[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----S.C., FLA., OKLA., NEB., USA

[Rick Halperin]

April 26



SOUTH CAROLINA:

S.C. executioners, get your guns?



And it's been national-mockery business as usual since state Rep. Joshua 
Putnam, R-Piedmont, filed a bill Wednesday to make firing squads an alternative 
for dispatching death-row inmates from this mortal coil.

Even S.C. House Democratic spokesman Tyler Jones aimed sarcastic scorn at the 
idea, suggesting that Putnam also consider "adding a guillotine option." Jones 
further asserted that Putnam's proposal "just makes South Carolina look 
medieval."

Hey, going "medieval" on very bad guys is sadly underrated in this 
hypersensitive era.

Anyway, Putnam's bill also would restore the much more recent means of 
execution via electrocution.

Meanwhile, with drugs formerly used for lethal injections unavailable, carrying 
out a death sentence demands other methods.

What about morphine? Isn't it frequently used to halt the pointless suffering 
of terminal patients in terrible pain?

Still, the supposedly merciful final act of putting a fatal potion into the 
bloodstream has drawn criticism after a series of botched U.S. executions in 
recent decades.

That grisly list includes the long good-bye of Michael Elkins on June 13, 1997. 
Due to ailment-driven swelling of his liver and spleen, his executioners had a 
tough time finding an accessible vein. It took nearly an hour before the needle 
was finally inserted in his neck.

But lest you waste much pity on Elkins, review this Associated Press account of 
the brutal crime to which he admitted - a stabbing murder he committed with 8 
knife wounds in a good Samaritan to facilitate a robbery:

"Elkins was convicted of killing Patricia Whitt, 59, of Largo, Fla., on July 9, 
1990, after she stopped to help him and another man who feigned car trouble 
along Interstate 95 near the Georgia border."

Sure, there have been more gruesome examples of American lethal injections gone 
long and wrong as the condemned writhed in extended agony before taking their 
last breaths.

That has made pharmaceutical companies increasingly reluctant to supply the 
stuff required for this imposition of the ultimate justice.

And that has made for those of us still lingering in the dwindled ranks of 
death-penalty advocates frustrated.

One way or the other

Capital punishment hasn't been administered in South Carolina since May 6, 
2011.

That's when Jeffrey Motts, who got 2 life sentences for murdering two aging 
relatives (one 79, the other 73) in 1995, was lethally injected for strangling 
a cellmate to death in 2007.

2 years after Motts' execution, the S.C. Department of Corrections' stash of 
death-penalty drugs expired. Now 2 years after that, Putnam's trying to solve 
that problem.

Oklahoma and Utah already have passed legislation reviving the use of firing 
squads.

Nazi war criminals executed after the Nuremberg Trials requested - and were 
rightly denied - to be executed by firing squads because they deemed that a 
more honorable end than being hanged like common killers.

And when you kill killers with bullets from guns instead of drugs from needles, 
you don't need an accessible vein.

OK, so capital punishment in the U.S. has long been gagging toward a slow death 
of its own.

So while our Founding Fathers clearly didn't deem the death penalty a "cruel 
and unusual punishment" under the Eighth Amendment, it's so belatedly, rarely 
and randomly applied these days that this can reasonably be branded as not just 
unusual but uneven.

Still, if it's OK for our state to kill killers with deadly doses of drugs, why 
shouldn't it also be OK to kill them with live rounds of ammunition?

And regardless of your view on whether, why, when, where and how capital 
punishment should be administered, remember, it's still the law of the land, 
er, state, here.

So don't too hastily dismiss Putnam's firing-squad notion.

Don't worry, either, about finding folks to serve on armed death panels. Our 
Palmetto State packs plenty of gun enthusiasts, many of whom are also diehard 
death penalty fans.

So there should be no shortage of volunteers to carry out that grim but 
necessary duty. We could even supplement now-meager Corrections Department 
funding by putting shots at firing-squad participation up for auction to 
certified marksmen - and markswomen.

Going out in style

This column's last words come from Englishman Robert Erskine Childers.

Author of the breakthrough 1903 spy novel "The Riddle of the Sands: A Record of 
Secret Service," he somehow metamorphosed from staunch defender of British 
imperialism to ardent Irish nationalist.

Sentenced to death on Nov. 20, 1922, under the Army Emergency Powers Resolution 
for possessing a semiautomatic pistol (what? no Second Amendment?), Childers 
shook hands with every member of his firing squad a mere 4 days later in 
Dublin, then told them:

"Take a step or 2 forward, lads. It will be easier that way."

