[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., VA., GA., FLA., ALA., LA., OHIO, US MIL.

[Rick Halperin]

May 29




PENNSYLVANIA:

Sentenced to death 3 times in 1989, Philly exoneree Harold Wilson dies at 61



Harold Wilson was convicted of a triple murder in a Philadelphia crack house in 
1989, and sentenced to die 3 times. Instead, he fought for his life.

Wilson became the 6th person exonerated from Pennsylvania’s death row, and 
spent his later years a staunch and outspoken death-penalty abolitionist. He 
died May 18 of complications from a stroke. He was 61.

Despite 17 years in solitary confinement, he told a Democracy Now! interviewer 
in 2005, “I never gave them that opportunity to dehumanize me.”

He grew up on 18th Street in South Philadelphia, in a house spilling over with 
his 5 brothers and a sister, according to Avis Savage, a friend of 40 years. An 
entrepreneur, he had 2 children and a couple businesses before he was charged 
and convicted in the 1988 hatchet slaying of Dorothy Sewell, 64, her nephew 
Tyrone Mason, 33, and Mason’s girlfriend, Cynthia Goines Mills, 40.

“He was in shock for a long period of time. He didn’t understand how they were 
going to kill him 3 times,” Savage said.

At a time when capital cases were handled by notoriously underfunded and 
underprepared defense lawyers, Mr. Wilson’s attorney conducted little 
investigation into the case, according to Robert Dunham, who won him a stay of 
execution in 1996.

“His death sentence in 1989 was near the peak of death sentencing in 
Philadelphia,” said Dunham. In the ’90s, nearly 10 people were sentenced to 
death each year — in part, Dunham alleged, because prosecutors “routinely 
overcharged the death penalty in order to get the strategic advantage of a 
death qualified jury.”

Later, Mr. Wilson became the 1st person to challenge his conviction based on 
the now-infamous training tape featuring Jack McMahon, who was the prosecutor 
on his case, advising how race should play into jury selection. At an 
evidentiary hearing, Dunham said, lawyers presented an analysis of jury 
selection in that case, as well as decades of Philadelphia trials, that found 
stark racial disparities in jury composition and in outcomes for defendants: In 
eligible cases, the odds of imposing the death sentence increased 3.1 times if 
the defendant was black, and among cases that went to trial, black defendants 
were 9.3 times more likely than white counterparts to be sentenced to death.

The DA’s office retried the case twice: the 2nd trial resulted in a mistrial, 
the 3rd in acquittal. By then, DNA evidence showed a jacket covered in the 
victims’ blood — that Mr. Wilson had argued was not his and was far too small 
for his 6-foot-4 frame — also contained blood from a different person.

“He was on death row when the internet came to be and when cell phones came to 
be so he had a lot to learn when he came out. The world was a very, very 
different place," Dunham said. “He wasn’t able to work full time because of the 
PTSD he had developed as a result of his time on death row. But he … spoke 
about the death penalty all over the country.”

Mr. Wilson became involved with Witness to Innocence, a group of 
death-row-exonerees-turned-advocates. Kirk Bloodsworth, the executive director 
of the organization, said Mr. Wilson spoke to church groups, legislators, 
students and communities around the country, and returned each year to the 
steps of the U.S. Supreme Court to tell his story at an annual demonstration.

“He was a mountain of a man, not just in stature," Bloodsworth said. "That was 
his heart. The way he’d speak and the passion he had in his heart made him 
twice the size he was. The criminal justice system has a lot of problems, and 
Harold knew that — and knew there were many others left behind.”

McMahon, who is now a defense lawyer, said he has never stopped believing that 
Mr. Wilson was guilty, and he denies that he made racist jury strikes. “It was 
a black-on-black crime and there was no racial component to the case,” he said.

“But he was found not guilty so, it is what it is. Obviously, 12 people thought 
he was guilty back then, and 12 people thought he was not guilty later on.”

According to the National Registry of Exonerations, he received a $500,000 
settlement from the city in 2016.

Wilson spent his final years in Accomac, Va., on the Eastern Shore, where he 
worked at a Walmart and a processing plant before he became disabled, according 
to Savage. He lived a quiet life, spending time in nature and with his family. 
He was clean to the point of fastidiousness; friends came to refer to him as 
“Monk” for his minimalist impulses.

But every chance he got, he gave interviews and spoke about his experience, 
alongside groups including the ACLU, Amnesty International, and Virginians for 
Alternatives to the Death Penalty.

He emphasized the conditions of confinement, which he likened to Abu Ghraib, 
and described receiving frequent discipline for covering the vents of his cell 
to block freezing air he believed was piped in as a subtle form of torture.

“He wasn’t bitter,” said Savage, “but he was very determined to let others know 
what the criminal justice system was like.”

