[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----ARK., CALIF., ORE., USA

[Rick Halperin]

Nov. 16


ARKANSAS----new death sentence

Sentence is death in killing of Arkansas boy, 6; abuse by father was fatal in 
2015


Defense Tactics

The defense team for Mauricio Torres submitted a list of mitigating 
circumstances for reasons not to impose the death sentence in his case.

Some of the factors included:

-- Torres was under the domination of another person.

-- The murder was committed by another person and Torres acted as an 
accomplice.

-- Torres had no previous criminal history.

-- Torres was abandoned by his mother and grew up without her.

-- Torres was an occupational therapist assistant who helped others overcome 
their injuries.

-- Torres did not intend to kill his son.

-- Torres attempted to revive his son and is remorseful about the death.

-- Torres suffered health problems from being obese.

[source: Staff report]

Mauricio Torres showed no emotion Tuesday as he was sentenced to death by 
lethal injection for killing his son.

Torres, 45, of Bella Vista stood at the defense table with his 3 attorneys as 
the jury entered the courtroom for sentencing Tuesday. Benton County Circuit 
Judge Brad Karren then read the sentences to a silent courtroom.

The jury -- 7 women and 5 men -- recommended a death sentence for capital 
murder and 20 years in state prison and a $10,000 fine for the battery 
conviction after deliberating for 2 hours and 20 minutes. The trial lasted 5 
days.

Torres was stoic throughout the trial and reacted only once -- shaking his head 
during testimony of a 21-year-old woman who said he raped her when she was a 
child. Torres did not testify.

Karren followed the jury's recommendation and sentenced Torres to die by lethal 
injection. He set the execution for Nov. 15, 2017. Torres will receive an 
automatic appeal and the date will be set aside, but Karren is required by law 
to set an execution date.

Torres declined to make any statements in court after the sentences were 
announced.

Benton County sheriff's deputies then took Torres from the courtroom.

A jury on Monday found Torres guilty of capital murder and 1st-degree battery 
in the death of 6-year-old Maurice Isaiah Torres, who died March 30, 2015, at a 
Bella Vista hospital. A medical examiner testified that the boy's death was 
caused by a bacterial infection as a result of being sodomized with a stick. 
The medical examiner also testified that chronic child abuse contributed to the 
child's death.

"I'm gratified that the jury gave this crime the punishment that it deserves," 
said Nathan Smith, Benton County's prosecuting attorney. "I think the death 
penalty was the appropriate punishment in this case. If anyone on earth 
deserves the death penalty, it's Mauricio Torres."

Smith described Torres as a serial child abuser who committed "vile and 
despicable acts" on Isaiah and other children.

"I think justice was served," said Bella Vista police Capt. Tim Cook, the lead 
detective on the case.

Kim Anderson of Springdale was an alternate juror for the trial. Anderson sat 
through the trial with the other jurors but did not vote or take part in any of 
the deliberations.

She described the experience in starkly contrasting terms. "It was quite 
touching, but also very traumatic," she said Tuesday.

Anderson said she was impressed with the way the legal system operated in the 
case. She said the law, as it was presented to the jury, left no choice in a 
verdict. She quoted a Latin phrase -- res ipsa loquitur, meaning, "the thing 
speaks for itself "-- to describe the case presented to the jury.

"The law took the emotion out of the process," she said. "I saw a system work 
as it was intended to. I personally think it was a very tough decision but one 
that would have to be made. If we were to follow the law, it was the only 
decision that could be made. It was tough but right."

At trial, prosecutors showed photographs of Isaiah's body. Bruises, some old 
and some fresh, covered much of his body in the photographs.

The jury listened to an interview in which Mauricio Torres confessed to Cook 
that he put a stick in Isaiah's rectum as punishment. Torres told Cook that his 
wife, Cathy, became angry and shoved the boy down on the stick.

Cathy Torres is charged with capital murder and 1st-degree battery. Her trial 
is scheduled for May.

Isaiah's 9-year-old sister testified that she saw her father put the stick in 
her brother's rectum during a Missouri camping trip. She also described other 
instances in which their father abused Isaiah.

During the sentencing phase, prosecutors presented 5 witnesses who testified 
that Torres either physically or sexually abused them as children.

Mauricio Torres' father and uncle testified Tuesday on his behalf.

