[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, PENN., S.C., NEB., CALIF.

[Rick Halperin]

April 29




TEXAS:

Buddhist Inmate Ready To Die As Court Considers Limits Of Religious Freedom In 
Texas



When the state of Texas tried to execute Patrick Murphy on March 28, the U.S. 
Supreme Court stepped in. The high court ruled that the execution was 
unconstitutional. But it wasn't because of any concerns about due process or 
the morality of the state taking a life. The issue was religious freedom.

On the day of the execution, Murphy said he was ready to die.

“Because ... when I went into the death house, I was fully prepared for death. 
Okay. I was mentally, emotionally and spiritually prepared to die.”

Murphy was sent to death row for his role in the Texas Seven escape. In 2000, 
the group of Texas inmates managed to slip out of a maximum state prison. While 
on the run they committed numerous robberies, and on Christmas Eve they killed 
Irving Police Officer Aubry Hawkins as they stole guns from a sporting goods 
store. Murphy said he did not participate in the killing of Hawkins. 
Nevertheless, he was sentenced to die.

But when the appointed hour of his execution came and went, he was still alive 
and sitting in the death house cell. He figured something was happening.

“Well, I knew that we were still waiting on ... the courts because ... they 
won't actually take us into the death chamber until all your legal actions are 
finished.”

He sat waiting for 2 hours until ...

“The assistant warden walked in, came through the door," Murphy said, "and said 
I had a stay.” He remembered how the warden delivered the news in a 
straightforward business-like manner.

“My first reaction was that I, I kind of covered my face with my hands ... 
[and] I said, 'oh, thank you.' ... I did weep a little bit. And then ... after 
that, my emotional state was pretty much turmoil. You know, I was kind of in 
shock. Yeah. Because I really wasn't expecting it.”

Few were expecting the Supreme Court to hit pause on the execution. All the 
more surprising was the reasoning for the stay; religious freedom. Murphy is a 
Buddhist, and he requested that a Buddhist spiritual advisor accompany him in 
the death chamber.

It’s a request that Texas routinely accommodates for Christian and Muslim 
inmates. Traditionally those religious advisors, who are employees of the 
prison system, stand at the foot of the execution gurney. After the prisoner is 
strapped in, they place a hand on his leg and silently pray as the lethal 
injection is delivered.

Murphy said, as a Buddhist, having a spiritual guide present at that final 
moment is critical.

“We believe that at the time of death, if we can focus our attention, our 
meditative, that focus on the Buddha," he explained, "it will help us 
transition to our next life."

The Texas Prison system said because Murphy’s Buddhist advisor isn’t a prison 
employee, they turned him down. The Supreme Court said that was 
unconstitutional.

But what was unusual about that is a similar case went before the Supreme Court 
just the month before and with a different outcome. Dominique Ray asked for a 
Muslim adviser for his execution in Alabama. The state turned him down, and the 
Supreme Court did not object. Ray was put to death. Murphy says he is ready to 
die.

Robert Dunham is the director of the Death Penalty Information Center.

I don't think there's any way that you can look at Dominique Ray's case and 
Patrick Murphy's case," he said, "and see one execution go forward and one 
execution not go forward ... and say that there's anything but inconsistent 
judgements by the court of the issues that were presented in the two cases were 
legally identical.”

He added that this inconsistency has opened the Supreme Court to harsh 
criticism about how it handles death row appeals and the court’s overall 
attitude about the death penalty – including another recent decision that ruled 
there is no right to a painless execution.

“I think what we're seeing is in particular hostility to method of execution 
challenges that death row prisoners are bringing," he said, "but that's part of 
a general hostility to all the litigation that the court is seeing that they 
had been asking for stays of execution.”

In the Patrick Murphy stay the Supreme Court ruled that for Texas to comply 
with the Constitution, it needed to allow all religions or none of them.

So the Texas prison system has now banned all religious advisors from the death 
chamber. Murphy said he found that decision cruel and reactionary, and that 
Texas could do better than that.

“Texas more or less prides itself as being part of the Bible belt and being 
very, very religious state,” he said.