The funeral service is scheduled for 11 a.m., Wednesday, May 29, at 
Mitchum-Wilson Funeral Home, 1410 S. 20th St., Philadelphia. The interment will 
be at Eden Cemetery in Collingdale.

(source: philly.com)








VIRGINIA:

Ruling establishes cruelty of solitary confinement



The solitary confinement conditions under which Virginia used to house death 
row inmates amounted to cruel and unusual punishment, and was therefore 
unconstitutional, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond ruled 
recently.

The 3-judge panel ruled 2–1 for the plaintiffs, upholding a lower court ruling 
in a lawsuit filed in 2014 on behalf of five death row inmates. The suit had 
taken issue with the small cells in which the inmates were confined—at 71 
square feet, they were about half the size of a parking space; the lack of time 
outside the small cell—one hour, five days a week in a small outdoor cell plus 
three 10-minute showers a week; and the policy of separating inmates and their 
visitors with a plexiglass wall.

Clearly the wheels of justice turn slowly in every aspect of capital punishment 
cases, even in the tangential consideration of how death row inmates are 
housed.

The wheels of the Virginia Department of Corrections, however, turned anything 
but slowly. Within a year of the lawsuit’s filing, the department had 
apparently recognized the problem and the validity of the suit. It acted 
quickly to not only liberalize its confinement and human interaction policies 
for death row inmates, it undertook the physical enlargement of cells to 
provide more inside and outdoor space.

Virginia death row inmates are housed at Sussex I State Prison in Sussex 
County. Those nearing execution are transported to Greensville Correctional 
Center, where the death chamber is located.

The improvements to Sussex 1 prompted the plaintiffs to acknowledge that 
conditions were no longer cruel or unconstitutional. The dissenting opinion by 
U.S. Judge Paul V. Niemeyer pointed to the improvements, suggesting that the 
case was moot and the appeal unnecessary.

The reason for the appeal, however, was that Virginia corrections officials had 
refused to guarantee that they would never revert to their former policies and 
methods. Because the same officials had been so pro-active in improving 
conditions, the refusal constituted “a head-scratching choice,” according to 
Robert Dunham, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center.

We think that issuing the ruling and closing the circle on the lawsuit was a 
wise and worthwhile decision. The state is forced to agree that it will never 
revert, and other states facing similar situations can refer to the 4th Circuit 
ruling as they determine their own courses of action.

It’s worth noting that Virginia’s death row population, which peaked in 1995 at 
57 inmates, is currently only three. Juries have gotten away from imposing the 
death penalty, preferring the life-without-parole option when available. The 
diminished death row population also comes at a time when the drugs used to 
administer a lethal injection are controversial and in short supply.

Corrections officials in Virginia and elsewhere are studying the overall use of 
solitary confinement and whether it in itself represents cruel and unusual 
punishment under the Eighth Amendment. There is evidence to suggest its use 
causes mental illness or exacerbates existing mental health issues in isolated 
prisoners, and that reform of the practice is necessary.

Legislation before the Virginia General Assembly earlier this year to require 
detailed annual reporting on solitary confinement passed both chambers 
unanimously and was signed by Gov. Ralph Northam. It requires information be 
compiled on the number of inmates placed in solitary and for how long and why; 
each inmate’s “age, sex, gender identity, national origin, race and ethnicity, 
English proficiency status, developmental or intellectual disability”; a 
specific count of “vulnerable” inmates—those 21 years old or younger and 55 or 
older; and the number of “self-harm” incidents involving each solitary inmate.

Inmates are where they are for good reason, but their treatment while 
incarcerated needs to be humane. The challenge is how to manage the worst of 
the worst, such as the South Carolina inmate who has now twice killed 
cellmates—17 years apart—since his original life sentence for murder was 
imposed in 1999. His second cellmate killing occurred after he had spent 15 
years in solitary and had “earned” his return to the general population.

Virginia is doing the right thing by studying and reforming its use of solitary 
confinement, even if it must remain a last-resort practice.

(source: Editorial, Free Lance-Star)








GEORGIA:

New trial requested in stepmom death penalty murder case----Tiffany Moss was 
sentenced to death for starving her 10-year-old stepdaughter and burning her 
body in a trashcan.



No sooner than the ink had dried on the guilty verdicts, the Georgia Capital 
Defender group filed a motion asking for a new trial for Tiffany Moss, the 
Gwinnett County woman convicted of killing her stepdaughter, Emani Moss.

The 10-year-old’s body was found in 2013 in a trash can outside the family’s 
apartment. Tiffany and Eman Moss, Emani’s father, originally tried to hide the 
crime. They plotted to tell police that she had run away and then tried to burn 
her body to get rid of evidence.

Eman eventually called police and is currently serving a life sentence without 
parole for his role in the murder. He testified against his wife during this 
trial.

