women on death row - ttu dspace home
TRANSCRIPT
WOMEN ON DEATH ROW:
ANALYSIS OF DETERMINANT FACTORS
by
Jennifer Rauch
A SENIOR THESIS
in
GENERAL STUDIES
Submitted to the General Studies Council in the College of Arts and Sciences
at Texas Tech University in Partial fixlfillment of the Requirements for
the Degree of
BACHELOR OF GENERAL STUDIES
Approved
DR. MINDY STOMBLER Department of Sociology
Chair of Thesis Committee
DR. CHARLES PEEK pepartlHent of^ociology
- A . * — t ^ -DR. ROGERjgfcHAEFER
ofTolit Department of Political Science
Accepted
DR. DALE DAVIS Director of General Studies
MAY 1998
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, I would like to thank all of my thesis committee members for
their time and dedication. I was truly fortunate to have such a helpftil and knowledgeable
committee that was so willing to work with me. I would like to especially thank the chair
of my committee. Dr. Mindy Stombler, who was always supportive and available for
advice.
I would also like to thank my advisor, Linda Gregston, who was always willing to
visit with me, and was especially encouraging throughout the development of my thesis.
Her reassurance kept me motivated during many difficult and stressful times.
I would like to thank Dr. Dale Davis for his patience and understanding, especially
since the completion of this thesis took much longer then was first expected.
Last but not least, I would like to thank my parents, Christopher and Lillian Rauch,
without whom none of this would have been possible. Their influence and inspiration
enabled me to stay focused on achieving those goals which I had set for myself so many
years ago.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii
LIST OF TABLES iv
LIST OF FIGURES v
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION 1
History of Women as Offenders 2
Female Crime 4
II. THEORIES OF FEMALE CRIMINALITY:
MASCULINITY VS. CHIVALRY 7
The Masculinity Thesis 9
The Chivalry Thesis 10
m. THE DEATH PENALTY 12
BriefHistoryofthe Death Penalty 12
The Death Penalty Since Its 1976 Reinstatement 16
Profile of Women on Death Row 16
Interpretations of Case Summaries 17
rv. DEATH PENALTY STATISTICS:
A REFLECTION OF CURRENT TRENDS 20
V. CONCLUSION 25
LIST OF REFERENCES 29
APPENDIX A: PROFILES OF WOMEN ON DEATH ROW 32 APPENDIX B: TABLES AND FIGURES FROM CHAPTERS IV & V 38 ADDENDUM 54
iii
LIST OF TABLES
3.1 Number and Percent of Executions Performed under States and Local Authority 13
3.2 Yearly Number of Executions in the United States and Five Year Averages: 1930-1970 14
4.1 Sentences Imposed for Murder in the 75 Largest Counties, 1988 39
4.2 Movement of Female Prisoners Under Sentences of Death,
by Race, 1995 40
4.3 Year of Sentencing of Women on Death Row, November 3, 1997 41
4.4 Prisoners Sentenced to Death, and the Outcomes of Their Sentences, by Year of Sentencing, 1973-95 42
4.5 16 States with Highest Death Row Inmate Population, November 4, 1997 45
4.6 Female Population on Death Row by States, November 4, 1997 46
4.7 Number of Executions By State Since 1976, November 4, 1997 47
4.8 Attitudes Toward the Death Penalty for Persons
Convicted of Murder 49
4.9 Attitudes Towards the Death Penalty 50
4.10 Police Chiefs' and County Sheriffs' Attitudes Toward the Death Penalty 51
4.11 Police Chiefs' and County Sheriffs' Attitudes Toward the Death Penalty 52
5.1 Historical Trends by Sex of Those Executed, 1987 53
IV
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
In recent years both media and researchers are directing more attention to female
criminals, especially those sentenced to death (Myers & Wight, 1996). Such attention
gives the impression that capital punishment of female homicide offenders has increased.
This thesis explores two questions about this putative increase in capital punishment of
women. Has it actually occurred? If it has, the second question asks why? I explore
three possible answers: increase among women in violent crimes such as homicide,
decrease in public tolerance and judicial chivalry toward female homicide, and a general
increase in use of the death penalty for homicides regardless of gender.
I will examine the history of women as offenders and what is traditionally
considered female crime in order to establish a level of comparison as to what may imply
changes in female offenders' behavior and treatment. Chapter II will explore the two
dominant theories used to discuss female crime in order to determine if these theories can
also be used to explain female offenders who are sentenced to death. Chapter III will
discuss the history of the death penalty and the changes which have occurred during its
existence in the United States. This chapter will also profile the women who are currently
sitting on death row, and interpret the data found in their case summaries. This
information will then be compared to overall data concerning death row inmates and the
death penalty itself Chapter IV will present the data which will be compared with the
data found in Chapter III, and use these comparisons to determine what significant trends
or correlations can be established concerning the death penalty. Finally, Chapter V will
summarize the findings of my thesis, state the important correlations that exist between
capital offenders and the death penalty, and discuss how neither of the dominant theories
is adequate in discussing the unique crime of murder and the women who are sentenced to
death for committing it.
History of Women as Oflfenders
In order to better understand what may be an increase in the severity of
punishment of criminals, I will examine the history of women as oflfenders. The dominant
perception is that women commit fewer and less severe crimes than their male
counterparts (Mann, 1996). The United States has firmly held on to this belief, more so
than any other country, partly due to its comparatively short existence (Deming, 1977).
For instance, other countries have had instances of female poHtical assassins that date back
well into their past. There was Charlotte Corday of France, who murdered Jean Paul
Marat, a leader of the French Revolution, in 1793. Fanya Kaplan attempted to kill Nikolai
Lenin in 1918. The United States had its first widely recognized encounter with female
assassins in 1975, when Squeaky Fromme and Sara Jane Moore attempted to kill
President Gerald Ford (Deming, 1977).^
Although the public may not perceive women as violent offenders, American
women have murdered throughout history, although not necessarily for political reasons
(Flowers, 1995). According to Stanko and Scully (1996), "It has become a truism that
men are largely responsible for crime and criminality" (p.61). They believe this is due to
the fact that women who commit violent crime have been and still are very rare, so
criminologists have not focused attention on the subject of violent female offenders.
Stanko and Scully (1996) also feel that when women commit violent offenses, their
actions are evaluated "with traditional notions of appropriate femininity" (p. 61).
^Deming does acknowledge the hanging of Mary Surrat for conspiracy in the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. However, he points out that she did not participate in the assassination. She was hanged because the plot was developed at her boardinghouse.
2
However, there is evidence that violent female oflfenders, specifically women
whose crimes of murder are not political in nature, have existed. Deming (1977) cites the
cases of Belle Gunnies in the early 1900's and Nannie Doss in the 1950's. Belle Gunness
is believed to have murdered over twenty men who responded to her lonely-hearts ads, yet
escaped punishment by setting her home on fire and making it appear as if she had died in
the flames, although it has never been proven that it was her charred body discovered in
the remains. Nannie Doss was processed by the courts, and was sentenced to life
imprisonment for the murder of eleven people, including four of her husbands and two of
her own children. These two cases illustrate that there have been instances of violent
crimes committed by women in the history of the United States.
Deming (1977) believes that most attention has been focused on male crime
because it was generally perceived that women had not committed acts of violence until
recently. According to Deming (1977), there may have been just as many horrific crimes
committed by women as by men. He states that it is difficult to determine because the FBI
Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program did not begin until 1930, and that it was quite a
few years before it ran smoothly and was relatively accurate in its depiction of crime
(Deming, 1977).
Whether women have been committing the same crimes as men and are just going
unnoticed, or they truly have been committing less violent crime at almost nonexistent
levels (as has been perceived by the public) is questionable. This is due to the uncertainty
of the UCR data, and also speculations of law enforcement officials being lenient towards
women oflfenders as a result of chivalrous attitudes. Many point to a supposed chivalrous
attitude prevalent in the criminal justice system. Some researchers believe that the
criminal justice system has shielded or protected women who have come to the attention
of law enforcement because the public is unwilling to accept that women are capable of
criminal acts (Mann, 1996). Americans may perceive that women commit fewer and less
3
severe crimes because of this shielding by law enforcement agents. Mann (1996) claims,
"Very few Americans associate violence with females, and an even lesser number are able
to visualize women as significant contributors to the public conception of violence as a
national problem, much less adopt a serious view of women as cunning murderess" (p. 2).
These two opposing ideas are fijrther explored in the next section, concerning the crimes
and punishments traditionally associated with women oflfenders.
Female Crime
The gender of the criminal has always been a deciding factor in whether a crime
has actually been committed, as well as the punishment the criminal might receive (Faith,
1993). The existence of "female" and "male" crimes dates back to early history.
