[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, VA., FLA., OHIO

[Rick Halperin]

Oct. 24



TEXAS:

Texas execution drug shipment seized by federal authorities


The U.S. Food and Drug Administration intercepted an international shipment of 
an unapproved lethal injection drug called sodium thiopental that was ordered 
by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, a federal official said Friday.

The shipment originated in India in July, according to the online news site 
Buzzfeed, which first reported the seized shipment.

"FDA has detained and is holding shipments of sodium thiopental that the state 
correctional facilities in Arizona and Texas attempted to import into the 
United States," FDA spokesman Jeff Ventura said. "Courts have concluded that 
sodium thiopental for the injection in humans is an unapproved drug and may not 
be imported into the country for this purpose."

But Texas Department of Criminal Justice spokesman Jason Clark said that state 
officials had received federal clearance to import the drug.

"The Texas Department of Criminal Justice obtained an import license from the 
Drug Enforcement Administration prior to the importation," Clark said. "In 
accordance with federal law and prior to shipment of the drug, TDCJ filed 
notice with the DEA of the anticipated shipment."

Clark said the state acquired the license on Jan. 21 and notified the DEA "more 
than 2 weeks prior to its arrival." He wouldn't say how much the state paid for 
the shipment or where it came from, citing a new state law that keeps the 
source of execution drugs secret.

Sodium thiopental is an anesthetic that had been used in conjunction with 2 
other drugs to perform lethal injections in Texas. Death penalty states have 
struggled to find new suppliers of execution drugs amid a nationwide shortage. 
Texas stopped using sodium thiopental in 2011 because it couldn't identify a 
supplier, and switched to pentobarbital and other drugs. The state has been 
using pentobarbital alone since 2012.

Clark wouldn't say whether Texas was considering using a different execution 
drug but said there was enough pentobarbital to execute all 253 inmates on 
death row.

In 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., ruled that the FDA 
could no longer allow the importation of sodium thiopental because the drug 
lacks FDA approval.

The seized shipment highlights a regulatory overlap between the FDA and DEA. 
The FDA regulates prescription and nonprescription drugs - including sodium 
thiopental. But the drug is also a Schedule III controlled substance, which 
falls under DEA jurisdiction.

DEA spokeswoman Barbara Carreno said it is possible that Texas could have 
obtained a permit to import the drug despite the FDA prohibiting the drug.

The news of the shipment has worried death penalty opponents, who cite concerns 
about the secrecy surrounding the state's lethal injection program.

"It shouts for the need for transparency," said Maurie Levin, 1 of the lawyers 
representing complainants in a federal lethal injection case in Houston. 
"Nobody knew that Texas was attempting to obtain sodium thiopental."

A new law that went into effect in September allows state prison officials to 
keep confidential the names of pharmacies or companies that sell execution 
drugs to Texas.

The Texas House sponsor of the bill, Rep. John Smithee, R-Amarillo, said 
secrecy was needed to protect pharmacies from retaliation, but Democrats argued 
that the protection is unnecessary because there have been no proven cases of 
such threats.

Condemned inmates and defense lawyers can still learn when the drug was 
purchased, when it expires and results of lab tests on the drug's potency and 
purity.

(source: Austin American-Statesman)






VIRGINIA:

Confounding case: Amid court pleas, execution was kept on schedule


His crimes were horrific and there was no hint of innocence or remorse. Alfredo 
Prieto had been denied clemency and his appeals turned down before his last 
words Oct. 1 at at 9:08 p.m.: "Get this over with."

The commonwealth of Virginia complied and Prieto was pronounced dead at 9:17 
p.m. in an execution that is apparently the 1st in modern state history carried 
out while a request for a stay was pending in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Gov. Terry McAuliffe's office was notified at 9:05 p.m. that the stay 
application was being filed and he could have, as have other governors, delayed 
proceedings until the Supreme Court ruled - a red telephone receiver held by a 
prison official inside the execution chamber kept open a direct line to the 
governor's office. McAuliffe, under no obligation to hold things up, did not.

Barry A. Weinstein, a former director of the Virginia Capital Representation 
Resource Center, conceded Prieto's chances for a stay appeared slim and agreed 
that without a stay in place the execution could proceed. Nevertheless, he was 
surprised the governor did not wait.

