Law enforcement planning show of support on Death Penalty vote

Screen Shot 2015-05-23 at 9.22.59 AMGovernor Pete Ricketts has scheuduled a press conference for Tuesday for further discussion of the votes for overriding his veto of the Death Penalty Repeal.

At that presser, Leavenworth St. has learned that there is a tentative plan for a display of support for the Death Penalty by county attorneys and law enforcement, along with others from around the state.

As was discussed briefly by the Omaha Police Union, there is also a plan to announce an initiative petition scenario should the Governor’s veto get overridden.

***

The Governor’s office is also making an effort to show support for the Death Penalty veto by various people around the state.

The OWH aluded to the release in a recent story. Here is what was sent out:

Nebraskans React to Legislature’s Decision to Repeal the Death Penalty

KETV: Ricketts: Legislature ‘way out of touch’ with Nebraskans 

“The Legislature is out of touch with Nebraskans on their vote to repeal the death penalty. The overwhelming majority of Nebraskans support the death penalty because they understand that it is an important tool for public safety. I will continue to work with senators to sustain my veto when I issue it.”

-Nebraska Governor Pete Ricketts

***
Lincoln Journal-Star: Supporters laud passage of death penalty repeal; attorney calls it betrayal

“There have been prior criminal acts in our communities, and I know there will be future criminal acts in Nebraska that will clearly warrant the use of the death penalty as a consequence of the criminal’s heinous, murderous acts.”

-Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson

***

Omaha World-Herald: A Vote Away from History 

“I ask them how they would feel if it was one of their family members, especially a child who was that young.”
-JoAnn Brandon, mother 1993 Richardson County murder victim

“I represent people, and people understand justice, and they are appalled, absolutely appalled.
-Senator Mike Groene, North Platte

 ***

KTIV: Family of U.S. Bank shooting victim speaks out after Nebraska lawmakers repeal the state’s death penalty (VIDEO)

“We’ve done a lot of things just to try to please them and in 40 seconds they can snuff out five lives. They need to be executed.”

-Vivian Tuttle, mother of 2002 Norfolk shooting victim

 ***

Norfolk Daily News: County attorney: Legislative action cowardly, disgraceful

 “I’ve heard that people are angry. I’m sure that they feel a sense of betrayal, and very rightly so. They’ve been getting told by the state as a whole for years and years that the people who died were important to us. We thought they wanted to prevent that from happening to other people. Now, they’re told that the people on death row who have committed multiple murders are more important than the people that (the victims’ loved ones) lost and that we saw murdered.”

-Joe Smith, Madison County Attorney

*** 

Grand Island Independent: 3 area sheriffs want to see state keep death penalty

“I tell you what, that repealing was the worst thing we’ve seen in years.”

-Greeley County Sheriff David Weeks

 “I think that it’s a major mistake for them to drop the death penalty.”

-Nancy County Sheriff Davis Moore

“There’s cases that we need it. It’s the only just result.”

-Valley County Sheriff Casey Hurlburt

 ***

Grand Island Independent: County board calls emergency meeting to discuss death penalty

“I think state senators should represent the people.”

-Hall County Commissioner Pam Lancaster

 ***

NBC Nebraska: Heineman’s Point of View on Death Penalty Repeal 

“It’s important for Nebraska to have a death penalty, for the most heinous of crimes. We just had the most recent situation in Omaha, the shooting in Norfolk and a variety of communities across the state.”

-Former Governor Dave Heineman

 ***

Letter to the Editor: People should have a say on death penalty

“This is just another case of the words ‘We the people’ falling on deaf ears. The senators have forgotten who the boss is, so I will remind them ‘We the people.’”

-Pierce County Sheriff Rick Eberhardt

 ***

Letter to the Editor: Repeal of death penalty wrong move

“Nebraskans should not allow the Legislature to take away the ultimate sanction for horrendous, remorseless behavior that leaves innocent families without their loved ones — for life.”

-Douglas Mang of Omaha

 

32 comments

  1. KHDS says:

    Correction. It is Nance County.

