From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 1 09:13:56 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 09:13:56 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., MO., OK., KAN., CALIF., USA Message-ID: Sept. 1 PENNSYLVANIA: DA seeks death penalty in Wrightsville stabbing of young mother A Wrightsville man is now facing the death penalty, accused of luring his baby's mother to his home and stabbing her at least 49 times. Marcus James Bordelon appeared before Common Pleas Court Judge Harry M. Ness on Monday morning for his formal court arraignment in the murder case. He pleaded not guilty to the charges against him, including 1st-degree murder, kidnapping, tampering with evidence, obstructing the administration of law, abuse of a corpse and conspiracy. Bordelon, 22, of Chestnut Street, remains in York County Prison without bail. His next scheduled court proceeding is a Dec. 14 pretrial conference set by Ness. York County District Attorney Tom Kearney noted during the arraignment that he is seeking the death penalty based on 2 aggravating factors - that victim Samantha Young was kidnapped and that she was tortured. Joint trial: Kearney also noted at the hearing that his office is consolidating Bordelon's case with that of his co-defendant and recent girlfriend, Natasha Stover. That means they will stand trial together. Defense attorney Kevin Hoffman told the judge that Bordelon was waiving his formal arraignment and pleading not guilty to the charges against him. Kearney, Hoffman and Ness discussed the fact that Hoffman, who is court-appointed, is not death-penalty certified, meaning the court will have to appoint a 2nd attorney to handle the penalty phase of Bordelon's trial. In York County, it's standard practice to assign two attorneys to each death-penalty case, even if both are death-penalty certified. "My intention is to stay on the case," Hoffman told The York Dispatch, but said it will be up to the court to make that decision. The attorney said Bordelon had an idea he might be facing the death penalty. "We anticipated it, but we didn't know for sure until today," Hoffman said on Monday. The allegations: Bordelon lured the 21-year-old mother - called Sami by friends and family - to his home by telling her something was wrong with their daughter, who was a year old at the time and visiting her father that night, according to Young's family. Police said Bordelon wouldn't let Young leave after she arrived, which is the basis of the kidnapping charge. Young suffered stab wounds and cuts all over her body, including clusters of stab wounds to her back and wounds to her neck, head chest, arms and legs. Some wounds penetrated into her heart, both lungs, liver and diaphragm, according to Dr. Michael Johnson, a forensic pathologist who testified at Bordelon's preliminary hearing. Johnson said she suffered at least 49 stab wounds, probably more. He explained that "clusters" of wounds with "co-mingled" pathways made it difficult to count the wounds with certainty. Charging documents filed by Wrightsville Police allege Bordelon used a stun gun to keep Young from leaving his home prior to killing her. Found in shed: Officers responding to his home on April 19 found Young's body in a locked shed in Bordelon's backyard, documents state. It appeared she had been dragged there, preliminary hearing testimony indicated. Stover, 19, also remains in prison without bail, charged with homicide, conspiracy and related offenses. Police allege she and Bordelon exchanged emails about him killing Young. They also say Stover helped Bordelon move Young's car away from his home, then drove him to Home Depot to buy bleach and lime. (source: York Dispatch) MISSOURI----impending execution Missouri death row inmate appeals to supreme court to halt execution ---- Roderick Nunley faces death penalty for raping and killing a 15-year-old girl in 1989 but detective blames delay in execution on 'legal mumbo jumbo nonsense' An inmate scheduled to be executed on Tuesday for killing a 15-year-old Missouri girl has asked the US supreme court to halt his punishment, saying the death penalty is unconstitutional. But a detective who helped break the case scoffed at the appeal on Monday, saying Roderick Nunley should have been put to death long ago. Nunley and a co-defendant were accused of kidnapping Ann Harrison as she waited for a school bus in Kansas City, then raping and killing the girl in 1989. If the courts do not step in, Nunley, 50, will be lethally injected at 6pm on Tuesday and become the 6th inmate executed this year in Missouri. Defense attorney Jennifer Herndon argued in an appeal that capital punishment, "under prevailing standards of decency", violates the US constitution's 8th amendment right against cruel and unusual punishment. But retired Kansas City detective Pete Edlund said the only thing cruel and unusual is how long Nunley and his co-defendant Michael Taylor, who was executed last year, remained on death row. "They just take forever to do the deed," Edlund told the Associated Press in an interview this week. "The delay in executing these 2 is just nuts because it didn't have anything to do with their guilt. It was legal mumbo jumbo nonsense." In a new appeal filed on Monday, Herndon challenged the state's refusal to disclose who makes its execution drug or how it is tested. The argument has been rejected by the supreme court in other death penalty cases. Governor Jay Nixon is reviewing a clemency petition from an anti-death penalty group that alleges racial bias played a role in the case because a prosecutor refused a plea deal that would have given Nunley life in prison without parole. Nunley is black, as was Taylor, while the victim was white. Prosecutors said Nunley and Taylor binged on cocaine and stole a car in the pre-dawn hours of 22 March 1989. At one point, a police officer from neighbouring Lee's Summit chased the car but was called off by a supervisor when the stolen car crossed into Kansas City. Later that morning, the men were driving around Kansas City when they saw Ann standing on her driveway, waiting for a school bus. Taylor and Nunley quickly grabbed the 15-year-old girl and took her to Nunley's mother's home. She was raped and sodomised, then stabbed repeatedly in the stomach and the neck. Taylor and Nunley put her body in the trunk of the stolen car, then abandoned it in a residential area. The body was found 3 days later. Edlund, the detective, said the case was cracked months later when a man in jail for robbery - and seeking a $10,000 reward in the case - snitched on Taylor and Nunley. Both men confessed. Meanwhile, some of Ann's hair was found in carpeting at the home where the crime occurred. Edlund said the killing was haunting for several reasons, chiefly because she was a child and a random target. Her father was a former reserve officer with the police department, and her uncle was a Kansas City officer. "To all of us, she was part of our police family," Edlund said. "That made it even more important that we solve the case." (source: The Guardian) **************** Retired detective says Missouri has taken too long in executing Nunley A man who investigated the murder of a 15-year-old girl in Kansas City in 1989 says the 2nd execution of one of her killers has taken too long in coming. It's been more than 26 years since Ann Harrison was abducted while waiting for her school bus, raped, fatally stabbed, and left in the trunk of a stolen car to die. 6 months later a tip led authorities to Michael Taylor, and he led them to his accomplice, Roderick Nunley. Nunley's execution is scheduled to happen Tuesday night at the state prison in Bonne Terre. Retired Kansas City Police detective Pete Edlund's squad investigated the case. "They're finally getting around to executing Roderick Nunley after they executed Michael Taylor last year," said Edlund. He thinks it's taken too long for that sentence to be carried out. "They admit they did it. The fact that we have to draw this out at ad infinitum for years and years and years is a real travesty of real justice," said Edlund. He said Harrison's one of the cases he'll never forget, in part because he knew her family. Her father and uncle were in law enforcement. "He parents and her sister are the nicest, sweetest people you could ever hope to meet," said Edlund. "They are so kind, so giving." Edlund said when Taylor and Nunley confessed to killing Harrison, they bragged about the crimes. Nunley, he said, was angry with Taylor, accusing him of taking too much credit. "He resented the fact that Michael Taylor was taking credit for leading the 2 of them to commit this crime, versus, in reality, Roderick was the one," said Edlund. Nunley's attorneys are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to halt his execution arguing that it would violate his constitutional rights and that he is entitled to sentencing by a jury. His conviction and sentencing were handed down by a judge. If those and any other appeals are unsuccessful, and if Governor Jay Nixon (D) declines to grant clemency, Nunley will be executed by lethal injection between 6 p.m. Tuesday and 5:59 p.m. Wednesday. (source: Missourinet.com) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Attorneys For Oklahoma Death Row Inmate Say They Have New Information In His Case Lawyers for Oklahoma death row inmate Richard Glossip will release new information in the case that they say jurors never saw. This on the same day supporters go on Dr. Phil to make an emotional plea to save his life. In an hour-long episode of Dr. Phil Monday, actress Susan Sarandon and anti-death penalty advocate Sister Helen Prejean laid out the case of why they believe Richard Glossip should not be executed on September 16. At the center of their concerns is the testimony of Justin Sneed. Sneed is the one who actually killed Barry Van Treese, but testified Glossip was the mastermind behind the murder in a deal to avoid the death penalty for himself. "It was solely on the word of this man, Justin Sneed, who was 19-years-old, under pressure and he finally gives them what they want to hear," said Prejean on the Dr. Phil show. "They've got about 8 distinct and separate stories that he has told," said Don Knight, 1 of Glossip's attorneys. Monday, Knight and Glossip's other attorney's released a 43-page document of the statements Sneed made to the police, at trial, and to relatives. "When you see all these other stories you realize even if one of them is somehow true, this man has told lies at least 7 other times," Knight said. Yet, Glossip's supporters and attorneys say Glossip was convicted and sentenced to death solely on Sneed's testimony. "To hear all the conflicting things and then say you going to believe on the word of this man? That he hired him? The 1 aggravating circumstance in getting the death penalty," Prejean said. Gov. Mary Fallin says she would reconsider her decision not to grant a 60 day stay to Glossip if new evidence came forward, but at this point, Glossip's attorney's haven't filed anything new with the courts. (source: 9news.com) KANSAS: Supremacist convicted of killing 3 at Kansas Jewish sites The man who admitted killing 3 people at 2 suburban Kansas City Jewish sites gave jurors a Nazi salute Monday after they convicted him of murder and other charges for the shootings, which he said would allow him to "die a martyr." It took the jury of 7 men and 5 women just over 2 hours to find Frazier Glenn Miller Jr. guilty of 1 count of capital murder, 3 counts of attempted murder and assault and weapons charges. After the verdict was announced, Miller, 74, of Aurora, Missouri, said: "The fat lady just sang" and he raised his right arm in the Nazi salute. As jurors were filing out of the courtroom later, he told them: "You probably won't sleep tonight." The judge reminded Miller that the same jury will decide his sentence. He could get the death penalty. The sentencing proceedings were expected to begin Tuesday. During the prosecution's closing, District Attorney Steve Howe cited a "mountain of evidence" against Miller, who is charged with capital murder in the April 2014 shootings at 2 Jewish sites in Overland Park, Kansas. Although he has admitted to killing the three people, he has pleaded not guilty, saying it was his duty to stop genocide against the white race. None of the victims was Jewish. "He wants to be the one who decides who lives and dies," Howe said of Miller. The Passover eve shootings killed William Corporon, 69, and Corporon's 14-year-old grandson, Reat Griffin Underwood, at the Jewish Community Center in Overland Park, and Terri LaManno, 53, at the nearby Village Shalom retirement center. During his closing, Miller said he had been "floating on a cloud" since the killings. Earlier, he objected when Howe alleged he wanted to kill as many people as possible. Miller interjected: "I wanted to kill Jews, not people." Miller, who also was known as Frazier Glenn Cross Jr., urged jurors to "show great courage" and find him not guilty. "You have the power in your hands to inspire the world," he said. "You can become a man or woman your forefathers will be proud of for your bravery." The proceedings were marked with frequent outbursts from Miller, who objected repeatedly while jurors were out of the courtroom during discussions about what instructions should guide deliberations. At one point, he said, "I object to everything on the grounds of George Washington, our founding father." The objections became so heated that Judge Thomas Kelly Ryan temporarily ejected Miller from the courtroom when Miller said he didn't respect the process and used an anti-Semitic comment to criticize the court system. Ryan told Miller that if there were further outbursts, he would permanently eject him or declare a mistrial. Miller groused before finally agreeing, "I will take it under advisement and try to improve." Miller is a Vietnam War veteran who founded the Carolina Knights of the Ku Klux Klan in his native North Carolina and later the White Patriot Party. He also ran for the U.S. House in 2006 and the U.S. Senate in 2010 in Missouri, each time espousing a white-power platform. (source: Associated Press) CALIFORNIA: California Defends Its Review Process in Appeal to Preserve Death Penalty California on Monday asked a federal appeals panel to overturn a 2014 court ruling that - unless it is reversed - could bring a reprieve to the more than 740 inmates on death row in the state. The ruling, by a federal district judge, held that judicial reviews of death sentences were so prolonged - and executions so rare and seemingly random - that prisoners were subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. If that ruling is allowed to stand, it could have repercussions for capital punishment across the country. At Monday's hearing, a lawyer from the state attorney general's office argued that the 2014 decision violated legal procedures and mislabeled as a sign of dysfunction what were actually the state's careful efforts to protect the rights of those sentenced to death, such as appointing well-qualified defense lawyers. "We do not believe that there is any evidence that the system is arbitrary or random," said Michael J. Mongan, a deputy solicitor general. But a lawyer for a condemned inmate responded that the contested ruling had rested on sound legal ground and that California's postconviction review process, which commonly lasts 2 decades or more, had become agonizingly slow and arbitrary because the state did not provide enough funds for defense lawyers. The plaintiff in the 2014 case, Ernest Dewayne Jones, was sentenced to death in 1995 for a murder and rape. But if the District Court's ruling prevails - withstanding a ruling by the appeals court and, possibly, by the United States Supreme Court - all the people now condemned to death in California might have their sentences altered. The case, Jones v. Davis, was argued Monday in Pasadena before a 3-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Most of the 45-minute hearing, before Judges Susan P. Graber, Johnnie B. Rawlinson and Paul J. Watford, was devoted to complex issues of procedure and precedent. At least 1 of the jurists, Judge Watford, appeared to accept the state's contention that Mr. Jones's claim was a novel one that must first be litigated in a state court. The disputed ruling was considered startling when it was issued in July 2014. In it, Judge Cormac J. Carney of Federal District Court in Santa Ana said the way death sentences were reviewed and carried out was arbitrary. Of more than 900 people sentenced to death in the state since 1978, Judge Carney noted, only 13 had been executed. The "random few" who are put to death, he said, "will have languished for so long on death row that their execution will serve no retributive or deterrent purpose and will be arbitrary." Defending Judge Carney's decision, a lawyer for Mr. Jones on Monday cited a major Supreme Court decision in 1972, Furman v. Georgia, which brought death sentences to a temporary halt across the country because the justices were concerned that such sentences were being given out arbitrarily. That case involved the sentencing stage. Mr. Mongan, the California state lawyer, maintained Monday that it did not apply to the later process of judicial review. Mr. Jones's lawyer asserted that the concerns expressed in the Furman case applied to the entire system of capital punishment. Michael Laurence, a lawyer from the state-financed Habeas Corpus Resource Center who was representing Mr. Jones, quoted from Justice Potter Stewart's concurring opinion in 1972: "These death sentences are cruel and unusual in the same way that being struck by lightning is cruel and unusual." But the most vulnerable aspect of Judge Carney's ruling, it appeared during Monday's hearing, may be whether the Federal District Court had overstepped its authority. The argument that the California judicial process resulted in arbitrary outcomes had not been previously considered by California courts, as is normally required. Mr. Laurence argued that Mr. Jones's case met the legal criteria for an exemption from the rule because returning to the state courts would be futile. (source: New York Times) ******************************** In oral arguments Monday, three federal judges did not signal whether they are willing to wade into the death penalty fight in California, instead focusing on procedural barriers that could hold up the case. The state has the largest population of inmates on death row in the country. The judges, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, must decide whether to uphold a lower court ruling asserting that California's death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. In California, more than 900 inmates have been sentenced to death since 1978, but fewer than 2 dozen have actually been executed. The appeals process is so lengthy, an inmate can expect to wait at least 25 years before execution becomes a realistic possibility. U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, ruled last year that "the dysfunctional administration of California's death penalty system has resulted, and will continue to result, in an inordinate and unpredictable period of delay." Such a system, he reasoned, fails to work as a deterrent to crime and is unconstitutional. Carney's 2014 ruling overturned the death sentence of Ernest Jones, a man convicted in 1995 of raping and murdering his girlfriend's mother. Douglas Berman, a law professor at Ohio State University who specializes in sentencing law and policy, said that the court may choose to avoid the merits of the case and instead focus on a technicality. The judges could decide, for example, that the case needs to be sent back to state court, as federal courts tend to abstain from ruling on issues that remain undecided at the state level. Jones' petition will sit in the California Supreme Court for up to four years if the federal appeals court judges send the case back, Michael Laurence, Jones' lawyer, warned. "In that time, countless people will die of old age or sickness on death row, no executions will take place and the system is only going to become more backlogged," Laurence told The Huffington Post. "I don't know whether or not they have the stomach, but certainly the Eighth Amendment compels them to act." The panel seemed "very interested in fleshing out the procedural issues," Ellen Kreitzberg, a professor at the Santa Clara University School of Law, told HuffPost. "They certainly weren't dismissive of Jones' arguments." The office of California's attorney general maintains that the process is lengthy because the state seeks to provide careful, individualized reviews of death sentences. In its appeal, the state argued that "no Eighth Amendment precedent requires the State to force every case to conform to some schedule designed to ensure greater speed." The Supreme Court last addressed the constitutionality of the death penalty almost 40 years ago, but has since considered various aspects of how states carry out the punishment. Most recently, the high court in June upheld Oklahoma's use of a controversial lethal injection drug that had previously been used in several botched executions. If the 9th Circuit judges decide to uphold the lower court ruling, their decision could end up echoing Justice Stephen Breyer's dissent from the June Supreme Court case. In his dissent, Breyer wrote that it was "highly likely that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment," due in part to the penalty's arbitrary application. It's possible that the case in California could also have ramifications for other states with lengthy death penalty delays. A growing number of states have recently rejected the death penalty. Nebraska, which carried out its last execution in 1997, repealed its death penalty in May, with lawmakers citing the cost of maintaining a seldom-used punishment system. Connecticut's high court ruled the state's entire death penalty system unconstitutional earlier this month, on the basis that the punishment "no longer comports with contemporary standards of decency and no longer serves any legitimate penological purpose." California has had a de facto moratorium on executions since 2006, when convicted murderer Michael Morales raised concerns about the state's lethal injection method. It's hard to predict what will happen, Laurence said. But "the system that we've had in California for the past 20 years is not going to fix itself." (source: Dana Liebelson & Kim Bellware, Huffington Post) ********************** Kern killers waiting on death row Here's a list of Kern County's current death penalty cases. Richard Galvan Montiel, slashed throat of 78-year-old man during robbery on Jan. 13, 1979. Convicted in 1979 and resentenced in 1986. Ronald Lee Sanders, bludgeoned woman to death in narcotics robbery on Jan. 23, 1981. Convicted in 1982. Resentenced in 2006. Ward Francis Weaver Jr., bludgeoned to death an 18-year-old Air Force cadet; kidnapped, raped and strangled the cadet's 23-year-old girlfriend. Crimes committed on Feb. 5 and 6, 1981. Convicted in 1985. David Keith Rogers, as a Kern County sheriff's deputy shot 2 prostitutes, ages 21 and 15, in separate slayings by the same canal near Arvin on Feb. 21, 1986, and Feb. 8, 1987. Convicted in 1988. Teddy Brian Sanchez, robbed, beat and stabbed to death three people in 2 separate robberies on Feb. 3, 1987. Convicted in 1988. Rodney Berryman, raped, strangled and stabbed a 17-year-old girl near Delano on Sept. 6, 1987. Convicted in 1988. Clarence Ray Jr., shot a woman to death in robbery attempted outside Bakersfield bar on April 17, 1984. Convicted in 1989. John Lee Holt, raped, robbed and strangled to death a 66-year-old Bakersfield woman on July 6, 1989. Convicted in 1990. Steven David Catlin, poisoned by paraquat his adoptive mother and 2 of his 6 wives in May 1976, March 1984 and December 1984. Convicted in 1990. Paul Clarence Bolin, shot to death 2 men at a marijuana farm 25 miles east of Bakersfield on Sept. 2, 1989. He was also convicted of attempting to murder a 3rd man who escaped with a shoulder wound. Convicted in 1991. Joseph Danks, while serving a term of 156 years to life for stabbing 6 transients to death in what became known as the Koreatown Slasher case in Los Angeles, Danks strangled to death a 67-year-old cellmate at Tehachapi prison on Sept. 20, 1990. Convicted in 1993. Vincente Figueroa Benavides, sexually abused a 21-month-old girl on Nov. 17, 1991, so severely she died. The victim was shaken and squeezed with rib-breaking pressure. Convicted in 1993. Charles F. Rountree Jr., kidnapped, robbed and shot to death a 19-year-old woman on Dec. 7, 1993. Stole her car and bank ATM card. Convicted in 1995. Christopher Charles Lightsey, stabbed a 76-year-old cancer patient 43 times to steal his gun collection and 2 video cameras on July 7, 1993. Convicted in 1995. Robert Wesley Cowan, shot to death a 75-year-old man and strangled the man's wife on Sept. 1, 1984. Convicted in 1996. Bob Russell Williams Jr., sexually assaulted and strangled to death a 40-year-old southwest Bakersfield woman on Oct. 27, 1994. Convicted in 1996. Richard McWhorter, killed a 48-year-old woman and her 10-year-old son on Sept. 11, 1995, in Oildale. Convicted in 1998. Willie Leo Harris, robbed and raped a 22-year-old Cal State Bakersfield student before slashing her throat and stabbing her 57 times on May 20, 1997. Stole her car and burned it. Convicted in 1999. Frank Jay Alvarez, shook a 5-month-old boy to death in 1994, and beat to death a 4-year-old boy in 1996. Convicted in 1998. Juan Villa Ramirez, kidnapped a 17-year-old Arvin High School student and shot him to death execution style on Oct. 14, 1997. Convicted in 2001. Larry Kusuth Hazlett Jr., strangled a 20-year-old Rosamond beauty queen after entering her apartment to sexually assault her in 1978. The case went unsolved for 24 years before the new technology of DNA evidence led to a suspect. Convicted in 2004. Vincent Brothers, shot and stabbed to death mother-in-law, estranged wife and their 3 small children in July 2003. Convicted in 2007. Timothy Titus Rodriguez, bludgeoned 90-year-old woman to death with a baseball bat, and brutally assaulted the woman's 60-year-old daughter. Convicted in late 2009 and sentenced to death in January 2010. Robert Dale Fuller, shot to death his estranged wife and mother-in-law on Aug. 8, 2009. Convicted Dec. 2, 2014, and sentenced to death in January 2015. Travis Frazier and Kenneth Nowlin, stabbed an inmate to death in the exercise yard of the California Correctional Institution in Tehachapi on May 11, 2009. Convicted June 4, 2013. Nowlin was sentenced to death in July 2013, and Frazier in September 2013. (source: The Bakersfield Californian) *********** OC Judge Triggers Potential End to State's Death Penalty----The Court of Appeals is reviewing a ruling by a judge in Orange County that the system is so "dysfunctional" it's cruel and unusual. The fate of California's death penalty was argued in a Pasadena courtroom today, as an appeals court panel heard arguments over a ruling by a federal judge in Orange County who found the system is so "dysfunctional" that it constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. It was unclear when the 3-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will issue a decision, but its ruling could have a lasting impact on whether the state will ever execute another prisoner. In July 2014, U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, issued a 29-page ruling overturning the death sentence of Ernest Dewayne Jones, who was sentenced in Los Angeles in 1995 for the killing 3 years earlier of his girlfriend's mother. "Nearly 2 decades later, Mr. Jones remains on California's death row, awaiting his execution, but with complete uncertainty as to when, or even whether, it will ever come," Carney wrote. "Mr. Jones is not alone. Since 1978, when the current death penalty system was adopted by California voters, over 900 people have been sentenced to death for their crimes. "Of them, only 13 have been executed," he wrote. "For the rest, the dysfunctional administration of California's death penalty system has resulted, and will continue to result, in an inordinate and unpredictable period of delay preceding their actual execution. Indeed, for most, systemic delay has made their execution so unlikely that the death sentence carefully and deliberately imposed by the jury has been quietly transformed into one no rational jury or legislature could ever impose: life in prison, with the remote possibility of death. "As for the random few for whom execution does become a reality, they will have languished for so long on death row that their execution will serve no retributive or deterrent purpose and will be arbitrary." In California, more death row inmates die by suicide than execution. Attorney General Kamala Harris, who personally opposed the death penalty, decided to appeal the decision. "I am appealing the court's decision because it is not supported by the law, and it undermines important protections that our courts provide to defendants," Harris said. "This flawed ruling requires appellate review." Between 1978 and last summer, 94 of the more than 900 inmates sentenced to death have died behind bars before execution could be carried out, according to Carney's ruling. 39 inmates won appeals and were not re-sentenced to death. There are 748 inmates on death row awaiting execution or rulings on appeals. Carney's ruling applied solely to Jones' case, but a ruling by the 9th Circuit would be precedent-setting. According to the Los Angeles Times, the 3 judges who heard the case in Pasadena -- Susan P. Graber, Johnnie B. Rawlinson and Paul J. Watford -- are considered to be politically moderate. All 3 were appointed by Democrat presidents, Graber and Rawlinson by President Bill Clinton and Watford by President Barack Obama. (source: patch.com) ********************* Cruel and unusual? Federal court to consider California death penalty A federal appeals court is set to hear arguments to determine if California's death penalty system - which opponents say is riddled with unfairness and arbitrary delays - constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, a violation of the Eighth Amendment. The Monday hearing before the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Pasadena, California, will come more than a year since US District Judge Cormac Carney ruled that the extended length of the state's death penalty process is, in fact, a violation of the US Constitution. Since 1978, California has sentenced to death more than 900 people, though only 13 have been executed. Around 100 death row inmates have died of natural causes in that time period. The ruling, the 1st time a judge has declared the state's current death penalty unconstitutional, is connected to the case of death row inmate Ernest DeWayne Jones, a convicted rapist and murderer from Los Angeles. "The dysfunctional administration of California's death penalty system has resulted, and will continue to result, in an inordinate and unpredictable period of delay," Carney wrote in his July 2014 opinion. "Allowing this system to continue to threaten Mr. Jones with the slight possibility of death, almost a generation after he was first sentenced, violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment." California Attorney General Kamala Harris appealed Carney's ruling, setting up the appeals court hearing. No matter how the state appeals court rules, the case could very well end up in the US Supreme Court. More than 700 inmates in California are currenly on death row, with more than 40 % of those being imprisoned for more than 19 years. It takes at least 25 years for death row inmates to litigate the merits of their death sentence, according to the California Department of Justice. The last execution in the state occurred in 2006. Capital punishment in California, Carney ruled, rested on arbitrary factors rather than the nature of a certain crime. For the nearly 750 Californians on death row, the judge wrote, "systemic delay has made their execution so unlikely that the death sentence carefully and deliberately imposed by the jury has been quietly transformed into one no rational jury or legislature could ever impose: life in prison, with the remote possibility of death." Prosecutors in the case said the state's system attempts to protect the interests of all involved parties in a given case and that delays don't necessarily mean an arbitrary or dysfunctional process. "The court mistook its policy critique as a proper basis for legal judgment," Supervising Deputy Attorney General James Bilderback II wrote in court filings cited by the Associated Press. Jones, 51, raped and murdered his girlfriend's mother in 1992. He has been on death row for 20 years. In that time, the state did not provide a fair and timely review of his case, he has stated in his appeal. He added that the constant delays and random nature of the death penalty process have contributed to his suffering, and, if he is eventually executed, his death is unlikely to deter criminals or serve as proper retribution. "As the district court concluded, the dysfunctional nature of California's death penalty process has ceased to provide any semblance of a rational and constitutional punishment," attorney Michael Laurence wrote. Legal battles have left California without a court-approved method of execution. 9 years ago, another federal judge ordered the state to overhaul its lethal injection procedures. In 2012, Gov. Jerry Brown asked an advisory board to come up with a single-drug injection method to replace a 3-drug cocktail. In June, the state settled a lawsuit, finally agreeing to draft a 1-drug policy. Meanwhile, in March, Brown asked for $3.2 million to adapt 100 more prison cells for the growing number of death row inmates in the state. In 2008, a bipartisan panel known as the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice called the state's death penalty system "dysfunctional" in its report on delays in the process. "The system is plagued with excessive delay in the appointments of counsel for direct appeals and habeas corpus petitions, and a severe backlog in the review of appeals and habeas petitions before the California Supreme Court," the report concluded. 19 US states and the District of Columbia have abolished the death penalty. In August, the Connecticut Supreme Court validated a 2012 law ending death sentences in these state. In May, Nebraska's legislature approved a law to abolish the death penalty, overriding the governor's veto of the bill. (source: rt.com) USA: Prosecutors Practice Racism in US Courts In early June of this year, the State Bar of Texas stripped Charles Sebesta of his law license and formally disbarred him. His crime? Prosecutorial misconduct that led to the wrongful conviction of exonerated death row prisoner Anthony Graves. Graves was released in 2010 after spending 19 years in prison and on death row. A federal appeals court had ordered a new trial for him in 2006, and over the intervening years prosecutors in Washington-Burleson county found that they had no credible evidence with which to re-try and convict him. The main witness against Graves had recanted his testimony and claimed that Sebesta had coerced him into making false statements. Since his release, Graves has fought for Sebesta to be sanctioned. For his part, Sebesta continued to make claims about Graves' guilt to the media as recently as January. Taking advantage of a new law, Graves was finally able to file a grievance against Sebesta, resulting in an investigation and subsequent hearings which culminated in the former prosecutor's expulsion from the bar. Speaking to Texas Monthly's Executive Editor Pamela Colloff after the decision, Graves said, "I never thought that a young, African American man from the projects could file a grievance against a powerful, white DA in Texas and win." Prosecutors facing consequences for misconduct is very rare. They hold one of the most powerful positions in the criminal justice system and have operated with very little scrutiny for decades. But that is starting to change. Prosecutorial Power and Racism This year has seen an explosion of outrage at the murders of unarmed people of color at the hands of the police. The anger at the cops has been coupled with an outcry against the unwillingness of prosecutors to pursue charges against police officers in cases like those of Eric Garner in New York City or Mike Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. Now, questions are coming to the fore about how prosecutors fit into the racist system of criminal justice that many call the New Jim Crow. A new study released by the Women Donors Network (WDN) reveals that out of 2,437 elected prosecutors, 95 % are white and 79 % are white men. 60 % of states have zero elected Black prosecutors. In 14 states, all elected prosecutors are white. Discussing the reason for the study, WDN President Donna Hall said: Americans are taking a new look at the relationship between race, gender and criminal justice - in the failures to indict police officers from Ferguson to Staten Island, the rogue prosecutions of women who terminated their pregnancies from Indiana to Idaho, and in the epidemic of mass incarceration. Elected prosecutors have an enormous influence on the pursuit of justice in America, yet 79 % of them are white men whose life experiences do not reflect those of most Americans. Prosecutors have enormous power in the criminal justice system. After someone is arrested, prosecutors' discretion allows them to decide whether to file charges, what charges to file and what kinds of sentences to pursue. There is no oversight over their offices and little data is collected on how their decisions are made. It has been historically hard to prove racial bias among prosecutors because of this lack of data. But the raw numbers regarding incarceration are revealing: While Black people make up only 13 % of the population, 37 % of people in prison are Black. Meanwhile, Black men are 6 times more likely to be incarcerated for the same crime as their white counterparts. Post-conviction, the same disparities continue in sentencing. According to the US Sentencing Commission, sentences for Black defendants are 10 % longer than those for white defendants convicted of the same crime. Black defendants are 21 % more likely to be given mandatory-minimum sentences than whites. Perhaps nothing is more revealing of the racial bias in sentencing than the way that death sentences are imposed. People of color are vastly overrepresented on death row as compared to the US population, accounting for 43 % of the executions carried out since 1976. Study after study has shown that the race of the victim is the biggest determining factor in a potential death penalty case. White victims make up 1/2 of all murder victims, yet 80 % of death penalty cases involve a white victim. In the 1,412 executions carried out since 1976, just 31 cases have involved a Black victim and white defendant. It seems that in the eyes of prosecutors, some lives matter more than others. Prosecutors alone decide whether or not to seek the death penalty. For many prosecutors, winning death penalty convictions meant a boost to their political careers. This political benefit has often resulted in egregious misconduct by prosecutors, such as suppressing evidence, coercing witnesses through plea deals and excluding people of color from juries. The Supreme Court outlawed discrimination in jury selection in the landmark Batson vs. Kentucky decision in 1986. Under the decision, defendants are allowed to challenge a decision to strike a juror if it seems like it was motivated by race. However, all prosecutors have to do is argue that they struck a juror for some other "race-neutral" reason, and then it's up to the judge to decide whether it was an improper strike. Over the years, a system of devising "race-neutral" reasons to target jurors of color has been rampantly abused. This June, the high court agreed to hear the case of Timothy Tyler Foster. Foster was convicted in Georgia by an all-white jury - an all-too-common scenario in a murder case involving a Black defendant and a white victim. The state's claim that race played no role in striking jurors is comical, as Foster's lawyers have discussed in their petition to the court which highlights the prosecution's notes from jury selection: (1) marked the name of each Black prospective juror in green highlighter on 4 different copies of the jury list; (2) circled the word "BLACK" next to the "Race" question on the juror questionnaires of 5 Black prospective jurors; (3) identified 3 Black prospective jurors as 'B#1,' 'B#2,' and 'B#3'; (4) ranked the Black prospective jurors against each other in case "it comes down to having to pick 1 of the Black jurors"; and (5) created strike lists that contradict the 'race-neutral' explanation provided by the prosecution for its strike of one of the Black prospective jurors. As recently as 2004, prosecutors in Texas were given instructions on how to exclude people of color from juries using "race-neutral" pretenses. Prosecutors' unique place in the justice system has led to other, more grotesque abuses of power. For example, a culture of celebrating death sentences in district attorneys' offices is common, especially in the South. One of the most notable examples is in Jefferson Parish in Louisiana. In 2003, as a murder trial for Lawrence Jacobs, Jr. began, parish prosecutors walked into the court wearing macabre neckties - one featuring the grim reaper and another depicting a noose. When the defendant's father objected, the men were told by superiors to remove the ties. There were however no further sanctions, although prosecutors had apparently worn the ties at a number of previous court proceedings. The New York Times reported in 2003 that the Jefferson Parish office also regularly held parties after they obtained a death sentence. The office took up a collection to buy a plaque with the name of the condemned person and a picture of a needle. One defense attorney reported seeing the plaques in the office of a prosecutor-turned-judge. Other outrages included a prosecutor in nearby Orleans Parish who kept an electric chair on his desk, an office in Texas that formed a "Silver Needle Society," and an office in Baton Rouge that celebrated death sentences at office parties replete with steak and Jim Beam. Pursuing Injustice While gruesome, these displays are just the most outward manifestation of an outlaw culture among prosecutors, who are rarely sanctioned for their role in wrongful convictions. In 2003, the Center for Public Integrity looked at more than 11,000 cases involving misconduct since 1970. They found that in only about 2,000 cases did an appeals court find that prosecutorial misconduct warranted the overturning of a conviction. Fewer than 50 prosecutors were sanctioned professionally for their actions. In 2010, USA Today published the results of an investigation of 201 federal cases concerning misconduct by prosecutors. They found that just 1 prosecutor "was barred even temporarily from practicing law for misconduct." The disbarment of Charles Sebesta is an important case of what could be a growing trend of prosecutors facing the music for their misuse of the law. The sanctioning of Sebesta came only a few years after the criminal conviction of another Texas prosecutor, Ken Anderson. Anderson presided for years as the district attorney - and later served as judge - in Williamson County, just outside of Austin, Texas. But it was his role in the wrongful conviction of Michael Morton, who spent 25 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit, that made Anderson infamous. Anderson went to trial in 2013, accused of hiding crucial evidence of Morton's innocence. He was found guilty, stripped of his law license and, in an unprecedented decision, sentenced to 10 days in jail. While he ultimately served just 3 of those days, the move sent shock waves through the system. Pamela Colloff reported extensively on the outcome of the case. "Regardless of whether justice was served, a single, extraordinary fact ... will ensure accountability," she wrote in Texas Monthly. "Innocence Project director Barry Scheck told reporters that the current Williamson County DA, Jana Duty, had agreed to allow an independent review of every single case that Anderson had ever prosecuted. The audit will hopefully answer the question that many people have wondered since Morton's exoneration in 2011. Was Anderson's misconduct in the Morton case the exception or the rule? " Anthony Graves is hopeful for a similar outcome for Sebesta. As he told Colloff in June, "I think this is a great 1st step. But a lot of people in Washington and Burleson counties were prosecuted and convicted by Charles Sebesta, and some of them are still behind bars. All of those cases need to be examined, too." Fixing a Broken System The sanctioning of these prosecutors in Texas, combined with the report from WDN, raise real questions about how prosecutorial misconduct can be combatted. Some commentators have called for more diversity in prosecutors' offices. Bryan Stevenson of the Equal Justice Initiative made this case in an interview with NPR in early July. Discussing the fact that most district attorney candidates run unopposed, he said, "There's no one running against them. I think that we can do some things to turn this around. I think, first of all, district attorneys in position today have the opportunity to begin prioritizing diversity and identifying people within their offices who are women and people of color to succeed them." Stevenson also addressed some of the reasons people of color don't pursue jobs as prosecutors: "I actually have had lots of students and others enter the prosecution profession. They say 'I want to change things from the inside.' And what they typically report is that the culture of many of these offices is so hostile to being more responsive to the needs of poor people and people of color that they can't make the change that they seek." Most would argue that more diversity in the profession is needed. Yet there are limits to how effective an electoral strategy can be. Since the civil rights movement, the strategy of electing more people of color to political office hasn't necessarily led to improved conditions in the communities they serve. In 1970, there were just 1,469 Black elected officials in the US Today there are over 10,000. But by many indices, the condition of Black life in America has stagnated or worsened in this time period. Poverty in the Black community is still double the national poverty rate, for example, and the homeownership rate among Black people has remained stagnant since 1970. Police departments have also diversified - but the "thin blue line" continues to prevail. Police culture is still dominated by a culture of closed ranks, as we have seen in virtually every police murder that's made the news. The advent of the Black Lives Matter movement has posed a real challenge to police culture - which also has the potential to push prosecutors to take action in cases of police killings. The indictment and conviction of officer Johannes Mehserle, who killed Oscar Grant in Oakland in 2009, is one example of the difference a movement can make in pushing prosecutors to do the right thing. Meanwhile, there are fights for policy reforms, especially at the state level. In Texas, the high-profile shenanigans of Ken Anderson and Charles Sebesta led to the Michael Morton Act, enacted in 2013, that takes aim at prosecutors' abuse of the Brady Rule, which requires prosecutors to hand over any evidence that might be favorable to the defense. But the rule is written in such a way that prosecutors have tremendous discretion in deciding what they think constitutes Brady evidence. Suppression of evidence is rampant under the system, something the Morton Act aims to change. As Pamela Colloff stated: The key thing the Act does is force every DA's office to have an open file policy - meaning that all prosecutors must hand over every piece of evidence they collect, no matter what. Now they can no longer do things like withhold witness statements. Of course there's always going to be prosecutorial discretion. You can't take that out of the equation. But if you enact reforms which require prosecutors to be more transparent, that could help change the win-at-all-costs culture that exists in some DA's offices. These sorts of reforms need to be enacted not just in Texas, but nationally. Colloff also highlighted the change in the public's perception of prosecutors, and the need for state bars to take action against unscrupulous officials: There's been a huge shift in the way people view prosecutors - they do believe there are prosecutors that are guilty. Now the Texas State Bar has belatedly and begrudgingly shown that it will take decisive action against prosecutors that don't play by the rules, including powerful elected district attorneys. Such campaigns for reforms like the Michael Morton Act in Texas, linked with the growing movement against police killings, show the way forward in the struggle to combat racism in the criminal justice system - and, ultimately, to dismantle the New Jim Crow. (source: truth-out.org) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 1 09:14:56 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 09:14:56 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 1 CHAD: UN office criticizes Chad for execution of 10 The U.N.'s main human rights office is criticizing Chad's execution of 10 Boko Haram members by firing squad. Cecile Pouilly of the office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights called Tuesday on the African country's government to introduce a moratorium on the death penalty, which was restored in a counterterrorism law passed in July. Pouilly said OHCHR officials were not granted access to Friday's trial, which was relocated for security reasons and reduced from 8 to 2 days. She said it wasn't clear if the defendants had access to lawyers. The 10 men were executed Saturday for crimes including murder and the use of explosives following suicide attacks in the capital, N'Djamena, in June and July that killed dozens of people. (source: Associated Press) PHILIPPINES/UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: Family of OFW on death row going to Dubai The family of an Overseas Filipino Worker (OFW) from this city who is facing death penalty in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) after being convicted last May of killing her employer will finally meet with her in the next few days. Rahima Dalquez, mother of convicted OFW Jennifer, said Tuesday they are set to leave for the UAE anytime this week to visit her daughter at the Al Ain jail and help in the ongoing appeals for her case. Rahima will be joined by her husband Abdulhamid and another family member in the trip, which is being facilitated by the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA). "We're happy that Allah is giving us this chance to see her and we're very thankful to the government for making this happen," she said in the vernacular in an interview over TV Patrol Socsksargen. Jennifer Dalquez, 28, who hails from Barangay Labangal here, was sentenced to death by a court in Al Ain, UAE last May 20 for stabbing her employer to death on Dec. 7, 2014. During trial, she said the act was in self-defense after her Emirati employer had tried to rape her. Ebrahim Zailon, acting head of the DFA regional consular office here, said the agency had assigned a lawyer to handle Dalquez' case, especially her appeal. A hearing for her appeal was set on Sept. 3 in Al Ain, UAE. Labor Secretary Rosalinda Baldoz visited Dalquez in jail last June 18 and expressed "high hopes" that the appeal would be successful. The Department of Social Welfare and Development and the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration had provided assistance to Dalquez' family, especially her 2 children. Jennifer's father Abdulhamid believes her daughter's conviction would be overturned as she only acted in self-defense. "She's innocent so we're very hopeful with her appeal," he said. Rahima, on the other hand, advised relatives of other OFWs who are facing various sentences overseas "not to lose hope." "We're also hoping that we will be joined by Jennifer when we return home," she added. (source: mindanews.com) INDIA: Abolishing death penalty: Extradition will still be a problem The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) will face problems in extraditing criminals from various countries despite the Law Commission's recommendations for speedy abolition of the death penalty from the statute books. In a report prepared by the Asian Centre for Human Rights in a report titled "India: Not Safe for Extradition of those facing Death Penalty", it is stated that the CBI will face legal hurdles from 158 countries while seeking extradition of suspects and accused including those accused of terrorism. Execution will impact extradition: The report states that as on July 31, 2015, the CBI had issued about red corner notices to 650 suspects/accused either to face prosecution or to serve a penal sentence. Of these, 192 wanted persons have been charged under laws that provides for death penalty as punishment such as under the Arms Act, Indian Penal Code, the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crimes Act, the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act and the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 2002. Out of 192 wanted persons, 124 are wanted for committing terrorist offences. However, the execution of 3 terror convicts i.e. Ajmal Kasab, Afzal Guru and Yakub Abdul Razak Memon in the last 3 years has seriously impacted India's requests for extradition from a number of countries which have abolished death penalty, the report also states. A total of 140 countries have abolished death penalty and further, a total of 158 countries have ratified the UN Convention Against Torture which under Article 3 prohibits return ("refouler") or extradition of a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture. Apart from the European Union, Canada, Mexico, South Africa and Philippines seek assurance that the death penalty shall not be carried out in case of extradition of those charged with offences carrying death sentence. Where India has failed: India has failed to secure extradition of Mohammed Hanif Umerji Patel @Tiger Hanif, an alleged associate of the underworld don Dawood Ibrahim, who is wanted in India for his role in 2 terror attacks in Surat city of Gujarat in January and April 1993. "If the government of India can give assurance to Portugal that death penalty shall not be imposed on Abu Salem who has been accused of the same offences for which Yakub Memon had been hanged, there is no reason as to why death penalty cannot be abolished altogether. It is the fear of the law, not necessarily death penalty, that can act as deterrent", says Suhas Chakma, Coordinator of the National Campaign for Abolition of Death Penalty. (source: oneindia.com) **************** Kanimozhi for abolition of death penalty DMK MP Kanimozhi on Monday made a strong case for abolishing death penalty for all crimes, arguing that only such a move would uphold a real and unfettered 'Right to Life' for every person. Reacting to the Law Commission's report recommending abolition of death penalty in all cases, except those related to terrorism and waging war against India, she said there were a number of instances of miscarriage of justice in trials concerning terrorism offences. "Likewise, the crime of waging war is often a vague and a misused provision of law," she said. Ms. Kanimozhi said she welcomed the overall tenor of the commission on death penalty, but said India should not stop short of complete abolition. Recalling her participation in the Law Commission's consultation on the issue, she said she was heartened to see the support for abolition of death penalty across political parties and various sections of society. (source: The Hindu) ****************** Govt opposes law panel recco to end the death penalty The government has opposed the Law Commission's recommendation to abolish the death penalty in a phased manner. In a dissent note, Union law secretary P K Malhotra has said that the time is not 'ripe'. Justice AP Shah heads the Law Commission. Other than Malhotra, secretary of legislative affairs, and member of Law Commission, Justice Usha Mehra, too, have submitted their dissents. "I agree with the view that abolition of death penalty is an eventual goal. I am of the considered view that the time is not ripe for its abolition in our country," Malhotra wrote in his dissent note. The top bureaucrat said punishment should serve as an example for the rest of the humanity. He justified his stand on the grounds that crime rates are increasing and there is "overall cultural deterioration". "It is incorrect to say that prescription of death penalty is indulging in revenge killing or primitive or barbaric," reads the dissent note, stating that there are in-built mechanisms of checks and balances. Malhotra has argued that even after conviction, an accused person gets as many as four opportunities before the higher judiciary and also an opportunity to file mercy petition with President and governor of the state. The law commission has contended in its report that death penalty has become aribitary and judgecentric. "We should have faith in the wisdom of our judges that they will exercise this power only in deserving cases for which law is well laid down." Malhotra offers a counter argument. Justice Usha Mehra has also criticised the Law Commission report claiming that too much emphasis has been given to human rights principles of the convicts on death row, forgetting the human rights of innocent victims. She said the possibility of error, as the report pointed out, should not be the reason to abolish death penalty. "What other punishment can be given in case of Nithari," questioned Justice Mehra. In Nithari, Surinder Koli was arrested for sexual assault and murder of several children. (source: punemirror.in) PAKISTAN: Pakistani prison officials given 24 hours to explain how they will hang paralysed convict ---- Pakistan has carried out more than 200 executions since lifting a moratorium in response to last year's Peshawar massacre Prison officials in Pakistan have been given 24 hours to explain how they intend to hang a wheelchair-bound prisoner. Paraplegic convict Abdul Basit is facing the grim prospect of being hanged from his wheelchair as he is unable to mount the scaffold. The 43-year-old was convicted of murder in 2009 but developed tuberculosis 1 year later, leaving him paralysed from the waist down. His lawyers have issued an urgent appeal for the execution to be called off as they say it would constitute cruel and inhuman treatment, which is banned under Pakistani and international law. A "Black Warrant" was issued for Basit's hanging on July 29 but appeals from Basit's legal team led to a stay of execution. At the latest hearing in Basit's case, at the Lahore High Court on Monday, a judge told prison officials they would need to draw up a detailed plan within the next 24 hours to show how they intend to hang Basit. Pakistani prison regulations contain no guidance on how to execute disabled prisoners, suggesting Basit could be the first paraplegic prisoner in the country to face the noose. The country has carried out a spate of executions after it lifted a moratorium in response to last year's Peshawar massacre, which saw Taliban soldiers gun down around 130 schoolboys. Nearly 200 convicts have been hanged since the December 2014 attack, ostensibly in a bid to crack down on terrorism - though critics note that many of those executed are not convicted of terror-related offences. Extracts from a Pakistani prison handbook, seen by The Telegraph, stipulate that prisoners must be able to "stand" on the scaffold. One extract reads: "The drop is the length of the rope from a point on the rope outside the angle of the lower jaw of the condemned prisoner as he stands on the scaffold, to the point where the lope is embraced in the noose after allowing for the constriction of the neck that takes place in hanging. "The condemned prisoner shall mount the scaffold and shall be placed directly under the beam to which the rope is attached, the warders still holding him by the arms." A medical report signed by 2 Pakistani doctors describing Abdul Basit's physical condition As Basit would be unable to "mount" the scaffold or "stand" beneath the noose, and there are no legal provisions in place for hanging disabled people, the execution should be called off, his lawyers at Justice Project Pakistan said. They have issued an urgent mercy appeal to Pakistan's president, Mamnoon Hussain, claiming that hanging a wheelchair-bound person is in breach of its own prison regulations. "Given that the condemned prisoner is unable to use his lower body to support his own weight and unable to stand, it is not possible to accurately measure the length of rope required for his hanging," they wrote. "Consequently, no provision can be safely made for the accurate measurement of the rope that would hang him and to proceed with an inaccurately-measured length of rope would place him at risk of an appalling death." Maya Foa, director of the death penalty team at the human rights group Reprieve, said: "It is astonishing that the jail authorities continue to push for the hanging of Abdul Basit, whose terrible treatment in prison has already left him paralyzed from the waist down. Basit's hanging would be a grotesque spectacle and cruel injustice. We must hope that the court puts a stop to this inhumanity and saves his life." A medical report seen by The Telegraph describes Basit's paraplegia as a "complication of tuberculous meningitis." "At this moment, he is having 0/5 power in lower limbs and 4/5 power in upper limbs," Dr Javaid Iqbal and Dr Anjum Mehdi wrote in the report. "In our opinion, patients with this condition are usually permanently disabled and there is almost no chance of any recovery. He is likely to remain bed bound for his life," they added. Earlier this month Pakistan hanged Shafqat Hussain, a young man whose murder confession was extracted through torture when he was just 14 years old, according to his legal team and human rights groups. United Nations rights experts said his trial "fell short of international standards" and had urged Pakistan to investigate claims he confessed under torture, as well as his age. (source: The Telegraph) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 1 14:03:07 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 14:03:07 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----ARK., NEB., CALIF. Message-ID: Sept. 1 ARKANSAS: Rutledge asks governor to set executions for 8 inmates Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge has officially asked Gov. Asa Hutchinson to set execution dates for 8 death-row inmates who have exhausted all appeals. The request Tuesday came after a 10-year hiatus on executions in the state because of legal challenges to the state's death-penalty procedures. The last execution - Eric Nance, convicted of murdering 18-year-old Julie Heath of Malvern in 1993 - was carried out in November 2005 by using a 3-drug cocktail of phenobarbital, a paralytic agent and potassium chloride. The Arkansas Department of Correction recently obtained the execution drugs, 1 of which was midazolam. The use of the drug was challenged in federal court after a handful of botched executions. Death-penalty opponents claimed that the drug does not induce a complete level of unconsciousness, which allows the inmate to feel pain. (source: arkansasonline.com) NEBRASKA: Ricketts says death penalty signatures should be verified before Nebraska pursues executions Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts says his administration is still pursuing lethal injection drugs for executions but will not decide how to proceed until state officials verify the signatures on a petition to keep capital punishment legal. Ricketts said Tuesday that he first wants to ensure that Nebraskans for the Death Penalty has collected enough valid voter signatures to prevent the law from being repealed. Nebraska lawmakers voted in May to abolish the death penalty, overriding the governor's veto. Death penalty supporters responded with the petition drive that sought to halt the repeal before it went into effect and place the issue before voters in 2016. The group announced last week that it had collected nearly 167,000 signatures. At least 113,883 valid signatures are needed to suspend the repeal. (source: Associated Press) CALIFORNIA: Appeals court looks reluctant to overturn California death penalty A federal appeals panel showed little appetite on Monday for upholding a lower-court ruling that could potentially overturn California's death penalty, saying a defense attorney's argument had already been dismissed by a state court. During oral arguments, a lawyer for Ernest Jones, who was sentenced to die in 1995, asked the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to agree with a federal judge's ruling that the death penalty is unconstitutional in California because of the time and uncertainty involved in carrying out such sentences. U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney last summer had cited the oftentimes decades-long judicial review process involved in putting an inmate to death when he overturned Jones' death sentence, saying it amounted to a violation of the Constitution's prohibitions against cruel and unusual punishment. California Attorney General Kamala Harris appealed, maintaining that the long appeals process represents an important safeguard for the condemned. California, which has more than 740 prisoners on death row, has not executed a condemned inmate since 2006 and has put 13 people to death since 1978. Several inmates awaiting execution at San Quentin State Prison have been behind bars on death row for more than 3 decades. Jones' attorney, Michael Laurence argued that the judge's ruling was supported by a 43-year-old U.S. Supreme Court decision that put a 4-year moratorium on the death penalty on the grounds that it was applied inconsistently. But the justices said that a state appeals panel had already heard and dismissed those arguments and that they were bound to follow the precedent set by its opinion. A state attorney, meanwhile, said the Supreme Court has never vacated a death sentence based on length. He added that the 1972 ruling had no bearing on Jones' case, since it addressed the randomness of sentences based on race. 1 of the justices, Judge Susan Graber, agreed, saying the case that had been before the Supreme Court was "a completely different issue." (source: Reuters) ************ Do Rare Executions Mean California's Death Penalty is Unconstitutional? Former State Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald George once quipped that "the leading cause of death on California's death row is old age." And he's pretty much right. It's been nearly a decade since California executed a death row inmate. In that time more than 50 condemned inmates died, mostly of natural causes or suicide. Last year those delays led federal trial court Judge Cormac Carney in Orange County to issue a stunning decision - saying California's death penalty was so dysfunctional that it no longer had any meaning - that the rare execution was determined not by the severity of the crime but by arbitrary factors like whose appeal process was exhausted first. And that, he said, was unconstitutional. Attorney General Kamala Harris, who personally opposes the death penalty, appealed the decision. And Monday a 3-judge panel heard arguments on both sides for the better part of an hour. Arguing for the state A.G.'s office, Michael Mongan acknowledged that the system is a lengthy one. He said that is to avoid mistakes. "We do not believe that there's any evidence, not on this record or any we're aware of, that the system is arbitrary or random or leads to random results," Mongan told the court. He went on to say that California insists on a careful review of death penalty cases, and that takes time. But attorney Michael Laurence, representing convicted murderer Ernest Jones, said appeals drag on because California refuses to fund enough attorneys for indigent death row inmates. "The average time it takes in the state courts exceeds 20 years," Laurence said. "I don't think it is a stretch to say that a system that produces such lengthy delays constitutes a gross malfunction of the criminal justice system." Laurence referred to a report by the bipartisan Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice on how to fix a "dysfunctional" system, mainly with an infusion of funds to provide legal defense for indigent death row inmates. "That was 2008 and not one dime has been spent to fix this problem," Laurence noted. Truth is with a governor and an attorney general who oppose the death penalty, along with the Democratic majority in the Legislature, opponents may figure that starving the legal appeals process for condemned inmates will slow it down enough to essentially invalidate it. The state has also responded very slowly to a 2006 order by federal Judge Jeremy Fogel, who stopped executions until California's lethal injection procedure was changed. Earlier this year the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation agreed to submit a new protocol for review by the end of October. Much of Monday's hearing focused on technical issues, including whether this case belonged in federal court at all. Attorneys for the state argued that the condemned inmate must exhaust all his appeals in state court first. It's unclear where the justices will come down on that. "As an aside, all 3 judges in the panel were appointed by Democratic presidents, 2 by Bill Clinton and 1 by Barack Obama. But any legal expert will say you can't read tea leaves based on that alone.) After today's oral arguments, Santa Clara University Law School professor Ellen Kreitzberg said if the lower court decision striking down the death penalty is upheld, it will lead to many more lawsuits - even if it's appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. "Every person on death row in California will now raise the claim that the delay there, the whole process by which they're brought to execution in California is unconstitutional," said Prof. Kreitzberg, "and these sentences of death should be converted to life without the possibility of parole." All these delays outrage advocates for crime victims. Kent Scheidegger of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation in Sacramento, predicted Judge Carney's decision will be reversed. The silver lining he said is that the dysfunctional nature of the state's capital punishment system has gotten renewed attention. He hopes it may also rekindle interest in a ballot measure, once backed by 3 former California governors, to speed up the appeals process. On the other hand, death penalty opponents are considering another ballot measure to ban capital punishment and convert all death sentences life without the possibility of parole. In 2012 voters narrowly rejected a measure to do just that. (source: KQED news) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 1 14:03:49 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 14:03:49 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 1 IRAN----execution 1 Prisoner Executed in Public in Southern Iran 1 prisoner on death row who was allegedly charged with kidnapping, armed robbery and rape was executed in public in the city of Bandar Abbas. According to the Press Department of Hormozgan's Judiciary, the prisoner's initials are "A.Gh." The report mentions the prisoner's brothers, identified as "V.Gh." and "A.Gh.", for allegedly assisting in the crime, but did not mention whether they are on death row. (source: Iran Human Rights) TAIWAN: Court acquits man after controversial death penalty case A defendant in a controversial death penalty case was declared innocent after his 9th appeal yesterday, exactly 20 years after his alleged crime. Hsu Tzu-chiang is 1 of 3 men sentenced to death in 2000 for the murder of a real estate businessman on Sept. 1, 1995. Activists and Hsu's lawyers criticized the ruling on grounds that the sentence had been based on the confessions of his co-defendants. The Taiwan High Court yesterday overturned Hsu's seven death sentences and two life sentences, declaring him not guilty. The case had already gone through 8 appeals on repeated retrials. Hsu, in disbelief, turned to a nearby friend after the announcement and asked, "Is it not guilty?" Upon confirming the verdict, the defendant embraced his tearful mother. "I have waited for 20 years," he said to a crowd of supporters waiting outside the high court. The sentence can still be appealed. Hsu and 2 other men were sentenced to death for the alleged murder of real-estate businessman Huang Chun-shu in 1995. The victim was kidnapped outside his home; after his murder, his disfigured body was abandoned in New Taipei City, and then Taipei County. During the trial, defendants Huang Chun-chi and Chen Yi-lung were sentenced based on forensic evidence, while Hsu was convicted based on their testimony. A 4th defendant had escaped to Thailand, where he died. Activists have criticized Hsu's sentence and said that there was security footage proving he was elsewhere during the events. The Judicial Reform Foundation has called the case deeply flawed, saying it demonstrates the need to implement a jury system in Taiwan to reduce judicial bias. After the initial sentencing, 1 of the 2 defendants said he had accused Hsu as a way of getting revenge and that Hsu was innocent. In 2001, Taiwan's Control Yuan released a report on Hsu's conviction that condemned the sentencing. Hsu's case is one of the longest-running murder cases in Taiwan's history, and his acquittal falls exactly 20 years after the alleged murder. Huang Chun-chi and Chen Yi-lung remain on death row. (source: The China Post) INDIA: Tamil Nadu political parties demand abolition of death penalty A day after the Law Commission suggested abolition of death penalty for crimes other than terrorism and waging war, political parties in Tamil Nadu on Tuesday urged the Centre to adopt the recommendations. In a statement, DMK chief M Karunanidhi said a survey by CSDS had confirmed the popular view of people that death penalty should be abolished. "Life sentence in which a person spends the entire life in prison is more cruel than death penalty. If a person is involved in a murder case and is sentenced to life, he will be thinking about it throughout his life and it is worse than death penalty," he said. The DMK chief wanted the Centre to adopt the law panel's recommendations and come to a conclusion that all crimes should not be given death sentence. The government should announce the decision at the earliest, he said. Incidentally, DMK Rajya Sabha MP Kanimozhi had presented a representation to the panel echoing the party's views on death penalty. PMK chief S Ramadoss also urged the Centre to abolish death penalty. "Nearly 150 countries have abolished death penalty, some have stopped it without giving administrative sanction, and some have reserved this for hardcore crimes. Only 36 countries, including India and the Gulf countries, are still practising it," he said. (source: The Times of India) ****************** Mercy Pleas of 306 Death Row Convicts Accepted by Presidents Death sentence of 306 convicts has been commuted by successive presidents so far out of total 437 such mercy petitions. This was disclosed by the Law Commission, which has given a chart of mercy petitions disposed of by successive Presidents since January 26, 1950 till today in its report released on Tuesday on death penalty. The analysis of the chart suggests that a death-row convict's "fate in matters of life and death may not only depend on the ideology and views of the government of the day but also on the personal views and belief systems of the President", the Commission said. The report, which recommended abolition of death sentence except in cases of terrorism and waging war against country, said from January 26, 1950 till today, out of a total of 437 mercy pleas, 306 were accepted - death sentence commuted to life in jail - and 131 rejected. It said during 1950-1982, which saw 6 Presidents, only 1 mercy petition was rejected as against 262 commutations of death sentence to life imprisonment. Quoting available records, it said President Rajendra Prasad commuted the death sentences in 180 out of the 181 mercy petitions he decided, rejecting only 1. President S Radhakrishnan commuted the death sentences in all the 57 mercy petitions decided by him. President Zakir Hussain and President VV Giri commuted the death sentence in all the petitions decided by them, while President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed and President N Sanjeeva Reddy did not get to deal with any mercy petitions in their tenure. "In contrast to the 1st phase (1950-1982), between 1982 and 1997, 3 Presidents rejected, between them, 93 mercy petitions and commuted 7 death sentences. President Zail Singh rejected 30 of the 32 mercy petitions he decided, and President R Venkataraman rejected 45 of the 50 mercy petitions decided by him. "Subsequently, President Shankar Dayal Sharma rejected all the 18 mercy petitions put up before him," the report said. (source: NDTV) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 1 23:42:15 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 23:42:15 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----FLA., LA., MO., CALIF. Message-ID: Sept. 1 FLORIDA----new death sentence Jurors recommend death penalty for Bessman Okafor A jury has reached a decision on whether a 30-year-old man already serving life in prison should be sentenced to death. On Tuesday afternoon, the jury said it recommends the death penalty for Bessman Okafor. A judge will take the recommendation under advisement and ultimately rule on Okafor's sentence. A sentencing date will be set for some time in the next couple of weeks. Bessman Okafor was convicted last week in the September 2012 killing of Alex Zaldivar, 19. Zaldivar was set to testify against Okafor in a home invasion trial. "Bessman Okafor decided that Alex Zaldivar should die by the hand of man, that he would not be allowed to live past the age of 19, that he would not be allowed to grow old and die of natural causes, that he would die by the hand of man," said State Attorney Jeff Ashton. "And ladies and gentlemen, based on the aggravated circumstances in this case, Mr. Okafor deserves the same thing, to die by the hand of man." But the defense said witness Brienna Campos' own description proves it was not the man in the house who drug her out of her room and fired shots. "The fact remains that Brienna Campos said that the person who brought her out of the room and she think fired the shots was tall and lanky and had different hair than Bessman Okafor. She told you that herself, and there was no other evidence to contradict that statement. None," said defense attorney Francis Iennaco. The defense also explained how Okafor was physically and sexually abused and that experts testified he had a learning behavior that resulted in anxiety, aggression and poor impulses. (source: WESH news) LOUISIANA: Louisiana Supreme Court upholds Shreveport killer's conviction, death sentence The Louisiana Supreme Court today upheld the conviction and death sentence of a Shreveport man who killed his pregnant, former girlfriend and dumped her body in a pond. LaMondre Tucker appealed the Caddo Parish jury verdict on a number of issues, ranging from claims the death qualification process did not represent a fair cross-section of the community to prosecutorial misconduct to allegations the presence of the Confederate flag flying at that time outside the courthouse influenced anti-death penalty views of blacks removed from potential jury service. A Caddo Parish jury in 2011 convicted Tucker of the 2008 kidnapping and murder of Tavia Sills, 18. Her decomposing body was found in a north Shreveport pond 3 days after she was reported missing by her mother. Evidence at trial showed Tucker, who days before learned of Sills' pregnancy, shot Sills twice, and he planned or attempted to set her on fire. He shot her a 3rd time to ensure her death then with the help of an accomplice used a large branch to push her body out into the pond in an attempt to hide the evidence. An autopsy concluded Sills was 19 weeks pregnant at the time; however, Tucker was not the father. Tucker has been fighting his conviction and sentence. He filed a motion to reconsider the sentence, contending his immaturity - he was 5 months past his 18th birthday when convicted - and diminished capacity made him ineligible for the death penalty. He also filed a motion for a new trial, alleging Sills' mother had forgiven him, denying he was the shooter and offering evidence rebutting the state's negative depiction of him in the penalty phase. When the motions were denied by the trial court Tucker appealed directly to the state's high court. (source: KTBS news) MISSOURI----execution Missouri executes man for 15-year-old girl's 1989 killing A man who spent nearly 25 years on Missouri's death row was executed Tuesday for the kidnapping, rape and stabbing death of a 15-year-old girl. Roderick Nunley, 50, became the 6th death row inmate to be put to death in Missouri this year. During the execution, his breathing became labored for a few seconds. He briefly opened his mouth before becoming still. He was pronounced dead at 9:09 p.m. CDT. "Despite openly admitting his guilt to the court, it has taken 25 years to get him to the execution chamber," Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster said in a statement. "Nunley's case offers a textbook example showing why society is so frustrated with a system that has become too cumbersome." Ann Harrison's disappearance and death haunted the Kansas City area in March 1989. She was waiting for a school bus on her driveway, 20 yards from her front door, when Nunley and Michael Taylor drove by in a stolen car and made the spur-of-the-moment decision to abduct her. Her body was found in the trunk of the abandoned car 3 days later. Both men were sentenced to death in 1991. Taylor was executed last year. Of 20 executions nationally in 2015, all but four have been in Missouri and Texas. Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon on Tuesday denied a clemency request for Nunley, filed by death penalty opponents, asserting that racial bias played a role in the case because a prosecutor refused a plea deal that would have given Nunley life in prison without parole. Nunley was black, as was Taylor, while the victim was white. The U.S. Supreme Court, meanwhile, denied several appeals from Nunley's attorney, including one claiming that the death penalty amounts to cruel and unusual punishment. Retired Kansas City detective Pete Edlund said the only thing cruel and unusual was how long Nunley and Taylor remained on death row. "They just take forever to do the deed," Edlund told The Associated Press. "The delay in executing these 2 is just nuts because it didn't have anything to do with their guilt. It was legal mumbo jumbo nonsense." According to prosecutors, Nunley and Taylor binged on cocaine and stole a car in the pre-dawn hours of March 22, 1989. At one point, a police officer from neighboring Lee's Summit chased the car but was called off by a supervisor when the stolen car crossed into Kansas City. Later that morning, the men were driving around Kansas City when they saw Ann, her school books and flute on the ground beside her. "They were just cruising and she's out at the driveway waiting for the school bus," Edlund said. The girl's mother had stepped inside to get a younger daughter ready for school. When she heard the bus, she looked outside. The books and flute were still there, but Ann was gone. "She knew something was wrong," Edlund said. Taylor and Nunley had grabbed the girl and taken her to Nunley's mother's home. She was raped and sodomized, then stabbed repeatedly in the stomach and neck. Taylor and Nunley put the girl's body in the trunk of the stolen car, then abandoned it in a residential area. The body was found 3 days later. Edlund said the case was cracked months later when a man in jail for robbery - and seeking a $10,000 reward in the case - turned in Taylor and Nunley. Both men confessed, and some of Ann's hair was found in carpeting at the home where the crime occurred. Edlund said Ann's father was a former reserve officer with the Police Department, and her uncle was a Kansas City officer. "To all of us, she was part of our police family," Edlund said. "That made it even more important that we solve the case." Nunlley becomes the 6th condemned inmate to be put to death this year in Missouri and the 86th overall since the state resumed capital punishment in 1989; only Texas (528), Oklahoma (112), Virginia (110), and Florida (90) have executed more individuals since the death penalty was re-legalized in the USA on July 2, 1976. Nunley becomes the 20th condemned inmate to be put to death this year in the USA and the 1414th overall since the nation resumed executions on january 17, 1977. (sources: Associated Press & Rick Halperin) ************* Death row inmate convicted in 1989 rape and murder of 15-year-old KC girl executed after Gov. Nixon denies clemency petition A man who has been on death row for the kidnapping, rape and murder of high school freshman 26 years ago, was finally put to death about 3 hours after he was originally scheduled to be executed Tuesday evening. Roderick Nunley, 50, was originally scheduled to be executed around 6 o'clock on Tuesday for the 1989 murder a 15-year-old Ann Harrison. His execution was put on hold though, after his attorneys filed a "petition for writ of habeas corpus," with the United States Supreme Court around 5:30 on Tuesday. The petition claimed Nunley's right to council may have been violated because of an "incurable conflict of interest" involving the attorney who has been representing Nunley. According to a news release from Missouri Governor's Office sent out just before 8 p.m Tuesday, Gov. Jay Nixon released a statement regarding his decision to deny the petition for clemency made on behalf of Nunley: "I have received from my counsel a final briefing on the petition for clemency from Roderick Nunley, which has been reviewed in detail. After deliberate consideration of its merits and the facts of this case, I have denied this petition. As Governor, this is a power and a process I do not take lightly. Each instance involves a very specific set of facts, which must be considered on its own. On the morning of March 22, 1989, 15-year-old Ann Harrison was waiting for the school bus at the end of the driveway of her Raytown home when she was abducted, raped, and then stabbed to death by Roderick Nunley and Michael Taylor. The capital punishment sentence given to Taylor for his role in these brutal crimes was carried out last year. Nunley also pleaded guilty to these heinous crimes and was sentenced to death. My decision today upholds this appropriate sentence. I ask that Missourians remember Ann Harrison at this time and keep her parents, Bob and Janel Harrison, and the Harrison family in your thoughts and prayers." Also around 8 p.m. the Missouri Attorney General's Office said Judge Samuel Alito issued an order dening Nunley's application for a stay of execution, as well as the petition for writ of habeas corpus. Nunley's co-defendant Michael Taylor was executed last year. The men were found guilty of kidnapping Harrison while she waited for her school bus at 67th and Booth on Kansas City's east side in 1989. Taylor and Nunley later raped and killed her. Pete Edlund, a retired Kansas City Missouri police detective, says his squad cracked the case and he says Nunley's execution is long overdue. "It was a horrific murder on top of raping and sodomizing her. They took their time and struggled with trying to kill her and the whole time she was begging for her life," said Edlund. Edlund says the delay in justice for Ann Harrison was mainly legal wrangling and if it were up to him, both would've been executed shortly after they were sentenced to death more than two decades ago. "They ended up sticking a 7 inch serrated knife through her neck and then twisting it on top of slicing and stabbing her in the stomach it was ugly," said Edlund. Edlund says Taylor and Nunley took away everything Harrison would have become. "He needs to meet his maker because he doesn't deserve to suck the same air that you and I do," said Edlund. (source: fox4kc.com) CALIFORNIA: CA Death Penalty Delays Traumatize Families of Victims - Advocacy Group On Monday, The Los Angeles Times reported that a US appeals court focused on procedural issues that could put at risk a previous district court ruling that declared California's system of capital punishment was unconstitutional because of "decades-long delays." "Long delays in their [state of California's] system and recurring appeals add to the already enormous tab and give nothing but uncertainty to murder victims' families who are retraumatized with every appeal and news story," Hyden said on Tuesday. California has spent more than $4 billion on their capital punishment system, Hyden added, and have executed 13 individuals while releasing three from death row who were wrongly convicted. "I think it's appropriate for the courts to review California's death penalty system," Hyden said. "It is marred by mistakes, inefficiency, and long delays." Witness to Innocence Executive Director Magdaleno Rose-Avila claims that California's 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will listen to all arguments in the recent ruling against the death penalty and will judge fairly. US District Court Judge Cormac Carney ruled last year that California's death penalty law is unconstitutional. Carney argued that the system was plagued by delays and uncertainty violating the US constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Conservatives Concerned about the Death Penalty is a network of political and social conservatives who question the alignment of capital punishment with conservative values, according to the group's website. (source: sputniknews.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 1 23:42:56 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 23:42:56 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 1 PAKISTAN: LHC dismisses plea against execution of disabled person A Lahore High Court (LHC) division bench Tuesday dismissed a petition against the execution of a disabled death row prisoner. The division bench comprising Justice Anwaarul Haq and Justice Erum Sajad Gull heard the petition, which was filed by Nusrat Parveen against the execution of her disabled son, Abdul Basit. During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel submitted that Basit was paralysed from the waist down and used a wheelchair as a result of an illness, which he contracted in prison. Basit's lawyer contended that he has already suffered unusual punishment, and to try to execute him now would be a form of "double punishment", prohibited under Pakistani law. The counsel further submitted that jail manual gave no instructions on how to execute disabled prisoners and the court could intervene if law was ambiguous. However, on behalf of the home department, a provincial law officer submitted that disabled person could be hanged under Sub-Section 2 of Sections 350 and 356 of jail rules. He pointed out that such a matter was raised before Lahore High Court and the Supreme Court but the execution was not stopped. He said that a disabled person could be hanged by using their wheel chair. The bench after hearing detailed arguments from both parties dismissed the petition. It is pertinent to mention that the court had stayed the execution of Basit which was scheduled for last month, Abdul Basit (43), was convicted and sentenced to death for a murder in 2009. (source: Pakistan Today) INDIA: Amnesty backs law panel's findings on death penalty Amnesty International India on Tuesday urged the government to accept the findings of the Law Commission on death penalty and immediately abolish it for all crimes. In a statement, it said the Centre "must heed the findings of a Law Commission report on the unfairness of the death penalty" and immediately abolish it for all crimes. "The Law Commission points out that in nearly a quarter of the cases in which the Supreme Court has recently given the death penalty, it has done so in error," Aakar Patel, Executive Director of Amnesty International India, said adding the report is a "vital step" forward in the debate around the death penalty in India. He said the Commission debunks many of the "myths surrounding death penalty". "Although the report stops short of recommending complete abolition, Parliament must seize this opportunity to show political leadership and abolish capital punishment for all crimes," he said. "As the report says, the government has the power to lead public opinion, and indeed an obligation to do so on issues of human dignity and equality. India's gamble with this lethal lottery needs to stop now," he said. The 20th Law Commission, in its report submitted on Monday, said the administration of the death penalty in India is "fallible, vulnerable to misapplication, and disproportionately" used against socially and economically marginalised people. The Commission recommended that the death penalty be abolished for all crimes other than terrorism-related offences and waging war and hoped that the movement towards absolute abolition will be "swift and irreversible". (source: Deccan Herald) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 2 11:13:25 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 11:13:25 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, PENN., FLA., ALA. Message-ID: Sept. 2 TEXAS: Oklahoma Chases the Texas Political Homicide Record The question is not whether you will execute an innocent person in a state that executes criminals. Oklahoma and Texas are engaged in a competition right now, a sort of Red River Shootout off the football field, to address the real question. For context, remember that Texas has the 4th largest Indian population among the states in the 2010 Census. Oklahoma is number 2. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, 16 Indians have been executed, a percentage of executions over twice the percentage of Indians in the general population. Of those, Oklahoma killed one and Texas killed 2, which would put Texas ahead if the competition were simply how many Indians do you kill. There are currently 31 Indians on death row. 12 are from California and the rest are distributed among Arizona, Florida, Oklahoma, Oregon, Tennessee, Utah, and there is 1 federal prisoner under sentence of death. There are no identified Indians currently on the Texas death row. Can an innocent man be convicted of capital murder in these United States? Since 1973, 155 people have been exonerated off of death row after an average stay of 11.3 years. Only 20 were exonerated by DNA, but to make the list, the defendant must have been (1) acquitted after a new trial or (2) had all charges dropped or (3) gotten an absolute pardon based on new evidence of innocence. No American Indians appear among the 155 exonerations, but since only 60 of the innocent death row residents were white, the dearth of Indians is a combination of luck and the fact that only 1 tribe has opted in to the federal death penalty. Texas Texas is gearing up for Mark Norwood's capital murder trial. If that name is too obscure, try Michael Morton, the man who got life in prison for the murder of his wife and served 25 years before DNA evidence that exonerated him pointed to Norwood, who has been convicted and is serving the sentence he put off on Michael Morton. 6 of those years were served during the legal battle to get the DNA testing. Besides the tragedy of an innocent man serving 25 years, another woman, Debra Baker, was killed with the same modus operandi, leading to speculation that Baker died because of a now-deceased sheriff and a district attorney named Ken Anderson too lazy to follow the evidence beyond the obvious suspect in a criminal homicide, the spouse. DA Anderson was later appointed a district judge by Governor (and presidential candidate) Rick Perry, but after the Morton exoneration Anderson lost his judgeship, his law license, and did 10 days in jail, reduced to 5 for good behavior. While this pales before the 25 years his victim served, the fact that Anderson's misconduct caught up with him and destroyed his career is an exceedingly rare and therefore welcome result. Anderson's protege John Bradley, the district attorney appointed by Perry to replace Anderson and who opposed the DNA testing that freed an innocent man for 6 years, was defeated in the next election. Besides keeping Michael Morton behind bars for an extra 6 years, John Bradley made history when Gov. Perry replaced the head of the Texas Forensic Science Commission with Bradley just 2 days before it was scheduled to review an expert report on Cameron Todd Willingham's case. Willingham was executed for homicide by arson after Perry refused to stay the execution on the ground that the 1st real expert investigation showed there was no arson. The expert Perry ignored would not be the last to opine on the Willingham evidence. Huffpost published the narrative that is the Willingham story: Willingham was executed by lethal injection on Feb. 17, 2004. Yet the efforts to exonerate Willingham only intensified, and in 2005, the Texas Forensic Science Commission decided to re-examine the case. The commission hired a nationally known fire scientist, Craig Beyler, to evaluate the evidence, and in his report, he came down on the same side as the scientists who had evaluated the case prior to Willingham's execution: there was no credible scientific basis for the conclusion that arson had been committed. Beyler was eventually scheduled to testify before the commission on Oct. 2, 2009. 2 days before Beyler's appearance, however, Rick Perry put a stop to it. There was speculation at the time that Perry did not wish to grant a stay of Willingham???s execution because he was locked in a serious battle for reelection against former Senator Kay Baily Hutchinson. Perry???s appointee Bradley called off the review, but in spite of their best efforts, the Willingham case has come to represent a political execution of an innocent man, since the science did not go away when Bradley stopped the hearing. Governor Perry, to be fair, was elected in a state that has been rabid about killing killers. Former Gov. Ann Richards took a political bath when she gave a man on death row a thirty-day stay to being forward evidence of innocence. Even former Gov. George W. Bush was criticized when he commuted the death sentence of a known serial killer who was shown to have been on a job site in Florida when the crime he was about to be killed for was perpetrated in Texas. In the Texas political context, the fact that the man was innocent of the crime for which Texas was about to take his life was "a technicality." After Bradley's 2 run-ins with innocence in homicide cases - Morton and Willingham - he found himself unable to find a job. At last notice, he was an assistant attorney general in the Republic of Palau, an island in Micronesia of about 20,000 souls that is a former U.S. territory independent since 1994. Then-Gov. Rick Perry, who had previously appointed Bradley first district attorney and then chair of the Texas Forensic Science Commission, visited Palau shortly before Bradley landed the job. Perry was on a political photo op mission to search for the remains of missing WWII airmen. The government of Palau declared Perry an "Honorary Consul" during his visit. The Houston Chronicle questioned whether Perry had interceded on Bradley's behalf, but Perry had no comment. Since Cameron Todd Willingham, the innocent man, was killed by Texas in 2004 and the innocent Michael Morton was released back in 2011, it's important to demonstrate Texas is still in the game of convicting innocent people of serious crimes if it's to be compared to Oklahoma. This year, Charles Sebesta, a Texas district attorney for 25 years, followed ex-Judge Ken Anderson in losing his law license for using testimony he had reason to know was false to put a man on death row for 12 years. I can't report this without noting that I had cases against Sebesta when practicing law, and while he was pretty tightly wrapped, he did not strike me as the kind of man to kill for political reasons. He continues to deny it, but his denials do not cover everything in the judgment taking his law license. Sebesta did not handle the case that got him disbarred in a manner fitting for taking a man's life, but I believe to a moral certainty that Sebesta believed then and believes now that he was doing his best to kill a killer, a fool's errand demanded by the voters. As long as the voters make that irrational demand, it's hard to blame elected officials for catering to it. Texas has so far 13 exonerations from death row. But remember, the question is not if a death penalty state will kill an innocent person. Oklahoma Oklahoma racked up some extra points for brutality when it botched the execution of Clayton Lockett on April 29, 2014. Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin had ignored an Oklahoma Supreme Court order to stay the execution, but that bit of lawlessness slipped from notice when Lockett was injected with the 1st drug in a 3 drug "cocktail" that was supposed to render him unconscious for the drugs that would first paralyze him and then stop his heart. If he were conscious, the 2nd drug would cause major panic and the third would cause excruciating pain. Lockett was not rendered unconscious by the 1st drug, midazolam. He gasped and struggled for over 40 minutes as the executioners first closed the curtain to take the debacle out of view of the legal observers and then, finally, decided to stop the attempt to kill Lockett - who then, they claimed, died of a coincidental heart failure. If the public was fascinated by this debacle, another audience was positively riveted: the other residents on Oklahoma's death row, and other death rows in states cued up to try midazolam for the ultimate off-label use. The objection was to becoming human subjects in a painful science experiment and the case was styled Warner v. Gross, but Charles Warner was executed and it got to the Supreme Court as Glossip v. Gross, where the Court made Richard Glossip an involuntary lab rat by a 5-4 vote. Ironically, the case that will have Richard Glossip's name on it is about whether the method used to kill him is "cruel and unusual punishment" and so unlawful under the Eighth Amendment. Glossip would rather dispute his guilt and ask about the propriety of executing an innocent man, apparently not having gotten my memo that the question is not whether a death penalty state will kill an innocent man. Is it possible that Glossip is in fact innocent? It's not only possible, it's likely. There is no question that another individual killed the victim or that the guilty person is mentally challenged, although it's unclear if his challenges are severe enough that he cannot be executed. The killer is not on death row because he was offered his life in exchange for saying that Richard Glossip hired him to kill the victim. In return for his testimony to that effect, Oklahoma did not seek the death penalty. He is now serving life without possibility of parole. The legal and moral problem is that the self-serving testimony of the admitted killer did not lead to any corroborating physical evidence and there is no credible motive for Glossip to kill the victim, who employed both Glossip and the killer. To call the case against Glossip "weak" is almost being charitable. His impending execution is set for what is a major holiday in much of the Southwestern Borderlands, Diez y Seis de Septiembre - September 16 - which commemorates the Grito de Dolores that kicked off the war for Mexican independence. Sullying a holiday with the execution of an innocent man is one of the ways you know you are in Oklahoma. Glossip's impending death by homicide for a homicide he probably did not commit has motivated lots of supporters, including Sister Helen Prejean of Dead Man Walking fame and the actor who played Prejean when the book was filmed, Susan Sarandon. Among the people who have spoken up for Glossip's innocence is the admitted killer's daughter, who has written her opinion that Glossip is innocent and her father wants to recant but fears that would lead to joining Glossip on death row. Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin has a record of doing politics with convicted killers without regard for the quality of the conviction that rivals Rick Perry's. As Mexican politicians perform the Grito de Dolores in public places and Texas indulges a more low key celebration with barbacoa, Indian Territory (now Oklahoma) marks September 16 by executing a man who is probably innocent, or at least by conducting a deadly science experiment even if he's guilty. All of which leads to the question that goes begging in the death penalty debate, where so many people want to pretend the issue is whether a death penalty state will kill an innocent person. Of course it will. Rick Perry and Mary Fallin are not outliers. The real question, and the subject of this ersatz Red River Shootout, is how many innocent people in each death penalty state will be a sacrifice to political ambition. (source: indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com) PENNSYLVANIA: Judge dismisses 'ridiculous' appeal by Easton triple murderer Facing the death penalty in 2011 on charges he gunned down 3 people in an Easton home, a New Jersey man agreed to put his fate in the hands of a judge, and not a jury.. Olayiwola Hollist's decision had its logic: By opting for a bench trial, the Newark man secured an agreement from Northampton County prosecutors that they would not seek his execution if he was convicted. But Hollist, who was found guilty of 1st-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison, now says he had an entirely different reason for taking the deal. Before he did so, he maintains, he was assured by an investigator for the defense that the judge in the case, Stephen Baratta, was predisposed toward an acquittal. That claim was called "absurd" by Baratta on Tuesday, though he granted that it was "novel." Baratta did so as he dismissed an appeal by Hollist, who is seeking a new trial by claiming that his court-appointed lawyers failed him. "Do we need to address this ridiculous theory for relief - that Hollist was cheated out of his constitutional right to a jury trial because he relied on his mitigation expert who told him to waive his right to a jury trial because the fix was in? ... We think not," wrote Baratta, who is now the county's president judge. Hollist and a co-defendant, Demar Edwards, were convicted 4 years ago by Baratta of what is still Easton's bloodiest slaying ever, a gangland killing at an apartment on North 13th Street in the West Ward. On Nov. 29, 2007, Hollist was 1 of 4 men who drove from New Jersey for a hit in which 3 people who were dressed for bed were shot execution-style, according to testimony. The victims were Alphe Rene, 20; Aleah Hamlin, 19; and Chanel Armour, 23. Authorities said they were murdered as retaliation between Bloods gang factions for killings in the Garden State in the days before. In 2013, the Superior Court affirmed Hollist's conviction at appeal. That led to a legal challenge last year under the state's post-conviction relief act, which allows defendants to argue their lawyers were ineffective. Baratta's 24-page opinion rejected all of Hollist's claims, finding that lead defense attorney Charles Banta gave his client sound advice and pursued a reasonable strategy at trial. But it was Hollist's assertion of a promised fix that the judge's decision spent the most time on. In May, Hollist testified that his mitigation specialist, Harvey Ellis, made the claim during a private conversation advocating for him to waive his right to a jury. "He said he knows that Stephen Baratta has reasonable doubt to find me not guilty, and if I went with Stephen Baratta, it would be in my best interest," Hollist said in court, according to Baratta's ruling. "That's what he made it seem like, that the judge was going to make sure that everything was done right and the right thing would be to find me not guilty," Hollist also said. Baratta said Hollist knew what he was doing when he opted for a bench trial, and he pointed to lengthy questioning that the defendant underwent before his decision was accepted. "That claim that he was tricked by his expert into believing that a nonjury trial would be a corrupt proceeding where he would be found not guilty, and as a result, he foolishly waived his jury trial, is not supported by the record and [is] unworthy of further discussion," Baratta said. Hollist's appellate attorney, Phillip Orlando Robertson of Altoona, Blair County, did not return a phone call Tuesday seeking comment. Reached at his home in Warminster Township, Bucks County, Ellis laughed when told by a reporter of the allegation. "I don't think so," said Ellis, 74, who is retired. "I don't think that ever would have happened." Hollist, 31, is jailed at Houtzdale State Prison in Clearfield County. Edwards, 36, is also under a life sentence, as is 27-year-old Ali E. Davis, who was convicted at trial in 2010. A fourth defendant, Lewis A. Gray, 38, is serving 13 to 26 years in prison. He cooperated with prosecutors after taking a plea deal to conspiracy charges. (source: Morning Call) FLORIDA: Florida Man Found Guilty of Killing Boss and Her Husband A Tampa Bay area man faces a possible death sentence for fatally shooting his boss and her husband. A Hillsborough County jury found 35-year-old Julian Ospina-Florez guilty Tuesday of 1st-degree murder. The same panel will reconvene later this week to recommend life in prison or the death penalty. A judge will make the final decision. Hector and Debra Rivera were found dead at their Tampa mansion in January 2012. Ospina-Florez had worked for Debra Rivera as her driver and helper in her jewelry business. He called 911 after the shootings, claiming he had been tied up by an unknown assailant. But authorities say the murder weapon -- a gun found in a locked drawer -- belonged to Ospina-Florez, and a box of ammunition with 10 rounds missing was found inside his car. (source: WCTV news) ALABAMA: Drug company named in lethal injection case----Firm says use of drug in death penalty against its policies Add another drug company to the list of potential sources of Alabama's death penalty drugs - a list state officials have long tried to keep secret. Court documents filed last month in the case of death row inmate Tommy Arthur suggest New Jersey pharmaceutical manufacturer Becton Dickinson could be a maker of the midazolam Alabama uses as the 1st element of its 3-drug execution protocol. The company, in a written statement, said its drugs are not intended for sale to U.S. prisons, and that its distributors have been warned of that fact. The company will take an "appropriate course of action" against any distributor found selling midazolam to prisons, according to the statement. The new documents are not the 1st time lawyers have dropped the name of a drugmaker in court, though state officials have long declined to publicly name the sources of their lethal injection drugs. "A company that's not involved in lethal injection would be very concerned about the potential unfair damage done to them by their association with executions," said Robert Dunham, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, a nonprofit which studies the death penalty. "A company that is involved would be rightly concerned about the consequences of being known to be involved." Alabama hasn't executed an inmate in more than two years. Drugs once used for lethal injection have become scarce as major drug companies - particularly those headquartered in Europe, where there's strong opposition to capital punishment - have backed away from providing those drugs to prison systems. Several inmates have challenged the constitutionality of the state's current execution drug protocol, which consists of midazolam to kill pain, rocuronium to relax the muscles, and finally, potassium chloride to stop the heart. Inmates claim midazolam doesn't kill the pain of execution and thus violates the ban on cruel and unusual punishment. For the past 2 years, lawmakers have proposed bills to make the names of Alabama's lethal injection drug suppliers secret. Those bills didn't pass, but state officials still decline to name the sources of their drugs, citing a gag order in Arthur's case. Many of the documents in that case are sealed, and many non-sealed documents contain redacted passages. Earlier this year, however, state officials included a "package insert" - essentially manufacturer's instructions - for midazolam produced by Illinois-based Akorn Pharmaceuticals as an exhibit in the case. The company denied selling any midazolam directly to the state. More recent court documents refer to a similar package insert from Becton Dickinson. In a court order issued Friday, U.S. District Judge W. Keith Watkins ruled that Arthur's lawyers could conduct depositions to find out which company's insert best applies to the drugs used in Alabama's executions. Consequences When Akorn's package insert surfaced in court documents earlier this year, the company said it "strongly objects" to use of its drugs in executions. Akorn later announced it would restrict sale of midazolam to wholesalers who "use their best efforts" to prevent sale of the drug to prisons. Becton Dickinson took a similar position in its Tuesday statement, sent by public relations director Troy Kirkpatrick. "All of our distributor partners have previously received formal notification ... that our products are not intended for use in U.S. prisons including state and federal penitentiaries," the statement read. Becton Dickinson did $163,905 in direct business with the state so far this year, and $156,162 in fiscal 2014, but all those sales appear to have been to the Department of Public Health, not the Department of Corrections. Dunham said it's possible for a drugmaker's products to be used in an execution without the company knowing it. But association with lethal injection is increasingly problematic for companies both ethically and from a marketing standpoint, he said. "A company's good name is worth a fortune," Dunham said. He cited the example of Mylan, a producer of rocuronium bromide, one of the drugs Alabama uses for lethal injection. According to Reuters, a Dutch public employees' pension fund last week divested itself of stock in Mylan. Mylan has said its drugs are not intended for use in capital punishment, but according to Reuters, pension fund managers thought the company wasn't doing enough to control use of its drugs. Changing tactics The judge's order comes as Arthur and other death row inmates search for a new defense in the wake of a U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding the use of midazolam in executions. An Oklahoma inmate, citing a botched 2014 execution which took more than half an hour, argued that midazolam shouldn't be used to kill inmates. The high court disagreed. "The prisoners failed to identify a known and available alternative method of execution that entails a lesser risk of pain," Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the opening lines of the majority opinion. The death penalty itself hasn't been ruled unconstitutional, Alito wrote, and there must therefore be a constitutional way to carry it out. Lawyers for Arthur, who was convicted in the 1980s murder-for-hire of a Muscle Shoals man, have since argued that Alabama does have alternatives, including the firing squad. "Execution by firing squad, if implemented properly, would result in a substantially lesser risk of harm than the state's continued use of the d-drug protocol involving midazolam," wrote Suhana Han, attorney for condemned inmate Tommy Arthur, in a court motion. Arthur has also argued that the state could buy sodium thiopental - once the 1st drug in Alabama???s execution protocol - from a drugmaker in India, or could hire a compounding pharmacist to mix the drug pentobarbital in small batches. Pentobarbital, too, was once used by the state to kill inmates. Arthur challenged the constitutionality of that drug in his original 2011 suit against the state. "Arthur cannot pretend that he has never adopted the position ... that pentobarbital violates the Eighth Amendment because it will cause him to have a heart attack and suffer a painful death before its anesthetic effects are achieved," lawyers for the attorney general's office wrote in a motion for summary judgment. Attempts to reach a spokesman for Arthur's legal team were unsuccessful Tuesday. Joy Patterson, a spokeswoman for the attorney general's office, said the office would not comment further on the case. The judge's Friday order blocks Arthur from directly seeking information about the sources of the state's drugs, their expiration dates and any effort by the state to adopt an alternate form of execution. Discovery in the case must be completed by Nov. 15, Watkins ordered. (source: Anniston Star) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 2 11:15:22 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 11:15:22 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----KAN., OKLA., NEB., USA Message-ID: Sept. 2 KANSAS: Capital punishment in Kansas and the impact it could have on the Frazier Glenn Cross trial In his nearly 2 decades as a criminal defense attorney, Paul Cramm has represented an array of memorable clients. But perhaps one of the most unforgettable was one he watched from bench, not at an attorney but as observer. "Unusual that Mr. Cross is representing himself," said Cramm, who watched the closing arguments in the Frazier Glenn Cross trial. "Very unusual, very rare to see the defendant act as council." While unusual, Cramm doesn't think that Cross hurt his case by representing himself. What could have hurt him, however, was killing 3 people back in April 2014. For that, Cramm suspects the jury will act swiftly. "I am relatively confident the jury will find that the aggravating factors have been met and will likely impose death penalties for the 3 convictions," said Cramm. But here's where it gets complicated. While Kansas still deems the death penalty constitutional, an execution has not been carried out since June 22, 1965. Part of the reason - capital punishment was unconstitutional for many years. Then once legally permissible again, Kansas was the last state to put it back on the books. Then in 2004, the Kansas Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional yet again, but that vote was later overturned. Right now, the death penalty is legal in Kansas only via lethal injection. "The vast majority of the folks who are sentenced to death will likely die of natural causes," explained Cramm. "They are going to die when the Lord calls them, not when the warden calls them. It's very expensive to put someone on the warden's call list." While Cramm suspects that Cross will join the 9 other men on Kansas' death row, he said because capital punishment in Kansas has a complicated past, Cross may never find himself in the hot seat. "If our supreme court finds that this is a valid conviction, Mr. Cross will join the nine gentleman already on death row, he will be number ten, and in all likelihood he will die of natural causes long before the initial post-conviction appellant process is complete." When I asked if the process could take years, Cramm corrected me, saying it would likely take decades. (source: Terra Hall, KSHB news) OKLAHOMA: With death penalty, caution doesn't signal opposition Does a district attorney's stance on the death penalty effectively dictate a community's support for it? A recent article by The Marshall Project, a news organization covering America's criminal justice system, suggests this is the case and cites Oklahoma County as an example. Nationally, the Death Penalty Information Center reports 2 % of U.S. counties accounted for 56 % of death row inmates as of 2012. The Marshall Project reports, "One reason for the national disparity: The fervor of local prosecutors." To make that case, the article highlights 3 counties where the "number of new capital sentences decreased significantly after prosecutors - each of them outspoken, even celebrity, proponents of the death penalty - either resigned or didn't seek re-election." During his tenure as Oklahoma County district attorney from 1980 to 2001, Robert Macy was a vocal proponent of the death penalty. Macy averaged a little more than 2.5 death sentence convictions each year he was in office - 54 total. But since 2009, The Marshall Project reports, just 3 people have been sentenced to death in Oklahoma County. Citing local defense attorneys, The Marshall Project attributes that decline partly to Oklahomans' skepticism about the death penalty. In 23 of the 54 death penalty cases he won, Macy relied on the testimony of former police chemist Joyce Gilchrist. A later investigation found many of Gilchrist's conclusions were sketchy at best, false at worst, and led to the release of one death row inmate. There's no doubt district attorneys have outsized impact on whether the death penalty is pursued. If a prosecutor doesn't believe in the death penalty and won't seek it, the discussion is over. But even when a DA supports the death penalty, deciding whether to pursue that sentence is a judgment call. Given the higher expenses involved with death penalty cases and the drawn-out appeals process, some district attorneys may opt to seek lengthy prison sentences. Factors such as the severity of the crime, a defendant's criminal history and suffering of a murder victim are also taken into account. But even if a district attorney vocally endorses the death penalty, that doesn't mean jurors will agree. The decision to sentence someone to death is never taken lightly. There's little evidence suggesting Oklahoma juries are now predisposed to distrust prosecution claims or oppose the death penalty by default, despite publicity regarding controversial convictions and botched executions nationwide. Local juries have supported the death penalty in the vast majority of cases where it has been sought since David Prater was elected Oklahoma County DA in 2006. Also, death penalty support has remained fairly consistent over many decades. A Gallup poll taken after the negative publicity surrounding Clayton Lockett's problematic execution in Oklahoma last year found 61 % of adults nationwide still found the death penalty morally acceptable. In 1936, when Gallup first asked that question, 59 % supported the death penalty. Oklahoma support for the death penalty remains strong enough that approval of a new state execution method - nitrogen hypoxia - passed this year with overwhelming support from Democrats and Republicans. It's appropriate that prosecutors and juries are contemplative before pursuing, or handing out, the ultimate sentence. But Oklahomans remain willing to impose the death penalty when they believe it's justified. Death penalty critics should not confuse deliberation with opposition. (source: Editorial Board, The Oklahoman) NEBRASKA: Governor Seeks Lethal Injection Drugs While Awaiting Verification Of Petition Signatures Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts says his administration is still pursuing lethal injection drugs for executions, but will not decide how to proceed until state officials verify the signatures on a petition to keep capital punishment legal. Ricketts said Tuesday that he first wants to ensure that Nebraskans for the Death Penalty has collected enough valid voter signatures to prevent the law from being repealed. Nebraska lawmakers voted in May to abolish the death penalty, overriding the governor's veto. Death penalty supporters responded with the petition drive that sought to halt the repeal before it went into effect and place the issue before voters in 2016. The group announced last week that it had collected nearly 167,000 signatures. At least 113,883 valid signatures are needed to suspend the repeal. The verification process could take more than a month. (source: WOWT news) **************** Is it cruel to stay too long on death row? Nebraska's death row inmates, like those in many states with capital punishment, have lived for decades under the cloud of possible execution. On Monday, a federal appeals court heard arguments from a California inmate who contends that all those years on death row violates the U.S. Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The argument, which swayed a lower court judge, has the potential of ending California's death penalty, although some legal observers have said such an outcome is doubtful. Legal challenges over subjecting inmates to the mental stresses of death row are not new. At least two condemned inmates in Nebraska unsuccessfully raised the challenge years ago. "Each year, the argument gets stronger," said Lincoln attorney Alan Peterson, who made the argument on behalf of death row inmate Carey Dean Moore. Convicted of killing 2 Omaha cab drivers, Moore has spent 35 years on death row. Moore failed to convince the Nebraska Supreme Court in 1999, when he had been on death row for 19 years. "Essentially, Moore claims that it is cruel and unusual punishment to keep a person confined with the knowledge that he is to be executed and then to prolong that process pursuant to legal machinations. Moore's argument is completely without merit," Judge John Gerrard wrote for the court. Gerrard has since been appointed a federal judge. Nebraska has not executed an inmate since 1997, when Robert Williams was killed in the electric chair. In one of his appeals, Williams also raised the argument about living on death row. Since the Williams execution, the Nebraska Supreme Court has struck down electrocution as cruel and unusual punishment. Nebraska lawmakers switched the method to lethal injection, but problems obtaining the proper drugs have blocked the state's attempts to execute Moore and Michael Ryan in recent years. Ryan, 66, died from cancer in May after spending nearly 30 years on death row. 10 men reside on Nebraska's death row, including Jose Sandoval, Erick Vela and Jorge Galindo, who were convicted in the 2002 Norfolk bank murders. Moore, 57, is the longest-serving inmate. Marco E. Torres Jr., 40, sentenced 5 years ago for a double murder in Grand Island, has served the least amount of time. The Nebraska Legislature voted earlier this year to repeal the death penalty. Last week, however, death penalty supporters turned in nearly 167,000 petition signatures so voters can decide in the 2016 general election whether to keep capital punishment. County election officials are verifying those signatures. In the meantime, the argument about the cruelty of death row returned Monday in Pasadena, Calif. The 3 judges on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals appeared concerned that procedural requirements might prevent them from deciding whether the state system was so dysfunctional as to be unconstitutional. The panel is reviewing a ruling last year by U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney that declared the California death penalty system unconstitutional because of decades-long delays that he said made executions a remote possibility and deprived them of any possible deterrent value. More than 900 people have been sentenced to death since California restored capital punishment in 1978, but only 13 have been executed, the last one in 1992. More than 100 condemned inmates either have had their sentences overturned or died of natural causes or suicide. University of Nebraska law professor Eric Berger said Monday that about the only way the California case could have a bearing on Nebraska and other states would be if the appeals court rules in favor of the inmates. Such a decision would likely force the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the issue. (source: Norfolk Daily News) USA: Where do Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders stand on the death penalty? An image circulating on Twitter and Reddit claims Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have opposing views on a host of issues, including the death penalty. According to the image, Sanders opposes the death penalty, but Clinton supports it. We wanted to see if the two candidates disagree on capital punishment. Sanders and the death penalty The Vermont senator has been an opponent of the death penalty for his entire political career. And with one exception, he has voted against expansions of the death penalty at every turn. Sanders opposed the Violent Crime Prevention Act of 1991 during his 1st year in the U.S. House of Representatives. "All over the industrialized world now, countries are saying, 'let us put an end to state murder, let us stop capital punishment'," Sanders said in a 1991 speech on the House floor. "But here what we're talking about is more and more capital punishment." The bill, which included provisions to authorize the death penalty as appropriate punishment for crimes involving the murder of a law enforcement officer, terrorism and drug trafficking, never reached the desk of President George H.W. Bush. In 1994, however, Sanders voted in favor of the final version of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, a bill that expanded the federal death penalty. Sanders had voted for an amendment to the bill that would have replaced all federal death sentences with life in prison. Even though the amendment failed, Sanders still voted for the larger crime bill. A spokesman for Sanders said he voted for the bill "because it included the Violence Against Women Act and the ban on certain assault weapons." Sanders reiterated his opposition to capital punishment in 2015. "I just don't think the state itself, whether it's the state government or federal government, should be in the business of killing people," he said on a radio show. Clinton and the death penalty Clinton's campaign did not provide her stance on capital punishment. The last time she publicly addressed capital punishment, which was 15 years ago, Clinton offered support. In her 2000 run for U.S. Senate, she was quoted by a Washington Post columnist as saying the death penalty had her "unenthusiastic support." Clinton's history on the issue, however, is slightly complicated. As director of the legal aid clinic at the University of Arkansas in the 1970s, Clinton helped to get the death sentence of a 20-year-old African-American man sentenced to life in prison. But according to a timeline of the case compiled by the Marshall Project, a nonprofit news organization that focuses on criminal justice, Clinton's views on the topic changed as her husband's did. Bill Clinton, then governor of Arkansas, is described as shifting his position on the death penalty as part of an effort to present himself as a centrist "New Democrat" in the 1980s. Citing Paul Kengor's 2007 book God and Hillary Clinton: A Spiritual Life, the timeline says that Hillary Clinton " 'agonized' over her husband's embrace of capital punishment," eventually supporting it. As first lady, she supported the 1994 crime bill that Sanders opposed. After her election to U.S. Senate, she co-sponsored a bill that made it easier for prisoners on death row to appeal for exoneration through DNA testing. Clinton hasn't yet addressed the issue in the 2016 election cycle. Our ruling The infographic claims Bernie Sanders opposes the death penalty and that Hillary Clinton supports it. Sanders has opposed the death penalty for at least the last 20 years, though he did vote for the 1994 crime bill that, among many other provisions, expanded the number of crimes that could result in death penalty sentences. While Clinton has helped make it easier to appeal a death sentence, her most recent documented statements on the topic expressed tepid support. Without a clear idea of her most recent stance, we can only assume she still holds that position. We rate the claim Mostly True. (source: politifact.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 2 11:16:43 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 11:16:43 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 2 THAILAND: Thai murders - defendants say confessions were 'forced' 1 of the suspects accused of the murder of British backpacker Hannah Witheridge from Norfolk and her friend on a resort island in Thailand last year testified in court for the 1st time today. 23-year-old Hannah and 24 year old David Miller, were murdered last year on Koh Tao, or Turtle Island, a popular tourist destination in southern Thailand. Thai police said in October that Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Htun, 2 22-year-old migrant workers from Myanmar, had initially confessed to the killings. The confessions followed weeks of speculation and pressure on police to solve the murders. The pair now deny charges of murder, rape and robbery, and could face the death penalty if found guilty. Police said DNA found on the victims matched the suspects but the 2 men later retracted their confessions, saying they had made them while being tortured. Defense lawyers said there appeared to be discrepancies between DNA evidence held by Thai police and DNA tested by British police. We are trying to show that the suspects' confessions were made under pressure and (that they) was forced to confess. ??? Zaw Lin's lawyer Nakhon Chomphuchart A verdict is expected in October. (source: itv.com) IRAN: 5 Prisoners in Rajai Shahr Prison Sent to Solitary Confinement in Preparation for Executions / 4 Prisoners Executed in East Azerbaijan and Kurdistan Provinces According to informed sources, 5 prisoners charged with murder have been transferred from their wards in Rajai Shahr Prison to solitary confinement in preparation for their executions. 2 of the prisoners' names are Davoud Alambeigi and Ghorban Mohammadi. The names of the 3 other prisoners are not known at this time. A source who wishes to be annonymous tells Iran Human Rights: "The prisoners are currently being held in solitary confinement, they are scheduled to be executed on the morning of Wednesday [September 2]." In the past week at least 4 prisoners charged with murder were hanged to death in Sanandaj Central and Tabriz Central prisons, accordng to the Kurdistan Human Rights Network. After conducting additional research, Iran Human Rights confirms these executions. On Wednesday August 26 one prisoner, identified as Davoud Amazadeh, was hanged to death at Tabriz Central Prison. On Thursday August 27 1 prisoner, identified as Jamal Jafari, was executed at Sanandaj Central Prison. On Monday August 31 1 prisoner, identified as Mostajab Pourmohammad, was hanged to death at Tabriz Central Prison. Pourmohammad was reportedly imprisoned for 8 years prior to his execution. On Tuesday September 1, a prisoner, identified as Seyed Zahed Hedayati, was hanged to death at Sanandaj Central Prison. Hedayati was reportedly imprisoned for 3 years prior to his execution. Iranian official sources, including state media and the Judiciary, have not reported on these executions. (source: Iran Human Rights) INDIA: December 16 gangrape convicts sentenced to 10 years imprisonment for robbery The 4 death row convicts in the December 16 gangrape and murder case were on Thursday held guilty of kidnapping and dacoity. Additional Sessions Judge Reetesh Singh convicted Akshay Kumar Singh, Mukesh, Pawan Gupta and Vinay Sharma for the offences under various sections of the IPC, including sections 395 (dacoity) and 365 (kidnapping or abducting with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine a person). "Vide separate order pronounced today, the accused persons are convicted in all the sections for which charges were framed against them. Put up the matter for arguments on sentence on September 2," the judge said. All the 4 convicts were present in the court at the time of pronouncement of judgement. 6 persons, including a juvenile, had beaten up and robbed a carpenter before raping and brutally assaulting a 23-year-old girl in a moving bus in south Delhi on December 16, 2012. The victim had died in a Singapore hospital on December 29, 2012. Mukesh, Vinay, Pawan and Akshay were awarded death penalty by trial court in the gangrape and murder case which was later confirmed by Delhi High Court. Their appeals are pending before the Supreme Court. Accused Ram Singh had allegedly committed suicide in Tihar Jail on March 11, 2013. The juvenile was facing proceedings in the gangrape and murder case before Juvenile Justice Board which sentenced him to 3 years detention in reformation home. Proceedings against Ram Singh were abated following his death. The court had on July 15, 2013 framed charges against the 4 accused after they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Apart from dacoity and kidnapping, the court had also framed charges against them for the offences punishable under sections 342 (wrongfully confining any person), 394(person voluntarily causing hurt in committing or attempting to commit robbery), 412 (dishonestly receiving stolen property knowing that it was obtained by dacoity) and 34 (common intention) of the IPC. (source: Daily News & Analysis) ***************** Caveat stunts death penalty punishment's progressive nature It is a positive and progressive move had it not been for the caveat. The Law Commission of India, headed by former Chief Justice of the Delhi high court, Justice Ajit Prakash Shah, on Monday submitted its report to the Union law minister, Sadananda Gowda, recommending that the death penalty be abolished for all crimes 'other than terrorism-related offences and waging war'. The commission pointed out that although 'there is no valid penological justification for treating terrorism differently from other crimes, concern is often raised that abolition of death penalty for terrorism related offences will affect national security'. The recommendations have been opposed from different quarters, including 3 members of the commission who refused to sign the report. The report, titled 'Death Penalty', rightly states that capital punishment is the extreme form of incapacitation and snuffs out the possibility of reform. While terror-related cases are cited as an exception, the question arises: What about other perpetrators of heinous crimes, like in the December 16 gang-rape case? For the system to work effectively after the abolition of the death penalty it is important that law and order and, more importantly, the criminal justice system work effectively. An overstretched police force and poor legal aid tilt the balance against the underprivileged and the commission's apprehensions about the misapplication of the death penalty should be seen from this perspective as well. The case of undertrials languishing in jails across the country for years without proper legal recourse is just one of the many examples of this. The commission has rightly taken into consideration the international landscape regarding the death penalty. A majority of countries in the world have abolished the death penalty and as of 2014, there were only 58 retentionists. Ironically, though it is only 58 nations, since they are populous, like China, India and the United States, a majority of the world's population potentially faces the gallows or lethal injection, as the case may be. The law commission's report reflects the maturity of the Indian judiciary and it is now up to our leaders to translate its recommendations into action. Complete abolition should be the goal with no exceptions made for any type of crime. As it stands, the commission has held back from going the whole hog and doing away with what is essentially an irreversible and inhumane form of punishment. (source: Hindustan Times) PAKISTAN: Death row delay for Pakistan paraplegic Abdul Basit file photoImage copyright Reprieve Image caption Abdul Basit's planned execution last month was postponed but he is still on death row Pakistani prison officials have missed Tuesday's court deadline to explain how they would hang a paraplegic man. Abdul Basit is paralysed from the waist down and uses a wheelchair after an illness he contracted while in prison. Abdul Basit was convicted 6 years ago of murder but maintains his innocence. He was to be hanged in Lahore last month but this was postponed. A petition for his pardon was dismissed. Hanging him would constitute cruel and degrading treatment, his lawyers say. They add that this is prohibited under Pakistani and international law. Pakistan has executed more than 200 people since reintroducing the death penalty in December 2014. At the time the government said it was a measure to combat terrorism after the Taliban massacred more than 150 people, most of them children, in a Peshawar school. Pakistan's jail manual gives no instructions on how to execute disabled prisoners. A high court judge had told prison officials they had until 1 September to come up with specific steps if they were to be allowed to proceed with the execution of Abdul Basit. The BBC's Shaimaa Khalil says Mr Basit remains on death row but his sentence has effectively been stayed until the jail authorities come up with a clear plan for how they will execute him. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Executions around the world Pakistan has executed more than 200 people since December 2014, almost all of them this year Figures for executions in other countries in 2015 are as yet largely unavailable In August Amnesty International said Saudi Arabia had executed 102 people in the first six months of 2015, compared with 90 in all of 2014 By the end of last year, the other countries with the highest number of reported executions were: Iran: 289, Iraq: 61, USA: 35, and Sudan: 23 In 2013 the numbers were: Iran: 369, Iraq: 169, Saudi Arabia: 79, Somalia: 68, USA: 39 China and North Korea refuse to divulge information on the number of executions that take place within their borders (source: BBC news) CHAD: UN human rights office urges Chad to halt death penalty after execution of Boko Haram members The U.N.'s main human rights office is criticizing Chad's execution of 10 Boko Haram members by firing squad. Cecile Pouilly of the office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights called Tuesday on the African country's government to introduce a moratorium on the death penalty, which was restored in a counterterrorism law passed in July. Pouilly said OHCHR officials were not granted access to Friday's trial, which was relocated for security reasons and reduced from 8 to 2 days. She said it wasn't clear if the defendants had access to lawyers. The 10 men were executed Saturday for crimes including murder and the use of explosives following suicide attacks in the capital, N'Djamena, in June and July that killed dozens of people. (source: Metro News) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 2 13:33:43 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 13:33:43 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, OHIO Message-ID: Sept. 2 TEXAS----stay of impending execution Execution for Houston convicted killer postponed The Harris County District Attorney's Office Wednesday postponed a scheduled Sept. 29 execution for Houston convicted killer Perry Eugene Williams to allow a federal judge time to appoint an appellate lawyer in the case. Williams, 34, was sentenced to die for the September 2000 killing of Matthew Carter, who was abducted from the parking lot of a video rental store. After forcing Carter into his own vehicle, Murphy and 3 accomplices drove around the area. When Carter attempted to escape, Murphy shot him in the head, officials said. According to court documents, Murphy then took items from the victim. Murphy told authorities that the gun accidentally discharged when the victim jostled him. (source: Houston Chronicle) ******** Executions under Greg Abbott, Jan. 21, 2015-present----10 Executions in Texas: Dec. 7, 1982----present-----528 Abbott#--------scheduled execution date-----name------------Tx. # 11---------October 6----------------Juan Garcia-----------529 12---------October 14---------------Licho Escamilla-------530 13---------October 28---------------Christopher Wilkins---531 14---------November 3---------------Julius Murphy---------532 15---------November 18--------------Raphael Holiday-------533 16---------January 20 (2016)-----Richard Masterson--------534 17---------January 27---------------James Freeman---------535 18---------February 16--------------Gustavo Garcia--------536 (sources: TDCJ & Rick Halperin) OHIO----new (2017) execution date Ohio Supreme Court sets 2017 execution date for condemned killer of 2 in robbery spree The Ohio Supreme Court has set an execution date for a man condemned to die for fatally shooting 2 people in a 1992 robbery spree. A 3-judge panel sentenced Gary Otte to die for killing Robert Wasikowski in an apartment in Parma in suburban Cleveland on Feb. 12, 1992, and for killing Sharon Kostura in the same apartment complex the next day. The high court on Wednesday set a March 15, 2017, execution date for the 43-year-old Otte, who has lost previous appeals of his death sentence. The decision makes Otte the 24th inmate on death row with an execution date. The prison system is scheduled to resume executions in January but hasn't been able to obtain new supplies of lethal injection drugs. (source: Associated Press) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 2 21:04:52 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 21:04:52 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----N.C., NEB. Message-ID: Sept. 2 NORTH CAROLINA: Wrongly convicted brothers each get $750,000 in compensation When 2 brothers were released after 3 decades of wrongful imprisonment, they struggled to adapt to an outside world neither had experienced since they were teenagers. The older one has managed to adjust and keep his "head up high," but the younger one, according to his family, is a broken man. On Wednesday, the state of North Carolina sought to make amends, awarding each man $750,000 for the time they spent behind bars after they falsely confessed to taking part in the killing of an 11-year-old girl. Henry McCollum, 51, appeared calm as a state official approved the maximum payout under the law to him and half-brother Leon Brown, 47. Brown did not attend the hearing; he is in the hospital, suffering from mental health problems including post-traumatic stress disorder, the brothers' lawyer said. McCollum and Brown were released last September after a judge threw out their convictions, citing new DNA evidence that points to another man in the 1983 rape and slaying of Sabrina Buie. McCollum had been the longest-serving inmate on North Carolina's death row. Brown had been sentenced to life in prison. They were pronounced innocent in June by Gov. Pat McCrory, who issued pardons that made them eligible for compensation. McCollum, who has been living with his sister in the Fayetteville area, said the money will enable him to support himself and help his family. "My family, they have struggled for years and years," he said. "It's hard out there for them, and I want to help them." Their attorney said the money will be put in a trust and invested so that the brothers can live off the earnings and won't have to work. North Carolina is among 30 states that have laws for compensating people wrongfully convicted, according to the Innocence Project. But North Carolina stands alone with its Innocence Inquiry Commission, set up to investigate disputed cases. It performed the DNA testing that set the brothers free. Sabrina's body was found in a soybean field in rural Robeson County, with a cigarette butt, a beer can and 2 bloody sticks nearby. Attorneys for the 2 brothers say that they were scared teenagers with low IQs and that investigators berated them and fed them details about the crime before they signed confessions saying they were part of a group that killed the youngster. McCollum was 19, Brown 15. But the DNA on the cigarette didn't match either one of them, and fingerprints on the beer can weren't theirs either. No physical evidence connected them to the crime. The current district attorney for Robeson County, who didn't prosecute McCollum and Brown, has said he is considering charging the man whose DNA was found on the cigarette butt. That man is in prison for another murder. McCollum listed some of the things he enjoys about freedom: "Being out here, to be able to breathe the air. To be able to walk around as a free man. To be able to walk down that street with my head up high." Meanwhile, Brown has been hospitalized at least 6 times in the last year for mental health problems that include hallucinations and deep depression, attorney Patrick Megaro said. Both men were bullied and attacked behind bars, and Brown was sexually assaulted repeatedly by other inmates, according to a lawsuit brought by Megaro against county authorities and others. The brothers were initially given death sentences. In 1988, the state Supreme Court threw out their convictions and ordered new trials. McCollum was again sent to death row, while Brown was found guilty of rape and sentenced to life. The Associated Press normally does not identify victims of sexual assault, but Megaro said Brown and his family were willing to make the information public to show how he suffered. The men's sister, Geraldine Brown, said her brother Leon is "really sick" from his time in prison. "He did not go in that way," she said. "They snatched him from my mother as a baby." (source: Associated Press) NEBRASKA: Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts (and his father) spent $300,000 to save the death penalty. Here's what he could have bought instead. Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts (R) really likes the thought of his state killing death row inmates. He likes it so much, in fact, that he's spending his own money to make sure his state keeps doing it. In May, the Nebraska legislature voted 32-15 to abolish the state's death penalty. This was a pretty remarkable thing. Nebraska, of course, only has 1 legislative body, and that body is officially nonpartisan. But this is a state that voted 60 % for Mitt Romney in 2012 and hasn't gone Democratic in a presidential election since 1964. Ricketts promised to veto the bill, and he did. The legislature then overrode his veto, 30-19. Classy guy that he is, Ricketts then vowed to kill as many of death row inmates as he can before the law takes effect, or even to carry out executions in spite of the new law. Ricketts then put $200,000 of his own money toward a petition drive to put the death penalty on the ballot in the next election. Ricketts's father contributed another $100,000. This isn't a lot of money for Ricketts. In 2006, the former Ameritrade chief operating officer spent $11 million of his own fortune in an effort to unseat then-Sen. Ben Nelson. Ricketts lost by 28 points. He won the state's governorship last year after squeaking through a crowded GOP primary field. The petition effort was successful. Pro-death-penalty campaigners collected nearly three times the number of required signatures to get on the ballot. It isn't clear how the initiative will fare. An American Civil Liberties Union poll taken in April found that 58 % of respondents opposed the death penalty when presented with alternatives; just 30 % support it. But asking the question while listing possible alternatives (such as life without parole) isn't how the issue will be presented to voters in the upcoming campaign. So we have a sitting governor spending hundreds of thousands of dollars of his own money to promote a ballot initiative to overturn a law the legislature passed over his veto, and a law he has promised to defy. It's certainly an odd sight. The same guy spending all that money to keep the death penalty legal is the guy who, if he has his way, will be the one signing the death warrants. It raises some interesting ethical questions. But it also raises some questions about Pete Ricketts and his priorities. Just for fun, I looked at some of the other things Pete Ricketts and his father could have bought instead of spending $300,000 so that Pete Ricketts can send men to their deaths. Here's what else $300,000 could have bought: --45 one-year tuition scholarships to the University of Nebraska. --One year of health insurance for 102 low-income Nebraskans. --Ricketts supports charters and vouchers for private schools. With the money he has spent to re-legalize state-sanctioned killing, he could have bought a year of tuition at a private elementary school for 81 kids who otherwise couldn't afford it. --Ricketts also opposes abortion rights. The average pregnancy costs about $8,800 in the United States. That means Ricketts could have paid the hospital and medical costs of at least 34 low-income women - probably more, given that the cost of health care in Nebraska is almost certainly lower than the U.S. average. --From what I can tell, the average soup kitchen meal costs about $1.20. For $300,000, Ricketts could have purchased 250,000 meals for homeless people. He could feed 228 people 3 meals per day for a year. --Alternately, he could a year of rent-free living for 45 people in an average 1-bedroom apartment in Lincoln. --He could employ 11 Nebraskans for a year at the state's median salary. Nebraska currently has 10 death row inmates. (The state hasn???t executed anyone since 1997.) This means that Ricketts (and his father) has spent more per inmate trying to execute those inmates ($30,000) than the average Nebraskan makes in a year ($26,899). Just 2 days ago, a federal appeals court ordered a new trial in the lawsuit brought by the "Beatrice 6." In 2009, the 6 Nebraskans were exonerated by DNA testing for a murder in 1985. Between them, they had served 77 years in prison. Remarkably, 5 of the 6 had confessed. 3 of them testified against the only 1 who insisted on a trial. They later cited their motivation for confessing to a crime they didn't commit, then falsely implicating someone else: fear of the state's death penalty. (source: Radley Balko, Washington Post) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 2 21:05:38 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 21:05:38 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 2 PAKSITAN: Army Chief ratifies death sentence of 5 terrorists Army Chief General Raheel Sharif ratified the sentence of 5 terrorists that were awarded death penalty by military courts on Wednesday. The terrorists were involved in killings of lawyers in Karachi and Lahore, killing of a DSP, attacks on security personnel and sectarian killings in Quetta, reported Dunya News. 5 terrorists were sentenced today after Supreme Court's verdict that decreed that military courts are legitimate. According to Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR), following are the terrorists that were awarded death sentence: Sabir Shah alias Akram Allah: For killing advocate Arshad Ali in Lahore Asad Ali alias Bhai Jan: He belonged to Tehreek-e-Taliban and was an expert in explosives. Asad killed police personnel in Karachi including DSP Kamal Mangro. Tahir: He was involved in breaking into Bannu jail. Fateh Khan: He was involved in killing Khasadars and civilians. Hafiz Usman: He has been convicted of involvement in sectarian killings and armed robberies in Quetta. According to ISPR, terrorist Qari Amin Shah, who was involved in attacks on polio teams and girls school in Khyber Agency, has been handed life sentence. (source: Dunya News) ************* Pak court sentences 5 'hardcore terrorists' to death 5 'hardcore terrorists' were on Wednesday sentenced to death by Pakistan's recently legalised secret military courts for their involvement in sectarian killings and attack on a girls' school. Army chief General Raheel Sharif confirmed the death sentences of the 5 accused persons. 1 other terrorist was jailed for life by the courts which were established as part of a crackdown on militancy following a massacre at an army-run school in Peshawar last year in which over 150 people, mostly schoolchildren were killed. "Chief of Army Staff confirms death sentences of another 5 hardcore terrorists, involved in killing of an advocate at Lahore, sectarian killings in Quetta, killings of police officials at Gudab Karachi, breaking of Bannu Jail, attack on a girls school in Khyber Agency and attack on polio team in Khyber Agency," the Army said in a statement. One gets lifer "Out of 6 terrorists, 5 were awarded death sentence and 1 life imprisonment by the military courts," military spokesman Major General Asim Bajwa said. The details of trial like date and venue were not shared by the military as the special courts operate in secrecy. Only lawyers of the accused are allowed to attend the proceedings. On August 25, General Sharif approved an increase in the number of military courts in Karachi to handle "outstanding terrorist cases." Following the Peshawar attack, the government had lifted the moratorium on the death penalty and the Parliament passed the 21st amendment which established military courts that were challenged in the Supreme Court. The apex court ruled in favour of setting up of the courts earlier this month. (source: Ther Hindu) MALAYSIA: Lorry driver detained, about 4kg drug seized Police detained a lorry driver and seized 3.97 kilogramme of drug, believed to be cannabis, worth RM10,000, at a house in a raid at Kampung Pegoh Dalam here last Saturday. Following his arrest, police believed that they had crippled a drug peddling syndicate in the Alor Gajah district. Alor Gajah district police chief Supt Muhammad Ismail Muhammad Yusuf said when police raided the house about 11.30 pm that day, the 41-year-old suspect, who had previous records for drug-related offences, was found in possession of several packets, believed to contain the drug. He tested positive for drug and was detained for investigation under Section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, an offence which carried the mandatory death penalty if found guilty. In another development, Muhammad Ismail said 31 men and 10 women, aged between 19 and 31, were detained at a wild party held at two bungalows in a resort here during a raid conducted about 2 am last Monday. He said 21 of them, including four women, tested positive for drug. One of them, who is in his 20s, was found in possession of drug, he added. He said initial investigation found that invitation to the party was made through the Whatsapp and Wechat applications and entrance was free. (source: astroawani.com) IRAN----execution Habibollah Latifi's Death Sentence Stopped By Leadership's Pardon Political prisoner, Habibollah Latifi's execution sentence was stopped by the leadership's pardon. According to the report of Human Rights Activists in Iran (HRANA), the death penalty of a political prisoner, Habibollah Latifi, was stopped after several requests and the amnesty of leadership of the Islamic Republic. Mohammad Saleh Nikbakht, lawyer of this political prisoner, announced this news and told HRANA that this political prisoner's sentence will soon be converted to another punishment. It should be noted that Habibollah Latifi has never been on leave since his arrest in 2007 until today due to his death sentence. Habibollah Latifi, a senior engineering student at the University of Ilam, was arrested on 23rd October 2007 and, after spending more than 3 months in solitary confinement and physical torture, was sentenced to death by the Islamic Revolutionary Court in Sanandaj presided by jusge Hasan Babaei on charges of "Combat and Corruption on Earth". His death sentence had been sent to the Court of Appeal due to his lawyer's objection, but in the winter of that year, the Court of Appeal also confirmed the death sentence and the verdict for a final appeal was sent to the Supreme Court, where it was again confirmed. Finally, after 8 years of the family and lawyers of this political prisoner and people's demand, Habibollah Latifi was pardoned by the leadership and his death sentence was suspended. ************* A Prisoner Hanged In Bandar Abbas Prison In the morning of Sunday 29th August, a prisoner who had been charged with "Murder", was executed in Bandar Abbas prison and a prisoner who has been accused with "Rape" was transferred to solitary confinement for execution in the same prison. According to the report of Human Rights Activists in Iran (HRANA), Abdullah Zarei, 25, from the city of Minab of Hormozgan province, charged with "murder", who was held in ward 2 of Bandar Abbas prison, was hanged in this prison. Also, Ali Ghaemi Fard, 23, who was charged with "Kidnapping and rape", and was sentenced to death, was transferred to solitary confinement from the youth ward in Bandar Abbas prison on Saturday 29th August. According to HRANA's sources; his execution will be run on Sunday 30th August. (source for both: Human Rights Activists News Agency) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 3 10:12:23 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 10:12:23 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----N.J., PENN., FLA., LA., OHIO Message-ID: Sept. 3 NEW JERSEY: Fiocchi to Sponsor Death Penalty as Deterrent for Cop-Killers Assembly Republican Sam Fiocchi is calling for the reinstatement of the death penalty for anyone convicted of killing a law enforcement official in the line of duty. Fiocchi will sign on as a sponsor of A-2429, which reverses the ban on capital punishment that was enacted in 2007. Tuesday, an Illinois police officer was killed which follows the cold-blooded murder of a Texas police office last Friday. "These heinous and callous acts are intolerable and show a total lack of regard for those who protect the public," said Fiocchi, R-Cumberland, Cape May and Atlantic. "Communities are in shock and families are emotionally scarred at the indefensible actions of individuals with such little respect for life. These senseless acts must stop and reinstating capital punishment for those found guilty will suffer the appropriate consequences under this bill." 24 officers have been murdered in the line of duty this year throughout the country. The bill which has been stalled in the Legislature since 2011 reinstates the death penalty in New Jersey for the murder of a law enforcement officer in the line of duty. (source: Cape May County Herald) PENNSYLVANIA: We must abolish capital punishment, says man who was exonerated from death row As the 122nd U.S. death row exoneree and the 6th in Pennsylvania, I've got some things to say about why we need to abolish the death penalty. I was sentenced to death for a crime of which I am innocent. Since 1976, 154 people in the U.S. have been exonerated after being condemned to death. On Nov. 15, 2005, I was acquitted after DNA evidence showed that the blood at the crime scene didn't match mine or that of the victims. I am, gratefully, living proof that the system is broken beyond repair. I live every day knowing that the state wanted to kill me despite my innocence. The guilty must be held accountable for their crimes, but we must do so without taking the unconscionable risk of executing another innocent person. Yes, I said "another." Learn about Cameron Todd Willingham and Carlos de Luna, just to name 2. Gov. Tom Wolf's moratorium on executions is a step in the right direction, but the only way to ensure that we don't end up with the blood of an innocent person on our hands is to abolish the death penalty entirely. HAROLD WILSON, Accomac, Virginia (source: Letter to the Editor, pennlive.com) FLORIDA: Circuit Judge Upholds Use Of Lethal Injection Drug Setting the stage for another Florida Supreme Court death-penalty debate, a Central Florida judge has rejected death row inmate Jerry Correll's arguments that 1 of the drugs in the state's execution protocol could subject the convicted killer to cruel and unusual punishment. Correll "has not presented sufficient scientific proof to establish that the application of Florida's lethal injection protocol is unconstitutional as applied to him," 9th Judicial Circuit Judge Jenifer M. Davis ruled last week. The Florida Supreme Court in February put Correll's execution --- ordered by Gov. Rick Scott in January --- on hold, pending the outcome of a U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding Oklahoma's lethal-injection protocol. In June, a bitterly divided U.S. Supreme Court signed off on the use of the drug midazolam, the 1st of a 3-drug lethal cocktail also used in Florida. The high court found that Oklahoma prisoners failed to prove that use of the drug "entails a substantial risk of severe pain." After the June decision, the state Supreme Court refused to grant Attorney General Pam Bondi's request to lift the stay on Correll's execution. Instead, the justices asked Davis to rule on Correll's arguments that midazolam poses a heightened risk to him because of his alleged brain damage and history of drug use. But Davis decided that Correll, convicted of the 1985 stabbing deaths in Orlando of his ex-wife and their 5-year-old daughter as well as his ex-mother-in-law and her sister, failed to prove that the drug was likely or very likely to have a "paradoxical" reaction on the inmate. (source: WUSF news) *************** Sanel Saint Simon Rejects Plea Deal, Could Face Death Penalty Sanel Saint Simon, the man accused of killing Florida teen Alexandria Chery last summer, rejected a plea deal Aug. 10, the Orlando Sentinel reported. If he had accepted the deal, Saint Simon, 44, would have faced life in prison. Now, he could face the death penalty if convicted of first-degree murder for the 16-year-old girl's death. "The state will pursue the death penalty," state attorney's spokeswoman Angela Starke said. "With the rejection of the plea, he will face a jury trial." Saint Simon has pleaded not guilty. Alexandria vanished from her family's home in Orange County on July 28, 2014. When she was found she had stab wounds and skull fractures, the autopsy showed. Police said Saint Simon beat her to death and then tried to hide her body in a wooded area, according to the Orlando Sentinel. When police started their search for Alexandria, Saint Simon lied to police officers and tried to clean the blood from the apartment where he allegedly beat her and the car in which he reportedly transported her body, investigators said. Saint Simon is charged with giving false information to law enforcement during a missing person investigation and aggravated child abuse, in addition to 1st-degree murder. His trial is set for March, court records showed. (source: ibtimes.com) LOUISIANA: State panel will take a new look at Louisiana public defender funding The financial plight of Louisiana's struggling public defenders is poised to get a fresh look with the kick-off of a panel to delve into how the state's offices spend their money. The Indigent Defense Review Committee was created after state Rep. Alan Seabaugh, R-Shreveport, pulled a measure during this legislative session aimed at canceling the Louisiana Public Defender Board's oversight of death penalty cases, which annually cost 1/3 of the state money allocated for indigent defendants. This new team will study the board's standards, fiscal priorities, composition and potential conflicts of interest. It comes as a wave of public defender offices across the state, including the one in East Baton Rouge Parish, have recently restricted services because of funding problems. "I think this group was formed because of the idea that ... we need to look at the operation of the board to see if there's anything we can suggest that they can do more with the money they already have," said Jerome Barbera, a retired judge from Thibodaux, who summed up one of the objectives of the group about an hour into the 1st meeting Tuesday. The team has 8 members, including former prosecutors, judges, criminal defense lawyers, attorneys for state agencies and the legislative auditor. One of the main issues discussed Tuesday was whether money spent by the public defender board on death penalty cases is a big part of why the organization doesn't have enough money to pay for lawyers for other defendants. Former Beauregard Parish District Attorney David Burton raised the question of whether spending 1/3 of the state funding on capital cases is a strategy by defense lawyers to "spend the state into submission" and get rid of the death penalty in Louisiana. Funded by the Legislature, the public defender board receives around $33 million in state funds each year and spends about $11 million on capital cases. Those cases, which must be staffed by more experienced attorneys, amount to less than a 1/2 of 1 % of the total public defender caseload, according to the resolution to create the committee. But the committee's mission also reflects the tug-of-war between those who believe public defenders truly need more money, and those who think the state supervising board might be mismanaging funds. "I don't know of another agency in state government, or in any government anywhere, that when they run out of money, or when they start running short on money, they get to say, 'I quit,'" said Pete Adams, executive director of the Louisiana District Attorneys Association, accusing the defenders board of operating without any oversight. "It has no incentive to be fiscally responsible," he said. That allegation is untrue, said Tiffany Simpson, LPDB's director of legislative affairs. She said the organization has its budget approved by the Division of Administration, submits annual reports and is audited regularly. Much of the local funding for the defender offices is from court costs such as traffic fines, but those amounts are unpredictable and have been declining, said State Public Defender James "Jay" Dixon Jr. The committee, which asked to see more documentation on the inner workings of the public defender board, is scheduled to meet 4 more times before presenting its findings before the 2016 legislative session. (source: The Advocate) ************** La. Supreme Court uphold death penalty conviction of Caddo man The Louisiana Supreme Court upheld the conviction and death penalty sentence of a Caddo Parish man convicted of killing his pregnant girlfriend and her unborn child. In an opinion released Tuesday, the state's highest court affirmed Lamondre Tucker's death penalty sentence for the 2008 murder of Tavia Sills. Sills was murdered a few weeks after she told Tucker he was the father of her unborn child. DNA testing later determined that was not the case, court documents say. Sills was last seen leaving her home with Tucker who came to pick her up. Fisherman later discovered her body floating in a secluded pond off of Legardy Street. According to the court record, Tucker kidnapped Sills, shot her twice in a secluded location, planned or attempted to set her on fire and shot her again. He then used a branch to push her body out into the pond. He was convicted in 2011. According to court records, Tucker appealed his conviction and sentence raising 55 assignments of errors combined into 21 arguments. Some of his claims were: insufficiency of evidence, the trial court erred in denying motions to suppress statements police officers obtain by allegedly exploiting his immaturity and having a biased and non-representative jury. According to the supreme court, Tucker's attorneys objected that the death qualification process was disproportionately excluding prospective blacks jurors after the state challenged a potential black juror because of his opposition to the death penalty. However, the defense did not assert a Batson challenge at the time nor did it accuse prosecutors of challenging prospective jurors based on race. He also complained he was convicted and sentenced to death in a courthouse that had a Confederate flag in front. The flag has since been removed. The Louisiana Supreme Court denied all of Tucker's claims. (source: Shreveport Times) ******************** Accused murderer in Sunset could face death penalty The 2nd of likely many court dates for Harrison Lee Riley, who is accused of killing 2 people in Sunset including a police officer, has been slated for 9:30 a.m. Sept. 23 at the St. Landry Parish Courthouse. The defense and prosecution will meet for the 2nd time after addressing motions Friday filed by Riley's attorney, Christine Lehmann, to preserve the crime scene for the defense to examine. Crime scene investigators with the St. Landry Parish Sheriff's Office completed their work Thursday at the Sunset Mini Food Mart, into which Riley drove a stolen car, and the home on Anna Street, where, Sheriff Bobby Guidroz says, he killed Shameka Johnson and officer Henry Nelson. The Louisiana Department of Corrections has custody of Riley, Guidroz said. But he wouldn't be more specific, he said, for security reasons. "He's just not in St. Landry Parish," Guidroz said. Investigators with the Louisiana Capital Assistance Center, which is defending Riley, planned this week to comb the crime scenes, allowing property owners to go in and out of the structures. The center, based in New Orleans, represents people in Louisiana facing the death penalty. Lehmann filed several motions for the Sept. 23 hearing, including an order to record considerations made by grand jury and for disclosure of evidence, a clerk with the St. Landry Parish Courthouse said Wednesday. CPAC Director Richard Bourke declined to comment on the case. Riley could eventually be charged with 1st- or 2nd-degree murder, Lafayette attorney Alfred Boustany said. If charged with 1st-degree murder, the only possible sentences are life in prison without parole or execution. Riley is currently charged with 5 counts of attempted 1st-degree murder, obstruction of justice and 2 counts of aggravated criminal damage to property after driving a stolen vehicle through the front of a store occupied by 2 people. The obstruction of justice charge stems from a fire inside the store room of the Sunset Mini Mart after Riley was apprehended. Police said Friday they believe Riley started the fire. (source: KLFY news) OHIO: Ohio Supreme Court sets execution date for 1992 killer of 2 Parma residents The Ohio Supreme Court on Wednesday set a March 15, 2017, execution date for an Indiana man guilty in the shooting deaths of 2 Parma residents during 1992 robberies. The ruling follows years of appeals by Gary Otte to the 8th Ohio District Court of Appeals, federal district courts, the Ohio Supreme Court, and the U.S. Supreme Court. Otte will get a clemency hearing about a month before his execution, and the date of the execution could still be pushed back. There are 141 inmates on death row in the state. Otte is now the 24th death row inmate with a scheduled execution date. Executions are supposed to resume in January, provided that the state finds a provider of lethal injection drugs. Otte, 43, is also part of a pending 2011 lawsuit that argues the lethal injection method used by Ohio is "torturous, lingering, and undignified." Cuyahoga County assistant prosecutor Christopher Schroeder said he spoke to the victims' families, and they were happy to hear the news. He said justice for the families "is long overdue." On Feb. 12, 1992, Otte asked 61-year-old Robert Wasikowski to use his telephone. When Wasikowski let him into his home at the Pleasant Lake apartment complex, Otte shot him in the head and stole $413. The next day, Otte forced his way inside the home of 45-year-old Sharon Kostura at the same apartment complex, shot her in the head, and stole $45, her car keys, and her checkbook. Court records show Otte waived his right to a jury trial, and a 3-judge panel found him guilty of multiple counts of aggravated murder and sentenced him to death. Otte's case has gone through four rounds of appeals, including several to the U.S. Supreme Court, which refused to hear the case. Cuyahoga County prosecutors asked the Ohio Supreme Court to set an execution date on June 19. "The prosecuting attorney now asks for the only relief that will bring finality to this case: the setting of an execution date," the motion says. In a response, assistant federal public defender Joseph Wilhelm argued that there's "no compelling government interest" to execute Otte now, and expressed concern that the death penalty is randomly enforced in Ohio. "To a casual observer of Ohio's capital sentencing regime it would appear that a coin flip, a lightening strike, or the whim of a decision maker provides the difference between a life sentence and the death penalty for a multiple murderer," Wilhelm wrote. He also argued the federal civil suit Otte is a part of challenging Ohio's execution methods should be resolved first. The federal defender's office declined to comment. (source: cleveland.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 3 10:13:03 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 10:13:03 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----MO., OKLA., KAN., NEB., MONT., CALIF. Message-ID: Sept. 3 MISSOURI: For 1 Missouri lawyer, 8 clients executed in 18 months At a time when other states in the US are backing away from the death penalty, Missouri has done the opposite. It is currently executing its death row inmates faster than any other state in the country, at a rate of about one per month. At 21:09 local time on Tuesday evening, Roderick Nunley became the 6th death row inmate executed by the state of Missouri in 2015. He was convicted of the 1989 kidnapping, rape and murder of a 15-year-old girl in Kansas City. His was the latest in a string of executions by the state since 2013. In May 2015, Nebraska became the 19th state to abolish the death penalty. A federal appeals court in California is currently considering the constitutionality of capital punishment. Difficulty procuring the drugs necessary for lethal injections has halted the process in some places. But while executions have slowed elsewhere, Missouri is ramping up, ever since it secured a new, secret source for the execution drug pentobarbital. Lawyer Jennifer Herndon's caseload is a testament to that fact. Of the last 18 men executed by Missouri, eight of them were her clients. Nunley was her final capital case. No one in Missouri has had more executed clients in the last 2 years. In part because of this, she was profiled by The Marshall Project in an article entitled "The Burnout". In the story, Herndon - known once as a dedicated lawyer who won a landmark decision that said individuals who committed their crimes while juveniles can not be executed - said she no longer wanted to represent death row inmates. At the time, Nunley and another man named Richard Strong were still alive. Strong was subsequently executed in June this year. "I'm not doing anybody any good," Herndon told the news outlet."There's no joy in it whatsoever. They execute people no matter what." Missouri capital defence attorneys Lindsay Runnels and Jennifer Merrigan were shocked by what they read about Herndon in the story. They did not realise that her law licence had been suspended for a time in 2013 because she was delinquent on her taxes to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars. The article also went into depth about her 2nd job as a business coach and online marketer. In the days leading up to Nunley's execution, they tried to convince the Missouri Supreme Court that Herndon did not fulfil her legal obligations to him by failing to find his original trial files and by commenting to media that only a "miracle" could save him. They say the problem is systemic. "It's the same lawyers over and over and over again, Ms Herndon among them. We are involved in every execution," says Runnels. "We're outgunned and out-resourced. And then there is competency problems with some of the bar." Merrigan - who helped Herndon back in 2010 with Nunley's case - has defended several death row clients, and says Herndon's caseload coupled with her tax trouble show a lawyer not able to devote significant time to clients whose lives hang in the balance. Merrigan says working on even a single execution case is a tremendously draining experience for capital defence lawyers. "Even for a person who is not in serious financial trouble, who has not taken another full-time job, it is still extremely stressful," she says. "To say that somebody has had 8 executions over the past 18 months, that means they've spent approximately 6 months in this type of crisis litigation. It's completely unreasonable to believe anyone could operate that way." Together, Runnels and Merrigan filed affidavits last week with the Missouri Supreme Court and a motion asking it to halt the execution so that Nunley could be properly represented. They had many concerns beyond the ones revealed in the Marshall Project article, including the fact that Herndon allegedly never tracked down Nunley's original trial file. According to her affidavit, Runnels says Herndon told her it was stolen, then later admitted she "didn't ever check with the trial attorneys" for the files. "Mr Nunley received mental health treatment as early as 1978...Mr Nunley was 'never the same' after his brother died suddenly as a child...he had suffered at least 2 gunshot wounds," wrote Runnels in her affidavit. "These red flags and potential lines of humanising and mitigating information were never developed. Additionally, no life history chronology has ever been completed for Mr Nunley nor has any in-depth social history ever been done." These types of investigations are crucial, says Sean O'Brien, associate law professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, in order to show "a unique and complex human being who deserves mercy". That, he says, is the "heart and soul" of the work of capital defence lawyers trying to convince a jury to hand down a life sentence instead of death. He says it takes a huge amount of time and is accomplished mostly pro bono after funding dries up over the years it takes for death penalty cases to be resolved. "A good lawyer wouldn't find herself appointed on seven death cases," he says. "No lawyer could do that. No lawyer could financially survive that." The Missouri Supreme Court overruled Runnels and Merrigan's motion. A half hour before his execution would be allowed to proceed, final appeals to the US Supreme Court sent by Herndon were denied, and Runnels and Merrigan submitted their final writ to the US Supreme Court. "Ms Herndon appears to lack the time and capacity to competently represent Mr Nunley," they wrote. "She also claims to no longer want to do capital defence work and claims to not be able to conduct the work her clients require." Herndon declined BBC's interview request on Tuesday. "I'm busy with my client," she wrote in an email. O'Brien says with the tiny defence bar, the wave of executions and the pro-death penalty politicians in power in Missouri, there is a "perfect storm" raging in the state. In March of this year, 4 lawyers who served on the American Bar Association's Death Penalty Assessment Team wrote that the Missouri Supreme Court should only allow lawyers to have a client facing execution once every six months. One of them was the group's co-chair, University of Missouri School of Law associate dean Paul Litton. "It is obviously increasing the chances of due process denials," he says of the pace of executions. "We're talking about a time where we're seeing not just fewer executions in general, we're seeing fewer juries sentencing people to death every year." Litton's recommendations were not taken up by the Missouri Supreme Court and the executions have continued at roughly the same pace. Shynise Nunley Spencer, Nunley's daughter, also submitted an affidavit to the Missouri Supreme Court on behalf of her father before he was executed. "Despite the ongoing, close relationship that my father and I share, I have never, not once, spoken with Jennifer Herndon. She has never called me. She has never returned my calls," Spencer wrote. "The simple truth is that I love my father and talk to him almost everyday. My children love my father. His death will be devastating for me and for them." After the US Supreme Court denied the final petition, Roderick Nunley was given a lethal injection at 20:58 and died 11 minutes later. He gave no final statement. Missouri Governor Jay Nixon reminded the public of Nunley's crime in a press release announcing he had denied Nunley clemency. "On the morning of March 22, 1989, 15-year-old Ann Harrison was waiting for the school bus at the end of the driveway of her Raytown home when she was abducted, raped, and then stabbed to death by Roderick Nunley and Michael Taylor. The capital punishment sentence given to Taylor for his role in these brutal crimes was carried out last year," Nixon's statement reads. "Nunley also pleaded guilty to these heinous crimes and was sentenced to death. My decision today upholds this appropriate sentence." Herndon did not respond to subsequent interview questions about whether she will ever represent a capital client again. Another execution is scheduled in Missouri for next month. (source: BBC news) OKLAHOMA: Oklahoma Man Handed Life Sentence in Machete Killing An Oklahoma man who pleaded guilty to murder in a gruesome machete attack on his friend was sentenced Wednesday to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Payne County Special Judge Phillip Corley sentenced 22-year-old Isaiah Marin after Marin waived his right to a preliminary hearing and entered a plea of guilty to first-degree murder. Prosecutors say Marin nearly severed 19-year-old Jacob Andrew Crockett's head during the Oct. 29 attack in Stillwater. District Attorney Laura Austin Thomas described Marin as an "extremely dangerous person." She had been seeking the death penalty but said she agreed to the plea agreement after consulting with Crockett's family. "The appeal possibilities on a verdict of death from a jury are very, very broad. For the next 15 to 18 years, you're in an appeal process and they can allege everything under the sun," Thomas said. "There are members of the (victim's) family that really were ready for the criminal proceedings to be at an end." Marin's attorneys initially sought a competency hearing that had been scheduled to begin Wednesday, but court records show Marin's attorneys stipulated that Marin was competent to stand trial. Defense attorney Peter Astor didn't immediately respond to a phone message seeking comment. According to police, Marin called 911 and told the dispatcher he had just killed someone, adding: "I hacked him to death with a machete." An officer reported finding Marin walking along a highway holding the weapon. Thomas described Marin as a heavy drug user from a "highly dysfunctional family," but said the motive for the attack was unclear. "We're never going to know what the motive was," Thomas said. "He's mean." (source: Associated Press) KANSAS: Death penalty will prolong Frazier Glenn Cross's public show, son says----Family, friends testify in penalty phase of Jewish center shootings trial Friends and family members of Frazier Glenn Cross took the witness stand during the penalty phase of his trial in the murders of 3 people at the Jewish Community Center and Village Shalom. Cross, who also goes by the name Frazier Glenn Miller, was convicted of capital murder on Monday. Jurors are now deciding whether he should get the death penalty or life in prison. One of those testifying was Cross's son, Frazier Glenn Miller Jr. He spoke with KMBC about growing up with a father who embraced anti-Semitism. He said his family doesn't share those beliefs. "No matter how much he tried to condition us to believe that way, none of my family believes the way he believes," he said. "Including my mother." On the stand, he talked about growing up on a farm with a father who built his children a treehouse and helped neighbors in need. However, he said he had no answers for why his father killed William Corporon, Reat Underwood and Terri LaManno on that April day in 2014. "I'll never understand the reasons why he did what he did, but people look at this, and they look at him like he's a horrible person," Miller said. "But he's done good in his life that not everybody has seen." Cross asked his son if he loved him. "Yes, I do love you, Dad," Miller said. He said that love comes from memories from before the shootings in Overland Park. "I think he regrets what he did and made mistakes in what he did, but he's trying to use it to further his beliefs," Miller said. Miller said it was a tough decision to testify on his father's behalf, and he and the rest of the family are heartsick for the families of the victims. He said he opposes the death penalty for his father but not out of any sense of mercy. "Give him life in prison and the whole thing will be over," Miller said. "Otherwise, he's just going to continue, and these news stories are just going to continue, and it's going to be a pointless show for the public. It's not worth it." ********************** Death penalty remains tough issue for Kansas juries----Kansas hasn't executed anyone since 1965 hangings If a Johnson County jury sentences Frazier Glenn Cross to die for murdering William Corporon, Reat Underwood and Terri LaManno, he will go to a Kansas death row that has seen no executions for a half-century. Cross, an avowed white supremacist who says his anti-Semitic beliefs prompted him to target Jews at the Jewish Community Center and Village Shalom, is trying to convince the jury to give him a sentence of life in prison instead. "I don't think anyone ever wants to go to the execution chamber, and I think he's among those also. So I think he'll fight hard to keep that from happening," said David Langston. Langston, a defense attorney, said he's been watching the trial as it has played out in Olathe. "(The victims) were gunned down for no reason, so sometimes terrible things deserve terrible punishment," Langston said. Many states are easing away from executions. The prospect of DNA exonerations has made some juries reluctant to sentence someone to die. In this case, Cross has admitted to the crime and even boasted about it. Jurors are still facing a tough call whether to sentence him to die. Kansas hasn't executed a prisoner since George Ronald York and James Douglas Latham were sent to the gallows in 1965. The Army privates were convicted in a murderous crime spree that crossed state lines. Kansas is among 30 states that have not carried out an executive in the last 5 years. Many states are in a holding pattern as lawyers battle over lethal injection drugs. Some states have backed up lethal injection with other methods, including Utah, which just approved the use of a firing squad last year. Missouri, Cross' home state, has been executing inmates through lethal injection at a rate of about 1 per month for more than a year. Roderick Nunley, who kidnapped and killed a Kansas City girl in 1989, was put to death Tuesday evening. (source for both: KMBC news) NEBRASKA: Nebraska's death penalty: repealed or not? Is Nebraska's death penalty repealed, or not? Events of the past week raise fundamental questions about the state's ultimate punishment. You can go online and look up the law that sets the penalty for 1st-degree murder in the state: it's Nebraska Revised Statute 28-105. You'll see the maximum penalty for a class 1A felonies - the most serious crimes, including 1st-degree murder - is life imprisonment. And you'll see this law took effect August 30, 2015. That's 3 months after the Legislature adjourned, after voting to repeal the state's death penalty. That's when the Nebraska Constitution says bills become law. But Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson says the repeal bill is not the law. "Repeal of the death penalty - efforts to do that through the statutory process - have been halted," Peterson said. Last Wednesday - 4 days before repeal was to take effect, death penalty supporters turned in nearly 167,000 petition signatures to repeal the repeal. That's more than 10 % of the state's registered voters. The Nebraska Constitution says that's enough to suspend the repeal law. The attorney general says those signatures are presumed valid, meaning the repeal never took effect. Not so, says defense attorney Jerry Soucie, who's defended death row inmates. "The reality is, is that the repeal goes into effect, and then you have a situation where there may or may not be actions on the part of the secretary of state to retroactively suspend the repeal," Soucie said. It will be a month or so before county officials finish checking whether the signatures match voter registration information. After that, Secretary of State John Gale will announce whether death penalty supporters got enough signatures to suspend the repeal, and put the issue before Nebraska voters next November. What difference does this make? Former Attorney General, now State Treasurer Don Stenberg alluded to one reason it could be important when and if the repeal of the death penalty is suspended. "It removes a possible argument that repeal of the death penalty by the Legislature, had it gone into effect, would affect those cases currently on death row. 10 men are currently on death row in Nebraska. Defense attorney Soucie says even if the repeal is suspended, none of them will be executed if Nebraskans are going to vote on the death penalty. "As a practical matter, I think it is rather a fanciful conjecture that the Nebraska Supreme Court would be willing to order the execution of someone, even if they do have the lethal drugs, if there is pending a vote of the people regarding whether to let the repeal effort stand," he said. "Nothing's going to happen for the next year and a half." Attorney General Doug Peterson isn't so sure. "I don't think we can speculate. I'm sure that those who are in favor of repealing the death penalty believe that position. I'm not going to step into that process and tell you what I think the Supreme Court would do in that regard." The state does not have any current requests into the Nebraska Supreme Court to set execution dates for inmates on death row. Officials have so far been unable to legally import the drugs needed to carry out lethal injections. Sen. Ernie Chambers, who sponsored the death penalty repeal bill, says that effectively pushes any potential execution back even more. "If any drugs are imported, then the whole panoply of appeals - remedies available to anybody under the sentence of death - will occur," Chambers said. "So for a minimum period, I would say, of a decade, there could not be an execution even if a death warrant somehow were procured." Peterson doesn't concede that point, either. "I wouldn't speculate like that with respect to what the future holds. I do think there are processes that can be put in place. But I'm not going to speculate on how quickly that would work at this point in time," he said. With about a month to go before signatures are verified; with possible legal challenges to the petition drive; and with almost a year and a half before it could go before voters, the death penalty in Nebraska still faces an uncertain future. (source: KVNO news) MONTANA: Trial over execution drug begins in Helena An anesthesiologist testifying on behalf of Montana's 2 death row inmates said Wednesday that 1 of the drugs used to execute state prisoners by lethal injection does not meet the standard set by lawmakers. Dr. Mark Heath of Columbia University Medical Center testified in a trial over Montana's execution methods. The state's two death row inmates are challenging those methods, saying that if the barbiturate pentobarbital does not take effect quickly enough, a condemned inmate could remain conscious while he suffocates to death. Pentobarbital is one of two drugs that would be used in a Montana execution now that the barbiturate previously used, sodium pentothal, is no longer available in the U.S. The state's last execution was carried out in 2006, and pentobarbital has been used in its lethal injection cocktail. In a lethal injection, pentobarbital would be administered first to render the inmate unconscious, followed by pancuronium bromide. Together, the two drugs are meant to stop the inmate from breathing and cause death by asphyxia. State law requires the use of an "ultra-fast-acting" barbiturate to make the inmate lose consciousness. Lawmakers did not define what they meant by "ultra-fast-acting" when they passed the law in the 1980s, but District Judge Jeffrey Sherlock interpreted it to mean the amount of time for the drug to take effect after entering the system. Pentobarbital is not used by doctors in clinical practice to induce anesthesia, and it takes longer for the drug to take full effect compared to sodium pentothal, which is also known as sodium thiopental, Heath told Sherlock. "With thiopental, it's lights out," Heath said. "Whereas with pentobarbital, the prisoner continues to talk and increasingly slurs their words." Heath said the medical community classifies only 3 drugs as "ultra-fast-acting" because of their molecular structures. Thiopental is one of those three, but pentobarbital isn't," he said. "Nobody ever called pentobarbital ultra-fast or ultra-short-acting because it isn't," Heath said. "It's not in that category of drugs." Assistant Attorney General Pam Collins attempted to paint Heath as an anti-death penalty advocate and pointed out a medical reference that says pentobarbital takes effect in under a minute, which is the same amount of time it takes sodium pentothal to take effect. Under questioning by Collins, Heath acknowledged that high doses of pentobarbital can produce anesthesia but he added that the drug is not used that way by doctors. The trial is expected to last through part of Thursday, and state attorneys plan to present their own witness to counter Heath's testimony. The state's lethal injection protocols were changed in 2013 in response to the lawsuit by death row inmates Ronald Allen Smith and William Gollehon. Sherlock previously ruled that the changes satisfied all of the issues raised by the defendants in their constitutional challenge of how the state carries out its executions except for the question of pentobarbital. (source: Associated Press) CALIFORNIA----death row inmate dies California inmate dies of natural causes after 26 years on death row A California prison inmate who spent 26 years on death row for murder has died of natural causes, the 4th so far this year in a state that hasn't carried out an execution since 2006. Ronald Harold Seaton, 69, died last week at Marin General Hospital near San Francisco, state prison authorities said on Wednesday. He had been on death row at San Quentin State Prison since 1989. The death penalty is technically legal in California, but legal challenges to the state's lethal injection practices along with political reticence to push the issue in a liberal state have instead left condemned inmates in a limbo that in many cases has lasted for decades until their natural deaths. Since 1978, when the death penalty was reinstated in California, the state has executed only 13 people. 69, including Seaton, have died of natural causes while on death row, and 24 have committed suicide. Still awaiting execution are 747 others, who are housed on death row at San Quentin, in Marin County near San Francisco. Last year, a federal judge said the lengthy wait for execution was unconstitutional, amounting to cruel and unusual punishment in the case of Ernest Dewayne Jones, who was condemned to death in 1995 but has not been executed. The judge overturned Jones' death sentence, but the case is under appeal, with arguments taking place this week. Support for the death penalty has dropped in California and other states, amid concerns that the drugs used for lethal injections have led to botched and painful deaths. The exoneration of some inmates by the Innocence Projects and other legal activists has also prompted skepticism. Last year, a Field Poll showed support for capital punishment at a 50-year low in California, with 54 percent of voters supporting the death penalty, down from 68 % in 2011. Seaton was sentenced to death in 1986 for murder, robbery and burglary in connection with the death of Willis Paul Jones in Riverside County. San Quentin has been experiencing an outbreak of Legionnaires' disease over the past week, with 6 confirmed cases and 95 inmates under observation for the severe form of pneumonia. But the state said on Wednesday that there are no indications that the disease was a factor in Seaton's death. (source: Reuters) **************** Time to kill death penalty in California In 2012, California voters had a chance with Proposition 34 to end the death penalty in California. But they voted instead to keep it. Our Editorial Board supported the measure, which ultimately lost by 4 % points. Since then, not a single person has been executed in the state. Our argument at the time was that if the death penalty was somehow shown to have been a deterrent to heinous criminals, and if the ultimate punishment was being applied in a fair and timely manner that furthermore served the equitable administration of justice in California, we might be persuaded to support the official sanction of capital punishment. But that wasn't true in 2012 and it's not true now. The death penalty in California is an expensive legal albatross perched upon our criminal justice system. In California, abolishing the death penalty will take a vote of the people - unless the courts step in. There are currently 750 people on death row in our state. Since voters passed Proposition 7 in 1978 to restore capital punishment, California has wasted $4 billion to execute 13 prisoners. A state report in 2008 found it costs an extra $90,000 a year per prisoner on death row than it would cost to put offenders in prison for life without the possibility of parole. Meanwhile, hundreds of homicides statewide go unsolved due to lack of funding. Not only is state-sanctioned killing barbaric (do we really want to be like Iran?), but California also leads the nation in exonerations of convicted prisoners, many of whom served time on death row. In his ruling last year declaring the death penalty unconstitutional in the state, U.S. District Judge Cormac J. Carney wrote, "As for the random few for whom execution does become a reality, they will have languished for so long on Death Row that their execution will serve no retributive or deterrent purpose and will be arbitrary." The ruling essentially held that judicial reviews of death sentences were so prolonged - and executions so rare and seemingly random - that prisoners were subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. If the ruling is allowed to stand, it could have repercussions for capital punishment across the country. Attorney General Kamala Harris says she is an opponent of the death penalty, but is appealing the judge's ruling. Monday, California asked a federal appeals panel to overturn the 2014 court ruling. At Monday's hearing, a lawyer from Harris' office argued that the 2014 decision violated legal procedures and mislabeled as a sign of dysfunction what were actually the state's careful efforts to protect the rights of those sentenced to death, such as appointing well-qualified defense lawyers. "We do not believe that there is any evidence that the system is arbitrary or random," said Michael J. Mongan, a deputy solicitor general. But a lawyer for a condemned inmate responded that the contested ruling had rested on sound legal ground and that California's post-conviction review process, which commonly lasts 2 decades or more, had become agonizingly slow and arbitrary because the state did not provide enough funds for defense lawyers. While the 3 appeals court judges seemed skeptical of the 2014 ruling, mainly because the state Supreme Court had not first stepped in, we still hope the 2014 ruling is allowed to stand. Overturning the death penalty would save state taxpayers the spiraling costs of funding extended appeals and incarceration of people on death row and put a stop to the legal maneuvering and entanglements that have resulted in no executions in California since 2006. No one is advocating leniency for murderers, but throwing out the death penalty also would end the racial and class imbalances that make capital punishment in California and other states unfair and inequitable. And most importantly it would end once and for all the possibility of an innocent person being executed. It's long past time to replace the death penalty with life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. (source: Editorial, Monterey Herald) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 3 10:13:46 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 10:13:46 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 3 SAUDI ARABIA: Prosecutor demands death penalty for businesswoman who killed maid The public prosecutor has demanded the death sentence for a businesswoman who allegedly tortured her maid to death. A source from the Criminal Court said the court is considering to slap the death sentence on the businesswoman. "The woman's husband is accused of abusing his sponsorship rights and violating a human trafficking law, which states sponsors must provide medical treatment for their expatriates if needed. The woman is currently in prison awaiting the final verdict," said the source. The source said the husband claimed that he had recruited the maid a few years ago but she had escaped from their household. "The husband said the bruises were caused by the maid falling off the window in her attempt to sneak into the house. The businesswoman denied ever beating the maid or abusing her. She said the maid was already skinny when she came to their house," said the source. The source said the maid was admitted to a local hospital and reports showed signs of bruises and abuse on her body. "She was severely underweight. She weighed only 30 kg. The businesswoman's other maid testified that the woman had beat the deceased maid with a stick and starved her resulting in the poor health, which caused her death. The maid stayed in the hospital for a week before her death and the doctors tried everything to save her but she succumbed," said the source. The source said the businesswoman claimed the maid was a drug addict in her home country and had caused her and her husband many problems due to her addiction. "The businesswoman and her husband are now under arrest, awaiting for the court to issue its final verdict," said the source. The prosecutor said the businesswoman should face the death sentence for her brutality and the husband must face penalties for his inhumane acts. The case was one of the cruelest incidents involving housemaids in the Kingdom. A Yemeni national was executed in Yanbu last August after he was convicted of sexually assaulting and murdering 2 Asian housemaids in separate cases. Awdah Salem, dubbed in the local media as "the Yanbu serial killer", was also found guilty of pouring acid on the body of 1 of the victims and hiding the remains of both women at different locations. Salem confessed in court that he had persuaded 1 of the 2 maids to run away with him in 2007. He killed her after a sexual encounter, and threw her body into an abandoned well 18 km north of Yanbu. The crime had gone unnoticed at the time. The defendant then admitted that he had lured another maid to elope with him to a deserted place. He hit her on the head with a rock after having sexual relations with her and buried the body on a beach in the Yanbu industrial area in 2008. Police had been notified of the presence of a body along the beach a few days later, but only managed to track down the killer following months of investigation. The man had impersonated a Saudi for several years, moving around with forged documents. Evidence also revealed that the man used to abuse his wife and children. While issuing the verdict, the court described the man's crimes as "evil," "gruesome" and "inhumane." (source: Saudi Gazette) IRAN----executions Another 5 prisoners hanged collectively in Iran prison The mullahs' regime in Iran on Wednesday hanged 5 prisoners collectively in the Central Prison of Karaj, north-west of Tehran. The 5 prisoners, hanged at dawn on Wednesday (September 2), were between the ages of 28 and 30. 4 of them were identified as Mostafa Akhundzadeh, Hossein Jalali, Majid Rezai, and Hamid Farji. The 5th prisoner was not identified. Iran's fundamentalist regime on Tuesday also hanged 4 prisoners in the north-western city of Tabriz and the western city of Sanandaj. Another prisoner was hanged in public in the southern city of Bandar Abbas on Monday. A statement by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein on August 5 said: "Iran has reportedly executed more than 600 individuals so far this year. Last year, at least 753 people were executed in the country." ********** Iran regime hangs 5 prisoners Iran's fundamentalist regime on Tuesday hanged 4 prisoners in the north-western city of Tabriz and the western city of Sanandaj. A 5th prisoner was hanged in public in the southern city of Bandar Abbas on Monday. Zahed Hedayati and Jamal Jaafari were hanged in Sanandaj Prison. Mostajab Pour Mohammad and Davoud Emazadeh were hanged in Tabriz Prison. A young man, whose name was not given, was hanged in public near Barq Square in Bandar Abbas on Monday. A statement by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein on August 5 said: "Iran has reportedly executed more than 600 individuals so far this year. Last year, at least 753 people were executed in the country." (source for both: NCR-Iran) INDIA: Death penalty abolition report: why the 3 dissenting voices aren't convincing If the Law Commission's report on death penalty was meant to force a wider debate, 3 of its members have ensured it has begun in earnest. Justice Usha Mehra, Sanjay Singh and PK Malhotra dissented from the panel's majority recommendation that the death penalty be abolished for all crimes save terrorism and waging war against the nation. The majority says it put in the lone caveat on terrorism and waging war as it was needed to safeguard national security. It, however, hopes that the movement towards absolute abolition will be "swift and irreversible". The dissenters aren't convinced. They believe India is not yet ready to drop the sentence from the statute books or restrict its scope. Here are their main arguments and whether they have any merit. Dissenter 1: Justice Usha Mehra Justice Mehra, a former judge of the Delhi High Court, makes 2 main arguments in her dissent note. 1, by the time a death penalty case reaches the Supreme Court, it has passed scrutiny of the high court and the sessions court. This should be enough to trust the soundness of the final judgment. 2, prescribing punishment for crimes is the right of the legislature, not court. And courts ought to show deference to the wisdom of the elected representatives. Most of the other points she makes are either subjective or emotional. She assesses, for instance, that the report lays "too much emphasis" on the human rights of those given the death sentence while ignoring the human rights of their 'innocent victims'. Recalling the serial murders of children in Uttar Pradesh's Nithari village in 2005-06, Justice Mehra asks, "What other sentence could have been given to the 'Nithari' (killer)?" She also shifts the debate from constitutionality to "wisdom" by asserting that courts ought to defer to the wisdom of the legislature, which alone has the right to prescribe punishment for crimes. Lastly, she rejects the possibility that a convict can be reformed. "How can a terrorist be reformed whose main aim is to destroy the peace of the society, if not the society as such?" she asks. Dissenter 2: Sanjay Singh Singh, the legislative secretary to the Ministry of Law and Justice, substantiates his disagreement by saying that the constitutionality of the death penalty has repeatedly been upheld by the Supreme Court. He forgets to mention though that the reference to the Law Commission on this subject came from the apex court itself. Singh refers to the much-discussed interpretation of the death penalty as a deterrent, saying if it's abolished, "the fear that comes in the way of people committing heinous crimes will be removed". This concern, however, is addressed in the panel's report in detail. It concludes that "the fact that there exists a criminal justice system which punishes criminal conduct is by itself a deterrent". Therefore, the report adds, it is not necessary that punishments by themselves be harsh or excessive. Singh's most contentious argument, perhaps, is that the panel should not recommend "something which has the effect of preventing the state from making any law in the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of the country". But how exactly will a recommendation from the Law Commission prevent the state from making laws? Singh doesn't explain. The judiciary is an arm of the state and well within its rights to make a recommendation to another arm. Of course, the executive or legislature then has the prerogative to accept or reject the suggestion. Backing the existing proviso of awarding death only in the "rarest of rare case", Singh emphasises the need to frame guidelines on what constitutes the "rarest of rare". Dissenter 3: PK Malhotra Malhotra, the law secretary and an ex-officio member of the commission, begins by saying that abolition of the death penalty is an "eventual goal". He, however, adds that someone planning to commit a crime should be aware of its "implications". And if these implications keep getting waived, the law itself would cease to exist. The objective behind punishing a convict, Malhotra argues, is to establish "an example for the rest of humanity" so that it will deter "perverted minds from committing such crimes". He even quotes former US President George W Bush, hardly a poster boy for progressive jurisprudence, to argue that the death penalty "saves other people's lives". Malhotra recalls that while studying the Anti-Hijacking Bill, a parliamentary committee had suggested the provision for death penalty if somebody dies during a hostage situation. This will of the Parliament, he argues, reflects that the "Indian society is yet to mature for total abolition of death penalty". Now, a sound debate The Law Commission has done a commendable job studying the issue in detail, giving unambiguous recommendations and also noting the points of disagreement. It's report, indeed, is a good start for a wide debate on abolishing the death penalty altogether. The debate though should be informed by facts, reason and a shared understanding of the direction in which civilisation, and this nation, should progress. (source: catchnews.com) ****************** Public can't influence death penalty policy The Law Commission report favouring abolition of death penalty has kicked up a debate. In a chat with Mirror, panel's chairman Ajit Prakash Shah explains what made him take the stand QAgainst the backdrop of the recent hanging of Yakub Memon, do you think is there a growing demand in our society for death penalty? Wherever the death penalty has remained on the statute books, public opinion all over the world has always been for the retention of death penalty. But public opinion should not be used as the only framework for debates on crime, punishment and death penalty. Evidence from other countries suggests that it takes about 1-2 generations (10-15 years) for public opinion on the issue to change. It is for lawmakers to decide and make the change. QThe Commission's report argues that death penalty serves no penological goal of deterrence. But then why should it still be applicable to terrorism-related crimes? The commission's recommendation was that India must move towards abolition. That is the ultimate goal. We are clear that this move towards abolition should be swift and irreversible. But there are concerns among lawmakers. So, we recommended that the move should be done in a phased manner. The UK also took over 30 years to achieve total abolition, having been done in a gradual and phased manner. QDo you believe that by hanging terrorists, we serve their cause? There is plenty to suggest that we serve the cause of terrorists by sending them to death. Terrorists solicit death. Many terrorists come on suicide missions. The theatrics associated with their execution boosts their political aims. They also get a lot of public attention, which should not be the case. Take the case of the Indonesian Bali Bomber: he reacted to news of his conviction and execution, beaming and with a "thumbs-up", as if he had just won an award. QIs the clause'rarest of rare' difficult to apply? In case after case, the Supreme Court has repeatedly expressed deep anguish about how we have failed to provide a principled, objective basis to select "rarest of rare" cases. Cases include Bariyar, Mohd. Farooq, Sangeet, Khade, Rajesh, Swamy Shraddhanand and Alokenath. The Supreme Court has also said that the selection of the "rarest of rare" cases has become judge-centric, arbitrary and un-principled. The Law Commission studied this question in great detail, and came to similar conclusions - that the rarest of rare principle is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to administer. QMany feel that abolition of death penalty is equal to letting the convict go free. The fact is that very few persons are actually executed in India, and the death penalty remains largely symbolic. Abolishing the death penalty does not mean that you abolish any form of punishment. The Law Commission is not opposed to just sentences/just remissions. Life imprisonment is no less deterrent than death. Further, there are several states in India that have longer punishments for heinous crimes, where life sentence is actually construed as periods ranging from 30 years to 60 years. Q Justice Usha Mehra has slammed the report, saying that there is too much emphasis on the death row convict's human rights and too little on the innocent victims, do you agree with the view? I do not wish to comment on her views. However, it is important to point out that one of the major reforms suggested in the report relates to reformative and restorative justice, focussing on the concerns of victims. The report recommends immediate compensation of up to 5 lakh rupees, based on prevalent victim compensation schemes in the country. There are also recommendations on witness protection, police reforms, as well as reforms of the criminal justice system. QLaw Secretary P K Malhotra argues that time is not ripe, more so because of "cultural deterioration". What's your take? Such arguments of cultural deterioration have been used for many centuries, including by our colonial rulers. Instead of using theoretical arguments, we need to focus on facts and evidence surrounding questions of crime and punishment. It is apparent that the death penalty serves no penological purpose. Therefore, we need to start talking about the alternative. (source: Bangalore Mirror) ****************** The Reasons India's Law Commission Says the Death Penalty Should Be Scrapped India's Law Commission released a report this week recommending that the country move toward abolishing the death penalty, except in terrorism cases to safeguard national security. It marks a shift for the body that advises the government on which laws have become outdated: In its previous major review in 1967, the commission concluded that India couldn't risk the "experiment of abolition of capital punishment." This time around, in a 251-page document, "the Commission feels that the time has come for India to move towards abolition of the death penalty." At the moment, judges in India can impose the death penalty in the "rarest of rare" of cases, including treason, mutiny, murder, abetment of suicide and kidnapping for ransom. In 2013, an amendment to the law permitted death as a punishment in cases where rape was fatal or left the victim in a persistent vegetative state; as well as for certain repeat offenders. According to the Law Commission report, recent executions have been few and far between. The latest was the execution of Yakub Memon in July. He was found guilty of being behind a series of explosions that rocked Mumbai in 1993, killing more than 250 people. On average, 129 people are sentenced to death row in India every year, the Law Commission report said, citing figures from the National Crime Records Bureau. Despite the fact that death sentences are rarely converted to executions in India, the Law Commission said the penalty should be abolished in most cases. Here are the reasons the Law Commission gave: Times have changed Previously, in reviewing the death penalty, the Law Commission rejected its abolition citing the size of the country and diversity of its population across which law and order had to be maintained. "A great deal has changed in India," the commission???s 2015 report said. It listed a higher national wage, changes in development, the introduction of a new code of criminal procedure in 1973, the emergence of constitutional due process standards, calls for abolition of the death penalty from political parties and judicial developments among the reasons to review capital punishment. It's not a deterrent India's murder rate has declined, falling from 4.6 per 100,000 people in 1992 to 2.7 per 100,000 in 2013. That has coincided with a decline in the rate of executions, "raising questions about whether the death penalty has any greater deterrent effect than life imprisonment," the report said. Sentencing is arbitrary India's Supreme Court has raised questions about "arbitrary sentencing" in death penalty cases, the report said. Making the sentencing less arbitrary would be difficult since any categorization of offenses doesn't take into account the differences between cases, it added. India's justice system is flawed and mercy doesn't work Administration of criminal justice in India is in "deep crisis," the report says. It cites a lack of resources, an overstretched police force and ineffective prosecution as among the reasons. As a result, the administration of capital punishment is vulnerable to misapplication, it said. Mercy powers have failed in acting as a final safeguard against a miscarriage of justice, the report says, adding that the Supreme Court has pointed out gaps and illegalities in how courts have discharged the powers. Waiting is almost torture People sentenced to death by Indian courts face long delays in trials and appeals, the report said. "During this time, the prisoner on death row suffers from extreme agony, anxiety and debilitating fear arising out of an imminent yet uncertain execution," the Law Commission said. It added that solitary confinement and harsh conditions imposed on prisoners were degrading and oppressive and that the Supreme Court had acknowledged that the circumstances of being on death row in India amount to "near torture" for the convict. India's in a minority on the death penalty India has retained capital punishment while 140 countries have abolished it in law or in practice, the report says. That leaves the South Asian nation in a club with the U.S., Iran, China, and Saudi Arabia as a country which retains it. (source: Wall Street Journal) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 3 15:46:39 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 15:46:39 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, PENN., N.C., S.C., OKLA., USA Message-ID: Sept. 3 TEXAS: Records: Man linked to Samantha Dean case charged with capital murder A man police believe VonTrey Clark hired to kill Samantha Dean has been charged with capital murder in her death, a law enforcement official said. Kevin Leo Watson, 31, had been in the Harris County Jail since April on an unrelated drug charge. Watson is 1 of 2 men that police believe former Austin police officer VonTrey Clark hired to kill Dean, according to court documents. The location of the other suspect, Freddie Lee Smith, 29, was unknown. Police believe Watson is a longtime associate of Clark's. Investigators connected Watson and Smith to the case earlier through cellphone records of so-called burner phones that police suspect were used to coordinate Dean's killing. Police uncovered that link after tracking down Aaron Lamont Williams, another Clark associate who police say sent a threatening text message to an Austin police employee who knew Dean, court documents said. While in the Bastrop County Jail in June, Williams told investigators that Clark had offered $5,000 for Dean's death to avoid paying child support for her unborn child. Watson and Smith committed the killing with Clark present, setting the scene up to look like a drug deal gone bad, according to court documents. Williams, 32, was charged with retaliation in connection with the threatening text message. He was released from the jail in June, records showed. Watson's girlfriend Kyla Fisk, 50, has also been connected to the case. Fisk was also still in the Harris County Jail on Thursday on a charge of tampering with evidence. Police believe she hid from investigators clothing that Watson wore during Dean's murder. Earlier: The president of the Austin police union, who has so far been silent about the murder investigation involving one of his officers said prosecutors should consider the death penalty against VonTrey Clark if he is convicted in Samantha Dean's death. In his first public comment about the case Thursday, Austin Police Association President Ken Casaday said "this whole ordeal has been very trying for the Austin Police Department and a tragedy for Samantha Dean's family. VonTrey Clark is our member and we hope he gets a fair trial, and if he is convicted, the state should consider the death penalty." Clark was fired from the Austin police force in July. Dean was a crime victims counselor working for the Kyle Police Department. Casaday's comments come after the former patrol officer returned to Texas late Wednesday in the custody of FBI agents and was handed over to Bastrop County officials. Federal and local law enforcement will publicly address the case at a planned news conference at the Bastrop County Sheriff's office at 1:30 p.m. Thursday. (source: Austin American-Statesman) PENNSYLVANIA: Gov. Wolf made the right call on death penalty moratorium When Gov. Tom Wolf put executions on hold in Pennsylvania, I joined many of my colleagues in publicly supporting this reasonable and appropriate action. The state Senate's bipartisan Pennsylvania Advisory Committee and Task Force on Capital Punishment requested that no executions should take place until their study of the death penalty in Pennsylvania is complete. Wolf was absolutely correct to ensure he has all the information and the committee's recommendations before proceeding with an execution. In using his constitutional reprieve power to delay executions pending the outcome of the study, he followed the lead of numerous other governors - both Republican and Democrat - across the nation. I have served as a Judge, prosecutor and public defender in Pennsylvania courtrooms, and I am strongly invested in making our system of justice work. Like many of my colleagues, I am highly concerned about the fairness of the capital punishment system. There are multiple, serious problems with the death penalty in our Commonwealth as it functions now. Even a cursory look at three issues reveals some of the problems. For example, the reversals of most death sentences, the poor compensation of public defenders in capital cases, and the racial bias in Pennsylvania's imposition of death sentences are all areas in dire need of improvement. The ultimate horror would be the execution of an innocent person. During a House Judiciary Committee hearing on the death penalty, information was shared by a deputy Philadelphia district attorney and a representative of the Death Penalty Information Center on the impact Gov. Tom Wolf's death penalty moratorium on capital cases making their way through the federal appeals process. Of the more than 400 death sentences imposed in Pennsylvania since 1978, the majority have later been reversed on appeal, due to serious flaws or misconduct at trial. This rate of error is of great concern to many professionals in the criminal justice system. Trials must be fair and reliable, but the reversals of so many death sentences prove that far too many individuals received unfair and unwarranted sentences of death. If we are to continue to have capital punishment, we must ensure that it is used fairly and without error. When the poor are charged with a crime and cannot afford an attorney, they have a constitutional right to a lawyer, which must be paid for by the Commonwealth. But Pennsylvania's capital public defenders are among the lowest-paid in the nation. In many cases, this leads to death penalty trials where the least-equipped, least-resourced attorneys represent people with the most at stake. Our low pay scale can result in low-quality lawyering where only the highest standard fits the gravity of the possible sentence at hand ??? the taking of a human life by the state. There is unquestionably an element of racial bias in the imposition of the death penalty. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court's Committee on Racial and Gender Bias in the Justice System found that our state was second only to Louisiana in the percentage of African Americans on death row. The Death Penalty Information Center reports that as of April 1, 2015, 100 of the 184 men on death row in Pennsylvania are African American, and yet African Americans make up only about ten percent of Pennsylvania's population. Disturbingly, the same Supreme Court Committee also found that "1/3 of the African American death-row inmates in Philadelphia County would have received life imprisonment if they had not been African American." The death penalty is meant to exist as a punishment for only the "the worst of the worst" cases and offenders. Even a preliminary look at how capital punishment is functioning in our state reveals that other factors - such as the quality of counsel assigned to those facing the death penalty and the race of the offender or victim - are far better barometers of whether death will be imposed. Such a reality is absolutely unacceptable. There have already been innocent men exonerated from Pennsylvania's death row. There could potentially be others out there. The ultimate horror for anyone involved in the criminal justice system would be the execution of an innocent person. It is essential that we do everything in our power to ensure that never happens. We need to assess the flaws in the system and analyze what could be done to address them. The suspension of executions is an appropriate use of the executive power and is in line with recent actions taken by the governors of numerous other states. If we are to have the penalty of death imposed on citizens by Pennsylvania, we should use every tool available to make capital punishment as fair as it can possibly be. (source: Robert Cindrich is a former U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Pennsylvania and the former U.S. Attorney for Pennsylvania's Western District----pennlive.com) NORTH CAROLINA: Death penalty upheld for Wilmington man convicted of murder A Superior Court judge has upheld the death penalty for a Wilmington man convicted of killing 3 people in 1996. The ruling, handed down on Tuesday, denied Shan Carter's motion seeking a retrial based on new DNA evidence he claimed would exonerate him. The court found the results of the post-conviction DNA testing -- which was a new method of testing old evidence -- only confirmed the pre-trial testing that the State has no physical evidence linking Carter to the crime. The judge therefore ruled Carter's motion for a new trial be denied as the trial jury was aware of all the evidence the State possessed at the time of his conviction. In December of 1996, Donald Brunson's body was found in a wooded area off Holly Shelter Road. An investigation revealed Brunson was kidnapped and killed after a home invasion and robbery. A few months later, a shooting on Dawson Street rocked the Wilmington community. Tyrone Baker was targeted and shot multiple times, and 8-year-old Demetrius Greene was caught in the crossfire. Both of the victims died as a result of their injuries. Shan Carter was taken into custody for the crimes a few days later. He was eventually charged with the murders of Greene, Baker, and Brunson and convicted of all 3. He received life in prison for the Brunson murder. He received the death penalty for the murders of Baker and Greene. "Shan Carter was convicted by 2 different New Hanover County Juries of killing 3 people, including, a completely innocent child," said District Attorney Ben David. "The juries' 2 death sentences were appropriate nearly 15 years ago when I tried these cases and they are still appropriate today. We thank Judge Hooks for upholding the juries' verdicts and insuring that Shan Carter remains on death row." (source: WECT news) SOUTH CAROLINA: Prosecutors to Seek Death Penalty for Dylann Roof in Charleston Shootings State prosecutors have said in court documents that they will seek the death penalty for Dylann S. Roof, who is charged with the racially motivated murders of 9 people in a church in Charleston, S.C., The Associated Press reported Thursday. After the June 17 massacre of black ministers and parishioners at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, it emerged that the suspect, Mr. Roof, 21, who is white, had expressed white supremacist views and hatred of black people. Mr. Roof has been indicted twice for the killings, in state court and in federal court, and each of those cases carries a possible death sentence. Until the court filing Thursday by Scarlett A. Wilson, the South Carolina state solicitor overseeing the case, neither set of prosecutors had said publicly whether they would seek to have him executed, but state officials, including Gov. Nikki R. Haley, have said emphatically that the case warrants the death penalty. The documents said prosecutors would pursue the death penalty because more than 2 people were killed, and that others' lives were put at risk, The A.P. reported. According to the report, prosecutors said they intended to present evidence on Mr. Roof's mental state, adult and juvenile criminal record and other conduct, as well as his apparent lack of remorse for the killings. A lone gunman walked into the historic church in downtown Charleston, and sat in a Bible study session for almost an hour before drawing a .45-caliber semiautomatic handgun, and shooting people ranging in age from 26 to 87. The slaughter drew international attention, prompting debate about race and guns - all the more so for taking place in a city that was the center of the American slave trade and the flash point of the Civil War, and in a church closely identified with the abolition and civil rights movements. Published pictures of Mr. Roof, 21, posing with the Confederate battle flag, also renewed debates about the use of that flag and other symbols of the Old South, and within days, both chambers of the South Carolina General Assembly voted to remove the banner from the State House grounds. Mr. Roof indicated in federal court on July 31 that he wanted to plead guilty, but his lawyers said he could not make such a plea without knowing whether it could bring on the death penalty. It remains unclear whether the federal or the state case against Mr. Roof will proceed first. Usually, when such cases overlap, the 2 sets of prosecutors reach an agreement between them on what order they will go in, but no such accord has been announced for Mr. Roof. (source: New York Times) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Death penalty opponents urge governor to delay OSP execution Family and supporters of a condemned Oklahoma death row inmate have delivered more than 250,000 online petitions to Oklahoma's governor, urging her to grant a 60-day stay of execution. Richard Eugene Glossip is to be executed Sept. 16 for his role in the 1997 beating death of a motel owner, but Glossip's supporters maintain he is innocent. Glossip's case has received international attention since actress Susan Sarandon, who played a death penalty opponent in the movie "Dead Man Walking," took up his cause. The woman Sarandon portrayed in the movie, anti-death penalty advocate Sister Helen Prejean, helped deliver the petitions Thursday to Gov., Mary Fallin's office. Fallin spokesman Alex Weintz says the governor is convinced of Glossip's guilt and that the state is planning to move forward with his execution. (source: Associated Press) USA: Murder Victim Families Can Change President on Death Penalty President Obama, according to his former law professor, Harvard's Charles Ogletree Jr., is close to opposing the death penalty. I've worked to abolish capital punishment for 31 years and would welcome his support. Obama should advocate for the end of the federal death penalty and offer hope for possible reprieves to the 62 persons awaiting executions in federal prisons. The President's advocacy for abolition would furthermore send a powerful message to the 31 states, which still have the death penalty: its days are numbered. Obama has held the death penalty should be reserved for the worst offenders, but concerns about racial bias in capital punishment's application may prompt the President to change his position. I hope the fact persons who kill white persons are 3 to 6 more times more likely to receive death sentences compels Obama to conclude, like former Supreme Court Justice Blackmun, he "will no longer tinker with the machinery of death." If, however, the President still needs persuasion to change his position on capital punishment, perhaps listening to the Journey of Hope members' stories will convince Obama to support abolition. I serve on the Journey of Hope's board. Begun in 1993, and led by murder victim family members, this national organization conducts educational tours against the death penalty. Beginning with a World Day Against the Death Penalty Conference in Dallas, the Journey will conduct a tour in Texas October 9 -25. These tours emphasize love, compassion, forgiveness and reconciliation to break the cycle of vengeance, death, and violence prevalent in our society. Journey members embraced their messages of hope through experiencing a family member's murder. After 15-year-old African American Paula Cooper was sentenced to death for stabbing his beloved grandmother Ruth Pelke 33 times to death in May 1985, Bill Pelke, the Journey's President, thought the death penalty was justified. However, the white crane operator from Indiana, while sitting atop his crane on morning in November 1986, was brought to tears, recalling his Nana preached Jesus' message of forgiveness to everyone she met. Her example converted Pelke to become part of an international movement that spared Cooper's life in 1989, because she was a juvenile at the murder's time. Emotion almost overcame Pelke when he re-told his story at the annual Fast and Vigil against the death penalty outside the Supreme Court in July. It was 1st time he spoke publicly about Cooper's recent suicide, a few days after the anniversary of Ruth's murder. Although tragic death has cycled painfully full for him, Pelke still believes "love and compassion for all of humanity is the answer." Also speaking that night, SueZann Bosler, faced unique challenges learning to forgive as Pelke has. On December 22, 1986, Bosler was 24 and happy. She and her dad the Reverend Billy Bosler planned to travel to Indiana to meet her first niece and his 1st granddaughter. That day, she wanted to do some last-minute Christmas shopping. As she got ready in her bedroom at the Church of the Brethren Parsonage in Opa-Locka, Florida, where her father was the pastor, Bosler heard strange moans from the living room. When Bosler investigated, she discovered a man stabbing her dad. Bosler went to help her dad, and the man stabbed her in the head. High on drugs, James Bernard Campbell stabbed Rev. Bosler 24 times to death, and Bosler 5 times. She only survived because she played dead, and several surgeries repaired her brain injuries. As a preacher's kid, Bosler had been taught forgiveness was central to her faith, and she publicly forgave Campbell, while privately conceiving ways to hurt him. 5 1/2 years after the murder at a second sentencing hearing for Campbell, Bosler finally understood the depth of her forgiveness when she said, "James Bernard Campbell, I forgive you." Her new understanding liberated Bosler. And despite a Judge's threat to cite her for contempt for objecting to the death penalty, the white hairdresser fought to save the life of the African American man who assaulted her and killed her dad. June 13, 1997 Bosler considers her day of victory because that day a jury voted to spare Campbell's life. As Bosler told her story that July night, her throat caught when she said it upset her when others implied her support for Campbell meant she didn't love her dad or cherish his memory. She worked to end capital punishment to honor her dad, who opposed the death penalty, and whose favorite hymn was Let There Be Peace on Earth. Bosler, Pelke and other Journey members re-live the worst experiences of their lives to show us the way to peace. Their heroic testimonies, I hope will convince the President to urge others to embrace the peace that comes from abolition. (source: Chris Byrd; chrisbyrdwriting.