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

[Rick Halperin]

Feb. 24



MONTANA:

House deadlocks on bill to abolish death penalty in Montana



The state House deadlocked Monday 50-50 on a bill to abolish the death penalty 
in Montana, likely killing the measure for the 2015 Legislature.

Rep. David "Doc" Moore, R-Missoula, the sponsor of House Bill 370, told members 
to "just vote your conscience" moments before the vote.

He said later he's undecided whether to ask the House on Tuesday to reconsider 
its action on HB 370, saying it could be difficult to pick up a single, 
additional vote to force another emotional debate and vote on the floor.

Monday's vote fell largely along party lines, with most Republicans against it 
- but it took 3 of the House's 41 Democrats voting "no" to reject the bill, 
which would abolish the death penalty in Montana and substitute it with life in 
prison without parole. Montana has 2 murderers on death row.

The vote also marked the closest that death-penalty opponents have come to 
getting a bill through the Montana House, which has blocked similar efforts for 
years. Bills to abolish the death penalty have been approved by the state 
Senate in recent legislatures, only to see them die in the House.

Supporters of the bill argued the death penalty does not act as a deterrent and 
costs the states millions of dollars on appeals and other prosecutorial costs.

Rep. Margie MacDonald, D-Billings, also said state prison workers shouldn't be 
put in the position of having to operate "the machineries of death."

"It is a ravaging, horrifying task to put in the hands of our state employees," 
she said.

1 longtime supporter of abolishing the death penalty, Rep. Mitch Tropila, 
D-Great Falls, spoke as though he thought supporters had the votes to pass HB 
370 on Monday.

"This is an historic moment in the Montana House of Representative," he said. 
"It has never voted to abolish the death penalty on 2nd reading. This is a 
momentous moment and we are on the cusp of history. ... "It is time for Montana 
to take her rightful place as a leader among all the great states of the union 
... and time to be recognized as a leader on the world stage"

Opponents, however, offered their own emotion-charged testimony against the 
measure, saying the death penalty can help prosecutors extract plea-bargains 
out of terrible criminals and spare both the state and the victims' families 
the financial and emotional cost of a trial.

"How can you put a price on my emotions and what I was going through with my 
family?" asked Rep. Tom Berry, R-Roundup, whose son was brutally murdered a 
dozen years ago. "All this bill does is reward the murderer, handicap the 
prosecutor ... and penalize victims like me."

Rep. Roy Hollandsworth, R-Brady, who opposed the bill, said those who want to 
abolish the death penalty should take it to the Montana public as a referendum 
- but they won't, because they know they would lose.

The public overwhelmingly supports the death penalty, he said.

"When you vote for this, whichever way you vote, I hope that the people ... 
remember in November when you run again," he said.

The 3 Democrats voting against the measure were Reps. Tom Jacobson and Bob 
Mehlhoff of Great Falls and Gordon Pierson of Deer Lodge.

(source: The Missoulian)

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

Bill to abolish death penalty in Montana fails after tie vote



A bill to end Montana's death penalty stalled Monday with a tie vote in the 
House.

House Bill 370, sponsored by Missoula Rep. Doc Moore (R), would have replaced 
the death penalty with life in prison without parole.

The House voted 50-50, defeating it.

Roundup Rep. Tom Berry (R) described his feelings about the murder of his son.

"Now you put him in prison without parole, why won't he kill again? A prison 
guard, another prisoner. It happens, people. All this bill does is reward their 
murderer," Berry said. "Handicap the prosecution and victimize, penalize 
victims like me."

The tie vote could be reconsidered if 51 representatives vote to do so.

Montana remains 1 of 32 states who use the death penalty in the United States.

(source: KXLF news)

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

Bad news for Ronald Smith? Montana bill to abolish death penalty fails



A bill to abolish Montana's death penalty was scuttled by a tie vote Monday in 
the lower house of the state legislature.

The proposed law could have affected the fate of Canadian Ronald Smith, 57, 1 
of 2 individuals on death row in Montana.

Republican Rep. David Moore introduced the bill which would have abolished 
executions and replaced them with a sentence of life imprisonment with no 
chance of parole.

The judiciary committee in the lower house of Montana's two-tier legislature 
stalled bills to abolish the death penalty in 2007, 2009, 2011 and 2013. But 
last week it decided to allow this bill to be voted on by the House of 
Representatives.