Tiffany Moss represented herself throughout the entire death penalty trial, but 
her defense was most notable because of her “non-defense.” She barely uttered a 
word during the entire proceedings. Moss asked no questions of witnesses, 
called no witnesses of her own and didn’t present an opening or closing 
argument. She sat stone-faced throughout the trial, showing no emotion as the 
District Attorney detailed the abuse and isolation Emani suffered at the hands 
of Tiffany.

Moss faced 3 possible sentences:

Life in prison with the possibility of parole

Life in prison with no possibility of parole

Death

After she was found guilty, Gwinnett District Attorney Danny Porter asked the 
jury to deliver a death sentence.

“This defendant has never shown remorse," said Porter. "Never shown that she 
even acknowledged that she had a part in it. So she forced the state to put her 
on trial and prove her but guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Moss was found guilty of all six counts against her, including murder, and was 
sentenced to the death penalty.

The Georgia Capital Defender’s group has filed a request for a new trial on six 
points. They claim Moss was not competent to act as her own attorney.

During the pre-trial hearings as well as jury selection, Judge George 
Hutchinson repeatedly urged Moss to rely upon the backup lawyers he appointed 
to her. He also urged her to accept a public defender to represent her. Until 
the bitter end of her trial, Moss refused to accept help.

11Alive News uncovered court documents that claim Moss has brain damage. The 
motion, which was filed with the Gwinnett Co. Court, says Moss had 
“neuropsychological testing data that showed the defendant to have damage to 
the premotor and prefrontal regions of the brain.”

The Director of the Brain Research Laboratory at Emory University, Dr. Don 
Stein, said this type of damage is caused by some sort of precipitating event 
or trauma: athletic injuries, trauma to the head, damage during childbirth, 
meningitis, strokes or aging. Stein has not examined Moss, but he did explain 
what damage like this could mean.

“What you’re talking about with prefrontal and premotor cortex (is) those areas 
of the brain, and especially in the left hemisphere, are very much thought to 
be intimately involved in executive function, decision making, and impulse 
control,” explain Dr. Stein.

The actual results of the neuropsychological testing done on Moss are sealed, 
but it could play a role in the motion for a new trial.

(source: 11alive.com)








FLORIDA:

Donald Davidson seeks to forgo trial, head straight to death row



After 4 1/2 years of delay, Donald Davidson’s death penalty trial was set to 
begin in June.

But at his final pretrial hearing Tuesday, he stunned prosecutors, the judge, 
even his own attorneys, saying he wanted to plead guilty.

Though not unprecedented, pleading guilty in a death penalty case is 
exceedingly rare. And it hasn’t happened since the state adopted new laws 
requiring unanimous jury decisions in death penalty cases.

“It’s a first for me,” Davidson’s attorney Mark Wright told Circuit Judge Don 
Lester with a small laugh. “I don’t really know how to proceed with a decision 
like that.”

Davidson is charged with first-degree murder, kidnapping and capital sexual 
battery, stemming from a grisly December 2014 crime. He is alleged to have 
assaulted and murdered 35-year-old Roseann Welsh in her Middleburg home, then 
kidnapped and raped her 10-year-old daughter. He was a registered sexual 
predator at the time. Up until this point, he has pleaded not guilty.

Death penalty cases are typically split into a guilt phase, and – if a jury 
finds a defendant guilty – a penalty phase, during which the jury decides 
whether to impose a sentence of death or life in prison.

Davidson’s attorney said his client wanted to dispense with both phases and 
have the judge decide the matter outright.

“Of course we spent a little bit of time – to be candid with the court – trying 
to talk him out of it,” Wright told the judge, “but that was the decision that 
he made.”

Criminal defense attorney Ann Finnell, who isn’t connected to the case, said 
before the state’s death penalty procedures changed, defendants would 
occasionally plead guilty in death cases. But the new procedures are generally 
interpreted to mean that a jury, not a judge, makes the recommendation of 
either life in prison or death.

A judge can ignore that recommendation, but that would be unlikely, and 
probably politically untenable.

Finnell says that even if Donaldson was permitted to skip the guilt phase and 
forgo a jury trial, prosecutors would still have to present evidence to the 
judge in order to get a death sentence.

“The judge, as a fact-finder, would have to go through the same process as a 
jury would,” Finnell said. “In other words -- has the state proved at least one 
aggravating factor beyond a reasonable doubt, and is that sufficient for the 
death penalty?”

Still, it was not clear if Davidson was fully committed to his plan. Shortly 
after Wright laid out the three options they had discussed with their client – 
the third being his desire to forgo a trial entirely -- Davidson interjected.

“Your honor, I decided with option number 2, that Mark [Wright] had just 
explained,” he said.

Judge Lester noted that was “a little bit different from what I heard” and 
wondered if “your thinking may be going back and forth a little bit.”

