[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OKLA., WYO., NEV., ARIZ., CALIF., ORE., WASH., USA

[Rick Halperin]

Jan. 17


OKLAHOMA:

Capital punishment raises questions



Asking the wrong questions always leads to the wrong answers.

When considering the death penalty, the question may not be whether it is right 
or wrong, but is it worth the cost.

Since the companies in the European Union that produce a key ingredient of the 
chemical cocktail used to carry out the death penalty began withholding them 
from the United States as a protest against their use in executions, the method 
used to exact the state's most severe punishment has come back under fire.

More than 35 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court signed off on the chemicals used 
in lethal injections. With sodium thiopental - the 1st drug used in the process 
that renders inmates deeply unconscious - being withheld by European companies, 
states that still use the death penalty are forced to use different 
combinations of drugs.

Oklahoma and Ohio have both had difficult executions since the change in 
chemicals. Part of the problem appears to be the chemicals used and part in how 
they are administered.

Thursday night, Oklahoma ended a nine-month hiatus from capital punishment when 
Charles Warner was executed. Warner earned his trip to death row by raping and 
killing the 11-month old daughter of his roommate. Because that crime landed 
him on death row, he hasn't even been forced to stand trial for the abuse and 
rape of a 5-year-old girl.

It is going to be difficult to convince me that anything we do to bring his 
life to an end was overly cruel or unusual.

Warner did his best to convince courts and medical personnel that the process 
should be stopped. "Before I give my final statement, I'll tell you they poked 
me five times. It hurt. It feels like acid," he said as the execution process 
began. "I'm not a monster. I didn't do everything they said I did. My body is 
on fire."

The only physical signs that Warner even felt the effects of the drugs was a 
slight twitching in his neck for a few minutes. That will make it hard to make 
a case that the punishment is cruel and or unusual. When compared to the crimes 
he was convicted of and accused of that he never faced trial for, I don't 
expect an outpouring of sympathy.

As a member of the media, I witnessed executions using the former combination 
of drugs. I never walked out of that chamber with any sympathy for the felon 
whose sentence was carried out. My focus has always been on those families 
whose last hope for closure came after the person who devastated their lives 
was finally out of the picture for good.

I don't think criminals have a constitutional right to know what chemicals will 
be used to fulfill their death sentence. The information should be a public 
record, but the fact that it isn't doesn't appear to violate Eighth Amendment 
protections.

However, we don't intentionally torture these convicts to death because we are 
not knit together with the same evil thread that became knotted in the 
consciousness of those facing the state???s ultimate punishment.

I also wonder if death sentences accomplish any goal beyond vengeance. I 
understand the desire for vengeance, but is it worth the increased risk and 
costs involved?

There are 3 arguments I would consider for abolishing the death penalty in its 
entirety.

First, the death penalty is impossible to overturn if you find a mistake after 
the sentence is carried out. That's a valid argument. However, that can be 
resolved easily enough by raising the bar even higher when deciding which cases 
are eligible for the death penalty.

Second, the death penalty tends to be more attractive to juries considering the 
fate of minority defendants - especially minority defendant accused of crimes 
against white people.

The executions I witnessed were white males. But statistics show that poor 
minorities face a far greater likelihood of being executed. Being represented 
by court-appointed counsel with limited budgets compared to private practice 
defense attorneys obviously plays a role in this inequity. Once again, the 
argument is valid but could be easily - if not inexpensively - resolved.

The final argument that is exemplified in the recent Oklahoma actions will 
never be resolved. Thanks to the severity of the punishment, and the fact that 
no one wants to execute the wrong person, death row inmates have increased 
access to courts and that is very expensive. It can cost 4 times as much to try 
a suspect facing the death penalty. It usually costs far more to house them and 
hear their appeals and motions as well.

I have no problem with the death penalty, but I am willing to consider whether 
life in jail with no chance for parole wouldn't be a less risky and more 
efficient way to punish the worst among us.

