[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----COLO., UTAH, CALIF., WASH., USA

[Rick Halperin]

July 31



COLORADO:

Aurora theater shooting trial: Defense pleads for mercy, outburst disrupts 
D.A.----Holmes' public defender said he was a normal child and young man until 
his mental illness - each doctor has said it he has a serious illness on the 
schizophrenia spectrum, but they disagree on what exactly it is - took control 
when he was a graduate student in 2012.


James Holmes' lawyer pleaded with jurors Thursday to sentence him to life in 
prison instead of death, arguing that his mental illness caused the July 2012 
Aurora theater shooting.

"But for this mental illness, that shooting would not have occurred," public 
defender Tamara Brady told the jury, noting that every doctor who examined 
Holmes said he was seriously mentally ill.

In this image made from Colorado Judicial Department video, defense attorney 
Tamara Brady, right, gestures while making her closing argument to the jury in 
the sentencing phase of the trial of James Holmes, top left in white shirt, in 
Centennial, Colo., on Thursday, July 30, 2015. Following closing arguments, 
jurors in the Colorado movie theater trial will deliberate to decide if there 
are any reasons to override a potential death penalty and sentence James Holmes 
to life without parole for 12 murders and 70 attempted murders. (Colorado 
Judicial Department via AP, Pool)Brady said Holmes was a normal child and young 
man until his mental illness - each doctor has said it he has a serious illness 
on the schizophrenia spectrum, but they disagree on what exactly it is - took 
control when he was a graduate student in 2012.

While Holmes plotted the shooting, his thoughts were all tainted by his 
psychosis, she said, and his shopping spree for weapons and armor were so out 
of the norm for him, they were the obvious product of his mental illness.

No matter what the jury decides, Brady said Holmes will be punished. She asked 
the jury to find that the mitigating factors, especially his mental illness, 
outweigh the aggravating factors.

"And then James Eagan Holmes will live the rest of his life in a prison cell," 
she said.

But District Attorney George Brauchler said Holmes' mental illness isn't enough 
to outweigh the horror of the crime, which left 12 dead and 70 others wounded.

"Is this mental illness a shield to treat him differently?" he asked the jury.

Brauchler told the jury that even if Holmes stopped after killing 3 people, or 
6 or 10, his crime would still be so heinous that the death penalty would be 
appropriate.

Holmes launched the attack not because he was mentally ill, but because he 
wanted to be famous, Brauchler said. In his jail cell, Holmes didn't post the 
family pictures his parents gave him, but instead the pictures of scantily clad 
women who wrote to him.

And, Brauchler said, Holmes acted rationally in the days and weeks leading to 
the shooting.

"Every decision he makes is purposeful and rational towards an outrageously 
evil goal," he said.

During Brauchler's closing argument, a woman in the gallery started screaming 
about mental illness and was lead from the courtroom by deputies. The woman 
yelled that she was bipolar and about mental illness.

"It's not his fault," she yelled before shouting profanities and being escorted 
out of the courtroom.

Once the woman was removed from the courtroom Brauchler immediately resumed his 
closing argument.

The woman's outburst marked the 1st of the trial. During a hearing in 2012, a 
woman stood up and addressed the court. At another hearing, 1 of the victim's 
fathers later yelled "rot in hell Holmes."

The woman had been in court for 5 days and while deputies were worried she 
might act out, Samour said she didn't cause any problems until Thursday.

Prosecutors asked Judge Carlos Samour Jr. to hold the woman in contempt. The 
defense said she was clearly mentally ill and asked Samour to have her checked 
into a mental health facility instead of jail.

After the jury went home for the day, Samour called the woman, Deborah Cave, 
back into the court room and found her in contempt. The judge, who had already 
ruled the woman would not be allowed to attend the trial any more, sentenced 
her to 3 weeks in jail.

Samour said the woman waited until Thursday, when the courtroom was full, to 
make a scene. The judge said the woman stepped over a few rows in the gallery 
and tried to elude the deputies when they tried to catch her.

"More disruptive behavior, I cannot possibly fathom," he said.

When given a chance to make a statement before the judge handed down a 
sanction, Cave said she tried to make a statement in May 2013 when she filed a 
motion with the court. She said she wrote several letter to Holmes early on and 
they were delivered with no problems, but then the jail stopped delivering her 
letters and a picture of herself she sent.

"I tried to do this properly, and you all denied my motion," she said.