Pressing for clarity, he asked, “So is your current thinking that you want to 
bypass the guilt phase, plead guilty and have penalty phase?”

“Yessir,” Davidson replied.

Given what he called “obviously very weighty matters,” Lester said he would 
give the defendant another day to mull it over.

“I’m going to pass your case until we’re going to reconvene tomorrow,” the 
judge said. “I’m going to give you an opportunity to think about this some 
more, and also to talk about this with your attorney some more. And then we’ll 
come back tomorrow, and whatever your decision is that day, then that’s the way 
we’ll go.”

Finnell said she thought the judge’s decision to give the matter extra time was 
smart, given the dissonance of a defendant essentially asking the state to 
execute him.

“The bottom line is, life in prison is a pretty terrible thing for anyone to 
endure,” Finnell said. “Faced with that prospect, I’m not sure how I would deal 
with it, frankly.”

Court resumes at 9 a.m. Wednesday.

(source: The Florida Times-Union)

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

Legal legend D’Alemberte fought for death-penalty review. Florida should not 
abandon his quest



This column isn’t a tribute to the late Talbot “Sandy” D’Alemberte, although it 
could be. The former FSU president emeritus, FSU College of Law dean, American 
Bar Association president, Miami area state legislator and chair of the 
1977-1978 Florida Constitution Revision Commission continues to evoke heartfelt 
reaction from so many whose lives he touched.

His sensibilities will continue to inspire people to envision a more just world 
and take meaningful steps to achieve it. His resolve to confront vexing 
challenges — regardless of whether they are unpopular, controversial or 
characterized by vitriolic, rather than well-informed, rhetoric — is legend.

This essentially is a call to action involving one of D’Alemberte’s many 
priorities to change the status quo.

Recently the state of Florida executed a death row inmate under authority of 
the 1st warrant signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis. D’Alemberte was opposed to capital 
punishment and aghast at Florida’s uneven process and procedures, and those 
around the country.

Years ago, he encouraged me to join an 8 member Florida-based assessment team 
assembled by the ABA. It included an elected state attorney, a former public 
defender, a former Florida Supreme Court Chief Justice, a circuit judge who 
taught the Florida College of Advanced Judicial Studies capital case sentencing 
course, an appellate lawyer in private practice who later served as president 
of the Florida Supreme Court Historical Society and was chaired by a then-UF 
law professor with special expertise in mental illness.

The 2006 ABA report that resulted highlighted a range of findings and 
recommendations regarding the fairness, accuracy and impartiality of Florida’s 
death penalty process — the report did not take a position on capital 
punishment.

Nor did it focus upon method of execution or the staggering fiscal implications 
of capital punishment since such would require different kinds of 
subject-matter expertise.

Significantly, all findings and recommendations were unanimous.

One recommendation called for unanimous penalty phase juries to advance a death 
sentence instead of by simple majority (e.g. 7-5) which was Florida’s standard 
at the time. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled a decade later that Florida’s scheme 
violated the U.S. Constitution — the Legislature took 2 sessions afterward to 
get it right.

Another finding documented jurors’ widespread confusion in capital cases. The 
Florida Supreme Court amended the corresponding jury instructions three years 
afterward.

Other key findings and recommendations involving, but not limited to, 
geographic, socioeconomic and racial disparities still apply but haven’t been 
effectively addressed.

I met D’Alemberte during the early 1990s. He requested a meeting when I served 
as assistant general counsel and clemency aide to Gov. Lawton Chiles. He was 
representing a death row inmate pro bono. My responsibilities included 
supporting the governor’s consideration of death penalty cases when they 
reached a point in the appellate process that executive clemency review would 
ensue. Chiles refrained from signing a death warrant in that instance.

The governor’s guidance simply was keep him apprised of significant issues that 
might affect his decision. I sat next to the governor in his office during an 
execution, with open phone lines to the courts, Florida’s attorney general and 
the execution chamber.

5 years after the ABA released its Florida report, former Florida Supreme Court 
Justice Raoul Cantero (appointed by Gov. Jeb Bush aand now practicing law in 
Miami) and I approached The Florida Bar’s Criminal Law Section — comprising 
judges, prosecutors, criminal defense lawyers (public and private) and 
academics — to propose a position supporting comprehensive review of Florida’s 
entire death-penalty process by all 3 branches of government. It passed 23-3.

That was 2011. No such review has been conducted. Moreover, a commission 
established in law to monitor Florida’s process and report back to all three 
branches was eliminated by the Legislature that same year without debate in the 
Senate purportedly as a cost-avoidance measure. For perspective, courts review 
issues raised within the context of any given case — they’re not informed by a 
broad assessment of the efficacy of Florida’s death-penalty process.