(source: Guest Columist Kent Bush is publisher of Shawnee News-Star----posted 
in the Alice (Texas) Echo Journal)








WYOMING:

Legislators Pass Firing Squad Bill In the Senate



A bill passed the Senate and is moving on to the House which will put into 
state statue a secondary form of execution, the firing squad. Currently the 
state statute has the gas chamber as the 2nd option, but that poses a problem 
because Wyoming doesn't have a gas chamber.

"I don't have any great interest in if it's a firing squad or hanging or 
electrocution, the other part of the bill is more important which opens up the 
secondary form of execution," said Senator Bruce Burns.

Senator Burns says the majority of people in the state support the death 
penalty, but there is disapproval in the legislature, and House members are 
already speaking out against the bill.

"To methodically execute someone goes against our human nature," said Senator 
Floyd Esquibel.

"We have made mistakes in this nation. We have executed innocent people which 
to me is unforgivable and the state should not in any way in the business of 
executing innocent people," said Representative Cathy Connolly.

Representative Connolly is sponsoring a bill in the House which abolishes the 
death penalty and imposes a maximum of life in prison for the most heinous 
crimes, which she says would immediately end the problems the department of 
corrections is seeing with trying to get lethal injection drugs. For some who 
voted in support of firing squads they see this as an international issue.

"The European Union is holding those drugs back. In other words the European 
Union is trying to affect domestic policy in the United States," said Senator 
Burns.

There hasn't been an execution in Wyoming since 1992. This past November a 
federal judge overturned the death sentence for the state's lone death row 
inmate, so even though an execution isn't likely in the near future senator 
burns says this execution bill will make sure steps are in place for when that 
time comes.

"I tried to put myself in the position of somebody being executed and what 
method would I prefer and although none of them are particularly enjoyable the 
firing squad to me seemed the most merciful," said Senator Burns.

(source: KCWY news)








NEVADA:

Man, 25, indicted on charges that can bring death penalty in Vegas pharmacy 
robberies, slaying



A 25-year-old Las Vegas man has been indicted on charges in 2 pharmacy armed 
robberies, including 1 that could get him the death penalty if he's convicted 
of killing a clerk he used to work with.

Jin William Young Ackerman II is scheduled for arraignment next Thursday on the 
9-count indictment handed up Friday.

It charges him with murder, kidnapping, armed robbery and burglary with a 
weapon.

The indictment avoids Jan. 21 bail arguments and a Feb. 3 preliminary hearing 
in Las Vegas Justice Court.

Ackerman is accused of holding up Walgreens stores Dec. 24 and Dec. 26, and 
shooting 58-year-old Antonino Isnit dead in the 2nd robbery.

Defense attorney Tom Pitaro says Ackerman plans to plead not guilty.

District Attorney Steve Wolfson says the death penalty is being considered.

(source: Associated Press)








ARIZONA:

Jodi Arias Sentencing Retrial Ongoing; Death Penalty Still In Play



The Jodi Arias sentencing retrial continued earlier this year following a short 
winter holiday break. In 2013, Arias was found guilty of murdering ex-boyfriend 
Travis Alexander and was formally charged with 1st-degree murder. Jurors are 
currently deliberating on the penalty for her crime, be it the death sentence 
or life imprisonment.

A report provided by MailOnline indicated that Maricopa County Judge Sherry 
Stephens dismissed all motions from the defense to deny the death penalty 
sentence. Arias' defense team filed the motion to dismiss the penalty based on 
allegations of trial misconduct on the part of prosecutor Juan Martinez and 
Mesa police detective Esteban Flores.

Defense attorneys have alleged that police officers on the case provided false 
testimony and mishandled crucial evidence that deleted traces of pornographic 
websites from Alexander's laptop. They are also arguing that several mitigation 
witnesses are declining to testify because they cannot do so in secret.

