[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, PENN., DEL., N.C., ALA., LA.

[Rick Halperin]

March 31



TEXAS:

Reverse the Texas Criminal Court of Appeals Suspension of Death Penalty 
Attorney David Dow and Reinstate Him



Texas based David Dow is one of the best and highly regarded death penalty 
defense attorneys in the United States. He and his team have represented over 
100 death row defendants, many pro bono. 2 defendants were innocent and 
completely exonerated. 20 defendants sentences were commuted from death to life 
sentences.

Over 20 years ago Dow founded Texas's oldest Innocence Project, The Innocence 
Network. Currently he runs the Death Penalty Clinic, staffed by law students, 
at the University of Houston Law Center where he is also the Cullen Professor. 
He has dedicated his life to representing prisoners on death row and inspires 
new generations to do the same. He now needs your help.

The Issue: In January 2015, the Texas Criminal Court of Appeals (CCA) suspended 
David Dow for a whole year for filing a petition of a stay of execution 30 
minutes late, 1 week before the execution was scheduled. This means he can not 
represent death row defendants before the Court until early 2016! A dissenting 
judge, Elsa Alcala, wrote, "Dow's pleadings were 30 minutes late under the 
plain language of the rule." She further wrote, "I would not hold Dow in 
contempt for filing pleadings only 30 minutes late under the circumstances in 
which this Court still had essentially 7 days to consider the pleadings."

The CCA's deadline rule is that a petition may not be filed "...fewer than 7 
days before the scheduled execution date." Dow's petition was filed at 6:30 pm 
on October 21, 2014 and the defendant's scheduled execution was after 6:00 pm 
on October 28th. Also, the lateness of Dow's filing is up for debate because 
the CCA's own example of a late filing is 8 days, which obfuscates their rule.

Other Texas death penalty lawyers have committed far worse offenses such as 
falling asleep or being intoxicated at trials and and were never sanctioned. 
Attorney Jerome Godinich missed three filing deadlines without a contempt 
ruling against him.

Why the excessive, unprecedented punishment? Well, it's complicated.

This was Dow's 2nd "late" filing. In 2007, he and his defense team petitioned 
the CCA for a last minute stay on the scheduled day of an execution. Their 
computers crashed and they asked the presiding judge, Sharon Keller, to keep 
the clerk's office open an extra 20 minutes. Judge Keller had already gone home 
to meet a repair person and said, "We close at 5." The defendant was executed 
that night.

Judge Keller's actions set off a tsunami of anger and protest. It is an 
unwritten Texas tradition for judges to deal with last minute death penalty 
pleadings from home after hours when lives are at stake. The press attacked 
her, Republicans disparaged her and people protested in front of her house. 
Lawyers asked her to step down. Even her friends became her detractors.

Fast forward to January 2015. Who is the presiding judge of the Texas Criminal 
Court of Appeals? Judge Sharon Keller. This could be a cruel coincidence, but 
Dow's suspension reeks of retaliation. His passion and skill defending death 
row prisoners for over 2 decades has made him a thorn in the CCA's judges 
sides.

David Dow is one of the good guys. The CCA's ruling prevents him from 
presenting the cases of, at this writing, a dozen death row clients in their 
courtroom.

A 12 month suspension is a draconian punishment that doesn't fit the "crime," 
if indeed there even is a crime. It can also have a ripple effect and deter 
attorneys from working on capital cases. Please sign the petition to the 
Supreme Court of Texas and ask them to overturn the CCA's ruling and reinstate 
David Dow. Let them know many eyes are upon them. It is literally a matter of 
life and death.

(source: change.org)








PENNSYLVANIA:

Officials argue need for reform to Pa.'s death penalty system----Some officials 
and associations believe that not enough is being done to ensure those on death 
row actually committed the crimes or deserve the punishment of death



The death penalty is a tool prosecutors use to punish those who commit the most 
grievous crimes against society.

Some officials and associations, however, believe that not enough is being done 
to ensure those on death row actually committed the crimes or deserve the 
punishment of death.

Through studies and reviews of Pennsylvania's death penalty system, some have 
found lacking and underfunded defenses as well as strong racial biases where 
black defendants were committed to death row more often and for the same crimes 
as white defendants.

For some, though, the death penalty is an important tool in the criminal 
process.

