[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, DEL., LA., OHIO, OKLA.

[Rick Halperin]

Sept. 8



TEXAS:

Watch: A Dying Breed----Can Texas Even Carry Out an Execution Anymore?


Officials down at Texas' once-proud and prolific death chamber must be 
beginning to wonder if they'll ever execute another inmate. The state hasn't 
executed anyone since Pablo Vasquez on April 6 and has since seen the past 12 
inmates avoid the imminent within a few days of their death dates. Those stays 
- and in Perry Williams' case, a straight withdrawal (see "Death Watch: A First 
Time for Everything," July 15) - have come through questions over innocence, 
certain legal statutes, and a creeping feeling that the death penalty might not 
be that good of an idea. Look no further than the June opinion from Elsa 
Alcala, a judge on the traditionally death-friendly Court of Criminal Appeals, 
in the case of Julius Murphy. The judge saw "serious deficiencies" that have 
"caused ... great concern about this form of punishment as it exists in Texas 
today." One begins to sense a changing tide.

A stay was the case again late Friday, Sept. 2, when the CCA put the execution 
of Robert Mitchell Jennings on ice pending further order of the court. 
Jennings, 58, was convicted in 1989 for the 1988 murder of Houston Police 
Officer Elston Howard, who was issuing a citation to the owner of an adult 
novelty store when Jennings burst in to rob the place and shot Howard 4 times. 
The Houston native already had 2 convictions for aggravated robbery, and 1 for 
a home burglary, and had only been out for 2 months when he killed Howard. Even 
during that short time, his appeals attorneys acknowledge, Jennings had 
committed 5 different robberies.

In his CCA appeal this summer, Jennings argued that the state destroyed 
mitigating evidence that could have spared his life - particularly a recording 
of a police interview conducted shortly after Jennings' arrest in which he 
expressed "remorse in the way I feel about the incident that happened." 
Jennings has said that he had been drinking, that Howard "ran towards him" 
before he shot, and that he wished he could "take it all back." The trial court 
issued a "nullification" instruction during punishment, rendering the recording 
irrelevant during trial. Jennings' attorney Randy Schaffer cites precedent from 
the U.S. Supreme Court establishing the "nullification" instruction as 
unconstitutional. The high court has held since 2001 that "nullification" 
instruction requires reversal of a death sentence if there was mitigating 
evidence that the jury was not afforded the opportunity to consider. (Jennings 
has also asserted that he received ineffective counsel during his trial and 
that the death penalty violates the constitutional prohibition against cruel 
and unusual punishment.)

Jennings' name has also been included in the joint lawsuit filed Aug. 12 in 
Judge Lynn Hughes' court with Jeffery Wood, Ramiro Gonzales, Rolando Ruiz, and 
Terry Edwards - the 5 inmates on the execution calendar at the time of the 
suit's filing (see "Death Watch: The Quality of State Killings," Aug. 26). The 
5 argue that they should be granted the right to have their doses of compounded 
pentobarbital (the cocktail used in state killings) tested for purity. The 
state said it would extend the courtesy to Perry Williams earlier this summer 
after Williams filed his own complaint, but in 6 months never got around to 
running the quick test (for some reason). Williams eventually got his date 
withdrawn.

Hughes dismissed Wood et al. 3 weeks ago, holding that: "The Constitution 
protects the rights of the people [to have their death doses tested] - not 
rights held collectively by groups." An appeal is currently pending in the 5th 
Circuit.

(soure: Ausstin Chronicle)

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

Why justice is 'fading away'


U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg thinks capital punishment is 
"fading away" in America.

We are confident that the demise of the death penalty - and justice - would 
make this liberal member of the highest court in the land quite happy. However, 
let us be realistic.

Capital punishment is not "fading away" due to some sudden and significant 
change in America's attitude. The primary reason the number of executions are 
declining nationwide is because of a shortage of the drugs used to carry out 
the death penalty.

And why is there a shortage? Because of the devious, nefarious and quite likely 
criminal acts of those who cannot change laws in America legally through the 
democratic process, so they resort to violence and threats of violence against 
drug manufacturers to create a shortage of the drugs used to administer the 
ultimate form of justice - thereby delaying or halting capital punishment.

So much for justice, right?

Texas has 4 scheduled executions for the rest of 2016, including the execution 
of an individual who shot to death 2 of his neighbors in 2003, another 
individual who kidnapped, sexually assaulted and killed an 18-year-old girl in 
2001 and another individual who shot and killed a policeman.

