State Measures
Victims’ rights on ballot
■ Measure 69 would clearly
define and grant seven
constitutional rights to victims
who suffer due to crime
Brian Goodell
Oregon Daily Emerald
Measure 69 is an amendment that
would grant seven constitutional
rights to crime victims.
Under current Oregon law, a “vic
tim” is defined as a person who has
suffered financial, social, psychologi
cal or physical harm as a result of a
crime. In any difference of opinion,
the state judicial system determines
who the victim is according to how
the law was written.
Under Measure 69, the “victim” is
defined as any person determined by
the prosecuting attorney to have suf
fered direct financial, psychological
or physical harm as a result of a
crime.
Proponents of the measure see it as
a means to legitimize victims’ rights
by adding them to the Oregon Consti
tution. Opponents of Measure 69 see
it as an attempt to increase the legal
powers of criminal prosecutors.
“This measure preserves and pro
tects the right of crime victims to jus
tice,” Rep. Kevin Mannix said in the
November Special Election Voters’
Pamphlet.
“It accords crime victims due digni
ty and respect, and ensures that crim
inal and juvenile court delinquency
proceedings are conducted to seek the
truth.”
As it stands now, victims’ rights are
outlined in the statutes, but are not
specifically discussed in the Oregon
Constitution.
“It’s important to constitutionalize
victims’ rights,” Lane County District
Attorney Doug Harcelroad said. “It
puts them [victims’ rights] right up
there with the rights of the defen
dant.”
Rep. Floyd Prozanski, D-Eugene, a
Measure 69
Measure 69 Adds Victims’ Rights to the
Oregon
Constitution
Pro: Gives victims constitutional rights in
criminal proceedings.
Con: increases the Segal powers of
criminal prosecutors.
member of the legislative committee
that framed the text of Measure 69,
has since withdrawn his support of
the measure.
“I made a mistake in supporting
this,” Prozanski said. “Victims are go
ing to lose rights if this measure pass
es.”
Prozanski said Measure 69 would
limit the right of next of kin to be con
sidered the victim in a homicide case.
David Fidanque, executive director
for the Oregon Chapter of the Ameri
can Civil Liberties Union, also oppos
es Measure 69.
“This is really about giving prose
cutors more power,” Fidanque said.
“It’s not about protecting crime vic
tims.”
Both Fidanque and Prozanski agree
that, without the section that entitles
prosecuting attorneys to interpreta
tion of the word “victim,” Measure 69
is a good law.
But they said that they consider it a
waste of time for voters to add victims
rights to the Oregon Constitution
when victims’ rights laws are already
in place.
“In and of itself, we don’t disagree
with the need for victims’ rights,” Fi
danque said.
“But there’s no need to put it in the
Constitution when there are already
laws in place that provide for victims’
rights.”
Mannix said, however, the rights of
crime victims that have been placed
in some statutes are not as strong as
the ones in Measure 69.
Measure to void unanimous
verdict rule in murder cases
■ Measure 72 would make jury
verdicts of 11-1 sufficient to
convict suspects of murder
By Darren Freeman
Oregon Daily Emerald
One measure in the November Special
Election could nullify the Oregon re
quirement of a unanimous jury decision
for a murder conviction.
Measure 72 proposes amending the
Oregon Constitution to allow a person to
be convicted of murder by an 11-1 jury
verdict. The bill doesn’t contest the cur
rent requirement of a unanimous jury ver
dict of guilty for aggravated murder, a
crime punishable with the death penalty
or life imprisonment without the possi
bility of release.
Supporters of the measure say it would
reduce the possibility of a single, irre
sponsible juror impeding justice, while
the measure’s opponent worry that inno
cent people will serve time unnecessarily.
Clatsop County District Attorney
Joshua Marquis said he “strongly sup
ports” Measure 72 calling it a logical ex
tension of Oregon’s use of non-unani
mous decisions. Oregon law allows a 10-2
jury verdict for conviction of any crime
except murder and allows acquittal when
only two jurors submit guilty verdicts.
Marquis said that the bill would elimi
nate the possibility of justice being im
peded by a “rogue” juror who fails to fol
low judges’ orders or allows prejudices to
affect judgment. Marquis said that in his
15 years serving as a prosecuting attorney,
three defendants received less serious
convictions and more lenient sentences
because a single juror refused to enter a
guilty verdict for improper reasons, such
as bigotry or sympathy.
Like most opposers of the bill, David Fi
danque, Executive Director of the Ameri
can Civil Liberties Union of Oregon, feels
11-1 jury verdicts “would greatly increase
the likelihood of an innocent person be
ing convicted.”
Measure 72
Measure 72 proposes to amend the Ore
gon Constitution to allow persons to be
convinced of murder by an 11 -1 jury ver
dict.
Pro: Would reduce the possibility of a
“rogue” juror impeding justice by ignoring a
judge’s orders or allowing prejudices to af
fect judgment.
Con: Could increase the possibility of inno
cent citizens serving time for crimes they
didn’t commit.
Even with unanimous jury decisions,
innocent defendants are sent to jail, Fi
danque said. He cited the convictions of
Springfield residents Eric Proctor and
Chris Boots who were released from
prison in 1994 after serving eight years
for a murder they didn’t commit.
“Prosecutors would not have as strong
a burden to prove guilt beyond a reason
able doubt if they have to convince only
11 jurors and not 12,” State Representa
tive Floyd Prozanski said. Prozanski op
poses Measure 72.
“When the government takes away
someone’s liberty, there should be a very
high burden to prove the case,” Fidanque
said. “It shouldn’t be easy for the state to
take away someone’s liberty.”
But Marquis said that Measure 71
wouldn’t increase the possibility of
wrongful convictions because a single ju
ror very rarely changes the minds of the
other 11 jurors. Nor is an 11 member jury
more likely than a 12 member jury to
make a wrongful conviction, Marquis
said.
“If you can wrongly convince 11 peo
ple, you can wrongly convince 12 peo
ple,” Marquis said.
Fidanque said unanimous jury ver
dicts in murder trials “are a fundamental
bedrock guarantee of our bill of rights.”
J du5»?otrTaie worldwideweD
IT’S JUST LIKE REALLY BEING HERE, BUT WITHOUT ALL THE RAIN
: i
Ever dreamed of taking on the Emerald
staffers in the weekly "Pac-10 Picks" that
appear in editions of Game Day? Now is your
chance! Simply march up to the Emerald
offices at Suite 300 in the EMU, fill out an
entry form and deposit it in the box to the
left of the receptionist desk. Deadline is
every Wednesday by 5 pm. Winners will be
notified Thursday mornings. Then you could
get the chance to prove your
PICKING PROWESS.
JamhxL ^Julc
Invites You to Start Your Day
the Healthy Way with a
tamfra 6m©©thie
October Grand Opening Special
AH Smeethies $1“ ©ff
Monday thru Friday from 7:30 am to 10:00 am
Located in the EMU
No other discounts apply. • Expires October 29, 1999