The mitigation stuff starts about 25 mins in sorry. The whole show is worth listening to imo.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I found this article interesting. I am just adding a snippet from it:
* Just One Juror. In the State of Washington, Kwan Fai Mak was represented at trial by counsel who had no experience with death penalty cases. The attorney realized too late that he had not adequately prepared for the sentencing phase of the trial. Due to his lack of preparation, none of the readily available mitigating evidence regarding Mak's background, family relationships, or cultural differences was presented to the jury, which returned a sentence of death. [52]
"To fail to present important mitigating evidence in the penalty phase . . . can be as devastating as a failure to present proof of innocence in the guilt phase."
--Mak v. Blodgett
Upon federal review, the court emphasized the critical nature of the sentencing hearing and the attorney's role in presenting evidence:
The issue for the jury is whether the defendant will live or die . . . . The sentencing hearing is defense counsel's chance to show the jury that the defendant, despite the crime, is worth saving as a human being . . . . To fail to present important mitigating evidence in the penalty phase--if there is no risk in doing so--can be as devastating as a failure to present proof of innocence in the guilt phase. [53]
Under Washington law, if just one juror had found the existence of a mitigating circumstance the sentence would have been life rather than death.[54] But with no such evidence presented, the jury had little choice."
The article is quite long but if anyone wants to read it, here is the link:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/node/742