The woman again yelled about the death penalty and said executing Holmes 
"offends" her. She shouted about the death penalty as jailers led her out to 
start serving her sentence.

The jury deliberated for about an hour before leaving for the day. They are 
scheduled to resume deliberations Monday.

The trial started in late April and is expected to wrap in August. If the jury 
finds there wasn't enough mitigation evidence to sentence Holmes to life, the 
sentencing phase will move onto a 3rd segment, during which prosecutors will 
call on the family of the victims to testify.

(source: Aurora Sentinel)



UTAH:

Poll: Utahns Favor Lethal Injection over Firing Squad in Death Penalty Cases


A majority of Utahns support the death penalty, but they are split on which 
method of execution the state should use.

Last month the Supreme Court ruled states could continue to use lethal 
injection drugs in executions. However, the chemicals used in that method of 
execution have become scarce due to manufacturers refusing to sell them for 
executions.

In response, Utah lawmakers brought back the firing squad as an alternative 
means of implementing the death penalty in case the ingredients for lethal 
injection were not available. Lawmakers passed a bill reinstating the firing 
squad during the 2015 session.

We asked Utah residents which method of execution they preferred the state use 
in capital punishment cases, lethal injection or firing squad, or whether the 
death penalty should be abolished completely.

68% of Utahns expressed support for either the firing squad or death penalty 
while just 17% said the death penalty should be abolished completely.

Specifically, nearly 40% told us they felt lethal injection was the proper 
method of execution while another 29% responded they favored the firing squad.

-- Republicans favor lethal injection over firing squad by a 46-34% margin.

-- 46% of Democrats prefer abolishing the death penalty. 27% like lethal 
injection and 20% say they want the state to use firing squads in executions.

-- 42% of independent voters say the state should use lethal injection while 
25% say firing squad.

Since the death penalty was reinstated by the Supreme Court in 1976, 31 states 
have capital punishment laws on the books. 19 states have either abolished the 
practice or had their statutes struck down by the courts. Only one state, 
Michigan, has never had a death penalty law on the books.

In 2015, the Nebraska legislature repealed that state's death penalty law over 
Gov. Pete Ricketts' veto.

The survey was conducted by Dan Jones & Associates from July 14-21, 2015 among 
610 Utah residents. It has a margin of error of +/- 3.97%.

(source: policy.com)






CALIFORNIA:

Mental exam sought for suspect in deputies' slayings in Sacramento, Placer ---- 
Luis Bracamontes faces the death penalty in the killings of 2 officers last 
October


Lawyers for the man accused of gunning down 2 deputies last October have asked 
a judge to suspend court proceedings in the case and begin an evaluation of 
whether their client is mentally competent to stand trial.

Luis Monroy Bracamontes faces the death penalty in the slayings of Sacramento 
County sheriff's Deputy Danny Oliver and Placer County sheriff's Deputy Michael 
Davis Jr. The lawmen were shot during a daylong crime spree that authorities 
say was conducted by Bracamontes and his wife that stretched from Sacramento to 
Auburn.

Since his arrest, Bracamontes, 35, has made a series of bizarre court 
appearances during which he loudly pronounced his guilt and asked to be 
executed, and also mocked court proceedings.

His public defenders, Jeffrey Barbour and Norman Dawson, filed a motion June 30 
that is scheduled to be heard in Sacramento Superior Court on Friday morning 
over whether Bracamontes is competent to face trial.

Barbour declined comment Thursday. But he and Dawson note in their motion that 
they have met with Bracamontes regularly for 8 months and that, "based upon 
those meetings and other information known to counsel, we request the court 
suspend criminal proceedings and commence competency proceedings."

State law does not allow a person to face trial if the defendant is mentally 
incompetent and cannot understand the proceedings or assist in his defense, 
Bracamontes' lawyers argued.

Judge Steve White must decide whether there is "reasonable doubt" about 
Bracamontes' ability to face trial and could order a mental evaluation to 
determine the defendant's mental state.

The judge also may hear from the defense in a closed session "if the court 
finds there is reason to believe that attorney-client privileged information 
will be inappropriately revealed if the hearing is conducted in open court," 
Bracamontes' lawyers argued. His lawyers previously have sought to exclude 
media from the courtroom in the case. White rejected that request but has 
barred cameras.

If the judge orders a competency hearing and mental experts declare Bracamontes 
incompetent, he would be held in a state hospital until a doctor determines he 
is able to face trial.

