[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----FLA., OHIO, USA

[Rick Halperin]

Oct. 27



FLORIDA:

Death sought for Andre Luciano in Lake Mary dry cleaner slaying


The Brevard-Seminole State Attorney's Office will seek the death penalty 
against a man accused of murdering a woman in her Lake Mary dry cleaning shop 
and fleeing the scene in her car, court records show.

A grand jury indicted Andre Luciano, 26, on a 1st-degree murder charge for the 
Sept. 15 killing of Nu "Jenny" Dang at her family business on North Country 
Club Road.

Luciano, who also faces charges of kidnapping, burglary and robbery related to 
the 60-year-old Vietnamese refugee's death is scheduled for arraignment on Nov. 
3.

According to a warrant affidavit for his arrest, Luciano told police he "got 
really mad" after Dang refused to let him use the restroom. He brooded outside 
in the rain and returned to shoot her in the head before dragging her body to 
the back of the store and disrobing her, the document states.

Police said Luciano took SunRail from the Longwood area to Lake Mary.

Recently filed court documents hint at the case the state is building against 
Luciano. A search of Luciano's backpack showed he was carrying zip ties, 
ammunition and parts of a handgun with him, according to a return of a search 
warrant.

When police found Dang slumped over in the store's bathroom, her ankle was zip 
tied to a table and another zip tie encircled her wrist, according to Luciano's 
warrant affidavit.

A judge also granted the state a warrant to conduct a forensic search on 
Luciano's iPhone 6, court records show. This could provide evidence because 
Luciano called his uncle and confided in him after the killing, police said.

His uncle contacted police and arranged a meeting that led to Luciano's arrest.

(source: Orlando Sentinel)






OHIO:

Springfield man's death sentence upheld


Jason Dean was convicted after a 4-day crime spree in 2005, for killing 1 man 
and attempting to murder 6 other people in Springfield.

Monday, the Ohio Supreme Court affirmed Dean's convictions and imposition of 
the death penalty.

On April 10, 2005, Dean approached Andre Piersoll and Yolanda Lyles while they 
were sitting in their vehicle in a parking lot. Dean tried to sell them some 
pills. He left and then came back demanding money and shooting at the car. 
Piersoll was shot in the left arm and was grazed on his right cheek.

2 days later, Dean, 16-year-old Josh Wade, and Dean's girlfriend drove to 
Dibert Avenue. Dean's girlfriend testified that both men were armed and told 
her they were looking for a house and a car. Shots were fired at one home, and 
a woman who lived there called 9-1-1.

Dean's car then headed back down the street, and the woman checking a vehicle 
damaged by gunfire ran to the house. As the car drove by, shots were fired 
toward 609 Dibert. No one was injured by the gunshots.

Dean's girlfriend stated that Dean and Wade went out the next night to a local 
bar to rob someone. The pair arrived at the bar near 11:45 p.m. and left a few 
minutes later. Titus Arnold, who worked at a nearby group home for troubled 
youth, left his job before midnight. Witnesses reported that 2 men got out of a 
car, began chasing Arnold, and shot at him. Arnold was dead when police 
arrived. The men returned to the car and drove away. Witnesses recognized Wade 
as the shooter and the driver.

Dean was indicted on 2 counts of aggravated murder, 6 counts of attempted 
murder, and several other crimes including firearm specifications. The jury 
convicted Dean on all charges, and the court imposed the death penalty. 
However, on appeal, the Ohio Supreme Court concluded in 2010 that he had not 
received a fair trial from an impartial judge, and the Court reversed the 
decision and ordered a new trial.

At that trial, a 2nd jury found Dean guilty on all charges, and he was 
sentenced to death.

"A showing of harm is unnecessary since the 'intent is what is transferred, not 
the harm.'"

In Monday's decision, the Court reviewed and rejected each of the 15 arguments 
presented in Dean's appeal.

Writing for the Supreme Court, Justice Judith Ann Lanzinger said, "We hold that 
that the doctrine of transferred intent was properly applied to the 
attempted-murder charges," Justice Lanzinger wrote. "Attempted murder, like 
murder, requires a purpose to kill. The victims of the transferred intent are 
readily identifiable because they were standing on the porch or seated in the 
front seat of the car. A showing of harm is unnecessary since the 'intent is 
what is transferred, not the harm.' ... Thus, we hold that the trial court's 
instruction was proper."