Death penalty

The potential for a death penalty starts with a homicide and a prosecutor's 
determination of whether that can be prosecuted as a 1st-, 2nd- or 3rd-degree 
murder.

Cumberland County District Attorney David Freed said if he and his office 
believe it is a strong 1st-degree murder case, then he has to determine if 
there are "aggravating circumstances" that meet the standards for a death 
penalty case.

Some potential circumstances include a history of violence, killing during the 
commission of a felony, or killing a child or elderly person, Freed said.

If any of those circumstances fit, then it's up to the prosecutor to decide if 
it should be a capital case that could result in the defendant's execution.

In his career of almost 20 years as a prosecutor, Freed said he has been 
involved in 30 homicide cases. In those that have fallen in the last 10 years, 
Freed has more often than not made the decision himself in whether to seek the 
death penalty.

He explained that his office will initially file a criminal homicide charge 
without detailing what degree or murder they intend on seeking. With some time, 
he will then determine the degree and aggravating circumstances to be ready at 
the formal arraignment in the case.

Not every prosecutor will opt for the death penalty, and Death Penalty 
Information Center Executive Director Robert Dunham said there aren't many 
district attorneys who consider it, even in states that allow it.

"The DA always has discretion," Dunham said, noting that studies show that only 
a small percentage of counties end up seeking the death penalty, which then 
increases the rate for an entire state.

Carlisle defense attorney and former prosecutor Jay Abom said he's also seen 
less of an interest in pursuing a death penalty.

"I think prosecutors in my opinion are much more judicious in applying the 
death penalty case," he said. "Anecdotally, its seems like it's being sought 
less frequently. Maybe they want to reserve (the sentence) for those who 
deserve it. And that may change over time."

"...I am willing to consider the development of mitigating evidence at any time 
during the proceedings," Freed said in an email. "I am confident that I make 
the decision to file aggravating circumstances after appropriate deliberation 
and only in the most egregious cases."

Freed noted that though cases involving the death of an infant - often in 
shaken baby cases - it's difficult to prove intent even with aggravating 
circumstances, so cases like that of Justin Thompson often aren't pursued as 
capital case options. In that particular case, Freed said the district 
attorney's office revised its decision and did not pursue the death penalty. 
Thompson was later found guilty by a jury of 3rd-degree murder.

Thompson, 36, of South Middleton Township, was charged after the September 2011 
death of his 5-week-old daughter. Aggravating circumstances were initially 
filed in this case, but they were repealed before the trial this past February. 
A jury convicted him of 3rd-degree murder, and he was sentenced to 16 to 40 
years in prison.

When a death sentence is sought, a jury must decide both the guilt of the 
defendant in the trial and the sentence in the penalty phase if the defendant 
is convicted of 1st-degree murder. The jury would then decide if the defendant 
should be sentenced to life in prison or death row.

After that trial in the county, an inmate then has the right to file an appeal. 
If that fails, the inmate can file post-conviction relief. If the ruling is not 
overturned at that stage either, the inmate can then go through the federal 
review of habeas corpus.

Problems

Defenders and organizations argue that there are numerous ways in this process 
where an innocent person can be convicted, and that the system is generally 
bogged down in the state, costing taxpayers millions.

The American Bar Association conducted a Pennsylvania Death Penalty Assessment 
report in October 2007 and noted recently that what it found then are still 
problems today.

"Over the course of the past 30 years, the American Bar Association has become 
increasingly concerned that capital jurisdictions too often provide neither 
fairness nor accuracy in the administration of the death penalty," the 
association wrote in the report.

The report said many of Pennsylvania's shortcomings were "substantial."

Among the issues the association took with the state's death penalty system 
were inadequate procedures to protect the innocent, the state's refusal to fund 
indigent capital cases, lack of collective data in the state, significant juror 
confusion and a racial bias. The report said Pennsylvania did not mandate the 
preservation of biological (DNA) evidence for as long as the defendant remains 
incarcerated, it did not provide state funding for capital indigent defense 
services, and it did not collect data on capital cases to ensure 
proportionality in charging or sentencing.

2 of the biggest faults it found in the system were juror confusion and racial 
bias. The report said 82.8 % of capital case jurors did not believe that "a 
life sentence really meant life in prison." The jurors said they thought a 
defendant could get parole if they were sentenced to life during the penalty 
phase of a capital case, which is not the case.

