Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
WELCOME TO AT ISSUE. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US. WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A HEALTHY
US. WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A HEALTHY DISCUSSION ON THE DEATH PENALTY
WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A HEALTHY DISCUSSION ON THE DEATH PENALTY OR CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IF THAT'S
DISCUSSION ON THE DEATH PENALTY OR CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IF THAT'S THE TERM YOU PREFER.
OR CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IF THAT'S THE TERM YOU PREFER. MY NAME IS H. WAYNE WILSON.
THE TERM YOU PREFER. MY NAME IS H. WAYNE WILSON. I AM HAPPY TO HAVE TWO GUESTS ON
MY NAME IS H. WAYNE WILSON. I AM HAPPY TO HAVE TWO GUESTS ON THE PROGRAM TO DISCUSS THIS
I AM HAPPY TO HAVE TWO GUESTS ON THE PROGRAM TO DISCUSS THIS ISSUE.
THE PROGRAM TO DISCUSS THIS ISSUE. LET ME INTRODUCE, SENATOR DALE
ISSUE. LET ME INTRODUCE, SENATOR DALE RISINGER, HE REPRESENTS THE 37TH
LET ME INTRODUCE, SENATOR DALE RISINGER, HE REPRESENTS THE 37TH DISTRICT WHICH IS PEORIA IN
RISINGER, HE REPRESENTS THE 37TH DISTRICT WHICH IS PEORIA IN PART.
DISTRICT WHICH IS PEORIA IN PART. >>CORRECT, AND WEST OVER TO
PART. >>CORRECT, AND WEST OVER TO GALESBURG AND UP NORTH TO
>>CORRECT, AND WEST OVER TO GALESBURG AND UP NORTH TO PRINCETON.
GALESBURG AND UP NORTH TO PRINCETON. GLAD TO BE HERE.
PRINCETON. GLAD TO BE HERE. ALSO WITH US JEREMY SCHROEDER.
GLAD TO BE HERE. ALSO WITH US JEREMY SCHROEDER. JEREMY IS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
ALSO WITH US JEREMY SCHROEDER. JEREMY IS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE ILLINOIS COALITION FOR
JEREMY IS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE ILLINOIS COALITION FOR THE ABOLITION OF THE DEATH
OF THE ILLINOIS COALITION FOR THE ABOLITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY SERVING THE ENTIRE STATE
THE ABOLITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY SERVING THE ENTIRE STATE OF ILLINOIS, BUT YOU CAME DOWN
PENALTY SERVING THE ENTIRE STATE OF ILLINOIS, BUT YOU CAME DOWN FROM CHICAGO.
OF ILLINOIS, BUT YOU CAME DOWN FROM CHICAGO. >>CAME UP FROM SPRINGFIELD!
FROM CHICAGO. >>CAME UP FROM SPRINGFIELD! (LAUGHING).
>>CAME UP FROM SPRINGFIELD! (LAUGHING). >>THE REASON YOU CAME UP FROM
(LAUGHING). >>THE REASON YOU CAME UP FROM SPRINGFIELD IS YOU HAVE BEEN
>>THE REASON YOU CAME UP FROM SPRINGFIELD IS YOU HAVE BEEN BUSY DOWN THERE BECAUSE THE
SPRINGFIELD IS YOU HAVE BEEN BUSY DOWN THERE BECAUSE THE HOUSE JUST PASSED A BILL, AND
BUSY DOWN THERE BECAUSE THE HOUSE JUST PASSED A BILL, AND LET ME POINT OUT TO THE VIEWING
HOUSE JUST PASSED A BILL, AND LET ME POINT OUT TO THE VIEWING AUDIENCE JUST JOINING US THAT WE
LET ME POINT OUT TO THE VIEWING AUDIENCE JUST JOINING US THAT WE TAPED THIS PRIOR TO AIR TIME,
AUDIENCE JUST JOINING US THAT WE TAPED THIS PRIOR TO AIR TIME, AND THE SENATE MAY HAVE VOTED ON
TAPED THIS PRIOR TO AIR TIME, AND THE SENATE MAY HAVE VOTED ON THE DEATH PENALTY ISSUE BY THE
AND THE SENATE MAY HAVE VOTED ON THE DEATH PENALTY ISSUE BY THE TIME THIS AIRS.
THE DEATH PENALTY ISSUE BY THE TIME THIS AIRS. IF THAT IS, INDEED, THE CASE,
TIME THIS AIRS. IF THAT IS, INDEED, THE CASE, YOU MIGHT WANT TO KEEP THAT IN
IF THAT IS, INDEED, THE CASE, YOU MIGHT WANT TO KEEP THAT IN MIND AS WE DISCUSS THIS BECAUSE,
YOU MIGHT WANT TO KEEP THAT IN MIND AS WE DISCUSS THIS BECAUSE, AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS, THE
MIND AS WE DISCUSS THIS BECAUSE, AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS, THE SENATE HAS NOT VOTED.
AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS, THE SENATE HAS NOT VOTED. WITH THAT IN MIND, THE HOUSE
SENATE HAS NOT VOTED. WITH THAT IN MIND, THE HOUSE WITH TWO VOTES FINALLY PASSED BY
WITH THAT IN MIND, THE HOUSE WITH TWO VOTES FINALLY PASSED BY NO MARGIN WHATSOEVER, 60-54, A
WITH TWO VOTES FINALLY PASSED BY NO MARGIN WHATSOEVER, 60-54, A BILL TO ABOLISH THE DEATH
NO MARGIN WHATSOEVER, 60-54, A BILL TO ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY IN THE STATE OF
BILL TO ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY IN THE STATE OF ILLINOIS.
PENALTY IN THE STATE OF ILLINOIS. OBVIOUSLY, FROM YOUR
ILLINOIS. OBVIOUSLY, FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, THIS IS A GOOD
OBVIOUSLY, FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, THIS IS A GOOD THING.
PERSPECTIVE, THIS IS A GOOD THING. IS THE PROCESS A GOOD THING?
THING. IS THE PROCESS A GOOD THING? I MEAN WE HAD A FAILED VOTE.
IS THE PROCESS A GOOD THING? I MEAN WE HAD A FAILED VOTE. IT WAS SHORT BY ONE VOTE.
I MEAN WE HAD A FAILED VOTE. IT WAS SHORT BY ONE VOTE. THEN, A SENATOR -- I AM SORRY, A
IT WAS SHORT BY ONE VOTE. THEN, A SENATOR -- I AM SORRY, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM MILAND,
THEN, A SENATOR -- I AM SORRY, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM MILAND, ILLINOIS, CHANGED HIS MIND.
REPRESENTATIVE FROM MILAND, ILLINOIS, CHANGED HIS MIND. IF IT IS STILL A GOOD PROCESS?
ILLINOIS, CHANGED HIS MIND. IF IT IS STILL A GOOD PROCESS? >> DEFINITELY.
IF IT IS STILL A GOOD PROCESS? >> DEFINITELY. IT WAS SOMETHING THAT I THINK
>> DEFINITELY. IT WAS SOMETHING THAT I THINK WHAT HAPPENED, A BE THIS IS A
IT WAS SOMETHING THAT I THINK WHAT HAPPENED, A BE THIS IS A VERY TOUGH ISSUE.
WHAT HAPPENED, A BE THIS IS A VERY TOUGH ISSUE. WE WERE SHORT BY ONE VOTE.
VERY TOUGH ISSUE. WE WERE SHORT BY ONE VOTE. BUT IT IS A VERY HEATED ISSUE.
WE WERE SHORT BY ONE VOTE. BUT IT IS A VERY HEATED ISSUE. IT IS SOMETHING PEOPLE ARE
BUT IT IS A VERY HEATED ISSUE. IT IS SOMETHING PEOPLE ARE PASSION HAD NIT ABOUT.
IT IS SOMETHING PEOPLE ARE PASSION HAD NIT ABOUT. GOING INTO THE VOTE, WE HAD
PASSION HAD NIT ABOUT. GOING INTO THE VOTE, WE HAD QUITE A FEW PEOPLE THAT WERE ON
GOING INTO THE VOTE, WE HAD QUITE A FEW PEOPLE THAT WERE ON THE FENCE, AND ACTUALLY WHEN WE
QUITE A FEW PEOPLE THAT WERE ON THE FENCE, AND ACTUALLY WHEN WE CAME BACK FOR THE SECOND TIME,
THE FENCE, AND ACTUALLY WHEN WE CAME BACK FOR THE SECOND TIME, TEMPERS HAD COOLED, EVERYBODY
CAME BACK FOR THE SECOND TIME, TEMPERS HAD COOLED, EVERYBODY HAD TIME TO TAKE A DEEP BREATH
TEMPERS HAD COOLED, EVERYBODY HAD TIME TO TAKE A DEEP BREATH AND EVERYBODY LOOKED AT THE
HAD TIME TO TAKE A DEEP BREATH AND EVERYBODY LOOKED AT THE BILL.
AND EVERYBODY LOOKED AT THE BILL. IT SETS UP A FUND FOR TRAINING
BILL. IT SETS UP A FUND FOR TRAINING AND LAW ENFORCEMENT, AND HELPS
IT SETS UP A FUND FOR TRAINING AND LAW ENFORCEMENT, AND HELPS THE FAMILIAR RIES ARE SOME OF
AND LAW ENFORCEMENT, AND HELPS THE FAMILIAR RIES ARE SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES.
THE FAMILIAR RIES ARE SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES. PEOPLE ON THE FENCE CHANGED, AND
THE OTHER ISSUES. PEOPLE ON THE FENCE CHANGED, AND SOME CHANGED THE OTHER WAY
PEOPLE ON THE FENCE CHANGED, AND SOME CHANGED THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
SOME CHANGED THE OTHER WAY AROUND. SECOND TIME AROUND, PEOPLE HAD A
AROUND. SECOND TIME AROUND, PEOPLE HAD A CHANCE TO THINK ABOUT THE VOTE.
SECOND TIME AROUND, PEOPLE HAD A CHANCE TO THINK ABOUT THE VOTE. >>SO IT COMES TO THE SENATE.
CHANCE TO THINK ABOUT THE VOTE. >>SO IT COMES TO THE SENATE. >>YES.
>>SO IT COMES TO THE SENATE. >>YES. >>HAVE YOU MADE A DECISION?
>>YES. >>HAVE YOU MADE A DECISION? >> WELL, I HAVE BEEN OPPOSED TO
>>HAVE YOU MADE A DECISION? >> WELL, I HAVE BEEN OPPOSED TO ABOLISHING THE DEATH PENALTY.
>> WELL, I HAVE BEEN OPPOSED TO ABOLISHING THE DEATH PENALTY. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT
ABOLISHING THE DEATH PENALTY. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT BOTHERS ME IS THE PROCESS.
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT BOTHERS ME IS THE PROCESS. WE DIDN'T HAVE A BILL IN FRONT
BOTHERS ME IS THE PROCESS. WE DIDN'T HAVE A BILL IN FRONT OF US UNTIL NOVEMBER 17, AND IT
WE DIDN'T HAVE A BILL IN FRONT OF US UNTIL NOVEMBER 17, AND IT WAS A SENATE BILL THAT HAD
OF US UNTIL NOVEMBER 17, AND IT WAS A SENATE BILL THAT HAD PASSED THE SENATE AND IT HAD TO
WAS A SENATE BILL THAT HAD PASSED THE SENATE AND IT HAD TO DO WITH SOME QUALIFICATIONS FOR
PASSED THE SENATE AND IT HAD TO DO WITH SOME QUALIFICATIONS FOR SOME LAW ENFORCEMENT.
DO WITH SOME QUALIFICATIONS FOR SOME LAW ENFORCEMENT. THEN THE HOUSE SHELLED THE BILL,
SOME LAW ENFORCEMENT. THEN THE HOUSE SHELLED THE BILL, TOOK ALL THE LANGUAGE OUT AND
THEN THE HOUSE SHELLED THE BILL, TOOK ALL THE LANGUAGE OUT AND ADDED THE ABOLITION OF THE DEATH
TOOK ALL THE LANGUAGE OUT AND ADDED THE ABOLITION OF THE DEATH P PENALTY WHAT THAT MEANS, WHEN
ADDED THE ABOLITION OF THE DEATH P PENALTY WHAT THAT MEANS, WHEN IT COMES TO THE SENATE, WE WILL
P PENALTY WHAT THAT MEANS, WHEN IT COMES TO THE SENATE, WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO AMEND THE BILL AT
IT COMES TO THE SENATE, WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO AMEND THE BILL AT ALL BECAUSE WE HAVE ALREADY
NOT BE ABLE TO AMEND THE BILL AT ALL BECAUSE WE HAVE ALREADY PASSED IT.
