[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----S.C., FLA., ALA., OHIO, IND., ARK., ORE., USA

[Rick Halperin]

June 2



SOUTH CAROLINA:

Prosecutor says state needs execution drugs


A South Carolina prosecutor says he didn't seek the death penalty against a man 
who admitted killing 7 people because he couldn't guarantee to the relatives of 
the victims that the killer would be executed.

Solicitor Barry Barnette said May 26 that lawmakers need to figure out a way to 
restart the death penalty. South Carolina ran out of execution drugs and hasn't 
been able to obtain any more. The last execution in the state happened in 2011.

Todd Kohlhepp pleaded guilty to 7 counts of murder and other charges.

Kohlhepp, 44, admitted killing 4 people at a motorcycle shop in 2003 after 
becoming enraged by something the shop owner said. He also killed a husband and 
wife doing work on his Spartanburg County property in 2015 and the boyfriend of 
the woman found chained in a shipping container on Kohlhepp's property.

He was sentenced to life in prison without parole as part of a plea deal. Under 
the plea, he agreed to never appeal the sentence.

(source: sclawyersweekly.com)

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

SC Supreme Court affirms death sentence for Ricky Lee Blackwell


The South Carolina Supreme Court has affirmed a lower court's decision to 
sentence Ricky Lee Blackwell to death.

Blackwell, 58, of Spartanburg was convicted in 2014 and sentenced to death for 
killing 8-year-old Brooke Center. Blackwell held Brooke in a chokehold and shot 
her 4 times as his ex-wife, who was dating Brooke's father, watched.

Affirmation of the sentence is just 1 step in the death penalty process, said 
Murray Glenn, spokesman for the 7th Circuit Solicitor's Office.

There is no guideline in terms of how long the appeal process takes, but this 
moves Blackwell 1 step closer to execution, Glenn said.

(source: goupstate.com)






FLORIDA:

Jury to decide if Christian Theodore will face death penalty for 2014 slaying


Prosecutors told a jury Thursday why 23-year-old Christian Theodore should face 
the death penalty for the 2014 slaying of Jonathan "J.J." Jeffery.

Theodore was convicted of 1st-degree murder and armed home-invasion robbery 
during a week-long trial in December.

Thursday's court hearing was the penalty phase of the case, which was presented 
to a new jury.

Assistant State Attorney Karen Fraivillig, the lead prosecutor, said Theodore 
was "the shot caller, the 2-star general" and "the only one in the group that 
knew the address."

"His executive functioning was not impaired," she said.

Fraivillig referred to a stack of medical records from Theodore's schools and 
medical reports. She suggested that his mother, who was at the hearing, did 
everything she could, and Theodore "chose this life."

Fraivillig concluded her argument by saying, "aggravators outweighed 
mitigators, and the state is pursuing death."

Assistant Public Defender Jerry Meisner addressed Fravillig's stack of records, 
saying that a man's life is "more than just a series of documents."

He showed jurors mental trauma reports and called it a "picture of misfortune." 
Meisner also said Theodore is bipolar and has other mental disorders.

Meisner told jurors Theodore suffered a "lifetime of abuse" and that he had a 
life-long history of psychotropic prescriptions.

He also attacked prosecutors' claim that the murder was premeditated, saying 
that the "plan was never to kill anyone."

Meisner concluded his arguments by reminding the jury to not judge out of 
anger: "An eye for an eye is a decision out of anger. Revenge is a decision of 
anger."

Jurors will return at 8:30 a.m. today to begin their deliberation.

'Commando style'

During his trial, prosecutors said Theodore shot Jeffery, 25, who was asleep 
with his wife, after Theodore and others burst "commando style" into Jeffery's 
home in the Summerside condominium complex.

2 of Theodore's co-defendants - Azalea Mendoza, 21, and Vincent Gonzalez, 27 - 
accepted plea deals in exchange for their testimony against Theodore.

3 other defendants involved in the murder - Shakoy Gale, 23, Aenri Ellis, 29, 
and Byron Jones, 27 - were each previously found guilty of murder and related 
charges and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Court documents and testimony showed that Mendoza had driven the men to and 
from St. Petersburg, trips captured on several security cameras near Jeffery's 
house, at a Walmart and a tollbooth.

Security video showed 3 of the men buying gloves and zip ties at Walmart on 
Cattlemen Road approximately 2 1/2 hours before the slaying.

