[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, OHIO, MO., COLO., N.MEX., ARIZ., USA

[Rick Halperin]

Oct. 28



TEXAS----impending execution

San Antonio Man Set to Be Executed Tuesday


A former San Antonio gang member is scheduled for execution Tuesday evening for 
his part in a 2002 triple slaying.

Miguel Angel Paredes, 32, was convicted for the shooting deaths of Adrian 
Torres, 27; his 23-year-old girlfriend, Nelly Bravo; and Shawn Michael Cain, 
23. Their burned bodies were found in nearby Frio County.

Paredes would become the 10th person put to death this year in Texas, and the 
518th since the state resumed executions in 1982.

2 co-defendants, John Anthony Saenz and Greg Alvarado, were also convicted in 
the deaths. Bexar County prosecutors claimed the 3 were settling a drug debt 
with Torres when the murders occurred.

Paredes told the San Antonio Express-News he and his fellow Hermanos Pistoleros 
Latinos associates met up with Torres, a member of a rival gang, the Mexican 
Mafia, to confront him about threats he had made.

Paredes, who was 18 at the time of the murders, was the only 1 of the 3 
defendants sentenced to death. Saenz was found guilty of capital murder but 
sentenced to life in prison. Alvarado pleaded guilty and is serving a life 
sentence.

On Monday, Paredes' lawyer, David Dow of Houston, asked the U.S. 5th Circuit 
Court of Appeals in New Orleans to stay the execution while it considers an 
appeal Dow also filed on Monday.

In the appeal, Dow argues that another appellate attorney failed to investigate 
whether Paredes was taking psychiatric medication when he waived his right to 
challenge his sentence based on ineffective trial counsel.

(source: Texas Tribune)

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

Inside the mind of a San Antonio man on death row: Condemned man finds art as 
release


Miguel Angel Paredes, who is set to be executed Tuesday for a gang-sanctioned 
triple slaying in San Antonio, said during a death row interview with the 
Express-News last week that he has turned to artwork over the past 13 years 
while waiting for his sentence to be carried out.

He has created sketches ranging from portraits of lions, puppies and dolphins 
to more haunting imagery, such as a man strapped to a death chamber gurney - 
arms outstretched, the IV line in place, with an angel in 1 witness box and the 
devil in the other.

Each drawing is posted at minutesbeforesix.com and can be seen in the gallery 
above.

Paredes, now 32, was convicted in 2001 of the capital murders a year earlier of 
Nelly Esmerelda Bravo, 23, her boyfriend and Texas Mexican Mafia member Adrian 
Torres, 27, and Shawn Michael Cain, 32. Paredes leveled a handgun to the head 
of Bravo as she begged for her life, ignoring her pleas, according to witness 
testimony at his trial.

When the shot to her head wasn't fatal, Paredes fired a shotgun at her chest. 
Co-defendants Greg Alvarado and John Anthony Saenz - who, like Paredes, were 
members of the Hermanos de Pistoleros Latinos prison gang - are both serving 
life sentences.

Paredes said he is remorseful for the slayings.

"All that gang life folklore, the romanticism, it's crap," he said. "As long as 
one kid sees beyond all that crap because of my situation, that's fine."

READY TO DIE

Parades was 18 at the time of the killings and was jailed as a minor for 
murder. His co-defendants received life sentences.

Paredes told the San Antonio Express-News he was ready to die for his crimes.

"For me, what matters is that people really get to see the reality of the death 
penalty, that it's affecting people that are invisible, like my son, my loved 
ones, my family. They're the ones really carrying that burden," he told the 
paper in an interview published over the weekend.

(sources: mysanantonio.com & Reuters)

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

San Antonio gang member faces execution


A former San Antonio gang member set to die tonight in Huntsville for a triple 
slaying 14 years ago has lost a federal court appeal.

Miguel Paredes was 18 when he was arrested 2 days after a farmer investigating 
a grass fire on a remote stretch of road near his South Texas home discovered 
the bodies of 2 men and a woman from San Antonio. The 3 had been shot, bound 
and wrapped in carpet that was set ablaze and dumped in Frio County.

Paredes, now 32, is set for lethal injection Tuesday evening.

Prosecutors say the slayings were the result of a drug dispute involving rival 
gangs.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected an appeal to halt the 
punishment, the 10th this year in Texas.