Judge Stephens, in her comprehensive 16-page ruling, responded to these 
allegations stating that there was no reason to dismiss a potential death 
penalty sentence. In her ruling, Stephens noted, "The cumulative effect of 
those allegations does not require dismissal of the charges or the notice of 
intent to seek the death penalty. 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."

A mistrial was declared last 2013 during the penalty phase of the trial as the 
jurors back then were unable to meet the required voting threshold to agree on 
a verdict. A new sentencing trial was started last October 2014.

The murder and subsequent trial has undergone extensive media coverage in 
recent years. A straight-to-television adaptation titled 'Jodi Arias: Dirty 
Little Secret' was released in 2013 by the Lifetime network. The film focuses 
heavily on portraying a love affair between the characters Jodi Arias and 
Travis Alexander.

(source: ecumenicalnews.com)




CALIFORNIA:

Voters beware: November 2016 ballot could set a record for propositions



California voters in November 2016 may be forced to read a ballot pamphlet as 
long and dense as a political science textbook -- and oddly enough, they'll 
have the millions who sat out last year's sleepy elections to thank for the 
extra work.

The number of signatures required to get a measure on the ballot is reset every 
four years, based on the votes cast for governor in the previous general 
election. Since only 42 % of the state's registered voters -- a record low -- 
turned out in November, it's going to be easier than ever to put a proposed law 
before the people.

A complete list of 2016 ballot initiatives won't take shape until early next 
year, but the short list is already a mile long. It includes proposals to 
legalize marijuana for recreational use, overturn the new plastic bag ban, 
increase tobacco taxes, eliminate the death penalty, make over the landmark 
Proposition 13 and boost California's minimum wage even higher.

Another reason the fall 2016 ballot will be jampacked is because state law now 
requires that all citizen initiatives go before voters in November. As a 
result, many Capitol observers are predicting the size of next year's ballot 
will break records and that campaign consultants will be forced to rethink 
their strategies to compete in an unusually crowded field.

"There's a storm of pent-up issues that folks have waited to put on the ballot 
in a presidential election year," said Corey Cook, director of the University 
of San Francisco's Leo T. McCarthy Center. "The sense now is that the ballot 
could be huge."

Over the past four years, 504,760 signatures were required to get on the ballot 
an initiative that seeks to change state law -- and for a constitutional 
amendment it took 807,615. Now, you need only 365,880 and 585,407, 
respectively.

California's lowest signature-gathering threshold in more than 30 years has 
some advocates cheering the savings they'll reap in getting measures on the 
ballot, but others are groaning about how much tougher it will be to reach 
voters in media markets saturated with proposition ads.

"According to the chatter, this is the year people will finally get off the 
sidelines and into the game," said Kurt Oneto, a Sacramento attorney who 
specializes in initiative and referendum law. "Time will tell if that 
speculation pans out."

The Drug Policy Alliance considered putting a recreational pot measure on the 
ballot last year but decided against it to leave more time for raising the $10 
million it needs to run a successful campaign. The group was instrumental in 
legalizing marijuana in Colorado and Washington. And with large shares of young 
people expected to vote in the next presidential election, the alliance thought 
2016 sounded like the perfect year to guide the change in California, said 
Lynne Lyman, the alliance's California director.

Now, she sees the exceptionally low signature-gathering threshold as a 
"double-edged sword" that will help the group save money but may invite other 
marijuana advocates to run their own initiatives and contaminate the alliance's 
messaging.

"Most of us forgot that these levels get reset," Lyman said. "It wasn't 
something we anticipated or something I'd really even thought about."

Many ballot measure proponents plan so far in advance that discussions already 
were underway last year for 2016, so the lowered signature threshold is more of 
a bonus than a motivator, said Shaun Bowler, a UC Riverside political science 
professor and expert on the initiative process.

