The issues affecting you reveal explained discussed now on W. GL eight in focus. Hello, I'm Susan pyro Governor josh Shapiro wants lawmakers to abolish the death penalty in pennsylvania. He said last week that he will not sign any execution warrants during his term. When my son asked me why it was okay to kill someone who killed someone else. I couldn't look him in the eye and answer that question. 27 states still allow the death penalty but four of those states, including pennsylvania, have governor imposed moratoriums. Michigan was the first of 23 states to get rid of the death penalty and Washington state was the most recent. Pennsylvania has only executed three people here at S. C. I rock views since the state reinstated the death penalty in 1978. Leon Moser and keith's Boyer were executed in 1995 and Gary Hyde Nick in 1999. They were voluntarily executed by lethal injection after waving their appeals tonight. We'll talk with two state senators who say the death penalty has its place and the executive director of an organization dedicated to eliminating the death penalty. We're putting the death penalty in Pennsylvania in focus. I'm joined now by state senator joe pittman, the Senate majority leader in pennsylvania. Thanks so much for being here. My pleasure. Susan, thank you. What was your reaction to the governor's announcement? Well, I thought he could have certainly reacted in *** much more clear and concise way in terms of communicating with the legislature. This is *** massive policy shift. It's something that in my opinion the death penalty process is broken as *** process. I think the question is how can we best serve law enforcement in our prosecutor community in this commonwealth to make sure that it's used as *** proper deterrent and it brings the most hardened criminals to justice. Why do you think it's broken? Well, if you look, for example, the district that I represent Indiana Armstrong, Westmoreland counties is home to one of the most legendary kill for thrills. Let's go and travel arugula. They had *** kill for thrill in the late 70s murdered *** cop murdered several under individuals. Those two perpetrators were convicted of the death penalty and here today they remain on death row 45 years later. To me, that is *** symbol of *** broken system that is not effective. Nevertheless, I think the death penalty has been used by law enforcement and prosecutors to achieve justice for some of the most heinous criminals. And I don't think we should just arbitrarily take it away. What do you think the legislature will do in reaction to this? I don't believe that the Senate has the interest or support in fully repealing the death penalty, the governor can make his decision to not issue death warrants. That's his prerogative. He's welcome to make that decision. But if we're going to remove the death penalty from the books, it's going to take the state Senate to approve it. And I'm just not convinced that there are 26 votes in the state Senate for such *** change. Why have *** death penalty if you're not going to use it? We haven't used this voluntarily for decades. Well, I think if you talk to prosecutors and the law enforced community, the death penalty as *** potential sentence is still *** very effective tool in achieving justice. *** lot of times, prosecutors have to deal with some of the most hardened criminals in our commonwealth. They have to deal with the victims and the families of victims. And often times it occurs that *** death penalty sentence is something that the public defenders, for example, will try to avoid and sometimes leads to life sentence please and and guilty pleas that otherwise would perhaps not occur. So I do think it's *** valuable tool and *** valuable asset to our prosecutor community and that's something we have to be very mindful of. Some will argue that the death penalty is inherently racist. In fact, we're going to be talking to the atlantic center for Capital representation, which says that that that's well proven. What's your reaction to that? I would just argue that our justice system is blind and it's supposed to be blind. And as far as I'm concerned, we need to make sure that regardless of *** perpetrator's background, that prosecutors have the opportunity to bring justice to the families of victims, particularly in our law enforcement community. We've seen at least three law enforcement officers in this commonwealth, tragically perished in the line of duty just this year. And I can't think of any more appropriate prosecution than to have the death penalty at least *** consideration for those who committed that heinous crime. But yet certainly many families of victims don't approve of the death penalty and don't think that the perpetrator should be put to death. Well, that's obviously in *** very emotional situation for families of victims. Again, I think the key here is that we leave this up to the prosecutors in the judicial system to move forward in *** responsible and efficient manner to make sure that justice is achieved and that those who have committed the most heinous crimes, the most crimes in this commonwealth should be brought to justice? Well, clearly, you can only put put to death if you have committed murder with aggravating circumstances. Of course, the, you know, the current governor is *** former prosecutor and says his stance has evolved. Do you think that's, you know, what happens to *** lot of people on this issue? It's certainly *** moral issue. Well, why the governor flip flopped on the issue is only for him to answer, I don't know what caused him to change his position so quickly and radically on it. I think the deeper question is, what does our law enforcement community need? What do the prosecutors in this commonwealth need to make sure that they bring justice to the most hardened criminals in this commonwealth. That's the real and most important question. Senator, thank you very much for joining us. Thank you. Pleasure being here and coming up on W. GAL eight in focus, we'll talk with an advocate who has dedicated his career to abolishing the death penalty. This is W. G L eight in focus coverage. You can count on joining us now is Marc Bookman, the executive director of the Atlantic Center for Capital Representation, an organization dedicated to the death penalty defense. Thanks so much for being here. Thanks for having me. Why did you become so passionate about this issue? Well, so what's interesting about the death penalty? I was *** public defender for 28 years. What's interesting about the death penalty is it's the only moral question in the law in any case civil criminal, whatever you can think of, there's only one, there's only one time