White, a former Sacramento County district attorney, already has indicated that 
he is growing impatient with delays in the case. At the last hearing on May 29, 
White scheduled a Sept. 4 status conference and said he wanted to be able to 
set a date then for a preliminary hearing unless valid reasons for further 
delay were presented.

Bracamontes faces murder and other charges along with his wife, Janelle Monroy, 
38, who faces life in prison.

The motion filed by Bracamontes' legal team may postpone trial in the case for 
months, with one veteran Sacramento lawyer saying Thursday that White almost 
certainly will order a mental evaluation.

"If a defense lawyer says he expresses a doubt about a client???s competence, 
then there???s one choice: the judge is required to stop everything and 
schedule a hearing on his competency," said William Portanova, a former state 
and federal prosecutor and current defense attorney. "That means he has to be 
evaluated by a psychiatrist or psychologist, and that usually takes weeks."

Rod Norgaard, Sacramento County chief assistant deputy district attorney, who 
is prosecuting the case along with Placer County Deputy District Attorney David 
Tellman, said Friday???s hearing is being held at the defense's request.

"It's the defendant's motion," Norgaard said. "The people will be there and the 
court will rule on it."

Legal observers have said since Bracamontes' 1st court appearances that they 
expected the defendant's mental state to play a role in the case, especially 
since the February hearing during which he blurted out, "I killed them cops. I 
did it ... I'm guilty ... I want a date of execution."

Delays in court proceedings over questions about a defendant's mental state are 
common and do not mean that a suspect will escape punishment.

In 2010, Phillip Garrido's mental competence was questioned as he faced charges 
of kidnapping Jaycee Lee Dugard in 1991 when she was 11. His case was postponed 
for 6 months while he was evaluated, but Garrido eventually was sentenced to 
431 years to life.

Similarly, Nicholas Teausant, a Lodi-area man accused of trying to join the 
Islamic State, has seen his case delayed in federal court in Sacramento for 
months because of questions over his mental state.

Portanova said he believes Bracamontes has been setting up a mental defense of 
some sort since his arrest.

"When I see a murder defendant putting on a clown show and laughing during 
court proceedings, my 1st instinct is to recoil in horror," he said. "But I 
also suspect someone is setting up a competency issue.

"It's pretty self-serving to act crazy when you're looking at the death 
penalty."

Portanova added that Bracamontes, a native of Mexico who was in this country 
illegally, showed no mental impairment as he "outmaneuvered the police and knew 
where to hide and how to hunker down."

"These are not the actions of an insane man," Portanova said.

If the effort to find Bracamontes incompetent fails and he heads to trial, the 
defendant still could plead not guilty by reason of insanity, in essence 
arguing that at the time of the killings he did not know what he was doing was 
wrong.

(source: Sacramento Bee)

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

California Needs an Execution Procedure to Carry Out the Death Penalty


If the punishment for one murder is life in prison, how do you punish someone 
for 3 murders or 5 murders? How do you deter a prisoner serving a life sentence 
from killing a fellow inmate or guard if there is no additional penalty? How 
can no-additional-punishment for additional murders be justice for victims?

You may be wondering what happened to California's death penalty. 17 of the 750 
inmates on death row have completed all their appeals and are eligible to be 
executed. So what's the problem? The problem is that the state does not have an 
execution protocol. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation 
(CDCR) has not bothered to enact a new regulation so that they can resume 
executions after the last protocol was invalidated by a state court judge.

Despite the 2014 vote by a majority of Californians to keep the death penalty, 
the CDCR and the Governor's office have effectively been nullifying the law by 
failing to enact a regulation by which to enforce that law. While the CDCR 
details the history of the death penalty on their website, they fail to 
acknowledge that a draft of a protocol for the single-drug method of execution 
that the state was requested to switch to by a Federal Court Judge has been 
sitting on the desk of the CDCR for over a year now, gathering dust.

It is easy to see why Governor Brown would be reluctant to put the state in a 
position to resume executions. With 17 inmates having exhausted all appeals, it 
would put Governor Brown in the awkward position of being an anti-death penalty 
governor who executed the most condemned inmates of any governor in state 
history. The Governor can't even grant most of them clemency since the State 
Constitution prohibits the Governor from granting clemency to a person "twice 
convicted of a felony." So, instead of carrying out the law, the Governor is 
asking the Legislature for $3.2 million to open nearly 100 more cells on death 
row.