(source: Frank Wooten is assistant editor of The Post and Courier)








FLORIDA:

Florida's death row could see vacancies if Supreme Court rules juries must be 
unanimous



Very few people in Jacksonville have heard of Timothy Hurst. But the Panhandle 
man may soon be responsible for getting dozens of people from the Jacksonville 
area off death row.

The scenario could happen because of the way Florida sentences convicted 
killers to death. Hurst, 36 and on death row for killing an Escambia County 
fast-food manager, claims his death sentence violates the Sixth Amendment 
because only 7 of his 12 jurors recommended he get the death penalty. The other 
5 said he should get life without the possibility of parole.

Florida, Delaware and Alabama are the only states that don't require juries in 
death-penalty cases to reach a unanimous decision when sentencing someone to 
death. In Florida, a jury must unanimously vote to convict someone of 
1st-degree murder and then decides whether to recommend death after a separate 
sentencing hearing.

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to consider Hurst's case. Oral arguments are 
expected to occur this year, with a ruling likely in the spring of 2016.

Public Defender Matt Shirk said he believes in the death penalty, but not the 
way Florida practices it. He hopes the Supreme Court throws out Hurst's death 
sentence.

"In this state, we're just getting it wrong when we don't require a unanimous 
jury verdict," Shirk said.

75 people are on death row for murders committed in Duval, Clay, Nassau, Putnam 
or St. Johns counties. Only 13 got sentenced to death after a jury unanimously 
recommended it.

That means 62 people on death row from Northeast Florida could have their death 
sentences thrown out if the Supreme Court rules in Hurst's favor. People who 
could be affected include Rasheem Dubose, convicted of the murder of 8-year-old 
Dreshawna Davis, Paul Durousseau for the murder of Tyresa Mack, and Alan Wade, 
Tiffany Cole and Michael James Jackson for the robbery, kidnapping and murders 
of Carol and Reggie Sumner.

Ring vs. Arizona

Ronald Clark, 47, knows Hurst very well. Hurst lives down the hall from him on 
Florida's death row. There since 1991 for the murder of Ronald Willis in 
Jacksonville, Clark sees Hurst as perhaps his best chance to die of natural 
causes. The jury that convicted Clark recommended death on an 11-1 vote.

"I think this case is way overdue," Clark said in a letter to the Times-Union. 
"Florida, in ignoring the court's ruling in Ring vs. Arizona basically was 
slapping the U.S. Supreme Court in the face, saying it's our way or the 
highway, we run things down here in the dirty South, not you do-gooders in 
Washington."

Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Network, 
said death-penalty opponents have been waiting a long time for a case like 
Hurst's. In fact, they've been waiting since 2002.

That was the year the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Ring vs. Arizona that a jury 
- not a judge - must make the factual findings required to sentence someone to 
death.

The 7-2 majority opinion, written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, said juries 
must find beyond a reasonable doubt each factor considered in determining 
whether a death sentence should be imposed.

To involve jurors any less, she said, violated defendants' Sixth-Amendment 
right to a trial by jury.

"We all took note of Ring when it was decided," said former Jacksonville Public 
Defender Bill White. "It was obvious that without a unanimous jury 
recommendation, there were going to be Sixth-Amendment issues in Florida."

The ruling essentially invalidated Arizona's death-penalty law, which had trial 
judges decide whether someone should be sentenced to death with no jury 
feedback. Dieter said it also should have invalidated Florida's death-penalty 
law because the court ruling required the jury to decide whether someone should 
be sentenced to death.

"Florida does not allow for such a determination," Dieter said. "Instead, the 
jury makes only an advisory recommendation to the judge that aggravating 
factors exist [thus indicating eligibility for the death penalty] and that the 
person should be sentenced to life or death."

The factual determination of death-penalty eligibility is left to the judge, 
not the jury, and that violates the Sixth Amendment as interpreted in Ring, 
Dieter said.

But in 2005, the Florida Supreme Court ruled it did not violate the 
Constitution. However, in his majority opinion upholding the law, Supreme Court 
Justice Raoul Cantero called on the Legislature to revisit Florida's 
death-penalty statute to require unanimity for jury recommendations of death.

Nothing happened. Legislation was introduced multiple times, but it has never 
come close to passing.

Jacksonville lawyer Frank Tassone defended death-penalty clients for decades at 
trials and appeals. He thinks there's a good chance the Supreme Court rules in 
favor of Hurst.

