跳到内容
现在

司法 · 死刑判决赦免

纽森寻求撤销加利福尼亚州所有死刑判决,但大多数案件需要法院采取行动

州长希望将548名死刑犯全部改为不得假释的终身监禁。但其中382宗案件需要加利福尼亚州最高法院提出建议,减刑令是否已全部签发仍未获确认。

文字 阅读需 6 分钟 · 71 个来源

原语言视频

译自英文原文。

加利福尼亚州已拆除死刑执行室。除少数人外,所有被判死刑的囚犯都已从圣昆廷监狱的隔离牢房转移到其他监狱。执行死刑的设备大多已不复存在,死刑判决却仍然有效。⁠7

州长加文·纽森现在希望将现有的548项死刑判决全部改为不得假释的终身监禁。他于2026年11月5日宣布的计划,超出了他在2019年实施的死刑执行暂停令:有效减刑将取代死刑本身,而不是让死刑判决继续处于暂停状态。但对于拟适用者中约七成的人,他不能单独作出决定。⁠9⁠3⁠8

这一区别很重要,因为最初的报道对事情进展并无一致说法。BBC新闻和NBC新闻于11月5日报道称,减刑已经完成。CBS新闻和《洛杉矶时报》在同日报道称,州长计划采取行动,但仍需法院审查。州长本人的文件描述的是一项计划和拟议中的赦免行动,而非所有判决都已改变的证明。目前没有已依法生效的个别减刑数量的确切统计。⁠1⁠6⁠3⁠7⁠8⁠9

大多数案件由法院把关

核心文件的标题是《说明文件——拟议死刑赦免行动》。文件请求加利福尼亚州最高法院就382名被判犯有一项以上重罪的死刑犯提出建议。相对于宣布涉及的548人,这一数字约占69.7%。其余166人约占30.3%;他们不在已确定的法院审查群体之内,并不能证明他们的减刑令已经签署。⁠8⁠3

548宣布的提议所涉及的人数 37
382需要最高法院提出建议的人数 8
69.7%经计算需要法院提出建议的比例 83

这些数字取代了《洛杉矶时报》最初的描述。该报道称,约有60–40的比例分别对应需要法院采取行动的案件和纽森可直接处理的案件。说明文件中的人数算出的比例更接近70–30。这是依据文件和已公布总人数进行的计算,并非与其他媒体报道相竞争的估算。⁠7⁠8

加利福尼亚州宪法第五条第8(a)款限制州长对曾两次被判重罪者行使赦免权。赦免或减刑须得到州最高法院多数法官的支持并提出建议,即七名法官中至少四人赞成。法院本身不会减轻刑罚;其建议为州长采取这一行动提供授权。⁠67⁠8

额外的定罪可能早于死刑判决,也可能源于等待处决期间所犯的罪行。而法院提出有利建议并非必然:2018年,杰里·布朗州长任期即将结束时,法院驳回了他提交的十宗赦免案件。这段历史无法预测本案结果,但说明法院审查并非走过场。⁠7

11月5日的公开宣布已得到确认。经独立确认的文件提交或收件日期、法院随后提出的建议,以及所有必要减刑文书是否已完成,均未得到确认。纽森已作出一项重大决定,但落实工作尚未完成。⁠8⁠9

改变刑罚,而非释放囚犯

对任何减刑决定生效的人而言,刑罚都将是不得假释的终身监禁。这既不是赦免,也不代表认定其无罪。定罪仍然有效,囚犯仍将继续服刑,此举也不会给予他们假释机会。纽森称,这是他通过赦免权能够施加的最严厉刑罚。⁠3

因此,这项提议不只是再次暂停执行死刑。2019年3月13日,纽森暂停执行死刑,撤销致命注射方案,并下令关闭圣昆廷监狱的死刑执行室。暂停令既没有取代死刑判决,也没有释放囚犯。减刑将改变当事人继续被监禁所依据的判决,尽管在现行暂停令下,近期并无执行死刑的安排。⁠69⁠8

加利福尼亚州最近一次执行死刑,是2006年1月17日对克拉伦斯·雷·艾伦实施致命注射。自1978年以来,该州共执行了13次死刑。艾伦当时76岁,已在死囚牢房中度过23年;目前有些被判死刑的囚犯已年届80多岁或90多岁。这项提议涉及的是在死刑判决之下度过数十年的人。⁠6⁠7

这不会废除死刑。检察官仍可寻求新的死刑判决,陪审团和法院也仍将发挥作用。选民在2012年否决了废除死刑的提案,2016年再次否决;同年,他们还以微弱优势通过了一项旨在加快死刑案件审理的措施。纽森是利用赦免权改变现有判决,而不是修改管辖未来案件的法律。⁠3

