the state has anywhere near the number

of filings even at all or in relation to

their population and in fact Clark

County has that I think the highest

number of pending cases in any of any

county in the country at this point far

higher than other counties that

historically have had high death cases

Maricopa County in Arizona Riverside

County in California her

County in Texas all of those counties

show a dramatic reduction in how many

cases they have pending and we have over

60 cases filed in Clark County that are

pending at the trial level right now

which is staggering and it puts a huge

burden on the state and the county from

a cost standpoint so that's another

reason that some people oppose the death

penalty is because it's it's extremely

financially costly to maintain

so then is the position of the coalition

that the highest penalty for murder

should be life without parole I mean we

don't take a position on what it should

be but we but that certainly is on the

books in Nevada and and that is a very

severe penalty because you lose you know

you're gonna live the rest of your days

in prison which ironically is pretty

much what happens if you have the death

penalty these days because you aren't

executed because the only people that

are executed are those who who want to

die like mr. Dozier who has given up his

Appeals and of course even in that case

we do have an inability to do it because

the drugs don't exist

so so it's an inefficiency is a big part

of the issue inefficiency is for some a

very compelling issue we spend an

enormous amount of money again Clark

County is spending millions of dollars

to prosecute those 60 cases that are

pending and ultimately for a very futile

system because we're not actually

executing individuals so it's a very

costly costly process for a for no

outcome now we've heard you know from

families of victims before when the

death penalty comes up that that for

them the death penalty is closure you

know something horrific has been done to

their family and they don't want this

person existing you know in their space

anymore how do you reconcile that if the

death penalty comes off the table

actually I think what's interesting is

to realize that not all victims family

members have the same voice and there

are actually a an increasing number of

family members of homicide victims who

speak out against the death penalty

because they believe it will not promote

healing for them or their family members

and so I think that it's very it's

impossible to say that all victims have

the same experience so while there might

be some victim family members who would

say that it would bring closure for them

one we don't we don't really follow how

victim family members feel ten years

afterwards and whether or not they

actually get closure but I also think

you need to look at the larger victim

family victim family member

population because of course the death

penalty is supposed to be reserved for

the worst of the worst but we have lots

of other homicide homicides in the in

the state who have family member vicked

UM's who are victims who have family

members and they have suffered traumatic

loss through violent crime these there's

no nice murder and I think that we need

to design a system that addresses the

needs of all victims of violent crime

all victims of all family members of

victims of homicide part of the concern

that we hear from the prosecuting side

of this is that having the death penalty

on the table provides a tool in the

toolbox that they can they can pursue

you know the highest punishment and then

you know everything beyond that is is

lesser and so then everything shifts

downward almost like you know if they

can't pursue the death penalty anymore

the highest they can pursue is life

without parole then fewer people will

get the highest so you know and then

everything just kind of shifts down and

so we're more lenient with sentences

basically do you see any issue with

something like that knowing that what

they're saying is then in some cases

someone who commits a murder could end

up getting parole and you know or more

of them could end up getting close not

at all I think that that is actually a

there's no evidence to suggest that

there would be any fewer serious

homicide prosecutions that would result

in life without parole sentences we have

an enormous number of them already in

this state and I don't see why there

would be any any real drop in in those

as what you might see is that the people

who would be otherwise eligible for

death would be sentenced to life without

parole

as I say is a very serious penalty that

cannot be you know you're not out on

parole and I don't think it translates

down to some homicide perpetrators

getting getting off when they wouldn't

when they wouldn't have otherwise

qualified for a lesser sentence for some

other reason okay now there have been

you know a lot of different arguments

for and against this what about you know

public opinion here in Nevada previously

has been fairly pro death penalty do you

sense that changing at all and do you

think that it matters I do sense it

changing and I think the you know it

depends on if you look at national

polling you know I don't think we've

done any real thorough polling within

Nevada we've had some what I would call

superficial polls where someone has

asked a simple question do you support

the death penalty yes or no and those

polls around the country tend to come

out yet in favor of the death penalty

but when you ask in a more comprehensive

way do you support the death penalty if

you know that the there is also a

sentence of life without parole the

numbers drop dramatically and if you

offer in a poll do you support the death

penalty if you know that there's life

without parole and some way of providing

restitution to victims the support drops

below fifty percent so I have every

reason to believe that in Nevada that

same kind of comp more comprehensive

polling would result in that kind of

those kinds of results I don't think

Nevadans are any different than Ohioans

or or Kansans or people from wherever

around the country and I think that the

national polling does reveal that there

is a declining trend and I have every

reason to believe that that is part of

that okay well we have just under a

minute left is there anything else that

you would want the public to know about

this well I think one thing that a that

it's important is that we need to that

the public is should be concerned about

this issue and should be following this

issue and

a right to know what's going on our

state is killing people in the and if

we're in the business of killing people

I think that we need to know we need to

maintain transparency around how it's

being done and and and that's a really

important part of maintaining a death

penalty is that it be something that the

public can follow because it's being

done in their names okay Nancy thank you

so much for your time I sure appreciate

it thank you well that is it for this

episode of face the state but for more

information on this or to see past

episodes you can just head to our

website

that's kim TBN comm thank you so much

for being with us we'll see you next

week