Smith told the jury in closing arguments that a death sentence was a just 
punishment. "Isaiah received a sentence from his father," Smith said. "I'm 
asking you to give a just sentence to his father."

Jeff Rosenzweig, one of Torres' attorneys, told jury members in closing 
arguments that they had to search their minds and souls to decide whether to 
impose a death sentence. He urged jurors not to let emotions guide their 
decision and to sentence Torres to life imprisonment.

(source: arkansasonline.com)






CALIFORNIA:

ACLU files suit to thwart resumption of executions in California


A civil liberties group on Tuesday filed a lawsuit that could slow California's 
plans for resuming executions.

The ACLU of Northern California challenged a state law that gives the 
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation wide flexibility in establishing 
execution procedures.

Delegating such policy decisions to a state agency, the suit says, violates 
separation of powers provisions of the California Constitution.

The suit follows a Nov. 4 decision by the corrections department to finalize 
new regulations for conducting lethal injections and the subsequent passage of 
a ballot measure intended to expedite executions.

A separate lawsuit challenging Proposition 66 is pending before the California 
Supreme Court. Votes on the measure still are being counted, but it is winning 
by a narrow margin.

Californians last week rejected another ballot measure that would have replaced 
the death penalty with life without the possibility of parole.

The ACLU suit, challenging a 1941 state law, could stall executions even if 
Proposition 66 were allowed to go forward.

The state has not executed an inmate since 2006. Courts struck down 
California's previous 3-drug lethal injection method, and Gov. Jerry Brown's 
administration did not propose a new protocol until last year.

There are 750 prisoners on California's death row, the largest in the country, 
and at least 16 have exhausted their appeals and could be executed.

The inmates facing imminent execution are older than 50 - 1 is approaching 80 - 
and were condemned for crimes that took place decades ago.

Kent Scheidegger, legal director for a statewide law-and-order group, said 
executions could resume during the first half of next year if courts dismiss 
the lawsuits quickly.

"Assuming we defeat all these attempts to get injunctions, it could be in the 
1st half of next year," said Scheidegger, legal director of the Criminal 
Justice Legal Foundation. "I think that is reasonable."

The latest suit says the Legislature, not a state agency, must set parameters 
for the kind of lethal injection procedure California adopts. It also argues 
that lawmakers should be the ones deciding on the acceptable amount of pain for 
an inmate to experience, the acceptable amount of time it takes for the inmate 
to die and the level of reliability of the execution process. "Those questions 
need to be decided by elected leaders, not un-elected bureaucrats," said Linda 
Lye, senior staff attorney for the ACLU of Northern California.

A similar lawsuit filed in Arkansas, Lye said, forced that state's legislature 
to clarify how lethal injections were to be carried out.

Scheidegger said he doubted the California effort would succeed.

"They are attacking what the law has always been," he said. "I don't think the 
California Supreme Court will follow the lead of the state of Arkansas."

(source: Los Angeles Times)

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

Governor Brown must immediately halt execution of Kevin Cooper - UN rights 
experts urge----State of California could "be about to execute an innocent 
man."


A group of United Nations human rights experts* today urged Jerry Brown, 
Governor of the State of California United States, to halt the execution of 
Kevin Cooper, who was convicted for murder following judicial proceedings that 
reportedly did not meet international standards of fair trial and due process. 
He is expected to be among the 1st inmates to be executed when lethal 
injections resume in California. In July 1983, Mr. Cooper, a 25 year old 
African American was arrested for the murders of a couple and their young 
children in Chino Hills, outside of Los Angeles. Despite testimonies and 
evidence suggesting that the crimes had been committed by several men, white or 
Latinos, the police is said to have carried out limited investigations solely 
directed at demonstrating Cooper???s culpability. It is also alleged that Mr. 
Cooper trial was marred with procedural irregularities including false evidence 
at trial on several occasions, the presentation of manipulated testimony and 
alteration of the results of blood sample.

"There are strong indications that the death penalty may be carried out against 
Mr. Cooper following judicial procedures that do not fulfill the most stringent 
guarantees of fair trial and due process, including access to adequate legal 
assistance and conviction upon clear and convincing evidence", the experts 
noted.

"If it were to proceed, his execution will most likely constitute a grave 
violation of applicable international human rights standards," they stressed.

