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

[Rick Halperin]

Dec. 3



ARIZONA:

Arizona court to rule on appeal of death row inmate convicted of killing man to 
join gang


The Arizona Supreme Court will rule Thursday on an appeal for a death row 
inmate convicted in a killing that prosecutors said was motivated by a desire 
to be allowed to become a member of a white supremacist gang, the Aryan 
Brotherhood.

Vincent Joseph Guarino was convicted of 1st-degree murder and other crimes in 
the March 2010 killing in Maricopa County of Chad Rowe, who was kidnapped from 
his home, then shot and stabbed.

Jurors sentenced Guarino to death for his murder conviction after finding 4 
different circumstances that permitted a death sentence.

Those circumstances included that the killing was committed with the intent to 
promote, further or assist the objectives of a criminal street gang or to join 
one.

Guarino was 24 when Rowe was killed. He's now 29.

(source: Associated Press)






CALIFORNIA:

Oakland: Oikos shooting suspect believes he's sane, wants death penalty trial


After nearly 3 years of forced medication, Oikos University massacre killer One 
Goh still holds delusions that staff at the Oakland nursing college conspired 
against him to precipitate his deadly rampage, according to testimony at a 
competency hearing for the schizophrenic Alameda man.

Goh, 47, sat silently with a frown on his face and his hands chained behind his 
back Wednesday at the hearing to determine whether he is mentally fit to go to 
trial. He faces 7 counts of murder and 3 counts of attempted murder in 
connection with the April 2, 2012 massacre. Most of those killed were Goh's 
classmates before he dropped out of the nursing program.

The Alameda County District Attorney's Office -- and Goh himself -- believe he 
is competent enough to go to trial, an opinion that Goh's attorneys are 
challenging. The hearing is expected to conclude with a decision by Judge 
Gloria Rhynes on Dec. 15.

"He wants to plead not guilty, make a statement in court, and get the death 
penalty," deputy public defender Patrick Jensen said in an opening statement 
Wednesday.

"9 out of 10 reports and Mr. Goh's entire treatment team ... believe he is 
incompetent," Jensen said.

If Rhynes rules that Goh is incompetent -- contrary to a doctor's recent 
opinion -- his criminal prosecution will be scrapped indefinitely and he will 
likely be placed under conservatorship in a locked mental health facility for 
the rest of his life.

If Rhynes agrees with prosecutors that Goh is competent, a trial will 
scheduled. The DA's office has not announced whether it would seek the death 
penalty, through defense attorneys suspect that it will.

Prosecutor Stacie Pettigrew said Wednesday that Goh understands the proceedings 
against him, and has the ability to assist in his defense, despite his will to 
fight his attorneys' defense strategy against the death penalty.

"He believes the death penalty will bring justice to the families of the 
victims in this case," Pettigrew said.

(source: San Jose Mercury News)






OREGON:

UO Law to host death penalty discussion


The American Constitution Society will host "The Future of the Death Penalty," 
with a panel of 3 legal experts at noon on Dec. 8 at the University of Oregon 
School of Law.

The discussion will cover state and national issues regarding the death 
penalty, including lethal injection drugs and racial discrimination in death 
penalty cases.

The status of capital punishment in Oregon will also discussed.

Panel members will be: Aliza Kaplan, Lewis and Clark Law School professor and 
co-founder of the Oregon Innocence Project; Carrie Leonetti, associate 
professor at UO Law and faculty leader of the Criminal Justice Initiative; and 
C. Renee Manes, assistant federal public defender.

(source: Statesman Journal)






USA:

US Evangelicals and death penalty: "The tide is turning"----"We have the 
opportunity now to play a key role in ending an institution that for too long 
has failed to live up to core Christian principles", thinks Heather Beaudoin.

Heather Baeudoin, interview, death penalty Heather Beaudoin, Director of EJUSA.

Are evangelical Christians in the US changing their views on death penalty? Is 
there a Biblical alternative which would bring more justice into a system that 
does not seem to work?