As required by statute, the Court also reviewed whether Dean's death sentence 
was appropriate and proportional. The Court held that the aggravating 
circumstance - murdering Arnold as part of a course of conduct - was supported 
by the evidence and then considered the weight of the mitigating factors.

Because Wade fired the shot that killed Arnold, the Court examined the fact 
that Dean was an accomplice rather than the principal offender in that murder.

"... Dean's participation in Arnold's murder and the attempted murders was 
extensive," Justice Lanzinger wrote. "The evidence shows that Dean was 30 years 
old and Wade was only 16. Dean exercised great influence over Wade and supplied 
the car and the weapons used in the offenses. Dean also attempted to shoot 
Arnold before Wade killed him."

As a result, the Court reasoned that Dean was complicit in the murder and that 
his role as an accomplice has less weight in mitigation. While acknowledging 
several other issues, Justice Lanzinger concluded that the mitigating factors 
were weak compared to the course of conduct involving Arnold's murder and 6 
attempted murders. The Court held that the death sentence, in this case, was 
appropriate and proportional.

(source: WDTN news)

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

Father could face the death penalty for murder charge in infant daughter's 
death----Coroner ruled death homicide by blunt force trauma


A Mount Healthy father could face the death penalty if convicted on charges in 
the death of his infant daughter.

James Phillips, 35, was indicted Monday 10 days after the death of his 
3-month-old daughter, Jasmine. Authorities said Phillips "slammed" her onto the 
floor. She died a day later.

Deputies charged Phillips Monday with 2 counts of special felony murder, one 
count of felonious assault, one count of child endangerment and one count of 
aggravated murder, according to the Hamilton County Prosecutor's Office. The 
latter charge is a capital offense. If convicted on all charges, he could face 
the death penalty.

"This wasn't just an accidental-type situation. The injuries were so 
substantial there had to be more involved than just a mishandling of the 
child," Mt. Healthy Police Chief Vince Demasi said.

Phillips admitted to slamming Jasmine on her back, deputies said, resulting in 
severe skull fractures and an inability to breathe unassisted.

When authorities arrived at Phillips' home on Oct. 17 in response to a 911 
call, they said Phillips was home alone with his 3 young children, and Jasmine 
was in "obvious distress." She was transported to Cincinnati Children's 
Hospital Medical Center where she died the next day.

The Hamilton County Coroner ruled her death a homicide by blunt force trauma, 
according to the prosecutor's office.

"Another baby dead at the hands of a person who was supposed to protect her," 
said Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters in a press release. "Our community 
has seen far too many of these cases in recent months."

Jasmine's 2 older siblings -- ages 5 and 2 years old -- have been placed with 
other relatives, officials said.

The children's mother, Breanna Phillips, was not home at the time the baby was 
harmed, police said. She told police that she had just left to go to the store.

No records show that Hamilton County Job and Family Services had any previous 
contact with the family.

Phillips was previously on probation in Clermont County for drug charges.

(source: WCPO news)






USA:

Evangelical Support for Death Penalty Comes to an End After Decades


The National Association of Evangelicals recently issued a new resolution on 
capital punishment recognizing Christians who work to abolish the death 
penalty.

The new statement is not a call to abolish the death penalty altogether but it 
flags both social and theological concerns and affirms the growing movement of 
evangelicals who are against the death penalty.

This may not sound like breaking news, especially after Pope Francis's 
charismatic call to Congress to abolish the death penalty last month. But 
here's why the NAE's announcement is a big deal. In addition to being 
distinguished by a personal relationship with Jesus and a high view of 
Scripture, evangelicals have provided an unwavering political base and a solid 
theological backbone for the death penalty in America -- until now.

The NAE represents some 10 million Christians, one of the largest faith groups 
in the country -- with over 45,000 congregations from nearly 40 different 
denominations. And it's pro-death penalty position has not changed since 1973.