Texas, which uses the drug Pentobarbital for lethal injection, has executed 6 
individuals this year, and had 13 executions in 2015.

As recently as 2009, Texas executed 24 individuals, but has not eclipsed 17 
executions since.

Is this because of a drop in the number of capital crimes?

Is it because Texans have change their tune regarding the death penalty?

Logic dictates that executions are "fading away" because of reprehensible 
tactics by those who do not respect law and order, or how laws are created 
and/or changed in America.

(source: Editorial, Amarillo Globe-News)






DELAWARE:

Retroactivity of death penalty ruling before court


Delaware's Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on whether its ruling 
declaring the state's death penalty law unconstitutional can be applied 
retroactively to the 13 men on death row.

The court has scheduled oral arguments for Dec. 7 in the case of Derrick 
Powell, who was sentenced to death in 2011 for killing Georgetown police 
officer Chad Spicer in 2009.

Last month, a majority of the justices said Delaware's death penalty law was 
unconstitutional because it allowed judges too much discretion and did not 
require that a jury find unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt that a 
defendant deserves execution.

Attorney General Matt Denn declined to appeal that ruling in federal court but 
said he believes that it cannot be applied retroactively to offenders already 
on death row.

(source: Associated Press)






LOUISIANA:

Death penalty upheld for X-Box killer----Supreme Court give unanimous green 
light to punish man who killed 3


The path today was cleared for the execution of the Shreveport man convicted 
and sentenced to death for a triple homicide over an X-Box in October 2013.

In a 7-0 unanimous decision, the Louisiana Supreme Court today upheld the death 
penalty conviction of Marcus Reed, 39, in the August 2010 deaths of 18-year-old 
Jarquis Adams, 20-year-old Jeremiah Adams, and 13-year-old Gene Adams.

It took a Caddo Parish jury only 67 minutes to convict Reed of the murders, and 
after hearing a day-and-a-half of testimony, a little more than 2 hours to 
impose the death penalty.

In its 72-page decision, the court denied a number of Reed's charges, including 
one of racism. Reed pointed to the large number of death penalty sentences 
imposed by Caddo Parish juries during the years his case was making its way 
through the courts.

But in their opinion, the jurists noted the defendant, the 3 victims and 4 of 
the jurors on the panel were African American.

In another argument, Reed's attorneys said prosecutors made impermissible 
references to religion during the penalty phase.

The justices, however, wrote Reed's attorneys made no objections regarding 
those allegations, adding the prosecutor only referenced religion on rebuttal 
in response to defense counsel's references to the New Testament in his closing 
argument.

Explaining their denial of that allegation, the justices wrote, "On the 
contrary, the prosecutor directly requested the jury leave religion out of 
their decision making process:

"You know, what I don't understand is why we can't leave God out of this. I 
mean, the law does not talk about the Bible. The law does not talk about God. 
The law talks about aggravating circumstances and mitigating circumstances and 
it talks about the circumstances of the offense and it talks about the 
character and propensity of the defendant. But nowhere does it talk about the 
Bible. Nowhere does it talk about God.'

Prosecuting attorneys were Caddo Assistant District Attorneys Dale Cox, Gia 
Prudhomme and Kelvin Rogers, and Reed was represented by Shreveport attorney 
Richard Gorley and Antonio Florence represented Reed. Caddo District Judge 
Kathryn Dorroh was the presiding judge.

Kappel seemed to make little headway with the justices regarding the penalty 
phase of Crawford's trial, when Cox, the prosecutor, invoked Christ in pressing 
the jury to condemn Crawford.

"He said, to the adult, who would harm one of these -- 'one of these' referring 
to small children -- woe be unto you, who would harm one of these. Now, this is 
Jesus Christ of the New Testament: 'It would be better as though you were never 
born. You shall have a millstone cast around your neck and you will be thrown 
into the sea,' " Cox told the jury.

"He (Jesus) reached a just verdict, which is what the law asks you to reach in 
this case: a just verdict. ... And that's why I think that we should not 
lightly disregard his words when he talks about what he would do to someone who 
hurt one of these."

This week, 111 clergy members, nuns and ministers attached their names to a 
"friend of the court" brief that criticized Cox, saying that he "wrongfully 
used or misused the Bible and his own opinions to advocate for the execution of 
Mr. Crawford."

Kappel said she couldn't think of "any other area more prejudicial than for a 
prosecutor to say to a jury, 'I believe that Jesus Christ's verdict in this 
case would be death.' "

Cox first raised the biblical passage while cross-examining a pastor who had 
testified on Crawford's behalf. Justice Scott Crichton noted that the rules for 
cross-examination are broad, and the rest of the court didn't dwell on the 
issue.