Moore, who was optimistic that the proposed legislation would pass, said that a 
tie vote means the bill has failed.

"It's disappointing to get this far and to have it end in a tie and probably 
not for the right reasons," he said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

"There was some passionate discussion on the house floor, but I think the 
reason is we had some people more worried about November elections than doing 
the right thing.

"I feel like I've let my northern neighbours down."

That means the matter will go on the backburner for at least 24 months since 
the Montana legislature only sits every 2 years.

Moore expects the issue will be back for public debate and he is hopeful of a 
different outcome.

"I would imagine it will come back again next session. I don't think this ends 
it."

Smith, who is originally from Red Deer, Alta., has been on death row since 1983 
for fatally shooting 2 cousins while he was high on drugs and alcohol near East 
Glacier, Mont.

He refused a plea deal that would have seen him avoid death row and spend the 
rest of his life in prison. Three weeks later, he pleaded guilty. He asked for 
and was given a death sentence.

Smith had a change of heart and has been on a legal roller-coaster for decades. 
An execution date has been set 5 times and each time the order was overturned.

Moore had indicated that bringing forward the legislation wasn't about seeking 
leniency for death-row convicts, but about eliminating the costs of protracted 
legal wrangling in a death-penalty case.

Ron Waterman, a senior lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Association, 
testified before the judiciary committee that the death penalty is flawed and 
there is the risk of executing an innocent person.

He said costs also mitigate the benefits the death penalty gives a prosecutor 
trying to negotiate a plea bargain.

Waterman is overseeing a civil case on behalf of Smith and another death-row 
inmate, William Jay Gollehon.

A hearing is scheduled for July on whether new drugs being proposed by the 
state comply with language in execution protocol requiring an 
"ultra-fast-acting barbiturate."

(source: Times Colonist)








NEVADA:

Nevada death penalty costs reflect U.S. trends



When Nevada lawmakers were informed in November that death penalty cases in the 
state cost $532,000 more on average than other murder cases from arrest through 
the end of incarceration, the findings were consistent with other studies 
pushed by anti-death penalty advocates. The financial hit taken by taxpayers 
has become 1 of the central arguments death penalty foes have used in recent 
years in an effort to have states overturn that form of punishment.

A search of the Internet turns up little in the way of arguments that refute 
the cost studies, even though the majority of states have death penalty laws 
that continue to be defended by victims' rights organizations.

There are 18 states without the death penalty. Michigan has been on that list 
the longest, having been without a death penalty since 1846, while Maryland was 
last to join this group in 2013.

Nevada is among the other 32 states with the death penalty, with April 2006 
being the last time the punishment was applied in this state. That's when 
lethal injection was used on Daryl Mack, a 47-year-old inmate who initially was 
sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole for the 1994 
strangulation death of one woman in northern Nevada. He was then given the 
death penalty when he was later convicted while in prison for the 1988 murder 
of another woman in Reno.

The report from Nevada's Legislative Auditor based its cost estimates by 
sampling 28 cases. Cases where the defendant was sentenced to death but not 
executed averaged $1,307,000, compared to $1,202,000 where prosecutors sought 
the death penalty but didn't get one, $1,032,000 when execution occurred, and 
$775,000 when the death penalty wasn't sought by prosecutors.

"Case costs, incorporating the trial and appeal phases, averaged about 3 times 
more for death penalty versus non-death penalty cases," the report concluded.

"For incarceration costs, the death penalty is the most expensive sentence for 
those convicted of 1st degree murder, but only slightly higher when compared to 
those sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. Costs for these 2 
sentences largely mirror one another because incarceration periods are similar 
considering 'involuntary' executions are extremely infrequent."

The Death Penalty Information Center, a nonprofit organization in Washington, 
D.C., that opposes the death penalty, posted on its website the Nevada report 
and similar studies from other states. Among the other findings:

--A Seattle University study released in January found that death penalty cases 
in Washington state cost $1 million more on average than similar cases where 
the death penalty wasn't sought.

--A 2014 report from the Kansas Legislature's Judicial Council concluded that 
defending a death penalty case in that state costs 4 times as much as defending 
a case where the death penalty isn't pursued.