"Let's assume the Supreme Court would have ruled in favor of Prieto's stay and 
he had been executed - someone's going to answer for it," said Weinstein, now a 
lawyer in Georgia. "You just never know when 5 justices are going to vote for a 
stay."

Former Virginia governors, attorneys general and defense lawyers contacted 
recently could not recall another case where a stay application was pending at 
the time of execution and noted that some executions were held up waiting for 
the high court to rule on a request. But they said the hours leading up to an 
execution are difficult for all parties and that it is up to each governor to 
decide how to handle matters.

"It probably would have just delayed them 30 minutes to an hour," said George 
Allen, governor from 1994 to 1998 and in office for 22 executions. He said the 
Supreme Court is usually alerted ahead of time when executions are imminent and 
these situations may develop.

Allen said he was not familiar with the details of Prieto's case and intends no 
criticism of McAuliffe. "This is a very personal decision," Allen said.

Allen noted that McAuliffe, a Roman Catholic, allowed the court's sentence to 
be carried out just after the U.S. visit by Pope Francis, who spoke against the 
death penalty.

"Now, it might have been slightly different from the way we did it," Allen said 
of Prieto's execution. But, he said, "I know Governor McAuliffe's faith and I 
know he deeply respects the pope and he went forward and did his (civil) duty," 
Allen said. "You can argue over this nuanced aspect of it but, in a broader 
sense, I commend him for doing his duty."

The Virginia attorney general's office, which had staff inside the execution 
chamber and in Richmond and was dealing with the courts on behalf of the state, 
was not notified by the Supreme Court about the stay application until 9:13 
p.m., well after the execution started

Spokesmen would not comment on whether the governor's office alerted the 
attorney general's office about the stay application prior to 9:13 p.m. But the 
attorney general's office said Prieto's lawyers did not advise them about going 
to the Supreme Court.

The drugs did not start flowing into Prieto via IVs until after his last 
statement at 9:08 p.m. The Virginia Department of Corrections, whose execution 
team carried out the procedure at the Greensville Correctional Center in 
Jarratt, was not told there was a stay application pending, a department 
spokeswoman said.

Many details of what transpired that night are not known. But emails obtained 
under a Virginia Freedom of Information Act request by the Richmond 
Times-Dispatch suggest that at least one official at the attorney general's 
office and a Supreme Court clerk were caught short by developments.

At 9:07 p.m., Alice Armstrong, a senior assistant attorney general working in 
Richmond, sent an email to Kyle R. Ratliff, emergency applications clerk for 
the U.S. Supreme Court, attaching the appeals court order. That was 7 minutes 
after the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Prieto's stay request, a 
minute after IV lines were placed in his arms, and a minute before he made his 
last statement.

At 9:13 p.m., Ratliff replied: "Received, thank you. Prieto has filed a stay 
application with this Court ... I assume the state plans to file a response?"

Armstrong replied at 9:15 p.m., "Yes. I will send shortly."

"OK, thanks Alice," Ratliff said at 9:15 p.m.

At 9:20 p.m., Armstrong emailed: "I'm told the application is now moot as of 
9:17."

Ratliff replied at 9:20 p.m.: "What do you mean?"

Michael Kelly, a spokesman for the attorney general's office, said the email 
chain ended there and that Armstrong picked up the telephone and called Ratliff 
to fill him in.

Brian Coy, a McAuliffe spokesman, said the governor, the only person outside 
the courts who could have intervened, announced his decision days earlier not 
to do so. The governor considered the same questions that had been turned down 
by other courts and that was before the Supreme Court.

"His job as governor is not to act as a court and intervene," Coy said. 
Although other governors have delayed executions under similar circumstances, 
Coy said, "Intervening at that point is up to the courts." The courts, he 
noted, saw no reason to intervene earlier that day.

Robert E. Lee, current director of the Capital Representation Resource Center 
and one of Prieto's lawyers, saw it differently. In a statement issued shortly 
after the execution, he complained that it was carried out while the stay 
application was before the Supreme Court. "We will never know whether Mr. 
Prieto's execution is legal and humane," Lee said.

Lee said Friday that he did not notify the attorney general's office in 
addition to the governor's office that night because it was his understanding 
the 2 offices were in communication via telephone from the prison.

In the past, Allen and other Virginia governors generally waited until all 
pending court matters were settled before acting on clemency petitions. That 
changed with Gov. Bob McDonnell, who immediately preceded McAuliffe in office. 
McDonnell announced early in his administration that he would act on clemency 
petitions 5 days beforehand instead of at the last moment to spare victims' 
families and the condemned from uncertainty.