While evangelicals have been champions for life on abortion, we've been the 
cheerleaders for death when it comes to execution. Over 85 percent of 
executions in the last 40 years have been in the Bible belt. As death penalty 
scholar and death row chaplain Dale Recinella puts it, "The Bible belt has 
become the death belt." The death penalty has succeeded in America, not in 
spite of Christians, but because of us.

The word "evangelical" comes from a Greek word and it means "good news." At the 
center of this "good news" is a belief that no one is beyond redemption.

We sing songs like "Amazing Grace" that insist on God's power to save sinners. 
We have doctrines stating that Jesus died so that we might be spared death. The 
Scripture we love so much is filled with murderers who were given a 2nd chance 
-- leaders like Moses, David, Saul of Tarsus. The Bible would be much shorter 
without grace. But for far too long we've missed the fact that every time we 
execute someone we undermine the very message of God's redeeming love.

We can see this even in recent executions like Kelly Gissendaner who was 
executed just last month in Georgia. Gissendaner embraced her Christian faith 
behind bars, earned her theological degree, reconciled with her kids, became an 
exemplary model of rehabilitation loved deeply by prisoners and guards alike. 
She shared the good news of God's love with dozens in prison and had the 
support of hundreds of pastors and tens of thousands of people, including Pope 
Francis.

Still, Gissendaner was executed by lethal injection in the state of Georgia by 
a governor who shares her Christian faith. As Gissendaner died, she sang 
"Amazing Grace." Among the last words to come from her lips were: "How sweet 
the sound that saved a wretch like me."

With the statement of the NAE, I believe we got one step closer to the end of 
the death penalty. Grace has a foot in the door of evangelicalism. The new 
resolution is one small step for the NAE, but it is one giant leap for 
abolition.

Last year, death sentences hit a 40-year low, and the number of executions were 
the lowest they've been in 20 years. A new Gallup poll shows that opposition 
for the death penalty is the highest it's been in 43 years, around the time the 
NAE wrote its original pro-death statement in 1973. Among those whose support 
for the death penalty is fading are white evangelicals.

Perhaps it's no coincidence that 2 of the NAE Board members leading the charge 
against the death penalty are young Latinos -- Gabriel Salguero and Samuel 
Rodriguez, Jr. -- providing promising signs that just as America is changing, 
so is evangelicalism. 6 months ahead of the NAE, the National Latino 
Evangelical Coalition unanimously passed an unambiguous call to abolish the 
death penalty.

But here's more good news. Recent studies show that the evangelicals who are 
for the death penalty are aging out. While younger evangelicals may not agree 
on all the hot topics, such as sexuality, the death penalty is a no-brainer for 
many. A recent Barna study showed that millennial Christians are overwhelmingly 
against capital punishment. And they are against it -- not in spite of their 
faith, but because of their faith. They cannot reconcile execution with Jesus 
who said, "Blessed are the merciful for they will be shown mercy." Of Americans 
as a whole, only 5 % say they think Jesus supports the death penalty.

While many of us would have loved the NAE to go a little further and issue an 
unambiguous call to abolish the death penalty, it is remarkable that the 
resolution names the inherent flaws in the contemporary practice of the death 
penalty, things like "eyewitness error, coerced confessions, prosecutorial 
misconduct, racial disparities, incompetent counsel, inadequate instruction to 
juries, judges who override juries that do not vote for the death penalty and 
improper sentencing of those who lack the mental capacity to understand their 
crime."

So, yes, I am proud of the NAE for affirming those evangelicals among us who 
are fueled by our faith to abolish the death penalty. I will feel even prouder 
when we actually end it, especially if evangelicals are on the front lines of 
this pro-life movement.

A generation from now, I sure hope that a post-death-penalty world looks back 
and sees Christians standing on the side of life... in the name of the executed 
and risen Christ.

(source: Shane Claiborne is an author and speaker. His most recent book 
"Executing Grace" is on the death penalty and comes out in March 
2016----Huffinton Post)

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

Why A Return To "Traditional" Execution Methods Might Make Sense


In the ongoing debate over the death penalty in America, some of the most 
significant battles involve execution methods. Over the decades, capital 
punishment opponents have mounted a tactically effective attack in this area, 
arguing for methods that cause the least possible discomfort to the condemned 
person.