More recently, Roberto Martinez, a member of the 2017-2018 Florida Constitution 
Revision Commission and former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of 
Florida — now practicing law in Coral Gables — attempted to amend his FCRC 
proposal to repeal capital punishment instead to require periodic review of 
Florida’s entire death-penalty process consistent with the Criminal Law Section 
position.

In a departure from traditional protocol the chairwoman of the respective FCRC 
committee broke a tie by voting No, effectively ending his effort to further, 
at a minimum, a constitutional framework.

In keeping with D’Alemberte’s sensibilities, death-penalty supporters and 
opponents alike have reason to advocate for meaningful periodic review of 
Florida’s entire death-penalty process by all 3 branches of government, so long 
as capital punishment is the law in this state.

(source: Opinion; Mark R. Schlakman is the senior program director of The 
Florida State University’s Center for the Advancement of Human Rights----Miami 
Herald)








ALABAMA----new death sentence

Jury recommends death penalty for man found guilty of 20-month-old daughter’s 
murder



A Madison County jury has recommended the death penalty for Lionel Francis in 
the case of his daughter’s murder.

Francis, 37, was found guilty last week of the May 2016 intentional shooting 
death of his 20-month-old daughter Alexandria Francis at the family’s home on 
Lockwood Court.

Francis claimed the shooting was accidental.

The jury had the option of choosing life without parole or the death penalty, 
but the judge is able to override their recommendation. The process of 
overriding jury recommendations in capital murder cases has ended in the state, 
but cases that began before the law changed in 2017 still give the judge the 
final word on sentencing.

The jury vote was 11-1 in favor of the death penalty. It takes 10 jurors out of 
12 to recommend the death penalty. A jury vote with fewer than 10 jurors is 
considered a recommendation for a life without parole sentence.

Madison County Assistant District Attorney Tim Douthit said it is difficult to 
ask for someone’s execution, but in this case, that’s what justice demands.

“In Alabama we allow for the death penalty, we reserve it for the worst of the 
worst,” Douthit said after the jury’s recommendation was issued. “People that 
have gone above and beyond in the evil acts they have done. I can, as a 
prosecutor, as a father, as a citizen, I can think of nothing worse than to 
take a gun, to look into the eyes of an 18-month-old child, put that gun into 
her head, press it and pull the trigger. Life without parole was just not 
equivalent to the crime in this case, it had to be death.”

The judge has set the final sentencing date for July 25.

(source: WHNT news)

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

Baldwin County woman charged with capital murder in death of 13-month-old 
daughter



Jordan Rice has been indicted by a Baldwin County Grand Jury for causing the 
death of her 13-month-old daughter, Violet.

The indictment alleges that Rice deprived Violet of “Food and/or nourishment, 
and/or water, and/or medical care, and/or other basic necessities to sustain 
life.”

Sheriff Hoss Mack said May of 2018 this was the most horrific case of child 
abuse he's ever seen.

They say the baby was dead for hours before Rice called Baldwin County 
Sheriff's deputies to report it in Wilcox on May 24, 2018.

Investigators say the child had been abused repeatedly.

The state has taken custody of other children in the home.

Capital Murder carries the possibility of the death penalty in Alabama.

(source: WPMI news)

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

Alabama inmate seeks to block execution set for Thursday



An Alabama inmate set to die by lethal injection on Thursday wants the 11th 
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to block his execution.

Court documents show Christopher Lee Price informed the court Tuesday he plans 
to challenge a lower court decision issued Sunday.

U.S. District Judge Kristi DuBose refused to block Price's execution. She ruled 
his latest attempt to postpone death was similar to previous challenges.

Price is set to die for his part in the sword-and-dagger slaying of pastor Bill 
Lynn in Fayette County in 1991. A second man pleaded guilty and was sentenced 
to life.

A federal judge stayed Price's execution in April after he challenged Alabama's 
lethal injection procedure. The Supreme Court fractured 5-4 to allow the 
execution, but the midnight death warrant expired.

(source: Associated Press)








LOUISIANA:

Reeves loses attempt to get U.S. Supreme Court to review death sentence



Convicted child killer Jason Reeves has lost his most recent attempt to get the 
U.S. Supreme Court to review his death sentence.

Almost two decades ago, in 2001, Reeves raped, then stabbed to death 4-year-old 
Mary Jean Thigpen. Her body was found in a cemetery.

The Louisiana State Supreme Court has already ruled that Reeves’ denial for 
relief at the state level is final.

Calcasieu Parish District Attorney John DeRosier said his office is working to 
get a new death warrant for Reeves.

“The death penalty is the law of the land in the State of Louisiana as it 
exists today and we will enforce that law,” DeRosier said. “This defendant is 
evil. He committed a horrible, atrocious crime against a little four-year-old 
girl.”

Once drafted, the death warrant will go to Judge Mike Canaday for his signature 
and to have a date set.

