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

[Rick Halperin]

Jan. 15



COLORADO:

Judge won't postpone James Holmes theater shooting trial----'The Court will not 
allow it to be unnecessarily and improperly delayed simply because it is a 
death penalty case,' judge writes in order.



The Colorado judge overseeing the James Holmes murder case on Wednesday denied 
an 11th-hour attempt to have the much-anticipated trial delayed again.

With jury selection set to begin Jan. 20, Holmes' court-appointed defense team 
asked the court last week for more time to sift through hundreds of pages of 
new evidence, among other things.

Holmes faces the death penalty for the July 2012 rampage at a Denver-area movie 
theater. 12 people were killed and 70 others injured during a midnight 
screening of the Batman movie "The Dark Knight Rises." Holmes, a graduate 
student in neuroscience at the time of the murders, pleaded not guilty by 
reason of insanity.

In his order, Judge Carlos Samour wrote that the defense's request "falls short 
on the merits."

"Regardless of how 'enormous' this case is, the 'unbelievable amount of 
information' that must be processed and the complexity of the mental health 
issues involved ... it is irrefutable that the defense counsel, their expert 
witnesses and their staff have had an abundant amount of time to prepare for 
trial," Samour wrote.

The trial date has been postponed 5 other times for various reasons. But now it 
appears Judge Samour is growing impatient.

"If, given the seemingly unlimited resources and manpower dedicated to this 
case, the defense cannot be ready for trial after so much time, the Court fears 
the defense will never announce ready for trial," he wrote.

The judge concluded by saying that he is mindful of the case's importance and 
that he has "unabated confidence" that the attorneys will be prepared to defend 
Holmes.

"If the defense's motion gave the Court any pause, the Court would grant it," 
Samour wrote. "This case is ready to proceed to trial. The Court will not allow 
it to be unnecessarily and improperly delayed simply because it is a death 
penalty case."

A state record 9,000 people in suburban Arapahoe County have been summonsed as 
potential jurors. Jury selection is expected to take up to 5 months, with 
opening arguments not possible until late May or June.

(source: Yahoo News)








ARIZONA:

Death Penalty a Possibility, Judge Says



The judge in the Jodi Arias case on Wednesday denied a bid by her lawyers to 
stop prosecutors from seeking the death penalty.

Arias was convicted in May 2013 of murdering her ex-boyfriend, Travis 
Alexander, at his suburban Phoenix home. But jurors deadlocked on whether she 
should be sentenced to life in prison or death. A new jury was picked to decide 
her sentence, and her sentencing retrial is ongoing.

Arias' attorneys had asked Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Sherry Stephens 
to dismiss a notice by prosecutors that they are seeking the death penalty on 
several grounds.

They alleged that 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.

In a ruling Wednesday, Stephens denied all of the motions to take the death 
penalty off the table.

"Many of those motions alleged prosecutorial misconduct. The cumulative effect 
of those allegations does not require dismissal of the charges or the notice of 
intent to seek the death penalty," Stephens wrote. "There may have been errors 
made, but those errors were not so egregious that they create concerns about 
the integrity or fundamental fairness of the trial."

Prosecutor Juan Martinez has denied authorities mishandled computer evidence.

Prosecutors have argued that 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 Arias case has been marked by secrecy since the conclusion of the 1st 
trial, where salacious and violent details about Arias and Alexander were 
broadcast live around the world.

Since then, the judge has held 1 secret hearing after another and barred the 
broadcast of footage from the sentencing retrial until after a verdict is 
reached.

(source: Associated Press)








CALIFORNIA----2, including female, face death penalty

Toddler's death case moves to penalty phase



It's now up to 2 juries to decide if a Corona woman and her boyfriend should 
get the death penalty.

The juries returned guilty verdicts this week against Michael Narine and 
Belinda Magana.

Prosecutors accused the pair of fabricating a story about the woman's 2 1/2 
year old son disappearing from a Corona park in 2009. In fact, Narine had 
killed the boy at the couple's home and buried him in the mountains near Lytle 
Creek.

The penalty phase of Magana's trial begins Thursday and Narine's next week in 
Superior Court in Corona.

(source: Inland News Today)

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

Oildale man sentenced to death for 2009 murders of wife, 
mother-in-law----Robert Dale Fuller received 2 death penalties, one each for 
the 2009 murders of his estranged wife and mother-in-law.



