[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, ALA., LA., OHIO, S.DAK., USA

[Rick Halperin]

Feb. 2



TEXAS----impending executions

Execution of Texas Inmate Donald Newbury Scheduled for February 4, 2015



Donald Keith Newbury is scheduled to be executed at 6 pm CST, on Wednesday, 
February 4, 2015, at the Walls Unit of the Huntsville State Penitentiary in 
Huntsville, Texas. 52-year-old Donald is convicted of the murder of 29-year-old 
Police Officer Aubrey Hawkins on December 24, 2000, in Irving, Texas. Donald 
has spent the last 12 years of his life on Texas' death row.

Donald attended school though the sixth grade. He had previously been arrested 
and served time for aggravated robbery, twice. Prior to his arrest he had 
worked as a carpenter, an electrician, and a laborer.

In 1998, Donald Newbury was, for a 3rd time, convicted of aggravated robbery 
with a deadly weapon, leading to a 99 year prison sentence. In December of 
2000, Newbury was serving his time at the John B. Connally Unit, a maximum 
security state prison near Kenedy, Texas. Donald conspired with 6 other inmates 
- 39-year-old Joseph C. Garcia, 23-year-old Randy Ethan Halprin, 37-year-old 
Larry James Harper, 39-year-old Patrick Henry Murphy, Jr., 30-year-old George 
Rivas, and 38-year-old Michael Anthony Rodriguez - to break out of the prison. 
The group, lead by George Rivas, became known as the "Texas 7." All were 
serving sentences of 30 years or longer, most with potential life sentences.

On December 13, 2000, around 11:20 am, the 7 inmates used a variety of ploys to 
overpower and restrain 9 civilian maintenance supervisors, four correctional 
officers, and 3 uninvolved inmates. They had planned the escape during the 
slowest part of the day and in areas with low surveillance. They stole a white 
prison truck to assist in their escape, eventually dumping it in a Wal-Mart 
parking lot.

After their escape, the group of 7 fled to San Antonio. On December 14, they 
robbed a Radio Shack in Pearland to obtain money. On December 19, the 4 of the 
7 checked into an Econo Lodge motel in Farmers Branch. They decided, once again 
needing money, to rob Oshman's Sporting Goods store in Irving, a nearby town. 
For several days they cased the store and created their plans.

On December 24, 2000, they held up to store, stealing 44 guns and over $70,000 
in cash. A customer outside the store saw the hold up and called police. 
Officer Aubrey Hawkins responded to the call and was immediately ambushed. He 
suffered 11 gunshot wounds from at least 5 different weapons. His body was 
dragged out from his vehicle and run over by the group as they fled the scene.

The Texas 7 were eventually arrested, with the help of the television show 
America's Most Wanted, which featured their story on January 20, 2001. 6 of 7 
were captured, while the 7th, Larry Harper, killed himself before he could be 
arrested. All 6 surviving members were charged, convicted, and sentenced to 
death for the murder of Officer Hawkins. As it was unclear who actually shot 
Officer Hawkins, they were convicted under the Law of Parties, which allows for 
a person to be criminally held responsible for another's actions if that person 
acts with "the intent to promote or assist the commission of the offense and 
solicits, encourages, directs aids, or attempts to aid the other person to 
commit the offense ... If, in the attempt to carry out a conspiracy to commit 1 
felony, another felony is committed by 1 of the conspirators, all conspirator 
are guilty of the felony actually committed."

The ringleader, George Rivas was executed on February 29, 2012. Michael Anthony 
Rodriguez was executed on August 14, 2008, after asking that his appeals be 
stopped.

Please pray for peace and healing for the family of Aubry Hawkins. Please pray 
for the family of Donald Newbury. Please pray that if Donald is innocent, 
evidence will be revealed before his execution. Please pray that Donald will 
come to find peace through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, if he has 
not already.

