VADP

History of Virginians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty

In September of 1991 a group of 22 people opposed to the death penalty gathered to strategize. One of the points brought out at the meeting was a 1989 survey conducted by the Center for Survey Research at Virginia Commonwealth University. The independent survey found that while Virginians supported the death penalty, support decreased to a minority when Virginians were given the alternative of life with no possibility of parole for a minimum of 25 years combined with restitution to the victims' family. It was decided that a steering committee would gather to see how we could use this poll to educate Virginians about the death penalty.

On November 9, 1991 a steering committee of 13 people gathered and thus VIRGINIANS AGAINST STATE KILLING (VASK) was formed. A year later it was decided to change our name to VIRGINIANS FOR ALTERNATIVES TO STATE KILLING. We wanted to be "for" something instead of "against". We also felt that being "for alternatives" was more descriptive of who we were.

By the end of 1994 we felt that response to our name wasn't very positive so we decided to drop the familiar VASK acronym and call ourselves VIRGINIANS FOR ALTERNATIVES TO THE DEATH PENALTY (VADP). We felt this would be a very positive change as people would react more positively to us as well as wanting to discuss the alternatives that we proposed.

Since the 1989 VCU survey the Center for Survey Research at Virginia Tech in its Quality of Life in Virginia survey has found similar results in its polling every year since 1993. Around 80% of Virginians support the death penalty when asked if they are for or against. Support drops by half to a minority when Virginians are given the alternative of life, with no possibility of parole for a minimum of 25 years combined with restitution to the victims' family.

                                          1999 Poll Results 

For the 7th consecutive year survey results from the Quality of Life in Virginia Poll show that Virginians prefer an alternative to the death penalty. When surveyors asked 514 respondents whether they supported the death penalty, 74 % agreed.  This is the lowest percentage that responded in favor of the death penalty in the 7 years. For the second consecutive year nearly 20% opposed the death penalty which is the highest recorded in the 7 years of polling.. 

But when respondents were asked their views if there  were the alternative of Life, with no possibility of parole for a minimum of 25 years combined with restitution to the victims’ family, 54.8% agreed with the alternative and 40.5 % disagreed. 
 
“What this survey shows us is that once again, for the 7th consecutive year, Virginians prefer an alternative to the death penalty”, said Henry Heller, director of  Virginians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty.  “If the public doesn’t really want the death penalty why are a large majority of our legislators pushing it down our throats?” 
 

      For the 6th consecutive year, Virginians support for the death penalty is cut by more than half when given the alternative of life with no possibility of parole for a minimum of 25 years combined with restitution to the victims' family.  This year's results also show a continuing downward trend in support of the death penalty overall.  75.4% supported the death penalty in this year's poll.  That is a decrease from 79.5% last from last year and 82.8% from the year before.  Consequently, opposition to the death penalty has risen through the last 3 years.  While 13.2% opposed the death penalty in 1996, and 17% opposed it last year, nearly 20% opposed it this year. 

When given the alternative, 56.3% agreed with the alternative while 37.9% disagreed.  This is consistent within a percentage point of results through the last 4 years. 

Results based on 726 completed interviews with a margin of error +- 3.8%. 
 

The Center for Survey Research at Virginia Tech has released this year's (1997) results to their annual poll. Highlights of the questions pertaining to the death penalty are: 

When asked the generic question of for or against, 79.5% supported the death penalty, 
compared to 82.8% last year. 17.1% opposed compared to 13.2% last year. While support 
for the alternative of Life, with no possibility of parole for a minimum of 25 years combined 
with restitution to the victims' families remained at 57%, support for the death penalty 
decreased from 40.3& to 38.2%. 

844 interviews were completed with a margin of error of +-3.4% at the 95% level of 
confidence. 

From This Year's Quality of Life in Virginia Poll (1997) 

Question #1) Do you support the death penalty for convicted murderers? 

Question #2) Would you favor an alternative sentence of Life, with no possibility of parole 
for 25 years, plus restitution to the victims' families? 

Question #3) Do you favor the Virginia law that does not allow any new evidence of 
innocence in a death penalty case to be presented more than 21 days after the trial? 

Virginians clearly oppose, by a 3 to 1 margin, the state law which prevents the accused from introducing new evidence of innocence 21 days after trial. 