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 3 15:47:49 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 15:47:49 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 3 PAKISTAN: Death Penalty For The Disabled Pakistan has executed more than 200 people since the reintroducing the death penalty in December 2014. At the time it was a measure to combat terrorism, after the massacre of almost 150 people in a Peshawar school. However, that seems to be long forgotten. Now the death penalty is focusing on rampantly clearing out jails- targeting the mentally ill and disabled as well. Pakistan's jail manual gives no instructions on how to execute disabled prisoners. One of the most recent cases of Abdul Basit, a prisoner who was paralyzed from the waist down after an illness he contracted in prison. He was convicted 6 years ago of murder but maintains his innocence. Prison officials have missed Tuesday's court deadline to explain how they would hang a paraplegic man, because of which his hanging in Lahore was postponed last month. A petition for his pardon has also been dismissed. Executions of the mentally ill violate the right to human dignity under the Constitution, and are an affront to Pakistan's obligations under international law. Additionally, Section 84 of the Pakistan Penal Code does not allow the state to punish any person suffering from a "disorder of his mental capabilities" The fact that officials are prepared to hang Basit, despite knowing this, shows they are even prepared to bend Pakistan's law to breaking point. Basit is not the only one. Justice Project Pakistan (JPP), a non- profit human rights law firm providing direct pro-bono legal and representative services to the most vulnerable prisoners in our system have appealed many cases just like his. Zainab Malik, a project manager at JPP, said to the Nation that the trial is a repeated script of a lack of diligence by trial courts, procedural oversight, records that suddenly go missing and incompetent legal representation. Whilst the wealthy and influential escape through the loopholes, "the poor, mentally ill, powerless and members of religious minorities are rushed to the gallows". Mentally ill prisoners are stuffed in Pakistan death row cells alongside other inmates. These death row cells, measuring 8 by 12 feet, designed to house not more than 2 prisoners at a time. They currently hold on average 6 or more prisoners for over 23 hours a day. Whilst the Medical Health Ordinance was enacted in 2001 to provide protection and treatment to mentally ill prisoners the law receives little or no implementation nation-wide. Pakistan has the world's largest number of death row inmates, with more than 8,000 people reported to be awaiting execution, and it is on course to have one of the highest rates of executions in the world. The current government should revisit the moratorium over the death penalty to put a stop to a blatant violation of human rights. (source: Editorial, The Nation) ******************* Pakistan's Bid to Hang a Disabled Man For 31 years, I have been a witness to various governments' efforts to execute people in a variety of ways. The bizarre nature of this barbaric debate continued apace on Monday, as a judge in Pakistan faced the government's demand for a date on the gallows for Abdul Basit, a condemned man rendered paraplegic some years ago when the prison failed to provide him with treatment for tubercular meningitis. The judge appeared sympathetic to the argument that it would be simply barbaric to hang a man in a wheelchair, but the prosecution lawyer was vehement in his desire that Abdul Basit should swing. If a man in a wheelchair killed a score of people, he demanded, would he be spared the noose? (Conveniently, he ignored the fact that Abdul Basit was put into his wheelchair by the very prison authorities who were charged with treating him humanely.) Faced with a barrage of venom, the judge turned to the prison authorities: precisely how, he demanded, did they plan to hang Abdul Basit? The jailers muttered and stuttered, but eventually conceded that they had not yet figured this one out. The judge ordered them to return within 24 hours with a plan. None was forthcoming. One might think that the most vengeful of governments would accept that Abdul Basit has suffered enough, whether he committed the crime or not. While he has been on death row for a decade (itself a dreadful punishment), he has come within hours of execution twice already this summer (which verges on torture), and his volunteer lawyers have had no time to investigate any claims of innocence, given the arguments over how the noose should be applied. In the meantime he has been paralysed from the waist down, with creeping loss of his upper body movement. He has lost all sphincter control. He cannot walk even a brief distance. He cannot climb the steps to the gallows. He cannot stand on the trapdoor, with the noose around his neck, to await his death. Back in the day - when Britain killed people who we thought had killed people to show that killing people was wrong - the notorious hangman Albert Pierrepoint would come in to measure the condemned man's neck, and weigh him, to calculate the distance of a final drop that would break his neck without wrenching the head from the torso. It was a strange and sickening science that ultimately led Pierrepoint to declare his opposition to capital punishment. It is rather chilling to imagine what will be taking place in the coming days, as Pierrepoint's Pakistani descendants ponder how best to kill this man. They will presumably be pulling out their paraplegia charts, factoring in the weight of his wheelchair, and wondering how best to roll Abdul Basit into place, all in the name of justice. Let us hope that sanity prevails. (source: Clive Stafford Smith; US lawyer and the founder and director of human rights organization Reprieve) From rhalperi at smu.edu Fri Sep 4 08:27:07 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 08:27:07 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, N.J., S.C., FLA., LA., OKLA., CALIF., WASH. Message-ID: Sept. 4 TEXAS: DA considers whether to seek death penalty in Dean case As the Bastrop County district attorney prepares to seek indictments for 2 suspects in the murder of Samantha Dean, he also has another consideration: whether he will pursue the death penalty. Court records indicate that former Austin Police Officer VonTrey Clark believes he was the father of Dean's unborn child. Dean was found dead in Bastrop County in February. After being in Indonesia for more than a month, federal agents extradited Clark back to Texas Wednesday. He arrived in Austin after midnight. Representatives from the Texas Highway Patrol, Texas Rangers, FBI, and Bastrop County agencies gathered Thursday to announce Clark and his friend Kevin Watson were both in custody for capital murder. However, grand juries have not indicted either of the men and Clark's attorney denies the claims from authorities about his client's involvement in Dean's killing. "Capital murder is an offense in the state of Texas that can carry the death penalty. The decision to seek the death penalty rests solely with me, my office," said Bastrop County District Attorney Bryan Goertz. "While this is still ongoing, that's a very complicated not only factual, but legal question. [A decision] will have to be made in the coming months. It will be made before trial. But I am not going to commit to when or what that decision is." The decision about whether to pursue the death penalty has implications for not only a suspect and his or her family, but for the length and cost of the legal process, and how long the victim???s family must wait before reaching a resolution in the case. "[A death penalty case] is just a completely different ball game," said Keith Hampton, an Austin criminal defense attorney who has been involved in capital murder cases. "If you seek death, there won't be a resolution for at least 7 years. Because if you get death, he gets an automatic review. Hampton and Austin attorney Mindy Montford say preparing for a death penalty case is like preparing for 2 trials. "You're going to have to prove that he is a future danger to the public and to people. You're also going to have to say that there are no mitigating circumstances at play," said Montford. "[A prosecutor has to show] he committed this crime and there's nothing like abuse or any kind of mental or physical condition that he has or he suffers from." "[In death penalty cases lawyers prepare] a defense and a mitigation study, which is basically deconstructing this person, going from before he was even born leading right up to the day that he did what he did, if he's guilty." said Hampton. "Then you have to prepare to present that to a jury. It is grueling, horrific work. None of us like this stuff." There is also a reason for the years it can take to see a death penalty case through to its end. "We make 2 promises to the public: that everybody gets a fair trial, everybody no matter what they get a fair trial," said Hampton. "And 2, we get it right. So that we do not execute another innocent person." In the Dean case, the district attorney has yet to decide whether he will try for the death penalty, if prosecutors secure indictments. The final decision of whether to proceed in seeking the death penalty rests with the DA. However, reaching that decision takes various forms across Texas. Montford and Hampton say some DAs take votes from within their offices about how to move forward. Still, each decision includes weighing a host of factors. "The DA has got to weigh the evidence in the case, what the victim's family wants to happen in this case, what the community probably wants in this case," said Montford. The Bastrop County DA is also working with the Texas Attorney General's Office for assistance in prosecuting the case. (source: KXAN news) NEW JERSEY: Andrzejczak and Land Join Fiocchi in Supporting Death Penalty for Killings of Police Incumbent Assemblyman Bob Andrzejczak (D-1) and running mate Bruce Land joined their GOP rival Assemblyman Sam Fiocchi (R-1) in praising a bill that would suspend New Jersey's 2007 ban on capital punishment in homicide cases where police officers are killed. Citing the recent killings of officers in Illinois and Texas, Fiocchi said Wednesday that the bill would be necessary to ensure that those responsible in such murders see retribution. "Communities are in shock and families are emotionally scarred at the indefensible actions of individuals with such little respect for life," said Fiocchi in a statement. "These senseless acts must stop and reinstating capital punishment for those found guilty will suffer the appropriate consequences under this bill." On Thursday, Andrzejczak and Land issued statements saying that they will also be supporting the bill. "The men and women who put on a badge every day to protect our communities need to know our laws are squarely behind them. Any coward who would target and murder a cop simply for wearing that badge should face the death penalty," said Andrzejczak. "As a retired captain in the Department of Corrections who saw first-hand the absolute disregard violent offenders hold for life, this issue strikes home. I would not hesitate to support this measure as a means of protecting those who protect the public's safety," said Land. Although the nation's overall murder rate has seen an uptick this summer and 8 officers have been killed in the last 10 days, a group that tracks officer deaths says that killings of officers have not increased. The Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund's Steve Groeninger told the AP that such murders were "down 13 % compared with the same January-to-September period in 2014." (source: politickernj.com) SOUTH CAROLINA: Prosecutor: Not all families agree with death A South Carolina prosecutor says not all of the families of the 9 people killed in June's shooting at a Charleston church want her to seek the death penalty, but they accept her decision to try to put the suspect to death. Prosecutor Scarlett Wilson read a statement Thursday afternoon, just hours after filing court papers saying she would pursue the death penalty against 21-year-old Dylann Roof. She took no questions at a brief news conference. Wilson called Roof's actions "the ultimate crime that deserved the ultimate punishment." Wilson says she understands the desire of some victims' families to forgive Roof, but she says forgiveness doesn't eliminate the consequences of Roof's actions. Roof faces state charges including nine murder counts in the June 17 slayings at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church. (source: Associated Press) FLORIDA: Death Penalty Set to be Reviewed Florida doesn't have any scheduled executions on the books and is in the midst of its longest stretch without one since the Governor's 1st year in office. Inmates on death row continue to appeal, with another death penalty debate brewing. A 2008 video from a St. Petersburg convenience store captured the murders of two people at the hands of Khadafy Mullens. A judge sentenced Mullens to death for the crimes in 2013. His lawyer made his appeal to Florida's Supreme Court Thursday. Mullens is 1 of 395 inmates on Florida's death row, 2nd only to California. Charles Grover Brant is another. He admitted to killing his neighbor in Hillsborough County and was sentenced to death in 2007. His appeals attorney argued his previous counsel failed him. "He was born with a bad brain because of lack of pre-natal care, and his lawyers failed to investigate his case," said attorney Marie-Louise Samuels Parmer. The state hasn't carried out an execution since January. They were temporarily on hold while a decision was made on the legality of lethal injection drugs. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the drugs use in June, and a circuit judge in Florida did the same earlier this week. Brant's lawyer still says the death penalty in the state needs a review. "We have a huge death row population, it's a tremendous burden on the tax dollars, it doesn't deter crime, and I think it's something that we really should take a look at," she said. Florida's current Governor is tied with Jeb Bush for most executions under a Governor's watch since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. The United States Supreme Court will consider a case in its next term on whether or not juries need to be unanimous when recommending a death sentence. Currently, a unanimous decision is not required in Florida. (source: WCTV news) **************** Mesac Damas murder trial on hold amid state death penalty talks The process deciding Mesac Damas' fate has been paused. Collier Circuit Judge Fred Hardt filed an order Thursday staying the trial of Damas, who has admitted he slaughtered his wife and 5 children in their North Naples townhouse 2 weeks short of 6 years. Hardt explained in his barely 3-page order that he is delaying the trial without a timeline until the U.S. Supreme Court makes a decision of whether Florida's means of sending people to death row is constitutional or not. He wrote that the Supreme Court decision isn't expected until summer 2016. The judge made this decision 6 days after reviewing the case and listening to arguments from both sides. The collection of killings is regarded as one of the most egregious crimes in the history of Collier County, and it trial has been fraught with legal issues. Damas is accused of binding his wife, Guerline Damas, 32, before slitting her throat and then systematically slitting the throats of all 5 of their children: Michzach, 9; Marven, 6; Maven, 5; Megan, 3; and Morgan, 11 months. Prosecutors filed a notice seeking the death penalty Dec. 3, 2009. Defense attorneys Kevin Clifford Shirley, of Punta Gorda, and James Anthony Ermacora asked Hardt to hold off on the trial while the legality of case's next steps are in flux. They said that if the trial continued and the sentencing plan was found unconstitutional, "the subsequent retrial would be a waste of judicial resources," Hardt wrote. The judge found prosecutors' position to continue inapplicable. "A potential reversal and remand would raise double jeopardy issues," Hardt wrote. The trial was scheduled for Nov. 9 and was slated to span several weeks if everything went according to plan. Hardt scheduled a case management conference for 9 a.m. Oct. 2 to set new dates for discovery and other formalities. (source: The News-Press) LOUISIANA: Man accused of killing state trooper, roommate to face death penalty The Calcasieu District Attorney's Office said it intends to seek the death penalty for a man accused of killing his roommate and a state trooper. Kevin Daigle was indicted today on charges of first-degree murder, second-degree murder in the deaths of Louisiana State Trooper Steven Vincent and Blake Brewer, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. (source: KATC news) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Activist's petition seeks stay for death row inmate Sister Helen Prejean delivered 270,000 signatures to Gov. Mary Fallin's office Thursday, her 3rd trip to Oklahoma to plead for the life of death row inmate Richard Glossip. However, a spokesman for the governor said she will not take action in this case. Glossip is scheduled to die Sept. 16 for orchestrating the 1997 murder of his boss, Barry Van Treese, at the Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City. Glossip was convicted largely on the testimony of Justin Sneed, who admitted to killing Van Treese but said that Glossip put him up to the task. Glossip always has maintained his innocence. Prejean, a noted anti-death penalty advocate and Glossip's spiritual adviser, said Sneed, a homeless teenager and drug addict at the time of the murder, told police what he had to in order to save his own life. In exchange for his testimony against Glossip, Sneed was given life without the possibility of parole. Prejean wrote the book "Dead Man Walking," her account of counseling a man on death row. Actress Susan Sarandon won an Academy Award for her portrayal of Prejean in the movie adaptation of the book. Sarandon also has publicly called for Glossip's exoneration. Prejean and her supporters, including members of the Oklahoma Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, local clergy, and 2 of Glossip's daughters, are asking Fallin to grant Glossip a 60-day stay of execution to give his attorneys more time to prove his innocence. "It's the people of Oklahoma that have to appeal to Governor Fallin in particular," Prejean said. Surrounded by supporters and members of the media in the cramped foyer of Fallin's office on Thursday, Prejean delivered the signatures to Fallin's spokesman, Alex Weintz, on a thumb drive. Personal appeal "I want to appeal personally to Governor Fallin. She's a good person. She's a wonderful leader," Prejean said. "Governors have been given additional powers exactly for cases like this, where there's a preponderance of doubt." While Fallin does have the authority to grant Glossip a 60-day stay, because the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board denied him clemency in October, she cannot commute his sentence to life without parole. Weintz noted that the majority of the signatures delivered by Prejean were from out of state and that even if Fallin could commute Glossip's sentence, she would not exercise that authority. The governor is choosing not to in this case, he said, because she is satisfied with the verdict that Glossip received. Weintz questioned any new evidence Glossip's attorneys could have, calling the movement behind the convicted murderer a public relations campaign for anti-death penalty advocates. "Richard Glossip was found guilty in court, his appeals are in courts, and this is something that is not going to be decided in the court of public opinion," Weintz said. "It is a legal matter, and it is going to be decided by courts. "The state of Oklahoma is prepared to hold him accountable for his crimes and move forward with the scheduled execution." (source: The Oklahoman) *********************** Death Penalty Opponents Deliver Over 250,000 Petition Signatures To Gov. Fallin Death penalty opponent Sister Helen Prejean delivered over 250,000 online petition signatures to Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin on Thursday morning, requesting a 60-day stay of execution for Richard Glossip. Glossip is scheduled to be executed on September 16. Glossip was found guilty in the murder-for-hire scheme of Barry Van Treese in 1997. Prejean said Glossip's defense was ineffective and she believes he is innocent. She said Glossip will die based on the testimony of Justin Sneed, the maintenance worker who killed Van Treese. Sneed said Glossip hired him to do it. "There's not a fingerprint of Richard Glossip on the money," Prejean said. "There's no forensic evidence to corroborate what Justin Sneed said. Solely on his word, Richard is going to his death." Glossip's execution gained international attention after Prejean and actress Susan Sarandon called on Fallin to halt his death. Sarandon portrayed Prejean in the 1995 film "Dead Man Walking." Prejean called Gov. Fallin "a wonderful person" and appealed to her to review Glossip's case. "When there is a question, even though it's been through the court system, all these questions that enough people are concerned," Prejean said. "You do not want the shadow of the doubt. The Supreme Court has said death is different. You have to make sure it is beyond the shadow of the doubt." Fallin spokesperson Alex Weintz said the execution will go forward. He said 2 juries found Glossip guilty and both sentenced him to death. Fallin won't 2nd-guess them. "He was given multiple appeals in state and federal court, including the Supreme Court of the United States," Wentz said. "He made his argument before the Pardon and Parole Board. And those were the arguments we heard today from Sister Prejean and others." Weintz said the governor's powers are limited in this situation. The most she can do is issue a 60-day stay. She cannot call off the execution, and she cannot grant clemency without a recommendation from the Pardon and Parole Board. Richard Glossip's daughter, Christina Glossip-Hodge, said she last saw her father on Wednesday and described his mental state as "positive." "He hasn't gotten down. He's got faith. He's got a lot of faith. He's at a peace that I haven't seen anyone at in my entire life," Glossip-Hodge said. Glossip will be the 1st inmate to be executed in Oklahoma after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the use of midazolam in executions does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment. (source: KGOU news) CALIFORNIA: Death Penalty Sought for Double Shooting----Elias Carmona Lopez, 29, faces 2 counts of 1st-degree murder in the shooting deaths of Erineo Perez and Martin Garcia in 2004. Final trial preparations continued Thursday in the trial of an Indio gang member accused in the execution-style murders of 2 men more than a decade ago. Elias Carmona Lopez, 29, faces 2 counts of 1st-degree murder and 2 felony counts of participating in a street gang in the shooting deaths of Erineo Perez and Martin Garcia on Oct. 10 and Oct. 26, 2004. Both victims were shot several times in the face, authorities said. Lopez faces 11 sentence-enhancing allegations, including special- circumstances of lying in wait, committing multiple murders and murder in furtherance of a criminal street gang. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for Lopez. During the hearing at the Larson Justice Center, prosecution and defense attorneys debated a number of pretrial motions -- a process that began Tuesday and was expected to continue through September. A month-long jury selection procedure was expected to begin in October, with opening statements and testimony scheduled for Nov. 2. Perez was found in the front seat of his vehicle near Indio City Hall and Garcia was found in an Indio alley, authorities said. Lopez was an early suspect in both killings, but there was insufficient evidence to prosecute the case until July 2008, county prosecutors said in 2010, declining to reveal what additional evidence came to light. Lopez was brought in 2008 to Riverside County from Arizona, where he was imprisoned for armed robbery. (source: patch.com) WASHINGTON: Last Rights: Ethics Of The Death Penalty In Washington State Since 1976, 1,413 people have been executed in the United States. That number rose steadily through 1999, when 98 people were executed. Last year, 35 people were put to death. Can there be justice in the imposition of capital punishment? Humanities Washington hosted a deeper discussion of issues surrounding the death penalty at The Royal Room in Columbia City on May 27, 2015. In a study published in 2014, University of Washington professor Katherine Beckett found that "jurors in Washington are 3 times more likely to recommend a death sentence for a black defendant than for a white defendant in a similar case." Soon after the study was published, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee announced that he would not carry out any death penalty sentence, but instead issue a reprieve in all capital cases brought before him. Inslee justified his decision this way: "Equal justice under the law is the state's primary responsibility. And in death penalty cases, I'm not convinced equal justice is being served. The use of the death penalty in this state is unequally applied, sometimes dependent on the budget of the county where the crime occurred." Inslee also referred to doubts that the death penalty was a deterrent and to his hope that his decision would prompt a deeper discussion of capital punishment in the state. The Humanities Washington Think & Drink event was moderated by KUOW's Ross Reynolds. Featured guests were Dorothy Van Soest, a writer and former dean at the University of Washington, and David E. Smith, professor of philosophy at the University of Washington. (source: kuow.org) From rhalperi at smu.edu Fri Sep 4 13:32:41 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 13:32:41 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----DELAWARE Message-ID: Sept. 4 DELAWARE----new death sentence Death penalty, life in prison in Eden Park shootout One man was sentenced to death and another was sentenced to life in prison Friday morning for their part in the murder of Herman Curry and the manslaughter of 16-year-old Alexander Kamara Jr. during a 2012 shootout at a soccer tournament in Wilmington's Eden Park. Otis Phillips was sentenced to be executed Nov. 17. That execution date will most likely be stayed as appeals are filed. "Those who judged me are condemned," the 38-year-old man said while looking at prosecutors after being sentenced to death. In addition to receiving the death penalty, Superior Court Judge Calvin L. Scott Jr. scentenced Otis Phillips to an additional 141 years in prison for additional charges related to the shootout and life in prison for the 2008 killing of Christopher Palmer. "We had a very thoughtful and conscientious jury who unanimously voted for death," Prosecutor Ipek Medford said after the sentencing hearing. "It was our honor to be able to echo their voices." Otis' co-defendant, Jeffery Phillips, was sentenced to life plus 76 years in prison. He said nothing during the hearing. Prosecutors charged that Otis Phillips and Jeffrey Phillips, who are not related, were members of the Sure Shots street gang and went to a Jamaican soccer tournament in Eden Park on July 8, 2012 seeking revenge against members of the Jamaican community because a Jamaican man shot and killed a friend of theirs at a party hours earlier. Prosecutors said Otis Phillips also specifically targeted Herman Curry, who had organized the soccer tournament, because in 2008 Curry had seen Otis Phillips shoot and kill Christopher Palmer. Eyewitnesses testified at trial that Otis Phillips and Jeffrey Phillips walked into the park together that day, around 2:30 p.m., dressed in black and with grim looks on their faces. Otis walked directly to Herman Curry and tapped Curry on his shoulder with his right hand and as Curry turned, Otis raised a gun with his left and began firing. One witness said he heard Otis tell Curry, "today you dead." Curry then tried to run but witnesses said Otis Phillips chased after him and continued to fire. As this was happening, witnesses testified Jeffrey Phillips pulled out a gun, turned toward the crowd and began shooting. At that moment witnesses said they saw Alexander Kamara Jr., who was waiting for his turn to play in the tournament, drop to the ground and never move again. Curry was hit 3 times in the chest by bullets. Kamara was hit once in the head. While a Superior Court jury convicted Jeffry Phillips and Otis Phillips last year for the killings, they split on their recommendation for punishment. The jury panel recommended 10-2 to spare Jeffery Phillips' life, while they unanimously recommended that Otis Phillips, 38, be executed. On Nov. 21, both men were found guilty of nearly a dozen charges including the 1st-degree murder of 47-year-old Herman Curry, the manslaughter of 16-year-old Alexander Kamara Jr., gang participation and conspiracy, among other charges. Prosecutor John Downs said this was very "violent, vengeful act" that sparked an investigation that brought closure to numerous criminals that had been operating in the area for years. "We're thankful to have been a part of that," Downs said. ***************** Judge blasts Delaware death penalty case Last-minute legal wrangling in 2012 led U.S. District Court Judge Gregory M. Sleet to twice delay the execution of convicted killer Shannon Johnson, but each time a higher court overruled him. The 28-year-old was executed in the James T. Vaughn Correctional Center near Smyrna on April 20, 2012, at 2:55 a.m. - just 74 minutes after the final override. Now, 3 years later, Sleet is criticizing the death penalty process, saying Johnson's execution "highlights profound failings in our judicial process." His comments - a rarity since judges usually remain tight-lipped about their cases - are featured in a 10-page article he wrote for the summer edition of the American Bar Association???s Criminal Justice magazine. "The Johnson case, and its result, is by far the most troubling I have encountered," Sleet wrote. Death penalty opponents and advocates haven taken notice, especially since his comments come just months after Delaware legislators failed to repeal the death penalty for the 2nd time in 2 years. "Judge Sleet has a reputation for being a very thoughtful person," Executive Director of the Death Penalty Information Center Robert Dunham said. "When someone like him writes something like this, we should be concerned." Johnson's case was unique - he wanted to be executed despite his sister's efforts to halt his execution at the last minute. Johnson was convicted in the September 2006 killing of Cameron Hamlin, a musician who had begun dating Johnson's ex-girlfriend and the mother of his child. One evening, Johnson set out to find his ex-girlfriend in hopes of reconciling. He found her sitting in front of her home in a car with Hamlin. Johnson pulled out a gun and began firing into the car, fatally injuring Hamlin. Prosecutors said Johnson then stalked his ex-girlfriend for several weeks, finally catching up with her on Nov. 10, 2006. Johnson, who evaded detection by sometimes dressing in the all-covering garb of a Muslim woman, fired at and hit his ex-girlfriend. He stopped and fled when his gun jammed, police said. After his arrest 5 days later, prosecutors said Johnson tried to hire an inmate who was going to be released to kill the woman and prevent her testimony. He was eventually found guilty in 2008. Johnson waived his appeals, speeding up his own execution. In the week before his 2012 execution, his sister, Lakeisha Truitt, and the Federal Public Defender's Office attempted to spare his life. The public defender tried to convince Sleet and then the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals to halt the execution. Sleet stayed the execution twice, the 2nd time arguing that Johnson was not mentally competent to speed his own execution and that a state competency review was flawed. He wanted more time to digest the lengthy briefs that had been filed in the case. "The case is troubling to me not because I was certain, based on the parties' filings, that Johnson was, in fact, incompetent - he very well may have been competent. Rather, the case was and remains disturbing to me because, in the unnecessary haste to execute Johnson before his execution certificate expired - a haste arguably exacerbated by the State and the Third Circuit - I believe that the judiciary's fundamental role of ensuring due process, as realized through an adversarial process, was sacrificed or, at the very least, undermined." The appeals court, however, vacated the stay and refused to hear Johnson's case. He was executed less than 2 hours later. Sleet wrote that it was wrong for the appeals court to vacate the stay "without a single court - state of federal - reviewing the process and the constitutionality of the state court competency proceeding." Thomas J. Reed, a professor emeritus at Widener University Delaware Law School, said challenging a state competency review is difficult. "I'm not surprised the ruling went against Johnson," Reed said. "I haven't heard of it going any other way in our state." Johnson is the last person to have been executed in Delaware. 15 inmates are currently sitting on Delaware's death row. In recent decades, Reed said at least 2 other death row inmates waived their appellate rights because they wanted to die. "No questions about their mental competency were raised," he said. "One cannot assume that a convicted murderer sentenced to die by lethal injection is mentally incompetent on the theory that no competent person would choose to hasten their death." But because it was Johnson's sister who intervened and asked the court to have Johnson submit to a mental exam - which he did not cooperate with - the death sentence was not set aside, Reed said. "It is a sad situation," he added, "and difficult because Johnson's murder was heinous and fit the parameters for a death sentence under Delaware law." The death penalty has been in place statewide since March 29, 1974, after it was reinstated. Delaware is one of 32 states with capital punishment still in place. Legislators attempted to repeal Delaware's death penalty in May, but was blocked by a crucial House committee for the 2nd time in 2 years. Lawmakers on the House Judiciary Committee declined to release the bill from the committee in a 6-5 vote. The result was the same that kept similar legislation unresolved 2 years ago. Gov. Jack Markell has said he would sign a repeal bill if it made its way to his desk, calling capital punishment an "instrument of imperfect justice." For Kristin Froehlich, board president of Delaware Citizens Opposed to the Death Penalty, the state???s judicial system is indicative of problems associated with the death penalty nationwide. Sleet's speaking out against the process is helpful in hopefully getting lawmakers to pay attention to the flaws in the system, she said, and ridding the state of the death penalty for good. "Delaware is going to execute an innocent person if we don't change this," she said. "Judge Sleet's article points to that rush to execute without sufficient due process." Froehlich, who is the sibling of a murder victim, knows firsthand the grief process, but she said killing someone else and using the death penalty as a crutch for punishment isn't the answer. "It's not an inexpensive system. It's not a deterrent," she added. "It's kind of an emotional response to a horrible situation, and it's not good enough." Sleet's article offered suggestions for fixing the failing death penalty process in the courts. He said that while Johnson's guilt was not in dispute - there was eyewitness to the shooting and his own admission - the court should have been allowed to review the state's competency hearing where Johnson waived his appeals. "Nevertheless, if one of the goals of our adversarial process is, as I believe it to be, to 'preserve the integrity of society itself,' we must face the fact that, in so far as the administration of the death penalty is concerned, the process is broken," Sleet wrote. Sleet isn't the first judge to voice his concerns about flaws in the judicial process, especially when it comes to competency proceedings, Dunham said. More recently, aggrieved judges across the country have spoken up about their frustrations with court proceedings and the lack of control they have in overruling decisions. In many cases, Dunham said, people who are mentally ill will argue that they don't want their lawyers pushing for a competency hearing because they believe they are in a fine mental state. However, this interference by defendants and unwillingness to cooperate is "often evidence of their incompetence," he said. "It amounts to placing a greater value on the finality of a state court judgment than on the accuracy, reliability, fairness or constitutionality of that judgment," Dunham said. Sleet wrote that he hopes his comments will be a starting point for analysis and action. He declined to talk further when he was reached for comment Thursday. "Thus while it is impossible to remedy any possible constitutional infirmity in Johnson's case, it seems to me that it is incumbent upon as as participants in the legal process at issue, especially those of us at the very heartbeat of that process, to continuously evaluate whether that process has functioned consistent with both our notions of due process and societal precepts of what is or is not fair," he wrote. (source for both: The News Journal) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sat Sep 5 13:42:59 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2015 13:42:59 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, CONN., FLA., LA., ARK., OHIO Message-ID: Sept. 5 TEXAS: Firing squad, blood-draining among suggestions sent to Gov. Greg Abbott to continue Texas death penalty With lethal injection drugs in short supply nationwide, one Texan offered Gov. Greg Abbott what he called a straight-forward, low-cost, pain-free alternative to execute murderers in Texas. "After administering a strong sedative," he wrote in an email, "just drain blood until they have bled to death." Other letter writers suggested carbon monoxide poisoning as a painless approach - and maybe even more humane than lethal injection. A firing squad could save the state money, wrote one man from a Houston suburb. More than 3,300 people have written to Abbott about his role overseeing executions since he took office in January, accounting for about 11 % of his communication from constituents. Most of the letters - obtained by The Dallas Morning News under the state's open records law - plead with Abbott to grant clemency for inmates facing imminent execution dates. Many are from around the world, in languages including French, German and Dutch. Many - some more politely than others - ask the governor to follow the lead of other states and stop the death penalty altogether. But about a dozen stood in stark contrast to the majority of letter writers, offering their novel, if sometimes grotesque, ideas for new ways to ensure capital punishment continues in Texas. Abbott can't change execution protocol; that's the purview of the Legislature. But the issue of how to carry out the death penalty has been top of mind for officials in many states in recent years. The drugs used in lethal injections have become increasingly difficult to find. European pharmaceutical companies stopped providing some drugs based on their objections to the use of the punishment. Now, Texas and other states are relying largely on compounding pharmacies, which are mostly unregulated, to produce execution drugs. In its death penalty procedure, Texas uses a single lethal dose of pentobarbital, a barbiturate often used in animal euthanasia. Some states started using it as the supply of other drugs dwindled. William Blackwood of North Little Rock, Ark., submitted perhaps the most creative proposal in the form of a 5-page, part fiction, part fact, short story he called, "An Alternative Method." The 90-year-old World War II veteran said in an interview that he's sent his letter to governors in several states, and though a couple acknowledged receiving his suggestion, no one has contacted him about how his alternative method might actually work. "I know they've got other things they're worrying with," he said. Nathan Carmack, a small town reporter assigned to cover a death penalty case is the main character in Blackwood's story. Over lunch at a small cafe, he runs into an elderly World War II veteran who trained in San Antonio. The veteran explains to Carmack how he and other cadets were put in a pressure chamber to check their reaction to changes in pressure and oxygen. The cadets were revived with oxygen shortly before passing out. But if the oxygen wasn't there, the veteran explained, the cadet would "painlessly go to sleep and die of hypoxia." (The veteran's story is the factual part, based on Blackwood's experiences.) Together, the 2 hatch a plan to present the idea of using a pressure chamber for executions to the Board of Corrections. "Each of the members was immediately alert and interested!" Blackwood wrote. "Joe (a board member) said, 'I've never even thought of that possibility for an execution!'" (The story is posted below, so we won't give away the ending here.) Military experience gave another writer an idea for executions. A retired U.S. Navy diver from Oregon, John Hill, discovered the lethal possibilities of nitrogen when he was nearly killed in a diving incident. Nitrogen, he said, displaces oxygen in the body without causing pain. "For your concerns I believe it would be a much better way to execute murderers because the (sic) won't know they are going out and they will be dead as soon as the nitrogen has displaced the oxygen in the body quite painlessly," he wrote, adding the procedure would also be cheap. Nitrogen Suggestions by rjrusak The most popular suggestion, perhaps not surprisingly in gun-loving Texas, was the firing squad. Peter Sabino, from Montgomery, volunteered to form a squad himself "if legal or applicable." "I have read that the average lethal injection cost $50,000. I would be willing to provide a five-man squad for $20,000 saving the state of Texas $30,000 on every execution," he wrote. Jim Greenberg ventured a proposal that would solve 2 problems. Heroin seized from drug busts could be used in lethal injections, he wrote, a solution that would also help reduce the street supply. Abbott's office has a policy of responding to most of the letters constituents send, said spokesman John Wittman. They try to either answer the writer's questions or connect them with the appropriate person to help. But the Legislature decides how executions should be carried out. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1982, the law has required that the Texas Department of Criminal Justice officials use lethal injection. While the number and type of drugs has changed in recent years, the process has not. In letters responding to the execution ideas, Abbott's office explained that his office couldn't help implement their suggestions. "We understand you are interested in forming a firing squad to carry out executions," wrote Dede Keith, Abbott's deputy director of constituent communications. "Changing Texas' execution method would require action by the Texas Legislature. As such, you may wish to share your concerns with your state legislators." (source: Dallas Morning News) **************** Where is the Texas death row class of '99 now? With 2015 2/3 over, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice this year has yet to process a single new prisoner into its death row unit in Huntsville. The dramatic slow-down has caused the Polunsky Unit's population to plunge to 257 residents, the lowest number since it peaked at 460 in 1999. That year represented another milestone for the state's death chamber waiting room. The 1st man to arrive in 1999 was Robert Neville, who checked in on Jan. 5, after his Tarrant County conviction for killing a disabled grocery bagger. (The only woman sent to death row that year, Suzanne Basso, who beat her boyfriend to death, arrived Oct. 28.) The last, Geno Wilson, took up residence 2 days before the close of the year, following his conviction for killing a man during a robbery in Houston. In all, 1999 saw 48 Texas inmates added to death row - more than any other year before or since. >From 4 dozen to zero in less than a generation is an extraordinary reversal for a state known for its support of government executions. A deconstruction of the historic class of '99 illustrates some of the trends responsible for the change. For starters, there is no obvious reason for the close-of-the-decade surge. The 2nd highest number of death sentences was in 1994, when the Texas prison system processed 43. Yet violent crime in Texas generally had been dropping since the early 1990s, and has continued to fall. In Houston, where nearly 1/4 of the Class of '99 was prosecuted for its crimes, the number of murders fell from more than 600 in 1991 to less than a 1/2 of that in 1998. "I don't have a theory as to why a specific number of death penalties were tried in 1999," said Roe Wilson, who has handled the Harris County district attorney office's post-conviction death penalty writs since 1986. Prosecutors cite the lack of a life-without-parole sentencing option as a major reason for their active use of the death penalty at the time. (That changed in 2005; today just under 100 inmates a year earn the life-without-parole sentence.) Anti-execution advocates say the high number of death penalty sentences at the time, despite the declining murder rate, represented the height of tough-on-crime paranoia - an effect detached from its cause. Scott Henson, author of the well-regarded Grits for Breakfast criminal justice blog, views the Class of '99 as the crest of a wave churned up by political turbulence. At the time, Democrats statewide were losing power. "So Democrats were trying to out-Republican the Republicans by getting ever more tougher on crime," he said. Exit routes But a willingness to deploy the death penalty only partially explains the bulge. Kathryn Kase, executive director of Texas Defender Service, said money and geography have contributed, too. 11 members of the class of '99 came from Harris County. Dallas, Bexar and Potter counties added another dozen. On one level, it's not surprising to see such high numbers from the state's population centers. But Kase also notes that placing convicts on the execution waiting list is expensive. Studies have pegged the cost to taxpayers of trying a death penalty case of between just under $1 million to $3 million. Some small counties have had to raise taxes to cover the cost. "So what it has always boiled down to is which counties have the money to put people on death row and keep them there," Kase said. She contends prosecutors from Texas's larger counties have been more likely to pursue an execution than their rural colleagues facing comparable crimes because they can afford to. Of the 4 dozen people who arrived on Texas' death row in 1999, 1/2 have been executed. That comports generally with the prison system's numbers over time. Since 1982, Texas has executed 528 prisoners. Another 257 remain on death row, while 306 have been removed from the unit or died. (The latter 2 numbers include prisoners from before 1982, altering the ratio slightly.) For those who leave, their exit routes vary. Raymond Reese, who killed a pregnant woman and her husband in Hidalgo County, died of cancer 3 years after arriving at Polunsky in March 1999. Harris County's Calvin McGee died from natural causes in 2004; he'd been sentenced to death in March 1999 for killing a woman during a carjacking. Some depart because they shouldn't have been there at all. 13 Texas men awaiting execution have been freed after it was determined they'd been wrongfully convicted. One, Michael Toney, arrived with the class of '99, convicted of setting a bomb 15 years earlier that killed 3 people. Appellate judges later concluded Tarrant County prosecutors withheld crucial evidence. (Released from Polunsky in September 2009, Toney died a month later in a car wreck.) It's a relatively small number (one study estimated 4 % of death row inmates nationally are wrongly accused). Yet the fact the state can march the innocent so close to the cliff's edge before admitting error almost certainly has eroded public support of the death punishment. 15 still on death row 6 of the 1999 death row class - 12 % - left the Polunsky Unit on the same day. When Leo Little, Derek Guillen, Christopher Solomon, Michael Lopez, Bruce Williams and Geno Wilson committed their murders, each was 17 years old. Historically, that made little difference in Texas; between 1985 and 2002, the state executed 13 men who committed their crimes as juveniles, according to the non-profit Death Penalty Information Center. While the youngest members of the class of '99 were awaiting their fate, however, the U.S. Supreme Court in March 2005 ruled that executing prisoners who were minors at the time of their crimes was unconstitutionally cruel. 3 months later, the 5 Texas men had their sentences commuted to life in prison. That leaves 15 of the class of 1999 still on death row 16 years after arrival. They are hardly alone in their lengthy limbo. 5 men in Polunsky arrived there in the 1970s; another 18 arrived in the 1980s. In many cases, lengthy appeals can delay an execution for decades. But to Kase and others who oppose the ultimate penalty, why one prisoner dies and another lives can also appear capricious - an example "of how people are not treated equally within the system," she said. The U.S. Supreme Court heard a case this week contending such discrepancies rendered California's death row system "arbitrary." Consider 2 of the Texas 1999-ers. John King arrived on Texas' death row Feb. 25, 1999; Lawrence Brewer arrived on the Polunsky Unit 7 months later. Both men were convicted of kidnapping and murder in the notorious racially motivated dragging death of James Byrd, Jr., in Jasper County. While Brewer was executed, in September 2011, King remains alive, his case pending appeals. "Who is going to be executed and who is going to be left alive," Kase said, "can be like a lightning strike." (source: Austin American-Statesman) CONNECTICUT: Prosecutor appeals end of death penalty The state's top prosecutor is asking the state Supreme Court to reconsider its 4-3 decision ending the death penalty in Connecticut. "The Division of Criminal Justice recognizes the complex legal and policy issues that the court confronted in this crucially important case," Chief State's Attorney Kevin Kane said in a motion filed Friday afternoon with the Supreme Court. "And, as always, the division realizes there are legitimate opinions on both sides of the death penalty debate. But the process that the majority followed in reaching its conclusion deprived the division of the opportunity to address the concerns that drove the results and led the majority unaided by the time-tested adversarial process to inaccurate assumptions and errors of law." This motion leaves the 11 inmates on Connecticut death row in limbo. Kane said the motion "speaks for itself," and declined further comment. Last month, the state Supreme Court, in deciding the death penalty case of Eduard Santiago, went beyond what it was asked to consider in that case and threw out Connecticut???s death penalty. Though neither side in that case argued the points, the state's highest court ruled the death penalty should be abolished because: the state rarely imposes the death penalty; there are other states that have abolished the death penalty; and there are racial disparities in the way the death penalty is administered. "The majority opinion, along with the concurring opinion of two justices, addresses issues, undertakes analysis and relies on materials that were never raised or presented and never subjected to any adversarial inquiry," the prosecutor's motion states. (source: Connecticut Post) *************** Connecticut prosecutors seek to again argue death penalty struck down by state Supreme court Connecticut prosecutors are seeking to re-argue the death penalty before the state Supreme Court, which voted last month to strike it down as unconstitutional. The Hartford Courant reports (http://cour.at/1JUZISZ ) that the chief state's attorney's office filed a motion Friday to again argue the case. Justices ruled 4-3 that the death penalty "no longer comports with contemporary standards of decency." Prosecutors seek to strike from the record an opinion by Justice Andrew J. McDonald and now-retired Justice Flemming Norcott who wrote that evidence suggests racial disparities in capital punishment. Chief State's Attorney Kevin Kane and Senior Assistant State's Attorney Harry Weller say that statement amounts to an advisory opinion the Supreme Court is barred from issuing. Prosecutors say the 2 justices are repeating an unsupported and "pernicious accusation." (source: Associated Press) FLORIDA: Trial delayed for Delray man charged with killing 2 kids, their mother Nearly 5 years after Delray Beach police found the bodies of 2 children stuffed in suitcases in a canal, the trial of their accused killer has been delayed again. Hoping to bring 38-year-old Clem Beauchamp to trial for the murders of the children and their mother before the end of the year, Palm Beach County Circuit Judge Charles Burton on Friday set the trial for Nov. 30. Noting that Beauchamp faces the death penalty in the triple-murder case, prosecutor Terri Skiles warned it may be difficult to find enough jurors willing to spend an estimated 4 to 6 weeks in court during the holidays. (source: Palm Beach Post) *************** Teens indicted for 1st-degree murder in autistic man's slaying 2 teens accused of targeting an autistic St. Augustine man in a car theft turned deadly shooting have been indicted on 1st-degree murder charges, the State Attorney's Office announced Friday. It's not yet clear whether prosecutors will seek the death penalty in their cases. Christopher O'Neal, 16, and Kevin Williams, 18, both of Jacksonville, will be charged as adults in the murder of Carl Starke, 36, of St. Augustine, who was found dead of a gunshot wound at the Vista Cove Condominiums Aug. 18, prosecutors told reporters at a news briefing. The teens had identified Starke as a "soft" target when they spotted him in the parking lot of Walmart and later followed him home with plans of stealing his car, according to the St. Johns County Sheriff's Office. Instead, Sheriff David Shoar has said, they murdered him in "cold blood." Starke's murder triggered a massive manhunt the following day that locked down 6 nearby schools. (source: firstcoastnews.com) ************ Rogers pleads guilty of 1st degree murder William Eddins, State Attorney for the First Judicial Circuit, announced Wednesday defendant Shawn Rogers entered a plea of guilty as charged to one count of First Degree Pre-Meditated Murder and/or Felony Murder and one count of Kidnapping with Intent to do Bodily Harm. Circuit Judge, Marci L. Goodman, in Santa RosaCounty accepted the plea. Mr. Rogers also waived a penalty phase jury and agreed that the sentence of either death or life in prison without parole would be decided by Judge Marci L. Goodman without a jury. The State Attorney is seeking the Death Penalty as to Count 1, First Degree Murder. As reported by the Northwest Florida Daily News January 9, Rogers was already serving a life sentence for armed robbery. Rogers received the kidnapping charge for typing up Martin before beating him. His hands and feet were tied with torn strips of bed sheet, and part of a bed sheet was found tied around his neck. Martin's pants and underwear were found pulled down around his knees, according to Eddins, leading to the victim's death at SacredHeartHospital in Pensacola April 8, 2012. At the time of his death, Martin had about a year left to serve for burglary, grand theft, and trafficking stolen property. In a 2nd story, the NWFL Daily News reported Rogers wrote a letter to Judge Goodman admitting to tying and beating Martin to death. However, his scheduled January trial came to a halt after Rogers' attorney motioned for a continuance due to serious questions regarding how the Florida Department of Corrections handles death investigations as well as guard actions at the prison the night of Rogers' attack. Goodman's concern was over courtroom security saying the Santa Rosa Courthouse has only one with satisfactory security for the trial. According to Assistant State Attorney, Robert C. Elmore, conducting prosecution in the case, starting October 28 in the morning to December 4, Rogers will be brought to the courthouse for the penalty phase hearing. The judge will hear evidence and witness testimony, then in December, the judge will read her sentencing decision. According to data from the Florida Department of Corrections, the last time Santa RosaCounty sentenced someone to death was in November of 2012. Before then, there was 1 in 2007, 3 in 2000, 1 in 1995, and 1 in 1989. Elmore, who handled the Hernandez case, said the death penalty "doesn't get handed down in small counties every week, or every year." (source: Santa Rosa Press Gazette) LOUISIANA: killing La. trooper----Suspect is charged with 1st-degree murder in the death of Trooper Steven Vincent Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty against a man accused of fatally shooting a Louisiana trooper last month. Multiple media outlets report 54-year-old Kevin Daigle of Lake Charles was indicted Thursday on murder charges. Daigle is charged with 1st-degree murder in the death of Trooper Steven Vincent on Aug. 23. Police say Daigle shot Vincent after Vincent found Daigle's truck in a ditch and stopped to offer assistance. Vincent died at a hospital the next day. Calcasieu Parish District Attorney John DeRosier says he'll seek the death penalty as part of Daigle's sentence. Daigle also faces a 2nd-degree murder charge in the death of 54-year-old Blake Brewer. Authorities say Brewer was found slain Aug. 24 in the Moss Bluff home he and Daigle shared. (source: Associated Press) ARKANSAS: Arkansas wants to get back in the execution business Arkansas has nearly 3 dozen inmates sitting on its death row, but like most states, it has not carried out an execution in years. This week, state officials said again that they intend to end that hiatus. It has been a decade since Arkansas executed an inmate. But several moves made in the state and beyond this year have pointed to a new path for trying to resume lethal injections, even as the number of executions continues to decline across the country. Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge (R) has asked Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R) to begin setting execution dates for inmates. Hutchinson's office said this week that it had received the letters from Rutledge requesting execution dates, but it has not scheduled any so far, said J.R. Davis, a spokesman for the governor. Hutchinson intends to quickly set the dates, Davis said, but he did not have a specific timetable. Earlier this year, the Arkansas Supreme Court said the state's method of executing inmates is constitutional. The justices had struck down an earlier law on the state's death penalty statute, ruling in 2012 that it was unconstitutional because it effectively gave too much leeway to the Department of Corrections. The current death-penalty statute, by comparison, "provides reasonable guidelines" to corrections officials who will figure out the precise way to carry out a lethal injection, Justice Karen R. Baker wrote in a March opinion explaining the court's 4-to-3 decision. Rutledge, who as a candidate last year said she thought executions should resume, praised that decision. "I am hopeful that this decision will allow the convictions of those on death row to move forward so that some closure and justice is brought to the families of the victims," she said in a statement. In June, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a lethal-injection protocol in Oklahoma that involved the drug midazolam. This drug was used in three problematic lethal injections, and experts have questioned whether it can produce the deep level of unconsciousness needed to prevent inmates from feeling pain during the executions. Officials in states that use midazolam or plan to said after the ruling that they wanted to move ahead with executions. Across the country, states continue scrambling for lethal injection drugs amid an ongoing shortage. As this uncertainty persists, some states have added other options, like Utah and the firing squad, Oklahoma and nitrogen gas and Tennessee and the electric chair. Still others have adopted new drugs and changed their protocols, sometimes multiple times; Ohio had used midazolam in a mishandled execution last year, and the state postponed all executions scheduled for this year while it changes the drugs it uses. Lawmakers in Arkansas passed legislation before the U.S. Supreme Court decision that allows the state to use midazolam as part of a 3-drug combination. The legislation also lets authorities hide the names of the companies that supply drugs for executions. Arkansas officials said this summer they purchased lethal injection drugs, and the Associated Press reported last month that an invoice shows the state purchased midazolam for lethal injections. There are 34 people on death row in the state, according to the Arkansas Department of Corrections. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, Arkansas has carried out 27 executions, the 13th-highest total in that span. It has not executed an inmate since Eric Nance was put to death in 2005 for killing 18-year-old Julie Heath. (source: Washington Post) OHIO: Ohio Death Row Quandary: 2 Dozen Executions, No Lethal Drugs The state now has 2 dozen condemned killers with firm execution dates, but with 4 months before the 1st one, it still doesn't have the lethal drugs it needs to carry them out. The state's inability to find drugs has death penalty opponents calling for the end of capital punishment in Ohio. Supporters say the state needs to keep looking or find alternatives to provide justice for killings that are in some cases decades old. "Rather than frustrate that process it would seem to me their goal ought to be to carry out that process," said Franklin County Prosecutor Ron O'Brien, who's contacted the prisons department, the attorney general and the governor's office for updates on their progress finding drugs. 1 option he'd like Ohio to consider: nitrogen gas, approved by Oklahoma in April as an execution alternative. On Jan. 21, the state is scheduled to execute Ronald Phillips for raping and killing his girlfriend's 3-year-old daughter in Akron in 1993. The Department of Rehabilitation and Correction "continues to seek all legal means to obtain the drugs necessary to carry out court-ordered executions," said spokeswoman JoEllen Smith, using the same statement the agency has offered for months. "This process has included multiple options." On Wednesday, the Ohio Supreme Court set a March 2017 date for Gary Otte of Cleveland for the shooting deaths of two people in a 1992 robbery spree. The remaining executions are scheduled clear into 2019. The state hasn't executed anyone since January 2014, when condemned killer Dennis McGuire gasped and snorted repeatedly during a 26-minute procedure with a then untried 2-drug method. Ohio abandoned that method in favor of other drugs it now can't find. Like other states, Ohio has struggled to obtain drugs as pharmaceutical companies discontinued the medications traditionally used by states or put them off limits for executions. The state's latest attempt, to obtain a federal import license to buy drugs from overseas, ran into a roadblock when the FDA informed Ohio such actions are illegal because the drugs in question aren't FDA-approved. That's the kind of thing that happens when dates are set without drugs on hand, said Tim Young, the state public defender. "That continual setting of dates seems to bring to bear unfortunate pressure to drive the choices with untested drugs, untested processes," he said. Gov. John Kasich said other states won't give Ohio their drugs and lawsuits may tie up attempts to import approved drugs. But he said there's still time before the January execution. "I want to continue forward with the death penalty, but if I don't have the drugs it becomes very difficult," Kasich said. Ohio appears to have the most killers with execution dates because of the state's system for scheduling them. Texas, which still leads the nation in the number of executions annually, sets dates a maximum of 90 days out. Missouri, which has a similar system, has a maximum 60-day window which extends up to 120 days next year. Last week in Arkansas, Attorney General Leslie Rutledge asked Gov. Asa Hutchinson to set execution dates for 8 death row inmates. Rutledge had waited until the prison system obtained the 3 drugs used in the state's new execution protocol, which happened about 2 months ago. (source: Associated Press) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sat Sep 5 13:44:36 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2015 13:44:36 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----KY., OKLA., COLO., CALIF., USA Message-ID: Sept. 5 KENTUCKY: Death penalty considered in murder case Commonwealth's Attorney Kelly Clarke requested more time to decide if he would seek the death penalty in the case of murdered University of Cincinnati professor Randall Russ. Clarke said he was originally supposed to decide if he would seek the death penalty for accused murderers Charles Black and Kevin Howard, by Aug. 28, but did not want to rush "such a serious decision." "I was not comfortable making a decision so serious before examining all the evidence," Clarke said. "There is still outstanding DNA evidence and I just didn't feel like this was a decision that needed to be rushed. I have now talked with the family and I know where they stand, so I'm just asking for a little more time." Nineteenth Judicial Circuit Court Judge Stockton Wood agreed the decision is not something to be taken lightly and agreed to allow more time, but said he would also proceed through the remainder of the hearings as if the commonwealth will be seeking the death penalty. "I will take under consideration any motions that would be filed as if the Commonwealth were to seek the death penalty," Wood said to attorneys for Howard and Black. Wood also asked Clarke where the commonwealth was in regards to DNA evidence against Howard and Black. Clarke said a lab technician will be able to do a buccal swab of the defendants, but hair follicle testing would be needed. "Normally, I would want to avoid a hair test if at all possible," Wood said. "However, due to the grave nature of this case, I may be willing to allow it." Howard agreed to submit to a hair follicle sample, if the commonwealth agreed to do it quickly. The charges against the 2 men came about after Black was arrested on Oct. 1 in connection with the disappearance of Randall Russ. Black was arrested after officials said he led officers with the Kentucky State Police to a body buried in a shallow grave in the Hillsboro area of Fleming County. The body was later identified as Russ. Black was questioned after evidence allegedly emerged of him using Russ's credit card to withdraw $700 from an ATM. Black told police Howard had killed Russ in his home while he was next door. Black said when he returned, Russ was bound and gagged and was dead. Black said he and Howard took Russ's body to the area of Ringo Grange City Road, where they buried him in a shallow grave before cleaning Russ's vehicle and taking it to Fort Boonesborough in Richmond, according to Kentucky State Police Trooper Wes Prather. A trial date for Howard and Black has been set for Feb. 8 and is expected to last about 3 weeks. (source: Ledger Independent) OKLAHOMA: A Summary: "When 8 is Enough" How many "true" stories does it take to execute an innocent man? Editor's Note: On September 16, Richard E. Glossip is scheduled for execution for his purported role in a "murder-for-hire" plot in 1997. Glossip is currently on death row in Oklahoma waiting his execution. The case has drawn national, and lately international, attention. The following material, offered by Glossip's advocates who are seeking either a stay in his execution or a 60-day or longer "stay" in carrying out the sentence - is self-explanatory. This summary is condensed from much longer document that breaks down what Don Knight - a well-known Colorado attorney who specializes in capital punishment cases - calls the "8 is enough" reasons to doubt Glossip's guilt. Below is a transcript summary and commentary written by Richard E. Glossip's Innocence Legal Defense team Don Knight, Kathleen Lord, and Mark Olive. With the execution of Richard Glossip rapidly approaching, many questions have been raised over why the jury reached the verdict it did. There was no physical evidence linking Richard to the crime. The conviction was based solely upon statements given to the police by Justin Sneed, the man who confessed to the murder of Barry Van Treese. In May 1998, on the eve of Mr. Glossip's 1st trial, Mr. Sneed signed an agreement with the District Attorney that spared Mr. Sneed from his own death sentence in exchange for "truthful testimony" in Richard Glossip's trial. However, a thorough search through the many conflicting statements made by Mr. Sneed since the day of his arrest makes it impossible to know the truth. This document presents for the 1st time, in comparison, at least 8 very different stories told by Justin Sneed. These varying accounts were taken directly from the transcript of his interview with the police, the official court records of his testimonies in the 2 trials, and statements that he had made to family members since the date of his arrest. These stories highlight exactly how the justice system has failed Richard Glossip, how innocent people can be put to death, and why no one should ever be put to death based on the word of just one person. Story 1 - "I don't really know what to say about it" When the interview with the police began, Justin Sneed stated he knew the manager of the Best Budget Inn as "Rich," but he did not even know Richard Glossip's last name. When first asked by Detectives Bemo and Cook about what happened at the Best Budget Inn on January 7, 1997, Sneed said that he really didn't know what to say about the death of Barry Van Treese. He did recall that his brother Wes mentioned staging a robbery at one point to get money from Barry Van Treese, but " ... it didn't go no further than that." Story 2 - "I didn't kill Barry Van Treese" After being pressed by the detectives following his initial denial of any knowledge, Sneed's story changed and he said affirmatively that he did not kill Barry Van Treese. He claimed he didn't really know him and had only met him a few times. The detectives implied that they wouldn't believe Sneed if he said he acted alone and that he had better give someone else up. For the 1st time in the interrogation they told Sneed that they had Richard Glossip in custody and " ... he is putting this all on you." Story 3 - "I just meant to knock him out" In this story Sneed described a plan to steal money from Van Treese and then how things went wrong once Sneed entered room 102. He admitted killing Van Treese but made it clear that he had no intention to do so. Sneed claimed that Richard told him Van Treese kept money in the car and that Richard would split the money with Sneed if Sneed took it from Barry's car. Sneed then went on to state that he entered room 102 only with the intent to take Van Treese's keys in order to take the money from 2 the car. Sneed stated he had no intent to kill Van Treese. However, as Sneed entered the room Van Treese unexpectedly woke up. Sneed stated he hit Van Treese only with the intent to knock him out but things got "out of control." Sneed said how he got the keys from Barry's pants which were on the couch, went to the car, took the money, and moved the car. He never explained to the police what plans, if any, he had to deal with Van Treese's body. This lack of any plan, which runs through later versions, supports the fact that Sneed never planned to kill Barry Van Treese. Instead, he only planned to steal the money that was in the car. Story 4 - "Rich asked me to kill Barry, so he could run the motel." In Story 4, Sneed created an entirely new scenario. He began by stating "Actually, Rich asked me to kill Barry, so he could run the motel." According to Sneed, D. Anna, Richard's girlfriend, was working in the office and saw Barry drive up at 3 a.m. Sneed claimed that Richard ran to Sneed's room, woke him up, and told him to kill Barry in exchange for $7000 and some extra money on-the-side for renting rooms. Sneed claimed that after he beat Barry and took the money, he met with Richard and the 2 of them split the money. They both went into room 102 to see if Van Treese was dead and then moved the car to the bank parking lot. After hearing these various versions of the death of Barry Van Treese, detectives Bemo and Cook told Sneed that this story (number four) would help him avoid the death penalty. In addition, there is evidence now that the 2 detectives took Justin Sneed from the interview room and continued to talk with him about the case. These conversations were not recorded and there is no way to know what was said. However, it appears they used this unrecorded time to drive home the importance of story number four over all others. Sneed makes a deal to save his own life In May of 1998, shortly before the start of Richard Glossip's 1st trial, Sneed made a deal with the prosecution that if he testified against Glossip he would not face the death penalty and would instead receive a life sentence without parole. This required him to give "truthful" testimony. Obviously, it would have to conform in some way to Story 4 for this to help him. The stories he has given since he made this agreement do contain some of the same threads as Story 4, but also add critical new information that, if true, would certainly have been remembered by Sneed, and told to Bemo and Cook, in Story 4. For example, a plan to "melt" the body with Muriatic acid, or an order given by Richard to Sneed to kill Van Treese with a hammer months before the actual homicide, are not details one would easily forget when talking to the police. Story 5 - "Glossip told me to pick up trash bags, a hacksaw, and muriatic acid ..." The 5th story was given by Sneed at the 1st trial in 1998. He testified that prior to the murder, Glossip approached Sneed "several times" with the idea to kill Barry Van Treese, but Sneed never asked him why. Sneed stated that he used methamphetamines several days before, but not the day of, the murder. When asked what he would get in exchange for killing Barry Van Treese he gave various answers, including: $7000; splitting $4000; the money was never on his mind as he was just going along; nothing really; and he could manage one of the motels that Barry owned. At trial Sneed also testified that Glossip woke him up (sometimes by phone, sometimes by knocking) at 3 a.m. and said words to the effect of "quick, go kill Barry" with a baseball bat which happened to be in Sneed's room. Sneed claimed he then went to the Sinclair station across the street and purchased a coke and waited an hour before going into room 102 with a master key which he used as the motel maintenance man. He stated once he entered room 102, Van Treese woke up and, without saying anything, rushed him. Sneed testified that he hit Van Treese 1 time with the bat before Van Treese pushed into him. Sneed fell back into a chair and the bat struck and broke the window. Sneed said Van Treese then ran toward the door but Sneed was able to grab him from behind, trip him to the floor, and beat him to death. He claimed he then sat in the room with Barry, watching him take his last breaths, for 30 minutes. Sneed testified he left room 102 and later in the morning both he and Richard returned to see if Van Treese was dead and to tape a shower curtain over the inside of the broken window. They left the room and Glossip told Sneed where the money was in the car. Sneed said he moved the car while Richard went back to his own room. Sneed then called Richard on the phone to come back down to Sneed's room and count the money. Instead of giving Sneed all the money, Sneed claimed that they split it because "I was never in it for the money." Sneed stated Glossip then told him to go to the hardware store to buy Plexiglas to cover the outside of the broken window. In the meantime, Sneed said Richard returned to his own room to "take a nap" (despite the fact that there was a dead body in one of his motel rooms). Sneed testified that he waited until 8:30 a.m. before leaving to buy the Plexiglas and, for the 1st time, stated Richard also asked him to buy trash bags, a hacksaw, and muriatic acid. This information was not given to Detectives Bemo and Cook in Story 4. Sneed claimed during this `st trial testimony that the acid would be used to "melt" the body, the saw to cut it up, and the trash bags to carry it away. Sneed claimed that even with all of this going on at the motel, Glossip was able to sleep until noon and then go to Walmart with his girlfriend. Sneed stated that the police came to the motel while Richard was away and, once he returned from Walmart, Richard told him twice to leave the motel. Sneed then stated that the tumbler from the doorknob of room 102 was missing and explained that it fell out as he tried to break the key off in the lock to prevent anyone from entering the room that had a key. This was another new fact Sneed had not mentioned. Story 6 - "Now is the time to do it, take the hammer and do it" The 2nd trial took place in 2004. Sneed testified to a great many new "details" which he did not tell Bemo and Cook about in Story 4 or the jury in the 1st trial. The transcripts do not say why this is, but they do show the new prosecutor on the case met with Sneed and discussed his testimony at least twice in advance of the trial. This 6th story began with Sneed stating that he could have gone back to live with his mother or his stepfather if things did not work out at the motel. It also said that, on the morning after the murder, Sneed went back to work for a roofing company making $500.00 per week and living in an apartment. His old roofing crew was within walking distance of the Best Budget Inn and he knew right where to find them. Despite these many options, Sneed swore that he had nowhere to go if he were thrown out of the motel and so he had no option but to kill Barry Van Treese at Glossip's behest. Sneed testified that in the late summer of 1997 he quit working for the roofing company and lived at the Best Budget Inn where he hustled money for drugs. He stated that he used methamphetamine regularly, but claimed the last time he used the drug was the day before Christmas, not just 2 days before his crime as he previously testified. He claimed that Glossip came to him joking about pulling off a robbery as early as September 1996. He said that Richard wanted to run both motels owned by Barry Van Treese, and said he could con Van Treese's widow into letting him do it if Van Treese were dead. According to Sneed, the robbery discussions eventually turned to doing a "hit" on Barry. Sneed stated that he was promised various things, including at different times in the testimony: $3500; $5000; $10,000; money from rooms rented on the side; $10,000 again; all the money; half the money; and finally to split around $4000.00 with Richard. Just like in Story 5, Sneed added critical new details which he did not give to Bemo and Cook, or to the jury in the 1st trial. In this version Sneed stated that "sometime in November" Barry Van Treese was working with Sneed and Glossip in the "boiler room" at the motel, attempting to fix the wiring for a cable TV. Sneed testified that, at a point when Van Treese was crouched down close to the floor, Richard suddenly told Sneed to kill Van Treese with a hammer that happened to be nearby. "Now is the time to do it, take the hammer and do it." However, Sneed testified that he decided not to do so. He gave no explanation for why he could resist Mr. Glossip???s orders in November but apparently not in January. In the 2nd trial Sneed also testified that prior to January 7, 1997, and despite Richard's supposed near constant talk with Sneed about killing Van Treese, Sneed decided not to because he did not take the talk seriously. However, in the early morning hours of January 7th, when Richard came into his room insisting that he kill Van Treese, Sneed inexplicably felt he had no choice but to follow these orders simply because of the way Richard "raised his voice." In this testimony, Sneed also added another new wrinkle told for the first time. He stated that during the fight with Van Treese he took a pocket knife out of his back pocket, had time to open the knife using both hands (he is not clear where the baseball bat was at this point in time), and then stabbed Van Treese with the knife one time in the chest before losing control of the knife. When previously asked by both the police and the prosecutor whether he had stabbed Van Treese during the altercation, Sneed denied that he stabbed Barry Van Treese. Sneed also testified for the 1st time that, following the murder, Richard entered room 102 and took a $100 bill out of Barry's wallet. He continued that Richard then told Sneed to move the car and take the money from under the seat. Sneed stated that they later met in his room where Richard told Sneed that instead of Sneed getting all the money they would split it. Sneed stated he didn't mind as "he just didn't have any argument against it." Story 6 contains many statements made by Sneed that he was never given an overall plan by Richard Glossip as to how the homicide or the clean-up was supposed to go. Instead, he testified that he was very suddenly told to kill Van Treese with the bat and then to return to Glossip for further instructions. He stated that Glossip then told him what to do next and, after he completed each separate act, Sneed stated that he simply returned to Richard for further orders. Story 7 - "There actually was a plan" In the 2nd trial Sneed testified that, after he left the police station with Bemo and Cook, he told the detectives that Richard actually did have a plan and apparently told Sneed about it. He said the plan was for Sneed to kill Van Treese, and that Richard agreed it was his (Richard's) job to clean up the room after the homicide. However, according to Sneed, he told the police that Richard didn't do a very good job with his end of the bargain. There is no way to know what other things he may have told the police after the tape was turned off, and what information about the case the detectives may have given to Sneed as they continued the conversation. Story 8 - "How high up does this go?" In August 2015, an investigator working for Mr. Glossip's defense team talked with Justin Sneed's mother. In this interview, his mother stated that in January 1997, just a few days after he was arrested, Justin Sneed wrote a letter to her from the jail. In this letter to his mother Justin talked about being involved in the murder and that there were others involved as well. According to his mother, Justin wrote in the letter, "You won't believe who!" His mother told the investigator that in the letter Justin made it sound like there were really powerful and important people involved in this crime and that his mother wondered at the time, "How high up does this go?" His mother told the investigator that she continues to believe there were other people involved in the murder. Anyone who has any information regarding this case can contact Don Knight at don at dknightlaw.com (source: The City Sentinel) COLORADO: The state of the death penalty in Colorado----Public officials and others weigh in on capital punishment's future in light of the James Holmes and Dexter Lewis verdicts 2 years ago, when Gov. John Hickenlooper granted Nathan Dunlap an indefinite reprieve on his death sentence for the Chuck E. Cheese murders, he said he hoped to spark a conversation about the death penalty. In that spirit, we asked a number a prominent Coloradans for their views on the death penalty in the wake of the recent verdicts in the James Holmes and Dexter Lewis trials. Should those verdicts of life without parole alter public attitudes toward the death penalty? Do they suggest the law should be changed? Or do they prove that Colorado's law works as it should, with each trial being decided on its merits? - The Denver Post Gov. John Hickenlooper: In 2 of the most horrific murders in our state's history, neither jury could come to the consensus necessary to deliver a death penalty verdict. Both juries were "death qualified" - meaning each person would be capable of sentencing the defendants to death. Yet when given the facts of the case, neither jury could conclude that death was the appropriate punishment. Capital punishment trials, and the decades of appeals that follow successful prosecutions, cost millions and millions of dollars, many times more than life in prison without parole. What do we get for that hefty sum? A months-long trial and semiannual appeals that drag victims and/or their families back through the horrors of the worst day of their lives. We make 2-bit celebrities out of cold-blooded killers. We almost certainly inspire copycats, as we have seen with recent theater shootings. Study after study demonstrates that the death penalty in no way serves as a deterrent. States that abolished the death penalty decades ago have no higher rates of homicide nor frequency of mass murders. Most religions of the world do not support the death penalty. Almost every other developed country on earth has abandoned capital punishment either in law or practice. Many other states have come to this conclusion, too, and this is not a red state-blue state issue. Nebraska's Republican legislature recently repealed its death penalty statute, and then overrode the governor's veto. In Colorado, the death penalty is arbitrarily sought and imposed. A recent University of Denver Law Review article demonstrates that, even when the heinousness of the crime is factored in, the race of the accused and place of the crime are statistically significant predictors of whether prosecutors will seek the death penalty. That is not justice. The death penalty does not make our homes or our state any safer. Life in prison without hope of parole is a just and harsh punishment. Each of these killers will die in prison. In the meantime, let's honor the memories of the victims and continue to support the survivors, their families and loved ones as they heal. Cynthia H. Coffman, state attorney general: The death penalty should remain a viable sentencing option in criminal cases with a singular exception: if the citizens of Colorado decide to repeal it through the initiative process. This appears unlikely, since any number of opinion polls indicate Coloradans want the death penalty as an option when their neighbors or families are killed in horrific, depraved crimes. They recognize that death is not intended to be a deterrent against another's future action but instead is a punishment for a crime already committed. The fact that an overwhelming majority wants to preserve capital punishment is evidence enough of the penalty's continued importance to the rule of law or, more simply, a sense of true justice. The current debate shifts in focus from the expense of trials and appeals and incarceration costs to mental capacity issues and perceived racial disparities. However, I have faith that, given the chance to vote, the public will not be duped. They rightly will focus on whether our criminal justice system functions as devised. It does, though not as swiftly as it should. The verdicts in two recent murder cases do nothing but prove that the death penalty process in Colorado works well. Jurors are thoughtful and deliberate in their decisions. The death penalty is justifiably difficult to obtain, which is merely symptomatic of the substantial due-process rights granted defendants. The continued viability of the death penalty in Colorado should rest in the voters' hands. They make up our jury pools and may one day sit on a capital case. Neither the executive nor legislative branch can be expected to read the minds of voters, nor should they substitute their judgment for the public's. And, if opponents are correct that the death penalty is passe in modern society, they should not fear an up or down vote of the people. Doug Wilson, state public defender: The death penalty is a failed public policy for many reasons. It's time to re-evaluate its use. The governor should call for a moratorium on all further death penalty cases until we complete that discussion, which should include the virtually unlimited prosecutorial discretion to seek death; the impact of race, ethnicity, gender and wealth of the victim and the defendant on that process; the aggregate expenditures on the death penalty since Colorado returned to jury sentencing in 2003; mental health issues that plague society and the criminal justice system; and the religious, moral and philosophical concerns surrounding the government's ability to execute its citizens. It's time to have a statewide discussion about the future of the death penalty led by an independent commission and to include elected prosecutors, law enforcement, the attorney general's office, defense counsel, the Judicial Department, Departments of Corrections and Human Services, mental health professionals, civil rights and religious leaders, academics, legislators, and defendant and victim family members. Whether you support abolition or not, it's time to talk. Bill Cadman, state Senate president: 2 high-profile murder convictions, neither of which drew a death sentence from jurors, have anti-death penalty groups declaring that our most serious criminal sanction is dead in Colorado. But I wouldn't be so fast to write that epitaph. I'm among those who believe the death penalty should be retained as an option for future jurors, even if most elect not to impose it. The vote of 2 juries - 1 of which was prepared to impose the death sentence but fell 1 vote short - do not a statewide referendum make. All the 2 cases prove is that the system works as it should. Jurors weighing all the details and circumstances after prolonged study and careful deliberation simply determined that a death sentence wasn't justified in these cases. We shouldn't read more into it than that. Nor should we assume that jurors weighing the circumstances of some future case might not rule otherwise. I believe James Holmes and Dexter Lewis deserved death for the horrific crimes they committed. But I wasn't on those juries, shouldering that weighty responsibility. And I'm not upset at jurors who made a different call because I believe in the process even when I'm personally disappointed by the result. If death penalty opponents believe society now overwhelmingly rejects this form of punishment, as evidenced by these verdicts, they should have no trouble trusting in future juries to make that decision, on a case by case basis. Dickey Lee Hullinghorst, speaker of the state House: I am morally opposed to the death penalty. It is imposed capriciously or, at the very least, inconsistently. It troubles me deeply that all 3 people on death row in Colorado are African-American men. The death penalty in Colorado is not consistently applied, and when it is applied, the evidence demonstrates racial inequity. It is a standard of justice for some, but not for all. It also troubles me that the handing down of a death sentence triggers a virtually endless appeals process that ends up costing the state millions in court costs over the life of a case. Those dollars could go toward education, mental health and other human services that just might turn some Coloradans away from the path that leads to murder. Before he handed down 12 life sentences in the Holmes case, Judge Carlos Samour Jr. said, "If we subscribe to the 'eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth' philosophy, we would be no different than the criminal." That statement captures my thoughts on why the death penalty is an outmoded punishment that I find personally wrong. Craig Silverman, legal analyst and former prosecutor: A single juror said "no way" to capital punishment in the Aurora theater trial. 1 juror was also enough to stop the Fero's massacre case during its penalty phase in Denver District Court. Individual jurors have that power under Colorado law. So does Gov. John Hickenlooper, who once claimed he supported the death penalty. The governor's audacious Nathan Dunlap reprieve has clouded every Colorado capital case under his watch. There is a strong chance the three mass murderers currently on Colorado's death row will be granted clemency before Hickenlooper leaves office. Public defenders presented compelling but opposite mitigation evidence in Colorado's most recent capital cases. James Holmes' supportive parents were highlighted in Arapahoe County while a Denver jury learned of Dexter Lewis' horrific upbringing. As for Dunlap, the governor informed us he now simply opposes capital punishment. But most Coloradans disagree. A recent Quinnipiac poll showed 63 % favored execution for the Aurora theater shooter, while 32 % preferred life in prison. Worse crimes than these massacres are, sadly, conceivable. Jack Graham blew up a United Airlines jet, killing 44 in 1955. He was tried in Denver District Court in 1956, and executed in 1957. In 1997, a federal jury made up of Coloradans sentenced Timothy McVeigh, murderer of 168 in Oklahoma City, to the execution he experienced four years later. Why abandon Colorado's death penalty now? Mass murdering defendants in Aurora, Sterling and Canon City have recently offered guilty pleas to avoid the possibility of execution. Death penalty abolitionists may have had a better argument if they lost Colorado's recent capital trials. But they prevailed. Now, as always, they want more, but most Coloradans say, "No way." State Rep. Rhonda Fields, an Aurora Democrat: James Holmes and Dexter Lewis killed 17 innocent people. Dozens more were injured, and the pain of hundreds of survivors and family members will never heal. I know this to be true because my beloved son, Javad Marshall Fields, and his wonderful fiancee, Vivian Wolfe, were brutally murdered. While their killers, Robert Ray and Sir Mario Owens, were sentenced to death, I have serious doubts that they will ever be executed. The third death row inmate in Colorado, Nathan Dunlap, was granted a reprieve after his sentence stood for more than 1 decades. I have concluded that my emotional well-being and that of my family is not dependent upon what happens to the killers who forever devastated my family. Our healing comes from within and with the support of those who love us. Now that the Holmes and Lewis trials have ended, my thoughts are with the victims and their families. I have come to understand and accept the fact that my family can never be made whole in any human-created system of justice. As a member of the state legislature, I must also be concerned about the high cost of death penalty prosecutions. In an era of severe budget constraints, I place a higher priority on school funding formulas that fairly support all students, early childhood education, crime prevention and the economic security of families. Serving as a policy-maker has given me a perspective to compare the cost of the death penalty and the deep pain in my heart caused by the murders of 2 precious people taken far too soon. Broomfield attorney Shawn Mitchell, former state senator: I support the death penalty in concept. It is a self-evident truth that a person can, by murderous savagery, forfeit the right to continue living. This is not an affront to human dignity; it is a defense of human dignity. It's debated whether execution promotes deterrence, retribution, or a visceral sense of just response to barbarity. All play a role. However, in 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court killed the death penalty - you might say, by lethal injunction. The court ruled execution was too arbitrary and discriminatory. In 1976 in the case of Gregg vs. Georgia, the court authorized a reshaped death sentence. The court ruled a routine sentence for first-degree murder was too mechanical, and therefore cruel and unusual. Rather than base the punishment on the nature of the crime, the court invented a kind of "totality of the killer's life" test. Juries must consider aggravating and mitigating factors. The heinous things about the murder must be found to outweigh every sympathetic, sad, mitigating, hopeful human thing that can be introduced about the rest of the defendant's life. Jurors must become gods and weigh the killer's life story against the crime in a strange, judicially invented balancing of apples and oranges. This unwieldy formulation ensures that capital cases will always be protracted, abitrary, clustered sideshows about the defendant's life. Seldom will justice and circumstance assemble 12 jurors who can unanimously keep their eye on the murder weapon instead of the sob story. It's a gamble, and probably wasteful to pursue capital punishment under current case law. A more practical and principled death penalty would be based on conviction of premeditated murder with aggravated circumstances of cruelty or depravity, by a new standard only for capital cases: beyond all possible doubt. No sideshow about a sad upbringing. Claire Levy, director of the Colorado Center on Law and Policy: The death penalty is an arbitrary punishment that does not separate the "worst of the worst" from other murderers. Colorado's law would allow the death penalty in 90 % of prosecuted 1st-degree murder cases. Yet prosecutors only seek execution against those insane enough or abused enough in their childhood to commit atrocities. Ordinary Coloradans reject execution in those circumstances. So where does that leave us? The death penalty is mostly a tool for extracting a guilty plea to first-degree murder. While that may be expedient, our system of justice should not condone that practice. The death penalty does not bring finality and closure to a horrible tragedy. It extends it indefinitely. Colorado's longest-serving death row inmate was convicted over 20 years ago. His face has defaced the front page of the newspaper numerous times, forcing the victims' families to relive their ordeals. There are 894 inmates serving life sentences for 1st-degree murder. Can anyone remember a name or a face that belongs to these inmates? They have been forgotten. That's finality. The death penalty serves no purpose in a modern criminal justice system. It doesn't deter crime. It isn't necessary to keep the public safe. It isn't sought consistently - not even when an inmate serving a life sentence kills again. The penalty is not consistent with current standards of decency, evidenced by juries' refusal to impose it. Death is sought out of vengeance, to obliterate someone who inflicted unimaginable pain. But our judicial system is not here to exact vengeance no matter how much pain a killer has imposed. The death penalty should be repealed. State Sen. Kevin Lundberg, a Republican from Berthoud: When a premeditated mass murder - where no one questions the guilt of the convicted - fails to yield a death sentence, it is obvious to all that our death penalty law does not work. Where do we go from here? Should we completely eliminate the death penalty, or should we find ways to fix the process? I believe we must fix it. The death penalty is necessary, for justice and for deterrence. Justice demands payment for crime, and it is the responsibility of civil government to administer that justice. An essential part of that justice has always been the death penalty for the worst of all crimes. It has been the standard for virtually all cultures in all ages. I believe in mercy, grace and reconciliation, but those virtues cannot become excuses to ignore the moral obligation the civil magistrate has to administer justice. The death penalty should always be rare, but to take it away entirely, which our current law has essentially done, is to remove the deterrence the death penalty can provide, and hopefully avoid some heinous crimes in the future. The Colorado legislature needs to own up to the fact that our death penalty law needs to change. Probably a simple adjustment to the requirement for a unanimous opinion from the jury to a super majority would cure the dilemma. State Rep. Angela Williams, a Denver Democrat: One of the major problems with the death penalty is obvious when you look at who is sentenced to death. Each man on Colorado's death row is African-American, and blacks make up only 4 % of our state's population. There is something seriously wrong with a policy when only non-white defendants are getting the death penalty. The state cannot go on arguing that this is a fair and just punishment. In the wake of these trials, the perpetrator has become the focus. The victims should be remembered and their families should be supported. The murderer should not become a celebrity. As a lawmaker, I cannot support the continuation of such a racist, arbitrary and broken system. David Lane, Denver criminal defense attorney: The U.S. Supreme Court has traditionally looked at what juries are doing around the country to determine what is or is not cruel and unusual punishment. 2 Colorado juries just sent powerful messages to the nation that despite 17 innocent deaths, the death penalty is not the appropriate response from a civilized society. Colorado has spent literally tens of millions of dollars in futile efforts to kill people over the last 50 years, and we have had 1 execution. Throwing scarce resources down the vengeance rat hole makes no sense. The U.S. Supreme Court has built these costs into the process, and there is no turning back. The costs - coupled with the imperfections of our justice system that resulted in 150 innocent people being freed from death rows around the country, and the fact that a number of actually innocent people have been executed - makes the death penalty an anachronism. The sentence of life without parole keeps us safe without having us stoop to the level of those we kill. The death penalty is a bygone relic of a brutal past. Dan Recht, Denver criminal defense attorney: The death penalty in Colorado is riddled with problems, not the least of which is the arbitrary and unfair nature in which it is applied. It is solely the decision of the elected district attorney to seek death. This means that politics will always be involved when choosing what sentence to pursue, and the location of the crime will often determine the defendant's fate. Now, with the most recent juries dismissing the death penalty, a decision to seek the death penalty amounts to little more than an effort to bolster a DA's political career by sticking to the tired rhetoric of being "tough on crime." It should not be lost on the public that George Brauchler, the elected DA in Arapahoe County, indicated his interest in running for the U.S. Senate before the ink even dried on the verdict form in Holmes. State Sen. Owen Hill, a Republican from Colorado Springs: Capital punishment is the ultimate and final condemnation of those who have proven themselves to be enemies of humanity. Whether in declared war or in our local community, the punishment for heinous crime should be death. It was right and virtuous to execute Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy and Timothy McVeigh. We might say Hermann Goering cheated justice by poisoning himself before he could be hanged. I used to be opposed to the death penalty because I mistakenly interpreted failures in our overly bureaucratic judicial system as an argument against justice itself. One of the most important public policy opportunities we have is to reinforce justice by enacting significant criminal justice reform. We must ensure that enemies of human life swiftly meet justice while those who make all-too-common mistakes are given more opportunities to succeed as productive members of our community. In this pursuit of justice, we must remember that our response to crime and to criminals, to victims and their families, is the greatest measure of the strength and character of our community. Virtue demands that we strenuously avoid two grave mistakes. The first mistake is condemning without due process and a universal assumption of innocence until proven guilty. The second is delaying and vacillating in acting justly to punish those who have inhumanely deprived others of life. Justice delayed is justice denied. Life is a privilege and a gift and those who wantonly and cruelly take this from others, proving themselves enemies of humanity, ought to be given justice and stripped of their own lives. Todd Shepherd, Independence Institute: When a person has been convicted of killing someone who is known to be willing to provide testimony to police or attorneys, or when the person has been convicted of killing a judge or prosecuting attorney, the death penalty is an appropriate sentencing option for jurors. Killing a listed witness or prosecuting attorney is a crime that does not happen in a vacuum. Those kinds of murders not only attempt to skew a particular trial, but they also have the potential to cast a veil of silence over the entire judicial system. The scenario I'm describing is not hypothetical. 2 of the 3 people on Colorado's death row - Robert Ray and Sir Mario Owens - were convicted for the 2005 killing of Javaad Marshall Fields and Vivan Wolfe, Fields' fianc???e. Fields was planning to testify against Ray and Owens in a separate murder case when he was gunned down in his car. In December 2006, Kalonnian Clark was gunned down in her own home. Clark was cooperating with the prosecution of a known gangster. By preserving the death penalty for these kinds of crimes, society sends a strong message that rightly ought to strengthen the judicial system in its routine work on non-death penalty cases. (source: The Denver Post) CALIFORNIA: Visiting of Condemned Inmates Resumes at San Quentin Seaton became the 69th death row inmate to die of natural causes in California since the state reinstated the death penalty in 1978, according to Reuters. The Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) and the Adams County Health Department (ACHD) are reporting 4 confirmed cases of Legionnaires' disease, including 1 death in Quincy. "We continue to focus on the outbreak at the Illinois Veterans' Home-Quincy and investigate possible sources of Legionella bacteria and make recommendations on how to eliminate the bacteria". The number of confirmed cases of Legionnaires' disease at California's San Quentin prison is holding steady at 6, 1 of 3 outbreaks of Legionnaires' around the country that have sickened dozens and killed 20. Corrections officials say full kitchen service will resume next week. By Friday the toilets were operable again, but because of concern of steam from heating food, the 3,700 inmates at San Quentin were put on a breakfast-lunch-dinner diet of peanut butter sandwiches. Antibiotics can treat the disease, but it is fatal for between 5% and 30% of patients, Moore said. A condemned San Quentin prisoner died of natural causes 29 years after he used a claw hammer to murder his 77-year-old disabled neighbor in Riverside. The bacterium that causes Legionnaires' disease thrives in warm water. The prison turned off running water last week after the first case surfaced. The prison's water comes from the Marin Municipal Water District, which is conducting its own testing. The letter asked lawyers to encourage prisoners to report any symptoms of illness to medical staff as legal visits resumed Wednesday. Since July there have been 124 cases of Legionnaires' disease at various locations the South Bronx; 12 people have died. There have been several outbreaks of Legionnaires??? disease in the United States this summer, with more than 100 people becoming sick and 19 deaths. (source: (Press Examiner) ******************* California Democrat urges court to reinstate death penalty The office of the California Attorney General argued Monday before a 3-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that last year's lower court ruling barring further executions in the state should be reversed. The death sentence of Earnest Jones, who was convicted for a rape and murder committed 23 years ago, was vacated by Federal District Judge Cormac J. Carney, an appointee of George W. Bush. As the WSWS explained at the time, this decision was the 1st to invalidate the California death penalty altogether since voters reinstated capital punishment in 1978. Carney based his ruling on the fact that during the ensuing 37 years, California courts have sentenced over 900 people to death, but only 13 have been executed. About 100 have died on death row of natural causes or suicide. "For the rest, the dysfunctional administration of California's death penalty system has resulted, and will continue to result, in an inordinate and unpredictable period of delay preceding their actual execution," Carney wrote. "As for the random few for whom execution does become a reality, they will have languished for so long on death row that their execution will serve no retributive or deterrent purpose and will be arbitrary." The Supreme Court has ruled that state laws resulting in arbitrary death sentences violate the Eighth Amendment's ban on "cruel and unusual punishments." Most cases have focused on procedures for the guilt and penalty phases of the death penalty trial, but Carney based his ruling instead on the inability of California to provide condemned inmates with meaningful review after their convictions. The challenge to Carney's ruling was argued by Michael J. Mongan on behalf of California Attorney General Kamala Harris. The 3rd-ranking Democrat in state government, Harris is the current favorite of the party establishment to replace retiring US Senator Barbara Boxer next year. Harris claims to personally oppose capital punishment, but attorneys for her office support it in court at every opportunity. Mongan's arguments concerned only mind-numbing technicalities, particularly the alleged failure of the condemned man to fully litigate his claims of state court dysfunction in state court before raising them in his federal habeas corpus petition, a draconian legal doctrine known as "exhaustion." The executive director of the Habeas Corpus Research Center (HCRC), Michael Lawrence, argued to uphold Carney's ruling. Lawrence told the Ninth Circuit panel that the state provided HCRC only 34 lawyers to represent 758 death row inmates. Presently 358 inmates are waiting for a lawyer to be assigned, a process that takes 8 to 10 years. Once the HCRC lawyer is assigned to a case, the process itself can take another 8 to 10 years, much of that time spent "exhausting" state-court proceedings so that a federal habeas corpus petition can be filed. Lawrence explained that in most cases HCRC lawyers submit extensive papers to the state courts detailing alleged constitutional violations, and then wait up to 4 years for the inevitable postcard denying their petitions without explanation. During the oral argument, all three judges, each appointed by a Democratic president, ignored the mental anguish of human beings left to languish for decades on death row, instead focusing on whether the technical requirements for exhaustion were met before Carney ruled that the state courts were dysfunctional. As explained by Laurie Levenson, a Loyola Law School professor who frequently comments on California legal developments, "The question is whether they have to go back to the state system - which both sides agreed is completely dysfunctional - before it comes back to the federal courts and they deal with it." Placing a condemned man into such a Catch-22 is cruel and unusual punishment in itself. Most legal experts forecast that the Ninth Circuit panel will reverse Carney. That ruling, however, could either reinstate Ernest Jones??? death sentence and move him closer to the execution chamber, or send him back into the California court system for a ruling on whether those courts are too dysfunctional to administer executions in a non-arbitrary manner. A formal opinion can be issued at any time between a few weeks and several months. After the panel rules, the losing side will likely petition the entire Ninth Circuit for review en banc. A petition to the US Supreme Court could then be filed. Carney's ruling reflects that opposition to the death penalty is growing not only within the population as a whole, but also within certain sections of the ruling class. 19 states have abolished the death penalty, including 6 - Maryland, New Jersey, New York, New Mexico, Illinois, Connecticut and Nebraska - since 2007. Opinion polls show a steady nationwide decline of support for capital punishment. Public approval in the mid-1990s reached an all-time high of 80 %, during the Clinton administration's promotion of a draconian "law and order" culture, with only 16 % opposed. Support has fallen below 60 % in the most recent polling. Last August, a Colorado jury rejected the death penalty for James Holmes, convicted of murdering 12 people and wounding 70 others in a movie theatre. A few weeks later another Colorado jury spared the life of Dexter Lewis after convicting him of killing 5 people. In 2012 California voters narrowly defeated a ballot measure that would have ended the death penalty. Many oppose capital punishment because of the growing understanding that corrupt and dishonest police and prosecutors manipulate evidence to obtain wrongful convictions. There is also growing recognition that low-income and minority defendants are disproportionally targeted for execution. The judicial system, representing some of the most class-conscious representatives of the ruling class, has been sensitive to this shift. In the last decade a divided Supreme Court has ruled that executions of mentally retarded individuals ( Atkins v. Virginia, 2002) and juveniles ( Roper v. Simmons, 2005) violate the Eighth Amendment. Last June, Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote a dissent urging the Supreme Court to rule "that the death penalty, in and of itself, now likely constitutes a legally prohibited cruel and unusual punishment." There are also "fiscal opponents" who reject capital punishment because of its exorbitant cost, estimated to exceed $300 million per execution in California. Despite the growing opposition, California's Democratic Governor Jerry Brown, like Attorney General Harris, chose to appeal Carney's ruling. Brown, like Harris, has expressed personal opposition to the death penalty, while using his political authority to support it. In 2012, in response to a federal court's invalidating California's 3-drug lethal injection protocol, Brown ordered prison officials to develop a single-drug method, stating, "My administration is working to ensure that California's laws on capital punishment are upheld and carried out in conformity with our statutes." Both Brown and Harris also refused to publicly support California's anti-death penalty ballot measure in 2012. (source: World Socialist Web Site) USA: Catholic policy advocates crossing fingers in advance of papal visit There is no doubt that Pope Francis' impending visit to the United States is generating a lot of enthusiasm. For some people, the rarity of a papal visit to these shores is reason enough to trek hundreds of miles or more for the opportunity to be with him, or near him, even if only briefly. There are others, though, who hope that the pope's words will provide a shot in the arm for their work on public policy issues. Over the course of 5 days, the pope will give homilies at Masses in Washington, New York and Philadelphia. He will address the World Meeting of Families, the United Nations General Assembly, and be the first pontiff to address a joint meeting of Congress. Pope Francis will also meet with President Barack Obama. "We're hoping and expecting that he is going to speak on issues of migration, and I'm hoping he'll talk about the dignity of those who are seeking a better life," said Jeanne Atkinson, executive director of the Catholic Legal Immigration Network. "I'm hoping he'll speak of compassion toward refugees and asylum seekers." Atkinson has been tracking Pope Francis' remarks. "He made a statement about the U.S.-Mexican border," she said. "He's concerned with Syrian refugees, trafficking, all that. He very much speaks to what CLINIC does." As to whether the pope's visit will move the needle on a long-stymied overhaul of U.S. immigration policy, Atkinson thinks it depends on who's listening. "A person who is virulently anti-immigrant, I don't think so." However, she clarified, "I think people are eager to hear what he has to say, Catholics, of course, but non-Catholics. I think he clearly speaks from a position of moral authority -- but without an agenda, in a sense. His agenda is the church's agenda. I think people will listen." And should they listen, "I hope it will cause people to re-examine the church's position on immigration," Atkinson said. "The church has been a strong force for immigration and immigration reform for decades." Opponents of the death penalty also hope the pope will mention their cause. "We are hopeful he will follow in the footsteps of St. John Paul II and help facilitate the end of the use of the death penalty in this country and point out the need for reform within our criminal justice system," said Karen Clifton, executive director of the Catholic Mobilizing Network to End the Use of the Death Penalty, in a Sept. 4 statement emailed to Catholic News Service. Clifton recalled St. John Paul's appeal against capital punishment during his January 1999 visit to St. Louis. The day after his appeal, a death row inmate's sentence was commuted to life in prison. "Pope Francis has been very outspoken against the use of the death penalty, stating it is 'inadmissible, no matter how serious the crime committed. ... It is an offense against the inviolability of life and the dignity of the human person, ... There is no humane way of killing another person,'" Clifton said. "With the current debate on the use of the death penalty in this country, Pope Francis' strong pastoral words need to be heard." (source: Catholic News Service) ****************** The 5 most controversial Supreme Court fights coming up Earlier this summer, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage, ostensibly settling one of the biggest civil-rights questions of our time. This fall is stacked with even more controversial, politically charged cases. Abortion clinics Perhaps the most politically volatile coming Supreme Court case is Whole Woman's Health v. Lakey, which will decide whether dozens of abortion clinics throughout Texas can remain open - a decision that probably will affect other conservative states that have in recent years imposed harsh restrictions on abortion clinics. "Not since before Roe v. Wade has a law or court decision had the potential to devastate access to reproductive healthcare on such a sweeping scale," Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, told Bloomberg earlier this year. In June, the court issued a temporary "stay," allowing the clinics to remain open until the case is formally decided. The stay, however, was opposed by the bench's 4 conservative justices: John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito. Anthony Kennedy, the court's usual swing vote in politically charged issues, joined the 4 liberal justices to permit the stay. It's unlikely that the court's eight ideological stalwarts will change their mind in the case's formal deliberation this fall. Kennedy will once again be the swing vote, and it's uncertain how he'll decide when he hears the case in court; in the past, he has supported limits on abortion. The vote could also have implications for other states' abortion limits. In the past few years, numerous other states have passed abortion restrictions similar to those in Texas, and a decision this term can sway how soon they will meet the Supreme Court. The death penalty 3 big cases about the constitutionality of the death penalty are set to be heard this term: 1 from Florida and 2 from Kansas. With all 3 cases, the Supreme Court has opportunities to make it harder - or easier - for lower courts to assign the death penalty to criminals. An important factor in determining whether the death penalty can be applied is whether the defendant is considered intellectually disabled. And whether someone is intellectually disabled is determined differently depending on the jurisdiction. Florida's state Supreme Court ruled that a defendant in a capital case doesn't have the right to have a jury determine that. Timothy Lee Hurst, a convicted murderer in Florida v. Hurst, the case before the court, was deemed fit for capital punishment by one of Florida's courts, even though psychologists determined that he was intellectually disabled. In the 2002 decision for Ring v. Arizona, the US Supreme Court decided that a jury was required to determine the factors that could allow the death penalty to be assigned to a convicted criminal. In light of that ruling, Hurst wants a jury to make the final decision on whether he is eligible for the death penalty. Florida argues that its procedural framework for death sentencing is sufficient. The Kansas cases - Kansas v. Carr and Kansas v. Gleason - will be heard together. The Kansas state Supreme Court found Jonathan and Reginald Carr guilty of capital murder in 2000 but overturned the death penalty that the state wanted. Gleason, too, was found guilty, but the state Supreme Court overturned the death sentence as a punishment. Sarah Johnson, an attorney with the state office defending Gleason and Jonathan Carr, told The Wichita Eagle that she was "honestly a little surprised" that the Supreme Court picked up the case. Kansas most recently executed someone in 1965. "We don't think this is an issue that really is worthy of the US Supreme Court's time and attention, but we are confident that once they get into it, they will recognize that the Kansas Supreme Court acted well within its discretion," Johnson told The Wichita Eagle. The Kansas cases will rest on the question of whether the Eighth Amendment requires that a jury deciding capital punishment can be told that it isn't necessary to prove mitigating circumstances "beyond a reasonable doubt." That is to say, the court will decide whether the "beyond a reasonable doubt" clause applies when a jury is deciding whether capital punishment should even be considered in a case, not just when it's applied. Affirmative action Unusually, the case is being heard again. The first time, the Supreme Court let a lower court decide whether the university complied with the affirmative-action guidelines established in previous cases. But now the Supreme Court itself seems to want to see whether Fisher's situation satisfies affirmative-action requirements. The Supreme Court has refined the rules of affirmative action over the years, and this case gives the opportunity for it to do that again. Kennedy, who is seen the swing vote in this issue, has never upheld an affirmative-action plan. "I hope the justices will rule that UT is not allowed to treat undergraduate applicants differently because of their race or ethnicity," Fisher said in a statement when the court agreed to review the case again. This particular case also has the rare chance to end in a tie; Elena Kagan will recuse herself from the case because she worked on it from 2009 to 2010, when she was the US' solicitor general. If that happens, the decision will loop back to the lower court. Life sentencing for juveniles Back in 2012, the Supreme Court decided in Miller v. Alabama that states may not sentence juveniles found guilty of murder to a mandatory life sentence without parole. Now, with Montgomery v. Louisiana, the court must decide whether that rule can be applied retroactively: Henry Montgomery, the plaintiff in that case, shot and killed a Louisiana sheriff when he was 17 years old - way back in 1963. The Louisiana state Supreme Court refused to retroactively change Montgomery's sentence, and the Supreme Court must also now decide whether the court has an authority to do that, also making this a case of state-versus-federal power when it comes to certain kinds of sentencing. Since the Miller v. Alabama ruling, hundreds of similar cases are being challenged again in the courts. Some states, like California, have agreed to allow inmates to apply for re-sentencing hearings, while states like Pennsylvania aren't. Florida, on the other hand, is relaxing its mandatory prison sentences in light of the ruling, throwing out every mandatory life sentence given to inmates who committed their crimes while a juvenile. Unions Many unions require that employees pay dues for representation by default but allow them to opt out. The decision for Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association might change the system to an opt-in one instead. Labor unions tend to argue that the opt-out system is essential for their survival. They are legally required to act in the interests of all workers in a "unit" regardless of whether any one worker pays dues. Those nonunion workers, therefore, still benefit from the union's actions even though the union doesn't get paid by them. Rebecca Friedrichs, one of the plaintiffs, told The Washington Post that she decided to pursue the case out of frustration with her union, which she said supported political candidates she didn't support, and didn't listen to the teachers it represented. "Unions are not going to go out of business over this," Friedrichs told The Post. "Unions will still have full monopoly bargaining power. They'll still be there in the schools. The only difference I see is that workers will have a choice. If teachers see that a union is good, they'll join. If they feel like me and they're troubled in their conscience, they won't join. To me, it's a liberty issue." Previous Supreme Court rulings have established complicated standards that, basically, allow unions to compel workers to pay dues if being a part of a union is required for the job. But even then, those unions may engage only in collective-bargaining activities, not speech-related activities. A 1977 ruling, for Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, determined that these special types of unions could exist in a public workplace, like a school, but the court may overrule that this term. If it does, it can be a crippling blow to public-sector unions, such as teachers unions. (source: Business Insider) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sat Sep 5 13:45:24 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2015 13:45:24 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 5 PHILIPPINES: Death penalty should remain dead Our people are united in sympathizing with and helping Mary Jane Veloso, the poor Filipino female domestic worker who was convicted of heroin smuggling in Indonesia. Despite her defense that she was merely duped into carrying the prohibited drug in her suitcase, she was nonetheless sentenced to death in October 2010. Saved from death. Due to a moratorium on the death penalty at that time, the sentence was not carried out immediately. But newly-elected Indonesian President Joko Widodo lifted the moratorium. So, together with 8 others, she was scheduled for execution by firing squad on the evening of April 29 this year. At the last moment on that very evening, President Widodo - heeding the plea of our President Aquino - granted her a reprieve so she could testify at the trial in the Philippines of her alleged recruiters, Maria Cristina Sergio and Sergio's live-in partner, Julius Lacanilao. The other 8 convicts were however executed, despite the ringing protest of many world leaders. Veloso's heart-wrenching story and the feverish effort to save her from the Indonesian firing squad is not yet over (she was merely granted a reprieve), but it reminds me of the grim finality of death as a penalty According to Amnesty International, the death penalty has been outlawed in 140 countries for being an inhuman and ineffective deterrent to crime. Our 1987 Constitution has also barred the imposition of the death penalty "unless for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it." Further, the Charter reduced death sentences already imposed to reclusion perpetua (or life imprisonment). Death penalty revived. Citing the constitutional exception allowing the death penalty for "compelling reasons involving heinous crimes," Congress enacted Republic Act No. 7659 prescribing death as a penalty for certain crimes it defined as "heinous." In People vs Echegaray (June 25, 1996 and Feb. 7, 1997), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of RA 7659, adjudged the accused Leo Echegaray guilty of raping a 10-year-old girl, and meted out on him the death penalty by lethal injection, the 1st under RA 7659. Together with 2 other justices, I dissented from this and all other judgments imposing the death penalty on the ground that RA 7659 was unconstitutional because Congress failed (1) to show "compelling reasons" to revive it and (2) the crimes for which it was prescribed were not "heinous." Apart from these legal grounds, I also strongly felt that the death penalty unfairly targeted the poor, the weak and the underprivileged. Though the many decisions imposing death were per curiam, I have, on many occasions, admitted my dissenting opinions and votes. Tilted vs the poor. To contribute to the worldwide clamor to abolish the death penalty, and to help Mary Jane (and her family) escape the agony and pain of death by firing squad, may I revisit some of my arguments why the death penalty is tilted against the poor who are exemplified by Mary Jane. Truly, the death penalty militates against the poor, the powerless and the marginalized. The best example to show the sad plight of the underprivileged is the fact that the counsel for Echegaray (like the one for Mary Jane) was less than competent and enthusiastic in defending him. The crucial issue of the constitutionality of the death penalty law was not raised in the trial court, not even in the Supreme Court, until Echegaray's counsel was replaced by the Free Legal Assistance Group, which belatedly brought it up only in the Supplemental Motion for Reconsideration in the high court. To the poor and unlettered, it is bad enough that the law is complex and written in a strange and incomprehensible language. Worse still, judicial proceedings are themselves complicated, intimidating and damning. The net effect of having a death penalty that is imposed more often than not upon the impecunious is to engender in the minds of the latter - unfounded at times, but unhealthy nevertheless - a sense of the unequal balance of the scales of justice. Precisely because the underprivileged are what they are, they require and deserve a greater degree of protection and assistance from our Constitution, our laws and our officials, and from the courts, so that in spite of their situation, they can be empowered to rise above themselves and their poverty. The basic postulates of such a position are, I think, simply that ultimately we all want to better ourselves and that we cannot better ourselves individually to a significant degree if we are unable to advance as an entire people and nation. All the glory provisions of the Constitution aim to help the poor. Yet, we were faced with this penalty that effectively inflicted the ultimate punishment on none other than the poor and the disadvantaged, a penalty so obviously final and so irreversibly permanent that it erased all hopes of reform, of change for the better. After a long battle in the courts of law and of public opinion, Congress finally repealed the Death Penalty Law effective June 30, 2006. Had Congress not abolished the death penalty, President Aquino (and the others who labored for Mary Jane) would not have had the moral ascendancy to plead for her life. This is one more reason why the death penalty should remain dead - in deference to and for the sake of our poor, struggling overseas Filipino workers, many of whom are virtually and unfairly lined up before firing squads in many countries of the world. (source: Opinion, Philippine Inquirer) PAKISTAN: Pakistan police arrest Christian labourer for blasphemy Pakistan police said Saturday they have arrested and imprisoned a Christian man accused of blasphemy in Punjab. "Blasphemy is a hugely sensitive issue in Pakistan, with even unproven allegations often prompting mob violence, and acquittals in court are rare. A Christian laborer named Pervaiz Masih was arrested earlier this week and sent on judicial remand for passing derogatory remarks against the prophet of Islam," a local police official told AFP on condition of anonymity. Ali Hussain, a senior police official in the area, confirmed the incident. He said the accused, a labourer, was working with several Muslim colleagues when the incident occurred. "They were working on a small construction site, one Muslim fellow was listening to religious speech while the accused was working," he said, adding that when the accused told his colleague to get back to work they had an argument during which the Christian man made derogatory remarks about the prophet of Islam. "We have registered a case under section 295C against the accused." The alleged incident occurred in Kasur district, around 54 kilometers (34 miles) southeast of Lahore.Under Pakistan's stringent blasphemy laws, insulting the Prophet Mohammed carries the death penalty, though the country has never executed anyone for the crime. But anyone convicted, or even just accused, of insulting Islam, risks a violent and bloody death at the hands of vigilantes. Bonded labourer Shehzad Masih and his pregnant wife Shama Bibi were beaten by a mob of 1,500 people then thrown into a furnace last year in a crazed reaction to rumours they had thrown pages of the Koran into the garbage. Critics, including European governments, say Pakistan's blasphemy laws are often misused to settle personal scores. Christians, who make up around 1.6 % of the country's 200 million people, are often discriminated against and marginalized by the Muslim majority. (source: The Jakarta Post) INDIA: Afzal Guru, Yakub Memon hangings send signals of weak Government: Justice Ajit Prakash Shah----Sudden decision on Guru was purely political, says former Delhi High Chief Justice. Less than a week after after he demitted office as Chairman of the Law Commission of India after submitting a landmark report recommending abolition of death penalty except in cases of terror attacks, former Delhi High Court Chief Justice Ajit Prakash Shah Friday said the sudden and "secretive" hanging of Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru was a mistake by the government. "I don't understand why it had to be done so secretly and so suddenly. In my opinion, it was a sign of weakness and caused great setback to attempts to resolve the Kashmir issue. The decision was completely political," Justice Shah told The Indian Express. Incidentally, former Jammu and Kashmir chief minister Omar Abdullah had also said Guru had been hanged for "political reasons", and that even he had been informed just hours before the execution. Asked if he agreed with the way in which the government and the Supreme Court handled the mercy plea and the petition filed by 1993 Mumbai blasts convict Yakub Memon, the jurist said, "Both the Executive and the Judiciary didn't perform their duty completely and transparently. "I have so far refrained from speaking on this issue as I was holding this post. But now I can speak freely. I don't know what was the great hurry to hang him. This is not the sign of a vibrant democracy. The manner in which the Supreme Court handled the case, holding a hearing pre-dawn, also was not good. It was almost as if the Judiciary was trying to stick to the deadline to hang him. This hanging has alienated an entire community. Look at the crowd that came to attend his burial. Unfortunately, the signal that has gone out is that there are 2 sets of rules for dealing with such cases - 1 for killers like Rajiv Gandhi's and another for those from the minority community like Yakub Memon. This is very unfortunate," he added. Elaborating on the role of the judiciary, he pointed out that several important reasons were ignored while deciding Memon's case as well as the mercy petition. "The governments may have an ideology but it should have absolutely no impact on the judiciary. Were all grounds taken into consideration while deciding his mercy plea? My feeling is that the due process was not followed," he said. To a question on whether he thought the entire mercy petition process was flawed, Justice Shah said, "It is provided for in the Constitution. But, yes, it is the decision of the Executive and not the President. Earlier, we had tall leaders as President, people who could put their foot down if they didn't agree with the viewpoint of the government; look at the number of people whose mercy pleas were accepted by earlier Presidents like Rajendra Prasad. That is not the case with recent Presidents." He also agreed that the manner in which mercy pleas are decided leaves a lot of room for questions about the lack of transparency. "There are guidelines that must be followed," he said. Asked if the NDA government would accept the Commission's recommendations on abolishing death penalty, Justice Shah said, "I am aware of this government's views. But, how can I not be hopeful?" In its report, the Law Commission, while questioning the "rarest of rare" doctraine, has noted that administration of death penalty, even within the "restrictive environment of rarest of rare doctraine", was constitutionally unsustainable. It also pointed out that in the last decade, the Supreme Court had on "numerous occasions expressed concern about arbitrary sentencing" in death penalty cases, adding, "There exists no principled method to remove such arbitrariness from capital sentencing." (source: Indian Express) BARBADOS: Rights body not happy THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION On Human Rights (IACHR) is frustrated with Barbados' non-compliance with its court's order to abolish the death penalty, and in a hearing Thursday night, queried the delay. In a video compliance hearing with Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Charles Leacock QC and Solicitor General Jennifer Edwards QC the Inter-American Court of Human Rights asked why Barbados was not complying with orders made since 2007 and 2009, what would be the timelines for implementing new legislation, and whether Section 26 of Barbados' near-50-year-old Constitution - which maintains the death penalty - was adequate. The compliance hearing between Costa Rica and Barbados has come after 2 convicted murderers, Lennox Boyce and Tyrone Cadogan, took their cases to the IACHR in 2007 and 2009, respectively. The Inter-American court has reminded this country that its orders are binding here. "The crux of the matter is that on June 4, 2000, Barbados accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the IACHR, so when its court heard the cases of Boyce and Cadogan, it made the orders that the mandatory death penalty was contrary to the OAS Convention on Human Rights, and that Section 26, which protects existing law, including the mandatory death penalty, is contrary to the convention and should be repealed," Leacock explained yesterday. (source: Nation News) SINGAPORE: Murder suspect 'told victim he loved him' A witness has told The Straits Times how a murder suspect had sat looking at his victim's bloodstained body and said: "Please, please, don't let anything happen to you, I love you." The 39-year-old man was arrested for allegedly stabbing a 48-year-old man repeatedly in a covered walkway near Ang Mo Kio MRT station during yesterday's morning rush hour. The attack left behind a 10m trail of bloodstains along the walkway, which links the MRT station with the Cheng San Community Club in Ang Mo Kio Street 53. It was the 3rd suspected murder in Singapore this week. Witnesses The Straits Times spoke to did not see the stabbing, but saw the immediate aftermath. One of them, Madam Connie Loh, was walking along the walkway at about 8am when she heard a commotion. "There was a man lying on the floor, covered in blood and groaning in pain - 'ahh, ahh, ahh'," said the 61-year-old housewife in Mandarin. "Another man was sitting on the grass patch behind him, with blood on his hands." She said she then heard the suspect say in Mandarin: "Please, please, don't let anything happen to you, I love you." She later saw the suspect being stretchered into an ambulance with his hands strapped down. Another resident, Ms Joanne Wong, 33, was on her way to work when she saw 2 police officers running towards the scene. She was diverted away from the walkway, which had been cordoned off. "I saw 2 guys lying there, one motionless in a pool of blood, and another one being guarded by four policemen," said Ms Wong, who works in a hospital. "He (the suspect) was lying down, like in a daze, and I thought he was dead at first. He did not say anything, did not shout or struggle. "There were quite a lot of people there. It is a popular route because people use it to get to the MRT, especially during peak period in the morning." Police said the victim was taken to Tan Tock Seng Hospital, where he was pronounced dead at about 9.14am. Both men are believed to be Chinese. Police said the suspect is expected to appear in court today and charged with murder. If convicted, he could face the death penalty. (source: Straits Times) MALAYSIA: Cops nab 3 in family for drugs offence A septuagenarian was among 3 female members of a family detained by the police in connection with the seizure of a kilogramme of heroin and 690 Eramin 5 pills in Tampin recently. The suspects, aged between 40 and 72, were picked up from a house where the drugs, worth about RM50,350 were found. Negri Sembilan police chief Datuk Jaafar Mohd Yusof said the suspects were remanded for a week to facilitate investigations under Section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act which carries the mandatory death penalty upon conviction. He said the police were monitoring the activities of the women since early this year. "During the raid, we found the drugs hidden in a large water pot at the house," he told a press conference at the Negri Sembilan police contingent headquarters. Jaafar said initial investigations revealed the seized drugs were obtained from Penang for distribution in Malacca and Johor. (source: The Malaysian Insider) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sun Sep 6 08:55:44 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2015 08:55:44 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----CONN., GA., OKLA., NEB. Message-ID: Sept. 6 CONNECTICUT: What a writer learned from serial killer Michael Ross Martha Elliott says nobody has ever done this before and you can understand why. "I am the 1st person who spent 10 years talking with a serial killer and getting to know him really well," she told me last week during a phone conversation from her home in Maine. But she quickly added that, in addition to becoming Michael Ross' friend, "I also got to be friends with 2 of the victims' families." Elliott said she wrote her book, "The Man in the Monster: An Intimate Portrait of a Serial Killer" (Penguin Press) because she wanted to document what she had been through with Ross, to shine a light on the problems of executing those who are mentally ill and to try to help those suffering families understand the man as well as "the monster." Elliott seems to take pride in the fact she was able to endure those 10 years of face-to-face and phone conversations with Ross, as well as witnessing his execution. But as she wrote in the first line of her book: "No one in her right mind invites a serial killer into her life." This man, while in what he called his "monster" stage, raped and strangled 8 females, most of them teenagers. 6 of them lived in Connecticut and 2 in New York state. These were his victims: in Connecticut, Robin Stavinsky, 19, of Columbia; April Brunais, 14, of Griswold; Leslie Shelley, 14, of Griswold; Wendy Baribeault, 17, of Lisbon; Tammy Williams, 17, of the town of Brooklyn; and Debra Smith Taylor, 23, of Griswold. In New York: Paula Perrera, 16, of Wallkill and Dzung Ngoc Tu, 25, a student at Cornell University. The killings, all of them random, the victims unknown to Ross, occurred from May 1981 to June 1984. "I deplore violence," Elliott wrote in her preface, "and I do not wish to mitigate what Michael Ross did before his 1984 arrest. He took 8 lives and he ruined many more." But she added, "Until we see the man in the monster, we cannot begin to comprehend why he did what he did or to make a personal judgment as to whether sentencing Michael to death was a just punishment." Elliott called Ross "my partner" in her long investigation. "I believe he worked with me for so many years as a kind of atonement for what he had done," she wrote. In much of the book, she described a man "consumed with guilt." He said the reason he dropped his legal appeals after he was convicted and received the death sentence was to spare the victims' families more anguish. He finally was executed on May 13, 2005, the 1st in this state since Joseph "Mad Dog" Taborsky in 1960. He will be the final person to be executed in Connecticut; last month the state Supreme Court spared the lives of the 11 remaining inmates on death row, ruling it would be unconstitutional to execute them because the General Assembly 3 years ago abolished the death penalty for all future cases. Elliott was pleased by the decision, as she opposes capital punishment. She admits, however, that she told Ross if he had killed one of her kids, "I would want to kill you with my bare hands." She said she would hope to stop herself from doing so in that situation and she doesn't think any state or federal government should kill a killer. She is particularly disturbed to see it applied to the mentally ill. (Ross was diagnosed by a series of psychiatrists as being a sexual sadist, a mental illness.) "Michael's death sentences were a perfect example of the almost impossibility of a jury listening to psychiatric evidence and acting on what psychiatric experts say," she told me. She noted that in 1987, when Ross was put on trial, convicted of the 4 murders he committed in New London County and sentenced to death, Connecticut law stipulated that only 1 mitigating factor needed to be found by a jury in order to spare the defendant the death penalty. (The law was later changed to require juries to balance mitigating and aggravating factors.) But in 1987, Elliott said, "Mental illness was an automatic mitigant. However, the jury couldn't ignore the pain of the families. So they voted for death. It's not fair to ask a jury to make that decision. That's why we shouldn't execute people who have severe mental illness. And I don't think we should execute anybody." Elliott didn't get involved with Ross' case until the summer of 1995, when she was editor-in-chief of the Connecticut Law Tribune and Ross was lobbying to have his appeals dropped so he could be executed. The state Supreme Court had overturned the death sentences (but not the convictions) from the New London County trial because some psychiatric evidence had been withheld from the jury. However, Ross said he wanted to be put to death so as to spare the victims' families another trial on the penalty phase. (Against his wishes, he was tried again in 2000 and that jury also sentenced him to die.) Elliott wrote to Ross in prison, asking him to do an interview with her. But as she wrote in her book, "The thought of him petrified me." Part of her fear doubtless stemmed from the fact Elliott herself had been the victim of an attack by a man when she was a college student. She thought the man, who didn't know her, was going to kill her. She was saved when another woman arrived in time to stop the assault. Although Elliott had feared Ross, even while just speaking with him over the phone as well as meeting him, she wrote: "The man I met was nothing like what I had expected ... This sensitive, articulate Cornell graduate was also a devout Roman Catholic who would profusely express his remorse for his crimes to anyone who would listen." She also wrote that "the man who emerged" during their relationship was "soft-spoken, self-effacing and even funny." But by then Ross had spent years on medication, 2 drugs that suppressed his production of testosterone. Ross said this got rid of the violent sexual fantasies that had driven him to commit those crimes. He said he had been freed from "the monster within" and returned to being "Michael." Their phone calls began in February 1996 and they first met at prison a month later. She was still nervous at the thought of being with him but when he was escorted out in his prison jumpsuit, he "looked like the type of person who would offer to carry my groceries." What made Michael Ross a killer? Elliott concluded that "some tragic alchemy of his genetics, brain structure and body chemistry, coupled with his childhood experiences, created a sadistic serial killer." Those childhood traumas included being ordered to repeatedly strangle the weakest chickens on his family's farm in Brooklyn, Connecticut, starting when he was 8; being psychologically and physically abused by his depressed mother; and being beaten by his father. Elliott acknowledges that her years spent with Ross helped her as well as him. "I had to confront the 'bogeyman' who attacked me," she said during our interview as she talked about her college trauma. "Knowing Michael, getting over the fear I'd had of him, helped me get over the lingering fear of being attacked again. I had a little forgiving to do (of her assailant) and Michael helped teach me how important that was." "He taught me a lot," she added. "He taught me about appreciating human beings and not making assumptions about them; that even in the worst of the worst, there is some good. That's a big lesson. I'm very glad I learned it." (source: Randall Beach, New Haven Register) GEORGIA: Athens woman facing death penalty blames attorneys for psych hospitalization An Athens woman facing the death penalty for allegedly murdering a pregnant convenience store clerk nearly 5 years ago recently asked a Superior Court judge to appoint her new legal representation. That is just one of the things Shameeka Lasha Watson, 35, writes in a letter she recently penned while in a state psychiatric hospital. In the letter, the accused killer tells Western Judicial Circuit Chief Judge David Sweat she did not belong in the facility and blamed her current attorneys for putting her there. "I'm not the one who's saying I'm crazy everybody else is," Watson writes in the letter filed Aug. 13 in Clarke County Superior Court. "That's considered as poor (judgment) because I know I'm sane and not insane. My bus is fully loaded. It might be missing a couple of people but that's all it's missing." Watson and her husband, Clarence McCord III, are accused of murder in the death of 25-year-old Kejuan Hall on Dec. 30, 2010. Hall worked the night shift at Golden Pantry at Timothy Road and Atlanta Highway. Because the single mother was pregnant, Watson and McCord are also charged with feticide for causing the death of the unborn child. In June, Watson's lawyers filed a motion requesting she undergo a psychological evaluation, the results of which have not yet been filed with the court. Sweat granted the motion and ordered Watson moved to East Central Regional Hospital in Augusta or another Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities facility. At whichever facility Watson was taken, she writes in her most recent letter to the judge she does not belong there. "These people (at the facility) walk around in so many circles that it's making me dizzy," Watson writes. "Have you ever seen a dog chase its tail? That's what it like. If I ain't crazy by the time I leave I would or will be very scrambled or discombobbulated (sic). LOL :) That was only supposed to make you laugh because it was somewhat of a small joke." Watson further writes, "Well any who ... I've been misrepresented wrong. My lawyer have not did their jobs. Because if they had I wouldn't be here and I show wouldn't've (sic) been in jail as long as I have either. This isn't a laughing matter because it's got to do with my life." Watson claims in the letter police charged her with Hall's murder because of her prior criminal record. "Let's just put it like this, I wouldn't harm a fly," the letter noted. "Take that back because I don't like buggs (sic) ... Just say I wouldn't hurt the regular citizen if they stomped on my foot and bumped me. That's the kind of person I am. But I'm being defiled as something else. I know what I do and don't do. "I know that I'm being wrongfully accused. I need someone on my side so I can show and tell," Watson writes. "I just want this stuff over with it's been dragging on too long. I'm not trying to rush you into anything. I got patience I can wait on you." She signed the letter, Meeka Wa Hall was stabbed 31 times by 2 different weapons in the convenience store's office, possibly a knife and screwdriver, according to authorities. Hall also suffered injuries to her head, torso and arms. Authorities said Hall's head was covered with a box when they discovered her body. The motive for Hall's killing was robbery, Athens-Clarke County police said. In his notice of intent to seek the death penalty for both defendants, District Attorney Ken Mauldin said Hall's killing was "outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible or inhuman in that it involved depravity of mind." Following a phone call from a tipster, police arrested Watson and McCord about a month after Hall's death. Both have written letters to the judge presiding over their case while incarcerated. McCord was the first to send Sweat a letter, claiming he was innocent several months after Hall was killed. Initially denying he was at the Golden Pantry the night Hall was murdered, court records show he later said he was there, but made no admission concerning the clerk's death. McCord then wrote to the judge claiming he and Watson only stumbled onto the murder scene. They left without notifying police because Watson was on probation, he wrote. "When I seen (Hall's body) i paniced (sic) and tried to leave and get my wife from that," McCord wrote. "(Watson) is on probation and I didn't want anything to happen to the rest of her time on it. From what i understands about probation u can't be around the police. I know i handle the susitution (sic) wrong but i didn't want no part of it." Also according to court records, Watson pointed the finger at her husband. When questioned by police soon after her arrest, Watson said she and McCord stopped at the Golden Pantry so she could use the restroom. Watson reportedly told police she came out of the restroom and saw her husband with "blood on his hands and cuts on the middle and ring finger of his left hand," a search warrant affidavit noted. One of Watson's attorney's filed a motion asking she be tried separately from McCord because their respective defenses are "in conflict and antagonistic." The motion was granted. Then, in a December 2013 letter to the judge, Watson may have incriminated herself. The letter was sealed by the judge, but not before the district attorney read it and concluded it contained incriminating statements. According to a prosecution motion, Watson's letter "would be admissible in a trial as an admission by the defendant." Trial dates for Watson and McCord have not been set. In May the DA filed victim impact statements written by Hall's family members, an indication the dates are close to being set. According to court sources, McCord is expected to go on trial 1st. (source: Athens Banner-Herald) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Richard Glossip case: Here's the story of his victim ---- A motel manager scheduled for execution was convicted of arranging for his boss to be killed. -- Richard Glossip: "I have to ask, 'How does murdering another innocent man make things better?'" the deathrow inmate wrote. Full statement from Barry Van Treese family The Van Treese family released a statement to the Tulsa World ahead of Richard Glossip's Sept. 16 execution: Over these many years our family has endured all manner of pain as a result of the death of Barry. The Van Treese family knows with absolute certainty the State of Oklahoma has provided the opportunity for justice to be served in this case. The death penalty in Oklahoma is reserved for the most heinous crimes. 2 juries who heard all of the testimony agreed this case warranted the death penalty for Richard Glossip. Numerous courts have reviewed the facts of this case and have determined Richard Glossip's case warrants the death penalty. To ensure Richard Glossip received a fair judgement, he was given a second trial where he was represented by a legal team with decades of experience. The facts and testimony of the case have been proven in two trials and reviewed by every possible court all the way to include the US Supreme Court. And, finally, as the law provides in these types of cases, the Pardon and Parole board extensively reviewed the case, talked with and questioned Glossip, and voted unanimously against clemency. Execution of Richard Glossip will not bring Barry back or lessen the empty hole left in the lives of those who loved Barry. What it does provide is a sense that justice has been served. We have a right as a family and as citizens of the United States of America to expect justice to be served. Would not you feel the same if this was your loved one? . -- In January 1997, Richard Glossip was living with his girlfriend at the Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City, where he worked as a manager for 1 of the 2 motels owned by Barry Van Treese. Van Treese and his wife, Donna Van Treese, audited their business in late December 1996 and discovered that more than $6,000 was missing from the Oklahoma City books, according to court records. Wondering whether Glossip had a hand in the discrepancy, Barry Van Treese told day desk manager Billye Hooper things "needed to be taken care of," which Hooper took to be a reference to Glossip's management despite not knowing for sure that money was missing. Oklahoma County prosecutors said Glossip told Justin Sneed, a maintenance worker at the motel, that if Barry Van Treese inspected the rooms and saw that work hadn't been done inside them, they both would be fired. Sneed was not a paid employee but was able to stay in one of the rooms in exchange for his services. So when Glossip reportedly offered Sneed $10,000 to kill their boss on the night of Jan. 6, 1997, police said Sneed - who they alleged was "totally dependent" on Glossip due to his work arrangement - listened. Sneed confessed to entering Room 102 using a master key and hitting Barry Van Treese with a bat before throwing him to the floor and hitting him "10 or 15" times. The motel owner gave Sneed a black eye, and photos of both men's injuries were included in a packet of papers requesting that Glossip be granted clemency from a death sentence in the case. The effort was denied in October. Sneed is serving a life sentence without parole for his role in the murder after pleading guilty and testifying against Glossip, who was convicted of 1st-degree murder with the added stipulation that his former boss was killed for remuneration. Glossip was sentenced to death Aug. 14, 1998. His conviction was overturned on appeal, and another jury found him guilty on Aug. 27, 2004, and returned the same sentence. Since then, Glossip has taken his case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court without success. He is scheduled to die by lethal injection Sept. 16 following the Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling that the use of midazolam in executions is constitutional. But hundreds of thousands of people, led by well-known anti-death-penalty advocate Sister Helen Prejean and actress Susan Sarandon, are calling on Gov. Mary Fallin to stay his execution. Van Treese family feels his loss every day Barry Van Treese's sister, Alana Mileto, and her family watched Prejean and Sarandon appear on a Monday broadcast of the "Dr. Phil" show, where they presented their case for Glossip's innocence. The women believe there is evidence that was never presented in court that casts doubt on his guilt, and they point to a letter they said was written by Sneed's daughter, O'Ryan Justine Sneed, in advance of Glossip's October clemency hearing. Sneed's daughter has not spoken to media about the case or confirmed publicly that she wrote the letter, which wasn't received in time for the hearing but which states that Justin Sneed is considering recanting his testimony but fears being sentenced to death himself. A statement from Van Treese's family sent to the Tulsa World by Mileto says the "Dr. Phil" segment was "very 1-sided." Van Treese was a "fun-loving" father and husband, and his family feels his loss every day, according to the statement, which further describes him as an honorable businessman who expected honesty and accountability from his employees. "Over these many years our family has endured all manner of pain as a result of the death of Barry," Mileto said in a separate statement. "The Van Treese family knows with absolute certainty the State of Oklahoma has provided the opportunity for justice to be served in this case. ... We have a right as a family and as citizens of the United States of America to expect justice to be served." During the television show, Sarandon choked up while reading a statement from Glossip in which he continued to maintain his innocence. For his part, Sneed wrote a letter to a former Tulsa World reporter in which he discussed his and Glossip's involvement in the crime. Sneed was described by the state as having limited intellectual ability and a child-like demeanor, which prosecutors said put him in a good position to be dependent on Glossip. "I have to ask, 'How does murdering another innocent man make things better?'" Glossip wrote. "I also have a family who should not have to suffer through that. They should not have to see their father, their brother, their uncle killed. That is not justice." He also said the fight for his life extends to others on death row who were wrongfully convicted. "I hope and pray my eventual exoneration will help others and that this country will finally realize just how broken our system is and how easy it is to make mistakes," Glossip said. "If my execution ensured no other innocent man was sent to the death chamber, I am prepared to die for that cause. I have never been in trouble with the law in my life. ... I was a good citizen and always tried to help others. Now I have gone from doing everything right to fighting (for) my life." Prejean held a press conference in Oklahoma City on Thursday and presented about 270,000 signatures requesting a stay of Glossip's execution to Fallin's office. Plans to cover up death thwarted by police Once the deed was finished early Jan. 7, 1997, Sneed said, he told Glossip what he had done and Glossip told him to drive Van Treese's car, which had about $4,000 inside, to a nearby parking lot. By this point, Donna Van Treese was concerned about her husband because she had not heard from him and called the motel to ask when he was last seen. "My sister and an uncle who live in Oklahoma City were on property at the motel within a short time joining the search for Barry," Mileto said. "We later learned Glossip knew exactly where Barry was. His dead body was still lying beneath the bedding in Room 102. The room where he was beaten to death." In that room, Sneed said, he and Glossip took money from their boss's wallet, put a shower curtain over a broken window and covered the body. The story for the broken window would be that it was broken during a fight, and they would use chemicals and a saw to clean the mess. "They turned the air conditioner on high, broke the key off in the door, then left," Mileto said. "Glossip made arrangements for the morning housekeeping crew to clean other rooms." Oklahoma City police officers were eventually called after Barry Van Treese's car was found at a nearby credit union, and after hearing what they said were conflicting statements from Glossip, they searched Room 102 themselves. The motel was described as being in "deplorable" condition, and police said only 1/2 of the rooms were habitable. Donna Van Treese testified that her husband was not as involved in motel operations in his last 6 months of life because her mother and her husband's mother had both died recently, which led to the facility's falling into disrepair. Officers found Barry Van Treese's body around 10 p.m. Jan. 7, and Sneed was already gone. Glossip was questioned and released and began making plans to leave town but was detained before he could do so. "We are enormously thankful Barry's body was discovered before their plan to dispose of it using the hacksaw, muriatic acid and trash bags was carried out," Mileto said. "Many families of victims do not have this closure." In Glossip's 2005 appeal to the state, the court stated that there was evidence that connected him with the commission of the crime. The court additionally found that he lied about Van Treese's whereabouts and Sneed's part in the murder because he felt like he "was involved in it." "He admitted knowing Sneed killed Van Treese in room 102," the appeal states. "He knew about the broken glass. However, he never told anyone that he thought Sneed was involved in the murder until after he was taken into custody that night, after Van Treese's body was found." State intends to carry out death sentence Fallin's office has repeatedly emphasized that Glossip has had multiple opportunities in court to prove his innocence and that 2 juries and several appeals court judges have determined his guilt. Fallin spokesman Alex Weintz said Thursday that Sarandon and Prejean are fighting a public relations campaign and should take evidence to a judge, as Fallin does not have the power to indefinitely stay an execution. "They can order new trials," he said of judges. "The governor can't. They are not doing that because they have no new evidence." Barry Van Treese's uncle, Boyce Bowdon, who lives in Oklahoma City, wrote a statement commending Fallin for the "wisdom and courage to stand strong against the pressures of crusaders against the death penalty." He also called for the end of the continuing focus on his family's heartbreak. "Governor Fallin recognizes that the issue before her is not whether the death penalty is barbaric and should be eliminated," Bowdon said. "The issue is whether a man who has been given every opportunity provided by our legal system should be given another 60 days to do what his attorneys could not do in nearly 2 decades. ... Talk shows, Hollywood, and petition campaigns should not be allowed to undermine the authority given by our Constitution to our courts." Mileto said she believes that Glossip is guilty and deserves the death penalty. "Execution of Richard Glossip will not bring Barry back or lessen the empty hole left in the lives of those who loved Barry," she said. "What it does provide is a sense that justice has been served." (source: Tulsa World) NEBRASKA: Nebraska ballot measure raises stakes for death penalty foes The Nebraska Legislature's vote to abolish the death penalty was hailed as a sign that red-state conservatives are turning away from the punishment, but opponents now face the much greater challenge of persuading voters. National death penalty experts say the campaign could test the notion that conservative sentiment has shifted. Even some opponents of capital punishment acknowledge they face an uphill battle. Ohio State University law professor Doug Berman, a death penalty expert, says the vote drew national attention because it played into the notion that capital punishment was losing support in a deeply conservative state. Nebraskans for the Death Penalty announced last month it had gathered nearly 167,000 signatures, nearly 3 times the minimum number needed to place the issue on the November 2016 ballot. (source: Associated Press) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sun Sep 6 08:56:27 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2015 08:56:27 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----COLO., MONT., CALIF. Message-ID: Sept. 6 COLORADO: After Aurora and Denver verdicts, Colorado mulls death penalty again----High-profile murder trials jump start death penalty debate in Colorado The statewide conversation on capital punishment promised more than two years ago, when Gov. John Hickenlooper granted a death-row inmate a temporary reprieve, hasn't materialized in the way some had hoped. But the life sentences that jurors recently handed down to 2 of the state's most heinous mass murderers have jump-started debate on the death penalty's future in a state that rarely uses it. Prosecutors in both cases said death was the only appropriate sentence for the 2 men - and 2/3 of Coloradans polled in a survey during the Aurora theater trial agreed. But the eventual actions of the 24 jurors in the 2 cases - although the precise breakdown for each remains unclear - re-energized the discussion over a punishment gathering resistance nationally. By any measure, the crimes, 3 months apart in 2012, were devastating in their scope: 12 shot dead and 70 wounded inside a movie theater; 5 stabbed to death in a Denver bar later set ablaze. For some, the verdicts in the James Holmes and Dexter Lewis trials underscore long-standing issues: Is the death penalty worth the expense when it's so seldom used? Should a single juror be able to nullify a death sentence? Should Colorado join the national trend toward repeal? For others, the cases demonstrate that the system worked exactly as it should. One week after the final verdict was read in the theater shooting case, Arapahoe County District Attorney George Brauchler sat in his Centennial office, reflecting on reports that a single juror voted for a life sentence for Holmes. Had the majority of the jury come back in favor of life, Brauchler might have 2nd-guessed his decision to seek the death penalty. But not for 1 juror. "Do you re-evaluate policy for an entire state, an entire system, off one juror?" Brauchler said. "The death penalty is rock solid in the state, and everything was done right." Weeks later, after a Denver judge read the verdict forms that spared Lewis' life in the bar murders, Chief Deputy District Attorney Joe Morales balanced his disappointment against the wider implications of the jury's decision. "If you cannot get 12 people to agree beyond a reasonable doubt that the person should lose their life for their crimes, then it should not be imposed," Morales said. "This was a great day for justice. But what about the day after? And the day after that? Broader conversation? Colorado's top public defender has been awaiting a broader conversation about the death penalty for more than 2 years. "There needs to be an honest, open, frank discussion about the different components of the death penalty," Colorado Public Defender Doug Wilson said recently. Wilson oversaw the teams of public defenders in the Aurora and Denver cases and felt that justice was served. Still, he said, the system should be examined - and the governor should fulfill the promise he made when he granted the reprieve to death-row inmate Nathan Dunlap three months before he was scheduled to die for killing 4 people in 1993 at a Chuck E. Cheese's restaurant in Aurora. "That discussion has not occurred," said Wilson, envisioning a statewide commission to address all aspects of the issue. Hickenlooper, who had reserved comment until after the state's 2 capital cases were resolved, makes his case against the death penalty on the front page of Sunday's Perspective section in The Denver Post - but he stops short of any direct recommendation for repeal. "The death penalty does not make our homes or our state any safer," he writes. "Life in prison without hope of parole is just and harsh punishment." For the moment, what the discussion lacks in structure, it makes up for in immediacy. And for Sam Kamin, a law professor at the University of Denver, the 2 juries' decisions reflected an evolving public attitude toward capital punishment. "I think that there's clearly an ambivalence about the death penalty in Colorado," he said. The death penalty, Kamin said, has been a moving target for decades, and as discussions resume in Colorado, those involved should be asking: What do we think we're getting from the death penalty? "Right now, we have an expensive system that doesn't execute anyone," Kamin said. Kamin co-authored a study examining the nexus between race, geography and Colorado's death penalty from 1999 to 2010. The study, which was released during the theater trial, concluded that the death penalty in Colorado is sought too infrequently and is applied so arbitrarily across racial and geographic lines that it is unconstitutional. But Kamin examined hundreds of cases for his study and notes the hazards of allowing two distinct cases to shape the conversation. Bob Grant, the former Adams County district attorney who prosecuted the death penalty case that resulted in the state's last execution, also cautions against drawing broad conclusions based on particular cases. The outcomes of the 2 Colorado trials carried characteristics that he could see causing at least one juror to balk at capital punishment. Grant doesn't necessarily see that as an indictment of the death penalty. Whether capital punishment stays or goes deserves a broader discussion, he said, like the one the governor promised. And then, perhaps, a vote. "If people feel the death penalty has no place in Colorado jurisprudence, so be it," Grant said. "I suspect they think that there are those cases heinous enough that the defendant deserves to look the devil in the eye and have the case weighed by a jury in terms of the ultimate punishment." A lifelong dream Repeal of the death penalty has been a lifelong dream for state Sen. Lucia Guzman, whose father was a murder victim. In her mind, the back-to-back Colorado decisions against death in 2 particularly brutal crimes points to just how confounding the issue can be for juries. "The death penalty is definitely not any longer a clear-cut decision," said the Denver Democrat, "even in the midst of absolute certainty that the perpetrators tried and convicted were the actual perpetrators." But the Senate minority leader also recognizes she cannot run a repeal bill on her own without Republican support. For that reason, she's not sure whether she'll press the issue in the upcoming session - "but there will be a time." Rep. Rhonda Fields views capital punishment through a unique lens: 2 of the 3 men currently on Colorado's death row were involved in the murder of her son. She sees the recent verdicts differently. "I have drawn some conclusions," said the Aurora Democrat. "Our criminal justice system works. ... At the end of the day, we have to accept what the jury said. That doesn't mean the death penalty doesn't have its place." She said she expects someone to introduce repeal legislation in the upcoming session, but she remains uncertain whether she would counter that with a bill of her own, such as to refer the issue to voters. The political discussion at the Capitol could very well be informed by events unfolding just across the state line. Raised voices in the death penalty controversy were well within Colorado's earshot last spring, when neighboring Nebraska's legislature voted to abolish its little-used punishment - then overrode Gov. Pete Ricketts' veto by the slimmest of margins. Not only did it become the 7th state since 2007 to repeal the death penalty, but it became the 1st predominantly Republican state to do so in more than 40 years. Arguments touching on religious, fiscal and practical concerns gained new-found traction with some conservative Nebraska lawmakers and dovetailed neatly with traditional values. "We pride ourselves on being a conservative legislature," said state Sen. Colby Coash, a Republican who represents a district in Lincoln. "We saw that repealing the death penalty is in line with our conservative nature of fiscally responsible government. If any other program in Nebraska were so inefficient and costly, we would've gotten rid of that a long time ago." Nebraska's last execution, which was by electrocution, was in 1997, the same year Colorado put convicted killer Gary Davis to death by lethal injection. Since Nebraska moved to lethal injection in 2009, the state has carried out no death sentences amid difficulty in legally obtaining one of the necessary drugs. A signature drive, largely financed by the governor's family, appears likely to take the issue to voters in the 2016 election. "Regardless of the outcome," Coash said, "I believe Nebraska has executed its last inmate." Stacy Anderson, widely credited with galvanizing conservative grassroots support for Nebraska's repeal, moved to Denver in July and has begun work as outreach coordinator for Colorado's effort, the Better Priorities Initiative. She has been invited to speak to some conservative groups in Colorado, where she said the death penalty conversation has been in high gear because of the recently resolved cases. She doesn't think that structured forums are necessarily the best places for this conversation to happen. "I think the best types of conversation are ones that happen over cups of coffee. They're the least emotionally charged and ones where we get the best sense of what's best for our community," said Anderson, who describes herself as a Republican convert to the repeal community. "It's easy for these things to get politicized in super-organized sessions." On the national radar The ongoing conversation about the death penalty in Colorado could touch on 1 element that raised concerns locally - and has appeared on the national radar. The decision for a life sentence over death, in both cases, may have revolved around the vote of a single juror. While the judge in the Aurora theater trial squashed any claims that there was a "plant" on the jury, the potential for 1 juror to nullify 11 other votes for death has drawn criticism. But unanimity in pronouncing a death sentence remains the rule in most states. Colorado briefly abandoned that rule in 1995 after prosecutors - who became frustrated by juries declining to impose a death sentence - backed a controversial law that allowed a three-judge panel to sentence a defendant to death instead of a unanimous jury. The state returned to juries in 2003. Still, 3 states do not require jurors to be unanimous in handing down a death sentence. Alabama, Delaware and Florida allow a jury to recommend a death sentence without unanimity, and judges in each of those states have the power to override a jury's decision. The law in Alabama allows for a 10-2 majority vote. Florida requires a simple majority when deciding whether aggravating circumstances exist or a defendant should live or die. The American Bar Association, which does not take a position on the death penalty, released a resolution in February urging all jurisdictions with the death penalty to require unanimity among jurors in finding aggravating factors and in imposing death. "This deliberative function is crucial in order to ensure that the death sentence is not being unfairly or arbitrarily imposed," the resolution reads. While it's unclear what persuaded any individual jurors to spare the defendants in the Colorado cases, defense attorneys sought to establish mental health issues and child abuse as mitigators. Are those arguments finding more traction with jurors? In what would be some of his final comments to the jury, Lewis' defense attorney Christopher Baumann reminded jurors that months earlier, during jury selection, they each said they could consider a death sentence but also wanted to hear about the defendant's life. And so, for a week, jurors heard about the chronic abuse that consumed the defendant's childhood. Less than 3 hours after Baumann sat down, at least one of the jurors found that the facts of the case that suggested mercy outweighed the horrific details that suggested death. Alan Tuerkheimer, a jury consultant who founded the Chicago-based firm Trial Methods, said as topics such as mental illness and abuse are discussed more frequently and comfortably in the public, those considerations eventually enter deliberation rooms as well. "Everybody shares more," Tuerkheimer said. "More people are aware of these things or have been connected to these issues personally." Robert Weisberg, professor of criminal law at Stanford who has written extensively on death penalty issues, doesn't think juries are necessarily better-informed on behavioral science or that defense lawyers have found better ways to make those arguments. Rather, he ties the willingness to consider those issues to a shift in the way the public generally perceives the death penalty. "There have always been lots of cases where mental illness is brought in as a mitigator or child abuse, and most of the time it fails," he said. "I think it's really more a matter of what's in the water, what's in the national consciousness. There's simply less motivation behind the death penalty, a greater sense of it being kind of a pointless exercise." Hickenlooper, citing what he called Colorado's arbitrary use of the death penalty, said it does not advance justice. "Each of these killers will die in prison," he writes in Sunday's Post. "In the meantime, let's honor the memories of the victims and continue to support the survivors, their families and loved ones as they heal." (source: Denver Post) **************** A renewed debate on Colorado's death penalty In the past 12 months, two separate polls have indicated that most Coloradans support the death penalty. In September of last year, a Denver Post poll found 63 % of respondents support the death penalty, with 28 % opposed (the rest were unsure). And 2 months ago a Quinnipiac University poll found 67 % of respondents in Colorado supported the death penalty, with only 26 % saying it should be abolished. Both of those polls occurred, of course, before the recent verdicts that sentenced both James Holmes and Dexter Lewis to life in prison without a chance for parole. Does that change the political calculus for Coloradans? Does the fact that criminals who committed 2 of the most brutal massacres in memory in this state escaped the death penalty despite the efforts of highly skilled prosecutors say anything about whether the law should be retained? We think it does. Indeed, the verdicts seem to confirm what death penalty opponents have been arguing for years: that some of the same Coloradans who tell pollsters that they support the death penalty are actually reluctant to vote for it when they find themselves on a jury faced with the life-or-death question. For that matter, prosecutors are clearly reluctant to ask for the penalty given the resources of staff and money they have to pour into the effort over a period that stretches into years. The result is that it is almost impossible to predict who will get the death penalty and who will not - not to mention when a prosecutor will even choose to seek it. No law with such serious consequences should be applied so haphazardly. Perhaps not surprisingly, however, the essays published in this section today suggest that despite the 2 verdicts, opinions on the death penalty remain nearly as entrenched as they ever were. With one possible exception: In her reaction, state Rep. Rhonda Fields, D-Aurora, appears to flirt with repudiating her past support for the death penalty, without actually doing so. If she ever does, it will be a major loss to the coalition in support of capital punishment given her party affiliation and personal history of having her son's killers on death row. Even if Colorado's law remains unchanged, it's an ideal time for Coloradans to reassess arguments for and against the death penalty given what has just occurred. So long as the penalty remains on the books, the debate about its morality and fairness will surely continue. (source: Denver Post Editorial Board) MONTANA: The ironic persistence of Ron Smith Pardon our dismay. Once again, the good people of Montana have been forced to watch the spectacle of lawyers jumping through hoops in order to try to save the life of a man who gave up his right to that life 33 years ago when he murdered 2 men because he wanted to know what it felt like to kill someone. Ronald Allen Smith pleaded guilty in 1983 to executing Harvey Mad Man Jr. and Thomas Running Rabbit Jr. near Marias Pass in Flathead County after the Browning cousins picked him up hitchhiking. He said at first that he wanted to die for his crime, but then changed his mind, and for the last 3 decades, Montanans have watched him squirm out of one execution date after another. Last week, he was at it again. Smith's attorneys have gone to court in Helena to argue that lethal injection using pentobarbital is cruel and unusual punishment because the sedative may not be "ultra-fast acting." The irony of this argument would be delicious were is not so nauseating. Here we have a man who shot 2 men with a sawed-off rifle in the back of the head arguing that he thinks it would not be humane to sedate him slowly in preparation for his death. If he really wants to go quicker, we are sure that the citizens of Montana would happily volunteer a number of methods of execution that would be fast-acting. But honestly, we all know that's not the issue. What Smith and his lawyers are after is a chance to find a judge who will rule that the death penalty is unconstitutional. Just as other traditional values have been struck down by activist courts, so too the notion of compelling the ultimate penalty for particularly heinous crimes is in the sights of the progressive left. They haven't been able to convince the Legislature to do away with the death penalty, so that leaves an activist judge as their best hope. The other irony, and one we have repeatedly noted in the past 20 years, is that prolonging Ron Smith's life year after year has amounted to cruel and unusual punishment not of Smith, but of his victims' friends and family. It is the legal system itself that should be on trial, not the method of execution. Keeping Ron Smith alive is an affront to justice itself. As we noted in 2002, "Smith originally asked for the death penalty. We still hope he gets his wish." (source: Editorial, Daily Interlake) CALIFORNIA: Court to Hear Appeal of Long Beach Cop Killer Sentenced to Death----The California Supreme Court will hear the appeal of a gang member who shot to police officers and a pregnant woman. The California Supreme Court is set to hear an automatic appeal next month in the case of a gang member who was sentenced to death for the April 2000 murder of a Long Beach police officer. The state's highest court is scheduled to hear the case against Ramon Sandoval Jr. on Oct. 7 in San Francisco. Sandoval was convicted in October 2002 of 1st-degree murder for the April 29, 2000, killing of Officer Daryle Black, along with the attempted murder of Black's partner, assault with an assault weapon on a peace officer and assault with an assault weapon. Jurors also found true the special circumstances of murder of a police officer in the performance of his duties, murder to avoid arrest, lying in wait and street gang murder. The 1st jury that convicted Sandoval of the crimes deadlocked on whether he should face the death penalty or life in prison without the possibility of parole. A 2nd jury recommended a death sentence in April 2003. Sandoval was sentenced to death the following month, with Superior Court Judge Joan Comparet-Cassani calling him a "cold-blooded, heartless killer." The judge said Sandoval spotted Black and his partner, Rick Delfin, in an unmarked patrol car and fired 28 rounds from an assault rifle to prevent the 2 from nabbing one of his fellow gang members, who was armed and on parole. At the May 2003 sentencing hearing, the judge said Sandoval recognized the unmarked car as a police unit as he and other gang members prepared to attack a member of a rival gang they believed was responsible for an earlier drive-by shooting in which Sandoval was wounded. "Defendant Sandoval shot at the police officers 28 times, each and every time pulling the trigger. He aimed at their heads," the judge said, noting that Sandoval was about 15 feet away and could see the officers' bodies move as they were being shot. "Even though Officer Delfin managed to slowly drive the car down the street to try to evade the shooter, Sandoval continued to shoot at the police officers," the judge said. "The trajectory analysis showed that Sandoval followed his targets as they attempted to leave the area of the attack." Black died of a massive head wound, and his partner had to undergo numerous surgeries, including a knee replacement. The gunfire also struck a pregnant woman in a nearby residence, with the bullet lodging inches from her unborn fetus, the judge said. "If there is a case where death is appropriate, this is one of those cases," Comparet-Cassani said. (source: patch.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sun Sep 6 08:57:11 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2015 08:57:11 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 6 IRAN: 5 Rajai Shahr Prisoners Scheduled for Execution Spared From Death 5 prisoners in Rajai Shahr Prison who are sentenced to death for murder have had their lives spared after receiving a last-minute reprieve from the plaintiffs on their case. The prisoners, who were scheduled to be executed on Wednesday September 2, were reportedly returned to their cells. 2 of the prisoners' names are Davoud Alambeigi and Ghorban Mohammadi. The names of the 3 other prisoners are not known at this time. Their executions have been postponed from 1 month to 1 year. Earlier in the week Iran Human Rights had reported on the 5 prisoners, when they were transferred from their wards to solitary confinement in preparation for their death sentences to be carried out. According to official sources in Iran, in the past week, 8 prisoners sentenced to death for murder have had their lives spared by the plaintiffs on their cases. (source: Iran Human Rights) TANZANIA: NGO tells Govt to amend death penalty codes Children Education Society (CHESO), a local non-governmental organization (NGO) has expressed concern over the country's penal laws saying it was prudent for the next government to amend such penalty to protect the rights of juvenile and pregnant women offenders. Addressing journalists in Dar es Salaam, this week CHESO Executive Chairman Richard Shimbala said even though some laws were prohibiting imposition of death penalty to juvenile offenders, sighting section 26(2) of the penal code. "There are many pathetic aspects of death penalty to children that needs a comprehensive revamp considering an aspect of human rights," he said. The activist said, some of the legal aspects considerate are notoriously unreliable and doubtful and risking the juveniles to be declared adult even though cases were being faced were committed at their tender age. "For example, when medical personnel are invited to courts to evaluate the age of an accused person , they tend to measure, writs, weight, height, or condition of the death" ...forgetting the higher possibility that such circumferences can completely give unreliable evidence. However, Shimbala blamed the same law for imposing life sentence for pregnant women convicted of murder saying "the term imprisonment for life means that the prisoner remains in jail for lifetime till death". He said the current law does not protect such groups when faced by death penalty something that continue to create poverty to disadvantaged families especially women and children. He said the law that needs amendment includes the Penal Code (chapter 16 of the laws of Tanzania, amended in 2002) and the Criminal Procedure Act (chapter 20 of the laws, revised edition, 2002). According to him, the country still needs to maintains 2 pieces of legislation providing death penalty mandates which includes; the Penal Code and the National Defense Act, No 24 of 1996 (chapter 47 of the laws). (source: ippmedia.com) LIBYA: ISIS orders parents to MARRY OFF their daughters to its depraved fighters----Terrified parents in Libya have been ordered to MARRY OFF their daughters to depraved Islamic State (ISIS) fighters, it emerged today. Sex-crazed Islamists in the coastal city of Sirte are looking to force mothers and fathers to hand over their young girls in the name of jihad. Those who refuse could find themselves hauled before a Sharia court, with public floggings and even the death penalty amongst the punishments routinely handed down by Isis militants. The move comes after Express.co.uk revealed how Nigerian terror group Boko Haram has sent hundreds of fighters to Sirte to help the jihadis hold the city. The hated terror group has declared the Sirte its new capital in north Africa as part of its bid to create a so-called caliphate. In a sermon to Sirte's terrified people - who recently rebelled against their new Isis rulers - militant Hassan al-Karami ordered locals to marry off their female relatives to Isis fighters. He said that mothers and fathers should "step up and take the initiative" by handing over their daughters as part of jihad. Isis has made similar demands in areas it has captured in Iraq and Syria, with many women revealing the horrific treatment they have received at the hands of its twisted and depraved fighters. The Benghazi-born jihadist also declared the city, once the hometown of Colonel Gaddafi, to be part of the so-called caliphate. Isis has declared its intention to use the Mediterranean city as a springboard from which to invade Europe. Speaking at a mosque in the city's third district, where an ill-fated anti-Isis rebellion was brutally crushed two weeks ago, al-Karami announced that the group will set up Sharia Law courts in Sirte to hand down brutal punishments to anyone who questions their rule. Penalties for anybody who disobeys the Islamist fanatics will include public flogging and even the death sentence. He also said that the city's university will be reopened in a bid to brainwash local inhabitants. It will teach a strictly Isis-approved curriculum, and men and women will be completely separated. Boosted by hundreds of heavily armed Boko Haram warriors, al-Karami also taunted the group's enemies, who are trying to take back the city. Referring to a newly formed Arab League force, which has vowed to fight Isis, he boasted: "The Islamic State does not fear the infidel apostate Arab coalition against it." Libya's embattled government has called for international air-strikes on Isis to halts its rapid spread through northern Africa. Last month Isis announced plans to use Sirte as a springboard to invade Europe, urging its militants to make the short journey across the Mediterranean and "conquer Rome". The jihadists in Sirte have threatened to turn their attentions on nearby Europe, saying in propaganda videos that they will "conquer Rome". (source: Sunday Express) THE MALDIVES: Maldives Pres condemns lawyer stabbing, reiterates death penalty vow President Abdulla Yameen on Saturday strongly condemned the stabbing of opposition lawyer Mahfooz Saeed. Speaking during the closing ceremony of his re-election convention to identify leaders for his campaign in the 2018 presidential polls, president Yameen condemned the attack in the strongest term. He reiterated that the government will impose capital punishment to stop future attacks. "I'm extremely saddened. It is simply not right for a person to suffer this type of physical injury over what he does or says. We need to stop such crimes in the Maldives. Under the security angle of our YES campaign, we will enforce the death penalty for premeditated murder," president stressed. Meanwhile, home minister Umar Naseer has also condemned the attack and vowed to bring the perpetrators to justice. Maldives human rights watchdog has urged authorities to fast track the investigation and deliver swift justice. Mahfooz who is a member of former president Mohamed Nasheed's legal team was stabbed in the left side of his head while he was on his motorbike on Friday. The knife had missed his eye-socket by a few millimeters. State run Indira Gandhi Memorial Hospital (IGMH) had said Mahfooz was now out of danger after a 3 hour emergency surgery. (source: haveeru.com) BARBADOS: Keep noose RETIRED HIGH COURT JUSTICE Leroy Inniss says he is personally not against the imposition of the death penalty, and believes it should remain on the statute books. "We have not had anyone here executed for a very long time and I would be very surprised if it happens in the very near future," Inniss told the SATURDAY SUN yesterday. But he maintained there was "nothing wrong in keeping it on the statute books if at some time it has to be used". While he noted that most countries around the world were refraining from execution, he said in view of the heinous crimes being committed in Barbados that were attracting a public outcry, "it might be good to let it remain there (on the statute book) in case you think you have to use it". Speaking against a background of public calls for retention of the death penalty, the former judge said: "I don't think that research shows it makes any particular difference. But in my own view, I am certainly not against the death penalty being imposed on persons." (source: Nation News) INDIA: Capital Punishment Violates Human Rights and the Constitution It's largely due to the anxiety among people to know more about an incident full of bizarre developments - like the Sheena Bora murder case - which gets the eye balls. It is natural for a human being to yearn for being the first to know. Though the emphasis given by media on certain points which it considers vital for making a news interesting or for its one-upmanship, it is for the people to form their own opinion. The possibility of a consensus among millions of information-starved-people will always be bleak. How much is too much, will also remain a dilemma. So is the legitimacy of other punitive actions in a variety of heinous crimes that attract the extreme penalty of death or imprisonment. Or for that matter, the necessity of putting up a person for trial in a case on the basis of fractured "public opinion". A similar argument was placed by the Union government in defence of retaining death sentence on statute. It told the Law Commission that has, however, in a split opinion recommended abolition of the capital sentence except in terror cases, that "public opinion demands it". Capital Punishment Debate Undoubtedly, a government could plead in the name of "public opinion" to further its own agenda on an important issue. The retention or abolition of the capital sentence had taken the centre stage of media pages when the sole death convict in 1983 Mumbai serial blasts case Yakub Abdul Razak Memon was trying hard to seek the indulgence of Supreme Court for commutation of the extreme penalty into life imprisonment. He lost the last remedy after about 3-hour long mid-night hearing by a bench of 3 Supreme Court judges on July 30, 2015. He was hanged at 7 AM. It wasn't for the 1st time that the sentence for death to a terror convict had taken a political turn. Similar division of public opinion was seen when the Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru was hanged. But the sentence for death is also a hot cake for intense debates in view of the fact that it has been banned in at least 140 countries because it's inhuman and archaic. A decision to abolish the death sentence could be taken either by keeping aside the public opinion or the sentence could be handed out by a judge after taking into account the views of public. Perhaps, both the propositions are far-fetched in the prevailing dispensation system. Law Commission's Report "One could argue that public opinion is indeed a factor to be considered while making important decisions which affect the population at large. However, it is not necessary for the government to follow public opinion on every issue", the Law Commission chairman A P Shah said in a lengthy report which was submitted to Union Law Minister D V Sadanand Gowda on August 31,2015. Disapproving of the government's stand on death sentence, the multi-member commission said, "Indeed, the Government has a duty to drive public opinion towards options which support fairness, dignity and justice, which are constitutionally enshrined ideals". There are undisputed precedents where laws, policies and practices that were inconsistent with human right standards were supported by a majority of the people, but were proven wrong. Eventually they were abolished or banned. "Leaders must show the way how deeply incompatible the death penalty is with human dignity", the Commission counsels the government. "Very few of the current abolitionist countries would have been able to ever abolish the death penalty had they waited for public opinion to change on the issue. Moreover, once the death penalty was abolished, the legal framework motivated the public opinion to change radically on the issue, and now the death penalty is thought of as unthinkable", it adds. Doing Away with Archaic Practices Take the case of India where certain laws relating to social issues such as Sati, dowry, untouchability, and child marriage underwent changes for the betterment of society. All these medieval practices have been banned now. Needless to say the government has the power to lead public opinion even against deeply entrenched cultural norms. Thus, it is an obligation to act accordingly when faced with issues concerning human dignity and equality. The existence of death sentence in India is abhorrent and an anathema to human rights and Article 21 of the Constitution that guarantees right to life with dignity. Fundamental rights don???t cease to exist at the gate of prison. It may be pointed out that a court does not have the means to rigorously examine public opinion in a given matter. A cohesive, coherent and consistent public opinion remains a "fiction" for the dispensation machinery. The Commission, therefore, feels that the opinion of members of the public can be "capricious, and dependent upon the (mis) information that the 'public' is provided not only of the facts of an individual case, but of the criminal justice process itself". In such a situation, capital sentencing becomes "a spectacle in media". If awarding of sentence is in consonance with the wishes of the majority, the media trial also becomes a possibility, something that's impossible in a country guided by the rule of law and the Constitution. In such situations, invoking public opinion would defeat the entire framework enumerated in some judgements and the Constitution. (source: Rakeksh Bhatnagar--The writer is a Delhi-based senior journalist; thequint.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 7 10:41:36 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2015 10:41:36 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----VA., FLA., OKLA., WASH. Message-ID: Sept. 7 VIRGINIA: Lawsuit sheds light on death row solitary confinement For most people, sympathy is a scarce commodity when it comes to death row inmates. Save some miscarriage of justice that should be brought to light, these people are there because of the heinous act or acts they committed. But now the courts are taking a hard look at Virginia's longstanding practice of automatically placing death row inmates in solitary confinement as a possible violation of the Eighth Amendment's protection against cruel and unusual punishment. Capital punishment, in Virginia and elsewhere, is reserved for those who kill deliberately and with premeditation in conjunction with the commission of another felony such as rape or robbery, or commit multiple killings, or take the life of a law officer - to name just a few of the circumstances. Death row inmates generally spend years awaiting execution as the appeal process plays out. These days, in Virginia and elsewhere, that day may never come as the death penalty debate wears on and and the scarcity of trusted execution drugs leaves states hesitant to initiate a process that could have an ugly result followed by lengthy litigation. In the meantime, Virginia, whose death row has shrunk dramatically over the past 20 years, has continued to keep death row inmates in solitary confinement for up to 23 hours a day, the 24th spent outdoors in individual cages. Now, a lawsuit filed earlier this year by 4 death row inmates claims that extended periods in solitary cause severe mental distress to the point that it is cruel and unusual punishment. Virginia officials' effort to have the suit thrown out was denied in U.S. District Court. As a result, Virginia is relaxing death row solitary rules to provide for weekly visits by family members, for opportunities to mingle with other death row inmates and for more showering and recreation time. These changes hardly threaten to turn death row into country club incarceration, but they do begin to address issues that could otherwise cost Virginia taxpayers millions in endless litigation. Indeed, U.S. District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema has put the case on hold while attorneys for both sides pursue a negotiated settlement. In broader terms, the case demands a hard look at the moral issues of how humans treat other humans, regardless of the crimes they've committed. One of Virginia's 8 current death row inmates has been there since 1998, others for as long as 10 years. If there becomes no discernible difference between a death sentence and life without the possibility of parole, perhaps there should be some similarity in how the inmates are treated. A lesson taught by Virginia's last executed inmate, Robert Gleason Jr., ensures corrections officials will remain vigilant as the rules are eased. Gleason, originally sentenced to life, landed on death row after killing 2 fellow inmates. After vowing to continue killing unless he was executed, his execution wish was granted. It's important for the attorneys, courts and state officials to remember, as these negotiations over death row conditions continue, exactly the kinds of people they're dealing with. (source: Editorial, The Free Lance-Star) FLORIDA: Clay County death-penalty case appeal goes to Florida Supreme Court Very little of Leo Kaczmar's behavior makes sense in trying to understand it logically. Now the Florida Supreme Court must take Kaczmar's illogical behavior and come up with a logical ruling on whether the 31-year-old sex offender should remain on death row for the murder of his father's girlfriend in Green Cove Springs. Kaczmar was convicted of stabbing 49-year-old Maria Ruiz at least 50 times and then setting fire to the home in an attempt to cover up the crime. He was offered a plea deal of life without parole to avoid a death sentence. He rejected it. When the jury was tasked with making a recommendation of whether Kaczmar should get life or death, he refused to let his lawyers present any mitigation evidence on his behalf. With no argument for why he shouldn't be executed, the jury recommended death by a 12-0 vote and Circuit Judge Donald Lester complied. But Kaczmar does not want to die, said Assistant Public Defender Nada Carey, who appealed his death sentence to the Florida Supreme Court last week. "Mr. Kaczmar waived mitigation evidence and said he wanted to receive the death penalty to get legal counsel for appeals," Carey said during oral arguments to Supreme Court justices. The mitigation would have included evidence that Kaczmar had been abused throughout his life and has a serious addiction to drugs and alcohol. Justice Barbara Pariente expressed shock and confusion at Kaczmar's action. "Did he waive the mitigation because he thought he'd get a greater review of his death sentence?" Pariente said. "And did someone explain to him that's not the case?" Kaczmar needs to understand that it's harder for them to review his case and determine that he might be wrongly on death row if he waives mitigation, Pariente said. Carey is arguing that Lester made a mistake in giving the unanimous jury recommendation of death "great weight" before sentencing Kaczmar to death. She's arguing that the Supreme Court should throw out the death sentence and send the case back to Lester with an instruction to resentence Kaczmar without giving the jury recommendation much credibility. But justices seemed resistant to that idea and pointed out that Lester knew the arguments against sentencing Kaczmar to death even if the jury didn't. Lester did an independent investigation and came to his own conclusion that Kaczmar deserved death, said Justice James Perry. Justice Fred Lewis also pointed out that while mitigation of Kaczmar's history of being abused and using drugs wasn't heard by jurors, Lester did hear about it during a sentencing hearing. So Pariente said sending it back to Lester seemed like a waste of time. This is the 2nd time Kaczmar's death sentence has gone to the Supreme Court. He was originally convicted of 1st-degree murder, arson and attempted sexual battery in 2010 and sentenced to death. But the sex charge was thrown out by the Florida Supreme Court due to circumstantial evidence and the medical examiner finding no evidence of assault on Ruiz's body. Since the attempted sexual battery was cited by prosecutors as an aggravating factor in why Kaczmar deserved death, the court ordered a new sentencing. The 2nd jury recommended death with Kaczmar refusing to defend himself. Ruiz was killed in December 2008 with police and prosecutors saying Kaczmar attacked her while he was high on cocaine. He set the house on fire and after his arrest paid an undercover officer $300 to frame someone else for the murder. Kaczmar also had a 2005 conviction of using the Internet to solicit or attempt to solicit a child for sex. Justices did not say when they would issue a ruling in the case. Kaczmar will remain in prison while the appeal is decided. (source: jacksonville.com) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Attorney of Oklahoma man to be executed says injustice will occur A convicted killer will be put to death next week in McAlester, unless his attorney finds new evidence in the 18-year-old murder case that could convince a judge to stop it. Richard Glossip is on death row for the 1997 murder of an Oklahoma City motel manager. "Once I got going on this matter it occurred to me that there was a great injustice that's about to occur," attorney Don Knight said. Don Knight has been Glossip's attorney since earlier this year. Glossip was convicted in the murder of Barry Van Treese after another man, Justin Sneed, testified Glossip paid him to commit the crime. The problem is, Knights says, Sneed changed his story a number of times, and in his opinion, Glossip's trial attorneys didn't do their job. "For instance, in trial number 1, he never said anything about stabbing Mr. Van Treese. That's what he said in trial number 2. I would've said, 'Mr. Sneed let's talk about that. That's a pretty significant event isn't it?'" Knight said. The case hinged on Sneed's testimony. Knight says Sneed told police at least 7 different versions of what happened. Prosecutors had no forensic evidence linking Glossip to the murder. The 52-year-old has always maintained his innocence. Knight argues, even if you think Glossip is guilty, his case doesn't add up to death. "Why would we think this man should deserve death when Terry Nichols was tried in Oklahoma, was convicted of 161 state charges, a man who took part in blowing up the Murrah federal building, and the jurors could not find that he should be given the death penalty?" Knight said. Van Treese's family does want the death penalty. Justin Sneed is serving life in prison. Knight is talking to witnesses this week to try to find information to take to a judge. Governor Fallin has said she will not grant a temporary stay for Glossip. (source: KFOR news) WASHINGTON: Green River Killer Gary Ridgway, Who Murdered 49 People, Transfers To High-Security Colorado Prison To Be Brought Out Of Isolation After 11 Years Gary Ridgway, 66, who is originally from Salt Lake City, Utah, is known as the Green River Killer who murdered 49 teen girls and young women, who were runaways, prostitutes, and drug addicts, according to Oregon Live. After his conviction in 2004, he has spent his prison sentence in isolation. It has now been reported that he was transferred to a high-security prison in Florence, Colorado, to be put back into population, but Dave Reichert isn't too fond of the idea. "It is unbelievable and absolutely intolerable that the Washington State Department of Corrections determined that because Gary Ridgway, this country's most notorious serial killer who confessed to 49 murders, was such a model inmate, he was relocated to a Colorado prison at a cost of [$20,000] for a private jet to transport him, so he can now socially interact with others and get a job," according to a statement made by Reichert. "I am incensed and outraged on behalf of the victim's families, the task force detectives, patrol officers, scientists, hundreds of volunteers who dedicated their lives to bring this monster to justice and all law abiding citizens." "These hardworking dedicated servants spent 20 years of their lives devoted to stopping Gary Ridgway from committing more crimes and solving those he did." The Green River Killer was initially arrested in 2001 after DNA evidence pointed to him in the murders of Shirley Shirell, 18, Denise Bush, 23, and 16-year-old Angela Marie Girdner, who were all discovered by a passerby, according to KOMO News. After his arrest, he entered an unprecedented plea where he wouldn't receive the death penalty if he confessed to the murders. However, police officials got a surprise when he confessed to 49 murders, all executed over the course of 20 years. (source: inquisitr.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 7 10:42:21 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2015 10:42:21 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----USA Message-ID: Sept. 7 USA: The Worst of the Worst----Judy Clarke excelled at saving the lives of notorious killers. Then she took the case of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. "We meet in the most tragic of circumstances," Judy Clarke, the lead defense lawyer representing Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, began. She stood at a lectern, facing the jurors, in a dark suit accented by a blue-and-purple scarf that she wears so often it seems like a courtroom talisman. To her right, George O'Toole, the judge, looked at her over his spectacles. Behind her was Tsarnaev, the slim, soft-featured young man who was on trial for the bombing at the Boston Marathon on April 15, 2013 - the worst domestic terrorist attack since September 11th. Outside the courthouse, snow from successive blizzards had piled up in grubby dunes. Clarke, who lives in San Diego, despises cold weather, but she'd endured an entire New England winter. "Judy was in Boston for a year before the case went to trial, meeting with this kid," her friend Jonathan Shapiro, who has taught with Clarke at Washington and Lee University Law School, told me. It was early March, and nearly 2 years had passed since Tsarnaev, along with his older brother, Tamerlan, detonated 2 homemade bombs near the finish line of the marathon, killing 3 people and injuring 264; they then carjacked a Mercedes, murdered an M.I.T. police officer named Sean Collier, and engaged in a shootout with the cops. Dzhokhar, 19 at the time, accidentally killed Tamerlan, who was 26, by running over him in the getaway car. Dzhokhar was discovered, wounded and expecting to die, inside a dry-docked boat in the suburb of Watertown. While he was recovering in the hospital, Miriam Conrad, the chief federal public defender in Massachusetts, contacted Clarke, and Clarke decided to take the case. Clarke may be the best death-penalty lawyer in America. Her efforts helped spare the lives of Ted Kaczynski (the Unabomber), Zacarias Moussaoui (the so-called "20th hijacker" in the 9/11 plot), and Jared Loughner (who killed 6 people and wounded 13 others, including Representative Gabrielle Giffords, at a Tucson mall). "Every time Judy takes a new case, it's a soul-searching process for her," Clarke's old friend Elisabeth Semel told me. "Because it's an enormous responsibility." On rare occasions when Clarke withdrew or was removed from a defense team, a defendant received the death penalty. But in cases that she tried through the sentencing phase, she had never lost a client to death row. The administration of capital punishment is notoriously prone to error. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, 155 death-row inmates have been exonerated, and it stands to reason that innocent people still face execution. Clarke does not represent such individuals. Her specialty is what the Supreme Court has called "the worst of the worst": child rapists, torturers, terrorists, mass murderers, and others who have committed crimes so appalling that even death-penalty opponents might be tempted to make an exception. Tsarnaev was indisputably guilty; the lead prosecutor, William Weinreb, described in his opening statement a video in which Tsarnaev is seen depositing a backpack directly behind an 8-year-old boy on Boylston Street and walking away before it explodes. In January, 2014, Attorney General Eric Holder, who had publicly expressed his personal opposition to the death penalty, announced that the government would seek to execute Tsarnaev, explaining that the scale of the horror had compelled the decision. The prosecution referred to Tsarnaev as Dzhokhar, his given name, which is Chechen and means "jewel." But as Clarke addressed the jury she used the nickname that he had adopted as a high-school student, in Cambridge, Massachusetts: Jahar. In a capital case, a defense attorney seeks to humanize the client to the point that jurors might hesitate to condemn him to death. Clarke has said that her job is to transform the defendant from an unfathomable monster into "one of us." Her use of the nickname also signalled genuine familiarity. Clarke spends hundreds of hours getting to know reviled criminals. Her friend Tina Hunt, a federal public defender in Georgia who has known Clarke for 30 years, said, "Judy is fascinated by what makes people tick - what drives people to commit these kinds of crimes. People aren't born evil. She has a very deep and abiding faith in that idea." Most of Clarke's success in death-penalty cases has come from negotiating plea deals. She often cites a legal adage: the 1st step in losing a death-penalty case is picking a jury. To avoid a trial, Clarke does not shy away from the muscular exertion of leverage. In 2005, she secured a plea deal for Eric Rudolph, who detonated bombs at abortion clinics and at the Atlanta Summer Olympics, after Rudolph promised to disclose the location of an explosive device that he had buried near a residential neighborhood in North Carolina. Soon after joining Tsarnaev's team, Clarke indicated that her client was prepared to plead guilty in exchange for a sentence of life without parole. Federal officials declined this offer. Clarke then pushed to move the trial out of Boston, arguing that local jurors would have an "overwhelming prejudice" against Tsarnaev. Judge O'Toole disagreed. Clarke looked at the jurors one by one. "For the next several weeks, we're all going to come face to face with unbearable grief, loss, and pain caused by a series of senseless, horribly misguided acts carried out by 2 brothers," she said. She is tall, with straight brown hair and long arms that dangle, a little comically, like the boughs of a weeping willow. Clarke's style with a jury is warm, conversational, devoid of bombast. Whenever she paused for emphasis, the muted clatter of typing would fill the room as journalists with laptops live-tweeted the proceedings. "There's little that occurred the week of April the 15th - the bombings, the murder of Officer Collier, the carjacking, the shootout in Watertown - that we dispute," she said. Clarke was acknowledging her client's guilt. So why bother with a trial? Each juror had a digital monitor for viewing evidence, and Clarke flashed a photograph of Jahar as a young boy, dark-eyed and floppy-haired, sitting next to a much larger Tamerlan. Clarke said, "What took Jahar Tsarnaev from this to Jahar Tsarnaev and his brother with backpacks walking down Boylston?" Before-and-after photographs are standard exhibits in Clarke's repertoire. The effect is deliberately jarring, like seeing the yearbook photo of a movie star before he became famous. Clarke promised the jury that she would not try to minimize or excuse Tsarnaev's conduct. Instead - in a vanishingly fine distinction - she hoped to present his life in a way that might mitigate his moral culpability. The jurors stared past her at Tsarnaev. He sat at the defense table, fiddling with his unruly dark hair, in a blazer and a shirt that was unbuttoned a little rakishly for a murder trial. "It's going to be a lot to ask of you to hold your minds and hearts open," Clarke said. "But that is what we ask." Among death-penalty lawyers, Clarke is known, without irony, as St. Judy, on the basis of her humility, her generosity, and her devotion to her clients. She has not given an interview to the mainstream press in 20 years. But, in a 2013 commencement speech at Gonzaga University School of Law, Clarke said that her clients have obliged her to "redefine what a win means." Victory usually means a life sentence. Even so, Clarke said, she owes a debt of gratitude to her clients, for "the lessons they've taught me - about human behavior and human frailty - and the constant reminder that there but for the grace of God go I." In some ways, Clarke's public persona resembles that of Sister Helen Prejean, the Catholic nun from New Orleans who runs the Ministry Against the Death Penalty. In her 1993 book, "Dead Man Walking," Prejean describes the bond that she formed with a killer who had been condemned to death. The "weight of his loneliness, his abandonment, draws me," she writes. She abhors his crimes, yet senses a "sheer and essential humanness" in him. But Clarke is no nun. Her convictions are rooted in constitutional law, not the Bible, and in the courtroom she is unabashedly gladiatorial. In 1990, she told the Los Angeles Times, "I love the fight." Though she lacks the flamboyant manner often associated with trial lawyers, she is not above courtroom theatre. In 2003, when she represented Jay Lentz - a former Navy intelligence officer accused of murdering his wife - Clarke summoned to the stand Lentz's 12-year-old daughter, Julia, who was 4 years old at the time of the killing. Julia told the jury that her father meant everything to her. The judge had warned Clarke that Julia was not to address her father, but Clarke defied this directive, asking her if she had anything to tell him. "I love you, Daddy," she said. The jury spared his life. Clarke is driven by an intense philosophical opposition to the death penalty. She once observed that "legalized homicide is not a good idea for a civilized nation." Her friend David Ruhnke, who has tried more than a dozen capital cases, said, "It's not often you get to occupy the moral high ground as a criminal-defense lawyer, but I think in death-penalty law we do." According to friends, Clarke is also drawn to the intellectual problem posed by unconscionable crime. When Eric Rudolph went on the run from authorities in the mountains of North Carolina, Clarke told Tina Hunt, "If they ever catch him, I want to represent him." Hunt recalls saying, "Are you fucking nuts? He's a fanatic! He blows up abortion clinics! Judy, we need to make you some flash cards that just say 'NO.'" According to Hunt, Clarke is perpetually seeking "the key that turns the lock that opens the door that would let a person do something like this." In this regard, Clarke evokes the French attorney Jacques Verges, who represented Klaus Barbie (the Butcher of Lyon), Carlos the Jackal, and the Khmer Rouge leader Khieu Samphan. Verges, who died in 2013, took a certain glee in upending the comforting pieties of criminal justice, by insisting that his clients were more human than others cared to admit. "What was so shocking about Hitler 'the monster' was that he loved his dog so much and kissed the hands of his secretaries," Verges once remarked. "The interesting thing about my clients is discovering what brings them to do these horrific things." As the Tsarnaev case began, Clarke told the jury that she would not contest the "who" or the "what" of the case. She would focus on the "why." Clarke, who is 63, grew up in Asheville, North Carolina. From an early age, she told the San Antonio Express News, she "thought it would be neat to be Perry Mason and win all the time." At Furman College, in Greenville, South Carolina, she studied psychology and led a successful campaign to change the name of the student government to the Association of Furman Students, on the ground that the group lacked genuine governing authority. She married her college boyfriend, Thomas (Speedy) Rice - a jovial round-faced man who also became an attorney. After she completed law school, at the University of South Carolina, they moved to San Diego, where, in 1977, she joined a small office of federal public defenders. "At that time, you could count the number of women criminal-defense lawyers practicing in San Diego County on one hand," Elisabeth Semel, who met Clarke during this period and now runs the death-penalty clinic at the University of California-Berkeley School of Law, recalls. Semel and Clarke went for 10-mile jogs on weekends. "We needed the camaraderie, because it was a hostile environment," Semel said, adding that the judicial establishment in San Diego was notably conservative. Clarke worked tirelessly on behalf of undocumented immigrants, drug dealers, and others charged with federal crimes who could not afford a private attorney. She was soon running the office, doubling the number of lawyers and tripling the budget. She asked new hires to sign a "blood letter" committing to work at least 60 hours a week. Clarke routinely put in 80. In 1991, Clarke joined a large law firm, McKenna Long & Aldridge, where she could apply her formidable skills to defending white-collar clients. But, according to Bob Brewer, the partner who recruited Clarke, "she had a real problem charging people for her time." They devised a system in which Clarke would meet a new client, hear about the case, then politely excuse herself, allowing Brewer to swoop in and negotiate a fee. Clarke lasted a little more than a year. These days, when discussing her career, she has been known to deadpan, "I was sentenced to 15 months of private practice at McKenna Long & Aldridge." In 1992, Clarke moved to Spokane and took over the federal defenders' office for Eastern Washington and Idaho. At the time, one of her law-school friends, David Bruck, remarked that this was like Mozart arriving in town to direct the Spokane Symphony Orchestra. Bruck is a soft-spoken Montreal native with thick white hair. He moved to South Carolina in 1972 to attend law school and became one of the state???s most prominent capital-defense attorneys. In 1994, he took on the case of Susan Smith, a 23-year-old woman from the small city of Union, who was charged with murdering her 2 sons - both toddlers - by letting her car slide into a lake while they were strapped into the back seat. Initially, Smith claimed that a black man had carjacked her and kidnapped the children, but, after a frantic, racially divisive manhunt, she confessed that her boys could be found in the lake. The state sought the death penalty, which meant that Smith was entitled to a second attorney; Bruck turned to his old friend Judy Clarke. When she protested that she had never tried a death-penalty case, Bruck said, "That's not what I need. I need you." In the Smith trial, Clarke developed many of the techniques that have become hallmarks of her work. She promised jurors that she wouldn't trivialize what Smith had done or present an "abuse excuse." Even so, she argued that the jury had an obligation to understand not just Smith's awful act but her whole life leading up to that moment. Smith's father, a millworker, had killed himself when she was little. Her mother remarried, and her stepfather molested her. She had twice attempted suicide, and at the lake, Clarke argued, Smith had intended to die with her children; at the last second, a survival instinct propelled her out of the car, at which point it was too late to save the kids. The prosecutors presented a devastating case. An ex-boyfriend of Smith's, the son of a wealthy mill owner, testified that, a week before the killing, he had sent Smith a breakup letter in which he wrote, "There are some things about you that aren't suited for me, and yes I mean your children." A diver testified about finding the car, overturned, at the bottom of the lake and spotting "a small hand pressed against the glass." The defense summoned 1 of Smith's prison guards, who attested to her remorse. "Everyone has a breaking point," Clarke told the jury. "Susan broke where many of us might bend." Her star witness was Beverly Russell, Smith's stepfather. He tearfully confessed to molesting Smith and, addressing her directly, said, "You do not have all the guilt in this tragedy." Smith received a life sentence. In a subsequent interview, Clarke suggested that while it is sometimes prudent to move a trial away from where the alleged crime took place, in this instance it helped that Smith was tried by South Carolinians. "She was one of them," Clarke said. After the case concluded, Clarke paid a Christmas visit to Smith in jail. Mindful of her clients' isolation, she remembers birthdays and holidays. South Carolina later passed a law barring courts from appointing out-of-state lawyers in capital cases. A death-penalty trial consists of 2 parts: the "guilt phase," in which the jury determines whether the defendant committed the crime, and the "penalty phase," in which the jurors vote on a sentence. Although Clarke had effectively conceded Tsarnaev's guilt in her opening statement, this did not stop prosecutors from summoning people who had lost limbs, or family members, in the bombing. Some entered the courtroom in wheelchairs, others on prosthetic legs. With astonishing composure, they described how their bodies had been damaged by shrapnel from the blast. Before-and-after photographs are potent exhibits for prosecutors as well, and as William Campbell testified about how his 29-year-old daughter, Krystle, was killed, jurors saw a photograph of her at her First Communion, wearing a fluffy white dress. After every witness, Clarke murmured, "We have no questions." Sometimes she thanked witnesses for their testimony. To cross-examine them would have been pointless, even offensive. "Defense attorneys have a fraught relationship with victims - not just in an individual case but almost as a metaphysical concept," Reuben Camper Cahn, who runs the federal defenders' office in San Diego, told me. "You've got to be respectful and aware of them, but at the same time you've got to focus on your client." Cahn worked with Clarke on the defense of Jared Loughner, and says that she is "especially good at remaining open to the suffering of the victims, and thinking about how each move that she and her colleagues make will be perceived not just by jurors but by victims." In the Tsarnaev case, Clarke was joined by Miriam Conrad, the federal defender in Boston, and David Bruck. They maintained a quiet intimacy with their client. Some nights when court was in session, Tsarnaev slept in a holding cell in the bowels of the courthouse, allowing him to be closer to Clarke and her team, who stayed at a nearby hotel. But Tsarnaev wasn't easy to manage. Each day, he sauntered to the defense table and slouched in his chair, his rangy limbs arrayed in a posture of insouciance, like a kid behind the wheel of a lowrider. Some commentators felt that Tsarnaev was smirking, though his lawyers noted in court that his features had been slightly twisted by nerve damage sustained when he was shot in the face by the police. One witness, a broad-shouldered man in his thirties named Marc Fucarile, had lost a leg in the blast; he revealed that he might yet lose the other. Prosecutors projected X-rays of his skeleton, and the dark spaces between his bones were perforated by bright-blue dots: BBs and other shrapnel that remained inside him. Fucarile, who had undergone nearly seventy operations, was in a wheelchair, but he glared at Tsarnaev as though he might launch out of the witness box and throttle him. Tsarnaev refused to look at him. Clarke sat on Tsarnaev's left, and Conrad, an animated woman in her 50s, sat on his right, so that the jurors always saw him flanked by women. They whispered and exchanged little jokes with him, and they touched him - a pat on the back, a squeeze of the arm. This was deliberate: like the Pope stooping to embrace a disfigured pilgrim at St. Peter's, the women were indicating that Tsarnaev was not a leper. Such gestures weren't aimed only at jurors. A training guide that Clarke helped prepare for defense attorneys in 2006 notes, "In capital cases, appropriate physical contact is frequently the one gesture that can maintain a defendant's trust." Under the terms of his confinement, Tsarnaev was not permitted to touch any visitors, even relatives, so the casual contact of his attorneys likely represented his only remaining form of tangible human connection. The centerpiece of the government's case was a montage of photographs and videos taken on the day of the bombing. One image, captured shortly before the 1st blast, shows a family of 5 from Dorchester watching runners cross the finish line. Just behind them, semi-obscured by a tree, stands Tsarnaev, in a backward baseball cap. On March 5th, the family's father, Bill Richard, a slim, haunted-looking man, took the stand. After the bomb blast threw him across the street, he recalled, he scrambled to find his children. He located his 11-year-old, Henry, who was unharmed, and then saw his 7-year-old, Jane, lying by the tree. He picked her up, but her leg did not come with her. "It was blown off," he said. Bill saw his wife, Denise, hunched over their 8-year-old son, Martin, who had been closest to the blast. Bill wanted to help care for Martin, but his daughter was losing blood so rapidly that she was not likely to survive unless he got her to an ambulance. He took one final look at Martin. "I knew he wasn't going to make it," Bill said. "From what I saw, there was no chance." He ran to an ambulance, and Jane survived. Denise was blinded in 1 eye. While jurors and spectators wept, a medical examiner described the blast's impact on Martin's body. Wearing rubber gloves, he held up the shorts that Martin had been wearing. They could have been long pants, he said - it was hard to tell. The fabric had melted. This was an act of terrorism, surely, and prosecutors characterized the Tsarnaevs as jihadists who set out to kill American civilians in the name of radical Islam. Investigators had retrieved from Jahar's laptop a downloaded copy of Inspire, a publication associated with Al Qaeda, which featured an article titled "Make a Bomb in the Kitchen of Your Mom." In the Tsarnaevs' family apartment in Cambridge, the F.B.I. had discovered the residue of explosives. Prosecutors also had what amounted to a confession from Jahar. Believing that he was dying in the dry-docked boat, he had written a message in pencil on the fibreglass interior. Initially, the government wanted to remove the section of the boat bearing the confession and display it in court. The defense objected that the jury needed to see Jahar's message in its full context. This was vintage Clarke. When she represented Ted Kaczynski, she felt that the jury should see the cramped shack in the Montana wilderness where the Unabomber had built his letter bombs and composed his manifesto. The shack was hauled to Sacramento on a flatbed truck. One day in March, Judge O'Toole accompanied the lawyers, the jury, and Tsarnaev to a warehouse where the boat sat, raised, on a trailer. The boat was streaked with Tsarnaev's blood and riddled with more than a hundred bullet holes. "God has a plan for each person," Tsarnaev wrote. "Mine was to hide in this boat and shed some light on our actions." He was "jealous" of Tamerlan for having achieved martyrdom. "The U.S. Government is killing our innocent civilians," he added, noting that "Muslims are one body, you hurt one you hurt us all." The note was difficult to read, because bullets had ripped through it. But near the end Tsarnaev wrote, "I don't like killing innocent people it is forbidden in Islam but due to said [bullet hole] it is allowed. All credit goes to [bullet hole]." For all the putative radicalism of these sentiments, there was an inescapable sense, even as the government presented its case, that Jahar Tsarnaev was less a soldier of God than a wayward child, curiously detached from his terrorist acts. He was hardly ascetic: at the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, where he was a sophomore, Jahar was known as a pot dealer. Less than an hour after the bombs exploded, surveillance cameras at a Whole Foods in Cambridge captured him selecting a half-gallon of milk, paying for it, leaving, then returning to exchange it for another half-gallon. Hours after the bombing, he tweeted, "Ain't no love in the heart of the city. Stay safe people," and, "I'm a stress free kind of guy." He went with a friend to the gym. It was precisely this eerie remove that had led authorities to identify him as a suspect. F.B.I. officials, examining surveillance footage of the marathon, noticed a man in a baseball cap who did not react when the first blast sent everyone else scrambling. Clarke Clarke isn't a notably original legal theorist. The course that she has taught at Washington and Lee is a practicum focussed on the rules and tactics of lawyering. She appeared twice before the Supreme Court before she was 40, in cases involving technical matters of criminal procedure - and lost both, unanimously. Still, in one of the cases, she paused to explain the subtleties of an obscure point of criminal law, and she clearly knew more about it than the Justices did. In a guide that Clarke prepared for federal defense lawyers, she invoked Thomas Edison's formula for genius: "99 % perspiration and 1 % inspiration." In a capital case, much of the exertion involves detective work. Collaborating with investigators and mental-health experts, Clarke assembles a "social history" - a comprehensive biography of the client, often drawing on decades of family records. She tracks down relatives, teachers, neighbors, and co-workers, looking for signs of mental illness or instability in the client's past. Such interviews, Clarke wrote in a court filing in 2013, can be "invaluable in building the case for a life verdict by documenting the nature, extent, and consequences of trauma." By searching for what Tina Hunt called "the key that turns the lock," a capital-defense attorney operates on the broad assumption that the perpetrators of terrible crimes are also victims themselves - indeed, that only victims of mental illness or awful circumstances could commit such crimes. "Nobody starts out as a killer," Jonathan Shapiro said. "These folks are damaged goods when they come to us. They're like a tangled-up piece of cloth. And our job is to try to untangle it, to figure out what made them the way that they are." Clarke has said that most of her death-penalty clients have endured "unbelievable trauma," and that "many suffer from severe cognitive-development issues that affect the core of their being." She often invokes a mantra of capital-defense work: "None of us, not any one of us, wants to be defined by the worst day or the worst hour or the worst moment of our lives." You can oppose the death penalty on any number of grounds and still find this assertion curious. If we mustn't judge someone who kills a child for his willingness to kill a child, isn't that essentially saying that we should never judge anyone at all? I wondered if this line of reasoning was truly an article of faith for Clarke. Indeed, you might think that spending time with killers would disabuse a lawyer of any illusions about the virtues of humanity. But a dozen of Clarke's friends and colleagues assured me that she ardently believes in the essential goodness of each client. "She has a well of compassion that just runs a little deeper," Elisabeth Semel said. Clarke goes to unusual lengths to establish bonds with her clients. "Many lawyers will go in to meet with the client, and if the client doesn't want to talk they'll give up and leave," Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School, said. "If Judy goes and they don't want to talk, she'll come back the next day and the day after that." David Bruck once told the Times that Clarke is a preternatural listener: "Even people who are quite mentally ill can identify someone who is real and who wants to protect them." When Clarke met with Jared Loughner, who suffers from paranoid schizophrenia, he threw chairs at her, lunged at her, and spat on her. (In court, Clarke and her colleagues downplayed these outbursts, arguing, in effect, that this was just Jared being Jared.) Before the Boston trial, Clarke went to the Caucasus, along with a Russian-speaking colleague, in order to meet Tsarnaev's parents. This labor of empathy can be consuming. In Bruck's words, "The client becomes her world." Clarke's husband, Speedy Rice, is also a death-penalty opponent. In 2009, he helped defend a Khmer Rouge torturer, Kaing Guek Eav, in a war-crimes trial in Cambodia. (Kaing received life imprisonment.) Clarke and Rice have always had dogs - including a blind-and-deaf pug - but they have no children. Several of Clarke's friends suggested to me that it would have been impossible for her to raise kids and maintain the pace of her work. Because Clarke's cases unfold in federal courts across the country, the decision to take on a new client can mean months away from home. With the exception of the Susan Smith case, all Clarke's capital cases have been federal. Most death-penalty prosecutions occur at the state level, where innocent people have often been condemned to death. In such states as Alabama or Texas, there are not enough capable death-penalty lawyers, and even strong ones cannot secure adequate funds to prepare a case properly. In state cases, a defense counsel is sometimes given an investigation budget of only 1,000 dollars; attorneys' fees can be capped at as little as 30,000 dollars, even when a case demands more than 1,000 hours of lawyering. "People who are well represented at trial do not get the death penalty," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg once said. Federal death-penalty prosecutions are far rarer, and tend to be reserved for cases, like Tsarnaev's, in which the government has strong evidence of guilt. Often in these cases, defense attorneys are paid more and have latitude to hire experts, investigators, and additional attorneys. Though no figure has yet been released, Tsarnaev's defense could cost millions of dollars in public funds. To one way of thinking, a talented attorney who fiercely opposes the death penalty should concentrate on saving defendants who may be innocent. Reuben Camper Cahn said, "For a utilitarian, is there an overconcentration of talent and resources in the federal system? Yes." People who know Clarke explained her focus on federal cases by citing the severe financial constraints on capital-defense attorneys in the states where most executions take place. In Boston, Clarke had ample resources, but she was hamstrung by another restriction: official secrecy. The government, citing the ongoing security threat that Tsarnaev might pose by communicating with co-conspirators - or by inspiring impressionable people to follow his example - invoked a protocol, known as Special Administrative Measures, that forbade the defendant from communicating with anyone outside his legal team and his immediate family. Secrecy also enveloped the legal process: many of the voluminous motions and filings made by both the government and the defense were sealed from the public record. Judge O'Toole granted the secrecy and explained his rationale in a series of rulings. But they, too, are secret. Matthew Segal, an attorney with the A.C.L.U. of Massachusetts, told me that the scale of official secrecy in the case was "extremely high" and hard to justify, given that Tsarnaev was "the lone surviving member of a 2-person cell." On April 8th, the jury convicted Tsarnaev of all 30 counts in the indictment. During the guilt phase, the defense had called only 4 witnesses, all technical experts, who demonstrated that the fingerprints on the bombmaking tools were Tamerlan's, and that, according to cell-phone records, while Tamerlan was purchasing pressure cookers and BBs, Jahar was far away, at college. On cross-examination, Clarke and her colleagues showed that radical-Islamist material constituted only a fraction of Jahar's Internet diet. (He most often visited Facebook.) Tweets by Jahar that the government had presented as indications of extremism were shown to be rap lyrics or references to Comedy Central shows. The man who was carjacked by the brothers, Dung Meng, recalled Tamerlan boasting about bombing the marathon and shooting the M.I.T. police officer; Jahar was quiet, asking only if the car stereo could play music from his iPhone. For the penalty phase, Clarke and her colleagues summoned more than forty witnesses to tell Jahar's life story. He and his parents had come to America in 2002, and were later joined by his two sisters and Tamerlan. The family had applied for political asylum, citing Russia's wars in Chechnya. The parents, Anzor and Zubeidat, were attractive and ambitious but volatile: Anzor, who found work as a mechanic, suffered from night terrors; Zubeidat was by turns smothering and neglectful. The Tsarnaevs lived in a cramped apartment in Cambridge, and their immigrant hopes gradually eroded. Jahar's sisters married young; each had a child, got divorced, and returned home. Tamerlan failed in his efforts at a professional boxing career, and at everything else he tried. He married an American, Katherine Russell, and they soon had a child. She and the baby joined the others in the apartment. By 2010, Zubeidat and Tamerlan had become immersed in Islam - not the largely moderate form that is practiced in the Caucasus but a strain of Salafism that had taken root on the Internet. Tamerlan, who was unemployed, stayed at home with his child while his wife worked, and he spent hours watching inflammatory videos of atrocities suffered by Muslims abroad. In 2012, he travelled to Dagestan for 6 months, hoping to participate in jihad, though he apparently whiled away most of his time in cafes, talking politics. (According to the Boston Globe, Tamerlan heard voices and may have suffered from undiagnosed schizophrenia.) Clarke's portrait of Jahar Tsarnaev was reminiscent, in some ways, of the one she helped construct for Zacarias Moussaoui. In that trial, defense testimony focussed on the dislocation that Moussaoui had faced as a Moroccan in France, and on his tumultuous upbringing; his father, a boxer, was abusive, and ended up in a psychiatric institution. Moussaoui's sister, Jamilla, testified that he was the "sweetheart of the family." Jahar Tsarnaev was the sweetheart of his family - a doe-eyed, easygoing child who adored his older brother, made friends easily, and seemed to acculturate to American life more quickly than his relatives did. He did well in school, skipping the 4th grade and becoming captain of his high-school wrestling team. Several tearful teachers took the stand and described him as bright and gentle. By the time he started college, however, his family was falling apart. His parents separated, and both eventually left the country. Tamerlan, meanwhile, was becoming more radical, walking around Cambridge in the kind of flowing white robe one sees in Saudi Arabia. Neither the government nor the defense claimed that the brothers were part of a larger conspiracy; rather, in Clarke's awkward phrasing, Tamerlan "self-radicalized" through the Internet. The question at the heart of the defense was whether Jahar did, too. In college, he spent evenings getting high and playing video games with friends. Photographs exhibit a painfully American banality: cinder-block dorm rooms, big-screen TVs, mammoth boxes of Cheez-Its. Several of Jahar's friends testified about his kindness. Whereas Tamerlan lectured anyone who would listen about U.S. imperialism and the plight of Muslims abroad, Jahar rarely discussed politics. Some of his close friends didn't even know that he was Muslim. The prosecution said that he was living a "double life." But it was hard to imagine, looking at a photograph of him lounging on a top bunk, how he hid a life of religious devotion from his dorm-mates. The defense argued that Jahar didn't engineer the terrorist plot. Tamerlan bought the bomb materials, made the bombs, and shot Officer Collier. In Chechen culture, one defense expert testified, an older brother is a dominant personality whom the younger brother must obey. A cognitive scientist testified that teen-aged brains are impulsive, like cars with powerful engines and faulty brakes. This line of argument echoed the successful defense in a 2002 case that Clarke was not involved in: the prosecution of Lee Malvo, who, at seventeen, had accompanied a deranged father figure, John Allen Muhammad, on a shooting spree around Washington, D.C., which left ten people dead. Muhammad was put to death, but Malvo got a life sentence. Like Malvo, Tsarnaev was young, had no history of violent conduct, and fell under the spell of a charismatic mentor. Malvo, his lawyer maintained, could "no more separate himself from John Muhammad than you could separate from your shadow." It was a Pied Piper defense, and Clarke was mounting a similar argument. One of Tsarnaev's teachers, whose husband had been his soccer coach, testified, "He's very coachable. He would do what the coach said." Zacarias Moussaoui, a genuine zealot, was given to outbursts during his court proceedings, in which he condemned America and the case against him. Jahar Tsarnaev sat silently at the defense table, occasionally reaching for a carafe of water to refill his attorneys' cups. There was such dissonance between the grotesque crime and the mild-mannered perpetrator that, outside the courtroom, an avid group of supporters, many of them young women, maintained that he must be the victim of a frameup. "It's a defense you don't often have recourse to in these types of cases: 'He was a good kid, one of ours,'" Carol Steiker, a death-penalty specialist at Harvard Law School, told me. "He also reads as white, which is very helpful in these kinds of cases." Spectators in the courtroom could see mainly the back of Tsarnaev's head, but, in overflow rooms for the press, closed-circuit monitors afforded a better view. One of the cameras in the courtroom was positioned to approximate the judge's view from the bench. David Bruck objected that the camera violated the defense team's "zone of privacy," but the camera stayed, offering an intimate perspective of Tsarnaev's detachment. He whispered and sometimes smiled with his attorneys, but he avoided looking at the witnesses, instead examining his fingernails or doodling. "I really miss the person that I knew," one of his college friends, Alexa Guevara, said, through tears, on the stand. She tried mightily to catch his eye, but he would not meet her gaze. Tsarnaev broke this mask of indifference only once. His aunt Patimat Suleimanova came from Dagestan to testify. But when she took the stand she was immediately convulsed by sobs. Tsarnaev dabbed tears from his eyes until she was escorted from the stand. This marked, in some ways, a promising development for the defense - a signal that the defendant had feelings, after all, and that his death would devastate his family. At the same time, it underscored Tsarnaev's implacability during weeks of harrowing testimony about the devastation he had caused. Clarke, in her opening statement, said that Jahar's terrorist path was "created" and "paved by his brother." If he had fallen under the sway of a violent older sibling, it seemed logical that Tsarnaev, after 2 lonely years in prison, might feel remorse. Of course, a defendant's posture in the courtroom is an imperfect proxy for his state of mind. But Tsarnaev's demeanor betrayed no contrition. This was critical because, according to studies, capital juries are heavily influenced by whether or not the defendant shows remorse. To prove that Tsarnaev was untroubled by his crime, the prosecution presented a still image taken by a surveillance camera in a holding cell in the courthouse. The image was captured on the day of his arraignment, several months after the attacks. Tsarnaev wears orange scrubs and scowls at the camera, his middle finger raised. "This is Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, unconcerned, unrepentant, unchanged," one of the prosecutors said. The defense immediately moved to show the jury the video from which the still was taken, and it emerged that Tsarnaev had aimed other gestures at the camera, including a 2-fingered gang sign, in the casual pose of a teen-ager on Instagram. The camera had a mirrored surface, and he carefully tousled his hair. To rebut the idea that Tsarnaev was remorseless, Clarke played one final card. She summoned Sister Helen Prejean, who explained that, before the trial, the defense had brought her to Boston to meet Tsarnaev. Her 1st thought upon seeing him was "My God, he's so young." They met 5 times over the course of the trial, Prejean explained, and in one conversation they talked about the victims. According to Prejean, Tsarnaev said, "No one deserves to suffer like they did." She added, "I just had every reason to think that ... he was genuinely sorry." When Clarke first considered representing Susan Smith, she called Rick Kammen, a death-penalty lawyer she knew, for advice. "Every time you take one of these cases, you have to be prepared to see your client executed," Kammen said. Many lawyers try one capital case, then never do another. Those who persist often burn out, or turn to alcohol or drugs. Clarke's colleagues say that, to maintain her sanity, she relies on her husband, devoted friends, and wry humor. She still runs to clear her head. The process of preparing a social history for a client is prone to artificial determinism: decades-old tragedies are portrayed as harbingers of recent behavior. When I asked Clarke's friends and colleagues to explain why she is so devoted to what she does, there was a uniform flatness to their answers: Clark is deeply compassionate, and has always been that way. But if Clarke were preparing her own social history she might underline one particular episode from her past. Her father, Harry Clarke, was a conservative Republican who wanted to impeach the Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren and was an early supporter of Senator Jesse Helms. The Clarke children were encouraged to debate ideas at the kitchen table, but there were limits. In 1972, Judy and her younger sister, Candy, told their mother, Patsy, that they intended to vote for George McGovern. Patsy was so shocked that she didn't tell their father. In 1987, when Judy was living in San Diego, Harry died, after the single-engine plane he was flying home from a business trip crashed, near Asheville. Clarke had been close to her father and never felt that being a defense attorney was incompatible with his principles. 