(source: The Forgiveness Foundation, Jan. 26)

******************

An appeal to save Rodney Reed



Rodney Reed, an innocent man on Texas death row, faces an execution date of 
March 5. Reed, who is African American, was convicted and sentenced to death by 
an all-white jury for the 1996 murder of Stacey Stites. His case is a troubling 
mixture of prosecutorial misconduct, police corruption, inadequate legal 
defense and institutional racism. Evidence of his innocence is overwhelming, 
and the need for a new trial is indisputable.

Rodney's family and supporters are organizing a campaign to win clemency from 
newly elected Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and the Texas Board of Pardons and 
Paroles. Here, we publish a sample clemency letter that can be used to collect 
signatures at tablings and other events, or as a basis for your own individual 
letter. Please print it out, collect signatures and send letters to Gov. Greg 
Abbott (Office of the Governor, P.O. Box 12428, Austin, TX 78711-2428) and the 
Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles (P.O. Box 13401, Austin, TX 78711-3401). 
Please make copies of all letters, along with signatures, and mail them to the 
Campaign to End the Death Penalty, 1311 E. 13th St., Austin, TX 78702.

Dear Governor Abbott and members of the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles:

I am writing to ask that you grant clemency to Texas death row prisoner Rodney 
Reed, who is scheduled to be killed on March 5, 2015.

Rodney Reed was convicted of the 1996 murder of Stacey Stites in Bastrop, 
Texas. His conviction was based on semen DNA evidence. However, no other 
physical evidence linked him to the murder. Rodney has maintained that he and 
Stacey were having an affair, which accounted for the presence of his DNA.

During the trial, important evidence of Rodney's innocence was not presented, 
through a combination of inadequate representation and prosecutorial 
misconduct. This included hidden eyewitness testimony, misleading expert 
witness testimony, and the failure of the defense to call either an alibi 
witness or the multiple witnesses who could have testified to the affair 
between Stacey and Rodney.

Over the years, evidence has been uncovered that points to Stacey's 
then-fiancee and former Giddings police officer Jimmy Fennell, Jr. as the 
perpetrator of this crime. Fennell failed two polygraph tests on the question 
of whether he had strangled Stacey. Witness testimony and DNA evidence 
collected at the site where Stacey was found point to the involvement of 
Fennell's known associates. Fennell is currently in prison for sexually 
assaulting a woman in his custody while policing in Georgetown, TX.

What you can do

Rodney Reed's family and supporters are asking everyone who cares about justice 
to step up their efforts for Rodney now. You can:

-- Collect clemency letters and signatures. Click here to download a sample 
clemency letter and find instructions on how to use it. You can find the online 
petition for Rodney at change.org. Download a paper petition here. The Campaign 
to End the Death Penalty also has an informational fact sheet on Rodney's case. 
Think about how you can use these materials at your school, church or community 
event.

-- Stay updated about Rodney's case through social media. Follow the Justice 
for Rodney Reed campaign on Facebook, on Twitter, and on Instagram. Share your 
own solidarity photo with us and tag it #Justice4Rodney

-- Host a screening of the documentary State vs. Reed. This is an incredible 
resource for showing the facts of the case. You can find it online at YouTube. 
A new shorter video about the case called Framed also updates the case with new 
witnesses interviews.

For more action items and information visit the Free Rodney Reed website and 
the Campaign to End the Death Penalty website.

Rodney is pursuing new DNA testing on several crucial pieces of 
evidence--including the belt that Stacey was strangled with--which has never 
been tested for DNA. These tests could very well prove Rodney's innocence. 
Rodney is also pursuing a new state appeal based on changed medical testimony 
about the DNA that convicted him, that could help to prove his innocence.

New laws passed in the last 2 legislative sessions concerning DNA testing in 
Texas speak to the importance of both pre- and post-conviction testing. In 
2013, then-Attorney General and now-Governor Abbott supported a bill for 
pre-conviction DNA testing, saying, "Texans may disagree about the death 
penalty, but one thing all Texans can and should agree upon is that no innocent 
person should be executed in Texas." I am asking that you stand by those words 
and that you stop the execution of an innocent man. I am asking that you ensure 
that all DNA testing and a thorough examination of all the evidence in Rodney's 
case is undertaken by the state.