Prepared for Dr. Robert Schneider
December 5, 1997
SLW 602 Social Work and Policy
Virginia Commonwealth University

Introduction

In a 1989 survey on the quality of life in Virginia, Henry Heller learned a majority of Virginians prefer an alternative to the death penalty. The annual survey, conducted by the Center for Survey Research at Virginia Tech, asked whether a person would "favor abolition of the death penalty if the alternative were a life sentence with no possibility of parole for 25 years, combined with a restitution program requiring the prisoner to work for money that would go to families of murder victims" (VADP, 1990).

Heller, who had been actively involved in Amnesty International, became part of a task force group who called themselves Virginians Against State Killing (VASK). Taking the mandate from the survey which showed Virginians would support alternatives to the death penalty, VASK set out to abolish the death penalty.

This paper will describe how VASK evolved to where it is today, and using Nancy Amidei's theoretical framework for advocacy, will apply and analyze three concepts apparent in the group's efforts. I will look at how this group utilizes facts to educate people, gets to know the decision-makers and their staff, and how it broadens its base of support. The paper will conclude with my observations and comments about the groups' work, reviewing whether this advocacy group meets the guidelines for success.

Why the Name Changed

Soon after the first meeting, VASK realized its name had strong negative implications and easily turned people off to hearing about the group's purpose. Henry Heller, tapped as the director, said they changed the name to Virginians for Alternatives to State Killing, which kept the acronym VASK but tried to sound in favor of something, rather than against something. The group's name, Heller noted, was extremely important to how people received the information. In the end, it was refined one more time to its current name of Virginians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty (VADP) to clearly state the group's purpose.

"We are for something, not against something," Heller said. The name makes people more comfortable, willing to listen and talk about the issue of state executions. The death penalty is a hot issue, and most people have strong opinions in favor of it, given the sparse knowledge they have based on the claims of politicians. Death row inmates are compared by the general public to molesters and the death penalty placates people's fears, attempting to provide a simple solution to a complex problem (VADP, 1990).

For the past five years, the same survey has shown Virginians prefer alternatives to the death penalty when given a choice. The 1997 poll found that 57% favor an alternative, while 38% would still want the death penalty (VADP, 1990). Most people never stop to think what the options may be, and VADP tries to keep people informed. The VADP Board recently rewrote its bylaws to reflect the groups' purpose as promoting alternatives, and not solely to abolish the death penalty. Although they would like to see that happen, their primary strategy is to keep voters and legislators aware of the facts and myths about the death penalty so that intelligent, compassionate decisions can be made.

To keep their goals realistic, VADP does not have a target date set as to when they would like to see the death penalty abolished or alternatives set in place. They see change as a slow process requiring a transformation of the heart. Heller speaks of his own change of heart taking place at the first vigil he attended on the night of Earl Clanton's execution. Before that, he had supported the death penalty. As one of their educational tactics, VADP sent information about the death penalty to the 140 Virginia legislators.

Another mailing will go out soon on a study that shows how the attitudes of law enforcement personnel reflect a lack of belief that the death penalty acts as a deterrent. The hope of VADP is to keep adding to the mound of evidence and conviction that the death penalty is not the solution some people like to believe it is. Nancy Amidei outlines five steps to advocacy in her book "So You Want to Make a Difference?" (1994), three of which I will examine in relation to VADP.

Get the Facts

When a person takes the time to review the literature VADP offers on reasons to rethink the death penalty issue, a strong and convincing argument could be made to change the heart of anyone. In this country, facts can make a powerful statement that challenge habitual ways of thinking. As Amidei explains, "there are few worse advocates than people with good intentions and bad information" (1991, p.31). VADP, however, does not fall into that category. On the contrary, they have a cause that comes loaded with facts, and this group has done an excellent job organizing the facts into a provocative position. The annual Quality of Life in Virginia survey that asks the question about the death penalty and its alternatives was already in place by the time VADP formed. Human Rights groups have watched this issue for a long time. Even a non-baised group called the Death Penalty Information Center has found many of the same points regarding public sentiment. "People believe that the death penalty is arbitrary, that it is imposed in a racially discriminatory manner and that there is a danger that innocent people may be executed by mistake," the report says (Wall Street Journal, 1993).

The fact that about 90% of all U.S. executions have been carried out in the South and over 90% of those executed had court-appointed lawyers at their original trials points to elements of racism. Of the 1200 people executed in Virginia's history, over 1000 have been Black. (VADP, 1990). It is far more likely a defendant will receive a death sentence if the murder victim was white than if the victim was Black. Also, African-Americans represent 41% of the death row population even though they compose only 12 % of the national population (NAACP, 1994).