"Common sense says that the Supreme Court isn't going to issue a ruling that 
lets thousands of people out of prison," Tassone said. "But they may be willing 
to do this."

No one would get out of prison. It would just mean some people would get off 
death row and be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole, he said.

The Hurst case is a strong appeal because the jury recommended death on a 7-5 
vote and he had no previous criminal record, said Gainesville-area Chief 
Assistant Public Defender Al Chipperfield, who previously defended 
death-penalty clients as an assistant public defender in Jacksonville.

"It's possible the Supreme Court has been waiting for the right case," 
Chipperfield said. "And this is it."

An unexpected emotion

Even when his son???s killer got the death penalty, Glen Mitchell was pretty 
certain he would never be executed.

"I had done research and saw that other murders much worse than what happened 
to Jeff had been overturned," Mitchell said. "So even during the trial, I 
thought the death penalty wouldn't hold up."

Jeff Mitchell, then 14, was shot and killed during a robbery attempt outside 
Terry Parker High.

Omar Shareef Jones, now 41, was convicted of 1st-degree murder and originally 
sentenced to death for shooting Mitchell as he waited outside school for a ride 
home. Also sentenced for 1st-degree murder was Edward Jerome Goodman, 41, who 
received life in prison. 2 others involved in the shooting were convicted of 
2nd-degree murder.

When the Florida Supreme Court overturned Jones' death penalty in 1998 and 
ordered him resentenced to life, Mitchell experienced an emotion that he'd 
never expected to have.

"It seemed like Jeff's life had just been cheapened," Mitchell said. "It wasn't 
the case, but even though I knew this was likely to happen, that's what it felt 
like."

The feeling went away at the end of the day, but it's something Mitchell said 
he always remembered because it was so unexpected.

While Mitchell will never experience that feeling again, many other people may 
soon deal with similar emotions.

Cecil King was convicted of beating 82-year-old Renie Telzer-Bain to death with 
a hammer. The jury recommended death on an 8-4 vote.

Telzer-Bain's daughter-in-law, Lysa Telzer, said it was "unnerving" to think 
King may get his death sentence thrown out.

"The law was followed in putting him on death row," she said. "There was never 
any doubt that he was guilty."

To put her family and other families who lost someone to violent crime through 
this isn't fair, and it isn't justice, Telzer said.

If the Supreme Court rules in favor of Hurst, it shouldn't be retroactive, she 
said. Everyone now on death row should remain, and new rules requiring a 
unanimous jury verdict of death should only factor into future cases.

Retroactive

If the U.S. Supreme Court rules for Hurst, the 62 First Coast death row inmates 
who had at least one juror recommend life will likely all claim they should 
have their death-penalty sentences thrown out. But Stephen Harper, a Florida 
International University law professor who previously worked as an assistant 
public defender in Miami, believes that most of them won't be happy with what 
happens next.

After Ring vs. Arizona was decided in 2002 the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 
follow-up ruling in 2004 that said the Ring decision couldn't be applied 
retroactively. That means anyone sentenced to death before 2002, such as Clark, 
is probably out of luck.

But since 2002 every lawyer of someone facing a potential death row sentence 
always makes a motion to declare Florida's death-penalty rules 
unconstitutional, citing the Ring case. The motion is always denied by the 
trial judge, but by making that motion the issue is preserved for an appeal.

So, in layman's terms, this means that everyone sentenced to death after 2002 
has a chance of getting off death row.

The Florida Department of Corrections lists about 30 First Coast death row 
inmates who've arrived on death row since 2002, although a few of them were 
originally sentenced before 2002 but had to be retried or resentenced after 
that date.

Shirk said he hopes that if the Supreme Court rules in favor of Hurst, the 
justices will explain in detail what it means for other people on death row in 
Florida. He said he thinks prosecutors will be more reluctant to seek the death 
penalty if a unanimous jury recommendation of death is required.

"But I can't say that will apply to our own prosecutor," Shirk said, referring 
to State Attorney Angela Corey, who has put more people on death row than any 
other prosecutor in Florida since she took office in 2009.

The effect

State Attorney Senior Managing Director Bernie de la Rionda, who has put more 
people on death row than just about any other prosecutor in Florida and spoke 
on behalf of Corey to the Times-Union, said the office would not change how the 
death penalty is sought if the ruling goes through.

But de la Rionda expressed hope that justices would recognize that the current 
system is fair.

A jury has already made a unanimous finding that a person is guilty of 
1st-degree murder before they decide whether someone deserves death, and that's 
the most important finding a jury makes, he said.