The experts recalled the 2009 warning by five federal appellate judges which 
said that the State of California could "be about to execute an innocent man." 
6 additional federal appellate judges joined dissents finding that Mr. Cooper 
never had a fair hearing to prove his innocence.

The 11 Ninth Circuit Judges' dissent determined that evidence against Mr. 
Cooper was likely planted or manipulated by authorities and that exculpatory 
evidence was destroyed or withheld from the defense. It also stressed that the 
state would not have been able to obtain a conviction against Mr. Cooper 
without the planted evidence and had the exculpatory evidence been disclosed.

"To proceed with Mr. Cooper's execution without proper investigation into the 
allegation of grave irregularities during his trial would be utterly 
unacceptable and in flagrant contravention of the United States' national and 
international obligations," the UN experts warned.

"International law, accepted as binding by the US, provides that capital 
punishment may only be imposed following trials that comply with the most 
stringent requirements of fair trial and due process, or could otherwise be 
considered an arbitrary execution," they stressed.

The UN independent experts also stressed that the UN Human Rights Committee and 
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights have urged the US Federal Government to 
consider establishing a federal moratorium on the death penalty.

(*) The experts: Ms. Agnes Callamard, Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, 
summary or arbitrary executions; Mr. Mutuma Ruteere, Special Rapporteur on 
contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related 
intolerance; and Mr. Ricardo Sunga, current chairperson of the Working Group of 
Experts on People of African Descent.

(source: yubanet.com)






OREGON:

How much does the Oregon death penalty cost? New study examines 100s of cases


A new study claims the trial and incarceration costs connected with the death 
penalty are almost twice as expensive than those for life sentences or other 
lesser penalties.

Researchers at Lewis & Clark Law School and Seattle University reviewed 
hundreds of aggravated murder cases from 1984 to 2013 in Oregon. The charge is 
the state's only crime eligible for the death penalty.

The 18-month study is being released Wednesday, a month after Gov. Kate Brown 
announced she would continue a state moratorium on capital punishment. The 
study, funded by the anti-death penalty Oregon Justice Resource Center, aims to 
provide a data-driven, objective look at taxpayer costs, said law school 
professor Aliza Kaplan, 1 of the authors.

Since 1984, Oregon courts have sentenced 62 people to death. The state executed 
two in the 1990s by lethal injection; four have died from natural causes while 
on death row; 21 have had their sentences reduced; and one person was released, 
according to the study. That leaves 34 people currently on death row.

Researchers at the law school gathered county jail costs per inmate during a 
death penalty trial, public defender cost per case, and costs from the state 
Department of Corrections to house an inmate after conviction. Researchers also 
obtained costs from the state Department of Justice to defend appeals and other 
filings from defendants during higher court proceedings, such as the state 
Supreme Court.

What's missing: costs from district attorneys and the courts. Their budgets 
don't break down expenditures per case, according to the study.

Of 374 aggravated murder trials, 61 death penalty cases cost an average of $2.3 
million compared with $1.4 million from 313 cases that resulted in lesser 
punishments, a $918,896 difference or 1.7 times less, according to the study.

Without prison expenditures, the death penalty cases drop on average to $1.1 
million compared to the $315,159 for the lesser sentences, which cost 3.5 times 
less. The report also looks at a smaller subset of cases from 2000 to 2013.

"Numerous states, as we describe in this report, have gotten rid of the death 
penalty," said Kaplan, Lewis & Clark law professor and director of the Criminal 
Justice Reform Clinic who acknowledges she has worked to abolish the death 
penalty. "There's a handful of states with moratoriums, including ours. So 
there's a lot of questioning of the death penalty currently around the country: 
its constitutionality (and) its value."

Public support about the death penalty appears mixed nationwide.

Since 2009, lawmakers have abolished the death penalty in New Mexico, Illinois, 
Connecticut, Maryland and most recently Nebraska, according to the National 
Conference of State Legislatures.

However after last week's general election, voters in Nebraska repealed the 
Legislature's abolition. Voters in California also rejected an effort to repeal 
the death penalty, and in Oklahoma, the electorate added language in the 
state's constitution declaring that capital punishment is not cruel and 
unusual.