    I find this whole thing incredible. Unless one is a super pro- life Republican and disclosed that position in a campaign, how could any Republican vote with Ernie? IOW, how could one be so stupid?

    Lindstrom, Murante et alia have lost their political futures. Good.

  2. to above says:

    It is pretty bad to make fun of someones faith. You do not have to be super relegious to be 100 percent pro life

  3. Lil Mac says:

    This policewoman’s murder isn’t some feather that fell into Ricketts’ lap. It is a meteor impact that is driving the entire outcome. Yes, Ricketts vetoed the law. But it took her symbolic crucifixion on a cross of public complacency and political correctness to change legislative minds. They will change.

    Senators who are viscerally against the death penalty are not more than the Senators who voted with them out of a dispassionate belief that to execute 3 out of 3,000 murderers is a waste of money; and who were then shamed into feeling bloodthirsty if they didn’t go along.

    That shame came to a screeching halt when a young policewoman with a premature baby was murdered for sake of her serving to protect every Nebraskan. That jolts Senators via their equally jolted constituents out of complacency and into grasping a visceral and compelling need for a death penalty.

    If ever there was a legislative mind changer, this is it.

  4. Anonymous says:

    I guess if you make it long and quote a bundle of people, it makes it overwhelmingly OK? I thought RIcketts was pro life. Can’t have it both ways. Can’t be God and man.

  5. Anonymous says:

    What’s the difference between a) no death penalty and b) a death penalty that exists but is rarely used? No difference at all. The effort to “restore” the death penalty will have no effect if the restoration is to status quo ante. You know, endless appeals and lawsuits, inability to obtain lethal injection chemicals, no support for alternatives like execution, hanging or firing squads. Just what are we going back to?

  6. back off Murante says:

    If the guy says he opposes death penalty for faith reasons so be it. You have no problem accepting faith as a reason to not agree with same sex marriage. Do not be a hypocrite

  7. Ken says:

    Yes, Murante can oppose the death penalty for faith reasons if he wants to. And we can make him pay the price for that position if we want as well. Just as many in the radical pro gay-rights community try to make people pay for opposition to same sex marriage. It’s OK to make somebody pay for a right-leaning position based on faith but it isn’t OK to make somebody pay for a left-leaning one? Who’s the hypocrite here?

  8. Lil Mac says:

    With or without the death penalty, RWP, you are likely correct. This murderer likely wouldn’t die in either case. However, I am not arguing the merits of a death penalty or its usefulness. Amid so many cheerleading for right vs. wrong with little impact on outcomes, I wished to assess the impact of this police officer’s death on the possibility of the governor’s veto standing. To me, it seems to predict a reversal by the unicameral.

    When Norris ripped out the emergency brake that was bicameralism, he made every Nebraska governor’s veto more important than that of all other states’ gubernatorial vetoes, though not more powerful. Plus, a unicameral suffers a harsher spotlight than a bicameral where the heat is shared. It is harder for NE Senators to change their minds without a good excuse. Hence my focus on NE Senators who are the least committed to eliminating the death penalty and the most relieved to have this unfortunate murder salve their fears of being called bloodthirsty. The same Senators cringe when Ernie threatens to call them racists. Sort of depressing, isn’t it?

  9. Unbelievable says:

    The democrats are exploiting the death of Officer Orozco to lobby for gun control, while the republicans are exploiting her death for the death penalty. Disgusting.

  10. The Eye Ball says:

    And it is a suicide mission. Have any of players in this, played more than tic-tac-toe? Do you remember why you stopped playing tic-tac-toe? If the Republicans cave now, you will give the Democrats the Holy Grail of politics. Flip-floppers and officials being “weak on crime”. So Sen Beau McCoy wants to put it on the ballot. Does he have brain as to what the hell he is doing? There would be bumper crop of socialists running for office claiming to be pro-death penalty but more than willing to raise taxes. They would get elected and forget the death penalty issue as the public is fickle. Do the players in this game have any idea what game they are playing?