According to Feinman (1980), this is largely due to the madonna/whore duality. Women
are categorized according to their placement in one of these roles. They are either pure,
good, and passive or promiscuous, evil, and uncontrollable. Feinman (1980) states that,
"Implicit in the madonna/whore duality is women's subservience to men, who assumed the
role of protectors of the madonnas and punishers of the whore" (p. 2). In classical times
the role of the woman was to produce male heirs to carry on her husband's name and
wealth. Therefore, adultery was considered a crime for women, because it "threatened the
purity and legitimacy of the next generation" (Feinman, 1980). Women who committed
such an offense could be, and often were, sentenced to death.
Prostitution is another offense which is typically linked to females and fiirther
illustrates how the madonna/whore duality affects the definition of crime. During the
1860's, England's Parliament passed the Contagious Diseases Acts, which allowed police
to arrest women on prostitution charges in order to test them for infections. In reality, this
law was used to target certain groups of women, such as women who were prostitutes for
soldiers, and even women who were not prostitutes. In the past, it has been the women ,
4
not the men, who were arrested for running prostitution houses. In 18th century England,
women who were found to be prostitutes were incarcerated, while male oflfenders were
sent to the army (Faith, 1993). According to Faith (1993), "More than any other oflfence,
prostitution signifies the historical continuum of sexualization of female criminality and
criminalization of female sex" (p. 29).
Another gender specific offense common in history is scolding. If a woman were
to scold her husband in early England, it was considered a common-law offense. Such
women had trials by jury, the same as any other criminal offense during that time period.
Women who were convicted of scolding would be subject to public humiliation, such as
being locked into the pillory, lashed, chained or whipped, or made to wear a scold's bridle,
which had points that would cut into a woman's tongue when she tried to speak (Faith,
1993). These punishments were administered in order to transform the woman from
deviant to obedient.
Theft, most often petty theft, has been a typical female crime. More than likely,
theft was in the form of "pickpocketing, petty forms of larceny and fraud for small,
immediate gain" (Faith, 1993). Highway robbery and bank robbery traditionally are linked
to male criminals. It was not until the 1930's that women, such as Margaret Sherman,
Bonnie Parker, and Ma Barker, were credited with robbery.
Adultery, prostitution, scolding, and petty theft are some of the more common
crimes historically labeled as feminine crimes. Today, women are tried and convicted for a
far wider range of crimes, thereby blurring the line between some traditionally feminine
and masculine crimes.
A number of theories attempt to explain why women's numbers as oflfenders are
growing in the criminal justice system. I have already illustrated support for these theories
through my discussions of the history of women as oflfenders. The next chapter will
introduce some of these theories, fiirther expand the ideas already presented, and explore
those theories which may be able to address the sentencing of women to death row.
CHAPTER II
THEORIES OF FEMALE CRIMINALITY: MASCULINITY VS. CHIVALRY
There are a variety of theses which have been developed to explain women's
growing presence in the criminal justice system. Some of these theses include (1) the
Masculinity thesis, (2) the Opportunity thesis^, the Economic Marginalization thesis^, and
(4) the Chivalry thesis. I will examine the two theses which appear more often and are
more supported by the literature on female criminality: the Masculinity thesis and the
Chivalry thesis. These two theories are also responsible for bringing researchers' attention
to female criminals, and have served as a basis for many other theories in this area. (Due
to the narrow focus of the Opportunity and Economic Marginalization theses, they are not
as adequate as the Masculinity and Chivalry theses in examining female crime, because
they only incorporate economic factors.)
Since the research on women on death row is relatively new and no theory has
been developed to specifically address why women are sentenced to death row (Mann,
1996), I will see if either the Masculinity or Chivalry thesis adequately address this issue.
Most of the literature focused on female offenders is viewed through the lens of one of
these two dominant perspectives of female criminality: Masculinity and Chivalry. These
two theses are also instrumental in explaining why more and more attention is being given
by both researchers and the public to the female criminal (Heidenshom, 1985). Both
^The Opportunity thesis argues that women are neither more nor less moral than men, or more likely to commit crimes than men. Instead, opportunities, skill, and social networks have encouraged and allowed men to commit crimes, while limiting women's opportunities to commit crime. As women make gains economically and socially, they encounter more opportunities and pressure to commit crimes (Simon & Landis, 1991). ^The Economic Marginalization thesis states that it is the absence of legitimate economic opportunities that causes women to commit crimes and leads to increases in female crimes (Simon & Landis, 1991).
7
theories attempt to explain why more and more women are ending up in our courts and in
our jails.
The Masculinity Thesis argues that the increase in the incarceration of women can
be directly Unked to the Feminist Movement: that as women have become liberated they
have also began to act like men, including committing the same crimes as men. The
Chivalry Thesis maintains the position that women have always been committing crimes: it
is just that the nature of the criminal justice system has been to protect or shield these
women, instead of prosecuting them. At some points the two do converge, yet the
underlying argument of "new criminal" vs. changing perceptions, insures the
incompatibility of the two view points.
Previously, I have given examples from both schools of thought (Masculinity vs
Chivalry), illustrated by the conflicting statements of Mann (1996) and Deming (1977)
versus those of Stanko and Scully (1996). Mann (1996) believes that female oflfenders
have been treated chivalrously because the public in unwilling to accept that women are
capable of violent deviance. Deming (1977) believes that female crime has not received as
much attention as male crime because the public perceives that women have not
committed violent acts until recently. These statements would correspond with the
Chivalry thesis. On the other hand, Stanko and Scully (1996) propose that women's
contribution to violent crime has been rare, and when they do offend, their actions are
assessed by what is traditionally considered "appropriate femininity."
This relates to the Masculinity thesis, since it argues that recently more attention is being
given to female oflfenders because they are now violating these notions of appropriate
femininity.
It is my belief that of these two theories, the Chivalry thesis best explains the
increase in the female criminal having more of a presence in the criminal justice system,
since it recognizes past instances of women committing crimes. The Masculinity thesis
8
treats violent female crime as a relatively new phenomena, and therefore I feel does not
address the issue as effectively as the Chivalry thesis. However, I find that neither theory
is sufficient in explaining why women are given the death penalty. I intend to demonstrate
how these theories are insufficient in the examination of the current relationship between
women and capital punishment, but will also argue that gender is less salient than other
factors in determining whether a woman is sentenced to death.
The Masculinity Thesis
Freda Adler's book Sisters in Crime (1975) can be credited with bringing attention
to the Masculinity thesis. Adler refers to "a new breed of women criminals" and projects
a "female crime wave," which she links to the same factors which produced the Women's
Movement, such as economic pressure and family breakdown (Adler, 1975). She rejects
the notion that females were committing fewer crimes than males due to inherent
biological traits of passivity and dependency, and accepted part of the Chivalry thesis that
stated that leniency existed from the initial encounter with law enforcement until the end
of the prosecution stage. Yet she "anticipated more rigorous law enforcement against
women as gender roles converged" (Faith, 1993). Therefore, the masculization of female
behavior, believed to be a result of the Women's Movement, translated into a "substantial
increase in the rate of female criminality, including violent crimes" (Feinman, 1980). To
support this, Adler cited Department of Justice statistics that showed between 1960 and
1972, arrests for major crimes for boys increased 82 percent and 306 percent for giris
(Faith, 1993). Criticisms of Adler's theory state that the base numbers were very low, so
any small increase would resuh in large jumps in percentages (Faith, 1993). Despite this
and criticisms from feminists who feU the theory drew negative attention to the Women's
Movement, the idea that the Women's Movement is an important causal factor in the
increase in female crime is still widely supported and researchers have used it as a basis for
9
the fiirther development of feminist criminological theories (Deming, 1977; Faith, 1993).
In summary, according to Simon (1991), the Masculinity thesis popularized by Adler gave
rise to the belief that as women become more liberated they would begin to assume the
gender roles traditionally associated with men. This would translate into women asserting
themselves in a more aggressive manner. Women would also learn to use crime as a
means of becoming successfiil and financially stable. The Masculinity thesis predicts that
as women become more masculinized and adopt traditional male roles, women's crime
rates and patterns will become more similar to those of men. The area in which these
changes will be most evident is in the patterns of violent female oflfenders.
The Chivalry Thesis
The idea of chivalry within the criminal justice system was first coined by Otto
PoUak (1950). According to Tjaden and Tjaden (1981), Pollak stated "that female crime
was largely undetected and underreported; he also believed that when a woman was
detected in criminal activity she was likely to receive preferential treatment" (p. 75).
Support for Pollak's thesis comes mainly from the analysis and comparison of transition
probabilities for male and female offenders which show that women are less likely to be
processed by the criminal justice system (Tjaden & Tjaden, 1981). Criticisms of the thesis
state that using the decline of chivalry as an explanation for increases in female crime
assumes that chivalry has been used to conceal official recognition of female oflfenders,
and that at best, chivalry was selective in nature, reserved for white, affluent women who
displayed behavior appropriate for a "lady" (Simon & Landis, 1991; Feinman, 1986).