--The Idaho Legislature's Office of Performance Evaluations reported last year 
that the State Appellate Public Defenders office spent almost 8,000 hours per 
capital defendant compared to 180 hours per non-death penalty defendant.

--A study published in the University of Denver Criminal Law Review in 2013 
found that capital proceedings in Colorado require 6 times more days in court 
and take much longer to resolve than life without parole cases.

--The Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review published a study in 2011 concluding 
that if the governor of California commuted the sentences of death row inmates 
to life without parole, the state would save $170 million a year and $5 billion 
over the next 20 years.

The nonprofit website ProCon.org of Santa Monica, Calif., which strives to 
promote critical thinking by providing pro and con arguments on dozens of 
controversial topics, posed the question of whether the death penalty costs 
less than life in prison without parole. The vast majority of respondents said 
they believed death penalty cases cost far more than those involving life in 
prison without parole.

One of the few respondents in the minority was Tennessee lawyer Chris Clem, who 
was quoted by the website as saying: "Executions do not have to cost that much. 
We could hang them and reuse the rope. No cost! Or we could use firing squads 
and ask for volunteer firing squad members who would provide their own guns and 
ammunition. Again, no cost."

Florida attorney Gary Beatty, in a 1997 article posted on the website of the 
conservative/libertarian Federalist Society for Law & Public Policy Studies in 
Washington, D.C., stated:

"The overwhelming majority of citizens of Florida, as in the rest of the 
nation, support the death penalty. To claim that when citizens are educated 
about the high fiscal cost of administering the death penalty they always opt 
for life imprisonment is intellectually dishonest. If the multiple layers of 
appeal are pursued in an ethical and fiscally responsible manner, execution is 
less costly than warehousing a murderer for life. Any increased cost is caused 
by death penalty opponents."

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

Delays normal in death penalty cases



2 years have passed since a shooting on the Las Vegas Strip led to a fiery 
crash and the deaths of 3 people.

The man accused of those murders, Ammar Harris, still has not been brought to 
trial. An old adage says justice delayed is justice denied but it's also true 
the wheels of justice turn slowly.

As the I-Team learned, the reasons for that aren't always foot-dragging or 
delay tactics.

It was in February 2013 when reputed pimp Kenneth Cherry was shot in his 
Maserati as he drove away from the Aria resort. The mortally wounded Cherry 
crashed his car into a taxicab, causing an explosion that killed cabbie Michael 
Bolden and passenger Sandra Sutton-Wasmund.

Since Harris was arrested the trial date in the death penalty case has moved 
three times and is now scheduled for July.

Bolden's brother, Tehran Bolden, worries about the toll the case continues to 
take on his 93-year-old mother.

"That's the justice system," Tehran Bolden told the I-Team. "It's been 2 years. 
My mother's aged 10 years in 2."

But he remains philosophical about the time it is taking for justice to 
prevail.

"Well, you can't blame anyone for dragging it out," he said. "I've already went 
through the blame game."

He said if anyone is to blame, it's Harris, who has already been prosecuted and 
convicted of 2 other felonies while awaiting trial in the triple murder case. 
The convictions were for a sexual assault prior to the carnage on the Strip, 
and for bribing a prison guard while serving time for the other offense.

"It's been my experience in the state of Nevada that a capital case rarely goes 
to trial inside of 2 years of the date that the person is arrested or taken 
into custody on the offenses," Clark County prosecutor David Stanton said.

Nevada death penalty costs reflect U.S. trends

A study released to the Nevada Legislature in November showed that the average 
death penalty case in the state takes more than 1,200 days, or 3 1/2 years, to 
complete. But if Harris goes to trial in July, it will have been roughly 2 1/2 
years from the time of the crime.

Stanton: "And, so, the length of time is actually fairly quick compared to 
other cases."

I-Team: "But you haven't seen any foot-dragging tactics or delays on the other 
side?"

Stanton: "No. Not by defense counsel, and certainly not by the court."

The legislative study indicated death penalty cases routinely take more than a 
year longer to bring to trial than other murder cases. The chief reason is that 
death penalty cases involve both the guilt phase and the penalty phase.

Prosecutors can use during the penalty phase evidence of other bad acts or 
crimes they cannot use in the guilt phase.

"And they have to go through a painstaking and detailed investigation of Mr. 
Harris and his background and the incidences that the state is going to bring 
forward -- and, so, that takes time," Stanton said.