(source: KSAT news)






OHIO:

Appeals court upholds Ohio killer's death sentence


A federal appeals court has upheld the death sentence for the condemned killer 
of a Toledo woman, rejecting arguments that he is mentally disabled and 
received poor legal assistance.

The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals also rejected a claim by death row inmate 
James Frazier that the death penalty amounts to unconstitutionally cruel and 
unusual punishment.

The court's ruling Monday involved the death sentence given Frazier for the 
2004 slaying of 49-year-old Mary Stevenson in her apartment, in the same 
building where Frazier lived.

The court said a lower court had properly determined that the 73-year-old 
Frazier failed to present enough evidence of being mentally disabled and thus 
ineligible for the death penalty.

Frazier's attorney, David Doughten, says he will appeal to the U.S. Supreme 
Court.

(source: Associated Press)

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

250 people possible jurors in Lima death penalty case


Questionnaires will go out to 250 prospective jurors next week to decide 
whether a convicted killer should get the death penalty for 2 more deaths he 
admitted to causing.

Those 250 people will have until Nov. 24 to answer the questions and return the 
forms. They will not have to answer numerous questions on their views on the 
death penalty, yet. Judge Jeffrey Reed rule that will be done in person during 
individual questioning, should they make it that far.

Church is charged with 2 counts of aggravated murder and aggravated arson from 
a 2009 fire that killed Massie "Tina" Flint, 45, and her boyfriend, Rex Hall, 
54. The fire was at a home at 262 S. Pine St.

The crime surfaced when Church told his cellmate about the crime while he was 
serving a life sentence for murdering a woman in 2010.

(source: limaohio.com)






MISSOURI----impending execution and new execution date

Calls mount for Missouri to stay execution of inmate 'abandoned' by lawyers


15 former federal and state judges have called for a stay of execution for Mark 
Christeson, a Missouri death row inmate who is set to be executed on Wednesday, 
arguing that the prisoner has in effect been abandoned by his own 
court-appointed lawyers.

Christeson, 35, will be judicially killed by lethal injection at 12.01am on 
Wednesday, barring a last-minute stay of execution. He is the only death row 
inmate in Missouri to have been denied a habeas review of his case - a crucial 
stage in the legal process that allows a prisoner to challenge his death 
sentence in the federal courts.

The legal record shows that the two public defense lawyers who have represented 
Christeson at the federal review stage missed a key deadline to file his 
petition. As a result, the prisoner was told he was not entitled to have his 
case looked at again because his request had been made in an "untimely" manner 
- thus destroying his last major hope of having his sentence overturned before 
execution.

The spotlight is now falling on his 2 Missouri-based lawyers, Eric Butts from 
St Louis and Philip Horwitz from Chesterfield. Not only did they file the 
petition 117 days late, they only met the prisoner for the 1st time more than a 
month after the April 2005 deadline had passed.

In a brief filed with the US eighth circuit appeals court, the judges, who come 
from 10 different states including Missouri, accuse Butts and Horwitz of 
"apparent abandonment and misconduct". They say the lawyers were "clearly not 
up to the task before them" and compounded their mistake by refusing to 
withdraw as Christeson's attorneys.

"Counsel appear never to have entertained the possibility that by confessing 
their malpractice, they might have aided their client's case," the judges 
argue. As a result, the judges go on, the 2 lawyers, who remain Christeson's 
official legal representatives to this day, have put themselves in a conflict 
of interest whereby they cannot argue that the prisoner should be given a new 
federal review because to do so would implicitly involve an admission of their 
own misconduct.

The judges are scathing about the decision, upheld by several courts, to refuse 
to grant Christeson a habeas review, despite evidence that his legal 
representation was seriously flawed. "Cases, including this one," the judges 
write, "are falling through the cracks of the system. And when the stakes are 
this high, such failures unacceptably threaten the very legitimacy of the 
judicial process."

In a separate report lodged with the federal district court for the western 
district of Missouri in June, Lawrence Fox, who teaches legal ethics at Yale 
law school, goes even further. He studied the case and concluded that "the 
conduct of Messrs Butts and Horwitz fell far beneath the bare minimum standard 
of care, let alone the standard applicable in a capital case; that they not 
only committed malpractice and breached multiple fiduciary duties, but also 
appear to have abandoned their client long before they did anything meaningful 
pursuant to their appointment by this court". Fox adds that the duo should have 
withdrawn from representing Christeson "years ago to avoid perpetuating an 
unwaivable conflict of interest".