"The death penalty, as applied today, discriminates against the poor, people of color, and the mentally impaired" VADP declares in its statement of purpose. Information like this makes a person pause to wonder if the death penalty was reinstated in 1976 as a mechanism to exert racist control. The Supreme Court had ruled for a 10-year hiatus, after which time some states brought back the death penalty. Every Western democracy except the USA has abolished the death penalty. When statistics show the murder rate is lower in some states that don't have the death penalty, deterrence is not a strong argument for the capital punishment, as many proponents claim.

Another fact most people probably do not know is how much more it costs to carry out the death penalty than it is to incarcerate for life. Most of the costs to the state occur at the trial level, and can increase up to 6 times as much for one person. The state of Indiana, who has a smaller death row load than Virginia, estimates it could save $5 million per year if they abolished capital punishment (VADP, 1990). Those millions of dollars could be better spent rehabilitating criminals and setting up restitution programs.

The arbitrary manner in which the death penalty is applied is cause for concern. Of the thousands convicted of murder each year, only 1% receive the death penalty. These defendants are usually subjects of racism, are from low socioeconomic status and education level, and have overzealous prosecutors (Bureau of Justice, 1992). Their crimes were not necessarily the most gruesome, but they did not have access to the full resources of the justice system.

Know the Decision-Makers

Among Amidei's Five Critical Steps (toward advocacy) is her fourth point about getting to know the decision-makers and their staff. "Effective advocates cultivate relationships with decision-makers....over a long period of time, and under stand the process well enough to know when to ask (or not)....It teaches who has what kinds of power at varying levels of government." (p.33)

VADP is an advocacy group that represents a majority of Virginians who would like to see alternatives to the death penalty legislated in the judicial system. In order to do this, VADP advocates must learn to know their political representatives. As director of VADP, Heller has established working relationships with several legislators who know him. VADP times their mailings to reach legislators before each session commences.

VADP is also working to overturn Virginia's 21-day rule which currently prevents new evidence from being introduced more than 21 days after conviction, even if such evidence shows the defendant is innocent. Another legal procedure the group wants to overturn is the contemporaneous objection rule which bars lawyers from raising objections on appeal if they were not brought up in the trial. Virginia is the only state which does not waive this rule in capital cases (VADP, 1990).

VADP has an ally in the Virginia Legislature. Delegate Jim Almand from Northern Virginia introduced a bill to repeal the 21-day rule but it was denied last year. Heller is not sure if Almand would introduce it again this year or not. Although Almand is not against the death penalty, Heller said he is concerned about justice and fairness, and wants to see archaic laws changed. VADP understands the complicated process a bill must go through to pass into law. The power for any ruling on the death penalty begins with the Legislature's Crime Commission, and from there it must pass through the courts of justice, the House, the Senate and finally signed by the Governor. The 21-day rule was aborted at the first level with the Crime Commission, so VADP is well aware of the odds they face.

Virginia's current administration is not soft on the death penalty and VADP's work has been, and will continue to be, slow moving. Particularly when sentiments like that of former Attorney General Mary Sue Terry, responding to an appeal to introduce new evidence after 21 days, said "Evidence of innocence is irrelevant" (VADP, 1990). However, VADP will take whatever victories they can find. Since 1991, five men's death sentences have been commuted, two by Gov. George Allen. The epilogue to the good news is that these five men are still in prison and can not get a retrial. So even though enough evidence was found to commute them, no action has been taken to resentence them.

Broaden the Base of Support

One of VADP's greatest strengths, in addition to its armory of compelling facts, is the broad base of support they have on the death penalty issue. There are numerous other groups and organizations that count the death penalty on their agendas. The ACLU has always been in favor of abolishing the death penalty and tracks the injustices and human rights violations that have occurred in this country as a result of capital punishment. The Interfaith Center for Public Policy has also named the death penalty as one of the top five causes they will focus on this upcoming legislative season. The Peace and Justice committee of the Charlottesville Catholic Diocese lists the death penalty among their concerns, and sponsored a candidate's forum this past Fall for the 57th and 58th Districts. The three attending candidates each stated their positions on the death penalty (VADP, 1997).