3 years after his death, she told the Los Angeles Times that she was an absolutist when it came to the rights guaranteed in the Constitution. "Yes, I'm a defense lawyer," she said. "But I think I have very conservative values." Judy's older brother, Bruce, also became a lawyer, and Candy became a high-school teacher. Her younger brother, Mark, moved to Florida after college and became a lifeguard. In 1992, he told his mother that he was gay and dying of AIDS. Patsy, who considered herself a proper Southern conservative, was shocked, but she devoted herself to caring for him. Judy went to Florida to support Mark, and he died in the spring of 1994. Upon Mark's death, Patsy grew frustrated that the family's old friend Jesse Helms had been blocking funding for AIDS research, claiming that gay men had brought the scourge upon themselves. Patsy later wrote a memoir, in which she recalls Judy telling her, "You ought to write to Senator Helms about Mark." Patsy did so, asking that he not "pass judgment on other human beings as 'deserving what they get.'" 2 weeks later, Helms replied. "I wish he had not played Russian roulette in his sexual activity," he wrote of Mark. "I have sympathy for him - and for you. But there is no escaping the reality of what happened." Patsy was so incensed that she launched a grassroots campaign, along with other mothers of AIDS victims, to oust Helms from the Senate. Judy also seems to have been galvanized. Several months after Mark's death, she joined her 1st capital case, defending Susan Smith. "Judy was Judy before Mark died," Tina Hunt said. "But it may have intensified her drive for justice and for accepting people for who they are." Then she chuckled and added, "If anything could make Judy more intense." Watching Tsarnaev in court, I sometimes wondered if Clarke was trying to save someone who didn't want to be saved. Perhaps he still envied Tamerlan's martyrdom. In death-penalty work, clients often come to desire a swift end. They may be suicidal, or hopeless, or insane; they may have made a considered decision that death by lethal injection would be preferable to a lifetime of solitary confinement. Such clients, known as "volunteers," present death-penalty lawyers with a dilemma. An attorney's job is to advocate vigorously for a client's interests. But there may come a point at which that duty diverges from the imperative to save the client's life. In 2007, Clarke took the case of Joseph Duncan, a drifter who had kidnapped 2 children - Dylan and Shasta Groene - in Idaho, after using a hammer to murder their older brother, their mother, and her boyfriend. Clarke joined the defense late, after another attorney had left the case. According to Tina Hunt, who was in the Spokane office at the time, "The crime was so devastating that he could not emotionally handle it." He was a "phenomenal trial lawyer," Hunt said. "But he wasn't Judy." After taking the 2 children to a remote campsite, Duncan had videotaped himself raping and torturing Dylan. He then forced Shasta to watch the video, before killing her brother in front of her, with a shotgun. Duncan was on a mountainside, about to bludgeon Shasta's head with a rock, when it occurred to him, in what he later called "an epiphany," that killing is wrong. He drove down the mountain with Shasta, and not long afterward a waitress at a local Denny's recognized them and summoned the police. Clarke spent hours talking with Duncan. She later characterized his ramblings as "head-spinning" and "crazy" - he seemed to have dissociative-identity disorder - but she remained patient. "Are you frustrated with me because I don't understand?" she would ask. Clarke planned to center her defense on the fact that Duncan had been locked up, at the age of sixteen, in a facility for adult sexual offenders. But Duncan refused to introduce any mitigating evidence about his childhood. Instead, he wanted to take full responsibility for his actions. He was eager to make sure that Shasta would not have to undergo the trauma of appearing on the stand. He wanted to plead guilty and waive his right to appeal. "Tell me you're not on a suicide mission," Clarke said to him, according to a subsequent deposition. She suggested to Duncan that if killing was wrong he should not allow the state to kill him. But it was no use. Clarke moved to withdraw from the case. "We are not gunslingers who do the bidding of someone who does not have a rational understanding," she told the judge. Duncan was subsequently sentenced to death. He is currently on death row in Indiana. Since 1984, capital punishment has been illegal in Massachusetts. Nevertheless, under our federalist system, the Department of Justice can pursue a criminal sanction that a state has judged unconstitutional. 18 other states have banned or suspended the death penalty, and the Supreme Court has gradually narrowed the scope of who can receive the punishment, ruling out juvenile perpetrators and people with intellectual disabilities. You might think that, in a liberal city like Boston, Tsarnaev's lawyers would not have to address his moral culpability in order to save his life; it would be enough to attack capital punishment itself. In 1999, when Clarke defended the white supremacist Buford Furrow, she argued that the death penalty was unconstitutional. In the Kaczynski case, the defense wrote, "Evolving standards of decency will eventually convince the American public that it is simply wrong and immoral to kill people, regardless of whether the killing is done by an individual or the government." In Boston, as the penalty phase began, David Bruck made a dramatic case against the death penalty. He has worked as an attorney or an adviser on scores of capital cases. He showed the jurors a photograph of ADX, the federal maximum-security prison in Florence, Colorado, where several of Clarke's former clients are held: a series of stark buildings nestled into barren, snow-covered terrain. It called to mind Siberia. If Tsarnaev was spared the death penalty, Bruck explained, he would live a life of near total isolation at ADX. Because of the Special Administrative Measures, he would have no contact with other inmates or the outside world. If the jury delivered a death sentence, Bruck continued, its decision would surely be followed by more than a decade of appeals, each one accompanied by a new wave of publicity for Tsarnaev and pain for the victims. Only then - maybe - would he be executed. Supporters of the death penalty often argue that it brings "closure" to the victims, but Bruck's logic seemed unassailable: if you want a sense of finality, send him away. "No martyrdom," he said. "Just years and years of punishment, day after day, while he grows up to face the lonely struggle of dealing with what he did." On April 17th, under the headline "to end the anguish, drop the death penalty," the Boston Globe carried an open letter from Bill and Denise Richard. "The defendant murdered our 8-year-old son, maimed our 7-year-old daughter, and stole part of our soul," they wrote. "We know that the government has its reasons for seeking the death penalty, but the continued pursuit of that punishment could bring years of appeals and prolong reliving the most painful day of our lives." They urged prosecutors to accept a plea deal for a sentence of life without parole. Some victims strenuously disagreed with this position. But the prosecution's most compelling witness was now begging to spare Tsarnaev's life. Hours after the letter was published, Carmen Ortiz, the U.S. Attorney in Massachusetts, reaffirmed her desire to pursue the death penalty. She was doing so, she said, on behalf of the victims. Had the jury been selected from a representative sampling of Bostonians, there would have been little possibility of a death sentence. But jury selection in death-penalty cases involves a procedure known as "death qualification," in which prospective jurors are questioned about their views on capital punishment, and anyone who opposes the practice on principle is disqualified. This makes a certain amount of sense, because a death sentence must be unanimous; if a single juror objects from the outset, the whole proceeding might be a waste of time. In Alabama or Oklahoma, where there is broad support for capital punishment, it is easy to death-qualify a panel of jurors. But in Boston a jury that is death-qualified is also demographically anomalous: according to polls taken during the trial, 60 % of Americans favored executing Tsarnaev, but only 15 % of Bostonians did. During jury selection, a middle-aged restaurant manager was asked if she could deliver a death sentence. "I don't really feel that I'm sentencing someone," she said. "It's like at work - I fire people, and I'm asked, 'How can you do that?' I'm not the one doing that. They did it. By their actions. Not coming to work, stealing, whatever." Elisabeth Semel, the Berkeley professor, notes that, with a death-qualified jury, "you are starting out with a jury that is conviction-prone and death-prone, because if they weren't they wouldn't be sitting there." The restaurant manager became the forewoman of the jury. On a May morning, as gulls hung on the breeze in Boston Harbor, Clarke addressed the jury a final time. She dismissed the idea of Jahar as a radical, arguing that he had been in his brother's thrall. "If not for Tamerlan," she said, the attack "would not have happened." She played video of Jahar putting his backpack behind the Richard family. "He stops at the tree, not at the children," she insisted, a little lamely. "It does not make it better, but let's not make his intent worse than it was." Clarke called Tsarnaev a "kid" and "an adolescent drawn into a passion and belief of his older brother." In his confession inside the boat, she argued, he was merely parroting the rhetoric of others. "He wrote words that had been introduced to him by his brother." At one point, Clarke nearly conceded the logic of capital punishment. "Dhzokar Tsarnaev is not the worst of the worst," she said. "That's what the death penalty is reserved for." Then again you could argue that if Tsarnaev wasn't among the worst of the worst Clarke would never have taken the case. And Clarke - who once defended someone who slashed a pregnant woman's belly and strangled her to death in order to steal the baby from her womb - has devoted her career to the notion that even the very worst should be spared. But she knew that these jurors didn't oppose the death penalty, so she appealed to their sympathy, repeating the words "us" and "we," reminding them that they were standing in judgment of one of their own. As her closing neared its crescendo, her normally casual demeanor assumed a frantic urgency, and she gesticulated - pounding her fist, slicing the air - as if she were conducting an orchestra. "Mercy is never earned," Clarke said. "It's bestowed." Then William Weinreb approached the lectern for a rebuttal. "His brother made him do it," he said. "That's the idea they've been trying to sell you." Weinreb observed that Clarke, in her closing statement, had referred to Tamerlan "well over one hundred times." But Tamerlan was not on trial, and the defense's evidence had actually revealed that Jahar Tsarnaev was a fortunate child whose family had loved him and given him opportunity. "He moved with his parents from one of the poorest parts of the world to the wealthiest," Weinreb said. "They were looking for a better life, and they found it." Weinreb calmly dismantled the social history that Clarke and her colleagues had constructed. "The murders on Boylston Street were not a youthful indiscretion," Weinreb said. Clarke had called the killings senseless, "but they made perfect sense to the defendant." Even Prejean, Weinreb noted, was unpersuasive about Tsarnaev's sense of remorse. The sentiment he expressed to her was not so different from what he wrote in the boat: it was a pity when innocent people died, even if it was necessary. "That's a core terrorist belief," Weinreb said. Miriam Conrad and David Bruck both fumed and raised objections. Clarke just stared at Weinreb, her chin propped on her left fist, her thumb digging deeper and deeper into her cheek. Earlier, one of Weinreb's colleagues had cited Emerson: "The only person you are destined to become is the person you decide to be." Now Weinreb assaulted the belief system upon which Clarke had staked her career. All of us, Weinreb said, should be judged on the basis of our actions. Tsarnaev should be put to death "not because he's inhuman but because he's inhumane." Before the murderer Gary Gilmore was executed at Utah State Prison in 1976, bullets were distributed to the 5-member firing squad; 1 of them was a blank. This dispersal of moral responsibility is a curious feature of our system of capital punishment: the message is that the state is doing the killing, and therefore no individual is culpable for the death. In lectures, Sister Helen Prejean rebuts this notion by saying, "If you really believe in the death penalty, ask yourself if you're willing to inject the fatal poison." In other words, we are all implicated when the state kills. One common rationale for capital punishment is that it will deter others from committing awful crimes. But there is no evidence that this is the case. (Arthur Koestler once pointed out that when thieves were hanged in the village square other thieves flocked to the execution to pick the pockets of the spectators.) A 2nd justification is that the most violent criminals, even if they are jailed for life, could still endanger others. The government labored to suggest that Tsarnaev might someday be transferred out of seclusion and into the general population at ADX. One defense witness, a former prison warden, observed that, in such an unlikely event, his greatest safety concern would be for Tsarnaev. The remaining ground for capital punishment is retribution. In a 1957 essay, "Reflections on the Guillotine," Albert Camus described retaliation as a "pure impulse" that is ingrained in human nature, passed down to us "from the primitive forests." This does not mean, he argued, that it should be legal. "Law, by definition, cannot obey the same rules as nature. If murder is in the nature of man, the law is not intended to imitate or reproduce that nature. It is intended to correct it." As Oliver Wendell Holmes put it, retribution is simply "vengeance in disguise." Before the jurors began to deliberate, they were issued a questionnaire that asked them to decide whether various "aggravating" and "mitigating" factors had been proved by the government and the defense. Though Judge O'Toole cautioned jurors not to simply tally the check marks and arrive at an answer, the exercise retained an air of sterile arithmetic. Clarke reminded the jury that, however they completed their forms, each of them was making a moral judgment. "This is an individual decision for each of you," she said. She could not let them think of the jury form the way the restaurant manager thought about errant employees, or the way the firing squad thought about that blank. As Clarke spoke, she looked straight at the forewoman, who glared back at her, arms folded across her chest. After 14 hours of deliberation, the jury returned with a death sentence. According to the jury forms, all but three of the jurors believed that, even without the influence of Tamerlan, Jahar would have carried out the attacks on his own. Only 2 believed that the defendant was remorseful. "Judy would probably say, if the public saw everything she sees, it would look at the client or the case differently," David Bruck once remarked. But in this instance Clarke had failed to paint a picture of her young client that was moving enough to save him. It may be that she never found the key. During her closing, she said, with frank bewilderment, "If you expect me to have an answer, a simple, clean answer as to how this could happen, I don't." Judge O'Toole had warned the jurors not to read anything into the defendant's manner in court, but Tsarnaev's inscrutability appears to have hurt him. Most jurors declined to speak with the press, but one of them told the Daily Beast, "My conscience is clear. ... And I don't know that he has one." Unbeknownst to that juror, and to the public in Boston, Tsarnaev had already expressed remorse for his actions. On June 24th, 6 weeks after the jury dispersed, Judge O'Toole presided over the formal sentencing of Tsarnaev, and Clarke made a fascinating remark. "There have been comments over time with regard to Mr. Tsarnaev lacking remorse," she said. "It's incumbent upon us to let the court know that Mr. Tsarnaev offered to resolve this case without a trial." Tsarnaev had not simply agreed to plead guilty before the trial, Clarke said; he had written a letter of apology. But it was never shared with the jury, because the government, under the terms of the Special Administrative Measures, had it sealed. I spoke recently with Nancy Gertner, a former federal judge in Massachusetts who now teaches at Harvard. "This could have been an immediate plea," she said. "He was prepared to cooperate with the government. Why go through with it all?" In Gertner's view, there is "no legal justification" for the secrecy surrounding the proceedings, given that Tsarnaev did not appear to pose an ongoing threat. "The classification was based on a premise that this was an international security issue, which is a little dishonest," she said. It seemed absurd that prosecutors had suppressed Tsarnaev's letter of apology on the ground that releasing it could be unsafe. (A spokesperson for the prosecutors declined to comment on why the letter was suppressed.) Gertner offered a hypothesis for why the Justice Department was intent on a death sentence: it might relate to the politics of Guant???namo. Supporters of the detention facility have long argued that American federal courts are not equipped to try terrorists. But here was a case in which a civilian federal court could deliver not just a guilty verdict but the death penalty. Numerous people have been convicted of terrorism in civilian courts since September 11th, but Tsarnaev is the 1st to receive a death sentence. Gertner said that the trial should not have been held in Massachusetts. If relocating was not appropriate in this case, she observed, when would it be? "They've essentially eliminated change of venue for anyone in the country," she said. The whole trial, she concluded, "was theatre, as far as I was concerned." A 2nd juror, a 23-year-old named Kevan Fagan, recently spoke to the press. Asked by the radio station WBUR about the Richard family's letter opposing the death penalty, he said, "If I had known that, I probably - I probably would change my vote." Before Judge O'Toole could deliver the death sentence, Clarke said, "Mr. Tsarnaev is prepared to address the court." He rose, next to her, wearing a dark jacket and a gray button-down shirt. "I would like to begin in the name of Allah, the exalted and glorious, the most gracious, the most merciful," he said. He spoke in a thick accent that sounded vaguely Middle Eastern. (Before the bombing, he had sounded more conventionally American.) "This is the blessed month of Ramadan, and it is the month of mercy from Allah to his creation, a month to ask forgiveness of Allah," he continued. Turning to Clarke and her colleagues, Tsarnaev said that he wanted to thank his attorneys. "I cherish their company," he said. "They're lovely companions." Then he thanked the jury that had sentenced him to death. The Prophet Muhammad, he noted, had said that "if you are not merciful to Allah's creation, Allah will not be merciful to you." Tsarnaev went on, "I'd like to now apologize to the victims." He recalled that after the bombings he began to learn about the injured and the dead. "Throughout this trial, more of those victims were given names." When the witnesses testified, they conveyed "how horrendous it was, this thing I put you through." Tsarnaev did not look at the many victims who had gathered in the courtroom. He stared straight ahead, his hands clasped around his belt buckle. Clarke sat motionless, watching him. "I am sorry for the lives that I've taken, for the suffering that I've caused," he said. He prayed that the victims might find "healing," and he asked Allah "to have mercy upon me and my brother and my family." Allah, he said, "knows best those deserving of his mercy." Tsarnaev spoke in precisely the language of religious devotion that the prosecutors might have predicted. But people often change considerably between the ages of nineteen and twenty-one. He had spent those 2 years in solitary confinement, with plenty of time to ponder his actions - and to read the Koran. Throughout the trial, Tsarnaev had been a cipher, and observers wanted him to demonstrate that he understood the gravity of his misdeeds. But I wondered, as he addressed the court, if Tsarnaev was mature enough - or distant enough in time from the bombing and from the death of his brother - to have arrived at a firm evaluation of what he'd done. The Koran, like other holy books, can be read to condemn such acts of violence or to condone them. On a given night, Tsarnaev might fall asleep believing that he would be rewarded in the afterlife, and the next night believing that he would be punished. Tsarnaev will not be executed anytime soon. Since 1988, 75 defendants have been given the federal death penalty, but only three have been put to death. Appeals drag out for decades. Until a California judge ruled capital punishment unconstitutional last year, death-row prisoners there were 7 times more likely to die of natural causes than of execution. (A death sentence, the judge observed, should really be called "life in prison with the remote possibility of death.") The very scenario that Bill and Denise Richard hoped to avoid - the appeals, the publicity, the endless replay of the city's trauma in the interests of retributive justice - will come to pass. Clarke has been known to say, of a death sentence that has not yet led to execution, "This case has a few miles to go." Clarke's friends say that the loss has been devastating to her. In death-penalty work, Elisabeth Semel told me, you talk not about losing a case but about losing a client. When it happens, she said, "you suffer, and you have to figure out how to pick yourself up." Clarke, she pointed out, "has never experienced this before." Tina Hunt, noting that Clarke and her husband don't have kids, said, "To some degree, these clients are her children." Clarke's friend Rick Kammen told me a story about Millard Farmer, who has represented scores of capital defendants in the South: "Millard would say, 'Everyone has a certain number of cases in them. You need to quit 1 trial early.' And it does take its toll on you, this work." But without exception the people who know Clarke agree that this will not be her last case - she will pick herself up and keep fighting. Last month, Clarke and her colleagues filed a motion for a retrial, maintaining, once again, that the case should not have been tried in Boston. Bruck recently agreed to represent Dylann Roof, who is accused of murdering 9 people in June at a black church in Charleston; Clarke could yet join him in that defense. Tsarnaev concluded his courtroom remarks with a few final encomiums to Allah. Then he sat stiffly and waited for Judge O'Toole to deliver the death sentence. Clarke reached out and placed her hand on his back. (source: The New Yorker) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 7 10:43:09 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2015 10:43:09 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 7 INDONESIA: Hopes for mercy for British grandmother on death row in Bali fade after Indonesia's new anti-drugs boss sets out tough stance ---- Lindsay Sandiford sentenced to death for attempting to smuggle cocaine A British grandmother on death row in a Bali jail for drug smuggling was yesterday told that Indonesia's new anti-narcotics chief plans to show no mercy to everyone involved with drugs. Lindsay Sandiford, 59, from Cheltenham, was sentenced to death by firing squad in January 2013 after attempting to smuggle 1.6million pounds worth of cocaine through Bali's international airport in May 2012. She has lost a number of appeals and has had no positive response to her pleas for mercy from Indonesian president Joko Widodo, who has taken a hardline stance on executing convicted drug offenders. Until now, people who have been able to prove they are addicts have been shown leniency, but the country's new anti-narcotics director, Budi Waseso, has now announced that he intends to bring in sweeping changes to the drug law, including an end to immunity from prosecution for addicts. They have until now been at the low end of the drug offenders list but they and those convicted of more serious narcotics offences now face execution. This is bad news for Mrs Sandiford, who has already been told that President Widodo intends to show her no mercy and she will be led to the firing squad sometime in the near future. 'If they now plan to execute addicts, what hope would someone who smuggles drugs have?' asked a visitor to Kerobokan prison, where Mrs Sandiford is being held. If she had been clinging to any hope, that appears now to have gone following Mr Waseso's pledge to dramatically change the drug laws and who has announced his total support for the President's no-nonsense attitude to serious drug offenders. The existing drug laws, Mr Waseso said, give dealers a loophole to evade prosecution by claiming to be a small-time user. "Dealers are flourishing because they're protected by the law if they admit to being a user,' the Jakarta Globe quoted him as saying in Jakarta. "Under the law, a user may only be put into rehab and not be prosecuted. "We need to change the law. There should be no more distinction about users ... so that dealers don't shield themselves behind the definition of a user.' Under the current Anti-Narcotics law, a user is qualified as someone who has no more than 8 ecstasy pills, less than 1 gram of crystal methamphetamine, or less than 5 grams of marijuana. To add to his tough comments, Mr Waseso denounced the government-run rehabilitation programme as a waste of taxpayers' money, claiming it was spent on 'fixing broken people'. Referring to President Widodo's hard-line stance on executing convicted drug offenders, Mr Waseso said it was a 'necessary measure' to reduce drug crimes. No date has been announced for Mrs Sandiford's execution. At a recent dance event in Bali's Kerobokan Prison where she is being held, she was said to have been the only female prisoner who did not come out of her cell to take part in the festivities to mark Indonesia's Independence Day. Fellow inmates said she was very depressed and in no mood to sit with people who, despite their confinement, were having fun. (source: Daily Mail) ****************** Prosecutors to make charges related to Engeline's murder The head of the Denpasar Prosecutor's Office, Imanuel Zebua, says the office has received 2 suspects who allegedly murdered Engeline Margret Megawe, an 8-year-old girl from Denpasar, Bali, along with evidence of the suspects involvement in the case from the Denpasar Police on Monday morning. The head of the Denpasar Prosecutor's Office, Imanuel Zebua, said a team of prosecutors would soon make charges against 2 suspects allegedly involved in the murder of 8-year-old Engeline.Imanuel said once the charge documents were completed the first trial for the 2 suspects would be held. "We received the case documents today and prosecutors will make charges against the 2 suspects as soon as possible so that their trial can be held immediately," Imanuel said as quoted by Antara in Denpasar on Monday. Imanuel said the prosecutor team from the Denpasar Prosecutor's Office took the 2 suspects along with evidence of their involvement in the murder to Kerobokan Penitentiary in Denpasar. Among the articles included in the case dossier for the 1st suspect, Agustinus "Agus" Tae Hamdamai, was Article 340 of the Criminal Code (KUHP) on the premeditated murder of Engeline, which carried potential sentences of 20 years to life or the death penalty. Agus was also charged with Article 338 of the KUHP on murder, which carries a sentence of 15 years in prison, and Article 181 on attempting to cover up a murder, which carries a sentence of 9 year's imprisonment, he added. Imanuel said Agus's case dossiers also included Articles 76 and 80 of Law No. 35/2014 in reference to Law No. 23/2002 on Child Protection. Margriet Megawe, the woman who adopted Engeline, will be charged with violating Article 340 of the KUHP on premeditated murder. She will also be charged with Article 338 of the KUHP on murder and Article 353 on cruel treatment, which carries a potential death sentence. Engeline was found buried in the backyard of Margriet's house on Jl. Sedap Malam in Denpasar on June 10 after she was reported missing on May 16. (source: The Jakarta Post) AUSTRALIA: Death penalty: Australian Federal Police dobs 1847 suspects Federal police have put more than one person at risk of the death penalty every day for the past 5 years by co-operating with police forces in countries, mainly in Asia, that execute offenders. The vast majority of the 1847 people whose names were provided to foreign police forces were being investigated for drug offences in countries where the death penalty is widely imposed and sometimes applied. The figure is much higher than previously reported, and will shock many who were dismayed by the April executions of Bali nine drug smugglers Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran in Indonesia. Australian Federal Police Commissioner Andrew Colvin assured Australians after their executions that "organisationally" and "personally", the police opposed the death penalty, and that the AFP tightly manages the number of reports made to foreign jurisdictions. But official police figures released under freedom-of-information laws to researcher Sarah Gill show that between December 2009 and December 2014, more than 370 people a year were reported to death penalty jurisdictions. More than 95 per cent of these referrals were for drug cases. Not all of these people are Australian citizens and residents - and police do not collect those figures - but the number of Australians is likely to amount to hundreds over the years. The figures show that, despite guidelines introduced in 2009, police grant about 93 % or more of requests for help from police forces in death penalty countries. Where the requests are turned down, it is usually for bureaucratic reasons - for example, because forms are filled out incorrectly - rather than because of the danger to an individual. Where people are already arrested by police in a death penalty jurisdiction, the justice minister must sign off on the help being provided. The vast majority of those cases are also approved. Guidelines introduced in 2009 after the outcry relating to the Bali nine case require police to consider the likelihood of the person being subject to the death penalty when co-operating with a foreign police force. However, that is just one among many considerations, including Australia's interest in promoting co-operation with foreign authorities. A dozen Australians, including two grandmothers, are on death row, including nine in China, where they are among 26 in custody in that country on drug charges. Police have said in the past that none of the 12 on death row were there An AFP spokesman said the organisation acts "appropriately and in accordance with Australian and international policies" in death penalty matters. Police policy was to try to fight criminal activity in "source countries," and working with foreign law enforcement "has been very successful" in fighting crimes including terrorism, child exploitation, human trafficking, people smuggling and drug importation, the spokesman said. "The AFP cannot limit its co-operation to countries that have similar legal systems as Australia ... [and] without the ability to work with all of its international partners, the AFP simply could not function." Julian McMahon, one of the lawyers for Chan and Sukumaran, called for an independent monitor to help police judge when to refer people to death penalty jurisdictions. "International co-operation is an essential part of the AFP doing their job to combat serious crime, and they must be able to continue to do that," Mr McMahon said. "But, where it's a matter of life and death, there is a very heavy burden of responsibility on the AFP and our government to act in accordance with our national policy to oppose the death penalty, torture and so on. Where so many lives may be at risk because of positive steps taken by a busy police force, an independent monitor or a review mechanism is in everybody's interest." Ms Gill said the figures showed the AFP was "exporting the death penalty". "One of the measures of genuine opposition is a refusal to co-operate with death penalty states unless there are assurances that the death penalty won't be carried out ... so it is utterly mystifying why our federal police are essentially given free reign. "The guidelines appear to be little more than a facade." . (source: Sydney Morning Herald) PAKISTAN: Capital punishment controversy ---- Today, the number of total abolitionists in law or practice is 140, whereas the retention countries are 58 in number The existence of the death penalty has been a bane of legal systems since time immemorial. Capital punishment dates back to the 18th century BC, when it was first inscripted on the stele of Hammurabi. It has from there on been in practice throughout the world. With changing times, countries around the world have opted to abolish the death penalty, limiting it to cases only where the ordainment of such punishment is necessary for exceptionally grave crimes. Today, the number of total abolitionists in law or practice is 140, whereas the retention countries are 58 in number. In Pakistan, a moratorium was introduced on the death sentence in 2008, which was eventually lifted in December 2014 after enormous public pressure in response to the barbaric school attack in Peshawar. Since then, military courts have been established for speedy trials and one can witness haste in death sentences while the cries of human rights activists resonate. The death penalty is considered an inhumane and barbaric practice, and at the very least, is a flagrant violation of one's most primal right: the right to life. Is a death sentence really as atrocious and vile as these activists claim? Is there really a need to impose a moratorium on executions in Pakistan? I do not believe so. The basic structure of society demands that every individual is entitled to basic rights and subject to liabilities. However, the question then arises: are the people convicted of violating these basic human rights really entitled to one of their own? Murder is essentially down to the bare bones, taking another's life wilfully. If someone believes that they have the right to take another's life, the court holds the same right against them. The most appropriate compensation for a crime or injustice is equal retribution: an eye for an eye, a life for a life. If the court does not have the right to make the decision of capital punishment, it essentially does not have the right to hand out equal punishment either. The opponents usually argue on how the death penalty is far from the realms of humanity. However, most countries worldwide have submitted to using lethal injections, shooting, hanging or sending convicts to gas chambers for carrying out the execution. Abandoning execution in this context would mean no longer using barbaric and primitive methods such as beheadings. Some still argue that it does not in fact matter whether the method of execution is lethal injection, hanging or anything else because all of these methods deliver the same result: ending a person's life. If the deliberate killing of an individual in this regard seems immoral, what about the pain suffered by the victims? Death penalties serve to provide closure to the families of the victim. The punishment is a means of avenging the death of an innocent person. True, the punishment itself may be no different than the crime itself; calculated and deliberate killing of a human being, but the process that is carried out to exact revenge is clearly a means of retribution. Hence, reiterating the proportionality principle: an eye for an eye and a life for a life. Furthermore, those in support of retaining the death penalty state that executing the criminal ensures that the same misconduct will not be repeated and further human lives will not be lost. It serves as a good deterrent. However, the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan in its report, 'Slow march to the gallows' questioned the death penalty and commented that if it sets an example to restrict other people from committing similar crimes, then why does the crime rate in Pakistan continue to grow? It further argues that there is no solid evidence of a death sentence actually deterring someone from committing a murder since most of such incidents take place in the heat of the moment. But the report fails to acknowledge some of the most important considerations. If there is no data that suggests capital punishment deters people, is there any to suggest that it is not a deterrent? Killing a murderer does not produce any other outcome other than the fact that those who have taken a life have had their life taken as well. However, on the flip side, not executing a murderer manifests the probability that he/she will further commit similar crimes in the future. The blood of all of their future victims will then be on our hands. The world does not deserve to live in fear of a murderer. A swift action taken by the law-enforcing agencies while the wounds are fresh can serve as a good deterrent for criminals. It is also quite relevant at this point to quote an example of Saudi Arabia and Singapore; countries that have a much lower crime rate than the USA. Statistically speaking, Saudi Arabia has one of the world's lowest crime rates related to drugs and Singapore has one of the lowest overall crime rates in the world. Whereas capital punishment is not necessarily the final outcome for cases in the US, lawyers make use of legal ambiguities to make sure their client escapes the clutches of death. However it is not the case in countries like Singapore where it is nearly impossible to save the life of a convict in the light of substantial evidence. Saudi Arabia's strict rules regarding all things from drug smuggling to murder serve to deter people from trying to commit any offense. While the rendering of such punishments will not sweep the system clean of perpetrators overnight but to discard the idea of the death penalty as a ruthless, barbaric one, would be nothing short of a na???ve and myopic approach towards the workings of a legal system. What is then needed is the use of exemplary punishment to ward off similar threats from potential offenders, for a crime so grave deserves to be treated with a punishment of an identical intensity and force. (source: Ali Sahi; The writer is a student at LUMS and freelance columnist----Daily Times) INDIA: 'Death penalty for terror offences alone worrying' The law commission's recent recommendation to continue with death penalty for terror offences was worrying, said former Supreme Court deputy registrar Anup Surendranath on Sunday. Anup, who recently resigned from the Supreme Court post in protest against abrupt hanging of Yakub Memon, was delivering keynote address at a seminar on death penalty organized by All India Lawyers Union here. "I find the recommendation for abolishing death penalty for all offences but terrorism and waging war problematic. It took 50 years for the law commission to review its decision in support of death penalty and we may take a long time to revisit it again. Over 94% of those awarded death penalty for terror offences are Muslims. It needs to be seen in the context of how the apex court had dealt with terrorism," said Anup recalling how 'happy' the court was to defer to the legislature whenever anti-terror legislations have approached it. He quoted the examples of the apex court's decision regarding constitutionality of Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) and Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA). "The problem of retaining death penalty for terror offences was questioned by the speaker, pointing out that the Supreme Court didn't apply its own recent judgment (Shabnam's case of May 2015) in Memon's case. While the court had created an absolute rule in Shabnam's case that the death row prisoner and his/her lawyer should be present before the trial court when time and place is fixed while issuing a death warrant, the apex court didn't follow it in Memon's case," he said. Similarly, dismissal of challenge raised to rejection of second mercy petition citing delay was wrong, Anup said. "Assuming that Memon does not have the right to file a second mercy petition was an important constitutional issue as the guidelines by ministry of home affairs recognize that a second mercy petition can be filed if different grounds (reasons) are taken. Memon took very different grounds in the second mercy petition that was filed on July 29. The court can't adjudicate these things in 40-90 minutes as to whether he could have filed a second mercy petition and under what circumstances or was he prevented from filing a 2nd mercy petition at all," observed Anup. He said it was a significant constitutional issue which could not be decided at three in the morning just by listening to lawyers. It required attention of a full constitutional bench. "Instead, it was celebrated as we opened the doors of the Supreme Court at 3am, it is celebration of the rule of the law' is just posturing," he said. There were serious issues in Memon's last 2 petitions, which had nothing to do with whether he deserved the death penalty or not. Those pleas could be seen in the context of procedural rights under the Constitution of India. "And irrespective of what he did, what he might have done or what I believe he might have done, he was entitled to his rights," he stated. (source: The Times of India) ***************** Man convicted for raping, killing minor----3 witnesses, including driver of a rickshaw hired by the accused, deposed that they had seen the man and the victim together. A special sessions court Saturday convicted a man for raping and murdering a 9-year-old girl in suburban Nehru Nagar, Kurla, in 2010. Javed Shaikh (23) was convicted under Sections 302 (murder), 363 (kidnapping) and 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code. 3 minor girls were raped and murdered in Nehru Nagar area since February 2010. The body of a 5-year-old was found in a drain on February 9, 2010 while an 8-year-old was found murdered on the terrace of a building in police quarters on March 9, 2010. A 9-year-old girl was found murdered in a dilapidated building on June 19, for which Shaikh - a technician with a cable operator - was arrested on July 1, 2010. While special public prosecutor Pradeep Gharat examined 26 witnesses in the case, the defence lawyer examined 4. According to Gharat, the crucial evidence was that hair found on the victim's nail matched DNA samples of the accused. Three witnesses, including driver of a rickshaw hired by the accused, deposed that they had seen the man and the victim together. The rickshaw driver deposed that he was hired by the duo to take them to a shanty in Nehru Nagar. The hutment was where Shaikh allegedly raped and murdered the victim. The defence lawyer examined witnesses from Shaikh's workplace. Claiming false implication in the case, the defence lawyer contended that Shaikh was working when the crime was allegedly committed. The lawyer also submitted that the police, under pressure to solve the crimes, had made Shaikh a scapegoat. The public prosecutor has sought death penalty for Shaikh. The court will hear arguments on the quantum of punishment on Tuesday. (source: Indian Express) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 8 09:27:16 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 09:27:16 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----KAN., OKLA., NEB., CALIF., USA Message-ID: Sept. 8 KANSAS: Amman Reu-El files pleading claiming he had ineffective assistance of counsel in capital murder retrial----No date scheduled to hear his filing Claiming he received ineffective assistance from the 2 attorneys appointed to defend him in the retrial of his death penalty case, King Phillip Amman Reu-El is asking a Shawnee County District Court judge to conduct an evidentiary hearing. Besides ineffective assistance of counsel, Amman Reu-El, 42, is asking District Court Judge Richard Anderson to void his 2 consecutive sentences and his convictions based on his no-contest pleas. In effect, Amman Reu-El is starting the process to seek a 3rd trial based on an allegation he received ineffectiveness of counsel, which got his case into court for a retrial starting in 2013. 10 years ago Tuesday, a jury convicted him of capital murder and other charges in the killings of 2 women in Topeka. Those convictions were overturned, and the case was sent back for retrial. During his 2nd trial, Amman Reu-El's defense attorneys were Paul Oller, of Hays, and John Val Wachtel, of Wichita. Both have worked on multiple death penalty cases. Amman Reu-El said his no-contest plea was the result of advice of counsel and was "involuntary in character and unintelligently made made as (Amman Reu-El) was misled" by Oller and Wachtel. Amman Reu-El said he was misled into thinking the no-contest plea wouldn't be used by the Kansas Supreme Court as grounds to deny a pre-trial habeas corpus action filed by the defendant on Dec. 30, 2014. Via the mail, Amman Reu-El wrote and filed the request, which was date-stamped in district court on Monday. As of Friday, a date hadn't been selected for Anderson to hear Amman Reu-El's filing seeking a hearing. When Amman Reu-El made the "no contest" pleas on Feb. 27, a jury was being chosen to hear his retrial in the slayings of Annette Roberson, 38, and Gloria A. Jones, 42, on Dec. 13, 2003, in a southeast Topeka house. The pleas removed the death penalty as a sentence. Amman Reu-El was charged with capital murder in the shooting deaths of Roberson and Jones; 2 alternative counts of premeditated 1st-degree murder of Roberson and Jones; attempted first-degree murder of Annetta D. Thomas; aggravated battery of Thomas; and criminal possession of a firearm. The Kansas Supreme Court previously ordered a new trial on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel following Amman Reu-El's trial conviction in the 2003 murders of 2 women and severe wounding of a 3rd. Amman Reu-El formally changed his name from Phillip D. Cheatham Jr. while awaiting retrial in the capital murder case. Amman Reu-El's interview In a face-to-face interview with The Topeka Capital-Journal, Amman Reu-El said he entered a no-contest plea Feb. 27 because he had lost faith in his attorneys and the legal system. He said pretrial publicity had tainted the jury pool, and entering a plea was the only way to avoid the death penalty. The interview occurred March 4 at the Shawnee County Jail. "If I couldn't get a fair trial the 1st time," Amman Reu-El said, "and throughout the course of the delay leading up to the setting aside of convictions, then how was I supposed to get a fair trial now?" Ozawkie attorney Dennis Hawver represented Amman Reu-El at the 1st trial and later was disbarred based on his legal work. But Amman Reu-El in March said his attorneys "couldn't protect my rights as they were obligated." "I knew from the start that the state has left me in a position that I couldn't receive my constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel anyway," Amman Reu-El said. "Because no matter how hard Mr. Hawver, no matter how hard Mr. Wachtel would have tried, they couldn't protect my other rights - as in my right to confrontation, my right to present the theory of my defense in its entirety - and they were just pushing forward in total disregard of my rights." The retrial A retrial was ordered for Amman Reu-El in 2013 after the Kansas Supreme Court overturned his capital murder convictions and death penalty based on a finding he received ineffective assistance by Hawver in 2005. A jury convicted him of the charges on Sept. 8, 2005. After months preparing for the 2nd trial, prosecutors and defense attorneys began choosing a jury in February. The plea Then, abruptly on Feb. 27, the judge was told a plea agreement had been reached. "We told the judge at 11:30 (a.m.) that we had come to an agreement," Oller said. Amman Reu-El pleaded no contest to capital murder and attempted murder, and the other charges were dismissed. With the plea, the death penalty was removed as a sentencing option. "It was a very difficult and thought-out decision by Phillip," Oller told a reporter on the day of the plea. "He doesn't come into this decision lightly." When sentenced on March 20, Amman Reu-El received a life term for the capital murder conviction and a sentence of 13 years and 9 months for the attempted murder. He would have to serve a minimum of 25 years on the life term before he was parole eligible, the nearly 14-year term. After he served 25 years, he could apply to the Kansas Prisoner Review Board to release him from the capital murder sentence, and if the request was granted, then he would begin serving the 2nd sentence for attempted murder. Since he was first convicted, Amman Reu-El has served almost 12 years. At the earliest, Amman Reu-El has a little more than 13 years. Speaking in March, Amman Reu-El said he would be out of prison "well before 14 years." "It really didn't matter what the deal was or how much the time was because I have faith in Allah in that the truth will be revealed that the state in the process and in their treatment of me has been very unfair," Amman Reu-El said. (source: Topeka Capital-Journal) ************ Prosecutors want Bennett's statement played during his trial Prosecutors in a quadruple murder case in Parsons are working to include a statement by the defendant at a jury trial. The Kansas Attorney General's Office, which is prosecuting David Cornell Bennett Jr., 23, filed a request for a hearing in the future on the issue of offering evidence at trial of Bennett's statements to law enforcement. Bennett's attorney, Timothy Frieden, has not filed a response. Bennett is accused of strangling Cami Umbarger and her three children, Hollie Betts, 9, Jaxon Betts, 6, and Averie Betts, 4, in November 2013. Their bodies were discovered on Nov. 25, 2013, at Umbarger???s home in Parsons after she didn't show up for work. Bennett is charged with capital murder or in the alternative 4 counts of 11st-degree murder. The punishment for capital murder is death by lethal injection or life in prison without parole, but the punishment requires an additional hearing after a finding of guilt. The prosecution filed notice that it is seeking the death penalty in the case. Bennett also faces a rape charge, 3 counts of criminal threat, all felonies, and 4 misdemeanors, 2 counts of phone harassment and 2 counts of criminal deprivation of property. Bennett's trial is scheduled for Sept. 7, 2016. Assistant Attorney General Jessica G. Domme filed the motion in late August in Bennett's case. She requested a hearing, called a Jackson v. Denno hearing, to determine the voluntariness of Bennett's statement to law enforcement. The AG would have to argue separately if the statement itself could be admitted at trial. Domme's motion indicates that Bennett spoke to KBI Senior Special Agent Steve Rosebrough and then Parsons Police Chief Scott Gofourth on Nov. 27, 2013. The interview took place at the Parsons Police Department after Bennett was advised of his Miranda rights. The motion doesn't mention any information that Bennett supplied, but indicated Bennett spoke freely with the officers and volunteered his statements. No hearing date has been scheduled on the voluntariness of Bennett's statement. Frieden filed a request for additional discovery in the case, but the AG's office objects to various parts of the motion, saying the requests go beyond what the prosecution may have collected or what a defendant is allowed. No hearing date for that has been scheduled. Frieden motion says he's received 4,246 pages of discovery, as well as more than 100 CD/DVDs and one flash drive. (source: Parsons Sun) ****************** Jurors set to decide fate of Frazier Glenn Cross this week----Death penalty possible for man convicted in Jewish center shootings The jury deciding whether Frazier Glenn Cross should be sentenced to die for murdering 3 people at the Jewish Community Center and Village Shalom will resume its work Tuesday. The jurors will hear closing arguments and instructions from the judge and then begin their deliberations. The same jury convicted Cross one week ago of killing William Corporon, Reat Underwood and Terri LaManno in April 2014. Cross never denied committing the crimes, but had argued that his anti-Semitic views left him no other choice. Cross, who served as his own defense attorney, said he was driven by his beliefs to kill Jews. He found out a week after the shootings that all 3 of his victims were Christians. During the penalty phase, prosecutors presents a swift case, saying that every argument for giving Cross the death penalty was made in the trial. In his own defense, Cross played anti-Semitic videos for the jury and called his son to testify. His son, who spoke out against his father's crimes, told the jury to sentence him to life in prison instead so that Cross won't get any more public platforms to share his views. A doctor also testified that Cross' emphysema makes it unlikely that he will live long enough to exhaust all appeals in a death sentence. Cross has told the court that he doesn't expect or want mercy from the jury. The judge said he wanted jurors to hold off on their deliberations until Tuesday so that they didn't feel pressured to make a quick decision before the holiday. (source: KMBC news) ******************* Convicted neo-Nazi murderer F. Glenn Miller Jr. should get life in prison Life in prison without parole would be an appropriate sentence for F. Glenn Miller Jr. following his capital murder conviction for fatally shooting three persons last year in Overland Park, Kan. A jury is considering arguments in the penalty phase of his trial and will decide whether to put Miller to death. Given that Kansas has not carried out the death penalty since 1965, and given that Miller, 74, suffers from emphysema, even a life sentence would essentially be a death sentence. A life sentence might well reduce the opportunities for an appeal and shield the public from more courtroom drama starring Miller and his despicable white-supremacist rants. In addition, life imprisonment would deny Miller, also known as Frazier Glenn Cross Jr., the satisfaction of touting execution as a kind of martyrdom in his neo-Nazi killing spree. A Johnson County District Court jury deliberated less than 2 hours before reaching the verdict in the 6-day trial. District Judge Kelly Ryan deserves praise for deftly maintaining courtroom decorum and keeping Miller's outbursts to a minimum. The jury convicted Miller for fatally shooting William Corporon, 69, and Reat Underwood, 14, on April 13, 2014, outside the Jewish Community Center in Overland Park, and Terri LaManno, 53, outside the nearby Village Shalom care center, where she had gone to visit her mother. Miller had driven from his home in Aurora, Mo., and scouted out the locations intent on killing Jews. But his shooting victims were Christian. Acting as his own attorney, Miller's defense included expressing the regret that he had not killed more people. In an opening statement, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Christopher McMullin called Miller's killing spree "heinous, cruel and atrocious" and asked jurors to impose the death penalty. But a long, isolating imprisonment could serve to be a rancid hell of Miller's own making. And it would give the public and his victims' families a better chance to get beyond the nightmare he wrought. (source: Opinion, Kansas City Star) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Death Row Inmate's Attorneys Search For New Evidence Richard Glossip's attorneys admit they are feeling the pressure. With just 8 days until his scheduled execution Glossip's attorneys are frantically working to save his life. "I don't even want to think about this execution going through, I can't," Glossip's attorney Don Knight said. Knight is 1 of 3 attorneys from across the country working pro bono to try and save Richard Glossip's life. Gov. Mary Fallin said the execution will go forward ... unless she is presented with new information in the case. Knight and defense investigators are currently in Oklahoma looking for that new evidence. Knight is from Colorado and said he plans to be in Oklahoma up until the execution date interviewing witnesses connected 1997 murder of Barry Van Treese. "What we have been finding in the course of our investigation is many key players have never been talked to by any defense lawyer at all or any defense investigator, which is stunning since there have been 2 trials in this case," Knight said. Glossip's attorneys are also looking for information from someone who did time with Justin Sneed. Sneed testified Glossip masterminded the murder. "If they would come forward and say let me tell you about something Justin Sneed has said, something that I overheard or that he said to me or something a friend told me he said about this situation that doesn't go along with this idea that Richard Glossip is guilty," Knight said. Knight said Glossip's legal team has not met yet with Fallin to discuss the case, but hope to before the execution. "She seems to be a substantive person so I think we need to respect that and come to her when we are absolutely ready to give her the information that we think gives her the ammunition she needs to give us the 60 say stay," Knight said. With the world now watching what happens in this case, it's up largely to Oklahomans to put pressure on the governor to issue the 60 day stay, Knight said. "When the rest of the world is looking at a state that is about ready to kill an innocent man, it really should make all Oklahomans pause and say 'Do we want that? Why are we doing this to ourselves?' Only Oklahomans can stop this," he said. Glossip's execution is scheduled for Sept. 16. (source: newson6.com) NEBRASKA: Ballot Measure Raises Stakes for Death Penalty Foes The Nebraska Legislature's vote to abolish the death penalty was hailed as a sign that red-state conservatives are turning away from the punishment, but opponents now face the much greater challenge of persuading voters. National death penalty experts say the campaign could test the notion that conservative sentiment has shifted. Even some opponents of capital punishment acknowledge they face an uphill battle. Ohio State University law professor Doug Berman, a death penalty expert, says the vote drew national attention because it played into the notion that capital punishment was losing support in a deeply conservative state. Nebraskans for the Death Penalty announced last month it had gathered nearly 167,000 signatures, nearly three times the minimum number needed to place the issue on the November 2016 ballot. (source: Associated Press) CALIFORNIA: Issues with CA death penalty result from improper funding Last year, U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney ruled the death penalty in California unconstitutional, resulting on a temporary ban on capital punishment. His decision is up for review by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and, if turned back to the California Supreme court, another 4 years of waiting for a decision is to come. Michael Laurence, a lawyer defending the ban, and Carney alleged that the death penalty is unconstitutional because of the length of time a prisoner must wait before being put to death. The average amount of time a prisoner spends on death row in California is 25 years because the judicial branch, among others, is underfunded. It only received 1.4 % of the state's budget for the 2015-2016 year. Of this small sliver of budget, the Court of Appeals gets 6.2 percent, according to the California State Budget. The way to go about fixing the process for the death penalty is to talk about funding. If California could reallocate some funds from other sections of the budget, even if the budget was only to make an even 2 %, it would help quite a bit. A botched lethal injection occurred in 2006, causing the state to reevaluate the method of death. In 2007, it was decided in Morales v. Tilton that lethal injection was an issue because of "inconsistent and unreliable screening of execution team members; a lack of meaningful training, supervision and oversight of the execution team; inconsistent and unreliable record keeping; ... and inadequate lighting, overcrowded conditions and poorly designed facilities in which the execution team must work." Executions are carried out through the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations, which is receiving 8.7 % of State General Funding for the 2015-2016 year, according to the California State Budget. What this department needs is more appropriate funding to make up for the shortcomings of 2006. California has not executed anyone on death row since 2006 because of the botched execution, which adds to the controversy surrounding the death penalty being considered a cruel and unusual punishment. Methods of death include lethal injection, gas chamber, hanging, firing squad or the electric chair. From the perspective of a prisoner, all methods have their benefits and disadvantages. Saying the death penalty is unconstitutional because specific areas of government are underfunded does not make sense. The state just has to figure out how it can get better facilities, better funding for lawyers and training for technicians scheduled to supervise executions. (source: Daily Titan) ************ Is Southern California the New Deep South?----Los Angeles County has sentenced more people to death than 5 Southern states combined. San Bernardino is among the top 15 counties that produce the highest number of death sentences nationally. "Texas is called the Death Belt. Harris County is the buckle." That's how one judge described the death penalty in the Lone Star State 15 years ago. In those days, Texas produced 40 death sentences per year, and no one blinked if Harris County accounted for 10 of them. These days, Texas is at the epicenter of a different trend: The Deep South has witnessed a sharp, sustained, and unmistakable drop in death verdicts. So far this year (as of Sept. 6, 2015) Texas has not had a single new death sentence. Neither has Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, or Virginia. While the Deep South has moved away from capital punishment, Riverside County, California, has become the buckle of a new Death Belt. It produced 7 new death sentences in the 1st half of this year. That's more than California's other 57 counties combined, more than any other state, and more than the whole Deep South combined. An hour's drive from Los Angeles, with a population of 2.3 million (6 % of California's population), Riverside has produced more death sentences since 2010 than any other county in America except 1 - Los Angeles County, which is 4 times its size. Unfortunately, most of these counties have more in common than overzealous use of the death penalty. Los Angeles County voters supported Proposition 34, a measure that would have replaced California's death penalty with a sentence of life without parole, 53.7 % to 46.3 %. Nonetheless, Los Angeles County has sentenced 33 people to death row since 2010, which is more than any other county in America. Sure, Los Angeles County has 10 million residents, but if you combine the death sentences of 5 Southern states with an aggregate population of 40 million people - Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia - Los Angeles still has more death sentences over the same time period. In addition to Riverside and Los Angeles, 3 other Southern California counties - Kern, Orange, and San Bernardino - are among the top 15 counties that produce the highest number of death sentences nationally out of 3,144 counties nationwide. With an aggregate population of 6 million people, these 3 California counties have produced more death sentences since 2010 than three Texas counties - Harris (Houston), Dallas, and Bexar (San Antonio) - which have an aggregate population of 8.5 million. The irony is that California is very unlikely to execute any of these people. On Jan. 17, 2006, Clarence Ray Allen, a 76-year-old man who spent 23 years on the state's death row, became the 13th and last person executed in California. Last year, in an order declaring the California death penalty unconstitutional, Judge Cormac Carney, whom President George W. Bush appointed to the federal bench, wrote: In fact, just to carry out the sentences of the 748 inmates currently on death row, the State would have to conduct more than 1 execution a week for the next 14 years. Such an outcome is obviously impossible for many reasons, not the least of which is that as a result of extraordinary delay in California's system, only 17 inmates currently on death row have even completed the post-conviction review process and are awaiting their execution. For all practical purposes then, a sentence of death in California is a sentence of life imprisonment with the remote possibility of death - a sentence no rational legislature or jury could ever impose. Yet last week California Deputy Solicitor General Michael Mongan urged a federal appellate court to reverse Carney's decision, arguing, in part, that the long delays in the system are a sign that California has a careful and deliberate death penalty scheme. Whatever makes taxpayers sleep at night - but the bottom line is that although California averages 2,000 homicides per year, it counts its executions not in weeks or months, but in years or decades. Much like a Hollywood movie script, then, new death sentences in California are just for show. And it is an expensive one: The death penalty costs California about $184 million per year, well above what it would cost to incarcerate these prisoners for the rest of their natural lives. Gil Garcetti, former Los Angeles district attorney, recently explained the opportunity cost of pursuing these purely symbolic sentences: "Spending our tax dollars on actually preventing crimes, instead of pursuing death sentences after they've already been committed, will assure us we will have fewer victims." Alternately, money currently used on the death penalty could be redirected to investigate unsolved murders. An astonishing 4,862 homicides, all of them occurring in Los Angeles County between 2000 and 2010, remain unsolved. This translates into a 54 % solve rate, which is an embarrassing figure that falls 9 percent below the national average. The greatest costs do not come attached to a dollar sign. In 2011, Bethany Webb's sister, Laura, was murdered in Orange County. She openly opposed death penalty proceedings and said that it's "torturous to have to keep going to court" and "there's no end in sight." Webb said of her sister's killer, "He's going to die of old age in jail. We know that." Aba Gayle, whose daughter was murdered in 1980, felt ignored when, after a court overturned the death sentenced imposed upon the person who murdered her daughter, prosecutors rejected her request that the case be settled with a sentence of life without the possibility of parole: "Over and over," she said, "I've been told that what we feel and what we think is not important." Now 3 decades after the crime, Gayle questions what the point is of executing a person for "something they did 30 years ago." Unwisely marshaling limited public resources and purposelessly traumatizing many victims' family members in support of a punishment that most prosecutors have chosen to forego are reason enough to question the wisdom of California prosecutors who continue to seek the death penalty with reckless abandon. Unfortunately, most of these counties have more in common than overzealous use of the death penalty. Earlier this year, a federal appellate court reversed the murder conviction of a Riverside County man, Johnny Baca, due to flagrant prosecutorial misconduct. One former Riverside prosecutor, Robert Spira, testified that a jailhouse snitch had not received any incentive to testify against Baca. It turns out he was lying. The prosecutor doing the questioning, Paul Vinegrad, apparently knew that Spira was lying and solicited the informant's testimony anyway. A federal magistrate judge, Patrick Walsh, said that the "Riverside County District Attorney's Office turned a blind eye to fundamental principles of justice to obtain a conviction." During oral argument in the federal 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski agreed. He asked the government's lawyer to ask Kamala Harris, the attorney general of California, "if she really wants to stick by a prosecution that was obtained by lying prosecutors." He also asked aloud why the former prosecutors were not being prosecuted for perjury. Mike Hestrin, who personally obtained seven death sentences before he took the helm of the Riverside County District Attorney's Office this year, refused to admit that either prosecutor intentionally committed misconduct. He also promised to retry Baca, a man who already has spent 20 years in prison. According to the National Registry of Exonerations, Kern County has wrongfully convicted 24 men and women. Of those 24 cases, 22 involved misconduct by a government official. Just this year, a state appellate court found that a prosecutor in Kern County, Robert Murray, "clearly engaged in egregious misconduct that prejudiced the defendant's constitutional right to counsel" when he "deliberately altered an interrogation transcript to include a confession that could be used to justify charges that carry a life sentence." Back in 2008, the same prosecutor appears to have hid unfavorable blood evidence results produced by a state crime lab and lied about having asked a state lab technician to preserve the (subsequently destroyed) evidence. The person who killed Bethany Webb's sister pleaded guilty. However, before the cased moved into the penalty phase, in which the jury would be asked to choose between the death penalty and life without parole, the trial judge recused the entire Orange County District Attorney's Office because of the extensive misconduct that the office had committed in the case. "The District Attorney cannot or will not in this case comply with the discovery orders of this court and the related constitutional and statutory mandates that guarantee this defendant's right to due process and a fair trial," the judge wrote. Among other misuses of discretion evident in the case, Orange County prosecutor Erik S. Petersen failed to turn over a host of material about what appears to be an illegal jailhouse informant program that the county used to secure testimony against defendants. This is not the DA office's 1st brush with misconduct. As Radley Balko reports, "Between 1997 and 2009, prosecutors in Orange County, California, were cited for misconduct 58 times." In 2010, the 9th Circuit reversed the murder conviction of a Los Angeles man, Bobby Joe Maxwell, because the prosecution failed to disclose that its star witness, a jailhouse informant named Sidney Storch, received a lighter sentence in exchange for his testimony against Maxwell. Storch, who had been discharged from the military for being "a habitual liar," was also in hot water for "impersonating a Central Intelligence Agency ('CIA') officer and Howard Johnson, the son of the well-known Howard Johnson hotel chain.' A detective once testified that he "would not trust anything Sidney Storch said unless you could corroborate the information with some source." Nonetheless, the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office used Storch as a jailhouse informant in multiple cases up until he was ???caught fabricating lies as he testified for the prosecution" in a different case. This summer, Justice Stephen Breyer penned a dissent, joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in Glossip v. Gross in which the duo urged the Supreme Court to revisit the broad question of whether the death penalty remains consistent with evolving standards of decency. One of the linchpins of their argument was that the country has abandoned the death penalty in practice, and "the number of active death penalty counties is small and getting smaller." Since 2010, "only 15 counties imposed 5 or more death sentences." If 1/3 of the active death sentencing counties are in Southern California - places where those death sentences do not mean anything, and prosecutors don't seem to play by the rules - then it is truly time to end the death penalty charade once and for all. (source: Robert J. Smith is an assistant professor of law at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill----slate.com) USA: Dismantle the machinery of death "We need to kill more people," said a man responsible for at least 4 deaths in the past 5 years. "... [R]evenge is important for society as a whole." Are these chilling words from the manifesto of a mass murderer or an ISIL insurgent? Actually, these telling statements were recently uttered by Dale Cox, one of the nation's most efficient death penalty prosecutors. When put in Cox's blunt terms, the motivations behind the death penalty become clear: revenge and bloodlust. With Cox's words in mind, if our nation seeks to be a fair arbiter of justice and a moral example to the world, we must end the death penalty without delay. But that fight will not be easy. The Supreme Court ended an otherwise fruitful term with a barbarous ruling in the case Glossip v. Gross. 5 justices found the execution drug midazolam neither cruel nor unusual - the same drug behind a number of horrendous botched executions that Justice Sonia Sotomayor LAW '79 described as "the chemical equivalent of being burned at the stake." To add insult to (literal) injury, the majority also decided that the burden is on the prisoner to find an alternative execution method, failing which the state can essentially kill him or her by whatever method it wishes. But other events of the summer offered some hope. Here in Connecticut, while Governor Dannel Malloy and the legislature had ended death sentencing, 11 prisoners remained on death row for past crimes. But in August, the state Supreme Court ruled the death penalty unconstitutional in all cases. Meanwhile in Nebraska, a state as conservative as Connecticut is liberal, a supermajority of the right-leaning legislature voted to repeal the death penalty in May. "The death penalty today is a broken and ineffective government program," wrote a group of Nebraska conservatives. "The time has come [for repeal]." Indeed, conservatives of all stripes should oppose the death penalty. For the libertarian, capital punishment is big government at its worst, allowing the state to meddle not just with taxes, but with lives. For the fiscal conservative, study after study has shown the death penalty to cost far more than life sentences. In one study, the death penalty costs up to 10 times more than sentencing criminals to life behind bars. For the religious conservative, capital punishment violates the values of many faith traditions. As Pope John Paul II preached, "the dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil." I applaud those in the pro-life movement, particularly at Yale, who realize that a true pro-life stance necessitates opposition to the death penalty. People across the political spectrum can agree that capital punishment is inaccurate, ineffective and racially biased. Astonishingly, over 150 death row inmates have been proven innocent and officially exonerated in the past 42 years - though even one would be too many. Scores of studies and the American Society of Criminology concur that the death penalty fails to deter crime. Sometimes, it even has the opposite outcome, desensitizing people to death via the "brutalization effect." And on top of all this, state after state has uncovered systemic racial biases in death penalty sentencing. For instance, a University of Washington study found black defendants three times more likely to be sentenced to death than whites, all other variables controlled, and a Government Accountability Office review of 53 different studies conclusively showed that those who killed white victims disproportionately receive the death penalty. Maybe, just maybe, these astounding statistics would be excusable if the punishment could be revoked. But the death penalty can't admit its mistakes. Of course, the crimes of the truly guilty on death row are unimaginably horrible. Homicide violates the most basic tenets of our society and causes untold trauma for the victim's loved ones. But if we collectively condemn those who take a life, why should our government stoop to the same level? How can our nation have written into its laws that the appropriate response to one killing is another? Surely homicidal criminals deserve severe punishment, but to have the death penalty in a democracy puts blood on all of our hands. Yet since we live in a democracy, collective action can remove this national moral stain. With states across the nation reconsidering their stances, the time is ripe for action. If you hail from a state where the death penalty has already been done away with, urge your federal representatives to do the same. In 1994, Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun came to realize the horrors of capital punishment, declaring "from this day forward, I no longer shall tinker with the machinery of death." While his statement rings powerfully to this day, it is not enough. 2 decades later, we cannot just sit back and "no longer tinker." We must actively dismantle the machinery of death, or it will continue to grind on. (source: Guest Columnist; Jacob Wasserman is a senior in Saybrook College and vice president of the Yale College Democrats----Yale Daily News) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 8 09:28:09 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 09:28:09 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 8 AUSTRALIA: Names of nearly 2000 drug suspects handed over----Australian Federal Police defend referring a bulky list of names to foreign agencies. 1 of the lawyers for 2 men executed in Bali in April has called for independent monitoring of the names of criminal suspects referred to death penalty jurisdictions. Julian McMahon, who represented Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, said an independent regulator should be established to oversee who was referred to foreign police by the Australian Federal Police. The call came as Fairfax Media revealed the AFP shared the names of 1847 suspects with foreign agencies between 2009 and 2014. About 95 % were for drug offences, risking death in countries where execution was imposed as a penalty. "International co-operation is an essential part of the AFP doing their job to combat serious crime, and they must be able to continue to do that," Mr McMahon told The Age. "But, where it's a matter of life and death, there is a very heavy burden of responsibility on the AFP and our government to act in accordance with our national policy to oppose the death penalty, torture and so on. "Where so many lives may be at risk because of positive steps taken by a busy police force, an independent monitor or a review mechanism is in everybody's interest." An AFP spokesperson said the agency's work with law enforcement agencies in other countries had been "very successful" in solving crime. "The AFP cannot limit its co-operation to countries that have similar legal systems as Australia ... [and] without the ability to work with all of its international partners, the AFP simply could not function," the spokesperson said. Following the execution of Bali nine drug smugglers Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran, AFP Commissioner Andrew Colvin said the agency opposed the death penalty and carefully managed the number of reports made to foreign police. "A dozen Australians, including 2 grandmothers, are on death row, including nine in China, where they are among 26 in custody in that country on drug charges," The Age reported. "Police have said in the past that none of the 12 on death row were there because of AFP intervention." (source: The New Daily) MALAWI: Malawi to have referendum on death penalty Barely days after Malawi Presdient Peter Mutharika said hw will call for a referendum on whether to legalize same sex marriage, the government says it also wants to conduct a referendum on whether to abolish the death penalty in the penal code or not. According to the country's Attorney General Kalekeni Kaphale, government could not make a judgment on its own on the matter saying that is why it wants the citizens of the country to make a ruling on whether the penalty should be eliminated in a referendum or let the members of parliament mark the way forward. Reacting to the development, Executive Director of Centre for Human Rights and Rehabiliation (CHRR), Timothy Mtambo, was quick to say that the penalty needs to be abolished as it violates the rights of the people. Mtambo said Malawi is a democratic country and it could sound awkward to maintain the death sentence in the penal code. Over the past 2 decades, both international and local human rights defenders have pressurised the giovernment to abolish the death penalty. Since attaining democracy in 1994, Malawi has never executed a death sentence on any convict despite the penalty in the country's Penal Code. (source: malawi24.com) NIGERIA: Kidnappers to die in Cross River----A bill recommending the death penalty for convicted kidnappers has been signed into law by Cross River state governor, Prof. Ben Ayade. The governor signed the bill, along with 9 others at the state executive chambers. Accounts and properties belonging to the kidnappers and anyone who aids them can be frozen and seized too, according to the law. One of the bills also passed was the Social Housing Law, which was made to provide shelter for the state's poorest. "The most emotional bill to me is the Social Housing Law which seeks to provide housing for the poorest of the poor in the state. "Various researches have linked corruption in civil service to housing. It has also been proven that given the salaries of average civil servants, if they don't originate memos that give them extra money, if they don't comprise, they is no civil servant in Nigeria that will be able to build a house." "So by virtue of our salary structure, you have already created a catalyst for corruption to thrive." "By this bill, housing in Cross River State is now a right to the citizenry, it may not be justiciable at this point in time but we have created a legal stimulus to drive the structure that we can achieve housing for everybody, and in the process, stamp out all mud and thatch houses in Cross River State." (source: 360nobs.com) BARBADOS: Court order----Mandatory death penalty questioned The Barbados Government has appeared before the Costa Rica-based Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) over its failure to comply with a six-year binding order to abolish the mandatory death penalty. Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Charles Leacock, QC, who was the lead representative for the Government via a video conference when the court held a compliance hearing last Thursday, said this country has to adhere to the order because it accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the IACHR since June 4, 2000. Leacock, who appeared in association with Solicitor General Jennifer Edwards, QC, told Barbados TODAY this afternoon that the court convened the sitting to determine the Government???s adherence to orders it made in 2007 and 2009 in the murder cases of three Barbadian men, Lennox Boyce, Jeffrey Joseph and Tyrone Cadogan, who turned to that tribunal after exhausting all other legal channels. The IAHRC ruled in those cases that Barbados' mandatory death penalty was contrary to the Organization of American States' (OAS) Convention on Human Rights because it was cruel and inhumane and that Section 26 of the Constitution must be amended or repealed since that section protects the existing laws. "Those decisions were given . . . Boyce and Joseph . . . by the Costa Rican court in 2007 and 2009 respectively. Now we are in 2015 and the court had asked periodically for updates by Barbados on our compliance with the order," Leacock explained. "Now, why Barbados has to comply with the order? On June 4, 2000 Barbados accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court which means that all of the rulings of that court are binding on Barbados and must be put into effect," the DPP added. Defence lawyers, Barbadian Andrew Pilgrim QC and Britain's Saul Lehfreund, who were in Costa Rica for the hearing, questioned a number of issues regarding the death sentence. One issue was related to the meaning of a life sentence for death in the Barbadian context. "That is one of the provisions of the (proposed) bill that if the mandatory death sentence is removed, the judge will now have a discretion to impose a life sentence, and, or further, there is a prison release board proposed which would then be able to provide for release of a prisoner after 2/3 of the time," Leacock explained. The other queries of Pilgrim and Lehfreund were whether Clause 2 of the Offences Against the Person Act only provides for the penalty of life imprisonment for murder, timelines for parliamentary action and implementation of the new legislation, whether the proposal for Section 26 of the Constitution was adequate and the reason for delay in complying with the court order. While the Costa Rica-based court called Barbados to account for the long delay in honouring its ruling, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), which was also represented at the hearing, expressed frustration that despite assurances from Government, no action had been taken for 6 years. Part of the DPP's answer was that if the legislation was passed, the judge could impose a death sentence after fully considering the sentencing guidelines. "If a man is convicted of murder, if this legislation is passed, the judge can say the death penalty is not merited on these facts and could give you 15 years, just like what we normally give you for life imprisonment," he further explained. Leacock was unable to give the court any assurances as to when Parliament would debate the legislation except to say that sittings were scheduled to resume on October 10 and the bills would be looked at some time after that. He also said that Section 26 of the Constitution had serious implications for governance in Barbados and must be dealt with carefully. "However, the amendment as proposed in the Constitutional Amendment Bill seeks to add flexibility to the existing realities and also allow the Attorney General, within 5 years of the passage of the amendment, to bring such specific legislation to address any particular issue like corporal punishment or anything like that," he said. The Solicitor General explained that the delay in complying with the court order was due to the fact that Barbados was seeking to address all of the issues for compliance in a holistic manner, because it had to pass several pieces of legislation as the bills provided for. She said, however, that on hindsight Barbados should have first passed the Offences Against the Person Bill 2014 which deals with the mandatory death penalty. (source: Barbados Today) PAKISTAN: Hearing today on execution of mentally-ill Pakistani A Pakistani court will decide today (8 September) whether the government should be allowed to execute a severely mentally ill man. At a hearing in Lahore, lawyers for Khizar Hayat - who has been diagnosed with schizophrenia, and is detained in a hospital cell - will argue that his hanging would be illegal. In June this year, the courts halted an initial government plan to execute Khizar after seeing jail records documenting his severe mental illness. The documents include comments from doctors that Khizar - a former police officer sentenced to death for murder in 2003 - "is suffering from active symptoms of severe psychosis". (http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/21796) The execution of mentally ill people is prohibited under Pakistani and international law, and the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to health, Dainius P???ras, has condemned plans for Khizar's execution. The hearing comes days after the Lahore High Court ordered prison authorities to explain how they would go about hanging Abdul Basit, a prisoner who is paralysed from the waist down, and who permanently uses a wheelchair. The Punjab Home Department, which oversees the jail, refused to provide the court with details of its plans. Pakistan's jail manual gives no instructions for the hanging of disabled prisoners, and lawyers for Basit believe that his hanging would constitute cruel and unusual punishment - violating the fundamental right to human dignity enshrined in Pakistan's Constitution. The Court has yet to issue its judgment. ( http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/22030) Pakistan's 8,500-strong death row is the largest in the world, and the government has hanged over 220 prisoners since resuming executions in December 2014. The authorities' claims to be targeting only 'terrorists' has been repeatedly called into question, most recently by a Reuters investigation which found that the vast majority of those already killed had no links to terrorism. Commenting, Harriet McCulloch, Deputy Director of Reprieve's Death Penalty Team, said: "Khizar Hayat is a severely mentally ill man - so much so that he is being held in a hospital cell. It is outrageous that the authorities are trying to rush through his execution, along with so many others. It's abundantly clear that this wave of executions has little to do with combatting terrorism, and will do nothing to make Pakistan more secure. The government must recognise this, and stop these killings." (source: ekklesia.co.uk) IRAN----executions Iran regime hangs 10 prisoners en masse Iran's fundamentalist regime on Monday hanged en masse 10 prisoners in the city of Karaj, north-west of the capital Tehran. The 10 prisoners were hanged at dawn in the notorious Qezelhessar Prison. They had been transferred to solitary confinement a day earlier. Following its July 14 nuclear accord with the world powers, the mullahs' regime, dubbed by the Iranian people as the "Godfather of ISIS," has found its only solution in confronting its many escalating internal and international crises in ratcheting up suppression and executions. Amnesty International said on Monday that "the Iranian authorities must end their unprecedented killing spree - more than 700 people have been executed so far this year." A statement by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein on August 5 said: "Iran has reportedly executed more than 600 individuals so far this year. Last year, at least 753 people were executed in the country." (source: NCR-Iran) ***************** 11 Prisoners Executed for Drug Offences in Iran Iranian authorities hanged 11 prisoners charged with drug offences early Monday morning, according to the Iran Human Rights (IHR) sources in Ghezelhesar prison of Karaj (west of Tehran). One of those executed was a school teacher identified as Mahmood Barati who was sentenced to death on false charges, according to an IHR source. Barati was arrested 10 years ago and sentenced to death based on false charges. The authorities sentenced Mahmood barati to death only based on the testimony by an individual who was also charged with drug offences. There were no other evidence against Mr. Barati besides the testimoney. The key witness, who was later executed for drug charges, had withdrawn his testimoney twice. Mahmood Barati didn't have any previous criminal record and at that time worked as teacher in Taybad (eastern Iran). The family of Mr. Barati didn't get the opprotunity to visit him for the last time. The other prisoners who were hanged today included "Ali Tafreshi", "Mehdi rahimi" from the Unit 2 of Ghezelhesar prison, "Hossein Rostami" from Fasha prison (south of Tehran), five prisoners from the "Great tehran Central Prison" and one unidentified prisoner. So far in 2015, Iranian authorities have executed more than 700 prisoners, including more than 400 prisoners charges with drug offences. Iran Human Rights strongly condemns today's executions. IHR's spokesperson Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam said: "Mahmood Barati is only one of many innocent prisoners who are executed for drug charges by the Iranian authorities. The international community must put pressure on Iran to stop the arbitrary executions under the pretext of fighting the drug trafficking". (source: Iran Human Righs) MALAYSIA: Kenyan woman escapes the noose for trafficking A 34-year-old Kenyan woman escaped the gallows when the Court of Appeal overturned her conviction and death sentence for trafficking 3,747.63 grammes of syabu and sentenced her to 20 years' jail instead on a lesser charge of possession. Justice Dato' Hj Mohd Zawawi Salleh, Vernon Ong Lam Kiat and Datuk Dr. Prasad Sandosham Abraham allowed Judith Achieng Odoyo's appeal Monday. In its decision the court held that there were some serious misdirection made on the part of the trial judge. The court, however, held that after reviewing the entire evidence, they were satisfied that there were some evidence to support a conviction under a reduced charge. "However in the circumstances of the case, we are of the firm opinion that this is a proper case for the court to exercise its discretion to substitute the conviction under Section 39B (1) (a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act (DDA) 1952 to one Section 39A(2) of DDA," held Mohd Zawawi. Judith appeared calm upon hearing the decision. Trafficking drugs under Section 39B(1)(a) of the DAA 1952 carries the death penalty while Section 39A(2)(r) of the same Act provides imprisonment for life or for a term of not be less than five years, and whipping of not less than ten strokes. The appellate court ordered Judith to serve the 20 years imprisonment from the date of her arrest on Sept 13, 2011. The court also told Judith that she was very lucky to have her conviction substituted. "We welcome foreigners as tourists in Malaysia but if they commit an offence they will be dealt with according our law," said Mohd Zawawi, who also told Judith to thank her counsel. Judith, a former college student in Nairobi, Kenya was on August 13, 2012 sentenced to death by the High Court here after she was found guilty to trafficking the drugs at 8.45am on Sept 13, 2011 at the passenger examination special unit in Terminal 1 of Kota Kinabalu International Airport (KKIA), here. Earlier, counsel Hamid Ismail representing Judith raised 5 grounds of appeal which were grouped into four, among others, were that the failure by the trial judge to subject the prosecution's evidence to maximum evaluation; the breach of the double presumption rule; the improper treatment of the appellant's defence and the failure by the trial judge to make finding whether the appellant had rebutted the presumption of trafficking at the end of the trial. Meanwhile, during mitigation Hamid requested for a sentence of 20 years jail while Deputy Public Prosecutor Tetralina Ahmad Fauzi urged the court to impose the maximum sentence of 30 years taking into consideration of the drug's weight and that Judith was not eligible to whipping being a woman. (source: Daily Express) PHILIPPINES: No funds from PNoy for OFWs in distress? The Aquino administration has not allotted even a single centavo for legal assistance for overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) in distress in 2016, a party-list lawmaker claimed on Monday. Citing budget documents, Kabataan party-list Rep. Terry Ridon noted the "conspicuous absence" of any particular item of appropriation for the Legal Assistance Fund (LAF). The LAF was created by virtue of Republic Act No. 10022, or the amended Migrant Workers Act. Under this law, the government is mandated to provide P100 million every year for legal assistance for OFWs. Around P30 million should be sourced directly from the national budget. "However, no such allocation can be found under the DFA [Department of Foreign Affairs] budget, nor is there a special provision that mentions the LAF," Ridon said. "The practical consequence of this move is that there is no separate budget for OFW legal assistance. Instead, OFWs need to beg Philippine embassies and consulates for help each time they need legal assistance," he added. "This is primarily the reason why OFWs like Mary Jane Veloso fall victim to human traffickers and abusers, and end up in the death row despite their innocence. How can our government provide legal protection for overseas Filipinos if it cannot allot even a single centavo for such service?" he asked. However, the budget briefer submitted by the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) to the House Appropriations Committee said that as of June 30, 2015, the Legal Assistance Fund had a balance of P55,878,233.63 valid until December 31, 2016. The original allotment is P100,051,893.79, of which P44,173,660.16 was obligated. The LAF is used for legal expenses, DSA and airfare, retainer fee, translation service, filing fee among others. The DFA also has an Assistance to Nationals Fund (ATN). As of June 30, 2015, it had a balance of P206,283,965.33 valid until December 31, 2016. This pays for repatriation, basic necessities, medical expenses, immigration fees/overstay penalties, travel to visit OFW conduct consulate assistance/attend hearing, payment for translation services, medico legal, and authentication fees/visa financial assistance among other expenses. >From January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014 , 20,939 Filipinos overseas were provided with ATN assistance while 10,139 were assisted from January 1 to June 30, 2015. A total of P143.71 million of the P350 million budget for this in 2015 has been used. >From January 1 to June 30, 433 OFWs were recipients of the LAF. The DFA assisted 70 Filipinos with pending death penalty cases. Meanwhile, 18 former death penalty convicts were spared from execution. The DFA pitched to lawmakers the approval of a P20.55 billion budget for 2016. Around P7.387 billion will go to new or expanded programs and projects. (source: abs-cbnnews.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 8 15:00:12 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 15:00:12 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OKLA., USA Message-ID: Sept. 8 OKALHOMA: URGE PAROLE BOARD TO RECONSIDER CLEMENCY Richard Glossip is scheduled to be executed in Oklahoma on 16 September. The case against him is circumstantial and he maintains his innocence. The parole board voted against clemency in 2014. It should reconsider that decision. Click here to view the full Urgent Action in Word or PDF format, including case information, addresses and sample messages. Richard Glossip, now 52, was sentenced to death in July 1998 for the murder of Barry Van Treese, whose body was found on 7 January 1997 in one of the rooms of the motel he owned in Oklahoma City. At the trial, Justin Sneed, who worked as a maintenance man in return for a free room in the motel, confessed to killing the victim but said that Richard Glossip, the manager of the motel, had asked him to do it. Justin Sneed testified against Richard Glossip in order to avoid the death penalty and is serving a life sentence. In 2001, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals granted Richard Glossip a new trial because his legal representation at trial had been ?so ineffective that we have no confidence that a reliable adversarial proceeding took place?. The Court noted that there was no forensic evidence against Richard Glossip and that the ?only direct evidence? linking him to the murder was Justin Sneed?s trial testimony, and that ?no compelling evidence corroborated Sneed?s testimony?. Richard Glossip was re-tried in 2004 and again convicted and sentenced to death. The case against him remained circumstantial. The prosecution argued that Justin Sneed was dependent on Richard Glossip and Sneed testified that Glossip had offered him US $10,000 to kill Barry Van Treese. In 2007, the Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that there was adequate evidence to corroborate Justin Sneed?s testimony, including evidence that Richard Glossip had made attempts to conceal the body from discovery, was intending to leave the area, and had some US $1,200 in his possession which he could not account for. The federal District Court judge who denied his habeas corpus petition in 2010 nevertheless wrote that ?The State?s case against petitioner hinged on the testimony of one witness, Justin Sneed, petitioner?s accomplice, who received a life sentence in exchange for his testimony. Unlike many cases in which the death penalty has been imposed, the evidence of petitioner?s guilt was not overwhelming.? In October 2014, the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board voted unanimously against clemency. At the hearing, Richard Glossip maintained his innocence, asserting that he neither planned nor participated in Barry Van Treese?s murder. The governor cannot commute a death sentence without a recommendation to do so from the Board, but she does have the authority to grant a 60-day reprieve. Last month, Governor Mary Fallin issued a statement that ?Postponing his execution an additional sixty days does nothing but delay justice for the family of Mr. Van Treese?. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION A judge who dissented from the 2007 decision of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals to uphold Richard Glossip?s conviction and death sentence argued that Richard Glossip had been denied a fair trial when the prosecution was allowed to post summaries of witness testimony around the courtroom and to leave them there until the end of the guilt stage, which ?placed undue and unfair emphasis on this summarized testimony?, allowed witnesses to learn about earlier testimony, and the prosecution effectively to make a continuous closing argument. The judge also argued that Richard Glossip had been denied an ?informed consideration of his claims on appeal? when the judge refused to order these exhibits preserved or digitally photographed. However, in 2013 the US Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit concluded that ?Glossip received a fundamentally fair trial?. The US Supreme Court declined to take the case. Click here to view the full Urgent Action in Word or PDF format. Name: Richard Glossip (m) Issues: Death penalty, Imminent execution, Legal concern UA: 192/15 Issue Date: 7 September 2015 Country: USA Please let us know if you took action so that we can track our impact! EITHER send a short email to uan at aiusa.org with "UA 192/15" in the subject line, and include in the body of the email the number of letters and/or emails you sent, OR fill out this short online form to let us know how you took action. Thank you for taking action! Please check with the AIUSA Urgent Action Office if taking action after the appeals date. If you receive a response from a government official, please forward it to us at uan at aiusa.org or to the Urgent Action Office address below. HOW YOU CAN HELP Please write immediately in English or your own language: * Calling on the Board to rehear Richard Glossip?s case and recommend commutation of his death sentence; * Calling on the Governor to grant a 60-day reprieve and to urge the Board to reconsider clemency; * Noting the circumstantial nature of the case against Richard Glossip and that the key evidence against him was the testimony of the person who killed the victim, testimony given to avoid the death penalty; * Explaining that you are not seeking to downplay the seriousness of the crime or the suffering caused. PLEASE SEND APPEALS BEFORE 16 SEPTEMBER 2015 TO: Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board PO Box 53448, Oklahoma City, OK 73152, USA Fax: 011 1 405 602-6437 Email: contact.us at ppb.ok.gov Salutation: Dear Board members Governor Mary Fallin Oklahoma State Capitol, 2300 N. Lincoln Blvd., Room 212 Oklahoma City, OK 73105, USA Fax: 011 1 405 521-3353 Salutation: Dear Governor Please share widely with your networks:?http://bit.ly/1KCzc2Q We encourage you to share Urgent Actions with your friends and colleagues! When you share with your networks, instead of forwarding the original email, please use the "Forward this email to a friend" link found at the very bottom of this email. Thank you for your activism! UA Network Office AIUSA ?600 Pennsylvania Ave SE, Washington DC 20003 T. 202.509.8193 ? F. 202.509.8193 ?E. uan at aiusa.org ?amnestyusa.org/urgent USA: Judge Wolf will not recuse himself from death penalty sentencing of Gary Lee Sampson Senior US District Judge Mark Wolf will not recuse himself from the upcoming death penalty sentencing of spree killer Gary Sampson. In court documents released on Tuesday, Judge Wolf said he was not biased or prejudiced in Sampson case, and that his recusal was not required. In June, Judge Wolf said he had just been helping a friend when he took part in a Martha's Vineyard panel discussion of the independent film, "The Life and Mind of Mark DeFriest." His participation on that panel with famed Harvard Law Professor Allan Dershowitz almost had Judge Wolf removed the Sampson's trial. The issue: The panel also featured Dr. James Gilligan, now set to be one of Sampson's defense witnesses. Judge Wolf said he did not know Dr. Gilligan was a potential defense witness until last September. The Government later produced four Sampson court filings, all of them dated before September 2014, which contain Dr. Gilligan's name. (source: MyFoxBoston.com) ****************** Lawyers argue alleged juror misconduct in death penalty case Attorneys for a man sentenced to death for the 2003 killing of a University of North Dakota student are questioning witnesses about allegations of juror misconduct. A jury in 2006 convicted Alfonso Rodriguez Jr. of kidnapping and killing Dru Sjodin, of Pequot Lakes, Minnesota. It has been nearly 4 years since Rodriguez's attorneys filed the federal habeas corpus motion, considered the last step in the appeals process. Rodriguez's attorneys have filed court documents outlining the alleged wrongdoing, but those papers are sealed from public view. One juror was questioned Tuesday morning about being a victim of domestic abuse. The hearing started nearly 2 hours late while technicians figured out how to hook up Rodriguez and one of his lawyers via video from a federal prison in Terre Haute, Indiana. (source: Associated Press) *************** see: http://www.denverpost.com/data/ci_28773983/executions-united-states-1977-2015-interactive (source: Denver Post) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 8 15:00:56 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 15:00:56 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 8 INDONESIA: Date for 3rd Round of Executions Yet to Be Determined The Indonesian government is reportedly "still evaluating and observing the situation" before it decides on a date for the 3rd round of executions of death-row inmates this year, Attorney General H.M. Prasetyo said on Tuesday. In April, Tony Spontana, a spokesman for the Attorney Genera's Office, revealed plans for the next round of executions to be conducted after the controversial and universally denounced killings of 8 drug convicts, 7 of them foreigners. The 1st round of executions, in January, saw 6 people, 5 of them foreigners, face the firing squad. When questioned on Tuesday about when the 3rd round of killings would take place, Prasetyo gave the rather vague response of "We're currently focusing on the law violation development." Tony had previously said the 3rd batch of condemned inmates would all be convicted murderers, after the 14 drug offenders put to death so far this year. (source: Jakarta Globe) CHAD: UN Rights Expert Questions Execution Of Boko Haram Militants After Swift Trial The UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions has condemned the recent executions of ten people in Chad following a swift process, which he says may have not respected the international human rights standards. Christof Heyns called on the Chadian authorities to reinstate the moratorium on the use of the capital punishment. On 29 August, Chad executed ten suspected members of Boko Haram after a t3-day hearing. There is no reliable information on whether the persons executed were able to use their right to appeal and clemency as the hearings were moved to a secret place on the last day. "While I express my deepest rejection of the terrorist attacks in June and July, I encourage the Government to react to such events within the limits of its obligations under international law," said the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Christof. Heyns emphasized that the death penalty is an extreme form of punishment and, if used at all, should only be imposed after a fair trial that respects the most stringent due process guarantees as stipulated in international human rights law. The Chadian authorities reintroduced the death penalty following terrorist attacks carried out by Boko Haram in the capital N'Djamena between June and July. "Prior to these events, the last official execution in the country took place in 2003," Heyns noted, recalling that Chad had accepted last year's recommendation on the abolition of the death penalty made by other States during the review of the country's human rights record. In September 2014, Chad announced that it would abolish the death penalty in its legislation. However, on 30 July 2015, the National Parliament adopted a new law on terrorism and introduced the death penalty. Heyns further called upon Chad's authorities to amend the antiterrorist law of 30 July. The expert's statement has been endorsed by the UN Special Rapporteurs on torture, Juan E. Mendez; and on human rights and counter terrorism, Ben Emmerson. (source: RTT news) EGYPT: Rights Group Condemns Death Sentences Against Clearly Innocent Anti-Coup Mansoura Youths----Rights groups and activists say the latest wave of death sentences against coup opponents kills Egypt's future. The #StopEgyEx (Stop Egypt Executions) rights campaign condemns a junta court's decision Monday to confirm death sentences against nine young-men from Dakahlia (north east of Cairo) in case No. 781 of 2014 South Mansoura Supreme State Security. These sentences are unjust and the whole process lacked all fair trial standards and failed to achieve justice or apply the law. Like all previous "death penalty" cases in Egypt in recent months, the accused are allowed no defense or testimony. They are not even allowed to explain how they were tortured and how they suffered extreme and brutal abuse and unspeakable violations by their interrogators. According to accounts of the defendants' families, all those have been subjected to enforced disappearance for several days during which they suffered the most extreme forms of torture, until the interior ministry extracted 'confessions' from some of them in videos posted on the ministry's webpage, and in which they confess crimes they never committed, like killing a Dakahlia Directorate of Security sergeant. Absurdly, the court deliberately ignored all exculpatory evidence that clearly exonerates the defendants. For example, Ahmed Waleed, the main defendant in the case, could not possibly have aimed a gun at any-one due to a surgical operation he had in his head. Moreover, the victim was killed standing, as stated in the report of the forensic doctor, which is contrary to statements in the police record which claim Waleed was a passenger in a vehicle at the time. Also, the weapons that appeared in front of the defendants in video evidence later disappeared completely, with only an old sewage pipe and an ancient gun shown in court, the gun had never been used before and had no bullets in it. All these and many other absurd facts confirm the case was fabricated and the verdict unjust against those innocent young men. We urge for social pressure to revive the law and justice in Egypt, and to stop the practice of systematic killings disguised in legal procedures and death sentence. It is not acceptable that we stand by and witness as more innocent young people are executed unjustly, just as before. This blood will remain a curse on all those who abuse the legal system or ignore principles of law and justice in this country. (source: ikhwanweb.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 9 10:03:41 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 10:03:41 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., N.C., GA., FLA., ALA. Message-ID: Sept. 9 PENNSYLVANIA: End Pennsylvania's limbo over death penalty The death penalty appears on Pennsylvania's books, but you won't find it in practice. Pin the situation partly on a slow-moving Legislature. By all appearances, certain lawmakers would prefer to cling to the status quo - in which the Keystone State still claims to have a death penalty yet hasn't executed anyone in the 21st century - rather than provide clarity on the issue, much less reverse its longstanding law. It's been about 4 years since the Pennsylvania Task Force and Advisory Commission on Capital Punishment was charged with delving into death penalty-related issues and publishing its findings. First, the legislative group blew past its December 2013 deadline. Several other extensions have pushed the highly anticipated report's completion date to, last we heard, later this year, maybe next. Meanwhile, Gov. Tom Wolf in a much publicized move earlier this year declared a moratorium on the death penalty. "Pennsylvania's system is riddled with flaws, making it error prone, expensive, and anything but infallible," the governor's memorandum released in February stated. Wolf intends for the moratorium to continue until he receives the task force's report and its recommendations, if any, are "satisfactorily addressed." Until then, the governor vowed to grant a reprieve to each death row inmate whose execution date is set. That doesn't mean the prisoner will avoid the ultimate punishment; the death sentence remains intact and could be carried out once the moratorium is lifted. Philadelphia's district attorney promptly sued, claiming Gov. Wolf overstepped his authority. That case is expected to be heard later this week by the state Supreme Court. Other detractors of Wolf's decision, including Attorney General Kathleen Kane, also blasted the governor's move as unconstitutional. When the state's task force finally produces its report, the findings are likely to fall in line with other in-depth examinations of the topic: certain people who spent years on death row subsequently have been exonerated by DNA or other evidence, minorities make up a disproportionate share of the death row population and paying for an inmate's string of death-penalty appeals often comes at an exorbitant price. Of course, there are compelling reasons - chiefly, to fulfill society's desire for fitting retribution - to keep the death penalty. In fairness to people on all sides of this sensitive issue, Pennsylvania's elected officials need to end the long, long wait and produce a report on capital punishment, then publicly dissect and debate it. Only then can we hope to end the limbo over the death penalty and adopt the most sensible policies. (source: Editorial, Wilkes Barre Times-Leader) NORTH CAROLINA: N.C. legislators working to restart capital punishment The Restoring Proper Justice Act has caused controversy regarding the application of the death penalty. After 9 years without a death penalty execution, North Carolina legislators have worked to lift an effective death penalty moratorium in the state. The Restoring Proper Justice Act - which Governor Pat McCrory signed Aug. 5 - aims to restart capital punishment but has caused significant controversy. The new law enables the state to withhold the contents of its lethal-injection drugs and also removes the requirement for doctors to be present during executions. Supporters of the law say that it will allow the death penalty to function as an effective deterrent against crime. Several coalitions calling for repeal and replacement of the death penalty on behalf of death-row inmates and exonerees have protested against the law, however, saying that it raises transparency and fairness issues. "The main concern is that [the death penalty] is a permanent punishment, it's the most severe punishment," said Sarah Preston, acting executive director for the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina. "We cannot guarantee that the process is fair and equitable and there is no way to reverse the outcome." Opponents of capital punishment argue that executing prisoners condones killing as a means of solving problems. Juries' reluctance to imposing the death penalty even when executions are legal remains a primary concern as to whether or not this punishment violates federal law. Those in support of the legislation, however, believe that the current moratorium prevents justice from being carried out. Supporters also say that not using the death penalty weakens North Carolina???s criminal justice system by getting rid of a potential deterrent against criminal behavior. "Our 9-year de facto moratorium on the death penalty is a gross miscarriage of justice," said Paul Stam, speaker pro tempore of the North Carolina House of Representatives. "The Restoring Proper Justice Act solves one small part of the problem. Until the de facto moratorium is ended, innocent human lives are needlessly put at risk." Pharmaceutical companies - which supply drugs for lethal injection - have come under fire recently for not revealing the content and quantity of their drugs as well as for recently botched execution, said Tarrah Callahan, executive director of the North Carolina Coalition for Alternatives to the Death Penalty. The non-disclosure aspect of the new law might run into legal obstacles, explained James Coleman, John S. Bradway professor of the practice of law and co-director of the Wrongful Convictions Clinic. He noted that if individuals are unaware as to what the drugs are, they can???t decide whether or not the drugs are legal and humane. "Making the drugs that they use secret poses questions for the public," Coleman said. "Should the public be shielded from knowing what the state is doing in its name?" Another question raised by capital punishment opponents is whether discrimination and bias impacts sentencing. The ACLU played a pivotal role in lobbying for the 2009 Racial Justice Act - which changes death sentences to life in prison without parole if the judge recognizes that a jury selection is impacted by race. "The system is just broken and it is so arbitrarily applied, from one county to the next and there is no real consistency," Callahan explained. All of these questions have caused death penalty opponents to warn that the new law may cause significant problems in the future. Representative Graig Meyer, a death penalty opponent, argued that the law is only likely to lead to further litigation and cast a shadow on the General Assembly. "There is great risk that this bill will result in improper administration of the execution protocol, putting the State into protracted litigation over cruel and unusual punishment," he said. "There's no reason for us to even risk that." (source: Duke Chornicle) GEORGIA: Georgia inmate on death row wants new hearing over juror's racial slur An African-American man on Georgia's death row is asking the Supreme Court for a new sentencing hearing because a white juror who voted for the death penalty later referred to him with a racial slur. Kenneth Fults was sentenced to death for the 1996 killing of Cathy Bounds, who was shot 5 times in the back of her head. Fults has been trying for 10 years to get a court to consider evidence that racial bias deprived him of a fair trial. Fults' lawyers obtained a signed statement from juror Thomas Buffington in which Buffington twice used the racial slur when referring to Fults. State and federal judges have so far rejected Fults' appeal. His case is on the justices' agenda when they meet on September 28. Buffington died last year. The appeal is striking in its use of a racial slur by a juror. But claims of racial bias regularly come before the court in its consideration of death-penalty cases. The justices already have agreed to hear argument over whether prosecutors improperly excluded all 4 African-American prospective jurors from the death penalty trial of another black defendant. That argument will take place in the fall. At Fults' trial in 1997, Buffington told the judge and lawyers on both sides that he harbored no racial prejudice. Fults pleaded guilty to killing Bounds and a jury then sentenced him to death. But 8 years later, an investigator who was part of Fults' legal team spoke to Buffington about his experience on the jury. Buffington, 79 at the time of the interview, twice used the slur in describing Fults. "Once he pled guilty, I knew I would vote for the death penalty because that's what that (N-word) deserved," Buffington said, according to the signed, April 12, 2005 affidavit in the court record. Court papers offer no explanation for why 8 years elapsed between the trial and Buffington's comments to the investigator. Lindsay N. Bennett, an assistant federal public defender in Sacramento, California, who is representing Fults, said it is common in Georgia for a defendant's legal team to reach out to jurors at that stage of an appeal, but not earlier. "During the course of the interview about his jury service, he made the statements reflected in the affidavit," Bennett said. "They caught the investigator completely off guard because she had no reason to believe prior to that time that this was the case." Buffington further surprised the investigator by agreeing to sign the statement, Bennett said. Since including the sworn statement in Fults' file, however, state and federal judges have uniformly ruled against Fults. Prosecutors also have opposed Fults' efforts to get Buffington's remarks into court, although they acknowledged in their Supreme Court filing that their opposition is not meant "to imply that the use of this word is acceptable." State judges said Fults waited too long to present the statement from Buffington and did not explain why the evidence couldn't be found sooner. Federal judges in these circumstances generally defer to state courts, unless the ruling under appeal is obviously in error. A federal trial judge and three appellate judges agreed that Fults did not make a strong case for undoing the state court ruling. The Supreme Court is his last stop in the legal system, Bennett said. "At this point, he has essentially reached the end stages of his legal proceedings with no court having assessed the substantive evidence in this case," she said. (source: WSAV news) FLORIDA: State to seek death penalty in killing of father, daughter Prosecutors will seek the death penalty for Cheyanne Jessie, the 25-year-old woman accused of fatally stabbing her daughter in the throat and shooting and killing her father. Polk Sheriff's detectives said Jessie went to her father's home, Mark Weekly, at 5221 Drane Field Road on July 18 with a knife and gun. Their bodies were left on the floor until July 22 when detectives said Jessie returned to the home and scraped up their remains with a shovel and put them in plastic tote bins. State Attorney's spokesman Brian Haas declined comment about why the state decided to seek the death penalty for the Jessie case. He said prosecutors typically review facts of each case and apply factors from state statute to determine whether it is appropriate to seek the death penalty. Investigators have said that Jessie didn't like her daughter and didn't want the child to ruin her relationship with her boyfriend. Arrests documents say that after the killing, Jessie "destroyed, concealed and removed evidence related to the incident." Investigators have said on July 22, Jessie backed her Suburban up to Weekly's home and loaded the bodies in the vehicle. She then drove 200 yards to her landlord's house, who was on vacation, and stacked the totes on top of each other in a shed behind the house. Jessie reported the 2 were missing on Aug. 1 after people kept questioning her. When deputies arrived, Jessie consented to a search of a home. Deputies found a leather sofa and love seat covered in blood stains and knife slashes, dead flies on the floor, and "a strong, obvious odor of decomposing human flesh," according to the Sheriff's Office. Homicide detectives were called out to investigate the unexplained smell, which eventually led to the human remains in the shed. During the investigation, Jessie told a variety of stories about where her daughter and father were, Judd has said. Her most recent version was that she went to her father's house on July 18 and they had an argument about her daughter that led to a fight. During the fight, Judd said, Jessie claimed her father tried to attack her with a knife and her daughter was accidentally stabbed. (source: The Leldlger) ************** Jacksonville man dodges death penalty for snitch shooting; jurors opt for manslaughter conviction A Jacksonville man dodged death row after a jury declined to convict him of 1st-degree murder and instead convicted him of manslaughter. Orion Christopher Gardiner, 29, also was convicted of possession of a firearm by a felon in the March 2010 death of 21-year-old Levi Broomfield. The jury, which deliberated for 11 hours Friday and Saturday, deadlocked on whether Broomfield was guilty of the attempted murder of Broomfield's wife, Jessica Nixon, now 29. After jurors were unable to make up their minds Friday, acting Circuit Judge Charles Cofer sequestered them overnight at a hotel. The verdict occurred early Saturday afternoon, and Cofer declared a mistrial on the attempted-murder charge. Prosecutors charged Gardiner with first-degree murder for Broomfield's death and were seeking the death penalty. Someone can only be put on death row if they're convicted of 1st-degree murder, so by convicting Gardiner of a lesser charge, the death penalty is no longer an option. Gardiner still faces up to life in prison. Prosecutors have not yet decided whether to retry him on the attempted-murder charge, said Assistant State Attorney Dan Skinner. Gardiner pleaded his case of self-defense in testifying for about an hour. Defense attorney Richard Kuritz said Gardiner was scared for his life and told jurors that prosecutors hadn't proved guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Gardiner, who sold drugs at the Eureka Garden apartments, said he entered Broomfield???s home at the invitation of Nixon because she told him she wanted to buy drugs. Once in the apartment, Broomfield and Nixon both attacked him and he used his gun to protect himself, he told the court. "I sell drugs," Gardiner said. "But a cold-hearted killer I am not." Prosecutors said Broomfield had just gotten out of jail after being arrested on a marijuana possession charge, and there were rumors it was because he snitched to police. Gardiner went into Broomfield's home and killed him believing he was a snitch, said Assistant State Attorney Alan Mizrahi. While jurors appeared to doubt Broomfield planned to kill Gardiner, a requirement to convicting him of 1st-degree murder, they still decided he was culpable for the death. Manslaughter is defined as unlawfully killing someone without intending too beforehand during a provocation or during the heat of passion. Gardiner said Broomfield accused him of believing he was a snitch. He also said Broomfield got angrier at him when he tried to reason with him. He shot Broomfield in the head at close range and said he did it in self-defense while Broomfield was charging him. Prosecutors pointed out that the shooting was at such a close range that Gardiner's gun was likely pressed up against Broomfield's temple when the shot was fired. A struggle with Nixon occurred after Broomfield was shot, with Gardiner and Nixon grappling for the gun. At some point Nixon was shot in the shoulder. He said he doesn't remember that shot being fired, and he eventually regained control of the gun and hit Nixon on her head with the butt of the weapon. Gardiner was previously convicted in 2005 for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. Jurors heard about that arrest when Gardiner chose to testify in his own defense because prosecutors were allowed to introduce that arrest to rebut his claim of self-defense. (source: jacksonville.com) ALABAMA: Court denies Alabama death row inmate's appeal in 1997 slayings of 4 in Shelby County A federal appeals court has rejected Alabama death row inmate Michael Brandon Samra's appeal of his conviction in the 1997 brutal slayings of 2 adults and 2 young children at a home in Pelham. A 3-member panel of the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday affirmed a district court judge's denial of Samra's appeal on 2 issues. Attorneys for Samra, 37, who is now on death row at William E. Donaldson Correctional Facility in Jefferson County, argued his appellate lawyer was ineffective for not raising an argument on appeal that Samra was entitled to pretrial notice of the specific aggravating factor that prosecutors would rely upon in pursuing the death penalty against him at his 1998 trial. Samra also argued his trial lawyer was ineffective for failing to investigate evidence of brain dysfunction and for introducing and emphasizing evidence of Samra's membership in a Satanic gang, Forever Our Lord King Satan (or FOLKS), which Samra contends strengthened the state's case to the jury that there were aggravating factors. The appeals court rejected Samra's arguments. "Even if we disregard the gang-related evidence and argument, the state presented overwhelming evidence - including Samra's own confession - of the heinousness of this crime," the 11th Circuit opinion states. "By Samra's own admission, after he assisted in killing three people, he slit the throat of a seven-year-old girl who was pleading and struggling for her life. We find no reasonable probability that, absent evidence or discussion of Samra's gang involvement, the jury would not have found these murders to be as especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel as it found them." "As a result, Samra's claim that his trial counsel was ineffective for pursing a gang-related strategy and for failing to object to gang-related evidence must be denied," the court stated. Samra was convicted of capital murder in 1998 and was sentenced to death for his role in the killings of Randy Duke, his fianc???e, Dedra Hunt, and her 2 daughters, Chelsea Hunt and Chelisa Hunt. According to evidence at trial and Samra's statements, Randy Duke's 16-year-old son, Mark Anthony Duke, came up with the murder plot following an argument in which Randy Duke refused to allow his son to use a pickup truck, the appeals decision states. 2 other friends, David Collums and Michael Ellison, went with Samra and Mark Anthony Duke to the Duke home. Collums and Ellison waited nearby as Samra and Mark Anthony Duke went inside, according to the appeals court. Duke shot and killed his father. Samra wounded Dedra before Duke shot her to death. Duke slit six-year-old Chelisa's throat. Samra slit Chelsea's throat as Duke held her down. In 2005 the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed Mark Anthony Duke's capital murder conviction in Shelby County Circuit Court. But that court also overturned the death penalty for Duke, who was 16 at the time of the murders. The court ordered he be re-sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Mark Anthony Duke is serving his sentence at the St. Clair Correctional Facility. Collums and Ellison were released from prison within the past 2 years. (sourcec: al.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 9 10:04:56 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 10:04:56 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----MO., KAN., OKLA., NEB., COLO., USA Message-ID: Sept. 9 MISSOURI: Why Missouri is an Outlier in Execution Trends As national execution numbers drop to historic lows and a growing number of states halt executions or repeal the death penalty altogether, Missouri has recently increased the number of executions it is carrying out and overtaken Texas for the highest per-capita execution rate. Missouri and Texas have carried out all of the last 15 executions in the U.S. and 80% of executions through September 1 of this year. A report by The Marshall Project explores why Missouri is bucking national trends, highlighting the availability of execution drugs, Missouri's political climate, and the lack of adequate defense resources. While shortages of lethal injection drugs have slowed executions in many states, Missouri has managed to stockpile pentobarbitral for use in executions. Because of state secrecy laws, the source of the drug is unknown, and state officials will not confirm whether the drug is produced by a compounding pharmacy or obtained from another source, such as a veterinary supplier or overseas manufacturer. The governor and attorney general of Missouri have pushed to move executions forward, using the death penalty to establish "tough-on-crime" credentials as Democrats in a politically conservative state. Courts have also contributed to the unusual situation in Missouri. The state Supreme Court, which sets execution dates, scheduled one execution per month to make up for holds due to drug shortages. Finally, underfunding and heavy caseloads have created what defense attorneys are calling a "crisis" in capital representation. Missouri was ranked 49th of the 50 states in per-capita spending on indigent defense in 2009. In March, the American Bar Association Death Penalty Assessment Team told the Missouri Supreme Court, "The current pace of executions is preventing counsel for the condemned from performing competently." Missouri has been the subject of charges of improprieties in obtaining execution drugs, including making secret cash payments for execution drugs and violating federal law by allegedly obtaining pentobarbital from a compounding pharmacy without a valid prescription. The American Bar Association assessment completed in 2012 reported numerous failings in the state's administration of the death penalty. (source: Death Penalty Information Center) KANSAS----new death sentence Jury recommends death penalty for man who killed 3 at Jewish sites A jury recommended the death penalty Tuesday for a white supremacist who fatally shot 3 people at Jewish sites in Kansas last year, just hours after the man told jurors he didn't care what sentence was handed down. The same jury convicted 74-year-old Frazier Glenn Miller Jr. last week of capital murder for the April 2014 shootings. The judge overseeing the trial will now decide whether to follow the jury's sentencing recommendation. Johnson County District Attorney Steve Howe had urged the jury to recommend a death sentence earlier Tuesday during closing arguments in the trial's penalty phase. He showed jurors one of the shotguns used in the shootings, saying Miller - who repeatedly admitted to the killings - pointed the gun at one of the victims, 53-year-old Terri LaManno, but the weapon didn't fire. Howe then grabbed another of Miller's guns to show the jury, saying LaManno "begged for her life" before Miller shot her. "There's no doubt she was terrified. She froze. ... And his response was to brutally kill her," Howe said. "The defendant's actions are clearly the type of case the death penalty was made for." Miller also killed 69-year-old William Corporon, and Corporon's 14-year-old grandson, Reat Griffin Underwood, at the Jewish Community Center in Overland Park. He shot LaManno later that day at the nearby Village Shalom retirement center. In a rambling, hour-long closing argument earlier Tuesday, Miller touched on the media, white supremacism and his health before telling jurors he didn't care what sentence they handed down. "Frankly my dears, I don't give a damn," he said. Miller later raised his right arm in the Nazi salute, as he did after jurors convicted him. Miller, who represented himself at the trial, has said he is suffering from chronic emphysema and wanted to kill Jewish people before he died. None of the victims was Jewish. Miller was removed from the courtroom after the verdict was read. His sentencing is scheduled for Nov. 10. Miller, also known as Frazier Glenn Cross Jr., is a Vietnam War veteran who founded the Carolina Knights of the Ku Klux Klan in his native North Carolina and later the White Patriot Party. He also ran for the U.S. House in 2006 and the U.S. Senate in 2010 in Missouri, each time espousing a white-power platform. Among Miller's witnesses, was his 39-year-old son, Frazier Glenn Miller III, who testified he doesn't know where his father learned about "hating Jews and about hating other races." If the judge agrees to a death sentence, it's unclear if the punishment would be carried out. A doctor testified during the trial that Miller likely had 5 to 6 years to live, and Kansas has not executed a death row inmate in decades. State Department of Corrections spokesman Adam Pfannenstiel said earlier Tuesday that the state doesn't currently have the drugs on hand to perform a lethal injection. "It's not something we've had to concern ourselves with," he said. (source: Associated Press) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Killing despite reasonable doubt The death penalty is inhuman and barbaric and should have no place in any society. Even those who may disagree with this fundamental moral principle cannot deny that capital punishment around the world is plagued by such massive problems that leave no other conclusion but to call for its universal abolition. In the US, 155 people on death row have been exonerated of their crimes since 1976, suggesting that many more innocent people have been sentenced to die and, in some cases, been executed. Then there is the inherent racial injustice. As study after study has shown, a black person accused of killing a white person is more likely to receive the death penalty than the white killer of a black person. Race and economic status, essentially the financial means to afford adequate legal representation, seem to be key factors in the sentence received. As the adage goes, "if you don???t have the capital, you will get the punishment." In just over a week's time, the State of Oklahoma plans to execute Richard Glossip, a man who was convicted 17 years ago for allegedly hiring another man to kill his employer. Following incriminating testimony from the man who actually swung the baseball bat that killed Barry Van Treese, Glossip was sentenced to die by lethal injection in Oklahoma's death chamber. In a chilling twist, Oklahoma plans to use the same lethal injection protocol to execute Glossip that was used in the botched execution of Clayton Lockett last year. Lockett's execution went so badly wrong that the Supreme Court took up the matter in Glossip v Gross. The case failed, and Glossip moved one step closer to the gurney. Looking at the details of the case, there are plenty of reasons to believe that Glossip did not commit the crimes he was accused of. The conviction was based entirely on the killer's testimony, which changed considerably over time. There is no physical evidence linking Glossip to the crime, and also no motive. But nonetheless, this total lack of evidence has not swayed state and federal courts to reconsider Mr Glossip's execution and grant the reprieve he needs now to make his case. As in many questionable cases before, from Troy Davis in Georgia to Cameron Todd Willingham in Texas, the system is moving mercilessly towards the scheduled death date. After his appeals have been exhausted, all of Glossip's hopes now rest with Governor Mary Fallin, who has the executive power to issue a stay of his execution. Thankfully, Mr. Glossip's case has received vocal support, most notably from Susan Sarandon, Sister Helen Prejean and Dr. Phil McGraw - who have started a petition to grant him a stay of execution. I have decided to join their call for reprieve, convinced that it cannot be the will of the good people of Oklahoma to kill a man when so much reasonable doubt has been cast on his guilt. 10 death row prisoners have been exonerated in Oklahoma since 1976, 4 of them based on findings of false testimony. I hope Governor Fallin will side with those who argue that Richard Glossip has not had a fair chance to make his case. Giving him another opportunity to prove his innocence is not being weak on crime, it's being strong on justice. (source: Richard Branson, virgin.com) NEBRASKA: Workers in 93 counties sifting through death penalty petition signatures Thousands of signatures filled stacks of boxes at the state's capital last month, and now it's time to verify and count them. Busy days are ahead at the Douglas County Election Commission. Those pages of signatures arrived last week, starting a 40-day race with the clock to get them all counted. Nearly 3 months of work was put in by death penalty supporters, canvasing the state and gathering signatures to put Nebraska's death penalty on the ballot. Election commissioners in all 93 counties are counting and verifying all of the signatures. "So we enter from the petition pages the voters' information, which sometimes can be challenging, because we know people are signing those while they are standing outside a grocery store. And hand writing is always really challenging to read," Douglas County election commission public relations coordinator Valerie Stoj said. Employees put those names into a statewide system, then compare the signatures on the petition with the saved signature from past voter registration. If everything adds up, the vote is added to the total. If there's evidence of voter fraud or a duplicate signature is found, the vote is thrown out. The Douglas County Election Commission is tasked with 39,000 signatures, now causing some unexpected costs for the county. "It is a considerable undertaking," Stoj said. "We have almost all of our full-time staff working on it. We've hired a team of temporary staff to come in and help us with that project. While we'll work as hard as we can, it will probably take us nearly all of (the 40 days)." Douglas County has hired 12 temporary employees to help. KETV NewsWatch 7 was told that the final cost won't be known until the job is done. In Lancaster County, with more than 23,000 signatures, election commissioner David Shively said they haven't hired anyone, but it will likely come down to the last of the 40 days. "We anticipate we'll probably be pretty close to that, hopefully we'll be done a day or 2 early," Shively said. "We're at a little bit of a slow time in our processes here and so permanent staff are the ones that are doing this." Sarpy County will count more than 16,000 signatures. They have not hired extra help at this time. Although it's early in the process, neither Douglas nor Lancaster County is reporting large numbers of invalid signatures. 57,000 valid signatures would place the law on the ballot; 115,000 would suspend the law before the vote would even happen. Organizers of the petition drive say they collected more than 166,000 signatures. (source: KETV news) COLORADO: Death penalty conviction for Sir Mario Owens now in limbo Sir Mario Owens' fate on death row could be changing. Owens was convicted in 2008 of double murder to keep a witness from testifying against him, prosecutors said. Javad Marshall Fields was gunned down in Aurora back in June of 2005 along with his fiancee Vivian Wolfe. Fields was going to testify in another murder. Now a judge could throw out the conviction, the death sentence or both because of new information gathered after the case - and a decision could come at any time. This move is the latest of several legal challenges. Owens' attorneys said their client's case was far from fair. They are accusing prosecutors of giving the key witness a car after the trial -- yet not telling the defense team of the promise. Another informant is accused of receiving money for information -- an exchange that was never disclosed to the defense team -- and even a $500 dollar Christmas gift. "There were un-level playing fields and this is why it's such a big deal," said legal analyst David Beller. Beller said the public could be forced to spend millions of dollars on a new trial if that is what the judge decides. "It would be a message to the Colorado public that perhaps our court process is, in fact, unfair in certain circumstances," he said. This looming decision comes at a critical time in Colorado as the Governor's moratorium on the death penalty is still in place. Juries have also rejected the death penalty as punishment in the Aurora theater shooting trial and the Fero's bar murders. "The death penalty in Colorado very much relies on the idea that it's a fair process and that the court is fair to the defense," said Beller. Fields is the son of Colorado state representative Rhonda Fields. Fields feels the challenge is a desperate move, telling 7NEWS she was in court during the trial and describes it as ethical. (source: thedenverchannel.com) ************ Governor Won't Push To Abolish Colorado's Death Penalty Gov. John Hickenlooper opposes the death penalty and has put one execution on hold indefinitely. But even despite recent life sentences in 2 high profile cases, including the Aurora theater shooter case, now is not the right time to try to force changes to Colorado's capital punishment law, Hickenlooper told Colorado Matters host Ryan Warner on Tuesday. Both cases raised questions about the future of the death penalty. "I think the verdicts in those 2 cases... do say something that the conversation [about the future of the death penalty] is taking place... but the conversation hasn't come to a head yet," he said. "I think [it] has to simmer a little more before we say, 'Now's the time where we're going to have a commission and we want people to make a decision,'" he added. The governor says it's possible that Colorado's death penalty statutes won't change during his tenure in office: "I think it would be better for Colorado, obviously, if [the death penalty were abolished before I leave office], but I don't think you can put a strict timeline on these things. It might take decades more. It's hard to predict." (source: cpr.org) USA: Juror testifies in hearing regarding misconduct in Rodriguez death penalty appeal All they asked her was to spell her name aloud, and Paulette Cotney burst into tears. Unexpected as it was, the feeling might have been shared by many in that courtroom, where so many of the same people had sat 9 years before. Cotney and 11 other men and women had sweated through the 6-week trial that summer of 2006, agonizing over the dark and ugly details of Dru Sjodin's bloody kidnapping, rape and murder, agonizing still more over their verdict. "We talked about those final moments," said Cotney's fellow juror, Rebecca Brandt Vettel, from the witness stand in U.S. District Court on Tuesday. "I can't imagine the fear." After handing in their verdict, death by lethal injection for Alfonso Rodriguez Jr., it was clear neither Brandt nor Cotney had ever expected to be there again. But both were sworn in as the 1st of a week's worth of witnesses by defense attorneys for Rodriguez, who are alleging juror misconduct in the case. The specifics of what that misconduct construed of remained murky until Vettel's testimony late Tuesday, thanks to dueling sealed motions in the case. On direct examination, defense attorney Andrew Mohring established that Vettel had checked "no" instead of "yes" on juror questionnaire items that would have otherwise revealed Vettel had survived 2 abusive marriages, and been the victim of a another, unrelated, attempted assault, 1 that had gone unreported. During jury selection, Vettel had also neglected to report she'd been involved in a handful of lawsuits and had even run afoul of the law herself, having been pulled over for driving without insurance on more than one occasion, Mohring pointed out. Mohring asked if she'd done so because she'd otherwise likely have been booted out of the jury pool, something Vettel denied. "I didn't purposely withhold it," she testified. "Crime was a more severe thing to me, I guess." Vettel was also questioned closely about statements she'd made publicly, decrying the lengthy appeals process that withheld closure from both Sjodin's and Rodriguez's families. Cotney took the stand to say she'd had misgivings from the beginning about the appeals process in the case. She admitted she couldn't accept Judge Ralph Erickson's explanation in 2006 that even if they gave Rodriguez life without parole, he would never be freed on appeal years later. It was important to her that he never be released to commit another crime, Cotney testified, and the death penalty would be one way to ensure that. "I've heard of people higher up, turning over decisions in courts. People being released from jail when they shouldn't be," she said. Her testimony is set to resume today. (source: Grand Forks Herald) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 9 10:05:59 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 10:05:59 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 9 BANGLADESH: Appeal hearing on Nizami's death penalty adjourned The Supreme Court today started hearing on the appeal filed by Jamaat-e-Islami chief Motiur Rahman Nizami challenging a verdict that had sentenced him to death for his crimes against humanity during the Liberation War in 1971. A 4-member bench of the Appellate Division headed by Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha began the hearing with Attorney General Mahbubey Alam placing 8 war crime charges on which Nizami was convicted. Defence counsel Joynul Abedin Tuhin was read out the statement of prosecution witnesses before the apex court. After hearing, the court was adjourned until November 3. On October 29 last year, International Crimes Tribunal-1 (ICT-1) handed Nizami the death penalty on 4 charges of war crimes, including murdering intellectuals during the Liberation War in 1971. The 71-year-old was also awarded life imprisonment on the other four charges. Nizami on November 23 of the same year challenged the death penalty claiming himself innocent. He sought acquittal of all the 8 charges on which he was found guilty. (source: The Daily Star) INDIA: Death sentence rate highest in Delhi, J&K A person convicted of murder in Delhi or Jammu & Kashmir has the highest probability of being handed the death penalty than anywhere else in India. In J&K, the likelihood is 6.8 times higher than the national average and in Delhi the convict is 6 times more likely to be put on death row. These stark differences in sentencing, based on NCRB data, are part of a study called 'Hanging in Balance: Arbitrariness in Death Penalty Adjudication in India', which was cited by the Law Commission as "another axis of disparity in death penalty jurisprudence". Death penalty cases have economic bias, says Kalam For instance, a man convicted of murder in Jharkhand is 2.4 times more likely to get the death sentence than the national average while the possibility increases to 2.5 times in Gujarat, 3 times in West Bengal and 3.2 times in Karnataka. The differences among many neighbouring states were found to be high. A murder convict in Karnataka is 5.8 times as likely to get the death sentence compared to Tamil Nadu. A convict in Gujarat is again 5.8 times more likely to get death than one in Rajasthan. Similarly, Maharashtra sends murder convicts to death row 2.9 times more frequently than Madhya Pradesh. In absolute numbers, Uttar Pradesh sentences the most number of persons to death row. But in terms of the proportion of death sentences to murder convictions, it is almost at par with the national average. In Karnataka, which is the 2nd largest contributor to death row sentencing, the death sentence rate was 3.2 times the national average. Mixed response on abolition of death penalty in India Citing this disparity, the Law Commission headed by Justice (retired) A P Shah has recommended gradual abolition of death penalty with the exception of terror cases. To strengthen its argument on the "excessive use of death penalty", the commission cited data from Supreme Court analyzed by the Death Penalty Litigation Clinic. This 2nd study - which was reported by TOI - indicates that between 2000 and 2015, trial courts imposed the death sentence on 1,790 persons. Of these, 1,512 cases were decided by the high court. In 62.8% of these 1,512 cases, the appellate courts commuted the sentence while upholding the conviction. In another 28.9 % cases, the convicts were acquitted, pointing to an even deeper systemic problem relating to the quality of adjudication in the lower courts. In all, the death sentence was confirmed in only 4.3% of the cases. The Supreme Court's data thus shows that trial courts had erroneously imposed the death penalty in 95.7% of cases. ********** Death sought for 2010 Kurla rape-murder accused 2 days after a cable operator, Javed Sheikh, was convicted for the rape and murder of a minor from Kurla in 2010, the prosecution sought the death penalty. Special public prosecutor Pradeep Gharat on Tuesday sought the death sentence on the ground that the case fell within the rarest of rare category. "The present offence is committed in a pre-calculated, pre-planned and cold blooded manner. After choosing his prey, intimacy was developed with the target and the feeling of truth and faith was developed in the mind of the victim," Gharat said. He further said the punishment should be a deterrent and retributive to the extent of satisfaction of the society. "It should give the correct message that a person committing such offences is not spared," Gharat said. The defence did not present its arguments. The accused once again told the court that he was not guilty. "I am innocent. However since the court has held me guilty, award me the death sentence," he said. A special women's court on Saturday convicted the 24-year-old man for the 2010 rape and murder of a minor from Nehru Nagar, Kurla. Judge Vrushali Joshi found the accused guilty of all charges framed against him - murder, rape and kidnapping in order to murder. Of the 3 rape and murder cases of minors that rocked Kurla in 2010, Sheikh was accused in 1. (source for both: The Times of India) SUDAN: S Kordofan governor announces severe penalties for trade with rebel areas The governor of Sudan's South Kordofan State, Issa Adam Abakar, on Monday issued a decree banning all kinds of trade with people in rebel-held territories. The decree said the trade with the population in the rebel-controlled areas amounts to a criminal offence that may result in the death penalty or life imprisonment. According to the decision, anyone who commits the crime of doing business with armed groups - a business locally known as "Tijara Al-Sumbuk" - will be punished by death or life imprisonment with confiscation of his or her properties and means used to commit the crime. The decree explained that the confiscated assets, goods or commodities will be used by the state government. The decision also said that 40% of the confiscated goods will be allocated to the military force that carried out the seizure operation. Last month, President Bashir proposed a 2-month ceasefire with rebels fighting to overthrow his government. (source: radiotamazuj.com) PAKISTAN: Pakistan among world's top executioners after terror attack For years, Pakistan did not put prisoners to death. Then a Taliban attack butchered 150 people, most of them children, and the country resumed carrying out the death penalty and quickly turned into one of the world's most avid executioners. But instead of killing militants, the campaign is largely executing common criminals, The Associated Press has found. Only one in 10 of the 226 prisoners executed since December was convicted of a terror attack, according to human rights activists. Still, the executions continue in order to placate a public still angry over last year's Taliban assault on a military school in the city of Peshawar. The Pakistani government refuses to discuss the executions, and most on the street still support them. Some, however, are beginning to question whether the death penalty truly works as a deterrent in a country where suicide bombings remain a common militant tactic. "You cannot deter those militants who are committed to die for a cause," said analyst Hasan Askari Rizvi, a retired political science professor. Pakistan under former President Pervez Musharraf halted executions in 2008, partly due to the pressure of human rights groups. The hiatus started after another terror attack shocked the nation - the assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto amid a heated election campaign. The government blamed the Pakistani Taliban for that attack as well, though the militants never claimed responsibility for the assault and others questioned why elements of Pakistan's powerful intelligence agencies failed to prevent her killing. At the time of the pause in 2008, Human Rights Watch said some 7,000 people were on Pakistan's death row and 36 had been put to death that year. The year before, authorities executed 134 people; they put to death 85 in 2006, 52 in 2005 and 21 in 2004. Officials discussed commuting the death sentences of those remaining to life in prison, but apparently never did. After 2008, Pakistan's military executed only one soldier in 2012 after convicting him of murder. Civilian authorities largely didn't discuss resuming executions, even as the Pakistani Taliban and other insurgent groups continued their campaign of violence across the country, including suicide bombings and the 2012 shooting of future Nobel Prize laureate Malala Yousafzai. The Dec. 16 attack changed everything. In Peshawar, Taliban gunmen stormed a military-run school, killing 150 people, nearly all children attending class. Popular anger raged against the militants, many of whom have long ties to sections of Pakistani intelligence services. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif used his strongest language yet against the extremists, vowing there would be no discrimination between "good or bad Taliban" as he allowed those convicted of terror charges to be executed. He also pledged to "continue this war until even a single terrorist is not left on our soil," Days later, Pakistan carried out its first executions by hanging Mohammed Aqeel, convicted of attacking an army headquarters near Islamabad, and Arshad Mahmood, put to death for his role in a 2003 plot to kill Musharraf. Other executions followed. In all, at least 21 people have been executed in terror cases involving a plane hijacking, attacks on soldiers and other violence, according to data from the independent Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. In March, Pakistan quietly lifted its execution ban entirely and hangings surged. Over all, Pakistan has executed at least 226 people, according to the commission, though an exact number is difficult to ascertain as authorities decline to discuss the death penalty in detail. Repeated requests for comment by the AP to the Pakistani Interior and Information ministries have gone unanswered. Officials also said Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan was traveling abroad and unable to discuss the executions. However, Khan told journalists in August that the country had executed at least 211 people, including terrorists. He did not elaborate. On the street, the executions remain incredibly popular among many Pakistanis, including those who lost loved ones in the Peshawar school attack. "I think terrorists should be killed at public places the way they kill innocent people," said Ashfaq Ahmed, an Islamabad taxi driver. "If terrorists use guns to kill people, you too kill them with guns. Kill them the way they kill innocent people." Mohammad Ahsan, a university student, agrees. "Hang 200 to 300 killers every day," he said. But the rise in executions worries activists like Zohra Yusuf, the head of Human Rights Commission of Pakistan. While only murder and treason carried the death penalty when Pakistan gained its independence in 1947, now 27 offenses carry the possibility of execution, including blasphemy charges often used in personal disputes against minorities in this largely Sunni Muslim country. While no one has been put to death for blasphemy, those accused in the past have been killed by mobs. Others have raised concerns about death-row inmates being beaten into confessing to crimes they didn't commit or took part in as minors. In August, Pakistani authorities hanged Shafqat Hussain, who was convicted of killing a 7-year-old boy in 2004 when he was just 14, according to his family. "There is a popular opinion in Pakistan that death penalty should not be abolished, but increasing incidents of terrorist attacks and routine crimes indicate that executions are not a deterrence," Yusuf said. "Even after the resumption of executions, violence has continued. There have been incidents of sectarian violence and we also witnessed attacks on churches." Of the prisoners executed since December, most were convicted on murder charges. A confidential government report submitted to Pakistan's Supreme Court and seen by the AP said 7,056 prisoners were on death row in 2014, while the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan said it believes the number is more than 8,000. It's unclear how many of those on death row were convicted on terror-related charges. Either way, Pakistan was one of the world's top executioners this year, behind China, Iran and Iraq but ahead of Saudi Arabia, according to Amnesty International. The U.S. has carried out 19 in 2015 - 10 of them in Texas. Pakistan carries out its executions at several locations, but all die by hanging. A senior prison official and three other workers, all speaking on condition of anonymity as they weren't authorized to talk to journalists, told the AP that executions are carried out before sunrise. The condemned has a final meal, bathes and then has time to pray before being led to the gallows, they said. Executioners cover their face with a black hood and tie their hands and legs before hanging them, they said. One of the last prisoners executed, 71-year-old Maqbool Husain, spoke to the AP before his death Aug. 27. He said a dispute between families over property saw him lose his right leg in an attack before his own family took revenge and amputated the leg of a rival. The other family killed 2 of his brothers in 1994 and Husain waited until 1996 before killing six of them in retaliation, he said. Looking back on his life, he said: "I request all to end enmity so that no one faces hanging like me." (source: Associated Press) *********** Notice to govt on appeal against death penalty A division bench of the Lahore High Court on Tuesday issued notice to ministry of interior on an appeal against conviction of an alleged member of a banned organisation by military court on murder charges.The military court had awarded death sentence to Muhammad Sabir Shah for his involvement in abetting murder of Advocate Syed Arshad Ali in Lahore. The Chief Of Army Staff (COAS) confirmed his death sentence last week. Laila Bibi, mother of the convict, filed the appeal against the conviction. As the bench took up the appeal, Advocate Zia Ali Bajwa argued on behalf of the appellant that her son was juvenile (below age of 18 years) at the time of the incident and was not given the right to fair trial. He said neither he was allowed to meet his family members nor given a chance to engage a counsel to plead his case. The counsel said the family of the convict had come to know about the military court decision through a press release issued by ISPR. He said a habeas corpus petition challenging illegal detention of Shah was still pending before the high court. He argued that requisites of justice were not met by the military court while awarding sentence to the appellant's son. He requested the court to set aside the military court's sentence decision being an unfair. The bench comprising Justice Abdul Sami Khan and Justice James Joseph issued notice to the ministry for tomorrow (September 10). (source: The News) INDONESIA: Death penalty no longer a priority----Does the change of priorities of the Attorney General Office mean those on death row will be spared? Indonesia hasn't changed its mind on the death penalty - but it did say it's no longer a priority. Attorney General HM Prasetyo on Tuesday, September 8 said it has changed its priorities to focus more on program development, given the country's discouraging economic conditions. "We are now focused on supporting and assisting government programs on development. We cannot do all the big things at the same time. We have to decide what is our priority," Prasetyo told Rappler. Prasetyo also denied that the change of heart is due to any outside pressure. "No pressure. We are a sovereign nation. We never give any pressure to other country, so we will not let other country do the same thing. We are a big country," he said. But Prasetyo also clarified that just because it is not on top of their list right now, it does not mean the government has changed its mind on its necessity. "We are not going to change our position on that. Particularly with drug offenders, dealers and manufacturers. We are resolute," he said. He said this is especially true for those whose death sentence have already been meted out, and are only waiting for their executions. He did say however that even those are not the government's priority, although he refused to call it a delay. He said the government is merely "evaluating" the death penalty. "We are examining some details," he said. "We are focused on development right now. The AGO (Attorney General Office) will focus on that issue." Indonesia has been in the spotlight in recent months due to their death penalty, specifically their executions of foreign nationals. Australia, for instance, had mounted a sustained campaign to save its citizens, who had been on death row for almost a decade, with the prime minister repeatedly appealing for them to be spared. The appeals did not work. Amnesty International has also condemned the executions as "utterly reprehensible" in a statement from research director for Southeast Asia and the Pacific, Rupert Abbott. The Penal Code of Indonesia states that death-sentenced inmates are to be executed by firing squad, out of public view. The inmate is informed of his or her execution only 72 hours in advance. The inmate can stand or sit, and have his or her eyes covered by a blindfold or a hood. In April however, Indonesia, in a rare move, did spare the execution of Filipino Mary Jane Veloso who is accused of drug trafficking, because of a last-minute plea from Philippine President Benigno Aquino III and the surrender of the recruiter of Mary Jane on the day of scheduled execution. The recruiter is under investigation in the Philippines. (source: rappler.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 9 15:45:10 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 15:45:10 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----FLA., ARK., OHIO, USA Message-ID: Sept. 9 FLORIDA: State to seek death penalty for woman accused of killing her father, 6-year-old daughter Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty against a 25-year-old woman accused of killing her father and 6-year-old daughter. Polk County Sheriff's detectives say Cheyanne Jessie stabbed the child and shot her father, Mark Weekly, on July 18. Arrest reports say she left their bodies in the house until July 22, when she put their remains in plastic tote bins and stored them in her landlord's shed. He was on vacation at the time. The Ledger of Lakeland (http://bit.ly/1Mbd2VJ ) reports that Jessie told the sheriff's department on Aug. 1 that her father and child were missing. Officials arrested Jessie after finding blood stains and knife slashes on the sofa and loveseat. Deputies say she told various stories about what happened to her father and daughter. It's not known whether she has a lawyer to contact for comment on the case. (source: Associated Press) ARKANSAS----8 new executions dates set----(4 double executions set) Hutchinson sets 8 execution dates after 10-year gap Execution dates: -- Oct. 21 - Bruce Earl Ward, convicted of the Aug. 11, 1989, murder of Rebecca Doss of Little Rock; and Don William Davis, convicted of the Oct. 12, 1990, murder of Jane Daniel of Rogers; -- Nov. 3 - Terrick Terrell Nooner, convicted of the March 16, 1993, murder of Scot Stobaugh of Little Rock; and Stacey Eugene Johnson, convicted in the April 1, 1993, murder of Carol Heath of DeQueen; -- Dec. 14 - Marcel Wayne Williams, convicted of the Nov. 20, 1994, murder of Stacy Errickson of Jacksonville; and Jack Harold Jones Jr., convicted of the June 6, 1995, murder of Mary Phillips of Searcy; - Jan. 14, 2016 - Jason McGehee, convicted of the Aug. 19, 1996, murder of John Melbourne Jr. of Harrison; and Kenneth Williams, convicted of the Oct. 3, 1999, murder of Cecil Boren of Grady Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson says the state will resume executions after a 10-year gap starting next month with a double execution. The Republican announced execution dates on Wednesday for 8 death-row inmates. Arkansas hasn't executed an inmate since 2005, largely because of court challenges to its lethal injection law and a shortage of execution drugs. But last week, Attorney General Leslie Rutledge sent letters to the governor requesting that execution dates be set. Rutledge said the inmates' appeals had been exhausted, and the state Department of Correction says it has enough doses of its lethal-injection drugs to perform the executions. Still, a pending lawsuit is challenging a new state law that allows the department not to disclose how it obtains its execution drugs. (source: arkansasonline.com) OHIO: Motions heard today in Robert Seman death penalty case Judge Maureen Sweeney heard arguments today on routine motions in the death penalty case of Robert Seman. Seman, 46, of Calla Road in Green, faces the death penalty if convicted of the deaths of Corinne Gump, 10, and her grandparents, William and Judith Schmidt, following a fire at their Powers away home in March, the day Seman was to go on trial for raping the girl. The judge said she will rule on the motions at a late date, some of them today. (source: vindy.com) USA: US files formal notice to seek death penalty in Fell retrial Federal prosecutors have formally filed notice that they will again seek the death penalty against a Vermont man facing a retrial in the 2000 killing of a woman who was abducted when she arrived for work at a Rutland supermarket and later killed. In an amended notice of intent to seek the death penalty against Donald Fell filed Tuesday in federal court, prosecutors say that Terry King of North Clarendon was killed during a kidnapping. Fell was convicted of killing King in 2005 and sentenced to death, but his conviction was overturned. He is now facing a retrial in September 2016. A hearing in Fell's case is scheduled for Friday in federal court in Burlington. (source: Associated Press) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 10 08:23:17 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 08:23:17 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----CONN., PENN., VA., OHIO, ARK., MO. Message-ID: Sept. 10 CONNECTICUT: Chief State's Attorney Asks Conn. Supreme Court to Reconsider Death Penalty Ruling The state's top prosecutor wants the Connecticut Supreme Court to reconsider its recent landmark decision to completely eliminate the death penalty in the state. Chief State's Attorney Kevin Kane and his office have filed a motion for argument and motions to strike the 4-3 decision in State v. Santiago. "The majority opinion, along with the concurring opinion of two justices, addresses issues, undertakes analysis and relies on materials that were never raised or presented by the defendant, and never subjected to any adversarial inquiry," Kane's motion for argument states. The legislature in 2012 repealed the death penalty for future murder cases, but kept it for those already on death row. In August, the Supreme Court found the retroactive application of the death penalty unconstitutional, meaning the 11 men on death row no longer faced execution. Kane's office, which heads the Division of Criminal Justice, notes in its motion that it recognizes the complex legal and policy issues the Supreme Court confronted, and the legitimate opinions on both sides of the debate. "But the process the majority followed in reaching its conclusion deprived the division of the opportunity to address the concerns that drove the results, and led the majority, unaided by the time-tested adversarial process, to inaccurate assumptions and errors of law," Kane wrote. He said the majority of justices unfairly denied the division the right to be heard. "There is much to debate in the majority opinion," the motion said. "And it is clear that the court itself engaged in that debate. However, the Division of Criminal Justice, which represents the people of Connecticut, also deserves an opportunity to engage in that debate through supplemental briefing and argument." The motion asserts that argument is warranted "for the simple reason that the majority has been unfair to the state." "It also is necessary because, without the state's input, the majority made several legal and logical errors and misinterpreted the constitutional history it decided to explore," the motion claimed. Kane claims the majority misunderstood the state's constitutional history regarding the court's role in protecting against cruel and unusual punishment. The court has previously stated it could not abolish the death penalty because it is "an inherently legislative determination," the motion said. Kane's motion also alleges the majority disregarded assurances that many state lawmakers relied on when they voted to eliminate the death penalty for future cases. When the death penalty abolition bill was debated, a number of legislators said they would not approve it if it meant sparing the lives of the two men found guilty of the 2007 Cheshire home invasion murders. "The majority failed to accord the proper respect for the legislature's express intent, and instead disregarded its prior assurance that the Court does not consider prospective repeal to be a rejection of capital punishment," the motion said. "Legislators justifiably could and should conclude that they were deceived." Debating Delays Chief Justice Chase Rogers used much the same language in her dissent in Santiago. "In making this determination" to spare the lives of those on death row, Rogers wrote, "the majority disregards the obvious: the legislature, which represents the people of the state and is the best indicator of contemporary societal mores, expressly retained the death penalty for crimes committed before the effective date" of the prospective repeal. The Division of Criminal Justice also wants a chance to present an argument on the issue of whether the delay in executions renders the death penalty unconstitutional. The division wrote in its motion that this view "turns on its head the accepted proposition that a robust appellate procedure is vital to shield inmates from improper death sentences." Connecticut has executed just one inmate since 1960, serial killer Michael Ross, who decided to end further appeals and was put to death in 2005. On the issue of the possibility of executing the innocent, Kane wrote, "Of the 11 men presently on Connecticut's death row, not a single one of them is anything but guilty." Kane also asserted there is no evidence to support the claim that the system is permeated by racial bias. Kane submitted motions to strike portions of the majority and concurring opinions that dealt with racial bias as justification for invalidating Connecticut's death penalty. Kane asserted the issue of racial bias wasn't before this panel in Santiago, and instead is properly pending before the court in another case, In re: Claims of Racial Disparity in Death Penalty Cases. "There is no factual record in this [Santiago] case from which the majority can determine if the present residents of death row were sentenced under a process that is racially biased," Kane wrote. Assistant Public Defender Mark Rademacher said on Sept. 9 his office is drafting and preparing to submit a response to the Division of Criminal Justice's motion for argument. Rademacher asserted the issues mentioned in the motion have all been considered by the court's justices. "There is no point to rehashing what they decided," Rademacher said. "The state has nothing new to say. It is a half-hearted attempt to change the vote. This motion doesn't offer any new reasons that would get the court to reconsider its decision. To get a chance for a new argument, you have to offer a new reason that would change the court's mind." Rademacher said he doesn't plan to respond to the division's motions to strike. "It is inappropriate to tell the justices they shouldn't discuss race," Rademacher said. The attorneys said they expect the court to decide later this month whether it will reconsider the death penalty ruling. (source: Connecticut Law Tribune) PENNSYLVANIA: Pennsylvania Supreme Court takes up the death penalty moratorium case this week A legal battle over Governor Tom Wolf's 7-month-old death penalty moratorium lands in Pennsylvania's state's Supreme Court Thursday. The court's ruling could disrupt Wolf's plans to continue issuing reprieves to death row inmates -- at least until a task force finishes studying capital punishment in Pennsylvania. The governor's 1st reprieve came in February for inmate Terrance Williams, sentenced to death for killing a man in 1984. The Philadelphia District Attorney's office said reprieves can't be open-ended rulings absent any consideration of the inmate, but the governor said his actions are supported by the constitution and history. Bruce Ledewitz, a professor at Duquesne University School of Law, has said case law requires a reprieve to be for a definite time and purpose. "The question is whether the reprieve has something to do with the particular prisoner who gets the reprieve," he said. The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Philadelphia. (source: newsworks.org) *************** State's high court to weigh Wolf's death-penalty moratorium The constitutionality of Gov. Tom Wolf's death-penalty moratorium is the focus of a hearing before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams challenged the moratorium only days after Wolf announced it in February. Lawyers will make oral arguments Thursday in Philadelphia. Wolf has granted reprieves for three death-row prisoners as part of an effort to block executions until a legislative panel completes a study of capital punishment. His lawyers argue that the state constitution gives the governor unconditional power to grant reprieves. Williams contends that the moratorium is unconstitutional and amounts to the improper use of a reprieve to achieve the indefinite suspension of a death sentence. The case involves Terrance Williams, whose scheduled execution in March for a 1984 killing was canceled by Wolf's 1st reprieve. (source: Associated Press) VIRGINIA----impendingn execution//foreign national Virginia Gives Alfredo Prieto Execution Date of October 1, 2015 Alfredo Rolando Prieto is scheduled to be executed at 9 pm EDT, on Thursday, October 1, 2015, at the Greenville Correctional Center in Jarratt, Virginia. 49-year-old Alfredo has been sentenced to death for the rape and murder of 22-year-old Rachel A. Raver and the murder of 22-year-old Warren H. Fulton, III, last seen alive on December 4, 1988. Their bodies were discovered 2 days later in Fairfax, Virginia. Alfredo has spent the last 7 years on Virginia's death row. Alfredo was born and spent part of his childhood in El Salvador, which was in the midst of a civil war. By the time Alfredo was a teenager, he and his family were living in California, where Alfredo became a member of the Pomona Northside gang. On December 4, 1988, 2 Georgetown University students, Rachel Raver and Warren Fulton were seen leaving a local restaurant in Washington, DC. 2 days later, their bodies were discovered in a deserted area near Reston, Virginia. Investigators determined that Warren had been shot in the back of head and Rachel was shot while trying to escape. As she lay bleeding to death, Prieto raped her. Prieto escaped to California. In 1990, 15-year-old Yvette Woodruff was raped and murdered in Ontario, California. Prieto was charged and convicted with her murder, receiving a death sentence in 1992. While in prison in California, Prieto's DNA was entered into a national database and, in 2005, matched a cold case in Virginia: the rape and murder of Rachel and the murder of Warren. Prieto was extradited to Virginia to stand trial, where he was given 2 death sentences, along with various prison terms for charges related to the murders. Through DNA evidence, Prieto has also been linked to the rape and murder of 24-year-old Veronica "Tina" Jefferson in Arlington, Virginia in May of 1988; the murder of 27-year-old Manuel F. Sermeno in Prince William County, Virginia in September of 1989; the rape and murder of 19-year-old Stacey Siegrist and the murder of 21-year-old Tony Gianuzzi in Riverside County, California in the spring of 1990; and the murder of 71-year-old Lula Farley and 65-year-old Herbert Farley, which also occurred in the spring of 1990, in Riverside County, California. Ballistic evidence also linked several of the crime. Attorneys for Prieto attempted to argue that he was mentally retarded and ineligible for the death penalty. They blamed Prieto???s upbringing war-torn El Salvador for his retardation. Neither the courts nor juries have found the claims to have merit. Please pray for peace and healing for the families of Rachel Raver, Warren Fulton, Tina Jefferson, Manuel Sermeno, Stacey Siegrist, Tony Gianuzzi, and Herbert and Lula Farley. Please pray for strength for the family of Alfredo Prieto. Please pray that Alfredo may come to find peace through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, if he has not already found one. (source: theforgivenessfoundation.org.) OHIO: Judge rejects death row inmate's request for new trial A judge overruled the request for a new trial by a man sent to Ohio's death row for his role in the 2002 execution-style killings of 2 girls in an Eureka Street apartment. Judge David Cheney ruled against Jeronique Cunningham's request for a new trial based on allegations of juror misconduct. Cunningham, now 42, accused the forewoman of his jury of bias saying she had prior knowledge of him or the victim's family, which she used to influence the decision of other jurors. Allen County Prosecutor Juergen Waldick was happy with the decision but said it's just part of "the appellate process that seems to never end in death penalty cases." The case goes back to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals which sent it back to state court to consider the matter. That court now will consider a further appeal, Waldick said. Cunningham and his half-brother, Cleveland Jackson, were convicted in the killings of Jala Grant, 3, and Leneshia Williams, 17, and the wounding of 6 others in the Eureka Street apartment. 6 of the 8 victims were shot in the head. Both men were sentenced to death. The motive for the crime was to achieve drugs and money. A prosecutor argued Cunningham's motion was filed more than a decade late but regardless she said there was no juror misconduct and even if there had been, 5 witnesses at trial pointed to Cunningham as the man who carried out the executions. Cunningham's attorney, Michael Benza, said he was not given the chance to question the forewoman. He said she was an investigator at Allen County Children Services and had knowledge of Cunningham or the victims that influenced her, and prevented Cunningham from getting a fair trial. But Assistant Allen County Prosecutor Jana Emerick said that was not the case. She said the forewoman was questioned extensively during jury selection about her employment and whether she had any knowledge of the case or parties involved that would prevent her from being a fair and impartial juror. She said she did not, Emerick said. When the juror had been questioned, she said she was not influenced ahead of the trial and anything she learned about Cunningham came after the trial when she reviewed agency records, Emerick said. But Benza said another juror stated in a deposition said the forewoman said she had to work in the community and see the families of the victims after the trial, and used that to influence the opinion of at least 1 other juror. Emerick said the statement was taken out of context. Jackson has exhausted his appeals. His final chance at avoiding execution is through clemency, which a hearing has not been scheduled. Jackson has a July 20, execution date set. (source: limaohio.com) ARKANSAS: Arkansas set to resume executions after 10-year hiatus The US state of Arkansas is set to resume executing death row inmates after a 10-year hiatus brought on by legal concerns and drug shortages. Governor Asa Hutchinson on Wednesday set the execution dates for 8 men. On 21 October, 2 inmates are scheduled to die by the state's lethal 3-drug cocktail, which includes the controversial drug midazolam. Executions in the US have been delayed recently amid problems buying drugs as many firms have refused to sell them. 27 people have been executed in Arkansas since 1976 when the US Supreme Court reintroduced the death penalty. The dates were set following the request last week of Attorney General Leslie Rutledge. She sent letters to the governor telling him that the condemned inmates had run out of appeals options and that state officials had acquired enough of the needed drugs to carry out the punishments. The state still faces 1 lawsuit that challenges a new law that allows the state to conceal how it obtains the lethal drugs needed to perform the execution procedure. However, the US Supreme Court and other federal courts have rejected similar challenges in other states. Lawyer Jeff Rosenzweig represents the e8 condemned inmates as well as a 9th individual whose case is still in the appeals process. Mr Rosenzweig has said that he plans to file for the executions to be delayed. On 1 July, the state's Department of Correction said it had enough of the lethal drugs it needed to perform the executions. Its stockpiles include a sufficient supply of midazolam, which has been criticized since executions last year in Arizona, Ohio and Oklahoma did not go as planned. In June, the US Supreme court approved the drug for continued use when it rejected a challenge from 3 Oklahoma death-row inmates. (source: BBC news) MISSOURI----new execution date Execution set for man convicted in 1994 Columbia triple slaying The Missouri Supreme Court has scheduled a November execution for an inmate convicted of killing 3 workers at a Columbia convenience store more than 2 decades ago. The state's high court issued the execution order Tuesday for 55-year-old Ernest Lee Johnson, scheduling his death by injection for Nov. 3. Johnson was convicted of bludgeoning 46-year-old Mary Bratcher, 57-year-old Mable Scruggs and 58-year-old Fred Jones with a hammer at a Casey's General Store where they worked in Boone County. The killings took place in February 1994. This execution order marks the beginning of the end of the decades-long legal process. Johnson was sentenced to death for the 1st time in 1995 on all 3 murder charges. The Missouri Supreme Court granted a retrial after an initial appeal from Johnson's defense team. His death sentences were re-imposed in 2003, but a 2nd appeal and subsequent retrial put them on hold again. Johnson's legal defenders argued in their appeals that Johnson was mentally disabled, a factor that defense team members said was not adequately presented in court in the initial trial. In the appeals, they said his mental state should have precluded him from the death penalty, according to previous Missourian reporting. The Missouri Supreme Court based the decisions to grant retrials on the defense team's arguments, as well as a 2001 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in which justices decided executing mentally disabled people was cruel and unusual punishment. In 2008, the Missouri Supreme Court returned Johnson to death row despite a third appeal, according to previous Missourian reporting. 6 murder convicts have been executed in Missouri this year. Missouri tied Texas for the state with the highest number of executions in 2014 with 10 lethal injections, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. (source: Associated Press) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 10 08:24:07 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 08:24:07 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----KAN., CALIF., USA Message-ID: Sept. 10 KANSAS: A look at the costs associated with death row in Kansas Tax dollars add up quickly in death penalty cases and typically state and local governments bear the burden of costs. The Now KC talked with a local criminal defense lawyer, Paul Cramm to learn more about what factors into the cost behind death row. Death Row Life Sentence Trial Defense $395,762 $98,963 Court Costs $72,530 $21,554 Guilty Plea $130,595 $64,711 Incarceration $130,595 $64,711 Appeals: 20x more hours are spent on death row than non-death row appeals. *Figures from the Kansas Judicial Council Death Penalty Advisory Committee (Feb. 2014). In Kansas, housing prisoners on death row costs more than twice as much per year ($49,380) as it does for prisoners in general population ($24,690). (source: KSHB news) SOUTH DAKOTA: Former police chief indicted on 1st-degree murder charge A grand jury in southern South Dakota has indicted a 63-year-old man who has served as a police chief on a 1st-degree murder charge. Attorney General Marty Jackley's office said Wednesday that if Russell Ray Bertram of Sioux Falls is convicted, he faces the death penalty or a mandatory life sentence. Authorities say Bertram in 2009 killed Leonila Stickney, who was his 26-year-old fiance. At the time, the Gregory County Sheriff's office said authorities believed Stickney's death was the result of an accidental shooting. Officials said then that Stickney's friend was getting back into a vehicle after shooting a pheasant when he accidentally fired, striking her in the chest. Bertram has served as police chief of Harrisburg and as a police officer. Court records don't list an attorney for Bertram. (source: Associated Press) CALIFORNIA: Constitutionality of death penalty in California I am saddened the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is considering overturning a federal ruling on the constitutionality of the death penalty in California. The death penalty simply does not work in our state. It is administered infrequently and, at times, it has also been administered arbitrarily. Both of these factors together create a situation where today the death penalty is a cruel and quite unusual form of punishment. If we look closely at the history and economic background of the death penalty in California, we find that only a small number of inmates have been put to death since 1978. In fact, one has been put to death in the last 9 years. However, we currently have over 740 inmates on death row and, on average, each death row inmate costs the state $90,000 per year. The 740 inmates taken as a whole cost $67,500,000 per year, and total systemic costs related to maintaining the death penalty run to nearly $184,000,000 per year. On the other hand, the cost of administering a penal system that has life without parole as its severest punishment is only a tenth of the cost of the current death penalty system. And it is not cruel and unusual in the sense outlined above. The death penalty is cruel and unusual to all members of society, not simply those on death row. We all bear some of its weight, both economically and morally, and it is time we laid such a burdensome penalty down. Peter Loetterle, Arcata (source: Letter to the Editor, Times-Standard) USA: APA Bars Psychologists from Participating in National Security Interrogations; 'It is time to do the same for psychologists' involvement in death ... Earlier this month, the American Psychological Association (APA) voted almost unanimously to adopt a policy banning psychologists from participating in national security interrogations, including noncoercive investigations now conducted by the Obama administration. "The vote followed an emotional debate in which several members said the ban was needed to restore the organization's reputation after a scathing independent investigation ordered by the association's board," The New York Times has reported. Psychologists are now barred from working at "Guantanamo, CIA black sites and other settings deemed illegal under the Geneva Conventions or the U.N. Convention Against Torture, unless they are working directly for the persons being detained or for an independent third party working to protect human rights," according to a report by Democracy Now. The final vote - which was 157-1, with 6 abstentions and 1 recusal - resulted in a standing ovation from APA members, as well as many in attendance, including anti-torture activists, some of whom wore T-shirts reading "First, Do No Harm," a reference to the Hippocratic oath. Fordham University Center for Ethics Education Director Dr. Celia B. Fisher, who has previously addressed human rights issues with psychologists' involvement in death penalty assessments, weighs in on the APA's new policy: "The most recent APA ban on psychologists' involvement in national security interrogations makes clear that psychologists' ethical duties supersede their legal obligations when their activities contribute in any way to a violation of human rights," Dr. Fisher explained. In addition, Dr. Fisher, who chaired the 2002 revision of the APA's Ethics Code and is author of Decoding the Ethics Code: A Practical Guide for Psychologists, now in its 3rd edition, has called for the end of psychologists' involvement in death penalty evaluations. "This [new APA policy] brings the field's moral compass in line with the UN Convention Against Torture and Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is time to do the same for psychologists' involvement in death penalty cases, an inequitable legal process that lethally violates the human rights of defendants in capital cases," Dr. Fisher stated. In May 2013, Dr. Fisher addressed these ethical issues in a blog post entitled, "Are Psychologists Violating their Ethics Code by Conducting Death Penalty Evaluations for Defendants with Mental Disabilities?" In this post, Dr. Fisher writes: Some have argued that psychological assessment is neutral and does not determine whether a judge or jury will sentence a prisoner like to death. However, given the current flaws, psychologists' contribution to legal decisions concerning competency and predictions of future violence hearings places the defendant at the mercy of an imperfect and unjust system. Even as Americans continue to disagree on whether the death penalty in itself violates human rights, the unwarranted and inequitable killing of innocent persons by their government is a flagrant violation of the basic rights of individuals to life and liberty. It is time for psychologists to consider whether the APA Ethics Code prohibition against activities that justify or defend violating human rights applies to forensic psychologists conducting evaluations that contribute to an inequitable correctional system whose inconsistencies lethally violates the human rights of innocent persons. For more information on the ethics of psychologists' involvement in death penalty evaluations - particularly for defendants with mental disabilities - read Dr. Fisher's blog post in its entirely, or her 2013 article in Ethics & Behavior entitled "Human Rights and Psychologists' Involvement in Assessments Related to Death Penalty Cases." APA Bars Psychologists from Participating in National Security Interrogations; 'It is time to do the same for psychologists' involvement in death ... was originally published @ Ethics and Society and has been syndicated with permission. (source: socialjusticesolutions.org) ****************** U.S. Terrorist Attacks Fast Facts Here's a list of terror attacks on U.S. soil since 1980 with casualties: 1978-1995 - 3 people die and 23 others are wounded after a string of mail bombings carried out by Ted Kaczynski. "The Unabomber," as he is also known, is serving 8 life sentences for murder. He was not charged with terrorism, but the string of bombings is considered to be a terror case. February 26, 1993 - A bomb explodes on the 2nd subterranean level of Vista Hotel's public parking garage, below the 2 World Trade Center building. 6 people are killed, and more than 1,000 people are treated for injuries. 6 suspects are convicted of participating in the bombing. The 7th suspect, Abdul Rahman Yasin, is still at large. April 19, 1995 - A bomb rips through the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, killing 168 people and injuring almost 700. Timothy McVeigh is convicted on federal murder charges and executed in 2001. July 27, 1996 - A bomb explodes in Centennial Olympic Park in Atlanta during the middle of a concert during the Summer Olympics. 1 person is killed, another dies from a heart attack, and 111 others are injured. Bombing suspect Eric Robert Rudolph is arrested in North Carolina in 2003, after being indicted in 2000 for the Atlanta bombing and for other bombings, including 1 at an abortion clinic where 1 person died. Rudolph is serving 4 consecutive sentences of life in prison plus 120 years for the attacks. September 11, 2001 - 19 al Qaeda members hijack 4 U.S. passenger airliners. 2 are flown into the Twin Towers in New York, 1 crashes into the Pentagon and another crashes into the Pennsylvania countryside after passengers attempt to wrest control of the aircraft to prevent an attack on the U.S. Capitol. 2,753 people are killed at the World Trade Center site; 184 at the Pentagon; and 40 in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. A total of 2,977 people are killed. November 5, 2009 - Major Nidal Hassan goes on a shooting rampage at a military processing center at Fort Hood, Texas, killing 13 and wounding 32. Hassan is convicted of 13 counts of murders and 32 counts of attempted murder. He has been given the death penalty. Hassan was not charged with terrorism, but the rampage is considered by many to be a terror incident. April 15, 2013 - Twin bomb blasts explode near the finish line of the Boston Marathon, killing three and wounding at least 264. Suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has been charged by the U.S. government with 1 count of using and conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction resulting in death and one count of malicious destruction of property by means of an explosive device resulting in death. He is given the death penalty on June 25, 2015. (source: GantDaily.com) ************** Judge in Boston's next death penalty case won't step down A lobster roll and a film panel on Martha's Vineyard isn't enough to force a federal judge off the bench in Boston's next death penalty trial, that judge ruled today. Prosecutors in the federal death penalty case against admitted carjacker and killer Gary Lee Sampson asked for Judge Mark L. Wolf to recuse himself in July. Sampson, who admitted to killing 3 people in Massachusetts and New Hampshire in 2001, was scheduled to be retried starting next week. At question is a panel discussion Wolf moderated on Martha's Vineyard in July 2014. The topic was a film, called The Life and Mind of Mark DeFriest, about a prisoner who may have a mental illness exacerbated by his solitary confinement. Sampson was never mentioned in the film or during the discussion. James Gilligan, a prison trauma expert, was on the panel at the request of the filmmaker. Wolf hosted Gilligan and the filmmaker for supper at his rented vacation house, he wrote in the 114-page decision released Tuesday. A year later, Sampson's defense attorneys said they planned to call Gilligan as an expert witness. Wolf also learned that Gilligan had submitted an affidavit contained in a 1,100-page petition for a new trial for Sampson back in 2009. None of that rises to the level "in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned" as required by law, the judge wrote. Sampson admitted to killing Phillip McCloskey, Jonathan Rizzo and Robert Whitney over several days in 2001, and was sentenced to death by a jury in 2003. But Wolf in 2011 threw out the sentence after it was discovered 1 of the jurors lied under oath. Sampson's attorneys plan to argue, among other mitigating factors, that Sampson suffers from a mental illness and brain damage, and that he was assaulted in prison. The penalty phase of Sampson's trial had been scheduled to begin on Sept. 16. Prosecutors will have until Oct. 13 to decide whether to appeal. (source: boston.com) ******************* Legal system churns as Dru Sjodin's killer appeals death sentence 9 years after Alfonso Rodriguez Jr. received a death sentence for abducting and murdering 22-year-old college student Dru Sjodin, his lawyers are still working to keep him alive. Their latest efforts came Wednesday in a Fargo, N.D., courtroom. While the hearing was closed to the public, Rodriguez's attorneys in hearings earlier in the week raised allegations of juror misconduct tied to the 2006 trial. Based on public testimony this week it appears the defense is trying to raise questions about information that was not part of the trial that may have influenced the jury's death penalty verdict. Federal rules limit what questions jurors can be asked about the jury deliberations. 