The claim of conflict of interest has been raised by two outside lawyers who 
became involved in the Christeson case earlier this year, paradoxically at the 
invitation of Butts and Horwitz. When the outside attorneys, Joseph Perkovich 
from New York and Jennifer Merrigan from Pennsylvania, began looking into the 
case, they quickly became alarmed by what they found.

"We saw from the record that Christeson's appointed lawyers didn't meet him 
until 6 weeks after the [habeas] deadline had passed. There was no sign of any 
legal activity indicating that anything was going on up to and beyond the 
deadline," said Perkovich, a capital punishment specialist who jointly leads a 
death penalty clinic at Saint Louis University law school.

Perkovich added that he and Merrigan had asked Butts and Horwitz repeatedly to 
hand over their files on the case. But even now, hours before the scheduled 
execution, the lawyers have shown nothing.

Christeson was put on death row for the January 1998 murders of Susan Brouk, 
36, her daughter, Adrian, 12, and her son, Kyle, 9. He was 18 at the time of 
the crimes. His cousin Jessie Carter, then 17, was also implicated in the 
murders but was spared the death sentence after he agreed to give evidence for 
the prosecution against his relative.

The Guardian asked Butts and Horwitz to respond to the allegation that they 
abandoned their client and put themselves in a position of conflict of interest 
by refusing to withdraw from the case in which their own conduct had become a 
key issue. Butts did not immediately reply but Horwitz told the Guardian that 
"we were the ones who asked the outside attorneys to come in and take over the 
case, but the courts have denied that. The district court and 8th circuit 
appeals court are aware of all the facts and of our position in this case, and 
have decided not to allow the other attorneys to come in."

Horwitz said he could not comment on any specific allegations about his or 
Butts' conduct as "this is still in litigation". In court submissions, the 2 
lawyers have made no attempt to defend their late filing of the habeas 
petition, but have claimed that there was a difference of opinion about the 
date on which the deadline fell. "While counsel does not defend the late 
filing, counsel believes they had a legal basis and rationale for the 
calculation of the filing date. Counsel believed that they timely filed Mr 
Christeson's petition for writ of habeas corpus."

Perkovich and Merrigan on Monday made a last-ditch appeal to the US supreme 
court asking for a stay of execution on grounds that Christeson had suffered 
abandonment by his own court-appointed lawyers. Perkovich said that were the 
supreme court to agree that the prisoner was entitled to a proper federal 
review of the case even at this late hour that would allow the prisoner's 
"unspeakable" personal history to be properly considered. "His brutal story of 
victimization and mental illness has never been meaningfully presented to any 
court and it would have made strong grounds to mitigate his death sentence."

He added that "the tragedy is that the dismissal of the federal review occurred 
seven years ago and all this could have been avoided if the appointed lawyers 
who failed Mr Christeson had turned the case over. He has been denied his 
federal day in court."

(source: The Guardian)

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

Missouri inmate to be put to death as overall U.S. executions drop


In Missouri, Mark Christeson, 35, is scheduled to die by lethal injection early 
on Wednesday. He was convicted of killing a woman and her 2 children 16 years 
ago.

The number of executions is likely to total about 35 in the United States this 
year, which would be the lowest number since 31 inmates were put to death in 
1994, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, which monitors capital 
punishment.

There were 39 executions in the United States last year.

The yearly number of executions since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the 
death penalty in 1976 peaked at 98 in 1999.

Difficulties with carrying out the death penalty and the high cost of 
prosecutions have helped drive the numbers lower in recent years, analysts have 
said.

Troubled executions in Oklahoma, Arizona and other states this year forced 
officials to review new combinations of lethal injection drugs and caused 
lawyers representing death row inmates to question whether the new mixes 
violated U.S. constitutional protections against cruel and unusual punishment.

Oklahoma has delayed until 2015 3 executions planned for this year to implement 
new death penalty protocols following errors in an April execution.

Christeson was convicted of killing Susan Brouk, her 9-year-old son and her 
12-year-old daughter in 1998 near her home in southern Missouri.

Christeson and his cousin broke into the home and raped Brouk, according to 
court documents. They then took the Brouks to a pond where Christeson cut the 
throats of the mother and son and threw them into the water. They suffocated 
the daughter and threw her into the pond.

