GateHouse: ‘Mayhem’ in Chicago, not what it seems

Matthew T. Mangino
GateHouse News Service
July 18, 2014
The July Fourth weekend was a bloodbath in Chicago. There were 82 shootings and 16 people killed. The shootings brought unwanted national attention to the nation’s third largest city. The attention was not only unwanted but unwarranted.

A look at FBI crime statistics reveals that Chicago has been at or near the top of U.S. cities in the number of annual murders. In 2012, Chicago got the distinction of being the nation’s “Murder Capital” when the city led the nation with 500 murders. Over the last 30 years, Chicago has been among the top three cities with the most murders.

All of that sounds bad. The raw numbers cast a shadow over the city as though it were a killing zone, and everyone living in Chicago or passing through is in danger. According to the Pew Research Center, about 2.7 million people live in Chicago, more than any other city except New York and Los Angeles. The more people, the more murders. Looking at the total number of homicides in a city is too simplistic. It is unfair to label a city as the murder capital without considering the size and composition of the city.

Adjust the raw numbers for population size and determine the murder rate per 100,000 people, and a Chicago’s violence problem looks very different.

Chicago’s murder rate of 18.5 per 100,000 people came in 21st nationwide. According to Pew, that number nearly quadruples the national average of 4.7 but is nowhere near the highest in the country. Flint, Michigan, had the highest murder rate of any sizeable U.S. city. In 2012, there were 62 murders per 100,000 people.

Although Chicago’s murder rate is still high, the city has shown substantial improvement. In 1994 there were 928 murders in the city. According to the Chicago Tribune, that number has been reduced by more than half. There were 440 murders last year.

A bloody stretch like the July Fourth holiday, and the media frenzy that ensued, reinforces the notion of Chicago as the USA’s murder capital and perpetuates the city’s violent reputation, but as National Public Radio suggested, “It’s a particularly gruesome bit of statistical noise.”

“It was an awful, awful horrific weekend,” Yale University Professor Andrew U. Papachristos told NPR. “But you cannot predict a trend based on a weekend. There are spikes and drops. It never goes down in a straight line.”

In fact, in a paper published last year, “Overview: 48 Years of Crime in Chicago,” Papachristos wrote, “Chicago has seen impressive declines in crime over the last four and a half decades … the overall levels of crime and violence have fallen to record lows.”

Papachristos also points to what he calls “the crime gap” — the huge disparity in homicide rates in different areas of Chicago, which is true for most major cities. “Even though the numbers in Chicago are what they are, the gap between the worst neighborhoods and the best neighborhoods is massive,” he told NPR. Papachristos’ research found that between 2000 and 2010, the murder rate for Jefferson Park on Chicago’s Northwest side was about 3.1 per 100,000 residents. In West Garfield Park, on the West Side, the homicide rate was an astounding 64 per 100,000.

In 2012, there were 14,827 murders nationwide — about two murders an hour. That was a slight increase from 2011 but an unprecedented decrease from the high point of 24,700 in 1991.

Criminologists continue to debate the reason for the decline. Theories abound from a decline in the demand for crack cocaine, technological advancements, policing strategies, incarceration rates, even abortion and the decline of lead in the air.

The bottom line — regardless of how the media portrays it, Chicago — and America — are much safer places than they used to be.

Matthew T. Mangino is of counsel with Luxenberg, Garbett, Kelly & George P.C. His book “The Executioner’s Toll, 2010” was recently released by McFarland Publishing. You can reach him at www.mattmangino.com and follow him on Twitter at @MatthewTMangino.
Visit The Column

The Cautionary Instruction: California death penalty struck down

Matthew T. Mangino
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette/Ipso Facto
July 18, 2014
A Federal Judge struck down California's death penalty. US District Judge Cormac Carney found that lengthy delays in carrying out the death penalty amounted to a violation of the Eight Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
Judge Carney wrote:

Inordinate and unpredictable delay has resulted in a death penalty system in which very few of the hundreds of individuals sentenced to death have been, or even will be, executed by the State. It has resulted in a system in which arbitrary factors, rather than legitimate ones like the nature of the crime or the date of the death sentence, determine whether an individual will actually be executed.

My book The Executioner's Toll, 2010, released in April made those very arguments:

Let's say that death penalty verdicts continue at 2010's pace of 112 per year for the next ten years. There would be approximately 4,500 men and women on death row. Let's say that all 32 states with the death penalty executed one offender a month for the next ten years; these occurrences are not completely realistic since only eight states have more than 120 offenders on death row. After ten years at that frantic, and frankly impossible, pace, there would be 4,300 executions, still leaving about 200 people on death row. Carrying out an execution today is as freakishly arbitrary as imposing the death penalty was in 1972. If you are one of 697 inmates on California’s death row, a state that has not carried out an execution in five years, and suddenly you are scheduled for execution — that is a lot like being struck by lightning.