The state said while the home was being ransacked, Theodore overheard Jonathan 
Jeffery speaking to his wife, and thought he had recognized him.

Theodore looked at one of the other intruders nearby, who nodded, and fired a 
single 9mm round into Jonathan Jeffery's head.

The couple's daughter was sleeping in another room, and their niece and nephew 
- 12-year-old twins - were sleeping on a living room couch.

The home invaders left the apartment with a backpack, an Xbox and 3 cellphones, 
according to Brandi Jeffery, the victim's wife.

Theodore chose not to testify in his own defense during the trial.

During his trial, prosecutors described for the jury how the assailants burst 
into the Jeffery home dressed in black and wearing masks and gloves, shouting 
that they were police to gain the couple's immediate compliance.

They also told jurors Theodore was a "2-star general in the Bloods," a 
notorious criminal street gang.

(source: Sarasota Herald Tribune)

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

Trials delayed for 2 men charged in double murder of Bradenton couple


The trials of the 2 men charged with in the slayings of a Bradenton couple 
during a drug-related armed home invasion in 2015 have been delayed until 
September and October.

Jimmie McNear, 20, and Trey Nonnombre, 21, were each indicted on 2 counts of 
1st-degree murder and armed home invasion in the July 9, 2015, fatal shootings 
of Esther Deneus and her boyfriend, Kantral Markeith Brooks, both 29.

Just before 4 a.m. on July 9, 2015, Bradenton police officers were called to 
the 3900 block of Southern Parkway after a security alarm was triggered by the 
break-in at the home Deneus and Brooks shared. When officers arrived, they 
found the couple shot dead in the home. Their 5 children, between the ages of 1 
and 11 at the time.

A 3rd defendant, Terez Jones, 34, who was facing identical charges and the 
death penalty as well, took a plea deal last month and was sentenced to 25 
years in prison. Jones will have to testify truthfully against McNear and 
Nonnombre as part of the plea deal.

During a hearing in both cases on Tuesday afternoon, defense attorneys for 
McNear and Nonnombre argued for a continuance, citing Jones' taking a deal and 
becoming a witness against their clients as reasons they need more time to 
prepare.

On Thursday morning, Circuit Judge Diana Moreland granted a delay in the cases 
against both men. One of the cases was scheduled to be tried beginning June 12, 
but defense attorneys for McNear and Nonnombre argued that neither would be 
ready by then.

Nonnombre will now stand trial beginning Sept. 11. McNear will stand trial 
during a 5-week trial period that begins Oct. 16 after the conclusion of 
another death-penalty case in Sarasota that Moreland is presiding over.

Moreland also approved the removal Charles Lykes as the lead appointed attorney 
for McNear's defense. William Bennett, the counsel appointed to the case 
earlier this year, will now take the lead and a 2nd attorney will be appointed 
as his co-counsel.

Bennett, along with Bjorn Brunvand, defense attorney for Nonnombre, renewed 
previous arguments made in both cases in efforts to stop the state from seeking 
the death penalty should McNear or Nonnombre be convicted of 1st-degree murder.

Daniel Hernandez, lead defense attorney for Nonnombre, also argued Thursday 
morning to suppress the photo identification of Nonnombre by a witness in the 
case, saying that he was shown single photos of the suspects instead of a photo 
array.

Homicide detective Jeffrey Bliss testified that he showed the witness a photo 
of each of the 3 suspects after that witness had already identified McNear, 
Nonnombre and Jones. The witness also took the stand saying that he had known 
Nonnombre for at least a month before the murders, had spend several hours with 
him on several occasions, including the night before the murders, and saw 
McNear, Nonnombre and Jones leaving when they were going to committed the 
burglary.

"There was no reason why a photo pack couldn't be shown," Hernandez said.

Assistant State Attorney Art Brown argued that case law supports showing a 
witness individual photos because he was already familiar with them.

(source: bradenton.com)

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

Death penalty for Gonzalez


Isn't it interesting, the convicted killer of Byrd and Melanie Billings, 
Leonard P. Gonzalez Jr., gets a new hearing because only 10 jurors voted in 
favor of death. There was irrefutable evidence against him, and he still got a 
trial and an appeal.

Doesn't anyone question why Byrd and Melanie were not offered a trial before 
their death sentence was carried out? Not only did they not get a trial, they 
were not afforded an appeal before they were put to death. How obnoxious is 
that?