Signature gatherers are typically paid for each swipe of the pen they collect, 
so the lower threshold means more to measures that don't have so much money 
behind them, he said. For example, the conservative Pacific Justice Institute 
may make a 2nd attempt to block a state law that allows transgender students to 
select which bathrooms and locker rooms they use. The referendum last year 
narrowly missed getting on the ballot.

Bowler said there's "definitely" a risk of voter fatigue, in which voters beset 
by an avalanche of measures throw up their hands and just vote no. "The ones at 
the top of the ballot are likely to see higher votes," he said.

Whatever effect a slew of measures might have on one another's success, it's 
looking like fat times for California campaign consultants.

"We should start calling next year's ballot the Political Consultants Relief 
Act," said Steve Maviglio, a veteran Democratic strategist who quipped that the 
voter guide will be thick enough that someone might mistake it for "War and 
Peace," the famously long novel by Leo Tolstoy.

Maviglio has already signed on to work with Californians Against Waste, the 
proponents of last year's landmark plastic bag ban legislation, if opponents of 
the ban -- as expected -- succeed in putting the law before voters as a 
referendum.

Out-of-state plastic bag manufacturers spent more than $3 million collecting 
signatures and are girding for a costly battle to overturn a law they call a 
"job killer" and a "cash grab" for grocers, who would get to keep 
10-cent-per-bag fees.

"This ballot is going to batter every spending record we've seen," Maviglio 
said. "I wouldn't be surprised if activity starts now because no one wants to 
be last."

Activists could submit initiative petitions to the Secretary of State's Office 
as late as early 2016, but they have only until Sept. 2 of this year if they 
want the full 180-day period allowed for signature gathering.

Former San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed said he and others are working to place a 
public-pension reform measure before voters in November 2016, and a crowded 
ballot "could work to our advantage if there are lots of other measures that 
labor unions want to support or oppose."

For example, the state's largest teachers union may lead efforts to extend the 
temporary sales and income taxes voters approved in 2012 when they endorsed 
Proposition 30. That would force labor to "spend their money on other things," 
Reed said.

Reed tried to put a measure on 2014's ballot but abandoned the effort after 
meager fundraising and a defeat in his court challenge to the measure's 
official summary.

The Save Lives California coalition is pushing for an additional $2-per-pack 
tobacco tax -- either through the Legislature, where a 2/3 majority would be 
needed in each chamber, or at the ballot box. Voters last approved a tobacco 
tax hike in 1998 but rejected a $1-per-pack proposal in 2012.

Coalition spokesman Mike Roth said supporters of the tax are not afraid the 
measure would get lost amid a flood of other ballot measures.

"No matter how many measures are on the ballot, there would be only one with 
life-or-death consequences," Roth said. "We've seen historically that voters 
want the ability to cut tobacco use, to save lives and to save money."

POSSIBLE Propositions FOR 2016

The measure that will appear on the 2016 ballot won't be finalized until early 
next year, but here are just some of the high-profile issues voters may be 
asked to decide.

DEATH PENALTY: Last year, a federal judge ruled that California's death penalty 
system is so plagued with delays that it's unconstitutional. Capital punishment 
opponents may use the decision to again push a measure that would outlaw the 
practice here.

(source: Mercury News)








OREGON----female faces possible death penalty

Defense files petition to delay Jessica Smith murder trial; Smith's defense 
attorneys William Falls and Lynne Morgan filed a written response this week to 
the state's motion for a "date certain" for the trial----Request wants it no 
earlier than summer 2016



The defense attorneys for Jessica Smith, the mother accused of drugging and 
murdering her 2-year-old daughter and attempting to kill her 13-year-old 
daughter in a Cannon Beach hotel last summer, are requesting a trial no earlier 
than the summer of 2016.

A trial date has initially been set for July 7.

Smith's defense attorneys William Falls and Lynne Morgan filed a written 
response this week to the state's motion for a "date certain" for the trial.