A lawsuit filed by the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation on behalf of crime 
victims, Bradley Winchell and Kermit Alexander pressed the issue and led to a 
settlement that will hopefully put the state in a position to resume executions 
in a year or 2. The last execution in California occurred in 2006. The 
settlement requires CDCR to begin promulgating an execution protocol within 120 
days of the U.S. Supreme Court's opinion in Glossip v. Gross.

The Supreme Court ruled that the sedative midazolam can be used without 
violating the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment. It should be 
noted that some people opposed to the death penalty support physician for 
assisted suicide which then begs the question; how can an execution drug be 
considered cruel when it's the same drug sometimes used by doctors for assisted 
suicide and regularly used in surgical procedures?

There are still hurdles to clear before the state stops dragging its feet and 
implements the voter approved death penalty. All state regulations are subject 
to the Administrative Procedures Act(APA) which requires that the proposed 
regulation undergo a public vetting process that permits the public to comment 
on the proposed regulation.

This concept makes sense when you are talking about a regulation covering 
business or industry. It allows the affected business to provide input about 
how the new rules would affect them and lobby for changes. But in the context 
of an execution protocol, allowing public commentary and requiring the 
department to provide a "meaningful response" to every single comment, creates 
a logjam. The last time CDCR put an execution protocol though the APA process 
they were flooded with over 30,000 comments from death penalty opponents from 
all over the country.

Marin County Superior Court Judge Fay D'Opal is the one who ruled the last 
protocol invalid. She said that CDCR did not "meaningfully" respond to every 
single one of the 30,000 comments and that CDCR failed to explain why it did 
not adopt the single-drug execution method recommended by its own expert.

If California does manage to get past the APA and get a regulation enacted, 
there will be few remaining barriers. The United States Supreme Court decisions 
in Baze v. Rees and in Glossip v. Gross have rejected challenges to the 
three-drug protocol formerly used by most states including California and the 
new 2-drug protocol being used in Oklahoma. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals 
has already denied stays to single drug executions in other states within its 
jurisdiction.

Once California has an execution protocol in place, there is little the 
Governor or the Attorney General can do to thwart the implementation of the 
law. After all appeals are final, jurisdiction over these cases returns to the 
local District Attorney and the local courts. It is the local District Attorney 
and court who then schedule an execution date. CDCR has no more power to refuse 
compliance than they have to refuse to accept a sentenced prisoner for housing.

It is important to remember that only a jury of one's peers can impose death - 
not the police, not the District Attorney, not the judge. Jury verdicts are 
rendered by the citizens of the community because they have the strongest 
interest in keeping their communities safe and protecting residents from the 
criminals who would prey on them. The people of this state voted to keep the 
death penalty and the Governor and Department of Corrections have an obligation 
to honor the will of the voters and impose the law of this state.

(source: Michele Hanisee is Vice President of the Association of Los Angeles 
Deputy District Attorneys----citywatchla.com)






WASHINGTON:

County should not seek the death penalty again


In theory, the death penalty is the ultimate punishment for the most serious 
murders in Washington. But in practice, it is pursued too randomly and with 
little success to justify its exorbitant costs and moral quandary.

This week, King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg wisely took the death penalty 
off the table in the last of 3 recent capital murder cases. No more 
death-penalty cases are pending in the state's largest county. There should not 
be any more in the future.

2 recent juries delivered life sentences in worst-of-the-worst capital murder 
cases. A jury took just 1 hour to unanimously decide Christopher Monfort - 
convicted of assassinating Seattle police officer Timothy Brenton and 
attempting to kill more - deserved a life-without-parole sentence.

Satterberg this week halted pursuit of the death penalty against Michele 
Anderson, accused of orchestrating the murder of 6 members of her family. Her 
co-defendant, Joseph McEnroe, received a life, not death, sentence. Satterberg 
explained it would be inequitable for him to continue to pursue the death 
penalty.

Inequity has been a hallmark of the death penalty. Pierce and Kitsap counties 
have been much more likely to pursue the death penalty than King or Snohomish 
counties, which are more able to absorb an estimated $1 million in legal and 
investigative costs associated with capital cases. Costs for the 3 recent King 
County death-penalty cases are an astonishing $15 million.

A capital-murder case can push poorer counties to the brink of bankruptcy, as 
Clallam County found in recent years. A state fund to ease the burden of 
aggravated murder cases paid just $3.4 million of the more than $23 million 
requested statewide, according to The Associated Press. Such stark fiscal 
reality inevitably influences prosecutors.