The standard for a conviction is beyond a reasonable doubt, but I would like to 
go one step further. If there is irrefutable evidence, beyond any shadow of a 
doubt in a capital crime where the victim(s) never were afforded a trial, let 
alone an appeal, the killer/killers should be removed from the courtroom, given 
24 hours to make peace with their maker and loved ones, and then put to death 
at the end of the 24 hour time period. No appeals for errors by the prosecutors 
or defense attorneys. A new standard for the immediate imposition of the death 
penalty for those committing capital crimes.

After all, Byrd and Melanie Billings didn't have a choice on how they were to 
die, let alone be afforded a trial before their peers. Gonzalez needs to be put 
to death for his assumption of duties as judge, jury and executioner.

Richard Mullen, Pensacola

(source: Letter to the Editor, Pensacola News Journal)






ALABAMA----impending execution

Alabama Attorney General responds to death row inmate's request for stay of 
execution


The Alabama Attorney General's Office filed a response yesterday to a death row 
inmate's request for a stay from execution.

The AG's Office filed their response Wednesday with the U.S. 11th Circuit Court 
of Appeals, days after Robert Melson's attorneys asked that same court to stay 
Melson's execution until an appeal can be heard.

"Melson's motion for a stay of execution pending his appeal is due to be 
denied. ... The claims that give rise to his appeal are virtually identical to 
the claims raised by co-plaintiffs Ronald Bert Smith and Christopher Eugene 
Brooks and rejected by this Court. Melson's claims do not lead this Court to a 
different result. As such, he cannot satisfy his burden of demonstrating that 
he has a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of his claims," the 
AG's filing states, referring to two other death row inmates who were executed.

The document was filed by Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall and Alabama 
Solicitor General Andrew Brasher.

The document states Melson's claims are meritless and says he does not have a 
likelihood of success upon appeal. Therefore, the AG's Office is asking the 
appellate court to deny Melson's stay.

Melson's attorney, John Palombi with the Federal Defenders for the Middle 
District of Alabama filed a motion last week in the 11th District Court of 
Appeals asking for the execution to be stayed until a judge can review and rule 
on Melson's appeal regarding his challenge to Alabama's 3-drug lethal injection 
method of execution. A lower court denied Melson's motion because it was filed 
past the deadline, records show.

The AG's response filed Wednesday states Melson cannot establish any 
alternative to the state's three-injection execution method. It stated, 
"Finally, Melson cannot establish any of the other requirements for a stay of 
execution because he unreasonably delayed in seeking a stay and because the 
State and the victims in this case have a strong interest in carrying out 
Melson's sentence."

Melson was convicted in Etowah County for fatally shooting three people, and 
injuring another, at a Gadsden restaurant in April 1994. Employees Tamika 
Collins, 18, Nathaniel Baker, 17, and Darrell Collier, 23, were killed in the 
shooting. Bryant Archer was the only survivor and identified Melson as the 
shooter, while prosecutors said another man planned the crime.

Attorneys for Robert Melson filed the appeal to a lower courts ruling in the 
11th District Court of Appeals last week. They are asking for a stay pending 
the outcome of Melson's appeal.

The filing from Palombi seeking a halt to the execution stated a list of 
reasons why the stay should be granted, claiming Melson meets the standard for 
being granted a stay, would likely be successful on appeal, and that he is not 
required to suggest a three-drug alternative method of execution.

The response filed by the AG stated, "Melson has been on death row for over 21 
years for a crime he committed in 1994. His crime was particularly heinous, his 
conviction is valid, and a competent state court with jurisdiction over his 
case properly set his execution date according to Alabama law. At a minimum, 
this Court should strongly consider Alabama's interest in enforcing its 
criminal judgment in weighing the equities against the grant of a stay."

(source: al.com)

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

Urgent Action


EXECUTION SET IN CIRCUMSTANTIAL ALABAMA CASE

Robert Melson is scheduled to be executed in Alabama on 8 June. He was 
convicted on circumstantial evidence and sentenced to death in May 1996 for 3 
murders during a robbery in 1994. He has consistently maintained that he was 
not involved in the crime.

Write a letter, send an email, call, fax or tweet:

* Calling on the governor to stop the execution of Robert Melson and to commute 
his death sentence;

* Noting the circumstantial nature of the case, and that no appeal court has 
considered the merits of his post-conviction appeals as a result of missed 
filing deadlines (noting what the governor said in the Arthur case).