De la Rionda also cited Ted Bundy, 1 of the most notorious serial killers in 
Florida history, as an example of why the death penalty is fair even without a 
unanimous jury verdict of death.

Bundy was executed for the murder of 12-year-old Kimberly Leach of Lake City, 
but he might have killed up to 30 women. The Orlando jury who convicted Bundy 
recommended death on a 10-2 vote.

"I think the most anti-death penalty person would struggle with keeping him 
alive," de la Rionda said.

But former Jacksonville State Attorney Harry Shorstein said the Bundy argument 
has been used for years, and it's not really valid.

"If that jury had to be unanimous, I think it would have been," he said. "Those 
10 jurors would have gotten the other 2 to change their votes."

If that hadn't happened, Bundy would have ended up being executed for another 
murder, Shorstein said.

While prosecutors argue that many majority verdicts recommending death would 
become unanimous verdicts if that was the requirement, Chipperfield isn't so 
sure.

When picking juries, defense lawyers always seek assurances from potential 
jurors that they will stick to what they believe even if other jurors disagree 
with them, and most jurors say they will do that.

"I know prosecutors say the other jurors would wear the holdouts down," 
Chipperfield said. "But in other states, all you need is 1 juror opposed to 
death and you've got a life sentence."

De la Rionda said a lot of the 9-3 or 10-2 recommendations of death should be 
taken with a grain of salt because some people vote no because they know 
they;re outvoted and don???t want a death sentence on their conscience.

De la Rionda said it would be more difficult if the Supreme Court requires a 
unanimous jury to call for death. But he doesn't think it will reduce the 
number of people his office puts on death row.

Juror selection will take more time and trials might also take longer, but the 
results will likely remain the same, he said.

De la Rionda also said if the Supreme Court throws out the death-penalty 
convictions of people in Jacksonville based on a jury not being unanimous, his 
office has the option of seeking another penalty phase with a new jury that 
puts those people back on death row.

"I think Ms. Corey would seek to put all of them back on death row," de la 
Rionda said.

His office hasn't spoken to victims' families yet in detail about this, 
although de la Rionda said a few have contacted them.

"It's too early to talk about this," de la Rionda said. "We don't want to add 
to their stress."

But the Hurst case already is making an impact. Attorneys for Lance Eugene 
Kirkpatrick, convicted this month for killing 38-year-old Kim Dorsey, asked 
Circuit Judge Mark Hulsey to delay his death-penalty phase until after the 
court rules on Hurst's case.

"This court should strike the death notice and move to protect Mr. Kirkpatrick 
from a trial under a scheme which, as shown below, the Supreme Court is 
virtually certain to find unconstitutional," said attorney Julie Schlax in her 
motion. "To allow a death sentence in these circumstances would waste scarce 
judicial resources and, more important, subject the defendant to 
constitutionally infirm capital proceedings."

Hulsey refused to delay the sentencing phase, and the jury rejected 
prosecutors' calls to execute him and recommended life without parole.

De la Rionda said at least one other death-penalty case is getting the same 
motion, but it's not realistic to wait for the Supreme Court to rule.

"We have to try these cases," he said. "It gets more difficult to prove your 
case the longer you wait."

***

Not unanimous

First Coast death row inmates who could have sentences affected if U.S. Supreme 
Court rules in favor of Timothy Hurst include:

2014

Death on 8-4 vote for Rodney Newberry in Duval County murder of Terrese Pernell 
Stevens

2013

Death on 8-4 vote for Kim Jackson in Duval County murder of Debra Pearce

2012

Death on 9-3 vote for Arthur Martin in Duval County murder of Javon Daniels

Death on 8-4 vote for Timothy Fletcher in Putnam County murder of Helen Key 
Googe

Death on 8-4 vote for Terrance Phillips in Duval County murders of Mateo Perez 
and Renaldo Antunez-Padilla

Death on 8-4 vote for Billy Sheppard in Duval County murder of Monquell Deshaun 
Wimberly

2011

Death on 7-5 vote for Thomas Brown in Duval County murder of Juanese Miller

Death on 8-4 vote for Cecil King in Duval County murder of Renie Telzer-Bain

Death on 8-4 vote for Terry Smith in Duval County murder of Berthum Gibson and 
on 10-2 vote for Smith in the murder of Kennethia Kennan

2010

Death on 8-4 vote for Rasheem Dubose in Duval County murder of 8-year-old 
DreShawna Davis

