Doodstraf in de VS

Sun Jan 12 19:27:10 CET 2003

REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl

Date sent:              Sun, 12 Jan 2003 13:52:39 +0100
From:                   Henk Elegeert <HmjE at home.nl>
To:                     D66 at NIC.SURFNET.NL
Subject:                Re: Doodstraf in de VS

> REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl
>
> Mark Giebels wrote:
> >
> > REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl
> >
> > Beste lijsters,
> >
> > Een prachtige dag voor de mensenrechten vandaag in de VS. Governor George
> > Ryan van  Illinois, Republikein nog wel, heeft tijdens het laatste weekend
> > van zijn ambtstermijn de doodstraf van alle 167 gevangen in 'death row'
> > omgezet in levenslang. Dit nadat hij gisteren al 4 ter dood veroordeelden
> > vrij heeft gelaten, omdat hij er absoluut niet van overtuigd was dat ze
> > daadwerkelijk schuldig zijn.
>
> Belangrijker vond ik zijn beweegredenen welke hij vond in; het feilen
> van het systeem, de (kwaliteit vd) advocatuur, het opsporen (zeker ook
> waarbij met moderne (opsporings)middelen het feilen duiden), de
> 'slachtoffers' in de zin van wie daarvoor in aanmerking kwamen. Alsmede,
> dat het al vele tientallen jaren blijkt te falen.
>
> > Tevens is al eerder de politiechef die de
> > leiding had bij de verhoren van deze verdachten ontslagen wegens verdenking
> > van martelpraktijken.
>
> Daar kan het niet bij blijven!
>
> > De nieuw gekozen governor, Democraat Rod Blagojevich, heeft al zijn
> > afkeuring uitgesproken over deze actie van Ryan.
>
> Wat is de motivering achter deze afkeuringen.

Mogelijk omdat hij tot 1992 in Cook County werkte in het kantoor van de District Attorney en deze DA tijdens een periode dat hij voor
het advocatenkantoor Phelan, Pope & John werkte zelf de politiecommissaris verdedigde die inmiddels ontslagen is wegens grove
fouten en misdaden die tot de betreffende veroordelingen hebben geleid.

M.a.w. de op 24 april 2002 aangestelde special prosecutor gaat waarschijnlijk de huidige DA en mogelijk zelfs de nieuwe gouverneur
vervolgen voor hun rol bij het jarenlang verkrijgen van onrechtmatig bewijs door o.a. grove mishandeling!

http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/election/nov2002/state/governor/a06bla gbio.htm
Before serving two terms in Congress, Blagojevich was an assistant Cook County state's attorney, prosecuting criminal cases. He was
elected to the Illinois House in 1992 and authored truth-in-sentencing legislation, requiring criminals to serve at least 85 percent of their
sentences before being eligible for parole.

http://macarthur.uchicago.edu/police/area2.html
On April 24, 2002, Chief Criminal Courts Judge Paul Biebel took the extraordinary step of appointing a special prosecutor to investigate
allegations that former Chicago Police Commander Jon Burge and police officers under his command at Area 2 police headquarters
employed torture techniques (such as electric shock and suffocation) against scores of African American men during the 1980's and
then conspired to cover up their actions.

