[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., ALA., MISS., KY., MO.

[Rick Halperin]

April 4



PENNSYLVANIA:

Exonerated death row survivor tells his story at CHC



Shujaa Graham, 64, will discuss his journey from death row to freedom on 
Wednesday, April 8, 7 p.m., at Chestnut Hill College's Third Annual Forgiveness 
Day, sponsored by the college's Institute of Forgiveness and Reconciliation.

Since 1973, 151 people in 26 states have been exonerated from death row. 6 were 
exonerated from Pennsylvania's death row. "I am not here today because the 
system works," said Graham in a telephone interview. "I am here today in spite 
of the system."

Graham's story is compelling and sheds light on a judicial system fraught with 
error and inequities. Born in Lake Providence, Louisiana, he grew up on a 
plantation in the segregated South. His parents worked as sharecroppers, who 
were paid meager wages and often forced to work from dawn to dusk. In an 
attempt to find a better life, his mother and step-father and older siblings 
moved to South Central Los Angles. "I had to stay behind with my grandmother 
and that was a hard thing," he said. "In 6th grade, I joined my family in 
California, and that's when my trouble started."

Graham, who experienced the Watts riot and police occupation of his community, 
said he joined a gang and was "in and out of juvenile detention. In 1969 (at 
age 18) I was convicted of a $35 robbery and sent to prison. It wasn't until I 
was 20 that I denounced my past."

Mentored by members in the Black Prison movement, he taught himself to read and 
write and studied history and world affairs in Soledad Prison. Later, he became 
a leader of the Black Panther Party within the California prison system. In 
November, 1973, Graham was wrongly accused of murdering white prison guard 
Jerry Sanders at the Deul Vocational Institute in Stockton, California.

"I was accused because of my involvement in political uprising. In my 1st trial 
the jury couldn't determine whether I was guilty or innocent," said Graham, a 
board member of the Witness to Innocence non-profit organization that campaigns 
for the abolition of the death penalty. "In my 2nd trial in 1976, I was 
convicted and sentenced to die."

Graham and his co-defendant, Eugene Allen, were convicted of 1st-degree murder 
and sent to San Quentin's death row in 1976. During his 2nd trial, the district 
attorney systematically excluded all African American jurors. In 1979, the 
California Supreme Court overturned his death sentence.

Graham recalled how the community rallied and helped raise money for a new 
lawyer. "When I was convicted and sentenced to death row, they were among the 
first people who came to see," said Graham, referring to young people who 
worked on his defense committee. "They said 'Shujaa, we're going to get you out 
of here.' I told them 'Shit, my life is finished. What are you kids going to do 
against the state of California?'"

A 3rd trial resulted in a hung jury. "In the beginning, I was really positive, 
but by my 4th trial I had spent 12 years of my life in prison," he said. "It 
takes a toll. People often ask me how it was on death row. Today, I can't find 
the words to describe the depth of the pain. All I can say is just think about 
each and every day of your life that as long as you live that each unborn 
tomorrow promises to be worse."

He said he will never forget his 4th trial. "I remember it like it was 
yesterday," Graham said. "They had me stand up, and when I heard them say 'Not 
guilty,' I sat down and put my hands over my head. I said to myself, 'After 8 
long years, this nightmare has finally come to an end.' I have been out over 20 
years now, and every day when I wake up I think about capital punishment and 
those folks who were put down. What if the state of California had their way? I 
wouldn't be here today. So, I try to do anything I can do to help other 
people."

Now, Graham spends most of his time speaking about his experiences and 
advocating to end the death penalty. "It's not just about the death penalty for 
me," Graham said. "It's about human rights and social justice for all human 
beings. That is my fight, and that is what I am doing with my time now. What 
happened to me is done with."

In 1981, after his release from prison, Graham said he was very angry. "I am 
not gonna lie. It took me a long time to overcome it. But after I studied Dr. 
King, I was able to deal with a lot of issues that happened in my life."

Graham, who has 3 children and 4 grandchildren, talked about the need to end 
the cycle of violence. He cited Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s quote about 
forgiveness. "We must develop and maintain the capacity to forgive. He who is 
devoid of the power to forgive is devoid of the power to love ... I believe 
communication and education is the key to our solution."

When he speaks at colleges and universities, he challenges students to find a 
cause or social justice issue and add that to their vocation. "When you add a 
social justice aspect to your vocation and your education, then you make the 
world a better place and become servants of humanity," he said.