ALL BECAUSE WE HAVE ALREADY PASSED IT. IT WILL ONLY BE CONCURRENT VOTE,
PASSED IT. IT WILL ONLY BE CONCURRENT VOTE, BUT IT WILL BE UP OR DOWN. WE
IT WILL ONLY BE CONCURRENT VOTE, BUT IT WILL BE UP OR DOWN. WE WON'T HAVE A FULL VETTING, I
BUT IT WILL BE UP OR DOWN. WE WON'T HAVE A FULL VETTING, I DON'T THINK, OF ALL THE ISSUES.
WON'T HAVE A FULL VETTING, I DON'T THINK, OF ALL THE ISSUES. OVER AT THE SENATE, AT LEAST ON
DON'T THINK, OF ALL THE ISSUES. OVER AT THE SENATE, AT LEAST ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE, WE HAVE
OVER AT THE SENATE, AT LEAST ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE, WE HAVE THREE BRAND NEW SENATORS SITTING
THE REPUBLICAN SIDE, WE HAVE THREE BRAND NEW SENATORS SITTING IN.
THREE BRAND NEW SENATORS SITTING IN. GARY DAHL RETIRED, AND WE HAVE
IN. GARY DAHL RETIRED, AND WE HAVE HAD REPLACEMENTS.
GARY DAHL RETIRED, AND WE HAVE HAD REPLACEMENTS. THEY NEED TO HEAR THE FULL
HAD REPLACEMENTS. THEY NEED TO HEAR THE FULL DISCUSSION.
THEY NEED TO HEAR THE FULL DISCUSSION. WE NEED TO HAVE FAMILIES IN THAT
DISCUSSION. WE NEED TO HAVE FAMILIES IN THAT HAVE -- FAMILIES OF THE VICTIMS
WE NEED TO HAVE FAMILIES IN THAT HAVE -- FAMILIES OF THE VICTIMS AND FAMILIES OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE
HAVE -- FAMILIES OF THE VICTIMS AND FAMILIES OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN SENTENCED TO DEATH.
AND FAMILIES OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN SENTENCED TO DEATH. WE NEED TO HEAR ALL OF THAT
BEEN SENTENCED TO DEATH. WE NEED TO HEAR ALL OF THAT DISCUSSION, AND IT NEEDS TO BE
WE NEED TO HEAR ALL OF THAT DISCUSSION, AND IT NEEDS TO BE WELL VETTED BECAUSE IT IS AN
DISCUSSION, AND IT NEEDS TO BE WELL VETTED BECAUSE IT IS AN ISSUE THAT PEOPLE HAVE REASONS
WELL VETTED BECAUSE IT IS AN ISSUE THAT PEOPLE HAVE REASONS ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.
ISSUE THAT PEOPLE HAVE REASONS ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. SOME JUST ON MORAL GROUNDS,
ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. SOME JUST ON MORAL GROUNDS, DON'T THINK WE OUGHT TO KILL
SOME JUST ON MORAL GROUNDS, DON'T THINK WE OUGHT TO KILL ANYBODY. THAT'S A RELIGIOUS
DON'T THINK WE OUGHT TO KILL ANYBODY. THAT'S A RELIGIOUS THING.
ANYBODY. THAT'S A RELIGIOUS THING. OTHER PEOPLE THINK WE NEED TO
THING. OTHER PEOPLE THINK WE NEED TO HAVE IT FOR JUSTICE.
OTHER PEOPLE THINK WE NEED TO HAVE IT FOR JUSTICE. I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A FULL
HAVE IT FOR JUSTICE. I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A FULL HEARING ON IT.
I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A FULL HEARING ON IT. THERE ISN'T ANY REASON THIS HAS
HEARING ON IT. THERE ISN'T ANY REASON THIS HAS TO BE DONE BY NEXT WEDNESDAY,
THERE ISN'T ANY REASON THIS HAS TO BE DONE BY NEXT WEDNESDAY, OTHER THAN THE LEADERSHIP IN THE
TO BE DONE BY NEXT WEDNESDAY, OTHER THAN THE LEADERSHIP IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY RIGHT NOW IS
OTHER THAN THE LEADERSHIP IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY RIGHT NOW IS PUSHING IT THAT DIRECTION.
GENERAL ASSEMBLY RIGHT NOW IS PUSHING IT THAT DIRECTION. >>ON THAT, THERE HAS BEEN TEN
PUSHING IT THAT DIRECTION. >>ON THAT, THERE HAS BEEN TEN YEARS OF DEBATE ON THE DEATH
>>ON THAT, THERE HAS BEEN TEN YEARS OF DEBATE ON THE DEATH PENALTY.
YEARS OF DEBATE ON THE DEATH PENALTY. THERE HAS BEEN TWO GOVERNORS
PENALTY. THERE HAS BEEN TWO GOVERNORS COMMISSION, ONE GOVERNOR
THERE HAS BEEN TWO GOVERNORS COMMISSION, ONE GOVERNOR COMMISSION, AND ONE GENERAL
COMMISSION, ONE GOVERNOR COMMISSION, AND ONE GENERAL ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE STUDYING THE
COMMISSION, AND ONE GENERAL ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE STUDYING THE DEATH PENALTY, ON THE REFORMS,
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE STUDYING THE DEATH PENALTY, ON THE REFORMS, STUDYING THIS ISSUE THOROUGHLY
DEATH PENALTY, ON THE REFORMS, STUDYING THIS ISSUE THOROUGHLY WITH WITH PUBLIC HEARINGS ON
STUDYING THIS ISSUE THOROUGHLY WITH WITH PUBLIC HEARINGS ON BOTH SIDES.
WITH WITH PUBLIC HEARINGS ON BOTH SIDES. WE HAVE TESTIFIED OVER THE LAST
BOTH SIDES. WE HAVE TESTIFIED OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS, INCLUDING WITH
WE HAVE TESTIFIED OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS, INCLUDING WITH STATE'S ATTORNEY'S, INCLUDING
TEN YEARS, INCLUDING WITH STATE'S ATTORNEY'S, INCLUDING THE ONE FROM PEORIA, AND THIS
STATE'S ATTORNEY'S, INCLUDING THE ONE FROM PEORIA, AND THIS ISSUE WE HAVE STUDIED IT MORE
THE ONE FROM PEORIA, AND THIS ISSUE WE HAVE STUDIED IT MORE THAN ANY STATE IN THE NATION.
ISSUE WE HAVE STUDIED IT MORE THAN ANY STATE IN THE NATION. WE HAVE PUT IN ACTIVE REFORMS
THAN ANY STATE IN THE NATION. WE HAVE PUT IN ACTIVE REFORMS MORE THAN MOST STATES HAVE IN
WE HAVE PUT IN ACTIVE REFORMS MORE THAN MOST STATES HAVE IN PLACE.
MORE THAN MOST STATES HAVE IN PLACE. AFTER ALL THAT, WE CONTINUE TO
PLACE. AFTER ALL THAT, WE CONTINUE TO HAVE EXONERATIONS, AND WE
AFTER ALL THAT, WE CONTINUE TO HAVE EXONERATIONS, AND WE CONTINUE TO SPEND OVER A HUNDRED
HAVE EXONERATIONS, AND WE CONTINUE TO SPEND OVER A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS OVER THE LAST
CONTINUE TO SPEND OVER A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS OVER THE LAST SEVEN YEARS A LONE. IT IS TIME
MILLION DOLLARS OVER THE LAST SEVEN YEARS A LONE. IT IS TIME TO TAKE A DEEP BREATH AND ADMIT
SEVEN YEARS A LONE. IT IS TIME TO TAKE A DEEP BREATH AND ADMIT WE CANNOT GET THIS RIGHT.
TO TAKE A DEEP BREATH AND ADMIT WE CANNOT GET THIS RIGHT. >>I HAVE TO TELL YOU, H, WE HAVE
WE CANNOT GET THIS RIGHT. >>I HAVE TO TELL YOU, H, WE HAVE ABOUT 12,000 BILLS THAT ENTER A
>>I HAVE TO TELL YOU, H, WE HAVE ABOUT 12,000 BILLS THAT ENTER A GENERAL ASSEMBLY OVER THE TWO
ABOUT 12,000 BILLS THAT ENTER A GENERAL ASSEMBLY OVER THE TWO YEAR PERIOD, THE GENERAL
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OVER THE TWO YEAR PERIOD, THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
YEAR PERIOD, THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. AND OUT OF THOSE 12,000, WHEN I
ASSEMBLY. AND OUT OF THOSE 12,000, WHEN I FIRST CAME IN THE SENATE, I WAS
AND OUT OF THOSE 12,000, WHEN I FIRST CAME IN THE SENATE, I WAS KILLING MYSELF STAYING UP AT
FIRST CAME IN THE SENATE, I WAS KILLING MYSELF STAYING UP AT NIGHT READING ALL THESE BILLS.
KILLING MYSELF STAYING UP AT NIGHT READING ALL THESE BILLS. FINALLY SOMEBODY TOLD ME "DON'T
NIGHT READING ALL THESE BILLS. FINALLY SOMEBODY TOLD ME "DON'T WORRY ABOUT THE BILLS IN THE
FINALLY SOMEBODY TOLD ME "DON'T WORRY ABOUT THE BILLS IN THE HOUSE BECAUSE MOST WON'T COME
WORRY ABOUT THE BILLS IN THE HOUSE BECAUSE MOST WON'T COME OVER TO THE SENATE, AND DON'T
HOUSE BECAUSE MOST WON'T COME OVER TO THE SENATE, AND DON'T WORRY ABOUT THEM IN THE SENATE
OVER TO THE SENATE, AND DON'T WORRY ABOUT THEM IN THE SENATE UNTIL YOU SEE THAT THEY ARE
WORRY ABOUT THEM IN THE SENATE UNTIL YOU SEE THAT THEY ARE GOING THROUGH COMMITTEE."
UNTIL YOU SEE THAT THEY ARE GOING THROUGH COMMITTEE." YOU KNOW, IT IS HOT RIGHT NOW
GOING THROUGH COMMITTEE." YOU KNOW, IT IS HOT RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE WILL GET A CHANCE TO
YOU KNOW, IT IS HOT RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE WILL GET A CHANCE TO VOTE ON THE ISSUE.
BECAUSE WE WILL GET A CHANCE TO VOTE ON THE ISSUE. BUT AT THAT POINT AND TIME,
VOTE ON THE ISSUE. BUT AT THAT POINT AND TIME, WHENEVER IT DOES COME OVER TO
BUT AT THAT POINT AND TIME, WHENEVER IT DOES COME OVER TO THE SENATE IS WHENEVER YOU
WHENEVER IT DOES COME OVER TO THE SENATE IS WHENEVER YOU REALLY PERK UP AND SAY "HEY, YOU
THE SENATE IS WHENEVER YOU REALLY PERK UP AND SAY "HEY, YOU KNOW WHAT, I WANT TO KNOW ALL
REALLY PERK UP AND SAY "HEY, YOU KNOW WHAT, I WANT TO KNOW ALL THE INFORMATION OF I NEED TO GET
KNOW WHAT, I WANT TO KNOW ALL THE INFORMATION OF I NEED TO GET ALL THIS INFORMATION, BECAUSE I
THE INFORMATION OF I NEED TO GET ALL THIS INFORMATION, BECAUSE I AM GOING TO CAST A VOTE FOR
ALL THIS INFORMATION, BECAUSE I AM GOING TO CAST A VOTE FOR THIS.
AM GOING TO CAST A VOTE FOR THIS. IT WILL BE FAR REACHING."
THIS. IT WILL BE FAR REACHING." >>THE CASE OF THE STATE IS IN
IT WILL BE FAR REACHING." >>THE CASE OF THE STATE IS IN DIRE STRAIGHTENING FINANCIALLY,
>>THE CASE OF THE STATE IS IN DIRE STRAIGHTENING FINANCIALLY, MUCH OF THE ATTENTION BY
DIRE STRAIGHTENING FINANCIALLY, MUCH OF THE ATTENTION BY LEGISLATORS HAD BEEN OUT TO DIG
MUCH OF THE ATTENTION BY LEGISLATORS HAD BEEN OUT TO DIG OUT OF UNKNOWN AMOUNT OF DEBT,
LEGISLATORS HAD BEEN OUT TO DIG OUT OF UNKNOWN AMOUNT OF DEBT, 15 BILLION, SOMEWHERE IN THAT
OUT OF UNKNOWN AMOUNT OF DEBT, 15 BILLION, SOMEWHERE IN THAT RANGE.
15 BILLION, SOMEWHERE IN THAT RANGE. WELL, WE MIGHT AS WELL GO AHEAD
RANGE. WELL, WE MIGHT AS WELL GO AHEAD AND PUSH THIS THROUGH.
WELL, WE MIGHT AS WELL GO AHEAD AND PUSH THIS THROUGH. >>NOT AS MUCH.