A Kern County judge sentenced Robert Dale Fuller to death Wednesday for the 
"violent, calculated and horrifying" murders of Fuller's estranged wife and 
mother-in-law in August 2009.

The 61-year-old Fuller had no reaction as Judge John S. Somers pronounced 
sentence. Fuller will be transported to death row at San Quentin State Prison.

Somers considered and denied a motion to sentence Fuller to life in prison 
without the possibility of parole. He instead affirmed the jury's 
recommendation that Fuller be put to death.

"The jury's verdict is not contrary to the law or evidence," Somers said.

Fuller's daughters addressed the court before sentencing. Both were in the home 
when Fuller shot and killed his wife, Annette Sowders, 45, and her 69-year- old 
mother, Sharon Sue Cannon.

Cheyenne Fuller, 10, said her father belongs in prison so he won't be able to 
hurt anyone else. She said his actions now force her to live her life without 
her mother and grandmother.

Savannah Fuller, 13, said Fuller's actions have forever changed her.

"He has destroyed my childhood and scarred me for life," she said.

Fuller's attorneys, Michael C. Lukehart and Richard Terry, said afterward they 
were "very disappointed" in the jury's verdicts.

Lukehart said the jury only deliberated 2 hours before finding Fuller guilty of 
the murders, and only about twice that amount before recommending death.

"We still believe there are significant proof issues that may be further 
explored on appeal," he said.

For instance, Lukehart said, Fuller shot himself in the head in April 2009, 
just a few months before the murders. He then attacked neighbors with a pair of 
hedge trimmers at an Oildale trailer park before deputies shot him with a Taser 
and took him to the hospital.

Lukehart has said Fuller was in despair when he shot himself and destroyed a 
significant portion of his brain. He said Fuller suffered "significant" brain 
damage that impacted his behavior, and he believes that will have an impact on 
his appeal.

Executions in California have been on hold since 2006 after a federal judge 
ruled California's execution procedures violated the 8th Amendment's ban 
against cruel and unusual punishment. Lukehart called it a "waste" to sentence 
someone to death considering the current state of the death penalty in 
California.

He said death penalty cases are costly and a poor use of taxpayer money. 
Appeals can drag on for decades.

And, despite what some people believe, Lukehart said the criminal justice 
system provides no comfort or healing to the victims.

"It doesn't happen," he said. "It's just not equipped to work for victims."

Fuller broke into a house in the 200 block of South Plymouth Avenue in the 
early hours of Aug. 8, 2009, and gunned down Sowders and Cannon, according to 
prosecutors.

Prosecutor Melissa Allen has said Fuller fired a total of 5 shots. She said the 
12-gauge shotgun recovered from Fuller's vehicle had a plug allowing it to hold 
only 3 rounds, indicating he reloaded and fired 2 more shots at the victims.

"It's obviously the most serious type of domestic violence case you can have 
because he killed somebody," Allen said. "In this case, (Fuller) murdered in a 
very brutal way his wife and her mother while his and 5- and 8-year-old 
children were in the home."

Allen said the death penalty is justified because the crime was so heinous, the 
law provides for it and the jury recommended it. She said the sentence sends a 
clear message that a defendant will be sentenced to death if he or she commits 
such a serious crime.

Whether or not the sentence is carried out is a separate matter, she said.

The last person executed in California was 76-year-old Clarence Ray Allen on 
Jan. 17, 2006. He'd spent 23 years, 1 month on death row.

According to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, there 
are 25 people from Kern County on death row.

(source: Bakersfield Californian)








OREGON:

Death row inmate in Woodburn bank bombing alleges court errors in appeal, 
demands new trial



The judge overseeing the Woodburn bank bombing trial should never have allowed 
the jury to hear about Bruce Turnidge's anti-government views, his attorneys 
argue in appealing his conviction and death sentence.

The judge also failed to intervene when a prosecutor told the jury to issue the 
death penalty because it was the only option that could "silence Bruce 
Turnidge's beliefs and his mind," the attorneys say.

In a 216-page brief, attorneys Andy Simrin and W. Keith Goody offer a preview 
of their oral arguments scheduled Thursday before the Oregon Supreme Court in 
Salem.