Evangelical Focus talked to Heather Beaudoin, an experienced campaigner. She 
leads the Evangelical Outreach for Equal Justice and believes that "it is time 
for us to let the death penalty go."

"No human system is 100% accurate, yet that's what the capital punishment 
demands - perfection", she argues.

Are there theological arguments for this shift? "The Bible most definitely 
talks about redemption, and death penalty takes away Christ's power to 
transform the lives of the people we are executing", Beaudoin says.

Influential evangelical leaders like Samuel Rodriguez (NHCLC) have already 
clearly stated that a fairer justice system is needed. Even the National 
Association of Evangelicals (NAE) changed its pro-death penalty position 
recently.

Evangelical Focus asked Heather Beaudoin about the changes happening across the 
US in the following interview.

Question. Is there a growing number of evangelical Christians who stand up 
against death penalty in the US? What evidences do you see for that in the 
churches?

Answer. I have certainly witnessed a shift away from the death penalty in the 
evangelical community. Individuals in the evangelical community have shown that 
they know the facts about our broken death penalty system. Regardless of 
whether or not we support it philosophically, we see that we cannot stand by a 
system that sentences innocent people to death, displays such rampant racial 
and economic disparities, puts murder victims' families through years of 
uncertainty, and drains local resources.

When I travel to evangelical gatherings all across the country, I find so many 
people who feel the way that I do - that the death penalty just isn't worth it. 
As evidence for this point, more evangelical organizations are addressing this 
issue. Just this year, the National Association of Evangelicals stepped away 
from their pro-death penalty position of over 40 years and adopted a new one 
making room for those who oppose the death penalty. Also, the National Latino 
Evangelical Coalition took a unanimous position against the death penalty 
altogether. The tide is turning.

Q. Do you think US seculars and society in general have been a step ahead of 
evangelicals in this topic?

A. I think that evangelicals and the secular society have come to the issue for 
different reasons. Evangelicals have the Bible to deal with. I sometimes hear 
evangelicals say that they support the death penalty because it is Biblical. In 
my experience, this is the main reason given by evangelicals who continue to 
back capital punishment. We are able to find common ground when we look at the 
Biblical death penalty and compare it to the system we have in place in 
America. They look nothing alike. The death penalty in the Bible has many 
mandates - including the fact that there must be 2 eyewitnesses in order to 
apply the death penalty, and that you cannot execute someone solely on the 
basis of circumstantial evidence. There are over 40 mandates that the Bible 
lays out that the American death penalty disregards. For this reason, we are 
able to discuss how the death penalty is currently functioning - the ways in 
which it is broken beyond repair.

Q. What arguments do you see in the Bible to support a view against death 
penalty?

A. The Bible most definitely talks about redemption, and death penalty takes 
away Christ's power to transform the lives of the people we are executing. 
Ezekiel 33:11 says: "As surely as I live declares the sovereign Lord, I take no 
pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they would turn from their 
ways and live." Throughout the Bible, God redeems some of the worst people, and 
even calls them to do great things. Take for instance Cain, Moses, David, and 
Paul.

The Bible certainly has many references to forgiveness, like Romans 12:17-19: 
"Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes 
of everyone. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with 
everyone. Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God's wrath, 
for it is written: 'It is mine to avenge; I will repay,' says the Lord."

The Bible also forbids the execution of the innocent, which is a real risk with 
the death penalty today, given all the wrongful convictions that have come to 
light. Specifically, Exodus 23:7 says: "Have nothing to do with a false charge 
and do not put an innocent or honest person to death, for I will not acquit the 
guilty." As Christians, we also cannot forget that at the heart of our faith is 
the wrongful execution of an innocent man.