The response claims the possibility of the death penalty requires additional 
time to prepare Smith's defense. Smith, 40, of Goldendale, Wash., pleaded not 
guilty Aug. 12 to aggravated murder and attempted aggravated murder. Smith is 
accused of drowning her 2-year-old daughter Isabella Smith and cutting the 
throat of Alana Smith in room 3302 at the Surfsand Resort.

"Defending a capital case is a time-consuming and intensive undertaking," Falls 
and Morgan wrote. "In addition to a thorough investigation of the fact issues 
presented by the charged offenses, effective capital defense counsel must 
conduct a thorough and complete investigation of a client's background, 
character, life experiences and mental health to prepare for what are, in 
essence, 2 separate trials - 1 to determine guilt, and 1 to determine the 
appropriate penalty."

Clatsop County District Attorney Josh Marquis said he plans to file a response 
to the defense's response reiterating his request for the trial date to remain 
set, especially since the case involves a surviving child, Alana Smith.

The dispute over the trial date will come up again at the next scheduled 
hearing at 2 p.m. Thursday in Clatsop County Circuit Court before Judge Cindee 
Matyas.

Attached to the defense's response was a 429-page law journal from Hofstra Law 
School that argues defense attorneys are allowed more time in cases involving 
the death penalty.

Marquis said he has not decided if he will pursue the death penalty.

In addition to needing more time for a death penalty case, Falls and Morgan 
said in their written response, that they are both already scheduled for trial 
this year in 2 aggravated murder cases.

Morgan is scheduled to begin jury selection Sept. 15 in the 4th resentencing 
trial of serial killer Dayton Leroy Rogers in Clackamas County.

Falls is scheduled to begin jury selection Oct. 26 in the trial of Hussein Ali 
Haidar in Multnomah County, a case with 5 co-defendants that is expected to 
take at least 6 weeks to try.

"We do not request a trial date in the summer of 2016 as a 'luxury' or the 
'convenience of the lawyers,' but rather for the time necessary to provide Ms. 
Smith with the effective assistance of counsel and a constitutionally adequate 
defense," Falls and Morgan wrote in their response.

Smith's defense attorneys said in the response they do not yet know who they 
intend to call as witnesses and what other evidence they intend to introduce in 
trial because they are in the very beginning of preparing this case for trial.

The discovery, or evidence, deadline is Jan. 30.

Marquis has provided almost 3,500 pages of police reports, 34 separate CDs and 
DVDs and detailed copies of the defendant's statements to investigators.

Marquis maintains that the trial needs to occur as soon as possible to best 
accommodate the defendant and the 13-year-old victim Alana Smith, who would 
prefer a trial date this summer or no later than winter.

The defense's proposed trial date of 2016 would be more than 2 years after the 
incident.

"For a 13-year-old child in which her natural mother is accused of killing her 
sister and then attempting to cut her throat, delays are nothing short of 
torture," Marquis wrote in his motion. "A year's delay for a 13-year-old child 
means much more than a similar delay to someone who is 60 years of age."

(source: Daily Astorian)

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

New trial sought in 2008 bank bombing----Supreme Court reviews death sentence 
imposed on Bruce Turnidge after killings of 2 officers.



Lawyers are asking the Oregon Supreme Court to order a new trial for Bruce 
Turnidge, who along with his son Joshua were convicted in the 2008 Woodburn 
bank bombing that killed 2 police officers and wounded a 3rd.

Bruce Turnidge's automatic appeal of his death sentence was argued Thursday 
before the Supreme Court, which has no deadline for issuing a decision.

His lawyers have raised 24 points of dispute, including Turnidge's conviction 
on 4 counts of felony murder, a lesser charge than the 6 counts of aggravated 
murder on which Turnidge also was found guilty.

W. Keith Goody, 1 of his lawyers, says Turnidge's motion for acquittal on the 4 
felony-murder counts should not have been rejected by Judge Thomas Hart in 
Marion County Circuit Court - and those convictions should be reversed.

"It would have changed the complexion of the case," says Goody, a death-penalty 
specialist from Cougar, Wash.