Christeson's attorneys argued in an appeal to the Supreme Court on Monday that 
his court-appointed attorneys had abandoned him and failed to meet deadlines 
for appeals.

17 former judges have filed a brief with the Supreme Court supporting a stay of 
execution based on problems with Christeson's court-appointed attorneys.

(source: Reuters)

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

Missouri Prepares for November 19, 2014, Execution of Leon Taylor


Leon Taylor's execution is scheduled for 12:01 am CST, on Wednesday, November 
19, 2014, at the Eastern Reception, Diagnostic, and Corrections Center in Bonne 
Terre, Missouri. 56-year-old Leon was convicted of the murder of 53-year-old 
Robert Newton in Independence, Missouri on April 14, 1994. Leon has spent the 
last 20 years on Missouri's death row.

Leon was scheduled to be executed earlier this year, on September 10, 2014. 
That execution date was withdrawn by the Missouri Supreme Court. The Missouri 
Supreme Court has not announced its reason for withdrawing Leon's execution 
date, the decision to do so came days after Leon's attorneys filed documents 
stating that the would not have enough time to work on the case prior to the 
execution.

Leon's mother was an alcoholic who drank while she was pregnant. She also gave 
alcohol to Leon to drink as a child and abused him. Leon alleged that he was 
sexually abused until the age of 5 and never taught right from wrong. As a 
teenager, Leon suffered from depression.

Leon Taylor and his half siblings, Willie and Tina Owens, were driving in 
Tina's car discussing robbery possibilities. Taylor suggested the gas station 
in Independence, Missouri because only 1 person would be working. Upon arriving 
at the station, they discovered that the gas station manager, Robert Newton had 
his daughter, 8-year-old Sarah Yates, with him that day. Tina no longer wanted 
to rob the store.

The trio bought gas and left the station, only to return minutes later because 
the oil light had come on. Willie entered the store and asked for some oil. 
Taylor then entered and drew a pistol. He pointed it at Robert and said he 
would shoot him unless he gave them his money. Robert handed over approximately 
$400 to Willie, who then left the store.

Taylor forced Robert and Sarah into a back room, where he shot Robert in the 
head. Taylor attempted to shoot Sarah but the gun jammed. Taylor locked Sarah 
in the back room and returned to the vehicle, telling Willie and Tina what had 
happened. Robert wanted to return and kill the girl, however Willie and Tina 
wanted to leave, so all 3 left.

(source: The Forgiveness Fuondation)






COLORADO:

Hickenlooper's attorneys warn TV stations that death penalty attack ad is 
"false;" RGA disputes claim


Gov. John Hickenlooper's campaign lawyers are asking TV stations to refuse to 
air a death penalty ad attacking him, saying it falsely states the "governor is 
threatening to set a mass murderer free."

The last frame of the ad states: "Now John Hickenlooper is threatening a 'full 
clemency' for Nathan Dunlap that could set him free." The ad cites an Aug. 25 
story in The Denver Post, but the article never mentions the governor setting 
Dunlap free. And the governor's attorneys said that's not possible.

"The statement in the ad is flagrantly false, misleading and factually 
inaccurate," Hickenlooper's attorneys said in their cease-and-desist letters.

The ad is from the Republican Governors Association, which was asked by The 
Post earlier today about claims the ad was inaccurate.

"There is not an error in the RGA ad. In fact, if the Hickenlooper folks want 
to have a conversation about what clemency means??? they should ask Governor 
Hickenlooper," said Gail Gitcho of the RGA. "This is HIS problem, his lack of 
and failure of leadership. We are happy to have this conversation."

Hickenlooper faces former Congressman Bob Beauprez, a Republican, on Nov. 4.

Last year, as Dunlap's execution date neared, Hickenlooper granted the death 
row inmate an "indefinite reprieve," which Hickenlooper's attorneys referred to 
in their cease-and-desist letters.

"The temporary reprieve of the governor's executive order leaves only 2 
possible outcomes with respect to Mr. Dunlap's sentence, neither of which 
includes setting him free: (1) full clemency with life in prison and no 
possiblity for parole or (2) execution," the attorneys wrote.

But Gitcho noted that Merriam-Webster defines clemency as "a disposition to be 
merciful and especially to moderate the severity of punishment due and an act 
or instance of leniency." As defined, she said, clemency does not necessarily 
mean that someone would be set free, but it does not rule that out either. She 
cited instances where that has happened and she noted legal definitions.