Friendly reminder: If you send an email, please create your own instead of 
forwarding this one!

Contact below official by 8 June, 2017:

(source: Amnesty International)

Governor Kay Ivey

Alabama State Capitol, 600 Dexter Avenue, Montgomery, Alabama 36130, USA

Phone: (334) 242-7100
Fax: +1 334 353 0004
Contact Form: http://governor.alabama.gov/contact (use US detail)

Salutation: Dear Governor

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

Colbert DA to seek death penalty in 2016 shooting case


The Colbert County District Attorney will seek the death penalty for Peter 
Capote if he is found guilty of capital murder in the shooting death of Ki-Jana 
Freeman.

Assistant Colbert County District Attorney Angela Hulsey recently filed the 
motion with Circuit Judge Hal Hughston Jr.'s office.

"We've been preparing like they would seek the death penalty," said Bill 
Marthaler, who along with Robert Graham is representing Capote.

Capote, 23, 1100 Midland Ave., Muscle Shoals, is charged with capital murder, 
1st-degree assault, and discharging a gun into an occupied vehicle.

Police said Capote, Thomas Hubbad, 32, same address, Benjamin Owen Young, 29, 
502 Staunton Ave., Florence, and De'Vontae Bernard Bates, 21, 106 Markate Ave., 
Muscle Shoals, are all charged in connection with the shooting death of 
Freeman, 19, of Tuscumbia.

The shooting took place March 1 outside Spring Creek Apartments on Avenue A in 
Tuscumbia. Freeman died at Helen Keller Hospital in Sheffield.

Tyler Blythe, 17, of Tuscumbia, was was flown to Huntsville Hospital, where he 
was treated for numerous gunshot wounds. He has been released and still is 
recovering from his injuries, police said.

Capote, Hubbard and Young have all been indicted for capital murder, 1st-degree 
assault, and shooting into an occupied vehicle. Bates was indicted for criminal 
conspiracy.

All 4 pleaded not guilty during preliminary hearings.

The case against Capote has been placed on the Aug. 21 circuit court criminal 
docket.

Chief Assistant Colbert County District Attorney Kyle Brown said prosecutors 
are seeking the death penalty against Capote because shooting into an occupied 
vehicle is a capital offense.

During testimony at a preliminary hearing, police said more than a dozen 
7.62-caliber shell casings were found at the scene of the shooting. Tuscumbia 
police investigator Wes Holland said the car Freeman and Blythe were in had "12 
bullet holes, all in the driver's side."

Capote, Hubbard and Young are being held without bail in the Colbert County 
Jail, while Bates is in jail on $500,000 bond.

(source: timesdaily.com)






OHIO:

Community activists say Dayton mom accused of killing kids shouldn't face death 
penalty


Community activist say a Dayton mom accused of fatally shooting 2 of her 
children in the head should not be eligible for the death penalty.

Bishop Richard Cox with Justice for Racial Equality and Brotherhood says he 
believes Claudena Helton is mentally ill. While Cox said he agrees that what 
Helton is accused of doing is wrong, she should have a mental evaluation, "the 
jumped the gun," Cox said of the Montgomery County Prosecutor Mat Heck. Cox 
believes Helton should not be charged with murder and that her case should be 
looked at again after a mental health evaluation is completed, "they need to 
give her some help," he said.

According to an affidavit, Helton admitted to Dayton Police that she shot her 
6-year-old son Kaiden and her 8-year-old daughter Khmorra in the head. Police 
say Helton told officers she did it to save them from the "evils of the world." 
People walking by Helton's home on Lori Sue Avenue called 911 after seeing the 
children being dragged out from the home. On Tuesday, May 30, Heck called a 
news conference, and announced that Helton had been indicted on charges of 
aggravated murder and that she was eligible for the death penalty, "We reserve 
it for the most horrific, and shocking crimes, gut-wrenching crimes, this case 
meets those specifications," said Heck. When asked about Helton's mental state, 
Heck said she is presumed to be sane and fit to stand trial until it's proven 
otherwise.

