"But this time it's different. I'm not talking about the immediacy of thing in the state with the nation's largest death row in part because they rarely actually manage to kill anyone. That may or may not be true.
I'm talking about the claim itself. What's different is that it isn't coming from some abolitionist group or the activist friends and supporters of the maybe-soon-to-be-killed guy or from his lawyers hoping to gin up some support among whoever.
This is different because it's actually the first sentence in a judicial opinion. By a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth (hey, some things are maybe predictable) Circuit, the Honorable William A. Fletcher, joined by 4 other judges."
JEFF GAMSO; GAMSO FOR THE DEFENCE; (Commentary by an Ohio criminal defense lawyer);
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The State of California may be about to execute an innocent man," Jeff Gamso's post published on December 9, 2010 under the heading, "Because everyone wants to be Texas: The California Edition," begins.
"Ho hum. Just another abolitionist rant," the post continues.
"If you spend any length of time trawling the sea of abolitionist and death row inmate websites on the internet you see that sort of claim all the time. Just substitute the state of your choice (as long as it has an active death row) for California.
Despite that "about to execute" language, it doesn't even need to be any time soon. I've been reading for 10 years or more that Mumia Abu Jamal will be executed within months if something dramatic doesn't happen. Someday, maybe, but don't be holding your breath either in horror or anticipation.
But this time it's different. I'm not talking about the immediacy of thing in the state with the nation's largest death row in part because they rarely actually manage to kill anyone. That may or may not be true.
I'm talking about the claim itself. What's different is that it isn't coming from some abolitionist group or the activist friends and supporters of the maybe-soon-to-be-killed guy or from his lawyers hoping to gin up some support among whoever.
This is different because it's actually the first sentence in a judicial opinion. By a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth (hey, some things are maybe predictable) Circuit, the Honorable William A. Fletcher, joined by 4 other judges.
Nicholas Kristoff writes about the case in today's NY Times. He says it's
an illuminating window into the pitfalls of capital punishment.
By which he means that it's another case where what sure looks like innocence isn't enough.
But really, that's only a part of it. Still, it's maybe where we should begin, because Kristoff's basic claim isn't just that the guy is innocent. It's that he was framed by the police."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The post can be found at:
http://gamso-forthedefense.blogspot.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be accessed at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith
For a breakdown of some of the cases, issues and controversies this Blog is currently following, please turn to:
http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=120008354894645705&postID=8369513443994476774
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;
