I'm one of them. Needless to say: I can only speak for myself.
I live in Norway and the toughest sentence you can get for anything is 21 years of imprisonment. I still have not heard of anyone who went back to society and committed a crime after serving 21 years. There has been a change lately though. Those who cannot convincingly show that they are 100% rehabilitated will be staying in custody indefinitely. That said: To serve a prison sentence here in Norway is totally different as in the US. Some say not enough is being done to rehabilitate these people, other says otherwise.
Back to your question. I think the sentence of 21 years in prison for taking another person's life is ridiculous. I would vote for LOWP. After all, taking a life is irreversible, and the way I see it, LOWP isn't unreasonable considered what has happened.
Some also say that LOWP is worse that the death penalty. They might be right. However, I am universially opposed to state killing, and as long as a person isn't mistreated, abused or starved to death, I don't mind if a murderer is sentenced to LOWP.
Difficult question. However, an important one: I think mercy should be given a consideration when possible exculpatory evidence can be presented so late in the process that the courts don't have any rememdies to review it. Also: When a person has a long history of mental illness "before" the murder took place.
I also, I know of a specific case in which a prisoner was denied to have his federal habeas petition reviewed, simply because
the lawyers filed the nofication that they would appeal the state habeas petition one (1) day late.
The circumstances were such:
On September 15, 1986, David Green at Arnold & Porter prepared a memo for his fellow attorneys working on the Coleman case. (Coleman is the one who was sentenced to die). As predicted, the memo said: "
Judge Phillips signed the Commonwealth's Order without changing a word. The order is dated September 4, but entered September 9. We have 30 days to file a Notice of Appeal with the Court.".
The Arnold & Porter lawyers prepared a notice of appeal and sent it to their local counsel. Johnny Farmer. On October 6, Farmer mailed the notice to the clerk in Grundy. The notice of appeal, which is a simple half-page document, said Coleman was appealing from a decree "entered on September 9, 1986."
If Johnny Farmer had sent the notice by registred mail or certified mail, under Virginia law it would have been deemed filed on the day it was sent, Monday, October 6. Since he didn't, the notice was deemed filed on the day it was received, October 7.
Some time later, the attorney general's office informed Roger Coleman's lawyers that they intended to argue that the thrity-day filing period began not on September 9, when the clerk in Grundy had entered the order, but on September 4 - when Judge Phillips signed it. Thirty days from September 4, was October 4,
but THAT WAS A SATURDAY, and under Virginia law, the thirty-day period expired on Saturday October 6. If the attorney general was right that the time ran from September 4, when the order was signed, the notice of appeal had been received one day late.
A convicted person has to file his appeals in a timely manner. This mistake (DONE BY THE LAWYERS), resulted in that Coleman's federal habeas was denied without review, because his state habeas was not filed in a timely manner.
In such a case, a STAY should at least be granted and the federal courts should be forced to review his federal habeas petition,
because this was not the convict's fault. (The convict just had to pay for it in the electric chair of Viriginia.....) for his lawyer's mistake.
This is nitpicking of the worst sort possible, and considered that a man's life was at stake, there should be conducted a hearing as to what matters the most: That the lawyers filed the Notice to Appeal in a timely manner - OR - that a convict will be allowed to have his issues heard in a federal court.
Needless to say: The courts find it more important that an appeal is NOT filed one (1) day late although the misunderstanding was due to the fact that the possibility to file a "Notifify to Appeal" expired in a weekend....If that is not nitpicking, when the result that the person didn't get his federal habeas appeals heard, then - I don't know what nitpicking is!!
The latter may not necessarily be a ground for mercy, but at least a
STAY OF EXECUTION until the matter had been resolved by a federal court. After all, it wasn't the prisoner's fault that the "notify to appeal" wasn't sent with certfied mail rather than ordinarly mail......
The then Governor of Viriginia came up with the brainy idea that IF Coleman could come up with a polygraph test showing he was innocent - the very day BEFORE his scheduled execution, he would grant a mercy. Needless to say: A polygraph test conducted the day before an execution came back as incluclusive.....
The reason why I mention this case particularly, is that mercy is solely in the hands of the Governor, and the point of giving this task to one specific person, is to provide a fail-safe against wrongful executions.
There might be other things, but this is what I come up with right now.
Love,
Turid