AND PUSH THIS THROUGH. >>NOT AS MUCH. I MEAN CERTAINLY COST IS AN
>>NOT AS MUCH. I MEAN CERTAINLY COST IS AN ISSUE.
I MEAN CERTAINLY COST IS AN ISSUE. WE ARE SPENDING AT LEAST
ISSUE. WE ARE SPENDING AT LEAST $20 MILLION A YEAR, AND WE USE
WE ARE SPENDING AT LEAST $20 MILLION A YEAR, AND WE USE THE NUMBER RIGHT IN THE BUDGET
$20 MILLION A YEAR, AND WE USE THE NUMBER RIGHT IN THE BUDGET THROUGH THE CAPITAL LITIGATION
THE NUMBER RIGHT IN THE BUDGET THROUGH THE CAPITAL LITIGATION TRUST FUND.
THROUGH THE CAPITAL LITIGATION TRUST FUND. IT IS MONEY JUST SPENT ON
TRUST FUND. IT IS MONEY JUST SPENT ON CAPITAL CASES.
IT IS MONEY JUST SPENT ON CAPITAL CASES. THESE ARE CASES -- THIS IS MONEY
CAPITAL CASES. THESE ARE CASES -- THIS IS MONEY THAT IS ABOVE AND BEYOND ANY
THESE ARE CASES -- THIS IS MONEY THAT IS ABOVE AND BEYOND ANY OTHER SENTENCING OPTION
THAT IS ABOVE AND BEYOND ANY OTHER SENTENCING OPTION INCLUDING LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE.
OTHER SENTENCING OPTION INCLUDING LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE. THAT MONEY BEING SPENT, THAT'S
INCLUDING LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE. THAT MONEY BEING SPENT, THAT'S NOT ENOUGH.
THAT MONEY BEING SPENT, THAT'S NOT ENOUGH. WE HAVE TALKED WITH LEGISLATORS,
NOT ENOUGH. WE HAVE TALKED WITH LEGISLATORS, AND MONEY IS NOT ENOUGH OF A
WE HAVE TALKED WITH LEGISLATORS, AND MONEY IS NOT ENOUGH OF A REASON.
AND MONEY IS NOT ENOUGH OF A REASON. THIS IS THE VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE
REASON. THIS IS THE VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE AND WHERE WE ARE REALLY GETTING
THIS IS THE VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE AND WHERE WE ARE REALLY GETTING THE SUPPORT ARE PEOPLE THAT HAVE
AND WHERE WE ARE REALLY GETTING THE SUPPORT ARE PEOPLE THAT HAVE TALKED TO *** VICTIM
THE SUPPORT ARE PEOPLE THAT HAVE TALKED TO *** VICTIM FAMILIES, AND EMONOREES, AND IT
TALKED TO *** VICTIM FAMILIES, AND EMONOREES, AND IT MOVES THEM SO FAR. BUT WHAT
FAMILIES, AND EMONOREES, AND IT MOVES THEM SO FAR. BUT WHAT GETS THEM THE REST OF THE WAY IS
MOVES THEM SO FAR. BUT WHAT GETS THEM THE REST OF THE WAY IS LOOKING AT THE COST. WHEN YOU
GETS THEM THE REST OF THE WAY IS LOOKING AT THE COST. WHEN YOU THROW THE COST IN THE EQUATION,
LOOKING AT THE COST. WHEN YOU THROW THE COST IN THE EQUATION, THIS BECOMES A COMMON SENSE
THROW THE COST IN THE EQUATION, THIS BECOMES A COMMON SENSE QUESTION.
THIS BECOMES A COMMON SENSE QUESTION. WE HAVE A BROKEN SYSTEM THAT
QUESTION. WE HAVE A BROKEN SYSTEM THAT ISN'T WORKING FOR ANYONE, AND WE
WE HAVE A BROKEN SYSTEM THAT ISN'T WORKING FOR ANYONE, AND WE ARE SPENDING MONEY IN A WAY THAT
ISN'T WORKING FOR ANYONE, AND WE ARE SPENDING MONEY IN A WAY THAT IS NOT HELPING OUR COMMUNITY.
ARE SPENDING MONEY IN A WAY THAT IS NOT HELPING OUR COMMUNITY. DO YOU WANT TO GET RID OF IT?
IS NOT HELPING OUR COMMUNITY. DO YOU WANT TO GET RID OF IT? MOST OF ILLINOIS SAYING, WE WANT
DO YOU WANT TO GET RID OF IT? MOST OF ILLINOIS SAYING, WE WANT TO GET RID OF IT AND REPLACE IT.
MOST OF ILLINOIS SAYING, WE WANT TO GET RID OF IT AND REPLACE IT. >>THERE IS A SURVEY THAT IND
TO GET RID OF IT AND REPLACE IT. >>THERE IS A SURVEY THAT IND INDICATES THAT?
>>THERE IS A SURVEY THAT IND INDICATES THAT? >> YES, A POLL DONE THIS SPRING
INDICATES THAT? >> YES, A POLL DONE THIS SPRING WHERE THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT
>> YES, A POLL DONE THIS SPRING WHERE THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT WHERE SHOULD THE PENALTY FOR
WHERE THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT WHERE SHOULD THE PENALTY FOR *** BE?
WHERE SHOULD THE PENALTY FOR *** BE? SHOULD IT BE THE DEATH PENALTY,
*** BE? SHOULD IT BE THE DEATH PENALTY, SHOULD IT BE LIFE WITHOUT
SHOULD IT BE THE DEATH PENALTY, SHOULD IT BE LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE.
SHOULD IT BE LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE. >>OVER 60% SAID LIFE WITHOUT
PAROLE. >>OVER 60% SAID LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE MAKES MOST SENSE.
>>OVER 60% SAID LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE MAKES MOST SENSE. ANOTHER QUESTION, IF YOU KNEW
PAROLE MAKES MOST SENSE. ANOTHER QUESTION, IF YOU KNEW THE DEATH PENALTY COST
ANOTHER QUESTION, IF YOU KNEW THE DEATH PENALTY COST $12 MILLION MORE THAN I EVER
THE DEATH PENALTY COST $12 MILLION MORE THAN I EVER EVERY SER SENTENCING OPTION PER
$12 MILLION MORE THAN I EVER EVERY SER SENTENCING OPTION PER YEAR, WOULD YOU BE IN FAVOR OF
EVERY SER SENTENCING OPTION PER YEAR, WOULD YOU BE IN FAVOR OF REPEALING THE DEATH PENALTY, AND
YEAR, WOULD YOU BE IN FAVOR OF REPEALING THE DEATH PENALTY, AND THE NUMBERS JUMPED TO 50%,
REPEALING THE DEATH PENALTY, AND THE NUMBERS JUMPED TO 50%, STRONGLY SUPPORT.
THE NUMBERS JUMPED TO 50%, STRONGLY SUPPORT. UNDERNEATH THAT, IT WAS STRONGLY
STRONGLY SUPPORT. UNDERNEATH THAT, IT WAS STRONGLY OVER ANOTHER TEN PERCENT THAT
UNDERNEATH THAT, IT WAS STRONGLY OVER ANOTHER TEN PERCENT THAT WERE JUST SUPPORTIVE.
OVER ANOTHER TEN PERCENT THAT WERE JUST SUPPORTIVE. THE SURVEYS I HAVE SEEN DISPUTE
WERE JUST SUPPORTIVE. THE SURVEYS I HAVE SEEN DISPUTE THAT.
THE SURVEYS I HAVE SEEN DISPUTE THAT. I THINK OVERWHELMINGLY, AT LEAST
THAT. I THINK OVERWHELMINGLY, AT LEAST IN MY DISTRICT, AND I THINK OVER
I THINK OVERWHELMINGLY, AT LEAST IN MY DISTRICT, AND I THINK OVER THE NATION THAT MAJORITY OF
IN MY DISTRICT, AND I THINK OVER THE NATION THAT MAJORITY OF PEOPLE DO SPORT DEATH PENALTY AS
THE NATION THAT MAJORITY OF PEOPLE DO SPORT DEATH PENALTY AS A DETERRENT.
PEOPLE DO SPORT DEATH PENALTY AS A DETERRENT. LET ME GIVE YOU LITTLE EXAMPLE
A DETERRENT. LET ME GIVE YOU LITTLE EXAMPLE WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE GENERAL
LET ME GIVE YOU LITTLE EXAMPLE WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND WHY I DON'T THINK
WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND WHY I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD HAPPEN RIGHT NOW.
ASSEMBLY AND WHY I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD HAPPEN RIGHT NOW. WE JUST PASSED MAJOR LEGISLATION
IT SHOULD HAPPEN RIGHT NOW. WE JUST PASSED MAJOR LEGISLATION TO TAKE CARE OF SOME PROBLEMS
WE JUST PASSED MAJOR LEGISLATION TO TAKE CARE OF SOME PROBLEMS WITH MEDICAID, MAJOR PIECE OF
TO TAKE CARE OF SOME PROBLEMS WITH MEDICAID, MAJOR PIECE OF LEGISLATION.
WITH MEDICAID, MAJOR PIECE OF LEGISLATION. WE ARE WORKING ON WORKERS COMP
LEGISLATION. WE ARE WORKING ON WORKERS COMP RIGHT NOW.
WE ARE WORKING ON WORKERS COMP RIGHT NOW. WE ARE WORKING ON EDUCATION
RIGHT NOW. WE ARE WORKING ON EDUCATION REFORM RIGHT NOW.
WE ARE WORKING ON EDUCATION REFORM RIGHT NOW. WE ARE LOOKING AT THE BUDGET AND
REFORM RIGHT NOW. WE ARE LOOKING AT THE BUDGET AND TAXES AND THOSE THINGS RIGHT
WE ARE LOOKING AT THE BUDGET AND TAXES AND THOSE THINGS RIGHT NOW.
TAXES AND THOSE THINGS RIGHT NOW. NOW, WE ALSO DEAL WITH THE DEATH
NOW. NOW, WE ALSO DEAL WITH THE DEATH PENALTY, A WE HAVE GOT TO GET
NOW, WE ALSO DEAL WITH THE DEATH PENALTY, A WE HAVE GOT TO GET ALL THAT DONE BY WEDNESDAY.
PENALTY, A WE HAVE GOT TO GET ALL THAT DONE BY WEDNESDAY. OKAY.
ALL THAT DONE BY WEDNESDAY. OKAY. TO BE ABLE TO FOCUS YOUR
OKAY. TO BE ABLE TO FOCUS YOUR ATTENTION ON THESE ISSUES THAT
TO BE ABLE TO FOCUS YOUR ATTENTION ON THESE ISSUES THAT ARE REALLY OF SIGNIFICANCE, IT
ATTENTION ON THESE ISSUES THAT ARE REALLY OF SIGNIFICANCE, IT TAKES AWAY FROM EVERYBODY TO BE
ARE REALLY OF SIGNIFICANCE, IT TAKES AWAY FROM EVERYBODY TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
TAKES AWAY FROM EVERYBODY TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. AND TO NOT BE ABLE TO HAVE A
ABLE TO DO THAT. AND TO NOT BE ABLE TO HAVE A FULL HEARING AND TO HEAR
AND TO NOT BE ABLE TO HAVE A FULL HEARING AND TO HEAR EVERYBODY'S INPUT BECAUSE THERE
FULL HEARING AND TO HEAR EVERYBODY'S INPUT BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT HAVE DIFFERENCES
EVERYBODY'S INPUT BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT HAVE DIFFERENCES OF OPINION.
ARE PEOPLE THAT HAVE DIFFERENCES OF OPINION. OUR STATE'S ATTORNEY'S HAVE
OF OPINION. OUR STATE'S ATTORNEY'S HAVE WRITTEN PIECES TO THE -- ON THE
OUR STATE'S ATTORNEY'S HAVE WRITTEN PIECES TO THE -- ON THE OPINION PAGE OF THE NEWSPAPER
WRITTEN PIECES TO THE -- ON THE OPINION PAGE OF THE NEWSPAPER THAT SAYS WHAT IS THE RUSH?
OPINION PAGE OF THE NEWSPAPER THAT SAYS WHAT IS THE RUSH? SLOW THIS DOWN.
THAT SAYS WHAT IS THE RUSH? SLOW THIS DOWN. WE MADE MAJOR CHANGES TO OUR
SLOW THIS DOWN. WE MADE MAJOR CHANGES TO OUR LAWS IN ILLINOIS IN 2003, AND
WE MADE MAJOR CHANGES TO OUR LAWS IN ILLINOIS IN 2003, AND THEY RA PEER TO ME TO BE WORKING
LAWS IN ILLINOIS IN 2003, AND THEY RA PEER TO ME TO BE WORKING VERY WELL.