我知道,在我们这个并不完美的法律体系中,我们无法处决人们,同时又忠于我们的核心价值观,其中最重要的是正义和人道。

加文·纽森 46

他的论点是原则性的,并非声称每个适用者都是被错误定罪,或理应获得特殊宽大处理。他表示,国家批准的杀戮与加利福尼亚州的价值观相悖,而且这一制度无法得到公平执行。他承认选民决定保留死刑,同时主张,同一部宪法也赋予州长赦免权。⁠46⁠7

即使不执行死刑,这一制度仍在消耗公共资源。人身保护令资源中心在2025年的估算显示,每年用于自动死刑上诉和人身保护令申请的支出超过200 million美元。据估计,死刑上诉约占州最高法院工作量的四分之一。减刑可能降低死刑案件诉讼成本,但这些数字并非节省金额预测:囚禁仍将继续,未决程序也不会全部自动消失。⁠7

家属的意见并不一致

一项普遍适用的决定,必然会涵盖那些罪行之残暴仍是家属反对理由核心的案件。拟适用者包括查尔斯·恩,1984年和1985年在北加州杀害六名男性、三名女性和两名男婴,经定罪;理查德·艾伦·戴维斯,1993年绑架并谋杀12岁的波莉·克拉斯;以及克里斯托弗·切里,因谋杀、强奸并折磨其女友3岁的女儿索菲娅·阿科斯塔而被定罪。他们被纳入其中,是因为提议涵盖范围如此,并非因为已宣布重新评估这些罪行。⁠7

贝瑟妮·韦布认为,漫长的死刑程序本身就是伤害的来源。她的姐姐劳拉是2011年海豹滩枪击案中八名遇难者之一;她们的母亲也遭枪击,身受重伤。韦布不接受处决罪犯就能弥补家人损失的说法。她对《洛杉矶时报》说:“整个制度都在折磨家属,令人痛苦不堪。”⁠7

桑迪·弗伦德则得出相反结论。她8岁的儿子迈克尔·莱昂斯于1996年遭绑架并被杀害。她谈到撤销死刑判决时说:“这完全是对受害者的不尊重,是对他们的一记耳光。”两人都不能代表所有失去亲人的家庭。同一项决定可能让一个家庭免于继续经历死刑诉讼,却剥夺另一个家庭认为正义所要求的惩罚。⁠7

纽森承认,他的决定会唤起痛苦的回忆,引发愤怒,也会伤害一些加州人。他称这是自己担任州长以来最艰难的决定之一,并承担其影响所带来的责任。他希望最终让罪犯终身服刑,并将关注点转向缅怀受害者,而非处决罪犯。⁠5⁠46

另一宗诉讼可能产生比赦免更广泛的影响。州公共辩护律师于2024年对加利福尼亚州的死刑制度提出质疑,指控其存在长期的种族差异。今年春天,州最高法院要求司法部长解释为何不应宣布死刑违宪。司法部长罗伯·邦塔在8月写道,普遍存在差异的证据可能表明,任意施加刑罚的风险已达到宪法所无法容忍的程度。该案针对的是法律本身,并非对纽森的赦免请求作出裁决。⁠7

对于这项提议,眼下的考验范围较窄,且有时间限制。纽森的任期将于2027年1月结束。要由他本人完成382项须经法院审议的减刑,他需要获得必要的建议,然后必须在仍任州长期间签发减刑令。目前尚无确定的法院裁决日期。下一个关键进展并非再一次反对执行死刑的声明,而是能使其决定生效的法律行动。⁠7⁠8

来源40

在此处引用的来源中,LEADERSHIP Newspapers最先发布,比本报道播出早6天。 随后还有21家媒体发布。

6篇早期文章作为背景资料参阅。17家媒体未注明日期:documentcloud.orgthemarshallproject.orgUnnamed channelACLU of Northern CaliforniaAmnesty International USAapnews.com