Death on 10-2 vote for Justin McMillian in Duval County murder of Danielle 
De-Ann Stubbs

Death on 9-3 vote for David Martin in Clay County murder of Jacey Lynn 
McWilliams

2009

Death on 7-5 vote for Robert Peterson in Duval County murder of Roy Andrews

Death on 8-4 vote for Raymond Bright in Duval County murders of Randall Brown 
and Derrick King III (trial judge threw out death sentence and ordered Bright 
resentenced because his trial lawyers were ineffective; Bright technically 
remains on Death Row while prosecutors appeal)

2008

Death on 7-5 vote for Galante Phillips in Duval County murder of Chris Aligada

Death on 10-2 vote for Donald Banks in Duval County murder of Linda Sue Volum

Death on 10-2 vote for James Turner in St. Johns County murder of Renee Boling 
Howard

Death on 9-3 vote for Tiffany Cole in Duval County murders of James "Reggie" 
Sumner and Carol Sumner

Death on 11-1 vote for Alan Wade in Duval County murders of James "Reggie" 
Sumner and Carol Sumner

2007

Death on 8-4 vote for Michael James Jackson in Duval County murders of James 
"Reggie" Sumner and Carol Sumner

Death on 8-4 vote for Jason Simpson in Duval County murders of Kimberli Kimbler 
and Archie Crook Sr.

Death on 10-2 vote for Paul Durousseau in Duval County murder of Tyresa Mack

Death on 10-2 vote for Norman McKenzie in St. Johns County murders of Charles 
Johnston and Randy Peacock

2006

Death on 8-4 vote for John Mosley in Duval County murder of Jay-Quan Mosley

2005

Death on 8-4 vote for Pinkney Carter in Duval County murder of Glenn Pafford 
and a 9-3 vote in death of Liz Reed

Death on 8-4 vote for Thomas Bevel in Duval County murder of Garrick 
Stringfield (jury also recommended death 12-0 for murder of Phillip Sims)

2003

Death on 11-1 vote for Gerald Murray in Duval County murder of Marilyn Vest

2002

Death 11-1 vote for Luther Douglas in Duval County murder of Maryann Hobgood

2001

Death on 7-5 vote for Richard McCoy in Duval County murder of Shervie Ann 
Elliot.

Death on 9-3 vote for James Belcher in Duval County murder of Jennifer Embry.

2000

Death on 8-4 vote for John Reese in Duval County murder of Sharlene Austin.

1999

Death on 10-2 vote John Taylor in Clay County murder of Shannon Carol Holzer.

Death on 11-1 vote for Connie Irael in Putnam County murder of Esther Hagans.

Death on 11-1 vote for Maurice Floyd in Putnam County murder of Mary Goss.

1998

Death on 10-2 vote for Donald Bradley in Clay County murder of Jack Jones.

Death on 9-3 vote for Jason Stephens in Duval County murder of Robert Sparrow.

Death on 7-5 vote for David Miller in Duval County murder of Albert Floyd.

1997

Death on 9-3 vote for Andrew Lukehart in Duval County murder of Gabrielle 
Hanshaw.

Death on 9-3 vote for David Jones in Duval County murder of Lori McRae.

1996

Death on 9-3 vote for Pressley Alston in Duval County murder of James Coon.

1995

Death on 11-1 vote for Toney Davis in Duval County murder of Caleasha 
Cunningham.

Death on 11-1 vote for Michael Shellito in murder of Sean Hathorne. Florida 
Supreme Court threw out death sentence due to incompetence of trial lawyers and 
ordered him resentenced. Shellito technically remains on death row until he is 
resentenced.

1994

Death on 9-3 vote for Marvin Jones in Duval County murder of Monique Stow.

Death on 11-1 vote for William Thomas in Duval County murder of Rachel Thomas.

1993

Death on 9-3 vote for Kenneth Hartley in Duval County murder of Gino Mayhew.

Death on 11-1 vote for Ronald Clark in Duval County murder of Ronald Willis.

Death on 7-5 vote for Anthony Mungin in Duval County murder of Betty Jean 
Woods.

Death by 9-3 vote for Thomas Moore in Duval County murder of Johnny Parrish.

1991

Death on 10-2 vote for Steven Stein in Duval County murders of Dennis Saunders 
and Bobby Hood.

Death on 10-2 vote for William Sweet in Duval County murder of Felicia Bryant.

Death on 10-2 vote Steven Taylor in the Duval County murder of Marilyn Vest.