I am asking that you spare the life of Rodney Reed.

(source: SocialistWorker.org)

**************************

Petition to stop the execution of Rodney Reed

see: https://www.change.org/p/stop-the-execution-of-rodney-reed

(source: change.org)








ALABAMA----impending execution

Alabama Attorney General's Office does not oppose execution delay for death row 
inmate



An Alabama death row inmate, convicted in the 1987 shooting death of a 
Sylacauga convenience store clerk, may have his March execution delayed after 
his defense attorneys on Monday filed a motion - unopposed by state prosecutors 
- with the Alabama Supreme Court.

On Dec. 23 the Alabama Supreme Court granted the Alabama Attorney General's 
request to set March 19 for the execution of William "Bill" Kuenzel.

But in the petition to the Supreme Court, Kuenzel's attorneys state that on 
Jan. 12 the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals set oral arguments for their 
appeal on April 7, 2015 - about three weeks after the scheduled execution.

"The state's (Alabama Attorney General's Office) motion to set an execution 
date seems to have been made as a matter of routine, despite the fact that an 
appeal was pending. Now that oral argument has been scheduled, the State of 
Alabama has advised undersigned counsel that it does not oppose Kuenzel's 
request for a stay of execution," according to the petition from Kuenzel's 
attorneys.

"To execute Kuenzel when his claims of actual innocence and unconstitutional 
prosecution are in active litigation in the courts of this state is itself 
unconstitutional under the Eighth and Fourteenth amendments of the U.S. 
Constitution," according to the petition.

The motion was signed by Kuenzel attorneys Doug Jones of Birmingham, Lucas 
Montgomery, of Talladega, Jeffrey E. Glen and Rene F. Hertzog, of New York, and 
David A. Kochman, of Colorado.

Kuenzel's attorneys also note in the petition that another execution planned 
for February, that of death row inmate Tommy Arthur, has been stayed by a 
federal court while the issue of the drugs used in state executions remains 
under review by the courts.

The petition also states that same federal court also have 5 other lawsuits 
pending that challenge Alabama's new execution protocol. The U.S. Supreme Court 
has already agreed to review Oklahoma's lethal injection protocol, which 
mirrors the new protocol sought to be used by Alabama, the petition states.

"Although Kuenzel has not yet elected to file a parallel lawsuit (regarding the 
execution drugs), he urges that prudence and caution each counsel for his not 
being executed while those claims remain the subject of active litigation," 
according to the petition.

(source: al.com)








LOUISIANA:

Death penalty lawyers group sues public defenders for money



The Louisiana Public Defenders Board is asking a state appeal court to overturn 
a ruling that it must pay a nonprofit group to defend clients facing a possible 
death penalty.

Judges in Caddo and Sabine parishes ordered the board to pay Capital Assistance 
Project of Louisiana Inc.

The Times reports (http://bit.ly/1tQVJRz ) that the public defenders board 
contends that district judges lack authority to make it fund the nonprofit.

The board assigns indigent clients facing the death penalty to contract groups 
and attorneys. Capital Assistance's contract ended June 30, and the board 
stopped paying it.

Capital Assistance Project head Richard Goorley says he's lost most of his 
staff.

State public defender Jay Dixon says there have been indications of problems 
with the nonprofit's representation, but litigation keeps him from describing 
them.

(source: Associated Press)








OHIO:

Politics and government from the Statehouse to the White House----Ohio Supreme 
Court ups requirements for attorneys in capital punishment cases



Court-appointed attorneys in capital murder cases must meet more demanding 
qualifications, under new rules approved by the Ohio Supreme Court.

Attorneys who seek court appointments to represent indigent clients in such 
cases must now be certified by the Commission on Appointment of Counsel in 
Capital Cases. To qualify, they must have had lead trial experience in at least 
1 capital case or have been co-counsel in a minimum of 2 capital cases in the 
past 10 years.

Also, attorneys will no longer get full credit for training taken 
electronically, compared to in-person training for which they will continue to 
receive full credit.

