[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----ARIZ., ORE., USA

[Rick Halperin]

Nov. 5



ARIZONA:

Jodi Arias penalty phase delayed after appeals court reopens trial


The Jody Arias penalty phase retrial was put on hold Tuesday, a day after an 
appeals court reopened the trial to the public, overruling a judge's unusual 
decision to allow a witness to testify in private.

On Monday, a 3-judge panel of the Arizona Court of Appeals ruled in favor of 
news organizations that were fighting Maricopa County Superior Court Judge 
Sherry Stephens' surprise decision last Thursday to close the courtroom as the 
defense began its case.

Lawyers for The Arizona Republic and 3 Phoenix TV stations - KPNX, KPHO and 
KTVK - wanted the testimony halted while they appealed Stephens' ruling 
allowing an unidentified defense witness to testify behind closed doors.

After meeting with attorneys from both sides, the judge delayed witness 
testimony until at least Nov. 12, according to The Arizona Republic.

The appeals court decision doesn't reveal the identity of the mystery witness 
who testified last week at the start of the defense case.

It also said that the appeals court "will address the merits of the special 
action petition in due course and after receiving any response or reply filed," 
so it's unclear how long the stay will last.

Arias was convicted last year of killing ex-boyfriend Travis Alexander at his 
home in suburban Phoenix on June 2008, but jurors deadlocked on her punishment. 
A new jury will decide whether she'll be sentenced to life imprisonment or the 
death penalty.

Prosecutors said Arias attacked Alexander in a jealous rage after he wanted to 
end their affair and planned a trip to Mexico with another woman.

Alexander was stabbed and slashed nearly 30 times, his throat was slit so 
deeply that he was nearly decapitated and he also was shot in the forehead. His 
body in left in a shower where friends found him about 5 days later.

Arias has acknowledged killing Alexander but claimed it was self-defense after 
he attacked her.

The case has been marked by secrecy ever since the conclusion of the 1st trial, 
which turned in to a media circus as salacious and violent details about Arias 
and Alexander were broadcast live for people around the world.

Since then, the judge has held one secret hearing after another and barred the 
broadcast of footage from the sentencing retrial until after a verdict is 
reached.

Arias' lawyers had argued that daily broadcasts of the trial would lead to 
defense witnesses backing out for fear of being harassed or threatened.

In addition, prosecutors have refused to provide details about what it has cost 
to twice put Arias on trial, saying the judge forbids them from discussing the 
case outside court. County officials, however, have reported that Arias' 
defense bill has topped $2.5 million, all being paid for by taxpayers.

(sourc: CBS news)






OREGON----mother may face death penalty

Mom Accused of Tossing Son off Bridge Sought Money


A woman who appealed for money online to help care for her autistic son and 
disabled husband has been accused of throwing her 6-year-old boy to his death 
off an historic bridge on the Oregon coast.

Police said Jillian Meredith McCabe, 34, called 911 from the bridge in Newport 
as darkness fell Monday to report what she had done and waited until police 
arrived.

"I just threw my son over the Yaquina Bay Bridge," McCabe told the dispatcher, 
according to a probable cause affidavit filed Tuesday.

She described her son, London Grey McCabe, and the clothes he was wearing, 
saying he was in the water and gone. Later that night, a body was reported in 
the water at a bayside resort about a mile from the bridge, and police said 
they confirmed it was the kindergartener.

"It's a great tragedy," said the boy's great aunt, Tanya McCabe.

Andrew McCabe confirmed Tuesday that his sister-in-law had written an appeal on 
YouCaring.com, a crowdfunding website. In it she described caring for her 
autistic son and her husband, Matt, who has been unable to work since 
developing multiple sclerosis and a mass on his brain stem.

The appeal ended 8 months ago, after raising $6,831 toward a goal of $50,000.

"If you are a praying person, pray for us," Jillian McCabe wrote. "I love my 
husband and he has taken care of myself and my son for years and years and now 
it's time for me to take the helm. I am scared and I am reaching out."

Andrew McCabe also confirmed that Jillian McCabe had posted YouTube videos, one 
showing her husband in a hospital bed and their son pushing a button to raise 
and lower it.