The death penalty has been a permissible form of punishment for certain crimes in the United States throughout the nation's history, with the first recorded case occurring in 1608, according to Jurist at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.
The Supreme Court has held on numerous occasions that state proscription of the death penalty is not a violation of the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The court has also held, however, that the Eighth Amendment does impose limitations on when and how states may use the death penalty.
The most recent Gallup Poll on the death penalty has support at about 60 percent, down from a high in 1994 of 80 percent. That’s not to say that 60 percent is not a significant number or that 32 of 50 states with the death penalty is not a substantial majority. But, unequivocally the death penalty is trending downward.

---

Matthew T. Mangino is of counsel with Luxenberg, Garbett, Kelly & George, P.C. He is the former district attorney of Lawrence County and just completed a six year term on the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole. His weekly column on crime and punishment is syndicated by GateHouse New Service. You can read his musings on the criminal justice system at www.mattmangino.com and follow Matt on Twitter @MatthewTMangino. His new book The Executioner’s Toll, 2010: The Crimes, Arrests, Trials, Appeals, Last Meals, Final Words and Executions of 46 Persons in the United States is now available from McFarland & Company publishers.
Visit Ipso Facto

California Death Penalty Struck Down

A Federal Judge struck down California's death penalty. US District Judge Cormac Carney found that the lengthy delays create uncertainty for death row inmates, amounting to cruel and unusual punishment. 

Inordinate and unpredictable delay has resulted in a death penalty system in which very few of the hundreds of individuals sentenced to death have been, or even will be, executed by the State. It has resulted in a system in which arbitrary factors, rather than legitimate ones like the nature of the crime or the date of the death sentence, determine whether an individual will actually be executed.

My book The Executioner's Toll, 2010, released in April made those very arguments:

 

Let's say that death penalty verdicts continue at 2010's pace of 112 per year for the next ten years. There would be approximately 4,500 men and women on death row. Let's say that all 34 states with the death penalty executed one offender a month for the next ten years; these occurrences are not completely realistic since only eight states have more than 120 offenders on death row.  After ten years at that frantic, and frankly impossible, pace, there would be 4,300 executions, still leaving about 200 people on death row.

Carrying out an execution today is as freakishly arbitrary as imposing the death penalty was in 1972.  If you are one of 697 inmates on California’s death row, a state that has not carried out an execution in five years, and suddenly you are scheduled for execution—that is a lot like being struck by lightning.

Former justice releases plan for judicial selection

Justice at Stake applauded the recent release by its Honorary Chair, Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, of her advancement of a model for choosing state judges. The plan, “The O’Connor Judicial Selection Plan,” is the culmination of a years-long study on judicial selection conducted by the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System (IAALS) and Justice O’Connor. The plan includes “a judicial nominating commission to screen judicial applicants and identify the best qualified candidates, appointment by the governor of one of those candidates, broad-based and objective evaluation of judges’ performance on the bench, and periodic retention elections,” according to an announcement by Justice O’Connor and IAALS. 
“Justice O’Connor has advocated tirelessly for fair and impartial courts, and is renowned for her leadership role in this area,” said Liz Seaton, Deputy Executive Director of Justice at Stake. “We are extremely proud that today, she and our partner group, IAALS, have released a plan that seeks to improve the U.S. justice system. We applaud this latest, outstanding achievement in a distinguished career and encourage everyone to read it.”
Judicial selection plans like the one released today are among reforms Justice at Stake supports as a means of reducing the influence of money and politics in judicial selection and ensuring the advancement of the best-qualified candidates to state high courts.  

NYPD using cutting-edge technology to solve crimes

According to the New York Daily News here is how NYPD uses technology to solve crimes. At a recent CompStat session  bullet cartridges found at several crime scenes over the prior two months were matched to one gun.
Surveillance cameras at multiple crime scenes revealed the same vehicle present at each scene. From there they tied the vehicle to an owner, and soon enough to a suspect.

All types of technology are now in play.

The NYPD recently provided the Daily News with an unprecedented look at its 21st century arsenal, which includes: 

• Thousands of security cameras scattered throughout the city linked together in a network called the Domain Awareness System (DAS). 

• Records of hundreds of thousands of license plate numbers scanned and pinned to specific locations at specific times. 

• Social media posts bragging about criminal behavior. 

• Facial recognition technology that matches facial characteristics of potential suspects to images in a massive NYPD database. 

• Improved ballistics capability that allows cops to quickly identify the source of a bullet. 

• Prosecutors in Manhattan, Brooklyn and Staten Island have created crime strategies units, using data to identify ties between crimes. Authorities can also map the crime to spot trends, quality of life issues or gang activity. 

• A system of sensors the NYPD plans to install that would detect gunshots — even when residents don’t report the shootings. Cops can then sync the sensors with cameras to capture footage of the crime. 

• Last week, a select group of cops answered calls with Microsoft tablet computers in hand that can instantly tap into the criminal history at an address — including residents with outstanding warrants. 

The department also has set aside $1.5 million for a sound sensor system called Shotspot that captures gunshots at specific locations. That allows police to respond to shots even if no one calls 911. 

