Elisabeth Semel quoted by Daily Journal (registration required), Nov. 7, 2016
“There is decreased support even among people who philosophically support the death penalty,” said Elisabeth Semel. … She said it harms more than helps the nation, whether it’s “the tremendous costs, the steady number of exonerations, or an increased awareness of how consistently capital punishment is reserved for the poor and people of color.”
Elisabeth Semel quoted by San Francisco Chronicle, Sept. 14, 2016
“It’s modeled after the laws in Texas, where we know innocent people have been executed,” said Elisabeth Semel, director of the Death Penalty Clinic at UC Berkeley Law School. Death penalty supporters heatedly dispute that claim, but Semel cited the Texas case of Cameron Todd Willingham, executed in 2004 for killing his three children in a fire that a series of experts, including one hired by the state, have since concluded was most likely accidental.
Elisabeth Semel quoted in National Catholic Reporter, June 7, 2016
Semel said switching the system to life without the possibility of parole is estimated to cost just over $11 million per year, as opposed to $150 million. “That is an enormous difference in a state that has profound needs in the area of education, housing and social services.”
Elisabeth Semel interviewed by The California Report, KQED-FM, Jan. 15, 2016
“It’s really a disservice to the people of the state to perpetuate something that not only doesn’t work effectively, but really is irreparable. … The prospect of executing 745 people is illusory. So, there will be a randomness to the number of people we execute in the state until we finally recognize that we’re done with it.”
Elisabeth Semel interviewed by Daily Journal (registration required), Dec. 30, 2015
“It is entirely in keeping with the precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court,” Semel said. In recent cases reviewing the use of a causal nexus rule in Texas, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a “nexus requirement prevents a sentencer from giving meaningful consideration to constitutionally relevant mitigation,” Semel said.
Elisabeth Semel interviewed by Daily Journal (registration required), Nov. 23, 2015
“I think the court was more generous with the prosecutor than I would have been … especially since the panel acknowledged that the prosecutor basically regurgitated the state court’s rank speculation as to why he might have struck the juror. It was as if the state court provided him a script.”
Elisabeth Semel quoted in Daily Journal (registration required), Oct. 27, 2015
The state Supreme Court, which affirmed Crittenden’s conviction back in 1994, would likely take issue with both the majority and the dissent’s approval of “comparative juror analysis” as a tool for resolving these issues, according to Elisabeth A. Semel.
Elisabeth Semel interviewed by CNN.com, September 24, 2015
“I do not believe in prognostication,” she said in an interview. But she allowed that, “it is fair to say we may be approaching a crossroads based on signs from multiple sources,” including popular opinion, legislatures, policymakers and declining death sentences and executions.
Elisabeth Semel quoted in The New Yorker, September 14, 2015
Elisabeth Semel, the Berkeley professor, notes that, with a death-qualified jury, “you are starting out with a jury that is conviction-prone and death-prone, because if they weren’t they wouldn’t be sitting there.”
Elisabeth A. Semel quoted in The New York Times, August 16, 2015
“If you repeatedly see all-white juries convict African-Americans, what does that do to public confidence in the criminal justice system?” asked Elisabeth A. Semel.