California Taxpayers Pay $308 Million for Each Inmate They Put to Death, What a Great Expenditure of Limited Resources

That's right folks, the LA Times reports that California ponies up nearly $308 million dollars for each inmate on death row that they get to kill.  Isn't that utterly brilliant? 

Here's an excerpt from the article by LA Times reporter Carol J. Williams (with credit to HuffPost for the tip:)

Taxpayers have spent more than $4 billion on capital punishment in California since it was reinstated in 1978, or about $308 million for each of the 13 executions carried out since then, according to a comprehensive analysis of the death penalty's costs.

The examination of state, federal and local expenditures for capital cases, conducted over three years by a senior federal judge and a law professor, estimated that the additional costs of capital trials, enhanced security on death row and legal representation for the condemned adds $184 million to the budget each year.

The study's authors, U.S. 9th Circuit Judge Arthur L. Alarcon and Loyola Law School professor Paula M. Mitchell, also forecast that the tab for maintaining the death penalty will climb to $9 billion by 2030, when San Quentin's death row will have swollen to well over 1,000.

In their research for "Executing the Will of the Voters: A Roadmap to Mend or End the California Legislature's Multi-Billion-Dollar Death Penalty Debacle," Alarcon and Mitchell obtained California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation records that were unavailable to others who have sought to calculate a cost-benefit analysis of capital punishment.

Their report traces the legislative and initiative history of the death penalty in California, identifying costs imposed by the expansion of the types of crimes that can lead to a death sentence and the exhaustive appeals guaranteed condemned prisoners.

The authors outline three options for voters to end the current reality of spiraling costs and infrequent executions: fully preserve capital punishment with about $85 million more in funding for courts and lawyers each year; reduce the number of death penalty-eligible crimes for an annual savings of $55 million; or abolish capital punishment and save taxpayers about $1 billion every five or six years.

Alarcon, who prosecuted capital cases as a Los Angeles County deputy district attorney in the 1950s and served as clemency secretary to Gov. Pat Brown, said in an interview that he believes the majority of California voters will want to retain some option for punishing the worst criminals with death. He isn't opposed to capital punishment, while Mitchell, his longtime law clerk, said she favors abolition. Both said they approached the analysis from an impartial academic perspective, aiming solely to educate voters about what they are spending on death row.

Alarcon four years ago issued an urgent appeal for overhaul of capital punishment in the state, noting that the average lag between conviction and execution was more than 17 years, twice the national figure. Now it is more than 25 years, with no executions since 2006 and none likely in the near future because of legal challenges to the state's lethal injection procedures.

The long wait for execution "reflects a wholesale failure to fund the efficient, effective capital punishment system that California voters were told they were choosing" in the battery of voter initiatives over the last three decades that have expanded the penalty to 39 special circumstances in murder, the report says.

Unless profound reforms are made by lawmakers who have failed to adopt previous recommendations for rescuing the system, Alarcon and Mitchell say, capital punishment will continue to exist mostly in theory while exacting an untenable cost.
_____________________________
The Bad Lawyer blawg has long ridiculed the capital punishment follies. Florida is currently conducting an expensive tax-payer funded media circus in an effort to put a young, lunatic woman to death while many other parental killers are sitting in Florida prisons doing life or a lot less.  In Cleveland families of the victims of serial killer Anthony Sowell have begged a prosecutor and judge to accept a guilty plea with the death penalty off the table to spare them the horror of living through a trial.  The official response, nope.

Our law enforcement and punishment priorities in this violent, crazy place are completely irrational.

Judge Saffold Sues You!

Judge Saffold and attorney Sims square off in court

Judge Shirley Strickland Saffold, the trial judge (the video) in Cleveland's notorious serial killer trial has hit the big time and not in a good way.  She is featured all over the internet especially on the law blawgs including a lead post at ABAJournal.com.  This morning we awake to news that the angry Judge who was outed by her local newspaper, the Cleveland Plain Dealer for anonymous racially-charged comments at their local website, Cleveland.com,  about serial killer Anthony Sowell's attorney Rufus Sims--filed a $50 million dollar lawsuit against the Cleveland Plain Dealer, their publisher and YOU!

That;'s right folks, if you are an "anonymous" commentator at Clevealnd.com and you criticized the Judge you are a "John or Jane Doe" defendant in her lawsuit.  Congratulations.

I'm pretty sure that the Plain Dealer's law firm, Baker & Hostettler is busily preparing to head into the trenches for the newspaper, and I have to imagine that the Judge who has thus far refused to step down from the Anthony Sowell matter has now stepped 5 steps over the line.  The Supreme Court of Ohio will doubtlessly summarily remove her from the Sowell case if not outright suspend her. 

Think about this--a man ran around Cleveland murdering poor black women.  The rotting flseh of these women raised alarms among neighborhood residents which the local police ignored.  When the horror was finally uncovered and prosecution commenced, two Cleveland-area judges have so injected their egos into this incredible matter that there are serious questions whether this alleged killer can get a fair trial.  Saffold and her predecessor on the case, McGinty, forgot that this isn't about the Judges, or their fragile egos, this is about Justice for Anthony Sowell, his victims, and their families, friends, and loved ones. 

The Serial Killer and the Judges

Anthony Sowell is allegedly Cleveland, Ohio's most notorious serial killer.  Sowell was luring young black women into an Imperial Avenue house where at least 11 were brutally raped and murdered. 