Q. Are there Christian leaders with clear theological convictions about this 
issue?

A. There are many evangelical leaders who have spoken out against the death 
penalty for theological reasons. For example, Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel for 
the American Center for Law and Justice, says, "I'm opposed to the death 
penalty not because I think it's unconstitutional per se - although I think 
it's been applied in ways that are unconstitutional - but it really is a moral 
view, and that is that the taking of life is not the way to handle even the 
most significant of crimes.... Who amongst anyone is not above redemption? I 
think we have to be careful in executing final judgment. The one thing my faith 
teaches me - I don't get to play God. I think you are short-cutting the whole 
process of redemption.... I don't want to be the person that stops that process 
from taking place." Also, Reverend Samuel Rodriguez, Leader of the National 
Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, says, "Because of my strong, staunch 
life commitment, my commitment to life in and out of the womb.... I believe 
that we need to re-evaluate our staunch support of the death penalty."

Q. An overwhelming majority of Christians in Europe sees death penalty as an 
outdated measure which clashes with the Biblical teachings about life and 
redemption. Why are there still so many sincere believers in the US that would 
support this system?

A. I often hear from death penalty supporters that "there are just some people 
who deserve to die." The sentiment here is that because there are evil people 
in the world who commit terrible acts, we must keep the death penalty on the 
books. The problem here is that you cannot have a death penalty that only gets 
the "worst of the worst" and does not get people like my friend Randy Steidl, 
who is a death row exoneree from Illinois.

You simply cannot have a death penalty that is 100% accurate. No human system 
is, yet that's what the capital punishment demands - perfection. Fortunately, 
we can keep society safe by putting those who commit violent crimes in prison, 
without needing to resort to an irrevocable punishment like the death penalty. 
It's time for us to let the death penalty go.

Q. Is there anything else you would like to add?

A. The growing support for ending the death penalty among evangelicals and 
conservatives - which especially was on display when the red state of Nebraska 
repealed the death penalty earlier this year - shows how diverse and strong the 
movement against the death penalty is becoming.

We as evangelicals have the opportunity now to play a key role in ending an 
institution that for too long has failed to live up to core Christian 
principles - recognizing that no one is beyond redemption, valuing life, and 
protecting the innocent.

****

Heather Beaudoin is the Director of Evangelical Outreach for Equal Justice USA 
- a national, grassroots organization "working to build a criminal justice 
system that is fair, effective, and responsive to everyone impacted by crime."

She is also one of the national coordinators for Conservatives Concerned About 
the Death Penalty - a group of political and social conservatives who question 
the alignment of capital punishment with conservative principles and values.

Heather previously worked for the Montana Abolition Coalition to end the death 
penalty where she was responsible for outreach efforts to Evangelicals, 
Conservatives and Law Enforcement. She also worked for the Helena Pregnancy 
Resource Center, the National Republican Congressional Committee in Washington 
DC, and the Michigan Republican Senate Majority Leader, Ken Sikkema.

Heather graduated from Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan with a degree 
in Political Science, and she currently resides in Three Rivers, Michigan with 
her husband Matt and their daughter Grace.

(source: Evangelical Focus)

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

Bush: 'I struggle' with the death penalty


Former Gov. Jeb Bush (R-Fla.) says his Catholic faith makes him question the 
morality of the death penalty.

"I struggle with it," the 2016 GOP presidential contender told Christianity 
Today in an interview published Wednesday. "I've tried to explain it, but 
sometimes in life it's not an either/or - it's not so simple."

"We're always confronted with challenges where one's values come into conflict 
and this was perfect case of that," he added.

Bush said he was "very uncomfortable signing death warrants" as Florida 
governor but went forward because it was state law.

"[B]ut I think it was because it was the law, number 1," he said, explaining 
his actions.

"Number 2, I think because I met families that, in their minds, justice was 
being denied by the delays," he continued. "They could not get closure in their 
lives until the death penalty was complete and was executed. You know, these 
are egregious crimes."

"I felt committed to doing it because of the hurting families, because of these 
horrific crimes. We had a duty to do this," added Bush.

Bush said that a major flaw with the death penalty is the lengthy appeals 
process.