VADP works closely with an organization called Citizens United for Rehabilitation of Errants (CURE), a Northern Virginia based group that promotes the rights of prisoners. CURE advocates for goods and services to be made available to inmates, such as books, GED testing, classes, programs, counseling and affordable phone calls. In the Mecklenburg state penitentiary, a death row inmate named Roger Coleman started a program called "The Choice is Yours," a letter writing campaign aimed at teens to encourage them to make the right decisions and stay away from a life of crime. After Coleman's execution in 1992, another inmate, Joe Payne, took over the program, which has since been banned by the warden. Heller has made several visits to death row and has learned to know some of the inmates personally.

The media has also demonstrated a willingness to address the death penalty issue, most notably with the release of the film "Dead Man Walking," which tells the story of Sister Helen Prejean's association with a death row inmate. Sister Prejean continues to speak around the country on the death penalty issue and was recently hosted at George Mason University. At the 10th Annual Virginia Film Festival in Charlottesville this year, Amnesty International sponsored the film "Incident At Oglala," a documentary that makes a case for the retrial of Leonard Peltier of the American Indian Movement. "Procedure 769," another film shown at the festival, explores the execution of Robert Harris in California in 1992. Even commercial television is tackling the issue. Heller recently saw on ABC a program called "The Practice," which delved into the death penalty issue in a sensitive and thorough way.

Amidei talks about unexpected alliances within an advocate's support base and how striking they are for showing "that support for an issue is broader than previously supposed" (1991, p. 33). VADP and other anti-death penalty supporters have a powerful alliance with a group called Murder Victim Families for Reconciliation. MVFR has a speaking tour called Journey of Hope, where members of families who lost a loved one through murder, talk about their experiences. VADP sponsored the tour through Virginia last year where schools, churches, universities and rotary clubs were among the audiences of the 225 speaking events. Heller said the response to hearing the stories of these families, who oppose the death penalty as an inadequate way to reach healing, was "fantastic." People left from these events with new ways to think about the death penalty. If murder victims' families can change their views of the effectiveness of the death penalty, there must be something compelling about the process that needs to be examined by citizens and lawmakers alike.

Summary

Virginians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty meets the criterion for Nancy Amidei's definition of a successful advocacy group. "Advocacy assumes that people have rights, and those rights are enforceable" ( 1991, p. 6). Death row inmates, although an unpopular group for most people, still fall into the scope of deserving human rights. When Heller is asked why he works on behalf of convicted criminals, when there are so many "good and worthy" causes needing help, he replies that someone has to take the stand. And so few people accept the less popular causes. As Amidei says, "advocacy is a frame of mind, a mind set - not a job title, occupation or role in life" (p.10)

Where most people see obstacles, advocates see opportunities. Heller certainly fits this description, as does VADP. Working to change institutions that cause problems is par for the course in advocacy work. By giving a voice to the many Virginians who prefer an alternative to the death penalty, VADP is an effective, heartfelt, organization that promotes justice for both death row inmates and the people who oppose the mechanism that got them there.

This paper has demonstrated how VADP works effectively with the facts, knows the decision-makers and their staffs, and utilizes a broad base of support. VADP has not tried to abolish the death penalty as its primary objective, knowing from firsthand experience that aggressive and ruthless tactics are not nearly as effective with an issue that requires a change of heart. By choosing to present itself as a positive alternative where everybody wins, VADP continues to leave a mark in the hearts of the people who encounter the troubled issue of capital punishment. The attitude of revenge and "an eye for an eye" mentality that the death penalty stands on does not address the myriad of subtle and not so subtle aspects of justice for all, loss, grief, restitution, and rehabilitation that tell the whole story.

By the time they are executed, many of the death row inmates are not the same person they were when they committed the acts of violence. The death penalty denies the possibility of redemption and transformation. Amidei emphasizes the importance of humanizing the facts, putting a face on the statistics. Journey for Hope does this by having victim's families tell their stories. Following the course of death row inmates through groups like VADP, supporting and educating legislators and other citizens, and participating in execution day vigils can bring the complex issue closer to the heart. The film "Dead Man Walking" did an excellent job putting a human face on the presumed monster. Though no one excuses the awful acts of violence that many death row inmates are responsible for, the book is closed too soon on these people by a justice system that refuses to see them as human beings. All that groups like VADP ask is for people to take a second look, consider the facts, and further their thinking before making up their minds.

Perhaps their hearts will be touched in the process.

References