[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., DEL., LA., OKLA.

[Rick Halperin]

March 25



PENNSYLVANIA:

Death-penalty defendant now gets life



Derrick White, the only defendant sentenced to death by a Philadelphia jury in 
2012, was sentenced to life in prison on Monday.

White, 24, was expected to face a new penalty-phase hearing this week, but a 
judge ruled that because of a "technical defect in a legal filing," prosecutors 
could not seek the death penalty against White, White's new defense attorney, 
Gary Server, said yesterday.

White was 20 years old on May 6, 2010, when he fatally shot Abdul Taylor, 33, 
because White allegedly wanted to prevent him from testifying as a prosecution 
witness in another murder case.

In 2012, a jury sentenced White to death after convicting him of 1st-degree 
murder following a trial before Common Pleas Judge Carolyn Engel Temin.

A prior defense attorney appealed to the state Supreme Court. It sent the case 
back to the lower court to decide whether White should get a new penalty 
hearing because his age was not brought up as a mitigating factor during his 
penalty hearing. Common Pleas Judge Barbara McDermott, assigned the case after 
Temin retired, determined White should get a new hearing.

Server was to argue this week before McDermott and a jury that White should be 
sentenced to life in prison without parole.

But on Friday, Server said yesterday, the judge noticed a "technical defect" in 
the commonwealth's notice of aggravating circumstance, when it originally 
sought the death penalty. The notice said White killed a witness in White's own 
murder case.

So, on Monday, before jury selection was to start in the new penalty-phase 
hearing, McDermott sentenced White to life in prison without parole.

(source: philly.com)

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

Defects identified in Fayette County man fighting death penalty in slayings



A Fayette County man on death row for a 2002 triple homicide has facial, 
physical and mental defects that are associated with fetal alcohol syndrome, a 
Seattle doctor testified Tuesday during an appeal hearing.

The mother of Mark Duane Edwards Jr., 32, told the doctor that she drank 
alcohol for 2 months before realizing she was pregnant, Dr. Julian Davies 
testified.

"This is a period of time before most women know that they're pregnant," said 
Davies, a pediatrician and fetal alcohol syndrome diagnostician. "The 1st 
trimester is the most vulnerable period in pregnancy for alcohol damage."

Edwards was sentenced to death in 2004 for shooting and stabbing Larry A. 
Bobish, 50; his wife, Joanna, 42; and their pregnant daughter, Krystal, 17, 
during a burglary and arson in the family's North Union home on April 14, 2002. 
The Bobishes' 12-year-old son, Larry Jr., was shot but managed to escape the 
fire. A bullet remains lodged in his head.

A death warrant was signed in November by then-Gov. Tom Corbett, but a motion 
seeking to stay the sentence was filed in Fayette County the next month.

Prosecutors said Edwards stole bottles of drugs from the elder Bobish days 
earlier. When Bobish demanded payment, Edwards decided to kill him, according 
to court records.

Edwards' trial defense attorneys and a neuropsychiatrist who evaluated him 
before the trial testified Monday, the 1st day of the appeal hearing. His 
defense attorneys, James Moreno and Peter Williams, are seeking a new trial 
and/or a sentence of life imprisonment without parole.

Davies testified Tuesday that Edwards' small stature, a cluster of facial 
anomalies, and brain damage and impairment led him to diagnose him with fetal 
alcohol syndrome.

Colorado psychologist Stephen Greenspan determined that Edwards is 
intellectually disabled and has an IQ score as low as 72.

The top preventable cause of intellectual disability is prenatal alcohol use, 
Greenspan testified.

IQ, or intelligence quotient, is a measurement of mental ability.

Almost 70 % of the population falls between scores of 85 and 115. A defendant 
whose IQ falls below 70 is considered mentally challenged under a 2002 U.S. 
Supreme Court ruling and cannot be put to death because it would constitute 
cruel and unusual punishment.

Edwards repeated 2 grades, was bullied and teased by classmates, and dropped 
out of high school as a freshman, Greenspan testified.

He characterized Edwards' academic record as "one of the worst I've seen."

"He couldn't read. He couldn't master school work," Greenspan testified. "He 
just couldn't keep up."

After Greenspan's testimony, President Judge John F. Wagner Jr. conferred with 
the attorneys, who outlined their claims.

"If you were to make the finding that he suffers from intellectual disability 
and he did at the time ... then he would be ineligible for execution?" Moreno 
argued.

"Clearly, that's what the doctor said," Wagner answered.