Taking these criticisms into account, Pollak's theory is still widely accepted today (Tjaden
& Tjaden, 1981). In sum, the Chivalry thesis finds that since men are socialized to protect
women, this socialization inherently caused conflict when male law enforcement agents
were faced with female criminals. Therefore, women have been committing crimes all
10
along; it is the recent changes in the official treatment of women's criminal behavior, not a
change in the behavior itself, that accounts for the increased number of women oflfenders
in the criminals justice system (Simon & Landis, 1991).
I have presented an exposition of these two theories in order to set the scene for
the debate on female criminality. Both these theories could be used to address why
women are being committed to death row. Yet, on closer examination, these theories
cannot be used to explain women's differential treatment regarding capital punishment
sentencing, because they do not incorporate other determinant factors that are more
important than gender. I will later explore these factors. Before that, however, I must
first introduce the past and current status of the death penalty and the women who are
currently affected by it.
11
CHAPTER III
THE DEATH PENALTY
In this chapter I will first briefly cover the tumultuous history of the death penalty
in the United States. I will then examine the status of the death penalty since its
reinstatement in 1976. Next, I will proceed to profile the 47 women who are currently
sitting on death row. Through examination of current trends demonstrated since the
reinstatement of the death penalty, and by fiirther comparing them to the characteristics of
the women on death row, I intend to show the true determinant factors involved in the
sentencing of female criminals to death.
Brief History of the Death Penalty in the United States
The first known execution in the United States was that of Captain George Kendall
in 1608. During colonial times, criminals were put to death for a variety of reasons, and a
majority of the framers of the Constitution were "knowledgeable and tolerant of the death
penalty" (Paternoster, 1991). Colonial America was still strongly influenced by its English
heritage, and capital punishment was very much an integral part of English society. Table
3.1 presents the number of executions that took place in the United States between the
1600's and 1920's. The data presented in table 3.1 demonstrate how Colonial America
very much favored the death penalty and that at the beginning of the twentieth century the
states continued this trend^.
•̂ Espy used newspaper accounts, microfilmed records, and secondary records to confirm data. When items conflicted, he used the most authoritative sources, such as appeals court records. Local authority refers to executions performed under civil authority (Schneider & Smykla, 1991).
12
Table 3.1: Number and Percent of Executions Performed under State and Local Authority in the United States: 1600s-1920s
Years Local State Authority Authority
1600s 1700s 1800-1865 1866-1879 1880s 1890s 1900s 1910s 1920s
162 (100%) 1391 (100%) 2441 (99%) 805 (97%) 989 (98%) 949 (86%) 997 (78%) 397 (36%) 274(21%)
0 0 10 (1%) 15(3%) 16 (2%) 149 (14%) 283 (22%) 694 (64%) 1015 (79%)
Source: Adapted from V.Schneider and JO. Smykla, "A Summary Analysis of Executions in States, 1608-1987: The Espy File," in R. Bohm, The Death Penalty in America: Current Research (Cmcitmati, Ohio: Anderson PubUshing, 1991), Table 1-2, 7.
Murder and rape were capital offenses in all of the colonies, but other capital
offenses diflfered by colony. Many of the distinctions defining what crimes received a
capital punishment were influenced by the strength of the church in the colony. During the
post-Revolutionary War period, the application of capital punishment narrowed with the
estabHshments of different degrees of murder and an increased emphasis on discretion
being used when administering the death penalty (Paternoster, 1991). When the territory
of Michigan aboHshed the death penahy in 1846, there was a tentative movement
throughout the nation towards abolition. This movement was marked by a series of states
abolishing the death penahy, reinstating it, abolishing it again, and so on. By 1930,
however, most of the states had firmly reinstated the death penahy.
In 1930 the Census began including the category "death by execution," allowing
for a more precise means by which to calculate the number and frequency of executions
(Paternoster, 1991). Table 3.2 and Figure 3.1 depict the number of executions that
occurred from 1930 until 1970. The data presented in Table 3.2 and Figure 3.1
13
demonstrate how the number of executions from 1930 to 1960 decreased dramatically,
reflecting a growing public sentiment against the use of the death penalty.
Table 3.2: Yearly Number of Executions in the United States and Five Year Averages: 1930-1970
1930s 1940s
1930 155
1931 153
1932 140
1933 160
1934 168
Five-year
average 155
1935 199
1936 195
1937 147
1938 190
1939 160
178
1940 124
1941 123
1942 147
1943 131
1944 120 Five-year
average 129
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
117 131 153 U9 119
128
1950s 1960s
1950 82
1951 105
1952 83
1953 62
1954 81
Five-year
average 83
1955 76
1956 65
1957 65
1958 49
1959 49
61
1960 56 1961 42
1962 47
1963 21
1964 15 Five-year
average 36
1965 1966
1967
1968
1969
7 1 2 0 0
2
Source: Capital Pmiishmetit-J 982 (V/sishington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1984), Table 1, 14. '̂ Numbers in bold represent the number of executions
14
Figure 3.1: Yearly Number of Executions, 1930-1970
Source: T.J. Flanagan and K. Maguire, Sourcebook of CriminalJustice Statistics-1989 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department Justice Bureau of Statistics, 1990), Table 6.95, 632.
Judges and juries still had discretion in the sentencing of capital cases, and used it
to give few death sentences. This was either a reflection of juries reserving the penalty for
the worst of the worst oflfenders, or a sign of random inconsistencies in the use of the
death penalty, and a possible racial bias. Because the death penalty appeared to be
randomly applied, it was most likely influenced by personal prejudices.
There was growing evidence that juries, judges, and prosecutors were more likely
to give the death sentence to Afiican-Americans (Dieter, 1996). Later, it was discovered
that the death penalty was used more often towards the poor, minorities, and oflfenders
who could not retain capable representation (Dieter, 1996). This demonstrated that
attitudes about certain groups of people affected the sentencing of criminals, not
necessarily the crime itself
In 1972, in their decision ofFurman v. Georgia, U.S. 238, the Supreme Court
declared capital punishments unconstitutional. As a result of this decision, the
approximately 600 prisoners who were on death row had their sentences commuted to life
imprisonment. Public sentiment towards the death penalty had been at an all time low
since 1966, and an execution had not occurred since 1967, so it appeared that the death
penalty would be abolished.
15
The Death Penalty Since Its 1976 Reinstatement
The 1972 Furman_decis\on had declared that the existing state capital statutes
were unconstitutional because they allowed for unlimited discretion on the part of juries.
It did not, however, state that capital punishment was unconstitutional because it was
cruel and unusual punishment. It was the procedures that were at fault, not the
punishment itself Therefore, states simply began to create new death penalty statutes that
would be considered constitutional. According to Paternoster (1991), there were two
types of these new statutes, mandatory and guided discretion statutes. Mandatory
sentences required the death penalty to be given to those convicted of a certain crime, and
were similar to the mandatory death penalty statutes of colonial America (Paternoster,
1991).
The Supreme Court reviewed the statutes presented by the states, and in 1976 in
Gregg V. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 decided that the death penahy was acceptable for the
crime of murder "under guided discretion statutes but unconstitutional under mandatory
ones" (Paternoster, 1991). As soon the Court provided constitutional approval to the new
statutes, the states began to use the death penahy once again, with the first execution since
1967 of Gary Gilmore in Utah on January 17, 1977.
Profile of Women on Death Row
Since the reinstatement of the death penalty, the courts have handed down 5,569
death sentences, of which 112 were to women. As of November 4, 1997, Velma Barfield
is the only one of the 112 women to be executed, which is less than \% of the female
death row population. This can be compared to the 301 men who have had their death
sentences carried out, almost 5.5 % of the male death row population (Rueter, 1996).
Currently, there are 47 women who remain on death row. The other women who were
sentenced to death row either had their sentences commuted to life or overturned. The
16
case summaries of female death row inmates as of June 30, 1996 can be found in
Appendix A. The information was compiled by Victor L. Streib and updated by the Death
Penalty Information Center, current as of November 3, 1997. The case summaries are
organized by state.
Interpretations of Case Summaries
In this section I will interpret the data found in the case summaries. The
interpretations will be compared to overall data concerning death row inmates and the
death penalty in the next chapter. The data are organized by state, nature of crime, race,
and age.
By State
Of the fifty states, only 16 currently have women on death row. Of these 16
states, California leads with 8 women sitting on its death row. Texas is not far behind
with 7 women, and Florida comes in third with 5 women on its death row. There are
seven states which have only one woman on death row (Arizona, Idaho, Indiana,
Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada, and Tennessee).
