Gold Dome Live is moving!
Our new spot will allow us to get the news to you even faster and make commenting easier. Please bookmark the new site and sign up for our rss feed:
http://blogs.ajc.com/gold-dome-live/
AJC.com > Legislature > Blog > Archives > 2007 > January > 29
Monday, January 29, 2007
Bill gives judges more discretion on death penalty
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
A Gwinnett County jury in 2005 unanimously decided Wesley Harris kidnapped and murdered a 2-year-old girl and her mother, stuffed them in a trunk and set the car on fire. But the jury split 10-2 on whether to give Harris the death penalty, and his life was spared.
Some Georgia legislators are hoping to change state law so people like Harris could be condemned to death even if only nine jurors agree on the sentence.
House Majority Whip Barry Fleming (R-Harlem) is citing the Harris case as part of his reasoning for introducing House Bill 185.
The bill gives judges the discretion to impose the death sentence on non-unanimous jury verdicts in which at least nine jurors voted for execution. That means verdicts of 9-3, 10-2 and 11-1 could lead to a death sentence. Current Georgia law requires a unanimous decision by the 12-person jury. HB 185 does not change the requirement of a unanimous jury needed for conviction.
Prosecutors believe the change will help them secure death penalty verdicts, which are increasingly difficult to get as questions mount over the imposition of capital punishment in the U.S. Death penalty lawyers say such a change would put Georgia in a category of only a few states that allow elected judges to impose a death penalty without a unanimous jury verdict.
Fleming said prosecutors sought the bill. He maintains that during jury selection some people will say they can impose the death penalty if necessary, but later refuse to do so on moral grounds.
“People morally opposed to the death penalty obviously aren’t opposed to fibbing,” Fleming said Monday.
Other key lawmakers, including House Majority Leader Jerry Keen, have signed on to the bill.
Gwinnett County District Attorney Danny Porter said HB 185 is a “great idea.”
“One juror said she could not vote to put another black man on death row and that was the end of that case,” Porter said of the Harris case, which his office tried. “Even though that juror said she could vote for the death penalty, she refused to particpate in further deliberations.”
Porter said he believes defense attorneys try to pick jurors in death penalty trials, based on race and gender, who are less likely to impose capital punishment.
Veteran death penalty lawyer Jack Martin dismissed those claims by prosecutors as “urban myth.”
Martin said there can be many reasons why jurors don’t impose the death sentence: They might find something redeeming about the defendant; there might be a lingering question of guilt; there might be a mental illness that could help explain the crime.
“Before you impose the ultimate sentence, there needs to be a consensus of the community — not a majority,” said Martin.
Majority verdicts allow minorities, particularly African-Americans, to be ignored during jury deliberations, he said.
“This is unique, and it would be venturing into uncharted waters under the U.S. and the Georgia Constitution,” Martin said.
Stephen Bright, a senior lawyer at the Southern Center for Human Rights and a nationally-recognized expert on death penalty law, said the bill represents a “marked” departure from current law.
Juries in Alabama and Florida currently only make a recommendation on the death penalty, and the decision is ultimately up to the judge.
Bright said leaving the decision to elected judges in non-unanimous verdicts, as proposed in HB 185, is particularly troublesome.
“There are political considerations that are going to come into play that don’t come into play when you have a largely anonymous jury … and no one person is the lightning rod for the decision,” Bright said. “I think the history in Alabama and other states has been that judges are much more likely to vote for the death penalty particularly if there’s an election coming up.”
Permalink | Comments (4) | Categories: politics
Bill eliminates state taxes on upper-income retirees
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Gov. Sonny Perdue’s legislation to eliminate state taxes on upper-income retirees was filed Monday. Under the bill, taxes on retirement income for Georgians 65 and older would be eliminated by 2013.
A Perdue measure that passed in 2003 will already exempt the first $35,000 in retirement income - per person - when it is fully phased in next year. Social security is already not taxed. So couples with $80,000-$90,000 in retirement income will already be exempt under current state law. Perdue’s latest bill would exempt income above that.
Seniors who work past 65 would continue to pay state income taxes on the wages they earn. However, any income from investments, 401-Ks, and the like would not be taxed.
“This tax cut will allow seniors to better cover the costs of prescription drugs and health care, or spend more times with their families,” Perdue said in a statement. “It will help attract retirees to our state and make our economy even stronger.”
Perdue has sought to cut or eliminate retirement income taxes to help the Georgia compete with states like Florida, which doesn’t have an income tax.
Once completely phased in, the latest senior tax credit will save retirees - and cost state coffers - $142 million a year, Perdue officials said.
Alan Essig, executive director of the Georgia Budget and Policy Institute, which advocates for more social service spending, said the state would lose more and more tax revenue each year because of the aging of Georgia’s population. Meanwhile, Essig said, working, middle-class families would continue paying state income taxes.
“A retired family making $100,000, $150,000 will pay nothing and a non-retired family of four earning $35,000 will pay state income taxes,” he said.
Permalink | Comments (53) | Categories: Taxes
Services »
