100th dead row exoneration


	Print or Email This Page Death Watch June 2002, Page 10 100th dead row exoneration By *Chris Adams* Ray Krone, once labeled the "snaggle tooth killer," signed autographs for fellow inmates as he walked out of prison after being exonerated by DNA. He became the 100th death row inmate to be proven innocent since 1973, the modern death penalty era beginning post- Furman. As in so many of these cases, the lessons are harsh. Ray Krone served ten years for this crime. As Ray Krone was locked up, Kenneth Phillips-- the man the DNA indicates is the real culprit, who is now in prison for an unrelated sex crime-- was free to commit other crimes, In a case where the prosecutor has twice asked that Ray Krone be sentenced to die, the prosecutor is unsure if he will prosecute Phillips. Ray Krone faced death due to junk science. Ray Krone was twice convicted for a murder he did not commit. A judge sentenced him to death after the first trial and to life at the retrial. The evidence against him was circumstantial, including shoe prints and bite marks. Due to an accident, he has a distinctive dental pattern. A government expert testified that bite marks on the victim "matched" Ray Krone's teeth print. The argument was he had to be the "snaggletooth killer." Now that the DNA results have exonerated Krone, the bite marks were compared to Phillips, the sex offender whose DNA was found on the victim. With the DNA results inland, the bite mark "expert" determined that bite marks are not uniquely Krone's pattern-- the bite marks are also "consistent with" Phillips. Retired Judge James McDougall presided over the second trial. With tears in his eyes, he told the press how shaken he is by the ordeal. He said that he always had serious doubts about the government's case and debated whether to set aside the verdict; however, he did not want to tell the jury he thought "they're wrong." Judge McDougall thanked Krone's lawyers for their pursuit of justice for their client. NACDL member Alan Simpson, of Phoenix, AZ, did a remarkable job. The district attorney apologized for the mistake, although he could not resist defending the death penalty by saying, "we have the best system in the world." Years ago Krone believed in the death penalty and our criminal justice system. Asked if he still has faith in the system, he responded "Absolutely not. I can't be the only one... people need to address this issue." Surely addressing the issues-- selective prosecution, junk science, shoddy government expert, death sentences based on circumstantial evidence, judge sentencing in capital cases, etc.-- is the least the "best system in the world" can do. Double jeopardy For us disciples of the "Colorado Method" of insulating and isolating jurors to holdout for life, be aware that the U.S. Supreme Court may take away our right to appeal when we are successful. On March 18, 2002, the Court granted certiorari in Sattazadn v. Pennsylvania, a Double Jeopardy case that has implications in the many jurisdictions that have a default life sentence when the jurors are unable to reach a unanimous verdict. In the early 1980s, Sattazahn was convicted of first-degree murder and the jurors hung on whether to sentence him to life or to death. The judge, as required by statute when the jurors are hung as to sentence, sentenced Sattazahn to life. He had his conviction reversed on direct appeal. At retrial, the judges allowed the prosecutor to once again seek the death penalty. He was convicted once again of first- degree murder and this time was sentenced to death. The Pennsylvania appellate courts affirmed the death sentence. Had the jury unanimously sentenced Sattazahn to life in his first trial, the Double Jeopardy Clause would have prevented the government from seeking death since he was "acquitted" of death in the first sentencing trial. Also, had the jury been unable to reach a verdict and a mistrial been declared, jeopardy would not attach and the state could once again seek the death penalty. The question the Supreme Court will resolve in Sattazahn is whether jeopardy attaches when state law mandates a life sentence when the jurors are not unanimous. The Supreme Court will also hear arguments on whether the Pennsylvania legislature's default life statute granted Sattazahn a life-and-liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Pennsylvania courts did not address this argument. The case will be heard in November 2002. Making the Case for Life V Last September's "Making the case for life V" seminar was canceled in the wake of 9/11. This year's seminar will be in Raleigh, North Carolina at the Sheraton. It is scheduled for Thursday, September 19 through midday Sunday, September 22, 2002. The focus of the program will be on juror selection and mitigation. The program is geared for investigators, mitigation specialist, new lawyers, and not-so-new lawyers. The faculty includes many seasoned death penalty lawyers and experts. Brochures will be mailed and e-mailed in early June. Please let me know if you would like more information.
	National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) 1660 L St., NW, 12th Floor, Washington, DC 20036 (202) 872-8600 • Fax (202) 872-8690 • assist@nacdl.org