Less than 2 months ago, detectives finally were able to interview a former 
female associate of Harris. She told police a tale of mental and physical abuse 
by Harris that may be used at the penalty hearing. So police are making 
progress, even as victims' families wait for justice.

"People talk about closure and I don't think we'll ever have closure but you 
know, you get some sense of gratification to know that this part is over with," 
Tehran Bolden said.

Though it may seem these cases move at a glacial pace, statistics show it's not 
unusual for a capital case to take several years to get to trial. Witnesses' 
memories can fade and evidence can grow stale while waiting for trial, but 
police also can use the time to develop new information.

That's what has occurred in this case.

(source for both: KLAS TV news)

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

Suspect in shooting death of Tammy Meyers appears in court



The 19-year-old man accused of shooting a valley mother in an apparent road 
rage incident appeared in court for the 1st time on Monday morning.

It was a packed courtroom as Erich Nowsch was brought into the courtroom to 
face the judge. He is facing charges of open murder, attempted murder and 
discharging a gun.

The judge set Nowsch's preliminary hearing for March 10 at 9 a.m.

Nowsch is accused of shooting Tammy Meyers outside of her family's home on Mt. 
Shasta Circle on February 12, after what the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police 
Department initially said was a road rage incident. Nowsch was arrested at his 
home near Meyers' house after a 2-hour standoff on February 19.

Las Vegas police are still looking for another suspect in the case. Outside of 
the courtroom on Monday, Clark County District Attorney Steve Wolfson said that 
it is imperative the other suspect is found.

When asked if he will seek the death penalty for Nowsch, he replied: "Nothing 
is off the table."

Robert Meyers, who was married to Tammy Meyers, was inside the courtroom. When 
he left the courtroom, he told Action News he plans to be at every one of 
Nowsch's scheduled appearances.

Nowsch's attorney, Conrad Claus, said he is not ready to speak to the media 
just about his client.

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

Mom Forgives, DA Withdraws Death Penalty in Vegas Slaying

A family's forgiveness prompted a dramatic turnaround in a Las Vegas courtroom, 
where a judge agreed to let prosecutors withdraw a call for the death penalty 
for a man found guilty in a 2011 Las Vegas brew pub slaying.

Brandon Hill apologized Monday to victim Michael Portaro's mother, Cynthia 
Portaro, and she stood and asked Clark County District Court Judge Elissa 
Cadish to spare Hill's life.

Portaro and Hill family members embraced outside court.

Cynthia Portaro told reporters she's relieved because good Christians can't 
live with hatred, animosity and anger.

The 26-year-old Hill was convicted Friday and still faces life in prison at 
sentencing April 16.

Michael Portaro was a 22-year-old aspiring musician when he was shot dead 
during a robbery outside Tenaya Creek brew pub in northwest Las Vegas.

(source for both: KTNV news)








ARIZONA:

Jodi Arias trial: 'Death penalty or life in prison' closing arguments



The Jodi Arias sentencing retrial resumes Tuesday, as lawyers make closing 
arguments on whether the convicted murderer should receive life in prison or be 
executed for the 2008 killing of her former boyfriend.

Lawyers in the Jodi Arias sentencing retrial are scheduled to make closing 
arguments Tuesday on whether the convicted murderer should receive life in 
prison or be executed for the 2008 killing of her former boyfriend.

Arias was convicted in 2013 of murdering Travis Alexander, but jurors 
deadlocked on her sentence. A new jury that has been hearing testimony over the 
last 4 months will decide only her punishment.

Prosecutors said Arias attacked Alexander in a jealous rage after he wanted to 
end their affair and planned a trip to Mexico with another woman. Arias has 
acknowledged killing Alexander but claimed it was self-defense after he 
attacked her.

The retrial revealed few new details about the crime and was more subdued than 
Arias' 1st trial, which turned into a media circus as salacious and violent 
details about Arias and Alexander were broadcast live around the world. At the 
retrial, the judge barred the broadcast of footage from the proceedings until 
after a verdict is reached.

The new penalty phase also was marked by a judge's decision to kick the public 
out of the courtroom for the testimony of a then-unspecified witness, who cited 
personal safety concerns about testifying in a public setting.