But several of the justices questioned whether the judge in the case properly 
vetted the state's removal of several black jurors before the trial.

According to Kappel, 5 of the 7 potential jurors stricken by prosecutors were 
black. Justice Greg Guidry, in particular, seemed persuaded that the trial 
judge short-circuited the constitutional process for determining whether the 
reasons for their removal were race-neutral.

Crawford's mother and several other family members rejoiced on the courthouse 
steps after Wednesday's hearing.

"The state just proved they wrongfully convicted him from jump," said Latosha 
Cosby, one of Crawford's aunts.

"I'm just speechless," said Abbie Crawford, who had tried to revive her young 
grandson when he died 4 years ago. "Because I know my son is coming home. He's 
not a murderer."

Kappel said she was "pleasantly surprised by the way this case was received" by 
the justices. "I think they have some serious concerns about whether this 
verdict is reliable."

It's uncertain when the court will render its decision.

(source: arklatexhomepage.com)

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

Louisiana Supreme Court hears case to overturn death verdict in Caddo Parish 
baby's death


A Caddo Parish jury convicted Rodricus Crawford of 1st-degree murder in 2013 
with scant evidence of a motive, relying largely on the testimony of a forensic 
pathologist who called it "more likely than not" that Crawford smothered his 
1-year-old son.

That same jury sentenced Crawford to death after prosecutor Dale Cox argued 
that it's what Jesus would do.

On Wednesday, the Louisiana Supreme Court heard oral arguments over Crawford's 
bid for a new trial, with several justices engaging in an unusually detailed 
review of medical evidence in the case.

The case marked the latest challenge to a death sentence out of Caddo Parish, 
the state's leader in sending people to death row.

According to a report last month from the Fair Punishment Project, Caddo Parish 
juries have sentenced 5 people to death since 2010, accounting for 38 % of the 
state's total death sentences in that time.

That record is due largely to Cox, a vocal advocate for the death penalty who 
resigned as acting district attorney at the end of last year in the face of 
national criticism.

Cecelia Kappel, an attorney with the Capital Appeals Project, argued that the 
jury in Crawford's case relied on bad forensic science that skipped over strong 
evidence little Roderius Lott died of sepsis, rather than at his father's 
hands. She said Cox's appeal to Scripture in arguing for death crossed the 
constitutional line.

As several clergy members and 11 of Crawford's relatives sat in a packed 
gallery, the 7 justices explored the makings of the toddler's death on Feb. 16, 
2012, 9 days past his 1st birthday.

The night before, the boy went to sleep with his father on a foldout couch at 
the Shreveport home where Crawford lived with his mother and other relatives. 
In the morning, Crawford, now 27, shouted frantically, "Look at the baby, look 
at the baby, what's wrong with Bobo, something is wrong with Bobo" while 
relatives called 911.

Authorities found bruises on the baby's buttocks and a broken lip. Crawford 
told police the child had fallen in the bathroom and insisted he never harmed 
him.

Dr. Todd Thoma, the Caddo Parish coroner, deemed it a homicide, and Dr. James 
Traylor followed with an autopsy. Traylor found that the injuries to the baby's 
mouth, his teeth having pushed through his inner lips, were proof of 
"compressive force."

He diagnosed the cause of death as smothering, making that determination before 
test results came back showing that the boy had pneumonia and that his blood 
was positive for streptococcus bacteria.

Still, Traylor testified at Crawford's trial that the baby would have appeared 
sickly before his death if he had died from sepsis, a life-threatening 
infection.

Several experts have since argued that Traylor's testimony was biased, that the 
evidence points to sepsis as the cause of the boy's death and that the 
pathologist's findings had no basis in science.

Crawford's attorneys, in an automatic appeal of the death sentence, are asking 
the court to take the unusual step of undoing a jury's verdict and death 
sentence based on insufficient evidence. The evidence, they argue, points 
instead to his innocence.

Justice Jeannette Theriot Knoll cast perhaps the most doubt from the bench as 
she questioned Caddo Parish Assistant District Attorney Tommy Johnson over the 
office's decision to seek death for Crawford.

"Is there any evidence he occasionally abused the child or was rough with the 
child?" Knoll asked.

"No, your honor," Johnson responded.

"Then how did the state come about (to the position) that this was a 1st-degree 
murder case, on circumstantial evidence, with a child that an autopsy had 
discovered had sepsis, and ask that this man be put to death on weak 
circumstances? You don't even have a motive," Knoll said.