THEY RA PEER TO ME TO BE WORKING VERY WELL. SO I JUST DON'T SEE THE REASON
VERY WELL. SO I JUST DON'T SEE THE REASON THAT WE NEED TO RUSH THIS VOTE.
SO I JUST DON'T SEE THE REASON THAT WE NEED TO RUSH THIS VOTE. IT LOOKS LIKE WE ARE GOING TO.
THAT WE NEED TO RUSH THIS VOTE. IT LOOKS LIKE WE ARE GOING TO. >>WHAT IS THE HURRY?
IT LOOKS LIKE WE ARE GOING TO. >>WHAT IS THE HURRY? THE LEGISLATURE COMES BACK AFTER
>>WHAT IS THE HURRY? THE LEGISLATURE COMES BACK AFTER NEXT WEDNESDAY.
THE LEGISLATURE COMES BACK AFTER NEXT WEDNESDAY. NEW LEGISLATURE.
NEXT WEDNESDAY. NEW LEGISLATURE. A FEW MORE REPUBLICANS THAN
NEW LEGISLATURE. A FEW MORE REPUBLICANS THAN BEFORE.
A FEW MORE REPUBLICANS THAN BEFORE. IS THERE A HURRY TO GET THIS?
BEFORE. IS THERE A HURRY TO GET THIS? >> NO, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON
IS THERE A HURRY TO GET THIS? >> NO, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR 30 YEARS.
>> NO, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR 30 YEARS. TO SAY THAT THIS IS RUSHED IS A
THIS FOR 30 YEARS. TO SAY THAT THIS IS RUSHED IS A LITTLE BEING LITTLE DISIN
TO SAY THAT THIS IS RUSHED IS A LITTLE BEING LITTLE DISIN GENUINENESS.
LITTLE BEING LITTLE DISIN GENUINENESS. AFTER WE HAVE STUDIED IT AND
GENUINENESS. AFTER WE HAVE STUDIED IT AND CONTINUED TO SPEND MONEY.
AFTER WE HAVE STUDIED IT AND CONTINUED TO SPEND MONEY. OTHER QUESTION WE ALSO GET, WE
CONTINUED TO SPEND MONEY. OTHER QUESTION WE ALSO GET, WE HAVE A MORATORIUM.
OTHER QUESTION WE ALSO GET, WE HAVE A MORATORIUM. WHY RUSH THIS NOW?
HAVE A MORATORIUM. WHY RUSH THIS NOW? BUT THE REALITY IS EVERY DAY WE
WHY RUSH THIS NOW? BUT THE REALITY IS EVERY DAY WE ARE SPENDING AND WASTING MONEY
BUT THE REALITY IS EVERY DAY WE ARE SPENDING AND WASTING MONEY ON THE DEATH PENALTY.
ARE SPENDING AND WASTING MONEY ON THE DEATH PENALTY. WE ARE DELAYING JUST THE TIME IT
ON THE DEATH PENALTY. WE ARE DELAYING JUST THE TIME IT TAKES FOR THE TIME THE CASES
WE ARE DELAYING JUST THE TIME IT TAKES FOR THE TIME THE CASES TAKE, THAT'S BEING PUT ON THE
TAKES FOR THE TIME THE CASES TAKE, THAT'S BEING PUT ON THE *** VICTIM'S FAMILIES.
TAKE, THAT'S BEING PUT ON THE *** VICTIM'S FAMILIES. THEY BEING PUT THROUGH LONG
*** VICTIM'S FAMILIES. THEY BEING PUT THROUGH LONG PROCESS, WHY GET RID OF IT, WHY
THEY BEING PUT THROUGH LONG PROCESS, WHY GET RID OF IT, WHY THE RUSH?
PROCESS, WHY GET RID OF IT, WHY THE RUSH? AFTER TEN YEARS, WE REALLY NEED
THE RUSH? AFTER TEN YEARS, WE REALLY NEED TO ADMIT THE DEATH PENALTY
AFTER TEN YEARS, WE REALLY NEED TO ADMIT THE DEATH PENALTY DOESN'T WORK, AND WITH WE NEED O
TO ADMIT THE DEATH PENALTY DOESN'T WORK, AND WITH WE NEED O GET RID OF IT AS SOON AS
DOESN'T WORK, AND WITH WE NEED O GET RID OF IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
GET RID OF IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. >>I HAVE TO DISAGREE THIS ISN'T
POSSIBLE. >>I HAVE TO DISAGREE THIS ISN'T RUSHED.
>>I HAVE TO DISAGREE THIS ISN'T RUSHED. THIS BILL COULD HAVE BEEN
RUSHED. THIS BILL COULD HAVE BEEN ENTERED BACK IN JANUARY, YOU
THIS BILL COULD HAVE BEEN ENTERED BACK IN JANUARY, YOU KNOW, AND GONE THROUGH THE
ENTERED BACK IN JANUARY, YOU KNOW, AND GONE THROUGH THE REGULAR GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
KNOW, AND GONE THROUGH THE REGULAR GENERAL ASSEMBLY. IT DOESN'T IS HAVE TO BE DONE IN
REGULAR GENERAL ASSEMBLY. IT DOESN'T IS HAVE TO BE DONE IN THE VETO SESSION.
IT DOESN'T IS HAVE TO BE DONE IN THE VETO SESSION. AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE DONE
THE VETO SESSION. AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE DONE WITH A BILL THAT IS SHELLED OUT,
AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE DONE WITH A BILL THAT IS SHELLED OUT, A BILL ALREADY PASSED THE SENATE
WITH A BILL THAT IS SHELLED OUT, A BILL ALREADY PASSED THE SENATE AND SHELLED OUT AND A ADDED TO
A BILL ALREADY PASSED THE SENATE AND SHELLED OUT AND A ADDED TO IN THE HOUSE AND PASSED BACK
AND SHELLED OUT AND A ADDED TO IN THE HOUSE AND PASSED BACK OVER TO THE SENATE WHERE WE
IN THE HOUSE AND PASSED BACK OVER TO THE SENATE WHERE WE CAN'T AMEND IT, IN RA VERY SHORT
OVER TO THE SENATE WHERE WE CAN'T AMEND IT, IN RA VERY SHORT TIME FRAME WE WILL VOTE ON IT.
CAN'T AMEND IT, IN RA VERY SHORT TIME FRAME WE WILL VOTE ON IT. >>FRANKLY, THE REALITY, I AM NOT
TIME FRAME WE WILL VOTE ON IT. >>FRANKLY, THE REALITY, I AM NOT A LEGISLATOR. NO ONE IN OUR
>>FRANKLY, THE REALITY, I AM NOT A LEGISLATOR. NO ONE IN OUR ORGANIZATION IS.
A LEGISLATOR. NO ONE IN OUR ORGANIZATION IS. SO WE DID INTRODUCE A BILL AT
ORGANIZATION IS. SO WE DID INTRODUCE A BILL AT THE START OF THIS GENERAL
SO WE DID INTRODUCE A BILL AT THE START OF THIS GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO ABOLISH THE DEATH
THE START OF THIS GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY.
ASSEMBLY TO ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY. WE INTRODUCED ONE IN THE HOUSE
PENALTY. WE INTRODUCED ONE IN THE HOUSE AND ONE IN THE SENATE.
WE INTRODUCED ONE IN THE HOUSE AND ONE IN THE SENATE. WE HAD A COMMITTEE HEARING IN
AND ONE IN THE SENATE. WE HAD A COMMITTEE HEARING IN THE SENATE.
WE HAD A COMMITTEE HEARING IN THE SENATE. WE CONTINUE TO LOBBY THIS
THE SENATE. WE CONTINUE TO LOBBY THIS LEGISLATURE THROUGHOUT THOSE TWO
WE CONTINUE TO LOBBY THIS LEGISLATURE THROUGHOUT THOSE TWO YEARS HAVING VARIOUS LOBBY DAYS
LEGISLATURE THROUGHOUT THOSE TWO YEARS HAVING VARIOUS LOBBY DAYS COMING DOWN TO THE CAPITOL,
YEARS HAVING VARIOUS LOBBY DAYS COMING DOWN TO THE CAPITOL, MAKING OUR VOICES HEARD, HAVING
COMING DOWN TO THE CAPITOL, MAKING OUR VOICES HEARD, HAVING *** VICTIM'S FAMILIES MEET
MAKING OUR VOICES HEARD, HAVING *** VICTIM'S FAMILIES MEET WITH LEGISLATORS, INCLUDING
*** VICTIM'S FAMILIES MEET WITH LEGISLATORS, INCLUDING EXONOREES MEETING WITH THEM.
WITH LEGISLATORS, INCLUDING EXONOREES MEETING WITH THEM. WE ARE AT THE END OF THIS
EXONOREES MEETING WITH THEM. WE ARE AT THE END OF THIS PROCESS.
WE ARE AT THE END OF THIS PROCESS. WE HAVE UNTIL WEDNESDAY, BUT IT
PROCESS. WE HAVE UNTIL WEDNESDAY, BUT IT HAS TAKEN THIS MUCH TIME TO MAKE
WE HAVE UNTIL WEDNESDAY, BUT IT HAS TAKEN THIS MUCH TIME TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE IS INFORMED.
HAS TAKEN THIS MUCH TIME TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE IS INFORMED. >>WHEN A NEW LEGISLATURE IS
SURE EVERYONE IS INFORMED. >>WHEN A NEW LEGISLATURE IS SEATED, ALL PREVIOUS BILLS THAT
>>WHEN A NEW LEGISLATURE IS SEATED, ALL PREVIOUS BILLS THAT HAVE NOT ALREADY BEEN VOTED ON
SEATED, ALL PREVIOUS BILLS THAT HAVE NOT ALREADY BEEN VOTED ON ARE DISCONTINUED.
HAVE NOT ALREADY BEEN VOTED ON ARE DISCONTINUED. YOU HAVE TO START ALL OVER
ARE DISCONTINUED. YOU HAVE TO START ALL OVER AGAIN.
YOU HAVE TO START ALL OVER AGAIN. FURTHERMORE, FOR THE VIEWERS,
AGAIN. FURTHERMORE, FOR THE VIEWERS, THE SENATOR HAS BEEN REFERRING
FURTHERMORE, FOR THE VIEWERS, THE SENATOR HAS BEEN REFERRING TO THE SHELL BILL THAT WAS
THE SENATOR HAS BEEN REFERRING TO THE SHELL BILL THAT WAS CHANGED.
TO THE SHELL BILL THAT WAS CHANGED. IT IS SENATE BILL 3539.
CHANGED. IT IS SENATE BILL 3539. IF YOU'D LIKE TO GO TO ILGA.GOV,
IT IS SENATE BILL 3539. IF YOU'D LIKE TO GO TO ILGA.GOV, AND CAN YOU FOLLOW THE PROCESS.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO GO TO ILGA.GOV, AND CAN YOU FOLLOW THE PROCESS. IT IS REAL SIMPLE, AND IT HAS IT
AND CAN YOU FOLLOW THE PROCESS. IT IS REAL SIMPLE, AND IT HAS IT IN GROUPS OF ONE HUNDRED.
IT IS REAL SIMPLE, AND IT HAS IT IN GROUPS OF ONE HUNDRED. YOU CAN GO DOWN TO THAT AND
IN GROUPS OF ONE HUNDRED. YOU CAN GO DOWN TO THAT AND CHECK SENATE BILL OR SB3539, AND
YOU CAN GO DOWN TO THAT AND CHECK SENATE BILL OR SB3539, AND YOU WILL SEE THE ORIGINAL BILL
CHECK SENATE BILL OR SB3539, AND YOU WILL SEE THE ORIGINAL BILL WAS FOR QUALIFICATION OF
YOU WILL SEE THE ORIGINAL BILL WAS FOR QUALIFICATION OF PROBATION OFFICERS TO REQUIRE 30
WAS FOR QUALIFICATION OF PROBATION OFFICERS TO REQUIRE 30 HOURS OF TRAINING A YEAR FOR
PROBATION OFFICERS TO REQUIRE 30 HOURS OF TRAINING A YEAR FOR PROBATION OFFICERS AND IT WAS
HOURS OF TRAINING A YEAR FOR PROBATION OFFICERS AND IT WAS COMPLETELY CHANGED OUT WITH NEW
PROBATION OFFICERS AND IT WAS COMPLETELY CHANGED OUT WITH NEW LANGUAGE.
COMPLETELY CHANGED OUT WITH NEW LANGUAGE. SO, JUST SO THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT
LANGUAGE. SO, JUST SO THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU HAVE BEEN REFERRING TO.
SO, JUST SO THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU HAVE BEEN REFERRING TO. THE LAST NUMBER I SAW IN 2010,
YOU HAVE BEEN REFERRING TO. THE LAST NUMBER I SAW IN 2010, WAS 3,261 PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY
THE LAST NUMBER I SAW IN 2010, WAS 3,261 PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY OR DEATH ROW.