The report also said 68 % thought they needed to be unanimous in finding the 
existence of mitigating circumstances, and 58.7 % failed to understand they 
could consider mitigating circumstances during the penalty phase of the case.

The report found racial bias was also an issue in capital cases, saying there 
were "strong indications" that the death penalty system did not operate in an 
"evenhanded manner." The committee analyzing the system found that 1/3 of the 
black death-row inmates in Philadelphia County would have received sentences of 
life imprisonment if they had not been black.

Freed argued that this report, and a similar one from the Pennsylvania Joint 
State Government Commission, are biased with staunch opponents to the death 
penalty and defense attorneys making up those committee boards.

"The last (joint commission) report hasn't resulted in any legislative action," 
he said.

Freed said the system has gotten better in training public defenders to 
appropriately defend capital case defendants, and the system allows for highly 
trained court-appointed attorneys to pick up a case if a public defender 
cannot. He noted that local attorneys have proven themselves more than capable 
over the years in defending their clients.

He also noted that the association's take on a racial bias has not come up in 
Cumberland County. He noted that of the 4 inmates on death row from sentences 
in the county, 2 are black and 2 are white.

"We haven't seen the racial disparity here," he said.

Appeals process

Dunham said a concern for him is the way Pennsylvania issues death warrants.

Dunham explained that a 1994 piece of legislation required death warrants to be 
issued "during times it will not be carried out." The death warrants, which 
would signify the impending execution of an inmate, are issued before certain 
stages in the appeals process - the post-conviction relief and habeas corpus 
review.

A case going to either stage would cause the death warrant to be stayed, and 
the execution date canceled.

"At both stages, it's clear the death warrant serves no legitimate purpose," he 
said. "The defendant will not be executed."

>From 1978 when the death penalty in Pennsylvania was re-established on through 
the Corbett administration, Dunham said governors have signed 433 death 
warrants. "Of those 433 death warrants, all but 3 were stayed or reprieved. 
Only 3 times were (the death warrants) carried out, and they were mentally ill 
defendants (who dropped their appeals)."

In a publication on death penalty stewardship that he wrote in 2013, 
Pennsylvania Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas Saylor of Camp Hill said that 
in 2013, 74 % of prisoners on death row in the state have been there for more 
than 10 years.

Freed agreed that there is a problem with the "bottleneck" of cases tied up in 
the appeals process, and that should be the question addressed in the 
discussion about the death penalty and reform.

Solutions

The American Bar Association in 2007 called for a nationwide moratorium on 
executions until serious flaws in the system are identified and eliminated.

Gov. Tom Wolf instituted such a moratorium shortly after taking office this 
year, and Freed has been vocal in his opposition to Wolf's moratorium, saying 
it was not in the governor???s purview to make such a decision.

"It's the law of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania," he said. "He's tied it to 
the Joint (State Government) Commission report, which is stacked with 
anti-death penalty (advocates). ... This is open-ended and outside of the law."

Wolf's moratorium is in front of the state Supreme Court, and until a decision 
is made - which judges said would not be immediate - the moratorium in 
Pennsylvania will stay in effect.

In addition to a moratorium, the bar association in its 2007 report recommended 
some things that Pennsylvania could do to make the system better and less 
likely to execute an innocent person.

Among the recommendations were a requirement for "innocence protection" that 
included evidence preservation and videotaped interrogations, a statewide data 
collection on all death-eligible cases, a state authority in charge of training 
and monitoring defense attorneys, state funding for capital indigent defense, 
clearer jury instructions and a comprehensive study about racial disparities in 
the system.

Dunham said that report has done little to change how the Pennsylvania death 
penalty system works.

"The fact is studies have shown in Pennsylvania that problems are long existent 
and haven't been addressed," he said.

Freed said he gives credit to those who take a stance in the death penalty 
debate, regardless of what side they take, but he noted that any changes to the 
system need to be met with considerations on how it would affect the judicial 
process.

"I have nothing but respect for those who have a very strong opinion against 
the death penalty," he said. "It's hard to argue there isn't a problem (with 
the system). What I want is to get (solutions) out there based in reality, not 
just conventional wisdom."

(source: correctionsone.com)

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

Officials argue over need for death sentence as inmates continue to sit and 
wait



Cumberland County Chief Public Defender Tim Clawges would love nothing more 
than to see the abolishment of the death penalty.