Death on 10-2 vote for Randall Jones in Putnam County murders of Matthew Brock 
and Kelly Perry.

1989

Death on 8-4 vote for Ernest Downs in Duval County murder of Forrest Harris.

Death on a 7-5 vote for Tony Watts in Duval County murder of Simon Jurado.

Death by 8-4 vote for Richard Randolph in the Putnam County murder of Minnie 
McCollum.

1988

Death on 9-3 vote for John Freeman in Duval County murder of Leonard Collier.

Death on 9-3 vote for Mark Asay in Duval County murders of Robert McDowell and 
Robert Lee Booker.

1987

Death on 9-3 vote for Jacob Dougan in Duval County murder of Stephen Orlando. A 
judge threw out Dougan's conviction and death sentence on allegations his 
original lawyer was incompetent, but Dougan technically remains on death row 
while prosecutors appeal ruling to Florida Supreme Court.

Death on 11-1 vote for Grover Reed in Duval County murder of Betty Oermann.

1986

Death on 7-5 vote for Etheria Jackson in Duval County murder of Linton Moody.

Death on 7-5 vote for John Hardwick in Duval County murder of Keith Pullam.

1983

Death on 9-3 vote for Joel Wright in Putnam County murder of Lima Smith.

(source: St. Augustine Record)








OKLAHOMA:

U.S. Supreme Court to consider constitutionality of Oklahoma's death 
penalty----On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on the 
state's execution protocol, specifically the use of 1 of the 3 drugs in 
Oklahoma's lethal cocktail. The court's decision could have a lasting impact on 
the use of the drug across the country.



The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments Wednesday on Oklahoma's 
execution protocol, specifically whether or not the use of a particular drug in 
the state's lethal cocktail is constitutional.

Midazolam has been at the center of much debate and legal wrangling since 2014, 
when the sedative was used in a few problematic executions across the country, 
including the lethal injection of Oklahoma inmate Clayton Lockett that April.

A state investigation later concluded that problems that occurred during 
Lockett's execution, which lasted 43 minutes and caused him to writhe and speak 
during a time he was supposed to be unconscious, were largely caused by an 
improperly placed IV. But expert testimony in a December federal court hearing 
suggested midazolam was a potentially dangerous drug to use in lethal 
injections.

The federal judge in that case found the use of midazolam did not violate 
inmates' Eighth Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment. But 
a 5 to 4 Supreme Court vote denying the final appeal of Charles Frederick 
Warner, an inmate who was put to death in January using the drug and the last 
prisoner to be executed in Oklahoma, was enough for the justices to hear 
arguments on the constitutionality of midazolam's use. The court later granted 
a request by state Attorney General Scott Pruitt to stay all of the state's 
scheduled executions.

Focus on midazolam

Since the court will be looking specifically at midazolam, the case likely will 
only be significant to states that also use the drug, such as Ohio, Arizona, 
and Florida, said Robert Dunham, executive director of the Death Penalty 
Information Center.

The case is not an indictment of lethal injections as a whole, Dunham said, 
and, in fact, the court could very likely focus not on the use of the drug 
itself, but instead how it is administered.

"The court could say that it's unconstitutional because midazolam is an 
inappropriate drug to be using and make it so that midazolam itself would be an 
Eighth Amendment violation," he said. "But, they could say that the use of 
midazolam without particular safeguards or in particular circumstances is 
unconstitutional. So, I think the states are rightly waiting for the court to 
act so that they can respond intelligently after the decision is announced."

If the court finds the drug or its application to be unconstitutional, Oklahoma 
still has two other lethal combinations that do not require the use of 
midazolam. However, those combinations utilize the drugs sodium thiopental and 
pentobarbital, 2 drugs that have become increasingly difficult to obtain.

3 more doses

The Department of Corrections has access to the ingredients of at least 3 more 
doses of the 3 drug cocktail that includes midazolam, spokeswoman Terri Watkins 
confirmed Thursday. She said the state also continues its search for a reliable 
source of pentobarbital.

Dale Baich, one of the federal public defenders representing the inmates who 
are challenging Oklahoma's execution protocol, argues the expert testimony in 
federal court in December was conclusive; midazloam is not an adequate 
anesthetic and does not properly sedate inmates for lethal injection purposes. 
He said other states, such as Texas and Georgia, have successfully been able to 
obtain pentobarbital, and it is unclear why Oklahoma cannot obtain the drug due 
to a lack of transparency in the state Department of Corrections.

Pruitt contends the use of midazolam has been upheld by multiple courts, and he 
has no doubt the Supreme Court will rule similarly.

