S 486

Remarks Of Sen. Patrick Leahy,  Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee, 
And Chief Senate Sponsor,  The Leahy-Smith-Collins Innocence Protection Act 
News Conference On Introduction  Of The Innocence Protection Act

Wed., March 7, 2001

Today we shift into higher gear with our one-year-old effort to address
problems with the administration of the death penalty. Our coalition is strong,
it is bipartisan, and it is growing. Today 133 of us _ Republicans and
Democrats, supporters and opponents of the death penalty, members of the House
and members of the Senate _ are joining together in introducing the Innocence
Protection Act.

In just a year we have turned the corner in showing that the death penalty
process is broken. Now we will push forward to our goal of acting on reforms
that address these problems.

Over the last year we have also shown this is not an "Illinois problem" or a
"Texas problem". . . or, with Earl Washington's release last month, a "Virginia
problem."There are death penalty problems across the nation, and as a nation we
need to pay attention to what is happening.

A year ago we pointed out the startling number of cases _ 85 _ in which death
row inmates had been exonerated after long stays in prison. In some of those
cases, the inmate had come within days of being executed. A single year later,
the number of exonerations has jumped to 95, in 22 states _ people who have
been cleared of the crimes that sent them to death row.

It is not uncommon these days, as it would have been a year ago, to pick up a
newspaper and read about another wrongful conviction. We should never forget
that behind each of these headlines is a person whose life was completely
shattered and nearly extinguished by a wrongful conviction. And those were the
"lucky" ones. We simply do not know how many innocent people remain on death
row, and how many may already have been executed.

Now the national debate is well under way -- in large part, because of the good
work of the courageous folks behind me. But the need for real, concrete reforms
is more urgent than ever.

We believe that targeting wrongful convictions and executions has to be a high
priority of the Congress and the Administration. We should not put it off
another year. Why?

Because a year may not seem like a long time on Capitol Hill, but it is an
eternity for someone sitting, wrongfully convicted, in a death row prison cell.

Because for every wrongfully convicted person on death row there is a true
killer somewhere else. Because death penalty errors undermine faith in our
system of justice.

I am gratified that our bill has served as a catalyst for reforms in the
states, in dealing with post-conviction DNA testing. In just one year, several
states have passed some form of DNA legislation. Others have DNA bills under
consideration. Much of this legislation is modeled on the DNA provisions
proposed in the Innocence Protection Act, and we can be proud about that. But
DNA is not a silver bullet.

DNA samples are not available in many cases. Even so, DNA is the fingerprint of
the 21st Century. If DNA evidence exists that could help determine guilt or
innocence, it should be available for testing. However, many states still that
have not moved on this issue, even though it has been more than six years since
New York passed the first post-conviction DNA statute. And some of the states
that have acted have done so in a way that will leave the vast majority of
prisoners without access to DNA testing. Moreover, none of these new laws
addresses the larger and more urgent problem of ensuring that people facing the
death penalty have adequate legal representation. The Innocence Protection Act
also addresses this problem.

We have consulted widely with legal experts and practitioners in formulating
these reforms. All have given us valuable insights, and we have refined the
bill in the process. Bill Delahunt and I are former prosecutors, and we have
been particularly pleased with the encouragement and assistance we have
received from prosecutors across the nation.

Good prosecutors have two things in common. First, they want to convict the
right person. Second, they want defendants to be represented by good defense
lawyers . . . lawyers who thoroughly investigate their clients' cases before
trial, and who represent their clients vigorously in court. Our adversarial
system counts on that happening. The last thing a prosecutor wants is to have
to retry a case years later, because key mistakes were made by a defendant' s
lawyer. Can you imagine the ordeal the nation would face if we had to retry the
Oklahoma City bombing case?

In parts of the country it is often better to be rich and guilty than poor and
innocent. All too often, lawyers defending people whose lives are at stake are
inexperienced, inept, or just plain incompetent.

If Congress offers some leadership with fair and objective standards and some
funding, America's prosecutors will be ready, willing and able to help fix the
system. We owe them, and the American people, that leadership.

The goal of our bill is simple, but profoundly important: We want to reduce the
risk of mistaken executions.

The Innocence Protection Act proposes basic, common-sense reforms to our
criminal justice system that are designed to protect the innocent and to ensure
that if the death penalty is imposed, it is the result of informed and reasoned
deliberation, not politics, luck, bias, or guesswork.

If we had a series of close calls in air traffic, we would be rushing to fix
the problem.

These close calls on death row should concentrate our minds, and focus our
will, to act. We will always be imperfect in administering justice, but we
should always be vigilant in striving toward the goal of true justice. This
bill is a tool that advances us toward that goal.


# # # # #