Murphy’s stay did not stop Texas from executing others. In mid-April 2019, John 
William King was put to death for his role in the notorious dragging death of 
James Byrd Jr.

According to the Texas prison system, King did not request a religious advisor 
during his execution. And that was troubling to Father Ronald Foshage, a 
Catholic priest who ministered to King’s father and reached out to the 
convicted killer.

“He wasn’t a Catholic," Foshage said, referring to the death row inmate. "He 
believed in the Norse religion. He worshiped the warriors.”

Nevertheless, Foshage said it was troubling that Texas had banned religion from 
the death chamber. He said the condemned deserve that last chance to ask for 
forgiveness, which is something King never did.

“I told Bill King you have to ask for forgiveness or else the devil wins,” he 
recalled.

As for Murphy’s date with death, he is waiting for a new execution warrant. 
That could be issued in a matter of months or years.

And when it does come, Murphy said he’ll be ready to die again.

(source: tpr.org)

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

No More Final Meal Requests Thanks To One Death Row Inmate



Texas prisoners set to be executed have been stripped of the traditional ‘final 
meal’ after a white supremacist ruined it for everybody else. Lawrence Russell 
Brewer, 44, was executed in September 2011. The final meal he ordered consisted 
of a triple-patty bacon cheeseburger, a cheese omelette with beef mince, 
tomatoes, onions, bell peppers and jalapenos, and 2 chicken fried steaks with 
gravy and sliced onions. Wait, there’s more; he was too served a pound of 
barbecued meat with half a loaf of white bread, 3 fajitas, a meat pizza, and 
fried okra with ketchup. And just when you were pondering, that’s got to be it 
– don’t fret, because it was not. Brewer ordered also a pint of ice cream and 
with crushed peanuts and peanut butter fudge. Oh, not leaving out the 3 root 
beers to wash it all down.

Prison officers probably presumed they were about to witness a really 
impressive feat. However, not quite. Once his food came, he told the guards he 
wasn’t hungry in one final attempt to ‘make a mockery of the system’, accordant 
to State Senator, John Whitmire. Lawrence Russell Brewer was handed the 
sentence of capital punishment for participating in the racially-motivated 
homicide of James Byrd Jr. His accessary, John William King, was executed on 
Wednesday though he did not get the opportunity to select any special meal and 
he’s only got his deceased buddy Brewer to thank for that.

Texas death row prisoners now are denied special requests and are merely given 
whatever food’s on the menu for each and every inmates. The day following 
Brewer’s last act of spite in 2011, lawmakers in Texas were irate and as a 
result elected to bring a halt to the personalized meal on death row tradition 
for good. Speaking on Brewer, State Senator John Whitmire – who called for the 
prohibition – explained back then to news outlets: “He never gave his victim an 
opportunity for a last meal. Why in the world are you going to treat him like a 
celebrity 2 hours before you execute him? It’s wrong to treat a vicious 
murderer in this fashion. Let him eat the same meal on the chow line as the 
others.”

(source: Social News Daily)








PENNSYLVANIA:

Pa. resolution overdue on capital punishment



The state Supreme Court’s decision last week to uphold the conviction and death 
penalty for Eric Frein was hardly surprising. After all, the anti-government 
survivalist was found guilty of murdering 1 Pennsylvania state trooper and 
badly wounding another in a 2014 ambush outside the Blooming Grove barracks.

What would come as a surprise is if Frein’s penalty is carried out.

That’s because while capital punishment exists on paper in Pennsylvania, it has 
been all but abandoned in practice. It has been almost two decades since a 
convicted murderer has been executed in Pennsylvania.

The state Supreme Court’s ruling is yet another reminder that Pennsylvania 
lawmakers continue to fail in resolving the status of capital punishment.

Gov. Tom Wolf issued a moratorium on executions shortly after taking office in 
2015 — and with good reason. Not only is the process of putting a prisoner to 
death time-consuming and expensive, Penn State’s Justice Center for Research 
found that death sentences are more common when the victim is white and less 
common when the victim is black. The system is, as Wolf aptly summed it up, 
“ineffective, unjust, and expensive.”