  11. To "back off Murante" says:

    Murante can try to claim he has always been against the death penalty as a matter of principle. However, HE CAN’T ESCAPE HIS OWN WORDS, “The people of Gretna and Sarpy County have been clear that THEY SUPPORT THE DEATH PENALTY. As their representative, I AM OBLIGED TO RESPECT THEIR OPINION.” -Nebraska Catholic Conference Voter Survey 2012.

    Murante is nothing more than a calculating and aspiring career politician. He will say whatever he thinks will get him elected. We have seen his type before!

    Telling people to back off a guy who can’t even stand by his word is illogical and a bit insulting. Those of us in his district have every right to complain. In fact, it is duty to hold people like him accountable.

  12. Not a Murante Fan, but... says:

    It may seem to be misleading, but the words “I am obligated to respect their opinion” don’t mean that he didn’t respectfully disagree.

    Murante didn’t lie to the voters – he just didn’t tell them the WHOLE truth.

  13. I smell bacon says:

    Yikes the bacon staff is in full force today. So much for Christian and “God calling me to run”

    Kind of hard to hide behind the bible guys, when you are engaging in this kind of activity.

    I hope Aaron Trost is at least getting a paycheck for exploiting this campaign.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Lil Mac, you make a good case about fodder for the unicam to reverse course on the death penalty. But I repeat: If there are not enough votes for an override, Chambers will make the whole unicam pay. Y’all think you’ve seen his tantrums, but you ain’t seen nothing yet! (I still have on videotape, somewhere, Chambers nearly week-long rant from the late 90’s when the unicam tried to change the filibuster rule!!!) Be mindful of the fact that Chambers already had to do some back-peddling himself to get the needed votes. Or did y’all believe that thirty of forty-nine legislators came to the same conclusion about this long-standing ethical issue only coincidentally this very year?

  15. Res Judicata says:

    We live in one of the most over-taxed states in the country, our budget is a mess, and the NEGOP consistently chooses to spend its political capital on keeping the death penalty, stopping gay marriage, etc. Is it any wonder the GOP is losing the faith (and electorate) of its youth? Time to think about the future, this said by a younger member of the NEGOP.

  16. Lil Mac says:

    5:26, you make a good point about Senator Chambers. Yet Ernie is just the surface of a problem which is a deeper and systemic national disease.

    Why would police fire a “barrage” of 137 rounds into a black couple in a car that backfired in front of a police station? The reason isn’t hate. It is fear. Deep, pervasive fear.

    Years ago, a black GOP country chairman and his son stopped for gas in central Nebraska. The only person in the store was an older white woman who was visibly “terrified” to encounter two black men. Despite a suit and tie on a man who holds military medals for defending this country, the father watched his son witness the horrific effect of them being black had on the poor woman. It wasn’t her fault. It wasn’t their fault. She saw them as a threat, as if monsters.

    And why not? For in America, when blacks are calm and successful, they are portrayed as people, but when angry and unsuccessful, blacks are portrayed as “black”. There is profit for many in perpetuating this, which explains why the most hated Blacks in America is the Black Conservative who preaches the need for America to become colorblind. For that threatens this industry of misery.

    The USA’s only Black President tried to blame “racism” when his policies failed. Nebraska’s only Black state senator says he would shoot policemen. They wouldn’t do this unless they felt it might get them more than by them not doing it. And, abetting and fueling this, is the Press. From MSNBC to the NYT to the OWH, whites shooting whites is small news, blacks shooting blacks is no news, and a white shooting a black is a jackpot.

    The answer is to enforce color blindness. But that is directly opposite of US civil rights law that enforces behaviors strictly according to one’s color and race.

  17. Anon says:

    Younger NEGOP- you have Krist, Campbell, Schumacher, McCollister and so on, pretty much what you seem to want

  18. Brian T. Osborn says:

    Will any of you that call yourselves “Christians” please explain to me Jesus Christ’s stance on state sponsored murder? I’m curious as to which method of murder by our government He would prefer.