The ad features a heartbroken Dennis O'Connor, whose 17-year-old daughter 
Colleen was 1 of 4 people killed at an Aurora pizzeria in 1993 by Dunlap, a 
disgruntled former employee. O'Connor said he waited 20 years for justice to be 
done, but Hickenlooper "robbed" the victims with his decision to indefinitely 
delay the execution.

"He's a coward who doesn't deserve to be in office," O'Connor says.

The video of Dennis O'Connor was shot by A Better Colorado Future, a political 
group run by Republican operatives Kelly Maher and Andy George. Last week, the 
group released 13 painful minutes of O'Connor describing his ordeal.

O'Connor is divorced and Colleen's mother Jodie McNally-Damore, has a different 
opinion of Hickenlooper's decision. Dunlap, she told CNN, "deserves to stay 
exactly in the hole that he's in ... let him rot."

And Colleen's cousin, Gillian McNally, told Colorado Public Radio that she 
"fully supports" Gov. Hickenlooper's decision. "I actually thought it was very 
brave," McNally said.

McNally issued a statement today:

Our family has patiently sat by waiting for the election season to conclude so 
that we could turn on our televisions and not be reminded that my cousin, 
Colleen O'Conner, was murdered in 1993 in an Aurora Chuck E. Cheese. We have 
sat by as you have used our loss for your own political gain. We can sit by no 
longer. Please do not use the tragic loss of our loved one for your political 
ad.

Contrary to what your ad claims (From the ad copy: Now John Hickenlooper is 
threatening a "Full Clemency" for Nathan Dunlap that could set him free), 
Nathan Dunlap will never be free, and will die in prison one way or another in 
payment for his crimes - to perpetuate this lie that he will be set free is 
outrageous.

To the Republican Governors Association, please take down this untruthful ad.

To Former Congressman Beauprez, please respect our family and our grief and ask 
the RGA to take this ad down and do not continue to use our tragedy on the 
campaign trail.

To the media, please do not air this ad or write stories about it, allow us our 
privacy.

Our family deserves to process our continuing grief in private and we request 
that you let us do so. The death penalty is a personal issue that requires deep 
reflection. It is not a political issue that should be used to win votes, but 
rather an issue that deserves serious contemplation, not 30-second sound bites.

(source: Denver Post)

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

Start of Aurora theater shooting trial pushed back to January; In a ruling 
handed down Monday, Samour said he still plans for opening arguments to start 
in June. Samour added, however, that he said he might grant a short delay.


The judge in the Aurora theater shooting case has pushed the start of jury 
selection from early December to late January, partially granting a request 
from the defense.

In a ruling handed down Monday, Samour said he still plans for opening 
arguments to start in June. Samour added, however, that he said he might grant 
a short delay.

Lawyers for accused shooter James Holmes asked for the delay after a 2nd 
doctor's psychiatric evaluation of Holmes was completed earlier this month. 
Prosecutors didn't object to a short delay, and said some victims preferred 
jury selection start after the holidays.

Samour said the delay will mean the defense will have had about 3 months to 
study the second evaluation before jury selection begins, which he said should 
be more than enough time.

Prosecutors asked for the 2nd evaluation last year and Samour granted it over 
the defense's objections.

After the second evaluation was complete, the defense asked for a longer delay, 
but didn't specify how long of a delay they needed. Instead they asked for a 
status conference in January for the 2 sides to discuss scheduling. But Samour 
- who has been adamant about keeping to a tight schedule and has scolded the 
defense for seeking delays - said further delay was unnecessary. He also said 
the defense has adequate resources to prepare for trial.

"The defendant has multiple experienced attorneys working on this case, and his 
counsel's office has devoted seemingly unlimited resources, including 
considerable manpower, to this litigation," he wrote.

Holmes is accused of killing 12 and injuring dozens more during a July 20, 
2012, shooting rampage at an Aurora movie theater. He has pleaded not guilty by 
reason of insanity. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty.

(source: Aurora Sentinal)


NEW MEXICO:

Death row inmates ask NM Supreme Court for life in prison


New Mexico's last 2 death row inmates want off the list and their attorneys 
plead their case in front of the state Supreme Court Monday morning.

However, some of the family members of the victims say this latest court battle 
is like reliving the nightmare of their death.