Cox stood along with Donald Dominic of Dayton's New Black Panther Party this 
morning, June 1, and said they believe Helton suffers from mental health 
issues. "They're trying her in the court of public opinion," Dominic said, 
"they're trying to get the public on their side to support them taking the 
woman's life." Cox said today he believes the system, particularly Children 
Services, failed Helton and her family. Police records show in 2014, Children 
Services was called after a teacher noticed bruises on Khmorra's arm and chest, 
marks on her cheek and cut on her lip. The child said her mom hit her with a 
belt buckle. Helton appeared in court this morning to be arraigned, and stood 
mute. A judge entered a 'not guilty' plea on her behalf and set her bond at 
$1,000,000. Helton's next court date, according to court records, is June 15.

(source: WKEF news)



INDIANA:

COA: Indiana death penalty protocol 'void'


Indiana's means of carrying out the death penalty through lethal injection "is 
void and without effect," the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled Thursday, 
reversing a death row inmate???s challenge to the Indiana Department of 
Correction's execution protocol.

Judge John Baker wrote for the court the Department of Correction was bound to 
enact new lethal-injection protocols under the state's Administrative Rules and 
Procedure Act (ARPA), subject to public comment, which it did not do. Failing 
to do so voids a protocol DOC adopted in May 2014, the court ruled, tossing out 
the state's means of execution via a fatal 3-drug cocktail that has never been 
used in any state or federal execution.

"Finding the General Assembly has not exempted the DOC from ARPA and that the 
statutory definition of 'rule' clearly includes the DOC's execution protocols, 
we reverse," Baker wrote for the Court in Roy Lee Ward v. Robert E. Carter, 
Jr., Commissioner of the Indiana Department of Correction, and Ron Neal, 
Superintendent of the Indiana State Prison, in their official capacities, 
46A03-1607-PL-1685.

The ruling remands the case brought by Ward to LaPorte Circuit Court, where 
Judge Thomas J. Alevizos previously dismissed the suit.

Ward was sentenced to death in 2007 for the 2001 rape and murder of 15-year-old 
Stacy Payne in Spencer County. He is 1 of 12 people on Indiana's death row at 
the Indiana State Prison in Michigan City.

The panel rejected the state's argument that the lethal injection statute says 
the DOC "may" adopt rules under the administrative code to administer capital 
punishment. "We disagree," Baker wrote, noting the lethal injection statute 
must be read in conjunction with ARPA, which specifically excludes 2 state 
agencies, neither of which is the DOC.

"If the legislature intended to exempt the DOC from the purview of ARPA 
altogether, or even to attempt to exempt the DOC's execution protocols, it 
could have easily done so, but it has not," Baker wrote for the panel that also 
included appellate judges Michael Barnes and Terry Crone.

Fort Wayne attorney David Frank of Christopher C. Myers & Associates 
represented Ward. "We're very pleased with the ruling. I think the message, the 
takeaway, is that even though jails and prisons are entitled to some deference, 
they're not entitled to carry out serious matters of the public's business in 
secret, and that???s exactly what the state was trying to do," Frank said.

A spokesman for the Indiana Attorney General's Office did not immediately reply 
to a message seeking comment on the ruling.

The Attorney General's Chief Counsel of Appeals Steve Creason during oral 
arguments last month suggested to the COA that the legislature had not required 
the Department of Correction to enact a rule for drugs used in lethal 
injection, and that's why it wrote the agency "may" adopt such rules.

Rulemaking under ARPA, he argued, was "completely unworkable as a potential 
solution." Barnes challenged Creason on that contention, as well as his 
assertions that death penalty cases by their nature receive extensive 
individual scrutiny in state and federal courts before executions are carried 
out, and that requiring the ARPA rulemaking processes would not further the 
purposes of administrative procedures.

"Is it not something to consider," Barnes said, "that if the state puts into 
effect the machinery of death for a person that the way in which that penalty 
is delivered and carried out ought to be subject to some sort of review by 
whatever body other than the people who are, in fact, doing it?"

"That might be valuable," Creason replied, "except that scrutiny, that review 
(by courts), that is going to happen regardless of whether you do the 
rulemaking." Creason argued, "... ARPA can be used as a tool to frustrate and 
delay the execution of death sentence."

Frank said Thursday the state sought to characterize Ward's suit as an attempt 
to bar the death penalty, which he said wasn???t the case. No executions are 
currently scheduled, so the immediate impact of the ruling remains uncertain.

The DOC "was trying to issue a new lethal injection protocol by themselves that 
has never been used," Frank said. "Before we execute a human being in manner 
that's never been done before in the history of country, maybe we should have 
some public discussion on it."