It's easy to understand the appeal of this argument. The deliberate taking of a 
human life is a morally challenging act, even for those philosophically in 
favor of the death penalty. We might say we want a convicted murderer to die a 
painful death--"he ought to go through what he put those victims through." But 
for most of us, our essential humanity eventually takes over. Even those who 
believe that a particular execution is appropriate tend to want it carried out 
in as dignified and painless a way as possible, and away from our field of 
view.

It hasn't always been this way. Historically, state-sanctioned executions were 
carried out by comparatively "insensitive" methods, and also with much more 
direct community involvement. These executions took place in public view, 
sometimes with hands-on community participation. The Old Testament book of 
Deuteronomy, for example, prescribes death by stoning and includes the mandate 
that "[t]he hand of the witnesses shall be first against [the condemned man] to 
put him to death, and afterward the hand of all the people."

This seems shocking to our modern minds. Most of us couldn't imagine the 
thought of even witnessing a public execution, much less actively and 
physically participating in it. But in a way, such a regime is actually more 
protective of the accused person's rights.

In the modern American system, even those who support capital punishment are 
largely insulated from the consequences of that position. Civilians don't have 
to observe executions, much less participate in them. And even when we hear or 
read about a person being executed, the national focus on humane methods allows 
us to envision a relatively peaceful, painless process--akin to putting a pet 
to sleep, or assisting with a willing person's suicide

But that's wrong. The act of putting a conscious, unwilling human being to 
death is an inherently violent act. As Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski 
recently explained:

Using drugs meant for individuals with medical needs to carry out executions is 
a misguided effort to mask the brutality of executions by making them look 
serene and peaceful--like something any one of us might experience in our final 
moments. . . . But executions are, in fact, nothing like that. They are brutal, 
savage events, and nothing the state tries to do can mask that reality. Nor 
should it. If we as a society want to carry out executions, we should be 
willing to face the fact that the state is committing a horrendous brutality on 
our behalf.

This might seem like an argument to end capital punishment, on the grounds that 
if we really thought about what we're doing we wouldn't do it. It's not. I 
respect the view that capital punishment is inherently immoral and 
illegitimate--a view held by most of my criminal defense colleagues, including 
virtually all who defend capital cases--but I don't share that view personally. 
I believe that people of goodwill can legitimately take either position on 
whether the death penalty has a place in a modern society. But like Chief Judge 
Kozinski--himself a supporter of capital punishment, as he noted in this 
follow-up interview--I believe the debate is a better-informed one when we 
start with a clear picture of what we're doing when we put someone to death.

Interestingly, a recent trend instituted by stalwart capital punishment 
supporters may end up contributing to the openness of this discussion. As noted 
above, abolitionists have focused in recent decades on limiting the choices of 
execution methods, but reducing the condemned person's suffering has been only 
part of their overall strategy. They've also pressured private businesses to 
stop producing the chemicals necessary for executions, with the openly 
expressed goal of making the only legally available methods practically 
impossible to carry out.

In response, legislators in some states have authorized a return to older 
execution methods, at least as "backup plans" if drug-based executions are 
impossible to carry out. Utah, for example, has legislatively reinstated the 
firing squad, and Tennessee has permitted a revival of the electric chair.

Such changes may seem barbaric and inhumane to some. But there's actually an 
argument that, if implemented, the resulting regime would be more enlightened 
than the existing one--by forcing all of us to be more honest about what we're 
doing when we impose the death penalty. If we support that penalty, we should 
do so with a clear understanding of what we're doing. We're killing a human 
being who knows he's about to die and doesn't want to, and there's no serene, 
idyllic way to do that.

And we all share the responsibility for that imposition--the executioners may 
perform the final physical acts, but the prosecutor who seeks the penalty, the 
jurors who vote to impose it, and the voters who keep the regime in place all 
contribute to that ultimate decision. If we can do so while envisioning a 
"traditional," visibly violent execution method, perhaps we're ultimately 
justified in our support for the death penalty. But if we can only accept the 
idea of capital punishment by distancing ourselves from its inherent 
brutality--by, for example, convincing ourselves that the ultimate penalty can 
be imposed peacefully and painlessly--we may need to reconsider what we really 
believe.