  19. Anonymous says:

    You all are just figuring out what many have known for years–that Murante plays all sides against the middle. Irony is he is the errand boy of the chief of staff and a major reason the corner office has struggled with the legislature. Coincidence he missed a vote on death penalty? doubtful. He is king of backroom deals and deceptive politics. Hiding behind religion on this one is just another tactic for him.

  20. Anon says:

    I would put it on the stance on being in the military, or an act of self defence. or a police officer enforcing the law. DP is a better insurance of keeping a life without parole just that, invoke Jesus, naw, keep that separation of church and state

  21. Brian T. Osborn says:

    I have no problem with the military taking out enemy combatants, as I have no problem with police officers taking out bad guys that are armed, dangerous and a threat to the lives or safety of themselves and others. I also have no problem with a citizen defending their own life and safety or that of another. “Being in the military” is not a license to kill; there are rules of engagement. Police officers do not have the right to be judge, jury and executioner. They don’t have the right to shoot anyone that is not a direct threat to themselves or others.
    Once a criminal is apprehended, tried, convicted and imprisoned, they are no longer a threat to society. Taking their life for the sake of revenge is nothing but more murder. The state committing the murder in our names makes us accessories to murder. There have been far too many cases of people being convicted to death, and even executed, that were later found to be innocent. Even ONE such death is far too many. So long as the death penalty exists such miscarriages of justice can, and will, occur. Execution allows for no turning back from a wrongful conviction.

  22. Gerard Harbison says:

    Retributive justice is not in any way revenge. It’s based on the principle that if one can rationally expect to profit from a crime, then breaking the law becomes a rational act. Society, to survive, needs to make it very unprofitable to break the law.

    Of course, we generally do not, and certainly should not, punish people based on how much of a threat they are. If we adopted that philosophy, we would imprison people before they ever committed a crime.

    Moreover, I’m unimpressed by the argument that the death penalty is wrong because it’s irreversible. Locking someone up for 10 years is pretty damn irreversible too. You can’t give someone ten years of their life back.

  23. Brian T. Osborn says:

    Gerard, what have you been smoking? Do you seriously equate losing ten years of your life behind bars due to a miscarriage of justice with irrevocably losing the remainder of your life? At least those that have been unjustly incarcerated might receive some form of compensation upon their release. But when you are dead, no such luck.

  24. Gerard Harbison says:

    Brian:

    What sum of money could someone give you to persuade you to be locked up for ten years? If some gave me maybe $10 m, I’d volunteer for a week.

    Ten years is the best part of the rest of your life. There is no possible compensation.

  25. Brian T. Osborn says:

    Gerard, I would say that 10 years of wrongful imprisonment to a young person has no comparison to being dead for the rest of eternity. Now, for old men like us, the story could be different as we might not have ten years left in us.
    I don’t know, right off hand, how much money it would take for me to be imprisoned for ten years, knowing beforehand that I would receive a rich reward for my troubles. The question you posit reminds me of an old Alfred Hitchcock Presents episode “Not the Running Type” and a Twilight Zone episode “The Silence.” In the former a man spends 15 years in prison after embezzling $200,000. Upon release he returns the money, but he had a tidy sum accumulated by investing it. The other depicted a man, a sort of chatterbox, who accepted a $500,000 bet to remain silent for a year, enclosed in a glass cage. It didn’t end well for him.
    In some ways, a ten year stretch of three hots and a cot might be more enjoyable than being enslaved in some corporate cubicle. Punching a clock as a wage slave is, after all, merely another form of imprisonment.

  26. Democrats are sick says:

    The Democrats must think that the whole death penalty is a big joke, they bought Bill Kintner’s name at dot com and are trying to make a joke out of it. Sick.

  27. The Grundle King says:

    Brian asked, “Will any of you that call yourselves “Christians” please explain to me Jesus Christ’s stance on state sponsored murder? I’m curious as to which method of murder by our government He would prefer.”

    B….bu…but…separation of church and state!

  28. Brian T. Osborn says:

    Grundle, I – like Gerard – am not religious, but I do expect those who claim to be so to actually follow the teachings of Jesus if they run about thumping their Bibles so fervently and claiming to be Christians. I have absolutely no use for religion in government.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.