WAS 3,261 PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY OR DEATH ROW. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY ARE
OR DEATH ROW. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE EXECUTED ANY TIME
THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE EXECUTED ANY TIME SOON, BUT THERE IS MORE THAN
GOING TO BE EXECUTED ANY TIME SOON, BUT THERE IS MORE THAN 3200 ON DEATH ROW.
SOON, BUT THERE IS MORE THAN 3200 ON DEATH ROW. SO IF THAT IS -- AND WOULD KNOW
3200 ON DEATH ROW. SO IF THAT IS -- AND WOULD KNOW THAT ILLINOIS HASN'T EXECUTED
SO IF THAT IS -- AND WOULD KNOW THAT ILLINOIS HASN'T EXECUTED ANYBODY IN QUITE SOME TIME.
THAT ILLINOIS HASN'T EXECUTED ANYBODY IN QUITE SOME TIME. MORATORIUM FOR THE PAST DECADE.
ANYBODY IN QUITE SOME TIME. MORATORIUM FOR THE PAST DECADE. THERE ARE 12 STATES THAT HAVE
MORATORIUM FOR THE PAST DECADE. THERE ARE 12 STATES THAT HAVE EXECUTED PRISONERS IN THE PAST
THERE ARE 12 STATES THAT HAVE EXECUTED PRISONERS IN THE PAST YEAR, TEXAS LEADING WITH 17.
EXECUTED PRISONERS IN THE PAST YEAR, TEXAS LEADING WITH 17. HAVE WE LEARNED ANYTHING FROM
YEAR, TEXAS LEADING WITH 17. HAVE WE LEARNED ANYTHING FROM THOSE STATES THAT ARE CONDUCTING
HAVE WE LEARNED ANYTHING FROM THOSE STATES THAT ARE CONDUCTING EXECUTIONS?
THOSE STATES THAT ARE CONDUCTING EXECUTIONS? >> DEFINITELY.
EXECUTIONS? >> DEFINITELY. I THINK WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED
>> DEFINITELY. I THINK WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED FROM ACTUALLY THE WHOLE NATION
I THINK WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED FROM ACTUALLY THE WHOLE NATION IS THAT ILLINOIS IS REALLY
FROM ACTUALLY THE WHOLE NATION IS THAT ILLINOIS IS REALLY FOLLOWING A NATIONAL TREND.
IS THAT ILLINOIS IS REALLY FOLLOWING A NATIONAL TREND. OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS,
FOLLOWING A NATIONAL TREND. OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, EXECUTIONS HAVE GONE DOWN.
OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, EXECUTIONS HAVE GONE DOWN. THE NUMBER OF DEATH SENTENCES
EXECUTIONS HAVE GONE DOWN. THE NUMBER OF DEATH SENTENCES HAVE GONE DOWN.
THE NUMBER OF DEATH SENTENCES HAVE GONE DOWN. LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, THREE
HAVE GONE DOWN. LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, THREE STATES ABOLISHED THE DEATH
LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, THREE STATES ABOLISHED THE DEATH PENALTY.
STATES ABOLISHED THE DEATH PENALTY. MORE THAN THAT, BACK JUST A YEAR
PENALTY. MORE THAN THAT, BACK JUST A YEAR AGO, 11 STATES HAD LEGISLATION
MORE THAN THAT, BACK JUST A YEAR AGO, 11 STATES HAD LEGISLATION INCLUDING ILLINOIS TO REPEAL THE
AGO, 11 STATES HAD LEGISLATION INCLUDING ILLINOIS TO REPEAL THE DEATH PENALTY COMPLETELY.
INCLUDING ILLINOIS TO REPEAL THE DEATH PENALTY COMPLETELY. WE ARE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF
DEATH PENALTY COMPLETELY. WE ARE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NATIONAL DEBATE.
WE ARE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NATIONAL DEBATE. >>I THINK WE HAVE BACKED DOWN ON
THE NATIONAL DEBATE. >>I THINK WE HAVE BACKED DOWN ON THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WE
>>I THINK WE HAVE BACKED DOWN ON THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WE HAVE SENTENCED TO DEATH ROW.
THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WE HAVE SENTENCED TO DEATH ROW. WE ARE LOOKING HARD AT THOSE
HAVE SENTENCED TO DEATH ROW. WE ARE LOOKING HARD AT THOSE CASES THAT COME FORWARD.
WE ARE LOOKING HARD AT THOSE CASES THAT COME FORWARD. THE STATE'S ATTORNEYS ARE VERY
CASES THAT COME FORWARD. THE STATE'S ATTORNEYS ARE VERY MUCH AWARE THAT ONLY THE MOST
THE STATE'S ATTORNEYS ARE VERY MUCH AWARE THAT ONLY THE MOST HEINOUS CRIMES BE PRESENTED IN
MUCH AWARE THAT ONLY THE MOST HEINOUS CRIMES BE PRESENTED IN THAT MANNER TO BRING THE OF THE
HEINOUS CRIMES BE PRESENTED IN THAT MANNER TO BRING THE OF THE DEATH PENALTY FORWARD.
THAT MANNER TO BRING THE OF THE DEATH PENALTY FORWARD. THE STATE'S ATTORNEYS THAT I
DEATH PENALTY FORWARD. THE STATE'S ATTORNEYS THAT I HAVE TALKED TO THINK IT IS A
THE STATE'S ATTORNEYS THAT I HAVE TALKED TO THINK IT IS A DETERRENT TO CRIME.
HAVE TALKED TO THINK IT IS A DETERRENT TO CRIME. THERE IS AN ISH A U BOTH WAYS,
DETERRENT TO CRIME. THERE IS AN ISH A U BOTH WAYS, AND I AM NOT SURE IF ANYBODY CAN
THERE IS AN ISH A U BOTH WAYS, AND I AM NOT SURE IF ANYBODY CAN PROVE IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
AND I AM NOT SURE IF ANYBODY CAN PROVE IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. BUT THE FEELING OF THE STATE'S
PROVE IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. BUT THE FEELING OF THE STATE'S ATTORNEYS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT IS
BUT THE FEELING OF THE STATE'S ATTORNEYS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT IS THAT IT IS A DETERRENT.
ATTORNEYS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT IS THAT IT IS A DETERRENT. SO THE PEOPLE THAT I TALK TO
THAT IT IS A DETERRENT. SO THE PEOPLE THAT I TALK TO THAT SAY WHENEVER SOMEBODY DOES
SO THE PEOPLE THAT I TALK TO THAT SAY WHENEVER SOMEBODY DOES A PREMEDITATED CRIME ON A SMALL
THAT SAY WHENEVER SOMEBODY DOES A PREMEDITATED CRIME ON A SMALL CHILD, CUTS UP THE BODY, DOES
A PREMEDITATED CRIME ON A SMALL CHILD, CUTS UP THE BODY, DOES MASS MURDERS, THOSE KIND OF
CHILD, CUTS UP THE BODY, DOES MASS MURDERS, THOSE KIND OF THINGS, THOSE OUGHT TO BE LOOKED
MASS MURDERS, THOSE KIND OF THINGS, THOSE OUGHT TO BE LOOKED AT WITH WITH THE DEATH PENALTY
THINGS, THOSE OUGHT TO BE LOOKED AT WITH WITH THE DEATH PENALTY IN MIND.
AT WITH WITH THE DEATH PENALTY IN MIND. >>THE ALTERNATIVE TO THE DEATH
IN MIND. >>THE ALTERNATIVE TO THE DEATH PENALTY IS LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE.
>>THE ALTERNATIVE TO THE DEATH PENALTY IS LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE. >>THAT'S CORRECT.
PENALTY IS LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE. >>THAT'S CORRECT. >>THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING
>>THAT'S CORRECT. >>THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING AS AN ORGANIZATION?
>>THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING AS AN ORGANIZATION? >> WE JUST SUGGEST GET RID OF
AS AN ORGANIZATION? >> WE JUST SUGGEST GET RID OF THE DEATH PENALTY.
>> WE JUST SUGGEST GET RID OF THE DEATH PENALTY. AND LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE IS THE
THE DEATH PENALTY. AND LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE IS THE LAW OF THE LAND IN ILLINOIS.
AND LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE IS THE LAW OF THE LAND IN ILLINOIS. IT IS WHAT WOULD BE THE
LAW OF THE LAND IN ILLINOIS. IT IS WHAT WOULD BE THE HIGHEST -- HARSHEST PUNISHMENT
IT IS WHAT WOULD BE THE HIGHEST -- HARSHEST PUNISHMENT ON THE BOOKS IF YOU ABOLISH THE
HIGHEST -- HARSHEST PUNISHMENT ON THE BOOKS IF YOU ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY.
ON THE BOOKS IF YOU ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY. >>THE SATISFACTION TO THE
DEATH PENALTY. >>THE SATISFACTION TO THE VICTIM'S FAMILY WOULD BE THAT
>>THE SATISFACTION TO THE VICTIM'S FAMILY WOULD BE THAT THE PERSON WHO PERPETRATED THE
VICTIM'S FAMILY WOULD BE THAT THE PERSON WHO PERPETRATED THE CRIME IS PUT AWAY FOR LIFE?
THE PERSON WHO PERPETRATED THE CRIME IS PUT AWAY FOR LIFE? >> THAT'S RIGHT, AND THEY WILL
CRIME IS PUT AWAY FOR LIFE? >> THAT'S RIGHT, AND THEY WILL NEVER HAVE TO DEAL WITH THEM
>> THAT'S RIGHT, AND THEY WILL NEVER HAVE TO DEAL WITH THEM AGAIN.
NEVER HAVE TO DEAL WITH THEM AGAIN. YOU ARE FULLY A WAREHOUSE BILL
AGAIN. YOU ARE FULLY A WAREHOUSE BILL 45 WAS INTRODUCED?
YOU ARE FULLY A WAREHOUSE BILL 45 WAS INTRODUCED? >> WE DID TALK ABOUT IT BEFORE
45 WAS INTRODUCED? >> WE DID TALK ABOUT IT BEFORE THE SHOW.
>> WE DID TALK ABOUT IT BEFORE THE SHOW. >>HOUSE BILL 45, JUST FOR THOSE
THE SHOW. >>HOUSE BILL 45, JUST FOR THOSE WHO AREN'T FAMILIAR WITH IT,
>>HOUSE BILL 45, JUST FOR THOSE WHO AREN'T FAMILIAR WITH IT, WOULD ALLOW A PRISONER WHO IS AT
WHO AREN'T FAMILIAR WITH IT, WOULD ALLOW A PRISONER WHO IS AT LEAST 50 YEARS OF AGE, WITH AT
WOULD ALLOW A PRISONER WHO IS AT LEAST 50 YEARS OF AGE, WITH AT LEAST 25 YEARS, HAVING SERVED 25
LEAST 50 YEARS OF AGE, WITH AT LEAST 25 YEARS, HAVING SERVED 25 YEARS OF HIS SENTENCE WOULD BE
LEAST 25 YEARS, HAVING SERVED 25 YEARS OF HIS SENTENCE WOULD BE ALLOWED TO PETITION THE PRISONER
YEARS OF HIS SENTENCE WOULD BE ALLOWED TO PETITION THE PRISONER REVIEW BOARD TO HAVE THEIR
ALLOWED TO PETITION THE PRISONER REVIEW BOARD TO HAVE THEIR SENTENCE REDUCED.
REVIEW BOARD TO HAVE THEIR SENTENCE REDUCED. THAT INCLUDES ALL SENTENCES,
SENTENCE REDUCED. THAT INCLUDES ALL SENTENCES, INCLUDING LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE,
THAT INCLUDES ALL SENTENCES, INCLUDING LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE DEATH
INCLUDING LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE DEATH PENALTY. I MIGHT ADD, THE
WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE DEATH PENALTY. I MIGHT ADD, THE PERSON MURDERED IN A *** CASE
PENALTY. I MIGHT ADD, THE PERSON MURDERED IN A *** CASE DOESN'T HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY.
PERSON MURDERED IN A *** CASE DOESN'T HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY. >>SO IF THE ALTERNATIVE, LIFE
DOESN'T HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY. >>SO IF THE ALTERNATIVE, LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE, BUT REALLY IF A
>>SO IF THE ALTERNATIVE, LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE, BUT REALLY IF A BILL LIKE THIS CAN BE
WITHOUT PAROLE, BUT REALLY IF A BILL LIKE THIS CAN BE INTRODUCED, IT CERTAINLY MIGHT
BILL LIKE THIS CAN BE INTRODUCED, IT CERTAINLY MIGHT PASS AT SOME POINT AND TIME.
INTRODUCED, IT CERTAINLY MIGHT PASS AT SOME POINT AND TIME. DON'T KNOW.