(source: Kevin Sali, Criminal defense attorney in Portland, 
Oregon----Huffington Post)

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

>From behind death row's walls----Lily Hughes, a leading member of the Campaign 
to End the Death Penalty, reviews a new collection of essays by political 
prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal.


Fighting for freedom for Mumia Abu-Jamal was my 1st step on the path toward 
becoming an abolitionist. It's the first death penalty case I organized around, 
and Mumia was the 1st person on death row who made me understand the urgent 
need to amplify the voices and the humanity of the men and women behind the 
walls.

A new collection of Mumia's essays, Writing on the Wall, will further amplify 
this important voice for abolition to a new generation of activists.

I joined the Campaign to End the Death Penalty (CEDP) in the fall of 1998 and 
helped start a chapter in Austin, Texas. We began following Mumia's case 
through the CEDP's newsletter, The New Abolitionist.

Mumia was on death row in Pennsylvania, wrongfully convicted for murdering a 
police officer. In Philadelphia, Mumia was a known voice in activist circles 
and city politics. He joined the local Black Panther Party at 16 and went on to 
become a radio journalist, known for his critical coverage of police violence 
and corruption and his indictment of city leaders for their treatment of MOVE, 
a local Black radical collective. On his radio show, Mumia decried the constant 
harassment, wrongful imprisonment and police violence against MOVE members.

To supplement his income, Mumia drove a cab at night. In the early morning 
hours of December 9, 1981, he pulled over his cab to intervene on behalf of his 
brother, who police were arresting. Moments later, Mumia was shot by officer 
Daniel Faulkner, who was subsequently shot by another person on the scene.

Months later, police would claim that Mumia confessed to the murder of Faulkner 
while he lay recovering in a hospital bed. That was just one of the many lies 
that police and prosecutors told in their attempts to frame Mumia. The many 
problems in the case are documented in an addendum at the end of this latest 
book--including false witness testimony, evidence tampering and racial bias.

Our CEDP chapter adopted the case as our first organizing campaign. We 
organized at the University of Texas to bring a group to Millions for Mumia, a 
march held in Philadelphia in April 1999. Our group of about 20 or so students 
and community activists joined a bus of Mumia supporters in Houston for the 
trip.

It was my 1st mass rally, and I marched alongside thousands of people who 
believed in Mumia's innocence, many of who also opposed the death penalty. My 
participation in Millions for Mumia inspired my continuous struggle for 
abolition of the death penalty to this day.

After the march, our chapter helped to build a local coalition devoted to 
fighting for justice for Mumia. One of the central aspects of our campaign was 
broadcasting Mumia's voice, through his writings and the available recordings 
he had done for radio from inside the walls.

Mumia's voice, played back on cassette tapes and CDs at numerous events, was at 
the heart of our struggle--it played an indelible role in the personal 
connection that many felt to him. Hearing about his struggle in his own words 
was powerful, yet it was his articulation of political struggle well beyond his 
own case that resonated deeply with me and the other young abolitionists I 
worked with.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Even if you've never heard him speak before, Mumia's powerful voice rings 
through Writing on the Wall. The words here are written to be spoken--the 
writing is concise and the ideas are laid out with simple clarity. Yet each 
selection is imbued with passion and a feeling of urgency.

The essays are laid out in chronological order, beginning with an essay from 
Christmas 1982 shortly after Mumia was first jailed. In "Christmas in a Cage," 
Mumia begins by railing against his treatment at the hands of the police and 
the prison, only to finish the piece with a story about violence perpetrated 
against another prisoner at a cell not far from his own.

This solidarity is a hallmark of Mumia's writings and at the center of his 
political expression, from his writings about MOVE to his attention to fellow 
prisoners.