按媒体查看所有来源

来自 40 家媒体的 71 个来源· 引用最多的优先

播出原貌
  1. Gavin Newsom wants to replace all 548 death sentences in California with life without parole.
  2. The prisoners would remain imprisoned, but their death sentences would be permanently replaced, going beyond the existing halt on executions. Can Newsom secure the court recommendations needed for hundreds of these cases before his term ends?
  3. Newsom announced his decision on November fifth, 2026. He's seeking the same punishment for everyone currently condemned. The legal process is still underway, and we don't yet know how many individual commutations have taken effect.
  4. Newsom's public decision starts a process that still requires court action for most recipients. His request to the justices covers people convicted of more than one felony. A court recommendation would allow him to grant their clemency.
  5. The governor's explanatory statement identifies 382 people in that group. Matching that figure against the announced total changes the picture of how much Newsom can do on his own.
  6. Newsom needs court recommendations for 382 people, or 69.7 percent of the total. The remaining 166 account for 30.3 percent. That's roughly a seventy-thirty split, correcting the earlier sixty-forty description. Both groups are proposed recipients.
  7. California's Constitution limits a governor's clemency power when someone has been convicted of two felonies. Those convictions can include crimes before the death sentence, or additional crimes committed while awaiting execution.
  8. The Supreme Court rejected ten clemency cases submitted by Governor Jerry Brown in 2018, near the end of his term. That history shows why Newsom can't simply count on receiving the recommendations he needs.
  9. Four of the court's seven justices must agree to recommend clemency in these cases. Newsom would then have to grant each commutation. Once effective, it would replace the death sentence with life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.
  10. The recipients would remain convicted and imprisoned for life, with no parole opportunity through this action. Newsom calls that the most severe punishment he can impose through clemency. He argues that the state should refuse to execute people even for brutal crimes.
  11. Newsom says state-sanctioned killing conflicts with California's values. He calls the death-penalty system a failure, challenges its fairness and points to the consequences of mistakes. His decision applies across the current condemned population, without selecting particular prisoners for special leniency.
  12. California prosecutors could still seek new death sentences under the law that remains in force. Newsom acknowledges that voters have repeatedly chosen to retain capital punishment. He argues that the same Constitution gives governors the power to grant clemency.
  13. Voters rejected repeal in 2012 and again in 2016. In that second election, they narrowly approved a measure intended to speed death-penalty proceedings. Newsom's proposal would change existing sentences while leaving prosecutors, juries and courts their roles in future cases.
  14. California has carried out 13 executions since 1978. The last was Clarence Ray Allen's lethal injection on January seventeenth, 2006. He was 76 and had spent 23 years on death row. His appeals cost the state more than 750,000 dollars.
  15. Newsom halted executions in March 2019, withdrew the lethal-injection protocol and closed San Quentin's execution chamber. That pause left death sentences intact. An effective commutation would replace the sentence itself, even though executions are already halted.
  16. The chamber was later taken down. All but a handful of the remaining condemned prisoners moved from segregated housing at San Quentin to other facilities. The prison is now called San Quentin Rehabilitation Center. Death row increasingly describes a sentence, rather than one shared location.
  17. Capital appeals and petitions challenging imprisonment cost an estimated more than 200 million dollars a year. Death-penalty appeals account for about a quarter of the state Supreme Court's work. Taxpayers fund defense lawyers, prosecutors and the courts administering years of litigation.
  18. Commutations could reduce capital-litigation costs, but nobody has put a reliable savings total on this proposal. Imprisonment would continue, and pending proceedings wouldn't all automatically disappear. Some condemned prisoners are now in their eighties and nineties, after decades under death sentences.
  19. Potential recipients include Charles Ng, convicted of killing six men, three women and two infant boys in Northern California in 1984 and 1985. They also include Richard Allen Davis, who abducted and murdered twelve-year-old Polly Klaas of Petaluma in 1993.
  20. Christopher Cheary is also covered. He was convicted of murdering, raping and torturing his girlfriend's three-year-old daughter, Sophia Acosta, in Tulare County. The universal proposal reaches these cases because it covers every current death sentence. Their convictions would remain in place.
  21. Bethany Webb's sister Laura was among eight people killed in the 2011 Seal Beach mass shooting. Their mother was shot and badly injured. Webb rejects the promise that execution will repair a family's loss and calls the prolonged capital process brutalizing.
  22. Sandy Friend sees removal of a death sentence as a betrayal. Her eight-year-old son, Michael Lyons, was abducted and murdered in 1996. She said, “It's total disrespect for the victims. It's a slap in the face.” Families carry different expectations of what justice should deliver.
  23. Newsom acknowledges that his decision will revive painful memories and anger and hurt some Californians. He calls it among the hardest decisions of his governorship. He says he accepts responsibility for its impact and wants the victims remembered while offenders remain imprisoned for life.
  24. A separate constitutional challenge could reach California's death-penalty law itself. The state public defender sued in 2024, alleging persistent racial disparities. This spring, the Supreme Court required the attorney general to explain why capital punishment should survive that challenge.
  25. Attorney General Rob Bonta said in August that evidence of pervasive racial disparities could reveal a constitutionally intolerable risk of arbitrary punishment. That lawsuit proceeds separately from Newsom's request for clemency recommendations.
  26. Court action on the 382 clemency requests is still pending. Newsom's term ends in January 2027, after eight years in office. To complete those commutations himself, he needs the court's recommendations and must issue the final grants while he's still governor.

译文更新于

近期播出