Nature of Crime
All of the women currently sitting on death row have either committed murder or
hired someone else to commit murder for them. Seven of the cases involved hiring another
party to commit the murder. Six of these seven cases involved the women hiring someone
to kill their husband; one woman hired someone to kill her lover's wife. Three of the
women killed a poHce officer, and ten of the women killed someone under the age of 13.
In six of these ten cases deahng with the murder of someone under the age of thirteen, the
victims were either the women's children or grandchildren (1 case). Twelve of the cases
involved the murder of a husband, while one involved the murder of a boyfiiend. Of the
47 cases, well over half the cases (approximately 26 cases) involved the murder of
17
someone to whom the offender was not related. Compared to men, women are more
likely to kill an intimate, as opposed to a stranger (Snell, 1994). Intimate is defined as a
boyfriend, husband, or significant other.
Race
Of the oflfenders, 27 were white (57.4%)), 16 were black (34%»), and 4 were Latina
(8.5%)). Twenty five of the cases involved white offenders and white victims. Eight cases
involved black oflfenders and black victims. One case involved a black oflfender and white
and Latina victims; another a black oflfender and white and Asian victims. One involved a
black oflfender and Asian and black victims. Two cases involved black oflfenders and
white victims, while four involved Latina offenders and Latina victims. In five cases the
race of the victim was unknown. According to data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics
Correctional Populations in the United States (1995), 33%) of the female death row
inmate population are black, while black men make up 41% of the male death row inmate
population.
Age
The majority of the female inmates on death row conmiitted the crime for which
they received the death penalty between the ages of twenty-one and thirty (18 cases).
Thirteen were between the ages of thirty-one and forty. Six were between the ages of
forty-one and fifty. Five were between the ages of eighteen and twenty. Three were
between the ages of fifty-one and sixty, while one oflfender was over the age of sixty at the
time she committed the crime. On average, the oflfenders were sentenced within two years
after they committed the crime.
Interpretations of the case summaries can be usefiil in many aspects. The data
pertaining to the states in which the women were convicted will be compared to overall
state and regional data in Chapter IV to determine how they correlate to death row
sentencing. The nature of the crime is also important, because it will be compared to
18
findings concerning who men are more likely to murder in order to determine if there is a
correlation between the level of violence in capital cases and the sentence given.
I will compare the data to determine the relevancy of the two theories in the
examination of women on death row, an issue which will be addressed in the conclusion of
the paper in combination with other relevant data I present in the next chapter. 1
acknowledged the race of the oflfender and victim in order to establish if race is a salient
factor in explaining the presence of female inmates on death row. Opponents of the death
penalty claim that it is racially biased^. However, there does not seem to be any evidence
of racial bias, in terms of the race of the victim being a determining factor, in whether the
death sentence is given to women, since this occurs when the victim is white and the
oflfender is of a minority background. Thirty-seven of the cases involved oflfenders and
victims of the same race, and only four involved white victims and minority oflfenders.
The age of the oflfender was examined to see if it varied from the overall data on
the age of all prisoners on death row. According to data compiled by Snell (1996), the
ages of female offenders on death row are similar to the overall data, with over half of all
inmates under sentence of death between the ages of twenty and twenty-nine. My purpose
for this section was to establish the characteristics of the women on death row so that this
information could be used in comparison to overall data and data on men in order to
determine if there are any apparent differences. The data will also be included in the
conclusion, when I examine the application of the two theories to the death penalty.
^The "devaluation of black lives theory" can be tested by the study of women on death row. This theory believes that harsher sentences are given to the killer of whites as opposed to the killer of blacks. However, the statistical evidence on the homicide victims of women does not add any support to this theory. (Mann, 1996)
19
CHAPTER IV
DEATH PENALTY STATISTICS: A REFLECTION OF CURRENT TRENDS
This chapter will examine the current trends pertaining to the death penalty as
demonstrated through statistics and graphs largely compiled by the Federal Bureau of
Justice. These statistics are usefiil in interpreting the factors involved in the imposition
and implementation of capital punishment and whether gender is truly a relevant
determinant.
Table 4.1 (see Appendix B) contains the data for sentences imposed for murder in
the 75 largest counties by sex and race of the defendant for the year of 1988^. In murder
cases, one percent of males received the death penalty as opposed to no females.
Twenty-six percent of the males were not convicted, and thirty-eight percent of the
females received no conviction. Two percent of the males received probation in
comparison to seven percent of the females. In cases of capital murder, thirteen percent of
the males received the death penalty and once again no females were sentenced to die.
None of the males received no conviction, while seven percent of the females were not
convicted. One percent of males did receive probation, while no females were given
probation. The data in this table demonstrates that a higher percentage of men than
women receive the death penalty and that they also have a better chance of being
convicted. It would appear that women are actually given leniency by the courts, since
they have a lower percentage rate of convictions and death penalty sentences in
comparison to men. This would remove support for the Masculinity thesis.
Table 4.2 (see Appendix B) contains data on the movement of female prisoners
under sentence of death by race and according to state and region of sentencing, between
^The latest publication of the special report Murder In Large Urban Counties by the Bureau of Justice Statistics provides data only up to 1988.
20
December 31, 1994 and December 31, 1995. Six women were received from court with a
death sentence in 1995 and one death sentence was removed. Table 4.3 (see Appendix B)
presents the data from the profiles of women on death row. It shows when the women
currently sitting on death row were sentenced to death. Since 1976, the number has been
gradually increasing until 1996, when there was a sudden drop. Overall, however, there
has been a significant increase in the female inmate population on death row and an
increase in the sentencing of women to death. The increase in the population of women
on death row can be attributed to an increase in the sentencing of women to death without
executing them, leading to a build up in numbers.
Table 4.4 (see Appendix B) depicts the number of prisoners sentenced to death
from 1973 to 1995. Similar to the sentencing of women, the rate is relatively steady with
an overall general increase. I cannot determine what has caused the small fluctuations
from year to year during the middle eighties and nineties, but most likely it is due to the
number of cases in which capital punishment could be administered. This table
demonstrates that there has been an overall increase in the use of the death penalty and
that this trend does not apply simply to women. Therefore, it would appear that women
are increasingly being sentenced to death as a result of an overall trend to give murderers
the death penahy.
Figure 4.1 (see Appendix B) reflects the size of death row from 1955 to 1995. It
demonstrates that around the early eighties the population of death row began to increase.
By 1995, the population of death row was almost three times the size it was in 1985.
Figure 4.2 (see Appendix B) reflects how the number of executions per year has
also steadily increased since 1976 until 1996. Similar to the rate of sentencing, there is
some fluctuation between years, but overall there has been a general increase in
executions. Only one women has been executed since the reinstatement of the death
penalty: Velma Barfield on November 2, 1984 in North Carolina. Velma Barfield was a
21
white female who received the death penalty for murdering her white fiancee. According
to Figure 4.2, 1984 was the first year of dramatic increase in executions since 1976. In
1983, there were five executions, and in 1984 this number jumped to 21 executions. The
assumption could be that one of the reasons Velma Barfield was executed was because
there was a significant increase in the number of executions in 1984, and she happened to
become part of this significant push for more executions.
Table 4.5 (see Appendix B) depicts the number of death row inmates in the sixteen
states which have the overall greatest number of inmates on death row. Table 4.6 (see
Appendix B) represents the female death row population in the sixteen states which have
women on death row. When compared to Table 4.5, thirteen of the states which have the
highest death row inmate population also have women on death row. The only states
found in the top sixteen states which do not have females on death row are Ohio, Georgia,
and South Carolina. The states which have females on death row but are not among the
top sixteen states with the highest inmate population are Idaho, Indiana, and Mississippi,
all of which have only one female on death row. It appears that women are more likely to
be on death row in states that have large death rows overall. States that are not among
the top sixteen states with the highest number of inmates on death row have only one
female on death row.
Table 4.7 (see Appendix B) contains the number of executions by state since 1976,
and Figure 4.3 (see Appendix B) represents the number of executions by region since
1976. When compared to the data found in Table 4.6, every state that has a woman on
death row (with the exception of Tennessee) has executed a death row inmate since 1976.
Eight of the sixteen states with women on death row are in the South, the region which
leads in the number of executions. Four are in the West, and three are in the Midwest.
One state, Pennsylvania, is in the Northeast region. Women on death row appear to be
22
located in states and regions which have a strong tendency to execute their death row
inmates.
Tables 4.8 to 4.11 (see Appendix B) all deal with public opinion towards the death
penalty. By examining the data in these tables, it is clear that public opinion is a strong
determinant in the trends concerning the application of the death penahy. According to
Table 4.8 (see Appendix B), 73.4% of the United States population supported the death
penalty for someone who was convicted of murder. Males favored it more so than
females, 81.7% as compared to 65.6%). When examining the level of support by the
region, the data correlate with the number of people executed or on death row in those
regions. The South, West, and Midwest strongly support the death penalty with
percentages above seventy, while the Northeast only has 67.6% of its populations in favor.
