A Broken System, Part II:
Why There Is So Much Error in Capital Cases,
and What Can Be Done About It

Updated Information

 

May 13, 2002
Click here for updated information as of May 13, 2002 (requires Adobe Acrobat).  **Please note that formatting of this file may change when printed.**

 

February 21, 2002
See below for updated information as of February 21, 2002.

On this page on our website, the authors of A Broken System, Part II: Why There Is So Much Error in Capital Cases, and What Can Be Done About It will periodically provide information that updates data presented in the Report, along with a reference to the passage in the Report that is affected by the new data. We very much appreciate hearing from readers about new information relevant to data reported in A Broken System, Part II, so that we can keep the Report as current and accurate as possible. Inquiries may be sent to jliebman@law.columbia.edu.

Table of Figures, page xxxiv, Figure 9: Replace title with "Overall Error Rate and Percent of Death Sentences Carried Out, 1973 to 1995."

Endnote 226, page 53: Endnote should read "R = -.69; significance = .001."

Appendix C, page C-4: In "Results on Retrial," replace "L = 222" with "L = 223" and "NG = 28" with "NG = 27."

Appendix C, page C-7: In the entry on the Knapp case, replace the citation "(Pima Cnty Super. Ct. 1987)" with "(Maricopa Cnty Super. Ct. 1987)."

Appendix C, page C-37: In the entry on the Mazzan case, replace "NG" with "L". Also replace "Results on Retrial: L=6; NG = 2; RP = 1" with "Results on Retrial: L=7; NG = 1; RP = 1." See Sean Whaley, Former Death Row Inmate Pleads Guilty at New Trial, Las Vegas Rev.-J., Feb. 16, 2002.