2 exceptions are probably at play in this week's questioning of jurors: Was extraneous, prejudicial information improperly brought to the jury's attention? Was an outside influence improperly brought to bear on any juror? Defense attorneys and prosecutors will file briefs on the information presented at Wednesday's hearing and the judge will rule, probably early next year, on whether this issue can be part of Rodriguez's long appeals process. Sjodin's abduction from a Grand Forks, N.D., mall parking lot gripped the region in 2003. An extensive search followed her disapperance. Her body was found the following spring near Crookston, Minn., where Rodriguez lived. He was initially charged in state court in North Dakota, but the case was transferred to federal court. Rodriguez was a convicted level 3 sex offender in Minnesota who'd recently been released when he abducted Sjodin, who was from Pequot Lakes, Minn. He was convicted of murder in 2006. The case prompted wide discussion and some change in Minnesota sex offender laws about when sex offenders should be released. In a 2nd phase of the trial the jury was asked to decide if he should be sentenced to life in prison or death by lethal injection. The jury chose the death sentence. The next stop for Rodriguez is expected in mid-January, when an evidentiary hearing takes up testimony related to his mental capacity. It's not clear what issues will be raised. But in a 2011 appeal, the defense argued Rodriguez is "mentally retarded," using a phrase that is no longer widely used. The defense claimed, in effect, that Rodriguez suffers from an intellectual disability now and did at the time of the crime, that his execution would violate the 8th amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. (source: mprnews.org) ******************* Seventh Circuit grants immunity to bite mark 'experts' who put innocent man in prison for 23 years Last month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit granted qualified immunity to Lowell Thomas Johnson and Raymond Rawson, the 2 bite mark specialists whose testimony helped convict Robert Lee Stinson of raping and murdering an elderly Wisconsin woman in 1984. Stinson spent 23 years in prison before DNA testing exonerated him in 2009. Further testing implicated a man named Moses Price, who then confessed to the crime. The only real evidence against Stinson was the testimony of Johnson and Rawson, who claimed they could match bite marks on the victim's body to Stinson, to the exclusion of everyone else. Johnson claimed that the marks on the woman "had to have been made by teeth identical in all of these characteristics" to Stinson's. Rawson claimed the marks matched Stinson's teeth "to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty." Stinson claims to have been severely beaten when he was arrested. Before trial, Stinson's attorneys consulted with their own bite mark analyst. That analyst too claimed that the marks were a match to Stinson. So Stinson's attorneys never called a witness to contradict Johnson and Rawson. They did attempt to draw attention to a line in a forensics journal about how some experts disagreed with the conclusions of bite mark analysts. The trial judge refused to let them. Stinson was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. I wrote a bit about Stinson's case in my series on bite mark evidence that ran in February. The particularly remarkable thing about Stinson's case is that in his appeal, he challenged the validity of bite mark analysis, claiming that there's no scientific research to support its claims. In 1986, the Wisconsin Supreme Court conceded in a footnote that without the bite mark evidence, the state's case against Stinson "may not have been sufficient to convict him." But the court not only rejected Stinson???s appeal; the justices also spent a dozen paragraphs meticulously explaining why bite mark evidence is sound. In 1 footnote, the justices pointed out that at the time of the decision, "bite mark comparison has received evidentiary acceptance in 19 jurisdictions. No jurisdiction has rejected the admission of such evidence." This is true. But as I pointed out in my series this year, this is almost entirely due what you might call a judicial echo chamber that began with the 1975 case Marx v. California. In that case, a California appeals court admitted testimony from bite mark analysts who had done their analysis six weeks after the murder victim had been autopsied, embalmed and buried. Even so, the court did not perform an analysis of the scientific validity of the evidence. Indeed, it conceded that there was no scientific evidence to analyze. Instead, the California court simply stated that the trial judge had eyeballed the evidence and found it persuasive. To overrule the trial judge, the court concluded, "would be to abandon common sense." As one critic of forensic analysis put it, Marx became a "global warrant" for bite mark evidence across the country. In the end, the Wisconsin Supreme Court concluded "that the evidence presented was sufficient to convince the jury, to a moral certainty, that there was no reasonable hypothesis of Stinson's innocence." The opinion was unanimous. The Stinson case itself then became a case that prosecutors would cite in seeking to have bite mark evidence admitted and that appeals courts would cite in upholding its validity. Of course, Stinson was innocent, although that wasn't discovered until he'd lost 23 years of his life. In its decision last month, the unanimous Seventh Circuit panel found that unless Stinson can show that Rawson and Johnson knowingly fabricated evidence, the 2 dentists are protected by qualified immunity and can't be sued. It isn't enough that their expert testimony was self-evidently bogus; Stinson would have to prove that they didn't believe their own nonsense. And barring some smoking-gun audio recording of the experts admitting as much, that's next to impossible. From the opinion: Arriving at an unreasonable expert opinion may suggest negligence, perhaps even gross negligence, but it does not amount to the intentional fabrication of evidence. A mistake in forensic analysis - even an egregious mistake - is grievous given the stakes in this context, but an expert who renders a mistaken opinion is protected by qualified immunity. Fabricated opinion evidence, for which the expert might not have qualified immunity, must be both wrong and known to be wrong by the expert. Stinson places special emphasis on the discrepancy between Dr. Johnson's early hypothesis - that the murderer was missing the right lateral incisor - and his ultimate opinion that Stinson's dentition matched the bite marks on Cychosz's body. (Recall that Stinson was missing his right central incisor, the tooth just next to the right lateral incisor.) This discrepancy suggests that forensic odontology is not very precise (raising legitimate questions about its reliability), but it's not evidence that Dr. Johnson knew his opinion was false - i.e., that it was a lie. We acknowledge that it's not easy to prove that an expert knowingly falsified an opinion. We also recognize that the first step toward proving that an expert was intentionally lying is proving that his opinion was wrong. But to conclude that an expert fabricated his opinion solely because it was wrong - even grossly wrong - would collapse the essential distinction between mistaken opinions (for which there is immunity) and fabricated opinions (for which there is not). Stinson's fabrication claim is based entirely on the opinions of new experts that Drs. Johnson and Rawson were terribly wrong about the bite-mark evidence and that they used unreliable methods falling far below the standards of their profession. We do not second-guess this new opinion evidence, but it demonstrates at most that the odontologists acted unreasonably, not that they fabricated their opinions. Stinson has nothing else to support his evidence-fabrication claim. On some level, this opinion makes some sense. To start allowing witnesses to be sued for making honest mistakes would provide a disincentive to testifying. If we're talking about charlatans and quacks, we want such a disincentive. But it could also prevent good witnesses from coming forward. The problem is that this case didn't exist in a vacuum. The courts allowed fraudulent experts to put a man in prison. But the courts now say that because the courts made that mistake, the man who was wrongly imprisoned can't sue those experts. Moreover, Raymond Rawson and Lowell Thomas Johnson didn't just use bogus science in this one case; they also were evangelists for bite mark evidence. They actively tried to persuade other judges and other appeals courts to accept bite mark evidence. And they (and others like them) have been enormously successful. In fact, Raymond Rawson would go on to help convict another innocent man - Ray Krone spent a decade in prison and was nearly executed after he was convicted of killing Phoenix waitress Kim Ancona. Krone was exonerated by DNA evidence in 2002. Over the years, Rawson has authored dozens of articles about bite mark analysis published by forensic journals. He was president of the American Board of Forensic Odontology, the leading advocacy group for bite mark analysts. He co-wrote the group's original guidelines for bite mark matching. He has taught bite mark analysis and served as a consultant to local governments. He even won a seat in the Nevada state Senate. Lowell Thomas Johnson has also been a fierce advocate for bite mark matching. In May 2008, Johnson was profiled in USA Today for starting a database of human dentition that he claimed would provide scientific validation for his field. (It didn't.) That article appeared about a year before Johnson would learn that a man he helped convict two decades ago had been proved innocent by DNA testing. It took more than 3 decades, but over the past several years, actual scientists have finally started testing the claims of bite mark analysts. And as we've pointed out on several occasions here at The Watch, those scientists are showing that bite mark analysis is a fraudulent field. Even the ABFO's own effort to show that its accredited analysts used sound science backfired and showed precisely the opposite. When given photos of marks on human skin, the analysts couldn't even come to a consensus on whether marks were made by human teeth. Last July, a senior-level science adviser to President Obama said that bite mark evidence should be "eradicated" from the courtroom. The same month, Judge Gary Feinerman of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois found that "There appears to be little, if any, scientifically valid data to support the accuracy of bite mark comparison, and the data that does exist is damning." He went on to call bite mark analysis "transparently fraudulent" and compared the field to astrology. But just as with Stinson, Feinerman found that bite mark analysts who testify are protected by qualified immunity. In fact, he ruled that the very quackery of the field protects its practitioners from liability. It would be akin to saying that an astrologer "falsified" his conclusion that, because the planets are in a particular alignment, the defendant must have committed the crime, or to complaining that a palm reader grossly deviated from professional standards by mistaking the heart line for the head line. Keep in mind, Feinerman wrote this in an opinion that denied a wrongly convicted man the opportunity to sue the experts Feinerman was comparing to palm readers and astrologists. This might all be dismissed as an outrageous and unjust but anachronistic quirk in the annals of our criminal justice system - like fugitive slave trials, or the use of phrenology - except for one huge problem: To date, not a single state court in the United States has rejected bite mark evidence. In Wisconsin, Stinson is still good law. It's still cited by prosecutors in other states when they want to argue for the validity of bite mark evidence. (Such as Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood in the case of Eddie Lee Howard.) If you were to look up the Stinson case on a legal database like Lexis or Westlaw, you wouldn't even know that he had been exonerated. You'd see the Wisconsin Supreme Court's through defense of bite mark matching in 1986, and you'd think that was the end of the story. (And if you didn't know better, you'd probably find it pretty convincing.) That's true of the other bite mark exonerations, too. And it isn't as if the courts merely haven't had the chance to revisit the issue. In 2012, an appeals court in Texas once again upheld the validity of bite mark evidence. So did a Pennsylvania judge in 2011. In 2013, a state judge in New York did the same, siding with a prosecutor in the Manhattan DA's office who has become a fierce public advocate for bite mark analysts. The courts and public officials aren't ignoring this issue. They're doubling down on it. Robert Lee Stinson wants the courts to extract a reckoning from the men who wrongly put him in prison. Our system doesn't allow that. But before you can have a reckoning with fraudulent expert witnesses, the system would first have to admit that it was wrong to allow them to testify. And yet despite all the exonerations, critiques and science debunking bite mark analysis, that???s still something no state court has been able to do. (source: Radley Balko, WashingtonPost) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 10 08:24:56 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 08:24:56 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 10 IRAN----executions 2 Prisoners Executed in Southern Iran----2 prisoners sentenced to death for drug related charges were executed in the province of Hormozgan, southern Iran. 2prisoners sentenced to death for drug related charges were executed at Bandar Abbas Central Prison on the morning of Tuesday September 8, say unoffiical reports. Official Iranian media and judicial sources have not reported on the news. The HRANA human rights website has identified the prisoners as Ali Teymourian, 27 years old, and Rasoul Mirzaei, 54 years old. On Sunday September 6, Iranian authorities had transferred Ali and Rasoul from their wards in Bandar Abbas Central Prison to solitary confinement in preparation for their executions. (source: iran Human Rights) INDIA: In 1984, HC saved Kattabomman heir from the gallows The demand for abolition of death penalty has been gathering voice, and the recent law commission report recommending abolition of death penalty, except in terror-related cases, emphasizes that need to change the laws of the country. At this point, it is relevant to recall a case where the Supreme Court and the President rejected the appeals of a death row convict, but, in a turn of fate, the Madras high court commuted the death sentence to life. And Gurusamy Naicker, descendant of Veerapandiya Kattabomman, was saved more than 30 years ago. It was September 27, 1984. Suspense was mounting in the corridors of the Madras high court - the final verdict on a 7-year-old case was being pronounced. If the verdict was against the petitioner, India would lose the descendant of an early freedom fighter Veerapandia Kattabomman who was hanged by the British in 1799. However, if the verdict went in favour of the petitioner, the case of Gurusamy would be unique in the legal history of the country where hanging for any culpable offence was not uncommon. The fight for the release of Gurusamy gained national attention after Vaiko (V Gopalasamy), DMK Rajya Sabha MP, took up his cause. The 2 met at Palayamkottai prison. Vaiko had been taken into custody under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act during the Emergency in 1977 and Gurusamy was convicted of murder and awaiting his execution. Gurusamy was sentenced to death by a sessions court in Tirunelveli in 1976 over a property dispute. During a fight, Gurusamy apparently struck back in self-defence, causing the death of his uncle. Upon hearing all this, Vaiko was determined to save Gurusamy from the gallows and approached the then President of India, Sanjiva Reddy, with a memorandum signed by 38 members of Parliament. The President said he was emotionally moved but the mercy petition fell through and the date of execution was fixed as September 15, 1981. Once again, on September 8, 1981, Vaiko submitted a memorandum signed by 50 MPs to the President, and was directed to submit it to the minister of state for home, Venkada Subbiah. Just 5 days ahead of Gurusamy's end the execution was put off. The home department directed the Tamil Nadu government to verify the bonafides of Guruswamy's direct lineage to Veerapandia Kattabomman. Execution was delayed for a year till the verification was complete and his case was recommended for commutation. However, it was only a year's reprieve, for President Zail Singh rejected the mercy plea on the ground that a criminal could not be excused for being a descendant of a freedom fighter. At this juncture, Justice Chinnappa Reddy of the Supreme Court pronounced that if the death row convict had served a long time in prison, the sentence can be commuted to life imprisonment. On the strength of this judgment, another petition was submitted to the President on the plea that Gurusamy had been languishing in prison for 5 years. It was already June 14, 1984, and the date of execution was fixed on June 21. Petitions for stay of execution were filed both before the Supreme Court and the Madras high court. The affidavit was supported by a goodwill certificate from all the 150 prisoners and the jailors of the Palayamkottai Central Prison. Amidst all this din and hustle, the only person who patiently and agonizingly waited for events to run their course was Gurusamy. His only wish was that if he was executed, his body should be handed over to Vaiko. The day of judgment arrived. Justice V Ramaswami and Justice David Annousamy pronounced: "If professional murderers can be excused from being hanged, it should only be just that the descendent of a freedom fighter too be saved from the gallows. I order the death sentence quashed and commute the sentence to life imprisonment." The long drawn 7-year battle to save the life of a condemned prisoner did not go in vain. Gurusamy is now serving time as a convict warden and is expected to join his family shortly, the life sentence being reduced on account of his good conduct. Had Guruswamy been hanged, the judicial system would not have had this avant-garde verdict in its legal annals. (source: The Times of India) NIGERIA: Nigeria Labour Unions Want Death Penalty for Corrupt Govt. Officials The Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), Trade Union Congress (TUC) and civil society on Wednesday in a joint conference advocated capital punishment for corrupt officials as obtained in China and India. To drum support for the anti-corruption crusade of President Muhammadu Buhari, they said the organised labour would hold a mass rally on Thursday in Abuja. Mr. Wabba said the NLC was in support of whatever would address the issue of corruption in the country, including death sentence. "If such capital punishment can happen in China, India and South Africa, it can also happen in Nigeria; whatever measure that will address the issue of this mind-boggling corruption in the country, NLC will support it," he said. "As organised labour, we firmly believe that the political leadership of our country must act decisively to get us out of the brink of disaster that greed and primitive accumulation [of wealth] through open looting of our commonwealth in the last 6 and more years, has brought us to," said the unionist. Also speaking, Mr. Kaigama of the TUC decried the level of looting at the state and local government levels across the country. "We have not experienced non-payment of salary for 8 months in the last 20years; this is sad and this is due to the massive corruption in the country," said the TUC president. (source: Nigerian Bulletin) BANGLADESH: Man to die for murder in Mymensingh A Mymensingh court yesterday sentenced a man to death for killing his neighbour over a land dispute in Tarakanda upazila in 2008. The death penalty awardee is Md Sohel Khan, 35, of Panihata village in the upazila. According to the prosecution, there had been a long-standing dispute between Monjurul Islam Khan, 45, of Panihata village and his neighbour Sohel Khan. Sohel Khan and his men locked in an altercation with Monjurul over the issue on October 5, 2008. At one stage, they attacked Monjurul with sharp weapons, leaving him critically injured. Monjurul was admitted to Mymensingh Medical College Hospital and died on way to Dhaka Medical College Hospital the same day. Later, victim's younger brother Sadiqul Islam Khan filed a murder case with Tarakanda Police Station, accusing Sohel Khan and 2 others. Police investigated the incident and pressed charges against Sohel. (source: The Daily Star) ***************** Hearing on Jamaat chief Nizami's death penalty begins Bangladesh Supreme Court has begun hearing Jamaat-e-Islami chief Motiur Rahman Nizami's appeal challenging a verdict which had sentenced him to death for his crimes against humanity during the Liberation War in 1971. According to the Daily Star, the Appellate Division's 4-member bench headed by Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha began the hearing with Attorney General Mahbubey Alam placing eight war crime charges on which Nizami was convicted. The report was filed when defence counsel Joynul Abedin Tuhin was reading out the statement of prosecution witnesses before the apex court. On October 29 last year, International Crimes Tribunal-1 (ICT-1) handed Nizami the death penalty on 4 charges of war crimes, including murdering intellectuals during the Liberation War in 1971. Nizami had challenged the court verdict on November 23, 2014, claiming that he was innocent. (source: newkerala.com) MALAYSIA: 5 sailors arrested, drugs worth RM3.1m seized during raid Delaying setting sail for a week resulted in the arrests of 5 Indonesian sailors and the seizure of RM3.1 million worth of drugs from the boat they were in during a raid on Tuesday. Customs Department Penang branch director Datuk Mohd Pudzi Man said the authorities suspected something amiss when the boat failed to set off for Acheh, Indonesia, despite given clearance on Sept 1. He said a raid was conducted resulting in the discovery of 22.07kg of drugs, believed to be meth and ecstasy, a pistol and 31 bullets during the 5pm operation. He added the drugs in 19 packages and the weapons were found concealed in the wall of the boat. He said the 5 sailors, aged 30 to 54, were arrested on the spot and have been remanded for 14 days to assist investigations. Initial checks showed the boat entered Malaysia 4 times this year and carried used items for trade, he added. "We believe the drugs are meant for Indonesia," he told a press conference today, adding the case was being investigated under the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 which carries the death penalty on conviction. (source: The Sun Daily) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 10 16:20:08 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 16:20:08 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., S.C., FLA., ALA., LA., TENN., ARK., ILL. Message-ID: Sept. 10 PENNSYLVANIA: Pennsylvania Death-Penalty Moratorium Sparks Lively Hearing Gov. Tom Wolf's death-penalty moratorium has stirred a lively discussion at a Pennsylvania Supreme Court hearing in Philadelphia. A top lawyer in the Philadelphia district attorney's office argued Thursday that Wolf's use of a reprieve to block the execution of a convicted killer who has run out of options violates the state constitution. Hugh Burns said Wolf's vow to use reprieves to block executions pending completion of a legislative study on the death penalty is too vague. Justices Debra Todd and Michael Eakin questioned whether Wolf's strategy is a moratorium or merely a series of individual reprieves. Geoffrey Moulton, the lead attorney for Wolf's legal team, acknowledged that Wolf cannot suspend the death penalty but said he clearly has authority to grant temporary reprieves without having to explain why. (source: Associated Press) SOUTH CAROLINA: Don't seek death penalty South Carolina is seeking the death penalty for Dylann Roof. I totally agree Roof should pay for his crime. Justice demands it and society needs to be protected from harm. However, justice can be served when Roof is secured in prison for a lifetime without parole; if the South Carolina prison system is adequate, he is no longer a threat to the safety of citizens. The families of the victims forgave him, choosing not to seek the death penalty. In seeking the death penalty, the prosecutor claims she is seeking justice. An "eye for an eye" is not justice, it is revenge, and revenge was never the intended role of our government. It is fact that the legal fees from appeals in capital punishment cases costs on average about $1 million more than the cost of keeping a prisoner clothed and fed for his lifetime. Why not use our tax dollars elsewhere, maybe to hire more police to patrol our cities or pay for body cams, rather than to kill an unarmed man already locked in prison? It is also fact that the death penalty is not a deterrent for crime. What it does do is open fresh wounds for the victims' family members for the next 20 years or so every time the news reports the status of his appeals. For example, Missouri just executed a man last week that was on death row for 25 years. It seems more merciful for the families of the victims of Emanuel AME Church to allow them closure by sentencing him to life in prison. As a Christian, I pray Roof, with the years he will serve in prison, will reconcile with God before his death. But it is not ours to decide when that death will be. The death penalty is unnecessary, immoral, and fiscally irresponsible, and it should not be sought in the case of Roof. For that matter, perhaps it is time capital punishment is abolished in the state altogether. Donna Pierce ---- Aiken (source: Letter to the Editor, Aiken Standard) FLORIDA: Young Republicans will host death penalty opponent Conservatives Concerned about the Death Penalty, a national network of conservatives and libertarians questioning the alignment of capital punishment with their principles, will be featured at the upcoming monthly meeting of the St. Johns County Young Republicans, according to an update received by Historic City News this week. National coordinator Marc Hyden, a representative of the NRA in Florida prior to taking this position, will be making a presentation to the group about why conservatives in Florida and across the nation are re-thinking the death penalty. "It is incumbent upon us as citizens to be educated on any law, policy or regulation that allows our government to remove any of our freedoms," said Elizabeth Amato of the St. Johns County Young Republicans. "The death penalty is one such power we have given to our government and the exercise of this power should rightfully be reviewed on a continuing basis." To date, more than 150 individuals have been released from death rows across America because they were wrongfully convicted and Florida leads the nation in exonerations with 25. "Increasingly, conservatives from across the country are opposing the death penalty because it fails to align with our principles," said Hyden. "It's simply a broken and incredibly costly government program that risks killing innocent Americans." The meeting and program will be open to members and guests and will begin Tuesday evening September 15th at 7:00 p.m. in Murray Bros Caddy Shack, 455 South Legacy Trail, Suite E106 at World Golf Village. About Us Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty is a network of political and social conservatives who question the alignment of capital punishment with conservative principles and values. Specifically, we are questioning a system marked by inefficiency, inequity, and inaccuracy. Conservatives concerned about the death penalty is a project of Equal Justice USA. EJUSA is a national, grassroots organization working to build a criminal justice system that works. For everyone. For more information contact Jon Crane at 203-982-4575 or email joncrane at criticalpr.com. (source: historiccity.com) ALABAMA: Montez Spradley, an Innocent Man Once on Death Row, Is Free Montez Spradley is finally free. He walked out of prison late last week, after spending more than 9 years behind bars - including 3 1/2 years on Alabama's death row - for a murder he did not commit. I began representing Montez seven years ago, not long after joining the ACLU. >From the very first day that I met him, Montez maintained his innocence. No physical evidence ever tied him, a young Black man, to the 2004 murder of a 58-year old white woman in Birmingham. The prosecution instead relied on the highly tainted and inconsistent testimony of his disgruntled ex-girlfriend as well as a jailhouse snitch, who both claimed he had confessed to them. Montez's jurors did not want him to die. They voted 10-2 to sentence him to life, but the trial judge who presided over his 1st trial, Judge Gloria Bahakel, overrode their decision of life in prison and sentenced him to death, in a process known as "judicial override." More than 20 % of the men on Alabama's death row have been sent there by Alabama judges, even though their juries voted for life. While Florida and Delaware still have judicial override on the books, only Alabama continues to use it with disturbing frequency. And Alabama judges almost never use override to reverse a jury's death verdict to impose life. In fact, since 1976, death-to-life overrides have only happened nine times - and only once in the last 10 years - compared to 99 times the Montez way. Montez was not the 1st innocent man to arrive to death row after a judge had overridden the jury's life vote, and until the practice is shut down, he will not be the last. Residual doubt about a defendant's guilt is often a major reason why a jury would vote for life. The fact that innocent people continue to be sentenced to death, especially when a jury would have spared their lives, is the very definition of a failed system. Fortunately, in a rare victory, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals recognized that Montez's 1st trial had been a "miscarriage of justice." Still, it took years to untangle the web of police misconduct and judicial misconduct by Judge Bahakel that led to Montez's conviction and death sentence. Montez had heard rumors that his ex-girlfriend had been paid reward money, but it was not until we won his appeal, that we started to find evidence of the payments. And we learned that she had been paid an incredible sum for her testimony: $10,000. We learned that she had tried to back out before Montez's trial and told the police that Montez had never confessed to her. Rather than honoring the truth, they dangled the $10,000 over her head and threatened to take her children away and to prosecute her for perjury if she did not "stick with her original story." Neither the police nor the prosecutors ever disclosed the payments to the defense. Judge Bahakel, before sentencing Montez to death, had signed off on a payment herself. Yet she never told Montez's trial lawyers about it, and her order authorizing the payment never made it into the court file. We also knew that the lead detective on the case - the same one who authorized the payments - had lied on the stand about the ex-girlfriend's statement to him. Unfortunately, such things are far too common in our system where the state often focuses on winning rather than justice. Police and prosecutors are rarely held accountable for their misconduct. In fact, the lead detective on the case - the same one who lied on the stand at trial - was honored with an award from a victims' rights group for solving this cold case that led to Montez's arrest. No one should be rewarded for turning a blind eye to truth and justice, especially when it means an innocent person faces execution. Montez is still a young man. More than anything, he wanted his freedom so he could be there for his children, and now he gets to be more present in their lives and watch them grow. But nothing can give him those years back, and he faces many challenges ahead. Others have not fared as well. Innocent people, and people whose juries wanted them to live, remain on death row. For Montez and for them, it is time to reject the failed system of capital punishment. (source: Anna Arceneaux, Staff Attorney, ACLU Capital Punishment Project, aclu.org) LOUISIANA: Child rapist who was spared death penalty in 2008 after Supreme Court ruled punishment was 'cruel and unusual' has new request for a retrial denied----Patrick Kennedy sentenced to death for brutal rape of stepdaughter in 1998 Patrick Kennedy, the convicted child rapist who successfully argued in 2008 that the death penalty was a 'cruel and unusual punishment' for his crime, has been denied a retrial of his case. Kennedy, who was initially sentenced to death for the brutal 1998 rape of his eight-year-old stepdaughter, was given life without parole instead following a Supreme Court Ruling. Kennedy continued to appeal his conviction, and recently lawyers argued that there was evidence of gender discrimination in selection the foreman of his grand jury, which was supported by a judge. If the accusation of discrimination was upheld it could have meant Kennedy was released while a retrial was arranged, but the evidence was yesterday rejected, meaning he will go back to jail. Kennedy's now-infamous case dates back to 1998 when police were called to his apartment in Harvey, Louisiana, in the early hours of the morning to reports of a rape. Kennedy told officers that 2 black teens had broken into the home before brutally raping his 8-year-old stepdaughter. The girl's injuries were so severe that she required emergency surgery. However, after 1 suspect was arrested and released without charge, suspicions fell on Kennedy, and it was later discovered he had called a carpet cleaning company to discuss getting bloodstains out of his rug before phoning police. Kennedy's stepdaughter then confessed to officer that he had come into her room while she was sleeping and raped her, then coached her to lie to police afterwards. In 2003 he was convicted of the crime and sentenced to death, becoming 1 of only 2 people in Louisiana on death row for a crime other than murder. His lawyers appealed the decision, arguing that death constituted a 'cruel and unusual punishment' for rape, and in 2008 Supreme Court judges ruled 5-4 in his favor. Kennedy's sentence was commuted to life in prison, despite outcry and opposition from Presidential hopefuls Barack Obama and John McCain, and then the initial conviction was also dismissed. Faced with the prospect of releasing Kennedy, authorities worked to have him resentenced, and in January 2009, aged 44, he was again given life in prison. He has continued to fight his conviction, moving to federal courts after failing at the state level. In October 2013, a District Judge Helen Berrigan agreed there was evidence that women were often passed over to serve as foreman at Kennedy's grand jury trial. Berrigan's order, which overruled a state court decision, called for Kennedy's release or re-indictment within 6 months. However, she approved a delay pending the appeal of her ruling, agreeing that Kennedy had 'significant incentive' to flee if released, given his violent crime and the life sentence awaiting him. The case was passed to a 3-judge 5th Circuit panel who examined whether the foremen and forewomen selected in Kennedy's case were drawn from a large enough pool of grand jury panels. Delivering their ruling yesterday, the judges said that the state court had been correct in rejecting the appeal, and that Berrigan had wrongly decided that discrimination had taken place. (source: dailymail.co.uk) TENNESSEE: Prisoners Make Therapeutic Art Monuments Addressing The Death Penalty "Life After Death and Beyond" displays a series of monuments or memorials addressing the death penalty directly or abstractly. Its organizers, Robin Paris and Tom Williams, have put on 4 previous exhibits highlighting the works of prison inmates, but this is their first to confront the topic head on. This particular showcase comes at a time when, according to a statement from the organizers, the state of Tennessee has scheduled the deaths of ten prisoners -- after executing fewer than 10 in the past 55 years. "These men have a lot to say about their experiences both inside and outside of prison, and their works show that they are much more than prisoners condemned to die," Robins told The Huffington Post. "We think it's important to get their voices into the world." In conjunction with organizing these exhibits, he and Paris teach an arts program, focusing on artistic concepts as opposed to technical instruction. He ventures to guess that the act of creation is therapeutic for the inmates he works with, but asserts that the social value of projecting their voices is equally vital to his mission. "Most of them would rather not make something that's about themselves," Robins said. "Nearly all of them would like to make a connection with the world outside using the modest resources at their disposal." This desire to connect with the outside world is a theme Williams sees resonating from most of his students' work. This, he says, is due to the solitary nature of life on death row in Tennessee. "Many of them haven't walked on the grass or seen the stars in over 20 years," Williams says. "Their lives take shape before a backdrop of concrete walls, razor wire, and chain link fences. As a consequence, they develop ways of escaping the realities that surround them. Some of them read. Some of them make art. Some of them turn to religion." So, while Cone's spiral of literary tomes illustrates his desired escape, others create homages to their budding religious lives. One of the exhibit's pieces, a model built by Derrick Quintero, depicts a prison cell adorned with a dreamcatcher, scroll and Buddhist sculpture. "When a person is under the sentence of death, it is the perfect opportunity to slowly build a life from scratch. Art is a perfect example of creating something new and developing your own existence from that piece of art." Still others reject the concept of personal monuments altogether, instead opting to sketch designs for community centers, such as a prison yard recreation center or a sculpture of a prison uniform shoe, free in an open field. Akil Jahi, the creator of the proposed shoe sculpture, wrote in a letter to The Huffington Post, "So many years have gone by without our very soles touching the grass." He views artistic creation as an act of therapy, writing, "It has become a way to express my deepest emotions without feeling sad or happy. I really enjoy bringing joy to another person's heart." Ron Cauthern, another participant in the exhibit, chose to confront his objections to the death penalty directly, by crafting a model airplane covered in drawings of sinewy veins. A music box is affixed to the outside of the plane, meant to represent the gentle perception of capital punishment by the general public. In his artist statement, he wrote, "It's simple, nothing can be born out of a life for a life." In a letter explaining his personal connection with building sculptures, Cauthern wrote, "When a person is under the sentence of death, it is the perfect opportunity to slowly build a life from scratch. Art is a perfect example of creating something new and developing your own existence from that piece of art." (source: Maddie Crum, Huffington Post) ARKANSAS: Arkansas Governor Sets Execution Dates After 10-Year Gap Arkansas will resume lethal injections after a 10-year gap starting next month with the first of four double executions, Gov. Asa Hutchinson said Wednesday. Arkansas hasn't executed an inmate since 2005, largely because of court challenges to its lethal injection law and a nationwide shortage of drugs often used during executions. But last week, Attorney General Leslie Rutledge requested execution dates for 8 inmates because their appeals had been exhausted, and prison officials said they had an adequate supply of lethal-injection drugs. Hutchinson set 4 dates through January, but acknowledged that challenges are likely. "Quite frankly I would expect continued litigation in it, but it's my understanding that all of the appeals have been exhausted and that there is a finality in the judgment and that is the reason the Attorney General has asked for those dates to be set," Hutchinson said. Several inmates have filed a lawsuit challenging a new state law that allows the Arkansas Department of Correction not to disclose how it obtains execution drugs. The U.S. Supreme Court has rejected similar arguments used by inmates in Missouri, Texas and other states that also allow prisons to keep their drug suppliers' names secret. The lawsuit's lead attorney, Jeff Rosenzweig, said Wednesday that his team was already working on filing motions to delay the executions. "We think the lethal injection lawsuit presents serious issues that need to be resolved 1st before any executions can take place," he said. The 1st 2 executions are scheduled Oct. 21, for inmates Bruce Earl Ward and Don William Davis. Ward, a former perfume salesman, was convicted in the 1989 killing of 18-year-old Rebecca Doss, whose body was found in the men's bathroom of the convenience store where she worked. Davis, who had an execution date set in 2006 that was later stayed, was sentenced to death for the 1990 robbery and death of Jane Daniels in northwest Arkansas. The other executions are scheduled for Nov. 3, Dec. 14 and Jan. 14. Arkansas has had multiple executions in the past, including triple executions in 1994 and 1997. At the time, the state Correction Department said multiple executions reduced stress on prison staff. Last year's botched execution of Oklahoma inmate Clayton Lockett was the 1st of a scheduled double execution. A state review team later recommended that at least 7 days pass between each execution; the report said a veteran paramedic who placed Lockett's intravenous line had noted a sense of urgency in the air. Hutchinson's spokesman, J.R. Davis, said late Wednesday that he didn't know if the governor had seen the Oklahoma study. But he said Hutchinson's staff had carefully considered the dates that were set. "The governor sees this as his duty as governor to carry this out, as requested by the Attorney General, and set these dates. This is a duty, nothing more, nothing less," Davis said. "This isn't something that anyone enjoys talking about, but at the same time we are confident in our staff's thoughtful approach to these dates." Arkansas' current execution protocol calls for a three-drug process that includes midazolam. The sedative was implicated after Lockett's execution, and executions in Arizona and Ohio last year, went longer than expected, with inmates gasping and groaning. The U.S. Supreme Court approved continued use of the drug in June, rejecting a challenge from 3 Oklahoma death-row inmates. Arkansas has executed 27 people since the U.S. Supreme Court reauthorized the death penalty in 1976. The other Arkansas scheduled executions are for Terrick Terrell Nooner and Stacey Eugene Johnson, convicted in separate killings in 1993, on Nov. 3; Marcel Wayne Williams, convicted of a 1994 killing, and Jack Harold Jones Jr., convicted of a 1995 killing, on Dec. 14; and Jason McGehee, convicted in a 1996 killing, and Kenneth Williams, convicted of a 1999 killing, on Jan. 14. (source: Associated Press) ILLINOIS: Haine to reintroduce death penalty legislation in wake of police and mass shootings State Sen. Bill Haine (D-Alton) said he intends to file legislation to restore the death penalty in limited cases involving "the most evil of crimes." "As a former State's Attorney, I understand the complexities of seeking the death penalty for individuals who have committed heinous crimes," Haine stated in a press release. "I have been shocked and appalled by the recent killings we have seen in churches and of police officers. The reality is there are some crimes in which the death penalty should be an option for a jury of our citizens to consider. Those who take the life of officers, or engage in mass killings, need to face the appropriate consequences." According to a press release, Haine plans to reintroduce legislation he had proposed in 2013 in the wake of a "series of atrocious murders across the country, including the murder of a police officer in Illinois." The original legislation came out of death penalty reform proposals from the Illinois Capital Punishment Reform Study Committee, the release states. Provisions of the legislation would give state's attorneys the ability to seek the death penalty in first-degree murder cases by requiring them to provide notice of intent to seek or decline the death penalty as soon as possible. The legislation would outline specific crimes which would be eligible to receive the death penalty such as; serial killings, heinous murders of a child, seniors or a person with a disability, murders of witnesses, correctional officers and law enforcement officials. The release states that Haine plans to file the legislation when the state senate reconvenes in the coming weeks. (source: madisonrecord.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 10 16:20:52 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 16:20:52 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 10 IRAN----executions 7 Prisoners Executed in Birjand and Tabriz Prisons According to Khorassan News, an Iranian official source, a 32-year-old prisoner charged with murder and 17 counts of robbery was hanged to death at Birjand Central Prison on the morning of Wdnesday September 9. According to Kurdistan Human Rights Network, an unofficial source, 6 prisoners have been hanged to death in the past week at Tabriz Central Prison. 5 prisoners were reportedly hanged to death on the morning of September 9: 4 for drug related offenses and 1 for murder. The names of the prisoners with drug related charges have been idenitified as Hojatoleslami, Sajjad Maghsoodi, Vali Narimani and Nasser Hosseinzadeh. The name of the prisoner charged with murder has been identified as Mohammad Ali Yousefi. On Saturday September 5, 1 prisoner, identified as Davoud Pourahmadian, was reportedly hanged to death for murder. Iranian official media or judicial sources have not commented on the recent executions at Tabriz Central Prison. (source: Iran Human Rights) PAKISTAN: 4 more death row convicts hanged 4 death row convicts were sent to the gallows in different jails of Punjab on early Wednesday. 2 real brothers, Muhabat Ali and Muhammad Bashir, were executed in the District Jail Vehari for killing of 2 brothers over property dispute in 2001. Another death row prisoner was hanged in Adiyala Central Jail in Rawalpindi. The convicted prisoner Mubashir Hassan had killed a man named Qadir over personal dispute in 1999. 1 more death row prisoner, Aslam Sial, was hanged in the New Central Jail Bahawalpur. Sial had murdered a man and his wife during a robbery attempt in 1992. (source: Pakistan Today) ******************** LHC stays execution of 2 death row prisoners A Lahore High Court division bench on Thursday stayed execution of 2 death row prisoners who were scheduled to be hanged on September 11 at Faisalabad Central Jail. The court staying the execution of Akhlaq Ahmad and Shaukat Ali till September 16 sought a reply from respondents including anti-terrorism court (ATC) Faisalabad. The bench comprising Justice Abdul Sami Khan and Justice James Joseph passed the orders on a petition filed by said convicts against issuance of their black warrants. During the hearing, the appellants's counsel Aftab Ahmad Bajwa arguing before the court submitted that the convicts were awarded death penalty by ATC Faisalabal for killing Zafar Iqbal and Tariq Javed in 2001. He said that the sentence was upheld by the Apex court and the president had also dismissed mercy appeal of the convicts. However, the victim party agreed to pardon the convicts after intervention by the locals and an application was filed on August 29 , 2015 before ATC Faisalabad for setting aside the death sentence on basis of pardon, he said. But, on September 8, 2015, the court issued black warrants for executing the convicts despite the fact that their application was pending with it. He pleaded the court to set aside the black warrants for being illegal and stay the execution of the convicts. The court after hearing the initial arguments stayed the execution till September 16 and sought reply from ATC Faislabad and other respondents. (source: Associated Press of Pakistan) ETHIOPIA: British Political Prisoner Moved to Ethiopian 'Gulag' British citizen Andargachew Tsege, facing a death sentence in Ethiopia for spurious terrorism charges, has been moved from a secret detention centre in Ethiopia to a notorious federal prison in the African nation's capital, VICE News can exclusively reveal. Longtime democracy campaigner Tsege has now been captive for more than a year without access to lawyers, family or consular assistance, after being kidnapped at a Yemen airport by Ethiopian officials. The 60-year-old father of three fled Ethiopia's military regime as a student activist in 1979 and became a political refugee in the UK. He later founded opposition group Ginbot 7 in 2005, which was classified by the Ethiopian government as a terrorist organization. In 2009 the government accused Ginbot 7 of organizing a failed coup and sentenced Tsege to death in absentia, in a trial "lacking in basic elements of due process," according to American diplomatic observers. Last year, Ethiopian agents seized Tsege at Sanaa Airport in Yemen. He has remained in solitary confinement since then, in an unknown location until the recent move. The legal charity Reprieve, based in London, has taken up his case. The democracy activist's family believe that the UK's close strategic alliance with Ethiopia means that an innocent man could end up being sacrificed on the geo-political altar. Despite criticizing Ethiopia for its human rights violations and its lack of civil liberties and democratic processes - the ruling EPRDF party won all 546 parliamentary seats in a May national elections criticized for alleged fraud - Western governments enjoy close security cooperation with Ethiopia, particularly regarding the "War on Terror," where its troops are fighting al Shabaab Islamist militants in Somalia. Maya Foa, the director of Reprieve's death penalty team, picked up on this political alliance when she told VICE News that, although Tsege is a British citizen who was kidnapped unlawfully and who has been subjected to probable torture, the British government has "not made a single request to the Ethiopian authorities to have Andy returned home to his family in the United Kingdom" - though it has lobbied for him to be afforded his basic rights. "The British government is definitely not championing him and that is heart-breaking for us," Tsege's partner Yemi Hailemariam told VICE News. This disappointment in the British government was heightened recently when Yemi discovered that Tobias Ellwood, an FCO minister, had been in Ethiopia on 16 and 17 August for talks on South Sudan but had failed to raise Tsege's case with any of his Ethiopian counterparts. In a letter to Yemi, Ellwood said that he was "not able to meet Ethiopian Government representatives and so did not have an opportunity to raise Andargachew's continued detention." In a separate letter to Reprieve, Ellwood did not even mention that he has just got back from Ethiopia. Officials at the UK's Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) know they are treading a fine line. On the one hand, they must lobby for better treatment for a British citizen. On the other hand, they do not want to jeopardize an alliance deemed strategically important. "The UK and Ethiopia have a deep and long-standing bilateral relationship covering many areas of shared concern, so it's important that further progress is made on this issue so those ties aren't affected," an FCO spokesman told VICE News. There are signs, though, that Tsege's continued illegal detention is causing a fraying of the Anglo-Ethiopian relationship. "The Foreign Secretary has raised this case on 17 separate occasions, most recently on August 8. We will continue to lobby at all levels for regular access to Mr Tsege, and for his family in the UK to be able to visit him", the FCO spokesman said. In June, a frustration with the progress that was being made on the case and the intransigence of Ethiopian government officials prompted the foreign secretary, Philip Hammond, to issue the British government's strongest statement on Andy Tsege's case. "I spoke to Foreign Minister Tedros this afternoon and made clear that Ethiopia's failure to grant our repeated and basic requests is not acceptable. I informed Dr. Tedros that the lack of progress risks undermining the UK's much valued bilateral relationship with Ethiopia", Hammond said. Yemi said she welcomed the statement but that Tobias Ellwood's recent failure to lobby on her partner's behalf had left her feeling "really, really disappointed - particularly as he had met us personally." When asked about her partner's situation, Yemi says, "nothing has changed." She is terrified that, even if he is ever released, "Andy will have been too traumatized by his time in prison." Following a recent meeting, the UK ambassador to Ethiopia noted that Yemi's partner had "no spare weight on him." Tsege told the ambassador that he still has no idea what charges he's facing, if any. The FCO told VICE News that Tsege's move to the Kality federal prison in Addis Adaba was a "welcome development", but whether it really represents an improvement is debatable. Amnesty International has referred to Kality as a "gulag," while the Swedish journalists Martin Schibbye and Johan Persson, who were imprisoned there for trying to report on the conflict in the Ethiopian region of Ogaden, said that conditions reminded a number of their fellow prisoners of paintings of the cramped bowels of 18th century slave ships. Kality is also, as Schibbye and Persson reported in their book 438 Days, a hotbed of government spying in which inmates feel unable to say anything for fear they will be taken away. For Maya Foa of Reprieve, the situation Andy Tsege is facing and the British government's refusal to demand for his release is a "stain on Britain's reputation and a travesty of justice. The British government must change its position and take immediate steps to bring Andy back before it's too late." Sitting in Kality prison, Tsege is a reminder that the fate of individuals falls victim to the strategies of nation states. Yemi, who feels as though she has been banging her head against a brick wall trying to secure the release of her partner, has begun to feel "more and more like a conspiracy theorist, more and more like an anarchist", as she tries to navigate the world of international politics. Her daughter, Helawit Hailemariam, just won a Liberty award for co-developing a play about her father's incarceration. "I wish I didn't have to receive this," she told her mother. (source: vice.com) LEBANON: Judge seeks death penalty for Beirut road rage killer A Lebanon magistrate Thursday recommended the death penalty for Tarek Yateem, who was arrested in July after stabbing to death George al-Reef in a Beirut road rage incident. Beirut Investigative Judge George Rizk charged Yateem with 1st-degree murder after the July 15 knife assault that left Reef lying unconscious in a pool of his own blood in a street in Achrafieh. He died 2 days later. The deadly stabbing in broad daylight, witnessed by dozens of passive bystanders, had shocked the public. The killing was sparked following a feud over a car collision. Rizk also sought a 2-year prison term for Lina Haidar who was charged with hiding Yateem to prevent his arrest. Haidar was traveling with Yateem during the incident. (source: The Daily Star) ********************** Judge Demands Death Penalty for Tareq Yatim Beirut Examining Magistrate George Rizk demanded on Thursday a death penalty against Tareq Yatim for stabbing and killing a man, and a jail sentence against Lina Haidar for helping the fugitive. An arrest warrant was issued in July against Yatim for stabbing to death George al-Rif over a traffic dispute, in a case that shocked the country after a graphic video of the incident went viral on social media. Haidar was detained then and interrogated. Yatim had dealt al-Rif several stabs in Beirut's neighborhood of Ashrafieh after a long car chase that started on the airport road after the two got into a right of way dispute. Some media reports said Yatim was under the influence of drugs when he committed the crime. According to reports, the man has a long criminal record. (source: naharnet.com) EGYPT: 680 death sentences handed down since 3 July 2013 9 anti-government defendants were sentenced to death in Egypt on Monday, bringing the number of those handed the death penalty to 680 since 3 July 2013, the Arab Organisation for Human Rights in the UK (AOHR UK) said in a report on Tuesday. The organisation said the Egyptian security services torture opponents of the Egyptian regime and commit crimes against them so as to force them to confess to "fabricated" charges so they can be given severe sentences that may amount to the death penalty. Seven of those who have received the death penalty have already been executed. The total number of defendants whose papers were referred to the Grand Mufti has reached 1,734. The report pointed out that senior officials at Mansoura's security directorate systematically exercise illegal detention, kidnapping, torture and the forgery of official documents and fabrications. The AOHR UK noted that photographing the defendants in a degrading manner, humiliating and torturing them and forcing them to give false confessions that were dictated to them constitute "unacceptable behaviour both legally and morally; and are also serious human rights violations which, if added to other human rights violations in Egypt, underline the collapse of the moral and legal system among individuals in the Egyptian police." The organisation warned that the adoption of the anti-terror law poses a threat to defendants who had already been sentenced to death as the new law decreased their chances of avoiding the death penalty and having fair trials. It invited UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to form a fact-finding committee with full powers to investigate crimes committed after 3 July 2013 and bring those responsible for these crimes to justice. On Monday, the Terrorism Circuit at the Mansoura Criminal Court, headed by Judge Osama Abdul Zahir, sentenced to death nine young men, including four students, in case number 16,850 of the year 2014, in which 24 people from the province of Dakahlia are accused. The remaining defendants were sentenced to life in prison. Yesterday the court referred the cases of 10 defendants to the Grand Mufti for his approval. They were sentenced on charges of killing a police sergeant, committing acts of violence against the army and police forces, forming a cell that seeks regime change, and possessing explosives and weapons. AOHR UK said it had that defendants were subjected to torture to force them to make fabricated confessions. Such confessions would help the regime demonise its opponents and incite public hatred ahead of the judicial procedures. (source: middleeastmonitor.com) INDIA: Capital punishment to man for murder of minor A 28-year-old man was sentenced to capital imprisonment on the charge of brutally killing a minor boy after sodomizing him; final verdict was delivered by Special Session Court Judge, Sagar, Anil Verma on Wednesday. The accused Sacchu alias Sachin Kushwaha was found guilty under sections 302, 363, 364, 377 and 201 of the IPC and sections 3 and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act-2012. According to prosecution, the accused had abducted a minor boy had unnatural sex with him and later killed him and disposed his body which was later recovered in the investigation by the police and it was found that the accused was behind the crime. In November 2013, the minor boy had gone missing from Khimlasa Sagar and was later found dead after 3 days. The minor went missing on November 17, 2013 and was later his body was found on November 20, 2013. The accused was convicted by the judge for offence under section 363 and 201 of the IPC and was sentenced of seven years of rigorous imprisonment and imposed a penalty of Rs 5000. The accused was convicted by the judge for offence under section 364 of the IPC for life imprisonment and imposed a penalty of Rs 10000. The accused was convicted by the judge for offence under section 364 of the IPC for life imprisonment and imposed a penalty of Rs 10000 and under section 302 of the IPC accused was convicted for death sentence and penalty of Rs 10000. Failing to pay the penalty would attract 6 months of additional imprisonment for every unpaid penalty amount. Life imprisonment was sentenced for section 3 and 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act-2012 and a penalty of Rs 10000 was imposed. (source: Daily Pioneer) From rhalperi at smu.edu Fri Sep 11 09:13:57 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 09:13:57 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., FLA., OHIO, TENN., OKLA., CALIF., USA Message-ID: Sept. 11 PENNSYLVANIA: Justices Hear Death-Penalty Moratorium Debate Gov. Tom Wolf's decision to grant a reprieve to a death row inmate - and announcement that he would grant more while a study of death penalty procedures was ongoing - should be set aside as an unconstitutional open-ended suspension of his duty to enforce the law, prosecutors argued to the state Supreme Court on Thursday. But H. Geoffrey Moulton Jr., representing the Wolf administration, argued the reprieves are not permanent, but indefinite pending a recommendation by a state task force. "It's not an unchecked power," Moulton said. "If the people are unhappy with the way this governor is granting reprieves, they could choose another governor," or amend the constitution. Justice J. Michael Eakin asked both sides whether Wolf inadvertently created the dispute when, instead of simply granting indefinite reprieves pending the task force recommendations, Wolf instead announced he was instituting a moratorium on the death penalty. "Are you asking us to overturn his political pronouncement?" Eakin asked Hugh J. Burns Jr., who argued the case for the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office. "It's not a political question at all. He could have given a proper reprieve," Burns said. "What actually happened is the governor created a rule of general application," violating the separation of powers doctrine and his mandate to execute the state's laws. Burns noted the moratorium has been cited as law in certain courts, most notably the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. "This shows that it is not a matter of individual clemency," Burns said. "Obviously, the executive is not a lawmaker." Justice Debra M. Todd asked if a governor would be able to issue bundles of reprieves, as opposed to simply single reprieves or a moratorium stopping all executions. "There's no limit on the number," Todd said. "You're characterizing it as a moratorium. Is it a moratorium or a collection of reprieves?" Burns said Wolf's actions were not constitutional because the moratorium is premised on something that may never happen, as the recommendations may never be addressed or implemented. "The recommendations may not even be possible," Burns said. In February, Wolf granted a reprieve for Terrance Williams, whose case has been the subject of litigation for more than 30 years, and announced plans to grant reprieves until the task force's report is reviewed, and the findings are addressed. Williams was convicted in 1986 of murder and robbery and he was sentenced to death in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas. He appealed several times under the Post Conviction Relief Act. The trial court in 2012 vacated his sentence, but the Supreme Court reinstated it in December. Former Gov. Tom Corbett signed a death warrant in the case Jan. 13. According to Moulton, the governor's open-ended ability to grant reprieves is nothing new. He said those powers have been used by governors since colonial times, and have remained with the office despite the laws being changed approximately 5 times. Justice Correale F. Stevens, however, asked if making the reprieve dependent on the task force recommendations circumvented the General Assembly, and the court's role in addressing the issue. The justice compared the situation to a "clerk in Kentucky ignoring current laws," in reference to Rowan County, Kentucky, clerk Kim Davis, who recently refused to give marriage licenses to same-sex couples. "Is that appropriate policy," Stevens asked. "No," Burns replied. However, later in the arguments, Todd noted the task force is not "some random" committee, but was established by the state legislature and chaired by Sen. Stewart J. Greenleaf, R-Montgomery, and Sen. Daylin Leach, D-Montgomery. Still, Stevens asked, "Shouldn't it go back to the legislature?" Moulton replied that nobody knows what the task force's recommendations will be, and noted the recommendations could be specifically aimed at legislative changes. But it was exactly this unknown about what the recommendations will be and whether they will be followed that Justice Max Baer and Chief Justice Thomas G. Saylor said could make the prosecutors' arguments premature. "What if the legislature follows the recommendations?" Saylor asked. Burns replied that regardless of the findings, Wolf's actions had set up a condition that may never come to pass. "That's just another way of saying, 'It's not a reprieve,'" Burns said. (source: thelegalintelligencer.com) FLORIDA: Killer of teen girl denied appeal for state execution A man who raped and killed a 13-year-old girl has had his appeal to state execution denied by the local court, according to court records. Matthew Caylor, 39, has been on death row since he was convicted in 2009 of raping and killing Melinda Hinson in a Panama City motel room. Caylor strangled the girl with a telephone cord and then hid her body under the bed and placed the bed frame on her head. Bay County Circuit Judge James Fensom on Thursday denied Caylor's motion vacate the court's judgment and sentence. It now can be appealed to the Florida Supreme Court. According to court records, Caylor confessed to the murder and detailed the events leading up to a housekeeper at the Valu-Lodge Motel finding Hinson's naked body under the bed. Her parents had reported her missing 2 days earlier, records show. Officers reported that Caylor was on felony probation from Georgia in July 2008 after he molested a 14-year-old, which he claimed to be falsely accused. After he said he came to Panama City to relax, he told investigators Hinson came to his room to ask for a cigarette. Caylor said he felt that he had "been through all this because of something I didn't do," and he decided to "make it worth it," according to court transcripts. Caylor claimed Hinson came on to him when he became angered and he began to choke her, investigators reported. "It was like, more or less like you're the ... reason I'm in this situation I'm in now because I did the right thing," he told investigators. "I think it was more of a hate, like a hate, like I was really angry, I think it was ... That she was 13 coming on to me." Caylor said after he strangled Hinson with the phone cord and hid her under the bed, he left the motel, officers reported. Jurors found him guilty of 1st-degree murder, sexual battery with serious force and aggravated child abuse. However, Caylor claimed he was denied a fair trial because his attorney failed to challenge jurors during the selection process; did not perform a sufficient investigation during the penalty phase; failed to obtain an adequate mental health evaluation; and did not provide effective counsel in pursuing post conviction remedies. He also argued that execution by electrocution or lethal injection violated his constitutional rights, court records indicate. Fensom denied Caylor's claims. (source: Panama City News Herald) OHIO: Death row inmate's new trial request denied A judge has denied a new trial request made by a Lima man sitting on death row. Allen County Common Pleas Court Judge David Cheney overruling Jeronique Cunningham's petition for a new trial. Cunningham was convicted by a jury of 2 counts of aggravated murder, both with the death penalty specification. Earlier that year, Cunningham and his half brother Cleveland Jackson shot 8 people in an apartment on Eureka Street. 2 children died of gunshot wounds. In the petition, Cunningham claimed one of the jurors knew him and the victim's family and used the information to sway the others. The ruling states that the petition was filed too late and that there was not enough evidence to the juror misconduct claim. The case will go back to an appeals court. Jackson has run out of appeals. His execution is scheduled for next year. (source: hometownstations.com) TENNESSEE: State Supreme Court Upholds Conviction, Death Penalty For Tipton County Man The Tennessee Supreme Court has upheld the death penalty for the man who kidnapped, sexually abused, and murdered a woman in west Tennessee in 2010. Rickey Alvis Bell, Jr. appealed his conviction and sentence after a trial court found him guilty of especially aggravated kidnapping, aggravated sexual battery, and 2 alternative counts of 1st-degree felony murder. The jury sentenced Bell to death for the 1st-degree murder conviction. The Court of Criminal Appeals upheld the convictions and sentence, despite finding that 2 of the 4 aggravating circumstances that warranted the death penalty were not supported by the record. The Supreme Court, which is required to review all death penalty cases, also considered 5 other issues on appeal. The 1st issue was whether it was proper for the state to seek the death penalty in light of Bell's possible intellectual disability. The court determined that the defense failed to prove that Bell suffered from an intellectual disability that would make him ineligible for the death penalty. The court also upheld the constitutionality of Tennessee's law on this subject, concluding that defendants are permitted to present evidence of intellectual capacity in addition to I.Q. test scores, thereby avoiding any constitutional issue. Next, the court reviewed Bell's 2 motions for mistrial based on testimony that he previously had been incarcerated, which typically is not admissible. The court determined that the brief testimony was not elicited by the state and was lacking in detail, that the trial court properly instructed the jury not to consider that statement, and that the other facts presented in the case where enough to outweigh any effect that limited testimony may have had on the jury. The court also reviewed the trial court's decision to prohibit any testimony regarding the husband's extramarital affair with his ex-wife, which was ongoing at the time of the crime. The court agreed with Bell that the evidence was crucial to his defense, but determined that, in light of the entire record and the overall strength of the state's case, the information would not have altered the jury's verdict. Bell next challenged whether the evidence was sufficient to support his convictions, an issue that often is appealed. After a trial court finds a defendant guilty, the burden shifts to the defendant on appeal to prove that the jury should not have convicted him. The court determined that the proof was sufficient to support the convictions. Finally, the court reviewed the evidence supporting the aggravating circumstances as part of its mandatory review of the death sentence. Before a defendant is sentenced to death, the state is required to prove at least one aggravating circumstance in the perpetration of the crime. These circumstances include factors such as previous convictions for violent felonies, the atrociousness of the crime, and whether a rape and/or kidnapping was committed during a murder. In this case, the trial court found that 4 aggravating circumstances applied. However, upon review, the Supreme Court concluded that 2 of those factors did not apply. First, Mr. Bell's 1997 sentence from Pennsylvania did not involve a violent felony. Secondly, the trial court permitted the jury to apply the aggravating factors of the rape and kidnapping twice, when the law only permits one application. Nonetheless, the court determined that the 2 remaining aggravating circumstances apply, and supported the death sentence. The Court also determined the sentence was not disproportionate to other similar sentences. In a dissent written by Chief Justice Sharon Lee and joined by Justice Gary Wade, the 2 members of the Court disagreed with the majority on the issue of the defense presenting evidence of the husband's extramarital affair. Chief Justice Lee wrote that the evidence against Bell was not overwhelming and the trial court hindered Bell's defense by prohibiting him from presenting evidence of the victim's husband's affair. (source: The Chattanoogan) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Death Row Inmate Richard Glossip Speaks To The National ENQUIRER As the final seconds tick away before his almost-certain execution for murder in Oklahoma, a despondent Richard Glossip has spoken out to The National ENQUIRER to declare he's ready to meet his awful fate! "I don't want people thinking that I want to die as a martyr, because I don't," Glossip said in his final interview from death row. "I am ready to die to prevent this from happening to another innocent person!" Glossip will receive a lethal injection on Sept. 16 for ordering the murder of his former boss - unless the governor of Oklahoma steps in to stay the execution. However, Hollywood actress and activist Susan Sarandon has been pulling out all the stops to save the condemned man's life! Susan - who won an Oscar for her portrayal of crusading, anti-death penalty nun Sister Helen Prejean in "Dead Man Walking" - is pressuring Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin to halt the execution. In the meantime, Glossip spends the last days before he'll be strapped to a gurney and wheeled into the death chamber confined to a cramped concrete cell in front of a flickering television in McAlester, Okla. He was moved to the Oklahoma State Penitentiary's grim H-Unit, which houses death row, on Aug. 15, and sits just yards from the room where he will breathe his last. "The worst thing is, they took away my music," Glossip told British journalist Christopher Bucktin of his stark surroundings. In the wake of his interview with Bucktin, on assignment for The Mirror newspaper, Glossip can now only receive limited visits from family, clergy and lawyers. In a world exclusive, Bucktin went behind bars to meet 52-year-old Glossip, who has been dreading his execution since he was first jailed in 1998. "It was a bizarre and deeply disturbing experience - and helped me understand why campaigners like Sarandon are fighting to save this man's life," Bucktin said. Glossip was convicted of 1st-degree murder for ordering the hit that killed his boss - based on the testimony of the man who actually committed the murder. Justin Sneed, a handyman at the hotel where the 2 men worked, was able to avoid execution himself by cutting a deal with the state and fingering Glossip. When Sneed was 19, he confessed to police that on the morning of Jan. 6, 1997, he beat Barry Van Treese to death, claiming Glossip put him up to it. However, there is no physical evidence corroborating Sneed's story. "When Glossip shuffled in, hands shackled, bent at the waist and wearing prison-issue clothing, he didn't look like the heinous individuals sharing death row with him," Bucktin said. While he seemed defeated by the judicial system, Glossip showed little fear to our reporter, stunning Bucktin with his final pronouncement of innocence. "It is just crazy for this to be happening in this country, but if I have to do my part to stop this (from happening) again, I will," the shackled Glossip told Bucktin under the din of an industrial air conditioner. "I am not afraid to die, but if I do, in my heart and my head I know I was taken from this Earth for something I had no part in." Meanwhile, Susan has been giving interviews, posting on Facebook and sending emails asking people to sign a petition to stop the execution. Susan said: "Rather than accept a life sentence in exchange for a guilty plea, he put his faith in justice - and justice let him down." Susan appeared on "Dr. Phil" to put pressure on Governor Fallin, who has the authority to delay the execution by 60 days. "Fallin argued that (Glossip) had two trials and appeals and a full clemency board hearing (all) ruling his conviction and sentencing are just," said Susan. "But her argument is grossly inaccurate." Susan read a letter from the condemned man on the air. "'If the worst happens, I want my death not to be in vain,'" Susan said, her voice cracking. "There's no forensic evidence," declared Sister Helen, who joined Susan on the show. "His dying is wrong!" Top legal experts consulted by The ENQUIRER concur. Even the daughter of Glossip's accuser has cast grave doubt on her father's damning testimony. "For a couple of years now, my father has been talking to me about recanting his original testimony," O'Ryan Justine Sneed wrote in a letter. "I feel his conscience is getting to him." But it may be too little too late for Glossip, who defiantly told our reporter his death will not be without purpose. "When I am on the table, I really would like Governor Fallin and all the people who put me there to witness my execution. "I'd look at them and say, 'Look innocence in the eyes before you murder it.' That way, my blood ends up on their hands. That's what I want my last words to be. "No man should die for a crime they didn't commit." (source: National Enquirer) CALIFORNIA: California Death Penalty Appeals Process Lawsuit Could End Capital Punishment, Shape National Debate In a system plagued by delays that can last decades, getting sentenced to death in California is tantamount to serving a life sentence fraught with the uncertain threat of execution, a U.S. District Court judge ruled last year. That constant tension violates the U.S. Constitution's Eight Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment, the judge determined, because prisoners are never sure whether they would live or be executed. The ruling has thrust the nation's largest death row to the forefront of a national debate on whether the U.S.' costly capital punishment system violates human rights. California officials have asked a federal appeals panel to overturn the 2014 court ruling, but if the federal judges determine the state's death penalty system is unconstitutional, it could lead to the reprieve of the more than 740 people on death row or at least an overhaul of the system to correct its problems. The case could make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where a decision on the constitutionality of the death penalty would have national legal implications as more states debate the legal and human costs of capital punishment. "I wouldn't be surprised if other states were to abolish the death penalty, whether that be because of California or a decline in use of the death penalty nationally," said Daniel Nagin, a professor at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, who studies the death penalty. "There's clearly much less enthusiasm [for the death penalty]." The Death Penalty In California California has the highest number of people on death row in the country, outnumbering other states significantly. Florida has the 2nd highest number of death row inmates at 401, and Texas has about 271. Of the 900 people sentenced to death in California since 1978, 94 have died of natural causes and only 13 have been executed. While other states don't have as many death row inmates, they carry out more executions. Since 1976, Texas has executed 528 inmates and Oklahoma has executed 112. California has not executed a prisoner in 9 years. Capital punishment in California has created a staggering cost for taxpayers. Between 1978 and 2011, capital punishment cost California taxpayers more than $4 billion, which went toward pre-trial, trial and appeals costs, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, a non-profit organization that compiles data on the death penalty based in Washington, D.C.. The high number of California inmates waiting to be executed is a result of long delays on death row. The state Legislature created the Habeas Corpus Resource Center in 1998 to provide death row inmates who can't afford private attorneys with legal representation in their appeals. But the Legislature limits the number of court-appointed attorneys at the center to 34, making it nearly impossible for appeals to be filed for the more than 740 death penalty cases in a reasonable amount of time, Robert Dunham, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center said. Convicts sentenced to death have an automatic appeal which they cannot waive, meaning every case has to be handled by at least one attorney. The plaintiff in the 2014 case, Ernest Dewayne Jones, was sentenced to death in 1995 after being convicted of the 1992 rape and murder of his then-girlfriend's mother. Jones' attorneys argued that the state didn't allow for a timely review of his appeal and that delays in his case were much longer than in other states. U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney last year ruled in Jones's case that California's death penalty system was flawed and that delays essentially meant those on death row would languish their indefinitely, never seeing their executions carried out. Carney said the long waits inmates see on death row make the death penalty cruel and unusual. The appeals judges could rule that the state needs to fix the death penalty system instead of abolish it, said Douglas Berman, a law professor at Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio, and an expert on criminal punishment. That could mean making the wait time for death row inmates less extensive. But if the court were to say the state needs to fix the system, that could give death penalty opponents more firing power to push for the abolition of the punishment altogether, Berman said. He said opponents would most likely bring up the high cost associated with preserving the death penalty, and some lawmakers could suggest a ballot initiative to abolish executions. "They might say, 'Why throw good money after bad to make this system work?'" Berman said. Nagen said for another state to take California's lead, that state's problems with the death penalty would have to be similar to California's - extended waits on death row. That means Texas, which sentences many prisoners to death and carries out those sentences much of the time, might not look to California as a leading example. But a state like Pennsylvania, which rarely carries out death sentences, might look to whatever happens in California with more scrutiny. A National Precedent? Critics argue that the death penalty is not a dependable form of punishment given that some people sentenced to death are possibly not guilty of the crime they were convicted of. About 4 % of people on death row are thought to be innocent, underscoring a significant problem in a system that ends peoples' lives, said Austin Sarat, a jurisprudence and political science professor at Amherst College in Massachusetts. At least one U.S. Supreme Court justice has questioned the constitutionality of the death penalty in recent months, and the California case could represent an opportunity for the high court to take a broad look in the near future at whether the death penalty should be allowed in the United States. In writing the dissenting opinion in the most recent case to come before the court regarding the death penalty, Glossip v. Gross, Justice Stephen Breyer invited the issue of the constitutionality of the death penalty to come before the court. In Glossip v. Gross, attorneys for prisoners in Oklahoma claim claimed that a three-drug protocol for lethal injections was cruel and unusual because the first drug given would not make a prisoner unconscious before getting the other 2 drugs, which cause a lot of pain. The Supreme Court, however, ruled that the use of the 3-drug approach was constitutional as the petitioners in the case failed to adequately prove it was unconstitutional. Glossip v. Gross followed the same path as the California case currently under debate before being brought to the Supreme Court. It first came up in a U.S District Court, then was kicked to a U.S. Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court has made broad decisions on the death penalty before, such as in the 1972 case Furman v. Georgia, in which a temporary moratorium was placed on the death penalty nationally, and the 1976 case Gregg v. Georgia, in which the court said the death penalty could be used in the country. Support On The Decline The Connecticut Supreme Court struck down the state's death penalty as unconstitutional in August, relieving 11 inmates on death row. Connecticut was the seventh state to abolish capital punishment since 2007 after Illinois, Maryland, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York and New Mexico. As of 2015, a total of 19 states and Washington, D.C. do not have the death penalty, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. While many Americans support the death penalty, opponents of capital punishment have grown in recent decades. Some 48 % of people say they favor life without parole for murderers instead of the death penalty, while 43 % of people favored the death penalty for convicted murderers, according to a June poll from Quinnipiac University in Hamden, Connecticut. Researchers have also found that while 56 % of people favor the death penalty overall, support for capital punishment has dropped since 1996, when 78 % of people favored execution, according to an April poll from the Pew Research Center, a think tank based in Washington, D.C. If California were to throw out its death penalty, it could create a domino effect around the country, some legal experts predict. "Indisputably, every state that has modified its death penalty in any way has had an echo effect in other states and around the country," Berman said. Michael Radelet, a sociology professor at the University of Colorado in Boulder, Colorado, who studies capital punishment, said that if California's death penalty were to be abolished, it would influence people in other states who make decisions regarding the death penalty, such as jurors and prosecutors. "It would make it more acceptable for jurors to voice reservations about the death penalty and make it more palatable for prosecutors to decline to seek a death sentence," Radelet said. Declining support for the death penalty in recent years has already influenced the way states sentence people to death. Since the 1990's, death sentences have decreased by more than 2/3, Sarat said. "The most important thing is the recognition that the death penalty system is unreliable," Sarat said. "It's the machinery of death." (source: International Business Times) ************ Case delayed for man accused of killing 3-year-old Sophia Acosta A man accused of killing a toddler was in court Thursday. His defense team is trying to get the death penalty off the table but the hearing has been postponed. The family of 3-year-old Sophia Acosta gathered outside a courtroom on Thursday. Cameras weren't allowed to show the toddler's accused killer, Christopher Cheary, in court. His defense team is trying to get the death penalty off the table. However, the hearing was continued until October 6th. "Recently they've been subpoenaing information from the prison system and we're stuck dealing with those issues," said David Alavezos, a supervising prosecutor. Sophia would be 7 if she were still alive today. Instead her life was cut short in May 2011 when she was found injured and not breathing. Less than a month later Christopher Cheary was arrested by Exeter police. He was dating Sophia's mom. Cheary faces murder and sexual assault charges. There are special circumstances attached to those charges that if convicted could mean the death penalty. Alavezos says death penalty cases include a penalty phase trial after the regular trial. Alavezos added, "The defense can present all kinds of evidence for why life without possibility of parole is more appropriate punishment than the death penalty." The trial is set to start in January -- that's what the family has been wanting for more than 4 years. "We are seeking justice, we know they want justice and its gonna take some time to go through the process," said Alavezos. The prosecution says they've been ready for the trial for 2 years. (source: ABC news) USA: Man Facing Death Penalty Retrial for 2000 Killing Due in Court----Federal prosecutors have formally filed notice that they will again seek the death penalty against Donald Fell A Vermont man facing a new trial for the 2000 killing of a woman who was abducted when she arrived for work at a Rutland supermarket and later killed is due to appear in federal court. Federal prosecutors have formally filed notice that they will again seek the death penalty against Donald Fell in the 2000 killing of Terry King of North Clarendon. Fell was convicted of killing King in 2005 and sentenced to death, but his conviction was overturned because of juror misconduct. He is now facing a retrial in September 2016. Among the issues expected to be discussed Friday is a 2012 incident in which Fell allegedly tried to kill another death row inmate in a federal prison in Indiana. (source: necn.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Fri Sep 11 09:14:49 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 09:14:49 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 11 AUSTRALIA/INDONESIA: Bali 9 executions left no lasting damage in Australia-Indonesia relations: Foreign Minister Julie Bishop 4 months after the Bali 9 executions, Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has said diplomatic relations between Australia and Indonesia have been absolutely repaired. Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran were executed by Indonesian authorities in April. Prior to that, Australian PM Tony Abbott reminded Indonesia of Australia's tsunami relief contribution and appealed for clemency. Amid speculations of causing irreparable damage in the bilateral relations between the countries, Indonesia went ahead with the executions anyway. The Australian foreign minister has now said there was no "lasting damage" done. Bishop's statement on Thursday revealed that she and her Indonesian counterpart Retno Marsudi are "text buddies." She has also said the lines of communication have opened up "at all levels." "It is a broad, diverse and deep relationship. It has its challenges from time to time but the overall relationship is in good shape," The Australian quoted Bishop by saying. "The personal contact between Australian government ministers and our counterparts is very important and that's why Retno Marsudi and I keep in constant contact." Indonesian Coordinating Maritime Affairs Minister Rizal Ramli said on Tuesday Australia was among 47 additional countries which would enjoy its visa-free policy. The latest move helps the number of countries with visa-free status with the Asian country go up to 92. The decision was made to boost the tourism industry in the country. Rizal said 3 countries with "drugs, economic or radicalisation problems" had been excluded from the original proposal of 50 countries. "We hope this extension will double the country's foreign exchange income to US$20 million in the next 5 years," The Jakarta Post quoted him saying. Indonesia targets 20 million tourist arrivals in the next 5 years. (source: ibtimes.com) TAIWAN: Man sentenced to death for killing woman with mallet The Kaohsiung District Court sentenced a man to death for killing a retired teacher with an iron mallet in Kaohsiung last year. The man, Liu Chih-ming, 38, was given the death sentence earlier this week. The ruling can be appealed. Prosecutors said Liu rode his motorcycle around the streets of Zuoying District in Kaohsiung in December last year to look for his ex-girlfriend, who broke up with him the previous month. He stopped by Lotus Pond, drank a bottle of Kaoliang and headed to a local temple. Seeing a woman - a retired teacher surnamed Chen - open the driver-side door to her car after buying groceries at the market, Liu thought of hijacking her car so he could look for his ex-girlfriend. He forced his way into the car and struck Chen in the head with an iron mallet, which incapacitated her, prosecutors said. He then pushed her into the passenger seat and attempted to drive the car away, but the vehicle's gear shift was locked, they said. He demanded that Chen, who was still conscious, unlock the gear shift. When she did not respond, he struck her repeatedly in the head, prosecutors said. An autopsy showed that Chen was struck 13 times in the head. Liu stole NT$2,000 from Chen's purse, wiped the bloodstains from the car and fled from the crime scene on his motorcycle. He hid for 5 days before he was apprehended by police, prosecutors said. Liu was found guilty of robbery, murder and other offenses. The court statement said that Liu killed Chen in a cruel manner, then tried to conceal his crime by destroying evidence and hiding from the law. "The judge concurs with prosecutors in seeking the death penalty for Liu, because of the cruelty of the crime, and little likelihood of him making amends and reintegrating into society," the ruling said. "Giving a life term or other prison terms in this case would not reflect the severity of the crime, and would fail to uphold justice and fairness in society," it said. (source: Taipei Times) BARBADOS: The end of the noose? The recent assertion of retired High Court judge, Mr. Leroy Inniss, that he is personally not against the imposition of the death penalty and believes that it should remain on the statute books, might afford some comfort to those who, perhaps not unreasonably, believe that this form of punishment is an effective answer to the current spate of slayings by the use of illegal guns. A word of caution should be introduced to such persons at some stage however, given that the applicable jurisprudence, global trends and not least of all, our national treaty commitments all suggest a real unlikelihood that there will be a hanging anytime soon or at all. Indeed, it would appear as if the authorities have conceded defeat on the issue. In the first place, we took a giant step backwards earlier this year with our repeal of the mandatory death penalty for murder convictions. And officialdom has not displayed any indecent haste in attempting to negate the consequences of the notorious decision of the Judicial Committee of Her Majesty's Privy Council in Pratt v Morgan that effectively renders unconstitutional the execution of the death penalty if not carried out within 5 years of its imposition. Clearly, this would have required an acceleration of the investigative, judicial and appeals process in respect of such sentences. However, according to credible reports, business in the criminal court system remains as usual. More over, this jurisdiction was called upon earlier this month by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights [IAHCR] to explain its indolence in complying with a 2009 order by that tribunal to abolish the death penalty in keeping with its undertakings under the American Convention on Human Rights. In response, it seems from reports, our representatives could pray in aid only a crowded legislative agenda and the provisions of section 26 of our Constitution that legitimises all pre-Independence law even if it is in textual conflict with the fundamental rights provisions of the Constitution. This provision itself has already been the subject of adverse comment by that same judicial body. The truth is that for all the learned and other disquisitions on the utility of maintaining the death penalty in our legislation, we are fighting a battle against the odds; including substantial doubt as to its effectiveness in moulding societal behaviour; the inclination of superior courts; our voluntarily ratified international obligations; and a hemispheric imperative of abolition. The battle may also be one against time. It is now the case that an entire generation has elapsed since the death penalty was last instituted locally and, to our best knowledge, there is at present no individual convict against whom such a sentence may be carried out. His Honour Mr Justice Inniss (ret'd) is of the mind that it might be good "to let it remain there ... in case you think you have to use it". We can understand this view that converts the possibility of state execution into a deterrent for those inclined unlawfully to take a life and as a tool to which the authorities may have recourse at some time in future. We are still to be persuaded of the effectiveness of such a proposal, however. Even as we write, the death penalty is still on the books although in a slightly adjusted form to be availed of when the circumstances require. It is decidedly not the case that this reality has had any palliative effect on incidence of unlawful homicides in our neck of the woods. (source: Editorial, The Barbados Advocate) *********************** Abolish death penalty A quarter of a century ago a top law enforcement official in Barbados made a bold, albeit private, prediction. It was: "You will never see another execution in our country." How come? For one thing, he replied, capital punishment solves nothing. It may satisfy people's need for vengeance but it doesn't deter crime. For another, both major political parties, the Democratic Labour Party and the Barbados Labour Party, which take turns running the country, are opposed to the death penalty. So while they have suspended carrying out executions and judges go through the motions of sentencing convicted murders to death, governments and the opposition wouldn't take the next logical and correct step and remove it from the statute books altogether. How come? Public opposition to the death penalty wouldn't get them many votes. England, which introduced capital punishment in Barbados and its Caribbean neighbours more than 150 years ago, finally abolished it there in 1969, 5 years after the last executions were carried out there in 1964. The issues of capital punishment and what to do about the rising tide of gun violence and related deaths have come roaring back in Barbados. Just the other day, retired Justice Leroy Inniss put it on the table for discussion. It has triggered a rising chorus "bring back the gallows". Don't be surprised if there is an accompanying chant of barbarism: impose lashes with the cat-o-9 tails. That may be next. But what have we learned about the use of the death penalty in recent years? A stubborn and enduring bit of mythology is that capital punishment deters killings. United Nations sponsored global research has shown that the deterrence effect isn't support by fact. Texas, a death penalty state in the United States with a high rate of executions also has a homicide rate that is higher than states that have abolished it. Then there is the simple fact that most homicides are crimes of passion committed without by people who know the victims. They act without thinking about being punished. Next is a miscarriage of justice. When courts make mistakes and order innocent people to be executed, we can't bring the wrongfully convicted back to life after execution. Scores of people have been exonerated after they were first found guilty of murder. The finality of the death sentence prevents us from telling the convicted we are sorry. Admittedly, the jump in killings in Barbados in recent years is making us nervous wrecks. But the truth is that life in prison without any possibility of eventual freedom is a far tougher punishment and a much better solution. Going to prison for life isn't a walk in Queen's Park on Christmas morning. The Government should put a legal stamp of approval on its capital punishment moratorium by enacting legislation that abolishes it, once and for all. It wouldn't be greeted with universal acclaim but it is the right thing to do. (source: Barbados Nation News) IRAN----execution Iranian Authorities Hang Schoolteacher Accused of Drug Trafficking The death sentences for Mahmoud Barati and 10 other prisoners were reportedly carried out at Ghezel Hesar Prison on Monday September 7. Before his arrest in 2006, Mahmoud Barati was an elementary school teacher and father to a 3-year-old son. He made ends meet by working a 2nd job as a taxi driver. His son, now 12 years old, is left wondering why his father was killed by Iranian authorities. Mahmoud's brother, Ahmad Barati, was arrested first. In the city of Robat Karim, Iranian authorities charged Ahmad with possessing and trafficking half a Kilogram of crack. Fearing that Ahmad would be executed, Mahmoud and his mother and sister traveled to the Tehran region to do whatever they could to help. After several months of pursuing Ahmad's case, the 3 of them were also arrested by authorities and accused of drug possession. A Barati family member who asked to be anonymous tells Iran Human Rights: "The drugs seized from Ahmad by authorities weren't even his, he was selling it for a friend. Mahmoud tried to pressure the owner of the drugs to help save Ahmad from death row, but the owner of the drugs was also arrested for drug possession. The drug owner suspected that Mahmoud had snitched on him, so he retaliated by telling the authorities that he had bought his drugs from Mahmoud and his sister and mother. That's how Mahmoud and his sister and mother were arrested by authorities." The confirmed source describes to Iran Human Rights the situation for Mahmoud during his interrogations: "They placed pressure on him in various ways to force false confessions. The interrogator told Mahmoud that he must confess now, and that he would get a chance to explain the truth later in court. The interrogator said that if Mahmoud complied, his sister and mother would be freed. Mahmoud agreed and confessed to whatever the interrogator wanted. When Mahmoud tried to explain in court that the accusations against him are false, his testimony was not considered by the Judiciary. When the owner of the drugs finally realized that Mahmoud had not snitched on him, he wrote a letter to authorities confessing to his mistake, but the authorities did not consider the letter. In 2011, the owner of the drugs, who was also on death row, wrote a second letter to authorities. The same day he released the letter, authorities took Mahmoud and the drug owner to the gallows and carried out the execution order for the drug owner - the second letter had caused authorities to suspend Mahmoud's execution order. The letter was sent to the Revolutionary Court for consideration in overturning Mahmoud's death sentence, but nothing changed." Ahmad Barati is currently on death row and is reportedly held in exile in the Central Prison of Tehran. "Mahmoud Barati is one of many prisoners in Iran who was charged with a drug related offense in an unfair trial and then later hanged to death," says Mahmoud Amiry-Moghaddam, the spokesperson for Iran Human Rights. UNODC Helping to Legitimize Executions for Drug Related Offenses While executions for drug related offenses continue in full force in Iran, the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime has renewed and increased cooperation in the fight against drugs with the Iranian authorities. On numerous occasions Iran Human Rights has asked the United Nations and governments who fund UNODC programs to make their funding conditional on an end to the death penalty for drug related offenses. The non-transparent and unfair detention and trial of people detained for drug-related charges has been opposed by many human rights organizations. Prisoners in Iran are issued trumped-up charges and sentenced to death in Revolutionary Court trials where they are not given the right to appeal. The trials are carried out behind closed doors and the lawyer and the accused are never given enough time to defend their side. Defendants are systematically psychologically and physically tortured under custody and are not given access to an attorney. Many defendants are arrested and sentenced to death for drug related offenses, even though authorities have no tangible evidence of the defendant ever possessing narcotics. According to Iran's anti-drug laws, a person who possesses more than five Kilograms of opium or 30 Grams of heroin, morphine or cocaine may be sentenced to death. Days before Iranian authorities hanged Mahmoud Barati and ten other prisoners to death, human rights groups, including Amnesty International, issued statements calling on the Iranian authorities to halt the schoolteacher's execution. (source: Iran Human Rights) INDIA: Mumbai train bombings: 12 face death penalty over 2006 terror attacks ---- 7-year trial ends with suspects guilty of murder and criminal conspiracy over attacks in which 188 people died An Indian court has convicted 12 people over the bombings of seven Mumbai commuter trains that killed 188 people and wounded 800 others in July 2006. The accused were found guilty of murder and criminal conspiracy charges and will be sentenced on Monday. They could face the death penalty. The trial in Mumbai lasted more than 7 years. Prosecutors say the conspiracy was hatched by Pakistan's Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and carried out by Lashkar-e-Tayyaba operatives with help from the Students' Islamic Movement of India, a banned militant organisation. The Lashkar-e-Tayyaba is a Pakistan-based Islamist militant group. Pakistan has denied the Indian claims. (source: The Guardian) **************** Court awards death penalty to rapist The special session judge has sentenced a rapist to death penalty besides a fine of Rs. 50,000. The incident occurred in the year 2013, when the rapist killed a 10 year boy after sodomising him. According to police sources, on 17 November 2013, a boy aged 10 year was found missing under the police station Khimlasha. Police registered a case of kidnapping and started investigations. Later as the body of boy was found on 20 November, the police registered the case under section 363, 364, 377, 302 and 201 of IPC and also child protection act of 2012 of section 4. The police arrested Sachin Kushwaha (28) for committing the crime. After hearing the case, the session and special judge Anil Verma, pronounced the sentence on Thursday, awarding culprit Sachin Kushwaha a death penalty and a fine of Rs. 50,000. (source: The Free Press Journal) NIGERIA: Govs reject death penalty for looters Many governors, who spoke with The PUNCH, on Thursday, out rightly rejected the suggestion that looters of the nation???s resources be sentenced to death. Organised labour- the Nigerian Labour Congress and the Trade Union Congress-at the beginning of the week said looters should be given the death sentence in order to serve as deterrence to others. Labour said it was only by killing looters that the anti-corruption crusade being championed by President Muhammadu Buhari could succeed. But most governors, who reacted to the labour suggestion on Thursday, said the death sentence would be too harsh. Ogun State Governor Ibikunle Amosun said he would rather canvass that looters be sentenced to life imprisonment, rather than the death sentence prescribed by the organised labour. Amosun said this while addressing the state workers who had marched to the Oke Mosan state secretariat in Abeokuta to give their backing to Buhari's anti-corruption crusade. The state chapters of the NLC and TUC organised the rally. The governor said, "Everybody knows President Muhammadu Buhari is transparent and meants well for the nation and would never want to hear anything about corruption. "Even under 100 days in office, electricity is improving. People know that if you try it you are gone. I always say this, whether you are a governor, permanent secretary or labour leader, you cannot be corrupt under a leader that is not corrupt, because you will be punished. "Unfortunately as a governor, I cannot be saying that capital punishment should be meted out to corrupt public officials. Because I cannot say that, that is why I will say that anybody that is found wanting, whether you are governor or any other public officer should be jailed for life." He however said that not only politicians should shun corruption but every Nigerian. "It is not only politicians that should shun corruption, workers too should not be corrupt," he said. His counterpart in Plateau State, Simon Lalong, also said he would rather prefer life imprisonment to death penalty. Lalong's Director of Press Affairs, Mr. Emmanuel Nanle, told our correspondent that "in all his discussions, Lalong has never mentioned death sentence. He has always preferred life imprisonment to taking human life because to him life is sacred." Also both governors of Ekiti and Rivers states, Ayodele Fayose and Nyesom Wike respectively, out rightly rejected death penalty for looters. Fayose, who reacted through his Chief Press Secretary, Mr. Idowu Adelusi, said jail sentence was better and capable of reforming thieves. "In countries where death penalty was introduced, it has not stopped looting. In advanced countries like US, jail sentence is the penalty. What we need is proper moral education to change orientation of the people. Jail sentence is better; it can reform," he told one of our correspondents in Ado Ekiti, the state capital. Wike said that Nigeria had enough laws to deter people from fleecing the nation. The governor, who spoke through his special adviser on media, Opunabo Inko-Tariah, said that the labour unions merely made the recommendation because of the impunity with which public office holders loot the nation's treasury. He said, "Nigerians have a role to play by deriding looters and not to praise them for their fiscal irresponsibility. There should be a strong punitive measure to discourage looting because of its domino effects. When a treasury is looted, there won't be money for the provision of necessities such as hospitals, roads, etc. "Maybe because it happened in Ghana and the economy improved, the labour organisations want it in Nigeria. But that was a military regime and Jerry Rawlings was a military man. However, the extant laws on looting need serious and urgent review, even if the death penalty is discouraged." Governor Olusegun Mimiko of Ondo State said he was comfortable with whatever the people want in relation to punishment for looters. Mimiko, who spoke through his information commissioner, Kayode Akinmade, said if it was the wish of the people of the country that looters should be killed by law, "so be it" but that the process of law must be followed in carrying out such executions. He said, "We are not under a military rule; this is democracy and we have constitution that we follow. If it is put in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, irrespective of whether you are a governor or not, so be it. If that is what Nigerians want, it is okay. "Everybody is against corruption, but there is a process of making law. Thank God we have a National Assembly and the state assemblies who are representative of the people. If such bill could be sent to the national and state assemblies and be passed into law, it must become a law. "If the process is followed and it is the wish of Nigerians that looters be killed, why not? Let it become a law. It is a fact that Nigerians are not happy with this corruption tag, which has slowed down our economic development but if we have a law that will bring about capital punishment for the looters, it is okay." Governor Rauf Aregbesola of Osun State on Thursday declined comment on whether looters should be sentenced to death or not. Aregbesola's media aide, Semiu Okanlawon, when contacted, said he did not know the mind of his principal on the matter and promised to contact the governor and get back to our correspondent but Okanlawon had yet to keep the promise as of the time of this report. Subsequent calls to his mobile telephone line also did not connect. The Special Adviser (Media and Public Affairs) to Governor Adams Oshiomhole of Edo State, Mr. Kassim Afegbua, told one of our correspondents on the telephone that his principal needed to personally examine the issue of whether to accept death penalty for looters or not because "it requires a process." "It has to go through a bill. It has to be an act of parliament and a lot of things would go into it," he said. Enugu State governor's Senior Special Assistant on Public Affairs, Mr. Louis Amoke, said he would also need to consult his principal, Governor Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi, to get his position on the matter. "I will have to get in touch with him to know his position on the matter, it is very sensitive and I will not talk without finding out from him," Amoke told our correspondent. As of the time of this report, Amoke said he had yet to have a contact with the governor. The Governor of Nasarawa State, Umaru Al-Makura, however, said he supported that capital punishment be meted out to corrupt public office holders. "I really agree with the NLC over call for capital punishment for any public office holder who is found guilty of looting public funds," the governor said in an interview with one of our correspondents. (source: Punch Nigeria) From rhalperi at smu.edu Fri Sep 11 14:36:05 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 14:36:05 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----FLA., ARK., S. DAK., USA Message-ID: Sept. 11 FLORIDA: Bessman Okafor case: Hearing delayed despite Jeff Ashton's objection----Jury finds Bessman Okafor guilty of 1st-degree murder, all other counts A jury has recommended Okafor be put to death for the 2012 witness execution of 19-year-old Alex Zaldivar. A hearing for convicted murder Bessman Okafor's possible death penalty has been delayed at the request of his defense attorneys. Circuit Judge John Marshall Kest said he will reset the hearing for some time in October. The judge has also pushed the sentencing hearing back to Nov. 17. Orange-Osceola State Attorney Jeff Ashton objected to the delay. Now a judge must decide whether to impose capital punishment or sentence Okafor to life in prison. Last month a jury convicted Okafor of 1st-degree murder to prevent Zaldivar and his 2 roommates from taking the stand after their Ocoee home was robbed. Zaldivar was killed by 2 fatal bullets to the back of his head. The same jury recommended he receive the death penalty after hearing testimony about Okafor's upbringing in the 31/2 week trial. (source: Orlando Sentinel) ARKANSAS: 8 Planned Executions in Arkansas 'Out of Step' With US Opinion - NGO Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson's decision to resume executions of prisoners on death row flies in the face of mounting opposition to capital punishment across the United States, advocacy group Equal Justice USA Executive Director Shari Silberstein told Sputnik. "Setting 8 execution dates after a long hiatus is out of step with a strong trend across the United States to move away from the death penalty," Silberstein said. On Wednesday, Hutchinson announced execution dates for eight convicted felons which will revive the practice of the death penalty process in Arkansas after it was dormant for 10 years. Arkansas Governor Sets Dates for Inmates Executions for 1st Time in 10 Years 2 executions are scheduled to take place once a month starting on October 21. The last 2 of the 8 inmates will be executed on January 14, 2016. Silberstein said 7 US states have already banned the death penalty, while four others have officially stopped any sort of death row execution. "Americans have seen the writing on the wall: the death penalty is a failed policy that risks executing innocent people, wastes millions of taxpayer dollars and distracts from public safety," she said. On September 1, Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge sent a letter to Hutchinson urging him to set execution dates for the 8 prisoners as their legal appeals had been exhausted and the state had enough drugs to carry out the executions by lethal injection. Capital punishment is currently the law in 31 US states, and abolished in 19 states. (source: sputniknews.com) SOUTH DAKOTA: Prosecutor mulling death penalty in Lead stabbing death The Lawrence County State's Attorney is still deciding whether to seek the death penalty against a Lead man charged in the Aug. 12 stabbing death of a 27-year-old woman. James Lewis Rogers Jr. is charged with one count of 1st-degree murder in the death of Caitlin Kelly Walsh. Rogers pleaded not guilty and has been held without bond in Lawrence County Jail since his arrest. State's Attorney John Fitzgerald tells the Rapid City Journal that prosecutors are still reviewing the facts of this case. Fitzgerald declined to comment on whether a potential plea deal was being discussed with Rogers and his court-appointed Rapid City defense attorney, Ellery Grey. Lead police say they arrested Rogers on Aug. 17 after discovering Walsh's body in his Main Street apartment. (source: Associated Press) USA: The Executions That Still Shock ---- 2 new plays revisit Roy Cohn and the Rosenbergs, whose stories continue to haunt the Jewish psyche. Whether it was the crime of the century or a government frame-up of an innocent Jewish couple - or, as is more likely, something in the middle - the execution for treason of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg continues to send shockwaves through American culture. Among the most troubling and fascinating aspects of the case was the involvement of Roy Cohn, the (secretly) gay, corrupt Jewish attorney who prosecuted the Jewish couple. 2 plays that opened last week in New York, Joan Beber's "In Bed With Roy Cohn," which imagines Cohn's last days, and Karen Ludwig's 1-woman show, "Where Was I?" in which she recalls playing Ethel Rosenberg in the 1992 TV film, "Citizen Cohn," testify to the unslackened grip of the Rosenberg case on our collective imagination. Cohn grew up in an observant Jewish family in the Bronx; his father, Albert Cohn, was active in Democratic Party politics. After graduating from Columbia Law School in 1947 at the age of 20, and being admitted to the bar a year later, Cohn was immediately hired by Irving Saypol, the U.S. attorney in Manhattan, and began prosecuting Communists in counterespionage cases. The 1951 trial of the Rosenbergs, who were accused of passing atomic secrets to the Soviets, thrust Cohn into the national spotlight; his direct examination of Ethel's brother, David Greenglass, was a major factor in the couple's conviction and execution. (Half a century later, Greenglass admitted to New York Times writer Sam Roberts that he had lied on the stand in order to divert attention from himself and his wife, Ruth, who had also been part of the spy ring. And in the grand jury transcript of his testimony, released just 2 months ago, Greenglass never mentioned that his sister was involved in any way, which has led legal experts to conclude that Ethel was innocent.) After the Rosenberg case, Cohn became Sen. Joseph McCarthy's right-hand man in conducting his crusade against Communists, many of whom were also Jewish. He went on to have many high-profile clients, from mafia boss John Gotti to nightclub owner Ian Schrager to the New York Yankees. One such client, now-presidential candidate Donald Trump, is even said to have learned his abrasive style of public discourse from Cohn. But Cohn's career ended in disgrace. He had just been disbarred when he died of AIDS in 1986. Cohn was most famously portrayed in Tony Kushner's "Angels in America," a 1990s Pulitzer Prize-winning two-part play, filmed in 2003 by HBO, in which the power-mad attorney appears fiendishly realistic. By contrast, Beber's play, which is directed by Katrin Hilbe, is a more surrealistic take on Cohn (Christopher Daftsios); in it, the dying lawyer, surrounded by blinking vital signs on the walls of his bedroom, hallucinates that he is visited by figures from his past like Ronald Reagan (Nelson Avidon), Barbara Walters (Lee Roy Rogers) and Julius Rosenberg (Ian Gould). Cohn's overbearing mother, Dora (Marilyn Sokol, "Old Jews Telling Jokes") is, the play suggests, most responsible for Cohn???s deep-seated psychological conflicts, because of her disapproval of his homosexual lifestyle. Beber, 81, is the author of a previous play about the Rosenbergs, "Ethel Sings," which ran in New York in 2013. She grew up in Omaha, Neb., the daughter of an attorney who was a distant relative of Ethel Rosenberg, and who not only visited the Rosenbergs in prison but also fruitlessly tried to get President Dwight Eisenhower to intervene in the case. In an interview, Beber told The Jewish Week that while she was only a teenager when the Rosenbergs were executed, she developed a lifelong fascination with the case, and particularly with Cohn. While Cohn was, the playwright opined, a "hateful person," he suffered from the "agony of having to hide his homosexuality," which he identified with utter powerlessness. "I wanted to find some humanity in him," she explained, in contrast to what she perceives as Kushner's portrayal, in which he is, she believes, "not explored in a complex way - he's just shouting, loud and impossible." For Ludwig, 72, who grew up in a Reform Jewish family in San Francisco, playing Ethel Rosenberg on TV has been a highlight of a career that has ranged from portraying Meryl Streep's lover in Woody Allen's 1979 film, "Manhattan," to performing, in 1991, in Craig Lucas' Broadway play, "Prelude to a Kiss." When she was a child, Ludwig recalled in an interview, she came home from school to see her father crying while watching TV. The Rosenbergs had just been electrocuted. Given that early memory, the opportunity to play Ethel, she said, "detonated in my body," and she became obsessed with "recreating everything that I could about her life and death." In the show, directed by Dorothy Lyman, Ludwig acts out the rehearsal of the electrocution scene - in which she was asked to be more vocal than Ethel actually was during her execution - and discusses how she felt waiting in her trailer to do the scene just as Ethel waited in her cell to be conducted to the electric chair. In the same way, playing Cohn on stage has given Mark Yochum, a law professor at Duquesne University in Pittsburgh, both a personal and professional fascination with the corrupt attorney. After performing last year in a regional theater production of both parts of "Angels in America," Yochum, who specializes in bankruptcy law and legal ethics, was inspired to organize a continuing legal education (CLE) seminar on Cohn in which he analyzed Cohn's misdeeds, ranging from his ex parte communications with Judge Irving Kaufman in the Rosenberg case (in which Cohn urged him to impose the death penalty) to later incidents of bribery - and perhaps even murder. Portraying the "spectacular, sharp dressing, flamboyant" character, Yochum said, "was like playing the Joker in 'Batman' - you know that whenever Cohn comes on the stage, there will be fireworks." Henry Feingold, an emeritus professor of American Jewish history at Baruch College, has written widely on the reaction of American Jewry to the Holocaust. Feingold, who himself participated in the marches for the Rosenbergs that took place in New York, recalled that many Jews at the time felt that America, "which had not done enough to save the Jews of Europe, was now giving vent to the kind of anti-Semitism that could - and did - stage a judicial lynching." As Cohn rode the wave of anti-Communist hysteria, he became, Feingold noted, "the answer to an anti-Semitic dream, a Jewish caricature who acted out every canard that had ever been thrown at the Jews throughout history." "In Bed With Roy Cohn" runs through Saturday, Oct. 3 at the Lion Theatre, 410 W. 42nd St. Performances are Tuesday at 7 p.m. and Wednesdays-Saturdays at 8 p.m., Saturdays at 2 p.m. and Sundays at 3 p.m. For tickets, $56.25-$66.25, call (212) 239-6200 or visit telecharge.com. "Where Was I?" runs through Sunday, Sept. 13 at Theatre 54, 244 W. 54th St. Performances are Thursdays-Saturdays at 8 p.m. and Sundays at 3 p.m. For tickets $18, call (212) 352-3101 or visit SpinCycleNYC.com. (source: thejewishweek.com) ****************** Neuroscience and the Future of the Insanity Defense----A legal scholar discusses why neuroimaging won't soon change how our courts measure crazy. The concept of the insanity defense dates back to ancient Greece and the Roman Empire. The idea has always been the same: Protect individuals from being held accountable for behavior they couldn't control. Yet there have been more than a few historical and recent instances of a judge or jury issuing a controversial "by reason of ..." verdict. What was intended as a human rights effort has become a last-ditch way to save killers (though it didn't work for James Holmes). The question that hangs in the air at these sort of proceedings has always been the same: Is there a way to make determinations more scientific and less traditionally judicial? Adam Shniderman, a criminal justice researcher at Texas Christian University, has been studying the role of neuroscience in the court system for several years now. He explains that neurological data and explanations don't easily translate into the world of lawyers and legal text. Inverse spoke with Shniderman to learn more about how neuroscience is used in today's insanity defenses, and whether this is likely to change as the technology used to observe the brain gets better and better. Can you give me a quick overview of how the role of neuroscience in the courts, has changed over the years? Especially in the last few decades with new advances in technology. Obviously, [neuroscientific evidence] has become more widely used as brain-scanning technology has gotten better. Some of the scanning technology we use now, like functional MRI that measures blood oxygenation as a proxy for neurological activity, is relatively new within the last 20 years or so. The nature of brain scanning has changed, but the knowledge that the brain influences someone???s actions is not new. I don't know how familiar you are in the case of Charles Whitman. He was the Texas Belltower shooter in 1966 who killed over a dozen people on the campus of University of Texas, Austin, after killing his mother. He sort of intuitively knew that something had gone wrong with him, so he asked in his suicide note that his brain be examined during his autopsy for irregularities. They actually found out that he had a tumor pressing on his frontal lobe, which may have been a significant cause in this aberrant behavior. Neuroscience certainly played a growing role in courtrooms from then on. There was a big 2007 New York Times Magazine article called, "The Brain on the Stand," that got people very interested in the notion that the brain would radically change the way criminal cases are tried; that it would radically change the conception of why people do what they do. But, you tend to find that this neuroscience is coupled with the study of psychopathy, and people aren't really sympathetic to psychopaths. That makes sense. The other, bigger problem is that the insanity defense isn't sort of what you might think of colloquially as insane. In most jurisdictions, it has to do with the knowledge of what's right versus wrong. So if you knew what you did was right or wrong at the time you did it, you aren't legally insane. So you tend to find that the very rare case where it is successful is like a paranoid schizophrenic who is completely in the state of delusion, and didn't know it was wrong because they thought they were killing ants, not people. It must be extremely difficult to prove that sort of state of mind. The insanity defense has little to do with the ability to sort of control your actions. We still haven't seen really much of an effect of neuroscience on the insanity defense - in part because the insanity defense is rarely offered and even more rarely successful. Contrary to the popular myth that people plead insanity all the time and then it works and they're back out on the streets, it's just rarely offered because criminals don't really want to be labeled insane. And juries, because of the potential misconception that you get to walk away and there's no repercussions for people who are deemed legally insane, very rarely find anyone legally insane. So neuroscience has had less of an impact directly in the insanity defense. Insanity plays a bigger role in sentencing, rather than convicting. The insanity defense is more used to mitigate punishment rather than exculpation via insanity. Do you see that moving in a different direction in any way in the next few years or in the next several years? Is the role of neuroscience in the insanity defense going to stay this way, with an emphasis in sentencing rather than determining guilt? The champions of neuroscience said, 'This is great, look at neuroscience is in the Supreme Court!' Some of us sort of said, "that's great, but it's really just a sort of crutch for a decision that they already wanted to come to on things we already knew." There's a reason insurance companies don't lower your rates until you're 25; there's a reason that, you know, all sorts of things. You can't rent a car until you're 25 because we knew that brain development wasn't fully formed in minors and people that are under 25 made worst decisions, they're more impulsive, etc. I mean, sort of when I teach this stuff, I say, you know, 'How many of your parents know you make bad decisions 'cause you're teenagers?" Every parent knows that teenagers make bad decisions, so it wasn't really any novel insight that this neuroscience that was submitted by the APA to the Supreme Court in a brief really shed light on. But, it was in a way to sort of bolster their decision. At the time - this was about 2005, I believe, maybe a couple years later - sort of used what was popular. Neuroscience was very popular. I think so. In research I did with a colleague that was published in Plos One, we looked at a phenomenon in social psychology called 'motivated reasoning,' which is where people sort of assimilate information in biased ways to come to desired conclusions. So science is popular with juries. But don't they struggle to interpret it? After all, it's not like jurors can be expected to have an applicable background. We made up a bunch neuroscience studies. They weren't real, but they were plausible, about the death penalty and about abortion. We basically showed participants how these supposed neuroscience studies back up the notion that either the death penalty was or was not a more effective deterrent to crime than life without parole or any other sentence. And we asked people to rate the studies. We looked at whether the participants' prior attitudes were a significant predictor of how they dealt with the neuroscience data, and it turned out that it was. People who were pro-death penalty rated the study really well when it said that the death penalty was a deterrent and really bad when it said it wasn't a deterrent. People who were anti-death penalty - sort of a flip. When we said the death penalty was a deterrent and the neuroscience data supported this, they said 'Oh, that's bad science, that's biased reporting, the researcher has an agenda,' and all this stuff. All of this is to say that people's prior attitudes seems to be one of the biggest determinants in how they evaluate neuroscience. If they agree that criminals are the worst and criminals should be put to death and all of this kind of very harsh-on-crime attitude, then if you give them neuroscience that says, 'Well, he's really not that responsible. He's not that bad a guy. It's his brain that made him do it.' They're simply going to say, 'Aw, that's bad science. That's BS, I don't trust it, it's biased. I know what I know. Your science is flawed.' In some sense, neuroscience is still just telling us a lot of what we already knew from psychology and just from common sense. In Graham vs. Florida, the Supreme Court said, "look, neuroscience tells us that the brain isn't fully formed in minors and therefore they're not of the most, you know, culpable class of offenders. So we can't sentence them to life without parole for non-homicide crimes because that's sort of reserved for among the worst of the worst of offenders. And these people can be changed because their brain still allows them to change." The champions of neuroscience said, 'this is great! Neuroscience is in the Supreme Court!' Some of us instead said, 'that's great, but it's really just a sort of crutch for a decision that they already wanted to come to on things we already knew.' There's a reason insurance companies don't lower your rates until you're 25. You can't rent a car until you're 25 because we knew that brain development wasn't fully formed in minors and people that are under 25 made worse decisions. Every parent knows that teenagers make bad decisions. When it comes to neuroscientific evidence being presented in court, this is almost exclusively data in terms of imaging, correct? Or are there other ways to gauge brain activity Where neuropsychology is involved in the court system, some psychologists do scanning, while others have tests where the individual sits down and does tasks and it'll tell something about the functioning of their brain. For instance, if you do poorly on one task, it tells the psychologist you have problems in say your frontal lobe or whatever. If you do poorly on another task, maybe it's on facial recognition of expressions and that tells them something about your inability to relate to expressions of emotion or something that tells about a different part of your brain. Scanning has been the focus, but there have been instances where people who have done scans have been allowed to testify but the scans themselves have not been admitted. This is in part because of the seductive allure of neuroimages. One study from many years ago showed how neuroimages have this fancy effect on people. It bamboozles them. That study was never replicated, and the results were perhaps just due to the participant sample that one experiment got. But it was causing judges to be wary of allowing the images themselves, even when they did allow the expert to testify at sentencing. In the Brian Dugun case in Chicago, psychologist Kent Kiehl was brought in to testify about Dugan's brain activity. He was only allowed to use pictures of brains with x's drawn on areas where he found lower activity in Brian Dugun's brain, because the judge was worried that if he let him bring in multi-color images from the fMRI, the jury would be confused and just sort of agree with Kiehl, and all the jurists would just forget their responsibility to weigh all the evidence. So it's sort of a mix. I had some unpublished evidence that suggested that imaging wasn't really key - it was really the analysis at the brain level rather than at the behavioral level. There's a belief that at the behavioral level you can fool a psychologist, but it's harder to fool a psychologist at the brain level, even if they're not conducting a scan. If the tools used to measure brain activity or track what's going on inside a suspect's or defendant's head - if all of that were to converge into a kind of a simpler and more universal method that the legal system can trust, would we finally be able to kind of come to a place where we can determine whether a criminal is sane or insane? Or are there too many factors and ambiguities in play? I think there are always going to be ambiguities, for a number of reasons. Again, you come back to the sort of legal definition of insanity. It's never going to really tell them the question of right from wrong. I don't think anyone anymore believes the brain is so mechanistic where a brain scan is gong to tell you, "well, he absolutely was bound and determined to do this because he had lower activity in his pre-frontal cortex or in his frontal lobe. You are maybe slightly more likely to engage in antisocial conduct if you find yourself in a situation where that person's brain had less activity in key regions. There's a professor at the University of California, Irvine, where I did my Ph.D, named James Fallon. He actually did an opening of an episode of Criminal Minds where he was giving a lecture on psychopaths. He scanned his brain and his brain looks exactly like a psychopath's. And he has other characteristics that fit. He's got a decreased prefrontal cortex activity; he's got a lower resting-heart rate, and all these sorts of things that are supposedly markers of things that predispose you to violence. But he's not violent. I believe he's married and has kids, and he was a professor at UCI for decades until he retired. And he's sort of still there, teaching classes for a bit of extra fun and doing some research. But this guy's never really had any run-ins. The psychologist Adrian Raine found out he has sort of the same markers that suggest, from his research, that he should be predisposed to antisocial or criminal behavior. But, again, he's a college professor. He's not antisocial, he isn't engaging in a life of crime or anything like that. It's all so probabilistic. So many other factors go into whether somebody is going to commit a crime or not that we could never find ourselves in a type of Minority Report situation where you can scan somebody and tell whether they'll commit a crime. We'll never be able to scan someone after the fact, either, and say, "well absolutely, his brain is what made him do it," because the question of criminal behavior is so much more complex than that. It's sociological, it's economic, it's perhaps brain- and genetic-based, etc. I don't think you're ever going to be able to say, 'yes, he can never overcome this impulse," because, again, it's probabilistic. Theres going to be a guy out there with the same brain chemistry who will have overcome all the impulses and lead a completely productive life. The last thing I'll point out is research that my colleague Cory Clark published in 2014. It showed that people still believe in free will despite evidence to the contrary, in part because of the desire to punish. She found that people believe in free will not just because of free will in the abstract, but because it helps them justify their desire to punish people for bad conduct. It comes back to motivated reasoning - the notion that people cling to things that help them justify actions that they want to take. I think people are going to cling to the notion that somebody still had a choice in part because we want to punish people for bad actions. (source: inverse.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Fri Sep 11 14:36:49 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 14:36:49 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 11 UNITED NATIONS: UN rights experts applaud steps by China and India to reduce, abolish death penalty 2 independent United Nations human rights experts welcomed today the recommendation to abolish the death penalty by India, as well as the decision to reduce the number of crimes subject to the death penalty by the Chinese authorities. In August, the Indian Law Commission issued a report concluding that the death penalty does not act as an effective deterrent, and recommended its abolition for all crimes except terrorism-related offences, and waging war. "The conclusions and recommendations of the Indian Law Commission represent an important voice in favour of the abolition of the death penalty in India," said the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Christof Heyns. "I encourage the Indian authorities to implement these recommendations and to move towards the complete abolition of the death penalty for all offences." Juan Mendez, the Special Rapporteur on torture, noted that the Commission "recognized the immense suffering caused by the death row phenomenon as a seemingly inevitable consequence of the imposition of the death penalty; this recognition supports the emergence of a customary norm that considers the death penalty as, per se, running afoul of the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment." The Indian authorities should review the findings very carefully and ratify the Convention against Torture, he added. China amended several provisions of its Criminal Law after the session of the National People's Congress Standing Committee, replacing the death penalty by life imprisonment for several offences, including the smuggling of weapons, ammunition, nuclear materials and counterfeit currency; arranging for a person or forcing a person to carry out prostitution; the obstruction of duty of a police officer; and creating rumours during wartime to mislead people. "By adopting these amendments to its criminal code, China has made progress in the right direction; this needs to be encouraged," the UN experts noted. "These new developments in India and China are in line with the general trend towards the abolition of the death penalty at a global level, even if there are isolated moves in the opposite direction," said Mr. Heyns. Special rapporteurs are appointed by the Geneva-based UN Human Rights Council to examine and report back on a country situation or a specific human rights theme. The positions are honorary and the experts are not UN staff, nor are they paid for their work. (source: UN News Centre) INDONESIA: Suspect in Murder of Japanese Woman Faces Possible Death Penalty The Indonesian security guard arrested for the alleged murder of a Japanese woman at her Jakarta apartment could face the death penalty if found guilty. "For such case, it could be [the] death [penalty]," Insp. Gen. Tito Karnavian, the Jakarta Police chief, said on Friday following the police???s arrest of Mursalim, 25, for the alleged murder of Yoshimi Nishimura, 28. "He can be charged under the Criminal Code article [on murder] because it appears to have been planned," Tito added. Nishimura's body was found by her driver, a friend and a building security guard at the Casa Grande apartment block in Tebet, South Jakarta, on Monday morning. Police suspect she was killed 2 days earlier. Investigators later arrested Mursalim, a security guard at the building, after studying security footage from the apartment that indicated he entered her apartment. Mursalim, who was arrested in his hometown of Lampung in Sumatra, reportedly confessed to the murder, saying he intended only to rob Nishimura, the general affairs manager at Yamaha Motors Indonesia, but ended up strangling her when she started screaming. Police said there were no indications of sexual violence on Nishimura's body. (source: Jakarta Globe) THAILAND: DNA of Myanmar men charged with killing British tourists in Thailand does not match weapon, expert says The DNA of 2 Myanmar men accused of killing a pair of British tourists on a Thai island does not match that found on the suspected murder weapon, a forensics expert witness says. The testimony cast fresh doubt on the controversial trial of migrant workers Zaw Lin and Win Zaw Tun, who are accused of the murder of 24-year-old David Miller and the rape and murder of Hannah Witheridge, 23, on southern Koh Tao island in September 2014. Both men have pleaded not guilty and face the death penalty if convicted over a case which has tarnished Thailand's reputation as a tourist paradise and seen the police accused of bungling the investigation. The defence pressed to retest crucial forensic evidence from the crime scene with a handful of items re-examined by Thailand's Central Institute of Forensic Science (CIFS) including a garden hoe, the suspected murder weapon. "The DNA on the weapon did not match with the 2 suspects," Porntip Rojanasunan, director-general of the CIFS, said after testifying at Koh Samui Provincial Court on Friday. The battered bodies of Miller and Witheridge were found on the sleepy diving island of Koh Tao on September 15 last year. Police say Miller had been struck by a single blow and left to drown in shallow surf while Witheridge had been raped and then beaten to death with a garden hoe. Prosecutors have previously argued that DNA evidence implicates the 2 Myanmar migrants but the defence has said an under-pressure police force coerced confessions, later retracted, from the pair. Nakhon Chomphuchat, the lead lawyer for the migrants, said Friday's testimony showed the 2 men "were not involved with the case as police have accused". Porntip also told the court that there was no DNA found on other items tested by the forensics institute including a shoe and some plastic bags. In July a witness at the trial had testified to removing and washing down the garden hoe after coming across it shortly after the tourists' bodies were found on the island. The trial is still underway and a verdict is expected in October. (source: ABC News) UNITED KINGDOM: UK Aid Cash Being Spent On Lobbying To Stop Death Penalty British aid money is simultaneously being spent on lobbying countries to overturn their death penalty laws, and to assist Pakistani forces in capturing drug smugglers, who face capital punishment if caught. Tanzania, Belarus, Nigeria, Kazakhstan and South Sudan and China are all among countries being targeted by 740,000 pounds' worth of spending on campaigns to end capital punishment. Meanwhile, 5m pounds a year is currently being handed to Pakistan's antinarcotics forces to help train and equip their officers. It's a situation that sends "really contradictory messages," Maya Foa of the charity Reprieve, said, adding: "It is a scandal that British public money is being used to help Pakistan send non-violent offenders to the gallows." Labour peer Lord Lipsey told The Times: "This is not what we in parliament vote an aid budget for. It is not what the British taxpayers think their aid taxes are going on. Campaigning on political issues is not what the aid budget is for." Among the aid projects are 50,000 pounds spent to achieve a "step by step" abolition of the death penalty in Morocco, 30,000 pounds to harangue Malaysian MPs into overturning the death penalty for drugs offences and 25,000 pounds towards an initiative run by a Swiss socialist local councillor, targeting Indonesia, Malawi and Sierra Leone. One of the most expensive projects was 70,000 pounds spent on holding a "dialogue with judges" to encourage them to understanding of international standards and obligations about the death penalty. Department papers do not stipulate which countries were involved in the dialogue. At the same time, 100 drug criminals languish on Pakistan's death row. 5 of them are British, 1 of whom is a woman. According to a diplomatic source: "The UK has raised at the highest level of the government of Pakistan its concerns about the principle of the use of the death penalty and the lifting of the moratorium on executions, and continues to urge Pakistan to ensure due process and adherence to international obligations." Despite widespread opposition to the spending, the Prime Minister David Cameron has stuck to his guns over a pledge to spend 0.7 % of GDP as overseas aid. Consequently department officials are under constant pressure to find ways to spend the 12 billion pounds a year target, which has now been enshrined in law. A spokeswoman for the Foreign Office said last night: "It remains our longstanding policy to oppose the death penalty in all circumstances as a matter of principle. This is a strong example of the promotion of British values to the world. "Only 22 states carried out an execution in 2014. UK work has contributed to this success. For example, following FCO-sponsored dialogue with British judges, China has just reduced the range of offences which attract death sentences. "There have been no executions in Pakistan as a result of UK counternarcotics co-operation. We continue to review the situation as we have always done. The UK and Pakistan have a shared interest in working together to tackle organised crime including the trafficking of drugs, which is a threat to both our societies." (source: breitbart.com) NIGERIA: Nigerian Governors Reject Capital Punishment For Looters Some Nigerian governors have rejected the calls by the trade unions that capital punishment be meted out to pubic official found guilty of corruption. Labour said it was only by killing looters that the anti-corruption crusade being championed by President Muhammadu Buhari could succeed. While the Ogun State Governor, Ibikunle Amosun, agitated that looters be sentenced to life imprisonment, rather than the death sentence prescribed by the organised labour, his Nasarawa state counterpart, Umaru Al-Makura, said he supported that capital punishment be meted out to corrupt public office holders. "I really agree with the NLC over call for capital punishment for any public office holder who is found guilty of looting public funds," Umaru Al-Makura told Punch. However, governors of Ekiti, Plateau and Rivers states, Ayodele Fayose, Simon Lalong and Nyesom Wike rejected death penalty for looters. "In all his discussions, Lalong has never mentioned death sentence. He has always preferred life imprisonment to taking human life because to him life is sacred," Lalong's Director of Press Affairs, Mr. Emmanuel Nanle said. Speaking through his Chief Press Secretary, Mr. Idowu Adelusi, Fayose said jail sentence was better and capable of reforming thieves. "In countries where death penalty was introduced, it has not stopped looting. In advanced countries like US, jail sentence is the penalty. What we need is proper moral education to change orientation of the people. Jail sentence is better; it can reform." On his part, Wike who equally spoke through his special adviser on media, Opunabo Inko-Tariah said; "Nigerians have a role to play by deriding looters and not to praise them for their fiscal irresponsibility. There should be a strong punitive measure to discourage looting because of its domino effects. When a treasury is looted, there won't be money for the provision of necessities such as hospitals, roads, etc. "Maybe because it happened in Ghana and the economy improved, the labour organisations want it in Nigeria. But that was a military regime and Jerry Rawlings was a military man. However, the extant laws on looting need serious and urgent review, even if the death penalty is discouraged." Meanwhile, the president's advisory committee on corruption has said that no corrupt Nigerian will be spared in its anti-corruption crusade. (source: naij.com) INDIA: Suspected Islamic militants could face death after conviction for 2006 India train bombings that killed 188 12 suspected Islamic militants were convicted Friday for the bombings 9 years ago of 7 Mumbai commuter trains that killed 188 people and wounded more than 800. The trial in India's notoriously slow justice system lasted more than 7 years. It concluded in August last year, but Judge Yatin D. Shinde took 1 year to write the verdict. He found 12 defendants guilty of murder and criminal conspiracy charges and acquitted one person for lack of evidence. Shinde said he would announce the sentence on Monday after hearing arguments from the prosecutors and defence attorneys. They face the death penalty or life in prison. 7 bombs exploded within a span of 10 minutes in the evening rush hour on trains in Mumbai, the financial and entertainment capital of India, on July 11, 2006. Prosecutors said the conspiracy was hatched by Pakistan's Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, and carried out by Lashkar-e-Tayyaba operatives with help from the Students' Islamic Movement of India, a banned militant organization. The 12 convicted in the case were believed to belong to the Indian militant group. The Lashkar-e-Tayyaba is a Pakistan-based Islamic militant group. Pakistan has denied the Indian claims. The neighbouring countries have fought 3 wars since their independence from Britain in 1947 and have been engaged in a fitful peace process in recent years. (source: National Post) From rhalperi at smu.edu Fri Sep 11 15:17:42 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 15:17:42 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OKLAHOMA Message-ID: Sept. 11 OKLAHOMA----impending execution Fox 25 Investigation: Testimony discrepancy uncovered during death penalty trial raise new questions about execution The next man on Oklahoma's death row has less than a week to live. His lawyers say they need more time as they do the investigation supporters of Richard Glossip say was never done in his original trials. As Fox 25 has continued to look into these claims we uncovered evidence of discrepancies during a key witness' testimony. That testimony is now being called into question by a forensic scientist who says the jury was misinformed during their key life or death decision. The governor's office has repeatedly pointed to the fact Richard Glossip received 2 trials and they are upholding the will of 24 jurors who sentenced him to death. When Fox 25 revealed one of the jurors for the 1st trial said their verdict would change based on newly revealed details of the crime, the governor's office said the focus should be on the 2nd trial which was narrowly upheld in the appeals court. Fox 25 reached out to jurors from that trial in our continuing effort to investigate claims by Glossip's that key facts were left out of his defense. We are not disclosing the identities of the jurors who spoke with us. The majority of the claims by Glossip's defense team center around the unreliability of the testimony of Justin Sneed, the man who beat Barry Van Treese to death with a baseball bat. One juror told Fox 25 they did not believe much of Sneed's testimony because they saw him as a teenager who was saying whatever he had to in order to save his own life. Another juror said they fully believed Sneed's version of events. However when it came to determining the Glossip's guilt, both jurors said the it was the testimony of the pathologist from the State Medical Examiner's office. During the trial the pathologist testified Van Treese slowly bled to death. The testimony indicates jurors were left with the impression Van Treese could have been alive as much as 8 hours after Sneed's attack. Jurors told Fox 25 they convicted Glossip because he could have saved Van Treese's life if he had called police immediately after Sneed told him he committed the murder. The juror said that action made Glossip not only guilty, but callous enough to deserve death. Glossip has never denied not telling police key facts early on in the investigation, but has always held that he did not ask or solicit Sneed to murder Van Treese. In Sneed's confession to police he said he hit Van Treese until he stopped bleeding and even returned to the room and hit him again to make sure he was dead. When Fox 25 examined trial testimony and the official record, we found a significant discrepancy between the trial testimony and the medical examiner's autopsy report. "There should never be a discrepancy between an autopsy report and what a medical examiner testifies to in court," said attorney Jaye Mendros. Mendros says she has had trial where that has happened and even helped lead the fight to reform the state medical examiner's office. "The short answer is it was a train wreck," Mendros said of the agency during the late 1990s and early 2000s, "I mean the medical examiner's office had a lot of problems during this time period." Mendros worked with families as they lobbied for reforms. Governor Mary Fallin signed those reforms into law in 2011. One bill in particular allowed families a legal recourse for families when there is evidence of errors made by the Medical Examiner's office. In an email exchange the governor's office says that bill was about better management of the ME's office and she never doubted the accuracy of any findings by the state pathologists. "If there is any question at all that hinges on the reliability of the medical examiner's office from this time period I would say there should be a significant doubt as to the accuracy and reliability," Mendros told Fox 25. According to the pathologist autopsy report, Van Treese died from blunt force and head injuries. The report makes no mention of blood loss. However during the 2nd trial the pathologist downplayed the head injuries and told jurors Van Treese's death was from blood loss and took hours. Fox 25 presented these questions to Glossip's new defense team which was not looking at the testimony of the pathologist. The attorneys said they have been focused on finding new evidence, but the discrepancies we uncovered were so serious they sent all the reports to an independent forensic pathologist. Dr. Carl Wigren's review found the Oklahoma pathology report showed the opposite of what the testimony said and said the science shows Van Treese died within a matter of minutes. The testimony of Justin Sneed backs this finding up and shows Sneed was likely present during the death. In a statement Dr. Wigren said: "It is my understanding that the attorneys for defendant Mr. Glossip did not engage the services of a forensic pathologist to review the case and provide testimony at either of his 2 trials. Considering the gravity of the outcome for Mr. Glossip, this is an unconscionable act of omission on the part of both defense teams. Even with my 11th hour review of the case, there are blatant inconsistencies in the testimony of the pathologist who performed the examination. Despite the fact that important information can be gleaned from the autopsy photographs, I was told that they are not available and were never reviewed by a consulting forensic pathologist. The entirety of materials including police narratives, autopsy report, pathologist's testimony statements, and autopsy photographs must be reviewed by a non-conflicted, outside forensic pathologist. It is essential that the conclusions that were accepted at trial were based on accepted scientific and medical principles." In fact, the testimony shows Glossip's defense attorneys never objected to the pathologist's testimony, even though the testimony in the second trial was different than the pathologist's testimony in the 1st trial. In addition, this discrepancy was never brought up in any appeal. Mendros says during the time period of Glossip's trial it was difficult for public defenders to get funding for independent experts and it was years after Glossip's appeal was filed when the questionable facts about the medical examiner's office began to emerge. "There were a lot of problems going on during this period of time that didn't come to light until later when these investigations started taking place in 2009," Mendros said. (source: KOKH TV news) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sat Sep 12 12:55:36 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2015 12:55:36 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, PENN., N.C., ALA., ARK. Message-ID: Sept. 12 TEXAS: Capital murder defendant fails in bid for new attorneys A Waco man facing the death penalty in a May 2014 double slaying failed Friday in his bid to replace his 2 court-appointed attorneys. Judge Ralph Strother of Waco's 19th State District Court denied a motion from Todric McDonald to fire attorneys John Donahue and Jon Evans after a closed-door conference in the judge's chambers. Donahue, Evans and McLennan County First Assistant District Attorney Michael Jarrett all declined comment after the hearing, citing a gag order Strother has placed on parties involved in the capital murder case. In a notarized motion McDonald filed with the court Aug. 31, McDonald tried to make it appear that Donahue was the one filing the motion and seeking to withdraw as counsel. But the motion was not signed by Donahue, and the person who notarized it is an officer at the Jack Harwell Detention Center, where the 28-year-old McDonald is housed with access to a law library and computer. McDonald is charged with capital murder in the deaths of Justin Javier Gonzalez, 24, and Ulysses Gonzalez, 30, at the Pecan Tree Apartments, 2600 Grim Ave. The district attorney's office has said it will seek the death penalty if McDonald is convicted of capital murder in the cousins' deaths. No date has been set for his trial. McDonald's motion reads, in part, "The defendant and counsel are in fundamental and unalterable disagreement over the conduct of the defense and the objectives that should be pursued in preparing and presenting the defense. This disagreement affects the very basis of the attorney-client relationship and impairs both counsels (sic) ability to exercise his best professional judgment and the defendants (sic) right to the effective assistance of counsel." Other charges McDonald also is indicted in separate cases for assault family violence, 2 counts of evading arrest in a vehicle, 2 counts of aggravated robbery and aggravated assault. He also has pending unindicted cases after arrests for unlawfully carrying a firearm by a felon, endangering a child and theft, according to court records. The cousins' bodies were found lying on the living room floor of a 2nd-story apartment. Each suffered multiple gunshot wounds, Waco police said. The 2 men did not live at the complex and were there visiting a friend, according to police reports. McDonald was arrested 3 days after the killings following a short police chase. Police said McDonald was working on a car outside his residence when officers from several agencies came to arrest him. He fled eastbound on Bosque Boulevard in his vehicle with a woman and a toddler inside. McDonald rammed a U.S. Marshals Service vehicle at North 26th Street and Bosque Boulevard, and McDonald's car was forced onto the curb, officers said. He tried to run, but his door was stuck on the curb and he could not get out of the vehicle, according to reports. (source: Waco Tribune) PENNSYLVANIA: Elytte Barbour claims councel was ineffective The attorney for admitted murderer Elytte Barbour claims his client's prior legal counsel was ineffective for not seeking a guilty but mentally ill plea in his amended petition under the state's Post-Conviction Collateral Relief Act. Attorney Richard Feudale, of Mount Carmel, who filed the amendment Thursday in the Court of Common Pleas, claims a breakdown in communication between Barbour and his previous legal counsel inadvertently led to his 2nd-degree murder plea over a year ago in connection with the stabbing and strangulation death of Port Trevorton resident Troy LaFerrara. The Barbours were charged with killing LaFerrara and stealing $150 from his wallet. Elytte Barbour claims his wife took the money. Feudale said Barbour's plea was defective for multiple reasons including his prior defense team's failure to pursue his wish of a temporary insanity plea. He claims Barbour had no intention to rob LaFerrara and that his plea was not knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily entered. Feudale also claims Barbour was coerced or induced into pleading guilty to second-degree murder because he was threatened by his prior counsel that if he did not plea, he would face the death penalty at trial. Barbour claims if he had been made aware of all the mitigating factors involved with seeking the death penalty, he would not have been afraid to face a death sentence at trial. The petition said Barbour was not provided a June 23, 2014, psychiatric report and mitigation reports until he entered the plea Aug. 26, 2014. Feudale said a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship during the time required for filing a direct appeal also occurred. In the petition, Feudale asks the court to schedule an evidentiary hearing on the defendant's post conviction issues and authorize payment for Dr. Neil Blumberg to testify at the hearing about Barbour's mental state. Feudale also is seeking prior counsel to provide him with copies of all information pertaining to the case stored electronically on their servers, in a cloud, or elsewhere, including but not limited to all e-mails, scanned documents and electronic media. The 23-year-old Barbour and his 19-year-old wife, Miranda, who were living in Selinsgrove at the time of the murder, struck 2nd-degree murder pleas in September 2014. They are serving life sentences in state prison without the possibility of parole. (source: News Item) NORTH CAROLINA: Bar admonishes lawyer who worked on Racial Justice Act case A Durham defense attorney who worked on the 1st successful challenge under the Racial Justice Act was admonished on Friday by a N.C. State Bar disciplinary hearing. Cassandra Stubbs, a lawyer described by her peers as "an absolute beacon of integrity," tearfully fought accusations of professional misconduct levied against her earlier this year in an anonymous complaint. The admonishment means the panel found that Stubbs committed a minor violation of the rules of professional conduct. Stubbs, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union Capital Punishment Project, was among a team of attorneys who used the short-lived Racial Justice Act to convert a North Carolina death-row inmate's sentence in 2012 to life without possibility for parole. The state bar, the organization that oversees lawyers in North Carolina, filed a public complaint against Stubbs built on the anonymous complaint. The allegations focused on sworn statements that Stubbs introduced from men who had been part of a 1994 jury pool but not selected for the panel in the case of Marcus Reymond Robinson, the 1st death-row inmate to have his sentence converted under the Racial Justice Act. The bar complaint accuses Stubbs of providing inaccurate information to Judge Gregory Weeks, who presided over the Racial Justice Act case. The bar complaint contended that Stubbs and another lawyer, Gretchen Engel, director of the Durham-based Center for Death Penalty Litigation, provided inaccurate information for the court to consider that ranged from a wrong address to a recollection from one of the potential jurors that did not jibe with the official trial transcript. Some legal analysts have characterized the allegations of wrongdoing as so minor and questionable that they think politics could be at play. On Friday, Stubbs could not fight back tears as she urged the bar disciplinary panel to reconsider its findings of conduct violations. She was on maternity leave at the time the statements were drafted and simply reviewed them. Weeks has said the statements played no role in his decision to overturn Robinson's death sentence and resentence him to life in prison without possibility for parole. The Racial Justice Act, which has since been repealed, allowed Weeks to consider statistics as he reviewed Robinson's claims that racial bias played a role in his capital punishment case. Stubbs said the charges have been "totally devastating" and go to "the heart" of what she considers herself to be as a person and as a lawyer. Stubbs's attorneys had sought dismissal of her case and a lesser warning after the accusations of misconduct were found. Now, with Engel's case still pending, Stubbs must weigh whether to appeal the disciplinary panel's actions. (source: News & Observer) ALABAMA: Appeal denied for death row inmate A man convicted of the 1997 murders of 4 people, including 2 Thorsby Elementary students, had his appeal rejected Sept. 8 by a federal appeals court. 3 members of the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court judge's denial of Michael Brandon Samra's appeal, according to court records. Samra and co-defendant Mark Duke, who was 16 at the time of the murders, killed Duke's father, Randy Duke, after a dispute over the family truck. In trying to cover up the crime, the 2 killed 3 other people in a Pelham residence: Randy Duke's girlfriend, Dedra Hunt, and her daughters, 7-year-old Chelsea and 6-year-old Chelisa. The girls were both students at Thorsby School. Duke was convicted in 1999 and given the death sentence. The death sentence was commuted to life in prison when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2005 that no one could be executed because of the crimes committed while under the age of 18. Samra, now 37, is on death row at William E. Donaldson Correctional Facility in Jefferson County. He argued his appellate lawyer was ineffective for failing to investigate evidence of brain dysfunction and for introducing and emphasizing evidence of Samra's membership in a Satanic gang, which he contends strengthened the state's aggravation case, according to court records. Samra also argued that his appellate counsel was ineffective for not raising an argument on appeal that Samra was entitled to pretrial notice of the specific statutory aggravating factor that the state intended to rely upon in pursuing the death penalty against him at his trial in 1998. The appeals court rejected Samra's arguments by stating, "Even if we disregard the gang-related evidence and argument, the state presented overwhelming evidence - including Samra's own confession - of the heinousness of this crime." According to court records, Mark Duke became angry with his father and enlisted help from friends to murder him and then make the crime appear as a burglary. Duke shot and killed his father at their home while Samra shot Hunt, who fled upstairs with her daughters. Duke and Samra then went after the victims and killed them, Duke killing Hunt and one of the girls while Samra killed the other. "By Samra's own admission, after he assisted in killing 3 people, he slit the throat of a 7-year-old girl who was pleading and struggling for her life," the appeals court wrote. "We find no reasonable probability that, absent evidence or discussion of Samra's gang involvement, the jury would not have found these murders to be especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel as it found them. As a result, Samra's claim that his trial counsel was ineffective for pursuing a gang-related strategy and for failing to object to gang-related evidence must be denied." Mark Anthony Duke is currently serving his sentence at the St. Clair Correctional Facility. (source: Clanton Advertiser) ARKANSAS: Analysis: Don't be surprised by delays on Arkansas death row It should come as no surprise that two years after Gov. Mike Beebe floated the idea of perhaps doing away with the death penalty, eight condemned inmates would be lined up for their turn in Arkansas' death chamber. But no one should be surprised if some or even all of the execution dates set between now and Jan. 14 pass without anyone dying. Gov. Asa Hutchinson last week scheduled Arkansas' 1st executions since 2005. Attorney General Leslie Rutledge certified to the governor that the men's criminal appeals are wrapped up, leaving nothing currently impeding their journeys to the execution chamber at Varner. "It's my understanding that all of the appeals have been exhausted and that there is a finality in the judgment and that is the reason the Attorney General has asked for those dates to be set," Hutchinson said. For their criminal cases, that is largely true - though last-minute appeals of inmate convictions are always possible. For challenges to how Arkansas puts prisoners to death, it is likely that nothing will be final without further court intervention. Arkansas, like many states, releases as little information as possible about the drugs it plans to use to kill its condemned. Lawyers for the inmates say that is wrong, and even the governor acknowledged that he expects the state to be back in court. "Quite frankly, I would expect continued litigation in it," Hutchinson said while announcing that he was setting the first executions for Oct. 21. A couple years ago, there was hope among death penalty opponents that Arkansas could perhaps mothball its execution chamber. Beebe said during a speech to the Political Animals group in 2013 that he would sign a bill abolishing the death penalty if lawmakers sent him one. It never came. Absent a special legislative session on the matter or lawmakers working through loopholes to address the matter during their 2014 fiscal session, Beebe's opportunity passed. It became clear during the 2014 political campaign that the idea wouldn't come up again soon. Each of the GOP candidates for attorney general and the Democratic candidate, too, said they wanted to find a way to jump-start an execution process clogged by challenges to the state's procedures and a seemingly perpetual shortage of the necessary drugs. Hutchinson, too, said on the stump that he hoped for a way to eliminate the problems that had kept Arkansas' death chamber vacant for a decades - though he rejected talk that the state should consider electrocutions or firing squads. "I believe the most humane means has proven to be lethal injection and while we're having problems right now in having access to the right chemicals, I hope we can resolve that just as other states have," Hutchinson said in March 2014. Arkansas this summer acquired the chemicals needed to carry out executions under its protocols, but from whom is still an official state secret. Legislators, in an effort to protect the state's drug supplier from possible protests, say the public doesn't have a right to know who is giving it the tools from a deadly trade. That means the inmates don't know either, so there is no way they can tell whether the drugs are pure, effective or from a reputable source. The state had to turn over a supply of deadly drugs in 2011 after regulators determined that a batch of executions drugs intended for use in the U.S. had come from a distributor that shared a building with a driving school in London, raising questions about their origin. Inmates and their lawyers have concerns again, but with the state shielding the process from the public, there's really no way to know. So with Arkansas' lack of openness, expect more court challenges - and expect more delays. (source: Associated Press) **************** Arkansas legislature needs to abolish death penalty Bishop Anthony B. Taylor released this statement Sept. 4. Last month we received the news that the state of Arkansas has acquired new drugs for use in executing criminals and therefore executions of those on death row will soon resume after a lapse of almost 10 years. I have a unique perspective to offer regarding capital punishment because I have experienced several sides of this issue: the murders of a number of people either personally or through involvement after the murders and the execution of a convicted murderer by the state. My family was visiting the University of Texas on Aug. 1, 1966, on the very day that a former Marine sniper, 25-year-old Charles Whitman, killed his wife and mother and then barricaded himself on the top of the Student Union tower, from which he killed 14 others and wounded 32 in cold blood. I took shelter with the rest of my family behind a coke machine at a service station on Guadalupe Street. So I have experienced the death penalty from the side of innocent victims and the side of criminals executed, and what is violated in both cases is the sanctity of life: either by the criminal or by the state. When we left our hiding place, I saw a bullet hole in the window and blood on the floor of a barber shop. I saw people assisting a terrified woman who had been shot at but not hit because she took shelter against the low brick wall that surrounded a raised flower bed. I saw a lone high-heel shoe on the sidewalk, apparently abandoned by a fleeing woman. It was very frightening and we were relieved when word came that the SWAT team had taken out the still well-armed sniper. I was 12 years old. You never forget something like that. Almost 30 years later I was a priest serving in the Oklahoma City area when the Federal Building was bombed, killing 168 innocent persons - including 19 babies - and injuring more than 680 others. Actually there were 171 deaths because three of the victims were pregnant. I had the funerals of 2 of the victims, Ethel Griffin and Tony Reyes. The grief of those families and indeed all of Oklahoma City was profound. We all drove with our lights on day and night until the last body was recovered. It felt like a month-long funeral procession. Practically everybody knew someone who had died. We felt some relief when the bombers were arrested and convicted, knowing that they would never be in a position to do that again. Terry Nichols was given life without possibility of parole. Timothy McVeigh was condemned to die, which actually turned out to be counterproductive: it made him something of a hero to some anti-government, white-supremacist groups to the point that for several years we had to live with heightened security every April 19 for fear of copy-cat bombers. Far from making us safer, his execution exposed us to greater danger because violence begets more violence, regardless of whether the killer is a Timothy McVeigh or the state of Oklahoma. By contrast, his accomplice, Terry Nichols is paying for his crimes in prison, a nobody, unable to inspire even white supremacists. On the other hand, in 1996 - the year after the OKC bombing - I accompanied Eric Patton to his execution by lethal injection for the brutal murder of Charlene Kauer whom he killed in a moment of passion under the influence of cocaine. Her family did not attend the execution. Her husband Les Kauer said, "The execution will do little more than stir up painful memories." I know many families of victims may feel like an execution will bring them closure, but true closure, the kind of closure that God's peace provides, cannot be obtained through the state-imposed taking of another life. We think of premeditated killing as being even worse than crimes of passion. When the state kills, it is premeditated. Eric was a model prisoner who probably should have been given a life sentence with drug treatment required - or at most, life without possibility of parole, but certainly not a sentence of death. Whenever people said they supported the death penalty, I had them speak with Peggy Patton, his mother and an active parishioner. Once they experienced the toll it takes on innocent members of even the perpetrator's family, they usually changed their mind. So I have experienced the death penalty from the side of innocent victims and the side of criminals executed, and what is violated in both cases is the sanctity of life: either by the criminal or by the state. I know you often hear Catholics talk about the sanctity of life in the context of abortion, so today I need to emphasize two obvious things: 1) life does not cease to be sacred once the baby is born, and 2) no one will be fully secure until we reject everything that threatens human life or degrades human dignity. Jesus' teaching about the sanctity of life is a seamless garment - an organic whole - that has come unraveled to the point that we tolerate utterly immoral behavior as if it were nothing - after all, if life is not sacred, "Who cares what the state does?" He was a criminal, after all! Jesus - who was himself executed as a criminal - proclaims the sanctity of life at every stage of human existence from the first moment of conception to natural death and at every moment in between. God's gift of life is sacred, regardless of a person's usefulness to society, which means that there is no justification whatsoever to take the lives of people who are locked away and pose no further threat to society. The Old Testament passages that call for the execution of criminals have to be read in the context of a semi-nomadic people living in tents who did not have any way to incarcerate vicious criminals long term, much less for life. And that is the only possible justification for capital punishment: when and only when, a society has no other way to protect itself. We do not live in tents and we have very secure prisons capable of keeping dangerous people off the streets for life. So in the United States today, capital punishment is never justified, no matter how heinous the crime. Not even in the case of Timothy McVeigh! Even his life was sacred, regardless of what anybody thinks - including even what he might have thought - because it was given to him by God. So also were the lives of his victims. So I appeal to the Arkansas state legislature to abolish the death penalty in our state and to Gov. Hutchinson to commute the sentences of all those on death row to life in prison, even if without possibility of parole. And as a first step, I appeal to Gov. Hutchinson not to schedule any executions at this time. (source: Arkansas Catholic) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sat Sep 12 12:56:57 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2015 12:56:57 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OKLA., NEB., COLO., ARIZ., NEV., CALIF., USA Message-ID: Sept. 12 OKLAHOMA----impending execution Richard Glossip case: We can't be cavalier about death penalty National attention is focused on the pending execution of Richard Glossip, and on his potential innocence. As a murder victim's family member, it has always bothered me that the victim and family seem to be a side note. Barry Van Treese, the victim in Glossip's case, was a victim of an awful crime. My heart, and that of my family, aches for his family. And while I cannot speak for how his family feels, I certainly have every blessing to speak for mine. My cousin was Debbie Carter, who in 1982 was raped and murdered. 5 years later, Dennis Fritz and Ron Williamson were convicted of the crime. Williamson received the death penalty. We had every reason to believe in the convictions. Over the years we suffered through numerous appeals and repeated findings of guilt. Then my family was delivered a bombshell of information: DNA testing proved that Williamson and Fritz had been wrongfully convicted. We were shocked. Debbie's justice was being ripped away. We eventually learned that Debbie's case was plagued with unreliable evidence. So what does wrongful conviction feel like from the perspective of the victim or victim's family? At first it looks like disbelief, and justice denied. We later felt a burden of guilt and shame for being led to support the near executions of innocent men. I know very little about Glossip's case, or if he is truly guilty or innocent. Gov. Mary Fallin stated Glossip "had over 6,000 days to present new evidence," and her spokesman said that, "To say that Glossip has had his day in court is an understatement." In Debbie's case, too, years of trials, retrials and appeals had happened - but the guilty verdict still proved incorrect. Looking at the evidence, there's no doubt Glossip might be innocent. But it's almost impossible to totally prove. Van Treese and his family deserve justice, but justice won't be served if Glossip is put to death and we find out too late that he is innocent of this crime. I'm a native Oklahoman. I have had a family member who was brutally murdered, and I grew up believing the death penalty was fair and just. I still struggle with my desire for justice and what I know about wrongful convictions. Regardless of how you feel about the death penalty, unless we're absolutely sure of Glossip's guilt, it actually threatens justice - and peace of mind - to make the leap to execute him. We can't be cavalier when it comes to the subject of putting someone to death, and turn a blind eye to information that may make a difference. (source: Christy Sheppard, The Oklahoman) ****************** Is Oklahoma About to Execute an Innocent Man? Dear Governor Mary Fallin: We urge you to stay the execution of Richard Glossip so that deep concerns about his guilt can be addressed. On September 16, unless you act, the State of Oklahoma will put Mr. Glossip to death for the murder of Barry Van Treese. Justin Sneed--who by his own admission beat Van Tresse to death with a baseball bat--will not meet that fate. Why this stunning difference? Sneed testified at Glossip's trial and said that Glossip persuaded him to do the killing. In return, Sneed was allowed to plead guilty and avoid a death sentence. Sneed's testimony is the only evidence that connects Glossip to this horrendous crime. There's no DNA evidence, no other forensic or physical evidence, no other witnesses. Just Sneed's word. Did Sneed tell the truth? We don't know, but we do know that he told many lies in this case because his story changed many times. When he was first questioned by detectives, Sneed said he didn't know anything about the murder. Then he said he didn't kill Mr. Van Treese. Then he admitted that he did but said it was an accident, he only meant to rob him and knock him out. Then, after the detectives told him that they didn't believe he acted alone, that they had Glossip in custody, and that it would be better for him if he gave them another name, Sneed finally said that Richard Glossip got him to kill Barry Van Treese. After getting what they were looking for, the police assured Sneed that this story would help him avoid the death penalty. That last version led to a deal with the prosecution: Sneed--the admitted killer--testified against Glossip in exchange for a life sentence. As a result, Glossip faces death by lethal injection. Why would anybody trust this testimony, given by a man like Sneed under the circumstances in which he gave it? But if Sneed was lying about Glossip's involvement -- as he unquestionably lied in his various contradictory statements--then Oklahoma is about to execute an innocent man. The writers of this letter have a wide range of professional backgrounds and political perspectives. But we share a deep concern about the integrity of the criminal justice system in Oklahoma and throughout the United States. We are particularly concerned about the danger of executing an innocent man. Could that really happen? In the United States, in 2015? Yes, it could. It almost certainly has happened--the cases of Cameron Todd Willingham and Carlos Deluna in Texas are troubling examples--and it may well happen again, perhaps as soon as September 16. The National Registry of Exonerations lists 115 defendants who were sentenced to death and later exonerated and released after new evidence of innocence was discovered. Of those 115 innocent defendants who had been sentenced to death, 29, a quarter of the total, were convicted after another person who was himself a suspect in the murder gave a confession that also implicated the innocent defendant. Richards Glossip's case is a classic example. Faced with the prospect of execution, anybody would be tempted to lie and shift the blame to someone else if that's what it takes to stay alive. But Justin Sneed isn't just anybody. He's a man who beat another person to death for money and then lied about it to try to save his own skin. Last year a study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences estimated that 4.1 percent of defendants who are sentenced to death in the United States are innocent, one in 25 or more than 300 death-sentenced defendants since 1973. Most of them, like most of all defendants who are sentenced to death, have not been exonerated or executed. They remain in prison or have died of other causes. But with that error rate among death sentences, there's no doubt that we have put innocent people to death. We don't know how many or who they all are, but it has happened. We also don't know for sure whether Richard Glossip is innocent or guilty. That is precisely the problem. If we keep executing defendants in cases like this, where the evidence of guilt is tenuous and untrustworthy, we will keep killing innocent people. Oklahoma has come close to executing innocent defendants. Ron Williamson's story is well known from John Grisham's book, The Innocent Man. He came within 5 days of execution. Fortunately, a federal judge ordered a new trial. 4 years later Williamson was exonerated by DNA tests--which also identified the real killer, who was later convicted of the murder. Most cases like this are weeded out by the courts, usually before a death sentence is ever imposed. That might have happened here if Glossip's defense attorneys had made the problems in the case clear to the judge and jury, but they never did. As a result, a juror in Glossip's first trial recently came forward and said, "I feel that this situation needs to be looked at and at the VERY least given a 60 days stay to make for certain that all the stones are unturned and everything is looked at with a fine tooth comb." Unfortunately, Governor, in this case you are the last state official with the power to prevent a deadly mistake. Sincerely, Sen. Tom Coburn, U.S. Senator for Oklahoma (2005-2015) and U.S. Representative for Oklahoma's Second Congressional District from (1995-2001) Barry Switzer, Head Football Coach, The University of Oklahoma (1973-1988) John W. Raley, Jr., U.S. Attorney, Eastern District of Oklahoma (1990-1997) Barry Scheck, Co-Director of the Innocence Project Samuel Gross, Professor of Law, University of Michigan and Editor, National Registry of Exonerations (source: Barry Scheck; Co-Founder and Co-Director of the Innocence Project) ************ Journalists, death penalty opponent among condemned inmate's requested execution witnesses 2 journalists and an outspoken death penalty opponent are among the execution witnesses for condemned Oklahoma inmate Richard Eugene Glossip. State Department of Corrections records show Huffington Post reporter Kim Belleware and Sky News reporter Ian Woods are listed among 5 friends of Glossip authorized to witness his execution on Wednesday. Anti-death penalty advocate Sister Helen Prejean is designated as Glossip's clergy witness. Belleware and Woods both say they were asked by Glossip to attend because of their coverage of his case. They will not be considered among the 5 media witnesses. Department of Corrections policy provides 1 media spot to a reporter for The Associated Press and another to a media outlet from the city where the crime occurred. The remaining 3 media witnesses are selected by random drawing. (source: Associated Press) ******************** klahoma Inmate the Focus of Renewed Attention as Execution Date Nears Richard E. Glossip was at the center of a major Supreme Court case this year, arguing along with 2 other men on Oklahoma's death row that the state's choice of lethal injection drugs could cause unconstitutional suffering. The court rejected that claim in a 5-4 decision in June, clearing the way for Oklahoma to resume executions. Mr. Glossip's is the 1st; he is scheduled to die on Wednesday. Now Mr. Glossip, 52, is again a focus of attention, this time over whether he is guilty of the arranged murder in 1997 of the owner of a run-down motel he was managing. Mr. Glossip's supporters call his case a striking example of a repeating pattern in American capital punishment, in which a defendant receives inadequate legal representation early on and then, many years later, only as execution nears, higher-powered lawyers and civil rights groups become involved, raising important new issues at the 11th hour, when it may be too late. The inmates who brought the case challenged the use of the sedative midazolam in executions, saying it did not reliably render the person unconscious. Mr. Glossip has won the fervent backing of Sister Helen Prejean, the anti-death-penalty campaigner; the actress Susan Sarandon, who played Sister Helen in the film "Dead Man Walking"; and a new legal team, working pro bono, which says his conviction was marred by poor lawyering and unreliable, police-coached testimony. In a drumbeat of media appearances, Mr. Glossip's supporters are calling on Gov. Mary Fallin of Oklahoma to delay his execution for 60 days while they explore what they say is important new evidence that they released on Friday and will discuss in a news conference in Oklahoma City on Monday. The victim, Barry Van Treese, was beaten to death with a baseball bat in a room at the Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City, a motel that he owned and Mr. Glossip managed. Justin Sneed, a 19-year-old drifter with an 8th-grade education whom Mr. Glossip allowed to stay at the motel in return for maintenance work, admitted to the murder and is serving life without parole. Mr. Sneed testified that Mr. Glossip had told him to kill Mr. Van Treese in return for thousands of dollars in motel receipts. Prosecutors said Mr. Glossip was a cunning figure who feared he was about to be fired for mismanagement and stealing motel revenues, and persuaded Mr. Sneed to commit the crime. In the absence of any physical evidence against him, Mr. Glossip's conviction was largely based on Mr. Sneed's testimony. Mr. Glossip's lawyers noted that Mr. Sneed changed his story several times before he admitted to the murder, then made a deal to receive life in prison in return for implicating Mr. Glossip. In a new report commissioned by the defense team and released on Friday, Richard A. Leo, an expert on police interrogations, said that based on transcripts of Mr. Sneed's questioning and testimony, officers had used techniques that were known to cause false confessions - like telling him he would be the scapegoat for the murder, planting the idea that Mr. Glossip was the mastermind and pressuring Mr. Sneed to say so. The defense also released on Friday an affidavit from a former drug dealer who said he repeatedly sold methamphetamine to Mr. Sneed at the Best Budget Inn, that Mr. Sneed appeared to be addicted and that he paid for drugs with items he stole from cars and rooms in the motel. Mr. Glossip's appeals to the state and federal Supreme Court have been exhausted. His last hope is for Governor Fallin, a Republican, to stay his execution while his lawyers work to persuade a judge, or the state board of pardon and parole, that significant new evidence warrants a new hearing or clemency. "We are seriously racing against time, as you can imagine," said one of those lawyers, Donald R. Knight, from Colorado. "We're trying to do work that should have been done by trial lawyers a long time ago." But Governor Fallin has rejected calls to intervene. "His actions directly led to the brutal murder of a husband and a father of seven children," she said last month in a statement about Mr. Glossip, stressing that he had been convicted in 2 jury trials and lost multiple appeals. "The state of Oklahoma is prepared to hold him accountable for his crimes and move forward with his scheduled execution." Barry C. Scheck, co-director of the Innocence Project in New York, said there were serious "residual doubts" about Mr. Glossip's guilt. A number of cases in which those sentenced to death were later exonerated, he said, had similarly relied on witnesses who benefited from testimony. Mr. Glossip was first found guilty and sentenced to death in 1998, but a state appeals court ordered a retrial because his defense lawyers had failed to cross-examine or investigate witnesses effectively. He was again convicted and condemned in 2004, and the courts did not find evidence of deficiencies that would require a new appeal. But Mr. Knight said the new team had identified weaknesses with that 2nd defense as well. By all accounts, Mr. Glossip's behavior on the day after the murder hurt his case. He later admitted that Mr. Snead knocked on his door late that night and told him he had just killed Mr. Van Treese. He said he did not believe him at first and went back to sleep. But he did not mention Mr. Sneed's statement to the police when they initially questioned him the next day, after Mr. Van Treese's wife reported him missing and his unlocked car was found across the street from the motel. Mr. Sneed testified that he had taken about $4,000 from Mr. Van Treese's car and divided it with Mr. Glossip the next morning, and that Mr. Glossip had sent him to buy a hacksaw, trash bags and muriatic acid to help dispose of the body. Mr. Glossip denied those accusations. In any event, Mr. Sneed fled on his skateboard, and Mr. Glossip was taken into custody after the body was discovered in the motel room the night after the murder. At that point, he did reveal what Mr. Sneed had told him. Last year, in a mysterious twist, the pardon and parole board received an email that was purportedly written by Mr. Sneed's daughter, O'Ryan Justine Sneed. Pleading for clemency for what she called "an innocent man," she wrote that her father had told her that Mr. Glossip had not asked him to commit the murder. She said her father had considered recanting, but was afraid his plea deal would unravel and he would be sentenced to death himself. But the daughter left no contact information, and so far no one has been able to find her or authenticate the email. Mr. Sneed has made no such statement himself. The Glossip case reflects a common problem in capital punishment, Mr. Scheck said: a poor defense in the initial trial, which then limits the legal options in later appeals. "What frequently happens in these capital cases is that the really good lawyers only get involved at the end, when it's too late," Mr. Scheck said. Mr. Van Treese's family is convinced of Mr. Glossip's guilt and has thanked the governor for standing firm. "Execution of Richard Glossip will not bring Barry back or lessen the empty hole left in the lives of those who loved Barry," family members said in a statement this week to The Tulsa World. "What it does provide is a sense that justice has been served." (source: New York Times) ************* Group wants doctor's name in botched execution unsealed A group of doctors have filed a brief in the federal court of appeals saying the doctor who oversaw Oklahoma's troubled execution should be named and be held accountable for any "professional errors." It's claim is the public should know which doctors are participating in executions and their role in them. The amici curiae, of friend of the court, brief was filed by the Doctors for the Ethical Practice of Medicine. At issue is a decision by the court to seal records that name the doctor who was the supervisor of the medical procedures during the execution of Clayton Lockett. The state wants to keep the name secret to protect the doctor from threats. It all stems from a civil lawsuit filed by the family of Clayton Locket against the state, the prison warden, the director of the department of corrections and the doctor. The group, through it's attorney Katherine Toomey, contends that medical ethics still apply to doctors assisting in executions and that withholding the name could keep professional groups from disciplining doctors who make mistakes during the procedure. In this case, the group claims the doctor, referred to as "Dr. Doe", "failed repeatedly to locate a vein" for the IV injections of drugs, "improperly placed" the IV, causing Lockett to writhe in pain, before dying 43 minutes later. The state contents the doctor wasn't engaging in a normal medical procedure and cannot be held responsible, according to its response. They also claim that his actions aren't "negligence" because the doctor has no patient relationship with the inmate. The ACLU also filed suit, saying not releasing the name amounted to "prior restraint." (source: okcfox.com) NEBRASKA: Death penalty supporters reach mark to get issue on 2016 ballot The Nebraska Secretary of State's Office released preliminary totals Friday for petition signatures verified by county officials, indicating that the petition drive to overturn the repeal of the state's death penalty had met the threshold to get the issue on the November 2016 ballot. As of Friday afternoon, officials at the county level had verified 65,171 of the nearly 166,000 signatures turned in by petition organizers. County officials had rejected 9,154, or about 12 percent, of the 74,667 signatures reviewed so far. The number of registered voters in Nebraska at the petition deadline was 1,138,825, according to the Secretary of State's Office. Organizers needed signatures from 5 percent of the state's registered voters, or 56,942 verified signatures, to put the issue on the ballot. Reaching 10 % of registered voters, or 113,883 valid signatures, would prevent the legislation from going into effect until it can be voted on. Both thresholds further require that the 5 % or 10 % mark be met in at least 38 of the state's 93 counties. In Lancaster County, Friday's report showed, 10,153 of 11,918 signatures gathered were verified, with 1,733 rejected. Douglas County signatures totaled 9,194, with 8,300 of those verified. Signatures and information are checked against voter registration records. Lancaster County Election Commissioner Dave Shively said his staff has a lot of leeway on verifying those signatures, even when they are hard to read or have missing or wrong information. "It's our responsibility to prove that they're not registered, not that they are registered," he said. The Secretary of State's Office has not certified any of the count totals released Friday. Some counties are still verifying signatures, said Laura Strimple, communications director with the Secretary of State's Office. Nebraska's death penalty was repealed by the Legislature in May with the passage of LB268. Lawmakers then voted 30-19 to override Gov. Pete Ricketts' veto of the bill. (source: Journal Star) COLORADO: Mom in baby death lost custody of other kids Before she was accused of child abuse in the death of her month-old daughter in Parachute, Phyllis Wyatt lost custody of her older children in California and once threatened to kill her family by burning her house down, according to a motion filed by the Ninth Judicial District Attorney's office. The prosecution's motion was a response to an attempt by defense attorney Kathy Goudy to reduce Wyatt's bond, which was initially set at $300,000 and later reduced to $100,000. Citing Wyatt's flight from Colorado after her daughter's death, lack of local connections or employment, the severity of the charge and "history of mental illness," the District Attorney's Office opposed a further reduction in bond. Wyatt and her partner Matthew Ogden's daughter, Sarah, died June 20 at Grand River Hospital in Rifle after emergency workers were called to their Parachute apartment. The case was ruled a homicide when an autopsy revealed 2 potentially fatal wounds - a skull fracture and liver injuries. The couple fled and were arrested in Minnesota. Ogden, 29, is being held without bond and faces charges of 1st-degree murder of a child by a person in a position of trust, a 1st-degree felony that could carry the death penalty. He also is charged with child abuse causing death, a 2nd-degree felony; and 2 counts child abuse causing serious bodily injury, a 3rd-degree felony. Wyatt, 41, faces charges of criminally negligent child abuse causing death, a 3rd-degree felony that carries a range of 4 to 12 years in prison. "It appears that Colorado's marijuana laws and, also, her previous history with social services in California were a driving factor for the relocation" to Colorado from California, the prosecution motion said. "Defendant and Mr. Ogden were hoping that by coming to Colorado they would not immediately lose custody of the twins." The arrest affidavits in the case say that Sarah woke up crying that night in June and Ogden grabbed her. Wyatt told authorities that she heard screaming and pounding sounds, but didn???t get out of bed. Sarah's twin brother was unhurt and taken into protective custody. When Wyatt, 41, appeared for her bond hearing on Friday morning, Goudy expressed reservations about discussing the issue in open court and pushed for the district attorney???s motion to be sealed. The DA's motion, she contended, contained private information carried over from a separate custody case for Sarah's twin brother. Judge John Neiley agreed to discuss the matter in chambers, but ultimately denied the attempt to have the document sealed. The bond hearing was subsequently rescheduled for Tuesday afternoon. Goudy later told the Post Independent that her next response will attempt to bring the District Attorney's assertions into context. "I think there are some other sides, and that it's not as monstrous as it appears in that affidavit. She's charged with an omission - failure to protect - not an action that she took against the baby," she said. "They were in there monitoring this couples and these babies, and there was not a problem until, basically the night the baby died." Specifically, she asserted that, while a cord blood test for the twins was positive for marijuana, Wyatt went off all other controlled psychotropic substance, prescription and otherwise, for the duration of her pregnancy. Goudy she also addressed Wyatt's past loss of custody. "It's not that she did something to them," she said. "I think it sometimes is a struggle for Amy to take care of Amy." (source: Post Independent) ARIZONA: Suspected killer of Arizona girl wants death penalty removed The man accused of strangling an 8-year-old girl in Bullhead City wants the prosecution to remove the death penalty in his upcoming trial. Lawyers for Justin James Rector filed a motion Friday in Mohave County Superior Court. Rector's attorneys say execution by lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment and his constitutional rights to due process and a fair trial will be violated if prosecutors don't take the death penalty off the table. County Attorney Matt Smith has already said he'll seek the death penalty if Rector is convicted. The 27-year-old Rector is scheduled to stand trial in October 2016. Rector is charged with first-degree murder stemming from the September 2014 strangulation of Isabella "Bella" Grogan-Canella. Her body was found in a shallow grave near her home in Bullhead City. (source: Associated Press) NEVADA: Judge denies several defense motions in Ammar Harris case He's accused of opening fire on a car on the Las Vegas Strip and killing 3 people. Ammar Harris' murder trial is expected to start in about a month. On Friday, his attorneys were wrangling for position in the case. Harris' attorneys argued the accused Strip shooter wouldn't be able to have a fair trial if cameras were allowed inside. When he was a free man, Harris was all about the camera. In a YouTube video he's seen counting stacks of money. In the courtroom Friday, it was a different view of the lens. "This is a situation of the actual trial being a fair proceeding for Mr. Harris," said Thomas Ericcson, Harris' attorney. Ericsson argued the presence of cameras could impact witnesses as they testify for the jury. As a result, they filed a motion to ban cameras. "This is part of the public's right to know what occurs in the courtroom," Chief Deputy District Attorney David Stanton said. Outside of this argument, Stanton left it up to Judge Kathleen Delaney to decide. "The court does not find a compelling reason in this case to exclude cameras or media microphones in the courtroom," Delaney said. Cameras will be allowed, but that was just the beginning of the defense's stack of motions to wrangle a better position in the trial. Seventeen motions in all were filed. Many with the same outcome, motion denied. One involved preventing prosecutors from seeking the death penalty on the murder charges involving cab driver Michael Boldon and passenger Sandra Sutton-Wasmond. That was also denied. Regardless of the outcome, Harris would have still been facing the death penalty for shooting and killing Ken Cherry Jr. while driving. They're small legal battles before a trial that could mean life or death for Harris. The defense did win some arguments. The motions that were granted mainly dealt with evidence prosecutors will have to produce for the defense. Some of the motions are also expected to reemerge once the trial gets under way. The trial has been set to start Oct. 12. (source: KSNV news) CALIFORNIA: Indio man could face death penalty in Coachella killing Murder, kidnapping and arson charges were filed Friday against an Indio parolee accused of killing a Palm Desert man and leaving his body in a burning vehicle in Coachella last month. Andrew John Muir, 27, also faces a special circumstance allegation of kidnapping in the commission of a murder, which makes him eligible for the death penalty if convicted. The district attorney has yet to decide whether to seek capital punishment for Muir, who's scheduled to be arraigned this afternoon at the Larson Justice Center in Indio. Muir was taken into custody Tuesday in the 46-200 block of Calhoun St., after deputies served search warrants at 4 locations in Indio and one in Coachella, Sgt. Walter Mendez said. On Aug. 14 around 3:40 a.m., authorities responded to a car fire near the intersection of Dillon Road and Vista Del Norte in Coachella. Firefighters who doused the flames discovered the body of a man, later identified as 38-year-old Matthew Cupit of Palm Desert. No other details, including the suspected motive or how Muir was linked to the killing, have been released. (source: The Desert Sun) USA: On U.S. soil will Pope Francis (please) speak out against the death penalty? On Aug. 25, Nicaraguan Bernardo Tercero sat alone in a small booth on death row in Livingston, Texas, talking through a phone receiver with loved ones on the other side of the glass, not knowing whether he would be killed the next day. Later that afternoon, the execution was off like a switch. Defense attorneys had won a last-minute reprieve from the Texas courts by contending a key witness had given false testimony at Tercero's trial for the 1997 murder of Robert Berger. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega claimed Tercero's rights had been violated and pleaded for clemency. Putting people to death is a fraught business, and Tercero's case is no exception. But as executions in Texas continue apace - 10 so far this year - exonerations, botched executions and prosecutorial misconduct have gained widespread attention in the media. Numerous states have repealed the death penalty or established de facto moratoriums in recent years. And death sentences in Texas are actually markedly down (zero so far this year compared with 11 in 2014) - a phenomenon associated with the growing awareness of wrongful convictions. Indeed, the movement to end the death penalty in the U.S. may be reaching critical mass. The debate is certainly on fire. In August, Nebraskans for the Death Penalty gathered enough signatures to block a legislative repeal of the death penalty, until it can be put to voters via referendum in 2016. And in California, a federal appeals court will review a finding that the death penalty there is arbitrarily applied, potentially commuting the sentences of over 740 prisoners. Into this state of play steps Pope Francis with his Sept. 22-27 visit to the U.S. In pronouncements, the pope has taken an unequivocal stance against capital punishment, reiterating the church's opposition by focusing not only on biblical principles, but on the sociology of penal systems and the philosophy of justice. In October 2014, he called Christians and "people of good will" to struggle against the death penalty, "but also to improve prison conditions, out of respect for the human dignity of persons deprived of their liberty." "Today the death penalty is inadmissible, no matter how serious the crime of the condemned," Pope Francis wrote in a March letter to the International Commission against the Death Penalty. "For a State of Law, the death penalty represents a failure, because it obliges it to kill in the name of justice," he continued. Will Pope Francis speak out against the death penalty when he's here? And if so, could it be a turning point? His scheduled visit to the Curran-Fromhold Correctional facility in Philadelphia on Sept. 27 has some wondering - and hoping. "We need Pope Francis to make a statement against the death penalty on our soil," said Karen Clifton, director of the Washington, D.C.-based Catholic Mobilizing Network to End the Use of the Death Penalty, which works with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to advocate against the death penalty. "People in this country are not aware of where we fit into this practice, compared to the rest of the world. If Francis spoke out on this issue it would have an extraordinary impact. People - not just Catholics - will listen to him because he is seen as a world figure." That the United States is an outlier when it comes to the death penalty worldwide is highlighted in Mario Marazziti's 13 Ways of Looking at the Death Penalty, a compact history of the death penalty and the global abolition movement, and an intimate portrait of injustices in the American system. "The death penalty keeps America on the other side. Not of the ocean, but of a democracy that is capable of respecting life and human dignity no matter what," said Marazziti, a prominent member of Italian parliament and spokesperson for the Community of Sant'Egidio - the Catholic NGO and faith community which brokered peace accords in various African civil wars, and spearheaded the effort to get millions of signatures for the U.N. moratorium on the use of the death penalty. The number of countries which have the death penalty, in law or practice, has been steadily decreasing since the post-World War II era. "What happens in the rest of the world matters for the United States," Marazziti said. In his statements, the pope has made clear that for a society to be humane, justice is justice only if it is restorative, that is, without retaliation or revenge. "Those who support the death penalty on a religious basis make the same terrible mistake of the fundamentalist Islamists that read the Koran under the bloody black flags of the Caliphate," said Marazziti, who worked side by side with Nelson Mandela to end the genocide in Burundi. "Retribution is a primitive stage of justice." Clifton of Catholics Mobilizing Network has come to a similar conclusion: "So what is the death penalty about? It's vengeance. Vengeance is the only thing holding up the abolishment of the death penalty in this country." "As a country we need to self-examine and understand what our true motives for the death penalty are. Francis can help us do that," Clifton said. (source: Dani Clark is a writer and editor at an international development organization in Washington, D.C., and a member of the Community of Sant'Egidio----National Catholic Reporter) ******************* 'Next To Die' Project Aims To Make It Easier To Track Executions----The goal is to improve media coverage around capital punishment. When an execution is reported on in the media, coverage typically peaks during the few days before and after it is carried out. But the coverage often fails to go into any depth. In an effort to spur more comprehensive coverage of capital punishment, the Marshall Project -- a non-profit, non-partisan criminal justice-focused news organization -- has launched a new partnership with outlets in all 9 U.S. states that have executed people since 2013 plus Arkansas, which is planning to resume executions after a hiatus. The project, called The Next to Die, offers a database that includes detailed information from the Death Penalty Information Center and participating media outlets about inmates facing execution in the U.S., as well as embeddable countdowns. Currently featured prominently on the website is 51-year-old Richard Glossip, who is scheduled to be put to death on Sept. 16 in Oklahoma. Glossip has spent 17 years on death row after being convicted of 1st-degree murder in 1998, though he maintains his innocence and has attracted high-profile supporters. Included in the information on Glossip is a link to a lengthy feature about his case from the Tulsa Frontier. In an interview with the Nieman Lab's Justin Ellis, project managing editor Gabriel Dance explained that he anticipates the database could eventually be used to track patterns in U.S. executions, such as what types of people are sentenced to death or which district attorneys have high conviction rates in such cases. Another editor compared it to the work being done by other media partnerships like PolitiFact and Homicide Watch. Ziva Branstetter, editor-in-chief at the Tulsa Frontier, a participating news startup, told Nieman she is optimistic the project will result in more thorough coverage. "The state is sending someone to death -- this is the most severe action they can take," Branstetter told Nieman. "We should cover it all with the same attention, no matter the manpower." (source: Joseph Erbentraut; Chicago Editor, The Huffington Post) ********** New Initiative Tracks Upcoming Death Penalty Cases A new partnership between The Marshall Project and several media properties will shed light on capital punishment in the United States with a project called The Next to Die. According to an email from The Marshall Project announcing the initiative: In partnership with 5 newsrooms - The Tampa Bay Times, Houston Chronicle, Tulsa Frontier, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and AL.com - we have created the 1st comprehensive, up-to-date schedule of executions in the United States. Featuring real-time tracking of every upcoming execution, an embeddable, responsive widget, and profiles of the men and women scheduled to die, The Next to Die humanizes those on death row and shines a light on a lethal issue that is too often shrouded in secrecy. The group has also compiled a database on the 1,414 executions in the United States since the Supreme Court lifted the suspension on executions in 1976. Recent opinion polls have indicated the the public's feeling toward executions is changing and some states have placed a moratorium on them. In the 1980s and 1990s a solid majority favored the death penalty, but a poll earlier this summer from Quinnipiac, showed that 48 % of people preferred life without parole for convicted murderers, compared to 43 % who preferred the death penalty. The change in public sentiment can be attributed to several factors, but highly-publicized botched executions undoubtedly have played a role. (source: bluenationreview.com) ****************** Vt. man facing death penalty speaks in court As prosecutors look to send a Vermont man back to death row, his defense will once again seek to invalidate the death penalty. Donald Fell's new trial is tentatively scheduled for next September, but hearings like Thursday's lay the groundwork for the prosecution and defense's cases. Fell spoke in court Thursday for the 1st time in years and likely the last time until the trial begins. It's been a decade and a half since investigators first tied then-20-year-old Fell and an alleged accomplice to the murder of 3 Vermonters. Fell allegedly kidnapped and murdered Terri King, 53, of North Clarendon. King's daughters Lori Hibbard and Karen Worcester are still fighting for justice. "It's been 15 long years, it should've been over with long ago," said Hibbard. Fell's case led a judge to rule the death penalty unconstitutional, in 2002. A higher court reversed that decision and a federal jury found him guilty of kidnapping and murder in 2005, placing him on death row. He remained there until last year when Judge William Sessions overturned the guilty verdict after evidence of juror misconduct emerged. Now, Fell is back in court facing a new trial and the same potential penalty-- execution. "Today he looks like the guy who kidnapped and murdered my mother," said Hibbard. While Kings' daughters plan on being at every court hearing in the leadup to a trial scheduled for next September, Fell likely won't. He told Judge Geoffrey Crawford the shackled ride from his Brooklyn prison to Vermont leaves him stressed and bruised. King's daughters aren't sympathetic. "We feel uncomfortable and I'm sure my mother did for the 3 1/2 hour ride she took with him," said Hibbard. Fell said he can't contribute while cuffed in court, but also rejected the opportunity to phone-in from prison. He ultimately received approval to stay in jail up to trial. His attorneys said they plan on challenging the death penalty again both in the case and in general. King's daughters know even if he's sentenced to death, the government is unlikely to ever execute Fell as it has only done so to three prisoners since the early 1960s. But that's the outcome they hope to see. "I definitely am going to be there, front row," said Hibbard. Fell never faced charges for the other 2 alleged murders because the federal case involving kidnapping takes precedence. He also faces accusations of trying to kill a fellow prisoner while on death row in Terre Haute, Indiana. There are no criminal charges, but he's being sued civilly by the alleged victim. (source: Associated Press) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sat Sep 12 12:57:45 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2015 12:57:45 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 12 NIGERIA: Nigerian Governors differ on punishment for corruption Governors in Nigeria have disagreed over what should be done to government officials found guilty of corrupt practices. However, Labour Unions in the country have demanded capital punishment for corrupt Nigerian officials as obtained in China and India. NLC President, Ayuba Wabba, and EFCC Chairman, Ibrahim Lamorde, said the campaign against corruption must be intensified and sustained. To drum support for the anti-corruption crusade of President Muhammadu Buhari, the organised labour held a mass rally on Thursday in Abuja. Governor of Ekiti, Ayodele Fayose and Rivers state Governor, Nyesome Wike both kicked against the suggestion that government officials found guilty of stealing the Nations treasury should be sentenced to death. The state governors spoke against this during the National rallies held by NLC members to canvass for support for the Buhari anti corruption drive as well as call for death penalty to be enforced on corrupt government officials. Ondo state governor, Olusegun Mimiko, who spoke through his information commissioner, Kayode Akinmade, said due process must be followed if Nigerians agree that the death penalty is what should be meted on corrupt officials. Governor Ibikunle Amosun of Ogun State called for life imprisonment for any public office holder convicted of corruption. Wabba said the NLC was in support of whatever would address the issue of corruption in the country, including death sentence as Corruption had badly damaged the core of the country's national existence. (source: tv360nigeria.com) IRAN: Imprisoned Leader of Spiritual Group on Hunger Strike Mohammad Ali Taheri, the leader of a spiritual group who has been behind bars since 2011 on charges of "corruption on earth" and "blasphemy," has been on a hunger strike since August 13, 2015 to protest his sentence and prison conditions, a member of his family told the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran. "Before he ends his hunger strike, we want the authorities to respect Mr. Taheri's most basic rights as a human being and prisoner," the relative said. "Secondly we demand a fair and open trial." Taheri's case has been surrounded by uncertainty following contradictory reports on the views of 3 senior religious leaders regarding whether he has also committed apostasy, a charge that carries the death penalty. "According to the court sentence viewed by Taheri's lawyers, the death sentence is based on the judgement of three Grand Ayatollahs. Yet news agencies recently quoted the same Grand Ayatollahs that their views are not definite and the sentence can change. What kind of game is this? If they really don't think he should be condemned to death, they should officially say so," Taheri's family member told the Campaign. Mohammad Ali Taheri is the founder of the now-banned "Erfan-e Halgheh" (Spiritual Circle) arts and culture institute whose popular books on religion and spirituality have all been published with permission from the Islamic Guidance and Culture Ministry. He has also taught classes in alternative medicine at Tehran University. On October 30, 2011, he was sentenced to 5 years in prison for "blasphemy," 74 lashes for "touching the wrists of female patients," and 900 million tomans in fines (about $300,000) for "interfering in medical science," "earning illegitimate funds," and "distribution of audio-visual products and use of academic titles." On July 13, 2015, Judiciary Spokesman Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei stated in a press conference that Taheri had been found guilty of "corruption on earth" in the lower court's ruling, a charge that potentially carries the death penalty. "Mr. Taheri is a researcher and author on alternative medicine. We want the Supreme Court to exonerate him. He has never accepted the accusations against him and there has never been any proof to back the charges in his case. The treatment he has been getting is a clear violation of his human rights," said the family member. In February 2014, Fars News Agency reported that the Judiciary had asked 3 religious authorities, Nasser Makkarem Shirazi, Lotfollah Safi Golpayegani, and Mohammad Alavi Gorgani, to give their opinion on Taheri and they had found him guilty of "apostasy," and a "corruptor on earth." Yet on September 1, 2015, the state-run Iranian Labor News Agency (ILNA) published replies from the three religious authorities denying that Taheri's "apostasy" had been absolutely determined. "The life of a human being is in the hands of 3 religious authorities who have not clearly expressed their opinion. You cannot play with someone's life like that," Taheri's family member told the Campaign. (source: Iran Human Rights) UNITED NATIONS: UN experts call for abolition of death penalty in India----The experts also welcomed the decision to reduce the number of crimes subject to death penalty by China. The recommendation by the 9-member panel was, however, not unanimous, with 1 full-time member and 2 government representatives dissenting and supporting retention of capital punishment. UN human rights experts have welcomed recommendations made by India's Law Commission to abolish death penalty with the exception of terror offences and called on Indian authorities to move towards the complete abolition of capital punishment. "The conclusions and recommendations of the Indian Law Commission represent an important voice in favour of the abolition of the death penalty in India," Special Rapporteur on extra-judicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Christof Heyns said. "I encourage the Indian authorities to implement these recommendations and to move towards the complete abolition of the death penalty for all offences," he added. The Indian Law Commission issued its report on August 31, concluding that the death penalty does not serve as a deterrent and recommended its abolition for all crimes, except terrorism-related offences and waging war. The Commission had been tasked by the Supreme Court to study the issue of the death penalty in India. In its report, the Indian Law Commission recognised that, while on death row, the prisoner "suffers from extreme agony, anxiety and debilitating fear arising out of an imminent yet uncertain execution," and that "the death row phenomenon is compounded by the degrading and oppressive effects of conditions of imprisonment imposed on the convict, including solitary confinement". Special Rapporteur on torture Juan Mendez said the Indian authorities should review the findings very carefully and ratify the law. The experts also welcomed the decision to reduce the number of crimes subject to death penalty by China. China amended several provisions of its Criminal Law, replacing death penalty with life imprisonment for several offences, including smuggling of weapons, ammunition, nuclear materials and counterfeit currency; obstruction of duty of police; and creating rumours during wartime. "By adopting these amendments to its criminal code, China has made progress in the right direction; this needs to be encouraged," the UN experts noted. "These new developments in India and China are in line with the general trend towards the abolition of the death penalty at a global level, even if there are isolated moves in the opposite direction," Heyns said. Special rapporteurs are appointed by the Geneva-based UN Human Rights Council to examine and report back on a country situation or a specific human rights theme. (source: Indian Express) PHILIPPINES: A witless decision 17-year-old Renzo Rei Bodoy, a 1st year college student, died after he was stabbed repeatedly by Richard Pring, 32, who grabbed his cell phone during a jeepney holdup in Quiapo, Manila. After he was stabbed in the chest for resisting, Bodoy jumped out of the jeepney to escape further harm, but Pring followed him and stabbed him again and again. Human rights advocates and bleeding hearts perhaps would ask people to understand the plight of Pring, who has been in and out of jail and is a member of the Batang City Jail gang. They would probably say Pring is a victim of society's apathy towards the poor and all that stuff about social injustice.Why should society treat a hardened criminal like Pring with compassion when he was merciless towards his victim? In Davao City, Pring would have been executed on the spot, and residents would have rejoiced at his fate. There should be no 2nd chance for criminals who treat their victims without mercy. The exceedingly slow process of putting a criminal on trial leads to an injustice - to his victim. The axiom "justice delayed is justice denied" appears to be mainly for the accused and not his victim. Human and constitutional rights for the accused? What about the human and constitutional rights of his victim or victims? * * * The abolition of the death penalty through a presidential edict was a witless decision on the part of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Why should we show mercy to persons who plunder, kill and rape or enslave others by making them drug addicts? Why should the government invoke humanitarian considerations for criminals but apparently show no sympathy towards crime victims through a court trial that takes so long? Gloria's convent school upbringing and pressure from the Catholic Church led to her decision. Or probably back then she had a premonition that she would be put on trial for plunder and she would rather rot in prison than be hanged if she got convicted. * * * Prompt and commonsensical dispensation of justice deters crime and discourages would-be criminals. This is what the vigilante group Davao Death Squad (DDS) does to hardened criminals avoiding tedious hearings. Handling of a case using common sense, as opposed to the conviction of a quadriplegic for rape. The Bulacan Regional Trial Court judge, Andres Soriano, who convicted the quadriplegic, and the Court of Appeals justices, who upheld the rape conviction, definitely lacked common sense. A Supreme Court justice (his name escapes me at the moment) once said that the application of law is common sense. In Davao City, the DDS doesn't pick its subjects at random or whim, but chooses them like a sniper gingerly aiming at his target before deliberately squeezing the trigger. That's why residents applaud whenever a criminal is found dead in an isolated alley because they know he was "ripe" for the killing. There are very few criminals in Davao City because they know their days are numbered if they continue to stay there. * * * The other day, a woman came to my office at Isumbong mo kay Tulfo with her 16-year-old daughter in tow. The woman, a domestic helper, was accompanied by her female employer. She said her husband started molesting their daughter when she was only 4 years old. At the age of 8, the father then started having sexual relations with the girl. To make things worse, her uncle, the brother of her father, raped her when she was 10. The brothers only stopped their bestial acts when their niece started menstruating at the age of 12. Now a teenager, the victim told her mother that she could not turn to her for help then because the latter at that time was working in Manila, far from their town in the Visayas. Her father and uncle would be likely candidates for lethal injection if President Gloria had not abolished the death penalty. (source: Philippine Inquirer) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sun Sep 13 11:59:33 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2015 11:59:33 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., FLA., MISS., LA., OKLA. Message-ID: Sept. 13 PENNSYLVANIA: Husband in Craigslist Slaying Says Counsel Was Ineffective A newlywed husband convicted along with his wife of killing a man who was lured through a Craigslist ad should be allowed to withdraw his guilty plea because his previous attorneys were ineffective, his lawyer argued. Attorney Richard Feudale has asked for a hearing in Northumberland County Court claiming that Elytte Barbour, 23, should have pleaded guilty but mentally ill in the stabbing death of Troy LeFerrara, 42, of Port Trevorton. Feudale argued that a breakdown in communication between Barbour and his previous legal counsel led to the August 2014 guilty plea to 2nd-degree murder and other charges. Barbour claimed he was told that no potential defense was available and he would face the death penalty if he didn't plead guilty. If Barbour had been aware of a possible mental illness defense and mitigating factors involved with seeking the death penalty, he wouldn't have been afraid to face a death sentence at trial, he argued. Barbour also wasn't provided with psychiatric or mitigation reports until after he entered his guilty plea, according to the petition. He and Miranda Barbour, 20, are serving life sentences without possibility of parole. Miranda Barbour admitted she used Craigslist to arrange a meeting with LaFerrara in a parking lot in November 2013. She drove LaFerrara into Sunbury where she repeatedly stabbed him while her husband, who had been hiding under a blanket on the backseat floor, restrained him with a piece of cable around his neck. (source: Associated Press) ************** Nicholas Yarris spent 22 years on death row for a murder he didn't commit One in a series on issues pertaining to the death penalty in Pennsylvania. On Jan. 16, 2004, Nicholas Yarris walked out of prison a free man after 22 years on Pennsylvania's death row. Yarris, now 54, is one of 15 people in the United States - and the only person in Pennsylvania - to be released from death row after being found not guilty of a capital murder by means of a DNA test. "I'm kind of a walking encyclopedia on the death penalty," Yarris joked during a recent phone interview from his home in California. In 1981, Yarris, 20 at the time, was driving with a friend in what turned out to be a stolen car. A Chester police officer pulled Yarris over and the encounter turned violent, the officer claimed. The incident ended with Yarris being charged with the attempted murder of a police officer. Yarris said the charges against him were trumped up and when the case went to trial, he was acquitted of the attempted murder charge. He was convicted of theft for stealing the car. A drug addict, Yarris struggled with withdrawal while in prison. In an attempt to get himself out of prison, he made up a story about knowing who killed Linda May Craig, who had been kidnapped from a parking lot of the Tri-State Mall in Delaware. Her body was found the next day, and it was determined she had been raped. When police could not connect the person Yarris had claimed killed Linda May Craig to the crime, they began to suspect Yarris Soon, a prison informant claimed that Yarris had confessed to the murder. Following a brief trial in 1982, a Delaware County jury convicted Yarris and sentenced him to death for the murder and rape of Linda May Craig. Though in 1984 while in transit between prison and the Delaware County Courthouse, Yarris escaped and was placed on the FBI's most wanted list. He said life on the run was not for him and thought he would have been shot to death if police found him first. "I didn't kill the woman. Why am I running?" he asked. After 25 days on the run he called his parents, told them where he was and turned himself in. For the next 20 years, Yarris would sit on death row waiting to die. The Stats According to the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, there are 182 convicts sitting on death row in Pennsylvania. State Correctional Institutes Graterford and Greene house the death row inmates, and executions are performed at State Correctional Institute Rockview. While many wait for their appeals to proceed or for their sentence to be carried out, no one has been executed in Pennsylvania since 1999. Gary Heidnik was executed by means of lethal injection in 1999, and before him Keith Zettlemoyer and Leon Moser, convicted of killing his former wife and 2 daughters on Easter Sunday in a Lower Providence church parking lot, were executed by the same method in 1995. All 3 men had given up their appeals process and asked to die. The last person in Pennsylvania to be executed involuntarily was Elmo Smith, a Bridgeport man sentenced to die for the rape and murder Mary Ann Mitchell, of a young woman from Roxborough, whose body was found in Lafayette Hill. He was executed in the electric chair in 1962. He would be the last person in Pennsylvania to be executed by the electric chair. Between 1915 and 1962, 350 people, including Smith, had been executed using the electric chair. In 1990 the electric chair was taken out of the State Correctional Institute Rockview and was no longer the official method of carrying out the death penalty in Pennsylvania. Lethal injection has become the method by which death row inmates are executed, but it has scarcely been used, partially because the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections does not have the drugs necessary to perform the executions. Pennsylvania uses a "3-drug cocktail" to perform lethal injections. The 1st part - fast-acting barbiturate - is very difficult to obtain, according to Secretary of Corrections John Wetzel said in a press release. The state does not currently have the drugs needed to perform lethal injections, but if it needed to purchase the drugs, it would be an open process, Wetzel said. "We would get it legally, ethically and appropriately," he said. The Moratorium In January, Gov. Tom Wolf placed a moratorium on the imposition of the death penalty until a study by the state Senate is completed and reviewed. With the moratorium in place, when a defendant is up for execution, the governor will issue the condemned a temporary reprieve lasting until the study is completed. "Today's action comes after significant consideration and reflection," Wolf said when he announced the moratorium. "This moratorium is in no way an expression of sympathy for the guilty on death row, all of whom have been convicted of committing heinous crimes. This decision is based on a flawed system that has been proven to be an endless cycle of court proceedings as well as ineffective, unjust and expensive. "Since the reinstatement of the death penalty, 150 people have been exonerated from death row nationwide, including six men in Pennsylvania. Recognizing the seriousness of these concerns, the Senate established the bipartisan Pennsylvania Task Force and Advisory Commission to conduct a study of the effectiveness of capital punishment in Pennsylvania. Today???s moratorium will remain in effect until this commission has produced its recommendation and all concerns are addressed satisfactorily." That study was supposed to be completed by 2011. Yarris, the man released from death row, said he thought something would have been done in Pennsylvania shortly after he left prison, not almost 10 years later. Life on the row: 'Abject Misery' Susan Behringer, a spokeswoman for the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, said the department does not take a stance in the death penalty debate. Its role is to house the offender and carry out the death sentence if it is ever taken that far. Those on death row spend their entire lives there, save for an hour a day for recreation, but even they are not placed with general population for their brief exercise. Those who can afford a television and cable can buy it for themselves, Behringer said. The death row Yarris remembers was one rife with violence. When he entered Pennsylvania's state prison system in 1982 he was more or less sentenced to live in hell, he said. Shortly after his 1982 conviction, Yarris was taken to State Correctional Institute Huntingdon just outside of Pittsburgh. There he was placed in a disciplinary unit, where he said he lived in silence because of a "no talking rule." "I did not want to live anymore," Yarris said. In 1995 Huntingdon was closed, and he was housed in a facility in Pittsburgh until 1998, when he was moved to death row at State Correctional Institute Greene. He said throughout his time he was beaten by corrections officers, contracted illnesses that he was not treated for and was at times beaten by other prisoners. One beating from a guard resulted in 11 broken bones in his hands. He said to save his humanity he would say "thank you" to the guards after they attacked him. Through the plethora of bad experiences he said he found some hope through reading. One officer took pity on him and gave him books. From then on, he said, he spent most of his time on death row reading. Yarris said he learned early on that an education was important, and during his time in prison he read thousands of books. He compared the idea of freedom to being hit with a tidal wave. "I had to prepare for it," he said. That said, in 2002, just 2 years before Yarris would be exonerated, he gave up his appeals and in 2002 asked to be put to death. "Lingering in hell is a lot worse than being executed," he said. While he openly talks about the abuse he suffered at the hands of prison guards and even other prisoners, Yarris called his time on death row "the greatest adventure of my life." On July 1, 1988, he married a woman while he was in prison. He says that marriage taught him how to love and how to accept love. "I made an effort to cherish every nuance of life," Yarris said. Freedom Yarris said he learned about DNA testing while incarcerated in the 1980s and wanted a test to prove that he had nothing to do with the killing of Craig. However, for years he was denied the opportunity to have a test completed from the evidence collected at the scene of the murder. Finally in 2003 a test of the killer's glove left at the crime scene proved that Yarris was not the killer. Yarris maintained that on the night Craig was killed, he was having dinner with his parents, 26 miles away. He said when he learned he would be getting out of prison he was put in a solitary cell for his own safety and for the protection for the officers. Yarris explained the officers acknowledged they broke him during his decades on death row. "They told me 'We believe you'll be so full of rage that you'll want to kill one of us,'" Yarris said. Almost immediately after being released from prison, Yarris left the United States and spent the next 9 years in the United Kingdom, where he met his 2nd wife and had a daughter. He knew that adjusting to life would be difficult, but said when he went to England he began speaking in Hyde Park. Shortly after he arrived in the United Kingdom he began working with organizations on criminal justice reform in the United Kingdom. "I want to be a productive citizen," Yarris said. During that time, Yarris sued the Delaware County District Attorney's Office, seeking compensation for time he wrongly served in prison. At some point, he said, he was having problems with his wife and did not want to deal with the possibility of a trial. He said he gave the Delaware County District Attorney's Office 30 days to settle for $4 million. If they wouldn???t take the settlement he would take the case to trial in federal court and seek $23 million. At the last minute the Delaware County District Attorney's Office agreed and paid out the $4 million settlement to Yarris. "I gave $1 million to my attorney and set up a trust fund for my daughter," he said. Yarris' daughter, 9, lives in England with 2nd his ex-wife. Present: "I don't have time to be bitter" Yarris is married for the 3rd time and is working on a movie based on his book, "7 Days to Live." He is also working on a television series in which he will interview exonerated inmates called "Dead Man Talking." In December, Variety.com reported that Yarris is working with Lucy Rice on a film based on his book. Yarris said it's taken him a while to adjust, but he???s not angry at anyone. "It's not been an easy road," Yarris said. "I don't have time to be bitter." (source: Times Herald) ********************* Should governors be jailed for not signing death warrants? The judge ordered jail for the Kentucky county clerk, Kim Davis, who is an elected official and refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples because of her religious beliefs, even though it is the law. When governors, who are elected officials, refuse to sign death warrants for convicted criminals on death row, even though the state has a death penalty law on the books, should they not be jailed for failure to carry out their official duties because they don't believe in the death penalty? Richard Graessel (source: Letter to the Editor, Morning Call) FLORIDA: Trial Begins for Inmate Accused of Killing Deputy Lawyers will begin selecting jurors Tuesday for the trial of Terrence Barnett, the inmate accused of fatally injuring Polk County detention deputy Sgt. Ronnie Brown during an altercation. Prosecutors want to seek the death penalty for Barnett, and the trial, expected to last 4 weeks, will be the 1st death penalty case Circuit Judge Jalal Harb will oversee. Barnett, 34, is already serving 30 years for his role in a 2007 killing in Highlands County. According to documents, Bryan "Red" Fanning was tied up, beaten and left to die in his home, which had been set on fire. Barnett's lawyer, Robert Norgard, could not be reached on Friday. While in South County Jail, Barnett was indicted on charges of killing Brown. On Aug. 30, 2009, he broke a sprinkler in his cell, swallowed pain-reliever pills and refused to let deputies put him on suicide watch, according to reports. He later told investigators that he was fading in and out of consciousness from the pills. According to a transcript, he said he didn't remember what happened after Brown came into his cell. An arrest report states Barnett said, "all bets are off." Brown attempted to restrain Barnett, but Barnett shoved him, causing Brown to fall backward onto his back. He died days later in the hospital after complications from back surgery. Brown's widow, Albertina, said she wants justice, but taking Barnett's life won't make life better for her. "I'm just learning how to live without my husband, my best friend and no matter what, he's not coming back," Albertina Brown said. "Taking his life won't bring me closure." She plans to be at the trial, but said their 23-year-old daughter and Brown's 26-year-old daughter from another marriage won't be attending. "Ronnie was our rock, our backbone," Albertina Brown said. "He held the family together." After the injury to his lower back, Brown had surgery, but never regained his ability to walk. Brown died soon afterwards. He was 48. Prosecutors decided to seek the death penalty in the case in 2010. Initially, Barnett was charged with battery on an officer causing serious bodily injury, But an indictment charged Barnett with first-degree murder under the concept of "felony murder" - meaning Brown died as the result of Barnett committing the felony of resisting an officer with violence. Death sentences require prosecutors to argue "aggravating circumstances." One aggravator is that the victim was a law enforcement officer "engaged in the performance of his or official duties." A second aggravator is that the defendant was previously convicted of another capital felony. In the Fanning case, Barnett pleaded no contest in 2009 to 2nd-degree murder as part of a plea deal in exchange for up to 30 years in prison. He attempted to withdraw from the agreement, but the request was denied. (source: The Ledger) MISSISSIPPI: Judge orders McGilberry to Jackson County for resentencing A judge has ordered the return of Stephen McGilberry to the Jackson County jail to await resentencing in the 1994 beating deaths of four family members. The Sun Herald reports (http://bit.ly/1iDsWeI ) Circuit Judge Roberts Krebs issued the order Friday, and Circuit Judge Dale Harkey signed off. Jackson County deputies are to retrieve McGilberry from the state prison at Parchman on Sunday and bring him back to the Jackson County jail until sentencing. McGilberry, now 37, was 16 when he killed his mother, stepfather, sister and her 3-year-old son with a baseball bat. He won a third chance at sentencing after a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court ruling found that automatic life sentences for juveniles violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. The court ruled that certain factors, such as the age of the offender at the time of the killing and the nature of the crime, should be considered first. McGilberry's stepfather, Kenneth Purifoy; mother, Patricia Purifoy; stepsister, Kimberly Self and her 3-year-old son Kristopher Self, were killed in October 1994 in St. Martin. McGilberry took a money order from his mother's purse and drove away in the family's vehicle. The jury sentenced him to death, but a U.S. Supreme Court barred the death penalty for juveniles. In 2005, McGilberry was re-sentenced to 4 life terms without parole. McGilberry said he committed the crimes because he was mad at his mother for grounding him from using the family car. She did so, authorities said, because he'd stopped going to school and lost a job. McGilberry claims he's changed since the killings, having found God and been ordained as a minister. He's also married and says he's been a trusted inmate over the years. Michael Purifoy, Kenneth Purifoy's son, said his family wants McGilberry to remain in prison for the rest of his life. The family and others have written letters to the Jackson County District Attorney Tony Lawrence to ask that he remain imprisoned. Charlotte James, Kenneth Purifoy's sister, said the family had moved on with their lives "just to have him open up the can of worms again. We are victimized all over again, and yet the court is worried about his rights and treats him like this poor, little victim. "He had no remorse for what he did," she said. "4 people no longer have their lives. My brother was the most loving, caring, easygoing guy that you could ever meet. "...These 4 people, these innocent people, will never get up again and have a life. Why should he?" (source: Associated Press) LOUISIANA: Murders of whites more likely to mean death penalty in Louisiana, though blacks make up most homicide victims, study finds The killers of white people in Louisiana are roughly 5 times as likely to be sentenced to death than the murderers of black people, according to a study released last month. Meanwhile, black people account for 72 % of all homicide victims in the state, a comparison the report's authors say shows implicit bias in the way juries and the courts go about punishing killers based on the race and gender of a victim. The report, by University of North Carolina political science professor Frank Baumgartner and documentation specialist Tim Lyman, will be published in the fall edition of the Loyola University of New Orleans Journal of Public Interest Law. "I think there's the death penalty that we might wish we had, and then there's the death penalty that we really do have," said Baumgartner, who earlier this year published a nationwide study partially titled "#BlackLivesDon'tMatter," which showed similar findings. (source: bayoubuzz.com) OKLAHOMA----impending execution New Evidence in Glossip case will be presented Monday, September 14 by Legal Defense Team Member Don Knight Editor's Note: This week, attorneys Don Knight, Mark Olive and Kathleen Lord, who are working to establish Richard Glossip's innocence - released a lengthy memorandum to reporters worldwide. The memo outlined new evidence in the case they are making for Glossip's innocence. They and others fighting to stop Glossip's execution are asking for more time to continue their investigations. Introducing the memo to reporters via email, the attorneys wrote: "In the early morning hours of January 7, 1997, Justin Sneed, by himself, beat Barry Van Treese to death with a baseball bat in Room 102 of the Best Budget Inn, a motel in Oklahoma City owned by Mr. Van Treese. Upon arrest, he first denied any involvement in or knowledge of the murder. Over the course of a long interrogation by 2 detectives, Sneed was pressured to implicate Richard Glossip, the manager of the hotel, and was fed details which, if he adopted them, would help him. "Sneed finally adopted the detectives' story and agreed, in exchange for a life sentence for the murder he alone committed, to testify that Mr. Glossip was the mastermind of the plot to murder Mr. Van Treese to steal money from his car. Based upon Sneed's testimony, Mr. Glossip is scheduled to be executed Wednesday, September 16, at 3:00 p.m. "The prosecutors conceded in argument at trial: 'the physical evidence doesn't directly implicate Mr. Glossip.' Therefore, the scheduled execution is based upon Sneed's testimony and credibility alone." Don Knight and leaders of the Oklahoma Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty (OK-CADP) will meet with reporters on Monday, September 14 at 10 a.m. in the 2nd floor Supreme Court Hallway at the state Capitol in Oklahoma City. Here is the summary Knight and his colleagues provided to the news media on Friday, September 11. They believe it strengthens the case that "Mr. Sneed lied to save his own life." Evidence includes the following: 1.1 The use of interrogation techniques proven to elicit false statements Richard A. Leo, Ph.D., J.D., is the national, leading expert on police-induced false confessions and erroneous convictions. ... Dr. Leo evaluated the circumstances of Mr. Sneed???s interrogations and concluded, based upon decades of social science research, that law enforcement in this case used the "personal and situational factors associated with, and believed to cause, false confessions." For example: "The suggestion that Richard Glossip was involved in the homicide of Barry Van Treese first came from investigators, not Justin Sneed. The investigators feed Justin Sneed their theory that Richard Glossip was the mastermind of this homicide, and they repeatedly tell him that Richard Glossip was putting the crime on him;" Interrogators "repeatedly tell him that he will be the scapegoat for the crime if he does not confess, implying that he will receive the harshest punishment if he does not confess to it; they repeatedly suggest that Richard Glossip is the one who put him up to it; and they tell him that he can get this straightened out;" Interrogators "presumed the guilt of Richard Glossip from almost the start and sought to pressure and persuade Justin Sneed to implicate Richard Glossip." "The investigators repeatedly lied to Justin Sneed by telling him that multiple people or witnesses had implicated him in the murder." Dr. Leo's report explains the science behind why techniques such as these create "the suspect's perception that he is trapped, there is no way out, and that his conviction will be inevitable, thus leading to the perception that he has little choice but to agree to or negotiate the best available outcome or mitigation of punishment given the subjective reality of his situation." Such tactics "are substantially likely to increase the risk of eliciting false statements, admissions, and or confessions." Finally, Dr. Leo notes Sneed's "multiple, inconsistent, and contradictory accounts of the crime" which is consistent with a guilty person "falsely implicating an innocent third part as an accomplice." 1.2 Sneed habitually broke into cars and hotel rooms to support his addiction to methamphetamine The state portrayed Sneed as a hapless dupe who had taken methamphetamine, but "he didn't use it that often." The state asked: "Why would he need that much money?" Mr. Glossip's legal team has newly discovered evidence never before presented that casts serious doubt on this key part of the prosecution's case. According to one of Sneed's drug dealers at the time, Sneed on his own, habitually broke into peoples' cars and motel rooms to take property to support his severe drug addition: AFFIDAVIT OF RICHARD ALLAN BARRETT 1. I met Bobby Glossip who I knew as "Critter" in late 1995 or early 1996 at the Plaza Motel in Oklahoma City. 2. At that time, I began dealing methamphetamine with Bobby Glossip and continued to do so until the end of 1996. During this period of time, we dealt drugs out of many different motels in the Oklahoma City area. 3. In or around September of 1996, I first started meeting Bobby Glossip at the Best Budget Inn on Council Road and 1-40. I met regularly with Bobby Glossip at the Best Budget Inn for the purposes of selling methamphetamine until the end of 1996. 4. I always met with Bobby Glossip in Room 102. Room 102 had a waterbed. I met with Bobby Glossip in Room 102 at the Best Budget Inn at least 3 times a week. 5. One of the first few times I was at the Best Budget Inn there was a young man in Room l02 getting high with Bobby Glossip. He was using methamphetamine with a needle. Bobbie Glossip always made people shoot up with a needle before he would sell to them; to be sure they were not the police. When he left, I asked Bobby Glossip who the guy was. Bobby Glossip told me the kid was the motel maintenance man. Bobby Glossip told me to always keep my car locked when I was at the motel. Later I learned this was because the maintenance man (Justin Sneed) broke into cars at the motel parking lot and stole items from the cars. 6. During this approximately four month period of time I would go to the Best Budget Inn to sell methamphetamine approximately 3 to 4 times a week. Each time I went to the Best Budget Inn, the guy I knew as the maintenance man would come to Room 102 within 30 minutes of me arriving to buy drugs from Bobby Glossip, who was buying drugs from me. 7. Each time the maintenance man would come to Room l02, he would use cash (mostly coins) or items to trade for methamphetamine. I specifically recall Justin Sneed bringing the following items to trade for drugs: food stamps (trade $150.00 in stamps for $100.00 of drugs), radar detectors, car stereos, a Samsonite silver hard-covered briefcase and, on one occasion, a nickel-plated .38 caliber handgun. I was present when Justin Sneed told Bobby Glossip that he had taken these items from occupied rooms at the motel and cars in the parking lots of the motel and other businesses near the motel. I remember that Bobby Glossip traded "a 16" (16th of an ounce) with Justin Sneed for the handgun. This would have been enough of the drug for Sneed to shoot up 6 or 7 times (and would typically last for a day and a half or so). People who use meth with a needle chase the "rush" instead of just the high and so they typically use more of the drug than those who snort it, as I used to do. However, either way, the effects of the drug would last for days. On more than one occasion I observed Justin Sneed shoot up with a needle. Based on my own experience, I believe Justin Sneed was addicted to methamphetamine in a bad way. Methamphetamine is a very addictive drug. I often saw Justin Sneed "tweaking." This means a twitching of his mouth and a chewing of his lips. This is a sure sign that someone is high on methamphetamine. 8. In my experience, 90 % of the people I knew who were addicted to meth were thieves; stealing to support their habit. People with this addiction stay awake for days or weeks and will do anything to get more of the drug, even kill. People get very paranoid and mean when they are high on methamphetamine, and will shoot someone, or beat someone, even to death, to keep them from telling others of illegal things the user may be doing, or just from having paranoid thoughts that someone might turn them in. 9. I saw nothing to make me think that Justin Sneed was controlled by Richard Glossip. I never saw anything to make me think that Richard Glossip knew anything about Justin Sneed stealing from motel rooms or cars in the motel parking lots or the businesses nearby. I did not see anything to make me think that Richard Glossip was addicted to drugs. 10. I met Richard Glossip when he would come to Room 102 to see Bobby Glossip. Richard Glossip came to the room but never would stay very long. He mostly came to tell us to quiet down. I did not see Richard Glossip socialize with Bobby Glossip. In fact, Bobby Glossip was mean to Richard Glossip and told him to stay out of his business. As far as I know, Richard Glossip was a good hearted guy who was not involved in Bobby Glossip's drug business. I never saw Richard in the room when people were shooting meth and I never saw Richard come to the room when Justin Sneed was there. 11. When I was in the Oklahoma County Jail, I got a letter from a lawyer named Wayne saying he wanted to talk to me about Richard Glossip's case. I didn't know what the case was about, but I heard through rumors at the jail that it was a murder at the Best Budget Inn in Room 102, and they had my fingerprints. This freaked me out, and I started trying to get transferred to federal custody. I entered a plea in my federal case to get transferred so as to get away from this situation. After this, no one contacted me again and it was my intention not to talk to anyone about this situation. When I was first called by my cousin on September 8, 2015 to tell me someone wanted to talk to me about the case, I hung up on her, as I did not want to talk to anyone about this case. I only agreed to talk to Richard Glossip's lawyer because my mother called me back and asked me to. 12. I was not at the Best Budget Inn on January 7, 1997. 13. I provided this affidavit freely. No one threatened me, coerced me, or offered anything to me in exchange for this affidavit. I swear and affirm that the foregoing statement is true and correct. I am aware that by providing this affidavit, I may have to testify. Thus, Sneed - a tweaking drug addict who, on his own and for his own selfish need for drug money, routinely broke into occupied motel rooms (like Mr. Van Treese's) using his access as the maintenance man at the Best Budget Inn, and cars that were in the parking lot of the Best Budget Inn (like Mr. Van Treese's) to steal people's property to sustain his drug habit - eventually provided the only evidence against Mr. Glossip. 