However, executions are currently on hold in Louisiana, at least partly due to 
difficulties getting drugs for lethal injection.

(source: KPLC news)

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

Proposal to hide source of execution drugs killed by Louisiana Senate panel



A Louisiana Senate panel shot down a bid to cloak the source of execution drugs 
in strict secrecy, a proposal framed as a way to restart executions in the 
state.

But critics called it an attack on transparency, arguing it'd potentially allow 
state prison officials to buy execution drugs from shady sources without any 
outside oversight and make it extremely difficult to hold suppliers accountable 
if improperly mixed drugs caused a botched execution.

The bill's death on a 3-to-2 vote in the Senate Judiciary B Committee likely 
ends debate over the death penalty in this year's legislative session without 
any changes to the current situation. Two separate proposals to abolish capital 
punishment both failed earlier in the session.

Louisiana hasn't carried out an execution since 2010. State prison officials 
have struggled in recent years to obtain the drugs needed for lethal 
injections, the only form of execution allowed under state law.

State Rep. Nicholas Muscarello, R-Hammond, argued that his secrecy proposal, 
House Bill 258, might allow the state to buy drugs from small specialty 
manufacturers that may be reluctant to face public scrutiny or possible 
protests if their involvement in executions was revealed. His bill would've 
provided "absolute confidentiality" for any company or person involved in 
supplying execution drugs or equipment. Contracts, emails or other documents 
that might identify companies would've been shielded from public records 
requests and exempt from being turned over in lawsuits or court proceedings.

The House of Representatives passed the bill last week, 68 to 31.

Large pharmaceutical companies, which make the drugs needed for lethal 
injections, have refused to sell them for use in executions and have taken 
steps in recent years to cut off the supply to prison death chambers. That's 
left death penalty states scrambling to obtain drugs necessary for executions. 
Louisiana prison officials have tried other avenues to obtain drugs.

Eighteen other states have passed similar secrecy measures, including several 
who've successfully carried out lethal injections in recent years, said 
Michelle Ghetti, who works for Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry as the 
state's deputy solicitor general.

Landry, a Republican, has trumpeted his support for the death penalty and 
backed Muscarello's proposal. Landry urged lawmakers before the session to push 
such a secrecy bill as part of a campaign to begin executing death row inmates 
again.

Records obtained by The Advocate through a public records request show the 
state’s most recent supply of any of the drugs used in executions had expired 
by 2016. A number of death-row inmates have challenged Louisiana's lethal 
injection protocol in an ongoing federal lawsuit. Attorneys for the inmates 
have sought information about possible suppliers and manufacturers of 
executions drugs.

Federal judges in the case have issued a series of orders that have blocked 
Louisiana from carrying out any executions since 2014. The most recent 
extension of that order, which is set to expire in July, was requested by state 
officials after acknowledging the state didn't have the drugs to move forward 
with any executions.

Current Louisiana law already provides confidentiality for most people involved 
in lethal executions, including those who "perform ancillary functions ... 
either directly or indirectly."

The Department of Corrections cited that law when blacked out large portions of 
email correspondence with a compounding pharmacy and a proposed non-disclosure 
agreement in response to a public records request from The Advocate.

But Muscarello's law would've gone further, its backers argued, by specifically 
guaranteeing confidentiality to drug makers and suppliers. It also would've 
sought to prohibit federal judges from ordering the state to turn over records 
related to its acquisition of execution drugs.

Death penalty supporters urged lawmakers to pass the bill, arguing the state 
made a promise to families of those killed by those on death row to carry out 
their death sentences. They expressed frustration with a seemingly endless wait 
for executions.

"There is no such thing as closure, all we’re asking you for is justice," said 
Wayne Guzzardo, whose daughter was murdered during a 1995 restaurant robbery in 
Baton Rouge by a man on death row.

Guzzardo — accompanied Tuesday by his wife, who carried a framed photo of their 
slain daughter, Stephanie — has become a regular and adamant pro-death penalty 
voice in the State Capitol. "This has gone on long enough," Guzzardo said.

Opponents of the bill — including the Louisiana Conference of Catholic Bishops, 
anti-death penalty groups and the Louisiana Press Association — said the total 
secrecy it'd impose on the purchase of execution drugs would open the door for 
all sorts of potential problems.

They argued that prison officials could potentially head across state lines to 
buy from disreputable or unqualified compounders, pay wildly inflated prices to 
cronies or even turn to the black market to buy deadly drugs.

"Any shady means of acquiring these drugs would be permissible" if the law 
passed, said Rob Tasman, the executive director of the Louisiana Conference of 
Catholic Bishops.

Several opponents pointed to Landry's own public suggestion that prison 
officials could take seized black-market fentanyl — an extremely powerful 
opioid painkiller blamed for a spike in fatal overdoses — from police evidence 
lockers to kill condemned prisoners.

