This co-constructed narrative reports on the experiences of a clinical social worker who testifies as an expert witness at death penalty mitigation hearings in Alabama. A state with a historic record riddled with racial inequities and injustices, Alabama uses the death penalty aggressively. For many poor defendants, the difference between death and life in prison without the possibility of parole is made at mitigation hearings in which the jury may hear testimony which puts the defendant’s life and crime in context. There is no better-suited profession than social work for conducting this task. This is the story of one social worker and one defendant whose life is on the line.
Allen, J.
(2001) ‘The Switch’, On Wisconsin102(3): 38-43.
2.
Bandura, A.
(1977) Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3.
Bright, S. B.
(1997) ‘Counsel for the Poor: The Death Sentence not for the Worst Crime but for the Worst Lawyer’, in H. A. Bedau (ed.) The Death Penalty in America: Current Controversies, pp. 275-309. New York: Oxford University Press.
4.
Brodsky, S. L.
(1999) The Expert Expert Witness: More Maxims and Guidelines for Testifying in Court. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
5.
Brodsky, S. L.
and Anderer, S. J. (2000) ‘Serving as an Expert Witness: Evaluations, Subpoenas, and Testimony’, in F. Kaslow (ed.) Handbook of Couple and Family Forensics: A Sourcebook for Mental Health and Legal Professionals, pp. 475-490. New York: Wiley.
6.
Clines, F. X.
(2002) ‘Death Penalty is Suspended in Maryland’, New York Times (10 May): A16.
7.
Equal Justice Initiative of Alabama, http://www.eji.org/index.html (consulted Nov. 2002).
8.
Finn, D.
(2002) ‘Death Row U.S.A. Spring 2002’, A Quarterly Report by the Criminal Justice Project of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/DEATHROWUSA (consulted June 2002).
9.
Greenhouse, L.
(2002a) ‘Citing “National Consensus,” Justices Bar Death Penalty for Retarded Defendants’, New York Times (21 June): A1.
10.
Greenhouse, L.
(2002b) ‘Hedging Bets: Ruling Barring Execution of Retarded may not lead to Further Restrictions’, New York Times (22 June): A7.
11.
Greenhouse, L.
(2002c) ‘Justices say Death Penalty is up to Juries, not Judges’, New York Times (25 June): A1.
12.
Kirby, B.
(2002) ‘Jury Recommends Life Sentence for Murderer’, Mobile Register’ (19 March) http://www.al.com/news/mobileregister (consulted March 2002).
13.
Liptak, A.
(2002) ‘Fewer Death Sentences likely if Juries make Ultimate Decision, Experts say’, New York Times (25 June): A19.
14.
Liptak, A.
and Rimer, S. (2002) ‘With Little Guidance, States Face Hard Debate on who is Retarded’, New York Times (21 June): A1.
15.
Prejean, H.
(1993) Dead Man Walking: An Eyewitness Account of the Death Penalty in the United States. New York: Random House.
16.
Reed, J. G.
and Rohrer, G. E. (2000) Death Penalty Mitigation: A Challenge for Social Work Education’, Journal of Teaching in Social Work20(1-2): 187-199.
17.
Reynolds, T. S.
and Bernstein, T. (1989) ‘Edison and ‘the Chair”’, IEEE Technology and Society Magazine8(1): 19-28.
18.
Rimer, S.
(2002) ‘In Similar Cases, One Inmate is Executed, One Wins Stay’, New York Times (29 May): A11.
19.
Witkin, S.
(2002) ‘“ New Voices”: A Column in Search Of Authors’, Qualitative Social Work: Research and Practice1(2): 141.