1.3 Exonerations of death-sentenced inmates are common under similar circumstances: For example, the following are cases that ended in exonerations for death-sentenced inmates: Randall Dale Adams (Texas) - David Harris was arrested for the murder when it was learned that he was bragging about it. Harris then claimed that Adams was the killer. Joseph Burrows (Illinois) - No physical evidence linked Burrows to the crime. He was convicted largely on the testimony of Gayle Potter and Ralph Frye, who received lighter sentences in exchange for testifying. Ms. Potter confessed in July of 1994 that she alone had committed the murder. Mr. Frye recanted his testimony as well, claiming that prosecutors and police officers had coerced him into providing testimony. Lawrence William (Larry) Lee (Georgia) - Lee was convicted and sentenced to death based upon what the court called "a weak prosecution case dependent for its success on the believability of 2 witnesses unfavored in the law and by the public - a jailhouse snitch and a co-conspirator - with absolutely no forensic evidence to link [him] to the crime scene." Anthony Graves (Texas) - Graves was convicted in 1994 of assisting Robert Carter in multiple murders in 1992. There was no physical evidence linking Graves to the crime, and his conviction relied primarily on Carter's testimony that Graves was his accomplice. 2 weeks before Carter was scheduled to be executed in 2000, he provided a statement saying he lied about Graves's involvement in the crime. He repeated that statement minutes before his execution. Nathson Fields (Illinois) (featured on Dr. Phil show with Susan Sarandon, Sister Helen Prejean and defense team member Don Knight) - Fields received a new trial because his trial judge, Thomas Maloney, accepted a $10,000 bribe during the trial and was convicted for fixing murder trials. Co-defendant Earl Hawkins, who had admitted to killing 15 to 20 people, testified against Fields in exchange for a lesser sentence. However, at Fields' retrial, Judge Vincent Gaughan found Hawkins "incredible," saying that "If someone has such disregard for human life, what regard will he have for his oath?" Jeremy Sheets (Nebraska) - Adam Barnett was arrested for the 1992 rape and murder of the same victim as in Sheets' case. Barnett confessed to the crime and implicated Sheets. In exchange for the taped statement, Barnett received a plea bargain in which he avoided a charge of 1st degree murder, did not have an additional weapons charge filed, and received a commitment for his safety while incarcerated. Barnett committed suicide prior to the trial and his taped statement was the key evidence used against Sheets at trial. Wesley Quick (Alabama) - Quick was accused of shooting 2 men in the presence of a female acquaintance, and then picking up his friend, Jason Beninati. Beninati testified that Quick drove to the scene of the crime and showed him the bodies of his victims. In the retrial in which he was acquitted, Quick testified that it was actually Beninati who was responsible for the murders, and the one who had disposed of the murder weapon. John Thompson (Louisiana) - Kevin Freeman was originally charged with the murder, but arranged a plea agreement with prosecutors and implicated Thompson. At Thompson's retrial, the jury heard testimony that Freeman, was the actual killer. Alan Gell (North Carolina) - The 2 key witnesses presented by prosecutors were Gell's ex-girlfriend and her best friend, both teenagers who were at the victim's house and pled guilty to involvement in the murder. They testified that they saw Gell shoot the victim on April 3, 1995, but many witnesses later testified to having seen the victim alive days later. Prosecutors withheld evidence that might have cleared Gell in the initial trial, including an audio tape of one of the girls saying she had to "make up a story" about the murder. Laurence Adams (Massachusetts) - Adams was convicted at age 19 on the testimony of 2 witnesses, both of whom had unrelated charges against them dropped after their testimony. The government's key witness testified that Adams had admitted to the offense in a discussion in a private home, but subsequently discovered records indicated that, at the time that the witness alleged the conversation took place, he was actually incarcerated with one of a pair of brothers who were suspects in the case. The 2nd witness recanted her testimony against Adams just prior to her death. Dan L. Bright (Louisiana) - There was no physical evidence against Bright and the prosecution's key witness, Freddie Thompson, provided the only evidence that served to convict Bright. Derrick Jamison (Ohio) - Jamison was originally convicted and sentenced to death in 1985 based in part on the testimony of Charles Howell, a co-defendant who received a lesser sentence in exchange for his testimony against Jamison. 1.4 A new defense report casts serious doubt on the testimony of the prosecution's medical examiner. As reported by Phil Cross at KOKH FOX 25 on September 10, 2015, jurors in the second trial report being misled by the testimony of medical examiner Choi as to the length of time that Mr. Van Treese survived after Sneed's attack. The new report is consistent with Mr. Sneed's statements that he waited to leave until he saw Mr. Van Treese take his last breath. At the press conference [on Monday, September 14], Mr. Knight will talk about what this information means to the case against Mr. Glossip, and will provide further details uncovered in this investigation, including new expert reports and a new key witness who will discuss statements made by Mr. Sneed after Mr. Sneed put Mr. Glossip on death row. (source: The City Sentinel) ****************** Don't put to death an innocent man The Oklahoma citizens who sentenced Richard Glossip to die are just like you and me -- ordinary folk. As fact finders, they are supposed to receive all the information they need to make an informed judgment. So if facts are falsified or withheld, crucial evidence goes missing or key witnesses lie, the jury's decision will inevitably be skewed. They can only work with what they're given. Unfortunately for Richard Glossip, what the jury did not know could mean an innocent man is executed next week. Of the 155 people exonerated off death row (10 of whom were tried in Oklahoma) most were wrongly convicted because their jurors received incomplete or misleading information at trial. This, I'm convinced, is what has happened to Richard Glossip, who is scheduled to be put to death on September 16 unless his pro bono lawyers can surface witnesses and evidence to get him a hearing in court. I'm involved in the effort to save his life because I am convinced he is innocent. I wrote to him and then spoke to him, and during that first phone call he asked me to be with him if he's executed. Sadly, this isn't the 1st time I have been asked to perform this duty. In fact, I've already accompanied 6 people to execution, 2 of whom I'm convinced were innocent. I've seen our justice system up close. And I've seen how broken it is. How did Glossip end up on death row in the first place? On January 7, 1997, Barry Van Treese, the owner of the Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City, was bludgeoned to death by a man, Justin Sneed, who confessed to the killing. However, he claimed that Glossip, the manager of the motel, had offered him money to kill Van Treese. The jury apparently believed Sneed's testimony, and despite the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals in 2001 describing the evidence in the first trial as "extremely weak," the decision was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals in 2013. As a result of all this, the person who actually committed the murder is now serving a life sentence in a medium security prison, while Glossip, convicted of "murder-for-hire" -- almost solely on Sneed's word, and in the absence of physical evidence from the scene -- now faces death by lethal injection. It shouldn't be this way. And if the jury had been given access to some key information, it probably wouldn't be. So what didn't they hear at the time? For a start, Sneed, age 19 when he was arrested, only saw his attorney once in the first 6 months he was in custody. Plus, during the police interrogation and his trial testimony, Sneed gave several contradictory versions of what took place. In fact, Sneed gave several versions of the story in his initial police interview. It is almost impossible, then, to see Sneed as a reliable witness. And without his testimony, it is exceedingly doubtful that the prosecution would have been able to obtain a guilty verdict against Glossip, much less a death sentence. The jury in both trials also didn't get to see Sneed's taped confession, which for some reason wasn't shown in court. As the video clearly shows, the police made clear they didn't believe that Sneed was acting alone, before finally revealing that they had arrested Glossip. They went on to press Sneed on whether the "whole thing" was his idea. Another key point I'm sure the jury would like to have been aware of is that Sneed told others before the trial that when he killed van Treese, he was coming off a "2-day meth run." This would have added additional weight to Sneed's admission that he "hustled" to get money for drugs, and it would have presented a clear motive for robbing Van Treese. Finally, a worker at the motel testified that Glossip was manipulating the books, something that documents submitted after the conviction show wasn't the case. It appears that having no solid forensic evidence to corroborate Sneed's accusations, the prosecution had no choice but to show that Glossip had a compelling motive to have van Treese killed. The theory proffered was that Glossip stole from his boss and thus feared for his job if the truth came out. But there is also a sinister realm of unfairness in capital cases, where exculpatory evidence "goes missing." In this case, it was motel receipts that supposedly were lost in a flood. And there was the shower curtain and duct tape that Sneed claimed he and Glossip used to cover the motel window that was broken during the struggle. Had the curtain and tape been presented as evidence, the jury might have heard that they contained only Sneed's fingerprints, not Glossip's. Finally, the jury did not get to see the surveillance video from the Sinclair gas station across the street where Sneed went the night of the murder -- as did a man staying at the motel, who left in the early morning hours in such a rush that he left behind his luggage. Common sense would suggest this man should at least have been a suspect, but he was not identified nor questioned. There was so much that the jurors never knew. The fact that Richard Glossip is facing imminent death based on such flawed and threadbare evidence shows just how broken our court system is. And the case is also a betrayal of the constitutional ideal of fairness that we all cherish, and of a group of people summoned to pass life-or-death judgment. They will be forced to live with the question and possible doubt that they may have sentenced to death an innocent man. (source: Helen Prejean, CNN----Editor's Note: Sister Helen Prejean ministers to prisoners on death row. The views expressed are her own.) *************** Unanswered questions 10 death row exonerees in Oklahoma alone, 155 nationally, bear witness to the reality that not everyone's "day in court" is fair, or results in a finding of the actual truth. This is one of many reasons death penalty abolitionists cite as justification for their position. Even supporters of state-sponsored executions must acknowledge that human beings called on to judge their peers can and do make mistakes. For this reason, Oklahoma established a final stopgap to prevent the ultimate injustice of executing someone for a crime he did not commit, the granting to a single person the ability to say, "Wait, let's make absolutely sure," thus giving the justice system a chance to re-evaluate, to find and correct possible wrongs. That unique responsibility rests with Gov. Mary Fallin, who seems eager to find any excuse not to exercise for Richard Glossip. Set for execution Wednesday, Glossip was convicted of the murder of Barry Van Treese, based on the testimony of one man, who admits to being the actual killer and who received a plea deal for that testimony, saving himself from death row. Glossip's 1st trial was overturned for inadequate legal representation. It was barely better in his 2nd trial. People without money are almost never able to defend themselves properly. Fallin has an opportunity -- a moral obligation -- to show discernment, wisdom and leadership and not allow unanswered questions to follow Glossip to his grave. Glossip's execution needs to be stayed for 60 days. (source: Letter to the Editor, Rena Guay; Tulsa World) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sun Sep 13 12:00:20 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2015 12:00:20 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----NEB., S.DAK., ARIZ., USA Message-ID: Sept. 13 NEBRASKA: In meeting with death penalty foes, Gov. Ricketts revealed the loss that shook his family She was a young transplant from Iowa, trying to raise 2 children in an unfamiliar community in southern Missouri. Then, she was gone. Authorities have long suspected she was slain, but after 27 years they have not made an arrest. Eventually her name slipped into the cold case files, forgotten by all but a few investigators and the people who loved her. One of those people would become the top elected official in Nebraska. As Gov. Pete Ricketts made the death penalty a defining issue during his 1st year in office, every argument came down to his belief that capital punishment represents a just sanction for the most heinous killers, and that it's a necessary tool for prosecutors. He never revealed in speeches or press interviews that his own first cousin had been slain. But he did discuss the matter in a meeting with death penalty opponents. His cousin's name was Ronna Anne Bremer. Her mother is the sister of the governor's mother, Marlene Volkmer Ricketts. Bremer had graduated from high school in the western Iowa community of Essex. By late 1988 she was 22 years old and married with 2 children, ages 3 and 1. She also was 7 months pregnant. She and her family had recently moved from Iowa to Ozark, Missouri, a town of fewer than 15,000 people just south of Springfield. They lived in a trailer on the north edge of town. 3 days before Christmas 1988, she disappeared. Law enforcement authorities initially had little to go on, so they worked it as a missing-person case. But they were deeply suspicious, said Lt. George Knowles with the Missouri Highway Patrol. Investigators developed nothing that would explain why she would suddenly leave without word. "The fact that she left a couple of kids behind, and it was a few days before Christmas, that was very unusual," Knowles said. The investigation eventually stalled and she was officially declared dead by a judge in January 1997. In 2001, sheriff's investigators got a major break in the case, according to a report by the Christian County Headliner News, the paper that covers Ozark. Working off a tip, authorities obtained a search warrant for a human skull that was in the possession of a forensic anthropologist in Colorado. Using dental records, an examiner back in Missouri confirmed the skull was Bremer's. In 1991, 3 years after Bremer disappeared, the skull had been anonymously mailed to the Sheriff's Office in Greene County, which adjoins Christian County. The sheriff, in turn, sent the skull to Colorado State University, to a forensic facial reconstructionist who produced a clay sculpture of the victim's facial features. The clay face was broadcast nationwide but failed to produce any solid leads. It did not resemble Bremer. In 2002, authorities said they were unsure if the skull had been compared with dental records of known missing people when it was mailed to the Sheriff's Office. The press accounts also didn???t indicate why the skull had remained in Colorado for a decade. "We have suspects in the case, and we believe it is a murder," Christian County Sheriff Joey Matlock told the paper in 2002. "It's a priority with us to run with this one." Still, no one was arrested. About the same time the skeletal remains were being identified, Joel Bremer, the husband of the slain woman, began serving a 7-year prison term. He had pleaded guilty in mid-2001 to two counts of felony sexual abuse. He did not return a message seeking comment last week. He had filed for divorce in 1989, the year after his wife disappeared, according to the Springfield News-Leader. The divorce was granted in May 1990. The paper reported that the two Bremer children were being raised by their maternal grandmother - Ricketts' aunt. Mary Ann Waller - Bremer's mother, who now lives in Omaha - declined a request to be interviewed for this story. When reached last week by phone, Deputy Ralph Phillips, chief investigator for the Christian County Sheriff's Office, said he could not answer questions about the Bremer case. "It's an ongoing investigation, and it's our policy not to disclose information on open cases," he said. "I can't disclose anything whatsoever." Lt. Knowles, with the Highway Patrol, said his agency assists the Sheriff's Office in the investigation. He said it's the patrol's policy to review all open homicide cases on a quarterly basis. "The only way to further an investigation when an investigation becomes stagnant is with new information," Knowles said, urging anyone with potential tips to call the Sheriff's Office at 417-581-2332. Missouri is among the states that have the death penalty, but it's unknown whether a prosecutor would seek a death sentence in the Bremer case. Ricketts declined a request for an interview on the topic. However, his spokesman issued a statement Friday: "The Ricketts family continues to grieve Ronna's tragic death, and pray that the person who took her life will be brought to justice." The revelation that his cousin had been killed was made by the governor during one of the many behind-the-scenes death penalty debates at the State Capitol. He had agreed to meet with several death penalty opponents in his office on April 7, even though he strongly disagreed with their position. They tried to talk him into supporting repeal legislation that was coming up for 1st-round debate in about a week. Among those who met with the governor was Elle Hansen, a volunteer activist from Lincoln who lobbied hard for repeal. This despite, she said, having lost a niece and two close friends to murder. The money spent on death penalty appeals, she added, could instead help those coping with tragedy and loss. Then, Hansen said, she told the governor that if more could be spent on crime prevention, maybe he would never have to experience the pain of losing a loved one to murder. Ricketts stopped her there. He said his cousin had been murdered. No minds were changed that day. The governor vetoed the repeal bill, and the Nebraska Legislature overrode his veto. Hansen said she does not discount the governor's experience. But she argued that Ricketts should have disclosed the Missouri incident. Hansen said she believes his family's experience influenced his views on the death penalty. In the wake of the repeal, the 1st-term governor has made it a priority to give voters the chance to preserve the death penalty at the ballot box. Ricketts, a former executive with TD Ameritrade, donated $200,000 to a pro-death penalty petition drive. His father, Joe Ricketts, gave $100,000. Last month, petition organizers turned in 166,692 signatures. Enough had been verified by Friday to put the matter on the ballot - voters will decide the fate of Nebraska's death penalty on Nov. 8, 2016 - but counting continues to determine whether the higher threshold has been met to suspend the repeal of the death penalty until the vote occurs. (source: Omaha World-Herald) SOUTH DAKOTA: Prosecutor mulling death penalty in Lead stabbing death The Lawrence County State's Attorney is still deciding whether to seek the death penalty against a Lead man charged in the August stabbing death of a 27-year-old woman. Prosecutors charged James Lewis Rogers Jr. with 1st-degree murder in the death of Caitlin Kelly Walsh. He pleaded not guilty on Sept. 1 and is being held without bond in the Lawrence County jail. "We're still reviewing all of the facts in this case," State's Attorney John Fitzgerald told the Rapid City Journal (http://bit.ly/1ijjwFC ). Fitzgerald declined to say whether a potential plea deal was being discussed with Rogers and Ellery Grey, his court-appointed Rapid City defense attorney. Lead police arrested Rogers on Aug. 17 after discovering Walsh's body in his apartment. Prosecutors allege Rogers stabbed Walsh multiple times and then kept her dead body in his apartment for 5 days. Authorities have not disclosed the nature of the relationship between Rogers and Walsh. If convicted, Rogers faces either the death penalty or life in prison without parole. No lesser sentence may be given, according to Fitzgerald. (source: Associated Press) ARIZONA: Rector lawyer challenges death penalty The attorney for a Bullhead City murder suspect on Friday spelled out his reasons to squash the death penalty against his client. Justin James Rector's attorney, Gerald Gavin, argued before Superior Court Judge Lee Jantzen that lethal injection is a cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the U.S. Constitution. Rector, 27, is charged with 1st-degree murder, kidnapping, child abuse and abandonment of a dead body in the kidnapping and death of 8-year-old Isabella Gavin argued that if a mistake is made in the execution of a defendant, it cannot be undone. The defense attorney also provided examples of botched lethal injections in Arizona and other states, causing "shockingly long, cruel, and torture-induced painful deaths." Gavin provided statements from nurses, pharmacists and doctors who condemn their participation in the death penalty. He also included statements from drug manufacturers who object to their drugs being used to execute people "It is inexact, expensive, illogical and cruel," Gavin said. "It is time to kill the death penalty." Gavin also argued that it is unconstitutional that wealthy people do not face the death penalty while the poor often face death for committing similar crimes, and that prosecutors seek the death penalty against men rather than women. Less than 1 % of death row inmates are women. The defense attorney also argued that there is no evidence the death penalty deters crime. He also argued that long-term incarceration of a death row inmate is cruel and unusual punishment. The death penalty is unconstitutional because it fails to require the jury to consider the cumulative weight of mitigating factors, Gavin said. He also argued that prosecutors have complete discretion in whether to seek the death penalty, which violates his client's constitutional rights. Rector's next hearing is set for Sept. 30 and his murder trial is set to begin Oct. 17, 2016. (source: Mohave Valley Daily News) USA: Mass. Death Penalty Retrial Halted in Carjack Deaths It's been 14 years since Gary Lee Sampson carjacked and killed 2 Massachusetts men, 12 years since a jury condemned him to die and almost 4 years since a federal judge overturned his death sentence. Sampson's sentencing retrial had been scheduled to begin this week but has been delayed indefinitely as prosecutors decide whether to appeal the judge's refusal to recuse himself from the case. Judge Mark Wolf, who presided over Sampson's 1st trial, has refused to step down. Prosecutors cited Wolf's professional relationship with an inmates' rights advocate, James Gilligan, who may testify for the defense during Sampson's retrial. Wolf moderated a film society panel that included Gilligan last year. Before the panel discussion, Wolf hosted Gilligan for supper at his rental home on Martha's Vineyard. Wolf said he didn't realize then that Gilligan had filed an expert affidavit in 2010 as part of Sampson's petition for a new trial. After Wolf learned in June that Sampson's lawyers decided to retain Gilligan as a potential expert witness at the retrial, he asked both sides if they saw a need for him to step down. Prosecutors argued that a reasonable person could question Wolf's impartiality and therefore he should recuse himself. Sampson's lawyers said there was no reason for Wolf to step down. Wolf has given prosecutors until Oct. 13 to let him know whether they plan to appeal his decision to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. He said he can't set a new date for Sampson's trial until the issue is resolved. Sampson, a drifter who grew up in Abington, pleaded guilty to federal charges in the 2001 carjacking and killing of Jonathan Rizzo, a 19-year-old college student from Kingston, and Philip McCloskey, a 69-year-old retiree from Taunton. He said he forced both men to drive to secluded spots, assured them he only wanted to steal their cars, then stabbed them repeatedly and slit their throats. Separately, Sampson pleaded guilty in state court in New Hampshire in the killing of Robert Whitney, 58, and received a life sentence. Sampson was arrested in Royalton when he turned himself in to Lt. Ray Keefe, the commanding officer of the Vermont State Police barracks there. On the day Keefe took him into custody, Sampson failed in what may have been a fourth killing when a copier repairman who had just finished a job in West Lebanon refused to drive to a secluded spot as Sampson insisted he do. William Gregory instead leaped from his own moving convertible on Route 4 in Bridgewater after Sampson hijacked the vehicle. While Sampson struggled to keep the car under control, Gregory fled to safety up a highway embankment. Sampson was the 1st person sentenced to death in Massachusetts under the federal death penalty law. This year, Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was also sentenced to death. Massachusetts abolished its state death penalty in 1984. In his written decision, Wolf implied that prosecutors may be trying to pick a judge they believe may be more sympathetic to their death penalty case against Sampson. He noted that a relative of one of Sampson's victims has publicly criticized him, particularly after he overturned the death sentence in 2011 based on misconduct by one of the jurors at his trial. Wolf didn't identify the man, but Rizzo's father, Michael Rizzo, has been openly critical of Wolf, particularly his decision to vacate the death sentence. (source: Valley News) ************** Q&A: Justice Breyer's Interview With The NLJ In an interview with The National Law Journal, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer commented not only on his new book but on a range of issues - including his thinking about retirement, the collegiality of the court and his recent dissent on capital punishment. I want to ask about your dissent in the Glossip case on the death penalty. Why that case? Did you have it written ahead of time, waiting for a case? I have been working on it for a while. This case was there and it seemed an appropriate place to say what I thought on the issue. I thought we should use that case, as I said in the opinion, to go into the basic problem here, which I thought was whether the death penalty itself is constitutional and I have my reasons. You know, sometimes people make mistakes, [executing] the wrong person. It is arbitrary. There is lots of evidence on that. Justice Potter Stewart said it was like being hit by lightning, whether the person is actually executed. If carried out, a death sentence, on average takes place now 18 years after it is imposed. The number of people who are executed has shrunk dramatically. They are centered in a very small number of counties in the United States. Bottom line is, let's go into the issue. It is time to go into it again. [39] years have passed [since Gregg v. Georgia, which reinstated the death penalty.] The non-arbitrary applications of the death penalty which the court hoped would take place, in my opinion, have not occurred. So, that is what I wrote. It has already been cited a number of places. Are you pleased with the reaction so far? When I write something and people find it useful, of course it is trite to say but it is true, I am always pleased. Do you think it will result in what you are hoping for soon? I don't know. You are the one who has to figure that out. I am going to be Yogi Berra. I never make predictions, especially about the future. It seemed like the announcement of that opinion and the oral argument in Glossip also were very tense and uncomfortable. That is for you to judge. Overall, would you say it was a difficult term? Well, I was probably more in the majority this term than I have been in other terms. The cases are always difficult and if people agree somewhat more with the perspective I bring to the case, of course I find that better than if they don't. Do you still go by what you always say that you have never heard a raised voice at conference? That is true. People get on well personally. Some people were kind of amazed how that could be after some of the language that was used. Well, it is professional. You know, people write what they write. They think it out. They write it down. And they make an effort, they really make an effort, to keep personal relations good. (source: nationallawjournal.com) ***************** Use simpler execution methods Why not spend all this money, time and manpower that we are in trying to find the perfect, comfortable euthanasia for murderers and put it to good use - like combating cancer, Alzheimers, paralysis, multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy and all the other afflictions and diseases that many people get and suffer with? I'm sure the murderers didn't give 2 hoots to the comfort of their victims while murdering them. We should get back to the method of execution that each state had before the bleeding hearts took over. Execution by means of the electric chair, gas chamber, firing squad and hanging seems more simple and cost-effective. But let's not take 30 years to do it! Maybe instead of lulling off to sleep almost immediately on a comfortable gurney, they'll have a little time to reflect on how they got to this point. Virginia R. Smith, Missoula (source: Letter to the Editor, The Missoulian) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sun Sep 13 12:01:03 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2015 12:01:03 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 13 EGYPT: Egypt court ratifies 'IS' death sentences A court in Egypt on Saturday ratified death sentences for 12 people convicted of planning attacks on behalf of the jihadist Islamic State group. 6 of those whose sentences were confirmed are in custody, while 6 were tried in absentia. All were convicted of having joined IS -- which has declared a "caliphate" in parts of Iraq and Syria under its control -- and of plotting to attack Egypt's police force and military. The court in the Nile Delta province of Sharqiya had recommended the death sentence for the men last month, and was awaiting the mufti's approval to ratify the ruling. The mufti, the government's official interpreter of Islamic law, issues a non-binding opinion in such cases. Those convicted can appeal a ruling before the Court of Cassation, which may either uphold the verdict or order a retrial. Hundreds of Islamists have been sentenced to death since the military toppled Islamist president Mohamed Morsi in 2013. Many, including Morsi himself, have appealed. 7 have been executed. Morsi's overthrow unleashed a deadly crackdown on Islamists that killed hundreds of protesters. Militants loyal to IS, meanwhile, have killed hundreds of police and soldiers, mostly in attacks in the Sinai Peninsula. (source: al-monitor.com) AFGHANISTAN----public stonings Couple stoned to death by Taliban on adultery charges in Sar-i-Pul A man and woman have been stoned to death by Taliban militants in northern Sar-i-Pul province for having immoral contacts. Abdul Jabar Haqbin, acting governor of Sar-i-Pul province said that Taliban had kidnapped the man and woman 3 days before. He said Taliban planned to execute the hostages on Friday but it was delayed due to an airstrike by Afghan forces. Haqbin added that the execution was ultimately carried in Kata Qala area of Suzma Qala District on yesterday. Reports suggest that both the woman and man have children. Taliban announce punishment to villagers based on the decision of their illegal courts, also called 'desert courts'. They assign judges in large areas coming under their control. Before this incident, Taliban have publicly executed people in different parts of the country including Nangarhar, Logar, Ghazni, Helmand, Zabul and Farah provinces. (source: rawa.org) INDIA: Death penalty: Life can be far worse, says the Mahabharata It has been over a month since we hanged Yakub Memon. Since then many Indians have wondered, what did we achieve? Some are worried that we may have made Yakub into a martyr, especially among a section of Muslims who feel that they are singled out for the death penalty. Others believe that justice was done, sending a powerful signal to terrorists. In a landmark report, the Law Commission, headed by Justice Ajit Prakash Shah, has now recommended abolishing capital punishment, except in terrorist cases. Among its reasons: the state must never be guilty of killing an innocent person; there's no link between death penalty and the amount of crime; and death sentences are inherently arbitrary, with no principled method to remove arbitrariness. As for me, I believe that keeping a person alive in maximum-security, solitary confinement without the prospect of bail is a far greater punishment than death. Human beings have long wrestled with the right relationship between crime and punishment. When we lived in tribes, individuals and clans avenged crimes. After we moved into civil society, we gave the state monopoly power to punish crimes under due process of law. However, the idea that 'if a good person suffers, the bad one should suffer even more' is embedded in our psyches. We deny it, proclaiming piously 'I'm not the sort of person who holds grudges'. Yet we applaud when the villain gets what he deserves in life, in novels and movies. Thirst for revenge is a powerful instinct in human beings. Many psychologists think it bad for it damages the 'core of the whole being'. Others argue that vindictive emotions are legitimate and bringing criminals to justice restores moral equilibrium in our lives. Thinkers from Plato onwards believed in the legitimacy of retributive justice. Punishment creates moral equality between victim and offender; forgiveness makes the offender superior to the victim. The other aim of punishment is to deter future crime - provide incentive for a normal person to obey the law. In the past 50 years, public opinion shifted in the West from retribution and deterrence to reforming and rehabilitating criminals. But rehabilitation programmes in prisons mostly failed and criminologists became disillusioned. Today, the global debate is more modest - about ensuring that punishment is fair and proportional to the crime. One is painfully aware, however, how difficult it is to achieve proportionality in practice. Prison sentences vary widely for the same crime in the same country. Crime and punishment is the central theme of Ashwatthama's story in the Mahabharata. By all accounts, Ashwatthama was a fine young man - confident, modest and fair-minded. The son of the great teacher, Drona, he grew up in the privileged company of princes. When war is declared, he finds himself on the wrong side. He fights with integrity and in the end accepts the defeat of the Kauravas. He is outraged at the deceitful death of his father, however, and vows revenge. He sets fire to the victorious, sleeping armies of the Pandavas. His night-time massacre is a deed so repulsive that it turns the mood of the epic from martial triumphalism to dark, stoic resignation. When Draupadi, Pandavas' queen, learns that all her children died in the night massacre, she cries for vengeance. When Ashwatthama is finally captured, the Pandavas debate over the right punishment for his horrendous crime. Death would be too kind, they agree. Krishna ultimately pronounces the sentence: 'For 3,000 years you will wander on this earth, alone, and invisible, stinking of blood and pus.' Indians have long felt ambivalent about the death penalty; hence, very few executions have taken place since Independence (57 in 68 years). Most of the world has abolished it - only 36 have not and this includes India and the US. The UN resolution says that it 'undermines human dignity'. But I am not convinced. I would argue that retaining the death penalty, in fact, enhances human dignity. The most serious argument for its abolition is that it is almost impossible to implement it fairly; why have we not used it, for instance, against the ghastly crimes of the Naxalites? Whether Krishna's sentence meets the test of proportionality, the Mahabharata has the right idea - keeping a person alive, brooding and suffering over his deed, is a far greater punishment than death. (source: Gucharan Das, The Times of India) INDONESIA: Death row British grandmother plays with granddaughter for 'first and final' time ---- Lindsay Sandiford, 59, says after playing with two-year-old Ayla that she is 'just grateful I've met her' A British grandmother who faces death by firing squad in Indonesia has met her granddaughter for the 1st time. Lindsay Sandiford, 59, was informed she was among a group of 10 convicted drug smugglers scheduled for execution on the 21 September, prompting a desperate attempt to reach out to her family for the last time. Officials in Indonesia later informed Ms Sandiford's legal team that all executions would be suspended until at least the end of this year. But that plans were already in motion for 2-year-old Ayla, who was born 7 months after Ms Sandiford's arrest in Bali in May 2012, to fly out and meet her grandmother for the 1st time. The pair met a number of times over the last week, according to the Mail on Sunday, along with Ayla's parents. They were pictured sat on the floor, playing with a Barbie toy set. Ms Sandiford's stay of execution means she now has at least 3 months to try and raise the 25,000 pounds she needs to fund a final appeal against her death penalty. She told the Mail the delay represented "just more torture". "I'm just grateful I've met Ayla," she said. "It's hard to come to terms with the fact I might not see her again and she might not remember me, but I'm so glad I got to spend time with her." David Cameron raised the case when he made a state visit to Indonesia in late July, and said he hoped to "help the family concerned". The British government has nonetheless said it will not help fund any of Ms Sandiford's legal costs. Dee Stepo, a British pastor who lives in Australia and runs a Facebook page raising funds for Ms Sandiford's cause, oversaw a blessing ceremony for the family in Bali. She wrote on Facebook on Sunday: "Please note no dates have been set for executions. We will always believe for justice and a miracle." (source: The Independent) IRAN----executions Iranian Authorities Execute 2 Prisoners in Gilan for Drug Possession 2 prisoners with drug related charges were hanged to death at *Rasht Central Prison on the morning of Saturday September 12, according to the Iranian official media source Seda o Sima. One of the prisoners was reportedly 34 years old and sentenced to death for possessing 3 Kilograms and 700 Grams of crystal meth and 20 Litres of raw substances for the production of crystal meth. The other prisoner was reportedly 45 years old and sentenced to death for possessing 1 Kilogram of crack. * Rasht Central Prison is also known as Lakan Prison and is located in the province of Gilan, northern Iran. (source: Iran Human Rights) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 14 08:31:40 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 08:31:40 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----FLA., OKLA., NEB., USA Message-ID: Sept. 14 FLORIDA: Man facing death penalty in strangulation of 8-year-old Cherish Perrywinkle back in court Monday The man accused of raping and killing 8-year-old Cherish Perrywinkle will be back in a Jacksonville courtroom Monday morning for a pretrial hearing that might lead to a trial date being set. Donald James Smith, 59, is facing the death penalty. Circuit Judge Mallory Cooper has previously said she'd like to get a trial date set, but defense attorneys have said they are still examining the evidence in the case and don't want to move forward until they have a good handle on the evidence against Smith. It is likely that defense attorneys Julie Schlax and Charles Fletcher will end up arguing that Smith is insane or too mentally handicapped to face the death penalty. But the lawyers have not yet indicated what their defense will be. Smith is charged with 1st-degree murder, kidnapping and sexual battery. He is a registered sex offender who was released from prison 3 weeks before Cherish was killed. He is accused of befriending Cherish, her mother, Rayne Perrywinkle, and siblings at a Dollar General store in June 2013 and convincing them to go to Wal-Mart on Lem Turner Road in his van after offering to buy them clothes and food. Perrywinkle told police that Smith offered to buy the family hamburgers at the McDonald's inside the Wal-Mart. Cherish went with him to get the food, and they did not return. Cherish's body was found near a creek off Broward Road the next morning. (source: Florida Times-Union) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Richard Glossip's Books of numbers, translations, alternatives, aspirations and justice: Time for mercy, not sacrifice The Ten Commandments include an admonition often translated "Thou shalt not kill" - alternatively, "You shall not murder." (Exodus 20:13, NAB) This directive from the One Who made us, some contend, should in these days preclude use of capital punishment, which is obviously the Ultimate Sanction for systems based in the Judeo-Christian tradition. Yet, the Holy Bible includes words pointing to a penalty of death for some crimes. In traditional interpretations, for capital punishment, the Hebrew Testament does not fundamentally contradict the New Testament to which Christians cling. That tradition is the basis for much of American law. No surprise, the U.S. Constitution explicitly makes provision for death penalties, including in the Eighth Amendment. However, the penalty of death is not required - hence the roughly half-and-half split among the 50 states in this matter. Words, numbers, and meaning(s), have rattled around the gray matter of many of us in Oklahoma these past few months. We will soon reach the end - or perhaps a fresh start? - in a matter now dominating news and conversation. Interpretations of Scripture, I believe, best follow those who say we must honor the whole even (perhaps especially) when there are matters unbelievers assert are "contradictions" among the various authors of the Bible. The same "Old" testament allowing death as a punishment includes these words, cited with some force in recent weeks by Rev. Adam Leathers, a leader of the Oklahoma Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty (OK-CADP): "Only on the testimony of 2 or 3 witnesses shall a person be put to death; no one shall be put to death on the testimony of only one witness." (Deuteronomy 17:6, NAB) I am among those who have encouraged Gov. Mary Fallin to grant another 60 days to attorneys for Richard Glossip. Those lawyers, including Don Knight, have introduced levels of doubt about the validity of Glossip's conviction in a murder-for-hire case. Their work amounts to "a web of doubt" about Glossip's guilt. In any case, his conviction is based on testimony from 1 man - the admitted killer. Now, just days before Glossip's date with a lethal injection, as a brother in our Lord, I call on the state's top ranking officer to act contrary to thus-far stated intentions. Reflect on these additional prophetic words from Scripture: "For it is loyalty that I desire, not sacrifice, and knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings." (Hosea 6:6) "Loyalty" in the text can also be rendered as "mercy" - as in the classic King James Version and the New International Version. >From personal memory: a summer press conference. The Capitol broadcast room was quite warm as a swarm of reporters listened to advocates for Richard Glossip. References from some on that day, and in the weeks since, were made to the Beatitudes of Jesus, asserting the state would be better served if we had a Beatitudes monument rather than a Ten Commandments monument at the state Capitol grounds. My thoughts during this process before Glossip's scheduled execution (Wednesday afternoon, September 16) have returned to a Saturday afternoon in Israel, at the Mount of Beautitudes during my only trip to the Holy Land. That was in October 2013. It became one of the most memorable Sabbath days of my life. As I gazed across the Sea of Gallilee, there was haze to the east and the north. The sun shone through the misty warmth, although it was not too hot. Traveling companions visited a Chapel atop the spot where many believe Jesus preached the words recorded in Matthew 5: 3-12 (with an alternate version in Luke 6:20-22). I stole away to a corner of the summit where fellow Catholics, mostly from California, prayed during a Mass celebrated by a Franciscan priest. Franciscans are those who follow the model of Francis of Assisi, a not-so-simple man of the 13th Century (Italy). His best-known prayer included a reflection that in "pardoning we are pardoned." To the Beautitudes (8 in Matthew; 4 in Luke with parallel admonitions) my mind has wandered often in recent weeks, fused with memories from that mount. I don't know what Richard Glossip did, or did not do, at or around the time of Barry Van Treece's murder in 1997. I don't even know what Justin Sneed, the admitted murderer, did. He's given at least 8 different versions about Barry Van Treece's death over the past 19 years or so. I do know there is doubt surrounding Glossip's conviction, about which there is a book or 2 or 3 to be written. The only thing certain is that Glossip's guilt is uncertain. With all my heart - appealing to the totality of Scripture and Tradition - I petition (beg might be a better word) Mary Fallin to use her just powers as our state's chief executive to grant in this case mercy, not sacrifice. I hope she will also support a new look at the entire case in competent courts or panels. Therein lies loyalty to shared American traditions. Dear Mary: Give Don Knight and his competent, serious and ethical colleagues 60 more days to study things previously unseen and unheard. Like you and I, they seek rough justice in one corner of this fallen world. Your friend, Pat. Editor's Note: Unless otherwise noted, all Scriptural References are from the New American Bible (NAB) translation, Revised Edition, 2011. (source: Patrick B. McGuigan, editor, The City Sentinel) NEBRASKA: Groups Respond to Death Penalty Petition Results A campaign group against the death penalty in Nebraska is getting support from state leaders to try to keep the issue in the past. The Secretary of State's Office said Nebraskans for the Death Penalty received enough petition signatures to get the issue on the ballot in November 2016. Zack Burgin with Nebraskans for Public Safety said there are bigger problems the state needs to focus on, considering there hasn't been an execution in Nebraska since 1997. "We're going to continue to monitor the process to make sure it's fair, but we're really excited for a strong campaign," Burgin said. "We have a lot of support from a strong coalition of supporters." Burgin said the group will continue its education work it started over the summer at petition locations, town hall events and through its online advocacy program. Meanwhile, some Central Nebraskans hold their stance on the issue: "Some crimes deserve that kind of punishment. Why do we want to leave them sitting forever?" Ravenna resident Brent Luth said. (source: nbcnebraska.com) USA: Courts, states put death penalty on life support----Despite Supreme Court support, executions on the wane Introduction 'Everywhere you look...there's a problem' If there is such a thing as a lock for the death penalty, the case against Daniel Higgins appeared to be just that. Already sought for sexually assaulting a child, Higgins killed Sheriff's Sgt. Michael Naylor last October with a point-blank shot to the head, making him the only deputy slain in the department's 130-year history. "I wanted him dead," Sheriff Gary Painter says of the murderer. But Naylor's widow, Denise Davis, said she couldn't bear the likely rounds of appeals that could stretch on for decades. Higgins was allowed to plead guilty and was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. The death penalty in America may be living on borrowed time. The emotional and financial toll of prosecuting a single capital case to its conclusion, along with the increased availability of life without parole and continuing court challenges to execution methods, have made the ultimate punishment more elusive than at any time since its reinstatement in 1976. Prosecutors, judges and juries also are being influenced by capital punishment's myriad afflictions: racial and ethnic discrimination, geographic disparities, decades spent on death row and glaring mistakes that have exonerated 155 prisoners in the last 42 years. Those trends may be squeezing the life out of the death penalty. That doesn't even take into account the added burden of legal clashes, legislative repeals, and problems finding and administering drugs for lethal injections. The Supreme Court in June upheld a controversial form of lethal injection by the narrowest of margins, thereby giving Oklahoma the green light to reschedule three executions. But courts in many states continue to wrestle with that issue, and the justices have four more death penalty cases on their docket this fall challenging the roles of Kansas juries, Florida judges and Georgia prosecutors. "The imposition and implementation of the death penalty seems capricious, random, indeed arbitrary,'' Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer said in dissenting from the court's June decision allowing the continued use of a problematic sedative for lethal injections. "From a defendant's perspective, to receive that sentence, and certainly to find it implemented, is the equivalent of being struck by lightning." Even in Texas - long home to the most active execution chamber in the country - the death penalty is on the ropes. The state sentenced 48 people to death as recently as 1999. So far this year? Not a single one. In Colorado last month, jurors couldn't agree on the death penalty for James Holmes, who killed 12 people watching The Dark Knight Rises at an Aurora movie theater three years ago. Their indecision resulted in an automatic sentence of life without parole. The sobering conclusion reached by Naylor's widow - that the lengthy pursuit of the death penalty wasn't worth the personal sacrifice - illuminates the forces now contributing to a precipitous drop in death sentences across the nation, as well as the declining numbers of those who reach the execution chamber. Among signs the death penalty may be on life support: -- The number of death sentences dropped from a high of 315 in 1996 to 73 last year - 1/2 of them coming in just 2% of the nation's counties. -- The number of prisoners on death row peaked at 3,593 in 2000 but now hovers around 3,000, a 17% decline. -- The number of executions peaked at 98 in 1999 and has dropped since then, hitting a low of 35 last year. In the first 8 months of this year, 20 prisoners have been killed - 16 of them in Texas and Missouri. -- 7 states have repealed the death penalty since 2007. Among the 31 that retain it, governors have imposed a moratorium in four, and most others haven't executed anyone in years. Only 7 states carried out executions in the past 2 years. -- The federal government has not carried out an execution since 2003. An unofficial moratorium has been declared pending the completion of a Justice Department review of the death penalty ordered last year by President Obama. However, the average time spent on death row for those eventually executed continued to rise until 2011, reaching a peak of 16.5 years before dipping to 15.5 years in 2013. For all the ethical arguments made by death penalty opponents - "abolitionists," in the words of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia - states now are faced with a more practical problem: how to carry out executions. All states favor lethal injection as the most humane method, but the supply of drugs that can do the job has been drying up because of a confluence of factors. They include: opposition to capital punishment in Europe, where many of the drugs are produced; federal regulations preventing the importation of drugs that don't meet U.S. standards; and recalcitrance by doctors and pharmacists who work to save lives, not end them. Still, the Supreme Court has twice upheld the constitutionality of lethal injection, 1st in 2008 and again in June, when the justices ruled 5-4 that Oklahoma can use a sedative involved in 3 botched executions last year. Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, said challengers could not suggest a better alternative. The ruling gave impetus to states such as Alabama and Mississippi seeking to jump-start executions after a hiatus of several years. But it also rejuvenated legal efforts by groups opposed to the death penalty, who continue to fight against lethal injection protocols in several states. Caught in the middle are people like Richard Glossip, Oklahoma prisoner #267303, who lost the Supreme Court case in June and now faces execution this Wednesday at the state penitentiary in McAlester. It's the fourth time a date has been set for his death. Glossip, twice convicted of masterminding a 1997 murder at the run-down budget motel he managed, still proclaims his innocence. "If they execute me, then I want it to be for a reason," he said during a lengthy phone interview. "What I want to come out of that is that they finally stop executing innocent people in this country." Several states took the high court's ruling as a reason to rejuvenate the death penalty. Missouri wasted little time resuming executions, putting David Zink to death 2 weeks later, on July 14. Texas, by far the nation's leader in executions with 528 since the Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1976, followed suit with an execution in August and has 6 more on tap this year. States from Florida to Montana that have not killed anyone for several years are in court, seeking to rejuvenate dormant death penalties. Some states are establishing backup methods in case lethal injections become impossible. 8 permit electrocution, 3 allow gas chambers, 3 allow hanging, and 2 would use firing squads - as Utah did in 2010 and 2013. The Supreme Court has chipped away at states' freedom to choose the ultimate punishment, first in 2002 by exempting those with intellectual disabilities, then in 2005 by exempting juveniles who were under 18 when they committed their crimes. In the latter case, decided 5-4, Justice Anthony Kennedy said trends against juvenile death penalties in the states had created a "national consensus." Today, there is a similar consensus: 2/3 of the states have held no executions since 2010. And the percentage of Americans who favor capital punishment is down from 78% 2 decades ago to 56% today, according to the Pew Research Center. "There seems to be a massive reassessment underway in this country in terms of capital punishment," says Kathryn Kase, executive director of the Texas Defender Service, which provides legal aid for those facing death sentences. "Everywhere you look with the death penalty, there's a problem." Chapter 1 The long, painful wait for justice For the past 3 decades, Gary Painter - a self-described "staunch Republican" - has been the law in Midland County. In a weathered straw hat and snap-button western shirt, the sheriff appears as if drawn from central casting. Blunt-spoken, he is an unwavering supporter of the death penalty. There are people, Painter says, who "need to die'' for their crimes. Yet he readily concedes that the circuitous journey to the execution chamber needs an overhaul. "The process has to be shorter, because that alone amounts to cruel and unusual punishment for the victim's family and the person who committed the act," the sheriff says. "That person has to know what punishment he must face.'' In the past 2 months, 2 defendants linked to separate high-profile mass killings in the U.S. eluded death sentences for rampages that claimed a total of 18 lives. -- A Colorado jury was unable to reach a unanimous decision to execute Holmes, who also wounded 70 people in the Aurora shooting, because there was 1 holdout. -- A Washington state prosecutor withdrew the state's notice to seek death in the murder trial of Michele Anderson, 1 of 2 suspects charged in the 2007 slaying of 6 family members. King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg acted after a jury could not render a unanimous decision to seek death for Anderson's accomplice, Joseph McEnroe. Jeff Blackburn, a Texas civil rights attorney, calls the Holmes sentence a "watershed moment for the death penalty.'' Despite serious concerns for the killer's mental state, Blackburn said, the outcome may have been different had Holmes been tried a decade earlier. In Texas, the number of death sentences declined from 48 in 1999 to 11 last year. That lower level had remained fairly constant since 2006, after state lawmakers approved life without the possibility of parole as an alternative to death in capital cases. Prosecutors who seek the death penalty often appear to be acting against historical trends. The federal government won a death sentence against Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in May but hasn't put a prisoner to death in more than a decade. A South Carolina prosecutor this month said she would seek death for Dylann Roof, who is charged with shooting 9 black church worshipers in June, but the state's execution chamber has been dormant since 2011. In Kansas, a jury has recommended death for white supremacist Frazier Glenn Cross, recently convicted of killing 3 people outside Jewish sites. A formal sentencing is scheduled for November. A death sentence would seem fruitless: The state has not executed anyone in 50 years. Oregon prosecutor Joshua Marquis, a vocal proponent of the death penalty, says the prospect of long and costly campaigns to beat back post-conviction appeals has cut the number of death cases filed in the first place. The quality of defense lawyers has been upgraded with the creation of regional defender systems dedicated to death penalty cases. Those types of improvements have only added to the costs -- and the calendars. A California study in 2008 found the state spent $137 million annually to support the death penalty but would spend only $11.5 million if it was repealed. A Colorado study in 2013 found that death penalty cases took more than five years on average to complete, compared to 1 1/2 years for cases involving life without parole. "Cases are being bypassed because it's going to take 15 to 20 years on appeal,'' Marquis says. "Do prosecutors consider these things? Absolutely." Such increased scrutiny has become commonplace in Odessa, just 23 miles west of Midland's modest skyline. In recent years, District Attorney Bobby Bland has seen his share of vicious killings, from the torturous murder of 5-year-old Zachery Dominguez in 2011 to the brutal stabbing deaths of prominent local couple Dick and Peggy Glover at their home just 4 months later. Both cases were "death eligible," in capital punishment vernacular, but Bland didn't seek it. The prosecutor describes the murder of Dominguez, whose stepfather had subjected him to repeated dunking in scalding water and assaults resulting in a ruptured bowel, as the "most horrible death I've ever seen of a child.'' Yet his concern that Dominguez's siblings could be subjected to painful cross-examinations as witnesses in the case prompted him to offer a deal for life without parole. Ralph Martinez Jr., the mother's boyfriend, readily pleaded guilty. "I felt that if I could get a plea for life without parole, that would be best for all,'' Bland says. In the Glover case, Bland had a catalog of damning evidence against James Burwell. His DNA was at the bloody crime scene, the couple's credit card records linked him to purchases made after their deaths, and he was driving their truck when arrested. But Bland also warned the family that it could take years to secure his execution. Skeet Glover, a death penalty proponent who believed Burwell deserved to die, said it was nevertheless an "easy decision'' to recommend that the prosecutor seek life without parole because other family members expressed concern about the long and likely painful effort. "It really wasn't difficult to get it done,'' says Glover, seated in the chair once occupied by his father, founder of The Glover Companies, which services the local energy industry. "As a family, we were going to do this together. I couldn't help my dad anymore. I couldn't help (stepmother) Peggy ... and I didn't want to punish anyone else in the family.'' In less than a week in 2012, Burwell was convicted and sentenced to life without parole. "There are no regrets,'' Glover says. Chapter 2 Dead men walking Anthony Ray Hinton figures he was within a year, maybe 2, of being executed. Hinton was nearing his 30th year on Alabama's death row when the U.S. Supreme Court, in a little-noticed decision last year, granted him a new hearing because of a defense lawyer's mistakes during his 1985 murder trial. That led to a new review of ballistics evidence used to convict Hinton of 2 murders half a lifetime ago, when he was 29. Although prosecution witnesses had testified the bullets came from a gun found in Hinton's mother's home, defense experts hired this year found no such connection. The case fell apart, and in April, Hinton was freed. "Being on death row has taken so much from me as a human being," he says. "I spent 30 years on death row for something I didn't do." Hinton became the 152nd death row prisoner exonerated since 1973. Many of them are now poster children for the myriad problems cited in June by 2 Supreme Court justices who questioned the constitutionality of the death penalty. Hinton, who is black, was an apparent victim of racial discrimination. He was convicted in a county known for delivering death sentences, making him a victim of geographic disparities. He spent decades in solitary confinement under threat of execution, a cruel and unusual punishment in the eyes of the two justices. And ultimately, the prosecution admitted it no longer had a case. "If this court had not ordered that Anthony Ray Hinton receive further hearings in state court, he may well have been executed rather than exonerated," Breyer wrote in dissent from the high court's decision upholding a controversial form of lethal injection. Instead, Hinton will be welcomed back into his mother's renovated home during an open house next week, thanks to donations from the likes of Starbucks' Howard Schultz and his family foundation. Of all the arguments against capital punishment, none is as powerful as the risk of executing the innocent. Yet research shows about 4% of prisoners sentenced to death are just that. They're also locked away for ever longer terms before their innocence is determined. The 12 men exonerated in 2014-15 served a combined 322 years in prison, an average of nearly 27 years. Seven of them, like Hinton, had served 30 years or more. 9 of them were black. Several condemned men recently exonerated from death row bring to life the issues raised in Breyer's dissent: -- Henry Lee McCollum was a black teenager with an intellectual disability when he was convicted of raping and murdering an 11-year-old girl in North Carolina. He spent 30 years in prison before DNA found on a cigarette butt led to his exoneration. Earlier this month, he won $750,000 in compensation from a state commission. "I represented him for 20 years and could not get anyone's attention," says Ken Rose, senior staff attorney at the Center for Death Penalty Litigation in Durham. "It is the most frustrating experience to know that you might have an innocent client and that there's nothing you can do about it." -- Ricky Jackson served 39 years in prison for murder in Ohio based on the false testimony of a 12-year-old boy. He holds the record for time in prison before being exonerated, though his death sentence eventually was commuted to life without parole. "If Ricky's sentence had not been commuted, he already would have been executed by the time we proved his innocence," says Brian Howe, one of his lawyers at the Ohio Innocence Project. "There's a very good chance that he would not have lasted that long on death row, and no one today would have known what happened." -- Glenn Ford languished on death row for nearly 30 years in Caddo Parish, Louisiana - home to half the death sentences rendered in the state - after inexperienced lawyers couldn't convince an all-white jury in 1984 that he did not murder a Shreveport jeweler. His exoneration produced an extraordinary mea culpa from one of the prosecutors, A.M. "Marty" Stroud. "At the time this case was tried, there was evidence that would have cleared Glenn Ford," Stroud wrote in The Times of Shreveport. "I apologize to Glenn Ford for all the misery I have caused him and his family." After 15 months of freedom, Ford died of lung cancer on June 29, the same day the Supreme Court upheld lethal injection. In addition to the death row prisoners still claiming innocence, some apparently innocent people have been put to death. Among those Breyer cited were 2 Texas men: Carlos DeLuna, executed in 1989 for stabbing to death a single mother, and Cameron Todd Willingham, executed in 2004 for killing his 3 young children in an arson fire. Hinton's conviction in 1985 hinged on flawed forensic evidence tying an old .38 revolver found under a mattress in his mother's house to bullets that killed two restaurant assistant managers in separate incidents. It also pointed up basic problems in the criminal justice system, particularly for poor black men. "He was convicted because he didn't have the money to get the expert assistance he needed at trial," says Bryan Stevenson, his new lawyer at the Equal Justice Initiative, an Alabama non-profit that provides legal aid to indigent defenders and prisoners. Hinton believes the situation is worse in Alabama than elsewhere because judges who must run for election tout their support for capital punishment - a concern cited in 2013 by Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor. State courts refused to grant him the hearing later ordered by the Supreme Court. "The judges on the United States Supreme Court do not have to be re-elected," Hinton says. "The judges in Alabama have to be re-elected every 4 years or 6 years." Chapter 3 Lethal injection on trial Capital punishment by lethal injection has been upheld twice in seven years by the highest court in the land, but it's still a bone of contention in places like Davidson County Chancery Court. For the better part of a month after the Supreme Court's most recent decision, lawyers for more than 30 death-row inmates in Tennessee argued that its execution protocol is unconstitutional. Their legal challenge - similar to others in Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Montana and elsewhere - illustrates the difficulty still faced by many states seeking to carry out executions in the wake of the high court's ruling. Despite the justices' imprimatur, their narrow 5-4 ruling that "the Constitution does not require the avoidance of all risk of pain" was hardly a vote of confidence for lethal injection, the preferred method for all states with an active death penalty - itself a dwindling number. Oklahoma, whose use of the sedative midazolam was challenged by 3 death row inmates, immediately declared victory and set September and October execution dates for Glossip, Benjamin Cole and John Grant. But Glossip, facing death on Wednesday, has two sets of lawyers still battling on separate fronts and continues to assert his innocence in what prosecutors and jurors concluded was a 1997 murder-for-hire at the motel he managed in Oklahoma City. The man who beat motel owner Barry Van Treese to death with a baseball bat, Justin Sneed, avoided the death penalty by fingering Glossip as the mastermind. Glossip's contention has won support from the likes of British business executive Richard Branson, actress Susan Sarandon and TV's "Dr. Phil" McGraw. More than 250,000 online petitions seeking a 60-day reprieve were delivered to Gov. Mary Fallin this month. On Friday, former U.S. senator Tom Coburn and former University of Oklahoma head football coach Barry Switzer added their names. "We ... don't know for sure whether Richard Glossip is innocent or guilty. That is precisely the problem," Coburn and Switzer said in a letter co-signed by others. "If we keep executing defendants in cases like this, where the evidence of guilt is tenuous and untrustworthy, we will keep killing innocent people." Van Treese's family issued a statement to the Tulsa World contending that the criminal justice system has run its course. "Execution of Richard Glossip will not bring Barry back or lessen the empty hole left in the lives of those who loved Barry," the statement said. "What it does provide is a sense that justice has been served." >From his cell on death row, Glossip remains upbeat. "If you're innocent, you can't just lay back and let them execute you," he says. "You've got to speak out. You've got to raise hell." Robert Dunham, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, which opposes capital punishment, says Glossip's case "has numerous hallmarks of innocence cases." If he's executed, Dunham says, Glossip "would fall in the category of people whom states have killed despite significant doubts as to their guilt." Glossip's legal battle is not unique. In Florida, more than 400 death row inmates are awaiting a state Supreme Court ruling on the pending execution of Jerry Correll, who murdered four women 30 years ago, following a lower court's approval of the planned drug protocol. In Alabama, seven prisoners challenging the state's lethal injection protocol are battling in federal district court; the state argues that its three-drug protocol is "virtually identical" to the one upheld by the Supreme Court. A federal judge in Mississippi last month temporarily blocked lethal injections after 2 of the state's 48 death row inmates protested it would be "chemical torture." Even in Lewis and Clark County, Montana, court proceedings continued through the summer in a case that dates back 7 years and several lethal injection methods. The state's death row population: 2. The cross-country battle over lethal injection methods has taken on added importance since last year, when inmates in Ohio, Oklahoma and Arizona gasped, moaned or writhed in pain during the administration of a 3-drug cocktail including the sedative midazolam. But other protocols have come under attack as well. "It can be quite a horrendous death," says Ron Waterman, an attorney challenging Montana's use of the drug pentobarbital. The situation is similarly uncertain in other states - particularly those that use midazolam, the sedative at issue in the Oklahoma case. Although Florida has used it with apparent success since 2013, critics claim it doesn't mask the pain of paralytic and heart-stopping drugs that follow. In Ohio, Gov. John Kasich - now 1 of 16 Republicans seeking his party's nomination for president - postponed all scheduled executions until 2016 after a prisoner there snorted through a 26-minute execution. Arizona, where a prisoner gasped for nearly 2 hours on the gurney last July, has been seeking alternatives to its drug cocktail. "The cat is out of the bag on midazolam, regardless of what the Supreme Court says," maintains Deborah Denno, a law professor at Fordham University. "The departments of corrections recognize that this is a problem drug. ... No one wants to be the next one that has a botched execution." The debate over lethal injection has energized legislatures as well as courts and corrections departments. North Carolina and Arkansas, 2 Southern states seeking to rejuvenate their dormant death penalties, approved laws this year that impose secrecy on the source of lethal injection drugs. Arkansas recently purchased a new supply of drugs. The problem for the legal system is that it's more of a medical issue. Some drugs, such as sodium thiopental and pentobarbital, no longer can be obtained from European drug makers. That has sent states scurrying to compounding pharmacists, where the drugs they get are not subject to Food and Drug Administration regulation. But those pharmacists aren't pleased. Its trade group in March discouraged members from "participating in the preparation, dispensing or distribution of compounded medications for use in legally authorized executions." A week later, the American Pharmacists Association called executions "fundamentally contrary to the role of pharmacists as providers of health care." In Tennessee, Davidson County Chancellor Claudia Bonnyman ultimately ruled late last month that the state's use of compounded pentobarbital is constitutional. "This court cannot find that the possibility of an accident ... causes the protocol to violate the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment," she said. An appeal is likely. Some states, meanwhile, are hedging their bets by establishing backup methods. Tennessee last year approved the use of the electric chair if lethal injection drugs are unavailable - a method Virginia used as recently as 2013. In March, Utah opted for the firing squad. In April, Oklahoma selected nitrogen gas. Chapter 4 States, courts confront new death challenges >From Connecticut to California, the death penalty is on trial in state and federal courts. From Delaware to Nebraska and from New Hampshire to Montana, it's on trial in state legislatures. The continuing court clashes illustrate that the debate is far from over. But the continuing legislative clashes showcase a clear trend in favor of retreat or repeal: No states are seeking to reinstate the death penalty. "The Eighth Amendment forbids punishments that are cruel and unusual," Breyer said in his dissent in June. "In the last 2 decades, the imposition and implementation of the death penalty have increasingly become unusual." Governors have declared moratoriums in Pennsylvania, Colorado, Oregon and Washington. In Ohio, all executions have been pushed back at least until next year. State legislators who came within a vote of repealing the death penalty this year in Delaware, New Hampshire and Montana are sure to try again. Just last month, Connecticut's Supreme Court struck down the death penalty for prisoners already convicted of their crimes, going beyond the legislature's prospective repeal. And on the last day of August, a federal appeals court in California heard oral arguments in a case that ultimately could reach the Supreme Court. Now housing roughly 25% of the nation's 3,000 death row prisoners, the state cannot pay enough defense lawyers or settle on a lethal injection method, even as the population at San Quentin continues to grow. The death penalty was narrowly upheld in a 2012 referendum, but attorneys for convicted murderer Ernest Jones noted that only 13 of more than 900 people sentenced to death since 1978 have been executed. The majority will die in prison or spend decades fighting their convictions. "There has been an extreme malfunction in California's death penalty process," Michael Laurence, the lead defense lawyer, told the 3-judge panel on Aug. 31. "The average time it takes from start to finish in the state courts exceeds 20 years." Nebraska this year became the 1st "red" state to ban capital punishment. That law faces potential repeal in 2016 if death penalty proponents can put it to a vote. The attention Nebraska received overshadowed near-misses in Delaware, where Rep. Sean Lynn says the death penalty is applied in discriminatory fashion, and Montana, where Rep. David Moore says the costs are proving to be unaffordable. In New Hampshire, where the Senate deadlocked 12-12 on a repeal bill in April, Rep. Renny Cushing is an unlikely proponent of abolition. His father and brother-in-law were murdered in separate incidents, 23 years and a thousand miles apart. Still, he says death sentences just divert attention from where it's most needed. "The entire death penalty debate is really offender-centered," Cushing says. "It makes rock stars out of killers. It allows us in many ways to ignore or not tend to the needs of individual victims' survivors." As capital punishment disappears from courtrooms and statehouses, the Supreme Court maintains a steady diet of death penalty cases. On Oct. 7, the day one of Glossip's co-defendants is slated to die, the justices will hear the first of four such cases on their 2015 docket. The most prominent of those cases, to be argued Nov. 2, involves Timothy Tyrone Foster's allegation that the prosecution in his May 1987 trial in Rome, Ga., illegally struck four potential jurors because they were black. That produced an all-white jury, in apparent violation of the court's ruling a year earlier in Batson v. Kentucky that peremptory challenges during jury selection can't be based on race. It took Foster's jury all of 90 minutes to convict him for killing a retired white female teacher, and about an hour to deliver his death sentence after hearing the prosecutor urge them to "deter other people out there in the projects." Prosecutors claimed their jury strikes were for race-neutral reasons. But since then, defense lawyers obtained the prosecution's notes, showing that they singled out prospective black jurors with a "B," circled the word "black," identified them with shorthand such as "B#1" and "B#2," and ranked them in case "it comes down to having to pick one of the black jurors." A new study by the anti-death penalty group Reprieve Australia showed that prosecutors in Caddo Parish, Louisiana, struck would-be black jurors 46% of the time, compared to 15% for others. And that mattered: In 200 verdicts from 2003-12, juries with fewer than 3 blacks did not acquit any defendants. When 5 or more blacks participated, the acquittal rate was 19%. Stephen Bright, Foster's lawyer at the Southern Center for Human Rights, says the upcoming Supreme Court case illustrates two of Justice Breyer's many concerns: racial discrimination and decades spent on death row. "If this case gets reversed," Bright says, "it will be back to Rome 30 years after the conviction ... starting all over again." (source: USA Today) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 14 08:32:56 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 08:32:56 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 14 SAUDI ARABIA----execution Saudi executes Iraqi for murder An Iraqi convicted of murder Thursday became the 132nd person executed in Saudi Arabia this year, the interior ministry said. Kazim al-Abasi, a sheep herder, was found guilty of killing a Saudi with whom he worked, the ministry said in a statement carried by the official Saudi Press Agency. It said Abasi bashed the victim in the head with a hammer while he slept, bound him and tossed him down a hole before fleeing in his car. Authorities carried out the death sentence in Hafr al-Batin, near Iraq. According to AFP tallies, 132 foreigners and Saudis have been put to death in the kingdom this year during a surge of executions that compares with 87 for all of 2014. London-based Amnesty International last month described Saudi Arabia's judicial system as "deeply flawed" and called for a moratorium on executions. Death sentences have nonetheless continued to be carried out. The interior ministry has cited deterrence as a reason for the punishment. Under the conservative kingdom's strict Islamic sharia legal code, murder, armed robbery, rape, drug trafficking and apostasy are all punishable by death. Most Saudi executions are carried out by beheading with a sword. In July, Amnesty also protested a "staggering" execution spree in Saudi Arabia's regional rival Iran, where almost 700 people were put to death this year. (source: The Daily Star) THAILAND: Death Penalty for 2014 train rapist: Appeals Court refuses to commute punishment The Appeals Court today has upheld the death penalty imposed on a former railway employee who raped a 13-year-old girl and later threw her off the train in July 2014. Wanchai 'Game' Saengkao, 23, was brought from Bang Kwang Prison in Bangkok to the Hua Hin Provincial Court in Prachuap Khiri Khan where the verdict from the Appeals Court was read out this morning. In attendance were the victim's relatives (except for her mother who was in hospital) and the family's lawyer Wanchai Bunnag. The court rejected Wanchai's appeal for a lighter sentence. It argued that he only confessed to the crime due to the overwhelming evidence against him, and not out of any sense of remorse. The death penalty was meted out by the Hua Hin Provincial Court in September last year. The former railway employee was arrested in July, 2014, for raping a 13-year-old girl who was sleeping on a train en route to Bangkok from Nakhon Sri Thammarat. After he violated her, Wanchai threw the unconscious girl out of the train while in Prachuap Khiri Khan province. He then searched her bag and took her iPhone which he later sold in Bangkok for THB1,800. Wanchai was arrested by the police the morning after as he confessed to the crime. He was found guilty and sentenced to death penalty for murder, raping a girl under 15, stealing her mobile phone, hiding her body and consuming methamphetamine. The State Railway of Thailand has paid the victim's family THB8.5 million in compensation, in addition to funeral costs, Bangkok Post reported. (source: Coconuts Bangkok) BULGARIA: Over 4,200 signatures collected in Bulgaria???s Veliko Tarnovo, Gorna Oryahovitsa in favour of death penalty reinstatement Over 4,200 signatures have been collected in the towns of Veliko Tarnovo and Gorna Oryahovitsa in favour of death penalty reinstatement. Petko Ganchev, who organised the petition, announced the news, speaking at a protest staged Monday in front of the court house in district centre Veliko Tarnovo, Radio FOCUS - Veliko Tarnovo reported. The District Court of Veliko Tarnovo is to sit Monday and Tuesday on the trial against Iliyan Zdravkov who murdered this spring 23-year old student Veronika Zdravkova. The District Prosecutor's Office of Veliko Tarnovo filed the indictment against the defendant in July. Petko Ganchev explained most of the people who had signed the petition had not provided their uniform civil numbers as they were afraid of disclosing this personal information. Ganchev commented some 200 signatures had been collected in Veliko Tarnovo and about 4,000 - in Gorna Oryahovitsa. (source: focus-fen.net) INDONESIA: Indonesian guard held over death of Japanese Indonesian police have arrested a man suspected of robbing and strangling a Japanese woman to death in her apartment in Jakarta. The woman identified as Yoshimi Nishimura, 28, was found dead with strangulation marks on her neck at Casa Grande apartment building in south Jakarta last Monday, the capital???s police chief Tito Karnavian told reporters. "There was definitely resistance, but the victim was later strangled and beaten to death," he said. Police arrested the apartment building's security guard, Mursalim, 25, who like many Indonesians goes by 1 name, and who had fled to Sumatra. According to a police statement released on Friday, the suspect had jammed the lock of the door to Nishimura???s apartment by stuffing it with paper and then demanded she hand over her belongings after he helped her to open the door. "His main motive was to take the victim's belongings," Karnavian alleged, adding that the items seized included money and mobile phones. "He observed that the woman was living alone which made it easier to rob her," he added. Mursalim could face the death penalty if found guilty of premeditated murder. An Indonesian court in 2010 sentenced a man to 10 years in prison as an accessory to the murder of a female Japanese tourist on the resort island of Bali. In 2009, an Indonesian man was jailed for 20 years for murdering another Japanese tourist, Rika Sano, after kidnapping her in Bali. (source: Agence France-Presse) IRAN: 10 Prisoners in Rajai Shahr in Danger of Execution On the morning of Sunday September 13, 10 prisoners in Rajai Shahr Prison who are charged with murder were reportedly transferred to solitary confinement in preparation for their executions. 4 of the 10 prisoners have been identified as Davoud Alambeigi, Mohammad Mahmoudi, Mehdi Kaheh and Morteza Ahmadbeigi. This is reportedly Alambeigi's 4th time being taken to the gallows. Last month Iranian authorities had stopped his execution at the last moment and returned him to his cell. According to reports, Alambeigi had received a last minute reprieve from the plaintiffs on his case file. According to a close source, due to the complications and difficulties that arose from processing Alambbeigi's reprieve, the plaintiffs gave up on their pursuit to save his life. (source: Iran Human Rights) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 14 16:02:57 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 16:02:57 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., ALA., MISS., MO., OKLA., USA Message-ID: Sept. 14 PENNSYLVANIA----female may face death penalty Mom accused of pushing baby into river will mount insanity defense Johnesha Monae Perry, 20, is charged with criminal homicide and child endangerment in the May 3 incident that led to the death of 20-month-old son Zymeir Perry. If convicted of 1st-degree murder, Perry could face the death penalty. The child was taken off life support 1 week after Perry allegedly threw him off the Hamilton Street Bridge into the Lehigh River. Perry is awaiting trial. In a motion filed recently in Lehigh County Court, her lawyers said she has a long history of mental illness. Perry "has suffered from severe and substantial mental infirmities since her teenage years," Public Defender Kimberly Makoul wrote in the motion. "Defendant's mental infirmities include but are not necessarily limited to paranoid schizophrenia and delusional disorder." Makoul wrote in the filing that lawyers are still investigating Perry's mental condition and are planning on calling psychologist Frank Dattilio as an expert witness. The defense may also call other experts and lay witness, Makoul wrote. Police said Perry pushed her son in his stroller from her Hall Street to the bridge around 1:40 p.m. May 3. Witnesses told police that saw her sit the baby on the railing, kiss him on the forehead and push him into the water, 52 feet below. Perry then jumped from the bridge, witnesses say. She landed in 4 feet of water and managed to walk to shore with a broken arm before collapsing, witnesses said. 2 Allentown police officers pulled the baby from the river about 700 yards downstream, but he wasn't breathing and had no pulse. The officers performed CPR but couldn't get any signs of life. Zymeir was taken to a hospital, where staff was able to revive him. He was on life support for 6 days. Police interviewed Perry that day and she admitted she intended to kill her son, authorities said. An autopsy determined Zymeir died from complications of blunt force trauma and drowning, and his death was ruled a homicide. Perry is scheduled to appear before Judge Kelly Banach at a pretrial hearing later this week. (source: Mornign Call) ALABAMA: AL.com joins 'Next to Die' project to track executions AL.com has joined with other news organizations around the nation in "The Next to Die," a project to track the upcoming executions of death row inmates. Led by The Marshall Project, a non-profit, non-partisan journalism group that covers the criminal justice system, "The Next to Die" is currently set up to track execution dates in 10 states. The information is being shared through The Marshall Project's website and an embedded 'countdown to execution' widget that can be shared by AL.com - and other local media outlets - or placed into social media content. Information includes the scheduled execution date of the condemned, links to background on their case, news as the execution date nears, and finally, the date of death. "The Next to Die aims to bring attention, and thus accountability, to these upcoming executions," The Marshall Project states on its website. "As impartial news organizations, The Marshall Project and its journalistic partners do not take a stance on the morality of capital punishment, but we do see a need for better reporting on a punishment that so divides Americans." "Whether you believe that execution is a fitting way for society to deplore the most heinous crimes, or that it is too expensive, racially biased and subject to lethal error, you should be prepared to look it in the face," The Marshall Project states. Alabama currently has no scheduled executions for any of the 189 inmates on its death row. But as those dates are announced AL.com will place the information into The Next to Die database to be shared with everyone. Alabama has been at the center of the debate over the death penalty on a few fronts, including judicial overrides. More than 20 % of Alabama death row inmates originally had been recommended by juries to serve life without parole sentences, a few studies show. But judges overrode the jury recommendations in favor of the death penalty. Alabama is among only three states that allows judicial overrides - Florida and Delaware are the others. But Alabama has been the only one in at least the past 15 years to override life recommendations and sentence defendants to death. Alabama also was among 13 states earlier this year to file briefs to the U.S. Supreme Court supporting Oklahoma's 3-drug combination used for the lethal injections during executions. The court ultimately ruled that the combination using that drug was not cruel and unusual punishment, clearing the way for Alabama and the other states to begin setting executions again. The other states with executions being tracked during the initial phase of "Next to Die" are Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas and Virginia. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The Frontier in Oklahoma, Houston Chronicle and Tampa Bay Times also are partners in the project. (source: al.com) MISSISSIPPI: Judge sends McGilberry to Jackson County for resentencing A judge has ordered the return of Stephen McGilberry to the Jackson County jail to await resentencing in the 1994 beating deaths of four family members. The Sun Herald reported Circuit Judge Roberts Krebs issued the order Friday and Circuit Judge Dale Harkey signed off. Jackson County deputies are to retrieve McGilberry from the state prison at Parchman on Sunday and bring him back to the Jackson County jail, where he is to be held until sentencing. McGilberry, now 37, was 16 when he killed his mother, stepfather, sister and her 3-year-old son with a baseball bat. He won a 3rd chance at sentencing after a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court ruling found that automatic life sentences for juveniles violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. The court ruled that certain factors, such as the age of the offender at the time of the killing and the nature of the crime, should be considered first. McGilberry's stepfather, Kenneth Purifoy; mother, Patricia Purifoy; stepsister, Kimberly Self; and her 3-year-old son, Kristopher Self; were killed in October 1994 in St. Martin. McGilberry took a money order from his mother's purse and drove away in the family's vehicle. The jury sentenced him to death, but a U.S. Supreme Court barred the death penalty for juveniles. In 2005, McGilberry was resentenced to 4 life terms without parole. McGilberry said he committed the crimes because he was mad at his mother for grounding him from using the family car. She did so, authorities said, because he'd stopped going to school and lost a job. McGilberry claims he's changed since the killings, having found God and been ordained as a minister. He's also married and says he's been a trusted inmate over the years. Michael Purifoy, Kenneth Purifoy's son, said his family wants McGilberry to remain in prison for the rest of his life. The family and others have written letters to Jackson County District Attorney Tony Lawrence to ask that he remain imprisoned. Charlotte James, Kenneth Purifoy's sister, said the family had moved on with their lives "just to have him open up the can of worms again. We are victimized all over again, and yet the court is worried about his rights and treats him like this poor little victim. "He had no remorse for what he did," she said. "4 people no longer have their lives. My brother was the most loving, caring, easygoing guy that you could ever meet. "These 4 people, these innocent people, will never get up again and have a life. Why should he?" (source: Associated Press) MISSOURI: Lawyer says mother did not let Gypsy see her own medical records The attorney representing Gypsy Blanchard said in court Monday that his client can't access her own medical records because of blocks set up by her now deceased mother. Gypsy Blanchard, 24, is accused of arranging for her online boyfriend to stab her mother, Clauddinnea "Dee Dee" Blanchard, 48, to death in June at the family's home just north of Springfield. Authorities have said the Blanchards were running a long financial fraud scheme that involved Gypsy pretending to need a wheelchair. It's unclear from police statements and public court documents how much Gypsy was involved in the alleged fraud scheme, family members have said Dee Dee forced Gypsy to act like she was sick and disabled. Gypsy's attorney Mike Stanfield seemed to distance Gypsy from the deceit with statements he made Monday after a pre-trial court appearance. Stanfield said Dee Dee had power of attorney and blocked Gypsy from her own medical records. "We are not able to get her medical records on her own signature," Stanfield said. "Her mom executed power of attorney to prevent her from getting her own medical records." Stanfield said a "family friend" was named as a successor following Dee Dee's death and he will have to go through that person to get access to the medical records. Monday's brief pre-trial court appearance marked the 1st time Gypsy and her boyfriend Nicholas Godejohn, 26, have been in the same room since they were both arrested in Wisconsin in June and charged with 1st-degree murder in Dee Dee's death. Greene County Prosecutor Dan Patterson said Monday he had recently provided the defense attorneys with 75 discs of evidence in the case for them to review. The judge set another pre-trial court appearance for Nov. 9 so the attorneys will have time to review the information. Patterson said he is still considering whether or not he will seek the death penalty in this case. In June, friends and neighbors believed Gypsy was disabled and feared she was in danger when Dee Dee's body was discovered in the family's home on Volunteer Way, just north of Springfield. Investigators quickly discovered, however, that Gypsy can walk and may have had something to do with Dee Dee's death. By June 16, Gypsy and Godejohn, had been arrested in Big Bend, Wisconsin and charged with murder. Court documents say Gypsy handed Godejohn gloves and a knife and told him to kill her mother. A probable cause statement says the couple then stole several thousand dollars from Dee Dee's safe, mailed the murder weapon to Wisconsin and took a Greyhound bus to Godejohn's residence 2 states away. Authorities believe Gypsy took credit for Dee Dee's death with a vulgar Facebook post, and that is what led them to discover the body. Gypsy and Godejohn are each being held in the Greene County Jail on $1 million bond. (source: Springfield News-Leader) OKLAHOMA----impending execution http://www.richardeglossip.com/the-case-1.html It appears a horrible miscarriage of justice is about to happen which undercuts the argument for the DEATH PENALTY oft made by Colorado's pre-eminent Prosecutor George Brauchler, ???that police, prosecutors, and interrogators need the death penalty in their "toolbox" to draw out the truth in capital murder cases. Glossip is innocent and the guilty murderer that accused Glossip of the murder is serving a life sentence, too frightened of being executed to confess that Glossip is innocent. On Wednesday, September 16, Richard Glossip will be killed by the State of Oklahoma with an as yet untested mixture of chemicals. The case is ripe with dozens of mis-steps and Glossip has already spent 18 year in prison. Our panel of wise men and women, SCOTUS: Supreme Court Of The United States, did not use due diligence in reviewing the Glossip case. It important for ordinary people all over the United States to email, fax, or call OK Governor Mary Fallin asking her to stay the Glossip execution and asking that she end the Death Penalty in Oklahoma. http://maryfallin.org/contact/ Why act to spare one life, while fleeing refugees are dying by the score at this very moment? Because every life matters. (source: EM-AIUSA) ************* Richard Glossip's attorneys claim to have new evidence in the case 2 days before execution Attorneys for a man who is scheduled to be executed this week are trying to halt his execution. Richard Glossip is on death row for the 1997 murder of an Oklahoma City motel manager. Glossip was convicted in the murder of Barry Van Treese after another man, Justin Sneed, testified Glossip paid him to commit the crime. However, Glossip's attorneys say their client is innocent. On Monday, those attorneys presented new information they've gathered in the case at the Oklahoma State Capitol. Lead attorney Don Knight said they have interviewed witnesses and found more evidence that exonerates Glossip. For example, he said one of Justin Sneed's cell mates said he clearly heard Sneed say he set Glossip up. Sneed is serving life in prison for the 1997 murder of Barry Van Treese. Glossip's attorneys again called on Gov. Fallin to issue a 60 day stay. Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater told NewsChannel 4 that Glossip's attorney reached out to him about new evidence, but he says he did not receive any documents. Prater called the press conference "a bull**** PR campaign." Glossip is set to be executed Wednesday. (source: KFOR news) ****************** Juror Who Sentenced Richard Glossip Speaks Out A juror who sentenced Richard Glossip to death is speaking out. Glossip is set to be executed Wednesday afternoon. This juror only wants to be known as "a juror from Richard Glossip's murder trial." The juror felt he should speak now because of all this recent attention on Glossip. The juror wants people to know what's set to happen Wednesday is not sudden for those involved in the case. This is what the juror had to say, "This has been 17 years for us, 17 years for the Van Treese Family. We saw Glossip as Charles Manson and as a juror for the state we wanted to protect Oklahomans." Glossip has been found guilty twice for hiring Justin Sneed to murder Barry Van Treese in 1997, which is why the juror sees Glossip as Manson because of his ability to influence someone to kill. Glossip though continues his innocence and continues to gain support. Not only does he have celebrities asking Governor Fallin for a stay of execution, Senator Tom Coburn and former OU coach Barry Switzer have put their names on a letter asking the Governor for a stay. Glossip's attorneys plan to hold a press conference at 10:00 a.m. Monday. The attorneys claim they have new evidence that proves Glossip's innocence, but none of that evidence has been filed in court. (source: news9.com) ***************** Wisconsin politician urges Gov. Fallin to grant Glossip a stay As a candidate for mayor, I care deeply about justice and politics. That's why I submitted this letter to Gov. Mary Fallin today: Dear Governor Fallin, I am writing to you regarding Richard Glossip, who is scheduled to be executed on September 16, 2015 at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary for the murder-for-hire plot of Barry Van Treese. 19-year-old Justin Sneed confessed to killing Van Treese in 1997, but claimed Glossip hired him, in an effort to avoid the death penalty. With no evidence to back up Sneed's allegations, the State of Oklahoma pursued those baseless claims in court, painting Glossip as a heartless murderer that deserved to die. There was and is no DNA evidence, no witnesses, and no physical or forensic evidence that indicated Glossip was involved in any way. There is probable cause to believe that mistakes were made in the wrongful prosecution of Richard Glossip, including failure to obtain adequate counsel during his trials. The defendant has already been incarcerated for nearly 20 years for a crime he did not commit, and now he is scheduled to die this week. Mistakes were made; while it's unacceptable, it is however forgivable, if you accept that fact and take measures to remedy the situation. Glossip wasn't sentenced to death because he was guilty, but rather because he was poor. The cost to defend oneself in a death penalty case is a minimum of $130,000; Glossip simply did not have that funding. If this execution takes place, it will be difficult for the State of Oklahoma to differentiate itself from countries like North Korea and Iran, where guilt is not necessarily a factor when sentencing a citizen to death. The death penalty is in place to punish the culprits and to deter crime (although, there's no evidence to that effect), but ironically, the threat of the death penalty in this case caused a guilty man to lie so as to avoid the punishment, and in return, execute an innocent man. This is a prime example of an egregious miscarriage of justice. For those reasons, I respectfully ask that you grant Glossip a 60-day stay in order to provide the defendant's attorneys time to submit newly uncovered evidence to the court. Jordan Turner is running for mayor of Watertown because he believes the city can turn into an example for other Wisconsin cities. (source: reddirtreport.com) USA: Death penalty on its way out? The death penalty is dying. Even in states with a reputation for being hard on crime, executions are becoming rare. Most people agree there are those whose crimes are so heinous that they deserve to die. But the problem, increasingly, is how to do it. There is wide agreement among states that lethal injection is the most practical and humane way to end a human life. But for several reasons, the supply of life-ending drugs is drying up, The Tennessean in Nashville reports. Many of those drugs are made in Europe, where there is widespread public opposition to capital punishment. Some imported drugs don't meet U.S. standards. Many U.S. doctors and pharmacists point out that their aim is to save lives, not end them. For a variety of reasons, 2/3 of the states have not executed anyone in the past five years. American public opinion still favors capital punishment, but by a diminishing margin: 78 % 2 decades ago to 58 % today, according to the Pew Research Center. One opponent of the death penalty sees "a massive reassessment under way in the country." Lengthy appeals are inevitable with capital cases, and creation of regional defense systems has raised the quality of defense lawyers. Supporters and opponents of capital punishment tend to agree that the process of execution takes too long, which in itself amounts to cruel and unusual punishment.< The Tennessean said a Colorado survey found that death penalty cases took more than 5 years on average to complete, compared to 18 months for cases involving life without parole. The frustration is typified by what's happening in Kansas, where a jury decided a white supremacist should die for killing 3 people outside Jewish sites. Formal sentencing is scheduled in November, but Kansas hasn't executed anyone for 50 years. Such frustrations suggest that capital punishment some day will be found only in the history books. (source: The Paris Post Intelligencer) *************** Supreme Court Justice Argues World Opinion Matters on the Death Penalty Should the Supreme Court care that other countries have abolished the death penalty? That looming question animates Justice Stephen Breyer's "The Court and the World," a brisk but academic book that argues that it is relevant for the nation's top judges to consider what other countries' legal systems have decided when faced with difficult issues. "If someone with a job roughly like my own, facing a legal problem roughly like the one confronting me, interpreting a document that resembles the one I look to, has written a legal opinion about a similar matter, why not read what that judge has said?" writes Breyer, who was appointed by President Clinton in 1994. "I might learn from it, whether or not I end up agreeing with it." It's not an academic question. In recent years, members of Congress have harshly criticized justices for citing foreign courts, with one former member even suggesting it could be grounds for impeachment. Meantime, the court is narrowly divided on the death penalty, an issue where the United States bucks the trend of other advanced democracies toward abolition. In 284 pages, Breyer explores the history of justices looking to foreign courts, the influence of America's legal system on the world, the increase in legal questions over international agreements and the role of judges in spreading American influence. But the heart of the book is an 11-page chapter defending the court's citation of foreign cases. And while Breyer mentions cases involving consumer safety, desertion and gay rights, that section of the book returns again and again to court decisions on the death penalty. That's because one of the arguments for the court to ban the death penalty in the United States is that it violates the constitutional prohibition on "cruel and unusual punishment." For Breyer, who called the death penalty "capricious, random, indeed arbitrary" in a dissent earlier this year, foreign practices help show how unusual it is. According to the human rights group Amnesty International, 101 countries have abolished the death penalty for all crimes. Breyer also notes how past cases have been shaped by world opinion, with justices barring executions for children under the age of 16, for rape that did not lead to death and for the accomplice in a robbery that led to a death. He even notes that the phrase "cruel and unusual punishment" itself is foreign since it comes from an English declaration from 1688. He also considers - then rejects - the arguments of critics, including that citing foreign courts could undermine American sovereignty or lead judges to a lazy "nose counting" of other countries' practices before making decisions. Ultimately, Breyer argues, foreign decisions are just another source of information, no different than lower court decisions, "useful law review articles, books of history (and) statistical studies." Informative, but unlike a Supreme Court decision, not binding. (source: TIME) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 14 16:03:38 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 16:03:38 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 14 IRAN: Major human rights concerns exist in Iran - UN High Commissioner The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights says he is concerned by the number of executions being carried out in Iran. "Accelerated use of the death penalty, concerns about the right to a fair trial, and the continued detention of journalists, bloggers and human rights defenders remain a major cause for concern," UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein said in a statement at the opening of the Human Rights Council session in Geneva on Monday, September 14. "I urge Iran to make commensurate progress in human rights," he said. A statement by the High Commissioner's office on August 5 said: "Iran has reportedly executed more than 600 individuals so far this year. Last year, at least 753 people were executed in the country." More than 2,000 people have been executed in Iran since Hassan Rouhani took office. (source: NCR-Iran) INDONESIA: Lindsay Sandiford: Redcar death row gran's execution put back until 'at least' the end of the year A Redcar gran on death row in Bali for smuggling drugs has had her date of execution put back until "at least" the end of the year. The 59-year-old has been sentenced to death after she was caught smuggling large quantities of cocaine. Despite claiming she was forced into trafficking the drugs due to threats against her son's safety, Mrs Sandiford was told she was scheduled to be executed on September 21. Although this was later put back until "at least" the end of the year, the grandmother's family raced out to see her and took her 2-year-old grandaughter Ayla, who she'd never met, with them. After spending time with the youngster, Mrs Sandiford told the Mail on Sunday: "I know this may be the 1st and last time I ever hold my granddaughter." Ayla was born 7 months after Mrs Sandiford was arrested in Bali in May 2012 and had never before met her grandmother. The 2 met up a number of times last week, and a beaming Mrs Sandiford revealed how the youngster was cuddling and kissing her after being introduced. Lindsay Sandiford covers her face during a press conference in Kuta, Bali Lindsay Sandiford covers her face during a press conference in Kuta, Bali After being given a fairy costume by her grandmother, Ayla then walked around the room blowing kisses at prison guards. Mrs Sandiford said: "I'm so glad I had the chance to meet her. Ayla is the most important thing in my life and no one can take this away from me now. She's an absolute delight - she's the sweetest baby I've ever met." The 2 were pictures sitting on the floor playing with dolls, after Ayla's father Lewis, Mrs Sandiford's son, arrived at the jail with the youngster. Following the news of her stay of execution, Mrs Sandiford has re-launched a campaign to raise the 25,000 pounds she needs to fund an appeal against her death penalty verdict. She told the Mail on Sunday: "I'm just grateful I've met Ayla. It's hard to come to terms with the fact I might not see her again and she might not remember me, but I'm so glad I got to spend time with her." The Briton has always claimed she was forced to take a suitcase containing 10.5lbs of cocaine into Bali from Bangkok by a criminal syndicate headed by a British mobester who was threatening the life of her son. (source: gazettelive.co.uk) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 15 09:52:04 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 09:52:04 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS Message-ID: Sept. 15 TEXAS: Years after being freed from death row, East Texas man fights to clear name Nearly 40 years after Linda Jo Edwards was murdered and mutilated in her Tyler apartment, the man convicted of the crime - and almost executed for it - wants to be exonerated, based on new DNA tests. Lawyers for Kerry Max Cook, who Smith County prosecutors contend killed Edwards in a perverse rage in June 1977, filed documents Monday urging the court to declare the former death row inmate innocent. They argue that 6 rounds of extensive DNA testing from 1999 through 2015 failed to identify any evidence that Cook was at the scene of the crime. Instead, the tests confirmed the presence of semen from Edwards' former lover, a longtime suspect in the case and a dean at the local university whose extramarital affair with the young woman had ended badly, the lawyers say. In a separate motion filed Monday, the lawyers also asked Smith County state district Judge Christi Kennedy to recuse herself from overseeing the case. They allege that Kennedy is too closely tied to prosecutors the courts have said engaged in misconduct to win Cook's conviction, including suppressing evidence and securing false testimony. The saga has been the most high-profile case in small Smith County's history. It's resulted in 3 lengthy trials, books and movies, and worldwide attention. Cook and his lawyers, including Barry Scheck from the New York-based Innocence Project, declined to comment, referring to the legal documents filed in court. Mike West, an assistant Smith County district attorney, said he hadn't had time Monday afternoon to review the latest filings in the decades-old case. "We're going to look at it and give it a serious look," West said. Cook was convicted in 1978 of stabbing and beating Edwards to death in a sexual frenzy, and he was sentenced to die. He maintained that he was innocent, and the guilty verdict was overturned. A 2nd trial produced a mistrial, and a 3rd trial sent Cook back to death row. An appeals court threw out that verdict, too, finding prosecutors had engaged in "pervasive" and "egregious" misconduct. In 1999, just days before what would have been Cook's 4th trial, Smith County prosecutors offered him a no-contest plea deal that allowed him to be released from prison. Cook didn't admit the crime but remained guilty in the eyes of the law. Cook has been out of prison since then. He's married and has a young son, and they've traveled the world to tell his story. But the conviction hangs over Cook, preventing him from voting and making it difficult to find work. He's hoping the new evidence will finally clear his name. Before Cook accepted the 1999 plea deal, prosecutors had sought DNA testing on semen found in Edwards' underwear. Cook took the deal before the results came back, but the report eventually showed that the semen belonged to James Mayfield, Edwards' boss and former lover. Mayfield has never been charged in relation to the crime, and prosecutors have said the DNA testing doesn't mean Cook is innocent. Efforts to reach Mayfield and his former lawyer for this report were unsuccessful. In the past, he has denied any role in the crime. In 2012, Cook asked for a new round of more advanced DNA testing on the underwear and other evidence at the crime scene, including the murder weapon and a hair found on Edwards' body. Lawyers discovered, though, that an investigator in the case had taken the knife used in the murder home for "field testing." They also learned that the state destroyed the hair just after lawmakers, in 2001, approved a statute that allowed inmates access to DNA evidence in their case files that might help prove their innocence. The knife, the underwear and dozens of other items collected from the crime scene were tested. None of the testing matched Cook???s DNA, according to lawyers. The only match, they said, was an even more conclusive finding that the skin and sperm cells in Edwards' panties belonged to Mayfield. "The DNA profile shared by Mayfield and the male donor on the samples tested by Cellmark, respectively, are shared by just 1 in 3.112 trillion and 1 in 10.07 billion unrelated Caucasians - i.e., fewer than 1 such individual out of the entire current population of the Earth," the lawyers wrote. In the filings, Cook's lawyers allege that Smith County prosecutors failed to fully investigate Mayfield despite knowing that he had a relationship with Edwards and that he matched a witness description of the perpetrator at the scene and despite reports from friends who said the man had a violent temper. Mayfield testified at trial that he was with his family the night of the murder, and he said he hadn't had sex with Edwards for weeks before she was killed. With the newly obtained evidence, Cook's lawyers argue, a jury would never convict him of Edwards' murder, and they want the court to declare him innocent. But to give Cook a fair shot at finally vindicating his name, the lawyers say a judge from outside of small, interconnected Smith County must oversee the proceedings. Kennedy has close relationships with prosecutors and others who helped secure Cook's conviction, they argue. While she did not work on the case herself before she took the bench, Kennedy's clients included Smith County law enforcement officers involved in Cook's case, and her late husband worked in the district attorney's office during 2 of Cook's trials. Additionally, they contend, she's close to other judges and lawyers who have been involved in the long-running case. Kennedy did not respond to a request for comment Monday. She has 3 days to decide whether to recuse herself in the case. Timeline: The Kerry Max Cook case June 1977: Linda Jo Edwards is mutilated and murdered in her Tyler apartment. August 1977: Kerry Max Cook is arrested and charged with the crime. He was staying with a friend in Edwards' apartment complex. July 1978: Cook's 1st trial takes place in Tyler. He's convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death. December 1987: The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals upholds the conviction and sentence. June 1988: The U.S. Supreme Court orders the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to review the case, just 11 days before Cook's scheduled execution. January 1990: The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals upholds the conviction. September 1991: The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reverses itself, vacating Cook's conviction and ordering a new trial. December 1992: Cook is tried again, this time in Williamson County. A mistrial is declared after the jury comes back deadlocked. January-March 1994: In a 3rd trial, Cook is again found guilty and sentenced to death. November 1996: The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals overturns the conviction and death sentence, ruling that due process had been violated because "prosecutorial and police misconduct has tainted this entire matter from the outset." October 1997: The Supreme Court refuses to overturn the appeals court ruling. Smith County prosecutors seek a 4th trial. November 1997: Cook is released on bond awaiting another trial. February 1999: Shortly before the trial is set to begin in Bastrop, Cook pleads no contest with the promise of avoiding any more prison time. He is released from prison. Cook maintains his innocence. April 1999: The Texs Department of Public Safety issues a DNA testing report showing a partial DNA match to James Mayfield, who is described in court documents as Edwards' "married, jealous ex-lover." The report finds no trace of Cook's DNA. April 2001: The Legislature enacts a measure to allow convicts to test DNA in the state's possession in efforts to exonerate themselves. The statute also bars the state from altering or destroying evidence that could be tested for DNA. December 2001: Smith County authorizes the destruction of some evidence in Cook's case. February 2012: Cook files a motion for post-conviction DNA testing, seeking exoneration. April 2013-March 2015: 5 separate DNA reports yield no DNA that matches Cook's. The tests further confirm the presence of DNA from Mayfield, lawyers say. [source: Dallas Morning News research] (source: Dallas Morning News) ************************ 4 Decades, 3 Trials, 2 Death Sentences, 1 Exoneree. Almost. 38 years after Kerry Max Cook was convicted of murder, he continues to seek exoneration. And now he might finally have a chance to convince the courts of his innocence. The long, strange ordeal of Kerry Max Cook - perhaps the most bizarre series of capital murder proceedings in Texas history - just got longer. And stranger. Cook, convicted of the 1977 rape, mutilation, and murder of Linda Jo Edwards, spent 20 years on death row. While there, he was stabbed and repeatedly raped. The abuses led him to twice attempt suicide. He always maintained his innocence, and though his death sentences were overturned - twice - and the people who prosecuted him were reprimanded by a high court for extensive malfeasance and he was eventually freed from death row in 1997, he has never been exonerated. That's because back in 1999, on the eve of an unprecedented fourth capital murder trial, he took a "no contest" plea. So even as he became a celebrity - writing a book about his experience, becoming a subject of a popular play and movie called The Exonerated, giving anti-death penalty speeches and hanging out with anti-death penalty celebrities - Cook is still considered a convicted killer. Especially in Tyler, Texas, where the murder took place. And so today he ventured there again, at least legally, accompanied by lawyers from the Innocence Project and the Innocence Project of Texas, who filed two motions at the Smith County courthouse: a writ of habeas corpus to get his murder conviction thrown out and a motion to recuse the judge who would actually rule on the writ. To win on a habeas writ, a person must have new evidence contradicting his verdict. Cook has that: DNA tests on 15 crime scene items, none of which show his blood or semen anywhere on or near the victim. In fact, these tests actually show a profile of another man: the victim's lover, a married man with whom she'd been having a tempestuous affair. While this isn't mind-blowing news - DNA tests from 1999 also excluded Cook and included the lover - this is the 1st time the test results have actually gone before a court. And they could eventually lead to a new trial for Cook. Cook's ordeal began with the bloody rape and murder of Edwards, a young secretary who lived in the same Tyler apartment complex he did. Over the next 16 years, prosecutors took Cook to court 3 times, even though they didn't have much evidence: fingerprints on a patio door, a jailhouse informant who said that Cook told him he killed her, the recollections of a gay man who said that on the night of the murder he and Mr. Cook had had sex and watched a movie that involved a cat torture scene. Prosecutors came up with the bizarre but effective theory that Cook, whom they said was a latent homosexual, was aroused by the torture scene and then left the apartment and raped and killed Edwards, cutting off body parts (including the inside wall of her vagina), which he then stuffed in a stocking of hers that had gone missing. But all of the evidence used against Cook proved to be problematic or downright fraudulent. It turned out that three different witnesses had testified to a grand jury that Cook told them he had met Edwards 3 days before the murder and had gone to her apartment, where they made out on the couch, which explained the fingerprints (prosecutors didn't tell the defense about the witnesses). The jailhouse snitch confessed that he lied because he had been offered a reduced sentence for a murder conviction. The man who testified he'd had sex with Cook had previously told a grand jury there was no sex - and that Mr. Cook had ignored the movie in the first place. And the missing stocking that was supposed to be full of souvenir body parts was found in 1992 rolled up in a pants leg of Edwards's jeans by a juror who'd asked to look closely at the trial exhibits - 15 years after the murder. Cook's 1st conviction in 1978 was overturned on a technicality. The second trial, in 1992, ended in a mistrial. The 3rd 2 years later led to a second guilty verdict and death sentence, but in 1996 the Court of Criminal Appeals overturned it too, thundering that "prosecutorial and police misconduct has tainted this entire matter from the outset." A concurring opinion said, "The state's misconduct in this case does not consist of an isolated incident or the doing of a police officer, but consists of the deliberate misconduct by members of the bar, representing the state, over a 14-year period - from the initial discovery proceedings in 1977, through the first trial in 1978, and continuing with the concealment of the misconduct until 1992." It looked like Cook was finally on his way to exoneration, and he was released on bond in 1997. But Smith County wasn't finished and set about trying him for a record 4th time. As the February 1999 trial date approached, prosecutors made him an offer: plead guilty in exchange for 20 years (which he had already served), and the charges would be dropped. Cook refused. He was innocent, he said. Then, on February 4, a DPS analyst, examining Edwards's underwear, found a previously unseen semen stain; the state moved to run modern DNA testing on the stain as well as a hair found on her buttock. According to reporter David Hanners of the Dallas Morning News, Assistant DA David Dobbs told him that the semen "could only have been left by the killer." On the morning of jury selection, the DA shocked Cook with a final offer: plead no-contest and the case would be dismissed. Such a plea had never been allowed in a Texas death penalty case before, but with it, Cook could maintain his innocence (even though he wouldn't be legally exonerated), while the state would keep its conviction. Cook's advisors - suspicious that prosecutors were panicking because they knew his DNA would not be found in the sample - urged him to go to trial. Cook, though, terrified of going before a Smith County jury again and returning to death row, took the plea. He should have waited. The DNA results came back 2 months later, and, as Cook had always insisted, it wasn't him. In fact, the semen came from James Mayfield, a former college dean with whom Edwards (a secretary in his division) had been having a stormy affair. 3 weeks before she was murdered, in fact, she had tried to kill herself, and when news of the attempt became public, both were fired from their jobs. Not only did Mayfield and Edwards see each other several times in her final days, according to a friend of hers who talked with her 5 hours before she was murdered, she had informed Mayfield she was going to date other men - and he did not take the news well. On that last night, her roommate saw a man standing in the doorway of her bedroom; she told police and others that it was Mayfield (though more than a year later she would change her mind and testify that it was Cook). Cook was ecstatic with the results, but the Smith County DA's office now said that they just confirmed what everyone knew - Edwards and Mayfield had a sexual relationship. Though Dobbs had told Hanners the DNA was essentially the smoking gun, now he told another reporter, "It's irrelevant. Cook has been convicted of the murder." And indeed he had. Cook tried to move on with his life - and had a terrible time of it. He was free but still had a murder conviction on his record. "I couldn't get a job, couldn't sign a lease," he said later. "We've had to move five times because people would find out about me. One woman threatened to put up posters in the neighborhood saying 'Convicted murderer lives here.'" He couldn't vote, own a gun, or run for office. In 2009 Cook befriended Marc McPeak, a civil lawyer who offered to help him. 3 years later, McPeak, working with Dallas lawyer and Innocence Project of Texas member Gary Udashen, filed for DNA testing on other crime scene evidence - including the bloody knife. The lawyers also moved to recuse the judge who would rule on the testing. That judge was Jack Skeen, who had prosecuted Cook twice. Judge John Ovard okayed the testing and the recusal, sending all further matters to be decided by fellow Smith County district judge Christi Kennedy. Next Udashen contacted the Innocence Project, which has used DNA testing to exonerate more than 300 people nationwide. 15 items from the crime scene, including Edwards's stained bra, her jeans, cigarette butts, and blood on the knife, were sent to Cellmark Forensics lab near Dallas. They were tested over the next 2 1/2 years; the final results came in March. The results corroborated the 1999 findings: None of Cook's DNA was found on anything at the bloody crime scene. More elaborate DNA testing on the underwear, though, got an even stronger profile of Mayfield. The DNA evidence is the biggest part of the writ of habeas corpus, and the lawyers use it to make the claim that Cook is actually innocent. To prevail in such a case, someone like Cook has to show that his innocence has been unquestionably established with newly discovered evidence, and the lawyers are banking on the fact that none of Cook's DNA evidence has ever been brought into a court, not even the 1999 results. Cook's lawyers are also using Texas's "junk science writ," passed in 2013, which says that new forensic science can be used to successfully attack a conviction; all a petitioner has to do to get a new trial is show that with the new scientific evidence, it's more likely than not that a jury wouldn't have convicted him. If Cook's trial were held today, with the DNA results pointing to the victim's ex-lover, would he still be found guilty? Almost certainly not. The Innocence Project also alleges that prosecutors knew when they made the "no contest" plea offer that Mayfield's DNA profile would show up in the semen, not Cook's - and urge an evidentiary hearing to look into the matter. And the lawyers attack law enforcement for destroying evidence, in particular the hair found on Edwards's buttock, which doubtless came from the killer. Prosecutors knew the hair wasn't from Cook or Edwards - an expert had already testified, back in 1978, that it couldn't have come from either person. But in early 2002, 2 years after the results of the DNA testing pointed to Mayfield, Tyler police destroyed the hair. This wasn't just an unbelievably wrongheaded action, it was also against the law, violating Chapter 64, the law the legislature had passed in 2001 that allowed inmates to ask for post-conviction testing. It also forbade law enforcement from destroying any piece of biological evidence that was eligible for testing. When police destroyed that hair, they destroyed an important clue to the killer of Linda Jo Edwards. Almost 4 decades into his ordeal, Cook, aided by the powerful, well-funded Innocence Project, has his best shot at vindication. But given (in the CCA's words), "the deliberate misconduct by members of the bar, representing the state, over a 14-year period," the one thing he says he hasn't had is an objective hearing of his claims. And so his lawyers filed a 2nd motion, this one to take the case out of the court of Judge Christi Kennedy, 1 of 4 district judges in Smith County. Tyler is a small town, they say, with a close-knit legal community, and there's no way Kennedy can objectively adjudge a writ of habeas corpus dealing with the most controversial case in the history of Smith County - she's just too close to the major players. For example, one of Kennedy's fellow district judges, Carole Clark, is married to A.D. Clark, the 1st DA to prosecute Cook. Another fellow judge is Skeen, who, of course, prosecuted Cook in his 2nd and 3rd trials. Kennedy's late husband Richard was an ADA under Skeen during Cook's 2nd trial. The Texas Rules of Civil Procedure say, "A judge shall recuse himself in any proceeding in which: (a) his impartiality might reasonably be questioned; (b) he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning the subject matter or a party ..." Could Kennedy be fair in ruling on the possible innocence of a man whom her friends and peers tried for so long to execute? There is precedent for judges stepping aside when their impartiality - or just the appearance of favoritism - might become an issue. In 2010, before Michael Morton's retrial in Williamson County, the judge set to hear the case, Billy Joe Stubblefield, recused himself when it became clear he was going to have to rule on charges of serious misconduct by former DA and current judge Ken Anderson, one of Stubblefield's peers on the Williamson County bench. Stubblefield never gave a reason for his recusal, but one can surmise that he thought the public's confidence in what was already a controversial trial would be higher if he didn't oversee it. Kennedy has 3 days to decide whether to recuse herself or to stay on and hear the case. Either way, the issue will go to Mary Murphy, presiding judge of the 1st Administrative Judicial Region in Dallas, which oversees Smith County. If Kennedy steps aside, Murphy will choose a replacement court and judge; if Kennedy refuses to recuse, Murphy will decide whether, in fact, she should or not. One way or another, Murphy will ultimately decide which judge - in which county - adjudicates the writ. How much stranger could the case of Kerry Max Cook get? After 38 tortured years, everyone would like to see a fair, impartial, and totally normal end to it. But at this point, there's only 1 way for that to happen: put Cook's writ of habeas corpus - which contains compelling evidence that he is an innocent man - in front of fresh eyes, in a courthouse unsullied by the taint of bitter memories and years of deliberate misconduct. (source: texasmonthly.com) ***************** Man faces capital murder charge in connection to child's death A 25-year-old man was charged with capital murder Monday following the death of his girlfriend's 2-year-old boy earlier this month. Juan Canales Deltoro, of Sullivan city, appeared before Hidalgo County Justice of the Peace Marcos Ochoa inside county jail where he was charged with a capital felony and given a $1 million dollar bond. Deltoro is suspected of causing the death of the unidentified child the night of Sept. 5 at a home he shared with the boy's 20-year-old mother in the 1900 block of Huisache Street near Sullivan City, according to Sheriff Eddie Guerra. Deltoro and the boy's mother arrived about 7 p.m. to La Joya Police department carrying the unresponsive child yelling for help. First responders tried to revive the boy at the station and inside an ambulance that rushed the boy to a local hospital where he was pronounced dead on arrival, Guerra said. Deltoro was arrested Sept. 12, after autopsy results revealed the boy's death was a homicide. The autopsy also showed signs of previous physical abuse, Guerra said. When police arrested Deltoro, he confessed to causing the boy's death while he was alone with the boy and the child's mother was at a store, according to investigators. The charges in this case were upgraded from murder to capital murder because the child victim was under the age of 10, according to Texas state law. If convicted, Deltoro faces life in prison or the death penalty. (source: The Monitor) ****************** Death penalty declines in popularity nationwide The murder of Midland County sheriff's deputy Sgt. Mike Naylor and the subsequent guilty plea by Dan Higgins -- who shot and killed the sergeant -- fell into a growing nationwide trend when the Midland County district attorney, on behalf of Naylor's widow, settled for a life sentence. As detailed in an analysis of the waning support for capital punishment in a recent USA Today article, the Higgins case is a leading example of how "the death penalty in America may be living on borrowed time." Naylor's widow requested that the prosecution not seek the death penalty in order to avoid costly protracted litigation and personal and emotional strain, Midland District Attorney Teresa Clingman said in March. Opting for a punishment of life without parole rather than capital punishment also saved the county an estimated $3 million in litigation fees -- according to a previous Reporter-Telegram article -- a cost that can be onerous for small to small-county budgets. "The emotional and financial toll of prosecuting a single capital case to its conclusion, along with the increased availability of life without parole and continuing court challenges to execution methods, have made the ultimate punishment more elusive than at any time since its reinstatement in 1976," according to the USA Today analysis. "Those trends may be squeezing the life out of the death penalty." But that's not to say that locally, proponents of seeking the death penalty are still strong. "I wanted him dead," Midland County Sheriff Gary Painter told a USA Today reporter. But in a more measured measured response during a press conference announcing the district attorney's decision last spring, Painter agreed with Clingman's logic. "I think saving the county money, saving the heartache for the families involved is the best solution for this particular case," he said through tears. In 1999, 98 inmates were executed across the nation; last year that number dropped to 35, according to the analysis. And in Texas, the state with the strongest zeal for capital punishment, the trend is declining, too, from 48 death sentences in 1999 to 11 last year. (source: Midland Reporter-Telegram) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 15 09:52:58 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 09:52:58 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----CONN., PENN., DEL., VA., FLA. Message-ID: Sept. 15 CONNECTICUT: Steiker study influential in Connecticut's decision to abolish death penalty A study on capital punishment co-authored by Harvard Law School Professor Carol Steiker '86 and her brother Jordan Steiker '88 a professor at the University of Texas School of Law, was influential in Connecticut's recent decision to abolish the death penalty in that state. In August, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that executing inmates on the state's death row would violate the constitution of Connecticut, effectively striking down the death penalty. This decision came 3 years after Connecticut abolished capital punishment, but left death sentences intact for inmates already on death row. In its decision, the court relied heavily on a report commissioned by The American Law Institute, the nation's most influential non-partisan law reform organization. The 2009 study, "Report to the ALI Concerning Capital Punishment," completed by Carol Steiker and Jordan Steiker, examined the effectiveness of the Model Penal Code's death penalty provisions, which were enacted by the ALI in 1962 and were designed to make the administration of the death penalty less arbitrary. "It is gratifying to have our ALI report read by jurists and cited in this pathbreaking decision," said Carol Steiker. "This kind of impact is exactly why Jordan and I took on the project at the ALI's request." The Steikers' study found that there are too many insuperable obstacles, both structural and institutional, to administering the death penalty in a non-arbitrary way, and recommended against a new death penalty reform project on the grounds of its likely futility. The report led to The American Law Institute's vote to withdraw the capital punishment provisions in the Model Penal Code. In support of the decision to strike down the death penalty, the Connecticut Supreme Court opinion cited declining death penalty use across most jurisdictions, as found in the 2009 study. The total number of executions carried out nationally has fallen by more than 60 % from the post-Furman peak of 1999, dropping from 98 in 1999 to 39 in 2013, and then falling again to 35 - a 20 year low - in 2014. Of the 35 executions carried out in 2014, approximately 90 % occurred in just 4 states: Texas, Missouri, Florida, and Oklahoma. The court's opinion also cited the conclusions reached by the ALI study to the effect that "the preconditions for an adequately administered regime of capital punishment do not currently exist and cannot reasonably be expected to be achieved" (emphasis added by the Connecticut Supreme Court). Read the full opinion online. The Steikers have been frequent collaborators in scholarship, litigation, and law reform. They are currently co-writing a book about the past half-century's experiment with the constitutional regulation of capital punishment in America. Carol Steiker currently directs, with Professor of Practice Alex Whiting, the new Criminal Justice Program of Study, Research, and Advocacy, a new initiative at Harvard Law School that seeks to analyze problems within the U.S. criminal justice system and look for solutions. The program was made possible by a recent gift that allowed the school to expand the mission of its existing Criminal Justice Program of Study beyond advising students to include research and policy advising in partnership with criminal justice agencies and NGOs. In an interview with the Harvard Gazette in February, Steiker, who has done extensive research on capital cases, said her interest in criminal justice was sparked during law school. "It began to appear to me that criminal justice was a great engine of American inequality," she said. As a 2014-2015 Rita E. Hauser Fellow at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study at Harvard University, Steiker focused her research on providing a better understanding of the roles played by the Constitution and the Supreme Court in the past, present, and future of the death penalty in America. In May, Steiker gave a talk on Capital Punishment and American Law. (source: Harvard Law Today) PENNSYLVANIA: Pa. mom to pursue mental health defense in death of child A mother accused of killing her 20-month-old son by pushing him off a bridge into an eastern Pennsylvania river before jumping in herself will pursue an insanity or mental health defense at trial, according to court documents. Johnesha Perry, 20, is charged with criminal homicide and child endangerment in the May death of Zymeir Perry. Lehigh County prosecutors say they plan to seek the death penalty if she is convicted of first-degree murder. Defense attorneys said in a recent motion that their client has a long history of mental illness, The (Allentown) Morning Call reported. Public defender Kimberly Makoul said Perry has had "severe and substantial mental infirmities" - including paranoid schizophrenia and delusional disorder - since she was a teenager. Authorities say Perry gave Zymeir a kiss before pushing him off the Hamilton Street Bridge in Allentown into the Lehigh River 50 feet below on May 3. She then jumped but managed to reach shore with a broken arm. The child was pulled out of the water about 700 yards downstream but died 6 days later. Makoul wrote that lawyers are still investigating Perry's mental condition and plan to call a psychologist as an expert witness. (source: WPVI news) ************ Saylor Offers a Lonely Voice in Death-Penalty Appeals In February of this year, just weeks after his inauguration as governor of Pennsylvania, Tom Wolf issued a moratorium on the death penalty, temporarily halting any executions in the state until he receives the report of the Pennsylvania Task Force and Advisory Committee on Capital Punishment. Although Pennsylvania has the 5th-largest death row in the nation - with 183 condemned prisoners - it has carried out only 3 death sentences in the 4 decades since the U.S. Supreme Court allowed executions to resume. And it has not executed anyone in more than 16 years, since Gary Heidnik was put to death in July 1999. Despite the dearth of actual executions, the large death-row population keeps the Pennsylvania Supreme Court busy, as the court has exclusive appellate jurisdiction in capital cases. Recently, the court has averaged almost 2 dozen substantive decisions per year in direct appeals from judgments imposing death sentences and collateral, post-conviction appeals in capital cases. In the vast majority of those cases, the court affirms the death sentence or the lower court decision rejecting a prisoner's claims in a collateral proceeding. And in an exceptionally high number of those cases, a single justice - current Chief Justice Thomas G. Saylor - dissents from the court's decision or writes a concurring opinion parting ways with the rest of his colleagues. While Saylor frequently dissents from decisions (and equally frequently concurs in judgments but declines to join majority opinions) upholding death sentences, his separate opinions offer little reason to believe that he harbors any outright opposition to the death penalty itself. Rather, although addressing many different aspects of the death-penalty process and the specific circumstances of individual cases, Saylor's opinions often focus on concerns about the effective representation - or, more accurately, the lack thereof - of capital defendants and the serious consequences that result from such inadequate representation. For example, in a dissent from an Aug. 17 decision affirming the denial of post-conviction relief for a death-row inmate in Commonwealth v. Treiber, No. 656 CAP, Saylor found the trial counsel's decision not to take steps to counteract key prosecution expert evidence egregious enough to overcome any presumption of effective assistance of counsel and sufficiently prejudicial to warrant a new trial. He was the lone dissenter in the case. In another typical case decided late last year, Commonwealth v. Rivera, 108 A.3d 779, Saylor dissented from the affirmance of the dismissal of a Post Conviction Relief Act petition without a hearing, arguing that the death-row inmate's "petition should be addressed on a developed evidentiary record, consistent with applicable protocols and fundamental fairness." In his dissent, Saylor incorporated his comments from many other cases, in which he bemoaned the "pattern of gross underrepresentation we have seen in the Pennsylvania death-penalty cases" and "the inconsistent fashion in which some post-conviction courts afford evidentiary hearing and others decide cases summarily." Again, he dissented alone. These 2 recent examples are emblematic of Saylor's concerns, expressed frequently in dissents and equally often in concurrences that argue for a different (and more searching) approach to the court's appellate review in capital cases. His focus invariably remains on the constitutional requirement of effective assistance of counsel, as well as the importance of full and fair procedures for ensuring that claims of ineffective assistance (or other flaws in the trial process) are considered by trial courts and the state Supreme Court before a death sentence is affirmed and, in post-conviction proceedings, reaffirmed. A cursory look at the numbers confirms that Saylor is a frequent - and usually solo - voice bemoaning the court's willingness to affirm death sentences in what he sees as problematic cases. In the past 5 years, the court has issued a substantive ruling in favor of the state in a capital case 91 times and has sided with the capital defendant only 18 times (usually vacating the dismissal of a PCRA petition and remanding for further proceedings). Of the 91 cases in which the state prevailed, Saylor wrote a separate opinion an astounding 62 times - about 2/3 of the cases. Saylor's separate opinions were roughly evenly divided between dissents (32) and concurrences (30). While he agreed with the court's ultimate ruling in the latter cases, he often disagreed significantly with the court's reasoning. In 50 of those 62 cases, he walked his separate path alone, with no other justice joining his dissent or concurrence. In fact, in 3 separate years - 2012, 2013 and thus far in 2015 - every one of Saylor's 28 total concurring and dissenting opinions in capital cases was a solo effort. Notably, during this period, no other justice came anywhere close to matching his record of differing with the court in capital cases. For example, in only 3 of the 91 rulings in favor of the state did Saylor join the majority opinion in full while another justice even partially dissented. In other words, while Saylor wrote a solitary dissent or concurrence more than 1/2 the time the court ruled in favor of the state in a death-penalty appeal, in barely 3 % of the capital cases in which the state prevailed did any other justice concur or dissent without Saylor's support. For the most part, these trends have held true throughout the past 5 years, with Saylor writing separately in capital cases at a clip of between 63 and 72 % each year. His dissent rate in capital cases, however, has ranged from a low of 16 % in 2013 to a high of 57 % so far in 2015 (and 50 % in 2011, the highest rate in any full calendar year). These numbers are notable not only for how far Saylor stands out from his colleagues, but for the identity of the justice who has become the lone protesting voice in so many capital cases. For those who think that a state jurist's party affiliation remains relevant even after he ascends to the bench, it is worth noting that Saylor is a Republican. He also is a former prosecutor and top official in the state Attorney General's Office. Little in Saylor's pre-jurist career or even his early days on the Supreme Court hinted at his later prolific opposition to the court's capital jurisprudence. While he penned some notable dissents from opinions affirming death sentences in his first few years on the court, he did so with much less frequency than he does now. In his first 5 years on the court, he wrote or joined 11 dissenting opinions in capital cases, roughly one-third as many as in the most recent five years, despite the court's much heavier capital caseload during those early years. Although Saylor increasingly has charted his own path in the death-penalty arena, his solo journey will come to an end before too long, as he reaches the court's mandatory retirement age of 70 next year. Perhaps 1 of the 3 new justices joining the court in early 2016 will take up the departing chief justice's mantle and continue to call attention to what he has seen as some of the court's shortcomings in its capital jurisprudence. Whether or not that is the case, Saylor will leave a legacy of continuously endeavoring to fulfill the high court's important role of carefully reviewing sentences and post-conviction appeals for the scores of inmates who reside on Pennsylvania's death row. (source: Bruce P. Merenstein is a partner and vice-chairperson of the litigation department at Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis. He has a comprehensive appellate and trial litigation practice, and has served for a number of years as a special master in multidistrict litigation in federal court---- thelegalintelligencer.com) DELAWARE: Hearing postponed for Ummad Rushdi, charged with killing toddler Common Pleas Judge James Nilon has set a new status conference date of Nov. 16 for accused baby killer Ummad Rushdi. Rushdi, 32, is facing the death penalty for allegedly killing 7-month-old Hamza Ali in August 2013 at his parent's home in the 6600 block of Chestnut Street, Upper Darby, then transporting the body elsewhere and burying it at an unknown location. He has been charged with 1st-, 2nd- and 3rd-degree murder, kidnapping and abuse of a corpse. Deputy District Attorney Stephanie Wills is prosecuting. Rushdi, represented by defense attorney Mike Malloy, attempted to deliver a letter he had written to Nilon during the short status conference Monday morning, but was rebuffed. Nilon said he would not accept anything from Rushdi because it could be used at trial, and advised him to instead hand it off to his attorneys. "If they think it requires action, they'll take action on it, and then it can't be attributed directly to you, and it can't be used against you in a trial," he told the defendant. Nilon also was set to hear a defense motion Monday afternoon that had been filed under seal by Malloy. Malloy indicated during the status conference that the substance of that motion was intertwined with an evaluation being performed by Dr. Anthony Pisa, Ph.D., and likened the situation to a medical doctor finding an additional issue while performing an examination. "This case is more than a little bit complicated in that sense," he said. Rushdi, who is additionally represented by death penalty council Scott Galloway, is also being evaluated by death penalty mitigation specialist Delores Andrews and psychiatrist Dr. Muhamad Aly Rifai. (source: Daily Times) VIRGINIA: Convicted murderer of 7 people appeals death penalty Lawyers for Ricky Gray, the man sentenced to death for the 2006 New Year's Day murders in Richmond, will argue his case in federal court Tuesday. Gray was convicted in the brutal murders of the Harvey family. The family was found slain in their Woodland Heights home, which was robbed and set on fire. In a brief filed in April, Gray's lawyers say he should be able to argue that his trial lawyers did not perform to acceptable standards. Gray was convicted in a series of murders that grabbed national attention because of the brutality and number of victims. The youngest were sisters Stella and Ruby Harvey. Ricky Gray, with the help of Ray Dandridge, also killed the girls' parents, Bryan and Kathryn. Then they set the Woodland Heights home on fire. A week later, Percyell Tucker, his wife Mary and their daughter, Ashley Baskerville - who was an accomplice in the Harveys' murder - were also killed. Gray was sentenced to death for the girls' murders. (source: WWBT news) FLORIDA: Costa Rica seeks clemency for Terence Valentine, on death row for brutal Florida murder In 1990, Terence Valentine, a Costa Rican man living in Texas, was convicted of the gruesome 1988 killing of Ferdinand Porsche and the attempted murder of Valentine's ex-wife, Libia Romero. Romero, who is also Costa Rican and who was divorced from Valentine at the time, testified in court that her ex-husband broke into the couple's home in Tampa, Florida, shot Porsche in the back, "trussed him like an animal" while Porsche was naked and stabbed him several times before he shot him in the head, according to court documents. Valentine was found guilty of Porsche's murder and sentenced to death in 1990. Valentine - now 66 - has maintained his innocence. Valentine's death sentence has tested the limits of Costa Rican influence in the United States during the last decade as the country's embassy works to commute Valentine's sentence in accordance with Costa Rica's long-standing disapproval of the death penalty. Valentine is the only Costa Rica in the United States facing capital punishment. National Liberation Party lawmaker Sandra Piszk brought Valentine's situation back into national news last week when she called on the Foreign Ministry to bolster its support for Valentine and make a full report of its efforts to assist him. Piszk told local media that she believed Valentine's race (he is black) and the fact that he's a Latin American immigrant prejudiced the jury against him in his sentencing. "Without getting into the details of the case, yes, we believe it's reasonable to question the prisoner's conditions," Piszk told the newspaper Prensa Libre on Sept. 7. "It appears he did not have the necessary legal counsel." Piszk's concerns are not unfounded. Robert Dunham, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Project in Washington, D.C., told The Tico Times that there was reason for concern about foreign nationals on death row. "The experience throughout the United States is that race, ethnicity and foreign nationality make a difference when you're a capital defendant," said Dunham. Dunham said that he could not comment on the specifics of Valentine's case but that a disproportionately high percentage of African Americans are on death row - 38 % - compared to the general population in the state of Florida. Additionally, Dunham noted that Florida has the 3rd highest number of foreign nationals on death row (21) after California (61) and Texas (22). Valentine and Romero married in Costa Rica in 1973, according to records from the Civil Registry. The couple emigrated to the United States in 1975, settling in New Orleans. Court documents said the marriage was "not a happy one" and Romero tried to divorce Valentine in 1986. She married Ferdinand Porsche in 1988 and moved to Tampa. The legality of the divorce was under dispute, though, and Valentine, believing he and Romero were still married, started making threatening phone calls to Romero and Porsche's home in Tampa between 1987 and September 1988. On Sept. 9, 1988, Valentine forced his way into the couple's home and shot Porsche in the back, paralyzing him from the waist down. Valentine then forced Porsche to crawl to the couple's bedroom where Romero - who was pregnant at the time, according to court records - was gagged and tied up naked on the bedroom floor. She told authorities that Valentine told Porsche, "this is my revenge." "I'm gonna kill you, but you're gonna suffer. This is not going to be easy," Valentine said, according to Romero's testimony. Valentine pistol whipped Porsche, beat him and stabbed him before driving him and Romero to an isolated area. Valentine shot and killed Porsche with a gunshot to the eye. He shot Romero but did not kill her. When Romero recovered after several weeks in the hospital she started receiving more threatening phone calls from Valentine. One of these calls she recorded and handed it over to the authorities. Valentine said he was not in the United States at the time of the homicide. Valentine successfully appealed his 1990 conviction and was granted a retrail on the basis of jury selection by the Florida Supreme Court in 1994. He was convicted again of murdering Porsche. He was not convicted of the attempted murder of Romero. Valentine appealed his case to the U.S. Supreme Court but the court refused to hear his appeal against the Florida Supreme Court that reaffirmed his death sentence. Since then, Valentine has argued that he received ineffective counsel from his public defenders. Foreign Ministry Legal Director Gioconda Ubeda told The Tico Times that the ministry has not taken a position on Valentine's guilt or innocence. "There are many other ways to punish someone. We do not share belief in the death penalty, regardless if someone is guilty or not. We are not defending any specific acts but we are keeping an eye on the case to ensure his due process rights are respected," Ubeda said. Costa Rica's death penalty stance and the Terence Valentine case Costa Rica banned the death penalty in 1871, a prohibition that was codified in the 1948 Constitution. The maximum sentence for a crime in Costa Rica is 50 years in prison. The Foreign Ministry and the Costa Rican diplomatic mission in the United States have been working on behalf of Valentine since 2005, Ubeda said, to try to secure an alternative sentence. In February 2012, the Costa Rican Embassy in Washington, D.C. sent a letter addressed to Florida Governor Rick Scott through diplomatic channels requesting that Scott consider commuting Valentine's sentence. Ubeda said the Costa Rican Embassy never confirmed that the letter was received. "The letter to reconsider the sentence has no position on the innocence or not of Mr. Valentine," Ubeda said. "At the time, in 2012, the sentence was against the beliefs of Costa Rica and we requested changing it for a non-capital sentence." Clemency rules are different in every U.S. state. In Florida the governor needs the recommendation of the Clemency Board, on which the governor has a seat, to take action on a prisoner's sentence. Only 6 clemencies have been granted in Florida since 1976, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. The state executed 90 people during that time period. Ubeda said the Foreign Ministry has since refocused its efforts on helping Valentine secure conflict-free counsel. Ubeda said the embassy has helped put Valentine in touch with a nongovernmental organization that specializes in death sentence cases but would not say which one. According to the Aug. 26 letter, Valentine had petitioned for Marie Louise Samuels to be named his new counsel. "Get these bums off my case," Valentine wrote to Julie Jones, secretary of the Florida Department of Corrections, in a letter she received Aug. 26 following the denial of his latest motion for appointment for new counsel. Though Valentine's Supreme Court appeal was denied, there is another case pending before the Supreme Court, Hurst v. Florida, challenging the constitutionality of Florida's death-sentencing scheme, arguing that it violates the sixth and eighth amendments. The Supreme Court of Florida denied Valentine's petition for a writ of habeas corpus in 2012. He appealed that decision and is currently awaiting a ruling on his petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the U.S. District Court of Middle Florida. No date has yet been set for Valentine's execution. (source: ticotimes.net) ******************* Donald Smith, suspect in 8-year-old Cherish Perrywinkle's abduction death, is back in court Donald James Smith, the man charged in the abduction, sexual assault and strangulation of 8-year-old Cherish Perrywinkle, is scheduled for another court appearance Tuesday that could lead to a trial date being set. Smith, 59, is facing the death penalty. He was previously supposed to be in court Monday, but that got delayed a day. Circuit Judge Mallory Cooper has said she'd like to get a trial date set, but defense attorneys have said they are still examining the evidence in the case and don't want to move forward until they have a good handle on the evidence against Smith. It is likely that defense attorneys Julie Schlax and Charles Fletcher will end up arguing that Smith is insane or too mentally handicapped to face the death penalty. But the lawyers have not yet indicated what their defense will be. Smith is charged with 1st-degree murder, kidnapping and sexual battery. He is a registered sex offender who was released from prison 3 weeks before Cherish was killed. He is accused of befriending Cherish, her mother, Rayne Perrywinkle, and siblings at a Dollar General store in June 2013 and convincing them to go to Wal-Mart on Lem Turner Road in his van after offering to buy them clothes and food. Perrywinkle told police that Smith offered to buy the family hamburgers at the McDonald's inside the Wal-Mart. Cherish went with him to get the food, and they did not return. Cherish's body was found near a creek off Broward Road the next morning. (source: jacksonville.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 15 09:53:38 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 09:53:38 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----ILL., OKLA., NEB., ARIZ., CALIF. Message-ID: Sept. 15 ILLINOIS: Should Illinois Reverse Its Death Penalty Ban? Illinois repealed capital punishment in 2011. 4 years and scores of horrific crimes later, a state legislator wants to bring it back. Sen. Bill Haine. D-Alton, was against Illinois' abolishing capital punishment a few years ago, in 2011; after all, he's a former Madison County prosecutor. Haine says since then, times have changed that have only buttressed his position. "There have been some dramatic, and terrible acts committed," he says. "Not only in Illinois, but in the United States, that have brought the attention of the citizens back to 'how do we establish order and justice for the innocent? And how do we punish grave evil-doers?'" Haine says next month he'll introduce legislation that would once again allow criminals to be sentenced to death -- but only in limited cases; he says the ultimate punishment should be reserved for serial killers, the premeditated murder of police, those who kill children, and mass murderers. "The law should be a force reckoned with. And part of that is to have available, to a prosecutor and to a jury, the option of asking for the death penalty -- if someone forfeits one's life if they cross that line," he says. Critics of the death penalty argue it's not an effective deterrent. They also say the system is prone to racial prejudice and flaws that could send innocent people to their deaths. (source: WUIS news) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Oklahoma district attorney dismisses efforts to exonerate Richard Glossip ---- David Prater accused Glossip's attorneys who claim to have new evidence to prove innocence of trying to abolish death penalty in 'bullshit PR campaign' An Oklahoma district attorney has denounced claims that a death row inmate scheduled to die this week is innocent as "a bullshit PR campaign", saying that legal representatives for the condemned prisoner have failed to produce any new documentation supporting their argument. Attorneys for Richard Glossip, who are appealing to Governor Mary Fallin for a 60-day stay of execution, held a press conference at the Oklahoma state capitol on Monday to present new information they claim supports efforts to exonerate him. Glossip - whose high-profile supporters include former senators, the actor Susan Sarandon and anti-death penalty activist Sister Helen Prejean - is scheduled to die by lethal injection on Wednesday for the 1997 murder of his boss, Barry Van Treese. "All they are trying to do is abolish the death penalty in the state of Oklahoma and this country by spreading a bunch of garbage," Oklahoma County district attorney David Prater told the local Fox 25 TV station after attending Monday's press conference. Prater, who did not prosecute Glossip, told Fox 25 he believes Glossip is guilty and said the man's attorneys have refused to hand over to him any of the evidence they presented on Monday. The evidence produced on Monday by defense attorney Don Knight includes a sworn affidavit from a man who claimed to have heard a confession from the man on whose testimony Glossip was convicted, Justin Sneed. It also includes a statement from another man who claims the prosecution's argument that Glossip controlled Sneed was false. Sneed is currently serving a sentence of life without parole at Joseph Harp Correctional Center, a medium-security prison in Lexington, Oklahoma. Glossip was convicted twice of Van Treese???s death, once in 1998 and again in 2004 after his first verdict was thrown out for ineffective council. Richard Allan Barrett, a man who claims to have been a friend of Glossip's brother, Bobby, and a drug dealer at the Best Budget Inn the year Van Treese was killed, claimed Sneed had regularly used robbery to finance a methamphetamine addiction that was more severe than prosecutors had admitted. "Bobby Glossip told me to always keep my car locked when I was at the hotel," Barrett said. "Later I learned this was because the maintenance man (Sneed) broke into cars at the motel parking lot and stole items from the car." Barrett said that Sneed traded items - like car stereos and radar detectors in exchange for drugs - he believes were stolen. "I was present when Justin Sneed told Bobby Glossip that he had taken these items from occupied rooms at the motel and cars in the parking lot of the motel and other businesses near the hotel." Barrett also said he "saw nothing to make me believe Justin Sneed was controlled by Richard Glossip", or that Glossip was aware of Sneed's alleged heists. Barrett's statement appears to suggest that Sneed had robbed people before, and supports the claim that Van Treese's death was not a premeditated homicide orchestrated by Glossip, as prosecutors had argued, but the result of a robbery gone wrong. A separate affidavit signed by Dr Richard A Leo, a professor at the San Francisco University School of Law, said Sneed's implication of Glossip was coerced by police and therefore unreliable. "It has been well-documented in the empirical social science research literature that hundreds of innocent suspects have confessed during police interrogation to crimes (often very serious crimes such as murder and rape) that it was later objectively proven they did not commit," Leo wrote. Leo said that investigators used false claims and intimidation to lead Sneed to believe that implicating Glossip would save him from a harsher sentencing. Like Glossip's attorneys, Leo stressed that Sneed told eight different versions of the murder, four of which were given during his interrogation. At various points during his police interrogation a week after the murder, Sneed, then 19, said he didn't know Van Treese, then that he didn't kill Van Treese, then that he had killed him accidentally, and then that he had killed him intentionally, under Glossip's instruction. Eventually, Sneed agreed to a plea deal in which he would testify against Glossip to save himself from the death penalty. "These accounts do not fit with one another, or the crime scene facts, and thus are one indicator of the potential unreliability of Sneed's statements implicating Richard Glossip in this case," Leo wrote. Another affidavit produced on Monday was from Michael Scott, who spent time in the cell across from Sneed and claims to have heard Sneed admit to making up testimony. "I clearly heard Justin Sneed say that, in his statements and testimony, he set Richard Glossip up, and that Richard Glossip didn't do anything," Scott's affidavit reads. Knight said attention to their investigation was producing witnesses that exonerate Glossip, but would benefit from more time. Fallon's office has so far consistently denied efforts to secure a stay of execution. (source: The Guardian) ************* Oklahoma should delay the Richard Glossip execution Did Richard Glossip hire or order Justin Sneed to kill their mutual boss, Barry Van Treese, 18 years ago in Oklahoma City? It???s unclear -- the best evidence against Glossip is the testimony of Sneed, who, after cooperating with police, received life in prison instead of the death penalty. Glossip wasn???t so lucky. Oklahoma intends to execute him Wednesday, despite a drought of corroborating evidence.. This is where the death penalty gets its full exposure as a ludicrous practice. If the name Glossip sounds familiar, he was the main plaintiff in the recent case in which the Supreme Court ruled that using midazolam, a light sedative, as the 1st drug in a 3-drug execution cocktail does not expose the condemned to the risk of unconstitutionally excessive pain. That was after the original plaintiff in the 4-plaintiff filing, Charles F. Warner, was executed while the case was pending, and reportedly said as the process was underway, "my body is on fire." In fact, the executions of 4 other people that appeared to involve significant pain -- Joseph Rudolph Wood III writhed for nearly 2 hours in Arizona's death chamber -- began with midazolam, the reason for the legal challenge. The issue now, though, is not cruel and unusual punishment, but the veracity, and reliability of a conviction. The short version is the lawyer appointed to represent him at the initial trial did such a poor job that a second trial was ordered, and Glossip was once again convicted, though now, as his execution date nears, a third team of pro bono lawyers argue that they have found sufficient evidence that the 2nd team missed to raise fresh questions about the competency of his legal representation throughout the process. And fresh questions about whether he did, in fact, direct Sneed to kill Van Treese. The case has picked up some celebrity/activist focus (Susan Sarandon, Sister Helen Prejean and Richard Branson, among others). More significantly, a roster of high-profile folks, including Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), who supports the death penalty, in a letter urged Gov. Mary Fallin to order a 60-day reprieve to give the new legal team a chance to develop the evidence they have found. "We share a deep concern about the integrity of the criminal justice system in Oklahoma and throughout the United States. We are particularly concerned about the danger of executing an innocent man. Could that really happen? In the United States, in 2015?" the letter says. "We also don't know for sure whether Richard Glossip is innocent or guilty. That is precisely the problem. If we keep executing defendants in cases like this, where the evidence of guilt is tenuous and untrustworthy, we will keep killing innocent people." The case also exposes one of the recurring, and highly objectionable, aspects of the death penalty: It falls disproportionately on those with limited means (and on people of color although in this case Glossip is white). And it also hinges on one person playing angles to limit his own exposure to the death penalty or other lengthy sentences, in return for testimony. My opposition to the death penalty is absolute, and I hope that at some point a majority of the Supreme Court comes to recognize, as many justices have, that the system is too screwed up, and too prone to manipulation, to be relied on when it comes to the execution of someone. Did Sneed lie? It's hard to say. Which is exactly why Fallin should grant this reprieve. After all, Oklahoma can always kill Glossip later. But if the new evidence shows, post-execution, that he is innocent, the damage is already done, and irreparable. And I should note that the Death Penalty Information Project counts 112 executions in Oklahoma since 1976, with 49 people currently on death row -- and 10 death row exonerations. That's a pretty high failure rate for any state to be rushing people to the death chamber. (source: Opinion, Scott Martelle----Los Angeles Times) ************** Glossip's actions hardly paint picture of innocence If nothing changes, Richard Glossip will reach the end of the line Wednesday and be executed for his role in the murder of Oklahoma City motel owner Barry Van Treese. This will upset death penalty opponents, who have made Glossip a national poster child for their cause. We understand those who oppose the death penalty for anyone based on moral objections. In the Glossip case, many supporters insist he's innocent. Yet the reason Glossip's execution is likely to occur as scheduled is because those arguments are largely based on the idea that you can't trust the word of someone serving a life sentence for murder, but can unquestioningly believe the word of someone on death row for murder. Glossip's defenders dispute much of the record in this case, but even the events they concede hardly paint a portrait of an innocent man. In January 1997, Glossip worked for Van Treese as a manager at a Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City. An audit had just found more than $6,000 missing; Glossip was suspected of stealing it. At that point, prosecutors say, Glossip offered $10,000 to Justin Sneed, a maintenance worker who lived rent-free at the motel, if he would kill Van Treese. Sneed did so, murdering Van Treese with a bat in one of the motel rooms. Sneed says he and Glossip then worked to cover up the killing. Sneed drove Van Treese's car to a nearby parking lot. They covered a broken window in the murder room with a shower curtain, covered the body, turned the air conditioner on high, broke the key off in the door, and planned to return later to use chemicals and a saw to dispose of the body. Glossip's defenders say Sneed cannot be trusted because he testified against Glossip in order to avoid the death penalty. How then to explain Glossip's actions? Why did Glossip make arrangements for the housekeeping crew to clean other rooms? Why would an innocent man try to prevent the discovery of a murder he had nothing to do with? Why did Glossip give conflicting statements to police investigating Van Treese's disappearance? Why not tell the police that Sneed killed Van Treese, if Glossip was innocent? Why did Glossip make plans to leave town before police found Van Treese's body? The aforementioned tidbits aren't seriously disputed. In a 2005 appeal hearing, a judge noted that Glossip "admitted knowing Sneed killed Van Treese" and "knew about the broken glass" in the murder room, yet "never told anyone that he thought Sneed was involved" until after Glossip was taken into custody after police had discovered the body. Glossip's defenders need to explain why an innocent man would take numerous steps to cover up a crime he had nothing to do with, and then do nothing to alert police to the identity of the killer despite numerous opportunities to do so. Glossip's attorney said Monday, in seeking a 60-day say of execution, that there is new evidence to vindicate his client. But it's telling that his defenders still don't offer a compelling explanation for Glossip's behavior. For most Oklahomans, a rational explanation is obvious: Glossip acted like a murderer and tried to cover up a killing because he was involved in the murder and committed the crime for which he was convicted. The simplest explanation is usually the correct one. (source: The Oklahoma Editorial Board) **************** The execution paradox: When a doctor is not a doctor Clayton Lockett was executed by lethal injection on April 29, 2014, in Oklahoma. The process was an abject failure, as the execution doctor repeatedly failed to correctly place an IV. As a result, Lockett writhed, moaned and gasped in apparent consciousness and pain for almost 45 minutes, before ultimately dying of a heart attack. The procedure was visibly and shockingly cruel. This was not the way the execution was supposed to go. Lockett's family has sued the state and the doctor in charge of the execution. For the purpose of that suit, the doctor has been tagged, "Dr. Doe." In that suit, the state of Oklahoma has invoked a state law requiring that the names of members of the execution team, including Dr. Doe's, be kept confidential, which could prevent (or deter) any doctor or patient from complaining to the Oklahoma Medical Board about Dr. Doe's competence in connection with the execution. The negligence of every other physician in Oklahoma, in every other circumstance, is accessible to the public through hearings and published findings. But the Oklahoma board has no way of investigating the negligent practice of medicine during executions unless the name of the treating physician can be disclosed. And while one incident may not be representative of a doctor???s competence, accumulated incidents may tell a different story. Prisoners are particularly vulnerable to malpractice and negligence; indeed, many prison doctors have disciplinary or criminal records themselves. And the subject of a botched execution cannot exactly file a complaint. Dead men, after all, tell no tales. If Oklahoma continues to require the participation of a physician in an execution, then the actions of that physician must be reviewable, just as they are with respect to any other patient. I am sensitive to the understandable, but false, equivalence of whether Lockett???s death was at least as merciful as the one he was convicted of visiting upon his victim, Stephanie Nieman. But as a country, we do not, and should not, judge our own conduct by the standard of convicted murderers. The state of Oklahoma was carrying out a court-ordered penalty, pursuant to legislation and a complex set of regulations. These regulations mandated that executions be carried out through a medical procedure supervised by a licensed physician. The state of Oklahoma responded to our filing by arguing that the gratuitous cruelty inflicted by Dr. Doe's incompetent medical practice does not matter, because "there is no duty" of competence or to provide reasonable medical care in carrying out an execution. The doctor's duties are limited to ensuring that "the inmate dies." In other words, in Oklahoma's view, there should be no accountability for cruelty or incompetence in a condemned man's final interaction on earth. So, why should anyone care whether the doctor who supervised the execution was any good and whether a convicted murderer suffered? Why should the public as a whole want to know whether Dr. Doe was incompetent or impaired or gratuitously cruel or willfully indifferent to the suffering of another human being? Because Doctor Doe does not work exclusively for the Oklahoma Department of Corrections. According to Internet accounts, which do disclose Dr. Doe's identity, he is an ordinary physician who practices emergency medicine in Oklahoma. One would expect that the placement and monitoring of IVs would be one of his regular professional responsibilities. And next time, you (or someone you love) could be lying in the emergency room at your local hospital, waiting for Doctor Doe to treat you. (source: Katherine Toomey is a partner at Lewis Baach PLLC in Washington D.C. She represents Doctors for the Ethical Practice of Medicine as Amici Curiae in the case Lockett v. Fallin, pending before the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, in Denver----The Tulsa World) NEBRASKA: Death Penalty effort to be on November 2016 ballot The Nebraska Secretary of State's Office released preliminary totals Friday for petition signatures verified by county officials, indicating that the petition drive to overturn the repeal of the state's death penalty had met the threshold to get the issue on the November 2016 ballot. As of Friday afternoon, officials at the county level had verified 65,171 of the nearly 166,000 signatures turned in by petition organizers. County officials rejected 9,154, or about 12 %, of the 74,667 signatures reviewed so far. The number of registered voters in Nebraska at the petition deadline was 1,138,825, according to the Secretary of State's Office. Organizers needed signatures from 5 % of the state's registered voters, or 56,942 verified signatures, to put the issue on the ballot. Reaching 10 % of registered voters, or 113,883 valid signatures, would prevent the legislation from going into effect until it can be voted on. Both thresholds further require that the 5 % or 10 % marks be met in at least 38 of the state's 93 counties. In Lancaster County, Friday's report showed, 10,153 of 11,918 signatures gathered were verified, with 1,733 rejected. Douglas County signatures totaled 9,194, with 8,300 of those verified. Signatures and information are checked against voter registration records. Lancaster County Election Commissioner Dave Shively said his staff has a lot of leeway on verifying those signatures, even when they are hard to read or have missing or wrong information. "It's our responsibility to prove that they're not registered, not that they are registered," he said. The Secretary of State's Office has not certified any of the count totals released Friday. Some counties are still verifying signatures, said Laura Strimple, communications director with the Secretary of State's Office. Nebraska's death penalty was repealed by the Legislature in May with the passage of LB268. Lawmakers then voted 30-19 to override Gov. Pete Ricketts' veto of the bill. (source: Columbus Telegram) ARIZONA: Justin James Rector files motion against death penalty Justin James Rector, accused of strangling 8 year old Isabella Grogan-Cannella last year in Bullhead City has asked the prosecution to remove the death penalty in his trail soon approaching. On Friday Rector's attorneys filed a motion in Mohave County Superior Court stating that lethal injection is a cruel and unusual punishment. The motion goes on to state that Rector has constitutional rights to due process and a fair trial, and those will be violated by the death penalty option. Matt Smith, county attorney, says he will seek the death penalty for Rector if he is convicted of 1st degree murder. The trial is set to stand in October of next year. (source: naztoday.com) ************* Phoenix man convicted in killing of brother, 6-year-old nephew A Phoenix man has been convicted of 1st- and 2nd-degree murder in the 2010 killings of his brother and his brother's 6-year-old son. Jurors returned the verdict Monday against Christopher Licon before Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Sherry Stephens. Jurors rejected defense claims of mental illness and convicted Licon of 1st-degree murder in the death of his nephew, Xavier Jaquez, and of second-degree murder in the death of his brother, Angel Jaquez. Licon was also guilty of kidnapping, burglary and tampering with evidence. The case now goes to a penalty phase in which jurors will determine whether Licon will get the death penalty in Xavier Jaquez's slaying. At trial, Licon's attorney had described Licon as an honor student on scholarship at Arizona State University before a series of events in 2010 left Licon mentally ill and capable of murder. Licon shot Angel Jaquez on Dec. 13, 2010, and the following day, Xavier Jaquez on the following day. The boy's murder, Deputy County Attorney Laura Reckart said, was to silence the only witness to Angel Jaquez's killing. Both were shot in the back of the head. In 2010, Licon told police he called 911 after he returned home to Angel's Broadway Road apartment and found Angel lying feet-up on the couch with a gunshot wound in the back of his head. On the morning of Dec. 14, 2010, Xavier was found shot to death in the alley behind his mother's home near 65th Drive and Roma Avenue. Homicide investigators then began to take a hard look at Licon as a suspect in both cases. Licon, 24, was charged in 2011 with 2 counts of 1st-degree murder, kidnapping and burglary for the slayings. (source: Arizona Republic) CALIFORNIA: Redwood City man pleads not guilty in 11-year-old murder of tire shop owner A Redwood City man pleaded not guilty Monday to murder charges in the 2004 killing of a Castro Valley tire shop manager who had been called to testify against him in court. Prisheen Sanjay Krishna, 36, was shot and killed outside his home in Brentwood's Shadow Lakes neighborhood about 6:15 a.m. on Oct. 26, 2004, the day before he was scheduled to testify against Larry Darnell Fuller Jr. in Alameda County Superior Court in Hayward. Krishna was the manager of RyNck Tires in Castro Valley in 2003 when Fuller fled the shop without paying a $2,700 bill for completed work and was subsequently charged with grand theft. Krishna testified at a parole revocation hearing that resulted in Fuller, who had prior felony convictions for battery, robbery and perjury, briefly returning to jail. Krishna was killed the day before he was scheduled to testify at Fuller's preliminary hearing. Krishna told his family that he was afraid to testify against Fuller because in 2000, Fuller cheated the auto shop out of paying another bill and then came back the next day and robbed them at gunpoint, according to the Alameda County Sheriff's Office. 3 days after the killing, Fuller's parole officer found Fuller was carrying handwritten notes containing Krishna's personal information, including directions to his house and license plate numbers for Krishna's wife's car and a rental car that the victim drove 2 weeks before the killing, authorities said. Fuller eventually pleaded guilty in the grand theft case involving the tire shop but avoided arrest for the killing though he was a suspect. The Alameda County Sheriff's Office took over the case from Contra Costa County authorities in 2009 and said it uncovered new evidence that led to Fuller, 45, being arrested and charged with capital murder in January. The special circumstance allegation that Fuller committed murder to prevent testimony makes him eligible for the death penalty or life in prison without the possibility of parole. Death penalty prosecutions in Alameda County are rare, and the DA's office waits to announce its intentions in eligible cases after a defendant's preliminary hearing. Fuller is being jailed without bail. He is scheduled to return to court on Oct. 19, and a preliminary hearing is set for Nov 2. (source: Mercury News) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 15 09:54:21 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 09:54:21 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 15 BANGLADESH: 2 men get death penalty for murdering woman and her child at Narayanganj A court has awarded death penalty to 2 men for murdering a woman and her child in Narayanganj 4 years ago. They had raped the woman and then killed her to cover it up. Narayanganj's additional district and sessions judge Miaji Shahidul Islam Choudhury handed down the death sentence to Dulal Hossain and Abul Hossain alias Kashem on Tuesday. Both were present in court at that time. Another accused, Babul Hossain, was given 7 years in prison, said additional public prosecutor Abdur Rahim. He said all the 3 convicts were fined TK 50000 each, failing to pay which would mean an additional 6 months in prison for them. Case details indicate that 3 convicts enticed a 25-year old woman who had come to Darigaon in Araihazar Upazilla of Narayanganj seeking help on Mar 5, 2011. The woman, who had a 6-year-old son, was paid Tk 90 and taken to a graveyard, where she was raped. Dulal Hossain raised an alarm that the woman might inform others in the locality about the rape. At that point, Kashem strangulated her with a piece of cloth. When her son started crying, Dulal Hossain smashed his head with a digger. The murderers dumped the dead bodies in the graveyard and covered them up with some soil. But locals discovered them and brought in the police. A case was filed in Araihazar police station after the bodies were found. Babul Hossain confessed in court about the rape and murder after his arrest. Later, police filed a charge sheet against the 3 accused. But the woman and her child could not yet be identified. (source: benews24.com) KUWAIT: Death sentence for 7 Shiite mosque bombers 7 defendants were sentenced to death on Tuesday for the Islamist militant suicide bombing of a mosque in June in Kuwait that killed 27 people, the Kuwaiti news agency KUNA reported. 8 other suspects were given prison sentences ranging from 2 to 15 years by a Kuwaiti criminal court, KUNA reported. 14 other defendants were acquitted. Islamic State claimed responsibility for the June 26 bombing, when a Saudi suicide bomber blew himself inside the Imam al-Sadeq mosque in Kuwait City. Hundreds of Shi'ite Muslims were performing Friday noon prayers when the bomb went off. Kuwait cracked down on Islamist militants after the bombing, the country's worst militant attack. Officials say the bombing was aimed at stoking strife between Sunnis and Shi'ites in the majority Sunni state, where the 2 sects have usually coexisted in peace. [IDn:L5N0ZV35D] The 29 people indicted on terrorism charges in relation to the attack included Kuwaitis, Saudis, Pakistanis and stateless residents. The charges ranged from premeditated murder to possession of explosives. Death sentences are subject to appeal in Kuwait. The Arabic daily al-Qabas said in July that the state prosecutor was seeking the death penalty for 11 of the defendants. (source: ghanaweb.com) ******************* Overturn death sentences in mosque bombing case 7 death sentences handed down by a Kuwait City court today are a misguided response to the bombing of Imam Sadiq Mosque in June this year and must be overturned, Amnesty International said. The armed group calling itself the Islamic State claimed responsibility for the bombing of the Shi'a mosque, in which a Saudi Arabian man blew himself up during Friday prayers, killing 26 others and wounding 227. It was the worst act of violence in Kuwait since the 1991 Iraqi invasion. The Kuwaiti authorities announced that they arrested 29 people in early August in connection with the bombing. "These death sentences are a misguided response to what was an utterly heinous and callous criminal act," said James Lynch, Acting Middle East and North Africa Deputy Director at Amnesty International. "The death penalty is not the way to tackle terror, and these sentences do nothing to build a culture of rule of law and tolerance which Kuwait needs now more than ever. They must be overturned." Death sentences are subject to appeal in Kuwait. 5 of the 7 defendants sentenced to the death were convicted in absentia. According to the Kuwaiti state news agency, 8 other defendants were given prison sentences ranging from 2 to 15 years and 14 others were acquitted. Background In the wake of the mosque bombing on 26 June, Amnesty International urged Kuwait to respond to the atrocity within the law and in compliance with its international human rights obligations. The organization called for thorough, effective and transparent investigations in line with international standards, leading to fair trials without recourse to the death penalty. Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases without exception, regardless of the nature or circumstances of the crime, the guilt, innocence or other characteristics of the offender or the method used by the state to carry out the execution. (source: Amnesty International) VIETNAM: NA's Standing Committee convenes 41st session----The 41st session of the 13th National Assembly (NA) Standing Committee opened in Hanoi on September 14, during which legislators are scheduled to debate several bills and laws. During the morning session of the 1st working day, legislators looked into the draft revised Penal Code - a leading draft law to be presented to the next meeting of the legislature, focusing on the supplementation of new charges and the removal of the death penalty in some cases. In this regard, NA Chairman Nguyen Sinh Hung approved the abolishment of the death penalty on criminals aged 75 and above due to humanitarian and international integration reasons, noting serious criminals will still have to face life imprisonment. NA Vice Chairman Uong Chu Luu said most opinions agreed to remove the penalty for women who are nursing under-36-month-old children, lengthen other sentences as opposed to the death penalty and reduce punishments on some crimes. However, they stressed the need to carefully consider removing the death penalty on war crimes such as genocide. Later on the same day, the committee heard a report on the outcomes of Vietnam's economic integration since joining the World Trade Organisation. Other draft documents to be debated at the session include the amended Law on Pharmacy, Law on Planning, Law on Press (revised), Law on Association, Law on Administrative Decisions, Law on Export and Import Duties (amended) and Law on Professional Soldiers and National Defence Workers. Legislators will also discuss the draft ordinance on training a number of judicial positions and the issuance of a decree on medical equipment management. (source: Vietnam News Agency) NIGERIA: Lawyers reject death penalty for looters Labour is pushing for death penalty for treasury looters. But lawyers think otherwise. To them, there are better ways the Buhari administration can fight corruption other than capital punishment. ROBERT EGBE writes. The hangman's noose? A firing squad? Stoning? Have your pick. You steal public funds, you die. This is the penalty the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and the Trade Union Congress (TUC) want for looters. Their demand, made last Thursday at a joint press conference in Abuja by NLC President Ayuba Wabba and TUC President Bobboi Kaigama - as radical as it seems - was not arrived at lightly. Only 39 of the world's 175 countries were more corrupt than Nigeria last year, according to the Transparency International global corruption index. In a paper titled: "Corruption, national development, the Bar and The Judiciary" presented at the Annual General Meeting (AGM) of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) in 2012, former Vice President of the World Bank for Africa and former Minister of Education Dr. Oby Ezekwesili said $400 billion of Nigeria's oil revenue has been stolen or misused since independence in 1960. The severity of the problem was acknowledged by President Muhammadu Buhari during his trip to the United States, when he declared: "If we don't kill corruption, corruption will kill Nigeria." The president has since set up a seven-man Presidential Advisory Committee on Corruption headed by eminent lawyer Prof Itse Sagay (SAN). The committee will advise the government on the prosecution of the war against corruption and the implementation of the required reforms in the criminal justice system. All Ministries, Departments and Agencies are to maintain a Treasury Single Account (TSA); the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFFC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) have stepped up their investigation of corruption cases. But, labour is not satisfied. It feels that a harsher penalty is needed to combat what it sees as problems of weak laws, especially the granting of perpetual injunctions stopping corruption cases. To labour, the way out is to make corruption a capital crime. Crimes, such as armed robbery, murder, treason, conspiracy to treason or instigating invasion of Nigeria, are already subject to the death penalty. But the use of death penalty usually generates mixed opinions and for 7 years between 2006 and 2013, there were no executions in Nigeria. Things changed in 2013 when 4 condemned robbers were executed. Lawyers disagree with labour Lawyers do not seem to share labour's enthusiasm for capital punishment. Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) President Augustine Alegeh (SAN) said death penalty is against global trends and won't help efforts to recover stolen funds. He suggests the encouragement of proactive steps that will prevent looting or make it difficult, if not impossible. Alegeh said: "With respect to labour???s views, what we think we need to put in place are more measures that will ensure that stealing is made impossible or very difficult for people to pillage treasuries; that way, we secure ourselves so that money is not taken away. "Current efforts by this government are in line with modern practices. If we kill them and we don't get the money, what have we gained as a country? "Even in capital offences, there is an increasing trend against the death penalty, so, I don't think we should be in the opposite direction at this time of our national history.???" He added that NBA encourages the strengthening of institutions and systems in the fight against corruption. "Our position at NBA is that there should be more measures to strengthen the system, and ensure that pillaging of the system is reduced to the barest minimum, and we see that the steps the government is taking are along the same lines; single treasury, single account, etc. "These measures will significantly take care of the loopholes through which looting could occur. These are proactive measures that saves the country from the cost of litigation, cost of prosecution, loss of revenue, the time lapse between when the money gets into the wrong account and when it is recovered." According to a former chairman, NBA, Ikeja Branch, Onyekachi Ubani, death penalty by itself is not the solution to the problem of corruption. He said though capital punishment for looters appears to be having the desired effect in China, Nigeria's problem is not the absence of penalties for offenders. "If you take into cognisance what corruption has done to the nation's growth, you'll tend to agree with anyone that is calling for the death penalty for offenders," Ubani said, adding: "but I tell you that the death penalty alone cannot deter corruption in Nigeria. "Our problem is actually the willpower to implement the laws even as enacted. Enforcement is difficult and as long as we don't enforce our laws, even if we make death the penalty for corruption, you'll find out that the institutions will not even apply it." For Adetokunbo Mumuni, director of Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), death penalty is a complete no-go area. Mumuni is an advocate for the cancellation of the death penalty for all capital offences, let alone corruption. He also feels killing people for stealing public funds would be tantamount to allowing them to escape. He said: "Once someone is killed for looting, you have more or less allowed him to go without experiencing the shame that is associated with what he has done. I would prefer that the person be given life imprisonment. "What he has made from the corrupt practices should be recovered, including even what he has legitimately acquired. That will ensure absolute deterrent and that person will now live a life of penury. Unlike when you kill the person and the family will begin to benefit from his loot." Although NBA Ikorodu Branch Chairman, Adedotun Adetunji, feels labour's call for death penalty is in order, he believes the National Assembly would be reluctant to pass such a law. "This country is so complex that I don't see the legislature agreeing to enact such law," he said. "I think such law would actually be the best, because it would serve as a serious deterrent. "When 1 or 2 people are caught and executed for corruption, all of these incidents of people storing huge amounts of stolen dollars in rooms and the craze for illegally amassing wealth will stop." Activist-lawyer Ebun Olu Adegboruwa also feels that resorting to death penalty is retrogression. "I think it will be retrogressive for us as a nation, because of the frustration of corruption, to be moving backwards, to be activating what others are doing away with," he said. Adegboruwa also says some members of the unions are guiltier of the corruption they accuse politicians of. He suggests that the cleansing must start from within labour itself, especially its civil service arm, otherwise labour would have no moral grounds to condemn anyone. He said: "Globally, the death penalty is becoming an anathema, whether it's for corruption, drug trafficking, murder, or any other offence. The United Nations is making a campaign to abolish the death penalty. "Secondly, I do not think that labour leaders, civil servants are in a good position to advocate for any penalty for corruption. "Those who carry files, directors, permanent secretaries, they are the problems of this nation, beyond politicians who are just figures, who are expected today and leave office tomorrow. "So, they don't have the locus, it amounts to sheer hypocrisy; the unions have to clear the whole house first. To be pointing fingers at people for corruption is to be pointing it at themselves. Until that lesson is done, I think the blame in this game should go back to the civil servants. He gave what happened with former Minister of Health, Mrs Alonge Gray, as an example. "No politician can embezzle money without the connivance of civil servants. You remember the experience of Mrs. Gray Longe, the former Minister of Health that former President Olusegun Obasanjo disgraced? "It was civil servants that told her 'Mama, there is excess money, don't return the money.' And they were the ones that shared it; they gave her a formula for sharing. "So, civil servants are the ones who put politicians' hands in corruption. The war against corruption should start with the civil servants, when they're making this clamour, they're making it against themselves." Perpetual injunctions The unions also kicked against the grant of perpetual injunctions in unjustifiable situations. On this issue, they find common ground with lawyers. "It's quite a challenge for us as lawyers," said Adegboruwa, "we cannot out of blind patriotism cover up the rot in the judiciary, whether at the Bar or Bench. "It is still painful to me today that the court gave a perpetual injunction in favour of the former governor of Rivers State, Peter Odilli, to the extent that up till today no one can take anything done by that administration. It's painful for us at the judiciary. "The EFCC refused to appeal against that, for whatever reason. If at all there should be such an order, it should be a temporary thing, when their positions are laid bare, and there is no persecution, no witch-hunting, the person should go and clear himself in the court. "By giving such an injunction, the court is indirectly working against itself. I think the NBA will have a lot to do in this regard, in terms of the attempts to restrain courts and the police from investigating people." Mumuni agrees. He feels such injunctions ought to be challenged. "You can't give an injunction against somebody who has a legal duty to carry out," he said. "So those kinds of orders are manufactured in mischief, conceived in mischief and delivered in mischief. "What the EFCC would have done would be to challenge that type of terrible order before a higher court, and I believe that the higher court would not have agreed with that particular judge. Declaration of assets Labour's call for office holders to declare their assets thrice; before swearing-in, while in office, and upon leaving office is already covered in a similar constitutional provision. Section 11 (1) of the 5th schedule of the 1999 Constitution mandates public officials to declare their assets to the Code of Conduct Bureau at least twice; before and immediately after leaving office. The declaration, which must be in writing, shall include all of the office holder's properties, assets, and liabilities and those of his/her unmarried children who are under 18. (source: The Nation Nigeria) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 15 09:55:17 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 09:55:17 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 15 CHINA: Prisoners on death row to get free legal aid Convicted criminals on death row will be entitled to free legal representation under a new rule drafted by the Ministry of Justice, a ministry source told China Daily. The ministry will assign lawyers to condemned prisoners who cannot afford one during the review of their sentences to ensure equal access to justice, according to the source. The source said officials from the ministry and the high court are "finalizing some detailed implementation measures and the rule will be released in the next few months". The source asked not to be identified because she was not authorized to discuss the draft plan with the media. Under Chinese law, all death sentences must be reviewed by the Supreme People's Court before defendants can be executed. Currently, defendants who cannot afford to hire lawyers are not guaranteed representation during a death penalty review. Che Xingyi, a lawyer at Beijing's Yingke Law Firm, which specializes in representing clients in death penalty cases, said the top court conducts reviews based on files from local courts and lawyers' previous defense statements. This method has limitations and is not sufficient to ensure justice, Che said. It is "more than necessary" to offer legal aid during a review of a death sentence, he said. "If the lawyers discover flaws in sentencing criteria or new evidence, they will fully defend the suspects and communicate with the judges quickly to stop imminent execution." China does not reveal the number of prisoners on death row. However, last year, Chinese lawyers provided free legal aid to nearly 40,000 suspects facing life imprisonment or the death penalty, a year-on-year increase of 7 %, according to the ministry. The new rule follows a recent meeting of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, which stressed the importance of legal aid and was attended by the country's top leaders. Paul Dalton, team leader for the China-EU Access to Justice Program, which was created to strengthen equality of justice in China especially among disadvantaged groups, recommended that Chinese judicial authorities be cautious when imposing the death penalty. The top court would better protect prisoners' rights by holding public hearings during a death penalty review, Dalton said. This would enable judges to listen to defense arguments by defendants and their lawyers instead of just reading the files. (source: ecns.cn) INDIA: Court gives convicts chance to defend the indefensible----Court asks defence to present its case as arguments begin in 7/11 blasts case. As the arguments on sentencing of the July 11 train blasts started on Monday, the defence made an unusual request: that the probation officer and jail superintendent put on record the conduct of the convicts in the 9 years that they were in prison. This, they said, would help establish whether the convicts could be reformed and rehabilitated in society. There was more. The defence also wanted a few witnesses to testify in court to demonstrate that the accused can be reformed. However, as soon as the application was filed, special judge Yatin D Shinde responded: "How can I call for such a report?" Orders on the both the applications will be passed on Tuesday. The defence lawyers had done their homework well. As soon as the judge asked the defence to argue its case, Yug Chaudhry opened his arguments stating that if a convict had to be sentenced to death, the court has to arrive at a conclusion that there is no room for reform. "The court has to record a finding, based on hard evidence. I repeat, based on 'hard evidence'," he said. Chaudhry argued that the jail records of the past nine years would bring out the character of the convicts and their chances of being re-integrated into the mainstream. "What better evidence than the report of a qualified officer, a government employee, to ascertain if there is any chance of reformation." Special Public Prosecutor Raja Thakre opposed the application saying that such a report could only be called for by the state and not by the defence. The convicts moved another application: that their medical files be put on record. The judge responded by asking them to 'keep it short'. Chaudry said 2 of the accused -bomb planters Kamal Ansari and Naved Khan - were undergoing psychiatric treatment while another planter, Faizal Shaikh, was suffering from brain tumor. When Chaudhry continued to list the ailments the accused had suffered during nine years in jail, he was directed by the court to restrict his arguments to 'terminal illnesses.' To which he retorted: "I hope each person's life is unique in my lord's eyes." "Definitely," the judge said, adding: "However, restrict your arguments." The prosecution opposed this application saying that the lawyer himself had suffered a bypass in these 9 years. "You weren't in jail," Chaudhry responded. The court came to session at 12.30 pm and in a rare turn of events, the defence was asked to argue its case first. Usually, it is the prosecution which lists charges and asks for punishment commensurate with the crime. The accused, or convict, is then asked to make the final argument. The court gave an opportunity to the defence lawyer to argue why his clients should be treated leniently. Almost all the accused had prepared their statements going by the probable severity of their sentence. Their answers ranged from ill health to social depravity to the amount of reform they underwent while still in jail. Convict no. 7, Sajid Ansari, said he had been falsely implicated by the ATS and that the court had failed to identify the false evidence. He further said that he sympathized with every single victim of the blast, stating that he was also a 'victim of the blast'. He was referring to how the arrest had destroyed his life. Another convict, bomb planter Asif Bashir Khan, a civil engineer, said: "I forgive all those officers who continuously tortured my family during the nine years I was in custody and pray that their families don't have to suffer the same fate." He cited a clutch of other points, including reformation, that he wanted the court to consider before his sentencing. Another convict, Naved Khan, started his defence in his 'impeccable' English and said that he was a responsible Indian and that his brother worked for the 4th estate, but the judge couldn't quite comprehend what he was saying. One of the lawyers then said that Naved was trying to tell the court that his brother is a journalist. When judge Shinde asked defence to open its arguments, Chaudhry protested saying there would be no need to argue on the death penalty for everyone in case the prosecution was not going to ask for it. But the judge refused, saywing the defence would be given an additional 5 minutes in case the prosecution asked for the death penalty. Advocate Prakash Shetty, representing 4 of the accused, wrapped up his argument saying: "While in a serious offence like the one at hand, life imprisonment was a norm, death is only a rarity." CONVICTS; THEIR DEFENCE Kamal Ansari -- Have 5 kids -- Not convicted in any case earlier; no adverse report from jail authorities -- Was an illiterate labourer -- Not abandoned by friends and family which shows roots in society and can be reformed and rehabilitated -- Under treatment for psychological illnesses; contracted glycoma in prison -- Children had to drop out of school Dr Tanvir Ahmad -- Was Unani doctor and was working as a resident medical officer -- Chosen critical care line to do charitable work in hospital -- Enrolled in a mgmt course in medicine; made most of my time in jail -- Not a danger to society Faisal Shaikh -- No intention of doing this again -- Have brain tumour and developed advanced spondylitis because of which unable to sit and requires rubber balloon -- No one to take care of old and ailing parents as brother also convicted in same case Ehtesham Siddiqui -- Used to publish books from home -- Enrolled in various educational, self-help programmes to reform -- Brother cannot run the house alone Majid Ansari -- A 'poor' shopkeeper; entire family is educated -- Wife has arthritis, her kidneys have failed and is on dialysis -- Have been counselling other inmates; enrolled in BA Urdu -- Want to be transferred to a prison close to home Mohammad Ali -- Was hawking at the time of blast -- Read 20 books on Mahatma Gandhi in order to reform himself -- Was a social worker; stopped illegal activity of hooch making in my area -- Father is paralysed and suffered heart attacks twice after the arrest -- Mother died during detention, yet was not allowed to attend her funeral -- Relatives help family Sajid Ansari -- I am also a victim of the blasts as I am innocent just like the accused of Malegaon blasts case of 2006 -- ATS has falsely implicated me -- Have sympathy for all blast victims Muzammil Shaikh -- No case against me -- No one to take care of old parents -- Because of the 9 years in jail I have even forgotten what I used to do before my arrest Suhail Shaikh -- Have taught self in jail by reading books regarding bones, sprains, etc., and had acquired a skill in treating such ailments. -- When I was out I served the society; do the same in jail. -- Wife suffers from severe spondylitis and back-ache -- Have 3 children - 2 sons and a daughter. Parents died after arrest -- Should be sentenced to time already undergone in prison so far Zamir Shaikh -- Helped father with his key making business at his roadside stall. Also drove a taxi -- Suffering from various psychiatric ailments; father has lost 1 eye and has cataract in the other eye -- Brother's one leg is shorter than the other Naved Khan -- Was working in a multi-national company even as an undergrad -- No contact with any illegal organisation -- Unfortunate that I have been convicted but not disheartened and have full faith in the judiciary -- Belong to a literate family. Father still works in Kuwait. Brother is a part of the fourth Estate. Pursuing a course in LLB, would like to complete it and join my advocate as a junior -- Never was, still not and never will be a threat to society Bashir Khan -- Have read 27 books on Mahatma Gandhi to reform myself -- Reading has increased the will to forgive -- Forgive ATS officers for fabricating evidence against me and for worrying my family for 9 years. Pray that this never happens to ATS officers' families -- Have full faith in the judiciary -- Have parents and 3 kids to take care of -- I am a Civil Engineer and before being arrested was working towards labour reforms -- I sponsored education of children of labourers -- Felt really bad about the blasts -- Father died due to cancer in 2011. Mother has gangrene and cannot be treated due to lack of finances -- Daughter's education dependant on charity -- Mental state ruined because of solitary for 2 years -- Have donated 12 times but could not do it later (source: Mumbai Mirror) PAKISTAN: Pakistan Can Hang Paralyzed Prisoner, Says Court A judge at the Lahore High Court has ruled that a disabled death-row inmate can be hanged, in a judgment that suggests that Pakistan's international obligations "should be kept aside." In his ruling, handed last week to lawyers for Abdul Basit, 43, the judge dismissed the fact that there are no provisions in Pakistan's Prison Rules for the hanging of wheelchair users. It says that "as there is no rule declaring the hanging of a disabled person as illegal", the authorities should be allowed to execute Basit, and use their "discretion" to determine how to carry it out. Basit's lawyers had argued that his hanging would amount to cruel and unusual punishment, which is prohibited under Pakistani and international law. Basit is paralyzed from the waist down, and the relevant authorities have so far been unable to explain how they will practically carry out the execution. The judge also states that "international laws should be kept aside" when considering whether prisoners on Pakistan's 8,500-strong death row should be executed. If this assertion is accepted, Pakistan would be in breach of its commitment to several tenets of international law, such as the prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. Several UN experts have recently condemned Pakistan's current spate of executions - which has seen over 220 people killed since December - as a breach of international standards. The ruling also contains a significant technical error, incorrectly asserting that Basit's lawyers at Pakistani NGO Justice Project Pakistan (JPP) had failed to challenge the dismissal of an earlier mercy petition for Basit. In fact, Basit's lawyers filed a mercy petition on 22nd July, on which to date, no decision has been made by the government. Pakistan's Prison Rules provide that ill-health provides valid grounds for the commutation of sentences. Jail medical records for Basit outline how he is "bed-bound" and has "almost no chance of recovery", but it appears that the government has not considered the records as grounds to grant mercy. Commenting, Maya Foa, director of the death penalty team at human rights organization Reprieve, said: "This ruling gives an absurdly technical response to a question of fundamental rights and common decency. It's very clear that Abdul Basit's execution will amount to a grisly spectacle, and will have little to do with justice. It is outrageous to suggest that Pakistan should simply ignore its international obligations in order to carry out yet more hangings. The international community must now step in and urge a halt to all executions, including that of Basit, and ensure that Pakistan complies with the treaties it has signed up to." (source: commondreams.org) IRAN----executions 4 Prisoners Hanged In The Central Prison Of Karaj 4 prisoners were hanged in Karaj central prison. According to the report of Human Rights Activists News Agency in Iran (HRANA), the death sentences of these 4 men, who were all charges with drug related crimes, were executed in the early hours of Wednesday 2nd September, in the yard of central prison of Karaj. Mustafa Akhondzadeh, Majid Rezaei, Saeed Jalali and Hamid Faraj are 4 prisoners who were executed. These prisoners had been transferred to the solitary confinements on Monday, 31st August. So far, none of the authorities and judicial offices has released information or has clarified regarding the process of detention and execution of these prisoners. (source: Human Rights Activists News Agency) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 15 14:24:03 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 14:24:03 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., VA., OKLA., COLO. Message-ID: Sept. 15 PENNSYLVANIA: Citing pope, activists call for end to death penalty Death-penalty foes will gather at a Germantown church tomorrow for a prayer vigil, during which they will pray for an end to capital punishment. The vigil will be at noon at St. Vincent de Paul Roman Catholic Church, 400 E. Price St. It is free and open to the public. Harold Wilson, a Philadelphia man exonerated in 2005 in a 1988 triple murder, will speak at the vigil about holding onto hope while living on death row. Pennsylvanians for Alternatives to the Death Penality, Witness to Innocence, various clergy and other activists organized the event to coincide with tomorrow's scheduled execution in Oklahoma of Richard Glossip, who was convicted in the 1997 murder of an Oklahoma City motel owner. Sister Helen Prejean, a noted anti-death-penalty crusader, has championed his case as a wrongful conviction. With Pope Francis' upcoming Philadelphia visit, organizers are citing the pontiff's past calls for an end to the death penalty as a rallying cry. "It is impossible to imagine that states today cannot make use of another means than capital punishment to defend people's lives from an unjust aggressor," Pope Francis said in October 2014 to representatives of the International Association of Penal Law. (source: philly.com) VIRGINIA: Convicted murderer's attorneys: He was high on PCP during Harvey family slayings Court-appointed attorneys representing death row inmate Ricky Javon Gray argued today that a federal court should be forced to take a closer look at Gray's contention that his earlier lawyers were ineffective and did not perform up to acceptable standards. They've argued that the lawyers failed to investigate and present evidence at Gray's trial that he was intoxicated by PCP when he murdered a South Richmond couple and their 2 young daughters. Gray was convicted in the slayings of the Harvey family on New Year's Day 2006, along with accomplice Ray Dandridge. Gray, 38, was sentenced to life in prison for the murders of Bryan Harvey, 49, and his wife Kathryn, 39. He was sentenced to death for the murders of their daughters Stella, 9, and Ruby, 4. The family was found dead in their burning home. They had been forced into their basement and tied up. Their throats were slit and they were beaten with hammers. "This was a crime crying out for an explanation," said Elizabeth Hambourger of the Durham, N.C.-based Center for Death Penalty Litigation. The PCP could have been that explanation, she said. Gray and Dandridge also murdered another Richmond family: Ashley Baskerville, 21; her mother, Mary Tucker, 47; and stepfather, Percyell Tucker, 55. Ashley Baskerville knew Gray and Dandridge and was a lookout when Gray killed the Harveys, authorities said. Gray also confessed he killed his wife in 2005 in Pennsylvania. Gray was not tried in the Baskerville-Tucker killings, but would have been had he not been sentenced to death in the Harvey case. Dandridge pleaded guilty and was sentenced to life in prison. Gray's attorneys want the 3-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn a federal judge's decision throwing out Gray's request. The Virginia Attorney General's Office is opposing the attempt. State officials have said that if the 4th Circuit rules against Gray and there are no other obstacles, he could have an execution date set for late winter or early spring. (source: Richmond Times-Dispatch) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Oklahoma May Execute an Innocent Man on Wednesday ---- What the case of Richard Glossip says about the state of capital punishment in the United States. In June, the US Supreme Court cleared the way for Oklahoma to execute Richard Glossip - who has been sitting on death row since 1998, when he was convicted of 1st-degree murder - using a controversial drug that's been implicated in several botched executions. Barring a last-minute stay by Gov. Mary Fallin, the state plans to put him to death on Wednesday. But if it does, it may execute an innocent man. Glossip's landmark Supreme Court petition challenging the method of his execution is a footnote to a larger story that highlights the death penalty's many flaws. Here's the backstory: In 1997, Glossip was working at the Best Budget Motel in Oklahoma City, when the body of his boss, motel owner Barry Van Treese, was discovered in Room 102. Within a week of finding the body, the police arrested Justin Sneed, a 19-year-old handyman and meth addict who worked at the motel. Sneed confessed to beating Van Treese to death with a baseball bat. His DNA was all over the crime scene, and his fingerprints were found on a soda cup in Van Treese's car. But egged on by police officers who promised him he could avoid a death sentence, Sneed claimed that Glossip had hired him to kill their boss. No physical evidence linked Glossip to the crime. (Prosecutors tried to combat this problem by suggesting that the lack of Glossip's fingerprints at the crime scene was actually evidence of his guilt.) In exchange for testifying against Glossip, Sneed received a life sentence. Meanwhile, a jury sentenced Glossip to death based entirely on Sneed's testimony and prosecutors' contention that he had wielded undue influence over Sneed, whom they described as a hapless dupe. An Oklahoma appeals court overturned the verdict, finding Glossip's lawyer incompetent and the evidence against him strikingly weak. A second trial was held in 2004. Before it started, prosecutors offered Glossip a deal: Plead guilty to 2nd-degree murder and receive a life sentence with the possibility of parole after 20 years. Glossip, who had no prior criminal record, refused, maintaining his innocence. The second jury also found him guilty and once again sentenced him to death. That verdict was upheld. In both trials, Sneed's testimony was inconsistent, changing considerably from what he'd initially told the police in 1997. Transcripts of the police interview with Sneed show officers coaching him to implicate Gossip, but video of the interrogation wasn't screened at either trial - a fact that led the first verdict to be overturned, but not the 2nd. It's not unconstitutional to execute someone who didn't commit murder. Hiring someone else to do the dirty work, or conspiring with someone else to kill for money, is grounds for the death penalty, so long as there's proof of that person's "intent to kill." In 2010, for instance, Virginia executed Theresa Lewis for hiring hit men to kill her husband and adult stepson, while the killers themselves got life without parole. But even under that standard, Glossip's death sentence is a stretch. Prosecutors went to great lengths to suggest that Glossip wanted to kill his boss because he was going to get fired. But defense lawyers showed that Glossip had done a decent enough job at the motel that he'd received salary bonuses for 11 out of the prior 12 months before the murder. Prosecutors noted that when he was arrested, Glossip had about $1,200 in cash on him - evidence, they said, that Sneed had robbed Van Treese and split the money with Glossip. The defense countered that Glossip had just sold his belongings so he could get legal help after being questioned by the police. Indeed, 2Glossip was arrested coming out of a lawyer's office. The appeals in Glossip's case have essentially run out, with the US Supreme Court turning down his last request for a rehearing on August 28. But over the past year, new developments have bolstered his claims of innocence. In October 2014, the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board denied a clemency petition from Glossip. The board then received an email claiming to be from Sneed's daughter, saying she believed Glossip was innocent and that her father would likely recant his testimony if he could be sure he wouldn't lose his plea agreement and end up on death row himself. She wrote: For a couple of years now, my father has been talking to me about recanting his original testimony. But [he] has been afraid to act upon it, in fear of being charged with the Death Penalty, and not be here for his children. My father has no reason to do so as a favor to Richard, as him and Mr. Glossip have no relationship and have had no communication in the last 17 years. I feel his conscious[sic] is getting to him. His fear of recanting, but guilt about not doing so, makes it obvious that information he is sitting on would exonerate Mr. Glossip. The letter didn't arrive in time, so the board never considered it, and Sneed's daughter has never repeated the claim. Glossip's lawyers say they have talked to her and she has said she now wants to support her father, who has denied wanting to recant his story. The unusual circumstances of Glossip's case and his rapidly approaching execution date have attracted international attention, including a sympathetic story in the National Enquirer. Dr. Phil devoted a show to Glossip in August featuring the actress Susan Sarandon, who publicly called on Oklahoma to spare his life, and Sister Helen Prejean, the nun Sarandon played in Dead Man Walking, who has also asked Oklahoma to spare Glossip. More than 200,000 people have signed online petitions supporting his clemency. Last week, Sir Richard Branson joined the chorus. So did former Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn (R), and legendary Oklahoma football coach Barry Switzer sent a letter to Gov. Fallin urging her to stay Glossip's execution. Last-ditch efforts to save potentially innocent condemned inmates haven't fared well in the past. Most notably, the state of Texas executed Todd Willingham in 2004 despite a huge amount of evidence suggesting he had been wrongly convicted. Most death row exonerations have resulted from DNA testing. But the only DNA evidence in Glossip's case implicates Sneed, the man who has already confessed to the crime. So a reprieve for Glossip is a long shot, especially in Oklahoma, where last year Fallin threatened to execute a pair of condemned men in defiance of her own state Supreme Court, which had issued a stay in their cases. When the judges refused to lift the stay, the GOP-controlled state Legislature threatened to start impeachment proceedings them. The judges caved, and the state went on to badly botch the execution of one of the inmates, Clayton Lockett, a debacle that prompted Glossip and his legal team to challenge Oklahoma's lethal injection procedure - unsuccessfully - before the US Supreme Court. Fallin shows no signs of wavering on Glossip's fate. Earlier this month, a local Fox station reported that a juror from his 1st trial would have voted differently if some of the information that has recently come to light had been presented to the jury. In response to the story, a spokesman for Fallin said, "The fact that Glossip had 1 conviction overturned and was given a 2nd trial illustrates that our justice system does respond to mistakes and has treated Glossip fairly. Governor Fallin believes in our justice system and is committed to upholding the law." Glossip's legal team is frantically trying to save his life. But the options are limited. Glossip's Hail Mary for staving off execution in the federal courts was his failed petition to the Supreme Court earlier this year, in which his lawyers argued that executing him with the sedative midazolam, a component of Oklahoma's lethal injection cocktail, would be unconstitutionally cruel. While the liberals on the court, led by Justice Stephen Breyer, used the case to make an impassioned argument for abolishing capital punishment, the conservatives held sway and ruled against Glossip. As a result, much of the recent public pressure and lobbying has been aimed at Oklahoma's governor. But Fallin only has the power to grant Glossip a 60-day stay of his execution, unless the parole board recommends clemency, which it hasn't. His last best hope lies with the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, where Gossip's lawyers will present last-minute new evidence on Tuesday that Sneed lied about Glossip's involvement in the murder. Much of that evidence hinges on the fact that Sneed was seriously addicted to methamphetamine, which he used intravenously. Sneed's former drug dealer has signed an affidavit saying Sneed supported his habit by regularly stealing from the Best Budget Motel's customers and breaking into their cars. The testimony is designed to change the government's narrative to show that Sneed was a drug addict who killed Van Treese during a robbery gone awry, and that he simply tried to use Glossip to save himself. If the Oklahoma court finds the evidence credible, it could stay Glossip's execution until it can hold a hearing to probe the new information further. Glossip's lawyers realize they have a high bar to meet, particularly in Oklahoma. "This is not a DNA-type case," says Don Knight, one of Glossip's attorneys. "This is a case of 'he said, she said.' It's hard to refute that kind of a situation." Still, Glossip has been lucky before: He received a last-minute reprieve from execution in January, when the US Supreme Court decided to take up his lethal injection challenge. He'll know by Wednesday whether he'll get another chance to stave off the death chamber. (source: Mother Jones) ****************** Rally held to oppose Oklahoma execution, sit-in planned A few dozen death penalty opponents gathered at the Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of the state Capitol on Tuesday to ask Gov. Mary Fallin to stay Wednesday's execution of Richard Glossip. Former State Sen. Connie Johnson said Fallin should follow the commandment, "Thou shall not kill." "As you know our governor has insisted this monument remain on the Capitol grounds despite a court order, but she has no regard for it," Johnson said. Nathson "Nate" Fields, who was exonerated from death row in Illinois, said his case illustrates that mistakes happen in the death penalty system. "I spent 12 years on death row for a crime I didn't commit," he said. He urged Fallin to stop the execution. "Just stop and pause, you may be making a mistake," he said. Fallin has the ability to grant a 60-day stay of execution. The governor's office has said that if representatives for Glossip have evidence for why he should not be executed, they should present it in court. Glossip is to receive a lethal injection at 3 p.m. Wednesday at the state penitentiary in McAlester for the 1997 killing of Barry Van Treese. (source: The Oklahoman) ****************** Oklahoma City bombing victim works to save Richard Glossip: 'Enough Killings' Jannie Coverdale, the grandmother of 2 young boys who died in the 1995 Murrah Building Bombing, is speaking out to save the life of death row inmate, Richard Glossip. Here's Coverdale???s letter to Glossip from August 4, 2015: Dear Mr. Glossip, I am Jannie Coverdale. And as you can see, I live in OKC. You first came to my attention when you and others were protesting the drug that the State was using to execute people. Mr. Glossip, I am a member of the anti-death penalty group here, and I just don't believe in capital punishment. It serves no purpose plus we are murdering too many innocent people. I lost 2 grandsons in the bombing here in "95" and I ranted and raved about the things that should happen to Tim McVeigh and Terry Nichols. Well, Tim was put to death and Terry wasn't. At first I was angry that Terry was allowed to live. And I heard a voice one morning in my sleep telling me that there had been "Enough Killings." When I awoke, I knew who had spoke to me, and since that day, I have been trying to forgive myself, for wanting those 2 men murdered, guilty or not. I ended up writing to Terry Nichols, and he asked for my forgiveness, which I did, but I have to live with the idea that Tim was executed and that I played a big part for him being sentenced to death. What I'm trying to saw is that even though Tim was guilty killing him was wrong, and with you I feel that if there's any possibility that you are innocent, you should have the chance to prove it to everyone. And be let out of prison and if you are proven guilty again, just sentence you to time served and give you the chance to show that you are a good man who has learned his lesson. I have (5) sons, and I don't know what I'd do if one of them ever ended up on death row. Mr. Glossip, I am praying for you and your family. And when I finish writing this letter, that probably don't make too much "sense" I will write to Mary Fallin, letting her know that everone in this state doesn't believe in the death penalty. In the meantime, keep praying and keep fighting. "In God I Trust." Jannie Coverdale (source: KFOR news) ******************* Juror who sent Richard Glossip to death row says he should not have been convicted One of the jurors who sent a man to death row has come forward to say he should not have been convicted, just hours before his execution. Richard Glossip, who was convicted of murder on the sole testimony of the man who carried out the killing, is due be given a lethal injection at 8pm on Wednesday unless his lawyers can win an 11th hour reprieve. The 52-year-old's legal team continue to work round the clock hoping a new piece of evidence will see authorities grant a 60-day stay of execution. But as Glossip nears the death chamber at Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester, a juror has said he should be allowed to live until new evidence has been heard. In statement the juror said: "If the defence would have presented the case that they are presenting now in the original trial, (and dare I say even the jurors in the 2nd), I would have not given a guilty verdict. "I think that now there is enough questions/evidence out there that there may be another story than what we as jurors were given. Why did that happen? "I don't know and frankly it p***es me off! I feel that this situation needs to be looked at and at the VERY least given a 60 days stay to make for certain that all the stones are unturned and everything is looked at with a fine tooth comb." The father-of-4's legal team have highlighted countless deficiencies in his defence during his 2 trials including how the killer was coached to implicate Glossip, how others present close to the scene were never questioned and how there is no physical evidence linking him to the murder. The Governor of Oklahoma, Mary Fallin, who has the power to grant a 60-day stay of execution, has said on numerous occasions the State is upholding the wishes of 24 jurors and the verdict of 2 trials. But despite the juror's statement, she has now said they will not be taking the juror's opinions into consideration. In a statement Governor Fallin's office said: "This juror served in Glossip's 1st trial, which was thrown out by a court. The fact that Glossip had 1 conviction overturned and was given a 2nd trial illustrates that our justice system does respond to mistakes and has treated Glossip fairly. "Governor Fallin believes in our justice system and is committed to upholding the law." Lawyers for Glossip say a former prisoner has come forward to to say he often heard the real killer, Justin Sneed boasting he had lied to save his own life. Glossip was convicted of murder in 1998 after Sneed confessed to the crime and claimed Glossip hired him to do it. The motel's handyman carried out the killing claiming it was Glossip's idea, saying he was promised 6,460 pounds to do it. >From his testimony, the sole evidence against Glossip, he received a plea deal of life without parole. Supporters say the case against the death row inmate is riddled with holes and an illogical motive, that interview footage shows officers appearing to encourage Sneed to implicate Glossip while there was not a shred of physical evidence against him. Supporters campaigning for his release include Oscar winning actress Susan Sarandon and anti death penalty advocate Sister Helen Prejean. More than 300,000 people have signed a petition calling for Glossip's release while Sir Richard Branson has also backed his cause. (source: The Mirror) COLORADO: Death penalty won't sway Colorado elections, suggests poll Capital punishment will not be a deciding issue in Colorado elections, suggest a new poll commissioned by the anti-capital punishment group, the Better Priorities Initiative. Only 5 % of Coloradans surveyed view a candidate's stance on the death penalty as a "most important" factor when deciding whom to vote for, and most will support candidates they generally agree with, even if those politicians have a different take on capital punishment, according to the poll conducted by Public Policy Polling. Jobs and the economy, health care and education top the list of voters' deciding priorities. The fate of people convicted of crimes does not. But that doesn't mean people aren't thinking about the death penalty. Just 32.6 % of Coloradans prefer the death penalty for people convicted of murder, and 71 % think that Colorado will not execute anybody in the next 10 years. Nearly 43 % want to see the death penalty replaced, and 47.2 % want it to stay in place. While capital punishment might not be a deciding factor in who gets in office, the conversation isn't over. The Colorado GOP's possible U.S. Senate candidate District Attorney George Brauchler is best known among voters for trying win the death penalty for Aurora Theater Shooter James Holmes. In a recent interview, death penalty opponent Gov. John Hickenlooper told Ryan Warner, host of Colorado Matters, that the time is not right for trying to end capital punishment. "I think it would be better for Colorado, obviously, if [the death penalty were abolished before I leave office], but I don't think you can put a strict timeline on these things. It might take decades more. It's hard to predict," the Governor said. (source: Colorado Independent) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 15 14:25:00 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 14:25:00 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 15 BANGLADESH: Man to walk gallows for killing wife in Barisal A Barisal court yesterday sentenced a man to death for killing his wife 8 years ago. The death penalty awardee is Sohrab Akon, 40, son of late Lal Mia Akon of Toyka village under Muladi upazila of the district. Adib Ali, additional district and sessions judge, handed down the verdict after examining case record and 11 witnesses. The court also fined Sohrab Tk 50 thousand. According to the prosecution, Sohrab took his pregnant wife Mili Begum to Dhaka for consulting a doctor on October 20, 2007. While returning to Muladi, Sohrab pushed Mili into the Meghna River from a launch, leaving her dead. On May 10, 2008, Mini Begum, sister of Mili, lodged a case with Muladi Police Station, accusing Sohrab of killing her sister. Sub-Inspector Abdur Rahim, also the investigating officer of the case, pressed charges against Sohrab on November 1, 2008. Away in Faridpur, a court here on Monday sentenced a man to life imprisonment for killing his wife in 2011, reports UNB. The convict, Shahid Thakur, is a resident of Shyamsundarpur village in Sadar upazila. (source: The Daily Star) INDIA: Death sentence rate highest in J&K. Data prepared by National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) has revealed that a person convicted of murder in the state of Jammu & Kashmir has the highest probability of being handed the death penalty than anywhere else in India. In J&K, the likelihood is 6.8 times higher than the national average and in Delhi the convict is 6 times more likely to be put on death row. These stark differences in sentencing, based on NCRB data, are part of a study called 'Hanging in Balance: Arbitrariness in Death Penalty Adjudication in India', which was cited by the Law Commission as "another axis of disparity in death penalty jurisprudence. The study looked at the rate of imposition of death sentences for murder convictions in various states. The disparities in sentencing reveal how a person can receive different punishment for the same crime. For instance instance, a man convicted of murder in Jharkhand is 2.4 times more likely to get the death sentence than the national average while the possibility increases to 2.5 times in Gujarat, three times in West Bengal and 3.2 times in Karnataka. The differences among many neighbouring states were found to be high. A murder convict in Karnataka is 5.8 times as likely to get the death sentence compared to Tamil Nadu. A convict in Gujarat is again 5.8 times more likely to get death than one in Rajasthan. Similarly, Maharashtra sends murder convicts to death row 2.9 times more frequently than Madhya Pradesh. In absolute numbers, Uttar Pradesh sentences the most number of persons to death row. But in terms of the proportion of death sentences to murder convictions, it is almost at par with the national average. In Karnataka, which is the 2nd largest contributor to death row sentencing, the death sentence rate was 3.2 times the national average. Citing this disparity, the Law Commission headed by Justice (retired) A P Shah has recommended gradual abolition of death penalty with the exception of terror cases. To strengthen its argument on the "excessive use of death penalty", the commission cited data from Supreme Court analyzed by the Death Penalty Litigation Clinic. Of these, 1,512 cases were decided by the high court. In 62.8% of these 1,512 cases, the appellate courts commuted the sentence while upholding the conviction. In another 28.9 % cases, the convicts were acquitted, pointing to an even deeper systemic problem relating to the quality of adjudication in the lower courts. In all, the death sentence was confirmed in only 4.3% of the cases. The Supreme Court's data thus shows that trial courts had erroneously imposed the death penalty in 95.7% of cases. (source: The Kashmir Monitor) EGYPT: 2 years of terror: Death sentences in Egypt since 2013 Egypt has seen seven death sentences carried out and 246 overturned, with a further 433 still subject to appeal, out of a total of 1,695 death sentences referred to the Grand Mufti since the military coup that deposed the country's 1st democratically-elected president Mohamed Morsi in July 2013. Most of the cases are related to protests against Morsi's ouster; some are old cases that resurfaced following the coup, while the rest are "terrorism" cases with the majority of defendants being active members of the Muslim Brotherhood. Anadolu Agency has compiled a list of all death sentences issued in Egypt in the period from July 2013 to September 2015 according, to judicial and human rights sources. Death sentences carried out On 17 May, Egypt's Ministry of Interior executed six defendants accused of membership in a terrorist group in the case known as the "Arab Sharkas Cell"; the prisoners were all arrested during a raid on a house believed to be harbouring members of the Ansar Bait Al-Maqdis armed group in the village of Arab Sharkas in the north of the country. The death sentences were carried out after the Supreme Military Court rejected an appeal on 24 March against a 1st-degree ruling issued against 7 defendants (including one fugitive) in October for membership of Ansar Bait Al-Maqdis and alleged involvement in the bombing of a military checkpoint in northern Cairo. Another death sentence was carried out on 7 March against Mahmoud Ramadan after the Court of Cessation (the highest court for such cases) decided on 5 February to confirm the first-degree ruling issued on 19 May, 2014, by Alexandria Criminal Court, which sentenced Ramadan to death on charges of throwing a teenage boy off the top of a building in Alexandria. Death sentences subject to appeal Death sentences that are subject to appeal in the Court of Cessation have been issued against 433 defendants, including ousted president Mohamed Morsi, the 1st democratically-elected civilian president in Egypt. Morsi's lawyers have appealed the death sentences issued against him in the Wadi Al-Natroun prison break case. There is also the case over the murder of the police officer in charge of guarding the judge of Morsi's trial, which took place on 28 February, 2014. Defendants denied the charge that they murdered the officer on his way back from work. The officer was in charge of guarding the home of Judge Hussein Kandil, a member of the panel responsible to rule in the Ittihadiya case in which Morsi is accused. On 7 September, the court sentenced to death nine defendants, including four students, for the murder of Kandil; the ruling is subject to appeal. Another case is known in the media as "contacting Daesh": An Egyptian court in the Nile Delta area decided on Sunday to sentence 12 defendants to death for allegedly having links to the terrorist organisation. The sentences are also subject to appeal. The Court of Cessation may decide to confirm criminal courts' rulings, making them final, or revoke them, in which case the trial would be repeated in another criminal court that belongs to a different circuit. If the 2nd criminal court issues a second ruling, it could be appealed at the Court of Cessation, which may accept the appeal, repeat the trial and issue a final sentence, or it may reject the appeal, in which case a criminal court's 2nd ruling is considered final. Revoked death sentences The death sentences issued against 246 defendants were revoked after their cases had already been referred to the Mufti for approval. The defendants appealed the rulings and the Court of Cessation accepted the appeal, repeated their trials and revoked the death sentences. A further 1,009 cases that had been referred to the Mufti did not see death sentences issued against the defendants. 