Wagner asked if a sentence of life imprisonment without parole would satisfy 
the defense.

"It would get him off death row and put him in general population," Moreno 
said.

Assistant District Attorney Anthony Iannamorelli told Wagner that he doesn't 
plan to call any witnesses.

"There are still issues that can be decided by the court," Iannamorelli said.

Testimony is scheduled to resume Wednesday morning.

(source: triblive.com)








DELAWARE:

Senate Panel Eyes Bill to Abolish Delaware Death Penalty



A bill reviving attempts to abolish capital punishment in Delaware after an 
earlier failed effort is teed up for its legislative hearing.

The Senate Judiciary Committee was scheduled to meet Wednesday to consider the 
legislation, which mirrors a bill that passed the Senate in 2013 by only 1 vote 
before dying in a House committee.

The legislation would remove execution as a possible punishment for 1st-degree 
murder, leaving life in prison without the possibility of parole as the only 
sentence.

The 15 inmates currently on Delaware's death row would still be subject to 
execution.

Attorney General Matt Denn says he is not opposed to capital punishment in 
appropriate cases, but that state law should be changed to require a unanimous 
jury recommendation before a judge can impose a death sentence.

(source: Associated Press)








LOUISIANA:

Give Ford real justice: Ban death penalty



The tragic case of Glenn Ford is the perfect illustration of why the death 
penalty should be banned, not only in Louisiana, but nationwide.

Ford is the former Angola inmate who was convicted in the 1983 murder of local 
jeweler Isadore Rozeman. He spent 30 years on death row before new information 
in an unrelated case proved his innocence in 2013. He was released in March 
2014, and now is fighting to get financial compensation for those lost decades. 
A Louisiana law says Ford is entitled to that compensation, but predictably, 
the state is dragging its feet, claiming that since Ford cannot prove that he 
is "factually innocent" of the crime, he isn't entitled to compensation.

Clearly, the state is wrong in denying Ford the compensation he is entitled to. 
Instead of admitting its mistake and doing what is right, the state appears to 
be more interested in saving face. That's outrageous. The truth is, the 
$330,000 Ford is seeking is a small price for the state to pay in exchange for 
stealing 30 years of a man's life. And if the state were really interested in 
giving Ford justice it would be just the beginning.

To truly do right by Ford, Louisiana should join with the 18 states that have 
already done so and ban the death penalty. Ideally, the death penalty should be 
banned nationwide.

Capital punishment has no place in a civilized society. To put it bluntly, it 
is state-sanctioned murder.

The death penalty has little or no deterrent value. If it did, we should have 
seen a sharp decline in the murder rate since it was reinstated by the U.S. 
Supreme Court in 1977. That hasn't happened.

Death penalty cases cost states significantly more to prosecute. According to 
Amnesty International, this is due to the increased investigation costs, the 
costs for expert witnesses and the fact that capital cases have two phases: the 
actual trial and the punishment phase. Many proponents of the death penalty 
advocate eliminating the numerous appeals that inevitably follow a capital 
conviction. But even if this were done, capital cases would still cost 
significantly more to prosecute. In fact, some prosecutors in states with the 
death penalty have admitted that a single capital murder case could bankrupt a 
county as opposed to seeking life imprisonment.

Then, there's the issue of the death penalty's unfair application. According to 
Amnesty International, since 1977, 77 % of death row inmates were sentenced to 
death for killing a white person, even though African-Americans and minorities 
make up around 50 % of homicide victims. Most defendants facing death can't 
afford their own representation and are saddled with overworked, underpaid 
public defenders, many of whom have no experience with capital trials. Add to 
that the dozens of inmates who have been executed despite having a provable 
mental illness, and I have to ask: Is this truly justice? Or is it simply 
vengeance?

I believe the death penalty is more about vengeance than actual justice, and 
that's wrong. What right do we have to decide who lives or dies? And what 
happens if the state gets it wrong, as Louisiana did in Ford's case? Once an 
inmate has been executed, there's no going back. What happens if that person is 
later found to be innocent? That's inexcusable. Since 1973, there have been 140 
people sitting on death rows across the nation who have been found to be 
innocent. And who knows how many more haven't been found yet, or have been 
executed by mistake?

I am pro-life. I am against abortion in all cases except in cases of rape, 
incest or harm to the mother. But to me, pro-life also means being against the 
death penalty. The right to give or take life belongs to God, not the state. 
And as long as there's even the smallest chance that a person sitting on death 
row might be innocent, the state has no business playing God and executing 
anyone.