A report by the state Task Force and Advisory Committee on Capital Punishment 
was to be the starting point for discussions to address this badly flawed 
system, but there has been little movement in Harrisburg since it was released 
almost a year ago.

If the state is going to retain capital punishment, the report offers some 
valuable reforms, such as setting up a publicly funded agency to provide legal 
representation in capital cases.

But frankly, the conversation should begin with whether the state should 
maintain the death penalty at all. It has put only three prisoners to death 
since ostensibly reviving executions in the 1970s. The appeals process is 
costly and can drag into decades, and juries have become increasingly hesitant 
to mete out the death penalty.

As a result, “Prosecutors are increasingly reluctant to pursue capital murder 
charges, given the high financial cost and lengthy legal battles they 
guarantee, and the improbability the sentences will ultimately be carried out,” 
according to a report by the Allentown Morning Call.

Thus it is only the most heinous crimes — Frien’s slaying of a state trooper or 
the grisly rape, murder and dismemberment of a 14-year-old girl by a monster in 
Bucks County — that result in death penalty sentences. (Indeed, just last week 
a York County judge threw out the death sentence of Fawn Township man convicted 
in a home-invasion double murder.)

State trends generally mirror those on the national level. According to the 
Death Penalty Information Center, which has closely tracked the nation’s 
executions since they were reintroduced in 1976:

More than 1/3 of the 1,494 persons put to death have been African-American, 
despite the fact that they make up only about 13 percent of the general 
population.

Repeated studies show the likelihood of a death sentence skyrockets if the 
victim is white and the defendant is African-American. Of 311 interracial 
murders that ended in executions, 290 involved African-American defendants and 
white victims; just 21 were the other way around.

More than 160 people nationwide have been exonerated by newly introduced 
evidence and released from death row.

So, there are strong and compelling arguments against instituting a death 
penalty — in Pennsylvania or anywhere else.

But state lawmakers need to decide, one way or the other, how the law will 
address capital punishment. If it is to be maintained, the system must be 
reformed to ensure equity and fairness. If it is deemed too costly, inefficient 
or disproportionately administered, then it should be formally stricken from 
the books.

Either way, a decision is long overdue.

(source: Editorial, Yoirk Dispatch)








SOUTH CAROLINA:

Death penalty trial set for dad charged with killing 5 kids



A father who police said killed his 5 young children in their South Carolina 
home and then drove their bodies around for more than a week is about to stand 
trial for his life.

Jury selection is set to begin Monday in Lexington County in the death penalty 
case of Timothy Jones Jr.

Jones is charged with 5 counts of murder for killing his children, ages 8, 7, 
6, 2 and 1, in their Lexington home in August 2014. Indictments said he 
strangled 4 of them and beat the other.

Jones then wrapped the bodies in plastic bags, put them in the back of his SUV 
and drove around the Southeast for a week, logging more than 700 miles (1,125 
kilometers) through North Carolina, Georgia, Alabama and finally Mississippi 
where he was arrested, authorities said

Well into the trip, Jones buried his children on a rural hillside near Camden, 
Alabama, police said.

When he was arrested at a drunken driving checkpoint in Smith County, 
Mississippi, an officer smelled a terrible odor and found blood, maggots and 
children's clothes in the SUV, authorities said.

Jones' lawyers have filed court papers saying he plans an insanity defense. 
Jury selection will likely take most, if not all this week.

Jones, 37, was a software engineer and was given custody of his children after 
his marriage started to fall apart.

The computer engineer struggled as a single father, according to records from 
the Department of Social Services, whose employees visited the home a dozen 
times in 3 years.

But Jones also worked to correct the problems as social workers found them. 
There were trips to Disney World and the beach and a birthday party with 
cupcakes detailed in those records along with a mark on 1 of the children and a 
report they were made to exercise excessively as punishment.

"Dad appears to be overwhelmed as he is unable to maintain the home, but the 
children appear to be clean, groomed and appropriately dressed," wrote the case 
worker, who name was blacked out, in a report filed 2 weeks before police said 
the children were killed.