Table 4.9 (see Appendix B) reflects how since 1965, more and more people believe in
capital punishment, from 38%) in 1965 to 15% in 1997. Public opinion appears to
significantly influence death penalty sentencing and execution.
Tables 4.10 (see Appendix B) and 4.11 (see Appendix B) reflect the attitudes of
police chiefs and county sheriffs toward the death penalty. It is interesting to examine
these data, since the Chivalry thesis believes that an increase of criminals being arrested
and charged for crimes that could result in the death sentence would be a resuh of
practices and beliefs of law enforcement officials. Yet, according to Table 4.10, 58%) of
police chiefs and county sheriffs do not view the death penalty as an effective preventive
law enforcement tool, even though they may philosophically believe in it. This
demonstrates an ability to separate personal beliefs from what is effective in the practice of
law enforcement.
Table 4.11 demonstrates how many police chiefs and county sheriffs feel that death
penalty cases take up a lot of police time. If 65%) believe this to be totally or largely
accurate, then it would be reasonable to assume that they would be carefiil in deciding
23
who should be arrested and charged for capital punishment offenses since it is so time
consuming. Also, they believe that the death penalty is simply a symbolic tool used by
politicians so that they appear tough on crime. In addition to this, they feel that it does
not significantly reduce the number of homicides. Using this information, it appears that
even though law enforcement officials may personally believe in capital punishment, they
recognize that it is not usefiil in deterring crime, and involves a lot of work on their part.
The preceding tables and figures present data that can be used to determine what,
if any, trends exist regarding the death penalty. More important for this study is how
these data relate to females and the theories dealing with female criminality. These data
are important in establishing whether the gender of the oflfender strongly correlates to
whether the death sentence is imposed, or whether other factors are more strongly linked
to the sentencing of capital oflfenders. In the next chapter, I will combine these data along
with other pertinent information to explain what are the strongest correlations between
who does and does not receive the death penalty, and also to predict what the fiiture of
the violent female will be based on these correlations.
24
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION
When looking at overall data pertaining to the death penalty, it is easy to see that
the one definite trend since its reinstatement is that more and more people are being
sentenced to die, and consequently the number of inmates on death row is growing larger
by the year. The number of executions has dramatically increased: no longer are people
just being sentenced to die, they are actually dying. Since 1984 there have been at least
ten executions a year, 1995 being a record year with a total of 56 executions. In Texas
alone, 139 executions took place from 1976 to October 14, 1997.
Yet, of all these executions, only one woman has actually been executed. This is
interesting considering that since colonial times, 356 women (see Table 5.1, Appendix B)
have been lawfijlly executed in America, including 27 for witchcraft (Schneider & Smykla,
1991; Rueter, 1996). This alone seems to point to the fact that women are being treated
more leniently now than in colonial times, undermining one of the central points of the
Chivalry thesis. Supporters of the Masculinity thesis would argue that even though
women may not be actually executed, they are increasingly committing more masculine
crimes and are being punished for them.
Yet, according to Snell, statistician for the Bureau of Justice Statistics, even
though the number of women in state prisons grew 75%) from 1986 to 1991, more than
half of the growth was due to women serving sentences for drug offenses (1994). Only a
fifth of the growth was attributed to violent offenders. In 1986, 40.7%o of the female
inmate population was comprised of women serving time for violent offenses, 13.0% of
theses were for murder. In 1991, this percentage had dropped to 32.2%) total, with 11.7%)
serving time for murder. (Snell, 1994) The female inmate population is seemingly
becoming less violent. Also according to Snell (1994), women in prison for homicide
25
were more likely to have killed a relative, intimate, or someone else they knew. They
were twice as likely to have killed an intimate, such as a husband, ex-husband, or
boyfiiend. Only a third of the women had victimized a stranger, as opposed to over half
the men who had committed violent offenses.
Even though women commit less violent crimes, their numbers have still increased
on death row. This can be linked to the fact that there is an overall trend to sentence
murderers to death. Gender does not seem to increase the chances of a woman being
sentenced to death; in fact, it appears that it actually works in favor of female defendants.
As was demonstrated in Table 3.1, in cases of capital murder, women have a better chance
of not being convicted or of being given a jail term or life sentence.
Since the gender of female defendants does not increase their chance of being
given the death penalty, there must be other determinants which account for the growing
number of women on death row. The first of these is the overall trend of using the death
penalty at increasing rates, as was discussed earlier. Second, the state and region in which
a defendant is prosecuted is an extremely important factor, regardless of gender. As was
demonstrated by Tables 4.6 and 4.7, along with Figure 4.3, most of the women who are
on death row are in states or regions with overall high death row inmate populations and
execution rates. If defendants are tried in a Southern state, their chances are greater that
they will be given the death penalty. Since 1976, over 82%) of the executions have taken
place in the South. Coincidentally, the only woman executed since 1976 was executed in
the Southern state of North Carolina. I demonstrated the final important determinant
through the data in Tables 4.8 to 4.11; public attitude is increasingly in favor of the death
penalty, in spite of the fact that law enforcement officials admit that it is not an effective
tool for deterring crime. The public is demanding the death penalty more and more, and it
is the pubhc that serves on juries and ultimately decides the sentences of violent oflfenders.
26
All the information points to the fact that women are not becoming more violent in
nature, as is believed by the supporters of the Masculinity thesis. When women are
violent, it is against intimates and not random acts of violence against strangers. Even
when they commit acts of violence, they are still less likely to receive a harsh sentence in
comparison to men. Additionally, there has been only one execution of a woman since
1976, whereas there were 356 executions of women from colonial times until 1976. If
supporters of the Chivalry thesis were correct, there should be an increase in women
arrested for violent offenses, not the decrease that occurred between 1986 and 1991. The
only explanation for this decrease (using the Chivalry perspective) is that law enforcement
officials are becoming more chivalrous, a highly unlikely prospect. The fact that women
are being arrested in larger numbers overall is not a reflection of law officers becoming
less chivalrous in nature, but is due to the criminalization of drugs and the subsequent
crackdown on eliminating drugs. Another weakness of the Chivalry thesis is that it does
not take into account the attitudes of judges and juries, only those of law enforcement
officials. It proposes that the chivalrous attitudes of law enforcement officials once
attempted to suppress female oflfenders actions from oflficial recognition. Since judges and
juries are uhimately the ones that determine who receives the death penalty or not, this is
an important aspect that needs to be a part of any theory which addresses female
criminality and the sentencing of female offenders.
So women are actually committing less violent crime and are not suddenly
receiving harsher treatment because they are females that are committing masculine
crimes. They are no longer being treated chivalrously by the criminal justice system, and
in fact appear to be treated justly and possibly even leniently. Then why does it seem that
more women are being given the harshest punishment which exists for capital offenses?
My hypothesis is h is the increasingly favorable attitude of the public towards the death
penalty coupled with the media's fascination with women who commit violent crimes.
27
Any capital murder case is highly publicized, and the rare cases in which the defendant is a
female receive even more attention. Therefore, neither the Masculinity nor Chivalry thesis
is appropriate for the examination of females being sentenced to death row. There is an
obvious need for the development of a theory which incorporates the unique crime of
murder and the capital cases which result in the sentencing of a female murderer to death.
Hopefijlly, the research which is currently underway pertaining to women on death row
will result in the development of such a theory.
It would appear that there is no trend to increasingly sentence women to death.
Women still remain a relatively small percentage of death row inmates (2%) and are not
being executed even when they are being sentenced to death row. If anything, women are
being treated more leniently in capital murder cases than in the past. The sentencing of
women to death row may simply be a symbolic act, an attempt to state that no one gets
away with murder, when in actuality there appears to be no intent to follow through with
the final act. Whether the state of Texas actually executes Karia Faye Tucker, whose
appeal was just recently turned down by the Supreme Court, will give fiirther insight as to
if we actually intend to execute women when we sentence them to death.
28
LIST OF REFERENCES
Adler, Freda. Sisters in Crime: The Rise of a New Female Criminal New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975/1985.
Death Penalty Information Center. Online, http://www.essential.org/dpic/dpic.r01.html 1320 Eighteenth Street, NW, 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20036. November 3-4,1997.
Deming, Richard. Women: The New Criminals Nashville, Tenn.: Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1977.
Dieter, Richard C. "Twenty Years of Capital Punishment: A Revaluation." Online. November 4, 1997. Death Penalty Information Center, June 1996.
Espy, M.W, and J.O. Smykla. Executions in the U S , 1608-1987: The Espy File. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research, 1987.
Faith, Karia. Unruly Women: The Politics of Confinement & Resistance. Vancouver: Press Gang PubUshers, 1993.
