President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%↑

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd

(D) Adam Frisch

50%

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

52%↑

48%↓

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
February 09, 2016 10:21 AM UTC

George Brauchler's Ugly Consolation Prize

  • 24 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
Arapahoe County DA George Brauchler.
Arapahoe County DA George Brauchler.

As the Colorado Independent’s Corey Hutchins reports, the failure of Arapahoe County DA George Brauchler to win the death penalty phase of the trial of the Aurora theater mass murderer last year–a loss that contributed to Brauchler’s momentous decision to not run for the U.S. Senate this year–has provoked a controversial response from his Republican allies in the Colorado General Assembly.

And by controversial, we mean, well, bloodthirsty:

Currently it takes a unanimous vote of all 12 jurors, but Republican Sen. Kevin Lundberg of Berthoud wants to get that number down a little lower. Like, maybe nine. Or 10. Or maybe 11 jurors. But not all 12. That just makes executing someone in Colorado too hard, he says. He doesn’t like the idea that one lone holdout could spoil a death sentence.

“If the policy is that the death penalty is appropriate for the worst of crimes, then a jury should not be composed of people who disagree with that basic point,” Lundberg told The Colorado Independent about his bill. Critics of the measure say it might not pass constitutional muster, and the bar shouldn’t be lowered for easing executions.

The senator will make the case for his legislation at 1:30 p.m. Wednesday in the Senate Judiciary Committee, according to the Senate calendar.

The Denver Post’s Jordan Steffen has more from the bill’s primary sponsor, GOP Sen. Kevin Lundberg of Loveland:

Sen. Kevin Lundberg, R-Berthoud, said he is sponsoring the bill because he “wants to save lives” and have a penalty “that will cause the bad guy to think twice before they pull the trigger.”

…But critics peg the legislation — which could still be amended — as an effort to make it easier to obtain a death sentence.

“We require the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt all criminal charges to a unanimous jury,” said Colorado public defender Doug Wilson. “So (under the proposed bill) someone charged with shoplifting would get a unanimous jury, and yet when we decide we want to execute one of our citizens, we would leave it to a jury of less than 12.” [Pols emphasis]

At a time when capital punishment in the United States is under more scrutiny than at any point since it was relegalized by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1976, and with so much controversy over the methods of execution in America and the possibility of wrongful executions, the idea of making it easier to execute people in any way seems radically counterintuitive. It’s even worse to think through the implications of executing someone over the objections of a sitting juror, which is apparently only possible in three states today. No matter how robbed Brauchler may feel over the three jurors who objected to imposing the death penalty in the Aurora shooting case, that is not something we think a majority of voters in Colorado would find morally conscionable.

In fact, this could get voters thinking about the death penalty in ways proponents won’t like at all.

Tweet
Share

Comments

24 thoughts on “George Brauchler’s Ugly Consolation Prize”

  3. I can understand and respect the opinion of those who think the death penalty is appropriate in certain cases. I'm not aware of any evidence that it saves lives, as opposed to when life without parole is imposed instead, by acting as a deterrent. I do think the idea of a simple majority, much less a coin toss, to determine whether a person should be killed by us, the state, or not is abhorrent. I'm confident Colorado will stick with its high standard for imposing the ultimate penalty. State sanctioned execution, as long as it exists, should be the most difficult sentence to impose. Unanimity is appropriate for this most serious of all punishments.

    1. I was being sarcastic, bc. I would require unanimity for the death penalty in the rare cases where it is appropriate.  I actually was foreman of the jury in a death penalty case.  The fact is juries might balk at conviction if you took away the individuL veto over the death penalty.

       

      3. Sorry I missed the sarcasm. blush I do seem to recall that you support the death penalty so I thought you were just being extra curmudgeonly. You have been known to be just a a tad curmudgeonly from time to time. My bad.crying

  4. Like there is a snowball's chance in hell this becomes law. And even if tthe House went along with this brain fart, even the Roberts court – with scalia and thomas dissenting – would toss it as unconstitutional.
    They should just pass a budget and adjourn until January.  The legislature is simply a waste of money and time.   

  5. Everyone with a shred of political sense knows that this legislation does not have a snowball's chance in Yuma (AZ) of passing the House, much less surviving a veto or constitutional challenge.  This is solely designed to try to keep Brauchler in the spotlight on his sole issue–one which Colorado voters have consistently put at or near the very bottom when ranking issues by importance here.  It is too bad that the Colorado Republican Party–unlike that in Nebraska or even Kansas–is so far gone that they continue to try to make political hay out of making it easier to kill people.

  6. "That will cause the bad guy to think twice before they (sic) pull the trigger"

    Aside from the grammatical lapse, does Kevin Lundborg actually believe that James Holmes or that psycho in Colorado Springs would have paused and "thought twice" about Colorado being an 11 to 1 (or 10 to 2) non-unanimous jury state before killing all those people?

    What frigging planet do these people come from?

    1. They are the same dim goons who will tell you that gun laws don't make any difference in criminal behavior, because criminals disregard laws …

  8. Gee, I always thought that Kevin Lundberg was "pro-life."  Oops, my bad. He's "pro-life" only when he is trying to regulate female bodies and body parts. 

  9. About the only societal "value" (and, I'm not sure that's the appropriate word) that I can see to any death penalty statute is its application as a "bargaining tool" to obtain a quick confession in lieu of a lengthy, prolonged, and perhaps iffy prosecution — confession and life imprisonment without parole in lieu of seeking the death penalty.

    Prosecutors like Brauchler who refuse to accept confessions are abusers of both their prosecutorial powers and the public trust.  Their concern is more with the pursuit of political office, and their tough-guy persona, than ultimate justice.  The cost of those crimes is then borne by society . . . twice.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

299 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!