Serving as a public defender for almost 25 years, Clawges has first-hand 
experience talking to defendants facing death row and researching their 
histories of potential abuse, drugs and mental illness. Clawges said that even 
criminals in the most serious cases "have some real humanity. Everybody's got 
some good parts to them."

It's the bad parts, however, that is the concern of Cumberland County District 
Attorney David Freed.

Freed emphasized that he and his office put serious consideration into whether 
they should pursue a death penalty case. While those cases must prove to have 
"aggravating circumstances," he said his office goes beyond that to consider 
how much evidence is against the defender.

"I feel in the cases we've (prosecuted), there's been no question of guilt or 
if they were appropriately handled," he said.

The argument for some boils down to whether the death penalty is a deterrent to 
crime, and some officials say there is no data that points to that being the 
case.

"It's nothing but vengeance," Clawges said of capital cases.

Deterrent

Among the arguments of a broken system and taxpayer burden, some say the death 
penalty simply does not deter people from killing others.

Both Clawges and private defense attorney Jay Abom of Carlisle said the death 
penalty is not something that comes up in the process of a crime.

"I don't think a (defendant) is necessarily thinking about consequences while 
engaging in that activity," Abom said.

Robert Dunham, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, said 
there are medical factors as to why criminals don't process their crimes with 
reasoning of consequences.

A former federal defender, Dunham said that the majority of those convicted and 
sentenced to death are in their mid- to late 20s. He said medical research 
indicates that people younger than 25 are still at a stage of life where their 
frontal lobe - the part that registers consequences - is still developing and 
maturing.

"The part of the brain that would be responsive to deterrents is not developed. 
If that's the case, we can't expect that (the death penalty) would be a 
deterrent," he said.

A study released Feb. 12 from the Brennan Center for Justice at New York 
University School of Law addressed reduction of crime and took a closer look at 
how the death penalty or longer incarceration in general affected crime rates 
across the country.

The report found that increased incarceration had a limited effect on reducing 
crime for the last 2 decades. The report estimates it had somewhere between 0 
to 10 % effect on reducing crime from 1990 to 2000, but almost zero effect on 
crime since then.

"They found there is no evidence at all that shows the death penalty has an 
effect on crime levels," Dunham said. "Crime rates rose in approximately the 
same rate in the states that had the death penalty and in the states that 
didn't. Crime levels fell in approximately the same rate in the states that had 
the death penalty and in the states that didn't. Homicide rates were generally 
lower in states that did not have the death penalty."

The report argued that factors that did prove successful in crime reduction 
were increasing numbers of police officers, changes in income, decreased 
alcohol consumption and more use of data-driven policing techniques.

Prison life

Some may argue that a death sentence might not be a deterrent to criminals, but 
the bleak picture of what is in store for death row inmates can make a 
difference in whether a defendant wants to take a plea deal.

Pennsylvania Department of Corrections spokeswoman Susan McNaughton said that 
Pennsylvania's death row inmates are housed in three facilities - State 
Correctional Institution Greene and SCI Graterford for men, and SCI Muncy for 
women. She noted that all men regardless of their sentence enter the 
corrections department through SCI Camp Hill. So, there are times where SCI 
Camp Hill might house a death row inmate. According to the department's 
records, SCI Camp Hill is the temporary home of Raghunandan Yandamuri, 29, who 
was sentenced in Montgomery County in November for the death of a 10-month-old 
girl and her grandmother.

In the state Department of Correction's monthly population report, which 
included data as of Feb. 28, there were 186 death row inmates and 5,353 inmates 
serving life sentences. The total prison population in the system was 49,019.

McNaughton said the department will place male capital case inmates in Greene 
or Graterford depending on bed space availability, which she said is not an 
issue for its death row population. That inmate most likely will spend the rest 
of his life at that facility unless he needs to be moved because of court 
appearances or because he is problematic for the facility. SCI Rockview is the 
state prison where inmates are executed.

Amenities are limited to those on death row. McNaughton said death row inmates 
are provided services from counselors, religious staff, barbers and health care 
providers, and food is served to them in their cells, as opposed to being eaten 
in the inmate dining hall. Capital case inmates may also purchase items from 
the prison's commissary, though those orders are more limited than the other 
prisoners' options because of security levels.