The new rules, which took effect Feb. 1, are not related to other pending 
proposals about trial counsel made by the Joint Task Force to Review the 
Administration of Ohio???s Death Penalty.

(source: Columbus Dispatch)



SOUTH DAKOTA:

Voice: Is death penalty too costly for taxpayers?----An opinion piece by James 
Abourezk, a former U.S. senator from South Dakota.



Is the cost of vengeance becoming too high? More and more Americans are 
believing that it is. Small wonder. By examining the cost of exercising the 
death penalty versus life imprisonment for those convicted of capital crimes 
(murder, kidnapping etc.), South Dakota taxpayers are being forced to cough up 
more money to satisfy the urge for vengeance by families of the victims of 
crimes, as well as to allow politicians to fulfill the blood lust of those who 
believe criminals should be put to death for serious crimes.

The Cost-Benefit Analysis of Killing Criminals. In study after study, we find 
that politicians - and prosecutors - push hard for execution of serious 
criminals mostly for political reasons. Should any of these tough talkers take 
time to compare the cost of state-sponsored executions to the much lower cost 
of locking up the criminal for life with no parole, saving tax money might just 
be preferred punishment for these major law-breakers.

In fact, should the voting public find out how much more expensive the death 
penalty is than imprisonment for life, politicians would become immediate 
converts to cheaper ways to punish those who commit capital crimes. But as it 
now stands, instead of politicians unwillingness to tell the public how much 
higher the cost to the taxpayers the death penalty is than life imprisonment - 
without parole - we hear only the vengeance part of their argument.

In a paper issued by the Death Penalty Information Center, updated in 1994, 
some of the costs to the states which use capital punishment are reported. In 
California, for example, death penalty trials are 6 times more costly than a 
trial where the death penalty is the final outcome. In Kansas, a 1994 capital 
trial cost more than a murder trial where the death penalty is taken off the 
table. There exist many reasons for the excessive cost, but included in those 
reasons are matters such as the accused fighting as hard as he or she can to 
avoid execution. They use every conceivable defense, which adds the expense for 
expert witnesses, laboratory analysis and other costs. The irreversibility of a 
capital crime death sentence requires courts to follow heightened due process 
in the preparation and in the course of the trial. The separate sentencing 
phase of a death penalty trial can cost much more than the trial itself. And 
when death penalty only is on the table, accused are much more likely to insist 
on a trial rather than settling for a deal along with a guilty plea. And, there 
are constitutionally mandated appeals which are costly to both sides of the 
case.

In Texas, which boasts of the largest death row in the country, a death penalty 
case in 1996 cost taxpayers an average of $2.3 million, which is about 3 times 
the cost of imprisoning the accused in a single cell for 40 years. Other states 
report similar savings when the death penalty is not the issue in a criminal 
trial.

If the excessive cost of a death penalty trial is compared to a nondeath case, 
each state could increase police presence, police training and other matters 
designed to curb criminal activity, which is where the money should be spent.

The Effect on the Public of Capital Crime and Capital Punishment. Aside from 
the money spent on capital cases, the effect on the public of highly publicized 
executions is damaging to efforts to downplay violence, especially violence 
committed by the state.

I've written before about the lack of deterrence of murders when capital 
punishment is on the table. I learned in law school about how England used to 
hang pickpockets, but during the public hanging of a convicted pickpocket, 
other pickpockets would work the crowd for an easy profit while their marks 
were watching the hanging. These stories by historians make the point that the 
death penalty is not at all effective as a deterrent to more crime.

Moreover, history has shown that leading up to a well-publicized public 
execution, the public becomes highly agitated, and more violent themselves as a 
result of the gruesome publicity. But what does one expect when the state 
itself commits legal murder by killing one of its citizens?

South Dakota would be well served by the Legislature ignoring political leaders 
who make a career of ramping up the public's blood lust.