Feinman, Clarice. Women in the Criminal Justice System. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1980.
Flanagan, T.J., and K. Maguire. Sottrcebook of CriminalJustice Statistics-1989. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1990.
Flowers, R. Barri. Female Crime, Criminals, and Cellmates. North Carolina: McFarland & Company, Inc., 1995.
Harris, Louis, and Associates, Inc. The Harris Poll. Los Angeles, CA: Creators Syndicate, Inc., June 11, 1997, p.3.
Heidenshom, Frances. Women & Crime. New York: New York University Press, 1995.
Leonard, Eileen B. A Critique of Criminology Theory: Women. Crime. & Society. New York: Longman, 1982.
Mann, Cormae Richey. When Women Kill. New York: State University of New York Press, 1996.
29
Myers, Alice, and Sarah Wight. No Angels: Women Who Commit Violence Great Britain: Caledonian International Book Manufacturing Ltd., 1996.
Paternoster, Raymond. Capital Punishment in America. New York: Lexington Books, 1991.
Pollak, Otto. The Criminality of Women. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1950.
Rueter, Thad. "Why Women Aren't Executed: Gender Bias and the Death Penalty." American Bar Association: Human Rights, v23 #4, Fall 1996. Online. November 4, 1997.
Schneider, Victor, and John Ortiz Smykla. "A Summary of Executions in the United States, 1608-1987: The Espy File." The Penalty in America: Current Research Ed.. Robert M. Bohm. Cincinnati, Ohio: Anderson Publishing, 1991.
Simon, Rita J., and Jean Landis. The Crimes Women Commit, the Punishments they Receive. Boston, Massachusetts: Lexington Books, 1991.
Snell, Tracy L. Women in Prison: Survey of State Prison Inmates, 1991. Special Report: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, March 1994.
Snell, Tracy L. Capital Punishment-1995. U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, December 1996.
Sourcebook Staff Sourcebook of CriminalJustice Statistics. Survey Research Program, College of Criminal Justice: Sam Houston University. Online. November 3, 1997.
Stanko, Elizabeth, and Anne Scully. "Retelling the Tale: The Emma Humphreys Case." No Angels: Women Who Commit Violence. Ed. Alice Myers and Sarah Wight. Great Britain: Caledonian International Book Manufacturing Ltd., 1996. 57-71.
Streib, Victor L. "Capital Punishment of Female Oflfenders: Present Female Death Row Inmates and Death Sentences and Executions of Female Offenders, January 1, 1973, to June 30, 1996." Death Penalty Information Center. Online. November 4, 1997.
Tjaden, Patricia Goedke, and Claus D. Tjaden. "Differential Treatment of the Female Felon: Myth or Reality?" Comparing Female and Male Offenders. Ed. Marguerite Q. Warren. Beverly Hills, CA.: Sage Publications, 1981.
30
U.S. Department of Justice. Capital Punishment-1982. Washington, D C : U.S. Government Printing Office, 1984.
U.S. Department of Justice. Correctional Populations in the United States-1995. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1995.
U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Murder in Large Urban Counties-1998. Special Report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, May 1993.
31
APPENDIX A
PROFILES OF WOMEN ON DEATH ROW
Source: Victor L. Streib. "Capital Punishment of Female Oflfenders: Present Female Death Row Inmates and Death Sentences and Executions of Female Oflfenders, January 1, 1973 to June 30, 1996." Updated by the Death Penalty Information Center, November 4,
1997.
32
ALABAMA
Haney, Judy M.: White; age 32 at crime and now age 45 (DOB 6-29-51), murder (hired killer) of her white husband in Talladega County on 1-1-84; sentenced on 11-18-88.
Harris, Louise: Black; age 34 at time of crime and now age 44 (DOB 6-16-53); murder (hired killer) of her black husband in Montgomery County on 3-11-88; sentenced on 8-11-89.
Lyon, Linda (Block): White; age 45 at crime and now age 49; murder of white male age 38 (police officer) on 10-4-93 in Opelika (Lee County); sentenced on 12-21-94.
Neelley, Judith Ann: White; age 18 at time of crime and now age 33 (DOB 6-7-64); kidnapping and murder of white female age 13 in DeKalb County on 9-28-82; sentenced on 4-18-83.
ARIZONA
Milke, Debra Jean: White; age 25 at crime and now age 33 (DOB 3-10-64); murder of white male age 4 (her son) in Maricopa County on 12-2-89; sentenced on 1-18-91.
CALIFORNIA
Alfaro, Maria del Rosio (Rosie): Latina; age 18 at crime and now age 25, burglary, robbery and murder of Hispanic girl age 9 in Anaheim on 6-15-90; sentenced 7-14-92.
Carrington, Celeste Simone: Black; age 30 at crimes and now age 36; murders (during burglaries) of Hispanic male age 34 on 1-26-92 in San Carlos and of white female age 36 on 3-11-92 in Palo Alto; sentenced on 11-23-94.
Coffman, Cynthia: White; age 24 at crime and now age 35 (DOB 1-19-62); murder of white female age 20 in San Bernardino County on 11-7-86; sentenced on 8-30-89.
Dalton, Kerry Lynn: White; age 28 at crime and now age 37; murder of white female age 23 in Live Oak Springs on 6-26-88; sentenced on 5-23-95.
McDermott, Maureen: White; age 37 at crime and now age 50 (DOB 5-15-47); murder of white male age 27 in Van Nuys (Los Angeles County) on 4-28-85, sentenced on 6-8-90.
Samuels, Mary Ellen: White; age 40 at crimes and now age 49; murder (hired killer) of white male age 40 (her husband) on 12-8-88 in Northridge (Los Angeles County) and of white male age 27 (her husbands killer) on 6-?-89 in Ventura County; sentenced on 9-16-94.
33
Thompson, Catherine: Black; age 42 at crime and now age 49; murder (hired killer) of her husband in Westwood (Los Angeles County) on 6-14-90; sentenced on 6-10-93.
Young, Caroline: Latino; age 49 at crime and now age 53; murder of Latino female age 4 and Latino male age 6 (her grandchildren) in Haywood (Almeida County) on 6-18-93, sentenced on 10-27-95.
FLORIDA
Buenoana, Judias V. (aka Judy Ann Goodyear): White; age 28 at crime and now age 54 (DOB 4-4-43); arsenic murder of white husband in Orlando on 9-16-71; sentenced on 11-26-85; execution date set for March 30, 1998.
Cardona, Ana: Latina (Cuban); age 30 at crime and now age 37; murder of son age 3 in Miami Beach on 11-2-90; sentenced on 4-1-92.
Jackson, Andrea Hicks (aka Felice): Black; age 25 at crime and now age 39 (DOB 2-26-58); murder of black male poHce officer age 28 in Jacksonville on 5-16-83; sentenced on 2-10-84; reversed in July 1989; resentenced on 2-21-92; reversed in 1994, resentenced on 12-13-95.
Larzelere, Virginia Gail: White; age 38 at crime and now age 45 (DOB 12-27-52), murder of white male (her husband) about age 40 in Edgewater near Daytona Beach on 3-8-91; sentenced on 5-11-93.
Wuornos, Aileen Carol: White; age 33 at crime and now age 41 (DOB 2-29-56); murder of white male age 51 in Volusa County near Daytona Beach on 12-1-89; sentenced 1-31-92; murder of white male age 43 in Citrus County on 5-24-90, white male age 50 in Volusa County on 7-30-90, and white male age 56 in Marion County near Ocala on 9-11-90; 3 additional death sentences imposed on 5-15-92.
IDAHO
Rowe (aka Roe), Robin Lee: White; age 35 at crime and now age 41; murder/arson of white male age 34 (husband, white male age 10 (son), and white female age 8 (daughter) in Boise in February 1992; sentenced on 12-16-93.
ILLINOIS
Mulero, Marilyn: Latina; age 20 at crime and now age 24; murder of 2 Latino males both age 22 in Chicago on 5-12-92; sentenced on 11-12-93.
34
Pulliam, Latasha: Black; age 19 at crime and now age 26; murder of black female age 6 (neighbors child) in Chicago on 3-21-91; sentenced on 6-15-94.
Smith, Geraldine: Black; age 38 at crime and now age 48; hired man to kill her lover's wife (black female, age 37) in Chicago in June 1987; sentenced on 2-10-91.
Williams, Dorothy: Black, age 35 at crime and now age 43; robbery and murder of black female age 97 in Chicago on 7-31-89; sentenced on 4-18-91.
INDIANA
Brown, Debra Denise: Black; age 21 at crime and now age 35 (DOB 11-11-62); murder of black female age 7 in Gary on 6-18-84; sentenced on 6-23-86.
LOUISIANA
Frank, Antoinette: Black; age 24 at crime and now age 28; robbery and murder of white (?) male age 25 (police officer), Asian male age 17, and Asian female age 24 on 3-4-94; sentenced 9-13-95.