Before ending our conversation, Graham quoted the words of an executed man 
written in a letter to his sister. "The most happiest of us may not have the 
best of things, they just make the best of what comes their way. Happiness 
comes to those who fight, those who struggle and surely to those who have 
served for only they can appreciate the importance of those who have touched 
their lives ... My beloved sister, when you were born, everyone around was 
probably smiling, and you were crying. Go on out and live your life so that 
when you die, you will be the one that is smiling, and everyone around you will 
be crying."

(source: Chestnut Hill Local)








ALABAMA:

Alabama tried to kill a man who never should have been on death row



If you want to understand why we should abolish the death penalty, consider the 
case of Anthony Ray Hinton.

If you don't want to understand, consider it anyway.

Authorities arrested Hinton in 1985, after a string of robberies at restaurants 
in Birmingham. In the 1st 2 robberies, the managers were killed and there were 
no witnesses or physical evidence to identify a suspect. After a 3rd similar 
robbery at a Quincy's in Bessemer, the manager survived the shooting and later 
picked Hinton from a photo lineup.

Here's the thing, at the time of the robbery, Hinton had an air-tight alibi. He 
had been working in a warehouse 15 miles away. The warehouse was even locked, 
so Hinton couldn't have slipped out on his shift while no one was looking.

Prosecutors never charged Hinton with the Quincy's robbery, but they still used 
the manager there as a witness against Hinton in the other murders.

The proof they had to tie them all together - the supposed murder weapon, a 
Smith and Wesson .38 that had belonged to Hinton's mother.

A ballistics "expert" for the prosecution testified that the bullets from all 
three robberies matched that weapon. I put "expert" in quotation marks because 
of what we know now after analysis by multiple other experts - that the bullets 
from those 3 robberies couldn't be matched to each other, much less to Hinton's 
mother's gun.

Hinton didn't have the money for a qualified ballistics expert during his 
trial.

I'm going to take a moment now to rant before we get to the horrifying parts. 
All my life in Alabama, I've heard the arguments, not just in favor of the 
death penalty, but arguments that the death penalty we have isn't good enough.

--That the appeals take too long, and we should set a time limit of (insert 
your number here: 10 years, five years, a week, string 'em up behind the 
courthouse that day).

--That victims' families shouldn't have to go through all this.

--That we might have made mistakes in the past, but most of those exonerations 
have come because of advances in DNA evidence. Our science has improved our 
accuracy and cured the process of its problems.

Watch the emotional moment an Alabama prisoner is released after 30 years on 
death row Anthony Ray Hinton walked out of the Jefferson County Jail after 30 
years on death row in Alabama. Hear what he has to say and watch the moment he 
is reunited with his family.

That last one deserves particular attention, because it has given many of us a 
false sense of security. People are involved in this process, and because of 
that, the system will always be messy, imperfect, and sometimes downright 
malicious.

To see why, you have to consider what happened next to Hinton.

Hinton has been on death row for almost 30 years. During much of that time, 
appellate attorneys have fought to have the ballistics on the supposed murder 
weapon retested. The Equal Justice Initiative has been fighting for those tests 
since they took up the case in 1998.

Thankfully, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of the defendant 
last year, and last month, 3 experts from the Alabama Department of Forensic 
Sciences tested the gun and reexamined the evidence. They found the bullets 
from the 3 robberies didn't match each other, much less the supposed murder 
weapon.

Let's be clear here. For decades, Alabama prosecutors have fought like hell to 
prevent a 2nd look at that evidence, and by doing so, they fought against 
justice, not for it.

Just so we know who's responsible, let's name a few of them.

--Former Jefferson County District Attorney David Barber.

--Former Alabama Attorney General Troy King.

--Current Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange.

None of these men should be able to sleep tonight.

And neither should we the voters who put them in office.

Had they been successful, the State of Alabama likely would have put an 
innocent man to death. Had they been successful, they would have been more 
guilty of murder as the man who went free on Good Friday.

"I shouldn't have sat on death row 30 years," Hinton said after his release 
Friday. "All they had to do was test the gun. But when you think you are high 
and mighty and you're above the law, you don't have to answer to nobody. But 
I've got news for you. Everybody who played a part in sending me to death row 
you will answer to God."

Don't think for a second that just because Hinton is free today, that the 
system worked. Hinton lost 30 years of his life. Justice will never be served.

We shouldn't abolish the death penalty because it's inhumane. There are people 
in the world who deserve to die - folks who have done unspeakable things.

Rather, we should abolish the death penalty because government can't be trusted 
to tell the difference between the folks who have it coming and those who 
don't.