In Oregon, defendants accused of aggravated murder get 2 lawyers plus 
state-funded investigators charged with learning as much as possible about the 
defendant and their family and life circumstances for the defense.

"Virtually everyone who is accused of aggravated murders is indigent," said 
3rd-year law student Venetia Mayhew, a co-author. "It's an incredibly expensive 
process, so the state is essentially covering the defense 99 % of the time, or 
very much close to that."

The report examines the average number of hearings, filings by public defenders 
and prosecutors, and the number of rulings made by the judges in response to 
attorneys.

Kaplan provided a letter written by the Oregon District Attorneys Association 
in January that claimed district attorney budgets would remain the same with or 
without the death penalty because the cases themselves would not disappear.

Clatsop County District Attorney Josh Marquis, a death penalty supporter, said 
he was surprised to learn researchers were able to obtain per-case costs from 
the state's Office of Public Defense Services, which has claimed in the past 
that releasing financial figures would hinder the fairness of future cases, he 
said.

Without seeing the report, Marquis made the correct assumption that the study's 
authors believe taxpayer money saved by eliminating the death penalty could be 
shifted to other criminal justice programs and other public systems.

"Do we really want to make decisions on justice issues based on whether we're 
saving or spending more money?," Marquis asked. "What if we showed it saved 
money to execute people more quickly? That would be a terrible reason to do 
it."

(source: oregonlive.com)

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

David Bartol to become 35th person on Oregon's death death row


Marion County Judge Tracy Prall signed a death warrant Tuesday and sent David 
Bartol, 45, to Oregon's Death Row. And into limbo.

Bartol joins 33 other men and 1 woman in Oregon's prison system who have been 
sentenced to death. But no execution has been carried out since 1997, and all 
potential executions have been subject to a moratorium put in place in 2011 by 
then-Gov. John Kitzhaber.

After taking office, current Gov. Kate Brown upheld the moratorium and made her 
personal opposition to the death penalty clear.

"(Brown) will continue Oregon's death penalty moratorium, because after 
thoroughly researching the issues, serious concerns remain about the 
constitutionality and workability of Oregon's lethal injection law," said 
spokesman Bryan Hockaday in a recent email.

He said the state's ability to obtain execution drugs was in question, as was 
the constitutionality of Oregon's current 3-drug protocol.

Brown expects a sea change nationally through legislation and court decisions, 
he added.

"These national dynamics, together with the very real challenges to carrying 
out the death penalty in Oregon, informed Governor Brown???s decision to 
continue the moratorium," Hockaday said.

Oregon is among 31 states that have death penalty, however, four of those 
states, including Washington and Oregon, have a gubernatorial moratorium in 
place.

Bartol's sentence, after being convicted of aggravated murder for stabbing 
fellow inmate Gavin Siscel, 33, to death with a homemade knife in the Marion 
County jail's day room, was the 1st death sentencing in more than 2 years in 
Oregon.

The 33 men on Oregon's death row are housed at the Oregon State Penitentiary in 
Salem. The only woman on death row, Angela McAnulty, 48, is incarcerated at the 
Coffee Creek Correctional Facility.

Tonya Gushard, spokeswoman for the Oregon State Penitentiary said Bartol, who 
was already incarcerated at the penitentiary, will return to special housing 
and undergo evaluation. After evaluation, which could take up to 30 days, he 
will be moved to death row.

Oregon's death row inmates are classified as Level 5, the maximum custody 
designation at the prison. They are housed in single cells and segregated from 
the general population.

Inmates are allowed a minimum of 40 minutes of inside exercise 7 days a week 
and 1 hour of outside exercise 5 days a week. Inmates cannot keep a change of 
clothes in their cell and instead must swap out clothes 3 times a week.

They may call using the inmate telephone system and are allowed scheduled 
visitations, but all visiting is non-contact.

Additionally, Bartol will be able to purchase televisions, radios and other 
items from the prison canteen.

Bartol will be provided religious counseling each week. Educational materials 
are provided to inmates upon written request, and they may also have work 
opportunities within their housing unit.

A death sentence yields an automatic, direct review to the Oregon Supreme 
Court, and the ensuing appeals process can last decades.

Since 2011, when Kitzhaber placed a moratorium on death sentence executions, 
inmates wanting to drop appeals and be executed were left in a waiting game.

