NASHVILLE, Tenn. – Gerald Galloway worked for more than 30 years in law enforcement in North Carolina, but in spite of encountering some of the hardest of criminals, he's joining other current and former law enforcement officials to voice concern about the fairness and effectiveness of the death penalty.

The new group, Public Safety Officials on the Death Penalty, seeks to explore alternatives to achieve a more just and effective public safety system.

Galloway says condemning someone to death doesn't always result in justice.

"When you look at it anecdotally, it looks as if it's a sentence that makes sense,” he states. “But if you look at it in a broader perspective in its actual implementation and what it actually delivers, it is about as dysfunctional a sentence as you can give."

Galloway points out that the death penalty is very costly to taxpayers because of multiple trials and hearings, and sometimes people on death row are later determined to be innocent.

Supporters of the death penalty say it's still needed for the most serious of crimes.

Six people have been executed in Tennessee since 2000. The death penalty costs Tennessee approximately $11 million annually, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.

Galloway says one of the biggest factors in his opposition is that death sentences often are never carried out, leaving the family members of victims without closure.

"Most folks who are put on death row will never be put to death, because of the processes it takes for government to actually kill somebody,” he explains. “We don't deliver justice to surviving families of victims who wait for years and years and years for something that they've been promised that never occurs."

According to the Tennessee Department of Correction there are 67 people on death row, some of them with convictions dating back to the 1980s.



get more stories like this via email

CHARLESTON, W.V. -- Advocacy groups held a candlelight vigil in Charleston over the weekend, marking the one-year anniversary of the passing of Georgia Congressman and civil-rights activist John Lewis, and asking West Virginia lawmakers to support national standards to protect voting rights.

Katonya Hart, vice president of the NAACP of West Virginia and the event emcee, said statewide, voters have indicated they approve of measures to expand and safeguard voting access.

"The polls show that 79% of West Virginians are for the 'For The People Act,'" Hart reported. "Overwhelmingly, they want to see the John Lewis Voting Act passed."

The two bills being considered by Congress would increase voting options and access nationwide, increase transparency of election donations, and restore provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The Charleston vigil was part of more than a hundred events held across the country.

Sally Roberts, volunteer chair of Rise Up WV and an organizer of the event, said it is important for West Virginians to show they care about the right to vote, despite setbacks from some U.S. Senators, including from West Virginia, whom critics noted are blocking passage of the legislation.

"So that every person in America can have a government that fully represents them and the concerns that matter most to them, from health care to creating jobs," Roberts urged.

Martin Luther King III and his wife, Arndrea Waters King, also announced over the weekend they are launching an online campaign, called 'hashtag For John,' aimed at honoring the late Georgia Congressman, while raising money for voting-rights activism.

PHOENIX -- In a landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld a pair of Arizona "election security" laws that many experts believe will suppress votes in the next election.

In a six-to-three conservative-liberal split, the justices upheld Arizona laws requiring voters to cast a ballot only in their assigned precinct, and making it illegal to collect ballots and drop them off at an elections office.

The laws had been struck down in lower courts, but the Supreme Court voted to uphold them.

Josh Sellers, associate professor of law for the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law at Arizona State University, said the decision could embolden other state legislatures to pass more laws aimed at voter suppression.

"There are these laws at issue in this case, but there's all the other prospective laws that are on the horizon, so we have to kind of wait and see what other laws are implemented before the next election," Sellers cautioned. "But there's certainly the possibility that these laws threaten to, I think, decrease voter turnout. That concerns me."

Sellers, who teaches voting-rights law, said lower courts ruled that the Arizona laws appeared to be aimed at making voting more difficult for people of color. Republicans said their goal in passing stricter laws is to make sure elections are secure.

Sellers believes the ruling is a blow to states trying to broaden voting rights, and a green light to legislatures passing laws that make it harder to vote.

"If I was a state legislator reading this opinion today, I would feel fairly comfortable that I would not have to worry about losing a Voting Rights Act lawsuit," Sellers remarked.

Sellers added it's now up to Congress to pass a federal voting rights bill to set basic elections rules that all states must follow.

"There is a bill that's under consideration, named after the late Congressman John Lewis, that would restore the pre-clearance regime that used to be in effect in a number of states, including here in Arizona, that would require states to get preapproval before enacting voting laws and regulations."

Since the November election, more than a dozen states have passed laws that restrict voter access to the polls. Sellers believes many will be challenged in the courts before the 2022 election, but this week's ruling will make those cases harder to win.

EASTON, Md. -- President Joe Biden just signed a law creating a federal holiday for Juneteenth, which commemorates the end of slavery in Texas.

Eastern Shore Marylanders are observing the holiday Saturday with a rally to remove the last Confederate statue in the state.

Groups, including the Talbot County NAACP, have been trying since 2005 to get lawmakers to take down the Talbot Boys monument from the county's courthouse lawn.

Ridgely Ochs, communications director of the Move the Monument Coalition, said a courthouse statue of a soldier holding a Confederate flag undermines the message all are equal under law. She noted holding the protest on Juneteenth is symbolic of a struggle for racial justice that still continues.

"Juneteenth is celebrated as part of the journey towards greater freedom and equality," Ochs pointed out. "And we felt that doing this march and rally is part of that tradition, part of that journey towards greater equality and justice."

Last August, the Talbot County Council rejected a proposal to take away the monument in a three-to-two vote. Maryland's ACLU and NAACP chapters filed a federal lawsuit last month demanding the statue's removal, citing precedents in other states among its objections.

At a town hall held earlier this week to draw attention to tomorrow's rally, Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., called on the Talbot County Council to do the right thing and get rid of the monument. He pointed to Charlottesville, Virginia's unanimous vote last week to remove its statue of Robert E. Lee, as an example of the pressing need to confront our past to move forward.

"It's time for Talbot County, it's time for Easton to remove this monument in front of the courthouse," Van Hollen urged. "A monument that doesn't celebrate justice for all, but one that glorifies the Confederacy and those who fought to protect slavery."

Tomorrow's rally will feature the singing of a proposed new state song written by Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md. This year, the General Assembly repealed the former state song, sung to the tune of "O Tannenbaum." Written in 1861, it referred to Abraham Lincoln as a "tyrant" and urges Maryland to secede from the Union, which it did not.