McNaughton said the inmates on death row will spend most of their time in their 
cells.

"Capital case inmates are housed in capital case units with other capital case 
inmates," she said in an email. "They are locked in their cells 22 hours a day. 
They are permitted out of their cells for exercise or out-of-cell use of the 
unit law library, visits, etc. Each time a capital case inmate is out of 
his/her cell, at least 2 officers escorts them, and they are handcuffed and 
shackled."

As a comparison, McNaughton said prisoners serving life sentences are housed 
among the general population throughout all of the prisons in the state system. 
They have the ability to work, attend classes, participate in programs and have 
contact visits just like all of the other inmates.

That kind of outlook may change what defendants do before they get to their 
county trials.

"I speak to clients about what life would be like," Abom said. "They say, 
'Well, I'll die in prison anyway.' But I'll talk about quality of life. 
Ultimately that is the choice of the defendant and not ours."

For those who go through with the trial and end up on death row, the price 
McNaughton mentioned for extra security does mean a slightly costlier price tag 
for taxpayers. Because of the need for additional staff, McNaughton said a 
capital case inmate costs about $47,000 per year to house - about $10,000 more 
than an inmate in the general population.

(source: The Sentinel)








DELAWARE:

Columnist draws wrong conclusion on death penalty



Don Flood's column of March 24 is an emotional appeal to repeal the death 
penalty. Emotions can make you "feel right" for all the wrong reasons. I prefer 
reasoning. Senate Bill 40, which, if passed by the General Assembly and signed 
by the governor, would end capital punishment in Delaware. Passing this bill 
would be an emotional, not a reasoned decision.

Don cites 2 books, John Grisham's "The Innocent Man," and Bryan Stevenson's 
"Just Mercy." Both tell the true-life story of murders. There is enormous 
pressure to bring the killers to justice. In each book, the law and judicial 
branches are complicit in convicting innocent people for the murders. 
Conspiring by lying in court, providing false evidence, or suppressing real 
evidence, are crimes in themselves, and the consequences in these 2 cases 
involve innocent lives.

While I haven't read either book, they do not present a case for abolishing the 
death penalty, but rather they present a case for prosecuting those responsible 
for abusing and manipulating the justice system we depend on. These 2 books are 
a sad commentary on the loss of integrity in these times. Mr. Flood draws the 
wrong conclusions from the wrong books.

Don writes that it is obvious that human nature does not change at the state 
border, and we Delawareans make mistakes too. What should also be obvious is 
that human nature will not change in any other criminal or civil court case; 
shall we argue then to throw out our whole justice system, and give up on the 
idea of law and order altogether?

Our Constitution calls for protecting the rights of its citizens, and punishing 
criminals proportionately. In cases of murder, the death penalty fits the 
crime. This has been supported by Judeo-Christian philosophy for millennia and 
agrees with almost everyone's sense of fairness. The problem is the degree of 
finality and demands the most rigorous efforts on the part of the justice 
system as well as the best policies man can devise to protect the innocent.

We have a very elaborate system to protect the accused, including a defense 
team and a jury of peers, any number of Constitutional protections, and the 
ideas of "innocent till proven guilty" and "the benefit of the doubt". There 
will never be a guarantee of being right in every case, but if the people 
involved in the justice system are virtuous, justice stands an excellent chance 
of success.

Don's column is full of counterfeit arguments, some noted above, but race is 
still another. There are some legitimate racial arguments to be made, but the 
central racial argument is an ideological fabrication. The idea of racial 
animus is predicated on the disproportionate incarceration rate of blacks to 
the general population rate of blacks. There is no correlation of one rate to 
the other. Should the incarceration rate ever fall below the population rate, 
should we all call for more incarceration of blacks, whether proven guilty of a 
crime or not? Incarceration should never be a quota system. This argument is 
more about violent fatherless males, and not about race. Violence will land you 
in jail sooner or later, regardless of race.

Don labels the death penalty as an "indefensible position." It is not. But 
there is at least 1 great problem with our justice system, and I credit Don for 
mentioning it, and that is the influence of money, celebrity and power.

If our justice system is to be fair, then address the problems, not the agenda 
of a small faction of people who are vociferous but have precious few workable 
solutions to real problems.