McAuliffe is following a similar policy and rejected intervening in Prieto's 
case 4 days earlier, stating in part: "It is the governor's responsibility to 
ensure that the laws of the commonwealth are properly carried out unless 
circumstances merit a stay or commutation of the sentence. After extensive 
review and deliberation, I have found no such circumstances, and have thus 
decided that this execution will move forward."

5 executions were carried out during McDonnell's term, but unlike Prieto's 
case, there were no 11th-hour stay requests that might have interfered with the 
timetable. A McDonnell spokesman said the former governor could not comment for 
this story.

Jerry Kilgore, a former Virginia attorney general, said that as he recalls, the 
court process was normally allowed to run its full course before executions 
proceeded.

Former Virginia Attorney General Mark L. Earley, a Richmond lawyer who now 
opposes the death penalty, did not respond to requests for comment.

There have been 111 executions in Virginia since the U.S. Supreme Court allowed 
the death penalty to resume in 1976. As is sometimes the case - but not in 
recent years - appeals and requests for stays were flying among courts in the 
hours and minutes preceding Prieto's execution.

Richmond lawyer William G. Broaddus, Virginia's attorney general during five 
executions in 1985 and 1986, later came to oppose the death penalty. He helped 
represent condemned killer Angel Breard, executed in 1998 after court 
proceedings came down to the wire.

"We did everything we could to avoid the last-minute stuff. I can't stand this 
last-minute stuff," Broaddus said. "It didn't matter which side you were on. 
The process is so difficult to have uncertainty thrown into it, it just makes 
the agony that much more difficult. It's just awful. It has to be awful for the 
judges," he said.

Breard's was the 1 case that current death penalty defense lawyers thought a 
stay request may have been pending when he was executed. But the clerks' 
offices for the U.S. Supreme Court and the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals 
said records show no stay requests were pending when Breard's execution took 
place.

According to Times-Dispatch accounts of Breard's execution - delayed from 9 
p.m. to after 10 p.m. - the U.S. Supreme Court denied a request for a stay and 
other matters after 8 p.m. Breard's lawyers filed a new petition in U.S. 
District Court, were refused there and then went to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court 
of Appeals, which also refused the stay. The lawyers apparently did not appeal 
yet again to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Then-Gov. Jim Gilmore turned down Breard's clemency request and Breard was 
executed. Gilmore, also a former Virginia attorney general and Henrico County 
prosecutor, said he could not recall a case where an execution took place while 
a stay request was pending. "But if it did happen, I could see where it would, 
logically, maybe occur ... the execution proceeds on time unless an order is 
issued to stay the execution," he said.

"It was my recollection that there was a stay requested in (virtually) every 
case. That's standard practice in death penalty cases," he said. "Those are 
last-minute requests that are made to the courts, and the courts usually refuse 
them."

In Prieto's case, the U.S. Supreme Court and other courts had turned down his 
appeal centering on his claim he was intellectually disabled.

Gerald T. Zerkin, a Richmond lawyer who headed the capital representation 
center after Weinstein, said he was less concerned about an unresolved stay 
request as he was that courts would not give Prieto a chance to present 
evidence on his intellectual disability claim. (Courts held the claim had not 
been raised at the proper time, and authorities argued 1 jury had already 
rejected that argument.)

Prieto's lawyers, however, learned that the state had obtained 1 of the 
injection drugs from Texas a little more than a month before the execution. 
Virginia's own supply would expire Sept. 30 - the day before the execution.

Prieto that day won a temporary restraining order from a federal judge in 
Alexandria over concerns the drug might be defective and its use would violate 
the ban against cruel and unusual punishment. But the case was transferred the 
next day to federal court in Richmond, where, at 5:50 p.m. with the execution 
set for 9 p.m., a judge ruled the execution could proceed.

Prieto appealed that ruling to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which 
turned him down at 9 p.m., triggering the application to the U.S. Supreme Court 
at 9:05 p.m.

****

A timeline in the Prieto case

This timeline is based on information from Alfredo Prieto's lawyers, the 
Virginia Department of Corrections, the Virginia attorney general's office, the 
governor's office and the courts.

Oct. 1

5:50 p.m.: U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson vacated the temporary stay of 
Prieto's execution entered the day before and the execution was allowed to go 
forward. Prieto then sought a stay of execution from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court 
of Appeals, which the state opposed.

