After Justice Sandra Day O’Connor announced her retirement, a leftist (ain’t they all) columnist of the Washington Post commented on how she came into her time on the bench a conservative but she “grew” and “matured”, discovering the Constitution must “breath” to modern times.
In other words she starting to find things she liked in the document and people are too stupid to see them.
Now we come to this judge in the Ohio who seems to have had a change of heart on the death penalty. In and of itself I have no issue with. If over his life he changes view on a major issue, so be it. But to stand up there and say he can give a fair judgment on this issue is beyond credibility
 |
| Senior Associate Justice Paul Pfeifer |
Ohio Justice Rejects Death Penalty Law He Wrote « CBS Cleveland
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — As a young state senator 30 years ago, Paul Pfeifer helped write Ohio’s death penalty law. Today, as the senior member of the state Supreme Court, he’s trying to eliminate it.
It’s not uncommon for sitting judges to change their mind on the death penalty — U.S. Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun famously said in 1994 he would no longer “tinker with the machinery of death” — but Pfeifer may be the only one to argue so ardently against a capital punishment law he himself created, and yet continue to rule on death penalty cases.
“I have concluded that the death sentence makes no sense to me at this point when you can have life without the possibility of parole,” Pfeifer said in his most recent public comments, testifying in December in favor a bill to abolish Ohio’s law. “I don’t see what society gains from that.”
Fair enough Mr Pfeifer, if you don’t think society should execute someone, so be it. But you are lying if you say you can be fair and impartial on a capital case. If you recluse yourself, fair enough. But I think that won’t happen.
…At least two county prosecutors say Pfeifer should stop ruling on death sentences, including Hamilton County prosecutor Joe Deters, who said that Pfeifer’s actions were inappropriate. “It gives rise to a credible inference that he cannot be fair to both sides,” Deters said recently.
Bettman, a University of Cincinnati law professor and former state appeals court judge….
…Pfeifer, a Republican, has always charted his own course on the court. For years he was a member of a foursome — two Democrats and two moderate Republicans — dubbed “the Gang of Four” for a series of 4-3 rulings that critics said were anti-business and favored Democrats and their causes …
…Pfeifer made similar statements in court opinions over the years. He took his position public in 2001, calling unsuccessfully for an independent panel to review the law. He began to complain that prosecutors were overusing the statute, seeking death sentences in domestic quarrels that went bad instead of for the worst of the worst killers.
He often cites the case of Richard Nields, who murdered his girlfriend in their southwestern Ohio home in 1997, then stole her car and travelers’ checks, as an example of overreaching by prosecutors.
“This case is not about robbery,” Pfeifer wrote in his dissent to the court’s 2001 decision upholding Nields’ death sentence. “It is about alcoholism, rage and rejection and about Nields’ inability to cope with any of them.” Ultimately, Gov. Ted Strickland agreed and in 2010 changed Nields’ sentence to life without parole.
In January 2011, Pfeifer made his strongest statements to date, calling on Gov. John Kasich to empty death row.
Pfeifer says he’s required as a judge to take positions to make laws better, hence his current stand. He’s also required to rule according to the law and the Constitution, which he says he does. Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor says she’s comfortable Pfeifer is following the law and not showing bias
This makes less sense than having George Stephanopoulos hosting a Republican debate or Danny Rather interviewing a Bush. Forgive me, it goes beyond the pale.
Mr Pfeifer, show some integrity and just recluse yourself.
No comments:
Post a Comment