(source: Kyle Whitmire, al.com)








MISSISSIPPI:

Mississippi Supreme Court rules for death row inmate Jeffrey Havard



This week, the Mississippi Supreme Court unanimously ruled that death row 
inmate Jeffrey Havard can proceed with an evidentiary hearing to challenge his 
murder conviction. Havard was convicted in 2002 of killing his girlfriend's 
6-month-old daughter. Havard claims the girl slipped from his arms as he was 
giving her a bath and hit her head.

Controversial medical examiner Steven Hayne concluded that the girl had died of 
Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS), a diagnosis that is also highly controversial. 
Hayne also claimed to have found evidence of sexual abuse, a finding that 
allowed prosecutors to seek the death penalty.

As I've written here before, Hayne has since come under fire for his improbable 
testimony, sloppy practices and herculean workload. He was effectively fired as 
the state's quasi-official medical examiner in 2008, although he still 
periodically testifies in civil cases, in old cases in which the defendant was 
given a new trial, and for defense attorneys. Hayne has since reversed part of 
his testimony in the Havard case, although as noted here at The Watch, he has 
still given highly suspect testimony in other SBS cases.

The ruling this week doesn't grant Havard a new trial, but it does give him 
permission to ask for an evidentiary hearing on the scientific legitimacy of 
the Shaken Baby Syndrome diagnosis. A favorable ruling in that hearing could 
then result in a new trial. Since Havard's conviction, SBS has come under fire 
as new research has called its underlying premises into doubt. This ruling 
basically acknowledges as much. But the court rejected Havard's claims related 
to Hayne's credibility as an expert witness.

While the court's ruling on SBS is correct - and encouraging, given how 
difficult it can be to get appeals courts to revisit convictions based on 
science later shown to be flawed - focusing solely on the SBS ruling shows that 
the Mississippi Supreme Court still isn't ready to acknowledge and account for 
the full extent of Hayne's corruption of the state's criminal justice system.

(source: Radley Balko, Washington Post)








KENTUCKY:

Death row exoneree talks about justice system flaws



I was a young mother wrongfully convicted and sentenced to death for the murder 
of my infant son, Walter.

On April 11, 1989, I lost my son to a hereditary kidney disease. Walter was 
only 9 months old and I was 17. I attempted to resuscitate him, but I didn???t 
know how to perform infant CPR. The county in Mississippi I lived in at the 
time did not do a proper autopsy. It was assumed because I was young, poor and 
African American that bruises on Walter's body were the result of abuse, not 
the result of incorrect CPR administration.

The day after my son died, what already felt like a bad dream turned into an 
almost 6-year-long nightmare. I was arrested and charged with child abuse 
because my failed efforts at CPR were determined to be the marks of physical 
abuse. I was a minor when I was arrested, so the state of Mississippi waited 
until after I turned 18 to charge and try me for capital murder for Walter's 
death.

At the time I was young, married and grieving the death of my second child; I 
was not very aware of how the legal system operated. I trusted my lawyers to 
provide the best possible representation. My attorneys convinced me that I 
should not testify in my own trial, and they failed to call subpoenaed 
witnesses to the stand who would have cast doubt on the picture of a monster 
the prosecution was painting.

I was convicted of capital murder by a jury that had been having picnics with 
the prosecution during my trial. You read correctly - members of the jury were 
given meals by, and spent time socializing with, the prosecution in my case. I 
was sentenced to die within the year.

While in prison, my case was taken up by attorney Clive Stafford Smith 
pro-bono. He did all of the work that my original defense team did not. With 
more competent legal defense, the Supreme Court of Mississippi found that the 
prosecution failed to prove that my son's death was anything but an accident. 
My conviction was sent back to the lower court and I awaited a retrial.

Mr. Smith made sure that I was able to testify this time around; he brought in 
witnesses who were able to corroborate the events that took place that day. 
Medical examiners did a proper autopsy, and discovered my son had a hereditary 
kidney disease. With a proper defense and investigation, I was easily found not 
guilty this time. I was released and exonerated of the murder of my son after 
spending over 5 years in prison - more than 1/2 of that on death row.

I'm visiting Kentucky this month to share my story and educate people about the 
mistakes the justice system made when handling my case. My case is not an 
anomaly, I'm one of a growing number of people who've been wrongfully convicted 
and sentenced to death only to be exonerated later. Our number grew to 151 in 
March, when another woman joined me in the ranks of death row exonerees. There 
are more of us; some of our wrongfully convicted citizens have already paid the 
ultimate price as victims of a broken justice system.