The DOC protocol includes a never-before-tried drug called methohexital (known 
by the brand name Brevital), along with pancuronium bromide and potassium 
chloride.

"The Court of Appeals wasn't questioning the state's ability to carry out 
executions lawfully, all they were saying in agreeing with Mr. Ward is that an 
individual who is condemned to death has right to be subjected to execution in 
a lawful way, and in a way that the public has knowledge of," Frank said. "So 
if the state intends to lawfully execute individuals, it should have no problem 
whatsoever with the Indiana Court of Appeals opinion."

(source: The Indiana Lawyer)






ARKANSAS:

Court upholds Arkansas death-row inmate's conviction


The Arkansas Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the conviction of a man who was 
sentenced in Benton County Circuit Court to death for killing a 6-year-old 
girl.

According to prosecutors at his trial, on the night of Nov. 19, 2012, Zachary 
Holly entered the home where the girl, identified in court papers as J.B., was 
sleeping, woke her, picked her up and took her to a nearby vacant house, where 
he raped her and then tied her pants around her neck and strangled her.

Holly received a death sentence for capital murder, two life sentences for rape 
and kidnapping, and a 20-year sentence for residential burglary.

On appeal, Holly, now 32, argued that the trial judge should have dismissed the 
burglary charge, should not have allowed a confession Holly made to police to 
be admitted as evidence, and should have allowed jurors to be told that Holly 
had offered to plead guilty to capital murder.

Holly claimed he had a key to the home because he and his wife often babysat 
J.B. and that he entered through an unlocked door. He said he had authority to 
enter the home and that he entered looking for medicine for an upset stomach 
and not with intent to commit a felony, so the charge of residential burglary 
did not apply.

"This argument is not persuasive," the Supreme Court said Thursday in an 
opinion written by Judge Josephine Hart.

The court said J.B.'s mother testified that she had given Holly's wife 
permission to enter the home when she needed medicine but did not testify that 
she had extended the same authority to Holly. The court said it would not 
consider Holly's claim that he entered the home without intent to commit a 
felony because Holly did not make that argument during his trial.

Holly also claimed that at the urging of police, his wife, Amanda Holly, 
coerced him into talking to police, which he argued amounted to the police 
improperly using a proxy to elicit a confession after he had asked for a 
lawyer.

The Supreme Court said testimony at the trial showed Amanda Holly did urge her 
husband to talk to police and submit to a polygraph test, but she did so for 
her own reasons, believing he was innocent and should "clear his name."

Holly further claimed that during the penalty phase of the trial, jurors should 
have been allowed to hear that he had offered to plead guilty to capital 
murder. Jurors could have seen this as a sign that he accepted responsibility 
for his crime and considered it a mitigating factor, he argued.

The Supreme Court disagreed.

"Proof that Holly offered to plead guilty in exchange for a lesser sanction is 
not evidence that Holly was taking responsibility for his crime," Hart wrote in 
the opinion.

Justice Rhonda Wood wrote in a separate opinion that she concurred in the 
decision to uphold Holly's conviction but found it "troubling" that Holly - who 
claimed to read at a 3rd-grade level - received 2 mental evaluations, but only 
the first evaluation was entered into the record. All that is in the record 
regarding the 2nd evaluation is a statement by a lawyer for Holly that he was 
fit to proceed, Wood noted.

Wood said she hopes the issue will be fully developed and resolved in future 
proceedings on the question of whether Holly had adequate counsel.

(source: arkansasnews.com)






OREGON:

Christian's public defenders preparing for death-penalty case----Accused 
killer's public defenders prepare


The public defenders representing Jeremy Christian are gearing up for a 
possible death penalty case.

Inside the Portland office of Metropolitan Public Defender Services, Executive 
Director Lane Borg knows his staff is taking on one of its highest-profile 
cases in a long time.

"These are all horrible cases," he said. But said that won't keep the lawyers 
from doing their job.

"Lawyers in my office - staff in my office - really believe they're making 
society better by holding the government to a higher standard, by saying, 'You 
don't get an easy pass, you don't get to just convict someone,'" Bog said. "We 
don't lynch people in the streets anymore and drag them out because we feel 
passionately strong about that."

There is no denying that passion and evidence appear to be plentiful in this 
case. Court documents show the brutal stabbings on the MAX train were caught on 
video, along with Christian???s confession in the patrol car after the attack.