An appeals court later overturned Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Sherry 
Stephens' move to close the courtroom and revealed that the witness was Arias 
herself. Her testimony was halted before the prosecutor got a chance to 
question her, although he did so at her 2013 trial.

A transcript of her testimony in late October was eventually released, 
revealing few new details about Alexander's killing.

Arias passed up a chance Monday to address the jury, saying she wanted to make 
such comments but insisting the courtroom be cleared. She said she wouldn't 
make any remarks if she could be seen and heard from a remote viewing room. 
Stephens said an appeals court has forbidden Arias from making such comments 
behind closed doors.

Earlier in the retrial, the judge denied a bid by Arias' lawyers to stop 
prosecutors from seeking the death penalty on several grounds.

They alleged authorities examining Alexander's laptop destroyed thousands of 
files - including files from pornographic websites - that would have been 
beneficial in defending Arias. They said the computer files could have helped 
them argue that Alexander had treated their client in a sexually humiliating 
manner.

Arias' lawyers also asked the judge to dismiss the death penalty because three 
witnesses on her behalf have refused to testify in open court for fear they 
will be harassed.

(source: Associated Press)








CALIFORNIA:

The death penalty in California: Yes, no, maybe?----The state seems to lack the 
will to carry out executions that were twice endorsed by voters; will that 
change?



California has a death penalty on the books. Both the California constitution 
and the United States constitution specifically recognize capital punishment. 
Yet somehow California seems unable to actually execute anyone even though 
Texas, Florida and other states, which operate under the same federal 
constitution, manage to execute condemned prisoners with some regularity. Why 
is that so?

Let's look at the current Dramatis Personae. They are Jerry Brown, Kamala 
Harris, Kermit Alexander, Bradley Winchell, Jeremy Fogel and Shellyanne Chang.

Jerry Brown is the Governor of the formerly great state of California. He is in 
his fourth term (non-consecutive) in office. He was well known as a young man 
and Jesuit seminary student when he attempted to intercede with his father, who 
was at the time Governor, in the matter of Caryl Chessman. Chessman was on 
death row for kidnap-rape, which at the time was a capital offense. Chessman 
was eventually executed under his father's administration.

Jerry Brown has regularly said he has a personal objection to the death 
penalty, but would act in accordance with the law.

Kamala Harris is the state Attorney General. She was formerly the District 
Attorney for the City and County of San Francisco. She was well-known for 
saying up front that, during her tenure in office, if elected, there would not 
be a death penalty prosecution in her bailiwick. She was, as far as it went, an 
honest politician. She caught heat from the SFPD when she refused a death 
penalty prosecution for a cop killer. Of course it didn't matter in the 
knee-jerk liberal haven of San Francisco; most of the voters applauded her for 
it. When she ran for A.G. she stated that she would enforce the law on the 
books.

There are now over 700 criminals on death row. One might almost think that 
Jerry and Kamala were slow-dragging the process of bringing California's death 
penalty into line with court orders.

Kermit Alexander and Bradley Winchell are private citizens. They have generated 
a legal action against the State of California to compel the state to bring its 
procedure into line and start executing condemned prisoners. Both men are 
related to murder victims whose killers have been caught, tried and sentenced. 
Kamala Harris submitted a brief in the case opposing their action on the basis 
of lack of standing. On February 9, 2015, Sacramento Superior Court Judge 
Shellyanne Chang ruled in favor of Alexander and Winchell.

U. S. District Court Judge Jeremy Fogel, an in interesting interpretation of 
"cruel and unusual," has ruled that if there is even 0.001 % chance that a 
prisoner would experience pain during the execution that procedure is not 
constitutionally valid. He stayed the execution of Michael Morales, who raped, 
beat with a hammer, stabbed and strangled Teri Winchell, 17, sister to Bradley 
Winchell.

So, what will shake out? Within my memory California voters have twice endorsed 
the death penalty by referendum. Yet the state, or at least the state's 
political leaders, seem to lack the will to carry through. Is that likely to 
change in the near future? In my humble opinion, no.

Our political ruling class will continue to obfuscate slow-drag and use a 
cooperative court system and media to drag the system out and out and out ad 
infinitum, in the hopes the system collapses under its own weight.

(source: correctionsone.com)

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

Man Tied to Beaumont Crime Faces Death Sentence in Trial of 
Home-Invasions-Turned-Fatal----He's accused of crimes which began in 2004 in 
Desert Hot Springs, Thousand Palms, North Palm Springs, Cathedral City and 
Beaumont.