At approximately 8:52 p.m., while the 4th Circuit stay request was pending, 
Prieto was led into the execution chamber and strapped into a gurney.

8:55 p.m.: The curtain blocking the witness viewing area was closed.

9 p.m.: The 4th Circuit denied Prieto's request for a stay of execution.

9:02 p.m.: The Virginia Department of Corrections was notified the 4th Circuit 
denied the stay request.

9:05 p.m.: Prieto's lawyers filed a motion for a stay of execution with the 
U.S. Supreme Court and told the governor's office that a stay was being sought 
there.

9:06 p.m.: The IV lines were placed in Prieto's arms.

9:08 p.m.: The curtain was drawn back. Prieto spoke his last words and, shortly 
thereafter, the 1st of 3 drugs used to execute him was administered.

9:10 p.m.: Prieto's lawyer, unaware the execution was proceeding, told the 
Supreme Court that, presuming the state's opposition to the stay request was 
the same as was filed in the 4th Circuit, the court should not wait for a reply 
on behalf of Prieto.

9:13 p.m.: The U.S. Supreme Court notified the Virginia attorney general's 
office that a stay motion was filed on behalf of Prieto and provided a docket 
number.

9:15 p.m.: The attorney general's office told the U.S. Supreme Court that the 
state was preparing a response to the stay request.

9:17 p.m.: Prieto was pronounced dead.

9:20 p.m.: The Virginia attorney general's office notified the U.S. Supreme 
Court that the issue was moot as of 9:17 p.m.

Oct. 2

Order from U.S. Supreme Court entered in case: "The application for stay of 
execution of sentence of death presented to The Chief Justice and by him 
referred to the Court is dismissed as moot."

(source: Richmond Times-Dispatch)






FLORIDA:

Require unanimity to impose death penalty


More than a year ago on this page, I wrote about 2 deaths: the slaughter of 
9-year-old Jimmy Ryce and the antiseptic, state-sanctioned execution of his 
killer, Juan Carlos Chavez.

As the lead prosecutor in the case who witnessed Chavez's execution, I observed 
that Florida's lack of juror unanimity in the penalty phase casts Florida as an 
outlier. About 10 years ago, the Florida Supreme Court, in State v. Steele, 
detailed the procedures in every death-penalty state and revealed that Florida 
was alone in not requiring jury unanimity in either finding aggravating factors 
or recommending a sentence of death.

Its opinion implored the state Legislature to revisit Florida's sentencing 
scheme. The Legislature failed to act on the recommendation, and today we find 
ourselves again in familiar, though, unsettled territory.

The U.S. Supreme Court accepted for review Hurst v. Florida and recently heard 
the argument. The court was again visiting and reviewing Florida's 
capital-sentencing scheme.

Timothy Lee Hurst was found guilty of murder, and the jury recommended the 
death penalty by a vote of 7-5. The trial court acknowledged the jury's finding 
and sentenced Hurst to death. The question before the U.S. Supreme Court is 
whether, in light of its decision in Ring v. Arizona, Florida's 
death-sentencing process violate the Sixth Amendment's jury trial guarantee or 
the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

In deciding Ring v. Arizona in 2002, the Supreme Court held that the Sixth 
Amendment required that the presence of aggravating factors, which Arizona's 
death-penalty sentencing scheme viewed, essentially, as elements of a larger 
offense, be determined by the jury. The Supreme Court of Florida had previously 
held that the decision did not apply to and specifically did not require that a 
jury's recommendation of death be unanimous. The U.S. Supreme Court's 
pronouncement on the necessity of a unanimous jury finding will potentially 
have a devastating effect on Florida's death-sentencing approach.

The Florida Legislature had the opportunity to confront this issue and fashion 
an acceptable resolution. Unfortunately, lawmakers took a pass - again - in its 
most recent session. This is a disappointing abrogation of responsibility. The 
Legislature's failure to act in the wake of State v. Steele has triggered the 
U.S. Supreme Court's action and, potentially, the imposition of its own remedy.

While one does not presume to know the mind of the court or the direction it 
may take, one can question state lawmakers ignoring the opportunity to make a 
decision by enacting legislation. Who will bear the burden of legislative 
inaction? Sadly, it will be the families and friends of the victims. By casting 
even more uncertainty into the process, any trial involving a penalty phase 
will be subject to reversal. This is intolerable to those who have lost loved 
ones and already endured a trial and penalty phase and now must endure it all 
over again.