"I support it, but here's what we tried to do and the courts basically ignored 
it," he said. "We tried to make the death penalty a deterrent by having it be 
complete within 5 years instead of 25 years."

"It doesn't have a deterrent effect when there's no certainty at all whether it 
will be complete," he added. "We tried by special session to change that.

Bush said that it was a difficult issue but that he tried to bring justice to 
the families of victims.

"It was not an easy thing to do. I did not relish my participation in 
[Florida's death penalty] but I do think we were denying justice for a whole 
lot of people that were suffering," he said.

Bush converted to Catholicism after he married his wife, Columba Bush.

He said in the interview that he generally follows church doctrine as a 
politician.

"I think if you asked the bishops or the people that worked at the Catholic 
conference they would say I was a very supportive governor, but for this 
point."

(source: thehill.com)

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

America's killingest counties


Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, Kern County, Calif., had a reputation for being 
one of the most law-and-order jurisdictions in the United States. Led by 
longtime tough-guy prosecutor Ed Jagels, the county earned the unofficial motto 
"Come for vacation, leave on probation." In 2009, Jagels's county Web page 
boasted that Kern had "the highest per capita prison commitment rate of any 
major California County." Jagels would retire to great acclaim and praise, 
despite the fact that at least 2 dozen of the people his office convicted 
during the ritual sex-abuse panic of the 1980s and 1990s have since been 
exonerated. Kern County has also sent 26 people to death row since 1976, 
putting it among the top 25 in the country, and among the 2 % of U.S. counties 
that account for more than 1/2 of America's death row population.

Given all of that, it probably isn't terribly surprising that Kern County is 
also home to the deadliest cops in the United States. From the Guardian:

75 years after Kern County's leaders banned The Grapes of Wrath from their 
schools and libraries, complaining that John Steinbeck's new book portrayed 
their policemen as "divested of sympathy or human decency or understanding", 
officer Aaron Stringer placed his hands on the body of James De La Rosa without 
permission.

De La Rosa had just been shot dead by police officers in Bakersfield, the 
biggest city in this central California county, after crashing his car when 
they tried to pull him over. He was unarmed. Now the 22-year-old oilfield 
worker lay on a gurney in the successor to the coroner's office where Tom 
Joad's granma awaited a pauper's funeral in the 1939 novel.

Stringer, a senior Bakersfield officer whose plaudits for once saving a 
colleague in peril had been overshadowed by his arrest for a hit-and-run while 
driving under the influence of prescription drugs, reached under the bloodied 
white sheet and tickled De La Rosa's toes. Then, a junior officer reported to 
commanders, he jerked the head to one side and joked about rigor mortis.

"I love playing with dead bodies," said Stringer.

It was only the most remarkable act in recent times by a police officer in this 
rugged territory, where law enforcement officers have this year killed more 
people relative to the population than in any other American county recorded by 
The Counted, a Guardian investigation into the use of deadly force by police 
across the US in 2015.

In all, 13 people have been killed so far this year by law enforcement officers 
in Kern County, which has a population of just under 875,000. During the same 
period, 9 people were killed by the NYPD across the 5 counties of New York 
City, where almost 10 times as many people live and about 23 times as many 
sworn law enforcement officers patrol.

Kern County, in fact, has seen 79 police killings since 2005, or about 8 per 
year. That's 0.9 police killings per 100,000 residents. By comparison, the 
city's overall murder rate is 4.6 per 100,000, a figure right at about the 
national average.