The Sowell case is pending in Cleveland courts since last year when the original Judge, Timothy McGinty (pic right), a hot-head former prosecutor recused himself from the case.  According to my sources in Clevealnd it is doubtful whether McGinty would even have a law license were he to become a lawyer in the current disciplinary environment since the Judge failed to disclose at least one DUI convictions on his bar application which came to light during McGinty's ugly campaign to become a judge. Modern day law students are permanently prevented from taking the bar exam for less dishonesy that McGinty exhibited in his bar application, but that was then.  Additionally McGinty's conduct as a prosecutor notoriously involved th the sorts of things that resulted criminal conviction reversals and in as we saw California prosecutor taking a 5 year suspension as recounted, here, on Bad Lawyer.  So it was no surprise when Judge McGinty stepped down in December from the Sowell prosecution, particularly after he had shot his mouth off in the press about the case before he was assigned it.  But McGinty's ego wouldn't let him stay out of the case, leaked a confidential psychiatric examination on Sowell to the press.  When the new trial judge learned about the leak--not realizing it was her colleague who leaked the report--she was on the verge of jailing the reporter who published the story for contempt of court.  

That judge, Judge Shirley Strickland Saffold (pic, below,) is in big trouble herself.  What remained of her reputation has taken a big hit and the story is all over major web blawgs including the ABA Journal and others.  While most of these websites leave out the Judger McGinty portion of this tale of judicial malpractice.  You see what's going on, and why anybody in their right mind should care, Anthony Sowell is far more dangerous than any of these clowns at Guantanamo Bay--and the judges presideing over his case are playing a dangerous game that implicates whether he stays behind bars. 

Now, the new judge, Judge Shirley Strickland Saffold is also a  controversial and mercurial Cleveland jurist.  She has battled openly with the Cleveland media over the years, but this time, she may have gone way over the line;  one thing is for certain she is about to lose the highest profile case she has ever been assigned.  This may not be the only consequence for Judge Saffold who committed a mind-boggling act of stupidity and injudiciousness--using a pseduonym, Judge Saffold has been anonymously posting comments at the website of Cleveland's only daily newspaper, the Cleveland Plain Dealer.  In posts under the name "lawmiss" traced to the court's computer the Judge has offered sarcastic, and racist comments about legal matters pending in front of her and specifically comments critical of Sowell's african-american attorney Rufus Sims.  When confronted by reporters for the Plain Dealer, the Judge tried to claim that the posts were made by her daughter, a non-lawyer who resides 2 1/2 hours away in Columbus, Ohio.  Even allowing for her alibi, why would her daughter would have access to the court's Cleveland computer?   The Judge isn't saying, but let's not kid ourselves--the Judge, herself, is caught doing what no judge should do, exhibiting extreme bias and prejudice.

Mr. Sowell (pic center) is represented by a number of reputedly excellent lawyers, including Mr Rufus Sims (on the left).  What follows is from the Cleveland.com website:

"The judge's personal AOL account was used to set up the lawmiss account.  One of the comments criticized [attorney Rufus Sims] for his defense work in a [separate] vehicular homicide trial in which Saffold was the judge. Sims' client in that case was convicted of vehicular homicide and sentenced to six months in jail. [Lawmiss] advised attorney Sims to 'shut his Amos and Andy style mouth.' The post said Rufus Sims did a disservice to his client and that other lawyers could've done a better job.

Saffold has denied writing any of the comments. Her 23-year-old daughter, Sydney, on Thursday took responsibility for writing all of the comments. Sydney Saffold is a former law student living in Columbus. Court records -- obtained by the newspaper under a public-records request -- showed that three of the comments were made at the exact times and dates someone was logged on to cleveland.com on the judge's office computer."

__________________________

According to the Plain Dealer the extended post said:    "“Rufus Sims did a disservice to his client,” the Nov. 21, 2009, post reads. “If only he could shut his Amos and Andy style mouth. What makes him think that is [sic] he insults and acts like buffon [sic] that it will cause the judge to think and see it his way. There are so many lawyers that could’ve done a much better job. This was not a tough case, folks. [The bus driver] should’ve hired a lawyer with the experience to truly handle her needs. Amos and Andy, shuffling around did not do it.”

Lawmiss/Judge Saffold was referring to a case where Mr. Sims represented a local bus driver who killed a pedestrian in a downtown Cleveland crosswalk while she was distracted and using a smartphone to text. 

This afternoon, Mr. Sims filed motions to have Judge Saffold removed from the case.  If she fails to remove herself, the Supreme Court of Ohio will remove her.  Can you imagine the incredible cost to Ohio taxpayers if this Judge had proceeded to handle the trial, conviction and sentencing of this defendant only to have this stuff come out later, only to have his convictions reversed.  Imagine for a moment, the pain and mental torture of the family members and friends of his victims as they relive again and again the testimonial horror of what happened to their daughters and sisters and loved ones because some thoughtless, egotistical Judge who couldn't restrict her opinions during the most important case of her judicial career.  Frankly it makes me wonder how many of the matters she has handled that are now going to have to be revisited because of bias and prejudice. 

Kashimir Hill at Above The Law, one of my favorite Blawgs, named Saffold,  Judge of the Day--this is not a compliment.

Look I think I can feel some empathy with Judge Saffold, it's tough to be a minority anything and feel dogged by the media, second guessing anything and everything you do, questioning even your basic intelligence.  By going after Mr. Sims, Judge Saffold betrays her tremendous insecurity. But more importantly, the Judge unintentionally reveals her own inability to separate herself as from, the basic instinct--victim hood.  Judge Saffold makes it impossible for her to do the job she was elected to do.  Judge Saffold should step down from not only this case, but she she ask herself whether she needs to step down from the bench.  The disciplinary authorities of Ohio may not let her have a choice in the matter, now.

The Ohio Supreme Court should also look at the intemperate Irish dry-drunk, I empathize with him too, but I'm not sending people to prison or to the death house, let alone abusing civil litigants or parties as a Judge.