Bruce Turnidge, now 63, and his son, Joshua Turnidge, 38, are on Oregon's death 
row, convicted in the Dec. 12, 2008, explosion that killed an Oregon State 
Police bomb technician and a Woodburn police lieutenant. It also wounded 
Woodburn's police chief and a bank employee.

--

Timeline of Woodburn bank bombing

Dec. 12, 2008 - A bomb explodes inside a West Coast Bank branch in Woodburn, 
killing Oregon State Police bomb technician William Hakim and Woodburn police 
Capt. Tom Tennant. Woodburn Police Chief Scott Russell and bank customer 
service manager Laurie Perkett were injured.

Dec. 14, 2008 - Joshua Turnidge of Salem, then 32, is arrested.

Dec. 16, 2008 - His father, Bruce Turnidge of Jefferson, then 57, is arrested.

Sept. 8, 2010 - Jury selection begins for the trial of both Turnidges.

Dec. 8, 2010 - A Marion County jury finds Bruce and Joshua Turnidge guilty on 
charges of aggravated murder, assault, unlawful manufacture of a destructive 
device, unlawful possession of a destruction device and conspiracy to commit 
murder.

Dec. 22, 2010 - The same jury unanimously votes to sentence Bruce and Joshua 
Turnidge to death.

Jan. 24, 2011 - A Marion County judge formally imposes death sentences on Bruce 
and Joshua Turnidge.

July 25, 2013 - Bruce Turnidge's attorneys, Andy Simrin and W. Keith Goody, 
file an opening brief with the Oregon Supreme Court for his automatic appeal.

July 24, 2014 - The state files a response to Turnidge's brief.

Jan. 15, 2015 - Oral arguments heard in Oregon Supreme Court for Bruce Turnidge 
appeal.

--

Death penalty cases automatically go to the high court for appeal in Oregon. A 
similar hearing for Joshua hasn't been scheduled yet.

The attorneys contend Marion County Circuit Judge Thomas Hart made 24 errors 
during the Turnidges' 2-month trial in 2010. They are seeking to overturn the 
jury's verdict against Bruce Turnidge, throw out his death sentence and get a 
new trial.

Prosecutors said the father and son hatched the bank robbery plot to get money 
for their struggling biodiesel fuel company. The 2 built the bomb, left it 
outside a West Coast Bank branch and phoned in a threat to a bank next door, 
prosecutors said. Authorities discovered a green utility box hours later and 
brought it into West Coast bank, where it went off.

Among the appeals team's arguments: Prosecutors didn't present sufficient 
evidence to justify aggravated murder convictions; didn't prove a connection 
between Turnidge's anti-government views and the bomb's placement near the 
bank; erroneously ordered juror questionnaires to be destroyed despite a motion 
to make them part of the record for review in an appeal; and violated 
Turnidge's First Amendment rights to free speech.

Trial testimony indicated Bruce Turnidge viewed Timothy McVeigh as a hero for 
his role in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and had discussed using bombs to 
kill police officers in the past. He also aimed to form a militia and feared 
the Obama administration would crack down on gun ownership, witnesses said.

But none of Turnidge's views suggested that he deliberately planned to kill or 
maim anyone during the failed bank robbery scheme or that he and his son were 
the "domestic terrorists" as prosecutors labeled them, his attorneys said.

Attorneys for the state Justice Department countered that Turnidge's well-known 
views supported his ultimate motive.

Turnidge's attorneys took exception to Marion County Deputy District Attorney 
Katie Suver's closing argument that used Turnidge's views as reasons to 
sentence him to death. Prosecutors also had told the jury that Turnidge could 
possibly inspire other inmates to criminal action with his beliefs and pose a 
future danger to society, according to the attorneys.

"It is a frightening and plain error, anywhere in this nation, to urge a 
sentence of death for a person's thoughts and words," Simrin and Goody wrote.

But state attorneys said Turnidge's attorneys are using Suver's statements out 
of context.

The appeal also argues that Bruce Turnidge shouldn't be held responsible for 
the deaths and injuries caused by the explosion because there was no intention 
to hurt anyone. The bomb was likely set off by bomb technician William Hakim 
who repeatedly hit the device with a crowbar or a hammer thinking it was a 
hoax, his attorneys said.