A death penalty delivered based on ZIP code - not justice - is not justice at 
all.

Satterberg knows that pursuing a death sentence rarely results in death. Since 
the death penalty was reinstated in Washington in 1981, prosecutors have sought 
a death sentence in 90 of 268 eligible cases. Juries delivered a death sentence 
in 32.

Of those, only 5 were executed, and 3 were effectively volunteers who waived 
appeals. Just twice in 34 years has the state executed defendants who exhausted 
appeals. The 9 men currently on death row will remain there at least until 2016 
because Gov. Jay Inslee has imposed a moratorium.

The muddled history of the death penalty demands a change in course. The 
Legislature briefly debated repeal this year. Lawmakers next year should rise 
to the task, air arguments and vote.

Until then, Satterberg should read the winds of social change and not seek the 
death penalty again.

(source: Seattle Times Editorial Board; Editorial board members are editorial 
page editor Kate Riley, Frank A. Blethen, Ryan Blethen, Brier Dudley, Mark 
Higgins, Jonathan Martin, Thanh Tan, Blanca Torres, William K. Blethen 
(emeritus) and Robert C. Blethen (emeritus).






USA:

The Death Penalty For Black & White Murderers Reveals How Capital Punishment Is 
Part Of The Racial Problem


Since capital punishment was reinstated in the United States in 1976, the death 
penalty has treated black and white murderers differently, and the racial 
discrepancies regarding the death penalty are astronomic, both in number and in 
public opinion. Dylann Roof, the white supremacist who allegedly murdered 9 
African Americans in June inside a Charleston, South Carolina, church, is 
likely on his way to a death penalty conviction. But he???ll be joining a small 
club since white-on-black killers are, in fact, rarely put on death row.

At first glance, there doesn't appear to be much racial disparity among death 
penalty recipients. The Death Penalty Information Center states 784 white 
individuals have been executed since 1976 compared to 490 African Americans. 
Black inmates and white inmates are more or less equally represented on death 
row as well (41 % and 42 %, respectively). But the numbers get concerning when 
you take into account that, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, African 
Americans make up 13 % of the population. And even more concerning are the 
differences in the race of the victims.

In all cases resulting in execution in the last 40 years, 75 % of the victims 
were white, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. Black people 
represent 15 % of victims in death penalty cases, even though they are 8 times 
more likely to be a homicide victim than white individuals, according to 
FiveThirtyEight???s estimates.

If Roof is sentenced to death, he would become the 32nd Caucasian to be 
executed for killing a black victim since 1976. Compare that to 294 black 
individuals who have been executed for killing a white victim, according Death 
Penalty Information Center's numbers. This means that blacks are executed nine 
times more for interracial murders than white people. But the corresponding 
amount of black-on-white crime doesn't remotely match this number. A 2013 FBI 
report states that 7 % of black homicide victims are killed by Caucasians, 
while 14 % of white victims are killed by African Americans. That means 
black-on-white murders are twice as likely as white-on-black ones. So how come 
African Americans are executed so much more frequently?

Part of the discrepancies in interracial murder death sentences could have 
something to do with public opinion. When pushing for the death penalty, 
prosecutors do consider the wishes of the victim's family, and only 36 % of 
black Americans support the death penalty. But it's unlikely that this alone 
explains the lack of white executions. In cases where there is a black victim, 
such as with the Roof case, the black community is far more likely to speak out 
against the death penalty, and offer forgiveness to the killer. But this is a 
cultural difference, likely tied to the black community's long and unjust 
relationship with the death penalty.

Although the earliest American settlers brought over English laws and 
penalties, Slate cites author Stuart Banner in pointing out that the first 
American-made capital punishment was put into effect directly after a slave 
revolt in 1712. In early America, slaves could be sentenced to death for the 
most minutia of crimes, in addition to murder or rape. By the mid-1800s, though 
most states had reserved the death penalty only for murder, Slate claims 
Louisiana and a handful of other states still enforced it for any action that 
could cause riots among slaves or free blacks.

Fear of legal execution was a psychological weapon wielded over slaves and the 
black community for decades and decades so it should come as no surprise that 
African Americans dislike the death penalty so strongly, even to the point of 
trying to spare white murderers from it. But when a race that makes up 13 % of 
the population accounts for 1/2 of the country's executions, it's difficult to 
imagine that the decades of fear and racial inequality are actually behind us.

(source: bustle.com)