Armand Carreau, Bridgeville

(source: Letter to the Editor, CapeGazette.com)








NORTH CAROLINA:

Will Jason Owens Face Death: Local DA Weighs In



Investigators continue to build their case against 37-year-old Robert Jason 
Owens for the alleged murders of Cristie and JT Codd and their unborn child.

While Buncombe County District Attorney Todd Williams isn't allowed to publicly 
discuss the case, Henderson County District Attorney Greg Newman believes the 
Owens case does have factors that would qualify for a death sentence case.

"If it's proven he dismembered individuals and destroyed their bodies by 
burning them and so forth," Newman said. "Then the heinous nature of the crimes 
can certainly be considered. The number of individuals murdered can also be 
considered."

But Newman also said he and other district attorneys know the national 
sentiment against death sentences is significant and reflected in prosecutions.

"We're seeing fewer and fewer death penalty trials in North Carolina," Newman 
said. "I believe if we could chart it we would see a decline in the number of 
cases where it's being sought statewide."

There are 10 convicted murderers from Buncombe County who were sentenced in the 
last 25 years and are still sitting on state and federal death rows. The last 
person put to death from Buncombe County was convicted murderer Zane Hill in 
1998 who killed his son. He was put to death by lethal injection. In 2004 
Charles Wesley Roach was put to death for the mass slayings of a Haywood County 
family.

As for what Owens will face, the decision lies with DA Williams. Williams told 
News 13 he could not comment on the case or whether he'll seek the death 
penalty for Owens.

Newman said North Carolina court rules do allow for a prosecutor to take their 
time in deciding if they will pursue the death penalty in a capital murder 
case.

(source: WLOS news)



ALABAMA:

Alabama Judges Override Juries and Order Death Sentences ... if There's an 
Election Coming Up



The worst time to be tried for murder in Alabama is in an election year, when 
state judges are prone to upgrade punishment to death in capital cases in order 
to curry favor with voters.

Alabama is 1 of 3 states (Delaware and Florida being the others) that grant 
judges the authority to override jury sentences and impose the death penalty. 
Since Florida rarely uses the judicial override and Delaware has abolished the 
death penalty, Alabama is the only state to use the option on a routine basis, 
according to the Christian Science Monitor.

Statistics show that Alabama judges, who are elected to the bench, have 
overridden juries in murder cases 111 times since the death penalty's 
reinstatement in 1976. Of that 111, judges have upgraded the sentences to death 
101 times. In the remaining 10 cases, the judges downgraded the sentence to 
life in prison. More than 20% of the inmates on death row in Alabama are there 
as a result of judicial overrides.

"Judicial candidates frequently campaign on their support and enthusiasm for 
capital punishment" because it is popular among the voting public, according to 
the Equal Justice Initiative. Consequently, "political pressure injects 
unfairness and arbitrariness into override decisions."

The Alabama Criminal Defense Lawyers Association says in the 111 death-penalty 
upgrade decisions, 80% occurred in the year leading up to a judge's reelection. 
For that reason, the organization is lobbying the state legislature to remove 
the override option.

The U.S. Supreme Court may decide to review 1 or 2 Alabama death row cases 
(Scott v. Alabama or Lockhart v. Alabama [pdf]), which could result in the 
court taking "a new look at the unusual power Alabama gives to its judges," 
Adam Liptak wrote at The New York Times.

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor has already given a clue to her 
perspective on the matter in a footnote that she wrote in her dissent in a 2013 
case, Mario Dion Woodward v. Alabama. "The only answer that is supported by 
empirical evidence," she wrote, "is one that, in my view, casts a cloud of 
illegitimacy over the criminal justice system: Alabama judges, who are elected 
in partisan proceedings, appear to have succumbed to electoral pressures." She 
supported her view by citing a study which shows that judicial overrides are 
more common during election years.

It has also been shown - based on a study of the Delaware judicial system - 
that judges, even those who are appointed, tend to apply the death sentence 
more often than juries do.

(source: allgov.com)








LOUISIANA:

Justice still elusive for exonerated death row inmate



The only thing Glenn Ford has received from the state of Louisiana after 
spending 30 years on death row as an innocent man is a $20 debit card.

After being exonerated of murder last year, he walked out of Angola prison with 
$20.24; the 24 cents was the money left in his prison account. Ford is now 
fighting to get compensation.