In addition to Hakim, the bank explosion killed Woodburn Police Lt. Tom 
Tennant.

The state's investigation also found that the Turnidges weren't anywhere near 
the device when it detonated and that neither man did anything to trigger it, 
the attorneys noted. Prosecutors had argued during the trial that a stray radio 
signal possibly from a passing motorist could have inadvertently triggered the 
reaction, but authorities found no receivers or detonators at the scene.

In their response, state attorneys said prosecutors presented enough evidence 
for a "reasonable fact-finder" to conclude that Turnidge created a bomb to rob 
a bank and kill responding police officers.

That's sufficient to hold him legally and personally responsible for the 
deaths, they said.

"Even if Trooper Hakim's attempt to dismantle what he thought was a very 
sophisticated hoax device was what ultimately caused the bomb to detonate, 
defendant contributed to Hakim's and Tennant's deaths by placing the bomb in 
their path," the state said. "He laid a trap for responding law enforcement 
officers, just like a hunter would bait an animal."

Turnidge's attorneys also claim the judge improperly excused three potential 
jurors during the selection process. The jurors had shown hesitation when asked 
about whether they could impose the death penalty, but didn't refuse to 
consider it, the lawyers said.

Bruce and Joshua Turnidge are among 34 Oregon inmates on death row. In 1984, 
Oregon voters reinstated the death penalty for the 3rd time. The last execution 
of a state inmate was Harry Charles Moore in 1997, after he waived his appeals.

In November 2011, Gov. John Kitzhaber banned executions while he remains in 
office. He was sworn in for a 4th term Monday.

Thursday's hearing is scheduled to begin before the Supreme Court at 9 a.m. It 
could be several months before the justices issue a ruling.

(source: The Oregonian)








USA:

The US must end the use of paralytic drugs when executing prisoners ---- The 
government claims that midazolam will produce humane deaths. Witnesses and the 
courts should be able to observe that without the opacity of paralysis Oklahoma 
leaves drug cocktail unchanged in first executions since botched procedure



When the state uses a paralytic drug in the course of executing a condemned 
prisoner - and successfully delivers it into the person's circulation - the 
prisoner will appear tranquil and comfortable, and will die of suffocation 
whether they are unconscious or they are wide awake, "locked in" and suffering 
the torture of that suffocation. From the point of view of the witnesses, the 
prison staff and the courts, paralytic drugs will make the execution seem 
humane and legal ... whether or not it is.

Whatever drug Oklahoma and other states decide to use to kill prisoners, they 
should abandon the barbaric use of paralyzing drugs entirely. If the state 
claims that midazolam will produce a smooth, peaceful, humane death, then they 
should be willing to allow witnesses and the courts to observe the process 
without the opacity of paralysis. If states can???t be confident that midazolam 
will produce a smooth and rapid death - and they shouldn't be, given the 
experience so far - they shouldn't be using it at all.

There are, in fact, real differences between utilizing barbiturates (thiopental 
and pentobarbital) and midazolam (a benzodiazepine related to Valium) to kill 
prisoners in state custody, which we can see when we focus our attention on the 
executions in which prisoners were not paralyzed. Of the numerous non-paralyzed 
executions that have used FDA-approved barbiturates (either thiopental or 
pentobarbital) every one of them has proceeded quickly ands smoothly and 
without evidence of suffering. By contrast, the non-paralyzed executions that 
have used midazolam (in conjunction with hydromorphone) have been blatantly 
botched disasters: instead of quickly and peacefully dying, the prisoners 
endure slow and prolonged deaths from gradual deterioration of the body's life 
support systems and suffocation.

Midazolam does not have the same effect in the brain as barbiturates such as 
thiopental and pentobarbital, even though all work on the same inhibitory 
receptor - called the gamma aminobutyric acid (Gaba) receptor - and all cause 
an inhibition of neuronal activity. But barbiturates directly activate the Gaba 
receptor and directly inhibit neurons without any assistance or cooperation 
from other chemicals; midazolam, however, is weaker than barbiturates because 
it requires the co-presence and assistance of a neurotransmitter (called Gaba) 
to help it inhibit neuron activity. Thus, prisoners who are given high doses of 
FDA-approved barbiturates quickly cease breathing and quickly die, while 
prisoners who receive midazolam - even in combination with the respiratory 
depressant hydromorphone - exhibit persistent and prolonged respiratory 
activity.

