Death row inmates from giving face-to-face interviews
federal appeals court has ruled an inmate can challenge a Bureau of Prisons policy prohibiting death row inmates from giving face-to-face interviews with the media.
The policy was adopted seven years ago after Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh appeared on "60 Minutes." A three-judge panel of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago ruled Tuesday that U.S. District Judge John Tinder in Indianapolis erred when he dismissed the 2004 lawsuit by David Hammer in a summary judgment in February 2006.
Edward Himmelfarb, who argued the case for the Justice Department, said Friday he had no comment on the decision. He also said no decision has been made on how the federal government will proceed in the case.
Chad Bell, Hammer's attorney, said his client is pleased.
"He's looking forward to press this case and show that this policy was enacted for unconstitutional purposes to suppress speech and to specifically silence inmates on death row," Bell said.
Hammer is an inmate at the federal penitentiary in Terre Haute, Ind. He was facing the death penalty in 1999 when he gave three face-to-face interviews to reporters. But subsequent requests for interviews were rejected by prison officials. His death sentence has since been vacated and is being appealed.
On April 12, 2001, then-Attorney General John Ashcroft announced at a news conference about McVeigh's execution that the Bureau of Prisons instituted a new policy banning face-to-face interviews with death row convicts.
"As an American who cares about our culture, I want to restrict a mass murderer's access to a public podium," Ashcroft said.
The ban began 13 months after his interview with "60 Minutes" and two months before McVeigh was executed in June 2001.
A spokesman for then-Warden Harley Lappin said the policy changes were based on prison security and the desire to avoid "sensationalizing" executions. According to the court ruling, Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., wrote to the Bureau of Prisons director following the McVeigh interview demanding that the bureau prohibit similar dialogues with death row inmates.
Hammer filed the lawsuit, alleging the policy violated his First Amendment and equal protection rights. He contended the security rational was a guise to cover up the real reason behind the ban — anger over the McVeigh interview.
The appeals judges ruled that a reasonable jury "could conclude that the media policy was implemented and is now enforced not because of safety concerns, but rather in response to public pressure to prevent death row inmates from voicing their views publicly."
Attorneys for the federal government have until the end of February to seek a rehearing before 7th Circuit Court. They could also appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court or allow the case to return to district court without seeking any further review.
Bell said if the case is returned to district court in Indianapolis his client could seek evidence from the federal government to back his claim and would have an attorney to help him. Hammer didn't have an attorney until the appeals court appointed him counsel a year ago, Bell said.
In 2005, a federal judge vacated Hammer's death sentence for killing his federal penitentiary cellmate in Allenwood, Pa. U.S. District Judge Malcolm Muir ruled that Hammer should have a new sentencing hearing because jurors were not given evidence that might have led them to conclude the strangling was accidental.
Hammer remains on death row while federal prosecutors appeal that decision. The Terre Haute prison is the only place in the nation housing federal death row inmates and the only place where they are executed.
The policy was adopted seven years ago after Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh appeared on "60 Minutes." A three-judge panel of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago ruled Tuesday that U.S. District Judge John Tinder in Indianapolis erred when he dismissed the 2004 lawsuit by David Hammer in a summary judgment in February 2006.
Edward Himmelfarb, who argued the case for the Justice Department, said Friday he had no comment on the decision. He also said no decision has been made on how the federal government will proceed in the case.
Chad Bell, Hammer's attorney, said his client is pleased.
"He's looking forward to press this case and show that this policy was enacted for unconstitutional purposes to suppress speech and to specifically silence inmates on death row," Bell said.
Hammer is an inmate at the federal penitentiary in Terre Haute, Ind. He was facing the death penalty in 1999 when he gave three face-to-face interviews to reporters. But subsequent requests for interviews were rejected by prison officials. His death sentence has since been vacated and is being appealed.
On April 12, 2001, then-Attorney General John Ashcroft announced at a news conference about McVeigh's execution that the Bureau of Prisons instituted a new policy banning face-to-face interviews with death row convicts.
"As an American who cares about our culture, I want to restrict a mass murderer's access to a public podium," Ashcroft said.
The ban began 13 months after his interview with "60 Minutes" and two months before McVeigh was executed in June 2001.
A spokesman for then-Warden Harley Lappin said the policy changes were based on prison security and the desire to avoid "sensationalizing" executions. According to the court ruling, Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., wrote to the Bureau of Prisons director following the McVeigh interview demanding that the bureau prohibit similar dialogues with death row inmates.
Hammer filed the lawsuit, alleging the policy violated his First Amendment and equal protection rights. He contended the security rational was a guise to cover up the real reason behind the ban — anger over the McVeigh interview.
The appeals judges ruled that a reasonable jury "could conclude that the media policy was implemented and is now enforced not because of safety concerns, but rather in response to public pressure to prevent death row inmates from voicing their views publicly."
Attorneys for the federal government have until the end of February to seek a rehearing before 7th Circuit Court. They could also appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court or allow the case to return to district court without seeking any further review.
Bell said if the case is returned to district court in Indianapolis his client could seek evidence from the federal government to back his claim and would have an attorney to help him. Hammer didn't have an attorney until the appeals court appointed him counsel a year ago, Bell said.
In 2005, a federal judge vacated Hammer's death sentence for killing his federal penitentiary cellmate in Allenwood, Pa. U.S. District Judge Malcolm Muir ruled that Hammer should have a new sentencing hearing because jurors were not given evidence that might have led them to conclude the strangling was accidental.
Hammer remains on death row while federal prosecutors appeal that decision. The Terre Haute prison is the only place in the nation housing federal death row inmates and the only place where they are executed.
No comments:
Post a Comment