MISSISSIPPI
Ballenger, Vernice: White; age 46 at crime and now age 60; arson and murder of white female age 75 in Leake County on 7-10-83; sentenced on 1-13-93.
MISSOURI
Copeland, Faye: White; age 67 at crime and now age 77; murder of four white males ages 21, 27, 27, and unknown in Livingston County from Oct. 1986 through May 1989; sentenced on 4-27-91.
Phillips, Shirley Jo: White, age 53 at crime and now age 59; murder of white female .age 66 in Springfield (Greene County) on 10-3-89; sentenced on 4-6-82.
NF.VADA
Ford, Priscilla: Black; age 51 at crime and now age 68 (DOB 2-10-29); murder of 3 white females and 3 white males in Reno on 11-27-80; sentenced on 4-29-82. NORTH CAROLINA
Jennings, Patricia JoAnn (Wells): White; age 47 at crime and now age 55 (DOB 8-24-42); murder of whhe male age 77 (her husband) in Wilson County on 9-19-89; sentenced on 11-5-90.
35
Moore, Blanche Kiser (Taylor): White; age 56 at crime and now age 64 (DOB 2-17-33); murder of white male age 50 (her boyfiiend) in Alamance County on 10-7-86, sentenced on 11-16-90.
OKLAHOMA
Allen, Wanda Jean: Black; age 29 at crime and now age 38 (DOB 8-17-59); murder of black female age 29 in Oklahoma County on 12-1-88; sentenced on 4-26-89.
Plantz, Marilyn Kay: White; age 27 at crime and now age 37 (DOB 10-19-60); murder (hired killer) of white male age 33 (her husband) in Oklahoma City on 8-26-88; sentenced on 3-31-89.
Smith, Lois Nadean: White; age 41 at crime and now age 57 (DOB 9-12-40); murder iif white female aduh in Gans (Sequoia County) on 7-4-82; sentenced 12-29-82.
Spunaugle, Delpha: White; age ? at crime and now age 47 (DOB 8-10-48); murder in Edmond (Oklahoma County); sentenced on 3-31-95.
PENNSYLVANIA
Hill, Doneta: Black; ages 23 and 24 at crimes and now age 30; murders of Asian male age 72 in Philadelphia on 6-20-90 and of black male age 21 in Philadelphia on 3-24-91; sentenced on 4-9-92.
King, Carolyn: Black; age 28 at crime and now age 32 (DOB 12-9-65); robbery and murder in October 1993 in Lebanon; sentenced on 11-30-94.
O'Donnell, Kelly: White; age 25 at crime and now age 30; murder of white male age 50 in Philadelphia on 11-11-92; sentenced on 7-1-93.
Rivers, Delores: Black; age 34 at crime and now age 44 (DOB 12-25-53); murder of female age 74 in Philadelphia on 1-30-88; sentenced on 3-16-89.
TENNESSEE
Owens, Gaile Kirksey: White; age 32 at crime and now age 45(DOB 9-22-52); hired someone to murder husband in Shelby County on 2-17-85); sentenced on 1-15-86.
TEXAS
Beets, Betty Lou: Whhe; age 46 at crime and now age 60 (DOB 3-12-37); murder of aduh white male (husband) in Athens (Henderson County) on 8-6-83; sentenced on 10-14-85.
36
Henderson, Cathy Lynn: White; age 37 at crime and now age 41; murder of white male age 3 months (she was babysitter) near Austin (Travis County) on 1-21-94; sentenced on 5-25-95.
Newton, Francis Elaine: Black; age 21 at crime and now age 32 (DOB 4-12-65); murder of husband (black male age 23), son (black male age 7), and daughter (black female age 2) in Houston on 4-7-87; sentenced on 11-17-88.
Perillo, Pamela Lynn: White; age 24 at crime and now age 42 (DOB 12-3-55), robbery and murder of white (?) male age 26 in Houston on 2-23-80, sentenced on 9-2-80 and 11-13-84.
Routier, Darlie: White; age 26 at crime and now age 28; murder of white male age 5 (her son) in Rowlett (Dallas County) on 6-6-96; sentenced on 2-4-97.
Sheppard, Erica: Black; age 19 at crime and now age 23; murder of white (?) female age 43 in Houston on 6-30-93; sentenced on 3-3-95.
Tucker, Karia Faye: White; age 23 at crime and now age 38 (DOB 11-18-59); murder xif white female age 32 and white male age 27 in Houston on 6-13-83; sentenced on 4-25-84; execution date set for February 3, 1998.
37
APPENDIX B
TABLES AND FIGURES FOR CHAPTERS IV & V
38
Table 4.1: Sentences Imposed for Murder in the 75 Largest Counties, 1988
Percent of murder defendants
Sentenced to prison
Characteristics
Murder Cases
Total
Sex
Male
Female
Race
White
Black
Other
Cases of
capital murder
Total
Sex
Male
Female
Race
White
Black
Total
100%
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Not con
victed
27%
26
38
25
29
21
a
0
7
1
0
Term
54%
55
44
56
52
65
31
30
35
32
27
Life
11%
12
6
10
12
6
51
51
42
44
60
Death
1%
1
0
2
1
0
12
13
0
16
10
Jail
1%
1
2
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
Probation
3%
2
7
2
2
4
1
1
0
1
1
Other
3%
3
3
3
3
4
5
4
15
7
3
Note: If a defendant's case had more than one outcome, the
outcome tabulated was the most serious. A sentence to life
was not counted as a prison temL A sentence to a prison term
and probation was counted only as a prison lemL
Source: Table adapted fiom U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau
of Justice Statistics, Murder in Large Urban Counties, 1988,
Special Report, NCJ-140614 (Washington, DC: U.S. Department
Justice, May 1993), p.9, Table 14.
*Less than 0.5 percent.
39
Table 4.2: Movement of Female Prisoners Under Sentence of Death, by Race, 1995
Female prisoners under sentence of death
Under death Received from
sentence 12'31/94 court in 1995*
Death sentence
removed in 1995
Under death
sentence 12'3l/95
Region and State Total White Black Total White Black Total White Black Total White Black
U.S. total 43 28 15 48 32 16
Federal
State
Northeast
Pennsylvania
Midwest
Illinois
Missouri
South
Alabama
Florida
Mississippi
North Carolina
Oklahoma
Tennessee
Texas
West
Arizona
Califomia
Idaho
Nevada
0
43
4
4
7
5
2
23
5
6
1
2
4
1
4
9
1
6
1
1
0
28
1
1
4
2
2
17
3
4
1
2
3
1
3
6
1
4
1
0
0
15
3
3
3
3
0
6
2
2
0
0
1
0
1
3
0
2
0
1
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
1
0
1
0
2
2
0
2
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
2
0
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
48
4
4
7
5
2
26
4
6
2
2
5
1
6
11
1
8
1
1
0
32
1
1
4
2
2
19
3
4
1
2
4
1
4
8
1
6
1
0
0
16
3
3
3
3
0
7
1
2
1
0
1
0
2
3
0
2
0
1
Note: The following States with death penalty states reported
no women under sentence of deadi in 1995: Connecticut,
New Hampshire, New Jersey, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota,
Arkansas, Delaware, Geoigia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maiyland,
South Carolina, Virginia, Colorado, Montana, New Mexico,
Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin,
Correctional Populations in the United States,
1995. (OfiBce of Justice Program, 1995)
•All women received from court with a death sentence in 1995 has been convicted of murder ''Dispositions of death sentence other than by execution included dismissal of indictment, reversal of judgment, commutation, resentencing, and order of a new trial. No women were executed in 1995.
40
Table 4.3: Year of Sentencing of Women on Death Row, November 3, 1997
Year Number of Women Sentenced
1976 0
1977 0 1978 0 1979 0 1980 0 1981 0 1982 2 1983 1 1984 2 1985 2 1986 2 1987 0 1988 2 1989 5 1990 3 1991 4 1992 5 1993 6 1994 5 1995 8 1996 0 1997 1
Source: Death Penalty Information Center, 1997
41
Table 4.4: Prisoners Sentenced to Death, and the Outcome of Their Sentence, by Year nf Sentencing, 1973-95
Year of sentence
1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978
1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1934
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
Total, 1973-95
Number sentenced to death
42 149 298 234 138 186
154 175 229 269 254 287
271 305 290 295 264 252
271 293 295 319 310
5.580
Execution
2 9 6
11 16 31
19 27 37 39 31 25
10 12 8
10 3 4
2 5 4 2 0
313
rN̂ -moe
Other death
0 4 4 5 2 A
9 11 12 13 12 10
3 13 8 6 6 4
5 1 4 1 1
138
Note: Table based upon most recent deaUi senlenco re:
01 pnsoners re Apoealor
Death penalty statute
14 65
171 137 40 21
2 3 0 0 1 2
1 0 3 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
460
elved.
rrxjved Irom under senten higher courts overturned
Conviction
9 15 24 16 26 34
28 27 39 29 22 33
37 39 33 28 25 28
22 14 4 0 0
532
Sentence
8 30 66 43 33 60
58 46 71 63 54 57
63 49 54 44 47 27
16 19 8 3 0
919
ce o( death
Sentence commuted
9 22 21 15 7 8
6 7 4 6 4 6
3 4 1 2 3 0
3 2 1 1 0
135
Other or unknown reasons
0 1
0 0 0
, 0 1 0 2 e
3 5 6 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
29
Under sentence of death, 12/31/95
0 3 4 7
14
28
31 54 65
119 128 146
151 183 177 205 180 189
223 252 274 312 309
3,054
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin, Capital Punishment 1995, (Office of Justice Programs, December 1996).