where we ask jurors *** moral question which is, should someone live or die. Uh, and that's the death penalty question. All other questions, you know, civilly is like green or red are the elements of the crime proven beyond *** reasonable doubt. The only moral questions of the death penalty. So that that was certainly an attractive uh feature for me as *** public defender. You know, I my only real ambition was to try was to handle the most serious cases for indigent defense for for poor people that couldn't afford *** lawyer. So the death penalty obviously is the is the most serious of cases and it was just it was *** natural uh inclination for me to just sort of move up the ladder of of of criminal defense to get to the most serious cases. And uh, you know, I wish, frankly, I I wish we didn't have *** death penalty so we could so I could handle the most serious cases without that moral question. But right now that's that's the situation we find ourselves in. Well, obviously our new governor wishes we didn't have *** death penalty point. Were you surprised or what was your reaction to him calling on the legislature to do away with the death? I would say. I was pleasantly surprised in the sense that that I think Governor Shapiro himself said that he had evolved on the issue and and they're, you know, following his career reasonably closely as the Attorney General, I was pleasantly surprised, but I'm not surprised that he did evolve my experience in this area. Is that that the more you look at the question, the closer you look at the, at the question of capital punishment, the less likely you are to be in favor of it. And I think that's what Governor Shapiro uh really, I I think that's where where, where he landed. He looked closely at the question, he thought about it more talked to his son about it more. And uh and and and came out where frankly, I would expect him to come out. It's interesting, he mentioned his son saying something to the effect of why are we killing people just because they killed someone. Yeah, that was his kind of simplistic, but that was what he said. His son really landed on the moral question. And, and to, to make it slightly less simplistic. Um, you know, the, the real the issue is should assume someone commits *** horrible murder. Should we as *** society act in the same way as that horrible murderer? And I think most people would say, no, we shouldn't, we shouldn't be acting that way. And so, you know, the governor's son kind of does put his finger on the, on the moral question. I think there are many practical issues that affect that moral question, but but he did land on the right issue, I think, But to that moral question, what about the, you know, the victims families who may say I want retribution for this person who killed my relative. Yeah, I would, I will never, um, I've had enough contact with with victims. Uh, I would never question how *** victim feels about about being the victim of *** horrible violent crime. The fact is that, that, that, um, many victims are for the death penalty. Many victims are not for the death penalty. And, and the reality is what, while I think victims need to be heard. And I think their, their, their feelings uh should be considered. We we don't set *** public policy based on what the victims want or don't want any more than we would set *** public policy based on what the defendants want or don't want. This is *** policy that affects the community and there's *** reason we don't have victims deciding the punishment because we need we need neutral family, we need neutral uh members of the community, not family members. So while I respect victims, I have to acknowledge that they don't all feel the same way and they cannot set public policy. Certainly they can't come into the courtroom and set the sentence for someone. They can give *** victim witness, you know, reaction in the courtroom and you you're exactly right. Even in the law of victims can come into *** capital trial and talk about their loss and talk about the impact of the death. But they cannot say to the jury what punishment they would want. The law does not allow that and it's for exactly that reason will stay with us. Mr Brooklyn. We're gonna talk about what you mentioned, the practical aspects of the death penalty in pennsylvania. This is WGL eight in focus coverage you can count on and we continue our conversation with marc Bookman, the executive director of the atlantic Center for Capital representation, an organization dedicated to death penalty defense. Again, thanks for being here. We have *** death penalty in pennsylvania yet. We haven't put anyone to death since 1999. Why have this death penalty if you're not going to use it? Well, that's, that's *** good question. In fact, we've only executed three people in the modern era, which is the, the, the death penalty since it, it came back in 1979. The truth is, we haven't actually executed anyone involved entirely in 60 years. Even the three people that were executed gave up their appeals and wanted to be executed. So clearly it's not working and there are *** lot of reasons for it. But the main one I think is that we have, we have 67 counties in pennsylvania, but we're the only state that provides no money for indigent defense. Uh, so what, what, what we have is 67 counties kind of fending for themselves. And the, the natural inclination is to cut corners when, when the counties, you know, oftentimes don't have enough money to properly fund uh, capital defense. That these cases are very, very expensive. I think *** lot of people would say, why are we spending all this money on, on, on, on capital punishment? We could be fixing our roads, our bridges, our, our schools. Uh, we could be giving more money for victims to help them heal from violent crime. Um, instead we've got counties kind of fending for themselves and cutting corners and because they're cutting corners and not properly funding it. Our appellate courts say, well this wasn't done correctly. So we we lead the country in in reversals of death sentences. Um And that's of course it's not fair to the defendants and their families. It's also totally not fair to the victims who have to relive this, you know, 15 to 20 years later, it is truly *** failed government program. Is the appeal process. What makes it so expensive to have someone on death row? Actually, the incarceration on death row is more expensive. Um The trials are longer and more expensive. The preparation is more expensive and then yes, the appeals are more expensive and of course there are always people saying, why do we need all these appeals, why can't we just cut the appeals? Of course, if we cut the ***. P we're gonna