There is, in fact, a pretty remarkable correlation between counties that 
produce a lot of death sentences and counties where cops kill a lot of people. 
Oklahoma County, Okla., for example, is 2nd in the nation in both death 
sentences and per capita killings by police officers. San Bernardino County, 
Calif., is 11th in death sentences, and 3rd in per capita killings by police. 
Clark County, Nev., is 4th in police killings, and among the top 50 in death 
sentences. Santa Clara County, Calif., is 5th in police killings, 19th in death 
sentences. It goes on like that:

Maricopa County, Ariz.: 6th in police killings, 4th in death sentences

Miami-Dade County, Fla.: 7th in police killings, 19th in death sentences

Dallas County, Tex.: 8th in police killings, 14th in death sentences

Riverside County, Calif.: 9th in police killings, 5th in death sentences

Tarrant County, Tex.: 10th in police killings, 27th in death sentences

Los Angeles County, Calif.: 11th in police killings, 1st in death sentences

Harris County, Calif.: 12th in police killings, 2nd in death sentences

San Diego County, Calif.: 13th in police killings, 10th in death sentences

The police killing figures are by rate; the death sentences are in raw figures. 
But the overlap is notable. There are more than 3,000 counties in the United 
States. But the 13 with the highest rates of police killings are not only all 
in death penalty states; they also all rank among the top 30 in death sentences 
meted out over the past 40 years. These 13 cities are wide-ranging in size 
(from Kern's 875,000 people to Los Angeles' 10 million), murder rate (from 9.1 
in Dallas to 2.3 in San Diego) and demographics.

What does this mean? I pointed out in a post a couple of years ago that the 
counties that send the most people to death row also tend to be counties with 
histories of prosecutorial abuse and misconduct. (Jagels's office in particular 
was regularly berated by appeals courts for bending - or outright ignoring - 
the rules.) District attorneys are the chief law enforcement officers within 
their judicial districts. They set the tone for the entire area. They're also 
typically in charge of investigating officer-involved shootings and other 
allegations of excessive force. It isn't difficult to see how when a DA takes a 
"win at all costs" approach to fighting crime, that philosophy would permeate 
an entire county's law enforcement apparatus, from the beat cop to the DA 
herself or himself.

(source: Radley Balko blogs about criminal justice, the drug war and civil 
liberties for The Washington Post. He is the author of the book "Rise of the 
Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces.")

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

Gavel Comes Down Harder in Election Season


The closer judges get to an election date, the more likely they are to impose 
harsher sentences and the death penalty, a report published Wednesday by the 
Brennan Center for Justice says.

The 28-page report parses 10 studies from various states, court levels and 
types of election, which investigated how judicial elections affect a judge's 
ruling on criminal cases.

All studies found that proximity to re-election correlated to judges more 
frequently imposing longer sentences, affirming death sentences and overriding 
life imprisonment sentences for the death penalty.

The report delves into 15 years of advertising for state supreme court 
elections, finding the percentage of ads that attack a candidate's history of 
decisions on criminal cases is on the rise, with 56 percent of the most recent 
ads discussing the topic, up from 33 % in the ads from 2010.

A focus on court decisions puts pressure on judges to be seen as "tough on 
crime," and turns the defendants into victims, the report finds.

Linking to a 2013 report by the Center for American Progress, the Brennan 
Center say judges are aware of the pressure.

"Judges who are running for re-election do keep in mind what the next 30-second 
ad is going to look like," former Justice Oliver Diaz from Mississippi said, as 
quoted in the reports.

The expense of running a judicial election these days only compounds the 
pressure, the Brennan Center found, following up on an October report about the 
rise in special-interest groups with a hand in such races.

"Between 1999 and 2014, the average spending for state supreme court elections 
was $57.7 million in presidential cycles and $37.1 million in non-presidential 
cycles," the report states.

Interest groups pay for about 1/3 of TV-ad spending, but 53 percent of these 
ads have a negative tone. By comparison, only 5 % of candidates' ads go 
negative, and political parties never sponsored an ad with a negative message, 
researchers found.

"Given the extraordinary power state court judges exercise over the liberty, 
and even lives, of defendants, it is vital that they remain impartial," the 
report says. "But mounting evidence suggests that the dynamics of judicial 
elections may threaten judges' ability to serve as impartial arbitrators in 
criminal cases."

"How Judicial Elections Impact Criminal Cases" is authored by Kate Berry, 
counsel in the Brennan Center's Democracy Program. The Brennan Center is run by 
the New York University School of Law.

(source: Courthouse News)