(source: MY VOICE----James Abourezk represented South Dakota in the U.S. Senate 
and in the U.S. House of Representatives where he served on the Senate 
Judiciary Committee. Retired, he lives in Sioux Falls with his wife and 
daughter; Argus Leader)








USA:

US Catholic Church welcomes Court decision to review protocols for use of 
lethal injection



The chairs of the Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development and 
Committee on Pro-life Activities welcomed the US Supreme Court's January 23 
announcement that it would review the drug protocols of lethal injection 
executions in the state of Oklahoma. The court will consider whether the 
procedures violate the US Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

"I welcome the Court's decision to review this cruel practice," said Archbishop 
Thomas G Wenski of Miami. "Our nation has witnessed through recent executions, 
such as occurred in Oklahoma, how the use of the death penalty devalues human 
life and diminishes respect for human dignity. We bishops continue to say, we 
cannot teach killing is wrong by killing."

The Court's decision to consider the case of Glossip v Gross, brought by 3 
death row inmates in Oklahoma, comes after several lethal injection executions 
were botched, including that of Clayton D Lockett in Oklahoma.

"Society can protect itself in ways other than the use of the death penalty," 
Cardinal Sean P O'Malley, Chair of the Committee on Pro-life Activities, said. 
"We pray that the Court's review of these protocols will lead to the 
recognition that institutionalized practices of violence against any person 
erode reverence for the sanctity of every human life. Capital punishment must 
end."

The U.S. bishops have been advocating against the death penalty for over 40 
years. In 2005, they initiated the Campaign to End the Use of the Death Penalty 
and continue to work closely with state Catholic Conferences, the Catholic 
Mobilizing Network and other groups towards the abolition of the death penalty 
in the United States.

The bishops join Pope Francis who in October 2014 called on Christians and all 
people of good will "to fight...for the abolition of the death penalty...in all 
its forms," out of respect for human dignity.

The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments in this matter in April.

(source: Independent Catholic News)

**********************************

Rethinking the Death Penalty



I can't really write a massive post about our Christian duty to conform 
ourselves to Christ through submission to the Magisterium and not take my own 
medicine. We are all called to struggle with Church doctrine, to let ourselves 
be transformed by the renewal of our minds, through the Spirit of sonship.

Hence, the death penalty. Years ago I wrote this post in support of the death 
penalty, and, I guess, I still think it's valid. There are no absolute rights; 
prison, particularly life imprisonment, is spectacularly cruel.

And now, as a Catholic, it's easy to lawyer your way to where you want. After 
all, Catholic doctrine has long accepted the death penalty; John Paul II and 
subsequent Popes made it clear that their stance on the death penalty was not 
dogma.

But, here's what the Catechism says (# 2267):

Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully 
determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to 
the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending 
human lives against the unjust aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's 
safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these 
are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in 
conformity to the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for 
effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense 
incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the 
possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the 
offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically 
nonexistent."

That doesn't leave much wiggle room, does it?

In a sense, this is "beside the point": the Catechism argues on the basis of 
consequences; which I guess it has to, because Church doctrine allowing the 
death penalty was also argued on the basis of consequences, which is what the 
Church does when it wants to commit the apostasies it can. (If we let heretics 
live, how many poor souls will end up in the flames of Hell!) To me the 
argument is not about consequences.

But there is also a key phrase here: "the dignity of the human person". If 
Christianity really represents, in David Bentley Hart's phrase, "total 
humanism", the belief that each and every human person is of infinite value, 
then, well, there you go. If each and every human person is of infinite value, 
there is no value that is commensurable; and civil authority certainly should 
not kill anyone when there are other available means of protecting the common 
good.

Another way to look at this is through the Girardian critique of scapegoating. 
All civil punishment, necessary though it is, is always ultimately an instance 
of scapegoating. Civil authority accomplishes justice by punishing and 
excluding an individual from society. It is the restoring of social order 
through sacrifice, and whether this sacrifice is "just" might be a matter of 
sheer coincidence more often than we can contemplate. We humans, as the parable 
of the Grand Inquisitor reminds us, spend our time killing Jesus, and our duty 
as Christians, as apostles of the Kingdom, is to work towards a world where we 
do that less and less.

Perhaps a 1st step towards not killing Jesus is not killing anyone at all.

(source: Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry, blog; patheos.com)