Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live At Daybreak

Experts Discuss Recommendations on Death Penalty to Be Publicized Today

Aired June 27, 2001 - 07:34   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
CAROL LIN, CNN ANCHOR: The recent executions of Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh and Texas inmate Juan Raul Garza have reignited debate over the death penalty. Today, a bipartisan national panel will present recommendations on death penalty reform, following a year-long study.

First we get a preview from two members of that panel: Gerald Kogan, former chief justice of the Florida Supreme Court, and Beth Wilkinson, a former prosecutor in the Oklahoma City bombing case.

Good morning to both of you.

BETH WILKINSON, FORMER OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING PROSECUTOR: Good morning.

GERALD KOGAN, FORMER FLORIDA CHIEF JUSTICE: Good morning, Carol.

LIN: Justice Kogan, let me begin with you first. There are 18 different recommendations, but perhaps you can pick one or two key recommendations that you think will make a difference in this debate.

KOGAN: I think, first of all, competency of counsel. Our investigation has shown us that in far too many cases, the attorneys that have been representing defendants in capcital cases have not been competent to do so. Our recommendation sets up qualifications, sets up a system whereby these defendants can be represented by competent counsel.

Another good, solid recommendation is we are telling states to go about and examine their progress on whether or not they are going to allow DNA testing in all cases where a defendant asks for it. We recommend that.

We also recommend that minors -- that is people under the age of 18 -- not be executed.

Also, we're calling for the abolishment of capital punishment for people who are mentally retarded.

LIN: Beth Wilkinson, when the justice talks about competency of the lawyers, as a prosecutor, what are some of the problems that you have seen in trials? WILKINSON: It depends on the trial, but you see everything, and we hear stories of everything, from counsel who were asleep at the counsel table, but more importantly, people who did not conduct any investigation on behalf of their client. And that's problematic not just for the defendant, but it's a problem for prosecutors, because if there wasn't a thorough investigation, if witnesses were not presented, when the case goes up on appeal, there's not a good record for the justices to use to decide whether there has, in fact, been a fair trial. So one of the reasons that I'm a strong supporter of the recommendations we're making today is because it will benefit not just the defendants, but the prosecutors and the victims, who are so important in this process.

LIN: Who are the public defenders, and what are their qualifications? Can a public defender system work as, perhaps, the jury system works, where you have mandatory compulsory service required of higher-level attorneys?

WILKINSON: In some jurisdictions, we have very fine public defenders. Where I'm from originally, in New York, there was an excellent public defender's office. But unfortunately, in many of the state jurisdictions we looked at where capital punishment was used on a regular basis, there was no public defender's office. So we are in favor of a strong standard for competent counsel that will be enforced so that we know that each defendant who faces the most serious punishment our country has to offer will have had sufficient training, resources, experts and investigators, so that the case before the trial will be thoroughly investigated and pursued.

LIN: Justice Kogan, does this year-long review mean that inmates were executed unnecessarily, unfairly?

KOGAN: I would submit that they have been, and one of the ways in which we know that is that since the advent of DNA evidence, which has really come to the forefront in the last 10 years, we've seen many people released from death row around the country who, in fact, were really innocent of the crimes that they were convicted of and sentenced to death for. And the important part to remember here is what happened to these people before we had DNA evidence? And I submit it's obvious what happened to them: They were executed.

I'm saying this is why we're tightening up all the requirements. In other words, what we're saying is, quite frankly, that if you're going to have the death penalty, then what you need to do is make sure that all of your requirements are adhered to, that they are very, very strict, so that the possibility of executing somebody who is innocent becomes almost non-existent.

LIN: Beth Wilkinson, you get the last question here, because I want to make sure we touch on a controversial debate. How do you prevent the death penalty from being racially discriminating? What in these recommendations ensures that that doesn't happen?

WILKINSON: That's very difficult, as you've alluded to, and I think the most basic way to do that is to collect the data and to ensure that, at every stage, race is not a factor that is considered when a prosecutor decides whether to ask for the death penalty in the jury, when a jury is picked to determine whether the defendant is guilty and whether there is a conviction, the counsel that represents that person -- really, at every stage, we have to ensure that there is no racial bias whatsoever.

LIN: Thank you very much, Beth Wilkinson, Justice Gerald Kogan. We will look forward to your testimony today on Capitol Hill.

WILKINSON: Thank you.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com