Another shows her son sitting in a hammock, smiling with a cup of juice and 
engrossed in an iPad. When she asks if he is happy, he says nothing. When she 
tells him to say "help" if he wants a push in the hammock, he says, "help." 
Still another video shows the boy holding a stuffed toy lion and throwing coins 
in an indoor fountain to make a wish.

Jillian McCabe appeared by video in Lincoln County Circuit Court in Newport, 
where she entered no pleas on charges of murder, aggravated murder and 
manslaughter, the court reported. 2 Portland attorneys were appointed to 
represent her. Christopher Clayhold and Deborah Burdzick did not immediately 
return calls for comment. The aggravated murder charge, which carries a 
potential death penalty, was filed because the boy was under 14 years old.

Police said she was from Seal Rock, south of Newport, but Andrew McCabe said 
they had lived in Hood River. He said his brother had a business doing email 
campaigns until he became disabled.

Police are asking anyone who saw the woman and child on the bridge to call 
detectives.

In the affidavit, a police officer writes that Jillian McCabe was still talking 
on her cellphone when a sheriff's deputy walked up to her on the bridge.

Another officer says he saw a woman matching Jillian McCabe's description 
carrying a boy matching London's description on the bridge shortly after 6 
p.m., and thought it odd because the boy was, "too big to be carried," 
according to the affidavit.

The Yaquina Bay arched bridge, one of the most famous on the Oregon coast, 
opened in 1936. It's listed on the National Register of Historic Places. It 
carries traffic for U.S. Highway 101 and rises more than 100 feet above the 
water.

In 2009, a woman threw her 2 young children off a bridge in Portland, killing 
her 4-year-old son. A daughter, then 7 years old, survived. Amanda Stott-Smith 
was sentenced in 2010 to at least 35 years in prison.

(source: Associated Press)






USA:

In Theory: Should we abolish capital punishment?


Speaking in late October to delegates from the International Assn. of Penal 
Law, Pope Francis called for the abolition not only of capital punishment, but 
also of life in prison, which he called a "hidden death penalty" and maximum 
security prisons, which he likened to torture chambers.

Religion News Service quoted the pope as saying, "It is impossible to imagine 
that states today cannot make use of another means than capital punishment to 
defend peoples' lives from an unjust aggressor."

Q: What do you think of the pope's stance on life sentences, maximum security 
prisons and capital punishment? Are there better ways to ensure the public's 
safety?

The Russian writer Fyodor Dostoyevsky said one time that if you want to see the 
level of civilization in a society, visit one of its prisons. Even though that 
great writer is from another era and another time, I think he would be appalled 
if he visited our prisons here in America. Somehow we want to hurt or 
"penalize" those who have broken our laws, rather than try to "correct" them. 
Isn't it interesting how we have softened what we call our prisons? They are 
under the department of "Corrections," not bureau of prisons.

So in theory, I am in agreement with the pope. I have long thought that capital 
punishment should be abolished, and I have contributed to groups that are 
trying to get the death penalty repealed.

Francis may be right that a life sentence is essentially a death penalty - but 
I do believe the public has a right to be protected from those who have 
committed and may continue to commit heinous acts. And I believe he is correct 
when he states that maximum security prisons come close to being torture 
chambers. Solitary confinement is a terrible punishment and should be used 
perhaps in only the most extreme cases. As it stands now, it is used - in my 
opinion - entirely too much. How do I know? Because I have a relative in jail! 
He isn't in California, but he has been sent to "the hole," as the inmates call 
it, often, and many times for very minor things. He's out now, pending a new 
trial, but I think corrections officers often overdo what they need to do.

Visit a prison sometime; I do along with some other parishioners who have taken 
a certain prisoner under our wings, so to speak. Adopt an inmate, whether he or 
she "deserves" it or not. Your eyes just may be opened to how good you have it 
and how bad our prisoners have it. And remember the words of Jesus from Matthew 
25: 39: "And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you?"

The Rev. Skip Lindeman

La Canada Congregational Church

La Canada Flintridge

--

Of the 36 member nations of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and 
Development (OECD), the world's most developed countries, the U.S. has the 
third highest rate of intentional homicide. We are 4th in rapes. For robbery, 
we do a little better, down the list at No. 8.