(source: Commentary; Peter Watson lives in Shreveport----Shreveport Times)

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

Prosecutor's regret for bad conviction includes revulsion for death penalty



A.M. Stroud sent the wrong man to prison for 30 years. The man is free now, but 
what if he had been executed?

A few words about the high-priced education of Marty Stroud.

31 years ago, A.M. "Marty" Stroud III was a prosecutor in Louisiana's Caddo 
Parish. He was arrogant, narcissistic, judgmental and full of himself. This 
assessment of Stroud's character, you should know, comes from Stroud himself.

It is contained in a remarkable letter to the editor of The Shreveport Times 
regarding a 65-year-old black man named Glenn Ford whom Stroud tried for murder 
in 1984.

When the all-white jury sentenced Ford to death, Stroud and his team went out 
drinking to celebrate. Meantime, Ford went to Louisiana's notorious Angola 
prison.

Last year, he was set free. The current district attorney asked a judge to 
vacate Ford's conviction and sentence in the wake of evidence that he was, as 
he had steadfastly maintained for over 30 years, innocent of the robbery and 
murder of Shreveport businessman Isadore Rozeman. The exact nature of that 
evidence has not been revealed, but that it is conclusive is attested to in the 
district attorney's capitulation.

We do know this much: Officials are now said to believe another man did the 
killing. In a motion seeking Ford's release, they say that if the state had 
known then what it knows now, "Glenn Ford might not even have been arrested or 
indicted for this offense." Which seems pretty ironclad.

And yet, incredibly, Louisiana is fighting Ford's request for compensation for 
his 30 lost years, a total that amounts to a relatively measly $330,000 under 
state law. One is reminded of Florida's equally ignoble 2011 refusal to 
compensate Derrick Williams after railroading him into spending 18 years behind 
bars for a rape he didn't commit.

But even if he wins, Ford is unlikely to ever enjoy the windfall. He has Stage 
4 lung cancer - he says it went undiagnosed while he was at Angola - and 
doctors say he is unlikely to be alive by Thanksgiving.

Ford wants to leave any monies he receives to his grandchildren. The state says 
he should receive nothing because he hasn't proven himself "factually 
innocent."

In a March 8 editorial, the Shreveport Times called that "hogwash." In his 
letter to the editor, Stroud co-signed that judgment. But he went further.

There is insufficient space here to do justice to what he wrote. But you will 
find it - along with a remarkable video interview - at shreveporttimes.com. 
Suffice it to say, the man is being eaten alive by remorse.

He rebukes himself for multiple sins, for being too "passive" to follow up on 
evidence suggesting Ford's innocence, for never considering the unfairness of 
striking black jurors from the panel that judged an indigent black man, for not 
caring that Ford was represented by "counsel who had never tried a criminal 
case, much less a capital one," for placing "junk science" into evidence, for 
caring less about justice than about winning.

He apologizes to the jurors, to the court, to the family of the victim, and to 
Ford "for all the misery I have caused him and his family."

And Stroud, now a 63-year-old attorney in private practice, also says this: "No 
one should be given the ability to impose a sentence of death in any criminal 
proceeding. We are simply incapable of devising a system that can fairly and 
impartially impose a sentence of death because we are all fallible human 
beings."

Some of us consider that a self-evident truth. Yet learning that truth cost 
Stroud his good opinion of himself, and 30 years of another man's life.

His experience should serve as a warning to those who persist in believing the 
death penalty is justice. The death penalty, writes Stroud, is "an 
abomination." The death penalty is "state-assisted revenge." He didn't always 
feel that way, but he has paid a high price for his education. And he will 
continue to pay. After all, Glenn Ford eventually walked free.

Marty Stroud never will.

(source: Leonard Pitts is a columnist for The Miami Herald----Press Herald)








OKLAHOMA:

Oklahoma bill to allow nitrogen gas in executions approved without debate



Oklahoma would become the country's 1st state to allow the use of nitrogen gas 
to execute death-row inmates under legislation given preliminary approval on 
Tuesday, as state lawmakers look for alternatives amid a growing shortage of 
lethal injection drugs.

The gas proposal was introduced at a time when fewer pharmacies and drug 
manufacturers are willing to supply drugs used in lethal injections, the 
primary method of execution in Oklahoma and other states. The US supreme court 
is also reviewing how Oklahoma conducts executions, which are currently on hold 
in the state, following the botched injection of an inmate last year.