The Austin chapter began organizing around the case of Texas death row prisoner 
Shaka Sankofa in 1999. Shaka, a juvenile at the time of his alleged crime, was 
deeply politicized during his time in prison and spoke out against the racism 
and cruelty of the death sentence. Mumia wrote about the case in a short essay 
from May 2005, just a few months before Shaka was murdered by the state:

If there is a crime for which Bloody Texas seeks his death, it is this: it is a 
crime in a racist nation for a Black youth to be conscious and thinking in 
political and collective terms. For Shaka Sankofa, innocence is not enough.

His contention that racism is at the heart of the death penalty system is 
evident in a fiery passage from an address he wrote to the first World Congress 
Against the Death Penalty:

There can therefore not be a World Congress to abolish the death penalty 
without an acknowledgement that the racist instrument of white supremacy 
devalues Black life, whether that of an accused or that of a potential juror, 
while elevating white life.

There can be no real movement here unless there the recognition that law, 
whether international or domestic, is an illusion designed to perpetuate a 
polite status quo that for decades has been based upon the premise that "the 
whole problem is really the Blacks," and that the system must recognize this 
"while not appearing to." It is this very status quo that is the lifeblood of 
the vampiric American death penalty machine. And it must be shattered if 
abolition can ever become reality.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mumia's writings here extend far beyond the death penalty or even just the 
criminal justice system. He writes brilliantly on the case of Lynn Stewart and 
rails against the vigilante murder of Trayvon Martin.

He frequently writes about the imperial adventures of the U.S.--in earlier 
writings throughout the late 1980s and early '90s, he frequently discusses 
America's interventions in South and Latin America. Another essay from 
September 17, 2001, titled "9-11...Why," discusses the history of colonial 
violence in Afghanistan:

Afghanistan, one of the poorest, most rugged places on earth, has a population 
with a male life expectancy of 46 (45 for females!). It has a literacy rate of 
about 29 %. It looks at the swollen opulence of the Americans, the global reach 
of the American Empire, and bristles.

Further essays take on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as Israel's 
role as a U.S. proxy in the region. Discussing the violent foundation of 
Israel, he concludes, "Such roots can only lead to bitter fruits." Other essays 
take on labor history and union organizing, the writings of radical Black 
socialist Franz Fanon, the rise of the Tea Party and the election of Barak 
Obama--no stone is unturned.

Toward the end of the book, Mumia considers the developing Black Lives Matter 
movement. In an essay from August 31, 2014, he writes about the protests that 
erupted against police murder in Ferguson, Missouri:

For the youth--excluded from the American economy by inferior, substandard 
education; targeted by the malevolence of the fake drug war and mass 
incarceration; stopped and frisked for Walking While Black--were given 
front-row seats to the national security state at Ferguson after a friend was 
murdered by police on their streets. Ferguson is a wake-up call. A call to 
build social, radical, revolutionary movements for change.

One of my favorites essays in the book is a piece from January 3, 2014, called 
"Martin, Women and the Movement." He writes about the ways that sexist 
attitudes hindered the work of activists in the civil rights movement, and 
later the Black Panther Party (BPP). He begins by discussing the relationship 
between King and Ella Baker.

Mumia says that Baker was "a brilliant and skillful organizer, unable to defer 
to any of the spiritual and national leaders of the time." He argues that King 
felt uncomfortable around Baker, but that because of women like Baker, King 
became more open over time to the role of women in the lead of the movement.

He describes the pivotal role that women played in the creation and maintenance 
of the Black Panther Party, concluding:

Women form the core of the movements. They organize, as did Ella Baker, they 
lead, as did Elaine Brown. They do the work to make organizations--and 
movements--work. And given the sexism in capitalist society, it rarely gets 
reported, much less known. But the simple truth is that revolution is women's 
work. It is the work of all of us, as comrades.

At a time when women's rights are under renewed attack, Mumia's profound 
solidarity is incredibly moving. Despite being imprisoned for decades, Mumia's 
sensitivity to the struggles developing around him is a hallmark of his 
writings and a reminder that his voice is paramount in the movements beyond the 
walls.

Mumia often ends his essays with a question--challenging the reader to go 
further in our various struggles for social justice. The essays in Writing on 
the Wall aren't simply analysis. They are alive--a powerful call to action to 
reader to join the fight for a better world.

(source: socialistworker.org)