How long could such uncertainty last? From 1 year to 2 years, depending upon 
how quickly the U.S. Supreme Court rules and how long it would take the 
Legislature to devise a new sentencing structure.

There is no need to wait. Bills have been filed in both the House and Senate 
proposing a jury's unanimous recommendation to impose the death penalty.

Florida should not be an outlier any longer. The Legislature can do the right 
thing by meeting its obligation to victims' families and friends. It should 
remove needless uncertainty from the death-penalty process.

The residents of Florida deserve nothing less.

(source: Op-Ed; Michael R. Band is the former chief assistant state 
attorney----Miami Herald)

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

'90s Nostalgia Alert: Old Sparky Might Be Making a Comeback!


Wow! It hasn't been this good of a time for fans of the '90s since the actual 
'90s themselves! Netflix is rebooting Full House, Gwen Stefani's best breakup 
single since "Don't Speak" is tearing up the iTunes charts, and Nickelodeon is 
playing all your favorite OG Nicktoons again!

Now another icon we haven't heard much from since the turn of the century might 
be making a comeback. Yeah, you're hearing this right. Florida's electric 
chair, Old Sparky, might be back in commission for the first time since 1999! 
Talk about a nostalgia trip!

Remember Old Sparky? Of course, you do! All true '90s Florida kids do! It was 
the state's sole means of execution from 1924 until 2000. In fact, Florida was 
one of the last states to move away from using electrocution as its default 
death penalty method because back in the '90s we were a backward state afraid 
of progress and change ... Well, we guess not everything has changed since the 
'90s! LOL! In fact, Florida is one of just eight states that still technically 
maintains an electric chair as a secondary means of execution, but only if the 
death-row inmate specifically asks for it.

Remember learning when you were a kid that the state's main instrument of 
punishment by death was colloquially referred to by a cutesy nickname and 
thinking for a second that that was really odd? Remember when you were a small 
child and it seemed to you that some adults in the state were actually somehow 
proud that we used this backward and brutal method? But you didn't think too 
much about it because, hey, Power Rangers was on! It was Morphin' Time!

Remember your parents awkwardly changing the channel when the news went into 
details about all the gruesome mishaps involving the state's electric chair in 
the '90s? Like the time those 6-inch flames reportedly shot out of one inmate's 
head in 1990? Or a full foot of fire came out of the mouth of another in 1997? 
How about the final straw when in 1999 the state executed Allen Lee Davis but 
thanks to someone not properly fitting the head strap his body became soaked in 
blood and chilling photos of the savage aftermath eventually forced the state 
to adopt lethal injection as its primary means of execution in 2000? Remember? 
Cowabunga, dude!

Well, for the 1st time since the switch, a death-row inmate has requested to be 
put to death by Old Sparky. The Tampa Bay Times reports that Wayne Doty, who 
has been sitting on death row since 2011 for killing a fellow inmate while he 
was already serving life in prison for the previous murder of a night watchman 
at a Plant City factory, wants to die and die quickly. In fact, he wasn't even 
scheduled for execution yet but hopes to speed to process along. Someone call 
up Daria, because this would make a great episode of Sick, Sad World!

"I think his goal is to get put to death as quickly as possible," Sean Fisher, 
a private investigator who once on Doty's defense case, told the paper. "I 
think he's nervous about lethal injection being found unconstitutional."

Doty reportedly wants the "spiritual freedom" and closure for the families of 
his victims that he believes that only death can bring.

Gov. Rick Scott is notably execution-happy and was one track to become the 
governor who signed the most execution orders in Florida's history until a 
lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of lethal injection was filed. 
Despite this, he did sign his first execution order in nine months earlier in 
October. Animaniacs!

The Florida Department of Corrections was reportedly caught off guard by Doty's 
request and wouldn't comment other to say that it's being reviewed.

Doty is now asking for the sweet relief of death from the very system that 
failed him. The Times reports that he grew up with a physically and emotionally 
abusive father who regularly beat women in front of him. He soon became a 
truant and runaway who was caught up in the juvenile corrections system but 
never received that proper treatment and counseling he needed. As an adult, he 
turned to drugs and seeking meth was a motivator in his original murder. He 
once tried to commit suicide in prison but never received any mental health 
counseling there either.

