SALT LAKE CITY - With the drugs most commonly used for lethal injections no longer available, the state of Utah may revert to carrying out death sentences with a firing squad. The state has used lethal injection for most of its executions since 1977, but firing squads have remained an option in some cases.
Ronald Dunham, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, said the Utah Legislature passed a bill in 2015 specifying that firing squads would be used if lethal drugs could not be obtained.
"The reason they went to lethal injection was because they did not like the image that was portrayed by using a firing squad," he said. "They thought it was bad for the state."
Utah has used firing squads throughout most of the state's history, and most recently used one in an execution in 2010. Dunham said there currently are nine people waiting on Utah's death row, although no execution dates have been set. He said earlier this year, a bill to end the death penalty passed in the state Senate but never came to a vote in the House.
Dunham said since the drug company Pfizer banned the use of its drugs for executions, only three states have announced they would use an alternative method. In addition to Utah, Oklahoma will use a gas chamber and Tennessee an electric chair. Dunham said most other states have taken a wait-and-see attitude.
"For the most part, states have chosen to do nothing, because most states aren't executing anybody right now and their constituents are not disappointed by that," he added.
Dunham said in recent years, several polls have shown that among people who back the use of the death penalty, the majority support lethal injections but do not approve of using other, more violent methods. There are currently 19 states without a death penalty.
get more stories like this via email
Three attorneys are joining forces to seek justice for a North Carolina family.
At a news conference, civil rights lawyer Ben Crump - along with attorneys Dawn Blagrove with Emancipate NC and Joe Fouche - announced the filing of a $25 million lawsuit on behalf of the family of Darryl Tyree Williams.
The suit is against the City of Raleigh, Raleigh's police chief, and five officers involved in the death of Williams.
Ben Crump said this was a case of excessive force stemming from a controversial practice of "proactive policing."
"They used this excuse where we're going to call them high-crime areas," said Crump. "And because of that, those people who live there don't have any constitutional rights."
He said this lawsuit calls on the city and police department to be accountable in upholding the 4th Amendment rights of Black people.
Williams died on January 17, 2023, approximately one hour after being repeatedly tased.
It was originally reported that Williams was only stunned three times, however the lawsuit alleges that number was actually six - after he was already in custody and handcuffed.
Williams' mom, Sonya Williams, stood beside her attorneys during the announcement at Mount Peace Baptist Church in Raleigh. She said for her this is about getting justice for her son.
"He was tased so many times as if he was some kind of vicious animal, and that was not right," said Williams. "He even told them about his heart problems, and they still tased him. I want justice."
Blagrove - also the executive director of Emancipate NC - said this case is not only about accountability, but it also aims to make sure that this doesn't happen to anyone else in the future.
It aims to make a change in the way tasers are handled.
"To ensure that this lawsuit is litigated in a way that is fair and just for this family," said Blagrove, "but more importantly, in a way that results in getting a change in policies, a change in practices, a change in procedures. "
Last year, the Wake County District Attorney declined to pursue charges against the involved officers.
Disclosure: Emancipate NC contributes to our fund for reporting on Civic Engagement, Criminal Justice, Human Rights/Racial Justice, Social Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
People wrongfully convicted of crimes in the United States have received around $2.2 billion in compensation claims since 2019.
A new report by the National Registry of Exonerations said the amount nearly doubled in just five years.
Barbara O'Brien, editor of the registry, explained even if states saw fewer or no exonerations, it does not necessarily mean there are fewer wrongfully convicted people behind bars. She noted people in prison may not have access to the resources needed to prove their innocence.
"Since 1989, West Virginia's had 14 exonerations," O'Brien reported. "I always caution people not to read too much into the number of exonerations as some sort of indicator of how the systems are working."
Official misconduct is the reason for wrongful convictions in at least 77% of exoneration cases. West Virginia has a two-year time limit for filing compensation claims.
According to The Innocence Project, in 2020, the state changed the law to remove a clause requiring another person to be convicted of the same crime in order for the exonerated person to qualify for compensation.
Other factors leading to exonerations include perjury or false accusations, false or misleading forensic evidence, false confessions and mistaken witness identification. O'Brien pointed out it is not just taxpayers who end up footing the bill for bloated prisons and exoneration payments.
"Incarcerating people costs a lot of money," O'Brien outlined. "If we're incarcerating the wrong people, that's costing the taxpayers. And if it's a case where there is a real perpetrator out there who they didn't catch, they're committing more crimes."
She added cost cannot make up for lost time innocent people have spent behind bars. The report said exonerated individuals in 2023 lost more than 2,000 years collectively for crimes they did not commit, an average of around 15 years per person wrongfully imprisoned. Nearly 84% of exonerees last year were persons of color, and 61% were Black.
get more stories like this via email
South Dakota is creating an Office of Indigent Legal Services after House Bill 1057 passed the Legislature with nearly unanimous support this month.
The U.S. Constitution gives all people accused of a crime the right to a lawyer. South Dakota is one of only two states where counties, not the state, have been responsible for providing public defenders for those who cannot afford to pay.
Neil Fulton, dean of the Knudson School of Law at the University of South Dakota and co-chair of the Indigent Legal Services Task Force, said costs added up for counties, and noted there are added challenges for people in rural counties seeking attorneys.
"The biggest challenge is just availability," Fulton observed. "And the geographic reach from where the lawyer is to where the client is."
Fulton predicted the bill will improve the quality of public defense. He hopes to see the new state office taking cases by the end of this year, following the creation of a Commission on Indigent Legal Services and hiring and training attorneys.
It is still undecided how the program will be funded long-term. Indigent defendants are expected to pay back the costs of their legal services.
Samantha Chapman, advocacy manager for the American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota, urged changes to the practice.
"We hope that there'll be future policy reform bills changing the way that the state is recouping the costs from those indigent defendants, many of which will never be able to pay off their debt," Chapman stressed.
The changes to the system are projected to cost the state $1.4 million annually, and save counties more than $1.5 million.
get more stories like this via email