Opening statements are scheduled in the death- penalty trial of a 34-year-old 
Desert Hot Springs man accused of involvement in a violent spree of 
home-invasion robberies across and near the Coachella Valley, culminating in 
the driveway shooting death of a Desert Hot Springs man in August 2004.

Miguel Enrique Felix faces 25 charges, including murder, robbery, attempted 
robbery, burglary, kidnapping and a variety of firearms charges, stemming from 
the crimes, which occurred from the summer of 2004 until the spring of 2005, in 
Desert Hot Springs, Thousand Palms, North Palm Springs, Cathedral City, 
Beaumont and unincorporated county areas.

The opening statements Monday are at the Larson Justice Center will be followed 
by the prosecution's 1st witnesses.

Authorities have said Felix was 1 of several men who grabbed victim after 
victim as they were at or near their homes, forced them inside at gunpoint, 
then tied them up with zip ties, pistol-whipped and beat them, and ransacked 
their homes in search of money or valuables.

In some cases, victims were kidnapped and taken to automatic teller machines or 
other locations to obtain money, while their children or other relatives were 
held at gunpoint by accomplices, prosecutors said in court documents.

On August 11, 2004, Felix and an accomplice, Javier Rodriguez Hernandez, who 
has remained at large for more than a decade, went to a home in Desert Hot 
Springs to rob Armando Gonzalez, prosecutors said.

Felix and Hernandez allegedly confronted Gonzalez as he was backing out of his 
driveway, with his wife and children in the vehicle.

The men pulled him out of the truck at gunpoint, but the wife and kids were 
able to flee to a neighbors house, authorities said.

Gonzalez resisted and was shot 7 times, some of the bullets traveling through 
the palms of his hands in an indication of defensive wounds, prosecutors said.

Felix is also accused of kidnapping his own girlfriend at gunpoint in March 
2005.

Also charged for involvement in various parts of the crime spree were 
Hernandez, Antonio Jesus Cantu, and Felix's girlfriend, Luisa Beatriz Lopez.

(source: patch.com)








USA:

Crookston nuns devoted to blocking death penalty for Rodriguez



A small group of Catholic nuns who live in the hometown of convicted killer 
Alfonso Rodriguez is on a mission to save his life.

Sister Pat Murphy is one of about a dozen members of the Congregation of St. 
Joseph in Crookston. Without recognition or fanfare, the nuns have been 
devoting their lives to overturning capital punishment.

Sister Pat has been focusing on Rodriguez, who is on death row for the 
kidnapping and murder of Dru Sjodin. "We have laws against premeditated murder" 
according to Sister Pat. "Capital punishment is premediated - and it's murder."

Sister Pat knows that many people would rather see Rodriguez executed. "I know 
there are people here in Crookston who know Alfonso Rodriguez", she said. "I 
was in one of the local restaurants during the time (Sjodin) was still being 
looked for. Her parents were there in the restaurant; easy to identify. Just 
those little connections kept my antennae up."

"It's a risk for me because I've never stepped out and spoken publicly on 
issues like this, and I know (my views) are unpopular. Even within my own 
family, they won't understand it."

Sister Pat has written letters to the U.S. Dept. of Justice and U.S. District 
Judge Ralph Erickson, who presided over Rodriguez's trial in Fargo. She 
received a reply from the warden of the federal prison in Indiana where 
Rodriguez is on death row. The warden referred her questions to Rodriguez's 
attorneys.

Sister Pat says she's realistic about what kind of impact the Congregation's 
work can have. She doesn't expect to change the entire justice system, but says 
she hopes to make a difference close to home.

(source: KFGO news)

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

A cause for optimism? States running out of ways to execute people



To borrow a speculative construct from pacifists about the fate of war should 
soldiers refuse to fight them, what would happen to lethal injections if 
pharmaceutical firms simply stopped selling execution drugs to prisons?.

We may find out. One of the U.S. manufacturers of midazolam, used by several 
states in multi-drug lethal injection protocols, says it won't sell the drug if 
it knows it will be used to execute someone.