Now he hopes to find solace in Old Sparky!

Of course, like all things we haven't thought much about since our childhood, 
we're likely to view them with more adult eyes now.

Questions like, is death really a greater punishment than being forced to live 
out the rest of your natural life in the confines of death row having to 
reflect each day on where exactly your life went wrong?

Why would we grant a murderer his request to die when we don't do the same for 
people living with the pain and misery of terminal, incurable illnesses?

In any event, it's unlikely that the FDOC will grant Doty's request to dust of 
a notoriously faulty apparatus that hasn't been used in 16 years, but at least 
we got to take a trip down memory lane! Now, if only Hulu would reboot Pinky 
and the Brain, then we'd be in business!

(source: Miami New Times)






OHIO:

Death penalty imposes social burden on Ohioans


The week of October 4-10, I walked with a diverse group of people dedicated to 
abolishing the death penalty in Ohio: Walkers ranged in age from 13 to their 
70s, and religious persuasions ranged from atheistic/agnostic to Baptist, 
Buddhist, Catholic, Jewish, Quaker and Unitarian-Universalist. We walked from 
the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility near Lucasville to the Statehouse in 
Columbus to draw attention to the wisdom of abolishing the death penalty in 
Ohio.

During the 6-day, 83-mile walk we were supported by various organizations for 
dinner and sleeping accommodations, including the International Brotherhood of 
Electrical Workers, Catholic churches, Word Alive Fellowship, Community of 
Christ, Quakers and others.

During the evenings, there were presentations from Terry Collins, a retired 
warden and former director of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and 
Corrections; Sam Reese Sheppard, son of Dr. Sam Sheppard, who was falsely 
convicted of his wife's murder; and Derrick Jamison, who was exonerated in 2005 
after sitting on Ohio's death row for 20 years. These presentations engaged us 
on the death penalty beyond the simplistic notion of revenge of a life for a 
life.

We had strong agreement that there are those who must be separated from 
society. But the death penalty has such a serious impact on society that it 
must be abolished and replaced with life imprisonment with no prospect of 
parole.

Some had commented to us that if imposing the death penalty prevents even 1 
killing, it is worth having. But, we ask, if abolishing the death penalty saves 
the life of even one wrongfully convicted person, that alone makes it worth 
abolishing it.

Sheppard reminded us of the effect that false accusation and conviction has on 
family members, and, that because the appeals process of the death penalty is 
so convoluted, it requires members of families of both the victim and of the 
"perpetrator" to relive the trauma of the crime details. This is a social 
burden.

The death row chaplains reminded us of the trauma on all parties of a wrongful 
execution and of an execution gone wrong: on the witnesses, the perpetrator's 
family, the victim's family, on the prison staff, the chaplain staff, and media 
present. This is a social burden. Both chaplains reminded us that tenets of the 
religious traditions underlying America's foundation speak of the right of fair 
treatment.

Collins pointed out that death-penalty cases only come from jurisdictions that 
can afford to finance a case; poorer jurisdictions do not bring a case no 
matter how heinous because they cannot afford to do so.

And, as state Rep. Dan Ramos pointed out at the Oct. 10 rally, money spent on 
these cases is money taken away from other projects for the community.

The death penalty serves no purpose other than vengeance. That is a poor 
foundation for any jurisprudence.

STUART SMITH

Columbus

(source: Letter to the Editor, Columbus Dispatch)

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

Life Sentence For Man Convicted In Ohio Policeman's Slaying


A jury recommended life in prison with no chance of parole for a man convicted 
of aggravated murder in the shooting of an off-duty Ohio policeman at a bar.

Jurors in Akron who convicted Kenan Ivery reached their decision Friday night 
after hearing more testimony in the sentencing phase.

The jury chose life over the death penalty for Ivery, who had pleaded to be 
spared. A judge will formally sentence Ivery Nov. 3.

Prosecutors say Ivery shot officer Justin Winebrenner and wounded four more 
people last November after returning to an Akron bar where he'd been kicked out 
earlier.

Ivery testified at trial that he returned to the bar after being kicked out to 
retrieve food he had left, and that he fired in self-defense after being 
surrounded by Winebrenner and several other men. In court Friday, Ivery said 
he's "not a monster."

Prosecutors contended Ivery went to his car, got a gun and returned seeking 
vengeance.

