Full Version: Warner commutes execution
Robin M. Lovitt's execution was commuted by Gov. Mark R. Warner of Virginia. Warner cited the fact that DNA evidence, which test inconclusively at first and then destroyed, would not give Lovitt a fair chance of proving his claim of innocense, thus, life in prison for Lovitt.
As stated by the Washington Post
Questions for debate:
1.)Does destroyed evidence really have an impact on fairness in this case?
2.)Would you have commuted the sentece?, why or why not?
3.)Will this hurt Warner if he has presidential ambitions? Would you vote for a person who used this commuting of a sentence in an attack ad against Warner?
As stated by the Washington Post
QUOTE
"In this case, the actions of an agent of the Commonwealth, in a manner contrary to the express direction of the law, comes at the expense of a defendant facing society's most severe and final sanction," Warner said in the statement. "The Commonwealth must ensure that every time this ultimate sanction is carried out, it is done fairly."
Questions for debate:
1.)Does destroyed evidence really have an impact on fairness in this case?
2.)Would you have commuted the sentece?, why or why not?
3.)Will this hurt Warner if he has presidential ambitions? Would you vote for a person who used this commuting of a sentence in an attack ad against Warner?
Does destroyed evidence really have an impact on fairness in this case?
I sure hope so!
Would you have commuted the sentence? Why or why not?
Yes, for destroying evidence. The stories I've read don't illuminate on the clerk's motivations. Was it really an accident or was it malicious? Were they fired? Is he or she glad his death sentence was commuted to a life sentence?
Will this hurt Warner if he has presidential ambitions? Would you vote for a person who used this commuting of a sentence in an attack ad against Warner?
I'm not sure presidential ambitions played a part, but I believe Warner didn't want Virginia to be remembered as the state that ushered in the first thousand execution. By commuting Lovitt's execution Warner will let North Carolina(?) have the honors.
If I were running against Warner I wouldn't make a campaign issue out of this unless my campaign manager is the same guy that signed up Corzine's ex wife in NJ. This is Warner's first grant of clemency.
I sure hope so!
Would you have commuted the sentence? Why or why not?
Yes, for destroying evidence. The stories I've read don't illuminate on the clerk's motivations. Was it really an accident or was it malicious? Were they fired? Is he or she glad his death sentence was commuted to a life sentence?
Will this hurt Warner if he has presidential ambitions? Would you vote for a person who used this commuting of a sentence in an attack ad against Warner?
I'm not sure presidential ambitions played a part, but I believe Warner didn't want Virginia to be remembered as the state that ushered in the first thousand execution. By commuting Lovitt's execution Warner will let North Carolina(?) have the honors.
If I were running against Warner I wouldn't make a campaign issue out of this unless my campaign manager is the same guy that signed up Corzine's ex wife in NJ. This is Warner's first grant of clemency.
I'll preface my comments by saying that I support the death penalty for certain crimes/cases - narrowly defined and specific.
1.)Does destroyed evidence really have an impact on fairness in this case?
I don't know about "fairness", but I do think it calls into question the validity of the verdict in this case. ie. It raises a reasonable doubt in my mind based strictly on the story presented by the article cited. I'm not familar with this case other than the description in that article.
2.)Would you have commuted the sentece?, why or why not?
Yes, for the reason stated above - reasonable doubt, once again based strictly on what I read in the article. Obviously Gov Warner had much more information available to him in making this decision.
3.)Will this hurt Warner if he has presidential ambitions? Would you vote for a person who used this commuting of a sentence in an attack ad against Warner?
I would be more inclined to consider Warner based on his actions in this case provided he could explain/defend his decision. I don't know that attack ads would be a good way to go, but certainly his decision is a worthy issue for discussion in a campaign. If his opponent were to raise the issue in the campaign and ask for an explanation from Warner on why he made this decision, I would expect Warner to respond with an explanation. If he did and his explanation seemed appropriate to me, it certainly wouldn't hurt him in my eyes. Might even help him.
1.)Does destroyed evidence really have an impact on fairness in this case?
I don't know about "fairness", but I do think it calls into question the validity of the verdict in this case. ie. It raises a reasonable doubt in my mind based strictly on the story presented by the article cited. I'm not familar with this case other than the description in that article.
2.)Would you have commuted the sentece?, why or why not?
Yes, for the reason stated above - reasonable doubt, once again based strictly on what I read in the article. Obviously Gov Warner had much more information available to him in making this decision.