have more innocent, we already have innocent people that that came close to executed. And many people think that we have had innocent people executed. We cut the appeals were likely to have more mistakes that we did not catch. Um So, you know, look, we can we can convict someone, take them out behind city hall and shoot them. That's not *** justice system that we want. Um We have the appellate system that we have because Because we need that appellate system to make sure that we're not making ultimate mistakes? Like executing someone that shouldn't be executed. Is there *** common theme of the people on death row in terms of their their background, we have 101 uh inmates on death row all male at this point. Yeah. Um, I don't know if there's one common theme. Certainly you're the, the great number of of them are low functioning. Um, the the percentages of, of uh, intellectually disabled and they shouldn't even be on death row, but the percentages are high according to the department of corrections, so they're low functioning. Um, the the racism of the death penalty is well proven at this point. And it's it's it's it's not, I wouldn't say it's counterintuitive, it's intuitive if you know where to look, the racism oftentimes is the race of the victim, not the race of the defendant in pennsylvania. We have *** race effect for both the defendant and the victim. But if you kill *** white victim, Arbitrarily you're much more likely to get *** death sentence than if you kill *** black victim, which is part of, you've written *** book with 12 different essays. And and you said it's it's really the norm. What what you've written about. I wrote *** book called *** descending spiral exposing the death penalty in 12 essays. And and what I what I set out to do was to was to To pick *** topic and write an essay about it. In other words, prosecutorial misconduct or bad defense lawyering or or uh impropriety on the part of judges, but in each one of the essays, I found one thing running through all of them and that was the racial discrimination. It was, it was consistent I think in 11 of the 12 stories and you can't separate out the death penalty, uh, from, from that sort of racism. That, that really *** lot of academics think that the death penalty sprung from racism, that when lynching went out of out of out of style for lack of *** better word and, and became uh more, more, more prosecuted and more legal capital punishment rose from those ashes to some extent. And I believe that. Well, thank you so much for being here. It's *** lot to think about for people certainly. And an important moral question. I hope people do think about it. Thank you for having me. Thanks very much coming up, we'll hear from *** state senator calling for *** mandatory death sentence in some cases. This is WGGL eight in focus coverage you can count on, I'm joined now by state senator, Mike Regan who represents parts of Cumberland and york counties. Thanks so much for being here. Thank you so much for having me senator. You plan to introduce legislation that would mean *** mandatory death sentence for anyone who murders *** law enforcement officer. Why are you doing that? Well, I mean, I think, um, part of it is we're seeing some shocking statistics for instance, since january 1st of this year, there's been seven police officers have been murdered And three of the seven are from Pennsylvania. No it was kind of brought into light just recently when that police officer from Temple Police Department was was murdered. Uh and I think that you know it's it's reaching *** I think *** point of critical mass where we need to take that offense homicide of *** police officer and separated out and given an enhancement and take some of the judgment out of the hands of the prosecutors. I was gonna say, why don't you think we should leave this up to prosecutors? Well, I mean I think there's this, you know because the prosecutors *** politician typically, you know the the U. S. Attorney or the or the county district attorney um you know may have *** bent one way or the other and leaving that discretion when I think this crime is so serious that it needs to be addressed this way where you don't have any wiggle room that if someone commits this terribly heinous crime, um they need to be put to death. Do you think the death penalty is *** deterrent? I do. I think it definitely would be. I think there's evidence at least anecdotally which which proves it. But you know, I think that if you think, well you know, if I commit this murder and I'm gonna be in jail for life Where I can go to school and I can you know have three hot meals and *** comfortable place to sleep. Um it may be less of *** deterrent. Um, you know, and we're seeing it just people more brazen. We're seeing more violent 600 homicides in Philadelphia last year. And on track to surpass that this year, there's *** more violent read of criminals out there and we're seeing it in our ability to hire qualified police officers. People, just police officers and departments are having trouble reading qualified people and because of it. But yet we haven't used the death penalty in many years in pennsylvania. What was your reaction to Governor Shapiro's call for the legislature to abolish the death penalty? Well, look, we've seen, I think we've seen over the last eight years with the wolf administration and then now Senator Federman *** tendency to lean in to try to help criminals. Um where I think I'm more of the idea where we should be more supportive of victims of crime. I think this is *** victims bill and you know, I'm not sure to what end that is, but I mean, I think, you know, someone who was the Attorney General, Attorney general of pennsylvania, who is the top cop is surprising to me that at least in this instance that he wouldn't be in favor of. So would you vote against that? Oh yes, absolutely. It's *** tough issue as you've said and many other lawmakers have said, yeah, it's *** difficult issue. There's no question about it. Um, you know, it's cut so many different ways people think of it differently. Um, but I think, you know, this is one of those times when the fence is so severe and so heinous that we have to look at it in *** different way. Senator Regan. Thanks so much for your time. Thank you Susan. Thank you so much. Thank you for joining us for W G *** L eight in Focus for all of us at W G *** L. I'm Susan Shapiro and join us again next saturday at seven o'clock for W G *** L eight in Focus right after NBC nightly news and you can watch every episode of in focus plus W G *** L. S latest newscast, original programming and more. Just download the very local app and stream for free on Roku and amazon fire tv.