Attorneys for Timothy Allen and Robert Fry argue their death sentences are now 
unconstitutional since the state repealed the death penalty in 2009. But some 
of the victim's families believe the fate of the two men has been sealed by a 
jury.

No one in the courtroom Monday was arguing the innocence of convicted killers 
and death row inmates Robert Fry and Timothy Allen. However, whether or not the 
2 men should be put to death is now the question for the New Mexico Supreme 
Court.

"We are here asking this court to find that the execution of Mr. Fry and Mr. 
Allen violate our state constitution," said Kathleen McGarry, attorney for 
Robert Fry.

Fry and Allen's attorneys argued Monday that putting the 2 to death would be 
"cruel and unusual punishment," since the New Mexico Legislature repealed death 
penalty and executions in 2009.

The attorneys also argue that killing Allen and Fry would violate equal 
protection for the men because the Legislature because of the Legislature's 
decision to establish a specific date when people could not be executed.

"Somebody with the identical characteristics who committed the identical crime 
1 minute after midnight, or July 1, 2009, would not receive the death penalty," 
said Melissa Hill, attorney for Timothy Allen.

Allen killed 17-year old Sandra Phillips in 1994 after kidnapping her and 
trying to rape her.

Robert Fry was convicted of killing a mother of five in 2000. He also murdered 
3 other people in the '90s.

However, the state disagrees.

"This is a heavy burden (to prove,") said Victoria Wilson, an assistant 
attorney general for New Mexico.

The state Attorney General's Office says the constitution allows for criminals 
to be sentenced under law that existed at the time they were convicted.

"This court does not sit as super legislature with the power to uphold or 
strike down the laws of the state based on the court's own judgment as to the 
wisdom and propriety of such laws," said Wilson.

Darlene Phillips doesn't feel that the latest appeal should be happening 
though.

"The most beautiful little red head you've ever seen in your life," said 
Phillips while looking at a photo of her daughter Sandra.

Sandra was killed by Allen in 1994 after he kidnapped and tried to rape her.

"You know the court of law has already decided this, why do they get another 
chance to over and over again," said Phillips.

Justices will take the next several months to make a decision. Sandra hopes it 
will finally be the end.

"He murdered my daughter. I gave my...that's my baby," said Phillips.

The state Supreme Court justices have not set a time table on when they'll make 
a decision. If the death penalty is overturned, both would get life in prison.

Since 1976, when the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty, New 
Mexico has only put 1 person to death. That was Terry Clark, who was executed 
in 2001.

(source: KRQE news)






ARIZONA:

Jodi Arias Trial: Attorney Describes Arias as 'Mentally Ill Young Girl' in 
Leniency Argument


The defense attorneys for Jodi Arias are arguing that the abuse the convicted 
killer suffered at an early age greatly impacted her, and that she should be 
shown leniency.

The sentencing phase for Arias, who was convicted last year of killing former 
boyfriend Travis Alexander, started recently.

In his opening arguments, Arias' attorney Kirk Nurmi told jurors that they need 
to understand the people involved in the case before making a decision.

Nurmi described Arias' alleged abuse at the hands of both of her parents, 
noting that the defense will present experts to discuss how abuse at an early 
age can affect someone and that will play a substantial role in the defense's 
call for leniency, reported HLN-TV.

"Using the state's own expert to make his point, Nurmi told the packed 
courtroom that Dr. Janeen DeMarte diagnosed Arias with Borderline Personality 
Disorder and this 'mentally ill young girl' then met her victim, Alexander," 
the broadcaster said in its recap of the 1st week of the trial.

"In keeping with the strategy during the 1st trial, Nurmi attacked the 'beloved 
Travis' for causing Arias to suffer extreme emotional distress. Nurmi claimed 
Arias was the girl behind closed doors in Alexander's bedroom engaging in 
sexual acts but not the girl being taken out on dates, alleging that is 
emotional abuse and Arias was simply being used for sex.

"Nurmi, who told the jury they would hear from Arias herself, cited the 27 stab 
wounds to Alexander as proof of Arias' extreme emotional distress in the 
relationship, and he told the jury the only appropriate sentence was life in 
prison."

Prosecutor Juan Martinez said that Arias was more jilted than disturbed, and 
described how Arias planned ahead of time to kill Alexander. He said that the 
diagnosis of PTSD was given only because Arias lied in a psychological test, 
and also said that the Borderline Personality Disorder doesn???t make Arias 
mentally ill.