The trial could take most of May. If jurors find Jones guilty of murder, the 
same jury will then hear testimony about whether he should be sentenced to life 
in prison or the death penalty.

(source: Associated Press)








NEBRASKA:

The death penalty, faith and partisan politics----The annual death penalty 
debate in the Legislature always is solemn, dramatic and revealing.



It's an issue that ought to be deeply personal, and it is. For many people it 
is faith-guided or faith-based.

A moral issue, Sen. Ernie Chambers suggests.

An issue that Chambers says ought to particularly challenge Catholic senators 
who take a position contrary to last year's action by Pope Francis changing the 
Catechism of the Catholic Church to state that "the death penalty is 
inadmissible."

It's an issue that really shouldn't be used as a partisan political instrument, 
but it is. Everything is today.

And so that was a big part of the debate last week with threats of political 
retaliation injected and the vote of the people to overturn the Legislature's 
previous repeal of capital punishment employed as a cudgel.

Hey, Sen. Adam Morfeld protested, so how about the 2018 vote of the people to 
expand Medicaid coverage to an estimated 90,000 Nebraskans who have no access 
to health care coverage and work at low-paying jobs?

That expressed will of the people is being slow-walked by the Ricketts 
administration's creation of a new and costly administrative structure that 
will delay implementation of the people's expressed will for almost 2 years, 
Morfeld argued.

The death penalty debate always is extraordinary and this year's version 
quickly engaged freshman senators. Sens. Julie Slama, Megan Hunt and Machaela 
Cavanaugh were among the first to speak.

"You are not pro-life if you support the death penalty," Hunt said.

"On a life and death issue, I choose life," Sen. Kate Bolz said.

But there's a difference if it's innocent life, several senators responded, a 
stark difference between death because of abortion and the execution of a 
convicted killer.

For many senators, it's a challenging political vote.

Three Republicans who formerly were members of the Legislature were "kicked 
out" because they voted to repeal the death penalty, Sen. Patty Pansing Brooks 
said, listing them as former Sens. Jerry Johnson, Les Seiler and Al Davis, each 
of whom was politically targeted and failed to win re-election.

In the end, the vote to advance Chambers' bill to eliminate the death penalty 
failed on a 17-25 vote. The proposal needed 25 votes to advance.

The Nebraska Republican Party was quick to inject itself into the debate once 
again, targeting by name Sens. Dan Quick, Lynne Walz and Carol Blood in 2020. 
Those 3 senators did not cast votes on the issue last week.

16 of the 17 votes to repeal the death penalty were cast by Democrats and 
Chambers, a registered non-partisan; Sen. John McCollister was the sole 
Republican.

All of those 17 votes were cast by senators from the Omaha-Lincoln-Sarpy County 
urban complex, another striking example of the differences between urban and 
rural Nebraska. It's a growing political divide.

8 of the 14 women in the Legislature voted for repeal; 26 of 35 men voted to 
retain the death penalty.

(source: Lincoln Journal Star)








CALIFORNIA:

I will spend my life fighting against the death penalty and I’m proud to have 
Newsom with me



For as long as I can remember I have been against the death penalty.

Killing someone because they had taken someone else’s life seemed so 
hypocritical and medieval.

I remember talking to my dear friend Victoria Buzzo at a holiday party thrown 
by my sister Laura about my feelings around the death penalty and if they would 
change if someone I loved was murdered. I hoped I would still oppose it.

Then on Oct. 12, 2011, I found out both Laura and Victoria were murdered along 
with three of their co-workers and 3 others at Salon Meritage in Seal Beach, 
California, in the deadliest mass shooting in Orange County history. My mother 
was also shot but survived.

Here’s what I can say now: my life was forever altered that day, but not my 
objection to the death penalty. I will spend the rest of my life fighting for 
its abolition, and I could not be prouder to have Gov. Gavin Newsom standing 
with me and other loved ones of victims for whom the death penalty has created 
years of prolonged pain and suffering rather than any sense of justice.

