Jens Söring Probably Wouldn't Have Gotten a Death Sentence
Even the prosecutor didn't think he would get one.
First, some housekeeping. As most of you know, I formerly hosted this blog on my professional website, Hammel Translations. I then decided to move the Söring-related content to this blog. Why? First, the interface is more elegant. Second, Substack gives you the opportunity to make a little money from donations. I don’t need it, but it’s a thoughtful gesture. Many thanks to the people who’ve already taken out a paid subscription! Don’t worry, though — this blog will remain free for the foreseeable future. You can pay a bit if you like, but you don’t have to.
In any case, in the coming weeks I will be transferring some of the “best-of” posts from the old blog to this one. I’ll probably edit them a bit and update them where necessary. I will label these “archive posts” and won’t send email notifications, since these will be posts many of you have already read. But keep checking back; perhaps I’ll post something you haven’t seen before!
Another thing: Using some of these donations, I’ve bought a bit of audiovisual equipment. Since Söring has now switched to video formats, I thought I might take a stab at that, too. I plan on making some YouTube videos: First a brief introduction to the case based on the actual facts of the case, and then “25 Questions for Jens Söring”. Since Söring is now actively inviting his subscribers to ask him questions, I thought I would join in with some of my own. I don’t know when the videos will come out — I’m new to this — but I hope maybe by next week.
In the meantime, though, let’s look at one of the claims Söring repeats in every interview: that he spent “three years” (1986-1989) under the “direct” threat of a death sentence. I’m not really sure what “direct” means here, it’s not a legal term. Söring also often says his lawyers told him there was a “100%” chance he would be executed if he were extradited to Virginia to stand trial.
None of this is true. The Virginia Assembly (state legislature) ordered the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) to analyze Virginia’s death penalty system, and JLARC issued a detailed report in 2002 which you can download here (pdf, possible regional block, set your VPN to a US IP address, or just email me).
Here’s Figure 7 from the report:
This is how American death penalty law works: in stages. Here’s what needs to happen for someone to get a death sentence in Virginia.
First, you need to commit a homicide — the killing of another human being.
Second, that homicide needs to be murder — the intentional unlawful killing of another person with no legal justification (such as self-defense). (970 people)
Third, that murder needs to be defined as capital murder — an especially aggravated crime. Things that make a murder capital include killing in the course of another serious crime, killing more than one person, killing a policeman, torturing someone before killing them, etc. (215 people)
Fourth, the prosecution needs to convict a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that you committed capital murder. (46 people).
Now will you get the death penalty? No, we’re not done yet. The US Supreme Court ruled in the 1970s that in every case with a potential death penalty, there has to be a separate phase after conviction where the only question is whether the defendant should receive life in prison or the death sentence. As we see from the above chart, the prosecution convinced the jury to sentence the defendant to death in only 52% of all cases (24/46). The other defendants were sentenced to life in prison.
So, as you can see, the chances of anyone arrested for murder (n=970) actually being sentenced to death were about 2.4 percent. Jens Söring killed two people, which certainly qualified as capital murder in Virginia at that time. But of all the people who were accused of committing capital murder (215), only 24 (11%) ultimately received a sentence of death.
Reliable sources confirm that the prosecutor at the time, Jim Updike, told people that, although he intended to pursue the death penalty against Söring, he didn’t think he would get a death sentence. It’s obvious why. First and foremost, the prosecution only gets a death sentence 50% of the time it asks for one. Second, there were “mitigating factors”: Söring was young, had no criminal record, the crime wasn’t perpetrated for venal reasons (money or sex) and Söring had some redeeming qualities and family support.
But wait, there’s even more: Even if you are sentenced to death in the United States, there is no guarantee at all that you will actually be executed. Death-row prisoners are entitled to file many different appeals against their sentence and conviction, and virtually all of them do so. This is why it takes between 8 and 12 years for an inmate to be sentenced to death to actually be executed — if this even happens at all. A 2002 study found:
Nationally, during the 23-year study period, the overall rate of prejudicial error in the American capital punishment system was 68%. (In other words, courts found serious, reversible error in nearly 7 out of every 10 of the capital cases that were finally reviewed during this period.)
Virginia’s reversal rate was much lower, at 18%, but that still means nearly 1 in 5 death sentences in Virginia were overturned by the courts.
So the next time Jens Söring says it was 100% certain he would be executed if he were extradited to Virginia, his facts are wrong (which he probably knows at some level). And when he says his lawyers told him this, he is almost certainly lying. As lawyers, they would obviously have been aware that only 11% of people who are charged with capital murder in Virginia ever get sentenced to death — and not even all of these people will ultimately be executed.
Once again, nothing Jens Söring says about his case — nothing — can be taken at face value.
@FS007/008
Du wurschtelst dir einen zurecht. Das ist doch ganz offensichtlich ein simpler Verlegeheits-post von Andrew.
Ein nichtssagender Pausenfüller bis zum nächsten Video von Söring, um so Hater wie dich bei Laune zu halten. Es tut zum Fall nichts zur Sache.
Updike hat ganz klar vor der Auslieferung mehrfach angedeutetet, weder von der Anklage zu capital murder, noch von der dazugehörigen Capital Punishment abzurücken. Natürlich muss die Jury am Schluss auch noch zustimmen. Die Spekulation fängt schon damit an, unwissend darüber zu sein, was Sörings/Neatons Strategie gewesen wäre, wenn er einfach so an die USA ausgeliefert worden wäre. Hätte er dann die Wahrheit erzählt, um der Todestrafe zu entgehen? Die Einzeltätervariante endlich richtig wiederholt, oder gleich sinniger die 2Tätervariante schlüssig vor der Jury runtergebetet???
Alles spekulativ. So wird jedenfalls oft vorgegangen. Ein Plea Deal, wie grade um Mr. Parkland. Und da sind es 17 Tote!
Sörings Geseier zum Thema Todesstrafe muss einfach ertragen werden. Er inszeniert sich in dem Fall nun mal am liebsten als Opfer.
Ob das Bettlaken unter dem Bett nun vorhanden war oder ein dramatisches Märchenelement Sörings ist....Was kein Märchen ist, dass die Redeker Anwaltskanzlei 1986 nichts anderes in ihrer Beratung vorsah, als Söring in den Bereich des deutschen Strafrechts zu ziehen, sprich Jugendstrafrecht!! Andrew Hammel kennt das zugehörige Schriftstück von Redeker!
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#%7B%22itemid%22:%5B%22001-57619%22%5D%7D
In Absätzen 93 bis 98 setzt sich der EGMR damit auseinander, ob es ein ernsthaftes Risiko einer Hinrichtung gäbe. Das Ergebnis: Das Risiko ist so groß, dass Artikel 3 ins Spiel kommt.
🤦🏻