When the moratorium was placed, it had already been more than a decade since 
Oregon executed an inmate. Between 1904 and 1997, 60 men were executed by 
hanging, gas and lethal injection, but only 2 executions took place after 1962. 
Both men executed in the 1990s had given up their appellate rights.

Since he began his time as Marion County's District Attorney, Walt Beglau said 
21 aggravated murder cases have been tried in the county. Of the 21, evidence 
for a death sentence has only been presented in seven cases.

In Oregon, death sentences are different, Beglau said. He cited the state's 
unique, 2-part process for trying cases when the death penalty is on the table. 
A jury first determines whether or not a defendant is guilty of aggravated 
murder, then enters a penalty phase where they must consider 4 questions:

1.Was the murder committed deliberately?

2.Whether the killing was unreasonable in response to the provocation, if any, 
by the deceased?

3.Is there a probability that the defendant would commit criminal acts of 
violence and be a continuing threat to society?

4.Considering all mitigating and aggravating circumstances, should the 
defendant receive a death sentence?

All 12 jurors must answer yes to the 4 questions in order for the defendant to 
be sentenced to death. It has to be 48 to 0 to impose the sentence.

"It's good to have the bar as high as it can be," he said.

The office embarks on years-long, fact-finding investigation that looks at the 
evidence of the case. Those facts matter because of the severity of the 
situation, he added.

Some question why the office continues to pursue the death penalty in light of 
the moratorium. Beglau said it is his legal duty to consider the death penalty 
for aggravated murder cases. He respects Brown's decision and other moral 
stances, but has to carry out his legal responsibility.

"We will continue to follow the law," he said, adding that it brings the public 
justice. "It's what Oregon voters approved, and we're fulfilling it."

The 12 jurors who unanimously found Bartol guilty of the aggravated murder of 
Gavin Siscel, 33, and sentenced him to death during the 6-week trial were 
relieved of their duties Thursday, but a handful returned to attend the 
sentencing. They crowded onto 1 side of the courtroom along with Siscel's 
family and friends.

Siscel's aunt and childhood friend addressed the courtroom.

Judith Krutsch, Siscel's aunt, thanked the prosecution, jury and others who 
stood up for her nephew and "delivered justice."

Bartol's attorney, Steven Gorham, said he was disappointed in the outcome and 
the state's willingness to spend millions of dollars seeking a death sentence.

"In the end, Mr. Bartol will clearly die in prison," Gorham said.

It could be from natural causes. Or he could be executed by lethal injection, 
but Gorham said, "We both know that's not likely."

After Bartol's attorney spoke, Prall addressed the court.

"The horrific nature of this crime was certainly hard to bear," she said.

She asked Bartol if he'd like to speak on his behalf.

"No, I have nothing to say," he replied.

(source: Statesman Journal)






USA:

Death Watch


Slowly, the death penalty is gaining ground again. Though many states have 
abolished the practice, residents of Oklahoma, California and Nebraska voted in 
favor of the death penalty on Election Day.

Nov. 7 marked the start of the federal death penalty trial of Dylann S. Roof, 
the white 22-year-old who a year and a half ago shot and killed 9 
African-American worshipers in a church in Charleston, S.C. Meanwhile, at the 
trials both of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev for the Boston Marathon bombings and of Mr. 
Roof, relatives of the victims have asked that the lives of the defendants be 
spared. The N.A.A.C.P. Legal Defense and Educational Fund, prominent civil 
rights leaders and a majority of black South Carolinians favor life without 
parole for Mr. Roof. His execution, some say, would only enforce the legitimacy 
of a punishment applied disproportionately to black people.

Death penalty trials make it more difficult for victims to heal and recover, 
and sentences are often poorly administered. According to a study from the 
Columbia University School of Law, courts found a "serious reversible error" in 
nearly 70 % of cases reviewed from between 1973 and 1995. But the strongest 
moral argument against capital punishment is that vengeance corrupts those who 
demand the death of a fellow human being. As Supreme Court Justice Anthony 
Kennedy wrote in 2008, "When the law punishes by death, it risks its own sudden 
descent into brutality, transgressing the constitutional commitment to decency 
and restraint." Each person strapped to the table or into the electric chair is 
redeemable and has a right to live until called by God.

(source: americamagazine.org)