To me the inescapable conclusion is that our system of criminal justice is not 
ensuring our public's safety as well as the systems in other advanced 
countries. Our lax gun laws and our high level of inequality help grease our 
slide into insecurity.

None of the countries doing better than we are in preventing violent crime use 
capital punishment, and all of them imprison fewer people per capita, for 
shorter terms. Rehabilitation plays a far bigger role in criminal justice in 
our peer countries. We also lead the developed world in solitary confinement, 
called "a form of torture" by Pope Francis.

So whether you side spiritually with me or with the Holy Father you're heading 
in the same direction on this issue. Our justice system needs radical, 
fundamental change - it is immoral and it doesn't work.

Roberta Medford

Atheist

Montrose

--

There are better ways to protect the needs of all the people. Let us look at a 
passage from Deuteronomy: "Life Shall Be for Life, (but) an eye for an eye, a 
tooth for a tooth...." (Deuteronomy 19:21). Most commentators say it includes 
taking a life, but in fact, excludes it, "life shall be for life." Those who 
kill by accident, alcohol, drugs, temper or poor choices, once, should be 
treated differently than those who are predators or who murder more than one. 
Even though it is woefully inadequate, all offenders should be made to 
compensate, monetarily, the victims' families for their loss. The quote from 
Deuteronomy is in essence an actuary table and established, biblically, the 
monetary compensation the families were to receive. A plan for today's offender 
is to keep our killer under house/employment arrest so they can keep their jobs 
paying for their fatal mistake. If the killer is illiterate and cannot get a 
fair paying job, they would go to prison, but only to get an education. The 
sooner the felon completed the required courses, the sooner he could leave 
prison and return to begin repaying his debt to society.

Another possible way for the single-time killer to serve his sentence, still 
with monetary repayment, is to do it in another part of our country. Although, 
the debt to the victims' family would still be there, he would then have a 
fresh start. The felon would still have a parole officer and be required to 
report. And if he commits another violent crime he would be sent to prison 
immediately to serve out his term with others who have committed serial violent 
crimes. Remember, if you have a choice between life and death, choose life.

Rabbi Mark Sobel

Temple Beth Emet

Burbank

--

I agree with the Pope, whether his ideas come from scripture, canon law, or his 
own good heart. When I think of the number of people in our country who are 
incarcerated for greatly extended periods or executed, it makes me weep. We 
have the largest percentage of imprisoned people of any country in the world, 
particularly people of color. And that is sad indeed. If we could educate those 
people to be productive citizens, our society would be a much healthier place. 
Instead, we warehouse large numbers or execute them in many states. What a 
waste!

I am not naive enough to believe that all people can be transformed into 
constructive human beings, and I do not believe that the rights of crime 
victims do not matter. But we could certainly do a better job than we do now. 
And statistics show that the fear of capital punishment is not a deterrent to 
crime. If we put more of our money into training programs for those who break 
the law rather than prisons, we would reap many benefits. And capital 
punishment cuts off any possibility for an affirmative outcome.

Our founding documents in this country say we believe that all people "are 
created equal" and "endowed . . . with certain inalienable rights." But our 
penal codes seem to agree with the words of George Orwell that "some are more 
equal than others." In fact, the maxim of "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a 
tooth" punishment in ancient Hebrew scriptures is what we appear to practice.

As a Unitarian Universalist, I passionately believe in "the inherent worth and 
dignity of every person" and "justice, equity and compassion in human 
relations." Capital punishment and maximum-security prisons do not fit into 
that paradigm for me. My hope is that we, along with the Pope, will find better 
ways to live up to our highest ideals as American and World Citizens and people 
of faith.

Rev. Dr. Betty Stapleford

Unitarian Universalist Church of the Verdugo Hills

La Crescenta

--

To release a dangerous person from incarceration is grossly irresponsible. If a 
prisoner refuses to be, or is incapable of being, corrected then that prisoner 
should remain incarcerated. Their living conditions should always be kept 
humane, of course, but the safety of others is of greater importance than the 
freedom of the convicted and chronically dangerous criminal.