Johnson responded that there was no proof the boy had sepsis at the trial. He 
acknowledged that prosecutors suggested a motive -- a rift with the mother of 
Crawford's older child -- but never backed it up with evidence.

He also pointed to the bruising on the boy, suggesting what he called "the 
abuse factor."

The boy's mother lived up the street but Crawford had been with the boy for the 
3 days prior to his death. Crawford was indicted 2 months after the death on a 
1st-degree murder count, with cruelty to a juvenile as an aggravating factor.

"All the evidence leading up to the night before his death was (that) family 
members saw no bruising on this baby, no evidence of trauma," Johnson argued. 
"He was healthy. He was not coughing. He was running around playing, happy, and 
the next morning, roughly 7 to 8 hours later, he was dead."

Kappel dismissed the claim that any of the evidence pointed to Crawford abusing 
the baby, saying the pathologist told the jury, falsely, that there was no way 
of telling specifically when the lip injury occurred.

And the boy was far from healthy, she told the court, evidenced by the test 
results after his death as well as by two earlier trips to the hospital with 
respiratory troubles, including a bout of bronchitis five months before his 
death.

"9 experts in this case have disagreed with Dr. Traylor's opinions. It's hard 
to believe the state can have any confidence the evidence in this case could 
support a verdict of negligent homicide, much less (1st-degree murder)," Kappel 
argued. "It is the state's burden not to show that the defendant is probably 
guilty but to establish guilt to a moral certainty."

(source: New Orleans Advocate)






OHIO:

Death penalty trial begins for man charged in Warrensville Heights barbershop 
slayings


The trial began Wednesday for a Cleveland man accused in a series of 2015 
shootings including the slayings of 3 men inside a Warrensville Heights 
barbershop.

Douglas Shine, 21, is charged with 47 felony counts, including aggravated 
murder charges. He is eligible for the death penalty if convicted.

Shine is accused of walking into Chalk Linez Barbershop on Harvard Avenue Feb. 
5, 2015 and killing William Gonzalez, Brandon Smith and Walter Barfield and 
wounding 4 others.

A witness said in court Wednesday that Shine stood over Barfield and shot him 
execution-style in the head.

The gun Shine used in the barbershop killing was tied to shootings on Jan. 20 
and Jan. 22 in Cleveland's East Side.

Cuyahoga County prosecutors said that the shooting was one in a string that 
Shine carried out at the behest of Tevaughn "Big Baby" Darling, after Darling 
was beaten and robbed by 2 members of the Loyal Always street gang.

Jury selection is expected to begin Monday. Wednesday's proceedings involved a 
series of motions Cuyahoga County Judge Joan Synenberg heard before selection 
begins. The judge is also expected to hear more motions Thursday and Friday.

Retaliation shooting evidence disputed

Prosecutors argued that they should be able to present to the jury a dead 
witness' statements to police identifying Shine as the shooter, because they 
say evidence shows Shine conspired to kill Aaron "Pudge" Ladson to keep him 
from testifying.

Shine is not charged in Ladson's death, which came June 4, 2015 while Shine sat 
in a Cuyahoga County Jail cell.

But prosecutors say a series of recorded jail phone calls and text messages 
between Shine, his brother Kevin McKinney and Lawrence Kennedy suggested they 
planned the Ladson's killing after they learned he gave police a written 
statement saying Shine threatened him with 2 guns in the barbershop parking lot 
after the killings.

3 minutes after Ladson was shot, Kennedy texted "checkmate" to McKinney, 
prosecutors said. Kennedy was later shot to death on Corlett Avenue.

Shine's attorneys said prosecutors are stretching thin evidence to fit their 
narrative, and Ladson's testimony shouldn't be allowed. Synenberg will decide 
whether to permit the evidence before opening statements.

Defense says witnesses shouldn't testify

Shine's attorneys want to block 4 witnesses from testifying in the barbershop 
killings. The witnesses took the stand Wednesday and were questioned by both 
the prosecution and the defense.

The attorneys argued that the witnesses saw Shine's picture on social media or 
the news, or had heard that Shine was the suspect before they picked him out of 
a photo lineup.

Again, Synenberg is expected to rule on the motion before opening statements.

Shine's mother also disputed

Attorneys for both sides argued over whether Shine's mother should be allowed 
to sit through the trial.

Prosecutors put her name on their witness list and say she could be called to 
testify, which would bar her from sitting through court proceedings. Witnesses 
are usually sequestered until they're released by the court so their testimony 
isn't influenced by other witnesses.