"All previous courts have ruled that the lethal injection protocol used by 
Oklahoma is constitutional," he said in an emailed statement. "My office 
believes the U.S. Supreme Court, after considering these facts, will also find 
that Oklahoma's lethal injection protocol is constitutional and thus allow the 
sentences for these heinous crimes to be carried out in accordance with the 
law."

Death penalty support

Joseph Thai, presidential professor of law at the University of Oklahoma, said 
while shining a light on the execution process is an important part of the 
democratic process, he agrees with Pruitt that the Supreme Court will likely 
rule to affirm the state's use of midazolam.

"Unlike bans on same-sex marriage, public opinion has not turned against the 
death penalty with the same swiftness and sweep, and support remains entrenched 
in states like Oklahoma that retain the death penalty," Thai said. "If the 
Court upholds the execution method at issue, debate over the death penalty will 
likely remain at a stalemate nationally, leaving its fate to state politics."

The court is expected to make a final decision sometime this summer.

(source: The Oklahoman)








NEBRASKA:

Death penalty a failure



I hope our legislators will continue to listen to the numbers of families of 
murder victims and conservatives who have said that its time to let go of the 
death penalty ("Death penalty repeal passes first round," April 16). If the 1st 
vote on LB268 is any indication, the legislators heard this message loud and 
clear. Nebraska is full of smart independent thinkers, and our unique 
Legislature creates an atmosphere where honest and introspective dialogue can 
occur.

People across the aisle in the state and in the Legislature know that the death 
penalty is a failed government program. It fails victims' families, fails to 
guarantee innocent people are not executed and wastes needed resources. I 
really hope the Legislature finally ends the death penalty this year.

Jo Crowl, Lincoln

(source: Letter to the Editor, Lincoln Journal Star)








USA:

Questions of insanity, death at heart of Aurora theater shooting trial



When James Holmes stormed an Aurora theater in July 2012 and began firing into 
the crowd, Alex Teves made a split-second decision to shield his girlfriend.

"He had to make a choice to save his girlfriend and die, or let her die," said 
his father, Tom Teves. "That's not a choice you should have to make at a 
movie."

Alex was killed, his girlfriend lived. The 24-year old had just completed his 
master's degree in counseling psychology.

Tom said he thinks about Alex constantly, "And on a good night I don't wake up 
at 3 o'clock in the morning, doubled over in pain that I'm never going to see 
my son again."

The trial of the gunman begins with opening statements Monday, nearly 3 years 
since Holmes killed 12 people and injured 70 at a midnight premier of the The 
Dark Knight Rises. His legal team admits he was behind the massacre. The key 
questions are: Was he insane, and should he be put to death?

Slow-moving trial

Tom and his wife Caren live in Phoenix and plan to travel to Colorado to be in 
court as often as they can. Like many families they are frustrated by the slow 
pace of the trial.

"Part of the travesty of this taking so long is the people that are allowed to 
moved forward, that can move forward, are going to be right back to that day," 
said Caren.

She places blame squarely on the gunman's lawyers. Former Colorado prosecutor 
Bob Grant said Holmes is represented by some of the best trained and financed 
public defenders in the country.

"Look they have one job, in cases like Holmes, and most death penalty cases," 
said Grant. "Their 1 job is to save the life of their client. Every delay is 
another day he or she lives."

The shooter has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, and 1 big reason for 
the delay is a battery of psychological testing from multiple experts.

It's a high bar to prove legal insanity, not just that the defendant has some 
mental illness, but that he lacked the ability to tell the difference between 
right and wrong at the time of the shooting.

"On a good night I don't wake up at 3 o'clock in the morning, doubled over in 
pain that I'm never going to see my son again." - Tom Teves, father of victim 
Alex Teves Colorado defense attorney Forrest "Boogie" Lewis said Holmes' 
attorneys may be playing the long game by raising the issue of sanity.

Even if the jury finds he's not legally insane, they may spare him the death 
penalty because they believe he is mentally ill, according to Lewis.

This trial is unique for many reasons, particularly because there is a trial at 
all. Mass shooters tend to die in the act or plead guilty and beg for the death 
penalty, according to Jack Levin, a criminologist at Northeastern University.

In this case, there will be a trial spanning 6 months, with extensive 
psychological evaluations.

"I think we will learn from this trial," said Levin. "And that's one of the few 
positive things you can say about it."

One big question for Levin: Why did the gunman target a movie theater? Mass 
shooters tend to focus on familiar places like work or school.