Although many of the groups fighting the execution secrecy proposal have also 
pushed to end the death penalty — such as the Catholic Church — they said their 
opposition to Muscarello's bill hinged more on issues of transparency, 
accountability and open government.

"The public has a right to know how its tax dollars are being spent," said 
Nicholas Mitchell, a researcher at Loyola University in New Orleans who's 
repeatedly testified at the State Capitol against the death penalty. "It is 
especially true regarding something as serious as capital punishment."

"We’re not here about the death penalty, that’s not what this is about," said 
Kevin Hayes, a lobbyist for the Louisiana Press Association, which represents 
newspapers in the state, including The Advocate. The group regularly opposes 
legislation that'd hide public records or government functions and came out 
against Muscarello's bill.

"Whatever one feels about capital punishment, the public has a right to know 
how those convicted of heinous crimes are being put to death," Hayes said. 
"Doing this controversial work in secret is not a gesture of democracy."

Muscarello, though, argued that secrecy around execution drugs has become 
essential for Louisiana to actually carry out death sentences. Lawmakers and 
the general public would need to trust state Department of Corrections 
officials are operating responsibly and above board in sourcing the drugs, he 
said.

"We have to make sure that whoever we have running DOC will do the right job," 
Muscarello said. "I think our DOC will run it correctly, they’ll hire the right 
people and do the right job."

State Sen. JP Morrell, D-New Orleans, also contended it'd leave state taxpayers 
on the hook for potential multi-million-dollar lawsuits if shoddy work or 
mistakes by drugmakers caused horrific botched executions since the state 
couldn't reveal the company responsible.

Muscarello said possible legal liability is something the state should be 
prepared to accept, likening the risk of a costly lawsuit over a botched 
execution to potential payouts for car wrecks caused by on-duty state 
employees.

A frustrated Muscarello after Tuesday's vote that he or another supporter would 
push a similar execution drug secrecy bill in the Louisiana Legislature again 
next year.

(source: The Advocate)

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

Louisiana Senate committee votes down death penalty secrecy bill



A Senate committee on Tuesday voted down an effort to guarantee secrecy to 
companies that make or prepare drugs used in the death penalty, most likely 
derailing the measure for the session.

Companies are wary about being associated with capital punishment, which makes 
the drugs used in lethal injection harder to get, officials say. Several states 
seeking to carry out executions have passed secrecy measures to shield those 
companies.

Louisiana has not executed anyone since 2010. Two measures that could have led 
to banning the death penalty in the state have been rejected by lawmakers 
during this session.

“It doesn’t look like the death penalty is going to be outlawed,” said Rep. 
Nicholas Muscarello, a Hammond Republican and the sponsor of House Bill 258. 
“We have to complete our duty.”

Sen. J.P. Morrell, D-New Orleans, said aspects of the bill would protect the 
drug companies from legal discovery and expose the state to “tens of millions” 
of dollars in legal liability if a drug doesn’t work as intended. He suggested 
secrecy would encourage future state officials to acquire the drugs through 
shady means.

As an aside, Morrell suggested the most humane and effective means to execute 
someone would be a firing squad.

“I do think that secrecy is anti-democratic,” said Sen. Karen Carter Peterson, 
D-New Orleans.

Peterson asked whether anyone from the Department of Corrections was available 
to testify that the drugs currently are impossible to get. No one from the 
department came forward, though officials have made public statements to that 
effect.

The committee voted 5-3 to defer the bill, ending its progress for the session.

(source: thecentersquare.com)








OHIO:

Ohio Bill To End Death Penalty For Those With "Serious Mental Illness"----The 
bill would also allow all prisoners on death row within the state to petition 
for resentencing.



A bipartisan bill would ban the death penalty in Ohio for anyone found to have 
“serious mental illness,” which the bill limits to diagnosed schizophrenia, 
schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder or 
delusional disorder.

It must also be determined that said mental illness “significantly impaired the 
person's capacity to exercise rational judgment” during the moment of the 
crime.

The bill, which is currently making its way through the Ohio legislature, would 
also allow all inmates on death row within the state to petition for 
resentencing under this new policy. Prosecutors are opposing the bill based on 
the concern that death row inmates will use this as an opportunity to delay 
their sentence. Allen County Prosecutor Juergen Waldick testified that it’s 
“likely that every single person on death row would file such a motion,” which 
could overwhelm the courts.

However, the bill is supported by multiple mental health professional and 
advocacy groups, including the Ohio Psychological Association, the Ohio 
Psychiatric Physician's Association and the National Alliance on Mental Illness 
of Ohio (NAMI Ohio).

"People with these mental illnesses don't always know what they're doing," said 
NAMI Ohio Executive Director Terry Russell. "We don't think it's ethically or 
morally right to take their life because of it."