PASS AT SOME POINT AND TIME. DON'T KNOW. THERE IS NO GUARANTEE TO THE
DON'T KNOW. THERE IS NO GUARANTEE TO THE VICTIM'S FAMILY.
THERE IS NO GUARANTEE TO THE VICTIM'S FAMILY. IS THAT, INDEED THE CASE?
VICTIM'S FAMILY. IS THAT, INDEED THE CASE? >> THE WAY YOU PHRASE IT, YES.
IS THAT, INDEED THE CASE? >> THE WAY YOU PHRASE IT, YES. BUT THE REALITY IS THAT HOUSE
>> THE WAY YOU PHRASE IT, YES. BUT THE REALITY IS THAT HOUSE BILL 45 WAS VOTED ON AND FAILED
BUT THE REALITY IS THAT HOUSE BILL 45 WAS VOTED ON AND FAILED MISERABLY.
BILL 45 WAS VOTED ON AND FAILED MISERABLY. IT DID NOT GET NEAR THE VOTES
MISERABLY. IT DID NOT GET NEAR THE VOTES NEEDED TO PASS.
IT DID NOT GET NEAR THE VOTES NEEDED TO PASS. THAT'S ACTUALLY MORE OF A
NEEDED TO PASS. THAT'S ACTUALLY MORE OF A QUESTION FOR THE LEGISLATURE.
THAT'S ACTUALLY MORE OF A QUESTION FOR THE LEGISLATURE. WE WERE NOT INVOLVED IN THAT
QUESTION FOR THE LEGISLATURE. WE WERE NOT INVOLVED IN THAT BILL, DID NOT ADVOCATE ON THAT
WE WERE NOT INVOLVED IN THAT BILL, DID NOT ADVOCATE ON THAT BILL.
BILL, DID NOT ADVOCATE ON THAT BILL. FRANKLY, WE ARE PRETTY MUCH A
BILL. FRANKLY, WE ARE PRETTY MUCH A ONE ISSUE ORGANIZATION.
FRANKLY, WE ARE PRETTY MUCH A ONE ISSUE ORGANIZATION. WE WERE A BROAD COALITION THAT
ONE ISSUE ORGANIZATION. WE WERE A BROAD COALITION THAT WORKS *** VICTIMS FAMILIES
WE WERE A BROAD COALITION THAT WORKS *** VICTIMS FAMILIES AND EXONOREES AND WORK WITH LAW
WORKS *** VICTIMS FAMILIES AND EXONOREES AND WORK WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT TO DO THE RIGHT
AND EXONOREES AND WORK WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT TO DO THE RIGHT THING TO MAKE SURE OUR
ENFORCEMENT TO DO THE RIGHT THING TO MAKE SURE OUR COMMUNITIES ARE SAFER AND DOING
THING TO MAKE SURE OUR COMMUNITIES ARE SAFER AND DOING THE RIGHT THING WITH THE SMALL
COMMUNITIES ARE SAFER AND DOING THE RIGHT THING WITH THE SMALL RESOURCES WE HAVE.
THE RIGHT THING WITH THE SMALL RESOURCES WE HAVE. >>LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT
RESOURCES WE HAVE. >>LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE IRREVERSIBLE ASPECT OF THE
>>LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE IRREVERSIBLE ASPECT OF THE DEATH PENALTY.
THE IRREVERSIBLE ASPECT OF THE DEATH PENALTY. >>IN THIS COUNTRY, WE HAVE
DEATH PENALTY. >>IN THIS COUNTRY, WE HAVE EXECUTED PEOPLE.
>>IN THIS COUNTRY, WE HAVE EXECUTED PEOPLE. THAT'S PRETTY SERIOUS.
EXECUTED PEOPLE. THAT'S PRETTY SERIOUS. >>IT IS VERY SERIOUS.
THAT'S PRETTY SERIOUS. >>IT IS VERY SERIOUS. >>IS THERE SOME SORT OF
>>IT IS VERY SERIOUS. >>IS THERE SOME SORT OF GUARANTEE THAT WE ARE GOING TO
>>IS THERE SOME SORT OF GUARANTEE THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO CORRECT THOSE
GUARANTEE THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO CORRECT THOSE PARTICULAR MISTAKES THAT WE CAN
BE ABLE TO CORRECT THOSE PARTICULAR MISTAKES THAT WE CAN PLACE SOME SORT OF CONTROLS IN
PARTICULAR MISTAKES THAT WE CAN PLACE SOME SORT OF CONTROLS IN PLACE -- IF WE KEEP THE DEATH
PLACE SOME SORT OF CONTROLS IN PLACE -- IF WE KEEP THE DEATH PENALTY, ARE THERE SOME CONTROLS
PLACE -- IF WE KEEP THE DEATH PENALTY, ARE THERE SOME CONTROLS THAT MIGHT MINIMIZE THE
PENALTY, ARE THERE SOME CONTROLS THAT MIGHT MINIMIZE THE OPPORTUNITY FROM MAKING
THAT MIGHT MINIMIZE THE OPPORTUNITY FROM MAKING MISTAKES.
OPPORTUNITY FROM MAKING MISTAKES. >>THERE IS NEVER A TOTAL
MISTAKES. >>THERE IS NEVER A TOTAL GUARANTEE.
>>THERE IS NEVER A TOTAL GUARANTEE. CERTAINLY, WE TOOK AT LOOK -- IN
GUARANTEE. CERTAINLY, WE TOOK AT LOOK -- IN FACT, WE HAD A COMMISSION LOOK
CERTAINLY, WE TOOK AT LOOK -- IN FACT, WE HAD A COMMISSION LOOK AT IT AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS.
FACT, WE HAD A COMMISSION LOOK AT IT AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS. BUT WE A A ADOPTED A LOT OF NEW
AT IT AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS. BUT WE A A ADOPTED A LOT OF NEW LAWS IN 2003 TO TIGHTEN UP THE
BUT WE A A ADOPTED A LOT OF NEW LAWS IN 2003 TO TIGHTEN UP THE WHOLE PROCESS, AND TO FUND
LAWS IN 2003 TO TIGHTEN UP THE WHOLE PROCESS, AND TO FUND APPEALS PROCESS TO MAKE SURE
WHOLE PROCESS, AND TO FUND APPEALS PROCESS TO MAKE SURE THAT JUDGES GOT TRAINING IN
APPEALS PROCESS TO MAKE SURE THAT JUDGES GOT TRAINING IN CAPITAL CASES IS SO THAT THERE
THAT JUDGES GOT TRAINING IN CAPITAL CASES IS SO THAT THERE WEREN'T MISTAKES MADE ALONG
CAPITAL CASES IS SO THAT THERE WEREN'T MISTAKES MADE ALONG THOSE LINES, AND THEY WERE AWARE
WEREN'T MISTAKES MADE ALONG THOSE LINES, AND THEY WERE AWARE OF ALL THE PITFALLS ALONG THE
THOSE LINES, AND THEY WERE AWARE OF ALL THE PITFALLS ALONG THE WAY.
OF ALL THE PITFALLS ALONG THE WAY. WE HAVE CASES, A SITUATION NOW
WAY. WE HAVE CASES, A SITUATION NOW WHERE ALONG THAT APPEAL PROCESS,
WE HAVE CASES, A SITUATION NOW WHERE ALONG THAT APPEAL PROCESS, THE JUDGES CAN REVERSE THE DEATH
WHERE ALONG THAT APPEAL PROCESS, THE JUDGES CAN REVERSE THE DEATH PENALTY IF THEY THINK THERE IS
THE JUDGES CAN REVERSE THE DEATH PENALTY IF THEY THINK THERE IS REASONABLE DOUBT FOR THAT TO --
PENALTY IF THEY THINK THERE IS REASONABLE DOUBT FOR THAT TO -- FOR THAT TO HAPPEN.
REASONABLE DOUBT FOR THAT TO -- FOR THAT TO HAPPEN. IT CAN GO ALL THE WAY UP TO THE
FOR THAT TO HAPPEN. IT CAN GO ALL THE WAY UP TO THE SUPREME COURT.
IT CAN GO ALL THE WAY UP TO THE SUPREME COURT. THE SUPREME COURT CAN DO THAT.
SUPREME COURT. THE SUPREME COURT CAN DO THAT. THE GOVERNOR CAN DO THAT.
THE SUPREME COURT CAN DO THAT. THE GOVERNOR CAN DO THAT. SO I WON'T SAY THAT THEY WILL
THE GOVERNOR CAN DO THAT. SO I WON'T SAY THAT THEY WILL NEVER BE A MISTAKE, OR WHERE YOU
SO I WON'T SAY THAT THEY WILL NEVER BE A MISTAKE, OR WHERE YOU HAVE HUMANS INVOLVED, THAT WILL
NEVER BE A MISTAKE, OR WHERE YOU HAVE HUMANS INVOLVED, THAT WILL BE THE CASE.
HAVE HUMANS INVOLVED, THAT WILL BE THE CASE. WE WILL STRIVE TO MAKE IT AS
BE THE CASE. WE WILL STRIVE TO MAKE IT AS TIGHT AS WE CAN.
WE WILL STRIVE TO MAKE IT AS TIGHT AS WE CAN. WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE
TIGHT AS WE CAN. WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE ALL THE SAFEGUARDS IN PLACE, AND
WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE ALL THE SAFEGUARDS IN PLACE, AND WE ARE GOING TO WORK WITH THAT.
ALL THE SAFEGUARDS IN PLACE, AND WE ARE GOING TO WORK WITH THAT. BUT TO SAY THAT YOU DON'T WANT
WE ARE GOING TO WORK WITH THAT. BUT TO SAY THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO TAKE THE LIFE OF SOMEONE THAT
BUT TO SAY THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO TAKE THE LIFE OF SOMEONE THAT HAS COMMITTED SOME OF THE WORST
TO TAKE THE LIFE OF SOMEONE THAT HAS COMMITTED SOME OF THE WORST CRIME THAT YOU CAN EVEN IMAGINE,
HAS COMMITTED SOME OF THE WORST CRIME THAT YOU CAN EVEN IMAGINE, I DON'T THINK THE PEOPLE THAT I
CRIME THAT YOU CAN EVEN IMAGINE, I DON'T THINK THE PEOPLE THAT I REPRESENT ARE FOR THAT.
I DON'T THINK THE PEOPLE THAT I REPRESENT ARE FOR THAT. >>I THINK THAT -- I'D HAVE TO
REPRESENT ARE FOR THAT. >>I THINK THAT -- I'D HAVE TO AGREE WITH THE SENATOR.
>>I THINK THAT -- I'D HAVE TO AGREE WITH THE SENATOR. THERE IS NOT A WAY TO DESIGN A
AGREE WITH THE SENATOR. THERE IS NOT A WAY TO DESIGN A SYSTEM WE CANNOT ENSURE THERE
THERE IS NOT A WAY TO DESIGN A SYSTEM WE CANNOT ENSURE THERE WILL BE AN INNOCENT PERSON
SYSTEM WE CANNOT ENSURE THERE WILL BE AN INNOCENT PERSON EXECUTED.
WILL BE AN INNOCENT PERSON EXECUTED. AND THAT'S WHAT THE TWO STUDY
EXECUTED. AND THAT'S WHAT THE TWO STUDY COMMISSIONS HAVE AGREED WITH, AS
AND THAT'S WHAT THE TWO STUDY COMMISSIONS HAVE AGREED WITH, AS LONG AS THERE IS HUMANS
COMMISSIONS HAVE AGREED WITH, AS LONG AS THERE IS HUMANS INVOLVED, THERE IS A CHANCE FOR
LONG AS THERE IS HUMANS INVOLVED, THERE IS A CHANCE FOR ERROR. THAT'S THE MAIN PROBLEM
INVOLVED, THERE IS A CHANCE FOR ERROR. THAT'S THE MAIN PROBLEM WITH THE SYSTEM.
ERROR. THAT'S THE MAIN PROBLEM WITH THE SYSTEM. WE TALK ABOUT HAVING THESE
WITH THE SYSTEM. WE TALK ABOUT HAVING THESE HEINOUS, HEINOUS CRIMES AND
WE TALK ABOUT HAVING THESE HEINOUS, HEINOUS CRIMES AND MAKING SURE THERE IS JUSTICE FOR
HEINOUS, HEINOUS CRIMES AND MAKING SURE THERE IS JUSTICE FOR THE VICTIMS AND FOR THE REST OF
MAKING SURE THERE IS JUSTICE FOR THE VICTIMS AND FOR THE REST OF US FOR SOCIETY.
THE VICTIMS AND FOR THE REST OF US FOR SOCIETY. THE REALITY WE CAN'T CREATE A
US FOR SOCIETY. THE REALITY WE CAN'T CREATE A SYSTEM THAT TAKES THE HORRIBLE
THE REALITY WE CAN'T CREATE A SYSTEM THAT TAKES THE HORRIBLE CRIMES OUT AND LEAVES OUT
SYSTEM THAT TAKES THE HORRIBLE CRIMES OUT AND LEAVES OUT EVERYBODY ELSE.