On that dark day in October, a deranged man armed with three guns and wearing a 
bullet-proof vest went into Salon Meritage where his ex-wife Michelle Fournier 
worked alongside my sister. He wanted to punish Michelle and everyone else who 
was there, later referring to my sister and the six other people he killed as 
“collateral damage”.

Eight people inside the salon would be engulfed in a hail of gunfire, all but 
one would die. The lone survivor, with bullet wounds to her arm and chest was 
my mother, Hattie Stretz, who was there for a manicure by Laura. When he was 
done with his carnage inside, the gunman strolled to his car where he would 
shoot and kill David Caouette, who happened to have parked next to him. He was 
pulled over and arrested several blocks away.

The worst mass shooting in county history. Multiple eyewitnesses. The confessed 
killer in custody. This sounds like an open and shut case, right?

Wrong. Because of the way some overzealous prosecutors pursue the death penalty 
at all costs, this case that should have been quickly concluded dragged on for 
6 years, subjecting me, my family and the loved ones of the other victims to 
unimaginable pain.

My mother and I decided that we would attend as many court hearings as possible 
to stand where Laura could not. From the beginning, it was clear the Orange 
County Sheriff’s Department and the District Attorney’s office were so focused 
on pursuing the death penalty that they were willing to cheat, withhold 
evidence and even lie on the stand.

The trial rapidly disintegrated into what became known as the “snitch scandal” 
when evidence was shown that OCDA & OC sheriff personnel had illegally placed 
an informant in the cell next to the defendant and wiretapped their 
conversation and had been doing the same thing in other cases.

To me, the question was: why would they resort to such tactics in what should 
have been a straightforward case? Clearly, it was their way of doing business, 
and perhaps the District Attorney saw an opportunity to appear “tough on crime” 
by pursuing what he defined as the ultimate punishment. This is another, 
insidious, evil of the death penalty. It is not just disproportionately wielded 
against people of color – it is wielded as a tool to score political points by 
an increasingly small group of prosecutors.

In 2016, Orange County sent people to death row at more than twice the state’s 
rate, and together with Riverside, account for more 34% of death row inmates 
despite being only 14% of the state’s population. We are even outliers 
nationwide. In 2017, 31% of death sentences came from 3 counties: Riverside, 
California; Clark, Nevada; and Maricopa, Arizona. Just 2% of the counties in 
the United States account for 56% of the nation’s population on death row.

This unyielding pursuit of the death penalty took an enormous toll on all our 
families. The prosecutors, the sheriffs, and even the California Attorney 
General’s office — headed first by Kamala Harris and then Xavier Becerra — 
ignored the increasingly desperate requests from most of the victims’ families 
to accept “life without parole.” Finally, in 2017, Judge Thomas Goethals, who 
conducted himself with both honor and compassion throughout the proceedings, 
became fed up. He removed the death penalty and handed down 8 sentences of life 
without parole plus additional time for attempted murder and special 
circumstances.

There are of course many reasons to oppose the death penalty: cost (the death 
penalty has cost California taxpayers $4 billion), the very real threat of 
killing an innocent person, considered by some collateral damage and the clear 
evidence that people of color are disproportionately sentenced to death.

For me, these academic arguments have become personal, and only strengthened by 
the gross prosecutorial misconduct on display in the state’s case against my 
sister’s killer. In fact, I am now a plaintiff in a civil rights lawsuit 
seeking to expose and end that misconduct.

Thankfully, however, because of the incredible bravery and righteousness of 
thought by Gov. Newsom, going forward in California, that kind of government 
malfeasance will never result in taking a person’s life while he is in office. 
That’s an incredibly good start but now we need to make it permanent in both 
California and the country.

(source: Beth Webb is a board member of Death Penalty Focus and a tireless 
advocate of abolition. In 2011, her sister, Laura, was killed, and her mother, 
Hattie, was wounded in the Salon Meritage Shooting in Seal Beach, CA. Beth is 
active in the fight to end the death penalty and to challenge corrupt 
prosecutors at the local level----Orange County Register)