The bill, along with a similar proposal in the Oklahoma house, would allow the 
state to use nitrogen gas - which when inhaled leads to hypoxia, the gradual 
lack of oxygen in the blood - if lethal injection is ruled unconstitutional. 
Lethal injection would remain the state's primary execution method, but 
nitrogen gas would be the state's 1st backup method ahead of the electric 
chair, which the state has not used since 1966, and a firing squad, which has 
never been used in an Oklahoma execution.

Neither the house nor senate version of the plan has been publicly debated, and 
that lack of open discussion continued on Tuesday when the senate judiciary 
committee voted 8-0 for the house bill without debate or testimony.

The legislation, which has already been approved in the house, now moves to the 
full senate. The senate version has already been passed by the senate and is 
pending in a house committee.

The co-author of the legislation, representative Mike Ritze, did not 
immediately return a telephone call seeking comment on Tuesday.

Ryan Kiesel, executive director of Oklahoma's American Civil Liberties Union 
chapter, said lawmakers are taking the wrong approach.

"It's a fool's errand to even engage in this utterly bizarre process of 
searching out new ways to take people's lives against their will," Kiesel said, 
noting that nitrogen gas is not used by any other states in executions. "We 
would be experimenting on the condemned using a process that has been banned in 
many states for the euthanasia of animals."

According to Amnesty International, which opposes the death penalty, no state 
has ever used nitrogen gas or inert gas hypoxia to execute an inmate. The 
organisation said there have been no reports of the method being used in other 
countries, though execution data from China - the country that executes the 
most people - is not readily available.

A group of Oklahoma death row inmates is challenging the state's lethal 
injection method in federal court. They sued following the botched execution 
last April of Clayton Lockett, who struggled against his restraints after 
attendants administered lethal drugs through a poorly placed intravenous line.

The case involves whether midazolam, a sedative, properly renders an inmate 
unconscious before the second and third drugs are administered. Oklahoma 
officials concede that midazolam is not their preferred execution drug, but 
that death-penalty states have been forced to explore alternatives because 
manufacturers of more effective drugs are refusing to sell them for use in 
lethal injections.

The governing body of the American Pharmacists Association is considering a 
policy that would oppose pharmacists' participation in executions, including 
providing the drugs used in lethal injections, according to group spokeswoman 
Michelle Spinnler.

In an email, she said the proposed wording of the policy states that the 
association opposes such participation in executions, "either directly or 
indirectly, on the basis that such activities are fundamentally contrary to the 
role of pharmacists as providers of healthcare".

A vote on the policy is scheduled this weekend.

(source: The Guardian)

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

Bill approving nitrogen gas executions advances in Oklahoma Senate



Oklahoma lawmakers are pushing for the state to become the 1st to allow the use 
of nitrogen gas as a back-up method to execute death row prisoners. The bill 
passed the state Senate Judiciary Committee and will now head to the floor for 
a vote.

The Committee voted 8-0 on Tuesday to move forward with a House-passed measure 
that would grant the use of nitrogen gas in executions. Under the bill, lethal 
injection would remain the state's primary method of execution, but using a gas 
chamber would be an alternative should lethal injection be declared 
unconstitutional or the drugs become unavailable.

Last year, Oklahoma State Rep. Mike Christian (R) introduced a bill making 
death by firing squad an alternative for the state. Under current Oklahoma law, 
electrocution is the 2nd option, followed by firing squad. Christian's bill 
would make electrocution the 3rd option, following death by firing squad.

Christian said that unlike traditional gas chambers that used drugs like 
cyanide, which cause a build-up of carbon dioxide in the blood, breathing 
nitrogen would be a painless death because it leads to hypoxia - a gradual lack 
of oxygen in the blood, similar to what can happen to pilots at high altitudes.

Execution via "nitrogen hypoxia" is a method advanced in the National Law 
Review paper in 2005 by Stuart A. Creque, which is seemingly based on the fatal 
outcomes of 2 chemical accidents involving nitrogen. There do not seem to be 
any instances of nitrogen having being used in executions to date.

The search for alternative methods for executions comes during an upheaval in 
the manufacture of the drugs. A decade-old ban in the European Union prohibits 
EU nations from exporting execution drugs, and the subsequent shortage that it 
spawned in the US has prompted prison officials to seek out compounding 
pharmacists to mix and develop new sorts of cocktails to carry out death 
sentences.

(source: rt.com)