Ivery, 36, apologized to Winebrenner's family during a 4-minute statement 
before the jury's decision was announced.

"My condolences go out to you guys, and my family feels the same way," Ivery 
said. "It comes from my heart."

He also told jurors he's "no saint" and asked them to save his life.

Ivery told the officer's family he lost a brother in 2011. People who testified 
on Ivery's behalf said the family has struggled with the death of the 
25-year-old brother, victim of an unsolved Akron slaying.

(source: Associated Press)

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

Sensible stop


This week, Ohio delayed all executions until 2017, as it struggles to find 
sufficient supplies of pentobarbital or sodium thiopental. The state decided to 
use these drugs for lethal injections after the botched execution of 
53-year-old Dennis McGuire of Montgomery County in January, 2014.

McGuire's execution - using the sedative midazolam with the morphine derivative 
hydromorphone - was Ohio's last. He took more than 25 minutes to die, as he 
gasped, convulsed, snorted, and struggled against his restraints.

The state has rescheduled the executions of 25 inmates, including 6 who were 
sentenced to death in northwest Ohio cases. This pause in lethal injections is 
prudent and necessary, given the dwindling supply of drugs, continuing problems 
with executions, and increased scrutiny by courts.

State officials should use the time to seek not only supplies of its chosen 
drugs, but also more humane and reliable options. Lethal injections accounted 
for nearly 90 percent of U.S. executions from 1976 to 2014, generally with the 
drug sodium thiopental as the first part of a standard 3-drug protocol.

Before that, hanging, electrocution, and the gas chamber were common. Now, 
states are scrambling to determine which drug, or drug combination, works most 
efficiently. Prior to 2010, practically every state used sodium thiopental.

More than a half-dozen states, including Ohio, have abandoned the three-drug 
protocol. Because of moral objections, European and domestic suppliers of the 
drugs have refused to make them available for executions.

Failing to seek alternatives would put Ohio's death penalty at risk. Decades 
after lethal injections became the method of choice for capital-punishment 
states, bungled executions here and around the country have shaken public 
confidence and subjected injections to intense legal scrutiny.

All kinds of lethal injections have encountered problems - some arising from 
untrained staff or veins that are difficult to find because of excessive weight 
or years of intravenous drug use. In a few grisly cases, inmates have tried to 
help their executioners locate veins in their legs, groin, or neck.

Whatever course Ohio takes, it must proceed with greater transparency. State 
lawmakers enacted a dangerous and shortsighted law last year that at least 
temporarily shields the identities of companies that supply execution drugs. 
The hope was that guarding compounding pharmacies from publicity would 
encourage them to make one of the drugs from scratch.

That strategy hasn't work. Government secrecy almost inevitably creates more 
problems than it solves. Shielding manufacturers of execution drugs from public 
scrutiny, at a time of enormous nationwide controversy over how states conduct 
executions, undermines democracy, violates at least the spirit of Ohio's open 
records law, and makes future problems with Ohio's death penalty law more 
likely.

With a dwindling supply of drugs and increasing legal attention, maintaining 
the death penalty will become increasingly costly and troublesome, as 
capital-punishment states such as Ohio seek to find scarce drugs and avoid 
undue liability, constitutional risks, and federal intervention.

Death-penalty supporters must continue to encourage Ohio to move forward 
cautiously, prudently, and openly.

(sourde: Editorial, Toleldo Blade)

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

Jury deliberating prison or death for Akron cop killer


A Summit County jury on Friday began deliberating the fate of an Akron man who 
shot and killed an off-duty Akron police officer and 4 others during an 
argument at an East Akron pub.

The jury will be sequestered until it reaches a decision on whether to 
recommend Kenan Ivery, 36, be executed or serve life in prison for killing 
32-year-old officer Justin Winebrenner on Nov. 16, 2014 at Papa Don's Pub.

Ivery was found guilty Oct. 15 of aggravated murder and 14 other felonies 
related to the shooting. The jury began deliberating on their sentencing 
recommendation about 4 p.m. Friday.

If the jury recommends the death penalty, Summit County Common Pleas Judge 
Alison McCarty can break from the recommendation and order Ivery held in prison 
for life or sentence him to death row. If the jury recommends life with or 
without the possibility of parole, McCarty is bound by the jury's decision.

Prosecutors and defense attorneys made their final arguments Friday afternoon, 
following an unsworn statement from Ivery to the jury, his family and 
Winebrenner's family.