Akorn Pharmaceuticals found itself dragged into an Alabama court record when 
the Illinois firm was listed in papers filed in connection with appeals by 
condemned murderer Thomas Arthur, who is challenging the constitutionality of 
the state's lethal injection protocol. The company said it has no record of its 
drug being sold to Alabama prisons, and objected to its inclusion in the court 
filing.

"To prevent the use of our products in capital punishment, Akorn will not sell 
any product directly to any prison or other correctional institution and we 
will restrict the sale of known components of lethal injection protocols to a 
select group of wholesalers who agree to use their best efforts to keep these 
products out of correctional institutions," Akorn investor relations director 
Dewey Steadman told the Anniston Star last week.

Remember, it was a revolt by (mostly) European-based pharmaceutical companies 
that made the executioners' drug of choice, sodium thiopental, nearly 
impossible to find. States have turned to compounding pharmacies, which are 
lightly regulated labs that primarily tailor drugs for individual patients, as 
an alternative source, but now some of those labs are balking at playing a role 
in capital punishment. And states are enacting laws making it a crime to 
identify sources of execution drugs, or those who take part. So in the name of 
justice we are moving closer to secretive executions.

Interestingly, the U.S. Supreme Court recently agreed to hear a legal challenge 
to the use of midazolam in lethal injection protocols, a challenge based on a 
record of botched executions and that raises questions - again - about the 
nature of capital punishment.

I've argued before that the death penalty is an immoral act by the government, 
and that it is applied unfairly and arbitrarily, is an expensive system to 
maintain, and that it serves no purpose other than revenge. It is not justice.

Pharmaceutical companies don't want to be connected with it. The American 
Medical Assn. warns that "as a member of a profession dedicated to preserving 
life when there is hope of doing so, [physicians] should not be a participant 
in a legally authorized execution." The American Public Health Assn. similarly 
tells members not to take part in executions. And the list goes on.

Of course, death-penalty states and proponents of executions will press for new 
ways of killing people, be it fresh drug cocktails or a reversion to the firing 
squad.

Let's hope that sanity, and civility, will take root, and the United States of 
America - the international beacon of justice - will end this despicable policy 
once and for all.

(source: Opinion, Scott Martelle----Los Angeles Times)

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

Aurora theater shooting trial judge adds to jury pool over defense 
objections----In addition to the two jurors who have previously served on a 
jury, Samour selected a woman who works as a special education teacher and a 
man who described himself in court as a "small town guy."



5 jurors in the Aurora theater shooting trial were sent to the group 
questioning phase Monday while another 6 were released from service.

The 5 jurors moving to the next round - which include 2 who have been jurors 
before - bring the total over 22 days of jury selection to 32, still far ahead 
of the pace Judge Carlos Samour Jr. had hoped for. Samour expected the court to 
need about 16 weeks of individual questioning to get the necessary 120 jurors 
for the next round. After just 2 weeks, the 2 sides already have a quarter of 
that number.

Among the jurors released Monday, 2 said they could never hand down a death 
sentence. 1 person worked at the mall adjacent to the theater and 3 said 
serving would be a financial hardship.

In addition to the 2 jurors who have previously served on a jury, Samour 
selected a woman who works as a special education teacher and a man who 
described himself in court as a "small town guy."

Samour also selected a young man over the defense's objection. The defense said 
the man seemed to view the death penalty as a starting point for a heinous 
crime, but Samour questioned the man a 2nd time and said the man was willing to 
consider life in prison or a death sentence.

Accused gunman James Holmes sat quietly at the defense table wearing a blue 
sweater.

Monday's hearing marked the 1st since Samour last week changed decided to call 
11 jurors each day instead of 12. Samour had said he hoped the new system would 
mean court ended a bit earlier, but Monday's session stretched past 6 p.m. 
anyway.

Prosecutors also asked Samour to release a juror who had previously been sent 
to the next round. The juror, whio has a criminal record, was previously 
questioned and the 2 Samour sent him to the group questioning phase. Deputy 
District Attorney Rich Orman said the man recently called the DA's office and 
spoke to another prosecutor.

Orman said the man should be released, but Holmes' defense team said they 
"strongly object" to the man's dismissal.

What exactly the man said and whether he was released was unclear. Samour 
closed the courtroom to the public while the 2 sides discussed the man's phone 
call and adjourned court for the day before reopening the courtroom to the 
public and press.

Court is in recess until Tuesday morning.

(source: Aurora Sentinel)