There is another big difference between midazolam and barbiturates. 
Barbiturates, in clinical doses - and even more so in the high doses used in 
executions - can cause circulatory and hemodynamic collapse; they depress the 
pumping strength of the heart; and they can reduce or collapse the blood 
pressure, producing a state of circulatory shock. So in addition to stopping 
the prisoner from breathing, barbiturates can push the circulatory system 
toward shutting down, producing a simultaneous "double strike" on the body's 
life support systems. Midazolam is much more "gentle" in its effects on the 
circulatory system - so much so that doctors frequently select it (along with 
other anesthetics) to induce general anesthesia on patients with weak or 
failing hearts.

During the botched execution of Clayton Lockett, he was subjected to conscious 
chemical paralysis, chemical entombment and suffocation because paralytic drugs 
are very rapidly absorbed into the circulatory system even if they are 
accidentally injected outside of the vein and into the surrounding tissues. If 
Oklahoma had kept up with the "advanced standard" of other states which have 
removed paralysis from the executions - including Texas, Missouri, Ohio, 
Arizona, and Georgia - it would not have paralyzed Lockett and there would have 
been no possibility of him dying from conscious paralysis and suffocation.

When the anesthetic and paralytic are maladministered into the tissues outside 
of the vein, the rapid absorption of the paralytic can paralyze and suffocate 
the prisoner before the anesthetic renders them unconscious. It is therefore 
critical that the intravenous catheter is properly inserted and that all of the 
drugs are injected directly into the circulatory system. The Oklahoma prison 
admitted that the drugs and IV fluid "infiltrated" and "extravasated" into the 
tissues of Lockett's groin because of the misplaced catheter, and that is why 
the execution was prolonged and botched. This is, of course, why incompetent 
medical practitioners should be excluded from the execution process; but the 
state of Oklahoma instead hired clinical clowns who repeatedly and 
unsuccessfully stabbed and needled Lockett, failed to acknowledge or recognize 
that they were unable to achieve intravenous access and nonetheless proceeded 
to inject the drugs into him.

Only a subset of physicians - typically intensive care doctors, invasive 
cardiologists, surgeons, and anesthesiologists - are experienced and proficient 
in obtaining central intravenous access, and only intensivists and 
anesthesiologists are proficient in ensuring that a paralyzed prisoner is 
adequately induced and maintained in a state of general anesthesia. If Oklahoma 
insists on continuing the relict, needless, and barbaric practice of paralyzing 
executions, it should promulgate protocols and procedures that explicitly 
require that the medical practitioners who obtain IV access are certified, 
competent, and proficient in obtaining IV access and providing anesthetic 
monitoring. While some ethicists claim that physicians should not and cannot be 
involved in executions, the reality is that many highly competent physicians 
are willing to supervise and participate in executions. Oklahoma could look to 
Missouri, where the prison has retained a board-certified anesthesiologist who 
supervises the executions and is available to insert central venous catheters 
if needed. (Missouri also abandoned the use of paralytic drugs altogether and, 
under the watch of their board-certified anesthesiologist, their executions 
have so far all proceeded quickly and smoothly.) Board certified 
anesthesiologists have also agreed to advise and/or participate in executions 
in other states including California and Ohio, and many states have enacted 
legislation to protect the participating doctors from professional sanctions.

Still, Oklahoma and other states should not be executing prisoners with 
midazolam; they should not proceed in the absence of qualified medical 
practitioners; they should only use FDA-approved drugs, and they should abandon 
the barbaric, outmoded and unnecessary use of chemical paralysis - even if just 
to be in compliance with the laws governing veterinary euthanasia. All of these 
conditions are readily achievable and, if they were to adhere to them, it would 
be difficult to mount an effective or realistic criticism of their current 
execution practices. The public and the courts could then return their 
attention to the more important questions and debate surrounding the death 
penalty enterprise, and those who support it, those who oppose it and those who 
adjudicate it could perhaps then focus and unite to achieve their shared goal 
of ensuring that innocent and mentally incompetent victims of the complex, 
time- and resource- intensive and imperfect death penalty institution are 
reliably and meaningfully protected from unjust government-imposed deprivation 
of liberty and life.

(source: Mark Heath MD, The Guardian)