If the high court agrees, Goody says, Turnidge should receive new proceedings 
that would vacate the current death sentence.

But Assistant Attorney General Susan Howe says the state's position is simple: 
The justices should uphold both Turnidge's convictions on those counts and his 
death sentence.

"The defendant's argument is too speculative," she says.

Under Oregon law, a jury must be unanimous in a conviction for aggravated 
murder - the only crime for which the death penalty can be applied - but it can 
acquit someone on felony murder charges on a vote of 10 to 2.

Bruce and Joshua Turnidge, both of Jefferson, were sentenced to death 4 years 
ago for the aggravated murders of Woodburn Capt. Tom Tennant and Bill Hakim, an 
Oregon State Police senior trooper on the bomb disposal squad. Woodburn Police 
Chief Scott Russell lost his right leg in the Dec. 12, 2008, blast, but has 
returned to work.

According to the Oregon Department of Corrections, Bruce Turnidge, now 63, and 
Joshua Turnidge, now 38, are among the 36 men and 1 woman on death row. All the 
men are housed at the Oregon State Penitentiary; the lone woman is at Coffee 
Creek Correctional Facility in Wilsonville.

As is usual in appeals proceedings, Turnidge was not present for the arguments.

Much of Thursday's argument focused on the legal standards for aggravated 
murder, one of which states that "the defendant personally and intentionally 
committed the homicide."

While Goody did not argue their intention, "they didn't do anything to set the 
bomb off," because Bruce Turnidge was in Jefferson when it exploded.

"It requires a physical act on the part of the defendant that causes death," 
Goody says. "He did absolutely nothing to set off the bomb."

Police officers were trying to dismantle the bomb, which had been placed in 
West Coast Bank as part of a robbery attempt, when it went off from a radio 
signal or jostling by one of the officers.

"You reasonably can expect police officers to come by and try to dismantle the 
bomb," says Chief Justice Thomas Balmer, one of several justices who raised 
questions.

Howe, representing the state, says it really makes no difference because there 
was sufficient evidence that making the bomb itself was a physical act that led 
to the officers' deaths.

"In this case, we have a defendant who created the murder weapon and armed the 
murder weapon," she says. "Nothing else had to happen ... It was not necessary 
to prove how the bomb detonated."

(source: pamplinmedia.com)








WASHINGTON:

Death-penalty trials against Monfort, McEnroe to begin Tuesday----1 of 2 
defendants charged with killing 6 family members in Carnation on Christmas Eve 
2007 will stand trial starting Tuesday, the same day the trial of an accused 
cop killer is to open. The state seeks the death penalty against both men, and 
their trials will take months.



Opening statements in the death-penalty trial of Joseph McEnroe will be Tuesday 
after the state Supreme Court on Friday denied a defense request to postpone 
the trial until at least early February.

McEnroe's defense team had sought to delay the trial until the high court 
decides Feb. 3 whether to grant discretionary review of the trial judge's 
decision not to allow McEnroe to change his not-guilty plea to not guilty by 
reason of insanity.

Last week, the Supreme Court commissioner granted a 1-week stay of the 
proceedings, delaying opening statements. McEnroe's trial, which was supposed 
to start Jan. 12, is expected to stretch into May.

It's been more than 7 years since McEnroe and his former girlfriend, Michele 
Anderson, were each charged with 6 counts of aggravated 1st-degree murder in 
the Christmas Eve 2007 shooting deaths of Anderson's parents, brother, 
sister-in-law, 5-year-old niece and 3-year-old nephew at the parents' home near 
Carnation.

Now, McEnroe's trial is to begin on the same day opening statements will be 
presented to a 16-member jury in the death-penalty case against Christopher 
Monfort, who is accused of fatally shooting Seattle police Officer Tim Brenton 
on Halloween 2009.