Martinez said that he hopes the jury will sentence Arias to death for the 
murder.

Meanwhile, Arias is desperately trying to raise money to fund appeals that she 
will utilize if she is sentenced to death.

Insiders told the National Enquirer tabloid that Arias has already raised 
$30,000 but that she wants to raise $250,000 to pay "a retainer for an attorney 
for her appeals," a source said.

Arias is going to keep selling her artwork along with "whatever else she can 
find to raise money."

(source: The Epoch Times)

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

News Organizations Sue Arizona Over Secrecy of Death Penalty Drugs


Several local and international news organizations are suing to force Arizona 
to reveal information about the drugs it uses for the death penalty.

The lawsuit argues that by refusing to disclose the source of its lethal 
injection drugs, the state is violating the public's First Amendment right to 
know how the death penalty is being carried out in its name.

European pharmaceutical companies have stopped supplying the U.S. with drugs 
used to execute prisoners. The boycott has forced Arizona to find different 
sources for the cocktail of drugs used in lethal injections.

This suit comes after Arizona's execution of convicted murderer Joseph Wood 
earlier this summer.

Wood was injected with 15 dosages of drugs that took nearly 2 hours to kill 
him. The state has refused to reveal the source of the drugs it used it used.

The Arizona Daily Star and 5 other news organizations filed the suit against 
Attorney General Tom Horne and the state Department of Corrections.

Arizona Daily Star editor Bobbie Jo Buel said a government's most serious 
action is to carry out a death sentence.

...If ever there is a reason that the government should be transparent about 
how it does its work, it seems it should be in the case where it is killing 
someone," she said.

Neither the Department of Corrections nor the Attorney General's Office would 
comment.

(source: azpm.com)






USA:

What Archbishop Chaput should have said about the death penalty


A few of my conservative Catholic readers have been provoked by my post about 
Pope Francis versus Archbishop Chaput on the death penalty to suggest a little 
intemperately that I don't know what I'm talking about. The Catechism permits 
the death penalty, they write. And anyway, His Holiness was not articulating 
doctrine ex cathedra (i.e. speaking infallibly) when he called on "all 
Christians and people of good will" to struggle for its abolition; i.e. he's 
entitled to his opinion but Catholics don't have to pay attention to it.

Well, I never claimed that Francis was making a doctrinal statement, only that 
what he had to say can be seen as a rebuttal to what Philadelphia Archbishop 
Charles Chaput allegedly told Colorado GOP gubernatorial candidate and death 
penalty supporter Bob Beauprez:

He said, "Bob, you pray on it, sleep on it, reach the conclusion that is right 
for your soul." And he said, "I'll back you up, because church doctrine is not 
anti-death penalty." I want to be very clear about that.

So here's what the Catechism has to say about the death penalty:

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's 
safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these 
are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in 
conformity with the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for 
effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense 
incapable of doing harm - without definitively taking away from him the 
possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the 
offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically 
non-existent."

(That last quote, by the way, is from John Paul II's 1995 encyclical Evangelium 
vitae.)

To conclude from this that church doctrine is (in Chaput's alleged words) "not 
anti-death penalty" is ridiculous. It would be like saying someone is not 
anti-abortion if he or she would allow abortions "only in the very rare cases 
where it was absolutely necessary to save the life of the mother."

Moreover, the catechetical position is not that a Catholic gets to decide 
whether his or position on the death penalty is "right for your soul." It's 
that an objective determination needs to be made as to the state's ability to 
protect people from a convicted murderer by non-lethal means. In other words, 
what Chaput should have told Beauprez was: "According to church doctrine, you 
can't continue to support the death penalty in Colorado if it's possible to 
keep people safely locked up."

In this respect, it's important to bear in mind that Beauprez has been 
attacking his opponent, Gov. John Hickenlooper for granting convicted murderer 
Nathan Dunlap a temporary reprieve from the death penalty, and has promised to 
commute Dunlap's death sentence if he is defeated for reelection. "You know," 
Hickenlooper told CNN, Nathan Dunlap's gonna die in prison, one way or the 
other."

Hickenlooper, who is not a Catholic, has in recent years changed his position 
on the death penalty. There's no question that he's on track with Catholic 
doctrine. Beauprez and, apparently, Chaput - not so much.

(source: Mark Silk; religionnews.com)