"He instead targeted people he didn't even know," Levin said.

Little comfort for families

Even if the trial can answer why this happened, it would be cold comfort to the 
families of victims.

Closure will not come in the form of a verdict for Tom Teves and his wife 
Caren, whose son was killed in the theater.

"If at the end of the trial Alex walks out alive, yes. Otherwise, no," said 
Tom. "We both know that Alex isn't going to come out of that trial alive. There 
is no closure. That was my 1st born son."

(source: Colorado Public Radio)

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

Boston Marathon bomber's lawyers prepare case for life



Lawyers for Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev will begin presenting 
witnesses this week in the penalty phase of his trial as they try to make their 
case that he should be sentenced to life in prison - not death - for his role 
in the deadly 2013 attack.

Tsarnaev was convicted of 30 federal charges in the twin bombings that killed 
three people and injured more than 260 on April 15, 2013. Seventeen of the 
charges carry the possibility of the death penalty.

Prosecutors called 17 witnesses over 3 days, mainly victims who lost loved ones 
or limbs in the explosions. The defense case begins Monday in federal court. 
Here are some things to expect:

DEFENSE STRATEGY

Legal analysts say the defense strategy - first and foremost - will be to 
humanize Tsarnaev. Prosecutors have depicted Tsarnaev as a callous and 
heartless terrorist who placed a bomb just feet from a group of children and 
targeted the marathon for maximum bloodshed.

In the 1st phase of the trial, the defense tried to show that Tsarnaev was then 
a 19-year-old college student who was flunking out of school and heavily 
influenced by his radicalized older brother, Tamerlan, 26. In the penalty 
phase, the defense is likely to continue to emphasize that theme, but may also 
focus on his seeming aimlessness to show that he did not appear to be motivated 
by political concerns and that his brother was the driving force behind the 
attack, aimed at punishing the U.S. for its wars in Muslim countries.

WITNESSES

The witness list has not been made public, but legal experts expect the defense 
to call family members and friends who will describe Tsarnaev as a well-behaved 
child who appeared to adjust well to his life in the U.S. after moving here 
with his parents and siblings from Russia about a decade before the bombings, 
when he was 8 or 9. Tsarnaev attended Cambridge Rindge and Latin School, was on 
the wrestling team and won a $7,500 college scholarship from the city of 
Cambridge.

Other witnesses could include friends who may be asked to describe the 
relationship between Dzhokhar and Tamerlan. During the 1st phase of the trial, 
a friend of Dzhokhar's testified that he told him Tamerlan was strict and 
opinionated, and said: "You don't want to meet my brother."

The defense also is expected to call experts who can testify about the 
political climate in Kyrgyzstan and the volatile region of Dagestan, Russia, an 
area bordering Chechnya where the Tsarnaev family lived before moving to the 
U.S.

Other witnesses may testify about problems in the Tsarnaev family. Tsarnaev's 
parents had divorced and moved back to Russia, leaving Tamerlan as his closest 
family member at the time of the bombings. During her opening statement to the 
jury, prosecutor Nadine Pellegrini offered a possible glimpse of the defense 
case when she told jurors they may hear about dysfunction in the Tsarnaev 
family. Trying to counter that, she said many people have dysfunctional 
families. "Who among them murders a child with a bomb?" she said.

TIMELINE

Judge George O'Toole Jr. told the jury he expects the penalty phase to last 
about four weeks. Since the prosecution case took less than a week, that leaves 
2 to 3 weeks for the defense to present its case. Prosecutors will be allowed 
to present rebuttal witnesses. Both sides will get the chance to give closing 
arguments. The jury of 7 woman and 5 men will then get instructions from the 
judge, then begin deliberating. The jurors have only 2 choices: life in prison 
or the death penalty.

JURY'S TASK

The jury will be asked to weigh aggravating factors presented by prosecutors 
against mitigating factors presented by Tsarnaev's lawyers.

Some aggravating factors outlined by prosecutors include their contention that 
the crime was committed in an especially heinous, cruel and depraved manner; 
that there was a particularly vulnerable victim, an 8-year-old boy who was 
killed; that Tsarnaev intended to kill more than 1 person; and that he 
committed the crime after substantial planning or premeditation to cause death 
or to commit an act of terrorism.

Tsarnaev's lawyers have not revealed what mitigating factors they will cite, 
but they have already sought to emphasize that he was only 19 at the time of 
the attack and that he was influenced by his brother.

(source: Associated Press)