Post by Anja Nieser on Sept 24, 2006 5:07:15 GMT -5
Vermonters, beware: treason still draws death penalty
By Adam Silverman
Free Press Staff Writer
September 23, 2006
Let's say, hypothetically, that Killington, in its quest to secede from Vermont in a spat over property taxes, were to raise an army. A small army, sure, but an army.
Now let's assume a town leader takes command of that tiny troop of toughs and marches on Montpelier, blustering about overthrowing the state government. And -- this is a stretch -- the Killington Light Infantry is defeated and its leader arrested.
That poor person now faces Vermont's death penalty.
What's that, you say? Vermont doesn't have capital punishment?
Think again.
It's a state law, at least 219 years old but still on the books, clinging to existence but nearly forgotten, like the world's oldest person if she lived, say, on a plateau in Patagonia.
Vermont statutes, Title 13, Chapter 75, Section 3401: "A person owing allegiance to this state, who levies war or conspires to levy war against the same, or adheres to the enemies thereof, giving them aid and comfort, within the state or elsewhere, shall be guilty of treason against this state and shall suffer the punishment of death."
Lest lawmakers be accused of omitting crucial details, a chapter written later tells us exactly how to take out a traitor.
"The punishment of death shall be inflicted by causing to pass through the body of the convict a current of electricity of sufficient intensity to cause death," reads the law, "and the application of such current shall be continued until such convict is dead."
The treason law goes on. If someone is found guilty of "obtaining maps and plans" -- spying, in other words -- or "furnishing information to the enemy," an executioner could fire up Old Sparky.
Scores of Vermont residents and political leaders proudly champion their opposition to capital punishment and point with pride to a 1987 legislative act abolishing the state death penalty. But there was one small oversight. Abolition covered only first- and second-degree murder, said current House Speaker Gaye Symington, D-Jericho.
The treason statute, ironically, survived.
Which is not to say that state law enforcers are looking to enforce that law anytime soon.
"We've effectively done away with capital punishment in Vermont, and if we tried to impose capital punishment in a treason case, we would be fighting in the courts for years and years and years," state Attorney General Bill Sorrell said.
"In my 20 years, I haven't had to use that statute," veteran Franklin County prosecutor Jim Hughes said. "Although there are a lot of freedom-minded and individualistic people up here in the northwest corner, we've never had to go as far as invoking that statute."
"Obviously, homeland security is a serious issue, but I'm not sure if the treason statute is the best way to address that," Assistant Attorney General John Treadwell said, somewhat more seriously.
Whether the measure itself is even legal is another question. Most experts say it's not.
"Short, succinct and unconstitutional," said Michael Mello, a professor at Vermont Law School in South Royalton and an expert on the death penalty, referring to the 49-word statute that dates to at least 1787.
Allen Gilbert, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Vermont, an organization that opposes the death penalty said, "I can't imagine how anyone could ever be prosecuted under this law. It's just a weird concept, how you could even commit treason against a state."
Gilbert and Symington agreed that the treason law doesn't diminish Vermont's stance on capital punishment. The speaker said, though, that she supports scratching the item from the books and will raise the idea during the next legislative session.
Until then, Killington, don't do anything rash.
www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Date=20060923&Category=NEWS01&ArtNo=609230310&SectionCat=NEWS05&Template=printart
By Adam Silverman
Free Press Staff Writer
September 23, 2006
Let's say, hypothetically, that Killington, in its quest to secede from Vermont in a spat over property taxes, were to raise an army. A small army, sure, but an army.
Now let's assume a town leader takes command of that tiny troop of toughs and marches on Montpelier, blustering about overthrowing the state government. And -- this is a stretch -- the Killington Light Infantry is defeated and its leader arrested.
That poor person now faces Vermont's death penalty.
What's that, you say? Vermont doesn't have capital punishment?
Think again.
It's a state law, at least 219 years old but still on the books, clinging to existence but nearly forgotten, like the world's oldest person if she lived, say, on a plateau in Patagonia.
Vermont statutes, Title 13, Chapter 75, Section 3401: "A person owing allegiance to this state, who levies war or conspires to levy war against the same, or adheres to the enemies thereof, giving them aid and comfort, within the state or elsewhere, shall be guilty of treason against this state and shall suffer the punishment of death."
Lest lawmakers be accused of omitting crucial details, a chapter written later tells us exactly how to take out a traitor.
"The punishment of death shall be inflicted by causing to pass through the body of the convict a current of electricity of sufficient intensity to cause death," reads the law, "and the application of such current shall be continued until such convict is dead."
The treason law goes on. If someone is found guilty of "obtaining maps and plans" -- spying, in other words -- or "furnishing information to the enemy," an executioner could fire up Old Sparky.
Scores of Vermont residents and political leaders proudly champion their opposition to capital punishment and point with pride to a 1987 legislative act abolishing the state death penalty. But there was one small oversight. Abolition covered only first- and second-degree murder, said current House Speaker Gaye Symington, D-Jericho.
The treason statute, ironically, survived.
Which is not to say that state law enforcers are looking to enforce that law anytime soon.
"We've effectively done away with capital punishment in Vermont, and if we tried to impose capital punishment in a treason case, we would be fighting in the courts for years and years and years," state Attorney General Bill Sorrell said.
"In my 20 years, I haven't had to use that statute," veteran Franklin County prosecutor Jim Hughes said. "Although there are a lot of freedom-minded and individualistic people up here in the northwest corner, we've never had to go as far as invoking that statute."
"Obviously, homeland security is a serious issue, but I'm not sure if the treason statute is the best way to address that," Assistant Attorney General John Treadwell said, somewhat more seriously.
Whether the measure itself is even legal is another question. Most experts say it's not.
"Short, succinct and unconstitutional," said Michael Mello, a professor at Vermont Law School in South Royalton and an expert on the death penalty, referring to the 49-word statute that dates to at least 1787.
Allen Gilbert, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Vermont, an organization that opposes the death penalty said, "I can't imagine how anyone could ever be prosecuted under this law. It's just a weird concept, how you could even commit treason against a state."
Gilbert and Symington agreed that the treason law doesn't diminish Vermont's stance on capital punishment. The speaker said, though, that she supports scratching the item from the books and will raise the idea during the next legislative session.
Until then, Killington, don't do anything rash.
www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Date=20060923&Category=NEWS01&ArtNo=609230310&SectionCat=NEWS05&Template=printart