42
size of Death Row: 1955-1995 4 0 0 0 - |
3 0 0 0 -
2 0 0 0 -
1 0 0 0 -
i i 1 1 1 i i i ! 1 i 1 i : i ! i i ' : i
i i ! i i
i ' 1 ^ i ^ i ! I 1 i .MHi
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
Figure 4.1: Size of Death Row, 1955-1995
Source: Death Penalty Information Center, 1997
43
76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96
Year
Figure 4.2: Executions since 1976, Total since 1976: 419
Source: Death Penalty Information Center, 1997
44
Table 4.5: 16 States with Highest Death Row Inmate Population, November 4, 1997
Califomia Texas Florida Pennsylvania North Carolina Ohio IlHnois Alabama Arizona Oklahoma Georgia Tennessee Missouri Nevada South Carolina Louisiana
474 372 350 210 193 180 171 153 125 123 109 107 96 84 73 64
Source: Death Penalty Information Center, 1997
45
Table 4.6: Female Population on Death Row by State, November 4, 1997
Alabama Arizona Califomia Florida Idaho Illinois Indiana Louisiana Mississippi Missouri Ix I j^» r e\ /^ r\
IN evaaa North Carolina Oklahoma Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas
4 I 7 5 I 4 I 1 1 2 1 2 4 4 1 7
Source: Death Penalty Information Center, 1997
46
Table 4.7: Number of Executions By State Since 1976, November 4, 1997
STATE
Texas Virginia Florida Missouri Louisiana Georgia Alabama Arkansas S. Carolina Oklahoma Delaware N. Carolina Illinois Arizona Nevada Utah California Indiana Mississippi Nebraska Pennsylvania Washington Oregon Maryland Montana Wyoming Idaho Kentucky Colorado
TOTAL
139 43 39 29 24 22 16 16 11 9 8 8 8 8 6 5 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 2
1996
3 8 2 6 1 2 1 1 6 2 3 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
1997
32 6 1 1 1 0 3 4 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1
Source: Death Penalty Information Center, 1997
47
400- |
300-
200-
100-
QA
/ ' / y^
343
• • > • :
• V - - : .
• • : • •
Executions By Region ^976 - Oct 14, 1997
\y
Executions By Region To Date:
South 344
West 31
Midwest 42
Northeast 2
Texas, alone 139
Figure 4.3: Executions by Region: 1976-October 14, 1997
Source: Death Penalty Information Center, 1997
48
Table 4.8: Attitudes Toward the Death Penalty for Persons Convicted of Murder
By demographic characteristics. United States, 1996
Question: "Are you in favor of the death penalty for persons convicted of murder?"
Yes No Don't Know/'Refused
National
Sex Male Female
Ag£ 18 to 24 years 25 to 39 years 40 to 59 years 60 years and older
Community Urban Suburban Small City Rural/Small Town
Region Northeast Midwest South West
73.4%
81.7 65.6
70.4 70.6 77.0 73.0
65.3 76.7 71.8 75.0
67.6 75.5 72.2 77.1
19.9%
13.7 25.7
26.8 23.4 14.1 20.2
28.7 15.3 21.0 19.0
26.7 15.0 21.6 17.7
6.7%
6.7 8.7
2.8 6.0 8.9 6.7
6.0 8.0 7.2 6.0
5.7 9.5 6.2 5.2
Source: Table adapted from table constructed by SOURCEBOOK staff from data provided by the Survey Research Program, College of Criminal Justice, Sam Houston State University.
49
Table 4.9: Attitudes Towards the Death Penalty
United States, selected years 1965-1997
Question: "Do you believe in capital punishment, that is the death penalty, or are you opposed to it?"
1965 1969 1970 1973 1976 1983 1997
Believe in it
38% 48 47 59 67 68 75
Opposed to it
47% 38 42 31 25 27 22
Not sure
15% 14 11 10 8 5 3
Source: Louis Harris and Associates, Inc., The Harris Poll (Los Angeles: Creators Syndicate, Inc., June 11, 1997), p.3. Tables adapted by SOURCEBOOK staff.
50
Table 4.10: Police Chiefs' and County Sheriffs' Attitudes Toward the Death Penalty
United States, 1995
Question: "Which of the following statements comes closest to your own point of view about the death penalty?"
Percent
I support the death penahy and think it works well 34%)
Philosophically, I support the death penalty, but I don't
think it is an effective law enforcement tool in practice 58
I oppose the death penalty 4
A combination 1
None 2 Source: Table constructed by SOURCEBOOK staff from data provided from the Death Penalty Information Center.
51
Table 4.11: PoHce Chiefs and County Sheriffs' Attitudes Toward the Death Penahy
United States, 1995
Question: "I would like to read you some statements people make about the death penalty. Regardless of whether you support or oppose the death penalty, for each one I read, please tell me whether that statement is totally accurate, largely accurate, largely inaccurate, or totally inaccurate when it comes to the death penalty as it is now used."
Totally Largely Largely Totally Not accurate accurate inaccurate inaccurate sure
Death penalty cases are hard to close and take up a lot of police time 20% 45% 27% 6% 2%
Politicians support the death penalty as a symbolic way to show they are tough on crime 33 52 10 2 3
The death penalty significantly reduces the number of homicides 4 22 45 22 7
Source: Table adapted from table constmcted by SOURCEBOOK staff from data provided by the Death Penahy Information Center
52
Table 5.1: Historical Trends by Sex of Those Executed, 1987
Years Executions
Male Female
1600s 1700s
1800-1865 1866-1879 1880s 1890s 1900s 1910s 1920s 1930s
1940s 1950s
1960s-1980s
120 1249 2205 814 991 1086 1277 1094 1286 1668
1284 716 271
42 100 139 11 13 12 3 1 3 11 12 8 2
Source: Table adapted from data compiled from Executions in the United States, 1608-1987: The Espy File, M.W. Espy & J.O. Smykla (Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research, 1987).
53
ADDENDUM
There have been some recent developments since the research in this thesis was
completed. Karia Faye Tucker was executed on February 4, 1998, for a 1983 pickax
slaying in Houston. On March 30, 1998, Judy Buenoano was executed in Florida for
fatally poisoning her husband with arsenic.
Both of the executions support the strong correlation between states that have
high rates of executions and large death row populations, and the number of women who
have received the death penalty in the state. Texas now leads the nation in the number of
executions since the reinstatement of the death penalty, with a total of 144 executions
since 1976, 37 occurring in 1997 alone. It is appropriate that Texas was the first state to
execute a woman since Velma Barfield's execution in 1983, since this makes Texas a
leader in the execution of women as well. Florida is also a leader in executions and has a
large death row inmate population. In fact, from January 1, 1973, to December 31, 1997,
Florida has sentenced 15 females to death row. With the execution of Judy Buenoano,
there are 4 women who remain sentenced to death in the state of Florida. It appears that
states with high death row inmate populations and execution rates will also be the leaders
not only in the sentencing of women to death row, but now also in the execution of these
women.
There was a significant amount of controversy surrounding the execution of Karia
Faye Tucker. She claimed to have undergone rehabilitation, found religion, and even
married the prison's minister. Despite the fanfare, the execution proceeded. The fact that
the execution took place, despite the public's outcries, removes support from the Chivalry
thesis. In contrast to the protest which occurred over Tucker, there was barely a mention
of Buenoano's execution. In fact, her gendered nickname "The Black Widow", denotes
an association of women as evil and destmctive and not needing protection. Is it possible
that now that the trend of executing women has begun, it will become as commonplace
54
and unrecognized as the execution of men. The states have already proven twice in 1998
that they intend to carry out the death sentences given to female oflfenders, and with many
execution dates in the near fiiture, I believe that we will continue to witness other
executions of females on death row, especially in states such as Califomia, Texas, and
Florida, which have high death row populations and rates of executions, overall.
Jennifer Rauch April 7, 1998
55