CRIMES OUT AND LEAVES OUT EVERYBODY ELSE. IT WILL SWEEP UP THE INNOCENT.
EVERYBODY ELSE. IT WILL SWEEP UP THE INNOCENT. IT WILL SWEEP UP THE OTHER
IT WILL SWEEP UP THE INNOCENT. IT WILL SWEEP UP THE OTHER CRIMES THAT ARE A LITTLE MORE
IT WILL SWEEP UP THE OTHER CRIMES THAT ARE A LITTLE MORE POLITICALLY MOTIVATED.
CRIMES THAT ARE A LITTLE MORE POLITICALLY MOTIVATED. IT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE SEEN THE
POLITICALLY MOTIVATED. IT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE SEEN THE LAST 30 YEARS ACROSS THE NATION
IT IS SOMETHING WE HAVE SEEN THE LAST 30 YEARS ACROSS THE NATION AS WELL AS IN ILLINOIS, THE
LAST 30 YEARS ACROSS THE NATION AS WELL AS IN ILLINOIS, THE PROBLEMS WITH THE SYSTEM, A BE
AS WELL AS IN ILLINOIS, THE PROBLEMS WITH THE SYSTEM, A BE WE HAVE NOT SEEN THOSE PROBLEMS
PROBLEMS WITH THE SYSTEM, A BE WE HAVE NOT SEEN THOSE PROBLEMS GO AWAY.
WE HAVE NOT SEEN THOSE PROBLEMS GO AWAY. >>CORRECT ME, EITHER ONE OF YOU
GO AWAY. >>CORRECT ME, EITHER ONE OF YOU CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG, WHEN
>>CORRECT ME, EITHER ONE OF YOU CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG, WHEN THE DEATH PENALTY WAS
CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG, WHEN THE DEATH PENALTY WAS REINSTITUTED IN THE LATE 70'S
THE DEATH PENALTY WAS REINSTITUTED IN THE LATE 70'S AFTER THE SUPREME COURT RULING,
REINSTITUTED IN THE LATE 70'S AFTER THE SUPREME COURT RULING, THAT THERE WERE SEVEN SCENARIOS
AFTER THE SUPREME COURT RULING, THAT THERE WERE SEVEN SCENARIOS UNDER WHICH THE DEATH PENALTY
THAT THERE WERE SEVEN SCENARIOS UNDER WHICH THE DEATH PENALTY COULD BE APPLIED.
UNDER WHICH THE DEATH PENALTY COULD BE APPLIED. TODAY, THAT'S GROWN TO 21.
COULD BE APPLIED. TODAY, THAT'S GROWN TO 21. >>THAT'S RIGHT.
TODAY, THAT'S GROWN TO 21. >>THAT'S RIGHT. >>MAYBE THAT'S TOO MANY.
>>THAT'S RIGHT. >>MAYBE THAT'S TOO MANY. MAYBE IT IS NOT ENOUGH.
>>MAYBE THAT'S TOO MANY. MAYBE IT IS NOT ENOUGH. WHAT WOULD YOU SAY ABOUT JOHN
MAYBE IT IS NOT ENOUGH. WHAT WOULD YOU SAY ABOUT JOHN WAYNE GACY.
WHAT WOULD YOU SAY ABOUT JOHN WAYNE GACY. HERE IS A MAN, 30, 32, PEOPLE HE
WAYNE GACY. HERE IS A MAN, 30, 32, PEOPLE HE KILLED OVER A PERIOD OF TIME,
HERE IS A MAN, 30, 32, PEOPLE HE KILLED OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, BURIED THEM IN HIS CRAWL SPACE
KILLED OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, BURIED THEM IN HIS CRAWL SPACE AND BACKYARD, , ETCETERA.
BURIED THEM IN HIS CRAWL SPACE AND BACKYARD, , ETCETERA. MANY WOULD SUGGEST, IF THERE IS
AND BACKYARD, , ETCETERA. MANY WOULD SUGGEST, IF THERE IS ONE CATEGORY THAT DESERVES THE
MANY WOULD SUGGEST, IF THERE IS ONE CATEGORY THAT DESERVES THE DEATH PENALTY, IT WOULD BE THE
ONE CATEGORY THAT DESERVES THE DEATH PENALTY, IT WOULD BE THE JOHN WAYNE GACY CASE.
DEATH PENALTY, IT WOULD BE THE JOHN WAYNE GACY CASE. O DO WE ELIMINATE THE DEATH
JOHN WAYNE GACY CASE. O DO WE ELIMINATE THE DEATH PENALTY ALTOGETHER AND JOHN
O DO WE ELIMINATE THE DEATH PENALTY ALTOGETHER AND JOHN WAYNE GACY GETS LIFE WITHOUT
PENALTY ALTOGETHER AND JOHN WAYNE GACY GETS LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE?
WAYNE GACY GETS LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE? OR ARE THERE SOME CASES SO
PAROLE? OR ARE THERE SOME CASES SO HEINOUS, THEY DESERVE THE DEATH
OR ARE THERE SOME CASES SO HEINOUS, THEY DESERVE THE DEATH PENALTY?
HEINOUS, THEY DESERVE THE DEATH PENALTY? >> LIKE I STATED EARLIER, I MEAN
PENALTY? >> LIKE I STATED EARLIER, I MEAN THERE IS NOT REALLY A WAY TO
>> LIKE I STATED EARLIER, I MEAN THERE IS NOT REALLY A WAY TO DESIGN A SYSTEM THAT JUST GETS
THERE IS NOT REALLY A WAY TO DESIGN A SYSTEM THAT JUST GETS LIKE THE JOHN WAYNE GACY
DESIGN A SYSTEM THAT JUST GETS LIKE THE JOHN WAYNE GACY CATEGORY.
LIKE THE JOHN WAYNE GACY CATEGORY. BUT ANOTHER ISSUE IS WHEN
CATEGORY. BUT ANOTHER ISSUE IS WHEN HORRIBLE CRIME HAPPENS, HAPPENS
BUT ANOTHER ISSUE IS WHEN HORRIBLE CRIME HAPPENS, HAPPENS TO YOU, AND HAPPENS TO YOUR
HORRIBLE CRIME HAPPENS, HAPPENS TO YOU, AND HAPPENS TO YOUR FAMILY, IT IS THE WITH WORST OF
TO YOU, AND HAPPENS TO YOUR FAMILY, IT IS THE WITH WORST OF THE WORST.
FAMILY, IT IS THE WITH WORST OF THE WORST. IT DOES NOT MATTER, THE AGE OF
THE WORST. IT DOES NOT MATTER, THE AGE OF THE VICTIM.
IT DOES NOT MATTER, THE AGE OF THE VICTIM. IT DOES NOT MATTER SEX OR IF
THE VICTIM. IT DOES NOT MATTER SEX OR IF OTHER PEOPLE WERE MURED ALONG
IT DOES NOT MATTER SEX OR IF OTHER PEOPLE WERE MURED ALONG WITH YOUR LOVED ONE. THIS IS
OTHER PEOPLE WERE MURED ALONG WITH YOUR LOVED ONE. THIS IS THE WORST THING THAT CAN HAPPEN
WITH YOUR LOVED ONE. THIS IS THE WORST THING THAT CAN HAPPEN TO YOU.
THE WORST THING THAT CAN HAPPEN TO YOU. TO SAY IF -- TO BE TOLD BY LAW
TO YOU. TO SAY IF -- TO BE TOLD BY LAW ENFORCEMENT THAT "I AM SORRY,
TO SAY IF -- TO BE TOLD BY LAW ENFORCEMENT THAT "I AM SORRY, YOUR CRIME WASN'T HORRIBLE
ENFORCEMENT THAT "I AM SORRY, YOUR CRIME WASN'T HORRIBLE ENOUGH, IT WASN'T SHOCKING
YOUR CRIME WASN'T HORRIBLE ENOUGH, IT WASN'T SHOCKING ENOUGH" YE ATES A DIFFERENT
ENOUGH, IT WASN'T SHOCKING ENOUGH" YE ATES A DIFFERENT SYSTEM FOR VICTIMS, AND THAT'S
ENOUGH" YE ATES A DIFFERENT SYSTEM FOR VICTIMS, AND THAT'S NOT WAY WE SHOULD BE HANDLING
SYSTEM FOR VICTIMS, AND THAT'S NOT WAY WE SHOULD BE HANDLING IT.
NOT WAY WE SHOULD BE HANDLING IT. WE SHOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT
IT. WE SHOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT VICTIMS AND THEIR NEEDS, NOT THE
WE SHOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT VICTIMS AND THEIR NEEDS, NOT THE HORRIBLE WAY THEY LOST SOMEBODY.
VICTIMS AND THEIR NEEDS, NOT THE HORRIBLE WAY THEY LOST SOMEBODY. >>THERE ARE CASES SUCH AS THE
HORRIBLE WAY THEY LOST SOMEBODY. >>THERE ARE CASES SUCH AS THE JOHN WAYNE GACY CASE WHERE THERE
>>THERE ARE CASES SUCH AS THE JOHN WAYNE GACY CASE WHERE THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT HE DID THE
JOHN WAYNE GACY CASE WHERE THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT HE DID THE CRIME.
IS NO DOUBT THAT HE DID THE CRIME. ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT THAT HE DID
CRIME. ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT THAT HE DID THE CRIME.
ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT THAT HE DID THE CRIME. AND TO SAY THAT YOU ARE GOING TO
THE CRIME. AND TO SAY THAT YOU ARE GOING TO MAKE A MISTAKE IN THE DEATH
AND TO SAY THAT YOU ARE GOING TO MAKE A MISTAKE IN THE DEATH PENALTY WITH SUCH A CASE IS
MAKE A MISTAKE IN THE DEATH PENALTY WITH SUCH A CASE IS WRONG, AND THERE ARE CASES LIKE
PENALTY WITH SUCH A CASE IS WRONG, AND THERE ARE CASES LIKE THAT WHERE THERE ISN'T ANY
WRONG, AND THERE ARE CASES LIKE THAT WHERE THERE ISN'T ANY DOUBT.
THAT WHERE THERE ISN'T ANY DOUBT. THERE ARE SOME WHERE IT IS
DOUBT. THERE ARE SOME WHERE IT IS CONFLICTING EVIDENCE,
THERE ARE SOME WHERE IT IS CONFLICTING EVIDENCE, EYEWITNESSES AND SO FORTH.
CONFLICTING EVIDENCE, EYEWITNESSES AND SO FORTH. THOSE WILL CONTINUE -- WE WILL
EYEWITNESSES AND SO FORTH. THOSE WILL CONTINUE -- WE WILL CONTINUE TO ARE WORK ON THOSE
THOSE WILL CONTINUE -- WE WILL CONTINUE TO ARE WORK ON THOSE AND CONTINUE TO PUT SAFEGUARDS
CONTINUE TO ARE WORK ON THOSE AND CONTINUE TO PUT SAFEGUARDS IN WHEREVER WE CAN.
AND CONTINUE TO PUT SAFEGUARDS IN WHEREVER WE CAN. BUT THERE ARE DEFINITELY SOME
IN WHEREVER WE CAN. BUT THERE ARE DEFINITELY SOME CASES WHERE THERE IS NO DOUBT
BUT THERE ARE DEFINITELY SOME CASES WHERE THERE IS NO DOUBT THE INDIVIDUAL DID THE CRIME.
CASES WHERE THERE IS NO DOUBT THE INDIVIDUAL DID THE CRIME. >>THE ISH A U, THOUGH, IS IS TO
THE INDIVIDUAL DID THE CRIME. >>THE ISH A U, THOUGH, IS IS TO GET TO JOHN WAYNE GACY, YOU NEED
>>THE ISH A U, THOUGH, IS IS TO GET TO JOHN WAYNE GACY, YOU NEED TO GO THROUGH THE 20 INNOCENT
GET TO JOHN WAYNE GACY, YOU NEED TO GO THROUGH THE 20 INNOCENT PEOPLE FOUND ON ILLINOIS' DEATH
TO GO THROUGH THE 20 INNOCENT PEOPLE FOUND ON ILLINOIS' DEATH ROW.
PEOPLE FOUND ON ILLINOIS' DEATH ROW. >>THE DEATH PENALTY, I DON'T
ROW. >>THE DEATH PENALTY, I DON'T KNOW IS THERE AVERAGE FOR DEATH
>>THE DEATH PENALTY, I DON'T KNOW IS THERE AVERAGE FOR DEATH PENALTY IN TERMS FROM THE
KNOW IS THERE AVERAGE FOR DEATH PENALTY IN TERMS FROM THE COMMITMENT OF THE CRIME, TO
PENALTY IN TERMS FROM THE COMMITMENT OF THE CRIME, TO EXECUTION, 15, 16, 17 YEARS?