3.)Will this hurt Warner if he has presidential ambitions? Would you vote for a person who used this commuting of a sentence in an attack ad against Warner?
I would be more inclined to consider Warner based on his actions in this case provided he could explain/defend his decision. I don't know that attack ads would be a good way to go, but certainly his decision is a worthy issue for discussion in a campaign. If his opponent were to raise the issue in the campaign and ask for an explanation from Warner on why he made this decision, I would expect Warner to respond with an explanation. If he did and his explanation seemed appropriate to me, it certainly wouldn't hurt him in my eyes. Might even help him.
Leave it to the Washington Times to criticize the commutation. They first contend that Lovitt's criminal history more than justifies the death penalty in light of the evidence being destroyed and then make the insinuation that Warner commuted the sentence for political reasons. 
Washington Times Editorial
Any thoughts?
QUOTE
In announcing that he would commute the death sentence of Lovitt, who was convicted of stabbing Mr. Dicks to death with a pair of scissors, Mr. Warner claimed that clemency was necessary "to reaffirm confidence in our justice system." Unfortunately, his move is likely to do the opposite: to encourage cynicism that he is politicizing Virginia's criminal justice system in order to advance his own political fortunes.
The Lovitt commutation is the first since Mr. Warner took office in January 2002; 11 prisoners have been executed during his term. In explaining his decision to commute Lovitt's sentence to life without parole, Mr. Warner cited the premature destruction of DNA evidence in the case by a court clerk in Arlington four years ago. A look at the evidence in the case, including Lovitt's extensive criminal history, leads us to the conclusion that the trial court had a reasonable basis for finding Lovitt guilty and sentencing him to death for a heinous crime.
The Lovitt commutation is the first since Mr. Warner took office in January 2002; 11 prisoners have been executed during his term. In explaining his decision to commute Lovitt's sentence to life without parole, Mr. Warner cited the premature destruction of DNA evidence in the case by a court clerk in Arlington four years ago. A look at the evidence in the case, including Lovitt's extensive criminal history, leads us to the conclusion that the trial court had a reasonable basis for finding Lovitt guilty and sentencing him to death for a heinous crime.
Washington Times Editorial
Any thoughts?
1.)Does destroyed evidence really have an impact on fairness in this case?
I think that it does have a real impact. Very hard to know what it meant without being able to double check it.
2.)Would you have commuted the sentence?, why or why not?
I am going to have to say that the governor has far more information than we do in this matter so I will go with him. I have always felt that most of the information available is not made public and I really have a hard time second guessing juries and authorities in this type of matter.
3.)Will this hurt Warner if he has presidential ambitions? Would you vote for a person who used this commuting of a sentence in an attack ad against Warner?
To the first part I do not really think that it will be a big issue. first he commuted the sentence, but the man is still behind bars for the rest of his life. Most people seem to feel that they are in favor of the death penalty, most are not zealots in it's use. Whereas the opponents are mainly totally against it's use.
As for the second part, his commutation of the death penalty sentence means little to me. I do not know where Governor Warner stands on what I consider important national issues. That would be a far larger impact than this issue. Though for the most part I feel that I would rather have a candidate that tells me where they stand on the issues and says nothing about their opponents at all. I do not need somebody to tell what they think their opponents stand for, I what to know what they stand for instead.
I think that it does have a real impact. Very hard to know what it meant without being able to double check it.
2.)Would you have commuted the sentence?, why or why not?
I am going to have to say that the governor has far more information than we do in this matter so I will go with him. I have always felt that most of the information available is not made public and I really have a hard time second guessing juries and authorities in this type of matter.
3.)Will this hurt Warner if he has presidential ambitions? Would you vote for a person who used this commuting of a sentence in an attack ad against Warner?
To the first part I do not really think that it will be a big issue. first he commuted the sentence, but the man is still behind bars for the rest of his life. Most people seem to feel that they are in favor of the death penalty, most are not zealots in it's use. Whereas the opponents are mainly totally against it's use.
As for the second part, his commutation of the death penalty sentence means little to me. I do not know where Governor Warner stands on what I consider important national issues. That would be a far larger impact than this issue. Though for the most part I feel that I would rather have a candidate that tells me where they stand on the issues and says nothing about their opponents at all. I do not need somebody to tell what they think their opponents stand for, I what to know what they stand for instead.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.