Defense attorney John Greven told the jury that he believes that a prison 
sentence is appropriate for Ivery. Greven's arguments included:

--Testimony by Dr. John Fabian, a forensic psychologist who testified for the 
defense that Ivery suffered from post-traumatic stress after his brother, Henry 
Ivery III, was killed in 2011. Fabian also found that Ivery suffered from 
alcohol and marijuana dependency.

--Greven also told the jury that it should consider Ivery's 2 children. He said 
both are good students, good kids and good athletes because Ivery was a good 
father who spent time with them. "Give them a chance to be able to pick up the 
phone and talk to him," Greven said.

--Greven also said that Ivery was not the "worst of the worst" and that the 
jury should consider that "every human life has dignity."

Assistant Summit County Prosecutor Jon Baumoel asked the jury to sentence Ivery 
to death. His arguments included:

--Ivery attacked Fabian's testimony, calling him a "hired gun." He also said 
Fabian advertised on his website to being able to provide defense attorneys a 
way to get mitigating evidence for defendants facing the death penalty.

--Baumoel told the jury that Ivery carried a gun long before his brother was 
murdered. He said that he was convicted in 2009 for possessing an Uzi 
submachine gun.

--Baumoel also argued that the heinous nature of the case should be a main 
factor in the jury's decision to recommend execution. "It wasn't about PTSD," 
Baumoel said. "It was about revenge."

(source: cleveland.com)

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

Death penalty quandry


Almost a year ago, in the waning days of the last General Assembly, state 
lawmakers moved a package of law changes aimed at ensuring Ohio could continue 
to administer the death penalty to inmates receiving capital sentences for 
heinous crimes.

House Bill 663 called for the names of compounding pharmacies to be shielded 
from public view, allowing those businesses to mix and provide the lethal 
injections used in executions without fear of being targeted by death-penalty 
opponents.

State prison officials earlier adopted protocols allowing the use of compounded 
drugs, but they couldn't find any pharmacies willing to provide the product.

Pharmacies had to request anonymity in advance, and their names would be 
released to the public after a couple of decades.

In January, a little more than a month after the Legislature passed HB 663, 
Gov. John Kasich postponed all 2015 executions to give the state time to find 
sources for the lethal-injection drugs.

10 months later, there still are no lethal-injection supplies to be found.

And in recent days, Kasich postponed a dozen executions, most scheduled for 
next year.

EXPLANATIONS FOR DELAY

"Circumstances exist justifying the grant of a temporary reprieve," the 
governor wrote in documents filed with the court.

The Department of Rehabilitation and Correction specified further that it 
"continues to seek all legal means to obtain the drugs necessary to carry out 
court- ordered executions, but over the past few years it has become 
exceedingly difficult to secure those drugs because of severe supply and 
distribution restrictions. The new dates are designed to provide DRC additional 
time necessary to secure the required execution drugs."

Death row inmates now facing 2017 executions include Ronald Phillips, convicted 
in the rape and murder of a 3-year-old Akron girl more than 20 years ago. He 
was supposed to be executed 2 years ago, but the governor postponed his initial 
date while he determined whether it was feasible to donate one of his kidneys 
to a sick family member.

In total, 11 inmates now have executions scheduled in 2017, plus 8 more in 2018 
and a half a dozen in 2019.

Next year's schedule includes 2 executions in March, 2 in May and 2 in July, 
marking the 1st time in recent history that multiple inmates could be put to 
death in Ohio in the same month.

That same bill that shielded compounding pharmacy names from public view 
included the formation of a legislative study committee to consider Ohio's 
death- penalty policies.

Among other issues, the panel is discussing other ways to carry out executions.

Gas chambers, hanging, electric chairs and firing squads have been mentioned in 
the larger national debate.

Senate President Keith Faber, R-Celina, didn't take issue with the governor's 
decision to postpone executions. But he suggested that it may be time to 
consider alternative methods.

"The death penalty, if we're going to conduct it in Ohio, needs to be done 
fairly, needs to be done safely, it needs to be done in a way that is 
transparent," he said. "From that perspective, if we can't get the drugs that 
our protocol calls for, either we need to change our protocols or we need to 
think about other solutions. There are a lot of people out there talking about 
other solutions. I've heard everything from using heroin to using nitrogen to 
going back to the electric chair. That's a debate that probably we need to 
have."

(source: Youngstown Vindicator)