COMMITMENT OF THE CRIME, TO EXECUTION, 15, 16, 17 YEARS? ARE YOU CONCERNED AS A SENATOR
EXECUTION, 15, 16, 17 YEARS? ARE YOU CONCERNED AS A SENATOR THAT THAT MEANS THAT THERE IS
ARE YOU CONCERNED AS A SENATOR THAT THAT MEANS THAT THERE IS 15, 16, 17 YEARS OF PAIN THAT
THAT THAT MEANS THAT THERE IS 15, 16, 17 YEARS OF PAIN THAT THE VICTIM'S FAMILY HAVE TO GO
15, 16, 17 YEARS OF PAIN THAT THE VICTIM'S FAMILY HAVE TO GO THROUGH BECAUSE IT IS SUCH A
THE VICTIM'S FAMILY HAVE TO GO THROUGH BECAUSE IT IS SUCH A LONG PROCESS.
THROUGH BECAUSE IT IS SUCH A LONG PROCESS. >>YES, I AM.
LONG PROCESS. >>YES, I AM. I AM.
>>YES, I AM. I AM. IT NEEDS TO BE SWIFTER.
I AM. IT NEEDS TO BE SWIFTER. BUT YOU FIGHT THE INDIVIDUALS
IT NEEDS TO BE SWIFTER. BUT YOU FIGHT THE INDIVIDUALS THAT SAY "LOOK, IF YOU MAKE IT
BUT YOU FIGHT THE INDIVIDUALS THAT SAY "LOOK, IF YOU MAKE IT QUICKER, THEN YOU WILL HAVE MORE
THAT SAY "LOOK, IF YOU MAKE IT QUICKER, THEN YOU WILL HAVE MORE MISTAKES."
QUICKER, THEN YOU WILL HAVE MORE MISTAKES." WE CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO MAKE
MISTAKES." WE CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO MAKE MISTAKES.
WE CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO MAKE MISTAKES. BUT EVERY YEAR THAT YOU DRAW IT
MISTAKES. BUT EVERY YEAR THAT YOU DRAW IT OUT, THE PAIN IS THERE.
BUT EVERY YEAR THAT YOU DRAW IT OUT, THE PAIN IS THERE. AND IT IS STILL IN FRONT OF
OUT, THE PAIN IS THERE. AND IT IS STILL IN FRONT OF THEM.
AND IT IS STILL IN FRONT OF THEM. AND THEY DON'T FEEL LIKE THEY
THEM. AND THEY DON'T FEEL LIKE THEY GOT THEIR JUSTICE.
AND THEY DON'T FEEL LIKE THEY GOT THEIR JUSTICE. YEAH, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT IT.
GOT THEIR JUSTICE. YEAH, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT IT. >>TECHNOLOGY HAS ADVANCED BEYOND
YEAH, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT IT. >>TECHNOLOGY HAS ADVANCED BEYOND OUR ABILITY TO UNDERSTAND IN
>>TECHNOLOGY HAS ADVANCED BEYOND OUR ABILITY TO UNDERSTAND IN SOME CASES.
OUR ABILITY TO UNDERSTAND IN SOME CASES. WE ARE MUCH BETTER WITH DNA,
SOME CASES. WE ARE MUCH BETTER WITH DNA, MUCH BETTER WITH OTHER CRIME
WE ARE MUCH BETTER WITH DNA, MUCH BETTER WITH OTHER CRIME FIGHTING TECHNIQUES.
MUCH BETTER WITH OTHER CRIME FIGHTING TECHNIQUES. ARE WE -- AREN'T WE MORE SURE
FIGHTING TECHNIQUES. ARE WE -- AREN'T WE MORE SURE TODAY, AT LEAST IN SOME CASES,
ARE WE -- AREN'T WE MORE SURE TODAY, AT LEAST IN SOME CASES, THAT THAT PERSON, DID, IN FACT,
TODAY, AT LEAST IN SOME CASES, THAT THAT PERSON, DID, IN FACT, COMMIT THE CRIME, HE IS THE
THAT THAT PERSON, DID, IN FACT, COMMIT THE CRIME, HE IS THE PERPETRATOR THAN -- WE SEE THIS
COMMIT THE CRIME, HE IS THE PERPETRATOR THAN -- WE SEE THIS PERSON WAS EXONERATED, IN 1988
PERPETRATOR THAN -- WE SEE THIS PERSON WAS EXONERATED, IN 1988 WHEN WE DIDN'T HAVE THE DNA
PERSON WAS EXONERATED, IN 1988 WHEN WE DIDN'T HAVE THE DNA TECHNOLOGY, , ETCETERA?
WHEN WE DIDN'T HAVE THE DNA TECHNOLOGY, , ETCETERA? >> DNA HAS BEEN A WONDERFUL TOOL
TECHNOLOGY, , ETCETERA? >> DNA HAS BEEN A WONDERFUL TOOL FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT.
>> DNA HAS BEEN A WONDERFUL TOOL FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT. BUT IT STILL HAS NOT -- IT IS
FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT. BUT IT STILL HAS NOT -- IT IS NOT THE IS SILVER BULLET.
BUT IT STILL HAS NOT -- IT IS NOT THE IS SILVER BULLET. WE STILL ARE NOT SURE.
NOT THE IS SILVER BULLET. WE STILL ARE NOT SURE. WE HAVE HAD RECENT CASES IN
WE STILL ARE NOT SURE. WE HAVE HAD RECENT CASES IN ILLINOIS THAT HAVE HAD DNA AND
WE HAVE HAD RECENT CASES IN ILLINOIS THAT HAVE HAD DNA AND THEY HAVE BEEN IN PRISON FOR
ILLINOIS THAT HAVE HAD DNA AND THEY HAVE BEEN IN PRISON FOR FIVE YEARS AND WE HAVE HAD THE
THEY HAVE BEEN IN PRISON FOR FIVE YEARS AND WE HAVE HAD THE WRONG PEOPLE.
FIVE YEARS AND WE HAVE HAD THE WRONG PEOPLE. BUT, ALSO, MOST CASES DO NOT
WRONG PEOPLE. BUT, ALSO, MOST CASES DO NOT HAVE DNA.
BUT, ALSO, MOST CASES DO NOT HAVE DNA. IT IS UNDER 20% OF CASES THAT
HAVE DNA. IT IS UNDER 20% OF CASES THAT ACTUALLY HAVE DNA EVIDENCE.
IT IS UNDER 20% OF CASES THAT ACTUALLY HAVE DNA EVIDENCE. IT IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT. WHERE
ACTUALLY HAVE DNA EVIDENCE. IT IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT. WHERE IT IS STILL A NEW TECHNOLOGY
IT IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT. WHERE IT IS STILL A NEW TECHNOLOGY THAT WE ARE LEARNING TO USE.
IT IS STILL A NEW TECHNOLOGY THAT WE ARE LEARNING TO USE. THERE HAS BEEN A BACKLOG IN THE
THAT WE ARE LEARNING TO USE. THERE HAS BEEN A BACKLOG IN THE STATE POLICE LABS.
THERE HAS BEEN A BACKLOG IN THE STATE POLICE LABS. SO THERE IS OVER I THINK LAST
STATE POLICE LABS. SO THERE IS OVER I THINK LAST CHECK OVER 400 CASE THAT IS ARE
SO THERE IS OVER I THINK LAST CHECK OVER 400 CASE THAT IS ARE BACKLOGGED.
CHECK OVER 400 CASE THAT IS ARE BACKLOGGED. WHILE WE HAVE THAT NEW
BACKLOGGED. WHILE WE HAVE THAT NEW TECHNOLOGY, IT IS NOT THE
WHILE WE HAVE THAT NEW TECHNOLOGY, IT IS NOT THE END-ALL, BE-ALL.
TECHNOLOGY, IT IS NOT THE END-ALL, BE-ALL. THE WRONG PEOPLE ARE STILL BEING
END-ALL, BE-ALL. THE WRONG PEOPLE ARE STILL BEING LOCKED UP. AND THE PEOPLE THAT
THE WRONG PEOPLE ARE STILL BEING LOCKED UP. AND THE PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY COMMITTED THE CRIME ARE
LOCKED UP. AND THE PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY COMMITTED THE CRIME ARE STILL ON THE STREETS F WE ARE
ACTUALLY COMMITTED THE CRIME ARE STILL ON THE STREETS F WE ARE RELYING ON DNA, WE ARE GOING TO
STILL ON THE STREETS F WE ARE RELYING ON DNA, WE ARE GOING TO REGRET THAT.
RELYING ON DNA, WE ARE GOING TO REGRET THAT. >>HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO TALK
REGRET THAT. >>HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO TALK TO GOVERNOR QUINN REGARDING THIS
>>HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO TALK TO GOVERNOR QUINN REGARDING THIS ISSUE?
TO GOVERNOR QUINN REGARDING THIS ISSUE? >> YES JUST BRIEFLY.
ISSUE? >> YES JUST BRIEFLY. GOVERNOR QUINN IS CONCERNED.
>> YES JUST BRIEFLY. GOVERNOR QUINN IS CONCERNED. HE INDICATED THAT HE FAVORS THE
GOVERNOR QUINN IS CONCERNED. HE INDICATED THAT HE FAVORS THE DEATH PENALTY IN CERTAIN CASES.
HE INDICATED THAT HE FAVORS THE DEATH PENALTY IN CERTAIN CASES. HE IS NOT SURE THAT HE SUPPORTS
DEATH PENALTY IN CERTAIN CASES. HE IS NOT SURE THAT HE SUPPORTS THE DEATH PENALTY IN ALL THOSE
HE IS NOT SURE THAT HE SUPPORTS THE DEATH PENALTY IN ALL THOSE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS THAT WE
THE DEATH PENALTY IN ALL THOSE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT.
DIFFERENT SCENARIOS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT. SO I DON'T THINK AT THIS POINTE
TALKED ABOUT. SO I DON'T THINK AT THIS POINTE KNOWS WHAT HE WILL DO WITH THE
SO I DON'T THINK AT THIS POINTE KNOWS WHAT HE WILL DO WITH THE DEATH PENALTY IF IT REACHES HIS
KNOWS WHAT HE WILL DO WITH THE DEATH PENALTY IF IT REACHES HIS DESK AS FAR AS THE BILL GOES.
DEATH PENALTY IF IT REACHES HIS DESK AS FAR AS THE BILL GOES. >>SENATOR DALE RISINGER THANK
DESK AS FAR AS THE BILL GOES. >>SENATOR DALE RISINGER THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US,
>>SENATOR DALE RISINGER THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US, JEREMY SCHROEDER FOR COALITION
YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US, JEREMY SCHROEDER FOR COALITION FOR ABOLITION OF THE DEATH
JEREMY SCHROEDER FOR COALITION FOR ABOLITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY, THANK YOU AS WELL FOR
FOR ABOLITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY, THANK YOU AS WELL FOR JOINING US ON AT ISSUE.
PENALTY, THANK YOU AS WELL FOR JOINING US ON AT ISSUE. WE HOPE YOU CONTINUE THE
JOINING US ON AT ISSUE. WE HOPE YOU CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION AT HOME.
WE HOPE YOU CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION AT HOME. OBVIOUSLY, THIS IS NOT A A
DISCUSSION AT HOME. OBVIOUSLY, THIS IS NOT A A SETTLED ISSUE.
OBVIOUSLY, THIS IS NOT A A SETTLED ISSUE. REMEMBER, WE RECORDED THIS
SETTLED ISSUE. REMEMBER, WE RECORDED THIS BEFORE THE SENATE PROBABLY TOOK
REMEMBER, WE RECORDED THIS BEFORE THE SENATE PROBABLY TOOK A VOTE ON IT.
BEFORE THE SENATE PROBABLY TOOK A VOTE ON IT. SO THAT MAY HAVE AFFECTED OUR
A VOTE ON IT. SO THAT MAY HAVE AFFECTED OUR DISCUSSION.
SO THAT MAY HAVE AFFECTED OUR DISCUSSION. AT ANY RATE, WE THANK YOU FOR
DISCUSSION. AT ANY RATE, WE THANK YOU FOR JOINING US ON "AT ISSUE."
AT ANY RATE, WE THANK YOU FOR JOINING US ON "AT ISSUE." PLEASE JOIN US NEXT WEEK FOR
JOINING US ON "AT ISSUE." PLEASE JOIN US NEXT WEEK FOR ANOTHER EDITION RIGHT HERE ON
PLEASE JOIN US NEXT WEEK FOR ANOTHER EDITION RIGHT HERE ON CHANNEL 47.
ANOTHER EDITION RIGHT HERE ON CHANNEL 47. >>