"What physically happened, the movement of people, what you see on camera, is 
only part of the equation in a criminal case," Borg said.

The defense lawyers and their investigators will try to find facts that might 
alter the perception of what the video captured.

"Somebody can commit the physical act of killing another person, a homicide," 
Borg said. "But if their mental state is such that they have a belief certain 
things are going on - that something is happening to them - that can raise 
certain defenses, like self defense," he said.

Borg said the lawyers don't know if they'll go after an insanity defense. He 
pointed out that they don't even have an indictment.

But he suspects the indictment will charge Christian with aggravated murder, 
making it a death-penalty case under Oregon law.

Borg said there are more than a dozen aggravating factors in a killing that can 
kick it up to aggravated murder.

"Killing a law enforcement officer. Killing a witness in a crime. I believe the 
one that they will use in this case - there may be others - but will be that 
there are multiple victims in a criminal episode," Borg said.

He added that if Christian faces the death penalty, his team is required to 
look back 2 generations in Christian's family to find mental illness or other 
issues that would explain his actions.

The guidelines for lawyers handling death penalty cases is 178 pages long, Borg 
said, which is why it will likely be a year or more before Christian goes to 
trial.

(source: KGW news)






USA:

Supreme Court Plaza Is No Place for Protests


A federal judge dismissed claims from 2 religiously motivated anti-war 
protesters who challenged the prohibition of political speech on the grounds of 
the Supreme Court.

The two want to hold candlelight and prayer vigils in the large oval plaza 
immediately outside the Supreme Court, rather than the sidewalk, to which 
federal law has relegated free speech activities.

John Payden-Travers and Midgelle Potts said their religious beliefs compel them 
to speak out against war, torture and the death penalty, and that the law 
violates their rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

Citing D.C. Circuit precedent, however, U.S. District Judge Colleen 
Kollar-Kotelly found Wednesday that law does not substantially burden the free 
exercise of their religion because it restricts "only one of a multitude of 
means by which plaintiffs could engage in their religiously motivated 
activity."

"Plaintiffs have not alleged that this is the only way or only place plaintiffs 
could pursue these religious convictions, and it is clearly not," the 12-page 
ruling states. "Plaintiffs could speak out against and distance themselves from 
torture, war or the death penalty in countless ways."

Potts has protested outside the Supreme Court and says her Unity Christian 
faith compels her to pray and speak out against the death penalty, war and 
torture.

Payden-Travers identifies as a post-denominational Christian and says he once 
led an organization that advocates for laws that would allow anti-war 
proponents to direct their taxes for non-military purposes.

He has chanted on the sidewalk outside the Supreme Court in opposition to the 
death penalty, and has twice held up a banner there that states "STOP 
EXECUTIONS."

Payden-Travers argued that a vigil on the sidewalk, rather than the plaza, 
during nights when executions are taking place would not sufficiently signal to 
the public his conscientious objection to the Supreme Court's approval of the 
death penalty.

Kollar-Kotelly found that argument unpersuasive.

"Plaintiffs do not allege in their complaint that their religions require them 
to demonstrate and pray in ways such that the public will associate their 
activities with the United States Supreme Court," she wrote. "It simply alleges 
that their religions require them to 'speak out' and 'distance themselves' from 
certain practices, such as the death penalty."

Kollar-Kotelly added that her ruling passes no judgment on the sincerity of the 
plaintiffs' religious beliefs.

The law they challenged is Section 6135 of the U.S. Code, which makes it 
"unlawful to parade, stand, or move in processions or assemblages in the 
Supreme Court Building or grounds, or to display in the Building and grounds a 
flag, banner, or device designed or adapted to bring into public notice a 
party, organization, or movement."

Kollar-Kotelly had stayed the matter pending the outcome of a similar case 
before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals that also challenged restrictions on 
demonstrations in the Supreme Court Plaza.

The D.C. Circuit held in Hodge v. Talkin that the Supreme Court plaza is not a 
public forum, which allows the government to impose reasonable speech 
restrictions in that space.

It also found that Section 6135 does not target specific viewpoints, and that 
the restrictions "reasonably served the government's 'long recognized interests 
in preserving decorum in the area of a courthouse and in assuring the 
appearance (and actuality) of a judiciary uninfluenced by public opinion and 
pressure.'"

(source: Courthouse News)