U.S. Senator Russ Feingold on the Execution of Louis Jones, Jr. From the Senate Floor March 18, 2003 Mr. President, I want to take a moment to comment on the execution of Louis Jones, Jr., earlier today by the Federal Government. Louis Jones was a highly decorated 22-year Army veteran, including service to our nation as an Army Ranger. He rose through the ranks to reach the top of enlisted personnel and retired with an honorable discharge in 1993 as a Master Sergeant. After serving on active duty in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm/Desert Shield, Mr. Jones returned to the United States and began experiencing symptoms consistent with gulf war syndrome. He exhibited personality and behavior changes, including increased hostility, aggression, and a tendency to fixate irrationally. In 1995, in a Federal district court in Texas, Louis Jones, Jr., an African-American, was convicted and sentenced to death for the kidnaping and murder of an airwoman at Goodfellow Air Force Base in Lubbock, TX. There is no question that Mr. Jones committed this horrific crime. Mr. Jones did not dispute his guilt. But what Mr. Jones requested, and what I believed he should have had, was further examination of his medical condition and its potential role in the crime he committed. Evidence of his brain damage was not available at his trial, as scientific research about the effects of exposure to toxins during the gulf war was still in its early stages. Since his trial, however, extensive research on gulf war syndrome and its symptoms has revealed brain damage as one possible result of exposure to toxins during the gulf war. Dr. Robert Haley, one of the Nation's most renowned researchers and experts on gulf war syndrome, has now concluded that Mr. Jones's symptoms were consistent with those of a subset of gulf war syndrome patients who were exposed to particularly toxic chemical agents during the gulf war. Had the jury known of Mr. Jones mental condition and that his condition was the result of service in the gulf war, it is very possible that the jury would have returned a sentence other than death. It is unconscionable that the Federal Government would execute a gulf war veteran who displayed the symptoms of gulf war syndrome at the time of the crime, but was denied a fair opportunity to use this evidence to argue for a sentence other than death. On the eve of war, and especially on the eve of another war in the Persian Gulf region where more than 200,000 brave American men and women are prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice for their nation, President Bush could have taken a small step for fairness and justice. He could have stayed the execution to allow further medical testing and examination. I believe that President Bush should have done more. He should not have gone forward with this execution in the face of increasing concerns about the fairness of the Federal death penalty system. Today, more than 2 years after the U.S. Department of Justice released a survey showing geographic and racial disparities in the Federal death penalty system, we still do not have an explanation of why who lives and who dies in the Federal system appears to relate to the color of the defendant's skin or the region of the country where the defendant is prosecuted. Attorney General Janet Reno was so disturbed by the results of this survey that she ordered a further, in-depth study of the results. Attorney General John Ashcroft pledged to continue that study, but we still await the results. And while we await the results of this study, we have also learned that the Justice Department appears to be seeking the death penalty more aggressively in Federal cases. Attorney General Ashcroft appears to be pursuing consistency in the application of the Federal death penalty nationwide by seeking it more aggressively in jurisdictions where Federal prosecutors have infrequently requested authorization from the Attorney General to seek the death penalty. In other words, he seems intent on making the Federal system replicative of States that aggressively pursue the death penalty States like Texas, which this week is scheduled to execute its 300th inmate in the modern death penalty era. I am very concerned that the Attorney General's apparent determination to increase death penalty prosecutions, including sometimes overriding decisions of local prosecutors, increases the risk that the Federal Government could execute an innocent person. Former Federal prosecutors have said that ``they need to take every last precaution to avoid the risk of condemning an innocent person to death.'' Last week I sent a letter to Attorney General Ashcroft expressing my grave concern about these issues and asking him to answer several questions about the Justice Department's decision-making process in death-eligible cases. There is no punishment in our criminal justice system more worthy of careful review and absolute certainty before we carry it out than capital punishment. Each time the Federal Government carries out the ultimate punishment while so many questions remain unanswered, it erodes confidence in the justice system. The case of Louis Jones, Jr., is no exception. His case is plagued by particularly troubling circumstances that also cast doubt on the fairness of the Federal death penalty system. The existing cracks in our Federal death penalty system seem to be widening, and new ones are appearing, further weakening the foundation of our justice system. Today, with the execution of Mr. Jones, our Federal criminal justice system has taken a step backward. Our goals of fairness and equal justice under law were not met, and the American people's reason for confidence in our Federal criminal justice system was diminished. I urge my colleagues to support a temporary freeze on executions to allow a thorough, nationwide review of the fairness of the administration of the death penalty. I urge my colleagues to support the National Death Penalty Moratorium Act.

# # #