Bill sponsor, Republican Rep. Brett Hudson Hillyer, argued that most Ohioans 
“will concede executing an individual found to be suffering from a serious 
mental illness at the time of the crime is neither fair nor just, and this 
punishment should be reserved for those who have intentionally done.”

A report by the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice at 
Harvard University found that 75% of executions in 2015 involved defendants and 
situations of “crippling disabilities and uncertain guilt.”

Seven of the 28 cases examined surrounded individuals who were found to have 
serious mental illnesses. Additionally, five executed prisoners had experienced 
“extreme” childhood trauma or abuse.

One individual had been classified by the Veterans Administration as being 100% 
disabled due to severe PTSD resulting from his service in the Vietnam War.

Defendants found guilty of capital offenses who are found to have severe mental 
illnesses will still be given harsh sentences such as life in prison without 
parole or life in prison with parole eligibility after 25 or 30 years.

Proponents of the bill have stressed that people who commit crimes while being 
mentally ill will still be held responsible for their actions. However, they 
argue that treatment is a better option for these individuals than execution.

“The stigma of these illnesses is so misunderstood in the community,” Russell 
said. “When the law is broken, we’re not going to use mental health as an 
excuse. We send them to treatment facilities instead of prisons.”

(source: thefix.com)








US MILITARY:

Former Navy Judge Named to Oversee Guantánamo Military Court



A retired Navy judge has been named to oversee the military tribunals at 
Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, filling a job that has lacked a permanent occupant since 
his predecessor was dismissed last year after discussing plea deals with 
defense lawyers in the Sept. 11 and the destroyer Cole cases.

The acting secretary of defense, Patrick Shanahan, appointed the retired judge, 
Christian L. Reismeier, to the civilian job — officially known as the convening 
authority for military commissions — last week and the Pentagon announced the 
decision on Tuesday. Mr. Reismeier, who retired as a 1-star admiral in 2015, 
was spotted last week at Military Commissions headquarters in Alexandria, Va.

The job includes negotiating plea deals with defense lawyers, approving 
proposed cases, deciding whether prosecutors can seek the death penalty and 
funding trial and defense teams. The job’s responsibilities have been carried 
out since early last year on an interim basis by 2 lower-level officials.

Mr. Reismeier is taking over more than 15 years after the Pentagon named the 
first overseer of a tribunal system at Guantánamo Bay — set up after the Sept. 
11, 2001, attacks — with no major Qaeda prosecution yet carried out.

The military commission’s most complex case — against 5 men accused of 
conspiring in the Sept. 11 attacks, which killed 2,976 people — still has no 
trial date 7 years after an Obama administration convening authority approved 
proceeding with the prosecution.

Progress has been scant in part because the judge and lawyers are still hashing 
out what classified information the defense lawyers, accused terrorists and 
public can see at the court. The defendants had spent years in the C.I.A.’s 
secret overseas prison network before being moved to Guantánamo Bay.

The military judge presiding in the trial has announced that he intends to 
leave the case next month. Last month, the commander of the prison at 
Guantánamo Bay, Rear Adm. John C. Ring, was fired after a monthlong 
investigation and for what his superior officer called a “loss of confidence” 
in his ability to lead.

Mr. Reismeier’s predecessor as the convening authority, Harvey Rishikof, and 
his legal adviser had been discussing whether to seek life imprisonment rather 
than death sentences in exchange for guilty pleas by Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, 
accused of being the Sept. 11 mastermind, and his four co-defendants in a bid 
to bring a swifter resolution. They were fired by the defense secretary at the 
time, Jim Mattis, on Feb. 5, 2018.

Mr. Mattis said in an affidavit that he dismissed Mr. Rishikof, whom he 
appointed at the start of the Trump administration but never met, because of 
his temperament and failure to coordinate properly with other divisions in the 
Defense Department.

Mr. Rishikof and his legal adviser, Gary Brown, said in a joint affidavit that 
they had not been warned in advance that senior Pentagon officials were unhappy 
with their performances but were aware that they had made some unpopular and 
controversial decisions, including discussing guilty pleas in the two capital 
cases in exchange for life in prison rather than execution.

2 issues that could engage Mr. Reismeier early include the scheduled November 
retirement of the chief prosecutor for military commissions, Brig. Gen. Mark 
Martins, and whether to approve a case the general wants brought to trial 
against 3 Guantánamo prisoners for suspected links to 2 deadly terrorist 
bombings in Indonesia in 2002 and 2003.

The spokesman for the Office of Military Commissions, Ron Flesvig, was unable 
to say whether, in his capacity of overseer of the war court, Mr. Reismeier 
could have a say on whether General Martins would be extended in the role. He 
has held the job since June 2011.

(source: New York Times)