Monfort, who has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, is also charged with 
1st-degree arson and 3 counts of 1st-degree attempted murder, with the latter 
charges all accusing him of trying to kill other Seattle police officers.

Monfort, who was shot by detectives and paralyzed below the waist, can't sit in 
his wheelchair for more than two hours at a time. As a result, Monfort???s 
trial will be in session for 2 hours in the morning and 2 hours in the 
afternoon, an unusual schedule that means his trial could go on for 6 to 8 
months.

In McEnroe's case, a 16-member King County jury was selected on Dec. 19 and the 
same day, McEnroe's defense team filed a notice of discretionary review, 
seeking the Supreme Court's review of an Oct. 31 ruling by Superior Court Judge 
Jeffrey Ramsdell that denied a defense motion to allow McEnroe to change his 
not-guilty plea to not guilty by reason of insanity. Ramsdell had previously 
denied similar motions to allow McEnroe to change his plea, ruling that there 
wasn't a sufficient basis to allow it and that the defense had waited too long 
to do so.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court commissioner heard oral arguments on whether to 
postpone the trial until at least Feb. 3, when the court is expected to decide 
whether to grant or deny discretionary review on the plea issue. But the 
defense team - comprised of attorneys Katie Ross, Leo Hamaji and Bill Prestia - 
will have 30 days to file a motion seeking to modify the high court's ruling.

The ruling notes that under state law, the defense must provide written notice 
to the state that it intends to pursue an insanity defense at arraignment or 
within 10 days after arraignment - or at a later time if the trial court 
determines there is good cause to permit it.

McEnroe was arraigned on Jan. 10, 2008, but the defense didn't seek to change 
his plea until Oct. 14, 2014 - more than 6 years after his arraignment.

"No explanation has been provided by Mr. McEnroe as to why a stay pending this 
court's decision on whether to grant review is needed to insure effective and 
equitable review or to preserve the fruits of a successful appeal," reads a 
letter sent to the parties outlining the commissioner's ruling. "And there are 
arguments on both sides which course of action will best conserve judicial 
resources, with no reason given as to why this court is in a better position 
than the trial court to weigh this factor."

(source: Seattle Times)








USA:

Potential juror chokes up describing young marathon bombing victim in court



The defense said it would be difficult to find a jury because this crime has 
affected so many Bostonians, and that was evident during jury selection for the 
Marathon bombing suspect's trial Thursday.

Potential jurors told the court that if Dhzokhar Tsarnaev is convicted, they 
cannot, under any circumstance, condemn him to death, some saying that only 
"God can end a life."

The disturbing facts of the Boston Marathon attacks have not yet been revealed 
in open court. But already, jury section was too much for one woman in the 
courtroom. Juror number 40, a woman who owns a Boston education non profit, 
broke down as she told the judge that she didn't know the family of 8-year-old 
victim Martin Richard, but that she had met him at a park clean up in 
Dorchester.

The memory so clear, she had trouble speaking through her emotions, and she was 
sent home.

Another potential juror, number 38, told the judge that he is friends with one 
of the Boston police officers who first responded to the Marathon bombings and 
a photo of that friend, the juror said was on the cover of Time Magazine. He 
also told the judge that he is in favor of the death penalty if Tsarnaev is 
convicted, but could consider life without parole.

Tsarnaev mostly avoided eye contact and fidgeted in his seat as he listened to 
potential jurors. And most of them spoke in strong opposition to the death 
penalty Thursday.

Juror 54, a data management consultant, called the death penalty state 
sponsored vengeance. He said it is not a logical punishment for any crime.

Another juror, number, 57, a local bank employee, identified herself as a 
Christian woman. And said only "God can end a life."

The court is looking for a qualified jury that can impose a death sentence if 
Tsarnaev is convicted, and if federal prosecutors prove death is appropriate. 
This could take a while for the Tsarnaev case.

He is charged in the deadly 2013 attack that killed 3 people and injured more 
than 260.

(source: myfoxboston.com)