In November 1983, Ford was a young man living in Shreveport, Louisiana. He 
sometimes did yard work for Isadore Rozeman, who owned a jewelry and watch 
repair shop. On November 5, Ford went to Rozeman's house to ask him if he had 
work for him; Rozeman did not.

Later that day, an acquaintance found Rozeman face down and shot to death 
inside his store. In a trial before an all-white jury, defended by 2 
inexperienced counsel who had never argued before a jury, let alone made a case 
in a murder trial, Ford was convicted of Rozeman's murder.

'A minor mistake'

>From his cell in Angola prison, Ford maintained his innocence. An attorney at 
the public defender's office worked on his appeal, and in 1991, attorneys at 
the Loyola Death Penalty Resource Center took over the case.

They went all the way to the US Supreme Court in May 2011, arguing that Ford's 
constitutional rights had been violated. The Supreme Court declined to hear the 
case 4 months later.

Ford's case changed when prosecutors went to federal court with evidence that 
someone else had confessed to Rozeman's murder.

In March 2014, they filed a motion to exonerate Ford due to evidence 
"supporting a finding that Ford was neither present at, nor a participant in, 
the robbery and murder of Isadore Rozeman".

Ford was released a few days later. After three decades on death row, the 
prison did little to note his release back into society. The warden, he says, 
told him "...it was a minor mistake on their behalf and he was sorry".

He found a home in an airy brick house in New Orleans owned by the non-profit 
organisation Resurrection After Exoneration (RAE), which helps exonerated 
prisoners re-establish themselves.

RAE was founded by John Thompson, himself an exonerated prisoner who spent 18 
years in prison, 14 of them on death row in the same prisoner where Ford was 
incarcerated.

Without Thompson's help, Ford imagines he would "...probably be under a bridge 
somewhere". Because of Thompson's help, he lives in a large basement room in a 
group house.

Even with help from RAE, adjusting to life outside of prison has been 
difficult. When Ford was incarcerated, the internet, cell phones, and computers 
were not widespread technology.

Ford told Al Jazeera the rapid pace of technology is staggering:

"When I left, a computer was almost as big as a refrigerator or something. Come 
back now you can put them in your pocket ... as fast as information moves now 
overwhelms me. The records you can keep in your pocket overwhelms me. 
Everything. I can't go into a grocery store and buy groceries."

A dying man's wish

Since his release, Ford has been fighting the state for compensation. 
Restitution for wrongful imprisonment is not a given in Louisiana; Ford is 
eligible for a maximum of $330,000.

Prisoners who are wrongly incarcerated in Louisiana not only have to petition 
for compensation from the state, they have to prove they are innocent of the 
crime for which they were convicted.

Ford has to prove a negative, that he did not commit the murder of Rozeman. 
Louisiana law states exonerees must "...prove by clear and convincing evidence 
that they are factually innocent of the crime for which they were convicted".

Now even the man who sent Ford to prison has recognised the injustice of this 
system. Last week lead prosecutor in Ford???s 1984 trial, A. M. "Marty" Stroud, 
wrote a letter to the editor in a local newspaper in Shreveport, the city where 
Ford was convicted.

He called on Ford to be "...completely compensated to every extent possible 
because of the flaws of a system that effectively destroyed his life".

Stroud also admitted there was evidence in 1984 that would have cleared Glenn 
Ford, that he did not do enough to uncover it, and that his "...inaction 
contributed to the miscarriage of justice in this matter".

Stroud ended the letter apologising to Ford for the misery he has caused him 
and his family. Prison took decades of Ford's life, and it has been punishing 
to his health.

Soon after he was released, Ford was diagnosed with lung cancer. The day Al 
Jazeera interviewed him in February, his doctors had just told him it had 
spread to his bones.

Since then, his health has declined precipitously, his cancer leaving him weak. 
One of Ford's lawyers, Gary Clements, told Al Jazeera, "People are on a vigil 
with him around the clock."

Al Jazeera contacted 1 of Ford's original trial attorneys, Paul Lawrence, to 
ask him about the circumstances of the trial and Ford's struggle for 
compensation.

Lawrence declined to speak about the case, saying simply; "My life has moved 
on."

Ford does not have long to live. His hope is he will receive some compensation 
from the state that sent him to prison before he dies, money he can give to his 
family, something to recognise the years stolen from his life.

(source: Yahoo News)