Being a victim of a flawed system has turned me into an outspoken opponent of 
the death penalty. There are a lot of reasons to oppose the use of capital 
punishment: it costs up to 5 times more than sending someone to life in prison 
without the possibility of parole, it is applied arbitrarily depending on 
funding and whether it's an election year, and it's always risky - no matter 
how convinced we are that we have the right person, we could be wrong.

But I think the strongest reason to oppose the death penalty is this: Any 
criminal justice system developed by human beings cannot be flawless. We make 
mistakes. My story is a testament to that. I cannot stand by while we continue 
executing people using a system that cannot be perfect.

(source: Sabrina Butler Porter is a death row exoneree living in Mississippi. 
She works with an organization for death row exonerees, Witness to Innocence, 
to share her story of wrongful conviction and exoneration across the 
country....Sabrina Butler Porter will speak at the University of Louisville 
Tuesday at 6 p.m. in the Chao Auditorium in the Ekstrom Library for an event 
organized by the Kentucky Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty and ACLU of 
Kentucky. The public is invited----Courier-Journal)








MISSOURI:

Advocates asking Nixon to examine whether St. Louis County removes 
African-Americans from juries



When Herbert Smulls faced a panel of black and white jurors in August 1992 in 
the death of a jewelry store owner, jurors couldn't agree on a sentence.

4 months after the mistrial, Smulls, a black man, stood in front of a new, 
all-white jury and was sentenced to death for the crime. He was executed last 
year.

His case is a perfect example, advocates say, of what can happen when an 
African-American faces a jury that has none of his or her peers. It's a problem 
that plagues St. Louis County, even though the county is 24 % black, said Sean 
O'Brien, associate professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School 
of Law.

And with 2 more black men facing executions in decisions handed down by 
all-white juries, advocates have written to Gov. Jay Nixon asking for an 
investigation.

"I just think a jury of our peers is what needs to take place," said Rep. 
Tommie Pierson, D-St. Louis, who signed the letter.

The letter asks Nixon, a Democrat, to delay the upcoming executions of Andre 
Cole and Kimber Edwards, who are black, and convene a Board of Inquiry to 
examine the exclusion of African-Americans from juries in county death penalty 
cases.

Nixon has received the letter but would not comment further.

Staci Pratt, state coordinator for Missourians for Alternatives to the Death 
Penalty, said now was the time to address this issue given the Justice 
Department report on Ferguson. The report found that African-Americans 
accounted for 90 % of citations and 93 % of arrests made by Ferguson police 
even though they make up only 67 % of the city's population.

The Justice Department report was "a wake-up call in the state," Pratt said. 
"We can't look away anymore. Responsible government must take notice of those 
things and must acknowledge the serious problem in this state."

Though comprehensive data are lacking on how often this happens, Joe Luby, 
Cole's attorney, compiled information for the Post-Dispatch on 6 of the 7 St. 
Louis County black men currently awaiting execution. One had 4 black jurors and 
the rest had fewer, according to the data.

Cole, scheduled to be executed April 14 for stabbing his ex-wife's boyfriend 22 
times in 1998, and Edwards, scheduled to be executed May 12 for shooting his 
ex-wife in the head twice in 2000, both faced all-white juries.

Luby said Cole's case was a particular concern because prosecutors eliminated a 
black juror for being divorced - because the homicide took place in the context 
of divorce - even though a white juror had the same background and was kept on. 
Additionally, a black alternate juror, Delphine Cobb, said in an affidavit in 
January that other jurors had made racist comments about Cole in front of her.

Missouri courts have found that county prosecutors excluded black jurors 
because of race 5 times since 2002. Luby said it happens more often but was 
difficult to prove.

Defense attorneys can call into question the removal of a juror under what is 
called a Batson challenge, alleging that an individual was removed because of 
race or a stereotype of what their view of the trial might be because of race, 
Luby said.

Prosecutors must explain their reasoning behind that person's removal and 
judges must make a "gut level determination" on whether the prosecutor is 
telling the truth, he said. But, O'Brien said, the process is too friendly 
toward a prosecutor's reasoning to work.

"A meaningful process would have resulted in (Cole's) getting a new trial," 
O'Brien said. "The black man gets questioned but a white person survives and 
serves on the jury without a question of divorce tells me the prosecutor didn't 
care, he's asking different questions."

Advocates still are unclear on a long-term fix to this problem but say an 
investigation will bring the problems to light.

Pratt said the state should track statistics showing how often all-white juries 
were seated or how often jurors were removed because of race.

This is "one way to create accountability in the form of making sure government 
is doing the right thing," Pratt said. "If over time we see a pattern, that's a 
wake-up call."

(source: St. Louis Today)