Can people change? Absolutely. Jesus changed many people during his earthly 
ministry. The Gerasene Demoniac couldn't be restrained even with shackles and 
chains, but Jesus restored him to a peaceable and socially decent condition. 
Paul the Apostle was a violent aggressor against Christians, but Jesus 
transformed him into a self-sacrificing servant of the church. Jesus still 
changes the lives of all who come to him. But the fact remains that some people 
refuse to turn from wickedness and violence. Those who do have condemned 
themselves to ostracism and separation away from those they intend to harm.

Pastor Jon Barta

Burbank

(source: Letters to the Editor, Burbank Leader)

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

US prosecutors lash out at Sampson lawyers----Accused of time wasting


Federal prosecutors lashed out at lawyers for convicted killer Gary Lee Sampson 
Monday for filing what they said were frivolous motions, and they called on a 
federal judge to refuse to pay the lawyers for the "unnecessary and meritless 
motions and pleadings they have filed."

The request came just before lawyers for Sampson filed an additional 20 
motions, some of them with lengthy affidavits and other records attached.

The lawyers had already filed 26 motions challenging the constitutionality of 
the death penalty, some based on arguments that have already been decided by 
higher courts, the prosecutors complained.

Lawyers in the case of accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, by 
contrast, have filed 9 motions related to the constitutionality of the death 
penalty.

The prosecutors say Sampson's lawyers are wasting the court's time in an effort 
to delay the scheduled February sentencing trial, an effort the prosecutors 
called an insult to the families of Sampson's victims.

"This strategy and these tactics are inappropriate and especially unfair to the 
victims' families, who have already had to endure 13-plus years of delay [and] 
uncertainty," the prosecutors argued.

Lawyers for Sampson did not immediately respond to the motion.

Sampson, now 55, admitted to the carjacking murders of 19-year-old Jonathan 
Rizzo and 69-year-old Philip McCloskey during a rampage in Massachusetts in 
2001. He then killed Robert "Eli" Whitney, 58, in New Hampshire.

A jury sentenced Sampson to death in 2003, but a federal judge overturned that 
sentence in 2011 after finding that one of the jurors lied about her 
background. Federal prosecutors have sought the death penalty again in a new 
trial.

In the last year, prosecutors have repeatedly sparred with Sampson's new 
lawyers, specifically Danalynn Recer, the court-appointed lawyer who 
specializes in the death penalty.

US District Court Judge Mark L. Wolf threatened in September to remove Recer 
from the case, accusing her of ignoring deadlines and filing overzealous 
motions after hours and on weekends.

Wolf said he was reluctant to remove her, however, because it would cause the 
trial to be delayed.

Prosecutors Monday called on Wolf to refuse to pay Sampson's court-appointed 
lawyers for time spent on the frivolous motions, noting that the lawyers 
submitted 26 motions, making up 850 separate docket entries and 25,358 pages, 
in August and September alone.

"Sampson has made no showing that any of his 26 constitutional motions are 
newly relevant," the prosecutors argued. "In fact, just the opposite is true - 
he has recycled arguments previously rejected by the First Circuit in this 
case, and/or uniformly rejected by the Supreme Court or every other federal 
circuit to consider them."

The prosecutors noted that the appellate courts have set limits on payments so 
that "court-appointed counsel cannot bill the government for time that is 
unproductive or unnecessary."

"A lawyer, after all, has no duty, indeed no right, to pester a court with 
frivolous arguments," the prosecutors argued, citing past court decisions.

(source: Boston Globe)

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

Ethical Considerations Surrounding Lethal Injection


To the Editor

Perhaps no part of the criminal justice system is more fraught with moral, 
ethical, and legal dilemmas than the execution process. The paramount concern 
of the Death Penalty Committee of The Constitution Project was to ensure that 
the system is as fair and transparent as possible and comports with the 
numerous protections found in the US Constitution. As Dr Truog and colleagues1 
pointed out, the Committee of The Constitution Project found that the justice 
system fails to do this in many areas and made recommendations to address these 
failures in its report.

see: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1920962

(source: JAMA)