Prosecutor Mahmoud Awadallah refused to say why the prosecution might call her, 
because he said he did not want to disclose the prosecution plan.

Shine's attorneys argued that she should be allowed to be in the courtroom 
during her son's capital murder trial. The judge did not rule on the motion.

Sequestering witnesses

Synenberg did rule that the state's witnesses would be allowed to wait in the 
jury room before they testify, rather than outside the courtroom with Shine's 
family and friends to "keep everybody separated."

Protecting witnesses

The judge also ordered reporters not to record faces or voices of witnesses 
during the trial to protect their identities. This move is likely due to the 
fact that 1 witness in the barbershop killings was shot to death.

(source: cleveland.com)






OKLAHOMA:

Plea deal for life sentences allows older Bever brother to avoid death penalty 
in killings of family members


The elder of 2 teenage brothers accused of fatally stabbing their parents and 3 
younger siblings in July 2015 pleaded guilty to all charges and was sentenced 
to life without parole Wednesday afternoon in Tulsa County District Court.

Defense attorney Cheryl Ramsey announced her client Robert Bever, 19, is 
pleading guilty and that he's already completed a summary of facts. Robert 
Bever and 17-year-old Michael Bever are charged with 5 counts of 1st-degree 
murder and a count of assault and battery with intent to kill.

District Judge Sharon Holmes sentenced Robert Bever to five terms of life 
without parole and one life term. All will run consecutively.

On Wednesday, Michael Bever's attorney filed a motion to dismiss his client's 
charges. Holmes entered a not guilty plea on Michael Bever's behalf, as he 
chose to remain silent during arraignment. His trial is scheduled to start June 
5, 2017. Michael Bever's attorney told the court he will file notice within 30 
days of intentions to pursue a mental health-based defense.

District Attorney Steve Kunzweiler indicated earlier that a decision on 
pursuing the death penalty would be made by the time of the arraignment.

Robert Bever was eligible to receive the death penalty if convicted and had a 
capital defense attorney on his team in case that came up. Michael's age - 16 
at the time of the stabbings - makes him ineligible for capital punishment in 
Oklahoma.

Case background

Robert and Michael Bever are accused of attacking their family July 22, 2015, 
in their home in the 700 block of Magnolia Court in Broken Arrow.

Police reported that a 911 caller from the home said the brothers were 
attacking their family, and Robert and Michael Bever were caught fleeing on 
foot in woods behind the residence.

Their parents - David Bever, 52; and April Bever, 44 - and 3 younger siblings - 
Daniel, 12; Christopher, 7; and Victoria 5 - were killed.

Their 13-year-old sister survived critical stabbing wounds, and their 
2-year-old sister was found uninjured in the home. The sisters have since been 
placed in foster care, Kunzweiler has said.

According to Broken Arrow Police detectives' testimony at the brothers' 
preliminary hearing Feb. 23, the boys told investigators they had wanted to be 
famous mass killers.

In police interviews with the Bever brothers and their teenage sister, 
investigators learned that Robert and Michael had plotted for at least a year 
to first attack their family and then embark on a killing spree across the 
country, Broken Arrow detectives testified.

A detective testified that Robert appeared calm and "mildly excited" talking 
about the killings, "laughing or chuckling" at times during the interview, and 
expressed that he thought killing more than one person would make him "like a 
god."

Another detective who interviewed Michael Bever said the younger brother seemed 
???a little bit sad" about what had happened to his family and that he had 
become physically ill during questioning.

The older surviving sister did not testify at the February hearing, but a 
detective told the court that in an interview the girl stated that Robert and 
Michael had begun stockpiling body armor and knives, and her mother had "marked 
it up to 'That's just what boys do.'"

The brothers' defense attorneys asked multiple questions about the siblings' 
isolation from people outside their immediate family, their lack of friends, 
their home-schooling, and physical and verbal abuse in the home.

On cross-examination by Robert Bever's attorney Cheryl Ramsey, a detective 
testified that the surviving sister had stated her father would throw the 
children and verbally abuse them. The sister also said she heard her parents 
discuss having perhaps been too rough on Robert and Michael when they were 
younger, according to the detective.

Ramsey also cross-examined the detectives regarding Robert Bever's statements 
that his parents beat him and told him he was worthless, which included an 
account of his mother telling him it was "hilarious" that her slaps left marks 
on his face.

The brothers have been held in the Tulsa Jail's medical unit, which has 
segregated cells, and an incident report revealed that Robert Bever attempted 
to commit suicide in his cell on June 17.

(source: Tulsa World)