To read more Click Here

The Vindicator: More time to install GPS

Matthew T. Mangino
The Youngstown Vindicator
July 6, 2014
Last week a new state court rule of procedure, proposed by the Ohio Supreme Court, took effect. The rule gives prosecutors and law enforcement up to 10 days, instead of three days, to install an electronic Global Positioning System (GPS) device to track a person, vehicle, container or package.
GPS is a network of global navigation satellites operated and maintained by the U.S. government. The space-based system was set up to enhance navigational systems. GPS can now provide accurate positional data at any given time, in any weather condition, anywhere on Earth. This data may be freely obtained using a GPS receiver. The technology is so widely available that many new vehicles, and all smartphones, come with GPS for everyday use.
Little fanfare
The Ohio rule was adopted with little fanfare. The Ohio Constitution requires that Rules of Practice and Procedure be filed with the General Assembly. The rule could have been blocked if the General Assembly specifically objected to the change. Legislators are not in Columbus and won’t be again until the fall. The rule became effective July 1.
Two years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police must obtain a search warrant before attaching an electronic tracking device to a vehicle. Ohio’s new rule complies with the Supreme Court’s directive. However, it provides law enforcement with an advantage the Supreme Court refused to acknowledge.
When the Supreme Court decided United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. ___ (2012), the justices unanimously ruled that the police violated the U.S. Constitution when they placed a GPS device on a suspect’s car and monitored the vehicle’s movements. The police had obtained a warrant before placing the device on Jones’ vehicle.
The Jones case began in 2004. At that time, a law enforcement task force began investigating Jones, a nightclub owner, for alleged cocaine trafficking.
According to Law.com, the task force obtained a warrant and covertly installed a GPS device on Jones’ Jeep Grand Cherokee. However, the task force installed the device one day after the expiration of the warrant. Using information obtained from the device, the task force was able to locate Jones and obtain surveillance photos and videos at a suspected drug house.

Ohio’s new rule extends the life of a warrant. A warrant should be reasonable with regard to time and scope. Ohio has, without much objection, tripled the lifespan of a warrant authorizing a device to track the whereabouts of the target of an investigation.
Franklin County Prosecutor Ron O’Brien told the Columbus Dispatch that the three-day rule has been in effect for about 40 years, starting well before the development of sophisticated electronic devices to track either a package or a vehicle.
“On occasion, once you develop a case, a car goes missing and you can’t find it within three days,” O’Brien said. “Then we would have to go get a new warrant.”
Sixty-five years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court said that the Fourth Amendment doesn’t deny police officers the discretion to draw an inference from evidence; it simply ensures that inferences will be reviewed by a “detached magistrate.”
Stale warrant
The detached magistrate’s review is essential to ensure the protections of the Fourth Amendment. A fundamental protection for those suspected of a crime is that a stale — untimely — warrant will not be honored.
The Ohio Supreme Court has now precluded the detached magistrate from determining how much time is reasonable as it relates to carrying out the directives of a warrant. The U.S. Supreme Court was offended by a stale warrant in 2012—Ohio now intends to avoid the staleness issue altogether.
Matthew T. Mangino is of counsel with Luxenberg, Garbett, Kelly & George P.C. His book “The Executioner’s Toll, 2010” was recently released by McFarland Publishing. You can reach him at www.mattmangino.com and follow him on Twitter @MatthewTMangino.
Visit The Vindictor

Florida executes man for killing 11-year-old girl

The 24th Execution of 2014

A man who confessed to the rape and murder of an 11-year-old girl was executed by lethal injection on July 10, reported the Orlando Sentinel.

Eddie Wayne Davis, 45, was sentenced to death in 1995 after he admitted to taking the girl from her mother's home, sexually assaulting and strangling her.

His death follows a string of executions in the U.S. South last month, including those of two other men in Florida and Georgia, in the wake of a botched Oklahoma execution in April that sparked an uproar among death penalty opponents.

Davis confessed three times to the murder of Kimberly Waters, who was found strangled in a dumpster in 1994. He was 25 years old at the time of her killing, but his defense team claimed that he was mentally of a juvenile.

Prison authorities said Davis was calm as he awaited his fate. He met with his mother and a Catholic spiritual adviser during the day before eating his last meal, and issued no final statement.

Davis is the seventh person executed in Florida this year, matching the total number of executions in 2013. The state has not seen more executions in a single year since 1984, when eight prisoners were put to death, according to the Department of Corrections.

The Florida Supreme Court rejected Davis' claim that a metabolic blood disorder known as porphyria might cause him to have a painful reaction to midazolam, the first of three drugs used by the state in executing convicted killers.

Another convicted murderer in Georgia had his death sentence, also due to be carried out on July 10, commuted to life imprisonment by the state Board of Pardons and Paroles. Tommy Lee Waldrip, 68, was convicted of the 1991 shooting death of a man who had been scheduled to testify against his son in an armed robbery trial.

It was the fifth death sentence commuted by the Georgia Parole Board since 2002 and the first since April 2012.

To read more Click Here