http://macarthur.uchicago.edu/pdf/SpecsPros.pdf
7. The continuing failure to investigate this widespread and disturbing criminality by those paid by the City of Chicago to enforce the
law must be attributed, at least in part, to the conflicts of interests under which the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office (CCSAO) and
State’s Attorney Richard A. Devine labor.
8. The CCSAO, as an institution, faces a conflict of interest in considering the allegations of torture at Area 2 and Area 3 because
many felony review assistants – some of whom are still with the CCSAO – were closely involved in the taking of statements from the
alleged torture victims, and other assistant state’s attorneys prosecuted those victims.
9. Apart from the institutional conflict faced by the office, State’s Attorney Richard A. Devine himself faces a conflict of interest in any
investigation of torture by Jon Burge and those under him. State’s Attorney Devine has an interest in the outcome of the investigation,
and any resulting prosecution, because of his role in the CCSAO at the time of the torture. In 1980, Devine became First Assistant in
the CCSAO, a position second only to the State’s Attorney himself, and he served in that position until 1983, when he left the office for
private practice. In his capacity as First Assistant, Devine was responsible for the day-to-day operations of the office. If an
investigation were to establish – as the torture victims allege and the Goldston report concludes – that a substantial portion of the abuse
of suspects by Burge and his underlings (27 0f 66 cases) occurred during the period in which Devine was in charge, this would be a
very significant political embarrassment for Devine, who must stand for reelection every four years.
10. State’s Attorney Devine also labors under a per se conflict of interest in investigating and prosecuting any criminality at Area 2 and
Area 3 because of his professional relationship with Jon Burge. Upon leaving the CCSAO in 1983, Devine joined and became a partner
in the Chicago law firm of Phelan, Pope & John, Ltd., where he remained until 1995, shortly before he ran for State’s Attorney.
Devine’s successor as First Assistant, who had been third in command in the office during Devine’s tenure as First Assistant, was
William Kunkle. Kunkle followed Devine to Phelan, Pope & John in 1985, where he served as special prosecutor in Andrew Wilson’s
retrial. The firm was paid approximately $40,000 by Cook County for this representation. Kunkle and the firm were retained again in
1988, this time at City expense, to defend Jon Burge and three other officers in Wilson’s federal suit against both the city and the
officers. After a mistrial in early 1989 and a retrial later that year, Wilson won a new trial on appeal and ultimately he and his attorneys
were awarded one million dollars, covering damages and attorneys fees. Phelan, Pope & John represented Burge throughout both trials
in 1989, on appeal to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in 1993, and in later proceedings. For their representation of Burge and the
other officers over this period, the firm was paid $839,250.64 by the City of Chicago. The firm also represented Burge in the
proceedings before the Police Board, as well as in Burge’s unsuccessful appeal of the Board’s ruling. O'Hara v. Police Board, Nos. 1-
94-0999, 1-94-2462, 1-94-2475 cons. (December 15, 1995). The Fraternal Order of Police, which has actively disputed all claims of
torture on the part of Burge and others, paid Phelan, Pope & John untold thousands more dollars to represent Burge in these
separation proceedings.

12. The conflict of interest resulting from Phelan, Pope & John’s representation of Burge and the others becomes all the more blatant
when one considers that Devine himself appeared in the federal district court in Chicago on at least one occasion as counsel for
Burge. See Plys, Seeking a Shock to the System, Chicago Sun-Times, April 7, 2000 (Exhibit I). While Devine has claimed that his
involvement in the case was insignificant, the firm’s billing in the case indicates otherwise. The firm billed the City of Chicago a total of
$4,287.50 for 24.5 hours of Devine’s time on the case in 1989. Exhibit J. Thus, Devine was in fact – and not just in theory – counsel for
the officers. The conflict of interest facing Devine under these circumstances is patent: he cannot prosecute those he has defended –
for the same conduct. He cannot, either ethically or practically, argue that the very same conduct he claimed was innocent from 1988
through 1995 is now to be considered a crime. Furthermore, Devine and his firm may have gained knowledge during their
representation of Burge and the others which would prevent Devine from investigating crimes at Area 2 and Area 3 without necessarily
breaching his ethical obligations to Burge and the others.

> > Wat maar weer eens
> > duidelijk maakt dat de mensenrechten zeker niet automatisch bij de Democrats
> > in betere handen zijn dan bij de Republicans.
>
> Vanuit mijn perspectief juist wel, het gaat dus om de grondslag voor een
> dergelijke standpunt en niet om de partij waartoe je behoort. Dat biedt
> dus perspectief.......
>
> > De kans is vrij groot dat deze actie een precendent schept voor andere
> > staten in de VS. Laten we het hopen.

Gezien het bovenstaande kan deze zaak, hopelijk, wel als enigszins uitzonderlijk worden beschouwd.

>
> Een maatschappelijk debat waarbij het systeem zelf eens doorgelicht
> wordt en waarbij onafhankelijk onderzoek (ook in het buitenland) de
> argumenten kan aandragen ipv. de emoties?
>
> Henk Elegeert

Groet,

Cees

**********
Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66
Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
Het on-line archief is te vinden op: http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
**********