516 defendants were given sentences other than the death penalty, while 493 were acquitted after their appeal was accepted and trials repeated. The Egyptian government asserts that the Egyptian judiciary's rulings are not politicised and the government respects Egyptian laws and the Egyptian constitution. Since Morsi's ouster, the ruling regime has accused the Muslim Brotherhood's leaders and supporters of "inciting violence and terror", while the group says that it adheres to a peaceful approach in its opposition what it sees as a "military coup" against Morsi. On the other hand, Egyptian security apparatuses are accused of murdering thousands of protesters opposed to Morsi's ouster in a number of high-profile massacres. (source: Middle East Monitor) INDONESIA: Bail death row Briton Lindsay Sandiford: 'No execution this year' A British drugs smuggler on death row in Indonesia has been told sentence will not be carried out this year, the BBC understands. Lindsay Sandiford, 59, of Cheltenham, has been in jail since 2012 after arriving in Bali from Thailand carrying drugs with a street value of ???1.6m. She was sentenced almost 3 years ago but the government has put a hold on executions until at least January. A grandmother, she is raising money in the hope of lodging an appeal. 'No execution plans' Indonesian president Joko Widodo previously said there would be no clemency for more than 60 people convicted of drug offences, and 2 rounds of executions were carried out earlier this year. The attorney-general's office in Indonesia told the BBC there were no plans for the 3rd round of executions "in the near future" due to the government's focus on the current economic situation. Ms Sandiford's lawyers have argued she was pressured into smuggling the drugs by a criminal gang. Alongside her appeal, an online petition calling on the British government to fund her legal expenses has been signed by 2,500 people. The Foreign Office (FCO) said it was a long-standing policy of the UK to oppose the death penalty in all circumstances. A spokesman added: "It has been the policy of successive governments not to fund legal assistance for British Nationals abroad. "The FCO receives numerous requests for help with legal bills and cannot provide funding because of the costs and complexities involved." (source: BBC news) THAILAND: Thai Appeals Court Reaffirms Death Sentence for Railway Worker who Raped and Murdered 13-year-old Kachakorn Pitakchamnong A Thai appeals court yesterday reaffirmed the death sentence for a railway worker Wanchai Saengkhao, 23, for the rape and murder of a 13-year-old girl. Wanchai Saengkhao, was sentenced to death by the court in September 2014 for killing 13-year-old Kachakorn Pitakchamnong. Mr.Wanchai's defense team appealed the verdict on the grounds his life should be spared because he had repented his action. "His argument that he has repented his wrongdoing is inadmissible," the judge said, rejecting Wanchai's call for leniency and affirming the death penalty the Khaosod News Reported. Under Thai law, those sentenced to death have 60 days to appeal the verdict. The execution cannot be carried out unless the case is considered final. Somjet Amnuaysawasdi, head of Seventh District Appeals Court, said prosecutors will not appeal the verdict, but Wanchai has the right to do so if he believes the sentence should be overturned. Wanchai Bunnag, the lawyer representing the victim's family, said his clients are satisfied with the court's affirmation of death penalty for the convict. The rape and murder of the 13-year-old Kachakorn Pitakchamnong took place on a night train operated by the State Railway of Thailand, or SRT, as it was passing through Prachuap Kiri Khan in the early morning of 6 July. Wanchai, an SRT custodian, was later arrested by police and confessed that he committed the crime after getting high on methamphetamine while on duty. Pro-death penalty activists also seized on the incident to campaign for making rapes punishable by death; under current law, rape carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison, and a rape committed with use of a weapon is punishable by life in prison. Capital punishment in Thailand had fallen out of favor by the time the country changed its means of execution to lethal injection in 2003. That year, 4 people were executed and since then, 2 were executed in 2009, according to Amnesty International. All were executed for drug-related offenses. The campaign for capital punishment of rapists was spearheaded by former beauty pageant winner Panadda Wongphudee and endorsed by the family of the 13-year-old girl raped and murdered by Wanchai. Supporters of the death penalty insist that executing rapists would decrease the number of rape incidents, though human rights activists say there is little proof the death penalty is an effective deterrent against crimes. (source: chiangraitimes.com) ENGLAND: Former lecturer Swithin Fry talks about his fight to save a death row inmate from death row Death Row prisoner Timothy Coleman has waited for 18 years for his sentence to be carried out. There is now only 1 appeal standing between life and death for the 43-year-old, convicted of murdering a prosecution witness in the drugs case against him. But according to retired Painswick lecturer Swithin Fry, Timothy is innocent of his crimes and should be released to live out the rest of his life in peace. Swithin feels so passionately about this that he has launched a campaign to free him, which include a one-man show, Dear Tim: Echoes from Death Row, about the case. "I would describe it as a dramatised talk," said Swithin, 66, a former lecturer in adult literacy at Cirencester College. "At the start I bring the audience into Tim's cell and recreate the moment, 4 years after his conviction, when he received a letter from an attorney saying that he had the name of someone who admitted to the murder that he was on death row for. "Despite this, it's now 14 years later and he's still on death row, so I then explore the issues of why he is there." Swithin starting writing to Timothy, who is incarcerated in the Chillicothe Correctional Institution in Ohio, 4 years ago when he saw an advert in the Big Issue, asking for volunteers. "I was recently retired and it sounded like a really good, compassionate thing to do that wouldn't be too onerous," he said. After writing regularly to him, Swithin ended up visiting him in person during a trip to America 6 months later. "It turned out the jail was 600 miles from where I was in New York! "I hadn't taken into account how vast the country is and I though twice about going there but I decided I would regret it for the rest of my life if I didn't, and it was during that visit that I began to be convinced he was innocent." When Swithin returned him, Timothy's attorneys sent him the documents about the case and his campaign began to take shape. "That fully convinced me. Not so much in his innocence because the murder happened 20 years ago and so much water has passed under the bridge since then I don't think anyone will ever know, but what they did show was that there was no concrete evidence against him - it was all witnesses." As Timothy has been in jail for almost 20 years, he has served almost a life sentence already. If his final appeal fails, he will then be executed for this crime, so effectively he has served 2 sentences. "The death penalty system in America is unbelievable, particularly from our perspective because we got rid of it decades ago," said Swithin. "It also doesn't help that he is black and poor, and statistically African-Americans make up a big percentage of people in prison and on death row." According to Swithin, death row inmates are allowed six mandatory appeals before the sentence is carried out, and Timothy's final one is coming up this month. "If it follows a typical scenario, it will be denied and the execution order will be given at some point by the state governor. "What he's asking for is a retrial and intuitively I really think he will get it and get his freedom, but how that is going to happen I don't know." As well as starting to write to Timothy, when Swithin retired he also joined his local amateur dramatics company - the Painswick Players. "I have been play writing for a number of years with a number of successes anyway, and then I had a whim to do stand-up comedy, with mentoring from comedian Susie Donkin. "I mentioned to her about Tim and asked her if it was a subject that would work as a show and she said absolutely. She helped me develop it." Swithin first performed the show 2 years ago as Dear Tim: Echoes of Death Row, and he is taking the latest updated incarnation to Croyden Amnesty next month and the King's Head in Islington in November for the Festival of New Writing. "I always get a very supportive reaction from the audiences and I'm trying to build up an email address list for people who would support Tim," he said. "From the advice I've been given, the best time for this support to happen is once the governor has announced the execution number. If there's enough international noise he might not give the final order for Timothy." Whatever happens, Swithin is planning to return to America next year to visit Timothy. "If the big 'what if' happens, I really want to be there. I would find it incredibly difficult but I feel we've built up over the years a strong connection and I just feel this is my friend now. "Tim was very pleased when he heard about the show. I think it gives him a lot of hope and really that's all I and other people can give him at the moment, hope. That is worth a lot, that's worth sanity in his situation." (source: Gloucestershire Echo) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 16 10:01:50 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 10:01:50 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, PENN., VA., S.C., FLA., LA., ILL. Message-ID: Sept. 16 TEXAS: An Unfinished Prison Story In 1967, Danny Lyon, a young photographer from New York who had spent the beginning of his career documenting the civil-rights movement, was granted permission by the Texas Department of Corrections to photograph freely inside the state's penitentiaries. He spent the next 14 months among the inmates at 6 institutions, producing a raw and revealing portrait of prison life that was published, in 1971, in the volume "Conversations with the Dead." Lyon wrote, in the book's foreword, that he had tried "to make a picture of imprisonment as distressing as I knew it to be." Several of the inmates Lyon had met in the jails stood out as the book's main characters, especially Billy McCune, a prisoner who was convicted of raping and beating a woman in a Fort Worth parking lot, in 1950. Originally condemned to die in the electric chair - at the time, rape cases were eligible for the death penalty - McCune had his sentence commuted to life, in 1952, after he cut off his own penis on death row. Diagnosed as psychotic, he lived in a 9-by-5-foot cell in a prison psych ward. However, after meeting Lyon, McCune began mailing the photographer a series of letters and colorful drawings that revealed him to be a person of artistic sensitivity and intelligence. In his book - which included facsimiles of McCune's art and transcriptions of his letters, along with mug shots and prison reports on him and other inmates - Lyon wrote, "Sometimes I would get as many as 3 envelopes a week, and sometimes only two in a month. But inside there was always something incredible, something beautiful, something a man had painted or written from a place where nothing should grow .... In the letters and drawings of a supposed madman, I have found someone much more eloquent than I to explain to the free world what life in prison is like." In the afterword to a new version of "Conversations with the Dead," just reissued by Phaidon, Lyon tells the chapters of McCune's story that unfolded after the book's initial publication. Released from prison in 1974, McCune visited Lyon at his home in Bernalillo, New Mexico, once, in 1982, then "vanished" from his life for the next 20 years. In 2000, though, Lyon received a letter from a nun at a homeless shelter in Kansas City, saying that McCune, a regular visitor to the shelter, was old and frail and hoped to see Lyon once more before he died. The 2 reunited in Kansas City several months later; McCune died in October, 2007. Reflecting on the decades since he made his remarkable body of work, Lyon writes, "If, back in 1968, I thought I could bring down the mighty walls of the Texas prison system by publishing 'Conversations with the Dead' and the work of Billy McCune, then those years of work are among the greatest failures of my life. . . . Prison is part and parcel of America, part of the American way. It's like a cancer inside us." (source; The New Yorker) ************** Man convicted in 1970s Tyler killing seeks to clear name Attorneys for a man convicted in the murder of an East Texas woman have filed paperwork to declare their client's innocence. Kerry Max Cook was convicted in the 1977 killing of Linda Jo Edwards, 21, of Tyler. Though originally sentenced to death, Cook maintained his innocence and a court overturned the verdict, spurring 2 subsequent trials. The 2nd ended in a mistrial and the 3rd sent him back to death row. Facing a 4th trial in 1999, with the State again pursuing the death penalty, Cook pleaded no contest and was granted a sentence of time served after spending more than 20 years on death row. On Tuesday, Cook's lawyers, Cheryl Wattley and Steven Rosen, sought to clear his name based on 5 different grounds: --That he is innocent of the rape and murder of Linda Jo Edwards --New scientific evidence requires that Cook's conviction be vacated --The State suppressed exculpatory evidence it possessed prior to entry of Cook's no-contest plea --Cook's due process rights were violated by the State's alleged destruction of exculpatory evidence --Cook's due process rights were violated by the presentation of false testimony from James Mayfield The documents were filed with the 114th Judicial District Court of Smith County. According to the documents, Edwards lived in the same apartment complex as Cook at the time of her death. Lawyers called the original accusations against him "bizarre and wholly unsupported," saying prosecutors' theory was that "Mr. Cook (who is heterosexual) was a closeted gay man who brutally raped, mutilated and murdered his female neighbor in an act of 'lust' and rage over his own so-called 'sexual ambivalence.'" Lawyers argue that new post-conviction DNA testing supports Cook's claim of innocence, saying that of the tests conducted on dozens of samples and cuttings from evidence at the scene, none yielded a trace of his DNA. Instead, lawyers say the tests connected another man, James Mayfield, to the incident. The documents allege DNA tests revealed Mayfield's semen was present on a pair of Edwards' torn underwear. Mayfield was Edwards' married former lover and testified at Cook's original trial. Cook's attorneys allege that Mayfield "had both motive and opportunity to commit the crime." The tests conducted were not available at the time of Cook's 1999 no contest plea, Wattley and Rosen say. "In light of the record as a whole, this new scientific evidence establishes ... that Cook would not have been convicted had it been available at the time of his plea in February 1999," the documents read. (source: KSLA news) PENNSYLVANIA: Why Philly is the Perfect Place for the Pope to Denounce the Death Penalty I guess there is no bad place to call for an end to execution. But Philadelphia, the City of Love, is a really divine place for his Holiness to denounce death. Just this year, Governor Tom Wolf announced a halt on all executions in Pennsylvania, citing deep concerns about errors and biases inherent in the system. A recent study shows that a majority of death sentences are coming from only 2% of US counties. Philadelphia County has the third largest death row population of any county, and we have THE highest rate of overturned death sentences in the country. Studies consistently show that the race of the victim, the county where a crime is committed and access to financial resources often determine who will get the death penalty more than the severity of the crime. As death penalty lawyer Bryan Stevenson, founder of Equal Justice Initiative, has said: "When it comes to the death penalty, you are better off being guilty and rich than poor and innocent." We now have over 150 people who have been released from death row because of new evidence - the latest only this past week. Montez Spradley, sentenced to death in Alabama only to be freed from prison a decade later... innocent of the crime for which he was almost executed. Even tomorrow, Oklahoma plans to execute Richard Glossip whose case is riddled with errors, causing many to believe he is innocent (over 250,000 have signed the petition asking for his life to be spared). Like Spradley, Glossip is being convicted solely on the testimony of one witness (who confessed to the crime and got life), and with no physical evidence linking Glossip to the crime. 6 of those 155 exonerations stories are from Pennsylvania -- people who could have been wrongfully executed. That means for every nine executions carried out in the United States, one person has been found to be innocent. What if an airline crashed one out of every 10 flights? So this is the time to abolish the death penalty. Despite having one of the largest death rows in the country -- with 184 inmates -- Pennsylvania has been losing steam when it comes to actually executing people. We've had only three executions since the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976, and the last execution was in 1999... a trend we see around the country. It may be that we are finally ready to find better forms of justice than the death penalty. In 2014, just 7 states carried out executions -- 3 of which accounted for 80 % of them (Texas, Missouri and Florida). Last year, death sentences in the United States hit a 40-year low, and executions were at a 20-year low. Recent polls show that for the 1st time in decades a majority of Americans prefer life in prison over the death penalty. And this is even more pronounced among young people -- including young people of faith, who are deeply troubled that 85 % of executions take place in the Bible Belt. Another great reason the Pope's voice is desperately needed on this issue - after all, Catholics have had a consistent ethic of life that shapes their thinking on issues like capital punishment... and many evangelicals are resonating with that seamless garment of a consistent life ethic. Victims' groups, such as Journey of Hope, Murder Victims' Families for Reconciliation and the Forgiveness Project, are gaining traction as they insist that capital punishment creates a new set of victims and perpetuates violence instead of healing. As you listen to them, you can't help but be convinced that we can do better than killing to show that killing is wrong. Just this year we saw Nebraska become the f1st conservative-led state in 40 years to abolish the death penalty - and several may be right behind. In many states, political conservatives concerned about the high cost of the death penalty are leading the way, pointing out that all the money wasted on the death penalty could be better used to support victims, prevent crime and repair broken schools and families. Pennsylvania -- home of the original U.S. Capitol, the birthplace of American democracy, the iconic site of the Declaration of Independence-- holds an important place in American history. And a part of that history is that our Commonwealth was founded by Quakers, who had abolished slavery in 1688, nearly 200 years before it was brought to an end. And it was the Quakers who denounced the death penalty long before the rest of us, insisting that better forms of justice are possible. I can't help but think old William Penn would be proud of Gov.Wolf earlier this year as he made his announcement to halt all executions. Penn was a pacifist and a serious skeptic of capital punishment. His Quaker heritage held that every human being carries the essence of God, and that no one should ever take the life of another, not even the state. As Pope Francis leads worship on JFK Boulevard in the heart of Philadelphia, a statue of William Penn will be looking down on him from atop City Hall... and I can't help but think our Quaker forefather will be smiling - especially as Pope Francis continues to insist that every person carries the image of God in them... and that no one is beyond redemption. I look forward to the end of the death penalty, and I hope we get one step closer to it as the Pope comes to the City of Love. (source: Shane Claiborne, Founder and board member of The Simple Way----Huffington Post) ************** Death Penalty Sought Against Former Delco Police Officer A former Colwyn, Delaware County police officer now faces the death penalty if convicted of murdering his ex-girlfriend and trying to gun down her husband and daughter. He pleaded not guilty today. Seeking capital punishment in Delaware County. "We only do it in rare cases." District Attorney Jack Whelan says Stephen Rozniakowski deserves it for the bloodshed 10 days before this past Christmas at Valerie Morrow's house in Glenolden, just hours after she'd taken out a protection from abuse order against him. "He had a callous disregard for that court order, and went and carried out the execution with the intent to kill all 3 family members." Morrow's husband was awakened and shot back. And despite the attack on her mom and the bullet wound in her arm, Morrow's 15-year-old daughter took action. "She was able to knock the gun out of his hand, run down the steps, and flee to safety." She watched in court, scarred but not scared, as Rozniakowski was arraigned. (source: CBS news) ******************* DA to seek death penalty against ex-officer charged in death Prosecutors plan to seek the death penalty in the case of a former suburban Philadelphia police officer accused of killing his ex-girlfriend and wounding her daughter. 32-year-old Stephen Rozniakowski of Norwood is charged in Delaware County with criminal homicide murder, attempted murder and aggravated assault. District Attorney Jack Whelan said Tuesday he would seek capital punishment if Rozniakowski is convicted of 1st-degree murder, citing a protection from abuse order, risk to another person and another felony at the time of the slaying. Authorities alleged that the part-time Colwyn officer killed Valerie Morrow and shot her daughter in December in Glenolden before he was wounded by the victim's husband, a part-time Morton officer. Whelan also said he believed the state Supreme Court would nullify the governor's moratorium on the death penalty. (source: Associated Press) VIRGINIA: Attorneys say Ricky Gray 'remorseful' for Harvey murders Lawyers for Ricky Gray, the man sentenced to death for the 2006 New Year's Day murders in Richmond, told a judge their client is "remorseful" for his actions. Attorneys argued his case in federal court Tuesday. Gray was convicted in the brutal murders of the Harvey family. The family was robbed and found slain in their Woodland Heights home, which was set on fire. In a brief filed in April, Gray's lawyers say he should be able to argue that his trial lawyers did not perform to acceptable standards. The court now has 120 days to consider the claims. Gray was convicted in a series of murders that grabbed national attention because of the brutality and number of victims. The youngest were sisters Stella and Ruby Harvey. Gray, with the help of Ray Dandridge, also killed the girls' parents, Bryan and Kathryn. A week later, Percyell Tucker, his wife Mary and their daughter, Ashley Baskerville - who was an accomplice in the Harveys' murder - were also killed. Gray was sentenced to death for the girls' murders. (source: WWBT news) ************* Roberts' Attorneys Work To Block Death Penalty; 4-Month Trial Eyed Preparations for the 1st capital murder trial in Loudoun in 3 decades continued in Circuit Court on Monday when defense attorneys again pressed to remove the possibility of a death penalty for Anthony R. Roberts. Roberts, 26, was indicted in February on 5 counts of capital murder and other crimes in connection with the 2009 killing of William Bennett and the beating of his wife Cynthia in Lansdowne. In court Monday, defense attorneys argued that the wording of the grand jury indictments failed to include enough information to allow the death penalty to be considered and prosecutors pressed for Judge Thomas D. Horne to set a date for the trial, which could take four months to complete. In arguing that Roberts should only face the possibility of life in prison, his attorneys pointed to a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court opinion that the charging documents must include all the elements required for defendants to have notice of the maximum charge they face. In that case, Alleyne v. United States, the defendant was charged and found guilty by a jury of carrying a firearm during a crime of violence. The judge then also applied a conviction for brandishing a firearm, which carried a 5-year mandatory sentence. The opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas found that the charging documents in the Alleyne case did not include elements permitting conviction on the brandishing charge. Roberts' attorneys said the Loudoun indictments were required to identify the aggravating factors required for a death sentence in Virginia. Prosecutors said the indictments for capital murder incorporate the possibility of the death penalty and noted the voluminous record of motions in the case in which the defense requested additional resources and support specifically because the death penalty was a possibility. If Horne grants the motion, the maximum sentence Roberts would face would be life without parole, unless prosecutors seek new indictments. Horne told the attorneys he would issue a written ruling on the case. The defense also is continuing its examination of the grand jury selection system to determine whether they will argue that jurors were not selected from a fair cross section of the community. They asked for 6 years of records relating to Loudoun's jury pool, including returned jury surveys and the names of individuals who were identified by the jury commissioners and the chief judge as being qualified to serve. Horne approved the request for the information. According to information provided in court, the 2015 grand jury, the pool started with about 15,000 qualified residents who returned surveys and was narrowed to 300 at random by computer. The chief judge cut that list in 1/2 and 7 grand jury members were selected at random. Information available to the commissioners and the judge did not include information such as race, ethnic background or gender. County prosecutors have been pressing for several months for the setting of a trial date, while defense attorneys argued it was too soon to know the full scope of the case. On Monday, the 2 sides told Horne they expect the trial and sentencing to take 3 or 4 months. They envision 4 to 6 weeks for the trial and then, if Roberts is found guilty of capital offenses, another 2 months to present evidence during the sentencing phase when jurors would decide whether to send him to death row. The defense attorneys again urged Horne to delay setting a trial date until at least December because of the large amount of evidence turned over by prosecutors last month. A decision could come Sept. 24, when another motions hearing is scheduled. (source: Leesburg Today) SOUTH CAROLINA: Judge to weigh arguments on gag order in Dylann Roof murder case For more than 2 months, a judge's gag order has stopped officials from releasing more public records about the shooting that killed nine people at Emanuel AME Church in downtown Charleston. On Wednesday, attorneys for the victims' families, church officials, news media and the federal government will discuss whether those restrictions should continue. Ninth Circuit Judge J.C. Nicholson issued the order in mid-July without a request from anyone involved in the prosecution of Dylann Roof, who faces the death penalty in the June 17 attack. Roof, 21, also is charged with federal hate crimes and religious freedom violations that could be punishable through execution. Nicholson made the move without anyone's input, he said, because he was worried about the effects that 911 calls and crime-scene photographs would have on victims' loved ones and survivors. He also worried that releasing such information would somehow harm the police agencies involved with the case, he said. Dispatch recordings, including 911 calls, and police supplemental reports are routinely made public after violent crimes. They often shed light on authorities' response to crimes. In the shooting at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, The Post and Courier asked for copies of the Charleston Police Department reports and audio recordings through a S.C. Freedom of Information Act request. The newspaper did not inquire about photos of the scene. Nicholson welcomed input on his gag order, and he got it from 7 groups, including one made up of the newspaper and other news media who filed FOIA requests with investigators. Wednesday's 9:30 a.m. hearing at the downtown Charleston County Judicial Center will give attorneys for the seven a chance to orally argue positions they already laid out in court filings. The last time Nicholson discussed his order publicly during a July 16 proceeding, Roof appeared at the courthouse in person. (source: The Post and Courier) FLORIDA: Tisdale jury selection: Potential jurors screened for trial Tuesday Jury selection for the trial of Eriese Tisdale, who is accused of killing a law enforcement officer, crawled along Tuesday with a small group of potential jurors returning after a day of answering questions. Tisdale, 28, is accused of gunning down St. Lucie County Sheriff's Sgt. Gary Morales on Feb. 28, 2013, during a traffic stop on Naylor Terrace, south of Edwards Road in Fort Pierce. He's never denied shooting Morales to authorities, but has claimed his actions were in self-defense. He's pleaded not guilty to 1st-degree murder and other offenses and faces the death penalty if convicted. On Tuesday, Tisdale entered court in a black jacket, khakis, a blue dress shirt and tie and leg irons. He spent the day watching potential jurors answer a host of questions about what they knew of Morales' killing and what media exposure they'd had since the homicide. Several men and women were dismissed for saying they'd made up their mind about Tisdale's guilt and couldn't set their opinions aside. Some others were dismissed after telling prosecutors and defense attorneys they were unable to sit in judgment of another charged with a crime. Jury panelists were asked about their ability to serve on a death penalty trial and what would be expected of them. Some people expressed religious reasons for being against capital punishment or said they were unwilling to follow the law and vote to recommend capital punishment. At the end of the day, 32 people were dismissed from the trial and 10 were told to return for more questions. 1 man never returned from a lunch break, something that was not missed by Circuit Judge Dan Vaughn, who asked that the man be contacted. A group of 24 will return Wednesday to go through the same process. Court officials have scheduled another group of 125 potential jurors to undergo questioning Thursday. A jury of 12 plus alternates are required for a death penalty trial. The panel will determine guilt during a phase expected to last a week. If Tisdale is convicted of 1st-degree murder, the jury will break for three days then return for a weeklong penalty phase. It's then they'll decide whether to recommend, by a majority vote, execution or life in prison without the possibility of parole. A judge makes the final decision, but must give great weight to the jury's recommendation. Court resumes Wednesday at 8:45 a.m. (source: tcpalm.com) ************* Sentencing phase begins today in Miami Subs founder's murder case A Broward jury returns to court this morning to determine whether the man convicted of arranging the 2001 murder of Miami Subs founder Gus Boulis should be executed for the crime. Anthony "Big Tony" Moscatiello was convicted July 1 of one count of 1st-degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder. The same jury that convicted him will now decide whether to recommend life in prison or the death penalty. The jury's recommendation does not have to be unanimous, and it is only binding if the majority votes for life in prison. If a death sentence is recommended, Broward Circuit Judge Ilona Holmes will decide whether to accept or reject it. No matter what the outcome, prosecutors and defense lawyers agree that Moscatiello will likely die in prison. He's 77 now, and the appeals process in death penalty cases typically lasts decades. "What's the deterrent value, really?" his lawyer, Ken Malnik, said after Moscatiello's conviction. "If he's alive, he'll be so infirm, it really makes no sense." Prosecutors say the death penalty is appropriate under the circumstances of the case, regardless of the defendant's age. According to the Florida Department of Corrections, the oldest inmate to be executed in Florida was Charlie Grifford, 72, who was put to death on Feb. 21, 1951. Ten months earlier, Grifford shot and killed a Florida state representative, Charles J. Schuh Jr., in the victim's office in Pinellas County. The oldest inmate on Florida's death row currently is Theodore Rogers, 75, who was convicted of the 2001 murder of his wife, Teresa Henderson, in Orange County. Boulis, 51, was gunned down on Feb. 6, 2001, while driving away from his office in Fort Lauderdale. Months earlier, he had sold his SunCruz Casino boat fleet to a business partnership in a deal that turned out to be fraudulent. One of the new owners, Adam Kidan, testified that he hired Moscatiello for mob protection from Boulis, but prosecutors said Moscatiello decided on his own to protect his income stream by killing Boulis. The man thought to be the shooter, John Gurino, was killed in an unrelated shooting in Boca Raton 2 years later. Moscatiello's 2 co-defendants have already been sentenced. Anthony "Little Tony" Ferrari was tried and convicted of murder and conspiracy in 2013. He was sentenced to life in prison. James "Pudgy" Fiorillo pleaded guilty to 1 count of conspiracy to commit murder and was sentenced to 6 years, which he had already served. He testified against both Ferrari and Moscatiello. Jurors will hear testimony from prosecutors and the defense today and Thursday before deliberating over Moscatiello's recommended punishment. (source: Sun-Sentinel) ******************** Death penalty sought for 'Big Tony' in businessman's slaying Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for Anthony "Big Tony" Moscatiello for orchestrating a 2001 mob hit on a prominent South Florida businessman. Moscatiello was convicted in July of 1st-degree murder and murder conspiracy in the fatal shooting of Konstantinos "Gus" Boulis during a dispute over a fleet of lucrative gambling ships. Trial evidence showed Boulis was shot by a hit man hired by Moscatiello, a reputed member of New York's Gambino crime family. The sentencing phase starts Tuesday in Broward County Circuit Court. A jury will recommend either life in prison or the death penalty for Moscatiello, but the final decision rests with the judge. Co-defendant Anthony "Little Tony" Ferrari was also convicted and is serving a life sentence. Boulis also founded the Miami Subs restaurant chain. (source: Associated Press) LOUISIANA: Caddo District Attorney assembles committee for death penalty consideration Keandre Broadway had just celebrated his 13th birthday 1 day prior, when he was hit by a stray bullet. It was a wound that claimed his life. Acting Caddo District Attorney Dale Cox thought the man suspected of firing the fatal shot, Antonious Cawthorne, would face the death penalty for his alleged crime, but a recent policy change means Cawthorne escapes the possibility of capital punishment. "They were cases that could have been 1st degree murder and could have been eligible for the death penalty but we chose not to," Cox said of the office's recently-assembled death penalty committee. While the district attorney typically has sole discretion on when to seek the death penalty, Cox is trying something new. Cox has put together a committee of the office's most experience murder trial lawyers -- men, woman, black and white -- who decide together when to seek the death penalty. The committee's looked at 3 murder cases -- including Cawthorne's -- and each time decided to forgo the death option. "We didn't want 1 person having that much power because the death penalty is the ultimate penalty," Cox said. State Public Defender Jay Dixon says he doesn't know enough about the Caddo committee to comment officially, but he says -- in general -- it would seem the more people involved, the better, and he disagrees with one person holding sole power. Cox came under fire recently with write-ups in the New York Times, New Yorker, and an upcoming 60 Minutes piece, each criticizing or expected to criticize his frequent and passionate use of the death penalty. He says the committee is not a direct reaction to the national attention, but he is cognizant of community support. "Before we all agree as a state -- as a DA's office -- to seek it, I want to make sure it's the kind of case that truly reflects the need for it, and the kind of case that the community would accept." Cox said. Cox's new committee goes over evidence, arguments and strategies, considering a suspect's age, education and mental health history. Cox says the meetings take hours and can be very thorough. They try to take into account the individual case and outside parties, like the victim's family and public at large. "You'd be surprised -- because I've been surprised -- how many victim's families do not want the death penalty," Cox said. The committee will meet again this Thursday, Sept.17 at 3 PM to examine the evidence against Grover Cannon in the Aug. 5 shooting death of Shreveport Police Ofc. Thomas LaValley. (source: KTBS news) ILLINOIS: Professor Argues Death Penalty Effectiveness Some Illinois criminology experts are asking lawmakers to hold off on trying to reinstate capital punishment in Illinois. State Senator Bill Haine (D-Alton) says he'll introduce the idea in a couple of weeks when the Senate returns - he says the worst of the worst, including cop killers and mass murderers, should be dealt with harshly. But Ryan Williams, an associate professor of criminal justice at the University of Illinois Springfield, says there's no evidence capital punishment is a deterrent. "Decades of research has shown there's little to no effect that capital punishment deters any more than an alternative non-capital punishment like life in prison without parole," Williams says. Williams also says cost arguments are suspect at best - while it costs a lot to incarcerate someone for life, it also costs a lot to conduct a death penalty trial. Williams says cases in Texas, for example, cost an average of 2.3 million dollars. (source: WBGZ news) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 16 10:04:28 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 10:04:28 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OKLA. Message-ID: Sept. 16 OKLAHOMA----impending execution Countdown to an Execution in Oklahoma At 3 p.m. on Wednesday, the State of Oklahoma plans to execute Richard Glossip in the face of mounting evidence that he is innocent, as he has argued all along. Mr. Glossip was convicted of masterminding the 1997 murder of a man named Barry Van Treese, who owned the motel where Mr. Glossip worked. The conviction was based on no physical evidence and relied largely on the testimony of Justin Sneed, the handyman who carried out the brutal killing with a baseball bat. Mr. Sneed is serving a life sentence without parole - a result of a deal he struck with prosecutors in exchange for testifying that he acted under Mr. Glossip's orders. The execution was originally scheduled for January, but it was put on hold when the Supreme Court agreed to consider a claim, brought by Mr. Glossip and other death-row inmates, that Oklahoma's lethal-injection drug protocol would cause them severe pain and suffering. The court ruled against the inmates in June, and Oklahoma immediately rescheduled Mr. Glossip's execution. This case pretty well sums up the state of the death penalty in America. Supporters like to say it is reserved for the "worst of the worst," but that is demonstrably untrue. It is more accurate to say that capital punishment is arbitrary, racist and meted out to those without the resources to defend themselves. That was the conclusion of Gov. Tom Wolf of Pennsylvania, who stopped all executions this year because of his concerns over "the accuracy and fundamental fairness" of the state's death sentencing system. Mr. Wolf pointed out a fact that is true for the whole country: Poor people and minority defendants are more likely to be charged with capital offenses, particularly when the victim is white. And then there is the steady stream of exonerations of people who had been sentenced to death since 1973 - 155 and counting, with five in 2015 alone. Only last week, an Alabama man was released after nearly 10 years, 1/3 of that time on death row. Montez Spradley was originally sentenced to life in prison by a jury, but the judge overrode that verdict and sentenced him to death. As in the Glossip case, there was no physical evidence and the prosecution relied on the testimony of a tainted witness. Bad lawyering is behind most death sentences, and Mr. Glossip's case is no exception. His first lawyer failed to introduce, among other things, Mr. Sneed's videotaped confession, during which police interrogators threatened him and said it "is definitely going to be better for you" to testify against Mr. Glossip. An appeals court threw out the conviction, finding that the case against Mr. Glossip was "extremely weak" and that his lawyers were ineffective. In 2004, he was convicted by a second jury, which also did not see the Sneed confession. At least 1 juror has stepped forward to say that had this and other information been presented at trial, the vote would have been different. Last year, Mr. Sneed's daughter wrote to the parole board to say she believes Mr. Glossip is innocent. Her father testified the way prosecutors wanted only to save his own life, she wrote, and would recant now but is afraid of losing his plea deal. The Oklahoma County prosecutor, David Prater, has called the efforts to exonerate Mr. Glossip a PR campaign. That's a remarkably dismissive thing to say when a man's life is at stake. This case is yet another reminder that the death penalty - in addition to being immoral and ineffective - has already taken innocent lives, and as long as it exists it is likely to take more. (source: Editorial, New York Times) ************** This May Be Oklahoma Death Row Inmate Richard Glossip's Last Chance----"I don't want to die for something I didn't do." Oklahoma plans to execute condemned killer Richard Glossip on Wednesday, despite fresh evidence supporting his claim of innocence. This will be the state's 3rd attempt to put Glossip to death. With his state and federal appeals exhausted and Gov. Mary Fallin saying on Tuesday that she won't intervene, Glossip's last hope is a motion his lawyers filed with the state Court of Criminal Appeals based on the new evidence. He is scheduled to die at 3 p.m. local time. Supporters of Glossip, 52, said they were outraged that his life hangs on the testimony of a convicted murderer who struck a plea deal to avoid execution himself. The man's daughter and his former cellblock neighbor both have said the testimony was false. Defense lawyer Don Knight said he and his team can make the case for Glossip's innocence, but need more time to finish investigating evidence that Knight said wasn't fully explored by Glossip's original defense nearly 2 decades ago. "We've gotten some work done, but there's a lot more to do," Knight said Monday. In 1997, Best Budget Inn handyman Justin Sneed confessed to beating his boss, Barry Van Treese, to death with a baseball bat. A week later, Sneed said that Glossip, his supervisor at the motel, had instructed him to do it. Glossip was convicted of murder and sentenced to death during a 2004 retrial. Sneed is serving a life sentence at a medium-security prison after striking a deal to finger Glossip in the plot. "I know Justin made up stuff to try and save his own life, and get a better deal: a life sentence on a soft yard," Michael Scott, Sneed's former cellblock neighbor, wrote in a sworn affidavit released Monday by Glossip's lawyers. "I heard Justin talking about the deal he made, and what he did to Richard. Justin was happy and proud of himself for selling Richard Glossip out." The affidavit was among the pages of new information Glossip's lawyers cite as proof that Glossip's prior defense was incompetent and that Sneed lied. The governor's office said Monday it would "take seriously" the lawyers' new information, but wasn't compelled to intervene because "the proper venue for this is in a court of law." Fallin's office said in a lengthy statement on Tuesday that it wouldn't act to delay the execution. "It's been increasingly clear over the past couple weeks that they're not interested in a legal battle but a PR campaign," Fallin spokesman Alex Weintz said of Glossip's lawyers. The governor's office has said postponing Glossip's execution would only "delay justice" for the victim's family. Glossip's case gained widespread attention this year after he became the lead plaintiff in a lawsuit against the state that reached the U.S. Supreme Court. Glossip challenged the lethal injection drug mixture that had caused several botched executions in Oklahoma. The Supreme Court decided in June that states may use sedatives in lethal injection drug cocktails. Meanwhile, death penalty opponents, including Sister Helen Prejean and Barry Scheck, are leading public calls for a reprieve in light of the new evidence. The new material also includes sworn affidavits from Glossip's ex-girlfriend, who lived with him at the motel at the time of the killing, and the former cop-turned-lawyer who testified that detectives who questioned Glossip and Sneed had a history of abuse, misconduct and coercing wrongful confessions. Glossip's team on Friday released newly discovered information from experts and witnesses, supporting the defense claim that Sneed lied to police to save himself from a death sentence. Phil Cross, an investigative reporter for Oklahoma City's Fox 25, also has revealed discrepancies in the medical examiner's testimony that raise new questions about whether Glossip's jury in his retrial was misinformed. A juror from Glossip's original 1998 trial came forward this month, saying she would not have voted to convict him if she had known of the information now coming to light. Nearly a year ago, Sneed's daughter wrote the Oklahoma clemency board to say that her father had talked about recanting his original testimony against Glossip, but fears he'll be the one to die if he does. Glossip is among 49 inmates on Oklahoma's death row, and may be one of the few who never killed someone with his own hands. "Actually, Rich asked me to kill Barry, that's what he'd done," Sneed told detectives, according to police transcripts. Glossip admitted he made several "stupid" decisions after Van Treese's murder. Most notably, when Sneed showed up at Glossip's room with a black eye and said he'd killed Van Treese, Glossip failed to mention the detail to police. He later said he didn't take Sneed seriously. Those confident in Glossip's guilt say he's a manipulative mastermind who enticed a vulnerable, 19-year-old drug addict to do his bidding. Prosecutors said Sneed, who was living at the motel in exchange for maintenance work, was "totally dependent" on Glossip. The Best Budget Inn was in shabby condition and short on money. As manager, Glossip was responsible for both. According to the state's theory, Glossip feared losing his job and recruited Sneed to kill Van Treese. Glossip could then convince Van Treese's widow to give him the Best Budget Inn and a second motel in Tulsa. In exchange, prosecutors said, Sneed could take cash from Van Treese's car -- the motel receipts Van Treese collected from Glossip on each visit -- and the men would split the money. Members of the Van Treese family did not respond to repeated attempts to contact them. D-Anna Wood, Glossip's girlfriend at the time, said in a recently released affidavit that most people paid for motel rooms in cash. "Richard could have taken that money and run off anytime he wanted," Wood wrote. "But Richard would never has stolen from Barry. Richard was too honest." Knight is 1 of the 3 attorneys who earlier this year took up Glossip's case pro bono. He said 2 previous defense teams had made catastrophic mistakes. Glossip's original trial was defended so poorly that the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals overturned his 1st conviction. The state admitted its case was weak. The State concedes the only 'direct evidence' connecting Appellant to the murder was Sneed's trial testimony. No forensic evidence linked Appellant to murder and no compelling evidence corroborated Sneed's testimony that Appellant was the mastermind behind the murder. Glossip's first 2 defense teams never persuaded a court to accept a videotape of Sneed's police interview as evidence, and never confronted Sneed or the detectives with inconsistencies between the tape and their trial testimony. In August, Glossip's legal team released a comprehensive list of inconsistencies in Sneed's testimony. It shows Sneed has given at least 8 different accounts of the murder plot. Oklahoma, 2nd only to Texas in the number of executions (and with the most executions per capita), has a far from perfect record on the death penalty. Since 1973, 10 people have been exonerated from Oklahoma's death row, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, a nonprofit that tracks capital punishment data. The specter of death doesn't appear to unnerve Glossip. 9 months ago, Glossip told HuffPost he came to terms with the state's zeal to kill him years ago. He remains hopeful for a repreive. If the courts deny him, Glossip said he hopes the attention his case has generated will speed the demise of death penalty once and for all -- even if it happens too late to save him. "If I gotta die, I at last want it to mean something," Glossip said. "I sure don't want to die, don't get me wrong. I don't want be a martyr. But I don't want to die for something I didn't do." (source: Kim Bellware, Associate Chicago Editor, Huffington Post) *********** Supporters of Richard Glossip rally on eve of Oklahoma execution ---- Lawyers and supporters say new evidence suggests convicted man was framed but governor and district attorney insist they are convinced of his guilt But Glossip's lawyers asked the Oklahoma court of criminal appeals to halt the execution, saying they uncovered new details in the case, including a signed affidavit from an inmate who served time in prison with Justin Sneed, who was convicted of fatally beating Van Treese. Sneed was the prosecution's key witness and testified that Glossip masterminded the killing because he was afraid Van Treese was about to fire him for embezzling money and poorly managing the motel. Sneed was sentenced to life in prison in exchange for his testimony. A fellow inmate, Michael Scott, said in an affidavit that he heard Sneed say "he set Richard Glossip up, and that Richard Glossip didn't do anything". "We're asking for a stay of execution to give the court more time to review this new evidence, which we think casts grave doubt on Richard's guilt," said Mark Henricksen, one of Glossip's attorneys. Glossip maintained his innocence on Tuesday in a brief telephone interview with the Associated Press and said he remained optimistic his lethal injection would be halted. "They'll never take that from me," Glossip said. "I'll hope for the best. I won't let it bring me down. "If you've got to go out ... you don't want to be bitter and angry about it." Glossip's case has drawn attention from death penalty opponents, and his family and supporters rallied Tuesday at the Oklahoma Capitol. They want Republican Governor Mary Fallin to issue a 60-day stay to give Glossip's attorneys more time to investigate new leads. But the governor said in a statement on Wednesday that she remained convinced of Glossip's guilt and "after carefully reviewing the facts of this case multiple times" had no plans to issue a stay. Among his supports is Hollywood actress Susan Sarandon, who played a nun in the movie Dead Man Walking. The woman Sarandon portrayed, anti-death penalty advocate Sister Helen Prejean, serves as Glossip's spiritual adviser and plans to attend his execution on Wednesday. The Oklahoma county district attorney David Prater, whose office prosecuted Glossip before Prater was elected, said he had reviewed boxes of evidence and was convinced of Glossip's guilt. Glossip's execution is scheduled for 3pm on Wednesday. Department of Corrections spokeswoman Terri Watkins said the time was moved from 6pm so the process did not disrupt a shift change and meal time at the facility, and so that media and execution witnesses would be off the prison grounds before dark. (source: The Guardian) *************** Court upholds death penalty in deadly 2003 Oklahoma crime spree The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals split 2-1 Tuesday to uphold the Oklahoma death sentence of Scott Eizember, who went on a deadly crime spree in 2003. One judge on a 3-judge panel said the death sentence should be overturned because a juror should not have been allowed on the jury. Eizember was sentenced to be executed for the bludgeoning death of A.J. Cantrell, 76, and to 150 years in prison in the shotgun slaying of Patsy Cantrell, 70, at their Depew home. "Scott Eizember left a Tulsa jail intent on settling a score," Judge Neil Gorsuch of the Denver-based appeals court wrote in a 34-page decision. "He was upset with his ex-girlfriend, Kathy Biggs, because she had tipped off authorities about his violation of a protective order. " Eizember had broken into the Cantrells' home to watch and wait for his ex-girlfriend to return to her mother's house across the street. Eizember also was convicted of shooting with intent to kill against Tyler Montgomery, the 16-year-old son of Biggs, and assault with a dangerous weapon against Karla Wright, Biggs' mother. Chief Judge Mary Beck Briscoe, in a 30-page dissenting opinion, wrote that one juror's views in favor of the death penalty raise doubts about her ability to be fair and impartial. The views could have indicated that the juror might not have met her obligation to also consider a sentence of life in prison without parole, Briscoe wrote. The two judges in the majority concluded that the juror's views about the death penalty, which she stated during jury selection, were inconclusive about her ability to be fair. The 2 judges wrote that, in any event, it was not unreasonable for the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals to have concluded that the juror did not need to be excused. Tuesday's decision involved a review of the 2007 state appeals court decision. The Oklahoma appeals court split 3-2 to uphold Eizember's death sentence. The dissenting judges concluded that the sentence "was tainted when biased jurors who sat on his jury should have been excused." The federal appellate judges said they based their decision, in part, on the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that trial judges are allowed considerable discretion to decide whether a potential juror should be excluded. (source: The Oklahoman) *************** Execution day arrives: Debate continues over death penalty and Richard Glossip's case ---- Fallin denies inmate's latest request for delay More than 18 years have passed since Richard Glossip was arrested in connection with the beating death of his boss at an Oklahoma City motel. On Tuesday, about 24 hours before his scheduled execution for the death of Barry Van Treese, Glossip lost one of his final chances to avoid Oklahoma's death chamber. Gov. Mary Fallin rejected Glossip's request for a 60-day stay of execution, increasing the likelihood that Glossip, 52, will be executed at 3 p.m. Wednesday at Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester. Glossip's attorneys began filing another round of appeals late Tuesday, the 1st an application for post-conviction review with the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals. They also were expected to file a petition for review with the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Denver by Wednesday morning. The appeals are part of the final efforts from a man whose case has triggered international attention as death-penalty opponents try to have his life spared. Many of Glossip's supporters question how the state can put Glossip to death while the person who confessed to the actual slaying was not condemned. Death penalty opponent Sister Helen Prejean has made public appearances on Glossip's behalf and insists he is innocent. Two juries have disagreed. This week, Glossip's attorneys released 2 affidavits with statements that appear to cast doubt on the credibility of Justin Sneed, who admits to killing Van Treese but says he was ordered to do so by Glossip. Fallin's office says its review of the case indicates that jurors made the right decision. "The deeper our review goes, the more convinced we become of Richard Glossip's guilt," said Alex Weintz, Fallin's spokesman. "His lawyers simply haven't presented any information that would make anyone in my office believe that the 12 jurors who convicted him got it wrong." One juror's account of Glossip's trial Glossip's supporters have decried every aspect of his case, from the way Glossip's earlier defense teams represented their client to the use of capital punishment. A juror from Glossip's 1998 trial wrote a letter to KOKH-TV, Oklahoma City's Fox affiliate, stating the juror would reconsider the verdict in light of information that hadn't been presented at the time. But Juror No. 1 in Glossip's 2004 trial, identified as David Piscitello, told the Tulsa World he is tired of the publicity and judgment from those who were not in the courtroom when either trial took place. "I was in there for 30 days," Piscitello said in a phone interview. "A month of my life, 8 hours a day was dedicated towards (the trial) and people are coming in and trying to undermine (the verdict) ... It just irritates me." Piscitello wrote a letter to Fallin's office saying he supports her decision to go forward with Glossip's execution, and he told the World that the evidence shared by Glossip's attorneys during a press conference Monday did not change his confidence in the jury's verdict. At first, he said, he was torn between a life-without-parole decision and the death penalty. But, he said he based his decision on evidence presented at trial that Glossip was manipulative and controlling. "If it wasn't for (Glossip), this kid (Sneed) never would have killed Barry Van Treese," he said. "He was the mastermind. So we decided to hold him to a higher level of accountability." As Juror No. 1, Piscitello was the closest to the stand and said he found Sneed and others who testified to be believable witnesses. "If he wasn't, he missed his calling because he would have been an Academy Award winner as an actor," he said. Glossip did not take the stand, although interrogation tapes showing him with police were played in court. "You could see him trying to work the detective," Piscitello said. "He came across in the interrogation tapes like a manipulator ... They asked the detective what he thought and ... He said the same thing, 'He's trying to bull---- me. He's a bull----ter.'" Piscitello said he hasn't discussed the case at length since finishing the trial but was compelled to do so after talking to an investigator with Glossip's legal team who visited his home within the past week. "The worst thing you can do to a juror is come up and say 'You helped execute an innocent man,'" he said. "From what we were presented at the trial that I was at and the group I was with, I can meet my maker with a clear conscience. I thought we delivered the right verdict." The state's case against Glossip Van Treese was asleep inside Room 102 at his motel late Jan. 6, where he typically stayed when making overnight visits. He had stopped by to issue checks on payday and get updated on his business' operations. Prosecutors claimed Glossip, the motel's manager, feared being fired because of the motel's poor condition and Van Treese's discovery that thousands of dollars were missing from the hotel's books. Sneed, a maintenance worker who was paid with room and board, did "pretty much whatever Rich asked him to do," according to trial testimony from their co-worker Billye Hooper. Prosecutors argued that Sneed was only 19 and had an 8th-grade education, meaning his limited intelligence and life circumstances made him fully dependent on Glossip. Court records also claimed Sneed believed he would be fired along with Glossip and forced to leave the complex. Prosecutors and police said Sneed - who they claim was promised up to $10,000 - entered Room 102 with a master key and beat Van Treese to death with a baseball bat. He then knocked on Glossip's door early Jan. 7 and told him what he had done. Later, according to court records, Glossip helped Sneed cover the room's window with Plexiglas, since it was broken during Sneed's struggle with Van Treese. Prosecutors alleged the pair went to Van Treese's car after the killing and split about $4,000 they found under a seat. Police found most of that money among the pair's possessions when they were arrested. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals later called it "the most compelling corroborative evidence" for the state's case, because no evidence indicated Sneed knew Van Treese kept large amounts of cash related to his business dealings in his car before Glossip told him. Glossip was found guilty of 1st-degree murder for remuneration and sentenced to die in 1998. He received the same conviction six years later after his first trial verdict was overturned on appeal. In Glossip's 2nd trial, Hooper, Sneed's co-worker, told the jury she did not believe Sneed would have killed Van Treese without being told to do so. Sneed's account has remained consistent since Glossip's 1st trial. Now 37 and serving life without parole in Lexington's Joseph Harp Correctional Center, he still maintains Glossip ordered the killing. "For one, he didn't know the man hardly at all," Hooper was recorded as saying. "... I wouldn't see, in my opinion, why he would have a reason to do such a violent act to someone that he hardly knew." Glossip told Hooper the window of Room 102 had been broken after a drunken fight, and Sneed told authorities the two fabricated that story to throw suspicion off them. Oklahoma City police found Van Treese's body 17 hours after he died. Initially, Sneed was nowhere to be found. "Rich's reaction to Justin, the fact that he left the property when Barry was there, things like that, just sort of started tying together," Hooper said of her belief in Glossip's involvement. "Because as a rule, he never would have done any of those things ... with Barry there." Appeal records indicate Glossip began selling his possessions immediately after Van Treese's death because "he was going to be moving on" and after being detained he admitted actively hiding Van Treese's body not to protect Sneed, but because he felt like he "was involved in it." Glossip has since filed multiple appeals, including one to the U.S. Supreme Court that challenged the drugs Oklahoma uses for lethal injection. His execution date was set following the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision in Glossip v. Gross, which ruled the use of the drug midazolam in executions was constitutional. Glossip's supporters question strength of case Glossip's attorneys and other supporters have been outspoken about their objections to his death sentence, saying he was convicted based on circumstantial evidence supported by the word of Sneed, who they say has motive to stay silent for fear of being sentenced to death himself. No direct evidence, such as fingerprints or DNA, exists that ties Glossip to Room 102 the night Van Treese died, and they argue killing Van Treese for his money was illogical. They additionally claim police interrogated Sneed in a way that led him to name Glossip as a suspect. Defense attorneys in both trials suggested Sneed acted alone. Glossip's new attorney, Don Knight, released an affidavit from a man who said he knew Glossip's brother Bobby, who was estranged from Richard Glossip. The man said he knew Bobby Glossip because they sold methamphetamine together out of Room 102 to people, including Sneed. The teenaged Sneed, according to the affidavit, had an addiction that was the catalyst for him reportedly stealing items from motel rooms and cars parked in the motel parking lot, and the new attorneys have implied Van Treese was killed because of Sneed's drug habit. Another affidavit, signed by a former inmate who was housed at the same prison as Sneed, alleged he overheard Sneed brag about setting Glossip up to take the harsher sentence in Van Treese's death. Glossip's website includes a letter that Prejean and others claim was written by Sneed's daughter, O'Ryan Justine Sneed, which states her father has talked to her about recanting his testimony and expresses belief in Glossip's innocence. O'Ryan Sneed has not publicly confirmed writing the unsigned letter and she has not spoken to media about the case. It was intended to be reviewed by the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board during Glossip's October clemency hearing, but was not received in time to be included in the file. On Aug. 31, Prejean and Sarandon appeared on a broadcast of the Dr. Phil show, which was wholly devoted to discussion of his case. Since the show aired, billionaire Richard Branson has written a letter calling for Fallin to stay Glossip's execution. Barry Scheck, co-director of the Innocence Project, also joined Coburn, former U.S. Attorney John Raley Jr. and former University of Oklahoma football coach Barry Switzer in urging Fallin to prevent what they said would be a mistake. When contacted by the World, Coburn declined additional comment, but Scheck said "skepticism is in order" when a state sentences someone to death and that enough questions have been raised about Glossip's guilt to warrant a stay. "One of the reasons we reached out to the senator is that it's our experience there is a coalition between conservatives and liberals on criminal justice reform," Scheck said. "One of the things that conservatives recognize is that the death penalty, particularly on the issue of innocents, is a serious problem." Mark Henricksen, one of Glossip's attorneys, said the legal team is looking into a new report that evidence was destroyed during Glossip's first appeal. They're also trying to determine if surveillance footage from a nearby establishment may show Sneed's involvement in the crime. The delay in presenting the new information to the court, he said, was partly due to getting witness statements under oath in affidavit form, adding that attorneys haven't known about most of the recent developments for more than a few weeks. Governor sees no reason to cast doubt on verdict Fallin released a statement Tuesday afternoon, saying the attorneys have rejected requests from public officials to examine the new information. "After reviewing it with my legal team, we have determined the vast majority of the limited content they have presented is not new; furthermore, we find none of the material to be credible evidence of Richard Glossip's innocence," she said. "After carefully reviewing the facts of this case multiple times, I see no reason to cast doubt on the guilty verdict reached by the jury or to delay Glossip's sentence of death." Van Treese's family has previously provided statements to the World discussing their belief in Glossip's guilt and said his execution would mean justice has been served. "I hope the execution brings a sense of closure and peace to the Van Treese family, who has suffered greatly because of Glossip???s crimes," Fallin said. (source: Tulsa World) ********** As Oklahoma nears execution, Breyer explains concerns----Richard Glossip to be executed using controversial drug Midazolam If Oklahoma puts Richard Glossip to death Wednesday, it will be the 1st time the controversial execution drug Midazolam has been used since a bitterly divided Supreme Court allowed its use in June over the objections of 2 justices who said the entire system of capital punishment should be re-examined. Without addressing the Glossip case in particular, Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer laid out his general concerns about the death penalty in a new interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer. Glossip's lawyers, meanwhile, are making frantic last minute claims of innocence, pointing to what they say is new evidence that would exonerate him. The lawyers, while unable to argue against Midazolam, are likely to file a flurry of other claims before Wednesday's deadline. The attorneys have asked Gov. Mary Fallon for a 60-day reprieve based on the new evidence of innocence they say they discovered in the past two weeks. Supporters of Glossip include death penalty activist Sister Helen Prejean and actress Susan Sarandon. "Although the use of Midazolam in this case has already been decided, the case raises very thorny questions about whether Oklahoma will be executing a potentially innocent man with a potentially tortuous drug," said Robert Dunham of the Death Penalty Information Center. Dunham says that since the ruling other executions have occurred but Midazolam was not a part of the protocol. Midazolam, is used in a handful of states. It is meant to cause unconsciousness but its critics say that it fails to produce a deep coma-like unconsciousness necessary to prevent a prisoner from feeling the painful effects of the other two drugs in the protocol. The case is also notable for the dissent that Justice Stephen Breyer issued on the last day of the Court's term. Joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Breyer said, for the 1st time, that he thought it was time for the Court to revisit the constitutionality of the death penalty. Although, in the past, some justices have said the death penalty is unconstitutional, no current sitting justice has said so. In an interview with Wolf Blitzer, Breyer reiterated his concerns about the punishment's reliability, and his belief that it is being arbitrarily imposed. "I think, it's time to revisit the issue," he said. "What I wrote in the opinion - first to suggest sometimes its the wrong person. Second, if you look at who is actually executed it seems pretty arbitrary," said Breyer. "Third, if you look at the average length of time it takes from the time a person is sentenced to death to the time of execution - 18 years now." "18 years before there is an execution," he repeated. "And if you look at the number of executions, it's fallen dramatically and they're almost all in a handful of counties." The death penalty, said Breyer, has changed since the decision that made it legal again. "This is not what people expected when they wrote the cases upholding the death penalty more than 40 years ago," he said. Glossip was convicted for the 1977 murder of Barry Van Treese. Last June Attorney General Scott Pruitt praised the Supreme Court's decision that went against Glossip and 2 other plaintiffs. "The families in these 3 cases have waited a combined 48 years for justice." he said. (source: myarklamiss.com) *************** A Man Who's Probably Innocent Will Die Today, And Lawyers Can't Save Him 18 years after the murder of motel owner Barry Van Treese, there is no concrete evidence to suggest Oklahoma death row inmate Richard Glossip was involved in the crime. According to witnesses, the actual killer, Justin Sneed, has repeatedly bragged about setting his former boss up by pinning him as the mastermind behind Treese's murder. Over time, new evidence has chipped away at the case against Glossip. Still, after a long battle to prove his innocence and have his sentence overturned, Glossip will be executed by lethal injection Wednesday afternoon. His looming execution highlights how difficult it is to have a conviction reversed - and for a death row inmate to walk free. "It's very difficult to exonerate anyone who's been wrongly convicted because the standard is much higher to reverse a conviction than to convict in the first place," Valena Beety, deputy director of the Clinical Law Program at West Virginia University and chair of the West Virginia Innocence Project, told ThinkProgress. "To convict someone, the prosecutor has to show that a defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. But once that conviction is in place, you're trying to reverse that with even more substantial evidence." Glossip was convicted in 1998 for the murder, which took place at the motel where he and Sneed worked. Without physical evidence, prosecutors argued that Glossip enlisted Sneed to kill their boss, because he was about to be terminated for embezzling money. Sneed's DNA was found all over the crime scene, authorities had a taped confession from him, and there was a recording of the killer striking a bargain with a detective to blame Glossip in order to reduce his sentence. But the strongest evidence in Glossip's favor was not presented in court. Glossip lost the legal battle and was sentenced to death. Years later, there was a ray of hope for him, when the Oklahoma Criminal Court of Appeals overturned the conviction based on the grossly inadequate representation that Glossip received. He was granted a new trial in 2004, but once again, the defense attorneys did not introduce the interrogation tape and, similar to his first attorney, conducted a weak cross-examination. He was convicted again in 2004. "[To] have a judge say, 'you're right, there's not enough evidence to convict you,' to have the Oklahoma Criminal Court of Appeals say, 'that's true, there's not enough evidence to convict this man' [and] to reverse the conviction, is huge," Beety said. "So [Glossip] already had his conviction reversed once, and then he was brought back to trial and convicted again. That alone makes me suspect of the legitimacy and weight of the conviction." People who are sentenced to death are technically guaranteed post-conviction representation. But their defense often falls short. Defense lawyers can't always dedicate time and resources to build the strongest case. In many instances, the inmates wind up with defense lawyers who worked on the 1st trial, meaning they could end up with the same defense attorney that provided inadequate representation - like Glossip. And when appealing their decision, defendants are not allowed to introduce new evidence. "We think of death penalty cases or murder conviction life sentences as high profile cases, but these are state cases. You really only have local prosecutors and local public defenders working on the vast majority of them," Beety said. Most defendants can't afford to hire an attorney, and have to rely on public defenders who do not have the capacity to launch a thorough investigation. Even if they are granted a retrial, the defendant is out of luck unless their attorneys can produce new evidence. "Public defenders work very hard but they're often overworked. There's not necessarily the level of expertise and dedication that you'd hope for in such a serious case," Beety explained. "For example, if you had a civil case, you'd have attorneys who have been hired from law firms to do in-depth background work on it. And for criminal defense attorneys, there's just not that time and you're not being paid that as a public defender." But recently, a heightened awareness of wrongful convictions and closer scrutiny of how those convictions came about is resulting in more exonerations than ever. In 2014, there were 125, more than any other year on record. 6 of the exonerees were death row inmates. More than 30 % of the crimes that were cleared were drug crimes, and non-homicide non-sex crimes accounted for 50 %. Beety attributed the momentum to scientific discovery and public interest. People are increasingly familiar with the flaws in "snitch" testimonies and witness identification. How witnesses are interviewed can determine what they will say, how they remember events, and how truthful they will be. Defendants' demographics, including their age, race and mental health status, also influence what they say or do in front of police. Still, none of this matters for Glossip, whose case has been botched from the beginning. A growing and far-reaching coalition of support - comprising celebrities, entrepreneurs, and legal professionals - has fought tooth and nail for an additional stay and re-trial. But Gov. Mary Fallin (R) remains unmoved, maintaining the 2 convictions are enough to carry out the execution. In July, soon after the Supreme Court ruled that the state's lethal injection cocktail does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment, Oklahoma scheduled three executions, including Glossip's, to be carried out this year. A last minute stay is unlikely. (source: thinkprogress.org) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 16 10:05:20 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 10:05:20 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----NEB., WYO., CALIF., USA Message-ID: Sept. 16 NEBRASKA: Judge considers whether Lotter keeps attorneys during death penalty legal limbo A federal judge hasn't ruled yet on whether a man on Nebraska's death row can keep his court-appointed counsel. But the question isn't whether John Lotter remains under a sentence of death despite the Legislature's repeal of the death penalty earlier this year or the current legal limbo while the Secretary of State???s office works to verify petition signatures expected to put the question to Nebraska voters next year. Both sides agree he does, for now. "We believe Mr. Lotter's sentence should be reformed to life imprisonment once the repeal bill goes into effect," attorney Rebecca Woodman of the Death Penalty Litigation Clinic in Kansas City said at a hearing Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Lincoln. "If it does," Senior U.S. District Judge Richard Kopf said. A petition drive has presented enough signatures to put the repeal on hold before the vote, if enough are found to be valid. That should be known by mid- to late October. The question Kopf seemed more interested in at Tuesday's hearing was whether Lotter has a right to counsel for anything but a request for clemency, which he hasn't filed in the year and a half he's had attorneys federally appointed to represent him. Kopf ruled previously that Lotter has exhausted all other federal and state remedies, but Woodman argued that it's too early for the court to make that determination. She said her office needs more time first to investigate other constitutional issues that could be raised in the case. "The question whether those remedies are going to be successful or not remains to be seen," Woodman said. Woodman also asserted that Lotter's execution should be barred, even if the petition is put on the ballot in 2016 because Gov. Pete Ricketts "is attempting to illegally procure lethal injection drugs." Under the circumstances, she said, it's imperative that they be allowed to continue working on Lotter's behalf. Assistant Nebraska Attorney General James Smith said the state's position remains the same: Regardless of what happens with the death penalty repeal, Lotter only is entitled to court-appointed counsel in the case to seek clemency. "Mr. Lotter remains under a penalty of death, and Mr. Lotter will remain under a penalty of death," he said. By law, Smith said, only the Nebraska Board of Pardons can commute a sentence from death to life imprisonment. Kopf asked if, once the petition signatures are verified, the state would seek an execution warrant to carry out Lotter's sentence whether death penalty supporters have enough to prevent the repeal from going into effect or not. Smith said if there are enough signatures to stay the repeal, his office still would have to show that the state has the drugs to carry it out. It does not. Once it does, Smith said, it is the attorney general office's position there would be no reason not to seek an execution warrant. But Woodman said many state and federal claims will arise if a death warrant is issued within the next year. Kopf ended the public portion of the hearing, then went into a closed hearing to confer with Lotter's attorneys about budgetary issues. Outside the courtroom later, Woodman said a lot of questions with the death penalty repeal remain unanswered. "Time will tell about what issues might arise," she said. Lotter was convicted for killing Teena Brandon, Lisa Lambert and Philip DeVine at a rural Humboldt farmhouse in 1993. At trial, Thomas Nissen testified against Lotter as part of a deal with prosecutors, saying he stabbed Brandon but Lotter fired the shots that killed all 3. Nissen got a life sentence, and a 3-judge panel sentenced Lotter to death. Nissen since has changed his story and said he, not Lotter, fired the fatal shots. Lotter appealed, but his appeals were rejected by the Nebraska Supreme Court, the U.S. District Court of Nebraska and the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. (source: Journal Star) *************** Attorneys debate Neb. death row inmate's legal options ---- Attorneys for John Lotter said in federal court Tuesday that there are unanswered legal questions Attorneys for a Nebraska death row inmate say the state's recent struggle over capital punishment has raised new legal questions that they need to explore, while a state attorney says the prisoner has exhausted all options except for clemency. Attorneys for John Lotter said in federal court Tuesday that there are unanswered legal questions stemming from the Legislature's vote to abolish capital punishment, a subsequent ballot measure to reinstate it and the governor's efforts to obtain lethal injection drugs. Lotter and co-defendant Thomas Nissen were convicted in the 1993 slaying of Teena Brandon, a 21-year-old woman who lived briefly as a man, and two witnesses, Lisa Lambert and Philip DeVine, at a rural Humboldt farmhouse. The crime inspired the 1999 movie "Boys Don't Cry." At trial, Nissen testified against Lotter as part of a deal with prosecutors, saying he stabbed Brandon while Lotter fired the shots that killed all 3. Nissen got a life sentence, and in 1996 Lotter was sentenced to death. Nissen has since changed his story and said he, not Lotter, shot all 3. Lotter appealed, but his appeals were rejected by the Nebraska Supreme Court, the U.S. District Court of Nebraska and the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The arguments on Tuesday came during a hearing over whether Lotter, 44, should be allowed to keep his court-appointed attorneys for anything other than a request for clemency. Lotter was convicted in a state district court but filed a legal challenge in federal court arguing that his sentence was unlawful. U.S. Senior District Judge Richard Kopf previously ruled that Lotter had exhausted all other legal remedies. "He has significant potential claims that he has to investigate before he can present them," said Lotter's attorney, Rebecca Woodman of the Kansas City-based Death Penalty Litigation Clinic. Woodman declined to elaborate after the hearing, but said the repeal law creates new legal uncertainty in Lotter's case. "Time will tell as to what issues might arise," she said. Woodman argued in court that Gov. Pete Ricketts' efforts to obtain lethal injection drugs from a supplier in India are illegal. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has said it won't allow state officials to import 2 required drugs, for which the state paid $54,400. Ricketts has said his administration is still working with the federal government to bring the drugs to Nebraska. Assistant Nebraska Attorney General James Smith said the state believes that Lotter has run out of all options except to request clemency, and that his death sentence remains in effect. Nebraska lawmakers voted in May to abolish the death penalty over Ricketts' veto, triggering a ballot drive to place the issue before voters in 2016. The group Nebraskans for the Death Penalty announced last month that it had collected nearly 167,000 signatures, which are now being verified to confirm whether the issue will appear on the November 2016 ballot. (source: Associated press) WYOMING: Dale Wayne Eaton Will Once Again Have a Death Row Hearing A state judge has ordered former Wyoming death row inmate Dale Eaton to attend a court hearing in Casper next week as prosecutors for the second time seek the death penalty against him. Eaton was convicted in 2004 of the 1988 murder of Lisa Marie Kimmell, 18, of Billings, Montana. U.S. District Judge Alan B. Johnson of Cheyenne last fall overturned Eaton's death sentence, ruling he didn't get an adequate defense. The Casper District Attorney's Office has filed notice that it's seeking the death penalty for Eaton again. District Judge Daniel Forgey of Casper has ordered Eaton to attend a Sept. 23 hearing. Johnson is weighing whether the state has lost standing to seek the death penalty against Eaton again by waiting too long to appoint defense lawyers. (source: KGWN TV news) CALIFORNIA: New initiative would end California death penalty Already on life support, California's death penalty would be abolished entirely under a proposed ballot initiative. The proposal would strike death as a possible punishment from the state's Penal Code, substituting life imprisonment without parole where state law currently allows for the death penalty. Its proponent, actor Mike Farrell, would have 180 days from when the secretary of state's office enters the measure into circulation to collect 365,880 signatures. California has not executed a death row inmate in nearly a decade, a point Farrell's initiative stresses in calling the death penalty an "empty promise" that drains public resources. "The state spends millions of taxpayer dollars providing lawyers for death row inmates, only to see the murderers it has sentenced to death by execution die of old age in prison," the proposal reads. It also points to the "fatal mistakes" of innocent people being sentenced to death as a reason to end capital punishment in California. "Wrongful convictions rob innocent people of decades of their lives, waste tax dollars, and re-traumatize the victims' families, while the real killers remain free to kill again," according to the proposal. In 2012, California voters rejected a death penalty repeal, Proposition 34, by a 52 % to 48 % margin. Polls have consistently shown support for capital punishment. (source: Sacramento Bee) *************** International Human Rights Body Rules in Favor of Prisoner Nearly Executed by California The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IAHCR) ruled that the human rights of a former death row prisoner were violated by a flawed trial and conviction that at one point resulted in him being hours away from execution. Kevin Cooper was convicted in 1983 of murdering Douglas and Peggy Ryen, their daughter Jessica and houseguest Christopher Hughes in California. The IAHCR ruled that Cooper's case was marred by racial discrimination, prosecutorial misconduct, ineffective defense counsel and unfair proceedings including evidence destruction, evidence tampering and planting of false evidence. In 2004, Cooper came within 4 hours of being executed. Although a federal court ruled last year that the death penalty in California is unconstitutional and the state has not executed anyone in nearly a decade, Cooper remains on death row. "Mr. Cooper's case shows that the death penalty system is broken beyond repair, and the risk of executing a wrongfully convicted person is very real," said James Clark, senior death penalty campaigner for Amnesty International USA. Since 1973, 155 people have been exonerated from death row in the United States. Although Cooper's conviction was upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the 5 dissenting judges expressed serious concern. Judge William Fletcher wrote an 82-page dissent that stated "The State of California may be about to execute an innocent man." (source: Amnety International USA) USA: Carry out death penalty only if system foolproof: #tellusatoday The number of people executed in the U.S. fell to 35 last year. Executions peaked in 1999, when 98 inmates were put to death. Comments from Facebook are edited for clarity and grammar: It's so sad people are feeling that it is wrong to serve a just punishment for murder. It is just if someone takes a life that he should lose his own. I mean, how simple does it have to be? -- Thomas Debaillon The death penalty should be considered only in the most extreme circumstances, with irrefutable hard evidence and heinous crimes. We cannot risk executing an innocent person. If we focused on only these extreme cases, I imagine speed and costs would both improve. -- Michael Ulrich Courts, states put death penalty on life support There is no perfect system, and no matter what, some innocent people can be executed. Until the day you have a perfect system, I will always be against the death penalty. There are many countries that do not have capital punishment. I don't want to be in the company of countries such as Iran, China, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria or Egypt that still have capital punishment. -- Arnold Indictor Life without the possibility of parole is a death sentence. -- George Kubach Letter to the editor: It is understandable that some would demand capital punishment for the severest of crimes. Vengeance is part of the human emotional makeup. However, capital punishment does not effectively deter crime. It is costly when one considers the appeals process. Perhaps the greatest problem with capital punishment is that it forces a defendant???s case to be heard by a jury composed of a skewed selection of the community. Moreover, a life sentence without the possibility of parole is for all practical purposes a death penalty. That should satisfy the most vengeful proponent of capital punishment. Execution as a punishment for crime has outlived its usefulness and should be done away with. John L. Indo; Houston (source: USA Today) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 16 10:06:26 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 10:06:26 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 16 JAPAN: Public support for death penalty not overwhelming, researchers say ---- Japanese may not be as enthusiastic about death row inmates being sent to the gallows as previously believed. A recent study by researchers shows public support for the death penalty in Japan is not deeply entrenched, despite a government survey indicating more than 80 % accept the practice. While Japan has cited the outcome of the survey to support its continuation of capital punishment amid a global trend to abolish it, Mai Sato, a lecturer of the University of Reading in Britain, said, "The majority of the public is in favor of the death penalty if asked in general, but how strongly or how unconditionally they want to retain it is a different matter. "Our research indicates behind the supposed majority support lies a minority of respondents who are really committed to keeping the death penalty," she said in recent interview. Sato, together with Paul Bacon, an associate professor at Waseda University in Tokyo, conducted a survey on the death penalty from February to March, shortly after the Cabinet Office carried out its own poll about the issue last November. Between the 2 surveys, no inmates were hanged, while no heinous crimes were reported, which means there were no significant factors to influence the public view of capital punishment during the three-month period, making it possible to meaningfully compare their results. The two surveys similarly asked respondents if they thought the death penalty was unavoidable or if they thought it should be abolished. Both found a similar tendency: around 80 % had a favorable attitude toward capital punishment. Additionally, the researchers gave the respondents 5 options in their own poll to examine the how committed respondents were to the death penalty: whether capital punishment should definitely be kept, probably be kept, probably be abolished, definitely be abolished or cannot say. The survey found respondents who chose the 1st option accounted for only 27 %. The researchers also closely examined the 2014 Cabinet Office survey data to find only 34 % of respondents were staunchly in favor of the death penalty and would never approve its abolition. "Headlines of the government survey's reports say '80 % support death penalty,' but our close study shows staunch supporters are the minority, standing at around 30 %," Sato said. "It is doubtful, given such an outcome, if the government has a sufficient rationale for executing inmates." The researchers' survey also showed 71 % of respondents who wanted to retain the death penalty said they would accept the abolition of capital punishment, if the government took the initiative to end the practice. "The outcome suggests a rather smooth road to abolition if the government exercises policy initiatives," said Sato, who was working at the Center for Criminology at the University of Oxford at the time of the survey. "We could say Japanese people possess the capacity and flexibility to embrace abolition." The researchers' survey results also showed skepticism about whether introducing life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, alongside the death penalty, would ultimately lead to capital punishment being abolished. It found only 12 % of those who wanted to retain the death penalty would accept life imprisonment without parole as an ultimate punishment. "The majority of them consider the death penalty to be irreplaceable by life imprisonment without parole, and support the death penalty for the very reason that it is an ultimate form of atonement," Sato said. The researchers also asked several questions to test the respondents' level of knowledge on the issue, given the government discloses little information about executions and it is still unknown how prisoners are chosen for the gallows or the cost of an execution. One of the questions was the method of execution used in Japan, with respondents given options including lethal injection, gas and electric chair. Only 51 % selected the correct answer - hanging. "The fact that only 1/2 of the respondents knew about the more than 140-year-old, only execution method in Japan highlights the secrecy surrounding the death penalty," Sato said. She also suggested it was paradoxical that while the government justified the death penalty based on public support, it did not provide people with sufficient information for making their decisions. She concluded, "Japan has the death penalty not because the general public is clamoring for its retention, but rather because the government has not yet taken steps to understand fully the nature of public opinion on the subject. "Were the government to change its stance on the death penalty, there is reliable evidence that its citizens would follow suit." Last year, the U.N. Human Rights Committee urged Japan to "give due consideration to the abolition of the death penalty," while the Japan Federation of Bar Associations asked Justice Minister Yoko Kamikawa to suspend the execution of death row inmates, saying public support for the death penalty did not necessarily affect the argument in favor of terminating it. However, Tokyo hanged a death row inmate in June, bringing the total number of executions under the second administration of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, which started December 2012, to 12. According to human rights group Amnesty International, 140 countries, or about 70 % of all nations in the world, had abolished the death penalty by law or in practice as of the end of 2014. In 2014, only 22 countries, including Japan, executed inmates. (source: Japan Times) SUDAN: Sudan's child welfare council aims to abolish child death penalty Sudanese child rights advocates are working to ban the death penalty for people under 18 years of age. Dr Omayma Abdel-Wahab of Sudan's National Council for Child Welfare said that her organization along with UNICEF is undertaking a workshop aimed at reviewing the death penalty for children with an aim to abolish the practice. She said the workshop has come up with a number of recommendations including the enforcement of Article 77 (d) of the Child Law 2010 to prevent execution of the death penalty for children. They have also recommended that children only be tried by child courts while stressing the importance of issuing birth certificates to children. Dr Omayma said they are still at the beginning stages of developing an operational plan to abolish the death penalty for children. She said they are studying national and international laws and constitutions and will also take note of jurisprudential and psychological recommendations regarding the practice. (source: radiotamazuj.org) INDIA: UP governor rejects mercy pleas of couple sentenced to death Uttar Pradesh governor Ram Naik has rejected the mercy petition of Shabnam and her lover Saleem, who were sentenced to death for killing 7 people, including a 10-month-old child, in 2008. BR Verma, senior superintendent of Moradabad Jail, where Shabnam is being held, confirmed the governor had rejected her mercy petition. Shabnam's mercy petition filed with the President is still pending, he said. The papers regarding the rejection of the mercy plea had reached Moradabad Jail and Shabnam had been informed about the governor's decision, he said. Shabnam had said in her petition that she should be granted mercy to take care of her 6-year-old son Taj Mohammad, Verma said. A district and sessions court in Amroha had in 2010 awarded the death penalty to the duo for killing 7 members of Shabnam's family on April 15, 2008. On May 15, the Supreme Court confirmed the death sentences. But within 10 days, the apex court quashed death warrants issued by the sessions court in Amroha for executing the couple, saying they were "signed in haste" without following guidelines. According to the law, the couple should have been given 30 days to file review petitions against the death sentence. They could also file curative petitions and mercy pleas. However, the sessions court issued the death warrants less than a week after the Supreme Court confirmed the death penalty. The duo had killed Shabnam' father Shaukat Ali, 55, mother Hashmi, 50, elder brother Anees, 35, his wife Anjum, 25, younger brother Rashid, 22, and cousin Rabia, 14. Shabnam had throttled Anees' 10-month-old child Arsh. Shabnam drugged members of her family while Saleem hacked them to death with an axe in Bawankhedi village of Hasanpur Kotwali. The couple confessed they eliminated Shabnam's family for opposing their relationship. Judge SAA Hussaini convicted Shabnam and Saleem and gave them the death sentence after hearing arguments by the prosecution and defence over a period of 27 months. The judge described the crime as "rarest of the rare" and rejected defence lawyer Arshad Hussain's appeal to convert the capital punishment into life imprisonment. (source: prameyanews7.com) CHINA: China Moves to Restrict Death Penalty - But Not For Drugs Last Friday, United Nations human rights experts welcomed a recommendation by India to abolish the death penalty, as well as a decision to reduce the number of crimes subject to capital punishment in China, the world's top executioner by far. The better news was that concerning India - which has thousands on death row, but has only carried out 4 executions so far this century. In August, the Indian Law Commission issued a report concluding that the death penalty does not act as an effective deterrent and recommended its abolition for all crimes except terrorism-related offenses. "I encourage the Indian authorities to implement these recommendations and to move towards the complete abolition of the death penalty for all offenses," Christof Heyns, U.N. special rapporteur on extrajudicial or arbitrary executions, said. Juan Mendez, the special rapporteur on torture, noted that the Commission "recognized the immense suffering caused by the death row phenomenon as a seemingly inevitable consequence of the imposition of the death penalty." He added that "this recognition supports the emergence of a customary norm that considers the death penalty as, per se, running afoul of the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment." Meanwhile, China amended several provisions of its criminal law after the session of the National People's Congress Standing Committee, replacing the death penalty with life imprisonment for several offenses, including the smuggling of weapons, ammunition, nuclear materials and counterfeit currency; arranging or forcing a person to carry out prostitution; obstruction of duty of a police officer; and creating rumors during wartime to mislead people. "By adopting these amendments to its criminal code, China has made progress in the right direction; this needs to be encouraged," Heyns and M???ndez jointly noted. "These new developments in India and China are in line with the general trend towards the abolition of the death penalty at a global level, even if there are isolated moves in the opposite direction." This is indeed a big step in the right direction. But note that China is not dropping the death penalty for drug-related offenses. China continues to top the list in the use of the death penalty worldwide. This makes it the foremost contributor to a global spike in the use of the death penalty - despite the abolition of capital punishment by some 2/3 of the world's nations. While the number of executions in China is kept secret, Amnesty International believes thousands are put to death there every year - including drug offenders. (source: hightimes.com) UNITED KINGDOM: How UK taxpayers are funding executions in Iran and Pakistan Among the new human rights concerns that have occurred as a result of this new Conservative government, such as the threats to scrap the Human Rights Act and the refugee crisis, you would be forgiven if you had not heard about how UK foreign aid and assistance money is being used to fund executions in Iran and Pakistan. Human rights organisation Reprieve has documented the catastrophic impact of money sent by the UK government to Iran and Pakistan in the name of the 'war on drugs'. Over a 2-year investigation Reprieve found that the 45m pounds worth of aid to these countries, given by European governments, has led to over 3,000 executions in Iran and 112 death sentences in Pakistan. The UK is by far the largest donor in Europe (providing just over 50 % of the contribution to the counter-narcotics aid in the region). UK taxpayers may therefore not be aware that their money is being used by these countries, under the guise of fighting drug supply, to execute their citizens. Instead of targeting the masterminds of the global drugs trade, this policy can be used to facilitate arrests and executions of the most vulnerable and abused people. Consider the case of Khadijah Shah, from Birmingham, who is currently being held in custody in Pakistan because she was asked to carry bags on her way back from Pakistan after a trip to the country. She was heavily pregnant when she was arrested in 2012 and was only allowed to leave for one day to give birth while she was incarcerated. The baby and her other 2 young children were incarcerated with her. The older children were allowed to return to the UK after 4 1/2 months but Khadijah, and her baby, remain in jail on a life sentence. Khadijah's case shows that the current system succeeds only in locking up 'mules' who are knowingly or unknowingly carrying drugs, while letting off those who make the big money from the narcotics trade. Indeed, UK-funded programmes are so hopelessly skewed that UN evaluators inspecting these initiatives recently observed 'an indication of increased [drug] trafficking' in Pakistan and a lack of 'tangible outcomes' with respect to the overall drugs trade. This is a very important issue because as a country we are, rightly, fundamentally opposed to the death penalty and our aid money should not be going towards any programmes which enable or encourage it. It is therefore up to Labour to put pressure on the government to understand how this has been allowed to happen, and to consider shifting the focus of drug policy on the demand-side (for example, better rehabilitation centres) rather than the supply-side of the trade. In August of this year an unprecedented coalition of 37 public figures - including Sir Richard Branson and former Director of Public Prosecutions Lord Ken Macdonald - called for the Labour chair of the Home Affairs committee to launch an enquiry into the Home Office's financial and operational support for overseas drug operations. After the Guardian reported on this the Committee's chair admitted he had received more than 3,000 emails from members of the public backing the call for an inquiry. The Home Office has responsibility to advance the UK's opposition to the death penalty. However, after the announcement that the Foreign Office has dropped its reference to the death penalty as one of its global thematic priorities, and with the aid for executions programme, Labour must ensure that opposition to the death penalty in any form is maintained by the UK government. In order to ensure that taxpayers' money is not fuelling executions worldwide it is absolutely vital that the UK's overseas drug programmes receive some degree of public and parliamentary scrutiny. Despite all the evidence that these programmes lead to grave human rights abuses, the home secretary has repeatedly refused to disclose any information about their funding or management - meaning their evident failings are hidden from public view. If you wish to help Reprieve's campaign, please write to your MP about this issue, asking them to contact the chair of the Home Affairs Committee and back the call for a full inquiry. You can find out more about UK aid for executions on Reprieve's website. (source: Ailar Hashemzadeh is the campaigns officer for Labour Campaign for Human Rights----leftfootforwoard.org) SAUDI ARABIA: Fears that Saudi Arabia is set to 'crucify' juvenile prisoner Saudi Arabia has dismissed the final appeal of a prisoner sentenced to death as a child, leading to fears his execution could take place in a matter of days. Ali Mohammed al-Nimr was arrested when he was 17 and initially held at a juvenile offenders facility. There is evidence that he was tortured and forced to sign a document amounting to a confession, which then formed the basis of the case against him. Last week, his family found out that his final appeal had been heard in secret, without Ali's knowledge, and dismissed. This means that there are now no remaining legal hurdles before he faces his sentence of 'death by crucifixion,' originally handed down on 27 May 2014. Ali was arrested on 14 February 2012 in the wake of anti-Government protests, and has been accused by the authorities of participation in an illegal demonstration and firearms offences - no evidence has been produced for the latter charge, which he and his family strongly deny. The opaque nature of the Specialised Criminal Court (SCC) through which Ali was convicted makes it hard to determine the detail of the charges against him. The Government appears to have rested its case against him in large part on his relation to Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, a prominent religious leader in the Kingdom and human rights activist. The Saudi Government has been widely criticised for its heavy-handed response against protesters and human rights activists since Arab Spring demonstrations began - including a death sentence for Sheikh Nimr. Ali is one of a number of people - thought to possibly include other juveniles - who has been sentenced to death following involvement in those protests. In January 2015, prominent Saudi blogger Raif Al-Badawi received the first of 1000 lashes as part of his sentence for his statements critical of the Saudi regime in 2012. The Saudi Government has carried out executions at a high rate since the coming to power of King Salman in January 2015, surpassing 100 for the year so far. Commenting, Maya Foa, Director of the death penalty team at legal charity Reprieve said: "No one should have to go through the ordeal Ali has suffered - torture, forced 'confession,' and an unfair, secret trial process, resulting in a sentence of death by 'crucifixion.' But worse still, Ali was a vulnerable child when he was arrested and this ordeal began. His execution - based apparently on the authorities' dislike for his uncle, and his involvement in anti-government protests - would violate international law and the most basic standards of decency. It must be stopped." (source: reprieve.org) ************ Child Offender at Risk of Execution----Torture Allegations Ignored, Due Process Violated Saudi authorities may soon execute a Saudi man for crimes related to a 2011 protest movement, committed when he was only 17. His trial was marred by serious due process violations, and the court failed to investigate his allegations that he had been tortured in detention. The Specialized Criminal Court sentenced Ali al-Nimr to death in 2014 after convicting him on charges related to an uprising by the country's minority Shia in Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province in 2011. The Saudi news website Okaz reported on September 14, 2015, that a Saudi appeals court and the country's Supreme Court had upheld the death sentence. The sentence requires the king's approval before it can be carried out. "Saudi Arabia has been on an execution spree in 2015, but beheading a child offender whose trial was unfair would be an appalling new low," said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director. "King Salman should immediately quash al-Nimr's conviction and order a new trial that guarantees him a fear hearing." Since January 1, Saudi Arabia has executed 135 people, compared with 88 in all of 2014. Most executions are carried out by beheading, sometimes in public. Saudi Arabia executed 3 child offenders in 2013. Mostly Shia residents of Eastern Province towns such as Qatif, Awamiyya, and Hufuf have repeatedly held protests over discrimination by the government since 2011. Saudi Arabia's Shia citizens face systematic discrimination in public education, government employment, and permission to build houses of worship in the majority-Sunni country. Al-Nimr's paternal uncle, the prominent Shia cleric and government critic Nimr al-Nimr, also faces execution. The same Specialized Criminal Court convicted him in October 2014 on a host of vague charges, based largely on his peaceful criticism of Saudi officials. The Nimrs are among 7 men sentenced to death for their role in the Eastern Province uprising in 2011. The court judgment in al-Nimr's case, which Human Rights Watch reviewed, exposes serious flaws in his trial. He faced broadly framed charges that do not resemble recognizable crimes and was denied access to a lawyer. He was held in prolonged pretrial detention without judicial review, and the trial court failed to investigate his allegations that officials tortured him in detention. The judgment says he was convicted on crimes that included "breaking allegiance with the ruler," "going out to a number of marches, demonstrations, and gatherings against the state and repeating some chants against the state," and setting up a website on his blackberry to incite demonstrations. The charges also included attacking police with Molotov cocktails and rocks, sheltering men wanted by police, and helping the wanted men avoid police raids. Prosecutors gave no details of any injuries to police officers. Al-Nimr denied the charges and told the court that security officials coerced him to make him "confess." International law prohibits executing people for crimes committed as children and restricts its application to the most serious crimes. Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all cases because of its inherent cruelty and irreversibility. Family members told Human Rights Watch that following al-Nimr's arrest in February 2012, authorities did not permit them to visit him for four months. The authorities called him before a judge for the 1st time in December 2013, without informing his family, allowing him to appoint a lawyer, or providing a copy of his charge sheet. The court held 3 more sessions before the authorities allowed al-Nimr to appoint a defense lawyer. Yet, as the trial judgment records, despite court orders to the contrary, Dammam Mabahith Prison officials did not allow al-Nimr's lawyer to visit him in prison to help prepare a defense before or during his trial. The court found al-Nimr guilty in May 2014 solely on the basis of a confession he signed during his interrogation despite his statements that one of his interrogators wrote it and that he signed under duress without reading it. The court was aware that the investigator wrote the confession, but judged it admissible because al-Nimr signed it. Family members said that al-Nimr agreed to sign the statement only after interrogators told him that they would then release him. In dismissing al-Nimr's torture claims, the judge said that "Religious scholars have ruled that retracting a confession for a discretionary crime is not acceptable .... Therefore what the defendant has retracted from what appeared in his legally signed statement is not permitted, and what the defendant has argued regarding coercion was not proven to the judges." Article 13 of the Arab Charter on Human Rights, which Saudi Arabia ratified in 2009, guarantees the right to a fair trial. The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), to which Saudi Arabia acceded in 1996, prohibits capital punishment for children in all cases (article 37(a)). The CRC stipulates a number of important rights for children accused of committing crimes, including the right to prepare an appropriate defense with "legal or other appropriate assistance" (article 40.2), the right "to have the matter determined without delay by a competent, independent and impartial authority or judicial body in a fair hearing according to law, in the presence of legal or other appropriate assistance" including the child's parents or legal guardian (article 40.3), and the right to "not to be compelled to give testimony or to confess guilt" (article 40.4). Saudi authorities appear to have violated these obligations in the case of al-Nimr, Human Rights Watch said. "Unfair trials of Shia citizens amount to no more than a legal veneer for state repression of their demands to end long-term discrimination," Stork said. "The authorities should not compound their repression by killing a child offender." (source: Human Rights Watch) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 16 10:08:12 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 10:08:12 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 16 IRAN----execution Prisoner hanged in western Iran Iran's fundamentalist regime on Wednesday hanged a prisoner in the Kurdish city of Sanandaj, western Iran. The prisoner, identified as Raouf Hosseini, was hanged at dawn in Sanadaj's central prison. He had been on death row for the past 13 years. The mullahs' regime on Saturday hanged 2 other prisoners, aged 34 and 45, in the northern city of Rasht. Their names were withheld by the authorities. Last week a 32-year-old prisoner was hanged in the eastern town of Birjand. Also last Wednesday 5 prisoners were hanged collectively in the central prison of Tabriz, north-west Iran. A statement by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra???ad Al Hussein on August 5 said: "Iran has reportedly executed more than 600 individuals so far this year. Last year, at least 753 people were executed in the country." (source: NCR-Iran) SRI LANKA: Ranjan wants death penalty for child rapists Social Empowerment and Welfare Deputy Minister Ranjan Ramanayake said yesterday he was taking measures to move a motion in Parliament on September 22 to urge the members to take action to implement the death penalty especially for child rapists. He said he intends to obtain instructions from President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe before moving the motion in Parliament. Ramanayake said he also intends to urge to formulate laws to implement the death penalty, a matter within the judiciary. He said he has to get instructions to decide as to how this motion be moved in Parliament. The deputy minister said however he will take steps to develop a dialogue on the matter of the increasing sexual assaults on under aged children. He said the public are outraged at the incidents that took place in the recent past and it was time to bring about such laws to put a full stop to such grave crimes. Ramanayake said he was planning to compel parliamentarians to take action to implement the death penalty for the convicts of heroin traffickers as well. He added that the death penalty had been implemented even after independence. (source: dailynews.lk) ************* SL reaffirms in Geneva its commitment to abolishing capital punishment----President under pressure to have killers of children hanged Amidst calls for the re-implementation of the death penalty in the wake of a 5-year-old girl being sexually abused and strangled to death at Kotadeniyawa, the government of Sri Lanka has assured the international community of its intention to abolish death penalty. Last judicial execution took place in 1976. On behalf of the Maithripala Sirisena-Wickremesinghe administration, Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera told Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) that Sri Lanka would maintain the moratorium on the death penalty leading to its eventual abolition. Minister Samaraweera was participating in the general debate of the 30th Geneva session on Monday (Sept.14). The assurance was in accordance with an understanding between Sri Lanka, beginning with Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga's presidency and the European Union. Villagers launched protests demanding death penalty for the perpetrators of Kotadeniyawa child killing. Some protestors demanded the guilty being hanged outside Negombo hospital where the post-mortem conducted by the Negombo Judicial Medical Officer (JMO) on Seya Sadewmi Bakmeedeniya of Akkarangaha, Kotadeniyawa revealed that she had been sexually abused and throttled. Well informed sources told The Island that the EU had told successive governments that judicial executions shouldn't be resumed under any circumstance. Since the change of government in January, President Maithripala Sirisena and Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe publicly declared their readiness to resume judicial executions. Senior university lecturer Ven. Dambara Amila urged President Maithripala Sirisena to execute at least child murderers at a state function held under the President's patronage. The appeal was made at the 151 Anagarika Dharmapala commemorations at Dharmapala College, Pannipitiya, on Monday. Ven. Amila affiliated to the JVP said that the government couldn't turn a blind eye to Kotadeniyawa killing. The 5-year-old victim's father is also a prime suspect in the killing. Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa, too, refrained from resuming judicial executions though some clamoured for immediate implementation of death penalty. Former President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga on three separate occasions before the Parliamentary Elections in April 2004 announced that she would resume judicial executions though her threat was never carried out. The pledge to implement the death penalty in the aftermath of High Court Judge Ambepitiya's assassination was the 4th instance since Parliament, in1995, adopted a private member's motion by the then PA MP Bharatha Lakshman Premachandra calling for the immediate implementation of capital punishment. Pakistan lifted moratorium on death penalty in the wake of a terrorist suicide attack on a school in spite of strong objections from the EU last year. Pakistan ignored EU's demand to halt judicial executions. Pakistan suspended judicial executions in 2008. (source: island.lk) EGYPT: 8 muslim brotherhood supporters get death penalty An Egyptian court on Tuesday sentenced 8 supporters of the banned Muslim Brotherhood to death, while 80 others were sentenced in absentia to life in prison for indulging in violence and attacking a police station in Upper Egypt in 2013, resulting in the death of 2 poilcemen. The supporters were convicted of attacking a police station in Samalout, a city in Menya governorate. 14 defendants were jailed for 15 years, while 8 defendants received a 10 year sentence besides 6 others who were sentenced to 5 years in prison. 5 other defendants were acquitted in the same case.The defendants were also accused of killing 2 policemen and injuring a number of people including the police and civilians. Since Islamist ex-President Mohamed Morsi's ouster in 2013, the Egyptian government has been cracking down on the Muslim Brotherhood and its supporters. Mr Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood supreme guide Mohamed Badie, and 100 other leaders, were sentenced to death in June for escaping from prison in 2011. (source: Asian Age) BANGLADESH: 2 get death penalty for killing mother, son A Narayanganj court yesterday sentenced 2 people to death while another person to 7 years' imprisonment for killing a woman and her son 4 years back. Narayanganj Additional Session's Judge Miaji Shahidul Alam Chowdhury handed down the verdict after examining the records and witnesses. The convicts are Abul Kashem, 58, and Dulal Hossain, 55, while the other convict is Babul Hossain of Darigaon village in Araihazar upazila. Of the convicts, Babul was tried in absentia. The court also fined the convicts Tk50,000 each. According to the prosecution, an unidentified woman along with her 7-year-old son had sought help from Abul and Dulal on March 5, 2011 after losing their way at Darigaon village. However, the duo in connivance with Babul took the woman to a local graveyard and raped her. Later, the killed the women and her son and cemented their bodies in a graveyard. Locals sensed the incident when the killers tried to dump the bodies. Later, police filed a case in this connection. (source: Dhaka Tribune) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 16 13:21:47 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 13:21:47 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., VA., OKLA. Message-ID: Sept. 16 PENNSYLVANIA: DA to seek death penalty against ex-officer charged in death Prosecutors plan to seek the death penalty in the case of a former suburban Philadelphia police officer accused of killing his ex-girlfriend and wounding her daughter. 32-year-old Stephen Rozniakowski of Norwood is charged in Delaware County with criminal homicide murder, attempted murder and aggravated assault. District Attorney Jack Whelan said Tuesday he would seek capital punishment if Rozniakowski is convicted of 1st-degree murder, citing a protection from abuse order, risk to another person and another felony at the time of the slaying. Authorities alleged that the part-time Colwyn officer killed Valerie Morrow and shot her daughter in December in Glenolden before he was wounded by the victim's husband, a part-time Morton officer. Whelan also said he believed the state Supreme Court would nullify the governor's moratorium on the death penalty. (source: Associated Press) VIRGINIA: Jesse Matthew Charged in Connection to Death of Morgan Harrington The man accused of capital murder in the death of Hannah Graham is now charged with the murder of Morgan Harrington. An Albemarle County grand jury indicted Jesse Matthew last Friday on 1st-degree murder and abduction with intent to defile charges in connection with the death of Morgan Harrington. Harrington left a Metallica concert at John Paul Jones Arena in Charlottesville back in October 2009 never to be seen again. Her remains were found months later on a southern Albemarle County farm. Matthew had been forensically linked to the case during 2 other investigations. "After a series of discussions within the office and with the various law enforcement agencies involved with this, we decided a month or so ago that it was time to proceed and ask a grand jury what they thought," said Albemarle County Commonwealth's Attorney Denise Lunsford. "Really it was just a matter of looking at what we had over the course of the years, making a determination if now is the appropriate time, whether we should wait any longer for any reason." Regarding the charges, Morgan Harrington's mother Gil said "it doesn't bring closure but there's some satisfaction. We have known in our hearts and believed very strongly that Mr. Matthew was responsible. It was very important and I don't know why it was so important for Dan, me, our son Alex to have some acknowledgment of the fact that Morgan's life was taken. She was robbed from us." A search warrant NBC29 obtained in November says Morgan's t-shirt had multiple DNA stains on it that matched Matthew's DNA. Matthew is accused of abducting University of Virginia student Hannah Graham from Charlottesville's Downtown Mall in September 2014 and killing her. Her body was found in a wooded area off of Old Lynchburg Road in southern Albemarle County. Matthew is facing a capital murder charge in her death, meaning he could face the death penalty. Legal analyst Lloyd Snook says investigating the Graham case along with a 3rd case where Matthew attacked a woman in Fairfax likely helped the Harrington case. "I'm guessing that they found some other things they've found in their other investigations of Jesse Matthew that they thought might add a little to this case. But sometimes cases get better but after a while if you don't get more evidence in, it's time to move," he said. Matthew's trial in the Graham case is set for next summer. He's set to be sentenced for the Fairfax case next month. He is due in court in connection with the Harrington case on Wednesday, Sept. 16. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Press Release from Albemarle County Commonwealth's Attorney: On September 11, 2015, an Albemarle County Grand Jury returned 2 Indictments against Jesse Leroy Matthew, Jr. in connection with the October 17, 2009 disappearance and death of Morgan Dana Harrington. Matthew was charged with First Degree Murder of Morgan Harrington and Abduction with the Intent to Defile. The maximum penalty for each offense is life in prison. These Indictments were received by the Court on September 15, 2015. An indictment is a charge and not evidence of guilt. A defendant is presumed innocent and entitled to a fair trial with the burden on the Commonwealth to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Matthew was served with the Indictments on September 15, 2015. His 1st appearance before the Albemarle County Circuit Court will take place at 12:45 p.m. on September 16, 2015. The indictments result from the dedicated investigative efforts over the past 6 years by the Virginia State Police, Albemarle County Police, Charlottesville Police, University of Virginia Police, and the FBI. There will be no press conference. The Virginia State Bar's Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys Rule 3:6 contains prohibitions on extrajudicial statements that may interfere with a fair trial. The Commonwealth intends to strictly adhere to this Rule and, accordingly, will not comment on the evidence, the penalty which may be sought, trial strategy or work product prior to trial. (source: WVIR news) OKLAHOMA----stay of impending execution Oklahoma Court Halts Execution Of Richard Glossip Amidst Claims He's Innocent The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday halted the scheduled execution of Richard Glossip hours before he was set to die by lethal injection for the 1997 murder of his former boss. Glossip has long maintained his innocence. His attorneys asked the court to stay the execution Tuesday and to grant Glossip a hearing for new evidence they say will prove his innocence. The court on Wednesday granted an emergency stay of execution for 2 weeks to give "fair consideration" to the new evidence his lawyers have presented. His execution has been reset for Sept. 30 pending the results of the hearing and subsequent court motions. Glossip was set to be put to death at 4 p.m. ET for the murder of Barry Van Treese, the owner of a motel at which he worked. Van Treese was found beaten to death with a baseball bat in a room of the Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City. Justin Sneed, a maintenance worker at the motel, confessed to killing Van Treese, but under police interrogation said that Glossip offered him money to carry out the murder. In exchange for testifying against Glossip, Sneed is serving life in prison, while Glossip was sentenced to death for his role as the mastermind of the murder. Glossip, 52, has maintained his innocence for more than 17 years on death row. Thousands of people, led by actress Susan Sarandon and renowned anti-death penalty advocate Sister Helen Prejean, have signed petitions to stop Glossip from being executed. The case has received more media attention than any of the other 20 executions in the United States this year. Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin who on Tuesday rejected Glossip's request for a 60-day stay of execution, responded to the court's decision saying, "My office will respect whatever decision the court makes." In a statement, Attorney General Scott Pruitt said he was confident that the Court of Criminal Appeals "will conclude there is nothing worthy" in its review of the filings to overturn Glossip's guilty verdict. "The family of Barry Van Treese has waited 18 agonizing years for justice to be realized for his brutal death," Pruitt said. Oklahoma uses midazolam, a controversial drug that is at the center of problematic executions, as part of its 3-drug lethal injection protocol. Unless the court intervenes, Glossip will be the 1st person to be executed since the significant Supreme Court decision in June which allowed the use of midazolam in executions. His attorneys have argued that Glossip was convicted and sentenced based solely on Sneed's confession and testimony, both of which they say are unreliable. There was also no forensic or physical evidence tying Glossip to the murder. His attorneys asked Fallin to grant a 60-day reprieve on the basis of "compelling new evidence of innocence." This included an expert's report which said that transcripts and tapes of Sneed's police interrogation showed the police used "personal and situational factors" to obtain false confessions from Sneed. It also included an affidavit from a man who claimed to have overheard Sneed in prison saying that he intentionally set Glossip up. His attorneys said the evidence also points to how Sneed was a meth addict who frequently stole from cars and rooms at the motel in order to support his drug addiction. Last year, Sneed's daughter wrote a letter to the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board requesting clemency for Glossip, stating that she "strongly believed is an innocent man sitting on death row" and that her father had talked to her about recanting his original testimony. In her statement denying a temporary reprieve for Glossip, Gov. Fallin said the "new evidence" presented to her did not provide "credible evidence of Richard Glossip's innocence." Describing Glossip's attorneys claims of having new evidece as "part of a larger publicity campaign opposing the death penalty," Fallin said she saw "no reason to cast doubt on the guilty verdict reached by the jury or to delay Glossip's sentence of death." In 2001, a court granted Glossip a new trial because of ineffective counsel and noted there was no forensic evidence to implicate him in the crime and "no compelling evidence" to corroborate Sneed's testimony against him. However, in the 2004 re-trial, Glossip was again convicted and sentenced to death. The Supreme Court postponed Glossip's execution, originally scheduled for Jan. 29, until a legal challenge - brought by Glossip and other death row inmates - against Oklahoma's use of a controversial lethal injection drug was resolved. In June, the Supreme Court ruled that the drug - midazolam - could be used in executions, allowing Oklahoma to reschedule Glossip's execution for Sept. 16. In August, the Supreme Court rejected Glossip's request for a new hearing in the case concerning the lethal injection drug. Glossip's case has received widespread attention primarily due to the support of several high-profile advocates against the death penalty. On an Aug 31. episode of Dr. Phil - dedicated almost entirely to Glossip's case - a visibly emotional Susan Sarandon publicly appealed to Fallin to stop his execution. "I believe the evidence shows Richard deserves a chance for this information to finally be heard by people," the actress said. Sister Helen Prejean, whom Sarandon portrayed in Dead Man Walking, told BuzzFeed News that she was Glossip's "spiritual adviser" and was "personally summoned by him." "This guy is so innocent," Prejean said. Nearly 300,000 people have signed petitions asking Fallin to stop the execution. Among his other supporters are British billionaire Richard Branson, as well as Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn and the Innocence Project???s Barry Scheck, who wrote a letter to Fallin asking her not to make "a deadly mistake." (source: buzzfeed.com) *************** Oklahoma executions: A look at the history of the death penalty in the Sooner state Should Richard Glossip's execution be carried out as scheduled, the 52-year-old will become the state's 196th inmate to be put to death. Furthermore, when 2015 comes to a close two more inmates will bring that number to 198 inmates put to death by the state. Oklahoma carried out its 1st execution in 1915 when Henry Bookman, 28, was executed by electrocution. Arthur Gooch holds the distinction as the lone death row inmate to be hanged. Gooch was a federal prisoner - convicted of kidnapping - who spent 318 days in Department of Corrections custody before he was executed on June 19, 1936. This is a look inside the numbers that define our state's history of capital punishment. AGE 18 - Youngest 74 - Oldest 38 - Average age COUNT BY RACE 1 - Asian (0.5 %) 2 - Other (1 %) 3 - Hispanic (1.5 %) 6 - Indian (3.1 %) 61- Black (31.3 %) 122 - White (62.6 %) COUNT BY GENDER 3 - Female (1.5 %) 192 - Male (98.5 %) COUNT BY METHOD 1 - Hanging (0.5 %) 82 - Electrocution (42.1 %) 112 - Lethal Injection (57.4 %) DAYS ON DEATH ROW 30 - Fewest number of days 2,784 - Average number of days 9,207 - Most number of days 4,529 - Average number of days once the Death Penalty was reinstated in 1990. MORE HISTORY The last execution by electrocution happened in 1966. The 1st execution by lethal injection in Oklahoma occurred on September 10, 1990, when Charles Troy Coleman, convicted in 1979 of Murder 1st Degree in Muskogee County, was executed. Lois Nadean Smith is the most recent female to be executed. Smith died by lethal injection on Dec. 4, 2001. In fact, the executions of the state's 3 females were all carried out in 2001. The busiest year for executions was 2001. 18 inmates were put to death that year. The state went 24 years without an execution (1966-1990). The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Oklahoma's Death Penalty Law that required executions to be carried out by electrocution to be unconstitutional in 1972. 5 years later, Oklahoma's current method of execution, lethal injection, was enacted into law. Benjamin Cole and John Grant are the next inmates in line for execution. Cole is scheduled for Oct. 7, 2015. Grant will be executed 21 days later. (source: KJRH news) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 17 08:30:28 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 08:30:28 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, PENN., VA., FLA., TENN., MO., OKLA., NEB. Message-ID: Sept. 17 TEXAS: Executing Scott Panetti would be a moral failure for conservatives We are still talking about executing Scott Panetti, the lifelong schizophrenic who famously insisted on representing himself while on trial for his life wearing a TV-Western cowboy costume. He attempted to subpoena the Pope, John F. Kennedy, and Jesus Christ. On Sept. 23, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments on a motion submitted on Panetti's behalf. The motion asks that the case be returned to the federal district court with orders to authorize funds for expert assistance, appoint counsel and allow counsel adequate time to file a petition raising the claim that he is currently incompetent for execution. Earlier this year, I joined with other leaders of the national conservative movement - some of us are death penalty supporters, while others oppose it - in a friend-of-the-court brief stating that we are united in our belief that the execution of Scott Panetti would serve no purpose to promote public safety. Rather than serving as a proportionate response to murder, the execution of Mr. Panetti would only undermine the public???s faith in a fair and moral justice system. And it would be a glaring and unwelcome example of excessive governmental power. As a conservative, I believe putting Panetti, a severely mentally ill man whose condition has only deteriorated on death row, to death would be senseless. He is not competent to be executed. Instead, he should spend the rest of his days under confinement - a common-sense solution that would keep the public safe and respect human dignity. Panetti's severe mental illness pre-dates the crime for which he was convicted and sentenced to death. In the decade before the offense, he was hospitalized a dozen times due to his psychotic behavior. As far back as 1986, the evidence shows, Panetti has believed he was engaging in spiritual warfare with Satan. In an affidavit his 1st wife signed to have him involuntarily committed, she testified that he engaged in a series of bizarre rituals to exorcise their home. In one instance, Panetti even buried his furniture in the backyard, believing that the devil was in it. If Panetti were executed today, he would be strapped to the gurney believing that he was being put to death for preaching the Gospels and saving souls on death row, not for murder. Panetti has not been evaluated by any mental health experts since late 2007. The last evidentiary hearing on his competency occurred in February 2008. Records indicate that his mental illness is worse now than it was 7 or 8 years ago. In any event, the only competency hearing that matters is the one that takes place when execution is imminent. As a civilized nation, we don't execute people with severe mental illness for the same reasons we don't execute people with intellectual disabilities or juveniles. All 3 categories of offenders have diminished capacities to understand what they have done. They have less moral culpability than the "worst of the worst" offenders who the death penalty is supposedly meant to punish. The rationales for the death penalty - retribution and deterrence - simply do not apply to a severely mentally ill individual like Panetti, who believes that a listening device has been implanted in one of his teeth. Panetti is not competent for execution. Others should be given the chance to make that legal argument. Meanwhile, this conservative makes the moral argument. (source: Column; Richard A. Viguerie is a longtime conservative activist and chairman of ConservativeHQ.com----Dallas Morning News) PENNSYLVANIA: Congregation to pope: Help us stop death penalty On the altar of St. Vincent de Paul Catholic Church in Germantown sits an oil painting of Pope Francis holding a tiny prisoner in his hands. The artist - the inmate pictured in the painting - resides at the Curran-Fromhold Correctional Facility, the prison where the pope will stop during his visit to Philadelphia later this month. "We're here to build a fire," Magdaleno Rose Avila, executive director of the Philly-based group Witness to Innocence, told the Daily News yesterday as he waited for Mass to begin at St. Vincent de Paul. Avila, an activist against the death penalty for three decades, said he has found flaws in the criminal-justice system that often lead to the death of an innocent person. "The government cannot give you life," Avila said. "Why should they take it away?" Avila's organization and the York-based Pennsylvanians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty gathered yesterday with religious leaders from across the state to preach their moral and religious convictions against sentencing prisoners to death. Capital punishment is as much as 8 times more expensive than life in prison without parole, said Kathleen Lucas, executive director of the York-based group. The additional costs usually come during the appeals process that follow a trial of a person sentenced to death, she said. In the United States, 155 people since 1973 have been exonerated from death row - many of whom, Avila said, had inadequate counsel, research or evidence. The York group regards the upcoming papal visit as a vehicle to spread its message and get Philadelphians involved. "Pope Francis has voiced his beliefs against capital punishment," Lucas said, adding that many religions oppose it. Avila and Lucas were joined by members of the church's congregation and leaders of parishes across the city and state to pray for Richard Glossip, who was scheduled to be executed yesterday in Oklahoma for the 1977 death of a motel owner. Just hours before Glossip was scheduled to die, an Oklahoma appellate court yesterday granted a two-week stay of execution, a temporary reprieve for a man whose lawyers say is innocent. In Pennsylvania, Gov. Wolf has put a moratorium on all 186 prisoners who've received death sentences and await a final date. A state Senate task force will study the death penalty. In February, Wolf called the system an "endless cycle of court proceedings as well as ineffective, unjust and expensive." Avila, Lucas and many of the parish leaders agreed that the governor is headed in the right direction, but said injustice and systemic errors won't be corrected until capital punishment is abolished. The Rev. Christopher Neilson, of the Living Church in Philadelphia, told the congregation that he was proud to be doing God's work. "You have called us to be light," he said. "You have called us to be your mouthpiece." At the end of Mass, St. Vincent de Paul's pastor, the Rev. Sy Peterka, announced, "While we've been praying, a court in Oklahoma gave stay of execution" to Glossip. "There's an army rising up," he said, "and that's what we've started today." (source: philly.com) VIRGINIA----impendingexecution California killer faces Virginia execution For the 1st time in nearly a decade, a California murderer who was sentenced to death is facing execution - but in Virginia.. Alfredo Prieto, a serial rapist and killer, was convicted of 3 murders in Southern California and northern Virginia and has been identified as the prime suspect in 6 more. He is due to be put to death in 2 weeks at a state prison in Jarratt, Va. "At this time, we are not aware of any litigation by Mr. Prieto challenging his Virginia convictions or sentence," said Michael Kelly, a spokesman for the Virginia attorney general. "The commonwealth is preparing to carry out the sentence on Oct. 1." Prieto, 49, a native of El Salvador, moved with his family to the Los Angeles area when he was a teenager. He became a member of the Pomona Northside gang. In 1990, he was arrested, charged and convicted of raping and murdering a 15-year-old girl in a field near Ontario. Prieto and 2 other men had kidnapped and assaulted 3 women, 2 of whom survived stabbings and testified against Prieto. A jury sentenced him to death. Prosecutors opted not to pursue further charges even though they had DNA and ballistics evidence that made Prieto the prime suspect in 4 murders and 2 rapes near Riverside. A federal judge in California put a moratorium on executions in 2006 because of doubts about the drugs used in lethal injections. Prieto languished on California's death row for more than a decade while his appeals churned through the courts. But when his DNA was entered into a national database in 2005, Virginia authorities said it matched evidence collected from crime scenes of several unsolved rapes and homicides. In 1 case, 2 22-year-old women disappeared after they left a holiday party at a Washington restaurant in December 1988. Their bodies were found in a field off the highway that leads to Dulles International Airport. 1 had been shot in the back, and the other had been raped and killed. The DNA test on the sample taken from the rape victim's body pointed to Prieto. DNA also identified Prieto as the suspect who raped and shot a young woman in Arlington, Va., earlier that year. A ballistic test separately linked him to the shooting death of a 27-year-old man in the fall of 1989, prosecutors said. Police theorized Prieto fled back to California after his suspected crime rampage in northern Virginia. In 2005, in response to a request from prosecutors, California authorities agreed to send Prieto back to Virginia to stand trial for 2 homicides in Fairfax County. The county's chief prosecutor said he pursued murder charges against Prieto "because he'll never get the death penalty in California. I think it was time to bring him to justice for his horrible crimes." Prieto's 1st prosecution in Virginia ended in mistrial when a single juror refused to deliberate. But in a retrial, Prieto was convicted of murdering the young couple near Dulles airport, and in 2010 he was sentenced to die. The state Supreme Court upheld his conviction and sentence, and the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected his appeals in May. Prieto launched his own lawsuit contending that it was cruel and unusual punishment to hold him in solitary confinement. An attorney in Richmond said he had filed a motion seeking to stop his execution so his appeals can proceed. The 2 states could not differ more on carrying out death sentences. California has 747 inmates condemned to die but has carried out just 13 executions in the last 40 years, and none since 2006. By contrast, Virginia has only 8 inmates on death row but has carried out 110 executions since 1976. When the "Beltway sniper" was arrested for 10 killings in the Washington area in 2002, federal authorities opted to send him to Virginia for prosecution even though most of the shootings took place in suburban Maryland. John Allen Muhammad was convicted in 2003 and executed in Virginia 6 years later. Kent Scheidegger, a lawyer for the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation in Sacramento and a supporter of the death penalty, says the difference in the 2 states can be explained by judges, not prosecutors and juries. "It's the willingness of the judges to work through the appeals and to get it done," he said. (source: Los Angeles Times) FLORIDA: Jury selection goes a little faster Wednesday in Tisdale murder trial but still dragging out Jury selection in the 1st-degree murder trial of Eriese Tisdale went more quickly Wednesday than the day before, but it could be next week before a panel is seated. Tisdale, 28, is accused of killing St. Lucie County Sheriff Sgt. Gary Morales, who was found shot to death in his patrol car on Naylor Terrace, south of Edwards Road in Fort Pierce. Tisdale faces the death penalty if convicted of the Feb. 28, 2013, slaying. Morales, 35, was shot 3 times during an attempted traffic stop, according to prosecutors and sheriff's officials. Tisdale entered court wearing a brown suit, off-white shirt and a blue-and-gray tie. He spent much of the day observing quietly as his team of public defenders and the prosecutors individually quizzed nearly 30 people about what they'd heard or read about the case. By day's end, a judge had asked about 40 people to return Thursday for additional questioning. At least 25 people were permanently released from the jury pool. One woman said her strong Christian beliefs meant she would be unable to support recommending a sentence of death if Tisdale were convicted. Another woman said because of her Christian upbringing, she was a firm believer in capital punishment. Both were dismissed from the case. Before court recessed Wednesday, Circuit Judge Dan Vaughn noted a new group of 125 was scheduled to arrive Thursday morning but attorneys won't get to them for hours because of the slow pace of questioning. Vaughn ordered that the 125 who arrive Thursday should be told to return Friday or as late as Monday. A panel of 12 plus alternates are required for a death penalty trial. After taking the bench Wednesday, Vaughn appeared peeved when he was told 6 jurors who were in court Tuesday failed to return. He ordered the people be contacted to learn why they didn't come back. Vaughn suggested there could be consequences for "folks who don't show up and don't have a good reason." (source: tcpalm.com) *************** 5 young people could face death penalty in Homestead machete death of 17-year-old----Body of Jose Santos Amaya Guardado, 17, found in wooded area behind vocational school 5 people have been indicted in the machete murder of a 17-year-old and could now face the death penalty. The body of Jose Santos Amaya Guardado, who was hacked to death with a machete, was found partially buried in a wooded area behind Homestead Job Corps in Homestead. Desiray Strickland, 18, Kareem Arbelo, 20, Jonathan Lucas, 18, Christian Colon, 19, and Joseph Michael Cabrera, who are all former students of the vocational school, were charged with 1st-degree murder, according to the Miami-Dade Office of the State Attorney. The group is accused of plotting to kill Guardado for weeks before executing the plan on June 28. A motive for the attack remains unclear, but a police source said the victim had been bullied before by the group and that Guardado may have owed Arbelo money. (source: local10.com) TENNESSEE: Professors explore racial bias in Tennessee death penalty cases It's a matter of life or death. Literally. As a part of both Constitution Day and Citizenship Day, the Howard H. Baker Jr. Center for Public Policy will be holding a discussion entitled, "The Death Penalty in Tennessee: A Statistical Perspective," on Sept. 17, hosted by UT political science professors John Scheb and Hemant Sharma. Rather than discussing whether imposing the death penalty is moral or immoral, the speakers plan to base their presentation off of an article published approximately 2 years ago and put together with the help of David Houston and Kristin Wagers, who both work for the political science department at UT. The article, entitled "Race and the Death Penalty: an Empirical Assessment of First Degree Murder Convictions in Tennessee after Gregg v. Georgia," analyzes up to 1,500 cases involving 1st-degree murder and the death penalty in the state of Tennessee, dating all the way back to 1977. "It is the 1st comprehensive study of its kind," Sharma said. "No one has ever looked at this data over this time period in the state of Tennessee." After examining the cases, the article makes an assessment on the different factors that influence the prosecutor's and the jury's decision to impose the death penalty upon a defendant who is proven guilty in court. The results of the study indicate that there was no "systematic bias" against the defendants from a specific race when the prosecutor or the jury would make the decision to use the death penalty. The article also comments that prosecutors would most likely ask for a death sentence if the victim involved in the case was white. In addition to race, prior criminal convictions and law enforcement casualties are also taken into consideration in the publication. Updated for 2015, the article is available to download at the Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange digital archive. Sharma also emphasized the importance of the presentation and the discussion of the practice, given Tennessee's history in handling the death penalty. "I think it's important that individual students take stock into how the death penalty is applied into specific situations, and I would encourage them to come by and hear more about how the death penalty has been applied in Tennessee since 1977," Sharma said. Additionally, Nissa Dahlin-Brown, associate director at the Baker Center, pointed out that because the death penalty is such a heavy topic, there will be no lack of discussion during the event. "(The death penalty) has seen many controversies," Dahlin-Brown said. "From euthanasia drugs that do not work to new DNA testing that has over-turned death row convictions, there is plenty to talk about." (source: The (Univ. Tenn.) Daily Beacon) MISSOURI: Man accused of strangling Branson girl found unfit to stand trial - for now A judge ruled Wednesday the man accused of strangling and killing a 6-year-old girl in his Branson hotel room is mentally unfit to stand trial, but that could change after he is treated at a mental hospital. John P. Roberts, 55, is charged with 1st-degree murder in the February killing of 6-year-old Jasmine Miller. Branson police say Roberts lured the girl into his room with snacks and strangled her. A state psychiatrist said in court Wednesday that Roberts has an IQ of 57 and "a very basic low comprehension that he is in trouble." Roberts appeared in court looking nothing like his police mug shot. He was clean shaven and had short hair and appeared to have lost quite a bit of weight. Forensic psychiatrist James Reynolds interviewed Roberts for 90 minutes in June and on Wednesday while on the witness stand recommended that Roberts be sent to a secure unit in the Fulton State Hospital. Judge Eric Eighmy agreed with that recommendation after hearing Reynolds testify. The goal is to treat and evaluate Roberts at the mental health facility so he can assist his attorneys in his defense and eventually stand trial. Eighmy said he expected a progress report on Roberts from the Missouri Department of Mental Health by March 15. The psychiatrist testified he asked Roberts about various aspects of the legal proceedings against him. He said Roberts told him that a jury was "6 girls and 6 guys and they hear your story." He said that Roberts' understanding of witnesses was that "they could be for you or against you and Jesus knew what happened." Roberts told the psychiatrist that he believed the range of punishment ranged from having his "brain cooked" and "injecting him with poison" - possibly referring to the death penalty - to having to go to schools and tell students about the evils of drugs and alcohol. Roberts' attorney said in court that she has been telling her client for months that if he is convicted there are only 2 options: life in prison without parole or possibly execution. The psychiatrist also testified that Roberts suffered from diabetes and hypertension and that his mental acuity possibly could improve if those health problems lessen while at Fulton. Regardless, Reynolds testified, over a span of 45 years Roberts has had his IQ tested 5 times - with scores ranging from 57 to 69. In general terms, the psychiatrist said, a person often is considered developmentally disabled with a score under 70. Prosecutor Jeff Merrell pointed out that Roberts was a high school graduate. The psychiatrist quickly responded: "He was in special ed." Jasmine was in kindergarten at Cedar Ridge Primary School in Branson at the time of her death. She and her family had only recently moved from Springfield, where she was a student at Mann Elementary. Police say her naked body was discovered under a bed in a guest room at the Windsor Inn on Missouri 76 in Branson on Feb. 21. Police say Roberts was the only inhabitant of the room. The Windsor Inn is used as an extended-stay motel, often inhabited by those who might otherwise be homeless. Roberts' attorney Lindsey Phoenix asked the psychiatrist if his opinion of Roberts' mental competency would change if there was testimony that Roberts tried to cover up the crime by hiding the girl's body under a bed. The psychiatrist said no. Roberts was also questioned while in the Taney County Jail by child welfare investigators. He told them he had been high on "devil poison" - methamphetamine - when he gripped Jasmine's neck "to scare her" for taking snacks from his room, according to documents. Investigators also said Roberts appeared to be "disoriented." Almost all details of the investigation are from those Children's Division documents. The probable cause statement used to file the charge against Roberts was sparse, prompting his defense attorney to move, unsuccessfully, for the case to be thrown out. The girl's stepfather, Jason Ballew, told Children's Division investigators the family had returned home from Wendy's about 5:30 p.m. the night Jasmine died. He said she went outside to play, according to Children's Division documents. He said he knew Jasmine was playing outside and that he kept the blinds and door open to keep an eye on her. He said he noticed she was missing about 6:15 p.m. and called police 15 minutes later. Ballew said the family knew Roberts and had twice given him a ride. Ballew said he had been to Roberts' room at the hotel once or twice and that Jasmine was "never alone when they went." (source: Springfield News-Leader) OKLAHOMA: In Winning Execution Stay, Attorneys Also Claim Other Lethal Drug Is Available Oklahoma was 3 hours away from executing Richard Glossip Wednesday when the court system threw 2 major wrenches into the state's execution process: An appellate court will review new evidence in Glossip's case, and the state's controversial drug of choice faces a new federal challenge. Glossip had been served what was supposed to be his final meal when the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals issued a 2-week stay to examine claims of new evidence presented by his attorneys in a last-minute court filing Tuesday. Glossip's attorneys asked for the stay based on what they say is new evidence indicating Glossip's accomplice, Justin Sneed, may have lied about their client's role in the 1997 murder of Barry Van Treese to avoid a death sentence. However, in an exclusive interview with The Frontier, Sneed maintains he told the truth at trial about Glossip planning Van Treese's murder for money. The state Court of Criminal Appeals issued its stay shortly before noon Wednesday, 3 hours before Glossip was set to die. The court said the stay was issued "in order for this Court to give fair consideration" to Glossip's claims in the "last-minute filing." Gov. Mary Fallin, who had rebuffed calls by Glossip's supporters for a 60-day stay, issued a written statement. "As I have repeatedly said, court is the proper place for Richard Glossip and his legal team to argue the merits of his case. My office will respect whatever decision the court makes, as we have throughout this process. "My thoughts and prayers go out to the Van Treese family who has suffered greatly during this long ordeal." Sister Helen Prejean, the nun and anti-death penalty activist who has been an outspoken advocate for Glossip, was jubilant as she addressed a throng of reporters outside the Oklahoma State Penitentiary, where death row is located. Public opinion, including an appearance on the Dr. Phil show, made a difference in the case, she said. In describing the public's reaction to the Glossip case, Prejean said, "You mean a man's really going to go to his death on the word of one other man without physical evidence and the one who did the murder is serving a life sentence in a medium-security facility? ... That doesn't seem right." Meanwhile, federal public defenders continued to pursue an injunction seeking to block the state's plans to use the sedative midazolam to execute Glossip and 2 other inmates set to die next month. In a filing Wednesday, Glossip's attorneys asked a federal judge for a preliminary injunction staying the execution due to new information about the availability of lethal drugs. The motion stated they had identified pharmacies that can supply compounded pentobarbital. That anesthetic has proven far more reliable than midazolam, which was used in several prolonged executions throughout the U.S. in 2014. However, as drug manufacturers refused to supply pentobarbital for executions, supplies ran short. Oklahoma and several other states turned to midazolam seeking an alternative. "The defendants have placed Glossip in an unbreakable box that prevents the Constitution from reaching him," the request for a preliminary injunction states. The motion was filed as part of a challenge to Oklahoma's death penalty process brought by Glossip and other death row inmates. That case was eventually decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, which rejected the challenge by a 5-4 vote. "First, defendants claimed that they looked for compounded pentobarbital, but they refused to explain to Glossip why they were unable to get that drug. Consequently, Glossip conducted his own investigation and discovered that compounded pentobarbital is available in Oklahoma," the motion said. Attorneys told state officials the names and locations of the 4 Oklahoma pharmacies they had identified as suppliers of pentobarbital, said Dale Baich, a federal public defender who represents the death row inmates. The filing was accompanied by an affidavits from by 2 paralegals who said they talked to representatives of the pharmacies on Sept. 3. "In the course of calling the pharmacies on my half of the list, I contacted an Oklahoma compounding pharmacy that indicated that it is able to compound sterile injectables and that it is willing and able to compound pentobarbital as a sterile injectable," 1 of the affidavits states. According to an affidavit from paralegal Julie Gardner, another pharmacy stated "it does not compound sterile injectables, but that it could order the pentobarbital in injectable form and distribute it for use." 2 other pharmacies agreed they could supply compounded pentobarbital, the affidavits state. However, it is unclear from the documents whether any of the pharmacies said they would supply the drugs for executions. Baich said the Oklahoma Department of Corrections informed defense attorneys about 10:30 a.m. Wednesday that it planned to go forward with Glossip's execution using midazolam. He said he is unsure what, if anything, state officials did to follow up on the new information. "You have to wonder how hard the state tried," said Baich, standing outside the prison where Glossip was to be executed. Records detail a last-minute flurry of letters and emails between the state and attorneys representing Glossip and 2 other death row inmates set for execution next month. Assistant Attorney General Jeb Joseph sent a letter, which arrived about 2:30 p.m. Tuesday, to one of Glossip's defense attorneys seeking additional information about the pharmacies. "Please provide the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of the relevant Oklahoma pharmacies by 5 o'clock today so that steps may be taken to possibly secure the drug in question in time for upcoming executions," his letter to Assistant Federal Public Defender Patti Palmer Ghezzi states. In a reply, Ghezzi challenged the state to turn over proof it was following up on the new information. Her letter apparently listed the pharmacies, but that information was redacted from court filings due to Oklahoma's law prohibiting release of such information. "We ask that you provide us the detail of efforts you have made to locate sources for pentobarbital for the executions of Mr. Glossip, Mr. Cole and Mr. Grant," her letter to Joseph states. "At this juncture you need not provide the names, addresses, and phone numbers of the pharmacies you have contacted, but we do require the number of pharmacies contacted, the dates they were contacted, and who contacted them. Please provide this by 6:00 p.m. today." In an email to Joseph at 6:27 a.m. Wednesday, Ghezzi wrote: "We have not heard back from you concerning our request in the letter we sent yesterday at 4:30 p.m. Considering Mr. Glossip's execution is set for 3:00 p.m. today, your immediate response is required." Aaron Cooper, a spokesman for Attorney General Scott Pruitt, said the federal court has ordered Oklahoma's response to be filed Sept. 23. There is also a hearing scheduled Sept. 25 in U.S. District Court for the Western District. Cooper said DOC should answer any questions about the lethal injection protocol. However, DOC has repeatedly refused to address questions about its drug supplies, citing the pending litigation. In a written statement, Pruitt said Van Treese's family has waited "18 agonizing years for justice to be realized for his brutal death." "The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals indicated it needs more time to review the filings. I'm confident that the Court of Criminal Appeals, after reviewing the filings, will conclude there is nothing worthy which would lead the court to overturn a verdict reached by 2 juries who both found Glossip guilty and sentenced him to death for Barry Van Treese's murder." The motion filed on behalf of Oklahoma death row inmates states defense attorneys "gave this information to defendants ... in response to defendants' assertion that they wanted to follow up on Glossip's information. "Now, almost 19 hours later, and less than 4 hours before Glossip's scheduled execution, defendants declared that they will not change the drug being used in his execution despite being provided information that pentobarbital is available." A key issue in the U.S. Supreme Court case that bore Glossip's name, Glossip v. Gross, involved whether the state has access to pentobarbital, an anesthetic that has proven reliable in past executions, or other viable alternative drugs. The state has claimed it could not obtain pentobarbital and thus turned to midazolam, a sedative that defense attorneys say is unconstitutional. The drug was used in botched executions in Ohio, Oklahoma and Arizona, in which the inmates gasped for air or writhed long after they were expected to be unconscious. In a case that originated in Oklahoma, a divided Supreme Court upheld the use of midazolam in lethal injections in June. The court's ruling rejecting the inmates' challenge notes that the legal standard requires them to show that the risk of harm from midazolam "was substantial when compared to a known and available alternative method of execution." Because pentobarbital and sodium thiopental, another drug previously used by the state, were not available, the state had no other alternative to midazolam, the majority opinion states. "The record shows that Oklahoma has been unable to procure those drugs despite a good-faith effort to do so," the court's June 29 opinion states. "Petitioners do not seriously contest this factual finding, and they have not identified any available drug or drugs that could be used in place of those that Oklahoma is now unable to obtain." News of Glossip's stay came after he had been served a last meal. Glossip's attorneys said a prison official told them about the stay while they were visiting Glossip around noon. Attorney Don Knight said Glossip???s reaction was "a look of pure joy." "What did he say? I'll tell you what he said: 'Hell yes!'" (source: oklahomawatch.org) *************** Bob 'Cowboy' Macy sent Richard Glossip to be executed alongside 53 others Condemned man Richard Glossip has reportedly already eaten his last meal and was just 3 hours away from being executed when the news came in. He had been scheduled to die by lethal injection at 3pm local time (6am AEST) but the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals agreed to delay the execution, granting a request from Glossip's attorneys, who say they needed more time to explore new evidence. Glossip was twice convicted of ordering the 1997 killing of his boss Barry Van Treese, who owned the Oklahoma City motel where Glossip worked. His co-worker, Justin Sneed, was convicted of fatally beating Van Treese and was a key prosecution witness in Glossip's trials. Glossip has always maintained that he was framed. His lawyers say they have new evidence, including a signed affidavit from another inmate who claims he heard Sneed admit he set Glossip up. Glossip's daughter, Ericka Glossip-Hodge, says she and several family members were driving to the prison in McAlester when she learned her father's execution had been stayed. Glossip-Hodge says they had to get off the road and pull over. She says, "everybody is freaking out. We're really excited." One of Glossip's lawyers says he was inside the Oklahoma State Penitentiary speaking to the condemned inmate when news came down that his execution had been put on hold. Lawyer Don Knight said Glossip was stunned to learn of the court's decision. Glossip's case has gone around the world, with Hollywood celebrities including Susan Sarandon, campaigning to have him freed. But the story is far from over. The court has rescheduled his execution for September 30. THE DEATH ROW COWBOY WHO PUT HIM THERE His signature look was a cowboy hat, thin-framed circle glasses, a white shirt and a skinny black tie. His signature move was sending killers to death row. Bob "Cowboy" Macy was remembered as the hard-nosed lawyer who, before his death in 2011, cleaned up Oklahoma. He put 54 men in front of a needle to die for their sins. He grew up with nothing - he didn't go to university and his parents lived in a house without running water until he was 18 - but he forged a career for himself doing the work others wouldn't. He attended every crime scene to see the grim details for himself, before exacting his own form of cowboy justice on behalf of the victims. His track record was immaculate, but maybe, just maybe, it wasn't perfect. Enter Richard Glossip, the man on death row in Oklahoma. Glossip is, according to Macy's account of evidence, the "mastermin" behind the motel room murder of Barry Van Treese. But others, including a host of Hollywood's elite and a woman with inside information on the case, say Glossip had nothing to do with it and Macy got it very, very wrong. THE KILLING Van Treese, 54, was beaten to death with a baseball bat in room 102 of the Inn motel in Oklahoma on January 7, 1997. Justin Sneed, aged 37, confessed to police that he bludgeoned Van Treese, then the motel owner. He said he killed the father-of-5 at the request of Glossip. Sneed told police Glossip ordered the murder because there were shortfalls in the motel's receipts and he was worried he would lose his job. The conviction was carried despite a number of holes in the story. Even Justin Sneed's daughter O'Ryan said her father framed Glossip in order to avoid the death penalty. In a letter to the Oklahoma clemency board on October 23, 2014, she wrote: "I strongly believe he (Glossip) is an innocent man on death row. "1 innocent life has already been taken by my father's actions. A 2nd one doesn't deserve to be taken as well." Kim Van Atta, who has known Glossip for more than 16 years, said his friend's innocence was "clear from the start". "There's no physical evidence, no rational motive. It just makes no sense," Mr Van Atta told news.com.au He speaks with Glossip regularly over the phone from his New York home and over the past 12 months has become actively involved in the desperate effort to clear Glossip's name. "There's a view that people on death row must've done something wrong. But Richard's an outlier. He's just a normal, decent guy," he said. "He has no criminal record, no history of violence." The lawyer representing Glossip performed so poorly that he lost his licence to practise as a result. On the other side of the courtroom, "Cowboy" Macy was merciless. Macy painted Glossip as a "mastermind" criminal and, like so many trials before, he was convincing. 'NOBODY CAN DO IT LIKE BOB' An Oklahoma City Police Department officer noted after Macy's death that "nobody can do it like Bob". He was right. "The way Bob handled the crime scenes - coming out to the scene, getting to know the victims' families, tears in his eyes - that's what Bob instils in his people," he told the Oklahoma Gazette. "Nobody can do it like Bob. Who else is going to defend these victims' families? Bob understands the misery they've been through. That's his claim to fame. What a defender this man has been for all of us." The man who died aged 81 grew up in Indianapolis, the son of a truck driver and his wife. He had 4 brothers and the family didn't have 2 pennies to rub together. He joined the United States Air Force in 1956 and went to the University of Oklahoma where he studied law. He found a job with the city's police department and was sworn in as District Attorney in 1980. That's when the phone started ringing and the bodies started piling up. Case after case landed on Macy's desk and he rarely lost. Asked in 2001 about the risk of sending innocent men to their deaths, he said: "I feel like it makes my city, county and state a safer place for people to live. I embrace it, not because I get any enjoyment out of it." Macy is no stranger to controversy. In 1986 he sent a 16-year-old boy, Sean Sellers, to death row. Sellers murdered a sales assistant at a convenience store in Oklahoma because, according to the New York Times, he "wanted to see how it felt". Some prosecutors were reluctant at the time to sentence minors to death but Macy never blinked. "He may very well have been the brightest person I sent to death row," he told the Times of Sellers, who also killed his parents. Some crimes stayed with him longer than others. The murder of the Lorenz family was particularly hard to forget. Roger Dale Stafford was executed - sent to death row by Macy - after slaughtering Melvin Lorenz, 38, Linda, 31, and their son Richard, 12. The family stopped on a highway to help Stafford's wife who was pretending to have car trouble. "The thing I remember is the little boy was in the camper - he had massive open-heart surgery and was kind of retarded," Macy said. "Coming out of that camper were the handprints of the little boy, in blood. They were still there at the crime scene. The one image in my mind was that poor boy being taken out of there and executed." A LAST-DITCH EFFORT TO OBTAIN A STAY Advocating for Glossip are billionaire Richard Branson and actress Susan Sarandon. Both have been vocal in their opposition to the death sentence and to Glossip's conviction. Joining them is a prominent Catholic nun in Oklahoma named Helen Prejean. Sister Prejean said this week the wrong man was on death row. "I firmly believe, as do so many others, that Richard is innocent of the crime that sent him to Oklahoma's death row," she said. Online, a petition requests Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin grant a stay. More than 23,000 people have signed it. The website saverichardnow.org lists in order the reasons Glossip should be let go. Among them are that he did not kill anyone, that he "had no prior history of violence", that he was sentenced on evidence of a convicted killer and that his lawyer failed him. Oklahoma's track record with administering the death penalty was marred in April 2014 when death row inmate Clayton Lockett took an agonising 43 minutes to die. He was writhing in pain on his stretcher. The incident led to calls to ban death by lethal injection. Macy is no longer around to see Glossip die. He wouldn't have watched anyway, as was his choice. "I don't go to the executions," he said in 2001. "My son said: 'Dad, that's not your job. That's someone else's job. Let them do it.'" Macy has done his job, but in doing so he might have sent an innocent man to his death. (source: news.com.au) *************** The Troubling Case of Richard Glossip----He was scheduled to be executed Wednesday evening, but an Oklahoma court granted a last-minute stay to consider evidence Glossip may be innocent. Oklahoma's highest criminal-appeals court granted Richard Glossip an eleventh-hour stay of execution Wednesday until September 30 to hear new evidence he may have been framed. Glossip's name is already synonymous with the problems plaguing American capital punishment. After the botched execution of Clayton Lockett in Oklahoma last year, he and 3 other death-row inmates sued the state department of corrections to prevent their own executions with the controversial sedative midazolam. In Glossip v. Gross, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Oklahoma's lethal-injection protocol in a sharply divided 5-4 opinion. Now, Glossip is challenging his conviction itself on grounds of innocence. A number of excellent reporters have written extensively about the case and the questions swirling around it. Liliana Segura and Jordan Smith at The Intercept first wrote about Glossip's case in July, just days after the Supreme Court ruled against him and the other death-row inmates. All sides agree that Justin Sneed fatally bludgeoned motel owner Barry Van Treese to death in January of 1998. But the stories diverge on whether Glossip commissioned Sneed to commit their boss's murder. Murder-for-hire can make the conspirator eligible for the death penalty in many states, even if he or she was not present at the murder. But Segura and Smith reported that Sneed's daughter tried to alert Oklahoma officials last October that her father's testimony about Glossip's role in the murder could be inaccurate: In a letter to the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board, she wrote that, based on her many communications with her dad, she "strongly believe[s]" that Richard Glossip is an innocent man. "For a couple of years now, my father has been talking to me about recanting his original testimony," she wrote. "I feel his conscious [sic] is getting to him." The case for Glossip's innocence hinges solely on whether or not Sneed lied. His motive would be obvious: Prosecutors spared Sneed the death penalty in exchange for his testimony against Glossip. In a recent interview with Cary Aspinwall at The Frontier, Sneed refused to recant his earlier testimony that Glossip paid him to commit murder. According to Aspinwall, Sneed's family members suggest his daughter was manipulated into sending the letter, which didn't reach the parole board in time to be considered. As concerns about Glossip's possible innocence grew over the summer, a broad array of public figures urged Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin to stay Glossip's execution for 60 days to allow new evidence to be heard, including Sister Helen Prejean, former Senator Tom Coburn, and former University of Oklahoma head coach Barry Switzer. Oklahoma City District Attorney David Prater dismissed their efforts a "bullshit P.R. campaign" on Monday. Fallin announced Tuesday she saw "no reason to cast doubt on the guilty verdict reached by the jury or to delay Glossip's sentence of death" and ruled out a temporary reprieve. Glossip's legal team then petitioned the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, the state's highest criminal-appeals court, to intervene. The court granted the stay less than eight hours before his scheduled execution at 5 p.m. (source: The Atlantic) NEBRASKA: Attorneys debate Neb. death row inmate's legal options ---- Attorneys for John Lotter said in federal court Tuesday that there are unanswered legal questions Attorneys for a Nebraska death row inmate say the state's recent struggle over capital punishment has raised new legal questions that they need to explore, while a state attorney says the prisoner has exhausted all options except for clemency. Attorneys for John Lotter said in federal court Tuesday that there are unanswered legal questions stemming from the Legislature's vote to abolish capital punishment, a subsequent ballot measure to reinstate it and the governor's efforts to obtain lethal injection drugs. Lotter and co-defendant Thomas Nissen were convicted in the 1993 slaying of Teena Brandon, a 21-year-old woman who lived briefly as a man, and two witnesses, Lisa Lambert and Philip DeVine, at a rural Humboldt farmhouse. The crime inspired the 1999 movie "Boys Don't Cry." At trial, Nissen testified against Lotter as part of a deal with prosecutors, saying he stabbed Brandon while Lotter fired the shots that killed all 3. Nissen got a life sentence, and in 1996 Lotter was sentenced to death. Nissen has since changed his story and said he, not Lotter, shot all 3. Lotter appealed, but his appeals were rejected by the Nebraska Supreme Court, the U.S. District Court of Nebraska and the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The arguments on Tuesday came during a hearing over whether Lotter, 44, should be allowed to keep his court-appointed attorneys for anything other than a request for clemency. Lotter was convicted in a state district court but filed a legal challenge in federal court arguing that his sentence was unlawful. U.S. Senior District Judge Richard Kopf previously ruled that Lotter had exhausted all other legal remedies. "He has significant potential claims that he has to investigate before he can present them," said Lotter's attorney, Rebecca Woodman of the Kansas City-based Death Penalty Litigation Clinic. Woodman declined to elaborate after the hearing, but said the repeal law creates new legal uncertainty in Lotter's case. "Time will tell as to what issues might arise," she said. Woodman argued in court that Gov. Pete Ricketts' efforts to obtain lethal injection drugs from a supplier in India are illegal. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has said it won't allow state officials to import two required drugs, for which the state paid $54,400. Ricketts has said his administration is still working with the federal government to bring the drugs to Nebraska. Assistant Nebraska Attorney General James Smith said the state believes that Lotter has run out of all options except to request clemency, and that his death sentence remains in effect. Nebraska lawmakers voted in May to abolish the death penalty over Ricketts' veto, triggering a ballot drive to place the issue before voters in 2016. The group Nebraskans for the Death Penalty announced last month that it had collected nearly 167,000 signatures, which are now being verified to confirm whether the issue will appear on the November 2016 ballot. (source: Associated Press) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 17 08:31:13 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 08:31:13 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 17 TRINIDAD & TOBAGO: CJ: Death penalty not denting serious crime but Let's talk about it Chief Justice Ivor Archie has called for a serious and meaningful national debate on the mandatory death penalty for murder. He made the plea yesterday in his annual address at the opening of the 2015/2016 law term at the Hall of Justice, Knox Street, Port-of-Spain. Pointing to statistics showing that 514 people are currently on remand awaiting trial for murder, Archie questioned the effectiveness of the controversial sentence in the reduction of violent crime in T&T. Archie said: "Apart from the dubiousness of its value as a deterrent, do we really believe, assuming that a significant fraction of those persons are found guilty, that we will be able to hang several hundred people or that, if we tried, we could stomach it?" While he was careful to underscore the Judiciary's neutral role on legislative issues, Archie claimed the Judiciary's input was necessary as it was the "independent and apolitical" organisation which is mandated to execute the sentence. "Please do not misunderstand me. The question whether we have a mandatory death penalty or any death penalty at all is a matter for the legislature and the people of T&T but as the ones who pass the death sentences, we must ask, is there a sense in futility in doing so? "And we must ask questions about the tactical difficulties of implementation. What are we going to do? Schedule 1 a day, or do it in groups? So what is the real problem and what can we do about it?" he asked. Archie's comments come hours after the murder toll for 2015 crossed the 300 toll on Tuesday after a 12-year-old student was innocently killed during a gang-related shooting in Gonzales. The last State-sanctioned execution took place in 1999 when Dole Chadee and his gang of 8 were executed for the quadruple murders of the Baboolal family. Another man, Anthony Briggs, was also executed that year for the murder of a PH taxi driver. Since then, legislation proposing to categorise murders into 1st and 2nd degrees has been laid in Parliament and debated but was never approved. There has been a chorus of dissent by some in society to move away from the Privy Council, this country's highest appellate court, in favour of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) after landmark rulings which deemed the mandatory death penalty as unconstitutional. Archie echoed the sentiment yesterday as he called for serious consideration of that issue by saying: "Why we still have a highest appellate court that one cannot access unless you are very rich or you are charged with murder and someone agrees to represent you for free." In addition to the death penalty and the CCJ, Archie also stated that failure of the Prisons Service to rehabilitate offenders was also an area of concern. "So collectively we turn a blind eye to harsh and inhumane prison conditions when all the empirical research tells us that there is a positive correlation between a more humane, restorative approach to incarceration and lower rates of recidivism. "The only punishment intended by a custodial sentence should be the deprivation of liberty," Archie said as he revealed that it costs the State $13,000 a month to incarcerate a prisoner. He also took issue with the merits of passing lengthy prison sentences on convicted criminals. "Common sense tells us that we cannot incarcerate our way out of our social problems and crime in general because many studies internationally show a positive correlation between longer sentences and higher rates of recidivism as well as between higher overall rates of incarceration per capita and higher rates of recidivism," Archie said. He also preached for the need of converting T&T into a more secular state. "Common sense tells me we need more respect for fundamental human rights because studies do not support the notion that professed adherence to any recognised religion is associated with reduced rates of violent crime. In fact, there is a considerable body of evidence to the contrary," Archie said. As part of his continuous call to citizens to adopt a common sense approach when seeking solutions to issues, Archie advised against lumping blame for the country's crime rate on his organisation. "People need to stop blaming us for those aspects of the justice system that are outside our control. We need a little common sense here. "What can I do about low crime detection rates or inadequate evidence or no proper detention facilities or slow forensic analysis or a shortage of attorneys at the criminal bar or prisoners arriving late for court despite our admonitions?" Archie asked. Although he admitted that most of the issues raised by him during his speech were highlighted by him in the past, Archie suggested that constant reminders may be the impetus for eventual change. "Those who have listened to my past addresses may find that some of what I have to say today may sound repetitive but it has been my experience that sound arguments and exhortations often require repetition before they are noted and acted upon," Archie added. (source: The Guardian) BARBADOS: Taken away so young----Youth dies after being struck with stone Less than a week before he was due to join the Barbados Defence Force (BDF) Shakeem Turton, 18, lay dying in his mother's arms, reportedly the victim of an altercation with a neighbour. And as he died, the former Frederick Smith Secondary School student gave her the "thumbs up", his mother Natalie Harris said. Turton died last night at his Long Gap, Grazettes, St Michael home after he was allegedly struck on his temple with a stone thrown by a neighbour. "My son died in my arms last night around 9 p.m. after giving me the thumbs up. My son had an altercation with one of his young neighbours and he first struck my son on his foot with a stone. However, he later struck him in his temple with a stone and that was the fatal blow," a distraught Harris told Barbados TODAY in an interview from her home in the presence of the young man???s father Mark Turton who was too distressed to talk. "The incident occurred around 7 p.m. and we took him to FMH for medical attention. He was released but died at home around 9 p.m. He attended the Frederick Smith Secondary School and was employed at Blakeys at the time of his death. Shakeem was expected to enter the Defence Force on Saturday," she added. Meanwhile, the young man's grandfather is questioning the seeming inability of Barbadian authorities to carry out the death penalty. The man, who spoke with Barbados TODAY on condition that his name is withheld, was critical of Attorney General Adriel Brathwaite and also had some harsh words for Amnesty International and other abolitionist groups which he sees as meddling in the affairs of small states like Barbados. "Why doesn't Amnesty International and other international agencies try to influence the policies of China, for example, as it relates to capital punishment?" asked the deceased lad's grandfather. "Why don't they try to change the policy in the mighty USA? I do not understand." "Nobody goes to China and tries to tell the political directorate there to discontinue capital punishment. They cannot go to Singapore and Indonesia and tell them to abolish capital punishment. All of these countries have the death penalty. "Earlier this year, Indonesia executed 2 Australian nationals ....They are coming to Third World countries and telling small countries what to do," the noticeably frustrated grandfather said. He said in the same way death penalty opponents claim that capital punishment does not stop murders, it can also be argued that imprisoning thieves does not stop theft. "... so why is the judicial system sending them to prison? Open the prison then because nothing stops anything. It is a situation that baffles me." The grandfather said Attorney General Adriel Brathwaite seems to share the view that the execution of convicted murderers does not show a corresponding decline in the incidence of murders. Even though he acknowledged this view was informed by research, he contended: "It is a fallacious argument." "99 % of Barbadians are in favour of capital punishment, yet our leaders refuse to impose it even though it remains on our statute books," he added. (source: Barbados Today) KUWAIT: Kuwait court upholds death penalty for maid----Ethopian domestic helper confessed to stabbing 19-year-old to death while she was asleep Kuwait's Cassation Court on Thursday upheld a death sentence for an Ethiopian domestic helper for killing a Kuwaiti teenager. The capital punishment verdict was issued late last year after the helper admitted to the public prosecution that she killed Siham Humood Flaitah Al Shemmari, 19, when the family members were resting after hosting a dinner reception celebrate the graduation of a relative. According to reports on the case, the helper, identified by Kuwaiti media as Rabiya Mahmoud, 22, confessed that in March 2014 she took a knife and walked into the victim's bedroom where she stabbed her in the chest. The victim survived the first stabs and pleaded for her life; however, the helper refused and stabbed her again until she died. She then fled the house, but later headed to the Sulaibikhat police station and turned herself in at 5:45 am. She told officers that she stabbed the victim who was asleep, then locked her inside the room before leaving her employer's house. She cited conflicts with the victim as the reason, and said that she had planned the murder days earlier and that her plans had been delayed because of the presence of the victim's younger sister. The police said that officers responded to an emergency call reporting that a door was locked in a Sulaibikhat house with a girl inside. Firefighters broke the door open and found the girl bleeding profusely. She was rushed to the hospital but doctors pronounced her dead on arrival. The medical report said the death was caused by four stab wounds - 2 in the chest and 2 in the abdominal area. Investigators confirmed that the helper killed the Kuwaiti woman after they found her fingerprints on the knife used in the crime. In November, the court sentenced her to death by hanging. Siham was a freshman at Kuwait University's Faculty of Arts when she was killed. Her father, Humood, was a member of Kuwait's national team that participated in the 1982 Fifa World Cup. (source: Gulf News) IRAN----executions 9 executions in Gohardasht and Sanandaj prisons in 1 day On Wednesday, September 16, at least 9 prisoners were hanged by the Iranian regime in Gohardasht (Rajai Shahr) prison, Karaj and in Sanandaj. 8 of them, including a 22 and a 24-year-old, were collectively hanged in Gohardasht Prison. And Raouf Hosseini was hanged in Sanandaj Prison after suffering 13 years of imprisonment. The Iranian regime, engulfed in increasing domestic and international crises especially after drinking the chalice of poison of the nuclear deal, is fearful of the uprising of Iran's fed up people and has found no avenue to survive but to ramp up suppression, especially the savage punishment of execution. Just in the 2-year tenure of Rouhani, who the people dub the president of executions, the number of executions has reached 2000. Any trade with this inhuman regime should be made contingent to the cessation of the cruel punishment of execution. ************** Call to save 19-year-old Ahwazi prisoner from execution in Iran The Iranian Resistance calls for urgent action to save the life of Ali Sudani, a 19-year-old member of Iran's Arab community, who is scheduled to face execution on Thursday, September 17 in public. It calls on all human rights organizations, in particular the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Iran, to take urgent action to prevent this inhuman crime. The mullahs' regime has accused Ali Sudani of setting ablaze a police vehicle during a protest by the people of Ahwaz on March 17, 2015. Following a raid that day by suppressive forces on spectators at a football match between Khuzestan's Foolad side and Al-Hilal from Saudi Arabia, the residents of Ahwaz and other towns in Khuzestan Province staged a large protest against the regime's suppressive measures against the people of Khuzestan. Hundreds of protestors were arrested. The residents also protested the tragic death of Younes Asakareh, a 31-year-old street vendor, who had set himself on fire four days earlier due to pressures by the regime and the confiscation of his meagre property in Khorramshahr. Ali Sudani was among those arrested on March 17, 2015. (source for both: Secretariat of the National Council of Resistance of Iran) UNITED KINGDOM: UK backs Saudi prisons despite impending child crucifixion - legal charity Despite Saudi plans to crucify a child for anti-government offences, the British government will continue with a bid to support the Gulf Kingdom's prison system, the legal charity Reprieve has claimed. It was reported this week that the final appeal to the Saudi courts by 17-year-old Mohammed al-Nimr had been dismissed, meaning his sentence to death by crucifixion for anti-government activities in 2012 is likely to be carried out. In a statement on its website, Reprieve says the British government has had to backtrack on its claim that the bid to service Saudi prisons could not be cancelled because to do so would incur "financial penalties." Parliamentary records were instead amended to suggest the bid could not be stopped because "withdrawing at this late stage would be detrimental to [Her Majesty's Government's] wider interests. "It is hard to see what British interests are strong enough to trump the principle that we should not be supporting the 'crucifixion' of juveniles," said Maya Foa, Director of the death penalty team at Reprieve. "The UK should have nothing to do with a so-called justice system responsible for atrocities such as this. "It is extremely worrying to see the British government abdicating its basic human rights values in the interests of cozying up to the Saudis. British complicity in gross abuses such as these is unacceptable and has to stop," Foa added. The UK's relationship with the Saudis has long been controversial, not least in terms of the UK's practice of selling armaments to the regime. In early September, Oxfam UK said the ongoing conflict in Yemen has been exacerbated by the UK government's arms deals with Saudi Arabia, causing a terrible humanitarian catastrophe and potentially placing the government in breach of international law. The war has seen Saudi Arabia, armed with US and UK weaponry, carry out airstrikes on Houthi rebels attempting to take control of Yemen. International law states that arms deals should be prohibited if there is a risk they could be used to commit war crimes or human rights abuses, the charity said. (source: rt.com) SAUDI ARABIA: Quash Ali Mohammed Baqir al-Nimr Conviction and Death Sentence (UA 143/14) Urgent Action September 16, 2015 A Saudi Arabian Shi'a activist has had his death sentence upheld. The offenses he "confessed" to had taken place when he was 17 years old. He has exhausted his appeals and may be executed as soon as the King ratifies the sentence. Please write immediately in English, Arabic or your own language: -- Urging the authorities to quash Ali Mohammed Baqir al-Nimr's conviction and death sentence, and ensure that he receives a fair trial in line with international law and standards and without recourse to the death penalty; -- Calling on them to open an independent investigation into his allegation of torture and other ill-treatment; -- Reminding them that Saudi Arabia is a state party to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which strictly prohibits the use of the death penalty for crimes committed by anyone below the age of 18; -- Urging them to establish immediately an official moratorium on all executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty in Saudi Arabia. (source: Amnesty International USA) NIGERIA: On corruption and capital punishment SIR: As their own contribution to support President Muhammadu Buhari's anti-corruption war, the president of the Nigeria Labour Congress, Comrade Ayuba Wabba and his counterpart in the Trade Union Congress, Comrade Bobboi Kaigama jointly called for capital punishment for anybody found guilty of corruption in Nigeria. In the old Roman Empire and Greece, it was one way of dealing with criminals and offenders. Some religious organisations also saw it as a method of eliminating anybody who was opposed to the teaching of the organisation. Now, Rome and Greece no longer practice this method. Meanwhile, the use of death penalty in Nigeria has generated mixed opinions among people in the society. Some people find this form of punishment as a tool which violates the human rights to live which is considered as a fundamental human right. Although, corruption has grown so deep in Nigeria that it has become a culture of government. But, what benefit can a nation get from the implementation of capital punishment? What does the victim of murder gain when the convict is killed? These are the questions which need to be addressed by the death penalty proponents. Some who want capital punishment say that killing the offender will bring pain to bear on him or her. But, is it really true that somebody killed by bullet feels any pain? It is doubtful. In the same vein, it is a kind of punishment that does not deter or discourage others who might want to commit the same offence. Honestly, once a criminal knows that the moment he or she is caught, only 1 bullet will silence him or her, such a person will become hardened. Until the major causes of corruption are addressed, capital punishment will not in any significant way enhance the anti-corruption war nor reduce the tendency to loot public treasury. Sunday Ogunkuade, Ogbomoso. (source: Letter to the Editor, The Nation) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 17 16:21:12 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 16:21:12 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----CONN., PENN.,N.C., FLA. Message-ID: Sept. 17 CONNECTICUT: Killing capital punishment in Connecticut The old saw has it that "exceptions prove the rule." They prove the rule precisely because they are exceptions. In Connecticut's politicized Supreme Court, exceptions have BECOME the rule. That is what happened when Justice Richard N. Palmer constructed his decision on the Constitutionality of Connecticut's death penalty on a dissent in Glossip v. Gross, a case in which a challenge to the death penalty on Constitutional grounds had been denied by the U.S. Supreme Court, which upheld Oklahoma's lethal injection protocol. The decision was a narrow one, but Justices Stephen G. Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg managed in their dissent to import larger issues. In the same manner, Mr. Palmer inflated his decision by importing into it extraneous detail. Mr. Palmer's decision rested upon putative changes in "contemporary standards of decency," a catch-all objection used by other courts to judicially repeal constitutionally passed laws justices feel are no longer necessary, a process that does indeed violate contemporary standards of judicial review. Mr. Palmer determined that "the death penalty is no longer consistent with standards of decency in Connecticut and does not serve any valid penological objective." In virtually every poll addressing the issue of justices who imperiously imagine themselves to be cultural psychologists and mini-legislators, the public has determined by wide margins that appellate courts should say what the law is and observe a necessary constitution modesty in rendering their decisions. In a concurring opinion, Justices Flemming Norcott and Andrew J. McDonald, newly appointed to Connecticut's Supreme Court by Governor Dannel Malloy, strayed even further from the proper matter under review by stressing allegations of racial and ethnic discrimination. Charges that Connecticut's judicial system is rife with discrimination have been percolating in the appellate courts for decades; no decisive judgment on the issue has been rendered. Since the Connecticut Supreme Court decision striking down the death penalty rests entirely on Connecticut's Constitution and not the U.S. Constitution, the highly attenuated decision of the court may not be appealed to the nation's highest court. Chief Justice Chase T. Rogers' stinging dissent is, unlike Mr. Palmer's initial non-appealable dictat, as thoughtful as it is devastating. "The majority's determination that the death penalty is unconstitutional under our state's constitution," Ms. Rogers wrote, "is based on a house of cards, falling under the slightest breath of scrutiny ... Every step" of the majority's opinion, Ms. Rogers wrote, was "fundamentally flawed." The Chief State's Attorney has requested that the whole concurring opinion of Justices Flemming Norcott and Andrew J. McDonald should be stricken from the record, a motion characterized in 1 newspaper as "extraordinary." However, extraordinary concurrences can only be ameliorated by extraordinary means. Justice McDonald should have recused himself from any deliberation concerning Connecticut's death penalty. Mr. McDonald was 1 of 2 co-chairs of the state's Judiciary Committee - the other was Mike Lawlor, now Mr. Malloy's meddlesome Under Secretary for Criminal Justice Policy and Planning -- who were chiefly responsible for mounting opposition to the death penalty in the General Assembly. As such, Mr. McDonald is incapable of rendering a disinterested opinion on any matter touching the death penalty. So then, we have a decision on the death penalty rendered by a partisan, highly politicized Connecticut Supreme Court that relies on a DISSENT issued in a U.S. Supreme Court decision that UPHELD the death penalty; the Connecticut Supreme Court's faulty decision was roundly and properly denounced by Chief Justice Chase Rogers as a house of cards that would fall apart at the slightest touch; the chief argument wielded by Justice Palmer - that "community standards" require the court to abolish the death penalty - is preposterous nonsense, according to multiple juries that sentenced to death the 11 convicted murderers awaiting punishment on death row; 1 of the Justices assenting to the majority decision, Mr. McDonald, is inescapably and irretrievably prejudiced against the death penalty - and, just to round off this repeating loop of absurdities - the decision of the Court, resting entirely upon the state rather than the U.S. Constitution, cannot be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, where it would be quickly overthrown by thoughtful jurists more rigorous than Mr. Palmer. This is how great Republics are ruined. In Connecticut's 1 party state, desperate republicans and democrats -- note the lower case designations - rely on a disinterested court to call legislators to their constitutional obligations. But alas, the court, the last bastion of republican and democratic government, is in danger of becoming a mere appendage of one-party Democratic rule. Gone is judicial independence, a fierce guardian of our liberties under law; gone is the separation of powers upon which republican government precariously rests. And the result of the concentration of power and the dissolution of independent political bodies is, as Justice Rogers rightly warns us, "a house of cards" resting precariously on the whimsy of self-interested politicians. (source: Opinion; Don Pesci, New Haven Register) PENNSYLVANIA: Johnesha Perry, 19, Could Get Death Penalty In Murder Of 1-Year-Old, But Is It Too Extreme? Johnesha Perry, the 19-year-old mother who allegedly kissed her 1-year-old baby boy goodbye before throwing him from a 52-foot tall bridge in Pennsylvania, is trying out the insanity defense, according to a new report. Lehigh Valley Live reports that Perry will plead insanity, which could be helped along by the fact that Perry herself jumped from the bridge, but survived the deadly plunge. Zymeir Perry's small body was found 700 yards downstream from the Hamilton Bridge in Allentown, Pennsylvania, in May. The infant survived being thrown from the bridge and was rushed to a local hospital, where he died 6 days later. Johnesha Perry jumped moments after allegedly pushing him. Perry was, at first, charged with attempted homicide, endangering the welfare of a child, and aggravated assault. The charges were later upgraded following Zymeir's death. According to a July report from the Morning Call, Perry was arraigned from her hospital bed. At that time, she did not have an attorney, but has since procured a defense team, including lawyer Gavin Holihan, who reacted to the District Attorney's consideration of the death penalty for Johnesha Perry "extreme." "It's an extreme penalty. Reasonable people will agree that this is not that type of case," Holihan said. Captain William Reinik of the Allentown Police department told local media that Perry was competent at the time of her arrest, and that she knew what she was doing. Witnesses of the botched murder-suicide attempt told officials that Perry took Zymeir out of his stroller, then threw him over the bridge. Perry then climbed over the bridge's railing and jumped. Witnesses also told police that Perry said it was her time before she plunged into the water. Zymeir was found floating in the Lehigh River, heading towards the town of Bethlehem. He had been in the water an estimated 5 minutes before officers jumped in and brought him to shore. Captain Renik highly commended the officers who came to Zymeir's aid. "I commend these 2 officers for actually going into the river and pulling him out and doing CPR," Renik said. Joseph Lanetta of the Allentown Police Department pulled Zymeir from the cold water and immediately performed mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, while another officer performed CPR. Johnesha Perry is no stranger to law enforcement. Her first time being charged with a crime involved 2 counts of aggravated assault and 1 count of endangering the welfare of a child. (source: inquisitr.com) NORTH CAROLINA: Marshville teen indicted on 1st-degree murder charge in slaying of Monroe man A Marshville teen has been indicted on a 1st-degree murder charge in connection with the July killing of a Monroe man. Union County prosecutors are still deciding whether to seek the death penalty in the case, District Attorney Trey Robison said. A hearing where prosecutors have to announce that decision has not been set yet. Jadis Deon'Tae Cole, 18, was indicted on charges of 1st-degree murder, robbery with a dangerous weapon and obstruction of justice in the death of Carroll Willis Griffin, 30. Griffin was found shot to death beside his car on East Hudson Street in Monroe in the early morning hours of July 11. Griffin had 8 children and helped provide for another child, Monroe police spokesman Pete Hovanec said. Cole was a student at South Providence School in Waxhaw, police records show. South Providence is an alternative school for students in grades six though 12 who have difficulty in a traditional school environment, according to Union County Public Schools. Court and police records provided more details of a case that Hovanec said "point toward a drug deal going bad." Monroe police are working with the State Bureau of Investigation. On a search warrant affidavit by an SBI agent, the agent wrote that Griffin is "known by this applicant and other law enforcement officers" to sell marijuana in the Monroe area, and that Griffin "uses his cell phone to sell marijuana." On July 10, Griffin was calling and texting a phone - later determined to be Cole's - "related to the purchase of marijuana from Griffin," according to the affidavit. Griffin sent a text about where to meet and received a response at 12:17 a.m. July 11 of "Hudson?" The last text Griffin received from the other phone was "U see me" at 12:32 a.m., records show. 20 minutes later, Monroe police were dispatched to the 500 block of East Hudson Street for a possible assault. When they arrived, they found Griffin's body next to his 2014 Kia Optima in the parking lot of an apartment complex. The front doors were open and the keys were in the ignition. 2 witnesses told authorities they saw a male walking away from the car's passenger side very fast, according to the affidavit. Griffin was robbed of $110 cash and marijuana, and killed with a handgun, according to Cole's arrest warrant. A search of Griffin's Kia turned up 4 grams of marijuana, 4.4 ounces of marijuana in a baggie, a spent projectile and a Glock handgun, records show. The Glock was not the murder weapon, Hovanec said. A review of police records found that the phone number Griffin had texted was involved in a 911 hang-up in May. When a 911 operator called that number back, the caller identified himself as Jadis Cole and said he accidentally had hit the emergency call button, according to the search warrant affidavit. Cole was arrested July 17. His court-appointed attorney, Bobby Khan of Monroe, could not be reached for comment. Cole has misdemeanor convictions for assault on a government official/employee and assault inflicting serious injury, records show. He also has pending trials on misdemeanor charges of simple possession of drugs and resisting a public officer. Griffin had felony convictions for marijuana possession and delivering marijuana, records show. He also had misdemeanor convictions of carrying a concealed weapon, possession of stolen goods/property, attempted breaking or entering a building, resisting a public officer and disorderly conduct. (source: Charlotte Observer) FLORIDA: Jury Recommends Life In Prison For 'Big Tony In Businessman's Slaying A South Florida jury has recommended life in prison for Anthony "Big Tony" Moscatiello in the mob-connected 2001 slaying of a prominent businessman. The jury's decision of life instead of the death penalty was a recommendation for Broward County Circuit Judge Ilona Holmes, who will make the final sentencing decision and must give "great weight" to the jury's advice. Moscatiello, 76, showed no reaction when the jury's decision was announced. He was convicted in July of murder and murder conspiracy in the fatal shooting of Konstantinos "Gus" Boulis during a dispute over lucrative gambling ships. Trial evidence showed Boulis was shot by a hit man hired by Moscatiello, a reputed member of New York's Gambino crime family once headed by "Teflon Don" John Gotti. Co-defendant Anthony "Little Tony" Ferrari was previously convicted and is serving a life sentence. A 3rd conspirator, James "Pudgy" Fiorillo, pleaded guilty and testified for prosecutors after serving more than 6 years behind bars. Boulis, 51, was slain on Feb. 6, 2001, during a struggle for control of the SunCruz Casinos fleet, which he had sold to businessman Adam Kidan and his partner, former Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Kidan was paying Moscatiello and Ferrari thousands of dollars each month to handle security and other services - payments that would end if Boulis regained control. Assistant State Attorney Brian Cavanagh urged jurors in a closing argument to recommend the death penalty for a crime he called a cold-blooded murder orchestrated by Moscatiello to protect his SunCruz profits. "Anthony "Big Tony" Moscatiello commissioned an execution, an assassination of Gus Boulis," Cavanagh said. "He did it not for vengeance, not for passion, not by accident or misfortune, not some sort of self-defense. He did it for money." Moscatiello attorney Sam Halpern, however, told jurors that the death penalty should be reserved for the worst killers - terrorists, serial killers, those who slay children - and that Moscatiello would be punished enough by living out his days behind prison walls with no chance of parole. "Mr. Moscatiello is never going to walk out of prison, ever," Halpern said. "It's not like he's getting a slap on the wrist." Boulis, who also founded the Miami Subs restaurant chain, was fatally shot by hit man John "J.J." Gurino as he sat in his car in downtown Fort Lauderdale. Cars blocked Boulis in from front and back, with Gurino firing the fatal shots from a black Mustang that pulled up to the driver's side. Gurino was later killed in a dispute with a Boca Raton delicatessen owner. Abramoff and Kidan were never charged in the Boulis killing. Both did serve federal prison sentences after pleading guilty to fraud in the $147.5 million SunCruz purchase. Abramoff also was the main figure in a Washington corruption scandal that resulted in charges against 21 people. (source: CBS news) ************ Accused smuggler asks for bail 1 of 2 men accused of smuggling Cuban migrants in a boat that capsized in a storm south of the Dry Tortugas 7 years ago in which 5 people were presumed to have drowned wants a judge to grant him bail. Suriel Quintana-Izquierdo and Ariel Salene-Torres were both indicted on April 17, 2015 on 1 count conspiracy to encourage and induce aliens to enter the United States, resulting in death and placing in jeopardy the life of another, and 17 counts of alien smuggling. Both men could face the death penalty. Assistant U.S. Public Defender Stewart Abrams, the attorney for Quintana-Izquierdo, asked Senior U.S. District Judge James Lawrence King this month to hold another detention hearing given his client's ties to South Florida, which lessens his risk of flight, according to court records. Abrams told King that Quintana-Izquierdo would live with his girlfriend and mother of his 2-year-old daughter in West Palm Beach and that his girlfriend's parents would help him pay for his bail, records state. Both her parents are willing to put up property for collateral for his bail, Abrams wrote. Abrams further argued that the events for which Quintana-Izquierdo is charged happened about 8 years ago and "since that time, the defendant has been gainfully employed in the community and has not had any problems in regard to the criminal justice system." Abrams asked King to set a $50,000 cash bail and a $100,000 personal surety bond, the latter of which would be co-signed by the girlfriend's parents. That means if Quintana-Izquierdo doesn't show up for trial, the parents would be required to pay the $100,000. Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert Emery opposes the request, Abrams wrote. Emery had not filed a response as of Wednesday and King has yet to issue a ruling on the matter. Last month, King dismissed a request by Abrams to drop the indictment against Quintana-Izquierdo because the government repatriated 12 surviving migrants who told the Coast Guard both men rescued them when their chug overturned. Everybody had to be rescued when Quintana-Izquierdo and Salene-Torres' boat overturned. Abrams argued that those migrants' testimony was key to Quintana-Izquierdo's defense. He also argued that the government waited too long to bring charges against his client in order to "prejudice" the case. Court records indicate his co-defendant Salene-Torres has yet to file any such motions. Judge King set a trial date for Jan. 19 at the federal courthouse in Key West. Case history A commercial vessel spotted a boat on April 9, 2008 that capsized about 40 miles south of the Dry Tortugas. Key West-based Coast Guard Cutter Key Biscyane responded and found 12 Cuban migrants, as well as both defendants, clinging to the capsized hull of the vessel, Open WYD. Migrants reportedly told officials they departed Orozco, Cuba with 17 migrants aboard bound for the United States but encountered a storm. The other 5 migrants are believed to have drowned, records state. One body was recovered by a fisherman on April 11, 2008 near Elliott Key. "Shortly before the Coast Guard arrived, the defendants told the migrants to say they had been rescued by the defendants, who had been out fishing," records state. Federal agents inspected the Open WYD on April 15 after the rescued migrants were returned to Cuba and discovered 3 GPS units, 3 full 15-gallon fuel barrels as well as water bottles and food that appeared to be from Cuba, records state. U.S. Magistrate Judge Lurana Snow ordered that both be detained without bail earlier this year, citing them as flight risks. Court records filed in the Salene-Torres case don't include any biographical information. Federal prosecutors and public defenders do not comment on pending cases. (source: keysnews.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 17 16:22:43 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 16:22:43 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OKLA., NEB., CALIF., USA Message-ID: Sept. 17 OKLAHOMA: Tears And Hugs After Richard Glossip Reprieve ---- A Sky correspondent invited to watch an Oklahoma man put to death describes emotional scenes as the execution is halted. The prison official who checked my passport as ID told us: "This is a horrible event but we're going to make it as pleasant as possible. We have cookies and coffee for you." And with that, 3 official witnesses to an execution were waved into Oklahoma State Penitentiary. I was in a car along with Sister Helen Prejean, the author of Dead Man Walking and Richard Glossip's best friend, Kim Van Atta. Behind us were the 2 other witnesses who the death row inmate had requested, Crystal Martinez, another friend, and Kim Bellware from the Huffington Post. So 2 friends, 2 journalists and a nun. Though the official briefing from the Oklahoma Department of Corrections had listed Kim Bellware and me as "friends" too. I may be a reporter but I now consider Richard Glossip to be a friend. It was 11.30am and Richard Glossip was due to die in 3 1/2 hours. Sister Helen was optimistic. She felt that the attorneys who filed a motion for a stay of execution with the Court of Criminal Appeals had done a good job. I didn't believe her. The speed with which the Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin had rejected the new evidence had convinced me the execution would go ahead. We were shown to a room with water and coffee, though not yet any cookies. We chatted. The mood was reasonably upbeat, given that was how Richard Glossip had been the night before. Sister Helen asked to use the bathroom. I was about to broach the tentative subject of funeral arrangements with Crystal and Kim Van Atta when half a dozen men in suits walked into the room. I recognised one of them as Robert Patton, the Director of the Department of Corrections. The big boss. He looked deadly serious. That was to be expected. He said he wanted to speak to us, but when told that Sister Helen was out of the room, he said he would wait. Only a few moments passed when she returned and sat down. Mr Patton announced there had been a stay of execution. We didn't quite take it in. He needed to repeat it. And then he emphasised the stay was until 30 September. There were gasps. And then people began to hug. Tears flowed. It was impossible not be emotionally involved. I hugged everyone too. I was happy and relieved. I didn't want this execution to happen. I didn't think it should happen. I didn't want to see it happen. But I was prepared to watch because I've reported on Richard Glossip's case for 9 months. I may go through it all again in 2 weeks. Or this story might have more twists to come. (source: Ian Woods, Sky News) ******************* Stay of execution prompts response from local residents, state officials After an appeals court halted Richard Glossip's execution hours before he was scheduled to die Wednesday, several Norman residents and officials across the state had mixed emotions. Norman resident Mary Francis, who protested the execution, said she was glad the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals saw fit to provide a little space for further investigation of the facts in the case. However, Francis and others with the Oklahoma Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty are opposed to all executions. "2 weeks is precious little time, but it's better than being executed, of course," Francis said. As a former president of the coalition, Francis said she came across lots of data about the death penalty, including a survey conducted at the University of Oklahoma in 1988. While a majority were in favor of the death penalty, support for executions dropped when certain factors were involved, such as if a person was mentally ill or there was racial discrimination. "The citizenry doesn't really understand how the death penalty works," Francis said. "It's a matter of educating the public. They don't understand the pitfalls of executing. There is nothing about killing somebody - I don't care if it's a drug, or hanging, or shooting, or beating them to death - it's not humane. It's immoral, in my opinion." Facebook user Zakk Flash, who commented on The Norman Transcript's Facebook post Wednesday regarding the issue, called not only for a permanent stay of execution for Glossip but to free him all together. "All sides agree that Justin Sneed bludgeoned Barry Van Treese to death. The only thing that put Richard Glossip on the chopping block is the word of Sneed, a man out to save his own skin. Even Sneed's own daughter wrote to the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board that she didn't believe him," Flash wrote. "Add this to the fact that evidence that could prove his innocence was destroyed before any appeal was decided, and you have a miscarriage of justice as big and wide as the Great Plains. Richard Glossip shouldn't merely be spared the executioner's hand; he should be freed." Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt issued a statement of his own Wednesday afternoon following the stay of execution. "The family of Barry Van Treese has waited 18 agonizing years for justice to be realized for his brutal death. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals indicated it needs more time to review the filings. I'm confident that the Court of Criminal Appeals, after reviewing the filings, will conclude there is nothing worthy which would lead the court to overturn a verdict reached by 2 juries who both found Glossip guilty and sentenced him to death for Barry Van Treese's murder," Pruitt said. Ryan Kiesel, executive director of American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Oklahoma, said the appellate court did what elected officials refused to do. "We stand with the many Oklahomans and individuals around the world in expressing our gratitude to the court. For today, at least, the state of Oklahoma has avoided the execution of a man not guilty of any capital offense," Kiesel said. Hundreds of Oklahomans and thousands across the country who are members of MoveOn voiced their positive reaction to the 2-week stay. "We are deeply relieved that - despite Gov. Mary Fallin's failure to act - Richard Glossip has won 2 more weeks to prove his innocence after coming within 3 hours of being executed for a crime many believe he did not commit," said Mark Crain, campaign director for MoveOn.org Civic Action. "MoveOn members have fought hard to save the life of Richard Glossip." More than 250,000 Americans hailing from every state have signed a MoveOn petition, started by Sister Helen Prejean and actress Susan Sarandon, calling for a stay of execution. This week, MoveOn members made more than 7,000 phone calls to the governor???s office pleading for her to stop Glossip???s execution, and they took over the homepage ads of the Oklahoman's website with their call for justice. "We will continue to fight to save Richard's life and for systemic reform to fix our broken criminal justice system," Crain said. (source: Norman Transcript) NEBRASKA: Death Penalty Opponents File Lawsuit Nebraska death penalty opponents allege in a lawsuit that a ballot measure to reinstate the punishment is invalid because Gov. Pete Ricketts wasn't listed as a sponsor. The lawsuit filed Thursday in Lancaster County District Court by Nebraskans For Public Safety argues that Gov. Ricketts should have been named because of his efforts to organize the Nebraskans for the Death Penalty campaign. Nebraskans for the Death Penalty announced last month that it had collected nearly 167,000 signatures, more than three times the minimum number needed to place the issue on the November 2016 ballot. The drive was launched after lawmakers overrode Ricketts' veto and abolished capital punishment in May. The lawsuit says petition signers should have been told the "true and actual sponsors" of the referendum drive because it could have influenced their decision. (source: WOWT news) CALIFORNIA: Proposed Ballot Measure Would End Death Penalty In California A new ballot initiative is being proposed in California to end the state's death penalty. Longtime anti-death penalty advocate actor Mike Farrell is promoting "The Justice That Works Act of 2016," which would amend the California penal code to replace the death penalty with life in prison without the possibility of parole. Initiative supporters have to collect more than 365,000 signatures in 180 days to get the measure on the November 2016 ballot. It's the latest move toward ending capitol punishment in California. In July 2014, a federal judge ruled California's death penalty unconstitutional. That ruling is awaiting review. California has not executed a prisoner in nearly a decade despite the state having more than 740 condemned convicts on death row - that's the largest number of any state. Alex Simpson, associate director of the California Innocence Project, will discuss the status of the death penalty in California Thursday on Midday Edition. (source: KPBS news) USA: Neuroscience and the Future of the Insanity Defense The concept of the insanity defense dates back to ancient Greece and the Roman Empire. The idea has always been the same: Protect individuals from being held accountable for behavior they couldn't control. Yet there have been more than a few historical and recent instances of a judge or jury issuing a controversial "by reason of..." verdict. What was intended as a human rights effort has become a last-ditch way to save killers (though it didn't work for James Holmes). The question that hangs in the air at these sort of proceedings has always been the same: Is there a way to make determinations more scientific and less traditionally judicial? Adam Shniderman, a criminal justice researcher at Texas Christian University, has been studying the role of neuroscience in the court system for several years now. He explains that neurological data and explanations don't easily translate into the world of lawyers and legal text. Inverse spoke with Shniderman to learn more about how neuroscience is used in today's insanity defenses, and whether this is likely to change as the technology used to observe the brain gets better and better. Can you give me a quick overview of how the role of neuroscience in the courts, has changed over the years? Especially in the last few decades with new advances in technology. Obviously, [neuroscientific evidence] has become more widely used as brain-scanning technology has gotten better. Some of the scanning technology we use now, like functional MRI that measures blood oxygenation as a proxy for neurological activity, is relatively new within the last 20 years or so. The nature of brain scanning has changed, but the knowledge that the brain influences someone's actions is not new. I don't know how familiar you are in the case of Charles Whitman. He was the Texas Belltower shooter in 1966 who killed over a dozen people on the campus of University of Texas, Austin, after killing his mother. He sort of intuitively knew that something had gone wrong with him, so he asked in his suicide note that his brain be examined during his autopsy for irregularities. They actually found out that he had a tumor pressing on his frontal lobe, which may have been a significant cause in this aberrant behavior. Neuroscience certainly played a growing role in courtrooms from then on. There was a big 2007 New York Times Magazine article called, "The Brain on the Stand," that got people very interested in the notion that the brain would radically change the way criminal cases are tried; that it would radically change the conception of why people do what they do. But, you tend to find that this neuroscience is coupled with the study of psychopathy, and people aren't really sympathetic to psychopaths. That makes sense. The other, bigger problem is that the insanity defense isn't sort of what you might think of colloquially as insane. In most jurisdictions, it has to do with the knowledge of what's right versus wrong. So if you knew what you did was right or wrong at the time you did it, you aren't legally insane. So you tend to find that the very rare case where it is successful is like a paranoid schizophrenic who is completely in the state of delusion, and didn't know it was wrong because they thought they were killing ants, not people. It must be extremely difficult to prove that sort of state of mind. The insanity defense has little to do with the ability to sort of control your actions. We still haven't seen really much of an effect of neuroscience on the insanity defense -- in part because the insanity defense is rarely offered and even more rarely successful. Contrary to the popular myth that people plead insanity all the time and then it works and they're back out on the streets, it's just rarely offered because criminals don't really want to be labeled insane. And juries, because of the potential misconception that you get to walk away and there's no repercussions for people who are deemed legally insane, very rarely find anyone legally insane. So neuroscience has had less of an impact directly in the insanity defense. Insanity plays a bigger role in sentencing, rather than convicting. The insanity defense is more used to mitigate punishment rather than exculpation via insanity. Do you see that moving in a different direction in any way in the next few years or in the next several years? Is the role of neuroscience in the insanity defense going to stay this way, with an emphasis in sentencing rather than determining guilt? The champions of neuroscience said, 'This is great, look at neuroscience is in the Supreme Court!' Some of us sort of said, "that's great, but it's really just a sort of crutch for a decision that they already wanted to come to on things we already knew." There's a reason insurance companies don't lower your rates until you're 25; there's a reason that, you know, all sorts of things. You can't rent a car until you're 25 because we knew that brain development wasn't fully formed in minors and people that are under 25 made worst decisions, they're more impulsive, etc. I mean, sort of when I teach this stuff, I say, you know, 'How many of your parents know you make bad decisions 'cause you're teenagers?'' Every parent knows that teenagers make bad decisions, so it wasn't really any novel insight that this neuroscience that was submitted by the APA to the Supreme Court in a brief really shed light on. But, it was in a way to sort of bolster their decision. At the time -- this was about 2005, I believe, maybe a couple years later -- sort of used what was popular. Neuroscience was very popular. I think so. In research I did with a colleague that was published in Plos One, we looked at a phenomenon in social psychology called 'motivated reasoning,' which is where people sort of assimilate information in biased ways to come to desired conclusions. So science is popular with juries. But don't they struggle to interpret it? After all, it's not like jurors can be expected to have an applicable background. We made up a bunch neuroscience studies. They weren't real, but they were plausible, about the death penalty and about abortion. We basically showed participants how these supposed neuroscience studies back up the notion that either the death penalty was or was not a more effective deterrent to crime than life without parole or any other sentence. And we asked people to rate the studies. We looked at whether the participants' prior attitudes were a significant predictor of how they dealt with the neuroscience data, and it turned out that it was. People who were pro-death penalty rated the study really well when it said that the death penalty was a deterrent and really bad when it said it wasn't a deterrent. People who were anti-death penalty -- sort of a flip. When we said the death penalty was a deterrent and the neuroscience data supported this, they said 'Oh, that's bad science, that's biased reporting, the researcher has an agenda,' and all this stuff. All of this is to say that people's prior attitudes seems to be one of the biggest determinants in how they evaluate neuroscience. If they agree that criminals are the worst and criminals should be put to death and all of this kind of very harsh-on-crime attitude, then if you give them neuroscience that says, 'Well, he's really not that responsible. He's not that bad a guy. It's his brain that made him do it.' They're simply going to say, 'Aw, that's bad science. That's BS, I don't trust it, it's biased. I know what I know. Your science is flawed.' In some sense, neuroscience is still just telling us a lot of what we already knew from psychology and just from common sense. In Graham vs. Florida, the Supreme Court said, "look, neuroscience tells us that the brain isn't fully formed in minors and therefore they're not of the most, you know, culpable class of offenders. So we can't sentence them to life without parole for non-homicide crimes because that's sort of reserved for among the worst of the worst of offenders. And these people can be changed because their brain still allows them to change." The champions of neuroscience said, 'This is great! Neuroscience is in the Supreme Court!' Some of us instead said, 'That's great, but it's really just a sort of crutch for a decision that they already wanted to come to on things we already knew.' There's a reason insurance companies don't lower your rates until you're 25. You can't rent a car until you're 25 because we knew that brain development wasn't fully formed in minors and people that are under 25 made worse decisions. Every parent knows that teenagers make bad decisions. When it comes to neuroscientific evidence being presented in court, this is almost exclusively data in terms of imaging, correct? Or are there other ways to gauge brain activity? Where neuropsychology is involved in the court system, some psychologists do scanning, while others have tests where the individual sits down and does tasks and it'll tell something about the functioning of their brain. For instance, if you do poorly on one task, it tells the psychologist you have problems in say your frontal lobe or whatever. If you do poorly on another task, maybe it's on facial recognition of expressions and that tells them something about your inability to relate to expressions of emotion or something that tells about a different part of your brain. Scanning has been the focus, but there have been instances where people who have done scans have been allowed to testify but the scans themselves have not been admitted. This is in part because of the seductive allure of neuroimages. One study from many years ago showed how neuroimages have this fancy effect on people. It bamboozles them. That study was never replicated, and the results were perhaps just due to the participant sample that one experiment got. But it was causing judges to be wary of allowing the images themselves, even when they did allow the expert to testify at sentencing. In the Brian Dugun case in Chicago, psychologist Kent Kiehl was brought in to testify about Dugan's brain activity. He was only allowed to use pictures of brains with x's drawn on areas where he found lower activity in Brian Dugun's brain, because the judge was worried that if he let him bring in multi-color images from the fMRI, the jury would be confused and just sort of agree with Kiehl, and all the jurists would just forget their responsibility to weigh all the evidence. So it's sort of a mix. I had some unpublished evidence that suggested that imaging wasn't really key -- it was really the analysis at the brain level rather than at the behavioral level. There's a belief that at the behavioral level you can fool a psychologist, but it's harder to fool a psychologist at the brain level, even if they're not conducting a scan. If the tools used to measure brain activity or track what's going on inside a suspect's or defendant's head -- if all of that were to converge into a kind of a simpler and more universal method that the legal system can trust, would we finally be able to kind of come to a place where we can determine whether a criminal is sane or insane? Or are there too many factors and ambiguities in play? I think there are always going to be ambiguities, for a number of reasons. Again, you come back to the sort of legal definition of insanity. It's never going to really tell them the question of right from wrong. I don't think anyone anymore believes the brain is so mechanistic where a brain scan is gong to tell you, "well, he absolutely was bound and determined to do this because he had lower activity in his pre-frontal cortex or in his frontal lobe." You are maybe slightly more likely to engage in antisocial conduct if you find yourself in a situation where that person's brain had less activity in key regions. There's a professor at the University of California, Irvine, where I did my Ph.D, named James Fallon. He actually did an opening of an episode of Criminal Minds where he was giving a lecture on psychopaths. He scanned his brain and his brain looks exactly like a psychopath's. And he has other characteristics that fit. He's got a decreased prefrontal cortex activity; he's got a lower resting-heart rate, and all these sorts of things that are supposedly markers of things that predispose you to violence. But he's not violent. I believe he's married and has kids, and he was a professor at UCI for decades until he retired. And he's sort of still there, teaching classes for a bit of extra fun and doing some research. But this guy's never really had any run-ins. The psychologist Adrian Raine found out he has sort of the same markers that suggest, from his research, that he should be predisposed to antisocial or criminal behavior. But, again, he's a college professor. He's not antisocial, he isn't engaging in a life of crime or anything like that. It's all so probabilistic. So many other factors go into whether somebody is going to commit a crime or not that we could never find ourselves in a type of Minority Report situation where you can scan somebody and tell whether they'll commit a crime. We'll never be able to scan someone after the fact, either, and say, "well absolutely, his brain is what made him do it," because the question of criminal behavior is so much more complex than that. It's sociological, it's economic, it's perhaps brain- and genetic-based, etc. I don't think you're ever going to be able to say, "yes, he can never overcome this impulse," because, again, it's probabilistic. There's going to be a guy out there with the same brain chemistry who will have overcome all the impulses and lead a completely productive life. The last thing I'll point out is research that my colleague Cory Clark published in 2014. It showed that people still believe in free will despite evidence to the contrary, in part because of the desire to punish. She found that people believe in free will not just because of free will in the abstract, but because it helps them justify their desire to punish people for bad conduct. It comes back to motivated reasoning -- the notion that people cling to things that help them justify actions that they want to take. I think people are going to cling to the notion that somebody still had a choice in part because we want to punish people for bad actions. (source: Neel Patel, Huffington Post) ********** Here's The Map Of What The Death Penalty Looks Like In The U.S. Today On Wednesday, the state of Oklahoma was scheduled to execute Richard Glossip, the 1st execution in the state since January and the 21st execution in the country this year. Hours before the execution, the state's Court of Criminal Appeals granted Glossip a 2-week stay of execution so that it can consider a last-minute filing by Glossip???s lawyers. Without further order from the court, however, the execution will proceed on Sept. 30. While the Supreme Court's June decision to allow Oklahoma to continue to use midazolam as part of its 3-drug execution protocol was a loss for opponents of the death penalty - who were attacked at oral arguments by Justice Samuel Alito as waging a "guerrilla war" against executions - the decision itself was overshadowed in some ways by a dissenting opinion by Justice Stephen Breyer. "In 1976, the Court thought that the constitutional infirmities in the death penalty could be healed; the Court in effect delegated significant responsibility to the States to develop procedures that would protect against those constitutional problems," Breyer, joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote. "Almost 40 years of studies, surveys, and experience strongly indicate, however, that this effort has failed." Breyer's reference to 1976 was to the Supreme Court's decision upholding the death penalty laws considered in Gregg v. Georgia as constitutional. The decision ended a 4-year moratorium on executions in the country that had resulted from the court's 1972 ruling in Furman v. Georgia that the implementation of the death penalty was unconstitutional. In detailing the reasons why he and Ginsburg called for reconsideration after nearly 40 years of whether the death penalty itself is unconstitutional, Breyer laid out 3 defects: unreliability of the death penalty process, arbitrariness of how that process is implemented, and delays in the process that undermine its purposes. "Perhaps as a result ... most places within the United States have abandoned its use," Breyer wrote. As part of its coverage of the death penalty in America, BuzzFeed News will be updating this map as needed to provide a visual answer - along with descriptions below - to the question of where the death penalty is used in the U.S. Active Death Penalty Law 14 states with the death penalty and with an execution in the past 5 years: For the past several months, only Texas and Missouri have been conducting executions. The states are the only known 2 that have both wanted to proceed with executions and have been able to secure pentobarbital, a single execution drug that was not at issue in the recent Supreme Court case. Earlier this year, Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma also held executions, all in January. Over the past 5 years, however, 9 other states also have conducted executions, with several of them planning to conduct executions over the coming 6 months. In Virginia, Alfredo Prieto, a foreign national from El Salvador, is scheduled to be executed on Oct. 1. In Ohio, Gov. John Kasich put off all executions in 2015, but they are scheduled to resume in January 2016. 12 states with the death penalty and no moratorium, but no executions in the past 5 years: Among the states that could but have not conducted an execution over the past 5 years is Arkansas. On Sept. 9, however, Gov. Asa Hutchinson announced that he had set execution dates beginning Oct. 21 and continuing through January 2016 for eight death row inmates. In many states, however, the death penalty remains the law but actual executions have all but ended. In Kansas, the most recent executions took place in 1965 and included Perry Smith and Richard Hickock - the killers of the Clutter family made famous by Truman Capote nonfiction novel In Cold Blood. New Hampshire last executed someone in 1939. In other states, the death penalty has been used since executions resumed in the U.S. again in 1976, but not recently. In Wyoming, for example, only 1 person has been executed since Gregg, and he was executed in 1992. Moratorium 4 states with a governor-imposed moratorium on executions: Halts on executions in Colorado, Oregon, and Washington have taken executions off the table in those states without much pushback, but Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf's decision to set a moratorium has been challenged by the Philadelphia district attorney. The state's Supreme Court heard arguments recently on whether Wolf has the authority to issue continual, indefinite reprieves on executions in the state. 1 state with a court-imposed moratorium on executions: A federal court declared California's death penalty system to be unconstitutional, although the state has appealed the ruling. The appeal was heard recently by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. In Flux 1 state with death penalty abolition referendum pending: Although the Nebraska legislature - over Gov. Pete Ricketts's veto - passed legislative repeal of the state's death penalty, a group, backed by Ricketts, has collected and submitted signatures seeking to put the measure up to a vote in 2016. No Death Penalty There are 18 states with no death penalty: The states include Alaska and Hawaii, which never had the death penalty as a punishment since becoming states. Among the states without the death penalty, Connecticut has the notable distinction of having had the death penalty legislatively repealed and declared to be unconstitutional by the state's Supreme Court. This happened because the state's legislative repeal of the death penalty was not retroactive, leading those remaining on death row to successfully challenge their continued death sentences. The lack of retroactivity in legislative death penalty repeal is also the reason why 2 people remain on New Mexico's death row, despite the fact that the death penalty there was repealed 6 years ago. (source: buzzfeed.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 17 16:23:27 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 16:23:27 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 17 NIGERIA: Appeal for death penalty to halt abductions The Human Rights Writers Association (HURIWA) has called for the death sentence to be imposed on kidnappers. This comes amid a spate of abductions that has rocked the country. "It has become very clear that the piecemeal legal approaches by the different states within the federation of Nigeria to tackle armed criminality of kidnapping hasn't worked therefore demanding that a national mechanism be put in place to make kidnapping a grave offence only punishable with the death penalty," said HURIWA's National Coordinator, Emmanuel Onwubiko, and the National Media Affairs Director, Zainab Yusuf. The officials urged President Muhammadu Buhari to constitute a team to probe the spate of kidnappings. "We urge the Nigerian Government to constitute an action team made up of few but versatile legal scholars to work in partnership with the hierarchies of the Legislature and the judiciary to articulate actionable positions on strategies for amending all relevant criminal laws relating to kidnapping with a view to make kidnapping a capital offence punishable by death." The rights group likened the abductions to the reign of terror by the Boko Haram sect. "Kidnappers are as bad as terrorists and therefore the harsher the punishment meted out to them the better." (source: news24nigeria) ************* 'NLC, TUC Call for Death Penalty On Corrupt Govt Officials Ridiculous' Former Commissioner of Police, Chief Ikechukwu Aduba (retd), has described as bizarre and unrefined the call by the Nigeria Labour Congress, NLC and Trade Union Congress, TUC, for death penalty on treasury looters to check official corruption. Aduba, who noted that some Nigerians often disparage well-meaning citizens for making forthright appraisal, said capital punishment has not tamed corruption in countries as China and India referred to by the unions, maintaining that what were required were practical and precautionary measures. He asserted, "It is truism that Nigerians' expertise in corruption is unparalleled the world over and corruption has destroyed every fabric of the Nigerian society... However, in my view, the call for death penalty by NLC and TUC is empirically absurd." "Emotions aside, they ought to call for immediate reform of the court system for a speedy conviction of the corrupt, strengthening of the apparatus of detection and investigation for quick arraignment of the corrupt and restructuring of the prison system to aid timely justice delivery in corruption cases. "These would serve as more effective deterrence than imposition of death penalty. Without touching these critical areas, death penalty for corruption would not have a salutary effect, it would hardly check corruption just as it has been ineffective in checking armed robbery and lately kidnapping," the ex-commissioner said. Aduba stated, "Globally, advance economies had been able to combat official corruption through other proactive and preventable measures. None had used the medium of death penalty, which in itself is reactive to and already consummated action." He said that China, currently acclaimed universally as having the stiffest punishment for official corruption "cannot match decent countries such as Sweden, Switzerland and Namibia in the corruption index," adding, "These other countries used other proactive tools and preventive measures to achieve milestones and not death penalty." His words, "In conclusion, I wish to state equivocally that deterrence, retribution (restitution) and reformation are the 3 essence of punishment. Death penalty as a form of punishment was initially thought to achieve deterrence, NLC should note that these were in primordial crude society, yet that goal was never achieved as savagery still characterized those societies." (source: Vanguard) INDIA: Amroha murders: Guv rejects mercy plea of Shabnam & Saleem The office of the governer have also sent the copy of the mercy plea rejection order to the President of India. The governor has rejected the couple`s mercy petition. The other mercy petition that was sent to the President is pending. Uttar Pradesh Governer Ram Naik has rejected the mercy petitions of Shabnam and her lover Saleem, convicted of murdering 7 people of the woman's family, including a 10-month-old infant, at Bahman Garhi in Amroha on April 2008 to remove the hurdles to their relationship. In May 2015, the Supreme Court had dismissed the appeals of Shabnam and Saleem and upheld the death penalty imposed on them by a sessions court, which was confirmed by the Allahabad High Court. The office of the governer have also sent the copy of the mercy plea rejection order to the President of India. Speaking to TOI, B D Panday, jailor of Moradabad prison, said, "Shabnam and Saleem had filed the mercy petitions through the jail authorities before the governer of the state and the President of India simultaneously soon after their death penalty was upheld by the Supreme Court on May 15. The governor has rejected the couple's mercy petition. The other mercy petition that was sent to the President is pending. (source: nyoooz.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Fri Sep 18 14:13:40 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 14:13:40 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., N.C., S.C., FLA., ARK., NEB., CALIF., USA Message-ID: Sept. 18 PENNSYLVANIA: Westmoreland judge rejects Daugherty murderer's complaints about death row conditions The mentally disabled woman tortured and stabbed to death by Ricky Smyrnes was foremost on the mind of Judge Rita Hathaway on Thursday when she ruled that the murderer is going to have to make do with whatever comforts he can find on death row. The judge rejected a defense request to appoint an expert to examine death row living conditions as part of Smyrnes' ongoing appeal of his death sentence. "I guess you're asking me to make Mr. Smyrnes more comfortable on death row," Hathaway said at the hearing in Westmoreland County court. "I'm not hearing any argument that he's being tortured on death row, unlike the innocent victim in this case, Jennifer Daugherty." Smyrnes, along with 5 of his Greensburg roommates, were convicted of the February 2010 torture slaying of Daugherty. The prosecution said Smyrnes, 29, formerly of Irwin, was ringleader of the group and convened "family meetings" in which the roommates voted to kill Daugherty, then discard her body. According to testimony during the trials, Daugherty, 30, of Mt. Pleasant was humiliated, beaten, tortured and stabbed to death. Smyrnes and Melvin Knight, 25, were convicted of 1st-degree murder and sentenced to death. Hathaway presided over all the cases connected to the torture slaying. During a sentencing hearing this summer for Angela Marinucci, who is also appealing her sentence of life in prison without parole, the judge said Daugherty's murder was one of the toughest for her to sit through during her 2-decade career on the bench. Hathaway has said she has nightmares and still struggles with the vivid details of what was done to Daugherty. But it's Smyrnes who contends his death sentence is cruel and unusual punishment, because there is little likelihood he will be executed and he now stays in solitary confinement with little interaction with the outside world. Smyrnes' appeal, in which he says there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction, also focused on constitutionality questions surrounding his sentence. Defense attorneys Brian Aston and James Fox argued that Smyrnes' living conditions - in which he is allowed only 3 showers a week and out of his cell for 2 hours a day - cause him to suffer from hallucinations, paranoia, depression and loss of appetite. "All of those psychological effects are due to solitary confinement and are cruel and unusual punishment," Aston said. The defense argued that since the death penalty was reinstated in Pennsylvania in 1976, there have been 182 defendants sent to death row and only 3 executed. During that same time, there have been 124 cases in which death sentences were reversed and 118 cases in which capital punishment was reimposed as a result of new hearings, Aston said. We're ready to explore whether the system itself is so broken it needs to be redone," Aston said. Gov. Tom Wolf has imposed a moratorium on the death penalty until the state's practices with regards to capital punishment can be reviewed. Meanwhile, the judge offered a suggestion to Smyrnes should he continue to have a problem with death row living conditions. "The conditions you are complaining about should be addressed through a civil lawsuit against the Department of Corrections," Hathaway said. (source: triblive.com) NORTH CAROLINA: Capital murder trial at least 6 months out The capital trial of a man accused of murdering an 88-year-old man more than 2 years ago will likely be at least 6 months away, and possibly as long as a year down the road. Attorneys for Bobby Joe Jackson argued they needed 12 months to prepare for the death penalty trial, while prosecutors urged the judge to look at holding the trial in March 2016 - which will be near the 3rd anniversary of the death of Lindsey Stikeleather. The trial was set to begin in November, but both sides told Judge Mark Klass that was not a possibility since one of Jackson's 2 attorneys withdrew from the case last month and a new one was just appointed. Scott Gsell made his 1st appearance on behalf of Jackson at Thursday's hearing in Iredell County Superior Court. Because this is a death penalty case, 2 attorneys are required. Gsell is the 3rd second-chair appointed since Jackson was arrested in March 2013. Authorities contend Jackson, a former tenant of Stikeleather's, lured him out with a story about a broken scooter. Stikeleather went to a local bank and withdrew a large sum of money under threat from Jackson, authorities said. Stikeleather's body was found underneath a bridge on Eufola Road, a few days after meeting Stikeleather about the broken down scooter. Since Jackson's arrest in March 2013, the case has wound its way through the court system. Lori Hamilton was appointed to represent Jackson, and once the death penalty was brought into the picture, a second attorney, Craig Blitzer was appointed. Hamilton told Klass that shortly after his appointment, Blitzer launched a campaign for district attorney in Rockingham County. She said his campaign left much of the trial preparation to her, and after he was elected, Blitzer formally withdrew from the case. Dan Dolan, from the Capital Defender's Service, was then appointed as second chair. Dolan was on the case for more than a year when he asked to withdraw from the case last month. Dolan cited an unspecified conflict of interest. Judge Joe Crosswhite, resident senior superior court judge for Iredell, granted the motion. Gsell was appointed last month, and he and Hamilton said he would need to get up to speed on the case, and in some instances, retrace investigative steps taken by Dolan. Hamilton said the defense needs a minimum of 1 year to be ready for trial. Assistant District Attorney Mikko Red Arrow, who along with District Attorney Sarah Kirkman is trying the case, told Klass a year was "absurd" and he proposed postponing the trial 6 months - until March 2016. Red Arrow argued that while Gsell is new to the case, Hamilton has been involved since shortly after Jackson's arrest. "This is not a factually complicated case," he said. Hamilton said she doesn't believe the 6 month timetable is realistic, adding it was likely she and Gsell would be back in court asking for a continuance if trial was set for March. Regardless of when the trial date is set, Red Arrow said, it will be necessary to set aside a special session of court since the case will likely take more than the 2 weeks normally allotted to a session of Superior Court. Klass agreed to set a tentative trial date for June 2016. (source: Statesville Record & Landmark) ************** A troubling case in Davidson County Recently, Davidson County had a death penalty trial that lasted a record-breaking 24 weeks and ended with a surprising plea bargain caused by the failure of the prosecutors to follow the law and comply with the orders of the court. After participating in one of the longest jury selections in North Carolina history, the state reversed course and offered a plea bargain to 3 counts of 2nd degree-murder after the judge removed the death penalty from consideration because the prosecutors failed to comply with discovery laws and the orders of the court. This unexpected plea understandably raised questions. In a recent one-sided column in the Winston-Salem Journal, District Attorney Garry Frank was quoted as expressing disappointment about what he considered an expensive loss for the state. He blamed it on Superior Court Judge Chris Bragg - a former prosecutor with experience prosecuting death penalty cases. Apparently, Frank felt that the judge unfairly pressed for a plea deal and undermined the state's case. As Carl Kennedy's defense attorneys, who watched this case unfold over several years, we want to offer another perspective on why this trial ended in an unexpected plea bargain. It had nothing to do with an activist judge, and everything to do with the fairness and integrity of our justice system. This was a case where the prosecutors failed to follow both the law and the orders of the court repeatedly. First, we acknowledge that Kennedy's trial was a tremendous waste of taxpayer dollars. Death penalty trials can be extremely expensive, and this one, handled by assistant district attorneys Alan Martin and Greg Brown, was even more lengthy and costly than most. But here's what hasn't been reported: In Kennedy's case, every penny could have been saved. In August, 2012, long before the trial began, Kennedy offered to plead guilty to 3 counts of 1st degree murder and accept 3 sentences of life in prison without the possibility of parole. The deal would have saved hundreds of thousands in trial costs, ensured that Kennedy took full responsibility for his crimes, and that he would certainly die in prison. Frank declined to accept a plea to three counts of 1st degree murder and insisted on a trial. Frank's office then failed to provide information that prosecutors were required to provide by law and the court's previous orders. Death penalty cases are subject to heightened reliability and should be free from error to avoid the possibility of retrials and further expense to the taxpayers, not to mention the conviction of innocent defendants. Prosecutors are required to maintain open files and disclose evidence that may be favorable to a defendant. They are also required to disclose when they offer witnesses benefits in exchange for testimony against a defendant. There is good reason for this law. Many innocent people who have been exonerated were convicted with the help of untruthful witnesses, who testified in exchange for reduced sentences for their own crimes. In a death penalty trial, this information helps the jury decide whether the witness' testimony is reliable enough to send a person to his death. Frank's office did not turn over evidence that discovery laws mandate should have been turned over. This pattern continued even after the judge's repeated warnings. Then, on the day one of Kennedy's co-defendants was set to testify against him, the defense discovered more evidence that had not been disclosed. Only then did the judge finally, and rightly, decide that the state should not be allowed to seek the death penalty in a case where the prosecutors had repeatedly not followed the law. Nothing about the judge's decision prevented Frank's office from continuing to pursue a 1st-degree murder conviction and sentences of life without parole. However, Frank made the decision to agree to a plea of 3 2nd-degree murder charges. The reality is that the District Attorney's Office compromised its own case by failing to comply with basic rules of discovery and the orders of the court. This case was a tragedy all the way around and, in the end, a waste of time and money for all involved. But the lesson is this: Death penalty prosecutions must be carried out with the utmost integrity and fairness and prosecutors must follow the law. The victims' families and the taxpayers of this state deserve a fair and trustworthy process. In a state where 9 innocent people have now been removed from death row, we must not look the other way when the prosecutors break the rules. The blame for the outcome in this case and the waste of significant taxpayer money falls squarely at the feet of the prosecutors, and not the judge. (source: Opinion; Robert E. Campbell practices law in Taylorsville. Lisa Dubs practices in Hickory----Winston-Salem Journal) SOUTH CAROLINA: Deputy met with former Pickens coach minutes before fatal shooting An investigator visited and spoke with former Pickens High football coach Bill Isaacs about 10 minutes before he was shot dead on Monday morning, the Pickens County Sheriff's Office said. The 2nd victim in the double homicide, Isaacs' longtime friend Dickie Stewart, was on the phone with a 911 dispatcher when he was shot at the scene, according to a 911 call authorities released Thursday. Albert Leon Bowen, 64, of Gilliland Road is charged with 2 counts of murder in their deaths. Thirteenth Circuit Solicitor Walt Wilkins said the double homicide qualifies for the death penalty, but authorities have not decided whether to pursue capital punishment. Sheriff Rick Clark said there was no evidence of a feud or threats involving the victims. The day before the shooting, however, Isaacs complained to the Sheriff's Office that someone shot at his vehicle, according to an incident report. Isaacs told a deputy by phone Sunday that the windshield of a replica model vehicle was damaged in his driveway, according to an incident report. The damage was consistent with a high-powered pellet gun, Clark said. Isaacs was "adamant about not wanting a deputy to respond to the scene," according to the report. He wanted to deal with an investigator whom he had talked to previously, the Sheriff's Office said. Since September 2014, Isaacs and his wife had made 3 reports to the Sheriff's Office about damage to their vehicles, according to incident reports. "It was believed that the property damage that happened to Mr. Isaacs was coming from the house across the street at Mr. Bowen's," Clark said. "Those were the initial things that we were looking at and trying to investigate." However, none of the incidents could be tied to anyone in the neighborhood, the Sheriff's Office said. There were no reports of damage to Stewart's property prior to the shooting, Clark said. Sheriff Clark said a detective met with Isaacs at 9:13 a.m. Monday at his home at 411 Gilliland Road. The detective left the home at 9:41 a.m. Monday to obtain information about the case at the Law Enforcement Center, authorities said. Isaacs decided to go for a morning walk when the detective left, Clark said. The Sheriff's Office played two 911 calls at a press conference Thursday. In a call received at 9:50 a.m., a woman tells a dispatcher she saw a man lying face down on the ground on North Homestead Road, down the street from where Isaacs lived, authorities said. In the 2nd call 1 minute later, Stewart says that Isaacs, his neighbor, is down on the ground. As the dispatcher questions Stewart, he yells in pain. "I've been shot," he screams. "Please, not me, too." The detective returned to the Isaacs home at 9:57 a.m., and Bowen was taken into custody at his home. Clark declined to elaborate on a motive for the shootings. In the past year, residents in the neighborhood reported hearing gunshots on multiple occasions. In September 2014, Isaacs' wife, Margaret Isaacs, told a deputy that their 2 SUVs were shot in the driveway, according to an incident report. An officer spoke with multiple people on Gilliland Road and on surrounding streets, according to a supplemental incident report. One man said he shot every day for target practice but never in the direction of the Isaacs home, according to the report. Discharging a firearm is not illegal in the county jurisdiction of Pickens. An officer also talked to Bowen and his wife. They lived across the street from Isaacses. An officer wrote in his supplemental report: "I am not positive, but I feel the shots must have came from a subject driving down the road." In the report he said that Bowen "Albert stated he had also heard several shots during the past week and said it shook his house." In December 2014, Isaacs reported to the Sheriff's Office that someone shot into his home and vehicle, according to an incident report. No other incidents were reported until this past weekend, the Sheriff's Office said. Isaacs lived in the neighborhood for decades, Clark said. He was the head football coach at Pickens for 27 years and is the winningest coach in the program's history. He was inducted into the South Carolina Athletic Coaches Hall of Fame in 2011. (source: thestate.com) ******************* Is life in prison less expensive than the death penalty? The defense team for accused South Carolina church shooter Dylann Roof made it very clear this week: Their client wants to keep his life, even if it's behind bars. Lawyers told the court Roof would plead guilty to all charges in exchange for a sentence of life without parole. The Solicitor, Scarlett Wilson, said she will seek the death penalty. Former South Carolina Attorney General Charlie Condon agreed, "I can't imagine a more appropriate case for the State to seek the death penalty." A 2006 Columbia School of Law study found executions cost between $2.5 and $5 million. A sentence of life without parole costs less than a million dollars. Reasons included that capital cases require at least 2 trials - 1 to determine the defendant's guilt and another to determine if the punishment should be death - greater scrutiny given to capital cases and their appeals, and higher costs for housing and monitoring a death row inmate. Condon counters, "If you let cost be the depository factor, that leaves aside what the court should be about." "Justice can be very expensive," he said. Some states have decided it's just too expensive. New Jersey abolished the death penalty in 2007. The state spent $254 million over 21 years without executing a single person. New Mexico followed in 2009. In August of this year, Connecticut's highest court ruled the death penalty is unconstitutional. Right now there are 43 inmates awaiting death in South Carolina. The last was executed in 2011. (source: WBAY news) FLORIDA: Students face death penalty for alleged machete murder 5 Jobs Corps students were indicted by a Miami grand jury on 1st degree murder charges for allegedly hacking to death a 17-year-old schoolmate with a machete, according to court documents. The 4 men and 1 woman aged 18 to 23, who were enrolled in Homestead Job Corps, a federally run live-in school, could face the death penalty. They are accused of planning the murder of Jose Amaya Guardado over the course of 2 weeks, including digging his grave beforehand, according to videotaped confessions, prosecutors say. The alleged ringleader, Kaheem Arbelo, 20, pleaded not guilty in state court prior to Wednesday's indictment. A trial is set for Oct 19. Guardado was reported missing from the school south of Miami in late June. After days of searching, his brother found him in early July decomposing in a shallow grave in the woods near the campus, according to a police report. A series of final, brutal attacks by Arbelo allegedly caused Guardado's face to cave in, the report said. Arbelo then had sex with the female suspect, Desiray Strickland, in the woods after the group allegedly cleaned up the crime scene and buried the dead teen, it added. After the arrests, federal authorities suspended classes and began reviewing the school's operating procedures. The murder has also caused increased scrutiny of the U.S. Department of Labor program which operates 125 campuses nationwide. The schools help at-risk men and women ages of 16 and 24 earn high-school degrees, prepare for college, or follow one of more than 100 vocational programs. (source: Reuters) ARKANSAS: Justices affirm 2 inmates' sentences ---- 1 still faces death, other is in for life A death-row inmate who killed his cellmate and a man who killed his girlfriend both lost appeals Thursday before the Arkansas Supreme Court. The state's high court issued unanimous opinions affirming the death sentence for Robert Holland and the conviction and life sentence for Fred Williams. Holland, 46, has been in prison since 1991, for killing his parents with a gun and a tire iron just outside El Dorado earlier that year. Once behind bars, he killed again. Already serving a life sentence for one count of capital murder, Holland told prison officials in the Cummins unit in Gould that he wanted a cell all to himself. Holland's refusal to share the space led to several disciplinary actions against him, and on Dec. 7, 2012, Holland agreed to accept a cellmate. Hours after Matthew Scheile was transferred to the cell, Holland stopped prison guards on their rounds and informed them that he'd just killed the man. Scheile, 22, was serving 4 years for failure to register as a sex offender; if he had lived 3 months longer, he would have been eligible for parole, prison records show. Scheile was strangled with a bedsheet, according to reports, and Holland told state police investigators that he killed Scheile to have the cell to himself. Holland was charged with capital murder and pleaded guilty early in his legal proceedings. Prosecutors sought the death penalty and on July 14, 2014, Holland was sentenced to be executed. Holland appealed last September, arguing that he was unfairly sentenced because state attorneys abused the jury-selection process. State attorneys struck three blacks from the jury and Holland, who is white, objected, arguing that the attorneys were discriminatory in their selections. In 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court outlined standards for such an objection and noted that an appeal on these grounds is only valid if the trial judge ruled against the preponderance of evidence that prosecutors were systemically discriminating along racial lines. State attorneys argued that one of the black candidates was struck because she knew a potential defense witness. Another was dismissed because her son was awaiting trial on accusations of smuggling contraband into a prison. A third prospective juror who had a son in prison also was rejected. The state high court, in an opinion penned by Justice Rhonda Wood, found that the jury strikes were "sufficiently race-neutral" and that Holland's argument "boils down to 'the court should have not believed the State.'" (source: arkansasonline.com) NEBRASKA: State foiled by improper paperwork in attempt to acquire execution drug Improper paperwork thwarted an effort by Nebraska prison officials to import a disputed shipment of lethal injection drugs earlier this month. Despite warnings from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration that it is illegal to import foreign-made sodium thiopental, the state proceeded with plans to obtain the drug from a pharmaceutical broker in India. However, "improper or missing international paperwork" filed by the drug exporter prompted FedEx to return the shipment before it left India, Jim McCluskey, a spokesman for FedEx, said Thursday. The company sends information about all imported drugs to the FDA and U.S. Customs officials in advance of their delivery, McCluskey said. "If the shipment is authorized, we will deliver it to the recipient," he said. "If it is not, we will return it to the foreign shipper." According to FedEx tracking records, the shipment was picked up by the company Aug. 28 but returned to the exporter Sept. 4. James Foster, spokesman for the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services, said Thursday that state officials "will continue to work with all entities involved for the legal importation of the substances." Earlier this year, Nebraska Corrections officials paid $54,400 to purchase the sodium thiopental and another drug called pancuronium bromide from a supplier in India. The substances, 2 of 3 required under the state's lethal injection protocol, had expired. Gov. Pete Ricketts has said he remains confident that Nebraska will obtain the drugs, but the FDA says the sodium thiopental is no longer approved for use in he United States. The domestic manufacturer of the anesthetic stopped making it several years ago under pressure from death penalty opponents. The FDA's position that the drug will not be allowed delivery to Nebraska or any other state remains unchanged, Jeff Ventura, the agency's spokesman, said in an email Thursday. In support of its ban on the importation of the drug, the FDA has referred to a 2013 federal appeals court ruling in Washington, D.C. Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson has hinted that the state may legally challenge the FDA's blockade of the drug. Nebraska was not a party to the case that led to the appeals court decision, and Peterson has said the FDA has staked out a position that goes beyond what the court required. The governor announced the purchase of the drugs last spring while the Legislature was debating a bill to repeal the death penalty in Nebraska. Ricketts wanted to counter arguments that the state would be unable to obtain the drugs needed to carry out an execution. Lawmakers voted to repeal the death penalty over the governor's veto. Death penalty supporters, however, apparently succeeded to obtaining enough petition signatures to put capital punishment on the ballot in 2016. Nebraska last executed an inmate in 1997, when the method of execution was the electric chair. Some death penalty supporters have argued that the state should seek a change in protocol and use different drugs for lethal injection. (source: Omaha World-Herald) CALIFORNIA: Death penalty's troubling contradictions While in seminary in the San Francisco Bay area I had the opportunity to become the franchise owner/operator of a Shell service station on Highway 101 at the Corte Madera Y. At that time, 101 was a 4-lane highway complete with stop signs at several intersections. Cars going north had stopped for the red light. There were several cars in the left-turn lane awaiting the light to change. A car not in that designated lane but in the center lane signaled he was going to make an unauthorized left turn. In the car behind him was an off-duty California Highway Patrol officer who sounded his horn to warn the car in front of him to not make the turn. The driver in the car panicked and turned left directly in the path of an 18-wheeler. Both the driver and passenger were ejected from the car and killed on impact. My 1st experience with violent death. I can still see the body of the man on the pavement as I covered him with a blanket from the service station. The next experience with violent death was as a legally mandated witness to the execution of a 38-year-old African-American man in San Quentin's infamous gas chamber. That particular Saturday morning I was working the day shift as a corrections officer. The required number of witnesses had not shown up, so the watch lieutenant tapped me to be the 13th witness. The condemned man was strapped securely in the stationary oak chair directly over a cauldron of sulfuric acid into which the cyanide eggs were dropped. Coached by death-row personnel to take large breaths of the hydrogen cyanide gas, the condemned prisoner's body jerked 3 or 4 times and he was pronounced dead by the attending physicians, safely using remote stethoscopes. Not the last bodies resulting from violent death I have witnessed, but 2 of the most vivid in my memory. One a senseless accident. The second the state of California's legally mandated act of societal revenge. As of earlier this month, there were 747 male prisoners on San Quentin's death row. The 21 female condemned prisoners are held at the Central California Women's facility in Chowchilla. The death penalty is only one discouragingly intractable social dilemma involving crime and punishment. In the United States we have 2.5 million people behind bars. That means with 5 % of the world's population, we have 25 % of those incarcerated worldwide. In addition, there are 6 million people under some kind of court supervision. In the face of this incredible drain on our national resources, costing some $30,000 per prisoner per year, some of our current presidential contenders are talking about shutting down the government if they can't defund Planned Parenthood. No one in the field of criminology leaves out "poverty" as one of the main contributing factors in criminal behavior. Planned Parenthood spends 97 % of its resources on birth control and sex education. The other 3 % that could be used for abortion services is exempted from using any federal funds under the Hyde Amendment passed in 1976. The anomaly of those stridently in favor of the death penalty is they often are the same people opposing birth control and all abortion services. Go figure. (source: The Rev. Chuck Arnold is pastor of Valley of the Flowers United Church of Christ in Vandenberg Village----Opinion, Lompoc Record) **************** Los Angeles father charged in stabbing death of 3 sons found in SUV A father who was found with stab wounds in an SUV with his 3 sons dead in the back was charged with murder on Tuesday. Luis Fuentes, 33, also known as Luiz Yantuche, was charged with 3 counts, prosecutors said. The district attorney's office alleges special circumstances - multiple murders and use of a knife in a killing - that would make Fuentes eligible for the death penalty, but prosecutors said they have not yet decided whether to seek capital punishment. Fuentes was being held without bail and was scheduled to appear in court Wednesday. It wasn't clear whether he has yet hired an attorney who could be reached for comment. Authorities allege Fuentes used a knife to kill his young sons - 8-year-old Alexander, 9-year-old Juan and 10-year-old Luis. A furniture store owner found the bodies. Fuentes was in the front seat bleeding from stab wounds to his chest with a knife sitting next to him but survived his injuries, authorities said. Neither police nor prosecutors have cited a motive, but Fuentes' wife died in 2008 and he had suffered from depression ever since, despite the efforts of friends and family to help, the Los Angeles Times reported. (source: Associated Press) ************ Defense wants judge to recuse himself----The judge presiding over a death penalty murder trial, represented one of the defendants in a 1996 unrelated case Defense attorneys in a death penalty murder trial have asked the judge presiding over the trial to disqualify himself from the case after learning that he represented 1 of the defendants in an unrelated robbery case in 1996. During a court hearing Thursday, Sept. 17, Riverside County Superior Judge Bernard Schwartz told attorneys in the murder case he did not remember the robbery case involving defendant Romaine Martin, who is on trial with Deontray Robinson. Jurors were not present during the hearing. Schwartz will meet again with attorneys Wednesday, Sept. 23. A number of options exist, including: Schwartz could recuse himself from hearing the case; he could continue hearing evidence; declare a mistrial; or, as requested by defense and prosecution attorneys, he could issue a stay in proceedings to allow the Judicial Council of California to select an independent judge to decide the disqualification issue. Martin, 40, of Moreno Valley, and Robinson, 25, of Palm Desert, face numerous charges, including murder and robbery, and special circumstances allegations of murder committed during a robbery, murder to benefit a criminal street gang, murder during a burglary and murder to prevent the testimony of a victim or witness. Their trial in the 2011 case began about 3 weeks ago. According to court records and testimony, victim Jerry Mitchell Jr. was beaten and bleeding after a home-invasion robbery at his condo on Carnation Lane in Moreno Valley. Then, one of the robbers, identified by prosecutors as Robinson, returned to shoot Mitchell. If the defendants are convicted of certain charges, the same jury would hear testimony in a penalty phase that could lead to a death penalty recommendation. While emphasizing he respected "the court" and fair treatment in the proceedings in reference to Schwartz, defense attorney Darryl Exum said, "The problem with this case is how it looks," the perception of impartiality and the consequences if the subject of the prior case comes up in the trial. The defense received information last week that confirmed Schwartz, who was a defense attorney back then, represented Martin in the 1996 case. The case was filed at a time the Superior Court was transitioning between paper files and electronic records. A short case abstract is available electronically, but Exum learned that because the case concluded in 1997 more detailed records are available. Prosecutors had provided information about the existence of the case prior to trial. "I should have been able to find this out and I didn't. .... I take this responsibility," Exum said about learning of the previous case details. A motion was filed on Martin's behalf Wednesday, Sept. 16, and later that day attorneys for Robinson filed a similar motion. Copies of the documents were not immediately available. (source: Press-Enterprise) USA: Inside the growing conservative movement to end the death penalty After years of sitting on death row in Oklahoma, Richard Glossip was scheduled to die on Wednesday. But today, Friday, he's still alive. That's thanks to a last-minute, 2-week reprieve - which was granted in no small part because of a growing cadre of conservative activists who oppose the death penalty. Glossip's case - he was convicted of hiring someone to kill his boss - had exhausted every avenue of appeal, even briefly heading to the Supreme Court last year as the justices weighed the legality of lethal injection. But time and again, state officials and the legal system rejected his team's claims of innocence. In recent weeks, pressure began to mount from evangelicals, young activists, and figures in the local media who wanted the state to take one last look at his case. The outreach to these groups came largely from an organization called Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty. Their outreach specialist is a man named Marc Hyden, a former campaign field representative for the National Rifle Association who argues that opposing capital punishment is a natural philosophical fit for tough-minded conservatives. "Point to a single government program that works flawlessly. Death penalty supporters have to accept that it's a human-run program and so my question is, how many innocent people are you willing to execute?" Hyden told me. The fallibility of government is just one of several strategic points from which Hyden and his conservative constituency come at capital punishment. They are also quick to point out that putting someone to death is far more expensive than simply keeping them in prison. Then there's the empirical data challenging whether the threat of execution is truly a disincentive for would-be criminals. Some anecdotal accounts challenge whether families of victims benefit in any measurable way from seeing a perpetrator put to death. And for the truly committed pro-life believer, there is the larger philosophical dilemma of whether a God-fearing society should be empowering the state to execute its citizens. But none of these arguments carries the weight of innocence. That brings us to the case of Ray Krone, an early player in state Republican politics before he was wrongfully convicted of murder. In 2002, Krone rose to prominence when he became the 100th U.S. citizen exonerated from death row since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. "I was in the Boy Scouts and the church choir. I did 6 years in the Air Force, 7 years in the Post Office," Krone said in a phone interview. "This could be your son, father, neighbor. I didn't have hundreds of thousands of dollars for a great lawyer and most people facing death row probably don't either. How many innocent people take a plea bargain?" That's where Hyden and conservatives find common ground with very liberal figures, such as the actress Susan Sarandon. Sarandon has been vocally involved in Glossip's case, teaming up with Sister Mary Prejean, whom Sarandon portrayed in her Oscar-winning performance in Dead Man Walking. When I asked Sarandon what she thinks about her strange bedfellows, she said, "There's a lot of common ground there," noting with a laugh that's not something she would normally say about a group of conservative Republicans. "From a philosophical point of view, they're being very consistent in challenging government power." 40 years ago, the death penalty was far less common than it is today. But as the nation recoiled from a sense of liberal policies gone awry amid spiking crime rates, most of the country was all too happy to get behind a tougher criminal justice approach. And for hungry prosecutors in states where a strong conviction record is intrinsically tied to a bright political future, sentencing a violent criminal to death became a badge of honor. Today, the death penalty is still supported by a majority of Americans, particularly conservative ones. However, the opposition has a few vocal opponents on the right, including former RNC Chairman Michael Steele and Oliver North. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul has expressed his own skepticism, but it's unlikely to become a relevant issue on the 2016 presidential campaign trail. No one wants to become the next Michael Dukakis, forced into the emasculating position of defending the human rights of a spouse's imaginary sexual predator. For those opposed to the death penalty, the strategy is largely mirrored in the push for same-sex marriage. Change policy at the state level and hope that doing so serves as the catalyst for a shift in public opinion, eventually leading to more direct action at the federal level. Support for the death penalty has noticeably dropped, peaking at 80 % in the mid-1990s and dropping to 63 % in the most recent Gallup data available. However, only 33 % of people say they oppose capital punishment, still nearly 10 % away from when the country was more or less split on the issue from the early 1960s through the mid '70s. Ironically, it was during a 4-year suspension by the Supreme Court, from 1972 to 1976, that support for state-sanctioned murder began to peak. Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty got off the ground in 2010 in Montana, an ideal breeding ground for forward-thinking conservative positions. After all, this is the same state where citizens have tussled with the federal government over using their gun registration cards to purchase medical marijuana. Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty has expanded to states including Florida, Delaware, Tennessee, Kentucky, North Carolina, Texas, Georgia, Connecticut, and Nebraska. The latter 2 abolished capital punishment this year. Altogether, 7 states have banned the death penalty since 2000, by far the biggest shift in American history. Over the coming days and weeks, Glossip's case will bring an increased spotlight to capital punishment and whether it has a place in modern American society. It's unlikely any one case will prove to be the tipping point, but when you consider that just 5 years ago, legalized marijuana and gay marriage seemed farfetched to most, it's not crazy to think that with a bipartisan coalition opposing it, the death penalty may soon find itself on life support, too. (source: The Week) **************** Charlie Rose Talks to Stephen Breyer ---- The Clinton appointee weighs in on his fellow Supreme Court justices and his stand against the death penalty. Your book, The Court and the World, explores foreign law's impact on the U.S. legal system. Give me an example. We've had 3 cases involving a treaty about domestic affairs, about abduction of children. They're tough cases. We have groups who were trying to fight child abduction on one side and groups who are against spousal abuse on the other. Why are we suddenly deciding these matters? Because the world today is filled with marriages that cross boundaries. The problem is, how do we adjust our institutions to sensibly create rules in a world where so many of these issues cross borders? It's not a problem that's been solved. I know lots of people who want to see the rule of law reach across borders before they'll do business with or live in another country. The point in this book is that by participating in what's going on in this world legally, we'll further the rule of law. And if we don't participate, what will happen is the world will go on without us. Who are we? We're people Jefferson and the founders said are engaging in an experiment. Lincoln said, "We are engaged in a great war to see if this nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure." And that's why I want us to think about what's going on beyond our shores and the relevance of what you're arguing here to what's going on over there. And there are plenty of places where it's relevant. Plenty. You wrote a dissent in Bush v. Gore. Talk about what you learned from that experience. What I find most interesting in that case is that we did accept the rule of law. Many Americans opposed it, probably half. And it may be wrong. After all, judges are human, and their decisions may be wrong. And if we're not prepared to accept that, we don't have rule of law. What I say to students on that is, "I know 20 % of you are thinking, 'Too bad there weren't a few riots.' Before you come to that conclusion, turn on the TV set and see what happens in countries where they make their decisions that way." I see in front of me people who are committed to deciding under law. That's a great thing. It's a great asset for this country. It's amazing, actually. "If we don't participate, what will happen is the world will go on without us." Explain your dissent questioning the constitutionality of the death penalty. I said we should go back and consider the basic issue. That's what judges do. And they don't announce the decision before they read the briefs. But I can say there's enough right in front of us, which is what I did say. There's enough in terms of the wrong person [being executed] sometimes, in terms of the arbitrary way in which it seems to have been applied, in terms of how long it takes - the average time a person is sentenced to death, between that moment and the time of execution, is 18 years. And I said, "Don't you think it's time to reconsider the matter?" What's the dynamic among you and your 8 longtime co-workers? I have not heard a voice raised in anger in that court. We disagree, but we disagree civilly. And we can be friends. And we are. It's professional. The disagreements can be serious, but no loud voices and no insults, not even as a joke. And that's true for 20 years. I tell law students, "You can make your point. And you'll make it better if you make it in a civil way." What do you think will be on the court's agenda, and how do you prepare? If there's an issue in this country that people are concerned about, it's quite likely to come up in front of the court. The way a judge proceeds and the strength of the institution is not to have a blank mind but to have an open mind. It means you do, in fact, read what people write on the issue. You think about it, and you don't just react as you might at a cocktail party. You discuss it with others and you make a decision. That's a kind of 12th grade civics text explanation, but the courts do work that way. Your fellow justices come to their decisions in very different ways, don't they? I used to think, "Isn't it too bad that not everyone agrees with me?" And I've sort of changed on that because it's a big country. There are 315 million people, and it isn't so terrible to have a Supreme Court where different judges do, in fact, have somewhat different attitudes some of the time. (source: Bloomberg News) From rhalperi at smu.edu Fri Sep 18 14:14:59 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 14:14:59 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 18 GLOBAL: 8 Brutal Ways People Were Put To Death Throughout History That Will Terrify You While today's society obviously has its issues, it usually seems pretty great in comparison to previous centuries, and even decades. Just the invention of the toilet is enough to make you grateful you don't live in medieval times, but when it comes to historical execution methods, things used to be pretty grim. These days, most execution practices are meant to be as quick and painless as possible, but that was not always the case - there are some insane ways people used to be put to death. The death penalty as a practice has been traced all the way back to ancient China. The first recorded execution took place in 16th century BC when a member of Egyptian nobility was accused of having magical powers and was ordered to take his or her own life (if he or she was not nobility, the accused would have been killed with an ax), according to PBS. The punishment of execution spread around the world and evolved over time. The American colonies' first execution was in 1608 when officials killed a Virginia man for plotting to betray Britain to the Spanish, and in 1612, Virginia governor Sir Thomas Dale created a law that made even minor crimes like stealing food or trading with Native Americans punishable by death. Here are 8 crazy ways people used to be put to death all over the world. Be warned: Some are pretty gruesome. Scaphism Scaphism, also known as "the boats," is an ancient Persian method of execution that involved placing a naked person in a tree trunk with their head, hands, and feet sticking out. Their exposed skin was covered in honey and they were left floating in a stagnant pond, with the honey attracting insects that would eat and breed in their skin. The person would eventually die of starvation, dehydration, and shock. Guillotine The guillotine, a more well-known method of execution, began in the 12th century and was used in France for the last time in 1977. Although it was invented as a more humane way to end criminals' lives, a beheading is really pretty cruel. Elephants In South and Southeast Asia, execution by elephant used to be a common way to put people to death. Elephants were trained to torture or crush people in public executions. Mazzatello Used for capital punishment by the Papal states until 1870, mazzatello involved a masked executioner hitting the criminal over the head with a large mallet. Since this typically only knocked them unconscious, the executioner would also cut their throat with a knife. Flaying During the Middle Ages, flaying was often used to torture and execute criminals and witches. An executioner would use a small knife to peel off the person's skin slowly, usually starting on their face. Most victims died before the peeling reached their waist. Blood Eagle Nordic Vikings used an especially brutal execution method known as the "blood eagle." The victim would be placed face down and restrained so that an eagle with outstretched wings could be carved into their back. Then, the person's ribs would be removed from their spine one by one, with the bones and skin pulled out on each side to look like wings. To make it even worse, their lungs would then be pulled out and stretched over the "wings." Breaking Wheel Execution by breaking wheel was often used for more serious crimes during the Middle Ages. The criminal was tied to spokes on a large wooden wheel and as someone moved the wheel in a circle, a torturer would hit the person with an iron hammer, breaking their bones. After all their bones were broken, they were left on the wheel to die slowly. Burning At The Stake Historically, a popular form of capital punishment was burning at the stake, which involved burning someone alive. It was used in England to punish heresy and high treason through the 18th century. (source: bustle.com) SRI LANKA: Death Penalty certain if obtained Parliament approval - President President Maithripala Sirisena says that a motion will be presented to the Parliament regarding the instigation of death penalty. He stated that it will be implemented from next year for severe crimes if the resolution received Parliament approval. The President made these observations at the Second National Drugs Prevention Programme held in Galle today (18th). The President revealed that there had been many requests for the implementation of capital punishment after the murder of Seya and that there were many requests made before too. He further pointed out that it is instigated in well-developed nations as well. (source: Hiru News) INDIA: Death penalty is arbitrary and should be abolished The recommendations of the Law Commission for graded abolition of death penalty has once again opened the debate on both the right of a State to take away the life of a person as well as effectiveness of death penalty as a deterrence against crime. The Commission is of the view that the notion of an 'eye for an eye' and 'a tooth for a tooth' has no place in our constitution and legal system. The Bhagavad Geeta has also taught us that there is no permanent labelling of human beings as good or evil. Even the man with most evil ways may chose to turn a new leaf, sometime in his life. Jesus has also said that even when we have undeniable proof of another's wrong doing, we should exercise mental charity. Therefore, we should not label a man a criminal beyond redemption and approve of putting him to death, without giving him a chance to repent and mend his ways. As per Amnesty International Report, 2014, at least 2,466 people in 55 countries have been sentenced to death in 2014 and more than 19,000 people were believed to be under sentence of death worldwide at the end of 2014. During this period, 64 persons have been sentenced to death in India. The figures appear to be high given the value of each human life is concerned. But, still there is a positive sign that the number of executions recorded in 2014 decreased by 22% compared to 2013. In case of India also, the number has reduced by almost 50% (from 125 in 2013 to 64 in 2014), during the period. A total of 339 convicts were awarded capital punishment during 2011-13 in India. This itself is an indication that the judiciary across the nations, including India, is gradually feeling uncomfortable with death penalty as a form of punishment. The change in heart and change in perception is not without basis and logic. About 80% of the under trials belong to the disadvantaged sections of society. A study done by National Law University, Delhi, and the Law Commission has confirmed that there is a class bias in awarding the death penalty. According to the study, more than 75% of death row convicts belong to backward classes and minorities; 75% are economically vulnerable and over 93% of those sentenced for terror crimes are minorities or Dalits. This goes against the principle that justice should not only be done but also appear to be done. One of the basic objectives of retaining capital punishment is believed to have an effective deterrent against crime. But, does it serve the purpose? Have we ever tried to correlate between the two? Perhaps not, fearing of not establishing the correlation. There is no evidence to support the argument that death sentence has a greater deterrent effect on crime than imprisonment. In fact, I have not come across any scientific study establishing that capital punishment deters criminals from committing crime. So far as victims' right is concerned, injustice, once done, cannot be returned. Death sentence is irreversible and in justice system which is not free from human error, execution of an innocent cannot be ruled out. The Supreme Court has, in the past, admitted that death penalty jurisprudence is arbitrary in India. Secondly, there is possibility of using death sentence as a political tool. When capital punishment is used as a political tool, either to silence the critics or to reap electoral dividends, it has the potential to create disharmony in society. The issue of national security is definitely a serious and sensitive issue. Keeping this mind, the Law Commission has kept it outside the purview of abolition. But, we need to keep in mind that we are victims of state sponsored terrorism. Terror is being unleashed against India as a political and military strategy. So, death penalty of a terrorist will have no implication as a deterrent. Besides diplomacy, we need effective counter-terrorism measures, stringent border management and very effective internal security and intelligence mechanism to fight against state sponsored terrorism. This will help us to fight not only against terrorism but naxal insurgency and internal law & order issues as well. As rightly pointed by Justice AP Shah Commission, the capital punishment system is diverting our attention to other urgent issues like low conviction rate, prevention of crime, protection of witnesses, police reforms, etc. According to the National Crime Records Bureau data, the rate of conviction in crimes committed under IPC has dropped significantly in the recent decades. In serious cases like rape and murder, conviction rate is abysmal, less than the average conviction rate of 38.5%. So, there is an urgency of strict enforcement of law and police reform so that conviction rates can be higher. This will be a greater deterrent than capital punishment as the probability of being punished for committing a crime will be higher. The Government should also clear the National Judicial Appointment Commission mess at the earliest and fill up the vacancies in both higher and lower judiciary. The Law Commission had recommended earlier that there should be at least 50 judges per one million population. At present, the number is eleven. So, the vacancies need to filled up on an emergent basis. Approximately, 2 crore 64 lakh cases are pending in lower and district courts. If the Government can fast track these cases, it will benefit crores of people. This will bestow confidence of people on the State and judiciary. Another important thing is that cases should be examined in terms of their merit, the result not being influenced by media and public opinion. Media driven justice is against healthy judicial practice. With nation-states evolving and their criminal justice system becoming more humane, nations after nations are abolishing death penalty. Despite this, the phenomenon is still there and unfortunately exist in a great civilisation like India. It is time for India to take a positive and progressive move and do away with the irreversible and extreme form of inhuman punishment. Even the 'rarest of rare' doctrine is arbitrary. Let's build a mature, functional and healthy criminal justice system. There should be complete moratorium on capital punishment. (source: Jaiveer Shergill; The Author is a Supreme Court Lawyer and National Media Panellist, the Indian National Congress----ibnlive.com) IRAN----executions 5 Prisoners Executed at Rajai Shahr Prison 5 prisoners charged with murder were reportedly hanged to death at Rajai Shahr Prison on the morning of Wednesday September 16. Iran Human Rights is aware of 2 of their names at this time: Davoud Alambeigi and Morteza Ahmadbeigiha. On Sunday September 13, the 5 prisoners along with 5 more prisoners, were transferred from their cells to solitary confinement in preparation for their executions. 5 of the 10 prisoners received reprieves from plaintiffs, and their execution order was suspended. (source: Iran Human Rights) SAUDI ARABIA----impending juvenile execution via crucifixion Saudi Arabia to execute juvenile Shiite prisoner by crucifixion Ali Mohammed al-Nimr, who was 17 years old when he was arrested in February 2012 for joining anti-government protests and allegedly carrying a firearm in Saudi Arabia, is set to be executed by crucifixion, which involves crucifying the body to a pole with nails. Ali's clemency appeals have been rejected, and he is likely to be executed in a few days despite international outrage. While Ali was held in a juvenile offenders' facility, human rights organisations claimed that he was tortured into confessing and was also denied access to lawyers. According to Reprieve, a legal organisation that works for human rights of prisoners, Ali's final appeal for clemency was secretly rejected last week. "No one should have to go through the ordeal Ali has suffered - torture, forced confession and an unfair, secret trial process, resulting in a sentence of death by crucifixion. But worse still, Ali was a vulnerable child when he was arrested and this ordeal began," Maya Foa, director of the death penalty team at Reprieve, said in a statement on the website. Ali's death sentence is being seen in the context of his relation to Shia cleric Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, who was also sentenced to death for promoting "foreign meddling" in Saudi Arabia. Sheikh Nimr, Alis uncle, was arrested two years ago in Saudi Arabia's Shia-dominated Eastern Province. Human rights activists are now seeking global intervention to stop Ali's execution. "His execution - based apparently on the authorities' dislike for his uncle, and his involvement in anti-government protests - would violate international law and the most basic standards of decency. It must be stopped," Foa wrote. "Unfair trials of Shia citizens amount to no more than a legal veneer for State repression of their demands to end long-term discrimination. The authorities should not compound their repression by killing a child offender," Joe Stark, deputy Middle East director for Human Rights Watch said on the website. Saudi Arabia is known to carry out the most number of executions in the world along with China and Iran, and has already executed more than 175 people in the past year after unfair trials, Amnesty International had reportedly said last month. In 2015, Saudi Arabia executed at least 132 people till September at a rate of nearly one execution every 2nd day. (source: International Business Times) KUWAIT: Fake Police sentence changed from life to death for raping Asian female The court of appeal recently accepted a contest filed by the public prosecution demanding changing a life time imprisonment sentence into death penalty for an unemployed citizen who impersonated as a policeman, arrested an Asian female and instead of taking her to a police station as he claimed, took her to Adan where he used a gun to threaten and rape her. ******************* Ethiopian maid in Sulaibikhat stabbing gets death penalty The court of cassation yesterday upheld the death sentence for an Ethiopian maid accused of murdering citizen Seham Humoud Flaiteh. The case drew national attention in March of last year when the domestic worker stabbed her employer's teenage daughter to death in Sulaibikhat. The suspect, identified as 22-year-old Rabiya Mahmoud, turned herself in at Sulaibikhat police station at 5:45 am that morning. She admitted killing 19-year-old Seham, daughter of former Kuwaiti national football team defender Hmoud Flaiteh Al-Shemmari, earlier that morning. She confirmed that the murder happened at Shemmari's house where she worked as a housemaid. She told officers that she stabbed the victim multiple times in the girl's bedroom while she was asleep, then locked her inside the room before leaving her employer's house. She also handed over the knife she used in the crime. She also confessed that she had planned the murder days earlier and that her plans had been delayed because of the presence of the victim's younger sister. The victim's father was a member of the Kuwait national team that participated in the 1982 World Cup. He served as the Deputy Director General for Youth Affairs at the Public Authority for Youth and Sports. Lawmakers at the time were quick to call for the banning of all Ethiopian domestic labor in Kuwait. (source for both: Kuwait Times) PAKISTAN: Bannu jailbreak: IHC stays execution of convict till October 5 Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday stayed execution of a convict of the military court facing charges of Bannu jailbreak till October 5. The IHC bench comprising Justice Noor ul N Haq Qureshi took up the petition filed by the Mir Shah Khan father of convict Tahir Khan. On September 2, the Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) announced that the Army Chief General Raheel Sharif has approved death sentence to the 'hardcore terrorists' and Tahir was one of the convicts. Father of the convict had filed the petition seeking trial proceedings of the military court and also permission to visit his son. IHC Justice Qureshi during the earlier hearing on September 10 had directed the federal government to submit detailed report in this matter. On Thursday, the standing counsel Raja Khalid told the court that he had approached the interior ministry, the FIA, and Punjab Rangers but could not get any information about the convict. The judge remarked that he had made futile exercise and instead of contacting the quarters concerned, he contacted the irrelevant people. On this the standing counsel requested the court to adjourn the matter for a fortnight enabling him to get complete report. Justice Qureshi then issued the restraining order against the conviction till the filing of the said report. Later on, the Interior Ministry has submitted the reply before the court regarding conviction of Tahir that he was awarded death penalty by Khyber Pakhtunkhawa Military on September 2. He has been kept in detention center at Peshawar. The family, however, can meet the convict with the approval of the administration. Earlier, a military court had convicted Tahir to death sentence for his involvement in the Bannu jailbreak incident. In petition father of convict, Mir Shah Khan contended before the court that he was a resident of Bannu city and on February 24, 2014 his son was working at his fruit and vegetable cart in Lahore when some unidentified persons kidnapped him. He stated that all his family members kept searching for him but could not find him and then the petitioner's another son Muhibullah reported the incident to Raiwind Police Station Lahore but the police also could not locate his son. Mir Shah continued that on September 3, 2015, he came to know that his son was being tried by a military court for the allegations of attacking the jail in Bannu and had been awarded death sentence adding that he had tried to meet his son but he was denied. (source: Business Recorder) PAPUA NEW GUINEA: PNG death penalty for rape talk 'too soon' PNG Prime Minister Peter O'Neill says it's premature to talk about whether three Australians could face the death penalty if convicted of rape. . Papua New Guinea's prime minister says it's premature to speculate about whether three Australians accused of rape could face the death penalty. The three, employed by Wilson Security as guards at the Australian-run immigration detention centre on Manus Island, were stood down and sent home to Australia following an alleged incident in mid-July. Manus Island police and locals claim they were removed before a proper investigation was carried out. PNG prime minister Peter O'Neill, who discussed the case with former prime minister Tony Abbott in Port Moresby last week, wants the trio returned to face justice. Rape convictions can carry the death sentence in PNG. The police investigation was ongoing and Australian authorities were cooperating on the matter, Mr O'Neill said. "It's premature for me to say they will be facing the death penalty," he told AAP in Port Moresby. "It depends on the evidence that is available." The country's death penalty laws were under review, Mr O'Neil said. His government was conscious of human rights issues but also wanted to send a strong message to the community about sexual and gender violence. According to Human Rights Watch an estimated 70 per cent of PNG women experience rape or assault in their lifetime. Detention centre operator Transfield Services reportedly told the Manus Island victim's family the three men would be returned to face police questioning, after a relative hijacked a bus and truck belonging to the facility. (source: sbs.com.au) NEW ZEALAND: NZ Government must step up efforts to end the death penalty----Australian death penalty experts to visit New Zealand - Monday 21 September The New Zealand Drug Foundation and Amnesty International are calling for the New Zealand Government to increase its diplomatic efforts on the global abolition of the death penalty. This call follows the conviction and sentencing of Tony de Malmanche who was facing the death penalty for methamphetamine trafficking into Indonesia, and the executions of 8 people, including 2 Australians in Indonesia in May. "New Zealand needs to make its voice heard loud and clear in this important debate", said Ross Bell, New Zealand Drug Foundation Executive Director. "Our government has previously played a central role promoting a global moratorium on the death penalty at the United Nations. The government's condemnation of the recent Indonesia executions was welcome, but since then we've been silent on the many executions conducted by the United Sates of American, Saudi Arabia, China, and our new trading partner Iran," said Mr Bell. This year, the World Day Against the Death Penalty (10 October) will focus on ending the use of the death penalty for drug-related offences. 33 countries and territories retain the death penalty for drug crimes, many of which are within our part of the world or are countries with whom New Zealand has a strong trading relationship. As part of efforts to build political and diplomatic momentum for the abolition of the death penalty the Drug Foundation and Amnesty International are hosting two leading Australian death penalty experts next week. They will meet with the minister responsible for drug policy Hon Peter Dunne, members of Parliament, and government officials. Julian P McMahon is a Melbourne-based barrister who has worked on death row cases in the Asia region. Most recently, he represented Myuran Sukumaran and Andrew Chan, two Australians who were executed in Indonesia in April along with 6 others. In 2005 Julian represented Australian citizen Van Nguyen who was executed by Singapore for drug trafficking. Ursula Noye is Vice-President of Reprieve Australia, which provides legal representation to people on death row, and is a lawyer practicising in Melbourne. Earlier in 2015 eight Australian NGOs issued a joint call to action outlining the key things they want their government to do to put in place. The visit is a chance to hear from those directly involved in death penalty cases how New Zealand can play its part speeding up the demise of this inhumane punishment. "The Australian Parliament has responded to the recent executions of its citizens by conducting a cross-party inquiry into how Australia can improve its advocacy efforts for the worldwide abolition of the death penalty. We are urging our government to do the same. We shouldn't sit back and wait until another New Zealander is facing a possible execution," said Mr Bell. "As a member of the UN Security Council our government has the authority and responsibility to speed up the global trend away from the use of the death penalty," Mr Bell said. There is every reason to continue the momentum towards abolition of the death penalty. In 1977 only 16 countries had abolished the death penalty in law or practice. Today, there are 140. "The use of the death penalty is a misguided effort to combat drug trafficking. There is not a shred of evidence to show that it is an effective method of tackling crime. All countries planning to carry out executions should immediately impose a moratorium as a 1st step towards abolition," said Carsten Bockemuehl, Advocacy and Research Coordinator at Amnesty International. A public seminar is being held on Monday 21 September, at Te Papa from 5.00pm, to which anyone is welcome to attend. PUBLIC EVENT: WHAT: Why must they die? Campaigning to end the death penalty, Public talk DATE: Monday 21 September TIME: 5.00pm LOCATION: Icon Room, Te Papa. SPEAKERS: Julian P McMahon, Melbourne barrister Ursula Noye, Vice-President, Reprieve Australia Carsten Bockemuehl, Advocacy and Research Coordinator at Amnesty International Chaired by Ross Bell, New Zealand Drug Foundation Executive Director (source: Scoop Media) From rhalperi at smu.edu Fri Sep 18 14:17:35 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 14:17:35 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----MISSOURI Message-ID: EXECUTION ALERT Stop the execution of a wrongfully convicted man, Kimber Edwards To be killed by the State of Missouri on October 6, 2015 Kimber Edwards was sentenced to death for the August 22, 2000 murder of his ex-wife, Kimberly Cantrell. The actual shooter, Orthell Wilson, lied to police several times, even saying the victim was a complete stranger he?d been hired to kill. Orthell Wilson?s later admission that victim Kimberly Cantrell was actually his girlfriend is substantiated by several neighbors who witnessed the two together as a couple on multiple occasions. 1. False Testimony 2. Coerced Confession 3. Prosecutorial Misconduct I. In 2015, Orthell Wilson signed a sworn affidavit that he acted alone in killing his girlfriend Kimberly Cantrell. The couple often fought over Orthell?s drug addiction and constant need for money. It?s what their heated argument was about on August 22, 2000, the day Orthell shot Kimberly to death, unintentionally, in the heat of the moment. This truth makes sense given the re-enactment of the crime police did with Orthell Wilson at the apartment where Kimberly was murdered. On the way to the scene, Orthell grew visibly distraught; police had to pull over to calm him down. Inside the apartment, Orthell ?fell to the floor upset and crying.? This behavior is not consistent with murder for hire of a total stranger. It is completely consistent with an unintended shooting of a lover. One part of Orthell?s version of events is plausible: Kimberly was startled, she screamed, Orthell panicked, and the gun went off. In the interrogation room in 2000, Orthell Wilson was panicked for a different reason ? he could face a death sentence for murdering Kimberly Cantrell. Police already had their suspect - Kimberly Cantrell?s ex-husband Kimber Edwards whom they?d fingered as soon as they found Kimberly?s body. So they offered Orthell Wilson a life sentence if he handed them Kimber Edwards. So he did. Orthell Wilson told police that Kimber Edwards hired him to kill Kimberly Cantrell. But after Kimber Edwards was wrongly convicted for this murder, Orthell Wilson felt bad. He stepped forward to set the record straight, but Kimber Edwards? attorneys did nothing in response to Orthell?s recantation.? Not until 2015 has Orthell Wilson?s truth been recorded in a sworn format, an affidavit. In it, he states, ?Kimber Edwards is completely innocent.? Kimber Edwards never asked Orthell to harm Kimberly Cantrell. Orthell Wilson acted alone. 2.? The only other ?evidence? against Kimber Edwards is his own statement to police. But that statement was also coerced. Reflexively targeting him, police took Kimber Edwards and his current wife and two small children to the station, putting the children in a separate squad car from their parents. For seven hours of interrogation, Kimber Edwards proclaimed his innocence. Then an officer put in motion the removal of Kimber?s daughter from his home on the grounds that her father was a suspect in the death of the girl?s mother. The child was placed into immediate DFS custody and taken from the station. Kimber?s current wife was also interrogated and fingerprinted. Police brought Kimber out of his interrogation room to watch his wife be photographed. Kimber Edwards finally agreed to tell the police what they wanted to hear, if they would leave his family alone. Self-incriminating statements were coerced. They are additionally unreliable because Kimber Edwards has an autistic spectrum mental disorder. It makes an individual susceptible to suggestion.? In fact, to minimize victimization, many law enforcement agencies have issued guidelines and manuals to instruct personnel on care and precautions to be taken when dealing with witnesses or suspects on the spectrum. 3. Finally, Edwards suffered from prosecutorial misconduct, since all African-American jurors were deliberately excluded from his jury pool.? In St. Louis County, this racially infected approach to criminal justice has been the source of public outcry.? Today, even with substantial doubts about his guilt, a wrongfully convicted man, Kimber Edwards, is facing imminent execution, while the actual shooter, Orthell Wilson, has a life sentence. * Missouri is burying its mistakes, and has executed 17 men since November 2013. * The Death Penalty in Missouri is Broken.? The 2012 Assessment Study said Missouri is ?substantially out of compliance? with the American Bar Association guidelines, and made 94 recommendations for reform.? Not one has been implemented by the State. * According to a 2013 study by the Death Penalty Information Center St. Louis County ranked #9 among jurisdictions in the nation in executions. ACTIONS NEEDED CONTACT Gov. Jay Nixon, urging him to commute his death sentence.? Call 573-751-3222; write a letter-- mailing it to Rm 216, State Capitol, Jefferson City MO 65101, fax it via 573-751-1495 or e-mail via www.governor.mo.gov. CONTACT Attorney General Chris Koster?s office, encouraging him to cease pushing for executions, including the killing of Mr. Edwards. Call 573-751-3321, write: PO Box 899, Jefferson City MO 652101 or e-mail www.ago.mo.gov. Missourians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty log onto www.madpmo.org or call 816-931-4177 for more details. From rhalperi at smu.edu Fri Sep 18 15:45:56 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 15:45:56 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., VA., S.C., GA., FLA., ARK., NEB. Message-ID: Sept. 18 PENNSYLVANIA: Judge won't delay trial of man accused of killing sisters in Pittsburgh The 2 public defenders representing a man accused of killing 2 sisters in their East Liberty home will work together on both the trial and, if needed, the penalty phase, Lisa Middleman, one of the public defenders told a judge Friday. Allen Wade, 44, who lived next door to Susan and Sarah Wolfe, could face the death penalty if convicted of their killings. The Wolfe sisters were found dead in their Chislett Street home on Feb. 7, 2014. Wade was arrested about a month later and has remained in jail since then. Wade's attorneys, Middleman and Lisa Phillips, Chief Public Defender Elliot Howsie and prosecutors appeared before county Common Pleas Judge Edward Borkowski on Friday to discuss concerns the judge had about preparations for the trial. Wade's attorneys asked Borkowski to delay the trial. He refused and asked for "renewed efforts" by the Public Defenders Office to prepare Wade's defense on time. The trial remains scheduled to begin Nov. 2, Middleman said. Typically, 2 defense attorneys will work on a death penalty case. One attorney will present the defense's case to the jury. Another attorney will work on the penalty phase if the jury convicts the defendant and prosecutors seek the death penalty. Middleman said theories on how best to try a death penalty case have changed. She believes a 2-attorney approach in both phases gives Wade the best defense. Borkowski worried it might hurt Wade if the same attorney who argues the defenses and loses appears before the jury again to argue against the death penalty. Middleman said juries are intelligent enough to understand the 2 phases are 2, separate legal arguments. (source: triblive.com) VIRGINIA: Court says Va. isn't required to release execution manuals Manuals used to guide executions in Virginia are exempt from Freedom of Information Act requests and do not have to be released to the public, The Virginia Supreme Court ruled. In its ruling, the court said current and prior manuals are covered by a public-safety exemption that does not explicitly require the release of any non-exempt portion. The exemption allows records such as architectural drawings to remain confidential for security reasons, multiple media outlets reported. "The wording of the statute applies the exclusion to the entire drawing, manual, minutes or record and makes it disclosable only at the discretion of the custodian," Justice Cleo E. Powell wrote for the majority. Wednesday's ruling overturned a September 2014 decision by then-Fairfax County Circuit Court Judge Janet M. Roush ordering the Department of Corrections to release the execution manual and several other documents. Roush was appointed as justice after the Supreme Court heard the case in June. The Supreme Court sent the case back to the circuit court to reconsider the release of the other documents, which include the wiring and operation of the electric chair and the schematic of the execution chamber at the Greensville Correction Center in Jarrat. "The decision addresses the department's security concerns," Department of Corrections spokeswoman Lisa Kinney said. "We are pleased with the court's decision regarding the execution manual." The department has argued that prisoners or protesters could exploit the information. "This case is not about Virginia trying to keep its execution protocols secret," said Assistant Attorney General Margaret O'Shea. Instead, she argued, it was answering this question: "Does the Department have to eviscerate the security of a maximum security prison?" Del. Scott A. Surovell, D-Fairfax, had submitted a FOIA request for the material last year amid debate over how the state carries out the death penalty. "What they've done here is really scary," Surovell said. "They've incentivized government officials to sprinkle so-called 'safety provisions' in any records they don't want the government to see, and they've also directed the courts that they have to give great deference to government officials about what documents the government officials want to produce." Megan Rhyne, executive director of the Virginia Coalition for Open Government, said the ruling could affect citizen access to other records that may include both exempt and non-exempt information. (source: Associated Press) SOUTH CAROLINA: Dylann Roof does not deserve any mercy, or consideration Dylann Roof wants to plead guilty to murdering 9 Emanuel AME parishioners in exchange for the state dropping its decision to seek the death penalty. Sorry, but this is one "person" in no position to dictate terms. This is our decision. Earlier this month, 9th Circuit Solicitor Scarlett Wilson announced plans to seek the death penalty in the Emanuel AME Church shooting. "This was the ultimate crime," she said, "and justice from our state calls for the ultimate punishment." Wilson is absolutely right. If there were ever a crime that called for the worst the state can dish out, this is it. Roof allegedly walked into the church on June 17, sat through Bible study for an hour, and then pulled a gun, announced he had come to kill black people, and did just that. He wanted to start a race war, and he failed. On Wednesday, during a court hearing to discuss a useless gag order on the case, Roof's attorneys let it be known - again - that he wants to plead guilty in order to get life imprisonment. Well, Roof should get exactly the same amount of mercy that he showed Cynthia Hurd, Susie Jackson, Ethel Lance, DePayne Middleton Doctor, Clementa Pinckney, Tywanza Sanders, Daniel Simmons, Sharonda Coleman-Singleton and Myra Thompson. The carrot That's a long list of names. 9 people who did absolutely nothing to anyone on this Earth. They were simply studying the Gospel, minding their own business. Their crime, in Roof's eyes, was being born black. There are far too many warped people in this world who hate others based solely on their skin color, and some of them are no better than accessories to murder for filling a foolish young mind with such hate. Let's hope the feds go after some of them, too. Neither the state, nor any of the rest of us, should get caught up in this gaming of the justice system. The carrot we are being offered by Roof's attorneys is this: a death penalty case is a long, drawn-out process that will take years, perhaps decades, and cost the state untold amounts of money. That's all true. Better to end this now, the argument goes, and spare the victims' families the pain of being reminded of this tragedy for years to come. But does anyone seriously believe the families are not going to have to live with this every day for the rest of their lives? Is a court case really going to make it any worse? It couldn't get any worse. The stick Wilson talked with the victims' families before she made her decision. Yes, they showed a true Christian spirit when they got up in that courtroom during Roof's bond hearing and forgave him his trespasses. And, like many people of true faith, they do not believe in the death penalty. Those families renewed a lot of people's faith. They are the true heroes here. But several of them also told Wilson they are comfortable with her decision. It is the law in this state, after all. So Wilson is following the letter of the law, and she is doing so with the blessing of the families of 9 people who are never going to forget this horrible year. It's facile to think otherwise. This is our system and it is expensive. The wheels of justice turn slowly, but this case deserves no less than justice. Ultimately, there is only one deal Roof should get: if the state accepts his offer and gives him life imprisonment, he must go into the general population at the most vicious prison in the state - no solitary confinement, no coddling. Let's see how long Mr. Race War survives locked up with other felons. Because even to hardened criminals, what Roof allegedly did - and "allegedly" is a joke, given his confession to the FBI - is unforgiveable. Let the general population of Lieber dole out a slow, torturous punishment. It's what Dylann Roof deserves. (source: Brian Hicks, Columnist, The Post and Courier) GEORGIA----impending female execution Execution date set for Kelly Gissendaner An execution warrant was signed Friday, setting the execution of Kelly Gissendaner for the week that begins Sept. 29. According to the warrant signed by Chief Judge Melodie Snell Conner, Gissendaner is to be put to death between noon Sept. 29 and noon Oct. 6 for the 1997 death of her husband Doug Gissendaner. The Department of Corrections sets the specific time and day the execution will be carried out. Usually, it's at 7 p.m. one the 1st day of the 7-day window, which would be Sept. 29. (source: Atlanta Journal-Constitution) FLORIDA: Prosecutor, activist argue over death penalty at Tiger Bay Club forum The political Tiger Bay Club hosted a debate Friday between a prosecutor who's argued dozens of death penalty cases and an advocate fighting for changes to the capital murder legal system. Bernie de la Rionda, who prosecutes many of Jacksonville's death penalty cases and who acts as senior managing director for the State Attorney's Office, argued the death penalty is necessary to distinguish between particularly heinous murders and other killings. Heinous murders, he argued, demand the death penalty. Kristina Musante, who works for the American Civil Liberties Union but is not an attorney, came to Jacksonville to coordinate the Justice 4 Jacksonville Coalition, which is requesting death penalty reforms. She argued that the way death penalty cases are prosecuted and decided is error prone. She said 25 people have been exonerated from Florida's death row since 1973, and she believes the state has executed people who did not murder. In response to a question about whether making executions more public would deter crime, de la Rionda said he???d like to bring back firing ranges to Florida. Obtaining the drugs necessary for executions has become more difficult, he said, because the drugs are made in European countries that object to executions. But "bullets are pretty cheap, and they're very quick," he said. If Florida can't get the drugs, then it should use firing ranges, he said. (source: jacksonville.com) ***************** Appeals dwindling in Milton death penalty case For 2nd time, the Florida Supreme Court has upheld the conviction and death penalty sentence of a man who in 2004 robbed an elderly Milton woman, broke her neck and stabbed her. Thursday, the state's highest court denied post-conviction relief to Michael A. Hernandez Jr., 34, who in 2007 was found guilty of murdering 67-year-old Ruth Everett. According to court documents, Hernandez, then 23, and his accomplice, Christopher Shawn Arnold, barged into Everett's home and falsely claimed her son owed them money. The men tried to suffocate Everett with a pillow and broke her neck during the struggle, witnesses said. Hernandez then cut her neck with a knife, and the duo took Everett's debit card and used it to by crack cocaine. After admitting the crime to acquaintances, the men were persuaded to turn themselves in. At trial, 11 of 12 jurors recommended the death penalty for Hernandez, and the trial court sentenced him to capital punishment citing the heinousness of the crime, the fact it occurred during a robbery and that Hernandez was a prior felon. Arnold pleaded to the charges and was sentenced to life in prison. On Hernandez's direct appeal in 2009, the Florida Supreme Court Court affirmed the trial court findings, and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the case. Hernandez filed for post-conviction relief once before in 2010 - claiming ineffective counsel - and lost. He can still seek to have the federal Supreme Court review the case, and failing that, can request clemency from Gov. Rick Scott. According to Florida Department of Corrections records, Hernandez is 1 of 15 people currently on death row for crimes in Escambia or Santa Rosa County. (source: Pensacola News Journal) ARKANSAS: After 10 Years, Return of Death Penalty in Arkansas an Ideological Statement The governor of Arkansas aims to end the state's decade-long hiatus on executions in October. Gov. Asa Hutchinson has set dates for the executions of 8 convicted murderers, according to Reuters. The first 2 men are sentenced 2 die in October. But this decision is already being challenged, according to Robert Dunham, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center. "The lawyers for the prisoners who are facing death warrants will be filing motions for an injunction to bar all of the scheduled executions," Dunham said. "They are arguing that Arkansas' lethal injection statute has constitutional defects, including, in particular, its lethal injection procedures." Dunham added that "a suit challenging the Arkansas lethal injection statute and protocol was pending well before the death warrants were signed, and the prisoners' lawyers expect that an injunction will be granted." Coming at a time when capital punishment is under national and international scrutiny, Hutchinson's move may be about taking a stand, said Rodney Engen, associate professor of sociology and criminal justice at the University of Arkansas. "As a nation, we are deeply ambivalent about the death penalty," Engen said. "7 states have repealed it since 2007, for a total of 19 that have abolished. However, this region, and the South generally, remains staunchly conservative. Moreover, with the extremely polarized political environment we have currently, certain policy positions have taken on even greater symbolic importance than they might have in the past - support for gun rights, opposition to abortion rights and marriage equality are a few examples. I think the death penalty is one of those issues." "With the extremely polarized political environment we have currently, certain policy positions have taken on even greater symbolic importance." - Rodney Engen, associate professor of sociology and criminal justice Data from Pew Research Center released in April shows that support for the death penalty in the United States is as low as it has been in 40 years - though a majority of Americans still support it for those convicted of murder. Taking a stand on this issue is a way for Republicans to buck national and international trends, and show a commitment to conservative ideology, Engen said. The scheduling is also a matter of practicality. Arkansas obtained the requisite drugs for lethal injection in August, according to Reuters. Though the state pales in execution numbers when compared with nearby Texas, the debate isn't about quantity, said Jacob Held, associate professor of philosophy at the University of Central Arkansas. "Being next to Texas makes anyone look good, especially in the case of the death penalty,??? Held said. "Texas performs the majority of executions in the country, and outpaces any other state significantly. But the issue with capital punishment isn't about how many you do, it's about whether or not you should do any. The debate hinges on the question of whether the government should exercise its power to deprive a citizen of life." But though Texas takes the lead, Arkansas is part of a region with a uniquely high execution rate, said James Clark, senior death penalty campaigner at Amnesty USA. "The world has largely abandoned the death penalty, but the United States stands out as a global leader in executions alongside Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and China," Clark said. "That ranking is driven largely by a few states like Texas, Missouri, and Oklahoma, while most jurisdictions in the U.S. have either abolished or abandoned the death penalty. In fact, just 2 % of the counties in the U.S. are responsible for a majority of death sentences. Arkansas' disuse of the death penalty over the last decade has been in step with the national and global trend." The current executions also ignore a long-term problem, Clark said - that capital punishment will always be costly and contested, no matter what form it comes in. "Difficulty acquiring drugs is just one aspect of a broken system," he said. "In every state with the death penalty, the system is costly, slow, and broken beyond repair, which is exactly why most states have either abolished it or abandoned its use. The only long-term solution is to abolish the death penalty once and for all." (source: ivn.us) NEBRASKA: Governor responds to allegations in death penalty lawsuit Gov. Pete Ricketts took time out from his trade mission in Beijing, China, Friday to briefly answer a lawsuit filed Thursday on behalf of death penalty opponents that focused on his involvement in the referendum petition process. "Just because the governor supports the effort does not make him a sponsor of the petition drive," said Ricketts' spokeswoman Brittany Hardin. "This is yet another example of special interests using the courts in an attempt to thwart the will of the voters." Nebraskans for Public Safety filed a lawsuit in Lancaster County District Court on behalf of longtime death penalty opponents Christy and Richard Hargesheimer questioning the validity of the petition process based on the belief that Ricketts' name was omitted from the list of sponsors even though he is the "primary initiating force" behind the petition. State law requires that a petition effort have a list of all sponsors in order to prevent fraud in the process. The lawsuit alleges the leaders of Nebraskans for the Death Penalty, which sponsored the petition drive, violated the law by leaving his name off intentionally, knowing he was a sponsor, organizer, early instigator, financier and in effect, the "boss" of the petition drive. Named in the lawsuit are Secretary of State John Gale, Nebraskans for the Death Penalty, and its board members Judy Glasburner, Aimee Melton and Bob Evnen. Hardin said the governor has been clear that he believes the death penalty is a valuable public safety tool, and he supports giving the voters of Nebraska the opportunity to retain it. (source: Lincoln Journal Star) **************** Nebraskans for the Death Penalty Don't Fear Lawsuit The Nebraska Legislature voted to abolish the death penalty in May. The lawsuit filed Thursday in Lancaster County District Court argues that Ricketts should have been named because of his efforts to organize the Nebraskans for the Death Penalty campaign. In August, death penalty supporters turned in what they said were more than enough petition signatures to prevent repeal from taking effect, pending voters' decision in a referendum next November. The suit says a document disclosing sponsors of the petition did not include Gov. Pete Ricketts, despite information that he was a "primary initiating force". The group, Nebraskans for Public Safety, claims the referendum effort failed to follow state law. A spokesperson for Nebraskans for the Death Penalty said he hadn't yet seen the lawsuit. Ricketts will meet Friday morning with Ambassador to China and former U-S Senator Max Baucus. "And we're confident they're not going to be successful", Peterson said. Peterson says he expects the courts to take up the measure quickly. (source: Dispatch Times) From rhalperi at smu.edu Fri Sep 18 15:46:40 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 15:46:40 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 18 INDONESIA: Malaysian gets death sentence for trafficking The panel of judges at the Pekanbaru District Court on Tuesday handed down a death sentence to Ng Hai Kuan, known as Jimmy, 55, for trafficking 46.5 kilograms of crystal methamphetamine worth Rp 180 billion (US$12.50 million). Presided Judge Amin Ismanto decided that Jimmy was guilty of owning the crystal methamphetamine, which was stored in 93 packages that were seized by the Riau Police at Hotel Parma in Pekanbaru, on April 2. "The first class narcotics were obtained from a man identified only with the initials ABE, a Malacca resident in Malaysia. The drugs were to be sent to ABE's friend in Palembang, South Sumatra," Amin said. A number of witnesses had testified in previous hearings that the narcotics were taken in 2 travel bags that were smuggled through a small port in Dumai city, transported in a speedboat. The key to the 2 travel bags had been sent by ABE to the buyer in Palembang. Amin said that Jimmy had violated articles 113 and 132 of Law No. 35/2009 on narcotics. Previously, Jimmy has twice been arrested for being involvement in narcotics. In 2004, he was arrested by the Malaysian police for owning ecstasy pills. He was freed after paying bail. He was arrested again in 2008 on similar charges. The panel of judges deemed that Jimmy had committed serious crimes that could spark social unrest and could destroy the young generation. "The defendant was aware that what they were doing violated Indonesian laws. Therefore, the panel of judges do not see any factors that could commute the sentence," Amin said. After consulting with his lawyers, Jimmy said that he would appeal to a higher court to have the death sentence downgraded. Syahrir, Jimmy's lawyer, said that the panel of judges had wrongly invoked articles 113 and 132 of the Narcotics Law because Jimmy was not actually an owner of the narcotics; only a carrier. "He is not an importer. It was not him who brought the narcotics from Malaysia," he added. (source: Jakarta Post) CANADA: Death penalty a worthy debate Should Derek Saretzky, if found guilty, receive the death penalty? This question has sprouted in conversations across the country this week. It's a serious debate worthy of consideration. Saretzky, if you recall, has been charged with 2 counts of 1st-degree murder and 1 count of indignity to a body in relation to the death of 2-year-old Hailey Dunbar-Blanchette and her father Terry Blanchette from earlier this week is Blairmore, Alta., a story that has gripped the nation this past week. Emotions are raw and at a peak right now at the mention of this heartbreaking tragedy. It's a story that rocks any compassionate person to his or her core, regardless whether they're a parent or not. Causing harm to children, let alone murder, is one of the few crimes that is unforgivable. But is it a crime that requires capital punishment? It's a yes or no answer with no room for a grey area. This is death we're talking about. In Canada, the last time anyone was put to death was in 1962. There was a moratorium placed on the death penalty in 1967, and nine years later it was abolished. The problem with criminals - and there are plenty - is the fact they don't fear the laughable justice system and they certainly don't shake in their boots at the thought of serving jail time. And why should they? Teenagers and young adolescents are protected by the Young Offenders Act and will continue to receive slaps on the wrist until changes are made. They know it and we know it. When it comes to jails and federal penitentiaries, the atmosphere resembles more of a high school reunion than anything. In addition, three square meals a day, complete with fruits and vegetables, leisure time in the courtyard with a good book or a basketball, a clean bed with pillow and mattress is hardly referred to as doing hard time. And then there's the television and Internet privileges. It's a better life than what a lot of non-criminals endure. Not quite a shangri-la paradise and 5-star resort, but our jails are not as feared and horrific as they should be in order to deter people from committing serious crimes. Does anyone remember Alcatraz? A life sentence doesn't necessarily equate to life in prison. If the crime committed was severe enough to warrant a life sentence, then why not lock up the guilty party for life? And therein lies the question of capital punishment. One the one hand, we in Saskatchewan are well aware of the David Milgaard case from 1970. Milgaard was wrongfully convicted of rape and murder of a Saskatoon nursing assistant and served 23 years in prison. He likely would have been put to death had the death penalty been in place. Milgaard was eventually exonerated. More cases similar to Milgaard's are out there. And once you take a life, you can't being it back. To counter that, we know our jails and prisons are over-crowded. Criminals are a burden on valuable tax dollars. Granted, they do have human rights. But should those rights be waived once convicted? Some would argue that bread, water and a used blanket is plenty for any convict. It's more than what some homeless people can enjoy on a daily basis. So, should Canada rethink capital punishment? You be the judge. (source: Editorial, Moose Jaw Times Herald) IRAN----execution Public Execution of One Prisoner in Isfahan Saeed Zargari; a prisoner charged with theft, kidnapping and murder; was reportedly hanged to death in public in Ardestan (a city in the province of Isfahan). According to Iran state media Seda o Sima, quoting Ardestan's Justice Department, Zargari was executed in public on the morning of Wednesday September 16. Zargari is reportedly accused of murdering Seyed Parsa Hashemi, a 7-year-old child. According to the Prosecutor of Ardestand, Saeed Zargari was arrested in 2013 as a result of a financial dispute with Parsa Hashemi's father. The Prosecutor says that prior to the arrest, Zargari had kidnapped Parsa Hashemi and hid him in the trunk of his car. Due to Zargari's arrest, Parsa Hashemi was left in the trunk of the car where he eventually died. Though Saeed Zargari's hanging was reportedly carried out in public, Iranian authorities or media have not published any photos of the execution. (source: Iran Human Rights) SRI LANKA: Sri Lankan president expects to implement capital punishment Sri Lankan President Maithriapala Sirisena said that he is expecting to approve capital punishment on the island by next year, if he receives parliamentary approval. Speaking in Galle today the president said that though he did not have to seek parliamentary approval, he would do consult with parliament and seek its opinion. Earlier this year, whilst meeting with Buddhist monks Sri Lanka's Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe also stated that his government was prepared to implement capital punishment in order to put a halt to an increase in crime. Mr Sirisena stated that the powers vested in him allowed him to implement the death penalty and pointed to other countries that use "gallows, electric chairs and lethal injection" reports Adaderana. (source: Tamil Guardian) SOMALIA----executions 7 soldiers executed for 'murdering civilians' 7 soldiers were executed by firing squad in the Southern strategic port town of Kismayo on Friday after a court found them guilty of murdering civilians, Horseed Media reports. According to officials of the Jubbaland regional administration, the soldiers were convicted on charges which included killing of 2 local residents yesterday evening. Some reports claim that the soldiers were involved in an al-Shabaab attack carried on a military camp that led to the death of 3 army officers. Death penalty is legal in Somalia. There was a decrease in the number of executions in Somalia last year compared to the previous years, Amnesty International said in a recent report. EU being in line with Amnesty International is opposed to the use of capital punishment in all cases and under all circumstances and has consistently called for its universal abolition. (source: horseedmedia.net) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sat Sep 19 08:42:44 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2015 08:42:44 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, VA., GA., FLA., LA. Message-ID: Sept. 19 TEXAS: Hall's competency called into question in capital murder case A man facing the death penalty for capital murder told a judge there are times when the trial gets so intense he is unable to focus or assist his counsel in his defense. The court examined Gabriel Hall's competency Friday to determine whether he was fit to continue the trial. Judge Travis Bryan III found Hall competent after hearing Hall's answers to questions such as: "Do you know what you're on trial for?" "Do you understand the roles of the attorneys?" Hall said there were times he is unable to participate in his defense because he is overwhelmed, but one of his attorneys agreed he was competent at the time of the evaluation. A competency evaluation is simply to determine a defendant's mental state at a point in the trial. If Hall would have been found incompetent, the court would have had to make a decision on how best to continue. Competency is not the same as insanity. Insanity is a legal issue determined by a jury's verdict. Hall faces life in prison or the death penalty for killing 68-year-old Edwin Shaar in the College Station man's Deacon Drive garage in October 2011, and seriously injuring his wife, Linda. A jury found Hall guilty on Sept. 11. The majority of the day was committed to hearing expert witness testimony out of the presence of the jury to make sure the testimony is valid and admissible in court. Law requires expert testimony to be validated before a jury can hear it. The jury will return Monday at 9 a.m. to continue the punishment phase of the trial. 4 mental health professionals told lawyers what their testimony would include. They're to present mitigating evidence to try and show the jury that Hall deserves life in prison without parole over the death penalty. Bethany Brand, a psychologist at Towson University in Maryland, streamed in via webcam as the first expert witness of the day. She specializes in trauma and dissociative, or multiple personality, disorders. She said at the time of the crime, Gabriel Hall suffered from a dissociative disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder and major depression that contributed to his behavior. She said he also suffered from an anxiety disorder characterized by pulling out his hair. She said this didn't contribute to the crime, but speaks to Hall's anxiety. She said Hall did not lack the ability to know right from wrong, and did not lack the ability to make choices -- though the mental disorders may have influenced him. Another psychologist, Jolie Brams, said Hall was negatively impacted by trauma experienced in his early childhood and after he was adopted by Wes and Karen Hall when he was 11. She said he did not receive the proper nurturing from his adoptive family that would have helped him cope with the damage extreme poverty did to him in the Philippines. (source: The Eagle) VIRGINIA: Va. Supreme Court decision lets officials withold more government records The state Supreme Court protected execution manuals and other materials from public view this week, a decision with potentially far reaching implications for public access to a slew of government documents unrelated to Virginia's death penalty. With the decision, a majority of the justices determined that much of Virginia's Freedom of Information Act doesn't require government agencies to redact sensitive information from requested documents. In many cases, state and local officials can simply decline to release anything at all if the law exempts part from release. "The question before us is whether an agency is required to redact an exempt document that may contain non-exempt material," Justice Cleo Powell wrote for the court. "We agree with the Commonwealth that an agency is not required to redact under these circumstances." Open government advocates lamented the decision, fearing some government officials will now deny access to otherwise public records because of minor inclusions. Coalition for Open Government Executive Director Megan Rhyne said the decision goes against one of FOIA's most basic tenets: That Virginia governments should lean toward access. "I'm fairly depressed about this," Rhyne said Friday. The case dealt detailed information about Virginia's execution protocols. Del. Scott Surovell, D-Mount Vernon, requested the floor plan of the state's execution chamber, schematics of the state electric chair and various manuals from the Department of Corrections. Department officials said releasing that information would have endangered security, and argued that they shouldn't have to produce redacted copies. The resulting high court opinion seems to indicate that, unless the relevant area of FOIA includes key phrases, state agencies don't have to redact documents. By Rhyne's count only 4 FOIA exemptions include both key phrases. More than 30, but not nearly all of them, use at least 1. "The implications are huge," Rhyne said. Brian Coy, spokesman for Gov. Terry McAuliffe, said the administration would study the opinion, which was released Thursday. He said it was too soon Friday to say whether the administration would advise state agency heads how to treat future records requests in light of the decision. The court did say, though, that state officials maintain the discretion to redact and release sensitive documents. State officials have some times argued that they don't have the discretion to release exempted documents under FOIA, when in fact the law says they do. 2 of the 7 justices, Bernard Goodwyn and William Mims, concurred with much of the majority opinion in this case, agreeing that the courts should give deference to agencies that reject FOIA requests over security concerns. But they disagreed about the duty to redact, saying the majority opinion allows public bodies to exempt entire records over single sentences. Mims, who wrote the partial dissent, argued that a public body "must release the requested record, and it may redact the exempt information in its discretion." Justice Jane Marum Roush didn't participate in the court's review. She was a circuit judge until late July, when McAuliffe appointed her to the state's high court. Surovell's original case came through her courtroom, and she decided in favor of releasing documents. That decision has now been reversed in part and remanded in part by the high court. The state's Freedom of Information Council is in the middle of a legislatively mandated 3 year review of the state's FOIA laws, and this new opinion will be part of that study, according to Del. Jim LeMunyon, a FOIA Council member. Daily Press Executive Editor Marisa Porto is also a council member, and recently joined both the council subcommittees tasked with reviewing the laws exemptions. The Daily Press has argued for some time now that significant FOIA reforms are needed. LeMunyon, R-Chantilly, has also favored reform, and said Friday that legislation may be needed to clarify the law on redactions. He said the court's opinion seems out of line with FOIA's intent. "I'm just 1 guy ... but I would find that hard to believe that was the intent of the legislature," LeMunyon said. Rhyne was not hopeful for change. "I have not seen a willingness over the last few years for legislators to go against whatever a court has come down with," she said. (source: Daily Press) GEORGIA: Court Sets Execution Window for Only Woman on Ga. Death Row A court has set a 7-day execution window for Georgia's only female death row inmate, whose execution was halted in March because of a problem with the lethal injection drug. Georgia Attorney General Sam Olens said in a news release that a Gwinnett County Superior Court judge issued an order Friday saying Kelly Renee Gissendaner may be executed between noon on Sept. 29 and noon on Oct. 6. Gissendaner was scheduled for execution at 7 p.m. March 2. Corrections officials told reporters about 11 p.m. that they were postponing the execution "out of an abundance of caution" because the lethal injection drug appeared "cloudy." Gissendaner was convicted of murder in the February 1997 slaying of her husband. Prosecutors said she conspired with her lover, who stabbed Douglas Gissendaner to death. (source: Associated Press) ************** Stop Execution of Kelly Gissendaner To: Nathan Deal, Governor of the State of Georgia Use your power to stop the execution of Kelly Gissendaner by insisting that her sentence be commuted to life in prison without parole. She is a woman who has been profoundly transformed while in prison. Kelly is a mother, a theologian, and a pastoral figure to many. Do not let this travesty of justice happen on your watch. Do not squander the opportunity to extend mercy. Why is this important? This week the state of Georgia issued a new warrant for Kelly's execution. She is scheduled to be put to death on Tuesday, September 29, 2015 - unless we act now. Kelly's story is one of redemption and transformation. Convicted for her part in planning the 1997 murder of her husband, Doug Gissendaner, Kelly has been transformed during her time in prison. She has accepted full responsibility for her crime and has become a powerful voice for good. While incarcerated, she has been a pastoral presence to many, teaching, preaching, and living a life of purpose. Kelly is a living testament to the possibility of change and the power of hope. She is an extraordinary example of the rehabilitation that the corrections system aims to produce. Despite the testimony of clergy, educators, former inmates, corrections officers, and Kelly's own children pleading for their mother's life, the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles has condemned Kelly to death. Earlier this year, Georgia twice planned to execute Kelly and then postponed, first because of snow, and then because the drugs secretively prepared for her execution were "cloudy." In August, the courts ruled that Georgia was free to set a new execution date. The Board of Pardons and Paroles' denial of clemency is an outrageous miscarriage of justice. As people of faith, we hold that all life is sacred. We also believe in mercy. Shaped by these beliefs, we are calling on Governor Nathan Deal's Board of Pardons and Paroles to commute Kelly's sentence from death to life in prison without parole. Time is running out, and we need you to join us in calling on Georgia Governor Nathan Deal to stop the execution of Kelly Gissendaner. For more information: http://www.kellyonmymind.com How it will be delivered----This petition and all signatures collected will be emailed to Governor Nathan Deal, and we will tell the media about our campaign. (to sign petition: ttp://action.groundswell-mvmt.org/petitions/governor-deal-use-your-power-to-stop-the-execution-of-kelly-gissendaner (source: groundswell-mvmt.org) FLORIDA: Prosecutor, activist argue over death penalty at Tiger Bay Club forum The political Tiger Bay Club hosted a debate Friday between a prosecutor who's argued dozens of death penalty cases and an advocate fighting for changes to the capital murder legal system. The issue isn't going away, either, with State Attorney Angela Corey hoping to plan an all-day forum in the coming year. Friday's event was held at the University Club of Jacksonville in the Riverplace Tower on the Southbank. Bernie de la Rionda, who prosecutes many Jacksonville death penalty cases and acts as senior managing director for the State Attorney's Office, argued the death penalty is necessary to distinguish between particularly heinous murders and other killings. Heinous murders, he argued, demand the death penalty. Kristina Musante, who works for the American Civil Liberties Union but is not an attorney, came to Jacksonville to coordinate the Justice 4 Jacksonville Coalition, which is requesting death penalty reforms. She argued that the way death penalty cases are prosecuted and decided is error prone. She argued the death penalty is far more costly than sentences of life without parole. She said 25 people have been exonerated from Florida's death row since 1973, and she believes the state has executed people who did not murder. In response to a question about whether making executions more public would deter crime, de la Rionda said he'd like to bring back firing squads to Florida. Obtaining the drugs necessary for executions is more difficult, he said, because the drugs are made in European countries that object to executions. But "bullets are pretty cheap, and they're very quick," he said. If Florida can't get the drugs, then it should use firing squads, he said. Corey said she wished the debate separated the issues of the financial cost of the death penalty, the possibility of innocence and the purpose of the death penalty. "I would address those concerns in different ways," she said. "We can speak to, 'Is it too expensive?' in a much different way." Musante also said a Jacksonville man sentenced to death was exonerated, but de la Rionda disputed that. Corey later said the prosecution dropped the death sentence, but that doesn't mean he was officially exonerated or declared innocent. The death penalty, Corey said, isn't about deterring future crimes, though that would be a positive outcome if it happens. The death penalty is about administering justice in the face of particularly wicked murders. "There are certain crimes that cry out for the harshest punishment available under the laws," Corey said. Death "is the deserving punishment for those crimes." The issue is important, Corey said, and she would like to organize a full-day forum in the coming year where the issue can be discussed more in-depth. When Harry Shorstein was state attorney and she was prosecuting death penalty cases, she said, she took part in a forum at St. Johns Cathedral, her home church. Tom Collins, a board member with the Tiger Club and a physicist, said he, too, would've liked to hear a debate based more in ethics and philosophy rather than one that used specific emotional anecdotes. He opposes the death penalty, but he said de la Rionda and Musante should've tried to answer questions about what types of justice society needs when a murder occurs. In Florida, a death penalty sentencing only needs a 7-5 vote from the jury. The Supreme Court will hear a case next summer to decide if that meets the constitutional requirements for punishing someone by execution. In the meantime, Musante said, the State Attorney's Office should wait to prosecute any death penalty cases until after that decision. Otherwise, if the Supreme Court rules non-unanimous decisions unconstitutional, the state may have to re-hear those cases at great cost, Musante said. She also pointed to the murder case involving Shelby Farah, who was killed at a MetroPCS store 2 years ago in Brentwood. Farah's family doesn't want the State Attorney's Office to pursue the death penalty. Most death penalty cases require years of appeals, and sometimes those cases have to be reheard. Musante said the State Attorney's Office shouldn't pursue the death penalty if the victim's families don't want it. De la Rionda, though, urged people to contact the state Legislature about removing what he called frivolous motions that stall these appeals after they've been sentenced. "I will forever believe in the death penalty," he said. "I think some murders are so, so, so horrific, so heinous. I think the issue becomes, Why does it take so long?" (source: jacksonville.com) ************ Florida Attorney General wants to hire more attorneys Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi says she needs to hire more attorneys to handle a growing number of cases. Bondi this week submitted her 2016 budget request to the Florida Legislature. It included a request to spend nearly $650,000 to hire six more senior attorneys in her criminal and capital appeals division. Under law, Bondi's office is responsible for handling appeals of any criminal cases prosecuted across the state. The Department of Legal Affairs also represents the state in death penalty cases. Her budget request states that this past fiscal year, her office handled nearly 23,000 new appeals. This was an 8 % increase over the previous year. Bondi's office states that currently her attorneys are handling more than 100 cases a year. The Department of Legal Affairs has nearly 1,400 positions. (source: Associated Press) LOUISIANA: Final state appeals for convicted serial killer Derrick Todd Lee were rejected Friday, case now moves to federal courts ----'No basis' for new trial in 2002 slaying Louisiana's highest court put an end Friday to condemned serial killer Derrick Todd Lee's state court appeals, more than a decade after he was convicted and sentenced to death in the brutal 2002 slaying of 22-year-old LSU graduate student Charlotte Murray Pace in her Baton Rouge home. The state Supreme Court said it found no error in state District Judge Richard Anderson's August 2014 ruling that rejected Lee's request for a new trial. The high court also stated it found "no basis" for sending the case back to Anderson for an evidentiary hearing and "no grounds" for throwing out his 1st-degree murder conviction and death sentence. "That's awesome. That's wonderful news. I'm so stunned, "Pace's mother, Ann Pace, said when told of the action taken by the Louisiana Supreme Court. "It's been 11 years (since the 2004 trial). I had almost given up hope that it would finish this 2nd part." Lee's attorney, Capital Post-Conviction Project of Louisiana director Gary Clements, said he will now take Lee's case to U.S. District Court in Baton Rouge for the federal post-conviction relief stage - a stage that can take years. "The Supreme Court's ruling is a huge step toward final resolution as we have finally completed all appeals and post-conviction relief at the state level," East Baton Rouge Parish District Attorney Hillar Moore III said. "I only hope that post-conviction proceedings at the federal level will move quickly and that the state Supreme Court's ruling will ease some of the frustration that the families are feeling." Justice Scott Crichton wrote Friday that evidence showing Lee killed Pace in a "brutal and vicious manner" was both overwhelming and horrific. She was stabbed 81 times with a knife and screwdriver; her throat was slashed; and a clothing iron was used to bludgeon her head, fracture her skull and crush her eyeballs, he noted. "This writ denial marks the end of Lee's state court proceedings, finally bringing some measure of closure to the families of the multiple victims that have been irreparably affected by his hideous crimes," Crichton stated. At the penalty phase of Lee's trial in the killing of Pace, East Baton Rouge Parish prosecutors introduced evidence of 4 other murders that he allegedly committed: Pam Kinamore, Gina Wilson Green and Carrie Lynn Yoder, all of Baton Rouge, and Trineisha Dene' Colomb, of Lafayette. Lee, 46, of St. Francisville, claims - among other things - that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at the guilt and penalty phases of his trial in Baton Rouge. Clements also contends Lee was incompetent when he was put on trial, and that Lee is mentally ill and brain-damaged and cannot be executed. DNA linked Lee to the murder of Pace, but Clements on Friday characterized the DNA evidence as highly questionable. The state Supreme Court disagreed. "(Lee) has alleged there existed significant doubt as to the presence of sperm on Pace's body and that only unreliable evidence linked him to the other victims," the high court said. "Other than mere technical allegations, (Lee) does not assert or provide any evidence suggesting he should have been excluded as the source of the DNA recovered from Pace or the other victims." Julia Naylor, a DNA analyst at the Louisiana State Police Crime Lab, testified at Lee's trial that the probability of Lee being randomly matched with the genetic profile recovered from Pace's body was 1 in 3.6 quadrillion, the court added. Pace was killed May 31, 2002, in her Sharlo Avenue home. Authorities testified she had been raped in addition to being bludgeoned and repeatedly stabbed. Lee also was found guilty at another trial of 2nd-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison in the January 2002 slaying of Geralyn Barr DeSoto, of Addis. Diane Alexander, of Breaux Bridge, who Lee attempted to rape and kill, testified against Lee at the DeSoto and Pace trials. (source: The Advocate) ****************** Death penalty by committee: How Caddo makes the decisions Caddo prosecutors must decide whether they will seek the death penalty if Grover Cannon, the man accused of killing Shreveport police officer Thomas LaValley, is indicted as charged and his case goes to trial. And even as he continues to fight criticism over some of his past death penalty decisions, acting Caddo District Attorney Dale Cox gives us a look at how those life-or-death determinations are made in his parish. Cox recoils at suggestions that he's a "Blunt Spokesman for the Death Penalty," as spelled out in national media reports this summer. "'Dale Cox wants a death penalty! Therefore, we have a death penalty'," the acting district attorney says as he slams his fist on his desk. "It is nothing like that." To the contrary, Cox says deciding whether to seek the death penalty in Caddo now is a group decision. Shortly after assuming the role of acting district attorney in April, he formed a committee comprised of himself and 7 other lawyers who meet after every homicide indictment. "These lawyers are the most experienced lawyers in our office," Cox says. "These are the lawyers who have tried other capital cases." In cases of 1st-degree murder (the charge Cannon faces if the grand jury returns such an indictment next month), the committee must decide whether to seek the death penalty. "It's not every homicide case. In fact, it's not every 1st-degree murder case that we automatically seek the death penalty," Cox says. However, statistics show that almost 1/2 of all death sentences in Louisiana over the past 5 years were rendered in Caddo. And Cox was a prosecutor on a third of those cases. But he still says seeking the death penalty is the exception rather than the rule. "I think the last three homicide cases that we've met on we have not sought to seek the death penalty in any of them." While such a committee is not required by law, it's something Cox says he's advocated for the past 20 years. "Any of us can get tunnel vision on a particular case, or a particular set of facts, or on a particular person." The panel may take hours, days or even longer to finally decide whether a case merits seeking the death penalty, the assistant district attorney says. "Unless there is a very strong consensus to seek the death penalty, we don't seek it." On a related note, Cox has said he would not seek the Caddo district attorney post in elections Oct. 24. His announcement came just one week after receiving national criticism over a New York Times article about his record of sending convicts to death row. (source: KSLA news) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sat Sep 19 08:44:06 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2015 08:44:06 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----MO.,OKLA., NEB. Message-ID: Sept. 19 MISSOURI: Missouri's parole board lumbers on in secrecy with unfilled seats MISSOURI BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE The 7-member board is responsible for determining whether a person confined in the Department of Corrections shall be paroled or conditionally released and for supervising all persons on probation and parole. The 5 existing members were appointed by Gov. Jay Nixon: Seat 1 -- Vacant Seat 2 -- Jimmie Lee Wells (D) The former sheriff of Pike County lives in Bowling Green Term began: Feb 16, 2009 Term expired: Feb 16, 2015 (Still serving) Seat 3 -- Vacant Seat 4 -- Board Chairman Ellis McSwain Jr. (D) Former warden at Algoa Correctional Center. Lives in Jefferson City Term began: Sep 18, 2009 Term expired: Aug 28, 2012 (Still serving) Seat 5 -- Martin Rucker (D) Former state representative from St. Joseph. Term began: Feb 14, 2011 Term expires: Apr 3, 2016 Seat 6 -- Don Ruzicka (R) Former state representative from Mt. Vernon. Term began: Dec 21, 2012 Term expires: Dec 20, 2018 Seat 7 -- Kenneth C. Jones (R) Former Moniteau County sheriff and former state representative Term began: Feb 9, 2012 Term expires: Dec 10, 2017 Source: State of Missouri, Post-Dispatch BY THE NUMBERS Missouri Board of Probation and Parole 7 members 2 vacancies 2 members serving on expired terms $83,574, board member salary, 2014 100 Number of hearings parole board members says they hear in a week. 31,908 Missouri prison population, 2014 31,057 Missouri prison population, 2012 16,172 number of parolees, 2014 17,833 number of parolees, 2012 84.3 % of hearings that resulted in parole, 2014 $57 daily cost of incarceration $6 daily cost of probation and parole supervision [source: State of Missouri] ---- The area around North Kingshighway and Cote Brillante Avenue has changed a lot since Cranston Mitchell grew up there in the 1950s. McBride High School closed. DePaul Hospital moved on, and so did many of the doctors and educators. Mitchell's field of expertise in criminal justice has also undergone a metamorphosis. "My God," he said, about starting on the Missouri Board of Probation and Parole in the early 1980s, a position he held nearly two decades. "There were 3 of us." Back then, they weighed cases for Missouri's roughly 6,000 inmates and kept tabs on others the board released from prison with terms to abide by. Today's parole board has 7 seats in a state with 32,000 inmates and thousands more supervised in the community. It's still a full-time job. Each member of the independent board might hear 25 cases in a day. Yet while state statute requires the board to have 7 members, 2 of the seats have been sitting vacant, 1 since June, the other since February 2014. "That says to me that if you don't have the 7 people, then how good is the job being done?" said Mitchell, 68, who went on to be appointed to the U.S. Parole Commission by President George W. Bush, then reappointed by Barack Obama. "It's a pressure-packed position for those people who take it very seriously in terms of a public safety issue." A vice chairman is also supposed to be in charge of the parole board's operations, funds and expenditures. Currently, there isn't a vice chairman. As governor, Jay Nixon, a Democrat, is responsible for parole board appointments. The state Senate confirms them. "The governor has been real slow in making his recommendations on appointments," Senate President Ron Richard, R-Joplin, chairman of the gubernatorial appointments committee, said in an interview last week. He said Nixon, who has also fallen behind by letting filled seats expire beyond the 6-year term, should reappoint sitting members of the parole board and other boards if they are to remain. Other critics, including people who held leadership positions for the Missouri Department of Corrections, want the parole board to be reformed. They say it operates almost entirely in secret and has become a plum place for former lawmakers to land since term limits went into place. The position pays $83,574 a year, not counting retirement benefits. Members get access to state cars to criss-cross Missouri to attend hearings at the state's 21 prisons. 3 out of the 5 current members served in the state Legislature. (The other 2 have law enforcement backgrounds, including a former sheriff.) Others say the Missouri board is too hesitant in granting parole. In the past few years, the number of offenders on parole in the state has dropped to just over 16,000, from a peak of nearly 18,000. Critics say that not only raises prison costs, but potentially threatens public safety. When an inmate leaves prison on parole, the state can keep tabs on him through drug screening, anger management and substance abuse programs. That's not the case for those who walk out of the corrections system after completing their sentences. Mitchell, who has trained parole boards, said former lawmakers have ended up on parole boards across the country. "I found that finding a spot for a defeated or retired incumbent to rest their feet is not always a good thing," he said. "There's just a different kind of motivation." "You can get an individual in those kinds of positions who has a particular philosophical bend and are not very willing to take a broader view," he added. "The wrong person in that job can be a real detriment." But he said it really depends on the individual. All former politicians don't make bad parole board members. Rather, Mitchell asked: "What is the litmus test in terms of the governor with that job?" 'A LOT OF WORK' Nixon, a former prosecutor, declined to comment through his spokesman Scott Holste. "The governor takes very seriously the responsibility of making nominations to the board for Senate approval, and is actively working to select qualified candidates," Holste said by email. He didn't respond to concerns raised about the board's performance and being stacked with former lawmakers. According to state statute, no more than 4 board members can be part of the same political party. Currently, 3 are Democrats, 2 are Republicans. While the number of filled seats is 5, a majority vote is still needed among the parole board to take significant action on a case involving violent crime. Just one member of the board is required to hear and vote on cases involving property and drug crimes. Ellis McSwain Jr., chairman of the parole board, wasn't available for comment either, said David Owen, spokesman for the Missouri Department of Corrections. The lack of public comment adds to the legacy of secrecy of a board that weighs anything from low-level felonies such as forgery to death penalty cases. Their meetings with inmates aren't public. Nor are the reasons why parole board members vote the way they do. "How do they make decisions in death penalty or clemency cases, or any cases?" asked Janet Barton, who retired in 2013 as the parole board's operations manager. "You have a parole board that is advising the governor on the death penalty, but their votes are not public record." Barton, who worked for the parole board for more than 3 decades, recalled when members used to be promoted from within the corrections department. "They were dedicated," she said. "They believed that offenders could change, that parole served the best interest of public safety." Then, in the 1990s, she said former lawmakers started showing up "looking for a job that brought a tidy salary and some benefits to them. And the fact that it was in parole was secondary." Joseph Knodell has seen how parole board vacancies and politics mix. At the tail end of Gov. Matt Blunt's administration, Knodell said, he was asked to briefly sit on the board. His stint lasted 6 months so that the outgoing governor could later fill the post with a trusted staffer. "They were looking for places for people to land," Knodell, 69, said. "That was OK. It's a position that kind of wears on you. You are sitting across from murderers and rapists." Knodell, a former school superintendent near Poplar Bluff, said the job pays well compared to other state positions. He called it a "plum position" governors have at their disposal. "(The seats) should be filled because there is a lot of work," he said of the vacancies. "Believe it or not, when I say it is a plum position, there is still a lot of work involved." Richard Lee, who served on the parole board in the early 2000s, said he is "fearful" where Missouri is headed. He said the state needs a parole board with the professionalism to weigh the merits of each case, free of politics and with more transparency. Most people who are sent to prison eventually return to the community. Lee said parole can be a tool to improve that transition. "It's hard to release a murderer, but you have to have the ability to do that," said Lee, 61, whose background is in law enforcement. Otherwise, he said, people become institutionalized, unable to function on their own. State figures show the parole board is granting parole in about 84 % of cases. But critics say those figures offer an incomplete picture, because many are refused parole until the tail end of their prison term. Lee said more attention is needed on the credentials of those on the board. "I'd like to see some change in the parole board and the selection process," he said. "I'd like to see standards for board members. I'd like to see them make it more of a diverse group." For years, he said Missouri was a leader in probation and parole. "You saw a lot of people at the national level who had Missouri ties," he said. "I hope we can continue to lead that path." 'WEIGHING THE RISKS' In a meeting last week in Jefferson City, members of Empower Missouri, a social justice organization, said they also want parole board reform. "Our concern is there are people who could be released from prison without destroying our society," Ted Schroeder, a former pastor in north St. Louis, said at the meeting. Nicole Porter, of the Washington-based Sentencing Project, which advocates for alternatives to incarceration, said at the meeting via conference call that victims' families often have heavy influence on whether an inmate is paroled. "Punishment is 1 reason why prisons exist, but it's not the only reason," she said. "Parole boards should be about weighing the risks of whether or not potential parolees pose a risk to public safety." According to a draft copy of an Empower Missouri policy paper about parole, 1 in 9 prisoners in Missouri is serving at least 50 years in prison. Republican lawmakers have taken note. "We don't need to be building another prison, we need to be cutting some people loose who are in there for minute reasons," House Corrections Committee Chairman Paul Fitzwater, R-Potosi, said in an interview. "We have a lot of nonviolent criminals who are locked up, and we are spending $25,000 to $30,000 a year to keep them housed." He said he recently worked hard to release Jeff Mizanskey, of Sedalia, who was 21 years into serving life without the possibility of parole for marijuana. "We spent over $600,000 housing this guy on a marijuana charge," Fitzwater said. "Now think about that." Nixon commuted Mizanskey's sentence to life with the possibility of parole. The parole board heard his case this summer. He was released Sept. 1. SEEKING CHANGES Rep. Caleb Jones, R-Columbia, is seeking changes to the parole system. Last legislative session, he filed a bill to put a 2-week limit on the amount of time the board could spend to make a decision on each case. Rep. Penny Hubbard, D-St. Louis, a former parole board member, encouraged Jones to lengthen the time requirement because of the heavy caseload. Sometimes they do 25 hearings per day with inmates, she said.And then they need to review cases that other board members heard. "If they are doing it fresh, without pressure and not being worn out, they make better decisions and can collectively review the cases and be fair," Hubbard said. The bill didn't get out of committee, but Jones said he wants to try again. His motivation isn't to help inmates. Rather, it is to ease fears for crime victims waiting to hear if the offender who attacked them will be kept in prison or allowed to go free. "As a victim myself, I understand how stressful that is," Jones said. Jones' mother, Pam, was slain in 1991 in front of her family at a Christmas party. The assailant, who also killed 3 law enforcement officials, was never up for parole. He was executed by the state in 2002. Pam Jones was also the wife of Kenny C. Jones, the former sheriff and Republican state representative from central Missouri. Kenny Jones is currently 1 of the 5 members of the parole board. (source: St. Louis Post-Dispatch) OKLAHOMA: New questions about destroyed evidence could put Glossip case back in federal court Oklahoma City Police released its report detailing the evidence from the murder of Barry Van Treese at the request of Fox 25. The report was never provided to attorneys who represented Richard Glossip in his second trial or his appeals according to his new defense team who received the report following a Fox 25 Investigation that aired the eve of his scheduled execution. The 1999 police report lists the contents of the box of property marked for destruction because the appeals were exhausted. In reality, the appeals process had just begun for Glossip. Listed as contents were: "1 roll of duct tape; 1 bag with duct tape; 1 envelope with note; 1 bag with glasses; 1 bag with wallet, knifes [sic], keys; 1 bag with white shower curtain; 1 white box with papers; 1 deposit book; 2 receipt books." While the state conceded in the second trial it had no physical evidence linking Richard Glossip to the motel room murder scene his new defense team says the police report discovered during the Fox 25 investigation is a document they had never seen and was never provided to his defense attorneys. "You're supposed to preserve it and all of us have a duty as lawyers, especially the prosecution has a duty to maintain custody of any evidence that is in any investigation of any criminal offense," said Oklahoma City defense attorney Garvin Isaacs. Isaacs is a noted defense attorney, but he spent part of his career in the prosecutor's office, but he is not connected to the Glossip case. Isaacs says the destruction of evidence is, to say the least, a big deal. "When you destroy a piece of evidence," Isaacs told Fox 25, "That raises the inference in the law that that evidence is against you. Isaacs says what that means is when a party destroys evidence, the jury should be instructed to take that as an admission of guilt. Isaacs read from the book he calls the "Bible for defense attorneys," in describing what the destruction of evidence means for prosecutors. "He is said to give ground to believe his case is weak and not to be won by fair means," Isaacs read. But who ordered the destruction? Police say no one knows, and it could have been the district attorney's office or it could have been a police error. Today's police policy would prohibit the destruction of any evidence from a homicide case. The police department says no one listed on the report is still employed by the police department, so Fox 25 tracked down the detective whose name is on the report. She has since retired but told us she doesn't remember that specific box. However she said when evidence was marked for destruction, the district attorney's office would call a police supervisor who would send her to get boxes of evidence. She said she never had access to the property room and someone from the DA's office would have had to have given her that specific box and it would have been marked with the case information and contents. Glossip's case had been ruled on, but according to online court records the destruction of evidence was ordered just days after the appeals court had ordered the case back to an Oklahoma County courtroom for a "fact finding" hearing. The detective who transferred the box of evidence was never associated with Glossip's case. And her report sat apparently unnoticed until the eve of Glossip's execution. That is a troubling prospect says Isaacs. "It really troubles me; it scares me that Glossip's an innocent man; it scares me that at no time have we known all these things until now." Isaacs says regardless of what the Oklahoma courts do in the case the issue of destroyed evidence is important enough it could open the door to new federal court appeals. Glossip's attorneys say they plan to supplement their filing to the Court of Criminal Appeals. (source: okcfox.com) NEBRASKA: Death penalty repeal appears to be on hold Nobody really doubted the death penalty referendum petition campaign would have enough signatures verified to hold up the Legislature's repeal. The campaign turned in nearly 167,000 signatures, when it needed 113,883, and a state-required cushion of slightly more than 125,000. It's not yet official, but the Secretary of State's office said Friday it appears enough petition signatures have been certified and verified to stop the death penalty repeal from becoming law until a vote of the people in November 2016. Chris Peterson, who co-managed the petition campaign along with Jessica Flanagain, a privately paid senior aide to Gov. Pete Ricketts, said they only were surprised at the speed with which county clerks and election commissioners were verifying signatures. They had until mid-October. "I'm guessing that must mean the county reviews of the petitions haven't encountered many hiccups. That's a credit to the hard work of our circulators and our petition drive's focus on compliance," Peterson said. The senator who brought the repeal bill to the Legislature -- Omaha Sen. Ernie Chambers -- even said it was a forgone conclusion the signatures would be obtained. But he's confident, he said, that the repeal (LB268) will take effect. The election will not turn out the way the Ricketts family wanted, and what they financed, he said. "I feel a deep, settled sense of serenity and peace about the whole thing," he said. "I've never had the sense of confidence and serenity that I feel now." Opponents of the death penalty have more than a year to make their case, he said. The Catholic bishops have indicated they will also give the message to their hundreds of thousands of followers that the death penalty should not be reinstated. The Secretary of State's office spokeswoman Laura Strimple said Friday that 68 counties have certified their final numbers to Gale's office. At least 38 counties have certified their numbers to meet both the 5 percent threshold to require a vote on the repeal, and it appears more than enough signatures -- 120,479 -- have been both certified and verified to meet the 10 % threshold to put a hold on the repeal for the next 14 months until a vote, she said. In May, the Legislature voted to abolish the death penalty in Nebraska and then overrode a veto of the bill by Ricketts. Almost immediately, death penalty supporters said they'd petition to put the issue to a vote and to prevent the law from taking effect this summer. "While it would appear the death penalty repeal is very likely to be stayed, we will be waiting until we reach a level of certified signatures of 110 percent before reaching that declaration," Gale said. Counties still verifying signatures will continue until they certify their final numbers to Gale's office, Strimple said. The Lancaster County election office has verified 18,124, signatures, has rejected 3,183 and has 162 pending. Stephen Griffith, Nebraskans for Alternatives to the Death Penalty executive director, said that assuming the death penalty repeal gets to the ballot, he also is confident that when Nebraskans know the facts, they will agree with the Legislature and reject the death penalty. "I grew up in Nebraska ... and I think Nebraskans are fair-minded," he said. "If we approach each other reasonably, people are open to hearing honest viewpoints, so we're ready for an open and energetic and spirited conversation on the death penalty with Nebraska voters." A lawsuit was filed this week against the petition referendum process alleging it is invalid because Ricketts intentionally was not named in the list of sponsors. In the suit, Nebraskans for Public Safety says it believes he is the "primary initiating force" behind the petition effort. State law requires all sponsors be named. Ricketts followed up his effort to veto the bill by donating at least $200,000, and his father Joe Ricketts donating $100,000 to the petition campaign. A spokeswoman for Ricketts said Friday that just because the governor supports the effort does not make him a sponsor of it. "This is yet another example of special interests using the courts in an attempt to thwart the will of the voters," said spokeswoman Brittany Hardin. Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson said the Nebraska Constitution provides that when 10 percent of voters are verified to have signed a referendum, the law is suspended until a vote is taken. In this case, the vote would be Nov. 8, 2016. But even if the state has the death penalty, it does not have the means to carry out an execution by lethal injection. Several months ago, Department of Correctional Services Director Scott Frakes ordered lethal injection drugs sodium thiopental and pancuronium bromide from a distributor in India. At least part of the sodium thiopental was shipped last month, but did not make it out of the country before being returned to the sender, according to forms provided by the Corrections Department. Frakes said in an email that the drug was returned to Chris Harris of HarrisPharma for further international review. (source: JournalStar) ******************* 120,479 verified signatures: Effort to reverse Nebraska's death penalty repeal hits another milestone A federal prosecutor has asked the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to weigh in on whether Nebraska officials are violating the law in their efforts to import a disputed death penalty drug. Last month, the ACLU of Nebraska prodded federal prosecutors to investigate Nebraska's attempts to import sodium thiopental, 1 of 3 drugs the state needs to carry out an execution. The FDA has said the drug is not approved in this country and it would be illegal to import a foreign-made version of the substance. U.S. Attorney Deborah Gilg said in a recent letter her office was unable to determine whether criminal or civil laws were broken. She has since sought further guidance from the Office of the Inspector General for the FDA. Jan Sharp, chief of the general crimes unit at the U.S. Attorney's Office in Omaha, said Friday he was awaiting the FDA's response. Gov. Pete Ricketts has said the state is in communications with federal officials to obtain $54,400 worth of lethal injection drugs it purchased earlier this year from a broker in India. Earlier this month, however, a private shipping company returned a package of the disputed drug that was bound for Nebraska before it even left India. Nebraska Secretary of State John Gale reported Friday that 120,479 signatures have been both certified and verified to his office. That would surpass a threshold of 10 % of the state's registered voters, or 113,883 signatures, necessary to suspend the repeal of the death penalty until a referendum is held on the issue during the November 2016 general election. Gale said he won't put a final stamp on the petition drive until 110 % of the signature requirement - 125,271 signatures - are certified and verified. "This is not an official certification yet," he said Friday. His report noted that 17,849 signature have been rejected so far. Petition organizers submitted nearly 167,000 total signatures last month. The drive needs to meet a 2nd requirement, exceeding the 10 % threshold in at least 38 of the state's 93 counties, but that may happen as early as next week, a spokeswoman for the office said. This spring, the Nebraska Legislature abolished capital punishment by overriding a veto from Gov. Pete Ricketts. It was a historic vote, making Nebraska the 1st conservative state in 4 decades to repeal the death penalty. Death penalty supporters immediately announced plans to gather signatures for a voter referendum on the issue. A week ago, the Secretary of State's office announced that the referendum drive had met a lower threshold, 5 % of all registered voters, needed to place the issue on the 2016 ballot. On Friday, the Secretary of State also released the ballot language as written by Attorney General Doug Peterson. Chris Peterson, the spokesman for Nebraskans for the Death Penalty, the group behind the petition drive, said Friday marked a significant milestone. "For supporters of the death penalty, its been important all along to ensure capital punishment remain the law of the land until voters have their say in November 2016," Chris Peterson said. Meanwhile, death-penalty opponents filed a lawsuit this week asking a judge to nullify the referendum. The lawsuit, however, did not request a temporary injunction to halt the referendum process until the legal issues are decided. State Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha, who sponsored the repeal legislation, said Friday while the effective date of the repeal may be suspended, it remains the law until voters say otherwise. And if the lawsuit fails to stop the referendum, Chambers said he believes repeal supporters ultimately will prevail. "Serenity is what I feel at this point," Chambers said. "And I feel supremely confident the will of the Legislature to repeal the death penalty will stand." Putting the repeal on hold also raises questions about whether the state could pursue an execution before the referendum could be held in about 14 months. The attorney general has not said if his office will ask the Nebraska Supreme Court to issue a death warrant before the public vote is taken. As of now, the state lacks two of the drugs it needs to carry out a lethal injection and it remains in doubt whether it will be able to obtain the drugs. Chambers argued there is no way the court would allow an execution before a vote of the people, especially with unsettled legal questions surrounding the petition and the lethal injection drugs. Stephen Griffith, director of Nebraskans for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, said Friday he was disappointed but not surprised to learn of the latest numbers. Petition organizers turned in close to 167,000 total signatures last month. "I believe when Nebraska voters know the facts, they'll agree with the Legislature and vote to repeal the death penalty," Griffith said Friday. Ricketts and other backers of the death penalty say that the Legislature was out of touch and that rank-and-file citizens support keeping capital punishment. Nebraskans for Public Safety, the group that formed to defend the repeal, filed a lawsuit Thursday to nullify the referendum drive. The lawsuit claims it had a fatal flaw because it failed to list as a sponsor Ricketts, a leading financier of the referendum. The law requires all sponsors of petition drives to be listed. A Ricketts spokeswoman responded to the lawsuit Friday, saying the governor's support for the death penalty doesn't make him a "sponsor" of a referendum to restore capital punishment. "This is yet another example of special interests using the courts in an attempt to thwart the will of the voters," spokeswoman Brittany Hardin said. The Republican governor has been a vocal and financial backer of the drive, and his privately funded political consultant helped coordinate the signature-collection effort. Chambers, who worked for 4 decades to repeal the death penalty, said that it was wrong to demean the effort to block the referendum. Just as citizens have the right to petition, they also have the right to go to court and challenge what they feel is unlawful, he said. "What the governor and his people seem to say is that the only people who have a right to act under the law and the constitution are those who agree with them," the senator said. The lawsuit also alleges that Ricketts violated his oath of office by seeking to overturn a state law, rather than working to uphold it. "Gov. Ricketts has been clear that he believes the death penalty is a valuable public safety tool and he supports giving the voters of Nebraska the opportunity to retain it," Hardin said. "Just because the governor supports the effort does not make him a sponsor of the petition drive." (source: Omaha World-Herald) *************** US attorney sends lethal injection docs to watchdog agency The U.S. attorney's office in Nebraska says it can't determine whether state officials violated federal law in their efforts to obtain lethal injection drugs, so prosecutors have forwarded key documents to a watchdog agency for further review, according to a letter released Friday. Prosecutors examined the documents last month at the request of the American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska, which accused Gov. Pete Ricketts and state officials of trying to import the foreign-made drugs illegally. In an Aug. 25 letter to the ACLU of Nebraska, U.S. Attorney Deborah Gilg said her office sent the documents to the Food and Drug Administration's Office of the Inspector General and will decide whether to take action based on that agency's report. "We are unable to determine from the materials whether or not any federal criminal or civil statutes are implicated," Gilg said. Nebraska currently has no way to execute inmates because it lacks 2 of the 3 required lethal injection drugs for its protocol. The state paid $54,400 in May for drugs from Harris Pharma, a distributor in India, but the FDA has said Nebraska can't legally import them. An attempt to ship them to the United States via FedEx was thwarted late last month because the delivery service company said the drugs didn't have proper paperwork for international transport. Ricketts has said state officials are working with the Drug Enforcement Administration to import the required drugs - sodium thiopental and pancuronium bromide - so Nebraska can resume executions. He also has argued that the review sought by the ACLU of Nebraska was politically motivated because the group opposes the death penalty. Lawmakers abolished the death penalty in May, overriding Ricketts' veto, but supporters of the punishment launched a petition drive to suspend the repeal until voters decide the issue in November 2016. On Thursday, death penalty opponents filed a lawsuit arguing the petition drive was invalid. Danielle Conrad, executive director of ACLU of Nebraska, said she was pleased that the U.S. attorney's office took the matter seriously. "The FDA and the U.S. attorney's office should give this matter their full attention to assure Nebraskans that their tax dollars aren't being used to violate the law," Conrad said. A phone message that The Associated Press left with the U.S. attorney's office wasn't immediately returned. The DEA has said Nebraska is legally registered to import drugs, but can be blocked from doing so if other federal agencies object. In a July 13 letter to Nebraska corrections director Scott Frakes, a DEA administrator said the FDA raised legal concerns about the state's efforts. (source: Associated Press) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sat Sep 19 08:44:51 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2015 08:44:51 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----ARIZ., CALIF., USA Message-ID: Sept. 19 ARIZONA: Carlos Cruz, Rosemary Velazco: State to seek death penalty against Surprise parents in child's death State prosecutors will seek the death penalty against 2 Surprise parents in connection with the death of the couple's 3-year-old daughter. The Maricopa County Attorney's Office on Friday filed its intent to seek the death penalty against Carlos Cruz and Rosemary Velazco. Cruz and Velazco's 3-year-old daughter died in late May; she weighed 15 pounds, "showing signs of extreme malnourishment," according to court documents. A cause of death has not been disclosed. The medical examiner's report has not been finalized, according to the prosecution's filing. At the time of her death, the victim's injuries included "bruising throughout her body ... [and] large lacerations to her forehead exposing her skull," according to court documents. Each parent "committed the offense in an especially heinous, cruel, or depraved manner," according to the prosecution's death penalty filing. Neither Cruz' nor Velazco's attorney could immediately be reached Friday night. (source: ABC news) CALIFORNIA: 'Grim Sleeper' Serial Killer Trial Postponed to December Trial has been postponed until December for a California man charged with 10 "Grim Sleeper" serial killings. City News Service says a Los Angeles judge on Friday pushed back the date by 2 months to Dec. 15. The defense objected but the judge said she wants both sides to be fully prepared for the death penalty case. Lonnie Franklin Jr. is charged with killing 9 women and a 15-year-old girl. They were shot and strangled, their bodies dumped in and around South Los Angeles. The killings took place between 1985 and 2007 with a 14-year gap, leading to the "Grim Sleeper" nickname. Franklin has spent 5 years behind bars, partly because of trial delays as prosecutors claimed the defense failed to share important documents. (source: Associated Press) **************** Lawmakers push initiative to end California death penalty A ballot proposal that could completely abolish California's death penalty is already on life support. The initiative would strike death as a possible punishment from the state's Penal Code, substituting life imprisonment without parole. California state law currently allows for the death penalty. "The death penalty in America may be living on borrowed time," USA Today reported. The ballot's proponent, actor Mike Farrell, would have 180 days from when the secretary of state's office enters the measure into circulation to collect the needed 365,880 signatures. California has not executed a death row inmate in nearly a decade, with the last one being in 2006, according to The Sacramento Bee. Farrell's initiative also stresses in calling the death penalty an "empty promise" that drains public resources. "The state spends millions of taxpayer dollars providing lawyers for death row inmates, only to see the murderers it has sentenced to death by execution die of old age in prison," the proposal reads. In June, death penalty advocates who sued in Sacramento Superior Court in 2014 won a critical settlement when the state agreed to develop a new method for lethal injection executions, using just 1 drug. Opponents of the death penalty argue that it will take more time and money drawing up a new procedure to restart executions in California, with many legal obstacles to face. California currently houses the nation's largest number of condemned inmates, nearly 1/4 of the more than 3,000 nationwide. The list also includes 21 women housed at a state prison in Chowchilla. Other opponents say they doubt any more prisoners will be executed at all, as more voters turn against the practice and they continue to challenge the state in court at every turn. Currently in California, nearly 20 inmates on death row are believed to have exhausted all appeals and be eligible for execution. However, the state lacks a court-approved way to kill them. "There seems to be a massive reassessment underway in this country in terms of capital punishment," said Kathryn Kase, executive director of the Texas Defender Service, which provides legal aid for those facing death row. "Everywhere you look with the death penalty, there's a problem." Farrell's ballot also points to the "fatal mistakes" of innocent people being carelessly sentenced to death as a reason to end capital punishment in California. "Wrongful convictions rob innocent people of decades of their lives, waste tax dollars, and re-traumatize the victims' families, while the real killers remain free to kill again," the proposal said. In 2012, California voters rejected a death penalty repeal - known as Proposition 34 - by a 52 to 48 % margin. Polls have consistently shown general public support for capital punishment. A growing number of states - 7, since 2007 - have already abolished the death penalty. Earlier this year, Nebraska, traditionally a conservative state, became the 19th state to ban capital punishment. The federal government has not carried out an execution since 2003. An unofficial moratorium has been declared, pending the completion of a Justice Department review of the death penalty ordered by President Obama. However, the average time spent on death row for those eventually executed continued to rise until 2011, with a peak of 16.5 years, before slightly dipping to 15.5 years in 2013. (source: Asian Journal) USA: When someone commits a murder, we all share a bit of the blame A headline on Stephanie McCrummen's Sept. 13 front-page article in The Post, "An American void," asked: "Why do the friends Dylann Roof stayed with before the Charleston church shooting shrug about their inaction?" I can answer that question. I am a high school dropout. I grew up in a small town in the Midwest. I spent many evenings in rundown trailers and apartments getting wasted with people whose lives were aimless. Crazy, stupid and sometimes threatening statements were not unusual. Everyone assumed they would be forgotten the next day. Acting on them was rare. Thankfully, nothing nearly as crazy, stupid or devastating as what Roof admitted to doing at Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, S.C., ever happened. I ended up becoming a lawyer. I have represented clients accused or convicted of crimes - including capital crimes - for more than 30 years. In every death penalty case, we thoroughly investigate every detail of our client's life. We work with experts on human development and psychology. In every one of the scores of capital cases in which I have been involved, there were moments - usually many of them - in which someone had an opportunity to change our client's path. Had that altered path been taken, the murder would not have been committed. These opportunities invariably come early in the client's life. But the opportunities also come just before the client's downward spiral results in murder. A client may become increasingly volatile, make threats or buy a gun. But friends and relatives do nothing. Why? Because the friends and relatives are human. Because we are programmed to believe that everything will be okay. Because the client said crazy things before but didn't do anything. Because - like many of those people in my home town - the friends and family are too impaired, depressed or caught up in their own problems to recognize that something must be said or done. Or because they don't know what to say or do. These failures are not just the failure to call police when a friend or relative buys a gun and makes threats. They are myriad failures that may seem insignificant: a pregnant mother's single night of drinking, a teacher's failure to report suspicious bruises on a student, a coach's cutting a player who cannot afford a uniform. I point this out not because I claim to have the answer to how society can prevent statistically rare tragedies such as the one reportedly caused by Roof. I point it out because it is one of the many reasons that the United States must join virtually every other industrialized nation and abolish the death penalty. Capital murders occur because of countless failures not only of the killers themselves, but also of their families, neighbors, teachers and friends to act to alter the path of people like Roof. This is not to say that murderers should not be punished for their crimes. It is simply to say that we all share at least a bit of the blame. Evil is not a rare virus that a few of us catch. It is a disease that is transmitted in bits and pieces from person to person until it accumulates and overcomes an individual. A sentence of life imprisonment without parole is a sufficient punishment for the ones who succumb. (source: Opinion, Natman Schaye is senior trial counsel for the nonprofit Arizona Capital Representation Project----Washington Post) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sat Sep 19 08:45:47 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2015 08:45:47 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 19 IRAN: Qisas: A Law for Injustice In this commentary, IHRDC Legal Advisor Hossein Raeesi analyzes a murder case and the court documents corresponding thereto, which reveal how the legal remedy of qisas [the principle of retaliatory punishment] entrenches blatant, systemic, and structurally-entrenched violations of human rights in Iran. The Case of Fatemeh Fatemeh was born on November 8, 1991. On April 19, 2009, only seven months before her 18th birthday, she was charged with the murder of her 2nd husband. At the age of 15, Fatemeh had been forced by her family to marry her first husband. That marriage only lasted 15 days, during which she was beaten several times. The couple eventually decided to separate. Not long after her divorce, Fatemeh's family decided to erase the shame of Fatemeh's failed 1st marriage and forced her again to marry. They believed that in their small town environment, their once-divorced daughter would not have a chance to marry a suitable man. With this in mind, they found an employed maternal relative and forced her to get married for the 2nd time. None of her protests or objections worked. No one paid any attention to her needs. Fatemeh, who was a student at the time, did not agree to live with her legally-wedded husband, with whom she never had a good relationship. Her husband lived in a room in a mosque, and every once in a while, Fatemeh would visit him in the mosque. Some of these visits ended in arguments between the 2. These arguments were so loud that the cleric and custodian of the mosque could hear them. In April 2009, Fatemeh's husband was found dead in his room. The police immediately launched a search for Fatemeh and she was found in the library of her school. One day after the incident and her arrest, the police began to interrogate her without the presence of a [defense] lawyer. They did not grant her permission to employ an attorney. Early on, at the police station, she admitted to the crime. But later in court, where she had a lawyer present, she denied the charges and announced that her confession was based on fear and ignorance of the system. She emphatically denied the charge of the 1st-degree murder of her husband and declared that she had had no motive to kill him. But her objection to the forced marriage and her refusal to engage in the [marital] relationship gave the court sufficient reason to put an end to further investigations into the case [which could have found further exculpatory evidence]. As a result, Fatemeh has been in detention for more than 6 years now. At the end of her 1st and only hearing, according to Article 206 of the Islamic Penal Code ratified in 1991, Fatemeh was sentenced to qisas nafs (qisas that results in the death of the convicted individual). Despite denying the charges throughout the hearing, she was sentenced to death. Her denial and her lawyer's defence had no impact on the judge's decision, nor did her age (17 at the time of the alleged murder), or the fact that she had been deprived of a defense lawyer at the outset of her arrest. She was sentenced to death in April/May of 2010 based only on her confession on the 2nd day of her arrest, when she was still being deprived of access to counsel. Fatemeh's lawyer's subsequent request for an appeal did not result in a reversal of the trial court decision, and 4 months thereafter the Supreme Court of Iran approved the imposition of the death penalty. After this, in order for the death sentence to be carried out, her file was sent to the Bureau for the Enforcement of Judgments on 1st-degree murder charges [these Bureaus for the Enforcement of Judgments are local offices of the judiciary throughout the country that are tasked with taking the administrative steps relating to the imposition of punishments after criminal sentences are finalized]. The sentence was then sent to the Head of the Judiciary, who in turn approved of the death penalty. The only remaining hope for Fatemeh was to be granted a pardon by the victim's family. Many attempts were made to secure a pardon for Fatemeh, but they were all turned down by her husband's family. Hope was gradually lost as despair and anxiety overwhelmed Fatemeh and her family, and Fatemeh went into a deep depression. The Human Rights Council of the Judiciary and the National Authority on the Rights of the Child were both informed of Fatemeh's situation. Although she was charged with a crime that she allegedly committed as a minor, and was indeed sentenced to death as a minor, they have paid no heed to the case and have done nothing to stay her execution. The View of the Islamic Penal Code ... With the promulgation of the new Islamic Penal Code in 2013, the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) claims to have put a stop to the executions of those who commit crimes punishable by hudud (punishments based on the Quran or Hadith) or qisas (retaliatory punishments) before the age of 18. This claim is not completely unfounded, since Article 91 of the New Code makes mention of the above improvement to the law. However, a closer look at the content of sections of this same law reveals that in practice, not much has changed and the execution of young offenders has not been completely abolished. (1) Chapter 10 of Book II of the Islamic Penal Code says that young offenders are not to be punished by execution. However, the majority of crimes mentioned in that chapter are punishable by ta'zir, a category of Shari'a punishments that allows for substantial judicial discretion in determining the manner and severity of punishment. Such crimes are based on Islamic rules, but the specifics of the penalties are determined by the judge, and the majority of crimes enumerated therein are less serious crimes that are not punishable by death or life imprisonment. As to crimes punishable by hudud or qisas, however, the same chapter only considers girls under the age of 9 lunar years and boys under the age of 15 lunar years as underage minors [meaning anyone accused of committing a capital crime over those minimums can be subject to the death penalty as well under this provision]. Thus, upon reflection it is clearly evident that the new developments in Chapter 10 and Article 91 of the Islamic Penal Code have little or no impact on the [positive] fate of young offenders. Furthermore, articles 146 and 147 of the [same] Code explicitly establish the age of criminal responsibility is indicated as a full 9 lunar years for girls and a full 15 lunar years for boys. (2) It does appear as though the provisions in Chapter 10 of Book II of the Penal Code reflect some recent improvements in laws pertaining to young offenders. But upon exploring Fatemeh's file, it becomes evident that legislators in Iran do not intend to forego Shari'a Law in such cases. Otherwise, why would the law discriminate between girls and boys? There is no practical reason for the 6-year difference between the social and legal responsibilities of girls and boys, whereby girls are criminally responsible at 9 lunar years of age and boys at 15 lunar years. Therefore, based on the Law, at this point a request for an extraordinary procedural review of the case was the only sure way to delay Fatemeh's impending execution. As a result, Fatemeh's execution order was stayed by Branch 14 of the Supreme Court due to the request for an extraordinary procedural review on September 21, 2013. Her age was discussed in the Supreme Court's order and on that basis, the execution order of May 2010 was overturned pursuant to the stipulations of Article 91 of the Islamic Penal Code. But the case did not end there--another court that was given the duty of reviewing her file paid heed neither to her lawyer's defense, nor to the reasons for the Supreme Court's reversal of the death sentence. As a result, in May of 2014, under to Article 206 of the old Islamic Penal Code and Article 290 of the new Islamic Penal Code, and at the request of the victim's family, Fatemeh was again sentenced to death by the 2nd trial court, which ignored Fatemeh's age at the time of the crime primarily because that the judges [in the initial trial] had sentenced her to qisas nafs, and also because Shari'a designates the age of criminal responsibility for girls to be 9 lunar years. In re-issuing the death sentence, the 2nd court reasoned that Fatemeh's mental and emotional state [at time of the crime] allowed her to make an informed decision, that she knew what she was doing and was quite aware of the consequence of the crime that she [allegedly] committed when she committed it, and that the coroner had testified as to Fatemeh's sanity. This decision of the court demonstrates the arrogance of some Islamic countries, where sentencing children to death is justified only on the basis of Shari'a with the excuse that the children so sentenced are of sane mind, while the rest of the world, plainly recognizes 18 as the age of maturity. Fatemeh's defense lawyer objected to the death penalty based on the fact that at the time of the crime Fatemeh was only 17 and because Article 37, Section (a) of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child establishes that "no child should be subjected to capital punishment." The defense lawyer also argued that the necessary investigations had not been carried out and Fatemeh's original confession had been extracted under duress and without the presence of her lawyer and therefore the death penalty should be annulled. Both of these arguments were rejected by the court. (3) Statutory Context The insistence of [Iran's] legislators and judges on implementing the laws of hudud and qisas without regard for its obligations under the CRC is [apparently] motivated by their eagerness to carry out Shari'a. This insistence represents a total disregard of all the international obligations that Iran accepted when it ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Since Iran joined the Covenant with no provisions or conditions, then it must adhere to Article 6, Section 5, which clearly prohibits the execution of offenders under the age of 18. (4) The Islamic Republic's commitment to the provisions of the Covenant is not subject to debate or derogation, and Iran is bound to consider the above provisions when legislating and executing laws. The Covenant also explicitly states that that nothing in its text can be interpreted in any way that would diminish the rights and freedoms recognized therein, or create any form of discrimination. (5) But Fatemeh's case and thousands of others clearly establish the Islamic Republic's gross and systematic breach of its commitments to the Covenant. What is evident is that, in practice, legislation of important criminal and penal laws, such as 1st-degree murder laws, don't mean anything. Because all of the above laws are, in one way or another, interpretations of Islamic laws accepted by the country's religious leaders and not based on society's need for justice and equality [as under a more positivist model of lawmaking]. Upon exploring the most recent legislation in Iran, as well as Fatemeh's file, one can only conclude that the faulty and unjust Islamic Penal Code [of Iran] has not undergone any considerable reform. In spite of the many promises of "freedom and equality for all" made by the leaders during the [1979] Revolution, the day after its victory it became evident that all social and legal relations and regulations in Iran were to be governed by Islamic laws. This remains the case to this day, with no exception. The problem of Hudud and Qisas has been a great challenge to the country's penal laws since 1979. In the last 3 decades, not one day has gone by without a Hudud or Qisas order or execution being discussed or challenged in Iranian society. Despite opposition from legal advisors, well-known political activists, and the Iranian Bar Association, Iranians face the gallows for different reasons on a daily basis (6). In its attempt to "Islamize" Iran's legal and judicial system, the Supreme Judicial Council (Shoraye Ali Ghazai) of the time first introduced the Hudud and Qisas Law in the early 1980s under the title Hudud and Qisas Act. Interestingly, this Act has not yet turned into permanent law. In the beginning, on August 25, 1982, the Act was introduced as a pilot legislation, to be reviewed every 5 years. It has so far been ratified twice - in 1991/1992 and 2012/2013 - each time as an experimental legislation. This is, of course, not surprising since the Act has never been based on social needs, it has not helped reduce the crime rate, and has very negatively impacted the country's development and security. The characteristics of this Act and the insistence of the Government to execute Sharia Law have gradually resulted in the [Islamic] law permeating all levels of Iranian society. Law schools throughout the country teach and discuss the law of Qisas, many books and theses are written exploring the merits of the Act and its [Islamic] basis from its proponents' point of view, while its opponents, including lawyers and attorneys, are being prosecuted and imprisoned. Conclusion In short, one can unequivocally and emphatically say that the Law of Qisas will never safeguard justice [in Iran] for the following reasons: 1.The law of Qisas is founded on a serious violation of human rights because it promotes personal revenge and fosters indifference towards the conditions of the crime and the subsequent interrogation, as well as the offender's personality, mental health status and age (9 being the age of criminal responsibility for girls and 15 for boys). In the case of Fatemeh, too, we see that even if she had committed the crime, the court failed to pay any attention to the poor emotional state brought on by her forced marriage at a very young and vulnerable age. The court completely failed to consider Fatemeh's condition and in the end, she was dealt with very unjustly. 2.This Law consists of very clear forms of discrimination such as gender discrimination, a husband's right to kill his unfaithful wife (Murder in Bed), discrimination against adherents of religions not recognized in the Constitution, relational discrimination (father and paternal grandfather have the right to kill their child or grandchild), or discrimination based on the mental health of the victim (the murder of an insane person is not punishable) (7). 3.In Qisas, proof of guilt is not scientific and does not lend itself to a fair hearing. It can ultimately lead to proof of guilt despite "reasonable doubt" (8). 4.Qisas is, in reality, the right of the victim's family [to take revenge]. It is not a legal act designed to punish a dangerous offender in order to protect society. In this light, the plaintiff and the victim's family play a crucial role first in determining the verdict, and once the defendant has been found guilty, in determining [the severity of] the punishment. Therefore, only those [offenders] who have the power and means to either pay the plaintiff off or to bully them into withdrawing their request for Qisas will be able to flee the sentence (9). 5.Qisas fosters and promotes violence and injustice among people and pits members of society against each other. 6.According to the law, the punishment for 1st degree murder and 2nd degree murder is the same. Both types of offenders - those who commit premeditated murder and those who cause death in a sudden and non-premeditated manner - are sentenced to death. According to the Islamic Penal Code, all 3 classes of intentional homicide receive the same sentence (10). 7.Children under the age of 18 are subjected to punishment by death. 8.Qisas dictates the order of the court. The court of law becomes a battleground for the victim's family and the defendant. Under these conditions, it is not unusual for the prosecutor to [side with the plaintiff and] limit the defendant's right to a defense lawyer. 9.The Law of Qisas strips society of justice, the ability to improve the law, and the opportunity to receive fair trials. 10.Qisas is a tool that allows the Islamic Republic to show off its power, particularly with respect to public display of punishment, and systemic and political violence. 11. Lastly, although there are no accurate statistics on murder rates in Iran, it is quite evident that Qisas does not reduce crime and does not create legal security for its citizens. Hossein Raeesi----Attorney, Human Rights Researcher Footnotes: 1.Article 91 of the Penal Code passed in 2013 states, "In the cases of offenses punishable by hadd or qisas, if mature people under 18 years do not realize the nature of the crime committed or its prohibition, or of there is uncertainty about their full mental development, according to their age, they shall be sentenced to the punishments prescribed in this chapter. 2.Id., Article 146- Non-mature children have no criminal responsibility. Article 147- The age of maturity for girls and boys are, respectively, a full 9 and 15 lunar years. 3. All signing states of the CRC must adhere to the following provision: Article 37 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child: (a) No child shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offences committed by persons below 18 years of age. 4.Article 6 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: 5) Sentence of death shall not be imposed for crimes committed by persons below 18 years of age and shall not be carried out on pregnant women. Id., Article 5: 1) Nothing in the present Covenant may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms recognized herein or at their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the present Covenant. 2) There shall be no restriction upon or derogation from any of the fundamental human rights recognized or existing in any State Party to the present Covenant pursuant to law, conventions, regulations or custom on the pretext that the present Covenant does not recognize such rights or that it recognizes them to a lesser extent. 6.For more information refer to the article on the Law of Qisas by Mohammad Hossein Nayyeri, available at http://www.iranhrdc.org/persian/permalink/3500.html#.VeXf9_lVhBc. 7.Articles 301 and 302 of Islamic Penal Code. 8.Id., Articles 312 to 349. 9.Id., Articles 347 to 367. 10.Id., Article 290. (source: Iran Human Rights Documentation Center) ******************* Life of Juvenile Offender on Death Row Spared According to Iran state news media, Shargh, a juvenile offender on death row had his life spared after authorities implemented Article 91 of the revised Islamic Penal Code on his case. The Article states: "In the cases of offenses punishable by hadd or qisas, if mature people under 18 years do not realize the nature of the crime committed or its prohibition, or of there is uncertainty about their full mental development, according to their age, they shall be sentenced to the punishments prescribed in this chapter." The juvenile prisoner was reportedly arrested along with a friend when he was a teenage boy under the age of 18. He was reportedly charged with murder and sentenced to death in 2010. Protesing his death sentence to the authorities, the juvenile offender said: "We were just sitting in a park and drinking alcohol when a young man approached us and attempted to take our phones from us. I refused, so he drew out a machete to stab me with. I was able to use his machete to stab him and also managed to get the weapon out of his hand and stab him a few more times. I was the one who delivered him to the hospital." Iranian authorities changed the juvenile offender's sentence to 5 years in prison and also issued him lashings for consuming alcohol. (source: Iran Human Rights) SAUDI ARABIA: Saudi Arabia rejects UN report on death penalty Saudi Arabia has rejected a report from the United Nations secretary-general urging countries to scrap the death penalty, stating that this was punishment approved under Islamic law to protect the rights of victims. The UN report was issued recently at a Human Rights Council meeting in Geneva. Faisal Trad, Saudi ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva, said the Kingdom had every right to define its own laws. "Saudi Arabia is an Islamic state, fully sovereign, and is proud that Islamic law is the basis of the country's constitution. Islam ensures justice and protects the rights of all without discrimination, in addition to the right of life for all. The death penalty is a legal measure to protect the right to life and interests of the community," he said. He said articles 5 to 19 of the report supported the views of countries that had scrapped capital punishment. "The report, unfortunately, did not include any views from countries that believe this punishment is an integral part of measures to achieve justice and protect the rights of victims," he said. Trad said the Kingdom was committed to honoring Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which guarantees the right to apply the penalty, including a commitment to ensure fair trials for all those accused of capital offenses. He said the Kingdom's courts only sentence people to death for offenses such as murder and drug trafficking. The country's judiciary is independent and protects the rights of all parties according to international law. In addition, lawyers are allowed to perform their duties without any interference, he said. (source: Arab News) INDIA: Anti-death penalty hartal on November 11 The fact that we still have to fight for abolition of death penalty tells us how socially backward our country is, senior journalist B.R.P. Bhaskar has said. He was speaking at a convention expressing solidarity with the anti-death penalty 'hartal' to be observed on November 11. "The Travancore state became a model by abolishing death penalty back in 1944. It came back here when we attained independence. Now, a majority of the countries have stopped death penalty. But here we are still fighting for its abolition," he said. The anti-death penalty 'hartal' is being organised by a collective of political, cultural and social activists. (source: The Hindu) ************* Death penalty to man who raped, killed 8-year-old niece in Pratapgarh A court in Pratapgarh on Friday, handed over death sentence to a man convicted of rape and murder of an 8-year-old in July 2013. The court also slapped a penalty of Rs. 10 thousand to be paid to the parents of the victim and life sentence under POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, 2012) Act. The murderer is the cousin of the victim's mother and the child called him 'mama'. On Friday, the court of District and Sessions Judge, Surendra Kumar Swami, in Pratapgarh vedicted the capital punishment to the accused, Prahlad Meena. While delivering the judgment, Swami said the crime committed is heinous and the accused has defaced humanity by the brutal act and hence deserves no less than a capital punishment. 'The child was not capable enough to resist and hence the act falls in the 'rarest of rare' case. The accused is a danger to the society and is to be hanged till death' came the verdict. The accused, 25-year-old Pratap Singh is cousin of the victim's mother. On July 6, 2013, Meena had gone to her house at Bhatoliya village of Arnod block, where the little girl was playing with other children. On the pretext of buying her sweets, the accused took the victim to an isolated place and raped her. He then hit her head on a stone repeatedly, killing her. The victim's father lodged a case next day at the Arnod police station under section 302, 376 of the IPC and section 3,4 of the POCSO Act. Public Prosecutor Tarun Das Vairagi produced 14 witnesses and 31 documental evidences against the accused. It is the 2nd ruling under the POCSO Act in Rajasthan and various sections of IPC for rape and murder against the convict. The 1st case being a death penalty awarded to Manoj Pratap Singh in the district of Rajmasand in October 2013 who had raped and killed an 8 year old girl who lived in his neighborhood. (source: udaipurkiran.com) PAKISTAN----impending execution Pakistan plans to hang paralysed man on Tuesday The Pakistani authorities have set Tuesday 22 September as the date on which they will hang a paraplegic prisoner. Abdul Basit (43) contracted tubercular meningitis while in prison, which has left him "bed-bound," according to a medical board report. Basit's lawyers at Justice Project Pakistan (JPP) have filed a petition with the Supreme Court, arguing that to carry out the hanging would constitute cruel and unusual punishment. They are also calling on Pakistan's President to consider a mercy petition filed on 22 July, on which no decision has yet been made. Pakistan's prison guidelines require that a prisoner stands on the gallows in order to be hanged, and the authorities have not made clear how they intend to hang a prisoner who requires the use of a wheelchair. The Pakistan Prison Rules state that the rope for hanging must be the correct length, in order to avoid prisoners facing protracted strangulation (if it is too long) or decapitation (if it is too short). The rules state that the rope's length is determined by measuring it from "the lower jaw of the condemned prisoner as he stands on the scaffold." This and other procedures set out in the rules cannot be followed in Basit's case, leaving open the possibility of a botched hanging. The Lahore High Court (LHC) initially stayed Basit's case, but ruled earlier this month that it could go ahead, despite the prison's failure to make clear how the execution would be carried out. The Court added that Pakistan's obligations under international law "should be kept aside." Commenting, Maya Foa said: "It may now just be days before we see the horrific spectacle of Pakistan hanging a parlaysed man - something which is likely to break Pakistan's own rules against cruel and unusual punishment. Worse still, Pakistan's Government has effectively ignored Basit's mercy petition, and seems prepared to push ahead with this execution even though the jail has no clear idea of how they will do it. Pakistan's President has the power to stay this execution - he must do so, without delay." (source: commondreams.org) SRI LANKA: Gallows is not the solution to curb crimes: says Human rights activists and intellectuals There is much talk in the society to implement the death penalty following several incidents where children were subjected to abuse. President Maithreepala Sirisena stated yesterday that he will mull over the reinstatement of the capital punishment. He stated that in order to do so, he will seek the approval of the parliament. Our news team inquired from several Human rights activists and intellectuals regarding the matter. Human Rights activists, Attonet At Law, Dr Prathiba Mahanama-hewa stated that implementing the capital punishment can be termed as violating human rights. Professor Rohana Lakshmna Piyadasa from the Kalaniya University states that implementing the death penalty is not the final solution to curb crimes. (source: Hiru news) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sun Sep 20 14:11:54 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 14:11:54 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----CONN., PENN., VA., GA., FLA., LA. Message-ID: Sept. 20 CONNECTICUT: Despite ruling abolishing the death penalty, inmates still being housed on death row Former death-row inmates in Connecticut may soon be living under less restrictive prison conditions than other inmates convicted of similar crimes, legal experts say. Connecticut's Supreme Court last month declared capital punishment unconstitutional in the state, striking down part of a 2012 law that had allowed the death penalty only for those already facing execution. That statute replaced what had been known as "capital felony" with a new crime, "murder with special circumstances." Under the new law, anyone who is convicted of what would have previously been a death-penalty eligible crime is now sentenced to life in prison under conditions mimicking death row. That means being held in single cell for 22 hours a day, being escorted by at least one staff member and placed in restraints when moving outside that cell. Of the 2 hours considered "recreation," 1 would typically be spent indoors, in an area that houses a law library and a phone. The other would be spent alone in a cage outside in a courtyard. There would be no physical contact with other inmates. Ironically, the 11 inmates currently housed on death row may soon be escaping those conditions. Those inmates must now be re-sentenced to life without parole under the old capital felony statue, which existed when they were convicted, their attorneys say. Though the Correction Department has leeway in the conditions imposed on individual inmates, someone sentenced to life without parole under the old statute was typically placed in the general population and allowed to be out of a cell six to seven hours a day with other inmates. They also have access to the prison commissary and gym. "At some point, the death-row inmates are going to be let into general population," said attorney Mark Rademacher, who successfully argued for the abolishment of capital punishment as the attorney for Eduardo Santiago and currently represents death-row inmate Russell Peeler Jr. "I don't see how the state could oppose that." So far, none of the death-row inmates has been moved, said Department of Correction spokeswoman Karen Martucci. "Nothing has changed with the management of the death-row population since their sentence has not been legally changed by a court," she wrote in an email to The Associated Press. "I really couldn't predict when any court action will take place." The process has been delayed, in part, because prosecutors have asked the court to reconsider the August ruling that declared capital punishment unconstitutional. 7 The chief state's attorney's office, citing that pending litigation, declined to comment for this story. Michael Courtney, who heads the capital defense unit for the state's Office of the Public Defender, said the high court typically does not grant motions to reconsider, but the legal maneuver could lead to further delays in abolishing death row. "I guess (prosecutors) feel like they have to keep swinging," he said. "They have the procedural mechanism to delay this, and they have used it." The American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut is also monitoring the proceedings. ACLU attorney David McGuire said the Correction Department already has the authority to decide where the former death-row inmates belong based on factors such as their age, mental health, disciplinary record while in prison and the security risk they present. It is possible that some will remain at the Northern Correctional Institution under the state's tightest security, known as level five, while others are sent to other prisons as level four inmates or even to medical units, he said. "All of those are very restrictive environments," he said. "These are not luxurious settings." (source: Associated Press) PENNSYLVANIA: Delaware County DA Seeking Death Penalty Despite Pennsylvania's Moratorium This past week, Delaware County's District Attorney vowed to seek the death penalty against a former police officer charged with the murder of his ex-girlfriend. This, despite the moratorium on capital punishment in Pennsylvania, ordered by Governor Wolf. It's the subject of a battle in the state's highest court. "In certain cases, justice demands the consideration of death." Such as the case against former Colwyn cop Stephen Rozniakowski, says Delaware County DA Jack Whelan. He argues there are 4 aggravating factors that warrant the defendant's execution, including that the victim had taken out a protection from abuse order against the man just hours before she was killed. "And although we highly respect the office of the governor and we highly respect the opinion of the sitting Governor Wolf, what he's done is unconstitutional." says Whelan. Wolf's lawyers say otherwise: that the state constitution gives him "unconditional power" to grant reprieves to death-row inmates. The governor says he won't stop doing so until a panel of lawmakers finishes a study on capital punishment in the commonwealth. His stance is being challenged in separate cases in the state Supreme Court by Philadelphia DA Seth Williams and Attorney General Kathleen Kane. 182 people sit on death row in Pennsylvania. Three have been executed in the nearly 4 decades since the penalty was made legal; each had given up their appeals. (source: CBS news) *************** Executions still scheduled, but moratorium likely to stay Despite the legal and political uproar over Gov. Tom Wolf's 7-month-old moratorium on executions, change comes slowly on Pennsylvania's death row. Executions continue to be scheduled at a normal pace as inmates become eligible to be put to death by lethal injection. Wolf has not signed any death warrants, but Corrections Secretary John Wetzel has fulfilled his legal duty to set execution dates when the governor does not act. Of the 15 executions slated to occur after Wolf took office in January, Wolf has blocked three by granting temporary reprieves and judges have issued stays for 11 other condemned prisoners. Barring a stay, the governor is likely to issue a reprieve for Northampton County mass killer Michael Ballard, whose Oct. 19 execution is the only one currently pending. Since the death penalty was restored in 1976, only 3 people have been executed in Pennsylvania, the most recent in 1999. The state has the nation's 5th-largest death row, according to the Washington-based Death Penalty Information Center, with 182 inmates as of Sept. 1. Even if a condemned prisoner gave up all his appeal rights and the governor stopped issuing reprieves, an execution could not go forward because the prison system lacks the mixture of drugs required by law. "We're in the process of legally obtaining them and we just haven't been successful," said Corrections Department spokeswoman Sue McNaughton. Wolf announced in February he would use his constitutional authority to grant reprieves to block any executions until a long-overdue legislative study of capital punishment in the state is completed. He said the system "is riddled with flaws, making it error prone, expensive and anything but infallible." "This is going to be a landmark study," said state Sen. Stewart Greenleaf, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee and the bipartisan 4-senator task force that will make recommendations. "If you want to take someone'a life, you better make sure that they're guilty." Wolf expressed support for a death penalty moratorium during his political campaign, joining fellow Democratic governors in Colorado, Oregon and Washington who took similar steps in recent years. But prosecutors and law enforcement groups roundly objected, branding the governor???s moratorium as an unconstitutional misuse of authority. A legal challenge filed by the Philadelphia district attorney's office sparked a lively discussion at a state Supreme Court hearing earlier this month. H. Geoffrey Moulton Jr., the governor's lead attorney in the case, acknowledged that Wolf lacks the power to unilaterally suspend the death penalty in Pennsylvania. But unlike pardons and commutations, which require approval of the state Pardons Board, the governor has broad authority to grant reprieves for indefinite periods during his tenure without having to explain his reasons, Moulton said. Wolf's moratorium-by-reprieve policy appears likely to extend into 2016, barring a negative ruling from the courts. The Senate-ordered study was originally due in December 2013. "It looks like it's going to be next year," said Greenleaf, R-Montgomery. The report from the Pennsylvania Task Force and Advisory Committee on Capital Punishment will examine concerns that include its cost, fairness, the impact on victims??? families, the role of mental illness, the value of DNA testing and the quality of legal advice available to defendants. The Joint State Government Commission, a legislative research agency overseeing the project, is collaborating with Penn State???s Center for Justice Research and the state courts??? Interbranch Commission on Gender, Racial and Ethnic Fairness. (source: cumberlink.com) ********************** Governor hopes moratorium will lead to death-penalty reforms Despite the legal and political uproar over Gov. Tom Wolf's 7-month-old moratorium on executions, change comes slowly on Pennsylvania's death row. Executions continue to be scheduled at a normal pace as inmates become eligible to be put to death by lethal injection. Wolf has not signed any death warrants, but Corrections Secretary John Wetzel has fulfilled his legal duty to set execution dates when the governor does not act. Of the 15 executions slated to occur after Wolf took office in January, Wolf has blocked three by granting temporary reprieves and judges have issued stays for 11 other condemned prisoners. Barring a stay, the governor is likely to issue a reprieve for Northampton County mass killer Michael Ballard, whose Oct. 19 execution is the only one currently pending. Since the death penalty was restored in 1976, only 3 people have been executed in Pennsylvania, the most recent in 1999. The state has the nation's 5th-largest death row, according to the Washington-based Death Penalty Information Center, with 182 inmates as of Sept. 1. Even if a condemned prisoner gave up all his appeal rights and the governor stopped issuing reprieves, an execution could not go forward because the prison system lacks the mixture of drugs required by law. "We're in the process of legally obtaining them and we just haven't been successful," said Corrections Department spokeswoman Sue McNaughton. Wolf announced in February he would use his constitutional authority to grant reprieves to block any executions until a long-overdue legislative study of capital punishment in the state is completed. He said the system "is riddled with flaws, making it error prone, expensive and anything but infallible." "This is going to be a landmark study," said state Sen. Stewart Greenleaf, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee and the bipartisan four-senator task force that will make recommendations. "If you want to take someone's life, you better make sure that they're guilty." Wolf expressed support for a death penalty moratorium during his political campaign, joining fellow Democratic governors in Colorado, Oregon and Washington who took similar steps in recent years. But prosecutors and law enforcement groups roundly objected, branding the governor's moratorium as an unconstitutional misuse of authority. A legal challenge filed by the Philadelphia district attorney's office sparked a lively discussion at a state Supreme Court hearing earlier this month. H. Geoffrey Moulton Jr., the governor's lead attorney in the case, acknowledged that Wolf lacks the power to unilaterally suspend the death penalty in Pennsylvania. But unlike pardons and commutations, which require approval of the state Pardons Board, the governor has broad authority to grant reprieves for indefinite periods during his tenure without having to explain his reasons, Moulton said. Wolf's moratorium-by-reprieve policy appears likely to extend into 2016, barring a negative ruling from the courts. The Senate-ordered study was originally due in December 2013. "It looks like it's going to be next year," said Greenleaf, R-Montgomery. The report from the Pennsylvania Task Force and Advisory Committee on Capital Punishment will examine concerns that include its cost, fairness, the impact on victims' families, the role of mental illness, the value of DNA testing and the quality of legal advice available to defendants. The Joint State Government Commission, a legislative research agency overseeing the project, is collaborating with Penn State's Center for Justice Research and the state courts' Interbranch Commission on Gender, Racial and Ethnic Fairness. (source: Associated Press) VIRGINIA: High court: Some info on executions can be kept secret Some information used to guide executions in Virginia does not have to be released to the public, the state Supreme Court ruled last week. The decision could have far-reaching ramifications for transparency in the commonwealth. The court ruled that manuals used to outline execution procedures, including sensitive security materials, are exempt from Freedom of Information Act requests and do not have to be redacted and partially released. The decision reverses an opinion by then-Fairfax County Circuit Judge Jane Roush, who ordered last year the release of the information, including execution manuals and a schematic of the chamber in which executions are carried out. Death penalty opponents have been trying for years to obtain details of the state's lethal injection procedures, amid national concern over the kinds of drugs being used. The court found that the security concerns raised by the state are legitimate, and that Virginia law regarding security exemptions says nothing about a requirement to redact such documents. "We give deference to the expert opinions of correctional officials charged with maintaining the safety and security of their employees, the inmates, and the public at large," Justice Cleo Powell wrote for the majority. The circuit court was ordered to reconsider the release of several other documents involving prison floor plans and the wiring and operation of the electric chair. Lawyers for the state had argued that specifics regarding the transfer of prisoners to the execution chamber, floor plans could be exploited by prisoners or protesters. (source: Washington Post) GEORGIA----impending female execution 7-day execution window set for Georgia's only woman on death row ---- Judge issues order saying Kelly Renee Gissendaner may be executed between noon on 29 September and noon on 6 October A court on Friday set a 7-day execution window for Georgia's only female death row inmate, whose execution was halted in March because of a problem with the lethal injection drug. A Gwinnett County superior court judge issued an order Friday saying Kelly Renee Gissendaner may be executed between noon on 29 September and noon on 6 October, attorney general Sam Olens said in a news release. Gissendaner would be the 1st woman executed by the state in 70 years. She was convicted of murder in the February 1997 slaying of her husband, Douglas Gissendaner. Prosecutors said she conspired with her lover, Gregory Owen, who stabbed Douglas Gissendaner to death. Owen is serving a life sentence. State officials on 2 March called off the scheduled execution of Gissendaner "out of an abundance of caution", saying the lethal injection drug they intended to use appeared "cloudy". Corrections officials suspended executions in the state until a drug analysis could be done. Corrections officials in April released lab reports, a sworn statement from a pharmacological expert hired by the state and a short video showing a syringe of clear liquid with chunks of a white solid floating in the solution. "After viewing a video of the solution and learning about the shipment and storage of the solution, my assessment of the formulation indicates that pentobarbital had precipitated or fallen out of solution," University of Georgia College of Pharmacy professor Jason Zastre wrote in a sworn statement released by the department. The most likely cause of the formation of solids is that the solution was shipped and stored at a temperature that was too low, Zastre wrote. Another possible cause could be that the pharmaceutical solvent used to dissolve pentobarbital sodium during the compounding process either absorbed some water or evaporated during preparation, he wrote. In a court filing in June, the department revealed that it did its own test on a new batch of pentobarbital made by the same compounding pharmacist who made the drug meant for Gissendaner's execution. The department of corrections' chief of special projects, William King, stored 1 sample in a refrigerator at 34 degrees and 1 in a room where the temperature fluctuated between 67 degrees and 72 degrees for 11 days, from 24 March to 3 April. He checked them every day except for 2 days over a weekend and recorded the temperature and appearance and took a photo of the samples. No changes were recorded in either sample. Both started and ended as clear liquid with no solids. Gissendaner's lawyers had filed a complaint in federal court a week after her scheduled execution date saying the state was violating her constitutional rights. In a filing in June they argued that the state???s own test didn't support its cold storage theory, which strengthened their argument that Gissendaner should not be put to death until a judge determines her rights won't be violated. The state countered that state officials consulted with Zastre and he said pentobarbital does not always precipitate when it is stored at a temperature that is too cold, and that Gissendaner's lawyers provided no scientific evidence to show that the state's explanation isn't correct. The judge last month dismissed Gissendaner's complaint. Her lawyers earlier this month asked the judge to reconsider that ruling. (source: The Guardian) FLORIDA: Opening statements made in trial of man accused in prison guard's death Opening statements were made on Friday in the trial of a man accused of killing a Polk County detention deputy. Prosecutors argue it was a push by 34-year-old Terrance Barnett that led to the death of Sergeant Ronnie Brown, but defense attorneys tell a different story. Prosecutors say Barnett cornered himself in his jail cell, ready for a fight. They told jurors how the 6-foot-9, 250 pound inmate taunted detention deputies from his cell. "He was saying, 'I'm going to take you out,'" said Prosecutor David Stamey. Prosecutors then detailed how deputies tried to relocate Barnett to another unit but he refused, squared off with deputies, broke a sprinkler head and started flooding his jail cell. Brown was one of the deputies who tried to restrain him. "The defendant braces himself against the wall and with 2 hands ... pushes Sgt. Brown forcefully and he reached in to grab his arm," Stamey said. It's that push that prosecutors say led to Brown's death. Brown was initially treated and released, but returned to the hospital where he died eight days later because of a blood clot. Defense attorneys said the story prosecutors tell isn't what it seems and neither is the video they've produced as evidence. "Out of all of the things, I expect the evidence will show that what they describe happened in that cell holding some sharp objects doing this, doing that ... [will not be shown] on the video," said defense attorney Robert Norgard. The defense also argues the alleged push inside the cell didn't cause Brown's death. "Sometimes life is stranger than fiction," Norgard said. "But in that same area, where his back happened to have been injured, was a malignant cancerous tumor." Barnett is already in prison serving a 30-year prison sentence on another case. If convicted, he faces the death penalty. (source: bay9news.com) LOUISIANA: Facing death, Louisiana serial killer Derrick Todd Lee loses state Supreme Court appeal A man convicted of murdering 2 women and linked to 5 other south Louisiana slayings has lost his latest appeal in a death penalty case. Louisiana's Supreme Court on Friday rejected Derrick Todd Lee's appeal of his conviction and death sentence in the 2002 death of LSU graduate student Charlotte Murray Pace in Baton Rouge. Lee's arguments included a claim that the district court provided the defense too little funding for adequate DNA testing of evidence. The high court rejected that and other arguments. Lee also was convicted of 2nd-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison in the 2002 killing of Geralyn Barr DeSoto of Addis. He also was implicated in the slaying of a woman in Lafayette, 1 in Zachary and 3 others in Baton Rouge. (source: Associated Press) ********************** Trial Date Set for Landon Broussard The judge presiding over Landon Broussard's death penalty case says his trial will be held July 25, 2016. According to the Acadiana Advocate, that same state district judge refused to house Broussard in the Lafayette Parish jail until the trial, which was requested by his defense attorneys. The trial could last at least a month, as jurors weigh the evidence in the 2012 beating death of 3-year-old Julian Madera. Julian's mother, and Broussard's girlfriend at the time of the incident, Laura Smith, pleaded guilty to negligence and is currently serving a 5-year prison sentence. Broussard was indicted on 1 count of 1st-degree murder in March 2013. Prosecutors say they are seeking the death penalty in the killing of a child. (source: KATC news) ' From rhalperi at smu.edu Sun Sep 20 14:12:41 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 14:12:41 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OHIO, OKLA., NEB., ORE., USA Message-ID: Sept. 20 OHIO: National organization representing exonerated death row inmates to meet in Northeast Ohio A national organization representing exonerated death row inmates will hold its annual gathering next month in Northeast Ohio. Witness to Innocence will gather Oct. 8 to 11 at the Church of Saint Clarence in North Olmsted. The meeting coincides with the World Day Against the Death Penalty, which is Oct. 10. The gathering will feature members of Witness to Innocence, Ohioans to Stop Executions, exonerated death row inmates and others who oppose the death penalty in Ohio and across the U.S, the organization said in a news release. Joe D'Ambrosio of North Royalton said he is one of nine people in Ohio and 155 people in the U.S. who have been exonerated in death-row cases since 1973. A federal judge overturned D'Ambrosio's murder conviction in 2006, ruling that prosecutors withheld evidence that might have exonerated him at trial. He was released from prison in 2010 after spending 21 years behind bars. "Four of us were convicted here in Cuyahoga County, and we're pleased to have our brothers and sisters from across the country join us to say 'enough is enough,'" D'Ambrosio said in the news release. "It is time to end the death penalty." Several events are open to the public. Exonerated death row inmates and opponents of the death penalty will speak at a press conference at 9 a.m. Oct. 9 outside the Justice Center. On Oct. 10, there will be a conference featuring workshops and speeches beginning at 9 a.m. at the Church of Saint Clarence. Speakers will include Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court Judge Margaret Russo and Sam Reese Sheppard, whose father Sam Sheppard was sentenced to life in prison for the killing of his wife, Marilyn Sheppard, before he was exonerated. Other speakers include attorney Dale Baich, who represented exonerated Oklahoma death row inmate Richard Glossip; innocence expert Mike Radelet; World Coalition Against the Death Penalty President Elizabeth Zitrin; Constitution Project President Virginia Sloan and actor and Death Penalty Focus President Mike Farrell. (source: Cleveland.com) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Attorneys working on 2 fronts to spare death row inmate Attorneys for an Oklahoma death row inmate who won a 2-week reprieve from his scheduled execution are working on 2 legal fronts in an effort to save their client's life. While 1 team of lawyers for Richard Glossip is trying to convince a state appeals court that their client is innocent, another group of public defenders is in federal court again challenging the use of a controversial sedative as part of a 3-drug formula that will be used to kill him. Glossip, 52, was just hours away from being executed Wednesday when the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals ordered his execution halted for 2 weeks so they could have time to review a lengthy legal filing his lawyers had filed a day earlier. Glossip's attorneys want the court to grant an evidentiary hearing so they can call witnesses and go over new facts that they claim "seriously call into question the reliability of Mr. Glossip's conviction and death sentence." So far the court has only delayed Glossip's execution until Sept. 30 so they can have time to review the last-minute filing and have not agreed to grant a hearing. Glossip was twice convicted of ordering the killing of Barry Van Treese, who owned the Oklahoma City motel where Glossip worked. Motel handyman Justin Sneed admitted robbing and beating Van Treese with a baseball bat, but said he did so only after Glossip promised to pay him $10,000. Prosecutors alleged Glossip was afraid Van Treese was about to fire him for embezzling money and poorly managing the motel. Among the new evidence Glossip's attorneys presented is a signed affidavit from another inmate, Michael Scott, who claims he heard Sneed say "he set Richard Glossip up, and that Richard Glossip didn't do anything." The Oklahoman reported Saturday that Scott, according to a prisons system document, once labeled himself a habitual liar. His attorneys also argued that Glossip's trial attorneys didn't present enough evidence to discredit Sneed, who was sentenced to life in prison and testified against Glossip. They presented an affidavit from an admitted methamphetamine dealer who said he frequently saw Sneed use the drug and trade stolen items for it. Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater, who took office after the 2nd trial ended with a second death sentence, said he's reviewed the new evidence, along with transcripts from the original trial, boxes of evidence and videotaped police interviews, and remains convinced of Glossip's guilt. Prater said Glossip lied to police and co-workers about Van Treese's whereabouts, helped Sneed cover up the crime and had half of the money the pair stole from Van Treese's car when he was arrested. "I don't just have beyond-a-reasonable-doubt assurances in my mind that Mr. Glossip is guilty, but to a moral certainty I'm convinced he's guilty," Prater said. If necessary, Prater said he would retry Glossip for first-degree murder and seek the death penalty again. Prater also discounted a box of evidence from the original trial that the Oklahoma City Police Department has acknowledged was inadvertently destroyed in 1999 after Glossip's initial trial. Those items, including duct tape, glasses, a wallet, knives, keys, a shower curtain, deposit book and receipt book, had no bearing on the case, Prater said. "Those items were all fully processed and there was no physical evidence that tied Glossip to those items," Prater said. "There was even a stipulation in the second trial as to that fact, so the jury knew about all that." Meanwhile, a separate team of attorneys are fighting in federal court for a full trial on the merits of using the sedative midazolam as the 1st in Oklahoma's 3-drug lethal injection protocol. Although the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June in a narrow 5-4 decision that the protocol is constitutional, attorneys for Glossip and other Oklahoma death row inmates are scheduled to go to trial again in April to prove that midazolam is not a proper drug for lethal injection and that other, more suitable drugs, are available. (source: Associated Press) ************** ttp://www.amnestyusa.org/get-involved/take-action-now/usa-commute-richard-glossip-s-death-sentence-19215 (source: Amnesty International USA) *********** Credibility of Glossip case witness comes into question, records show----Michael G. Scott, a former inmate who said he served time with Justin Sneed, testified recently he heard Sneed brag about setting Glossip up as the fall guy for the 1997 murder of Barry Alan Van Treese. The new key witness being relied on by attorneys to stop the execution of Richard Glossip once told authorities he lied "all the time," records show. Glossip's execution was postponed this week after Michael G. Scott, a former inmate who said he served time with Justin Sneed, testified recently he heard Sneed brag about setting Glossip up as the fall guy for the 1997 murder of Barry Alan Van Treese. However, Scott's credibility has now come into question. In a 2005 Oklahoma Department of Corrections document, Scott admitted he was an habitual liar - answering "yes all the time" to a question "Have you lied about something or not told the truth?" In the document, Scott, then 18, admitted to using several illegal drugs, including cocaine, marijuana, inhalants, amphetamines and barbiturates. He also noted that he only completed 9 years of school. Glossip, 57, was convicted for hiring Sneed, 37, to kill their boss, Van Treese, at the Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City. Sneed was convicted of beating Van Treese, 54, to death with a baseball bat. He received a sentence of life without parole after agreeing to testify against Glossip. Glossip, who received the death penalty, always has maintained his innocence. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals postponed Glossip's execution by lethal injection for 14 days - until Sept. 30 - after defense attorneys claimed Scott's testimony is new evidence that could cast doubt on Glossip's guilt. Scott stated that in 2006 he "heard Justin Sneed talk about the murder case that he was in prison for, and about Richard Glossip. I clearly heard Justin Sneed say that, in his statements and testimony, he set Richard Glossip up, and that Richard Glossip didn't do anything." Scott served 5 years in state prison on armed robbery charges. He said when he saw Don Knight, one of Glossip's attorneys, speaking about the case on television, he felt compelled to tell someone. Knight and Glossip's legal team presented Scott's affidavit as new evidence in the case, along with the interview of another man, former inmate Richard Allan Barrett, who testified that Sneed was addicted to methamphetamine. Barrett has prior federal drug convictions. Over the past several days, Glossip's legal team has asserted that had the jury in Glossip's case seen Scott's affidavit and known that Sneed had a serious drug addiction they would have found his testimony against Glossip less credible. Reached by phone Friday, Knight dismissed the new attempts to discredit Scott. "This is 2015. You're bringing me documents from 2005," he said. "If (Scott) was a drug user and liar in 2005, which by the way, Justin Sneed was a drug user and a liar in 1997, and apparently what he has to say is good enough for the government. "If they're going to say that liars and drug users are people that we can't trust ... that's exactly who they're expecting us to trust." Knight said both Scott and Barrett, who are both free men, came to him with information, fully aware that their lives would come under scrutiny for their involvement. Knight said other inmates to whom he has spoken, who have similar information about Sneed, have declined to get involved in the case. "If it wasn't for the courage of those 2 guys, I don't think we'd be having this conversation right now," Knight said. "I think they would have killed (Glossip) on Wednesday. So, I guess they must have something to say, and I guess those affidavits must be worth something." Knight still is working to find new evidence and is asking the court for a new trial in Glossip's murder for hire conviction. "I want a hearing," he said. "I want to put Michael Scott up on the witness stand, and I want whoever represents the state to have at it. Let's do it in court, that's where it needs to be." (source: The Oklahoman) NEBRASKA: Gale: Death penalty repeal 'very likely' on hold until 2016 Nebraska Secretary of State John Gale says it appears "very likely" that a petition to save the death penalty has enough valid signatures to prevent its repeal until the 2016 election. Gale's office said Friday that county election officials have verified and certified 120,479 signatures. Petition sponsors needed at least 113,883 to keep the Legislature's repeal from going into effect. State law requires that 110 percent of the required number of signatures must be certified to the state. That means 125,271 are needed before Gale can formally declare that the issue has qualified for the ballot. So far, 68 of Nebraska's 93 counties have certified their numbers. Death penalty opponents sued this week to try to keep the issue off the ballot. (source: Associated Press) **************** Thwarting voters' ability to vote on the death penalty Apparently Nebraskans' civil liberties don't include the right to vote on the death penalty. The ACLU does have a point in its lawsuit, that Gov. Pete Ricketts should have been listed as a sponsor of a successful petition drive by the Nebraskans for the Death Penalty, since he and his father, TD Ameritrade founder Jo Ricketts donated several hundred thousand dollars to the drive. As a result of the petition drive, Nebraska voters will have a chance in November 2016 to overturn the Legislature's abolition of the death penalty. The petition drive was managed by a Republican political consultant on the governor's private payroll. "Powerful interests like the Governor are not entitled to their own set of rules to pursue their own political objectives," said Christy Hargesheimer, one of the plaintiffs in the ACLU lawsuit against Secretary of State John Gale, Nebraskans for the Death Penalty and 3 others. Nebraska hasn't executed an inmate since 1997 and technical issues may prevent it from doing so, even if the voters overturn the repeal. The Department of Correctional Services spent more than $54,000 to buy drugs from India, but the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has prevented their import. The supplier attempted to ship them via FedEx last month, but the package was flagged because of "improper or missing international paperwork" and it was returned Sept. 4, according to FedEx's online tracking page. Ricketts' ability to privately bankroll his political activities sticks in the craw of many of us, but the fact the the petition drive collected nearly 167,000 signatures, more than three times the minimum number needed, shows that many Nebraskans are on his side. Death penalty proponents would argue that opponents were exerting undue influence on lawmakers. Whatever the eventual fate of capital punishment in Nebraska, thanks to the petition drive, at least most residents will know that we had a chance to have our say. (source: Editorial, McCook Gazette) OREGON: Kate Brown's death penalty review slowly moves from back burner 8 days after taking office, Gov. Kate Brown said she would convene a small group of advisers to help her puzzle through one of Oregon's most contentious issues: the death penalty. Gov. John Kitzhaber stopped executions in Oregon 4 years ago, citing concerns about injustice as a death row inmate sought to speed his execution. Brown, thrust into office after Kitzhaber quit last February, decided to keep his moratorium while she sought answers. Now, 7 months later, her office acknowledges she's just getting started. Brown's advisers insist she remains committed to a deep study of the subject. But the wait threatens to undercut one of Brown's early promises, that voters would have a sense of her direction on the issue before she stood for election. As Brown positions herself to run next year to finish the final 2 years of Kitzhaber's term, it's not clear that they will. Brown spokeswoman Kristen Grainger said the governor has directed her office attorney, Ben Souede, to lead an effort to get "legal advice about the practical aspects related to capital punishment in Oregon." "The goal is to have some recommendations before the fall of 2016," she said. That could leave any decision about reinstating the death penalty until after the November general election. The delay comes after a tense legislative session, Brown's 1st as governor. "The work of the session was our 1st priority," Grainger said, then finding "a timeframe workable for all participants." A change of heart by Gary Haugen, the death row inmate at the center of Kitzhaber's moratorium, also sapped some of the urgency in making a decision. The state's 34 other death row inmates are years from exhausting appeals. Haugen, sentenced to death after killing a fellow inmate, waived years of appeals and battled Kitzhaber over his right to volunteer for execution. But in July, he filed a petition in Marion County court asking the state to restore his right to appeal his conviction and death sentence. His attorney, nationally noted death penalty opponent Jeff Ellis, also filed a motion arguing that the state lost its chance to kill Haugen when it let his 2011 death warrant expire. By then, Kitzhaber's moratorium was in place. A judge denied Haugen's petition for an appeal, saying he missed a two-year window to file. Ellis may appeal that decision. Hearings on the motion accusing the state of failing to renew Haugen's death warrant are pending. "If you go back and read why he wanted to give up," Ellis said, "it was very much an indictment of the criminal justice system to produce fair and just results. He now says he has some renewed hope in the ability of the system to do that." Ellis said the moratorium, for now, is blocking only Haugen's execution. Grainger, Brown's spokeswoman, said that's not an issue: "Whether or not Mr. Haugen has changed his position, the governor has not changed her intention to study and address these issues from a practical standpoint." The governor has said she opposes the death penalty and would vote to abolish it. But she's been far more measured when contrasting her personal feelings with her office's role in enforcing state law. Even as she raised questions this year about the logistics of capital punishment in Oregon, including questions about the availability of lethal drugs, Brown wouldn't rule out letting executions resume. Souede, Brown's office attorney, plans to consult academics and legal experts on both sides of the debate. The group's precise charge remains undecided, however. One potential adviser invited to join a work group months ago, Marion County District Attorney Walt Beglau, said he wasn't contacted again until this week, after The Oregonian/OregonLive asked the governor's office about progress. "It's been a while," Beglau said. "This group has not met yet, and I'm waiting to hear back." A spokeswoman for the Oregon Department of Corrections said Brown's office spoke with the agency's director, Colette Peters, this year. Other prominent advocates and justice officials said they're still waiting for the phone to ring. Clatsop County District Attorney Josh Marquis, who lectures nationally on capital punishment and supports executing only the worst offenders, said he is disappointed Brown's office hasn't called. "It's a legitimate topic," he said. "Is a candidate for governor going to take the position that their personal views on the death penalty trump the law?" The American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon, which supports repeal, also made clear it would welcome a call. "Our number didn't change," said Associate Director Jann Carson. She said the group's former longtime director, David Fidanque, urged Brown in early March to maintain the moratorium. The review isn't intended to decide whether the death penalty should be repealed, Grainger said. But Oregon may find itself faced with that question all the same. Rep. Mitch Greenlick, D-Portland, said he's ready to revive an anti-death-penalty ballot measure in 2017. He's watching states such as Nebraska, where lawmakers voted to abolish capital punishment. Asked about a 2012 poll for Oregon Public Broadcasting that found 57 % of Oregonians favor executions, Greenlick said he was encouraged support wasn't higher. "We keep hearing things from other states, that there's more and more interest" in repeal, Greenlick said. "It's a battle we can win." (source: oregonlive.com) USA: Fair Executions Impossible to Achieve At the end of his inspiring Convocation talk, Brian Stevenson was asked, "Are there people who deserve to die?" And he answered something like, "Personally, I do not think so." We are not our worst action. But it wouldn't matter if there were people who deserve to die. Does the criminal justice system - with all of its known faults and errors - really deserve to kill people? This is the moral paradox of killing criminals: Even if you believe some people deserve to die, who deserves to kill? 140 countries have banned state-sponsored capital punishment. Many people, myself included, are uncomfortable with the U.S. government exercising the death penalty. But there is another history of capital punishment, and I've never heard that history mentioned. This is the history of outlaw status - a sentence declaring a criminal outside of the law, subject to mob violence and stripped of legal recourse. We now think of outlaws as people with bandanas and hats roaming the desert or wreaking havoc on trains in the 1800s. Those outlaws chose to live outside of the law, but the original outlaws were not outside of the law by choice. Outlaw status was like a democratized death sentence. Outlaw status existed in Ancient Rome and in many premodern societies. In pre-Magna Carta England, for example, being issued a Writ of Outlawry was the harshest punishment ??? anyone could kill you and take your property, not just the state. There was an English legal phrase for outlaws, caput gerat lupinum, or "Let him bear the head of a wolf." If you were an outlaw, you were a lone wolf. You had no protection. Of course, to sentence somebody to outlaw status seems barbaric. On a pragmatic level, I would rather not live next to neighbors who, to brighten up their mundane Wednesdays, club outlaws to death. And, on a moral level, isn't this the crowdsourced, licensed killing of a whole community of murderers? Yet at the same time, 140 countries have abolished the modern, state-sponsored death penalty. That method's clearly not optimal either. Neither a mob nor the state government seem to be appropriate executioners. The practical problem with thinking that criminals deserve to die, then, is that it's difficult to pick a just executioner. On April 29, 2014, Oklahoma performed 1 of the worst, most inhumane and botched executions in the bad, inhumane and botched history of American executions. It was a bumbling 42 minutes long. The man to be executed was Clayton Lockett. Why was Lockett on death row? On June 3, 1999, Stephanie Neiman, a recent high school graduate, was driving a friend home. She arrived at her friend's house at the same time Lockett and 2 accomplices were planning a break-in. The trio raped Neiman's friend. When pressed, Neiman refused to give up her car keys. Eventually, the men drove Neiman to a dirt road and threatened her, but she still maintained that she would go to the police. Lockett and his accomplices started to bury her alive, then finally shot and killed her. Perhaps the executioners, those in charge of delivering the lethal doses, thought that Lockett deserved to die. But imagine 40 minutes into this hellish spectacle, with Lockett gasping for his last breath. Maybe the executioners were also thinking, "But why are we the ones to kill him?" (source: Opinion, Josh Ashkinaze----Oberlin Review) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sun Sep 20 14:13:25 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 14:13:25 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 20 BARBADOS: A nation under law (iii) Initially, I did not intend that this essay on the rule of law should be extended to as many instalments as three, but the opening of the Law Year in a few regional jurisdictions; the release of a book by a sitting US Supreme Court justice; and some provocative comments from an English Law Lord together with some other related phenomena all seemingly conspired to provide enough relevant fodder for another part or 2. Too besides, readers of this column should have surmised by now that I am far more comfortable discussing the law and its operation in society than the admittedly more populist issue of partisan politics that is frequently reduced in these parts to the lowest common denominator of the personalities of the leading participants rather than being raised to the higher level of the quality of their contributions on significant issues. The situation is further exacerbated by the predictability of the contributions in this context of most of those who attempt public commentary and the tired reluctance of the very actors to debate the hard issues beyond mere assertion. Because of the diverse nature of the topics covered by the writers and speakers last week, it may be preferable to discuss them separately although, given their provenance, their content offers some insight into the perspectives of those who are constitutionally charged with the practical administration of the rule of law in the various jurisdictions. In Trinidad & Tobago, Archie CJ has firmly asserted the view that common sense should dictate that the carrying out of the sentence of death by hanging is not the solution to the spiralling murder rate in the twin-island republic. He appears to base this view on a combination of an apparent moratorium on such executions - the last occurred some 16 years ago - the number of those awaiting trial for murder - an estimated 514 - the dubiousness of the penalty of a deterrent and the sheer repugnance of executing even a fraction of the number awaiting trial even assuming that they were found guilty. In his words, " ... do we really believe, assuming that a significant fraction of those persons are found guilty, that we will be able to hang several hundreds of people or that if we tried we could stomach it?" Of course, the learned justice was mindful of his and the court's limited jurisdiction in the matter, recognising expressly that this was a matter for the legislature and, by extension, the people of the country, but he decried too the judicial sense of futility of pronouncing a death sentence nowadays. These sentiments are in sharp contrast to the view expressed recently by my learned friend, the retired Justice Leroy Inniss, who has advocated keeping the penalty on the statute books even as Barbados struggles to come to terms with its international undertakings, a partly self-imposed and partly judicially-enforced moratorium on execution of any imposed death penalty longer even than that in Trinidad & Tobago, and a hemispheric mood that for the most part regards the imposition of death penalty as an inhuman and a poorly-thought-out response to a grave societal problem. In these circumstances, it may be difficult to accommodate a view that the death penalty remaining a legal form of punishment will serve any useful purpose, no matter the eminence of its source. Moreover, with all respect to the opinion of Mr Justice Inniss, it seems particularly unseemly and perhaps unnecessarily dangerous to add to the number of laws on our statute books for which there is little likelihood of enforcement. What may be more needful at this stage, if we should be so lucky, is a parliamentary debate on the issue; not one premised on the toeing of the unswerving party line as espoused by our current Westminster export-model system of governance but, rather, one based on the expression of the member's conscience or, more desirably though less likely, that of his or her constituents collectively. We have skirted this difficult question for far too long. And, after all, some things are more important than partisan political stances. Across the globe, in New Zealand, the Lord Chief Justice of England & Wales, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, advanced a revolutionary view of the concept of judicial independence in a speech to a convocation of the Commonwealth Magistrates and Judges Association. Rather than counselling his fellow judicial officers to adopt the traditional stance of abstentionism in the political sphere, he urged them to take "proactive steps" to secure adequate funding for a justice system that is becoming "unaffordable to most people". In an article by Owen Bowcott in the Guardian newspaper last Thursday, Thomas LCJ is reported as enjoining, " ... Judicial independence must not mean judicial isolation ... the judiciary must explain the centrality of justice and why it matters. That task cannot be left to others. Transparency and openness are crucial to instilling public confidence in the judicial system ... " The Lord Chief Justice's comments were made in the context, as already noted, of funding for the justice system, a point likewise referred to in the speech of Archie CJ at the opening of the Law Year in Trinidad & Tobago. There, Archie CJ bewailed "the inability to obtain the necessary financial resources to implement critical infrastructure projects, although, unsurprisingly, he did not go as far as Thomas LCJ did in advocating a reformation of the concept of judicial independence so as directly to engage the political directorate. Given our apparent judicial tradition of being perceived as being politically detached and, at most times, the existence of a healthy mutual respect for each other's constitutional authority, it is unlikely that Lord Thomas's advice will resonate in this region anytime soon. Yet few will want to deny that the justice system has not profited from the customary disengagement from the public sphere. This has consequently led to a climate of mistrust and suspicion; a circumstance that a notion so important as the dispensation of justice could very well do without. Those days when a judge could state with some degree of pride that he or she never reads the newspapers are arguably, and happily, now of the past. And a local tradition that appears to abhor the idea of any judicial officer being invited to speak publicly on matters of law serves only to enforce a regime of mystery rather than the more desirable one of openness in the justice system. (source: Jeff Cumberbatch, Barbados Advocate) INDIA: A BJP MLA Now Demands Capital Punishment For Slaughter And Sale Of Beef Indian politics has always been an arena dominated by aggressive competition, and Indian politicians have been known for their capability for making some of the most absurd statements. While the government has been on a banning spree for a while now, a BJP MLA from Jammu and Kashmir has taken ridiculous to a new level. Ravinder Raina who got elected to the assembly from Nowshera constituency, has moved a resolution for the implementation of the beef ban in Jammu and Kashmir. But in addition to that, he has also asked for capital punishment to be awarded for cow slaughter and sale of beef. It is both unnerving and worrying to see that in a country where the option of capital punishment for heinous crimes such as rape is still being discussed, and even mass murderers escape the death penalty, leaders are advocating such a punishment for selling beef. A demand of this nature itself is ridiculous, but a major cause of concern is the confidence with which such demands are being raised. While women are unsafe in this nation and a lot needs to be done with regards to law and order, the government is more concerned about deciding what people eat, even as millions in India are starving. The irony is that those convicted for gruesome mass murders, and brutal rapes have not been awarded capital punishment, and often get out on quick bails, but slaughtering a cow or selling beef can land an individual in jail for 5 years in Maharashtra and ten years in Haryana. The government is willing to impose meat bans, but it has been unable to address the issue of farmer suicides in Marathwada and other parts of the country, which has plagued the nation for a long time. The very fact that the government isn't concerned about other animals apart from the cow in a red flag indicating the communal nature of these bans. Citing a certain religion's beliefs as justification for bans exposes the undemocratic approach of the government, and dismisses any speculation of the ban being against animal cruelty. The audacity with which secularism is constantly and increasingly violated, the communal forces are assured that they can have their way in India. The BJP MLA asking for capital punishment to be given for sale and slaughter of beef, probably knows that there are chances his demand might get an approval. In this country people can spew venom through their speech, trigger violence and get away with it. MLAs like Ravinder Raina can make ridiculous demands and still not face any action in a state facing rising unrest and where security of citizens is constantly at risk. In a democracy the power and responsibility to protect their freedom, rests in the hands of the people themselves. Why are we not as outraged at the Cultutal Minister's absurd statement about late night or night outs do not befit women in India, because sanskar? Why are we not as outraged as we were when porn was banned? (source: scoopwhoop.com) PAKISTAN: Don't Execute Paralyzed Prisoner----Government Reportedly Conducts Most Executions in World in 2015 The Pakistan government should halt the scheduled September 22, 2015, execution of Abdul Basit, who is paralyzed from the waist down, Human Rights Watch said today. The case underscores the inherent cruelty of capital punishment by the execution of a person with a severe disability. Basit, a former administrator at a medical college, was sentenced to death in 2009, after being convicted of murder. He became paralyzed after contracting tubercular meningitis in 2010 while in the central jail in Faisalabad. "Rather than confronting the inherent cruelty of capital punishment, Pakistani officials are puzzling over how to hang a man in a wheelchair," said Brad Adams, Asia director. "The government should urgently commute Abdul Basit's sentence." Basit's execution was earlier scheduled for July 29. On July 28, the Lahore High Court accepted a petition challenging Basit's execution on the basis that it would constitute cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, contravening Pakistan's prison rules and violating Basit's fundamental rights under Pakistan's constitution and international law. On September 1, the Lahore High Court dismissed Basit's petition, ruling that since the hanging of a paralyzed prisoner was not expressly forbidden by the prison rules, there was no bar to the execution. On December 17, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif rescinded a 4-year unofficial moratorium on capital punishment in apparent response to the December 16 attack by the Pakistani Taliban splinter group Tehreek-e-Taliban on a school in Peshawar in northwestern Pakistan that left at least 148 dead - almost all of them children. The Pakistani government has executed 236 people this year, making Pakistan responsible for the largest number of reported executions in the world in 2015. Despite government claims that the death penalty is necessary to confront terrorism, only a small percentage of those executed were linked to militancy. Pakistan has more than 8,000 prisoners on death row, one of the world's largest populations of prisoners facing execution. Pakistani law mandates capital punishment for 28 offenses, including murder, rape, treason, and blasphemy. Those on death row are often from the most marginalized sections of society, such as Aasia Bibi, a Christian woman sentenced to death by the Lahore High Court on charges of blasphemy. In many cases, particularly those involving the poor, accused persons facing capital punishment do not receive adequate assistance of counsel. Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all circumstances because of its inherent cruelty and irrevocability. Pakistan's use of the death penalty is inconsistent with international human rights law, according to statements of United Nations human rights experts and various UN bodies because of the fundamental nature of the right to life, the unacceptable risk of executing innocent people, and the absence of proof that the death penalty serves as a deterrent to crime. Pakistan should join with the many countries already committed to the UN General Assembly's 2007 resolution calling for a moratorium on executions and a move by UN member countries toward abolition of the death penalty. "The death penalty is an inherently cruel and irrevocable punishment that doesn't solve any of the complex security problems facing the Pakistani people," Adams said. "The Pakistani government should strengthen its justice system rather than sending more people like Abdul Basit to the gallows. The government should place an official moratorium on capital punishment until the practice is abolished." (source: Human Rights Watch) ***************** Death penalty for the disabled Rather than challenging the inherent cruelty and injustice of capital punishment, it seems that the state has embarked upon an unyielding spree to execute hordes of prisoners-ones that have not seen any semblance of justice towards them for decades. The story of Abdul Basit echoes the appalling state of Pakistan's criminal justice system and reaffirms that capital punishment means those without the capital get the punishment. Whilst the wealthy and influential escape through the loopholes, the poor, disabled, mentally ill, and the most vulnerable just like him, are rushed to the gallows - celebrated as an indicator of its success in eradicating terrorism. The state is apathetic to the violations of their human dignity, and it has become evident with Basit, where despite his permanent disability and humiliating imprisonment, Abdul Basit faces execution on Tuesday, 22nd September 2015. Abdul Basit was convicted for the murder of another man during a heated altercation in 2009. The deceased was a 3rd year law student, the younger brother of a noted local advocate. No lawyer from Okara would take the case, and even a respected advocate from Faisalabad came under pressure, not to represent the Petitioner. Abdul Basit has always claimed his innocence, asserting that Asif Nadeem was the one who first offered violence. It was on the basis of evidence given by just 2 relatives of the deceased that Abdul Basit was convicted of murder. The police investigation reeked of corruption (Basit's family was too poor to pay the bribe asked by the police) and implanted evidence: there was a gun allegedly found at the scene, but the police officer did not take the fundamental step of writing down its serial number and there was no ballistics evidence to show that Basit's gun was the one used in the killing. Nevertheless, Basit was sentenced to death and his subsequent appeals to the High Court and Supreme Court were rejected. In 2010, Abdul Basit was transferred to Central Jail, Faisalabad. Later that year, the prisoners in Faisalabad jail rioted against the torturous practices of the jail administration especially, the Superintendents. Several prisoners died in the riots, and many more injured. The Superintendent was suspended and the new Superintendent, confined most of the prisoners to the "punishment wing" in Central Jail. For, months, Abdul Basit was held in the filthy and unhygienic conditions of the punishment ward where disease is rampant. While there, he began complaining of severe headache and an extremely high temperature. His family narrated that his headache became so severe that he would scream and bang his head against the wall for any form of relief. His anguish was only met with apathy by jail authorities despite repeated pleas from his family. It was discovered later that based on his symptoms Abdul Basit had contracted Tuberculosis (TB) meningitis in prison. Despite the knowledge that TB, if left untreated, could result in permanent damage, the jail authorities denied him any access to the requisite healthcare and simply confined him to a solitary cell to prevent an outbreak. It was only after Abdul Basit succumbed to a month of indelible pain and lost consciousness that he was transferred to DHQ hospital in Faisalabad. At DHQ hospital, Faisalabad, it was discovered that his condition was so critical, that he fell into a coma for 3 weeks. Eventually his family was informed that as a result of neglect and a lack of timely treatment he had contracted Tuberculosis (TB) meningitis. Over the course of thirteen months his condition plummeted - he became paralyzed from the waist down and would suffer from long-term consequences of spinal cord permanently. Abdul Basit would never walk again, and lost all control of his basic bodily functions permanently. In 2011, a Medical Board at Services Hospital Lahore deemed that management of his medical condition "would be very difficult in jail". In April 2012 it was established that he was suffering from paraplegia and long term complications of spinal atrophy. More recently in August, a new medical board was convened at the order of the Lahore High Court, where it was concluded that Basit was "permanently disabled ... He is likely to remain bed-bound for the rest of his life." Under Rule 107 (iv) of the Prison Rules (1978) ill health is a ground for clemency from execution. However, despite this, the President of Pakistan in January 2013 rejected a petition from Abdul Basit's family requesting to commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment on the basis of his disability. On 28th July 2015 the Lahore High Court accepted a writ petition challenging Basit's execution on the basis that it would constitute cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, contravening the Pakistan Prison Rules and violating Basit's fundamental rights as protected by the Constitution of Pakistan and international law. This was made clear with the Pakistan Prison Rules 1978, a binding statutory legislation, which governs the manner and procedure to be adopted at the time of executing a condemned prisoner. Here, rule 356 (Regulation of drops) has been specifically designed in order to avoid the possibility of a botched execution and contains procedures that simply cannot be carried out in respect of a disabled prisoner. The prison authorities once again showed their indifference and incompetence when they appeared in court on 1st September, unable to give exact details of the procedures they intended to use, but instead suggesting that there were a number of possibilities, including hanging Basit from his wheelchair or from a stool placed on the gallows. This led to the Lahore High Court dismissing Basit's petition, vehemently stating that "international laws should be set aside". Abdul Basit remains in prison, with only 3 days left till his execution. He has spent the past several years lying on the floor of his cell, reliant on jail officers to assist him with even the most basic hygiene. He also suffers from fecal and urinary incontinence. He has even been denied access to a wheel chair with the result that he suffers from bedsores. Despite these horrendous conditions, he occupies himself by copying out verses from the Qur'an, perhaps, this being his only cradle of hope. He leads an undignified, inhumane and unhygienic life - failed by the government, prison system and the criminal justice system. The state refuses to look past it incongruity, and look at Abdul Basit as a paraplegic prisoner, especially one who has suffered for seven years in prison. Under the guise of combating terrorism, it seems that it is obliviously using the death penalty- clearing out its prisons, one helpless casualty at a time. Abdul's disability is permanent. His execution would constitute a cruel and inhuman punishment under our constitution and Islamic jurisprudence. His lawyers have petitioned for a stay, one that has to fight the labyrinthine and archaic procedure of testimony and evidence, that has been used to pass death sentences. These courts are blind to justice and norms, where saying enough is enough is only the beginning. The justice system has proved to be nothing less than vengeful and futile. The constitution has also been amended to speed up the prosecution of terrorism-related cases, and move them from civilian to military courts. On 11 March 2015, the Pakistan government announced that it was unconditionally lifting the moratorium for all capital crimes and threatened to send up to 1000 prisoners to the gallows who had exhausted all legal options and mercy petitions. Pakistan has executed more than 200 people since reintroducing the death penalty, where its initial use of combatting terrorism seems to be long forgotten. Abdul Basit is not a terrorist nor does he pose a violent threat to society. He has already forsaken his dignity and freedom to try to fight an inequitable justice system. It is time for the President of Pakistan, our self-proclaimed gallant state, and the inadequate justice system to look at what they have taken from Abdul Basit. It is time to take a stand and halt his execution- not making him another faceless number, hung from his wheelchair from the gallows. (source: The Nation) NEW ZEALAND: International death penalty experts calls for NZ to toughen its death penalty opposition 2 leading Australian death penalty experts have arrived in New Zealand in a bid to persuade the Government to toughen its stance against the practice in foreign countries. Julian McMahon, the lawyer who represented executed Bali nine ring leaders Myuran Sukumaran and Andrew Chan, and Reprieve Australia vice president Ursula Noye will meet with Associate Health Minister Peter Dunne, members of Parliament, and Government officials this week. They will also take part in a public seminar about the issue at Te Papa at 5pm on Monday, at the invitation of the New Zealand Drug Foundation and Amnesty International. The call for New Zealand to boost its opposition of the death penalty came after Kiwi Anthony de Malmanche faced that prospect for trafficking methamphetamine into Indonesia last December. New Zealand-Australia dual citizen Peter Gardner is still at risk of being put to death for allegedly smuggling drugs out China in November. De Malmanche's life was spared but he received a 15-year jail sentence. McMahon said on Sunday New Zealand "absolutely" had the capacity to do more in ending the death penalty. "New Zealand is ideally positioned to provide continued and sustained principled leadership in this important debate." New Zealand was well-respected internationally and had a seat at the United Nations Security Council table. It could also discuss the death penalty during trading negotiations with its partners and when sending aid, he said. Drug Foundation executive director Ross Bell said the government's condemnation of the recent Indonesia executions was welcome, but it was silent on the many executions conducted by the United States, Saudi Arabia, China, and new trading partner Iran. New Zealand shouldn't sit back and wait until another one of its citizens was facing a possible execution, he said. Speaking as United Future leader, Dunne said on Sunday the death penalty was "despicable" and New Zealand should throw its weight around at the UN Security Council to push for its abolition. There needed to be a consistent campaign, rather than raising the issue only when a high-profile execution loomed, he said. "It's all very well and good when a case like the Bali nine arrives but frankly, it's a little too late at that point." A spokesman for Foreign Affairs Minister Murray McCully said the minister was on his way to New York on Sunday and was unavailable for comment. However, in response to the executions of the Bali nine members and other prisoners in April, McCully said New Zealand was strongly opposed to the death penalty in all cases under all circumstances. (source: The Dominiona Post) IRAN----executions 2 men hanged in northern Iran city Iran's fundamentalist regime on Saturday hanged 2 men in the northern city of Rasht. The 2 men were hanged at dawn in Rasht's central prison. Their full names were not given. They were identified only as 45-year-old H.M. and 46-year-old S.P. They were accused of drug smuggling. On Wednesday, the mullahs' regime hanged a man in public in Ardestan (central Iran). The official state broadcaster announced his name as Saeed Zargari. Only on Wednesday 9 prisoners were hanged by the Iranian regime in prisons in Karaj (north-west of the capital Tehran) and in Sanandaj (western Iran). 8 of the prisoners, including a 22 and a 24-year-old, were collectively hanged in Gohardasht Prison in Karaj. A statement by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein on August 5 said: "Iran has reportedly executed more than 600 individuals so far this year. Last year, at least 753 people were executed in the country." Amnesty International said on September 7 that "the Iranian authorities must end their unprecedented killing spree - more than 700 people have been executed so far this year." ************************** The Netherlands' Foreign Minister visits Iran amid executions The Iranian Resistance strongly condemns the visit of the Netherlands' foreign minister Mr. Bert Koenders to Iran under the rule of religious fascism and calls on the country's parliamentarians and human rights defenders to stop this visit that encourages this regime in carrying out its executions and suppression that is against the interests of the Iranian people and their will for the establishment of democracy. The leaders of the velayat-e faqih regime that the Netherlands' foreign minister plans to meet have the execution of 120,000 political prisoners in their infamous record and are dubbed "Godfather of ISIS" by the Iranian people. The number of executions in the 2 years of Rouhani's presidency stands at 2000. The leaders of this regime are, for example, the actual murderers of Motahare (Zahra) Bahrami, the Dutch-Iranian citizen who was arrested in the 2009 uprising and subsequently executed on January 29, 2011. This trip in the midst of large number of executions is nothing but disrespect for human rights and democratic values. The leaders of the religious fascism ruling Iran stand to benefit from this and similar trips to cover up their medieval nature. These visits have only resulted in the continuation and intensification of suppression, especially the savage usage of the death penalty inside Iran and the export of terrorism and fundamentalism and warmongering in the region. The visit by Mr. Bert Koenders is taking place while on September 16, the regime's supreme leader Khamenei reiterated the regime's policies and strategic principles. He wholeheartedly supported the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) and stressed on the need to continue nationwide suppression domestically and warmongering, terrorism and aggressive meddling by the IRGC in other countries in order to ensure the survival of the regime. Similarly, a day prior, the regime's president Rouhani who was meeting IRGC leaders, emphasized on continuing regime's aggressive meddling and warmongering in the region by saying, "We cannot be indifferent regarding Muslim nations." This visit is taking place while thousands of prisoners are on the death row and while political prisoners are constantly harassed and tortured. Mr. Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, asserted on September 14: "Accelerated use of the death penalty, concerns about the right to a fair trial, and the continued detention of the journalists, bloggers, and human rights defenders remain a major cause for concern" in Iran. Similarly, in a statement on July 23, Amnesty International expressed its concern regarding the close to 700 executions in the 1st half of this year and noted: This "paints a sinister picture of the machinery of state carrying out premeditated judicially-sanctioned killing on a mass scale." Travelling to Iran under the rule of the mullahs, turning a blind eye to its crimes, and making concessions to this regime under whatever pretext is vehemently condemned by the Iranian people and Resistance and is utterly unacceptable. All relations with Iran need to be made contingent on the improvement of human rights and a halt to the death penalty. (source for both: NCR-Iran) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 21 08:47:29 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 08:47:29 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----N.C., IND., ILL. OKLA. COLO. Message-ID: Sept. 21 NORTH CAROLINA: DA stands by death penalty decision in Kennedy case Davidson County District Attorney Garry Frank stands by his decision to seek the death penalty against 45-year-old Carl Kennedy in 3 November 2011 deaths in Thomasville. Kennedy reached a plea deal late last month with Frank's office that resulted in him spending between 62-78 years in prison. He was initially facing the death penalty until Judge Christopher Bragg took it off the table. Instead, Kennedy pleaded guilty to 3 counts of 2nd-degree murder and a burglary charge in the deaths of Sharon F. Rushing, 61, Angela Dawn Soles, 43, and Gary Lynn Seward, 52, all of 101 Rotary Lane, Thomasville. "I would do the same exact thing today even after all this has happened," Frank said during a recent interview. "With Mr. Kennedy's case and the exact same thing, I would seek the exact same thing." Kennedy's attorneys, Robert Campbell and Lisa Dubs, had requested a plea August 2012 for 3 life sentences. But Frank was adamant that he had the facts to support the death penalty for Kennedy's case. "The evidence in the middle of the night that someone would go over and blow open a door with a shotgun and (kill) three people in their home at night," Frank said. The district attorney also pointed to testimony that alleged Kennedy said he and his co-defendants were to kill anyone over the age of 5 years old in the Rotary Lane residence. Frank reiterated the death penalty is the "law of the land." State law gives district attorneys the discretion to seek capital punishment. "I don't think you will find any district attorney in the state who will be seeking the death penalty unless they feel like their evidence is very strong," Frank said. "I believe in court, (Kennedy's attorneys) were willing to take 3 consecutive life without paroles. That showed the defense thought the evidence was very strong." The case for Kennedy's co-defendants - David Manning, 45, and Leigh Williams, 43 -- remain pending. They are also facing the death penalty. Trial was costly Shortly after the plea was reached, Campbell said he was sure the Kennedy case cost taxpayers well over $1 million. He referenced a 2011 study from the N.C. Administrative Office of the Courts that indicates it costs $6,215 a day for Superior Criminal Court. The 20 weeks of jury selection and 3 weeks of the trial means the attorneys were in court for about 115 days, costing over $700,000 alone if factoring the numbers by the AOC study. According to court records, Kennedy's court-appointed attorneys submitted $249,620.67 in fees from when they took the case in 2011 up until opening arguments Aug. 10. Final figures for the attorneys, who were each paid $85 an hour, have not been submitted to the Davidson County Clerk of Court's Office. The hundreds of jurors who were summoned to jury selection for the Kennedy trial were paid a total of $27,200. In Davidson County, jurors are compensated $12 for the 1st day, $20 for days 2 through 5 and $40 for day 6 and over. "From the taxpayers' standpoint, you can't make sense of it," Campbell said, referring to the cost of death penalty cases. "The cost that AOC put out there is $6,000 a day. That doesn't include attorneys, experts, the power bill of having the lights on for 6 months. It's very costly." Attorneys want death penalty removed Campbell is just 1 of the defense attorneys in the state who want the death penalty removed. He told The Dispatch the Kennedy case is an example of why capital punishment shouldn't be imposed in North Carolina. "There's no certainty in it," he said. "From county to county, it's such a different treatment of it. Prosecutor to prosecutor, you could have one county with one prosecutor who doesn't believe in it. You can commit a murder in the next county, and you are facing the death penalty and it could not be as severe. There's too much disparity in it. I think there are too many factors that are unfair about it. "There are discovery issues that pop up. You can never know truly what else (evidence) is out there. It's frustrating. I think the expense of it just doesn't justify anymore. There are so few death penalty murders now." Charles Harp, a defense attorney in Lexington, said the Kennedy case is a perfect example of why the death penalty should be removed in North Carolina. He listed a number of reasons of why he thinks capital punishment should be abolished in the state, including how the Kennedy case tied up a courtroom for over 20 weeks. "I think there is a mood in this country that people who are going to serve as jurors on death penalty cases don't like it," Harp said. "I think it goes against every human characteristic and every nature of every human being to decide if someone should live or die." Judgment is unchanged "My judgment that this was a capital case is unchanged," Frank reiterated, as he referred to state v. Kennedy. "That's the reason over the course over the entire summer ... I stood steadfast until the judge took it off the table. That ruling was not appealable." Having the death penalty removed in the state could lower the bar for negotiations in murder cases. "The minute that the judge took the death penalty off the table, they would no longer plead to 3 consecutive life without paroles, which is what they asked for from the get-go," Frank said. Frank believes his constituents believe in the judicious use of the death penalty. He said the measure is a "useful tool in the hands of honest prosecutors." "I would be willing to wager that a full 50 % of the jurors that went through, passed through and didn't get chosen were dismissed because they were so strongly in favor of the death penalty," the district attorney said. "That's without even hearing the facts of this particular case. They just felt like a murderer needed to face this." (source: The Dispatch) INDIANA: IN Supreme Court denies request for speedy trial for suspect in Officer Perry Renn shooting The man accused of killing IMPD officer Perry Renn in July 2014 will not get a speedy trial. The Indiana Supreme Court denied Major Davis Jr.'s appeal to the court for a speedy trial and to get copies of his legal records last week. Davis filed this appeal on his own, not through his public defender. Davis could face the death penalty for the shooting of Officer Renn if he is convicted. Renn was killed in a shootout after responding to a call of shots fired. According to court documents, Davis is accused of firing on Officer Renn and a second IMPD officer when the men responded to the report of shots fired. Detectives said Davis raised the barrel of an AK-47 after he was asked to show his hands. Renn was hit by 3 rifle rounds -- believed to have been fired by Davis -- and the fatal shot hit him just under his right armpit, striking his right lung and heart. His trial is scheduled to start in 2017. (source: theindychannel.com) ILLINOIS: Bringing Executions Back to IL: Expert Predicts it's Unlikely Will the death penalty be coming back to Illinois? There have been no executions since 2000, when a moratorium was put in place by Gov. George Ryan, and capital punishment was eventually abolished in 2011. Democratic state Sen. Bill Haine has said he intends to file legislation when the Senate reconvenes next month to restore the death penalty in limited instances. Robert Dunham, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, says while it isn't an unusual move, he doesn't expect it to get any traction. "There have been legislators in other states that have abolished the death penalty who have introduced bills to reinstate it, and typically those bills have gone nowhere," says Dunham. "Generally, they haven't even gotten hearings set up in the committees." There have been past attempts to bring back capital punishment to Illinois, but none of the bills made it out of committee. Haine points out that times have changed since 2011, with terrible acts occurring around the country that include the recent shooting death of a police officer in Illinois. He suggests the death sentence be used for the most heinous crimes, such as the murder of police officers or children. Meanwhile, Dunham explains the national view on capital punishment is changing. "Over time, the debate has shifted," he says, "from, 'Are there some rare instances in which it might be imposed?' to 'Is this a policy that can be carried out reliably and consistently?'" According to the Death Penalty Information Center, there have been 155 death row inmates exonerated since 1971, the most recent in June of this year. Besides the problem of wrongful convictions, Dunham says there are questions about racial discrimination in the use of the death penalty and about police and prosecutorial misconduct. "As in Illinois - where there were more innocent people who were tortured into giving false confessions than there were guilty people who were executed in the state - there is ongoing, very serious concern about the death penalty," Dunham states. A poll from the Pew Research Center earlier this year showed 56 % of the public supports the death penalty, the lowest level it has reported in the last 40 years. (source: publicnewsservice.org) OKLAHOMA: Anti-death penalty group works to defeat ballot question on executions ---- Connie Johnson of the Oklahoma Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty says her group will work against a measure to preserve the legality of executions in Oklahoma. An anti-death penalty group plans to work to defeat a state question that seeks to preserve the legality of executions in the Oklahoma Constitution. Last session, lawmakers passed Senate Joint Resolution 31 to put the measure on the ballot. Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt found the wording did not comply with state law and rewrote it. The new wording for State Question 776 says the Legislature can designate any method of execution not prohibited by the U.S. Constitution. It says death sentences shall not be reduced because a method of execution is ruled invalid. It says when an execution method is declared invalid, the death penalty shall remain in force until it can be carried out using any valid execution method. "The imposition of a death penalty under Oklahoma law - as distinguished from the method of execution - shall not be deemed to be or constitute the infliction of cruel or unusual punishment under Oklahoman's Constitution, nor to contravene any provision of the Oklahoma Constitution," according to the measure. The state question will be on the Nov. 8, 2016, ballot. Connie Johnson, Oklahoma Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty chairwoman, said recent high-profile executions have eroded public confidence in the process. The organization will be holding events in an effort to defeat the proposal, she said. "I want to make it clear the mission of the coalition is to abolish the death penalty, be it a wrongful conviction or a rightful conviction," Johnson said. Defeating the state question would not abolish the death penalty, which is in state statute. The authors of the measure, Sen. Anthony Sykes, R-Moore, and Rep. Mike Christian, R-Oklahoma City, said there is overwhelming support in the state for the death penalty. Christian predicted the state question would pass by more than 70 %. "People of Oklahoma look for justice, and they will overwhelmingly support it," Christian said. Sykes declined to make a percentage prediction but said he believes the measure will pass, citing its overwhelming and bipartisan support in the Legislature. Keith Gaddie, a University of Oklahoma political science professor, said Oklahomans overwhelmingly support the death penalty. However, they do not believe minors or adults who are mentally ill should be executed, he said. Oklahomans believe it serves as a deterrent, Gaddie said. However, a campaign against the death penalty could change hearts and minds, he said. And that is what Johnson, a former state senator, is hoping to do. She wants to educate residents about the problems with the death penalty. It costs up to 3 times more to execute a person than to keep them in prison for life, she said. "The death penalty is racially discriminatory with the majority and the disproportionate number of people of color being sentenced to death more so than any other group," she said. William Tabbernee is executive director of the Oklahoma Conference of Churches, which represents the major churches in the state. "We believe, affirm and state complete that the death penalty is wrong," he said. "Every one of the churches that belongs to the Oklahoma Conference of Churches has a statement declaring the death penalty is wrong." (source: Tulsa World) COLORADO: What are the true costs of capital cases? Re: "Colorado public defender's office is indeed transparent," Sept. 13 My Turn column. Colorado Public Defender Doug Wilson asserts that his office is as transparent as the law and attorneys' ethical rules permit it to be. He claims that by providing the public with the "salary range" of his staff, and with the offices' annual and monthly expenditures, the public has been provided with all of the information it could legitimately and lawfully desire. I respectfully disagree. As with all other taxpayer-funded positions of public employment, the citizens of this state are entitled to know, down to the penny, precisely how much money the public employees in his office receive. Nor do I agree with Wilson's claim that this state's ethical rules for attorneys prevent him from disclosing how much taxpayer funds that office expended on any individual criminal case. To the contrary, earlier this year, in response to a subpoena, Judge Jane Tidball ordered Wilson's office to disclose what it spent on the defense of Michael Blagg. Other state public defenders who are subject to the same ethical rules have publicly disclosed the amount of money they have expended in defense of specifically identified capital defendants. In 1993, Maryland's highest court held that the amount of overtime fees and other expenses incurred by the state public defender in a capital case could be disclosed under that state's open records law without violating the attorney's ethical duties so long as disclosure would not prejudice that client's interests; here, there is no danger of prejudicing James Holmes' interests in further proceedings. Other courts have similarly found that disclosure simply of the amount of money a public defender has spent defending a criminal case does not prejudice a defendant's rights. Wilson owes it to the public to obtain an authoritative independent opinion on the scope of his ethical obligations. The Colorado Bar Association provides a mechanism for attorneys to obtain an informal letter opinion and also to request a formal published ethics opinion. If he has not sought such advice, Wilson should do so today. Lastly, Wilson would have no ethical quandary if Holmes authorized him to disclose the sum that this state's taxpayers have borne as a result of prosecutor George Brauchler's decision to seek the death penalty in his case. If he has not done so, Wilson should immediately seek that consent. Coloradans are engaged in a much-needed debate about the wisdom of continuing to apply the death penalty. To inform that debate, the public is entitled to know precisely what is the cost of taking such cases to trial and through all appeals. (source: Steve Zansberg is president of the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition----Guest Column, Denver Post) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 21 08:48:13 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 08:48:13 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 21 INDIA: Let BJP seek death penalty for killers of hundreds of Kashmiris: Er Rashid President Awami Ittihaad Party (AIP) and MLA Langate Er Rasheed has condemned BJP for bringing resolution in the assembly seeking death penalty for cow slaughters and asked PDP and Peoples Conference to end their already exposed unholy alliance with BJP. In a statement, Er Rasheed arned BJP to restrain from spreading communal hatred in the state. Er Rasheed said. "Kashmiris Muslims have never been communal and will never interfere into religious affairs of devotees of other religions, but it is BJP who despite being in power in centre, talks communal, objectionable, unnatural and irresponsible things. BJP forgets that nobody can thrust his dictation on devotees of any community pertaining to religious affairs. How could slaughtering a cow amount to hurting sentiments of Hindus, if cow like other bovine animals is a pet animal and there is no restriction that should have a cow at his home. If BJP and its allies have so respect for the cows and other bovine animals they should not wear shoes or use any leather products." Er Rasheed asked BJP to restrain from hurting sentiments for Muslims in and outside assembly and added. "If BJP is so keen about giving death penalty to cow slaughters then as humans they should have highest respect for human rights and human lives. BJP must start a campaign to hang all those state actors in uniform who slaughtered hundreds of Kashmiris from Pathribal to Machil and elsewhere and also committed heinous crimes in every nook and corner of state in the name of so called national interest. Let BJP explain that if cow slaughtering hurts them more than Kashmiris getting slaughtered? Do they have more respect towards rights of humans irrespective of cast, creed and religion as compared to pet animals? Isn???t it hypocrisy on behalf of BJP that while they eat meat of many other animals but care only about cows. Before seeking death penalty for cow slaughtering, BJP must withdraw from the coalition as its government failed to save life of even 3 year old Burhan." Er Rasheed asked PDP and Sajad Lone to respect sentiments of their voters and restrain from becoming proxies and collaborators of fascist Hindu radicals who have now expanded their anti Muslim agenda and are directly hurting sentiments of Muslims in Jammu and Kashmir. (source: Rising Kashmir) IRAN----execution Official Sources in Iran: 1 Execution in the Northeast, 2 in the Northwest On the morning of Saturday September 19, 2 prisoners with drug related charges were hanged to death by Iranian authorities in Lakan Prison (also known as Rasht Central Prison), according to the press department of the Judiciary in Gilan. The report identfies 1 of the prisoners as H.M., 45 years old, charged with participating in the trafficking of 1 Kilogram and 5 Grams of crystal meth. The other prisoner is identified as Sh.P., 46 years old, charged with participating in the trafficking of one Kilogram of crystal meth, sentenced to death by the Revolutionary Court in Rasht. In a report published over the weekend, Iran state media Khorassan News mentions the execution of one prisoner in Bojnord (the capital city of North Khorasan). The prisoner was reportedly hanged to death by Iranian authorities for murdering a family member with a gun; however, the report does not include any information on the prisoner's identity or the date and location of the execution (prison or public). (source: iran Human Rights) SAUDI ARABIA: Saudi Arabia to Crucify Protester Arrested at 17 Years Old A man named Ali Mohammed al-Nimr is set to be crucified in Saudi Arabia for his participation in anti-government protests, which he engaged in back in 2012, when he was 17 years old. Aside from the crime of demonstration, al-Nimr has also been accused of illegally possessing firearms. Many suspect that the now-21-year-old is being targeted with such harsh punishment due to his familial ties. His uncle is Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, a well known religious leader and human rights activist, who, like his nephew, was sentenced to death in 2014. The International Business Times reports that Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr was jailed and sentenced to death for speeches he made against Saudi Arabia's ruling House of Saud dynasty. The Saudi government has recently dismissed Al-Nimr's final appeal, which was held in secret. There are no more legal routes of objection to his impending crucifixion. The Middle East Monitor reports that Maya Foa, the director of the death penalty team at the human rights charity group Reprieve, has condemned the situation that the Saudi government has placed Al-Nimr under, saying, "No one should have to go through the ordeal Ali has suffered - torture, forced 'confession,' and an unfair, secret trial process, resulting in a sentence of death by 'crucifixion.'" "Ali was a vulnerable child when he was arrested and this ordeal began," said Foa, "His execution - based apparently on the authorities' dislike for his uncle, and his involvement in anti-government protests - would violate international law and the most basic standards of decency. It must be stopped." Advocates for al-Nimr are now calling on the British government to pressure Saudi Arabia to block the execution. Amnesty International is asking concerned people to write in and request that Saudi authorities quash al-Nimr's conviction, as well as his death sentence, and ensure that he receives a fair trial in line with international law and standards. (source: Latin Post) ******************* Saudi Arabia to head UN human rights panel; Twitterati criticise move citing beheadings, Raif Badawai flogging The United Nations has appointed an official from Saudi Arabia to head a panel on human rights, inviting global criticism for ignoring the kingdom's poor human rights record. Saudi Arabia's ambassador in Geneva Faisal bin Hassan Trad will head the UN Human Rights Council, which works on setting human rights standards globally. The move comes even after Saudi Arabia strongly rejected the UN secretary-general's plea to scrap the death penalty. Saudi Arabia has already executed more than 130 people till September this year at a rate of nearly 1 execution every 2nd day. Saudi Arabia's human rights record is often compared to that of the Islamic State, given that it practices beheading and crucifixion and even amputation as forms of punishment. "It is scandalous that the UN chose a country that has beheaded more people this year than ISIS to be head of a key human rights panel," UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer said on the NGOwebsite. Twitterati vented harsh criticism against the United Nations for choosing a Saudi representative to head its human rights panel, especially amidst outrage over itspunishment to blogger Raif Badawai and the scheduled execution of Ali Mohammed al-Nimr, who was 17 years old when he was arrested for joining anti-government protests. (source: International Business Times) NEW ZEALAND: NZ urged to push for abolition of death penalty A call for New Zealand to toughen up on the international use of the death penalty is being welcomed by at least 1 politician. 2 leading Australian experts are at Parliament today, hoping to persuade the Government to use its influence to try to stop the use of capital punishment. United Future leader Peter Dunne is meeting them. He said New Zealand should be using its UN Security Council seat to push for the change. Mr Dunne said he saw the practice as reprehensible, and New Zealand should not be scared of asking allies such as the United States and China to stop. (source: New Zealand Herald) TRINIDAD: Death penalty debate 'unsolvable' Even if there is meaningful debate on the death penalty, the conundrum legislators face on whether to abolish it will never be solved, vice-president of the Criminal Bar Association (CBA) Sophia Chote, SC, has said. At the opening of the new law term last Wednesday, Chief Justice Ivor Archie called for serious and meaningful discussion on the death penalty, saying he believed hanging convicted murderers would not solve crime. On the issue of whether it should be abolished, although no convicted murderer has been executed since the 1999 hangings of drug kingpin Dole Chadee, his gang of 8 and Anthony Briggs, both the CBA and the Law Association (LATT) revealed that they had no definite position on the death penalty and had not discussed the issue. In a telephone interview on Friday, Chote said, "I don't think this is an issue that is ever going to be put to rest because its very nature depends on people's individual consciences. In the United Kingdom where the death penalty has been abolished for many years, there is still debate on whether they should reintroduce it or whether they should have abolished it at all. No philosophical matter is ever put to rest." But in giving her personal view as a seasoned criminal attorney, Chote said the death penalty was not a deterrent to crime and there were alternative forms of punishment. She suggested that convicted murderers who have the potential or request rehabilitation could be enrolled in the various prisoner transformation programmes. Asked if she believed convicted murderers should ever walk the streets again, she said, "There are different kinds of crimes and there are different kinds of offenders. To paint someone with a broad brush and say once a life has been taken it must be that another life must be taken, I think it is unfair and arbitrary." Recalling that in previous consultations it was suggested that killings be categorised, she said the new Government could look at bringing those legislations. LATT president Reginald Armour, SC, said he supported Archie's call for T&T to take a commonsense approach to the issues affecting the administration of justice and the death penalty. However, he said, he would not speak on behalf of the LATT because of his personal views. "I have not discussed it with members of council and I would not want to say anything that represents the views of the individual members of the council on what is admittedly a controversial subject," Armour said. NGO support Supporting Chote's advocacy against capital punishment, founding member of the Network of NGOs of T&T for the Advancement of Women Hazel Brown said they had always supported the abolishment of the death penalty. Brown said hanging was inhumane and would not deter criminals. She said discussions on the overall improvement of the justice system were needed and the death penalty, along with proper systems to deal with women and juvenile prisoners, should be addressed. "What we first have to agree on is the need for an overall reform and improvement of the justice system, including the juvenile justice system. If you think the regular justice system is unfair and unjust, for children - boys and girls - it is even worse. "We as a society should determine where our humanity is expressed and the best place for it is in a justice system. The discussion has to be about the justice system generally and just pull out the hangings which is a very emotive subject. This should include women's and children's issues as well," Brown said. (ssource: The Guardian) CHINA: New rule to help lawyers assert rights----Protections cover meetings with their clients, viewing of court records, gathering evidence Several national authorities jointly issued a rule on Sunday designed to ensure that lawyers are not impeded in their practices. It also prohibits public statements designed to manipulate public opinion or pressure law enforcement. The rule- announced by the Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of State Security and the Ministry of Justice - says that law enforcement authorities should fully guarantee lawyers' rights, including the right to get information, the right to petition and other professional rights. Lawyers' requests to meet with clients should be fulfilled within 48 hours, except in cases involving State security, terrorism or major corruption; and prosecutors and police should listen to lawyers' opinions before concluding their investigations, as well as during death penalty reviews by the Supreme Court, the rule said. The top authorities have said they want to improve mechanisms for lawyers and to establish a group of highly trained professional lawyers nationally to implement law-based governance. The Central Leading Group for Deepening Overall Reform, chaired by President Xi Jinping, adopted guidelines applying to the legal profession on Sept 15. China has about 270,000 lawyers. Zhou Qiang, China's top judge, highlighted the role of lawyers in the legal community in August, saying attorneys' rights, including reading case materials and obtaining evidence, must be protected. "If lawyers are in danger during a trial, judges and court police should act to protect them," Zhou said. Last week, a provincial guideline governing lawyers working on major cases aroused controversy. The Shaanxi Lawyers Association issued a guideline to regulate lawyers' behavior on major and sensitive cases, requiring that lawyers report to the local judicial department or lawyers association within three working days of accepting major or sensitive cases, or cases involving mass incidents. The regulation also bans lawyers from publicizing their opinions, including posting messages online or manipulating public opinion to pressure law enforcement. That guideline raised concerns among lawyers, who saw it as a gag order. Si Weijiang, a lawyer based in Shanghai, said the order of silence for lawyers who are not directly involved in a case violates the right of free speech. There should be little concern, Si said, because only lawyers with expertise would be commenting; ordinary people wouldn't make professional comments. However, an official from the Ministry of Justice who asked to remain anonymous, said the regulation had been misinterpreted. "To a certain point, the guidelines are necessary to manage lawyers' behavior according to the law and ensure that lawyers respect professional ethics when dealing with major and sensitive cases," he said. The professional level of lawyers across the country varies, and some poorly practiced lawyers have severely harmed clients' rights and hindered justice, the official said, adding that the guidelines help ensure that justice is served. (source: ECNS) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 21 17:19:08 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 17:19:08 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----CONN., N.C., GA., FLA., ALA., LA. Message-ID: Sept. 21 CONNECTICUT: Death row inmates could face less restrictions Officials say the 11 men currently on death row could soon be placed in general population. Connecticut's death row inmates may soon face less restrictive prison conditions. 11 men were spared execution when the state Supreme Court ruled the death penalty unconstitutional last month. Officials say those people will be re-sentenced and that could put them in the general prison population rather than solitary confinement. (source: news12.com) NORTH CAROLINA: New names could be linked to suspected gang killings in Lake Wylie A federal prosecutor said Monday that new suspects could face death-penalty charges in the suspected gang killings of Doug and Debbie London. 6 alleged members of United Blood Nation already stand accused of capital murder in the October 2014 slayings of the couple at their Lake Wylie, S.C., home. However, Assistant U.S. Attorney Beth Greene told U.S. District Judge Max Cogburn Monday morning that more names could be added under a new indictment. A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office declined to say whether the additions would come from the 12 alleged UBN members already charged or would be new names entirely. Authorities say the Londons were shot to death to keep them from testifying against 3 UBN members accused of attempting to rob the couple's Pineville mattress store in May 2014. The final list of death penalty defendants in the case remains in flux. All decisions by federal prosecutors to seek or waive capital punishment must be approved by top Justice Department officials in Washington, D.C. Just when those decisions will be announced in unclear. Prosecutors said it will take another 2 to 3 months to distribute all the evidence to the numerous defense attorneys now assigned to the case. 14 of those attorneys were in Cogburn's courtroom for Monday's docket call. Richard Culler, who represents defendant Nana "Ratchet" Adoma, asked Cogburn to separate his client's case from the others and give Adoma the speedy trial he deserves. Adoma now faces federal robbery, assault and racketeering charges that carry up to life imprisonment. Culler said the longer the investigation continues the more his client is placed at risk. Cogburn would not go that far. But he urged prosecutors to move the cases along to save taxpayer money and protect the defendants' rights. Adoma has been in jail since the robbery attempt on the Londons' store. He and the other accused gang members were indicted by federal prosecutors in April. The 6 facing death-penalty charges include: -- Jamell "Murda Mell" Cureton, who was wounded in a shootout with Doug London during the robbery and is accused of masterminding the couple's murders from his Mecklenburg Jail cell. Cureton, who is Adoma's brother, also has been charged with the 2013 shooting death of homeless teenager Kwamne Clyburn in a Charlotte park. An FBI raid of his jail cell uncovered photographs of 2 judges and led to their being placed under protective watch. -- Malcom "Bloody Silent" Hartley, the alleged hitman accused of carrying out the hit on the Londons. -- Ahkeem "Lil Keem" McDonald, also accused in the killing of Clyburn. -- Rahkeem "Big Keem" McDonald, charged with planning the Londons' killings and helping hide the murder weapon. -- David "Flames" Fudge, the admitted driver in the store robbery who prosecutors say helped plan the Londons' killings. Documents also indicate that some gang members considered Fudge to be an FBI informant. -- Randall "Foe" Hankins, who court documents say was Cureton's top assistant in orchestrating the plot against the Londons. -- Briana "Breezy B" Johnson, the daughter of a law enforcement officer who authorities say drove Hartley to the Londons' home. The other 6 defendants face a range of racketeering charges that carry punishments of up to life in prison and hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines. Hartley and Johnson also face murder charges in York County, S.C., where the killings of the Londons occurred. As in state courts, death-penalty trials and sentences have become increasingly rare in federal judicial circuits. 3 defendants are on death row in North Carolina for federal murder convictions; South Carolina has 2. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, federal prosecutors have tried around 200 death penalty cases since 1988. Give the choice of life or death, federal juries have imposed life sentences in 2/3 of the capital cases. Previous Attorney General Eric Holder authorized less than 10 % of the capital cases as predecessor John Ashcroft did a decade before. Yet, former federal prosecutor Richard Myers says the death penalty remains an effective bargaining chip in investigations, particularly in persuading defendants to provide more information about criminal organizations and their leaders. The goal, says Myers, now assistant dean of the UNC Chapel Hill law school, is to implicate the highest-ranking figures possible and to do the most damage to the gang. (source: Charlotte Observer) GEORGIA----impending female execution Former inmates rally to save murderess from death Hers is a life measured by the dictates of Pulaski State Prison: when to rise, when to eat, when to go to bed so she can repeat the process the next day, and the day after that, and the day after that. This is how Kelly Gissendaner's life will unspool until the state of Georgia ends it. That day may not be far off. Judicial officials on Friday issued a death warrant, Gissendaner's 3rd, for convinving her lover to kill her husband 2 decades ago. Her execution date is set for Sept. 29 and, if it proceeds, she would become the 1st woman Georgia has put to death since 1945. That day will not arrive, say her supporters, without a chorus of cries that Gissendaner, 47, be spared the ultimate punishment. A loose-knit collection of former female convicts credit Gissendaner with giving them hope behind bars, ministering to them through an air vent. They are urging the state to reconsider her death sentence and let her live out her days in prison instead. The women call themselves Struggle Sisters. Gissendaner acknowledges she coordinated the beating and stabbing death of her husband in 1997. She faced capital punishment twice earlier this year. Bad weather delayed one execution; a cloudy vial of lethal drugs prompted the 2nd execution's postponement. The former inmates see those delays as a final chance to make their appeal. The women have established a Facebook page explaining their mission. They've recorded videos pleading her case, echoing the emotional pleas for mercycoming from 2 of Gissendaner's children. The women credit Gissendaner with helping them turn their own troubled lives around. Nikki Roberts, convicted of robbery, is typical. "I was at my low of lows" when chance brought her into contact with Gissendaner, the Atlanta resident recalled. "But I got some hope." She got it at Metro State Prison, where she'd been temporarily sent to "lockdown," a cell block for high-security female prisoners or inmates who posed a threat to themselves. Roberts had earned a spot: She'd tried to slit her wrists. In the new cell, she cried, cursed, howled. She paused in her rantings only when she heard a voice, coming through a heating vent: "Don't wish death on yourself," the voice said. "You sound like you've got some sense." The voice, she discovered, belonged to Gissendaner, Georgia's sole female facing capital punishment - and, Roberts quickly learned, the sole voice of compassion in that echoing warren. Roberts listened. The voice said she ought to sign up for some teaching courses, maybe impart some of that knowledge to others. Gissendaner, who'd spent years studying theology, suggested topics that Roberts might study. A chaplain agreed to work with her. Prison officials transferred Roberts back to the general population. She was, they discovered, a different inmate. She joined a choir. She became a prayer leader. She served her 10 years and was paroled last year. Roberts now works for an Atlanta agency that teaches adult literacy. Others could benefit from Gissendaner's counsel, Roberts said. "Killing Kelly is essentially killing hope," said Roberts, 40. "Kelly is the poster child for redemption." That's not just hyperbole, said Stephen Bright, senior counsel for the Southern Center for Human Rights. The Atlanta nonprofit specializes in prison issues, especially capital punishment cases. Gissendaner, he suggested, has changed for the better in her 2 decades behind bars. "There is such a thing as redemption," Bright said. "I've seen it over and over." Deborah Denno, a law professor at Fordham University and an expert on capital punishment, likened Gissendaner's case to that of Karla Faye Tucker. Convicted of murder in Texas, Tucker became a Christian while in prison. Like Gissendaner, she counseled other inmates and built a following of supporters urging Texas corrections officials to commute her sentence to life in prison. It wasn't enough: In 1998, the state gave her a lethal injection. Gissendaner's supporters may have just as much of an uphill fight, she said. "It's too few people at too low a rung in the hierarchy of influence," she said. "They would have to make a lot of noise. But who knows?" Gwinnett County District Attorney Danny Porter believes that Gissendaner deserves the death penalty and accused her of manipulation in planning her husband's slaying and in trying to avoid execution. Gissendaner has never forgotten her crime, said her lead defense lawyer, Susan Casey. "She prays every day for the people she's hurt," said Casey. The Struggle Sisters, she said, are a collective voice of conscience. "We didn't even know about them until they started coming to us," Casey said. They appeared - seemingly out of nowhere - at Gissendaner's clemency hearing earlier year, intent on explaining to anyone who would listen how the death row inmate set them on a new course. Gissendaner's clemency plea was denied but her legal team soon learned that the inmates their client had counseled in prison were among her most passionate defenders. "These women have some incredible stories of rehabilitation and change," Casey said. Kara Stephens, for one. Convicted of armed robbery, she was remanded to Metro's lockdown for fighting. There, she met Gissendaner, and was impressed with her grace under the worst sort of pressure. What other death-row prisoner, she wondered, could find reason to be upbeat? As her days of incarceration dwindled, Stephens despaired. Would her children welcome her back? Where would she stay? Could she survive in society after a decade of strictly regulated existence? "I was just wanting to give up," said Stephens, now 38. "I was terrified of going home." Gissendaner offered some support: Stephens was somebody. God loved her. Things would be OK. In March 2009, a frightened Stephens re-entered society. These days, she works for a Chattanooga social-works agency sponsored by the Presbyterian church. Nicole Legere, convicted of theft, is another Struggle Sister. When lawyers asked if she'd appear in a video supporting Gissendaner, she said yes. "I saw the change in (other inmates) who talked to her," said Legere, 36, who left prison in 2013 after serving her full sentence. She lives in Ringgold and works for a printing company. "There needs to be people like her, someone to be a mentor," Legere said. "She's a lot of hope. And there's not much hope in there." To Learn More about this execution and capital punishment nationwide: https://www.themarshallproject.org/next-to-die?ref=hp -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Women and Capital Punishment: Women remain a rarity on death row. There are 56 women currently awaiting execution in the United States. That represents less than 2 % of the total death row population. Since capital punishment was reinstated in 1976, 15 women have been executed in the United States - or 1 % of the 1,414 executions. In Georgia, the last woman put to death was Lena Baker, who was electrocuted in 1945. Baker who was black, was executed for killing a white mill operator in Cuthbert, Ga. She had been hired to care for him after he broke his leg. She argued he tried to sexually assault her and has since been pardoned. [sources: The Death Penalty Information Center and the NACCP Legal Defense Fund] *************** Emory to host panel discussion on death penalty Emory University's Candler School of Theology will host a panel discussion on the death penalty Tuesday in light of a new execution date set for Kelly Gissendaner, the only women on Georgia's death row. The "No One is Beyond Redemption: A Candler Conversation on Capital Punishment and the Scheduled Execution of Kelly Gissendaner," forum will be led by professors Liz Bounds and Robert Franklin, and human rights attorney Katie Chamblee, who focuses on death-penalty cases in Georgia and Alabama. Emory's Center for the Study of Law & Religion is assisting in sponsoring this event. Gissendaner, who is a graduate of the Certificate in Theological Studies program that Candler co-sponsors at Lee Arrendale State Prison, is scheduled for execution sometime between Sept. 29 and Oct. 6. Gissendaner persuaded her boyfriend to kill her husband. Though she did not commit the actual killing, she was convicted of the murder and sentenced to die. A group of former female inmates and 2 of her children are petitioning the state to reconsider Gissendaner's execution. Emory's forum is scheduled for 5 p.m., Sept. 22 in the Rita Anne Rollins building, Room 252 of the Candler School of Theology, 1531 Dickey Drive in Atlanta. (source for both: Atlanta Journal Constitution) FLORIDA: Luis Toledo's attorneys request motion to delay trial----Toledo accused of killing wife, 2 stepchildren A man accused of killing his wife and 2 stepchildren returned to a Volusia County courtroom on Monday. Luis Toledo's attorneys argued several motions, including 1 to delay the trial while the Supreme Court decides if Florida's death penalty is constitutional. "By waiting, it guarantees Mr. Toledo his rights to a fair trial, his rights under the correct law," defense attorney Jeff Deen said. Defense attorneys argued that without the Supreme Court's decision, they cannot properly advise their client on the law. Prosecutors objected the delay. "There's always some sort of litigation going on with the death penalty," prosecutor Ed Davis said. A judge plans to issue a ruling by the end of the week on the motion. The defense team asked for a 2nd motion, one which would suppress evidence and statements made by Toledo to police. "Mr. Toledo denied any knowledge, basically, during an interview and said he didn't know anything, didn't know where his wife and children were," Davis said. Investigators said Toledo admitted to murdering his wife, Yessenia Suarez, in October of 2013 but not her 2 children, Michael and Thalia. Davis said Toledo was read his Miranda rights, but the defense is questioning the validity of some those statements because Toledo's counsel was never present for any of the interviews. There's also a motion to change the trial to a different venue, but that motion has not been heard yet. The trial is scheduled to be held Jan. 3. (source: WESH news) ALABAMA: The outrageous conviction of Montez Spradley Last week, an Oklahoma appeals court granted death row inmate Richard Glossip a stay of execution about an hour before he was scheduled to die. There's plenty of evidence casting doubt on Glossip???s guilt, including new evidence his legal team unveiled just last week. (Much of it came from witnesses who came forward after seeing the publicity surrounding Glossip's nearing execution.) Whenever a death row inmate claims innocence in the waning hours of his life, there's inevitably a chorus of death penalty supporters who point out that the condemned was convicted by a jury, by the work of police and prosecutors, that the verdict would need to have been upheld by a judge, and then by multiple appeals courts. But consider the case of Montez Spradley. As Glossip neared his execution, Spradley was enjoying his second week of freedom after nearly a decade in prison. For most of that time, he was on death row. He had been convicted of robbing and killing a woman, Marlene Jason, in 2004. At 1st glance, the case against Spradley seemed strong. The police claimed to have records of the victim's credit card being used at the gas station and seafood store, and surveillance photos of Spradley at those businesses at the time the card was used. Spradley's ex-girlfriend, and the mother of his 3 children, testified that he had confessed to her, then beat her and threatened her if she tried to testify against him. A jailhouse informant also claimed that Spradley had confessed to him, and even claimed to have corroborating evidence to back up the allegation. Spradley was convicted in 2008, both for the murder and for threatening his ex-girlfriend to dissuade her from testifying. But there were problems with the state's case. Most notably, there was no physical evidence linking Spradley to the crime. Perhaps that's why, during the sentencing phase, the jury voted 10-2 to spare Spradley the death penalty. Unfortunately for Spradley, Alabama is one of three states in which a judge can override the jury's verdict in a capital case. Judge Gloria Bahakel disregarded the jury's recommendation and sentenced Spradley to death. (Incidentally, judges and these 3 states can also go the other way - they could override a jury's death recommendation to impose a life sentence. But since 1976, they're 11 times more likely to override life for death than the other way around.) Over the next few years, the state's case against Spradley began to fall apart. In 2011, the Alabama Court of Appeals ordered a new trial on several grounds. Most notably, the court found that the state never established that the security camera photos allegedly showing Spradley at the gas station and seafood store were actually taken at the time the victim's credit card was used. In fact, the state never produced any documents from a bank showing that the card was used at those businesses. Instead, the state relied on the testimony of the police detective who investigated the case, Jefferson County Sheriff's Office Det. Don Edge. As the court pointed out, this was the only evidence linking Spradley to the victim. The state moved ahead with plans to prosecute Spradley again, led by the man who prosecuted him the first time, deputy district attorney Mike Anderton. But before the 2nd trial started, new information further crippled the state's case. The most damning piece of evidence against Spradley was the testimony of his ex-girlfriend and the mother of his children, Alisha Booker, who claimed that Spradley had confessed to her. There were already problems with Booker's story. She claimed in a recorded interview that Spradley told her he committed the crime with a man named Antonio Atkins. The police already knew about Atkins because witnesses claimed someone in a car matching the one he owned tried to sell them gas purchased with Jason's credit card. But the police also knew that Atkins had an alibi - he had been working the night of the murder. His attorneys have suggested that Atkins's brother Sedrick was Jason's killer. Unfortunately, Sedrick Atkins was shot and killed in 2011. At trial, Det. Edge testified that he couldn't recall if Booker told him Spradley was with someone on the night of the murder, a convenient memory lapse that saved the jury from hearing a critical detail that cast serious doubt on Booker's testimony. After his death sentence, Spradley was represented by Birmingham defense attorney Richard Jaffe and Anna Arceneaux, a staff attorney with the ACLU's Capital Punishment Project. In a phone interview, Arceneaux says they had learned of a fund run by the Alabama governor's office that provides reward money to citizens who help solve serious crimes. On a whim, Spradley's attorneys asked the governor's office for any information related to payments to witnesses in the Spradley case. They discovered that Alisha Booker had been paid $5,000 for her testimony. They later discovered that she had been paid an additional $5,000 through a private fund. None of this had been disclosed to Spradley's defense team, as is required by law. But it gets worse. They also discovered that the money from the governor's fund was paid to Booker after Spradley's conviction but before his sentencing. What's more, Judge Gloria Bahakel had signed off on the payment. She too never disclosed the payment to Spradley's defense team. "That means not only did she know that the state had paid Booker and did nothing about it, she also had knowledge of the payment when she overrode the jury and imposed the death penalty," Arceneaux says. Anderton has publicly said that he wasn't personally aware of the payments to Booker, but Arceneaux points out that the documents came from the office of Anderton's boss at the time, Jefferson County District Attorney David Barber. If Anderton didn't know about the payments, then someone in his office was making deals with a witness without his knowledge. "Either scenario is disturbing," Arceneaux says. Both Arceneaux and Jaffe say they also believe that Booker received yet more money later, possibly from a Crime Stoppers program. They also learned that shortly before trial, Booker attempted to recant her testimony. According to them, police officials in the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office threatened to prosecute her for perjury and take away her children if she didn't implicate Spradley. Incidentally, the way these reward programs work, Booker would have been paid only if Spradley was convicted. "You can see how the incentives work," says Jaffe. "If you want to get paid, you not only testify, but you'd be wise to make sure your testimony is as helpful as you can make it." For Booker, the incentives were even stronger: Give the testimony that sends Spradley to death row, and she gets paid $10,000. Refuse to testify, and she may lose her kids, and possibly end up in jail herself. Jaffe says these tactics are common in Jefferson County. And if Spradley's new legal team hadn't thought to request information from the governor's office, it may never have come to light. On Booker's testimony alone, Spradley could well have been convicted again. "We had heard rumors that Booker had been paid," Arceneaux says. "But when we contacted the county clerk, there was no record of any payments in the case file." And then there's Matthew Bryant, the informant who testified against Spradley. Bryant was in jail awaiting trial on charges that he hired two men to kill his father. Spradley had been arrested after Booker claimed he threatened her, although at that point he had not yet been charged with Jason's murder. Bryant then approached police claiming that Spradley had been implicating himself for Jason's murder and offered to testify in exchange for favorable treatment in his own case. But when Bryant attempted to secretly record Spradley confessing, he came up empty. Nevertheless, he still testified against Spradley at trial. By that time he had been convicted in his own case. He received a split sentence that required him to spend just 5 years in prison, followed by probation. "That's an extraordinarily light sentence for a crime that serious," Jaffe says. Anderton has publicly said that there was no deal cut with Bryant. But for some perspective on his sentence, Richard Glossip was essentially convicted of the same crime. Bryant got 5 years. Glossip was sentenced to death. Once all of this came out, the state offered Spradley an Alford plea, an agreement in which a defendant maintains his innocence but concedes that the state has enough evidence to prove his guilt. Spradley took the offer and was released this month. It's far from an exoneration, but it spared him death and got him out of prison. "Montez is innocent," Jaffe says. "But you don't mess around with the death penalty. If my client has the chance to save his own life, I always advise him to take it." If you don't closely follow the criminal justice system, the details of Spradley's conviction seem pretty shocking. But they aren't uncommon. The use of testimony from jailhouse informants, for example, is extremely common, despite the obvious incentive problems and that such testimony relies on the assumption that defendants frequently confess their crimes to cellmates they barely know. Anderton's denials aside, it's not unreasonable to wonder if Bryant's suspiciously light sentence was the result of favorable treatment of his testimony. But even if no one ever explicitly offered him a deal, it isn't difficult to see how he might come forward in anticipation of one. (Indeed, Arceneaux says transcripts show that he made such a request.) Then there's the money paid to Booker. Timothy O'Toole, an attorney in Washington considered an expert in discovery issues and a board member of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, says the practice of police and prosecutors offering reward money to non-expert witnesses for their testimony is standard practice. (The NACDL doesn't comment on specific cases, so O'Toole's opinions are his own.) "It just has to be disclosed," O'Toole says. "But the rules are pretty loose." You might think that sounds like bribery. O'Toole points out that in 1998, a panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit agreed, explaining that, "If justice is perverted when a criminal defendant seeks to buy testimony from a witness, it is no less perverted when the government does so. The judicial process is tainted and justice is cheapened when factual testimony is purchased, whether with leniency or money." That seemingly reasonable decision made headlines. It was then promptly vacated by the full 10th Circuit, and then swiftly condemned and repudiated by courts all over the country. The majority opinion for the full appeals court assured that, "fears our decision would permit improper use or abuse of prosecutorial authority simply have no foundation." Since then, testimony from paid witnesses, paid informants and jailhouse snitches rewarded with reduced sentences has been implicated in wrongful convictions, unjust prosecutions, and scandals at all levels of government, all over the country. The Innocence Project estimates that 15 % of wrongful convictions were due to critical testimony from witnesses who were in some way compensated for what they told the jury. Both prosecutors and defense attorneys can pay for travel and hotel for witnesses, along with a reasonable per diem for the time they spend testifying. That seems reasonable. But state rewards in the thousands of dollars, contingent on conviction, are another matter. But believe it or not, this is permissible. To put that into perspective, imagine the scenario hinted at by that 10th Circuit panel in 1998: Imagine if a defense attorney had paid a witness $10,000 to claim someone other than the defendant had confessed to her, only payable upon acquittal. Even if the attorney disclosed the payment, it would probably lead to disbarment. If the attorney didn't disclose, it would likely result in criminal charges. So police and prosecutors can reward witnesses for testimony. But disclosure is key. And there was no disclosure here. "If payments of that size weren't disclosed in this case, that's outrageous," O'Toole says. So why isn't this story a huge scandal? The problem is that there's enough ambiguity in when and how some of these awards are distributed to give every state actor with a duty to disclosure an excuse for not having done it. Crime Stoppers rewards are usually advertised publicly, for example. So police investigators might say a witness was already aware of the award, so they never made an explicit offer, so there was nothing to do disclose. (In Spradley's case, Det. Edge said in a 2013 hearing that there was "discussion" of a reward, but that he never explicitly promised Booker the money. He also denied threatening Booker.) Prosecutors can simply say that it was the responsibility of the police to disclose any payments. "I don't know about plausible deniability, but it definitely lets them get away with saying they didn't know," Arceneaux says. Making these rewards contingent on conviction also lets state officials claim that if there was not yet an explicit offer, and the witness was paid only after the conviction, then again, there was nothing to disclose before the trial. All of this clearly subverts the intent of the Supreme Court's ruling both in Brady v. Maryland, which requires prosecutors to turn over exculpatory evidence, and the 1985 case U.S. v. Bagley, which specifically addresses the issue of payments to witnesses. The harm occurs when a jury is deprived of information that compromises a witness's integrity. Perversely, while making a reward contingent on a conviction may (at least in theory) provide some cover for officials who fail to disclose the reward, it actually strengthens a witness's incentive to lie or exaggerate. The more convincing the testimony, the more likely the jury convicts. The Supreme Court's ruling in Bagley added that in order for a disclosure violation to merit overturning a conviction, the undisclosed evidence should be material, and a defendant needs to show that it would likely have affected the outcome of the case if it had been disclosed. So even the minor deterrent of an overturned conviction is far from automatic. Here, the Alabama Court of Appeals found that the video and photo evidence against Spradley alone met that standard. (Remember, the payments to Booker weren't discovered until after that decision.) So once the payments were discovered, it seems likely that just about any court in the country would have eventually overturned his conviction. "There's no question that there were Brady violations in this case," Jaffe says. The problem is that with a violation this egregious, an overturned conviction isn't enough. There needs to be some accountability. Anderton didn't return a request for a phone interview. But he's still a prosecutor in Jefferson County. If he wasn't aware of the payments to Booker, who in his office was? Clearly someone was, given that the authorization form included a letter on the DA's letterhead, signed by his former boss. Has he investigated who in his office authorized payment to a witness in one of his cases without notifying him? Has that person been sanctioned for violating Montez Spradley's rights? If it was the responsibility of the police to notify Anderton of any payment to Booker, has he investigated why that wasn't disclosed? Has he investigated Booker's allegations that when she attempted to recant her statement, she was threatened with criminal charges and with losing her children?* Remember that this information was only discovered when defense attorneys learned of the governor's reward fund and sent a letter to inquire if anyone in Spradley's case had been paid. Had they not found out about the payments, Anderton would likely have tried Spradley again. (Earlier this month, Anderton still insisted that Spradley is guilty.) But if this has happened once, it has likely happened before. How many other people may have been wrongly convicted in Jefferson County due to testimony from witnesses who were incentivized with reward money and/or threats of criminal prosecution, none of which was disclosed? Given that all of the law enforcement officials involved in this case are still on the job, how do we know it isn't still going on? The one public official who did eventually get some comeuppance in this story is Judge Gloria Bahakel, who lost her bid for reelection in 2010, then lost subsequent bids for a judgeship in 2012, and again last year. Morally, Bahakel's sins in this case seem to be the most egregious. It's bad enough to allow for a man to be executed while knowing that the jury was never told that the state's key witness had been paid thousands of dollars for her testimony. But Bahakel ordered Spradley's execution herself, against the jury's wishes. But judges aren't subject to Brady requirements. So technically, it isn't even clear if Bahakel committed an actionable breach of ethics. Given that prosecutors are rarely sanctioned for failure to disclose exculpatory evidence, it seems unlikely that the Alabama Bar or an appeals court would sanction a judge, even one no longer on the bench. Those close to the case also say it would be a stretch to attribute Bahakel's election losses to the Spradley case, though they say it's possible voters were responding to her reputation as a particularly harsh law-and-order judge, even in a state known for law-and-order judges. In the end, no public official has been directly held accountable for the wrongful prosecution of Montez Spradley, and it's unlikely that any will. In an interview with Andrew Cohen of the Marshall Project, Spradley displayed the grace typical of recently-freed exonorees. "I just want to be free and be around my kids and my family and my loved ones. Just glad to be home. I am just happy for that," he said. "I am not mad at anyone, not holding any grudges against anyone, I don't hold any ill feelings toward anyone." That's admirably magnanimous of him. But the rest of us can't afford to be so forgiving. Assertions from death penalty proponents aside, Spradley is far from the 1st person to be freed from death row. He isn't the 1st in Alabama. He isn't even the 1st in Alabama this year. There are undoubtedly more Montez Spradleys rotting in Alabama's prisons, and in prisons around the country. Like Spradley, some of them are probably awaiting execution. And without any real accountability in these cases, there will undoubtedly be more. (*Amusingly, at the 2013 hearing in which Booker recanted her testimony, Anderton suggested that her recantation may have been influenced by the help she received from Spradley's family in raising her 3 children.) (source: Radley Balko, Washington Post) LOUISIANA: Serial killer closer to execution in Miss. woman's death Louisiana serial killer Derrick Todd Lee is one step closer to being executed for the 2002 killing of 22-year-old Jackson, Miss. native Charlotte Murray Pace. On Friday, the Louisiana Supreme Court rejected Lee???s last state challenge to his execution. He still has some federal appeals left and his execution could still be years away. "It has been 11 years since this serial murderer was convicted and sentenced to death in the vicious, violent murder of my daughter, Jackson native and Millsaps graduate Murray Pace," Ann Pace said. "It has taken 11 long, often frustrating, often heartbreaking years for surviving family and friends of this killer's numerous victims to complete only the first 2 of 3 levels of adjudication. We now face the 3rd (federal) level of appeals that will begin in the federal district court in Baton Rouge and end on an unknown timeline at the US Supreme Court (again)." Lee has been linked to 7 killings and 1 attack. He was sentenced to death in Pace's death. Ann Pace said the count of years begins again for those who remain to fight for justice for those who died at the hands of Lee. "2 of us have died this past year," Pace said in a statement. "I myself was in my 50s when my daughter was murdered and am now 70. Time feels treacherous." Charlotte Murray Pace was found dead in her Baton Rouge apartment on May 31, 2002. Since her daughter's death, Ann Pace has been a victim's advocate and supporter of the death penalty. She said the death penalty isn't something that is morally wrong. "It's not a good thing, it's a tough thing you do to protect innocent people," Pace has said about carrying out executions. Pace said that with DNA evidence that can exonerate innocent people and prove the guilt of guilty individuals, there shouldn't be the extensively time lag in carrying out executions. "I beg those with the power to do so to act to amend the process to make it congruent with science or justice will continue to be lost in the quagmire of an antiquated, irrational system, which offers little to the dead or those who love them still," Pace said. East Baton Rouge Parish District Attorney Hillar Moore III said the state Supreme Court ruling moves the Lee case closer to final resolution. (source: Clarion-Ledger) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 21 17:19:49 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 17:19:49 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OHIO, KAN., USA Message-ID: Sept. 21 OHIO: Anti-death penalty group announces speakers for walk to Columbus The group planning a walk from Southern Ohio Correctional Facility to the Statehouse in Columbus in opposition to Ohio???s death penalty has announced the speakers who will address walkers each evening during the trek. Among those scheduled to speak are former director of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, Terry Collins, who, according to a news release from the group, participated in 33 executions; Derrick Jamison, who was exonerated in 2005 after serving 20 years on Ohio's death row; Sam Reese Sheppard, whose father, Dr. Sam Sheppart, was, according to the news release, wrongly convicted in the murder of his wife, and Rev. Dr. Jeff Hood, a Southern Baptist minister who has engaged with death row prisoners in Texas. Hood is the author of 7 books. The event is jointly organized by Scioto Peace & Justice Fellowship of Reconciliation, Intercommunity Justice & Peace Center, Footprints for Peace, Unitarian Universalist Justice Ohio, and Ohioans to Stop Executions. Starting at 8:30 a.m. on Sunday Oct. 4, death penalty abolitionists from Ohio and beyond will begin a 7 day, 83-mile walk from the SOCF where Ohio conducts executions to the Statehouse in Columbus, calling for an end to capital punishment. More than a dozen participants are registered to walk the entire route, and the group says hundreds of supporters from across Ohio are expected for the final leg to the Statehouse on Saturday, Oct. 10, which is observed internationally as World Day Against the Death Penalty. At evening programs in Portsmouth on Oct. 3, Chillicothe on Oct. 5, Circleville on Oct. 7, and Columbus on Oct. 9, residents of local communities are invited to conversations about the death penalty with walkers and special guests. (source: Portsmouth Daily Times) KANSAS: Mixed reactions felt on Kansas College Republicans' death penalty resolution As the presidential election cycle continues to highlight the differences between Republicans and Democrats, a student group in Kansas is attempting to create unity among the parties on 1 issue. As expected, however, not everybody thinks it is the right move. In August, the Kansas Federation of College Republicans, which represents the state's major universities, came to a unanimous vote among its representatives to call for an end to the death penalty. While the Kansas Republican Party is officially neutral on the issue, support of the death penalty is traditionally seen as a conservative value. Dalton Glasscock, the student group's chairman and a Wichita State student, sees the resolution as a natural extension of the party's generally pro-life stance. "We've always been on the forefront of protecting bodies," Glasscock said. In an August editorial in The Wichita Eagle, Glasscock wrote at length about the decision, saying the stance is more "consistently conservative" than before, a 2014 study suggests, 4.1 % of death row inmates are actually innocent. "We simply cannot support a policy that would endanger even one innocent life," Glasscock wrote. As a member of the WSU chapter of College Republicans, Austin Gilpin is against the resolution. He said it only serves to alienate young Republicans who may passionately support the death penalty. "I think it creates an atmosphere of shutting up one side, especially when it is a really divisive issue," Gilpin said. "It doesn't really work to accomplish anything." Paige Hungate, WSU College Republican Chair, however, said traditional conservative stances on certain issues such as the death penalty are eroding as younger Republicans gain more influence in the party. "I think it's important that the College Republicans are taking a stand," Hungate said. "We always say that we're the grand old party for the new generation." Hungate, a devout Catholic, also echoed Glasscock's sentiments that supporting the death penalty is inconsistent with her personal beliefs. "In the Catholic faith, it says that the death penalty should not be used unless there is no other way of containing that person," Hungate said. "I think that, in today's society, we have so many different ways of containing individuals like that and we shouldn't put that heavy burden on taxpayers." Hungate worked as an intern for U.S. Sen. Jerry Moran in Washington D.C. in the spring. She said her experience there influenced her decision to bridge the gap between Democrats and Republicans on this issue. "I think it's problematic that you can sit there and count how many votes you're going to get on a certain bill just based on party lines," Hungate said. "The fact that we're reaching across the aisle and we're kind of meeting there, I think that's important." Paul Brink, WSU College Democrats president, agreed that unity between the parties is preferable to the gridlock that has become common in the nation's capital. "Throughout history, the only way we get anything accomplished is when everyone can find some common ground and find things we agree on and work towards that," Brink said. Brink also said the resolution could represent a shift among young Republicans, and to him that is a good thing. "I think reception among young people in general has been positive," Brink said. "Most people don't see it as true justice." Gilpin, on the other hand, would like to see the issue discussed again among College Republicans. He said the vote occurred in the summer, and now that everyone is back in school and involved in the process, the conversation could be different. "I would like for them to reconsider it," Gilpin said. "It is not near as decided as they would like to paint it." (source: The Sunflower) USA: 5 Cases to Watch in the Supreme Court's Next Term The Supreme Court's last term was one for the history books, with high-profile cases involving Obamacare and gay marriage. The next term may not attract the same level of attention from the media and general public, but the justices will consider a number of important issues. Voting rights, public employee unions, and racial preferences in college admissions, and sentencing in death penalty cases are just a few of the big issues coming up in the 2015-2016 term. 1.Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin. This is Abigail Fisher's 2nd trip to the Supreme Court in her challenge to the university's use of race in college admissions decisions. In Fisher I, the Court ruled that the lower courts were too deferential to school administrators and they must look at actual evidence and not rely on school administrators' assurances of their good intentions. Given the history of this case, the university may be facing an uphill battle. 2.Evenwel v. Abbott. The Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause includes a "1-person, 1-vote" guarantee. The plaintiffs in Evenwel challenge the constitutionality of the Texas legislature's use of total population in drawing the state Senate's districts, arguing that this violates "1 person, 1 vote" by significantly diluting their votes compared to neighboring districts with large populations of illegal aliens. The Court has previously said states are free to choose which population to use in drawing district lines, unless it would otherwise violate the Constitution. 3.Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association. Can public employee unions require non-members to pay their "fair share" of the costs of collective bargaining? The Supreme Court said "yes" in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977), but recent cases have called into question continuing validity of that decision due to concerns about impinging employees' free speech and associational rights. A group of California teachers are calling on the Court to overrule Abood, arguing that public-sector collective bargaining is political speech and compelling them to subsidize that speech violates the First Amendment. 4.Hurst v. Florida. The Court will review Florida's bifurcated death-penalty sentencing scheme, which requires a judge to find 1 or more aggravating circumstances in order to impose the death penalty. A death-row inmate argues that findings of fact - such as the existence of aggravating or mitigating circumstances - are for a jury, not a judge, to decide in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Ring v. Arizona (2002). Florida maintains that Ring requires only that the jury decide whether there are sufficient facts to make the defendant eligible for the capital punishment. 5.Kansas v. Carr and Kansas v. Carr. In 3 consolidated cases from Kansas, the Supreme Court will consider whether the Eighth Amendment requires separate sentencing hearings for defendants who were tried together. Brothers Reginald and Jonathan Carr were charged, tried, convicted, and sentenced together for a crime spree that included robbery, carjacking, torture, rape, and murder. The state court vacated their death sentences, finding that the Constitution guarantees a right to individualized sentencing. (source: Elizabeth Slattery writes about the rule of law, the proper role of the courts, civil rights and equal protection, and the scope of constitutional provisions such as the Commerce Clause and the Recess Appointments Clause as a legal fellow in the Heritage Foundation's Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies----The Daily Signal) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 21 17:20:31 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 17:20:31 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 21 SRI LANKA: Death fast to enforce death penalty A father of 3 from Hettigedara, Kurunegala is on a fast requesting to enforce the death penalty against child abusers. G.O. Roshan Navaratne, 32, said he was ready to take up the position of the hangman. Navaratne said he requests President Maithripala Sirisena to enforce the death penalty as the number of child abuse cases are rising in the country. "I have no permanent place to live. I have 3 children and I am afraid about their lives. If there is no one to take the place of the hangman I am ready to take that responsibility without even a salary," he said. (source: dailynews.lk) INDIA: 7/11 Hearing: Defence cites '93 case, argues against death----Need to differentiate between 'beyond reasonable doubt' and 'absolute certainty', says defence. Stressing that the focus should shift from "crime to criminal" in cases that attract the death penalty, the defence in the 7/11 Mumbai serial blasts case argued against death penalty, and drew parallels with the 1993 blasts case. The defence cited the example of the Supreme Court commuting to life term the sentence of 10 of the 11 awarded capital punishment in the case. Defence counsel Dr Yug Mohit Chaudhry also cited the Law Commission's latest report, which has SC data that shows "trial courts erroneously imposed death penalty in 95.7 % of the cases". While dealing with cases that attract death penalty, the evidence should be higher than the "beyond the reasonable doubt" argument, said Chaudhry. After they were found guilty of crimes against the country, each of the 12 convicted in the case pleaded for a minimum sentence. They are facing a maximum punishment of death penalty and a minimum of life term. Chaudhry, arguing on the quantum of punishment, said there is a difference between "beyond reasonable doubt" and "absolute certainty" that needs to be kept in mind while awarding death penalty. The defense argued the possibility of reform of the convicts as a mitigating circumstance. "Emphasis is on the criminal at this stage. Crime takes a backseat. When your lordship convicts, it is for the crime; sentencing is for the criminal," said the lawyer. The SC, he argued, upheld death penalty in only those cases of the "rarest of rare" nature. Relying on landmark judgments of the apex court, Chaudhry argued that only when the alternative - life sentence - is "unquestionably foreclosed" should capital punishment be awarded. The human rights lawyer pointed out that there was a 'misconception' among people that life term meant 14 years. "Life term means life. But this is subject to remission, which is in turn is subject to the state government's discretion," he said. Chaudhry argued that in Maharashtra, a convict has to serve a minimum of 40 years to 60 years in jail before being considered for remission, in serious cases relating to POTA, TADA, MCOCA and terror. Two probabilities, Chaudhry argued, gain significance. One is probability of the accused continuing to be a threat to society, and the second is his reformation that needs to be examined before death is awarded. Further arguing against death, he said if someone is behind bars for 40 years, 'how can he be a threat to society?'. He added that the accused in the present case were reformed. Chaudhry also quoted Irish writer Jonathan Swift, who had remarked, "Laws are like cobwebs, which may catch small flies, but lets wasps and hornets break through." The lawyer's reference was to the mastermind behind the 7/11 blasts, Azam Cheema. "These accused were delivery boys at best as the entire diabolical enterprise was of Azam Cheema and the ISI," he stressed and said, "Law is meant to preserve life; not take life, except in the rarest of rare case." (source: The Indian Express) PAKISTAN: Pakistani court refuses to halt execution of paraplegic man Pakistan's highest court on Monday refused to halt the execution of the country's first known paraplegic death-row convict, a decision handed down one day before he's scheduled to be hanged at a high-security prison, according to a lawyer and an international rights group. Abdul Basit, 43, has been paralyzed from the waist down and uses a wheelchair since contracting meningitis in prison in 2010, said Sara Belal, a lawyer at the Justice Project Pakistan legal aid group. He has been on death row since 2009 after being convicted of murdering a man in a financial dispute in Punjab province. The Supreme Court of Pakistan rejected a plea to grant a stay of execution for Basit, according to Belal and the human rights group Reprieve. Court officials could not be reached for comment after hours Monday. Basit's mother Nusrat Perveen told The Associated Press they met with him for the final time on Monday at a jail in the city of Faisalabad and said their last hope was a pardon from President Mamnoon Hussain. "I beg to the president to pardon my son," she said. "My son was a healthy man but he became disabled in jail." Perveen said jail officials told her they will hang Basit before dawn Tuesday. Basit's lawyers had previously filed a petition arguing that hanging him would constitute cruel and inhuman punishment. Amnesty International urged Pakistan to halt Basit's execution and called for a moratorium on all executions in the country. "Instead of debating the logistics of how to put a man in a wheelchair to death, the authorities in Pakistan should grant reprieve to Abdul Basit," Sultana Noon, Amnesty International's Pakistan researcher, said in a statement. "This case has once again drawn widespread attention to the cruelty of the relentless conveyer belt of executions in Pakistan." According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, authorities have hanged 236 people after lifting a 2008 moratorium on executions in December after a deadly Taliban attack on a school in the northwestern city of Peshawar killed 150 people, mostly children. But only 1 in 10 of the 236 prisoners executed since December were convicted of a terror attack. Meanwhile, Pakistan's military in a statement Monday that military courts had handed down death sentences to nine "hard core terrorists" who had killed civilians and security officials. (source: Associated Press) *************** Calls for stay of execution for paralyzed Pakistani man----Rights groups, church official deplore 'cruel' decision A rights group has called on Pakistan's president to stop the imminent execution of a paraplegic man, while Catholic officials in the country are also urging mercy. Abdul Basit, 43, is scheduled to be executed Sept. 22. Basit, who is paralyzed from the waist down, was sentenced to death in 2009 after he was convicted of killing a man. He maintains his innocence but a petition calling for a stay of execution was dismissed by a court in Lahore in August. In a statement Sept. 21, the Lahore-based Human Rights Commission of Pakistan expressed "shock" to learn that authorities planned to proceed with Basit's execution. The group noted that international human rights principles call for special considerations for people with physical disabilities, while Basit's petition to the president is also still pending. "In these circumstances, the execution of Abdul Basit will offend ... all norms of civilized justice, raise awkward questions about the Pakistan justice system's insensitivity to humanitarian imperatives, and indict the Pakistan state and society as brutal entities," the statement said. Father Aftab James Paul of the Diocesan Commission for Interreligious Dialogue in Faisalabad deplored the planned execution. "The government should change his death sentence to life imprisonment if it doesn't want to free him. But hanging a paraplegic inmate will be a cruel decision," he said. "Today, the world is marking the International Day of Peace. We can contribute to peace by sparing the life of Abdul Basit," he added. Pakistan lifted a 6-year moratorium on capital punishment in December after a deadly Taliban assault on a school in Peshawar resulted in the deaths of 132 children. The government initially reinstated executions for terror convicts, but later resumed hanging for all death row inmates. Since December, 236 people have been hanged in Pakistan despite strong opposition from rights groups and the international community. (source: ucanews.com) **************** Halt execution of paralysed man due to take place tomorrow Pakistan must halt tomorrow's scheduled hanging of a paraplegic man who developed tubercular (TB) meningitis while on death row, and immediately impose a moratorium on all executions, Amnesty International said. Abdul Basit, who is paralysed from the waist down, was convicted of murder six years ago but has always maintained his innocence. His execution was originally due to be carried out on 29 July 2015, but the Lahore High Court stayed his execution at the 11th hour after a petition was filed by his lawyers arguing his hanging would constitute cruel and inhuman punishment. The Court rejected the petition and gave the prison authorities a green light for the hanging to go ahead on 22 September. "Instead of debating the logistics of how to put a man in a wheelchair to death, the authorities in Pakistan should grant reprieve to Abdul Basit," said Sultana Noon, Amnesty International???s Pakistan Researcher. "This case has once again drawn widespread attention to the cruelty of the relentless conveyer belt of executions in Pakistan. At least 240 people have been put to death since December 2014 - a staggeringly high number that makes it 1 of the top 3 executing countries in the world. Pakistan should immediately impose a moratorium on executions with a view to the full abolition of the death penalty." Abdul Basit became paralysed in 2010 due to the inhumane conditions in which he was kept in Central Jail Faisalabad, and was not given sufficient healthcare after being diagnosed with TB meningitis, leading to severe spinal cord damage. Background In December 2014, Pakistan resumed executions after a 6 year pause with the government claiming that this was necessary to fight terrorism. Since then Amnesty International has recorded 240 executions, many of which have been carried out in violation of Pakistan's commitment to international law, making Pakistan one of the most prolific executioners in the world in 2015. Around 8,000 prisoners are currently on death row. Amnesty International has repeatedly called for an immediate halt to executions as a 1st step towards the eventual repeal of the death penalty in Pakistan. (source: Amnesty International) *************** Pakistan confirms death sentences for 9 militants linked to terrorist attacks Pakistan's army Monday announced the death penalty for 9 hardline militants linked to a series of terrorist attacks across the country. The men were convicted by military courts established as part of a crackdown on militancy following a massacre at a school in the north-west city of Peshawar on Dec 16 last year, in which more than 150 people, mostly children, were killed. Parliament approved the use of the courts for the next 2 years, and the Supreme Court endorsed the move last month, rejecting claims it was unconstitutional. "The army chief confirms death sentence of 9 hard core terrorists involved in killing civilians/law enforcement agencies personnel in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province and sectarian killings," in south-western Baluchistan province, military spokesman Major-General Asim Bajwa said in a brief tweet. The militants were also involved in several other incidents including attacks on senior army officials and a mosque in the northwestern city of Nowshera. "One terrorist(was)awarded life imprisonment," Maj-Gen Bajwa said but did not disclose the convicted person's name or other details. The army announced the first verdicts and sentences from the new courts in April when 6 militants were condemned to death and another jailed for life, all on terrorism charges. On Aug 13, it announced death sentences for 7 more militants for their involvement in the Peshawar school massacre and an attack on a bus carrying members of the minority Shi'ite Ismaili community. (source: Agence France-Presse) SAUDI ARABIA----impending juvenile execution Social media users call for freeing a Saudi teen ordered to death by crucifixion In 2012, then-17-year-old Ali Mohammed al-Nimr was arrested on questionable charges of illegal protesting and gun possession, the International Business Times reported. It was part of the kingdom's crackdown on anti-government protests in the Qatif province, though it's unclear how involved al-Nimr was in the demonstrations. There was never any evidence to support the gun charge, let alone the accusations of "waging war on God." Two years later he was sentenced to "death by crucifixion." Britan-based legal aid group Reprieve said the teen was tortured to force a confession, and it's likely he was targeted solely because of who his uncle is. Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr is a well-known critic of the Saudi government. "No one should have to go through the ordeal Ali has suffered - torture, forced 'confession' and an unfair, secret trial process, resulting in a sentence of death by 'crucifixion,'" Reprieve Director Maya Foa said in a statement. So when word spread about al-Nimr last week, social media users organized a Twitter storm to bring his case to the forefront. (source: albawaba.com) PHILIPPINES: The alternative What do the violent deaths of a 2-year-old girl from Minglanilla, a young lawyer from Mandaue, and a university coed from Lapu-Lapu City remind us? That no one is safe anymore, wherever the place, whatever the time. Lawyer Amelie Ocanada-Alegre was headed home, probably looking forward to a restful evening. But criminals declared no one should feel safe even with others around. They pumped bullets into her face and other parts of the body. Ritsanlyn Donaire was left at home with stepfather Nicodemo Deloy, a construction worker. He commanded her to sleep, but the little girl was sick and restless. Annoyed, he reportedly punched the 2-year-old and hit her head on the wall, driving sleep only farther away. Coed Karen Kaye Montebon felt safe in her house. But the criminals declared no family home was private or sacred. So, at the very young age of 17, Karen Kaye breathed her last. Ritsanlyn's stepfather reportedly said he was remorseful, but no tear was shed. Better that than crocodile tears. Neighbors said he and the toddler's mother used illegal drugs. Also, that prior to Ritsanlyn's mauling, Deloy was irritable and worried about the late arrival of his wife. As if any explanation is ever enough to justify cruelty to a child. Having a 6-year-old grandson who is my constant source of joy, I share the mother's feeling of irreparable loss. But that does not stop me from asking why she continued to expose her child to danger at the hands of her live-in partner. Neighbors were quick to share that they had known past instances of abuse on the little girl. What happened to a mother's ferocious instinct to protect her child? Amelie's and Karen's perpetrators are still at large. To date, the motives for their killings are still big unknowns. And the hands that snuffed their lives cannot even be called suspects, just "persons of interest." Very visible on the freedom wall set up for Karen were writings of :Kill all the criminals!," "Nigara na ang mga criminal!," "We need you, Duterte!" and "Yes to death penalty! Yes to death penalty!" All with exclamation points, shouting out feelings of anger, pain, helplessness, frustration, hopelessness, desperation, depression. I see where they're coming from. Would that the victims were still in hospitals, being cared for and nurtured to recovery! Even if connected to tubes, far from flat-lining, doctors and nurses consulting each other...these could give us hope. I can see the fascination with (Rodrigo) Duterte and with the death penalty. Abolished in 1987, reintroduced in 1993, and abolished again in 2006. How about resurrecting it once again? A knee-jerk reaction, really. Even in the U.S., having the death penalty did not make much difference. Its 31 states without death penalty consistently showed lower murder rates, than the 19 states with death penalty. In rejecting calls for reviving the death penalty, anti-apartheid revolutionary and South African president Nelson Mandela puts it succinctly, "That type of vengeance does not help us, to kill people merely because they have killed others." So instead, can our law enforcers, investigators and crime fighters go faster and smarter, please? (source: Opinion, Lelani Echaves; Philippine Sn Star) GREAT BRITAIN: Hangmen, Royal Court, theatre review: Play about the last public executioners in Britain is a flawless treat True, you might want to think twice before declaring that this play about the last public hangmen in Britain is "drop-dead hilarious" or "perfectly executed". But that's a pretty exact description both of the blackly comic brilliance of Martin McDonagh's writing in the piece (which marks his long-awaited return to the Royal Court) and of the sterling virtues of Matthew Dunster's consummately well-cast and performed production. The American musical Fields of Ambrosia ("where everyone knows ya") has gone down in the annals of infamy for the unintentionally killing mirth that it aroused with its portrait of an intinerant executioner and his portable electric chair. Set in 1963 and then in 1965 on the very day that the death penalty was scrapped in this country, McDonagh's play, by contrast, adds up to a stinging indictment of capital punishment but never can the case against it have been mounted with such blissfully disreputable humour in a work that refuses, to put it mildly, to wear its heart on its sleeve. We start in a brick prison cell where the hanging of a young man veers into grotesque farce. The hangmen are all three-piece-suits and dicky-bows and standing-on-their dignity, even correcting the youth's grammar ("hanged" not "hung") as he frantically resists He's told that it will be easier for him if he relaxes: "It won't be easier for me. I'll be dead". Belying the front of pernickety professionalism, the episode is fraught with bad-joke bungling. The whole set then lifts (the ace design is by Anna Fleischle) to reveal the cosy, nicotine-coloured bar of the pub in Oldham where David Morrisey's sublimely tinpot-but-touchy Harry, the last hangman, is now mine host, surrounded by a collection of goon-like sychophants who laugh like drains at his bumptious remarks and really get off on their proximity to the dealer in death. The Northern-ness is in deliciously dour inverted commas. "You wanna watch yourself, lad. We're not all friendly up north"; the figure thus addressed is Johnny Flynn's disquietingly charismatic Mooney, who, it turns out, has been hired to be a "vaguely menacing" but is more Pete'n'Dud than Pinter. Why is he chatting up Harry's shy, moping adolescent daughter Shirley (gorgeously played by Bronwyn James). A quoter of Nietzsche, Mooney also gets to deliver one of the more bottomlessly banal sentences in world drama: "I'm slow with nuts". The immaculate ingenuity and off-beam symmetry of the plotting is a thing of wonder. I won't spoil it for you, except to say that, on this day of abolition, we have not seen the last of nooses or possible miscarriages of justice. Reece Shearsmith is spot-on conveying the hapless, pervy resentment as the assistant still smarting that the priggish Harry sacked him for tittering at the enormous penis on the corpse of one of their victims. And John Hodgkinson is wonderfully imposing at the real-life Pierrepoint, Harry's rival who arrives at a massively inconvenient moment and proceeds to anatomise his cowardice and his feeble dependence on his dubious status. A flawless treat. (source: The Independent) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 22 08:27:12 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 08:27:12 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----DEL. S.C., FLA., LA., OHIO Message-ID: Sept. 22 DELAWLARE: Delaware groups say it's time to revoke the death penalty The Complexities of Color Coalition. the Delaware chapter of the NAACP, the Delaware Repeal Project and the Unitarian Universalists of Southern Delaware"announced the 1st of 4 town hall meetings in the effort to repeal the death penalty Monday. The 1st meeting will take place in Lewes, Del. on Sept. 24 at 7 p.m. at the new Unitarian Universalists of Southern Delaware building. The group says they encourage people of all races and view points to attend the meetings. Dr. Donald Morton, executive director of the Complexities of Color Coalition says he welcomes a debate on the topic and is hopeful that death penalty reform will pass during the next legislative session. "We believe that (the meetings) are critically important to making sure that is what is done on behalf of the citizens of the state Delaware what is happening in legislative hall is done for the right reasons and by those individuals that we've elected," Morton says. (source: WMDT news) SOUTH CAROLINA: Columbia attorney Deborah Barbier assigned to Roof-related case A federal judge on Monday appointed Columbia defense attorney Deborah Barbier to represent a friend of Dylann Roof's, the Columbia area man charged with murder in connection with the June shooting deaths of 9 African-American churchgoers at a Charleston church. Roof stayed with Joey Meek, 21, at Meek's mother's trailer in a Red Bank mobile home park in the weeks before the June 17 slayings. A federal indictment made public Friday alleges Meek knew about Roof's plans to shoot African-American parishioners at Emanuel AME Church in Charleston before the June 17 killings. And the indictment said he "did not, as soon as possible, make known the same to some judge or other person in civil authority under the United States." The indictment also alleges that on June 18, a day after the shootings, Meek told an FBI agent "he did not know specifics of Dylann Roof's plan" to kill people at the church. The document alleged "Meek's statements and representations denying such specifics were false, fictitious and fraudulent when made." The FBI agent had gone to interview Meek about Roof the day after the Charleston killings, which have emerged as one of the nation's most horrific mass killings in recent years. Barbier, 46, whose father was an FBI agent, is a former federal prosecutor with wide experience in both state and federal criminal cases. She declined comment Monday afternoon. In a 2012 interview about her work, Barbier said federal court "is not a place for amateurs" and to be a good trial lawyer "you have to have a very thick skin." Under the order by U.S. Magistrate Judge Shiva Hodges, Barbier will defend Meek at taxpayer expense. To receive a court-appointed lawyer, Meek had to qualify as being too poor to pay for a lawyer. Under the Constitution, poor defendants in criminal cases are entitled to have a competent lawyer. Meek faces a maximum of 8 years in prison on both the charges. Barbier has represented a variety of high-profile defendants in state and federal courts since leaving the U.S. Attorney's office in Columbia in 2012. Currently, she is representing a client in the high-profile Berkeley County school case, which is being investigated by the state grand jury. Earlier this year in federal court, she represented former Williamsburg County Sheriff Michael Johnson, who was convicted in a jury trial of a white collar fraud scheme. As a prosecutor, one of Barbier's more publicized cases involved an undercover agent who penetrated a secret Lexington County illegal major cockfighting operation. After that 2010 trial, the jury convicted 6 defendants, most of whom wound up with prison sentences. She also prosecuted former Lee County Sheriff E.J. Mevin, who was convicted in 2010 on federal racketeering charges, and assorted drug dealers and white collar criminals. In the federal court system, judges and prosecutors usually prefer to have an experienced defense lawyer on the other side because it lessens the chance of an appeal overturning a case because a defendant didn't receive adequate representation. Also, as a former federal prosecutor, Barbier will presumably know the strengths and weaknesses of the case against Meek. Although Deborah Butcher, a Camden attorney who represented Meek on Friday for his 1st court appearance, has extensive state criminal experience, a review of U.S. court records turned up no federal criminal cases that she had been involved in. Butcher is no longer involved in Meek's defense, according to federal court records. Roof has been charged with murder in both state and federal courts. Ninth Circuit Solicitor Scarlett Wilson is seeking the death penalty, and a tentative date for trial on those charges is early July. Federal prosecutors have not yet decided to seek the death penalty; no date has been set for his trial. (source: thestate.com) FLORIDA: Defense attorneys request suppression of Toledo's statements----Bodies of mother, 2 children missing Luis Toledo, accused of killing his wife and her 2 children 3 years ago, said to deputies after his arrest: "I'm never going to tell where the bodies are." That's according to testimony from Volusia County Sheriff's Office Investigator Bryan Ford during a hearing Monday in the case against Toledo. Toledo is charged with 2nd-degree murder in the slaying of his wife, Yessenia Suarez, 28, and 2 counts of 1st-degree murder in the killing of her children, Thalia, 9, and Michael, 8. The mother and children were reported missing from their home at 317 Covent Gardens Place in Deltona by the children's grandmother on Oct. 23, 2013. Their bodies have not been found. If convicted of 1st-degree murder, Toledo, 33, could face the death penalty. Toledo also suggested that investigators help him commit suicide. Toledo made the request on Oct. 26, 2013 to Volusia Sheriff's Office Sgt. Kurt Schoeps, Ford testified. "Mr. Toledo asked that Sgt. Schoeps arrange to take him back to the Covent Gardens house," Ford said. "And he said we could, I say we the Sheriff's Office, ... loosen his cuffs. He could slip his cuffs and pretend like he was trying to escape and we could shoot him." Later that day, Toledo did try to commit suicide by using his handcuffs to smash the glass inside a restroom at the Sheriff's Office. Toledo then used a glass shard to cut himself. Deputies broke into the restroom and used a Taser on Toledo to subdue him. Toledo, who was at one time a high-ranking member of the Latin Kings gang in Florida, wore an orange jail jumpsuit and handcuffs as he sat between 2 of his 3 defense attorneys and looked straight ahead during the testimony. Some women who identified themselves as Toledo's cousins sat in the audience and watched the proceedings. On the opposite side of the courtroom some of Suarez's family watched. Toledo, who at one point was studying to be a barber, had his hair and beard neatly trimmed. The hearing before Circuit Judge Raul Zambrano at the Volusia County Courthouse was based on a request to suppress Toledo's statements by defense attorneys' Jeff Deen, Michael Nielsen and Michael Nappi. Deen questioned Ford about whether investigators had told Toledo's defense attorney, which at the time was the Public Defender's Office, that they were talking to Toledo. Ford said no and that Toledo had asked to talk to them and had been given his Miranda rights. Deen also renewed a motion that Judge Zambrano stay the proceedings until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of Florida's death penalty. Florida is 1 of only 2 states with the death penalty that does not require a unanimous recommendation from a jury for a judge to impose a death sentence. The other state, Alabama, requires a supermajority but Florida only requires a majority vote from jurors, 7 to 5. Deen said that some circuits have stopped death penalty cases until the Supreme Court makes its decision. Judge Zambrano also asked if other circuits were going ahead with their death penalty cases. Deen said some others were going forward. Prosecutor Ed Davis argued against delaying the case, saying there was no reason to stop and that other courts were not stopping their death penalty cases. Zambrano said the hearing will continue on Tuesday and he will make a decision this week. Zambrano approved a defense request for Toledo to wear a white T-shirt beneath his orange jail jumpsuit on Tuesday after one of his defense attorneys asked, saying that the courthouse could get cold. (source: Pensacola News Journal) LOUISIANA: New study says Louisiana's system of execution is one in 'disrepair' Black Lives Matter has become a rallying cry for thousands of activists across the country for more than a year, heightening a debate over policing in the wake of high-profile officer-involved shootings. But a new study of capital punishment in Louisiana also calls into question the value of Black lives versus the lives of the state's white majority when it comes to how the state metes out the death penalty. A new white paper from the University of North Carolina details stark differences in the race of who the state chooses to execute and for what crimes capital punishment is seen as justified sentencing. Homicides of white residents are 10 times more likely to result in an execution than criminal deaths of Blacks. Homicides of white women are 48 times more likely to yield capital punishment than those of Black men. Prof. Frank Baumgartner, who authored the study, said "...these racial ... disparities are not measured by a few percentage points of difference. Rather, they differ by orders of magnitude, demonstrating that Louisiana's death penalty is plagued by vast inequities which will undermine public confidence in the state's ability to carry out the death penalty in a fair and impartial manner" in a news release. Louisiana's system of capital punishment has long been under scrutiny as death row inmates continue to battle the state on temperature indexes inside the Louisiana State Penitentiary, which are reported to reach well over 100 degrees in the summer months. The years-long legal wrangling between the state and 3 inmates facing capital punishment has not aided the public perception of death sentencing. The report also highlights the overwhelming favorability that white homicide victims, and their families, enjoy in the pursuit of justice. 79 % of the individuals executed in Louisiana in the modern era were convicted of killing white victims even though white victims are only 26 % of all murder victims in the state. Austin Sarat, a professor at Amherst College, called the state's system of execution one in "disrepair." Sarat, a professor of jurisprudence and political science, said Louisiana's problem, while more stark than other states, is not unique and represents a "pervasive problem" connected to administering the death penalty, citing recent attention to a spate of botched executions and the controversial search for drug cocktails to kill inmates as pharmacies and medial professionals back away from aiding state executions. Louisiana has come under fire as recently as 2014 for illegally obtaining drug cocktails for executions. Sarat co-authored the book From Lynch Mobs to the Killing State which paints a picture connecting the states that were home to the lynching era of the early 1900s, mostly of Black southern men, to who today are home to high rates of capital punishment, mostly involving Black and Hispanic men. Sarat said the reasons for the racial gap in capital sentencing "speak for themselves," calling the death penalty as a tool and its political application a nationwide "mechanism for maintaining racial privilege." The UNC study also states that 74 % of death sentences in Louisiana in the past 40 years have been for killing a white victim. Additionally, "there are no documented cases in the entire history of Louisiana," according to the report, "where a White person has been executed for killing a Black male." The full study will appear this fall in the New Orleans Journal of Public Interest Law published by Loyola University. (source: Louisiana Weekly) ************ Killers of black men less likely to get the death penalty It's extremely rare for the killer of a black male to receive the death penalty, according to a new study published by Loyola University. "Across the state 72 % of the homicide victims are black, only 28 % are white or other, so you would expect that it would be somewhere in line with that with the use of the death sentence, but its not," said Tim Lyman, the study's co-author. Lyman co-wrote the study with Frank Baumgartner, a political science professor. For the past five years, they have been collecting data on every execution and death sentence since 1976. Out of 1,400 executions across the country, only 17 involved someone who killed a black victim. In the state of Louisiana, Baumgartner says the racial disparity is even more extreme. "There has never been a white person in the history of Louisiana executed for killing a black man," said Baumgartner. That's a big contrast to crimes where a white woman is killed. The study found that those who murder white females are 48 times more likely to be executed. They believe these racial and gender discrepancies are deeply rooted in historical patterns. Baumgartner explained, "In particular it was based on a fear of some kind of sexual crime targeted toward white females." Marjorie Esman with the ACLU was shocked by the numbers and says it's time to reevaluate how the country views capital punishment. "The problems in the system are so ingrained that we really need to give it a halt because we can't as a society do it fairly and I think that's what these numbers show is that we can't do it fairly," said Esman. If you would like to view the entire study visit: http://www.unc.edu/~fbaum/articles/Louisiana-RaceOfVictim-LJPIL-Fall2015.pdf (source: WWL TV news) OHIO: Defending Ohio's indigents pays little The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1963 that a fair trial requires adequate legal representation, even if the defendant can't afford it. But 52 years after that decision, critics say the criminal-defense system for indigent people is both dramatically underfunded and ripe for abuse. In Ohio, providing legal defense for those who can't afford it has largely been left to each county. Consequently, there is little consistency. Indigent defense is provided through various state and/or county public-defenders offices or private lawyers appointed by a judge. 39 of Ohio's 88 counties exclusively appoint private counsel to indigent defendants. But even in the 49 counties that have their own public defender's office, such as Franklin County, or rely on the state public defender's office, private, court-appointed lawyers are needed. Each county sets its own hourly rates and caps for reimbursing court-appointed lawyers. In many cases, those rates haven't changed for decades. The result, said Ohio Public Defender Timothy Young, is that more and more of the most-qualified and most-experienced lawyers are cutting back on court-appointed work, leaving it to less-experienced attorneys who are willing to take less money to gain the experience. What the government has done is kept pay low to subsidize the prosecution of their clients that they're sworn to defend, at the cost of their constitutional obligation," said Young, a staunch advocate of reforming the state's indigent-defense system. "Don't get me wrong: there are some really good lawyers still doing this work. But we're losing good lawyers by the droves." In Licking County, for example, the rate for reimbursing court-appointed lawyers is $35 an hour for out-of-court work and $45 for in-court time, up to a maximum reimbursement of $1,000 for a felony case - that's less than many of the area's top lawyers charge just as a retainer fee. Licking's rate is one of the lowest in the state. Kristin Burkett, partner in the Burkett-Sanderson law firm that provides most of the county's indigent defense work, explained: "When you figure the cost of providing an office and staff, health and retirement benefits, utilities and supplies, we're working for a lot less than that." "It's atrocious," said Licking County Common Pleas Judge David Branstool, who estimated that 90 percent of the cases in his court qualify for court-appointed defense. "It's been 20 years since the Licking County commissioners have addressed this. The commissioners, judges, prosecutors have all had raises in that time. Yet the people who we expect to provide the same quality of work haven't. It's not fair. It's a problem, and it's an embarrassment." Licking County Commissioner Tim Bubb disagreed: "If there's a problem, they haven't told us that." Bubb blamed the state for the funding problems. When the state instituted its system of providing criminal defense for those who couldn't afford it, the plan was that the state and the counties would split the costs equally, he said. But when the recession hit, the state began to back off on its share of local indigent-defense funding, Bubb said. By 2008, the state's portion was down to 25 %, with the counties forced to make up the difference. Since then, the state's portion has slowly started to grow again, with the latest increase, from 40 % to 48 % (50 % for death-penalty cases), occurring in July. "It's not like that's found money," Bubb said. "We were punished. The state didn't live up to its end of the bargain, and for a decade the counties have paid dearly for the state's portion." Young thinks that indigent defense should be the sole responsibility of the state and proposed legislation that would make it a state-funded system by adding 10 % to the state's share over a 6-year period. "It was dead on arrival," Young said. "It got 1 hearing in the legislature. I was told that it was too controversial." Young tried again with another proposal for the state's last budget cycle that would keep the 50-50 state/county split but add $20 million to the system to allow every county to pay the same rate. That one didn't go anywhere, either. The Ohio Administrative Code states that the assignment of an attorney "should be independent from individual influence or choice by any member of the judiciary." Many judges get around that by having a magistrate or another member of the court make the selections. Some judges divide their lists of lawyers seeking court-appointed work into segments, separating those qualified for more-serious felonies from those who are less experienced and relegated to the lower-level crimes. Those then are appointed on a straight rotation, picking the next name on the list. But there's little oversight, and some say the system invites conflicts, particularly when attorneys donate to judicial campaigns. Franklin County Common Pleas Judge David Young, whose term on the bench began July 1, dismissed the notion that favoritism plays a role in picking attorneys for indigent defendants. "(The campaign contributions) had zero impact whatsoever," he said. Tim Young, the Ohio public defender and no relation to Judge Young, said that the very perception of a conflict is indication of a fatal flaw in the system. "I am not suggesting that there's any judge who's corrupt," he said. "Judges may never even see who contributes, or never intend for those contributions to buy any influence. But the perception of this is so driven by what the lawyers think that judges want, in the end it doesn't matter." Judges also are in the position to approve who meets the state's indigent standard, without any real time or resources to do much verification, and also are the ones who approve the bills submitted by court-appointed lawyers. "I don't think that we should be the gatekeeper deciding who gets cases and who doesn't," Branstool said. "Nor do I think we should be put in the position of having to audit the bills of the defense. But the way the system is now, I'm not going to leave it up to anybody else." (source: The Columbus Dispaptch) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 22 08:27:56 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 08:27:56 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OKLA., NEB., ARIZ., NEV., USA Message-ID: Sept. 22 OKLAHOMA----impending execution Attorneys for Oklahoma death row inmate Glossip file new affidavit claiming he was framed Defense attorneys for an Oklahoma death row inmate whose execution was delayed last week filed a new affidavit Monday from a 2nd former cellmate who claims the man was framed. Richard Glossip, 52, was just hours away from being executed Wednesday when the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals ordered his execution halted until Sept. 30 to give the court time to review a lengthy death penalty challenge that Glossip's lawyers filed a day earlier. His attorneys are trying to convince the appeals court that Glossip did not commit the 1997 beating death of Barry Alan Van Treese of Lawton. A co-defendant, Justin Sneed, confessed to beating Van Treese to death in an Oklahoma City motel room, but said he did so at Glossip's direction. The new affidavit from Joseph Tapley, whom the affidavit claims shared a cell with Sneed in 1997 at the Oklahoma County Jail, said he never heard Sneed say "anyone - especially not - Richard Glossip" enlisted him to kill the victim. Tapley's affidavit also claims Sneed discussed Van Treese's death 2 or 3 times while they were cellmates and that Sneed gave him "very detailed accounts" of how he killed Van Treese with a baseball bat. "I am sure that Justin Sneed acted alone," the affidavit said. "He never gave me any indication that someone else was involved. He never mentioned the name of Richard Glossip to me. If he had told me that someone else was involved I definitely would have remembered that." The affidavit says Tapley reached out to Glossip's defense attorneys on Sept. 15 and was interviewed Sunday. Previously, Glossip's attorneys gave the court an affidavit from inmate Michael Scott, who claims he heard Sneed say "he set Richard Glossip up, and that Richard Glossip didn't do anything." The Oklahoman reported Saturday, according to a prisons system document, that Scott once labeled himself a habitual liar. Glossip's attorneys for the appeals have argued that his trial representation didn't present enough evidence to discredit Sneed, who was sentenced to life in prison and testified against Glossip. A spokesman for Attorney General Scott Pruitt's office, which is defending Glossip's first-degree murder conviction and death sentence, did not immediately return a telephone call seeking comment Monday. Glossip was twice convicted of ordering the killing of Van Treese, who owned the Oklahoma City motel where Glossip worked. Prosecutors said Sneed, a motel handyman, admitted robbing and beating Van Treese, but said he did so only after Glossip promised to pay him $10,000. Had it not been halted, Glossip's execution would have been the 1st in Oklahoma since a sharply divided U.S. Supreme Court upheld the state's 3-drug lethal injection formula in June. (source: Associated Press) NEBRASKA: New lawsuit says death penalty ballot language 'unlawfully misleading,' 'unfairly slanted' An anti-death penalty group has filed a second lawsuit against a referendum to restore capital punishment off the 2016 ballot. Nebraskans for Public Safety, in a press release Monday, said the proposed ballot language, approved by Attorney General Doug Peterson, is "unlawfully misleading" and "unfairly slanted." The plaintiff named in the lawsuit, defense attorney Lyle Koenig, said the language inaccurately states that life in prison would be the "maximum" sentence allowable if the death penalty is not restored. In fact, it would be the only penalty allowed for 1st-degree murder if capital punishment is abolished, Koenig said, adding that the ballot language gives the incorrect impression that the repeal of the death penalty provides a more lenient sentence than life behind bars. "Nebraskans have respectful differences of opinion on the death penalty," he said. "However, I think we can agree that all voters deserve a fair explanation of what this vote is really about." The lawsuit follows one filed last week asking that the referendum be blocked because Gov. Pete Ricketts was not listed as one of the sponsors. The Republican governor has been a leading financial backer of the drive, and his privately funded political consultant helped coordinate the signature-collection effort. The Nebraska Legislature voted in the spring to repeal the death penalty, overriding Ricketts' veto. That prompted the formation of Nebraskans for the Death Penalty, which launched a petition drive to put the issue before voters in the 2016 election. The effort to get the issue on the ballot appears headed for success. Nebraskans for the Death Penalty turned in 166,692 signatures last month. On Friday, Secretary of State John Gale announced that more than enough signatures had been verified to place the issue on the ballot and suspend the repeal of the death penalty until that vote is taken. Gale said he could not make that official until the signature verification process is further along. Nebraskans for Public Safety includes 2 of the leading anti-death penalty groups in the state, ACLU of Nebraska and Nebraskans for Alternatives to the Death Penalty. Both lawsuits have been filed in Lancaster County District Court. (source: Omaha World-Herald) **************** Too civilized for death penalty Let's keep the death penalty out of Nebraska ("Death penalty repeal appears to be on hold," September 18). I am opposed to the death penalty for so many reasons. Mistakes are made and people are wrongfully convicted. The death penalty is meted out unfairly. If you are a person of color, you are far more likely to get the death penalty than if you are white. That is especially true if the victim is white. It is more expensive to have the death penalty option, rather than life in prison without possibility of parole because of the built-in safeguards. The money we save by abolishing the death penalty could be put to use elsewhere. Health professionals are required to attend, if not administer, the death penalty, which is a violation of the Hippocratic oath. It can be emotionally devastating to the prison personnel to lose someone they have overseen for a period of years and the death penalty is government-sanctioned murder. The United States should take the moral high ground by having life in prison with no possibility of parole as our ultimate penalty. We should not debase ourselves by putting ourselves on the same level as Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia and China. Certainly we are more civilized than that. Linda Ager, Lincoln *************** Hypocrisy on death penalty I read with continued amusement the hypocrisy demonstrated by the left over the death penalty petition initiative ("Governor responds to allegations in death penalty lawsuit," September 18). While they supported the people's right to vote on the minimum wage law, and will likely spearhead a similar drive for Medicaid expansion and other issues, the same effort by their opponents draws cries of foul, and outlandish claims that it subverts the democratic process. Another thing that seems to repeatedly drive them into an apoplectic frenzy is the funding provided by Governor Ricketts for a portion of the drive, which he did openly and honestly. All this is done while neglecting to detail where the funding for their counter effort is coming from; widely reported, including by the Journal Star ("Death penalty financial reports filed," July 2), to be George Soros, the foreign-born socialist billionaire, who has provided this funding through a Massachusetts shill organization in an attempt to hide his involvement. Dave Kendle, Lincoln (source for both: Letter to the Editor, Lincoln Journal Star) ARIZONA: Rosemary Velazco, Carlos Cruz update: Death penalty sought for parents of 3-year-old Surprise girl Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for a Surprise couple accused of killing their 3-year-old daughter four months ago. The Maricopa County Attorney's Office said Monday that the intent paperwork has been filed in the cases against 36-year-old Rosemary Velazco and 28-year-old Carlos Tercerro Cruz. Both pleaded not guilty to charges of 1st-degree murder and felony child abuse in June. Their trial date hasn't been set. Prosecutors say Alexandra Velazco-Tercerro weighed only 15 pounds when she was found dead May 23. Surprise police say the girl showed signs of extreme malnourishment and had numerous injuries. Authorities say the girl was placed in foster care at birth because she tested positive for methamphetamines. She was returned to her parents about 10 months later after they completed substance abuse and parenting classes. (source: ABC News) *********** Phoenix man, Christopher Licon, now facing death penalty over 2010 killings A Phoenix man convicted of killing his half-brother and 6-year-old nephew in 2010 now is facing the death penalty. Maricopa County Superior Court officials say jurors on Monday found 2 aggravating circumstances against 24-year-old Christopher Rey Licon. The trial's sentencing phase begins Tuesday. Last Monday, jurors rejected Licon's insanity defense and found him guilty of 1st-degree murder and kidnapping in the death of 6-year-old Xavier Jaquez. Licon also was convicted of 2nd-degree murder in the death of his half-brother, Angel Jaquez. He faces 16 to 25 years in prison for that death. Licon was accused of killing his half-brother in a drug dispute in December 2010 and then gunning down his nephew who witnessed the murder. He also was found guilty last week of kidnapping, burglary and tampering with evidence. (source: Associated Press) NEVADA: Court upholds death penalty in slaying of Las Vegas woman The Nevada Supreme Court today upheld the death penalty for Richard Haberstroh, convicted of abducting, sexually assaulting and strangling a Las Vegas woman. Haberstroh argued the death penalty was excessive. He said his family had a history of alcoholism, that he was abused as a child and had mental problems, according to court documents. In a unanimous decision, the court upheld the death penalty, noting, among other things, "the nature and circumstances of his crimes" and his "lengthy criminal record." On July 21, 1986, he abducted Donna Kitowski, 20, from a grocery store parking lot in Las Vegas, according to court records. He took her to the desert outside the city, robbed her, sexually assaulted her and strangled her, the records say. The attack caused irreparable brain damage that led to her death. Haberstroh, now 60, was sentenced to death. He was subsequently granted a new penalty hearing, but a jury returned the same sentence. (source: Associcated Press) **************** Trial underway for suspect in airman's shooting death Nathan Paet rushed out the door of his far southwest valley home, late to work at Nellis Air Force Base, and was gunned down before he could make it out of the garage. Shot five times, the 28-year-old staff sergeant stumbled back inside, bleeding through his camouflage fatigues, and fell to the floor. His wife, Michelle Paet, who prosecutors say wanted her husband out of the picture and planned the killing with her boyfriend, called police, as four young children watched their father die. Just moments earlier on the night of Dec. 1, 2010, Michael Rodriguez had sent a text message to Michelle Paet that read, "This contract is a pain." "This contract being the murder that they're planning, and that they're going to carry out," prosecutor Frank Coumou told jurors in opening statements of Rodriguez's death penalty trial Monday. Michelle Paet replied to the text: "My husband just woke up. I guess he's late. Lol." Rodriguez was waiting outside in his black Cadillac CTS with the alleged gunman, Corry Hawkins, prosecutors said. "I got it covered," Rodriguez told Michelle Paet. And just before the blasts from a .38-caliber handgun killed her husband, she replied: "He's rushing to get out the door. Lol." Rodriguez is the first of four defendants, along with Michelle Paet, Hawkins and Jessica Austin, to face trial in the killing. Defense lawyers portrayed Michelle Paet as the mastermind of the killing, and said she had tried to take out a life insurance policy on her husband as early as April 2009, long before she met Rodriguez. The Paets had raised four children, ages 2 through 9, together, and Nathan Paet was unaware of his wife's infidelity, prosecutors said. He was born in 1982 in Tamuning, Guam. He and Michelle were high school sweethearts. After graduation, Nathan joined the Air Force in April 2002, and the 2 married in 2006. At Nellis, Nathan Paet was the assistant non-commissioned officer-in-charge for the Strike Aircraft Maintenance Supply section of the 757th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron. Prosecutors said his life insurance policy was increased to $600,000 less than a month before he was killed. Authorities have said that Michelle Paet admitted to planning the killing in October 2010. But Rodriguez, who was addicted to painkillers, stood to reap none of the financial benefits, defense lawyer Alzora Jackson told jurors. She asked jurors to "determine if Mr. Rodriguez was capable of possessing the requisite intent" for 1st-degree murder. Metro officer John Harris responded to the southwest valley home, where he saw blood stains on the garage floor and a streak of red on the white door. He walked inside and found Michelle Paet kneeling over her husband, feigning CPR. Harris testified that the woman did not appear upset and her "demeanor did not match the situation." He asked her what could have happened. "It had to be random," she said. "It had to be completely random." Nothing was stolen, and neighbors reported seeing the black Cadillac speed off without headlights after they heard gunfire. As Nathan Paet lay dying, his wife reached her arms around the officer in what was described as a "flirtatious hug" that Harris found "strange, very strange." After paramedics arrived, one of the children looked up at Harris and asked, "Is my daddy going to be OK?" (source: Las Vegas Review-Journal) USA: U.S. justices unlikely to address death penalty's constitutionality When the last U.S. Supreme Court term ended in June with an unusual showdown over a decision approving Oklahoma's lethal injection process, some court watchers saw it as a sign the court might soon take up the bigger question of the constitutionality of the death penalty itself. But more recent signals from the court suggest that such a broad ruling is not likely any time soon, even though there are 3 death-penalty cases already on the docket for the new term, which begins Oct 5. In the June case, which upheld Oklahoma's procedures by a 5-to-4 margin, liberal justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined in a dissenting opinion that called for a full reexamination of capital punishment. As currently applied, Breyer wrote, the death penalty "likely constitutes a legally prohibited 'cruel and unusual punishment.'" Within 2 weeks of that June 29 decision, however, Breyer and Ginsburg indicated that they don't intend to raise their concerns in every death penalty case that comes before them. On July 14, the court rejected last-minute stay applications filed by Missouri inmate David Zink. In one of his court filings, Zink had asked the court to rule that the death penalty was unconstitutional. The court often rejects stay-of-execution applications without comment or a record of how justices voted, but it does note if justices publicly dissent, and neither Breyer nor Ginsburg did. This month, the court rejected a similar stay application from another Missouri inmate, Roderick Nunley. Again, neither Breyer nor Ginsburg publicly dissented and the inmate was executed. Their silence indicated that Breyer and Ginsburg were "not quite in the category of adamant opposition in all cases," said Kent Scheiddeger, legal director of the pro-death penalty Criminal Justice Legal Foundation. In any event, since 4 votes are needed to accept a case for consideration by the court, Breyer and Ginsburg would need two more justices to join them in support of hearing a case directly challenging the death penalty. Fellow liberal justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan also dissented in the Oklahoma case, but neither joined Breyer's opinion. The court's conservatives would be expected to uphold the death penalty, with Justice Anthony Kennedy, a conservative appointed by President Ronald Reagan, likely to be the swing vote. He joined liberals in the majority in 2002, when the court banned death sentences for the mentally disabled, and in a 2005 case in which the court said that people sentenced to death for offenses committed as juveniles could not be executed. But he voted with his fellow conservatives in June's lethal injection case. Some death penalty experts have suggested that Breyer's dissent in the Oklahoma case may have been carefully aimed. He was "writing not just for the public, but for Justice Kennedy," said Robert Dunham, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, a nonprofit that tracks the issue and does not take a stand on whether capital punishment should be abolished. NIBBLING AROUND THE EDGES Although death penalty opponents are now on alert that Breyer and Ginsburg are interested in a case that squarely attacks the death penalty, it could take time for the right case to come to the court. In the meantime, if the court-watchers' interpretations of Breyer and Ginsburg's moves this summer are accurate, the justices will likely continue to consider more discrete legal issues that nibble around the edges of the bigger constitutional question. The case this fall most likely to attract public attention to capital punishment involves allegations of prosecutorial misconduct in Georgia. In that case, a black man, Timothy Foster, was sentenced to death by an all-white jury, and the question before the Supreme Court will be whether prosecutors unlawfully struck potential black members of the jury. 2 other cases scheduled for the session will focus on narrower, state-specific issues concerning the death penalty process in Kansas and Florida. The high court has not seriously debated the constitutionality of the death penalty since the 1970s. In 1972, the justices effectively suspended it in the landmark Furman v. Georgia decision, ruling that the punishment was being imposed unconstitutionally. But the decision allowed states to re-write their laws to address the problem. Within 4 years, the court had approved new standards for death penalty cases, saying that, if states conformed to them, the punishment was constitutional. The death penalty is on the books in 31 states, and the federal government also authorizes the punishment in cases it prosecutes. There are signs that the U.S. public is turning away from the death penalty. The number of death sentences imposed fell to a 20-year low in 2014, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. The high-profile ruling in June, Glossip v. Gross, came at a time of increased focus on the death penalty following several botched executions. The lead plaintiff in that case, convicted murderer Richard Glossip, received a last minute stay from the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals on Sept. 16, after filing new court papers claiming his innocence. His execution has since been rescheduled for Sept. 30 absent further court intervention. (source: Reuters) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 22 08:29:55 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 08:29:55 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 22 PAKISTAN: Pakistan delays hanging of paraplegic man The planned hanging of a paraplegic prisoner convicted of murder in Pakistan has been delayed, his lawyer has said. Abdul Basit could not be hanged in compliance with the jail manual because he is in a wheelchair, a magistrate said when ordering the postponement. Pakistan's prison guidelines require that a prisoner stand on the gallows. Rights groups say hanging Basit would constitute cruel and degrading treatment. Abdul Basit, 43, is paralysed from the waist down and uses a wheelchair after becoming ill in prison. Pakistan reintroduced the death penalty in December 2014 and has hanged 239 people since. At the time, the government said it was a measure to combat terrorism after the Taliban massacred more than 150 people, most of them children, in a Peshawar school. The hanging of Abdul Basit has been put off not because of any questions over his trial or any media campaign, but due to a purely bureaucratic constraint: there was no way he could stand on his legs on the gallows and thereby allow the hangman to tie a noose of the right length. This length is calculated in relation to the height and weight of the convict and is meant to ensure instant, more humane death. Since the so-called "long-drop" method of hanging is the only form of execution allowed under the jail manual, there were fears that if applied to Abdul Basit, it could go seriously wrong. But the postponement came in the wee hours of Tuesday, barely an hour before the hanging, possibly to avoid any immediate controversy. The postponement has created an interesting situation. Basit cannot be hanged unless the authorities are willing to be seen as "barbaric" by rights watchers, or unless they amend jail rules. Basit was convicted 6 years ago of murder and was to have been hanged in Lahore last month - but that was postponed. A court then ordered the jail authorities to go ahead with the hanging, even though his mercy petition filed on 22 July before the president is still pending. Both the Supreme Court and the Lahore High Court have given their consent to the execution. It is unclear if any time limit was imposed on the most recent postponement. "Why do they want his execution? He is already severely sick, what will they get from his hanging?" Basit's mother, Nusrat Perveen, told AFP. Campaigners say there is a danger that the hanging could go wrong and end up being a breach of the prisoner's dignity - which is protected by Pakistani laws. "The rules presume that the convict [can] walk up to the gallows, which is not possible in Abdul Basit's case," Wassam Waheed, a spokesman for Justice Project Pakistan (JPP) told the BBC. In a statement on Sunday the independent Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) described the court order to hang Abdul Basit as an offence "against all norms of civilised justice" which would raise awkward questions about the Pakistani justice system and "indict the Pakistani state and society as brutal entities". The HRCP also urged the president to stay the execution and grant him a reprieve. Pakistan has the world's largest number of death row inmates, with more than 8,000 people reported to be awaiting execution. It is on course to have one of the highest rates of executions in the world. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Executions around the world Pakistan has executed at least 239 people since December 2014 In July Amnesty said it believed Iran had put 694 people to death between 1 January and 15 July In August, Amnesty International said Saudi Arabia had executed 102 people in the first 6 months of 2015, compared with 90 in the whole of 2014 Figures for executions in some other countries in 2015 are not yet available By the end of last year, the other countries with the highest number of reported executions were Iraq: 61, USA: 35, and Sudan: 23 China and North Korea refuse to divulge information on the number of executions that take place within their borders (source: BBC news) VIETNAM: Killer of 4 in northern Vietnam faces death penalty Police in the northern province of Yen Bai have proposed that the local People's Procuracy prosecute a man for murdering 4 people last month and demand the death penalty for him. The provincial police on Monday said they had completed their investigation into the case in which Dang Van Hung, 26, killed four members in a family in Van Yen District on August 12. Hung should be prosecuted for that murder and sentenced to death, pursuant to Article 93 of the Penal Code, police said in their conclusion. Hung, along with 36-year-old Nguyen Thi Han, who was his family's maid, was arrested on August 15 in Luc Yen District, a few kilometers away from where he killed the victims. Investigation showed that Hung forced Han to go with him after he killed Tran Van Long, 32, his 20-year-old wife Phan Thi Hoa, 2-year-old son Tran Van Tuyen, and sister-in-law, 15-year-old Phan Thi Ha. At 4:00 pm on August 12, Hung went to his mountainous field in Van Yen, bringing along with him a machete and a bush hook. On his way Hung met Long and Hoa in an area about 300 meters from his field and asked them why they were working in his family's field. After Long replied that he was working in the area that his parents-in-law had given him, Hung kicked him in his face, causing him to fall to the ground. Long then asked his wife to phone his father-in-law and she followed suit. Hung requested her to hand her cellphone to him but Hoa turned him down. Long ran away but Hung chased him and slashed him to death. Hung then returned and killed Hoa and the 2 other victims. He moved on to rush to the tent in his family's mountainous field, where he informed his father of the killings and took away 2 guns before fleeing. On the way out of the field, he met Han and forced her to go along with him. Hung threw his knives and guns during the escape, and they were arrested on August 15 morning in Khanh Hoa Commune in Luc Yen. Police released Han a day later after investigation showed that she was not involved in the murder and did not know about it, Colonel Pham Ngoc Thang, deputy director of the provincial Police Department, told Tuoi Tre (Youth) newspaper. Han only knew about the killings when Hung revealed them to her, Col. Thang said. (source: Tuoi Tre News) AUSTRALIA: AFP actions at odds with death-penalty foes On April 30 this year, Australia's Justice Minister Michael Keenan made a disturbing revelation: 24 hours after two Australians lost their lives on the killing fields of Indonesia's Nusa Kambangan, Keenan released a statement defending the Australian Federal Police's approach to international co-operation in death-penalty situations, saying it "reflects Australia's position on the death penalty". If it does, though, we're in deep trouble. Despite the AFP commissioner's assurances, in May this year, that the organisation had "tightened" its co-operation with death-penalty states, 1847 individuals have been exposed to the risk of execution over the past 5 years - an average of one a day. How many of these are Australian citizens is anyone's guess because, apparently, police don't track that data; an assertion that stretches belief almost as much as the claim that the current approach delivers "appropriate checks, safeguards and balances". Indeed, the word "balance" is verging on unseemly, in light of figures revealing that requests for assistance are almost never refused. Information on the 15 occasions in recent years when the AFP has declined to provide information, released under FOI, offers no comfort. A cursory analysis of these documents suggests that - when you remove the double counting, the requests that were subsequently approved, and the requests rejected on purely procedural grounds - possibly as few as 3 requests for assistance were declined because of perceived risks to the individual. So we're left to conclude that our federal police, for whatever reason, do not give any serious weight to death-penalty risks when deciding whether to release information to foreign law enforcement. There is no other way to construe these grim statistics and no amount of evasion or justification - by the commissioner or the Minister for Justice, or by successive Australian governments that have failed to deal with this nefarious policy conundrum - can make it otherwise. Why this is a surprise to anyone, though, is bewildering. Almost 10 years ago, in a Federal Court case brought by members of the Bali 9, Justice Paul Finn observed that Australia's opposition to the death penalty "has not been pursued unqualifiedly in our legislation and guides in relation to dealings with foreign countries". Despite 2009 revisions to the AFP guideline - a document described by legal expert Simon Bronitt as "entirely agnostic" with respect to the death penalty - not much has changed. In 2010, the Law Council of Australia offered strident criticism of the new guideline, noting with concern the "broad discretion" available to the AFP and pointing to a "balancing exercise that is neither weighted in favour nor against the provision of information in death-penalty cases". That assessment, it now seems, was wildly optimistic. Almost every request for assistance from death-penalty states is approved, which might say something about police culture, and a fixation with law enforcement outcomes. The tendency to view the world through the prism of the "thin blue line" might also explain why arguments in favour of unfettered co-operation are uncomfortably similar to those advanced by police against our current approach to extradition, which requires a refusal to extradite in capital cases unless assurances are provided that the death penalty won't be carried out. In 1997, the president of the AFP Association denounced "conditional" extradition, arguing that Australia would become a "safe haven" for murderers and terrorists. In the decades since its adoption, however, there is no evidence to suggest this approach - now widely adopted around the world - has significantly hampered effective law enforcement. There's little to be gained from a forensic dissection of police procedure but there's no doubt that effective policing of transnational organised crime relies to a large extent on the capacity to exchange information in real time. Police will naturally find any measures that restrict information exchange unpalatable. When it comes to actual life-and-death decisions, though, something more robust than a guideline is called for, let alone one as nebulous as the AFP's guideline for death-penalty situations. If anyone was in any doubt about that, they need only consider the precarious balancing act that has put 1847 lives at risk. The realisation of a "better balance" as recommended by Justice Finn remains frustratingly remote. It may be possible, but not unless we confront the facts; the truth, as it's said, is a bitter pill to swallow. If it's any consolation to those caught in the crossfire, coming to grips with the true state of affairs is not about vilifying our law enforcement agencies, which are in the unenviable position of having to balance complex and occasionally contradictory justice objectives - to say nothing of flip-flopping ministerial directives - under the gaze of a vengeful public. But a genuine remedy for these bleak circumstances is not, in the end, about blaming our federal police for failings that are well beyond their capacity to address. It's about relieving them of a burden they shouldn't have to bear. (source: Sarah Gill has worked as a writer, researcher and government policy analyst. She is undertaking postgraduate study in law, policy and government at the University of Western Australia----The Age) INDIA: 11/7 accused earned respect of fellow inmates: Arun Ferreira The last among the 9 witnesses to testify, to seek a lenient sentence for convicts in the 2006 Mumbai serial train blasts case, was Arun Ferreira, a writer and social activist, who was acquitted on charges of being involved in naxal activities. Ferreira who was released from jail after being incarcerated for four years and eight months, told the special MCOCA court on Monday how he and 3 other accused in the blasts case were kept in solitary confinement in the phansi (hanging) yard at the Nagpur jail, which was meant for convicts on the death row. He described it as a collection of solitary cells adjoining the gallows. The witness said he was in jail from 2007, and there were 11 cases against him, in which he was acquitted. He said that it was a practice to keep terror accused in the cells. Ferreira said he was acquainted with 10 of the accused while he was in that jail and knew Mohammed Shafi, Sajid Ansari and Muzammil Shaikh well. He said Sajid was soft-spoken and always cooperated with jail authorities in solving problems. Ferreira described Shafi as an emotional person who comforted others who were awarded the death penalty, and would give them hope of being released. He stated that Muzammil used to pass time reading books and studying the chargesheet to prepare his defence in the case. Ferreira claimed the accused had earned the respect of fellow inmates as they helped them draft applications and in correspondence. Referring to his stint in solitary confinement, Ferreira said it had affected him mentally and when released he found it difficult to adjust to social life. He alleged that he remembered seeing the accused bruised when they were brought to the Nagpur jail from Arthur Road jail. In his cross-examination by special public prosecutor Raja Thakare, Fereirra said he was not in touch with the accused or any of their relatives since his release. He further said Sajid's brother Khaled had approached him to appear before the court on Monday. Following the deposition, advocate for the defence, Yug Chaudhary, while opposing the death penalty told the court that the accused had committed the offence under duress and this was a mitigating factor. He said the prosecution had to show that the accused could not be reformed. He said there was no evidence to show the death sentence acted as a greater deterrent than life imprisonment. 'Neighbours welcomed me back but I'm not happy' (source: The Times of India) ******* 2006 Mumbai train blasts: Defence examines its last witness Advocate Chaudhari restricted his arguments on a number of findings laid down by the apex court, wherein the court had described the conditionswhich attract capital punishment. While advancing his defence arguments in the 2006 serial train blast case, senior advocate Yug Chaudhari said: "As per Supreme Court's rulings, the main criterion to award death penalty is that the quality of evidence has to be higher than expected. The evidence should be beyond reasonable doubt and above certainty." Meanwhile, the defence examined its last witness, Arun Ferreira, whom it had called to testify on the conduct of convicts in the prison. Advocate Chaudhari restricted his arguments on a number of findings laid down by the apex court, wherein the court had described the conditionswhich attract capital punishment. "It has been observed that especially in Mumbai (court's) the application of death is much alarming than what is envisaged in the known Bachan Singh's case (Bachan Singh vs State of Punjab, 1980). The court while awarding the death penalty needs to be very clear on its reasoning. The prosecution needs to exhaust all of its options which would prove that there is no chance of reformation of the convict. The defence had pleaded the court to call for reports from the probation officer, which would give a clear picture to the court to decide if there was any chance for the accused to reform. However, the court had rejected the application. "The fact remains that the entire burden to prove that there is no scope of reformation left with the convicts is with the prosecution; however, it has not been done in this case," argued Chaudhari. "As per the Supreme Court's findings, the term 'rarest of rare' is not attracted with respect to the crime aspect of the case, but with the criminal's aspect. The person has to be a menace to the society and that he has a heinous mindset, with no scope of reformation. However, conditions when the crime was heinous or brutal, cannot attract the criteria of rarest of rare case," argued Chaudhari. The senior advocate further argued on the quality of evidence recorded by the prosecution. Advocate Chaudhari said that the prime aspect for the court to award the convicts with death penalty is that the evidence which the prosecution has brought on record has to be higher than expectation. "The main point in this case is that can the death penalty be based on the confessional statement, which was not recorded before the magistrate, but was recorded by the deputy commissioner of police? Also, we cannot forget that the police officials who were investigating the case, their names have been popped up in certain criminal cases," he said. Citing from the latest Law Commission report of August 2015, advocate Chaudhary pointed out that over 95 per cent of death sentences awarded by the trial courts either resulted in acquittals at the Supreme Court or were commuted to life. Only 4.3 per cent of the death penalties were upheld by the apex court. "Only if the accused is a threat to society is the death penalty given. In more than 95 per cent of the cases the trial courts have wrongly given the death sentence. Especially in Mumbai, the application of the death sentence is alarmingly high," he said. Meanwhile, the last witness in the case, was examined by the defence advocate to testify in favour of the accused. Arun Ferreira, formerly accused and later acquitted under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act for alleged Maoist activities, vouched for the helpful nature of 10 of the accused persons. (source: dnaindia.com) *************** Justice for the victims The 7 peak-hour serial explosions on July 11, 2006 in Mumbai came as a blow to the collective consciousness of Maximum City. For months after the explosions, daily commuters entered the compartments of suburban trains, rightly called the lifelines of Mumbai, with suspicion in their eyes, and fear in their hearts, every single day. The task of securing the lives of 7.5 million daily commuters against attacks still remains a challenge. In these nine years, the Railways spent over Rs. 10 crore to upgrade security on the Central and Western Railway systems. From a situation where there were virtually no CCTV cameras, the suburban train lines now have over 3,600 cameras. But Mumbaikars know in their hearts that while commuting on the train network they are really on their own in a city that has faced 7 major terror attacks since 1993 - 3 of them on its trains. The 2006 train bombings killed 189 people; in terms of numbers it is 2nd only to 257 victims in the 1993 serial bombings. The trial of the 1993 serial bombings case took 14 agonising years, but Judge Y.D. Shinde has managed to complete this trial in less than 5 years. At least 2 more terror trials including the Aurangabad arms haul case of 2006 and the Malegaon bombings case of 2008 are still pending in Maharashtra. Mumbai's 2 worst terror attacks make for a strong case to expedite terror trials through fast-track courts. It will not only help bring quicker closure to the victims and reduce their helplessness in the face of a tardy justice system, but also aid the rehabilitation of unfortunate people like Abdul Wahid Shaikh, a 37-year-old teacher who has now been acquitted after 9 years in jail. The final verdict in this case will be significant as it will be the 1st major terror case after the July 30 hanging of Yakub Memon to bring into focus the question of the death penalty. The Law Commission of India in its draft report recommended speedy abolition of the death penalty for all crimes except those involving terrorism. The defence team led by advocate Yug Mohit Chaudhry, a strong voice against the death penalty, has made pertinent points before the court. He submitted that the Law Commission's August 2015 report points out that only 4.3 % of all death sentences awarded by trial courts were upheld by the Supreme Court; the rest either resulted in acquittals or were commuted. Arguing that the train blasts case rests merely on the confessions of the accused, which may be a basis for conviction, he urged the court to award the death penalty only if culpability is absolutely certain. Now, Judge Shinde has the task of defining the direction of the debate on capital punishment with his verdict. (source: Editorial, The Hindu) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 22 16:54:42 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 16:54:42 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty new----N.C., GA., ARK., OKLA. Message-ID: Sept. 22 NORTH CAROLINA: Nebraska senator talks about state's death penalty repeal A Republican legislator from Nebraska says North Carolina GOP lawmakers should consider abolishing the death penalty because the process is financially inefficient, subject to errors and does not give closure to victims' families. Nebraska Sen. Colby Coash visited the Legislative Building on Tuesday to talk about his experiences leading efforts this year to repeal capital punishment in his state. The group North Carolina Conservatives Concerned about the Death Penalty brought in Coash for Raleigh, Greensboro and Charlotte appearances. Nebraska became the 2st traditionally conservative state to eliminate the punishment since 1973 when its legislature overrode the veto of Gov. Pete Ricketts. Republican Rep. Jon Hardister of Greensboro also opposes the death penalty. Hardister says he hopes Coash's visit will start discussions with fellow GOP lawmakers about repeal legislation. (source: Associated Press) GEORGIA: Monroe prosecutors seek death penalty against Christopher Calmer in deputy killing Prosecutors announced Tuesday that they will seek the death penalty against Christopher Keith Calmer, the man accused of fatally shooting a Monroe County deputy last year. Calmer, 47, is accused of firing shots in a Sept. 13, 2014, shootout at his parents' Haley Lane home, killing deputy Michael Norris and injuring deputy Jeff Wilson. Calmer, who was housed by the Georgia Department of Corrections for a stint soon after his arrest last September -- walked into a Monroe Count courtroom Tuesday wearing a Monroe County jail jumpsuit. Calmer was dressed in the orange and white uniform after arriving at the Monroe County Justice Center prior to the hearing, but he isn't being housed at the county jail, according to the sheriff's office. The location where he is being held hasn't been released due to security concerns. Calmer didn't speak during the brief hearing except to answer the judge when he asked if Calmer was satisfied with his lawyers and if he had any questions about the proceedings. Calmer declined to speak, citing advice from his lawyers, but indicated he didn't have any questions. He is represented by 2 attorneys from the Georgia Capital Defender's Office, the state agency that provides lawyers for indigent defendants facing a possible death sentence. Calmer is next scheduled to appear in court Oct. 19 for an arraignment -- a hearing in which he'll enter a plea of guilty or not guilty. Some motions in the case may also be argued that day, said Towaliga Judicial Circuit District Attorney Richard Milam. Milam said his goal is for the case to go to trial sometime next year. The death notice filed Tuesday by prosecutors cites 2 aggravating circumstances as reasoning for seeking capital punishment against Calmer. A jury must ultimately decide that at least 1 of the circumstances has been proven during the trial in order for Calmer to receive a death sentence. The 1st circumstance alleges that Calmer committed "murder against a peace officer who was engaged in the performance of his official duties." The 2nd alleges he committed murder "during the commission of aggravated battery," which Milam explained stems from allegations that Calmer also shot Wilson. Norris and Wilson went to Calmer's parents' house near Bolingbroke just before 6 p.m. Sept. 13, 2014, after receiving a call that someone there was attempting suicide. Calmer is accused of shooting Norris in the head. He also allegedly shot Wilson in the leg and buttocks. Wilson's bulletproof vest kept another bullet from entering his abdomen. Calmer was shot in the leg. Monroe County grand jurors voted to indict Calmer in May on charges of malice murder, 2 counts of felony murder, attempted murder, 2 counts of aggravated assault on a peace officer, aggravated battery and 2 counts of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. Calmer has been held in custody without bond since his arrest last September. Calmer is the 3rd person for whom Monroe County prosecutors have announced intentions to seek the death penalty in recent months. They announced intentions of seeking capital punishment June 17 against Robert Buckner, 35, and Amanda Hendrickson, 33, in the 2014 death of Hendrickson's daughter, 5-year-old Heaven Woods. Buckner pleaded guilty to murder June 17 and was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Hendrickson's case is still pending with motions hearings set to be held in December. The last Monroe County death penalty case went to trial 18 years ago. Andrew Allen Cook was sentenced to death for the 1995 shooting deaths of Mercer University students Michele Cartagena, 19, and Grant Hendrickson, 22, at Lake Juliette. Cook was executed in 2013. (source: macon.com) **************** Former inmates rally to stop woman's execution in Georgia Hers is a life measured by the dictates of Pulaski State Prison: when to rise, when to eat, when to go to bed so she can repeat the process the next day, and the day after that, and the day after that. This is how Kelly Gissendaner's life will unspool until the state of Georgia ends it. That day may not be far off. Judicial officials on Friday issued a death warrant, Gissendaner's 3rd, for persuading her lover to kill her husband 2 decades ago. Her execution date is set for Sept. 29 and, if it proceeds, she would become the 1st woman Georgia has put to death since 1945. That day will not arrive, say her supporters, without a chorus of cries that Gissendaner, 47, be spared the ultimate punishment. A loose-knit collection of former female convicts credits Gissendaner with giving them hope behind bars, ministering to them through an air vent. They are urging the state to reconsider her death sentence and let her live out her days in prison instead. The women call themselves Struggle Sisters. Gissendaner acknowledges she coordinated the beating and stabbing death of her husband in 1997. She faced capital punishment twice earlier this year. Bad weather delayed one execution; a cloudy vial of lethal drugs prompted the 2nd execution's postponement. The former inmates see those delays as a final chance to make their appeal. The women have established a Facebook page explaining their mission. They've recorded videos pleading her case, echoing the emotional pleas for mercy coming from 2 of Gissendaner's children. The women credit Gissendaner with helping them turn their own troubled lives around. Nikki Roberts, convicted of robbery, is typical. "I was at my low of lows" when chance brought her into contact with Gissendaner, the Atlanta resident recalled. "But I got some hope." She got it at Metro State Prison, where she had been temporarily sent to "lockdown," a cell block for high-security female prisoners or inmates who posed a threat to themselves. Roberts had earned a spot: She had tried to slit her wrists. In the new cell, she cried, cursed, howled. She paused in her rantings only when she heard a voice, coming through a heating vent: "Don't wish death on yourself," the voice said. "You sound like you've got some sense." The voice, she discovered, belonged to Gissendaner, Georgia's sole female facing capital punishment - and, Roberts quickly learned, the sole voice of compassion in that echoing warren. Roberts listened. The voice said she ought to sign up for some teaching courses, maybe impart some of that knowledge to others. Gissendaner, who had spent years studying theology, suggested topics that Roberts might study. A chaplain agreed to work with her. Prison officials transferred Roberts back to the general population. She was, they discovered, a different inmate. She joined a choir. She became a prayer leader. She served her 10 years and was paroled last year. Roberts now works for an Atlanta agency that teaches adult literacy. Others could benefit from Gissendaner's counsel, Roberts said. "Killing Kelly is essentially killing hope," said Roberts, 40. "Kelly is the poster child for redemption." That's not just hyperbole, said Stephen Bright, senior counsel for the Southern Center for Human Rights. The Atlanta nonprofit specializes in prison issues, especially capital punishment cases. Gissendaner, he suggested, has changed for the better in her 2 decades behind bars. "There is such a thing as redemption," Bright said. "I've seen it over and over." Deborah Denno, a law professor at Fordham University and an expert on capital punishment, likened Gissendaner???s case to that of Karla Faye Tucker. Convicted of murder in Texas, Tucker became a Christian while in prison. Like Gissendaner, she counseled other inmates and built a following of supporters urging Texas corrections officials to commute her sentence to life in prison. It wasn't enough: In 1998, the state gave her a lethal injection. Gissendaner's supporters may have just as much of an uphill fight, she said. "It's too few people at too low a rung in the hierarchy of influence," she said. "They would have to make a lot of noise. But who knows?" Gwinnett County District Attorney Danny Porter believes that Gissendaner deserves the death penalty and accused her of manipulation in planning her husband's slaying and in trying to avoid execution. Gissendaner has never forgotten her crime, said her lead defense lawyer, Susan Casey. "She prays every day for the people she's hurt," said Casey. The Struggle Sisters, she said, are a collective voice of conscience. "We didn't even know about them until they started coming to us," Casey said. They appeared - seemingly out of nowhere - at Gissendaner's clemency hearing earlier this year, intent on explaining to anyone who would listen how the death row inmate set them on a new course. Gissendaner's clemency plea was denied but her legal team soon learned that the inmates their client had counseled in prison were among her most passionate defenders. "These women have some incredible stories of rehabilitation and change," Casey said. Kara Stephens, for one. Convicted of armed robbery, she was remanded to Metro's lockdown for fighting. There, she met Gissendaner, and was impressed with her grace under the worst sort of pressure. What other death-row prisoner, she wondered, could find reason to be upbeat? As her days of incarceration dwindled, Stephens despaired. Would her children welcome her back? Where would she stay? Could she survive in society after a decade of strictly regulated existence? "I was just wanting to give up," said Stephens, now 38. "I was terrified of going home." Gissendaner offered some support: Stephens was somebody. God loved her. Things would be OK. In March 2009, a frightened Stephens re-entered society. These days, she works for a Chattanooga, Tenn., social works agency sponsored by the Presbyterian church. Nicole Legere, convicted of theft, is another Struggle Sister. When lawyers asked if she'd appear in a video supporting Gissendaner, she said yes. "I saw the change in (other inmates) who talked to her," said Legere, 36, who left prison in 2013 after serving her full sentence. She lives in Ringgold, Ga., and works for a printing company. "There needs to be people like her, someone to be a mentor," Legere said. "She's a lot of hope. And there's not much hope in there." WOMEN AND CAPITAL PUNISHMENT There are 56 women awaiting execution in the United States. That represents less than 2 % of the total death row population. Since capital punishment was reinstated in 1976, 15 women have been executed in the United States - or 1 % of the 1,414 executions. In Georgia, the last woman put to death was Lena Baker, who was electrocuted in 1945. Baker, who was black, was executed for killing a white mill operator in Cuthbert. She had been hired to care for him after he broke his leg. She argued he tried to sexually assault her and has since been pardoned. [sources: The Death Penalty Information Center and the NACCP Legal Defense Fund] (source: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution) ARKANSAS----impending executions Neither of 2 to die apply for clemency Neither of the 2 death-row inmates scheduled for execution in October requested clemency before the Monday deadline, said state Parole Board administrator Solomon Graves. Bruce Ward and Don Davis -- who are set to die by lethal injection on Oct. 21 -- had until noon Monday to ask the state Parole Board to recommend to Gov. Asa Hutchinson that they be granted clemency, which can be either total forgiveness for the crime or a reduction of the criminal penalty. Under the state's protocol, the state Parole Board must first review the application and then make a recommendation to the governor to either approve or deny the request. The governor is not obligated to follow the board's decision. Both men, as well as 6 other death-row inmates, have exhausted all standard appeals. The execution dates have been scheduled for all 8 men over the next 4 months. A lawsuit filed in June in Pulaski County Circuit Court by all eight men asking the prison system to disclose the source of its execution drugs is still pending. Jeff Rosenzweig, an attorney for all 8 men, has said that he will ask the court to delay the executions. Ward, 58, is also seeking a review by the U.S. Supreme Court after a February Arkansas Supreme Court ruling that affirmed his death sentence. A case conference is set for Sept. 28. Ward was convicted of strangling to death 18-year-old Little Rock convenience-store clerk Rebecca Doss on Aug. 11, 1989. Davis, 52, was sentenced to death for the Oct. 12, 1990, execution-style shooting of 62-year-old Jane Daniels during a robbery in Rogers. (source: arkansasonline.com) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Glossip's Lawyers File New Documents To Court ---- Unless the court intervenes again, Richard Glossip is scheduled to be executed in Oklahoma in just over a week. Attorneys for death row inmate Richard Glossip, who got a temporary stay of execution 3 hours before he was due to be put to death, have filed new court documents supporting his claim of innocence. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals ordered a halt to his execution last Wednesday so judges had time to examine new witness statements and other details. One of his attorneys, Don Knight, told Sky News that they are also interested in a document submitted by the state in response to their appeal. The psychiatric evaluation of Justin Sneed, who beat motel owner Barry Van Treese to death with a baseball bat, has never been made public before. The report was written in July 1997, almost 6 months after the crime. It was written by Edith King, Oklahoma County's director of forensic psychology, to determine whether Sneed was competent to stand trial. Sneed told her that he understood he was facing a murder charge, but said it was in connection with a burglary. He makes no mention of Richard Glossip, even though he later testified that Glossip had paid him to carry out the murder. It was this testimony which led to Glossip being convicted and sentenced to death while Sneed was given life in prison. The author of the report says Sneed told her he would prefer a death sentence to life in prison because it would be depressing to spend his life behind bars with "no sunlight and no air". The report says he admitted to drug use in the past and was prescribed lithium while in prison. Glossip's new lawyers have tried to portray Sneed as an addict who stole to feed his habit. The execution of Richard Glossip is still scheduled to go ahead on 30 September unless the court intervenes again. (source: Sky news) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 22 16:55:27 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 16:55:27 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----UTAH, ORE. USA Message-ID: Sept. 22 UTAH: Man accused in girl's death to appear in court A man accused of killing a 6-year-old girl 3 years ago is set to appear in court Tuesday for the 1st time since the Utah Supreme Court cleared the way for prosecutors to continue the case against him. Terry Lee Black, 44, is accused of abducting Sierra Newbold from her home in June 2012. Prosecutors say he beat, raped and choked the girl before throwing her in a canal where she drowned. He has not yet entered a plea. The case has been hold since his lawyers said the judge was biased and appealed to the Utah Supreme Court for a new one. A lawyer for Black told the high court that Judge Mark Kouris scolded defense attorneys for 9 minutes after they asked for a delay to determine whether Black was mentally competent to stand trial. Joan Watt said the judge ridiculed and mocked them. Prosecutors, on the other hand, said Kouris had reason to be exasperated when lawyers asked for the delay just before the preliminary hearing was scheduled to begin, more than a year after the girl's death. The Utah Supreme Court ruled in July that the issue is moot because Kouris has already been transferred. Black could face the death penalty if convicted on charges of aggravated murder, child kidnapping and child rape. He was arrested 3 days after the girl's death, accused of robbing a West Jordan bank using a stolen car. Investigators said he attended the same congregation as the Newbold family in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and his apartment was near the canal where she was found. Police said they had home surveillance video of someone entering the Newbold house through a sliding glass door, and they linked Black to the crime by matching debris on his clothing to a fire-blackened field where Sierra's clothing was found. (source: Associated Press) OREGON: Brown seeks a narrow line on death penalty Now that Gov. Kate Brown has made it official that she'll be a candidate in 2016 for the state's highest office, the pressure will be mounting on her to address a question that her predecessor, John Kitzhaber, managed to duck: Where will she stand if it comes time to enforce Oregon's death penalty? A recent story in The Oregonian reminded us of one of Brown's earliest promises when she assumed office in the wake of Kitzhaber's February resignation: She said she would convene a small group of advisers to help her think through the issue. The important thing, she said, was for voters to have a clear sense of her position in the event she stood for election in 2016. Well, now one of those shoes has officially dropped, although it didn't exactly qualify as a surprise: Brown confirmed last week that she'll be running next year. So what's the status of the other shoe? Brown's office told The Oregonian that it's just getting started on its study of the issue. Brown spokeswoman Kristen Grainger told the newspaper that office attorney Ben Souede will lead an effort to get "legal advice on the practical aspects related to capital punishment in Oregon." Sounds good so far. But here's the catch: Grainger said the goal is to have recommendations in place before the fall of 2016 - which means those recommendations could come after the election. Which means voters may be casting ballots without any much of a sense where Brown stands on the issue. You'll recall that Kitzhaber imposed a moratorium on the death penalty in Oregon in 2011, saying that he believed capital punishment had "devolved into an unworkable system that fails to meet the basic standards of justice. ... I am still convinced that we can find a better solution that holds offenders accountable and keeps society safe, supports the victims of crime and their families and reflects Oregon values." Here's the problem with invoking Oregon values in this case: The last time voters weighed in on the issue, they supported the death penalty. It's true that 3 decades have passed since that vote, and it may be that voters' values have changed since then. But we don't know for sure (a 2012 poll suggested that 57 % of Oregonians still support the death penalty), and neither Kitzhaber nor Brown has seemed eager to push the issue. Brown has said she personally opposes the death penalty. But she has declined to rule out reinstating executions, as she tries to find a balance between her views and the mandate she faces to enforce the laws of the state. She's raised questions about the logistics of capital punishment, which suggests she may be looking to find a safe harbor from which to maintain the state's moratorium. She appears to have the luxury of time: None of the state's 35 death row inmates is facing execution any time soon. But as she hits the campaign trail next year, voters should press Brown to explain exactly how she intends to deal with the death penalty, which, after all, remains the law of the state. (source: Editorial, Albany Democrat Herald) USA: Elected judges more likely to affirm death sentences, analysis finds When Ohio's Supreme Court last October backed the death penalty for Ashford Thompson, the ruling was close. 3 of the 7 justices felt that Thompson, convicted of killing a cop during a traffic stop, should have received life without parole. One called the shooting a tragic misunderstanding. 2 of the 4 judges who voted to uphold the death penalty were also in the middle of an election campaign to keep their seats. The same month the ruling was published, television ads lauded 1 of them, Justice Judith French, for 1 of her previous votes in favor of death. Ohio is one of the states where high court judges are directly elected - and that, a Reuters analysis found, makes a big difference in death penalty appeals. A review of 2,102 state supreme court rulings on death penalty appeals from the 37 states that heard such cases over the past 15 years found a strong correlation between the results in those cases and the way each state chooses its justices. In the 15 states where high court judges are directly elected, justices rejected the death sentence in 11 percent of appeals, less than 1/2 the 26 % reversal rate in the 7 states where justices are appointed. Justices who are initially appointed but then must appear on the ballot in "retention" elections fell in the middle, reversing 15 % of death penalty decisions in those 15 states, according to opinions retrieved from online legal research service Westlaw, a unit of Thomson Reuters. Some academic studies over the past 20 years have mirrored the Reuters analysis, showing a relationship between the result in death penalty appeals and how state supreme courts are selected. The U.S. Supreme Court has not addressed these findings in its rulings. Now, however, at least three current justices are sympathetic to the idea that political pressure on judges is a factor that leads to arbitrary, and perhaps unconstitutional, application of the death penalty. The findings, several legal experts said, support the argument that the death penalty is arbitrary and unconstitutional because politics - in addition to the facts - influence the outcome of an appeal. Courts have a responsibility to protect a defendant's constitutional rights without political pressure, especially when the person's life is at stake, said Stephen Bright, a Yale Law School lecturer who has worked on hundreds of death defenses. "It's the difference between the rule of law and the rule of the mob," Bright said. In an interview, French said she and her colleagues cast their votes months before the Thompson opinion was published. Justice Sharon Kennedy, the other Ohio Supreme Court judge running for re-election last year, said facing voters helps ensure that judges apply the law regardless of personal views on the death penalty. "If you're not answerable to the people, you have a wider slide to become what I would call an activist," she said. EXTERNAL FACTORS State supreme courts automatically review every death penalty verdict. Apart from examining whether any legal errors were made, judges must also weigh different factors to decide whether the death sentence is an appropriate punishment. Was it the defendant's first offense or do they have a history of violent behavior? When a death sentence is reversed, the offender usually gets life in prison instead. But as the Reuters analysis suggests, external factors may come into play. The election effect was a far stronger variable in determining outcomes of death penalty cases than state politics and even race. Justices in states that supported Democratic President Barack Obama in the 2012 election reversed death sentences at roughly the same rate as those that went for Republican candidate Mitt Romney, at around 14 %. African-American defendants had lower reversal rates in both elected and appointed states. Nationally, death sentences were reversed 15 percent of the time for whites, compared with 12 % for African-Americans, according to the Reuters findings. Reuters did not analyze the possible impact of the race of the victim on death penalty appeals. The analysis also excluded a category of death penalty appeals known as habeas challenges, because state supreme courts are not required to hear them and overwhelmingly refuse to do so. Thompson's attorneys are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the case and throw out the Ohio ruling, arguing that prosecutors improperly dismissed a potential African-American juror. They also argue that it was "basically impossible" for French to vote against capital punishment while she was being praised during her election campaign for supporting death sentences. Ohio prosecutors say Thompson only complained about political influence after he lost. The Supreme Court is scheduled to review Thompson's appeal at the end of September. His arguments could meet a difficult audience. A SKEPTICAL COURT The U.S. Supreme Court suspended the death penalty in 1972, finding that the punishment was often applied arbitrarily. After several states rewrote their laws to codify specific guidelines that could lead to death, like a violent criminal history, the Supreme Court in 1976 found those approaches constitutional. Since then, majorities on the high court have taken a skeptical view of data used to argue that the death penalty is applied arbitrarily. In 1987, for instance, the court voted 5-4 that an academic study that showed a "racially disproportionate impact" of capital punishment in Georgia wasn't enough to overturn a death sentence there. In 2013, however, Justice Sonia Sotomayor cited a study showing that Alabama judges are more likely to impose the death penalty in election years, part of a failed effort to persuade her colleagues to review an Alabama capital case. Last June, in Glossip vs. Gross, the high court voted 5-4 that the method of execution in Oklahoma is constitutional. In dissent, Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg cited studies showing capital punishment is arbitrary because of racial bias, as well as political pressure, "including pressures on judges who must stand for election." Retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, who has said he believes the death penalty to be unconstitutional, said in an interview that the Reuters findings "definitely lend support" to his side of the debate because they show how arbitrary capital punishment can be. Yet in the Glossip case, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that arbitrariness was "an imaginary constitutional rule." And Justice Antonin Scalia wrote that Breyer and Ginsburg cited "abolitionist" academic studies "as though they have discovered the lost folios of Shakespeare," despite the fact that the death penalty is clearly constitutional. Beyond the Supreme Court, capital punishment is under attack in several states. Among the 31 states that have the death penalty, the punishment is on hold in at least 9 due to legal challenges, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. (The 37 states in the Reuters analysis included 7 that abolished the death penalty during the 15-year period covered; Montana did not have any direct appeals during the period, according to Westlaw.) In Nebraska earlier this year, conservatives joined progressives to secure its repeal, calling it inefficient, costly and morally wrong. The Connecticut Supreme Court recently declared the punishment unconstitutional, citing a determination by the state legislature that it is arbitrarily applied. But other death penalty states are holding fast where public opinion favors it as a valuable law enforcement tool. Ohio, which had an 8.7 percent reversal rate in the Reuters analysis, has scheduled 11 executions for 2016. Ohio prison officials, citing "victim sensitivity" and other issues, denied a request to interview Thompson, who could have years of court appeals ahead of him. In California, where Supreme Court justices run in retention elections, 56 % of voters support the death penalty, a 2014 Field Poll showed. The court reversed 4.6 % of death penalties in the Reuters analysis. In South Carolina, where justices never appear on the ballot, the state Supreme Court reversed death sentences 20.7 % of the time. Justice Costa Pleicones, a former defense lawyer who has voted to reverse several death sentences, said judges' capital punishment voting records never come up in the legislature. "We don't really fear public outcry or reaction," he said. In 1996, Tennessee Supreme Court Justice Penny J. White became the first and only Tennessee appellate judge to lose a retention election. The Tennessee Conservative Union and the Republican Party put out ads urging voters to support capital punishment by removing her. White, now a professor at the University of Tennessee College of Law, said people she knew refused to look at her or shake her hand during the campaign. After the election, then-Tennessee Gov. Don Sundquist said: "Should a judge look over his shoulder about whether they're going to be thrown out of office? I hope so." Last year, 3 Tennessee justices faced an organized campaign to oust them from the court. In campaign ads, a Tennessee group backed by the pro-business Republican State Leadership Committee called the court "liberal on crime," citing a death sentence it reversed. The justices fought back with a television ad reminding voters that the bench "affirmed nearly 90 %" of death sentences, a statistic which matches the Reuters data. In an interview, Justice Gary Wade said his campaign conducted polling showing that more than 70 % of Tennessee voters supported capital punishment. "Those who were employed to run the campaign believed that it was important for this court to have a demonstrated record, or willingness, to impose the death penalty," said Wade. Wade and the 2 other Tennessee judges kept their seats. Wade retired in early September. The RSLC, which backs Republican candidates for state office, chooses which judicial elections to get involved in based on "which ones we have an opportunity to flip a court to Republican, or to help maintain a Republican majority on a court," said Matt Walter, the group's president. DEADLY ENCOUNTER In the Ohio case that the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether to review in late September, there is no doubt that Ashford Thompson is a cop killer. A little after midnight on July 13, 2008, Thompson and his girlfriend, Danielle Roberson, went for a drink at the Rav's Creekside Tap & Grill in Twinsburg, Ohio. The bartender served him a single Budweiser draft. A witness who had been at the bar testified that he heard Thompson make angry comments including, "I will kill any one f***r that threatens me," and, "There's demons in me." At about 1:55 a.m, Twinsburg police officer Joshua Miktarian called dispatch to report a traffic stop. Thompson had pulled into his driveway, and Miktarian pulled in behind him, according to Roberson. It's not clear why the officer stopped Thompson, but a witness testified that Thompson's car was playing loud music. According to Roberson's testimony, Miktarian asked Thompson: "[W]hy are you running through my city with all that boom, boom, boom. I ought to rip all this s*** out of your car." Miktarian said he had been following Thompson for 2 1/2 miles and asked Thompson why he had not stopped, and whether he had been drinking. According to Roberson's testimony, the officer "slammed" Thompson onto the hood of the cruiser and reached for his belt. Roberson said she then saw Thompson, who had a license to carry a concealed firearm, turn and shoot Miktarian. When other officers arrived at the scene, they found Miktarian dead, with four gunshot wounds to the head. Thompson was arrested less than half an hour later, the handcuffs marked with Miktarian's badge number still hanging off his right wrist. After a 5-day trial, a jury convicted Thompson of aggravated murder, escape, resisting arrest, tampering with evidence and carrying a concealed weapon. He was sentenced to death. The Ohio Supreme Court heard Thompson's appeal on April 8, 2014, and French was chosen to write the majority opinion affirming the death sentence. As she was writing, French was in the midst of a hard-fought campaign to keep her seat on the bench. In her campaign literature, French used the tagline "Judge Judi" and touted her conservative credentials. Introducing Ohio Gov. John Kasich at a campaign event, French described the Ohio Supreme Court as a "backstop" for laws passed in the Republican-dominated legislature. None of the votes, for governor, for state senator, would matter if the Ohio Supreme Court didn't stay conservative, she said. "We are the ones that will decide whether it is constitutional," she said. That month, American Freedom Builders, a Washington-based nonprofit that advocates for small government, bought about $600,000 in ads for French, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law. An ad reminded voters that French is "tough" and upheld a death sentence "for a murderer who shot his girlfriend in front of her three year old daughter." In the opinion on Thompson's appeal, French wrote that the death penalty was appropriate compared to similar cases. "We have previously upheld death sentences for killing a law-enforcement officer who is engaged in official duties," she wrote. 1 of 3 dissenting judges, William O'Neill, wrote that the evidence depicted a routine traffic stop gone tragically wrong. He said the majority did not seriously take mitigating factors into account: Thompson went to college, was a licensed practical nurse with a steady job who was involved in his community and church, and was a law-abiding citizen. He carried a concealed weapon, O'Neill wrote, for his own protection because he often treated patients who lived in dangerous neighborhoods. "The majority's failure to seriously engage in the weighing process provides yet another reason why, in my opinion, Ohio's system of imposing and reviewing death sentences is unconstitutional," he wrote. Thompson's attorney said the problem is broader. "There are men all over the U.S. who are going to die because of politics. That's a basic component of the death penalty," said Tim Young, director of the Office of the Ohio Public Defender. The opinion in Thompson's case was issued on Oct. 29, 2014. 6 days later, French was re-elected with 56 % of the vote, and Kennedy with 73 % of the vote. (source: Yahoo news) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 22 16:56:39 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 16:56:39 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 22 SAUDI ARABIA----impending execution Saudi must halt execution of Arab Spring protester: UN experts Saudi Arabia must not execute a man who was convicted of joining a criminal group after participating in Arab Spring protests when he was 17, UN rights experts said Tuesday. Ali Mohammed al-Nimr was in high school in 2012 when he joined reform protests in Qatif in the eastern part of the kingdom. In a statement, the UN experts said he was reportedly tortured, coerced into a confession and denied adequate access to a lawyer before and during a trial that did not meet international standards. His appeal was also handled "with a complete disregard for international standards," according to the statement. "Any judgement imposing the death penalty upon persons who were children at the time of the offence, and their execution, are incompatible with Saudi Arabia's international obligations," the experts said. Al-Nimr "may be executed at any time," the statement added. Aside from joining a criminal group, the teenager was also convicted of attacking the police. The panel said it had received reports that 2 other people, both minors during the time of their alleged offences, are facing imminent execution after joining the protests in Qatif. Amnesty international said in August that at least 2,208 people were executed between January 1985 and June 2015 in Saudi Arabia, nearly 1/2 of them foreigners, adding that juvenile offenders and people with mental disabilities were among them. The UN panel said 134 people have been executed in the kingdom this year, 44 more than last year's total. "We urge the Saudi authorities to establish a moratorium on the use of the death penalty, halt executions of persons convicted who were children at the time of the offence, and ensure a prompt and impartial investigation into all alleged acts of torture," the UN experts said. (source: Agence France-Presse) SUDAN: Sudanese president pardons armed groups leaders, members Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir on Monday issued 2 presidential decrees pardoning leaders and members of armed groups all over the country if they agree to participate in the national dialogue, official SUNA news agency reported. A number of rebel leaders, top of them Yasir Arman and Malik Aqar of the Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM)/northern sector, are facing judicial rulings on charges, some of which amount to death penalty. The 2 decrees came in affirmation of what al-Bashir has announced at the meeting of the general assembly of the national dialogue on Aug. 20, when the president expressed the government's readiness to declare a ceasefire for 2 months so that the national dialogue could be conducted in a healthy atmosphere. In January 2014, al-Bashir declared an initiative calling on the opposition parties and the armed groups to join a national dialogue to end the country's crises. Al-Bashir's invitation found a relative acceptance from political forces, but the process faced difficulties that slowed it down. The armed movements in Darfur, South Kordofan and Blue Nile regions rejected to join the dialogue, insisting that a parallel forum should be established under the supervision of the African Union High-Level Implementation Panel. (source: Xinhua News Agency) BANGLADESH: Bangladesh court indicts 13 in beating death of teenager shown in online video A court in northeastern Bangladesh indicted 13 people on Tuesday in the beating death of a 13-year-old boy that shocked a nation used to violent crime because a video of him being tortured was posted online. Metropolitan Sessions Judge Akbar Hossain Mridha said the trial of the 13, including the main suspect who fled to Saudi Arabia, will begin Oct. 1. The boy, Samiul Islam Rajon, died of internal bleeding after being attacked in the northeastern city of Sylhet. The attackers allegedly were punishing him for stealing a bicycle, an allegation his family and police say is unfounded. His body bore at least 64 injuries, according to an autopsy report. The main suspect, Kamrul Islam, has been detained in Saudi Arabia and is awaiting repatriation. 10 men are behind bars after being arrested with the help of local residents, and 2 others are still at large. The 10 arrested defendants pleaded innocent Tuesday. Some face murder charges while others are accused of helping the attackers. Murder charges carry a maximum penalty of death. The chilling, 28-minute cellphone video was widely viewed online. In it, the boy is heard screaming in pain and pleading with his attackers, who laughed when he asked for water. Like many poor children in Bangladesh, Rajon was forced to leave school to work to help his family, in his case selling vegetables. (source: Agence France-Presse) SRI LANKA: Friday Forum opposes death penalty The Friday Forum said it was deeply disturbed at the prospect of judicial executions taking place again in Sri Lanka after a gap of nearly 40 years. "This is, we believe, an understandable, but, a simplistic and counter-productive reaction to horrible crimes. It is a measure that will divert attention from the real need, which is to seek why and how these appalling things are occurring, and then take preventive action," it said in a statement. The statement further added: "The true incentive to crime is that perpetrators feel that they can get away with it. The real deterrent is the likelihood that one will be found out, arrested, tried, convicted and punished. "The remedy is improving the criminal justice system - better crime prevention, better crime detection, better investigation, improved prosecutions and trial procedures. "It is in the most horrific and pitiable cases, where there is huge pressure on the police, both by their superiors and by the public, to show results, that arrests of innocent persons and miscarriages of justice are most likely to take place. Do we have enough faith in our police, our prosecutors, our judges, our defence lawyers, our courts, our public from whom juries are drawn, to be sure that arrests and prosecutions and convictions will never be influenced by inefficiency or carelessness or political pressure or corruption? Or just plain bona fide mistake? That perjured evidence will never be acted on? Even under the best criminal justice system, wrong convictions are bound to take place". (source: dailynews.lk) INDONESIA: Indonesian Soldier Accused Of Killing Woman, 2 Children In Papua An Indonesian soldier has been detained on suspicion of killing a pregnant woman and her 2 young children in remote West Papua province, the military said on Tuesday. The unidentified soldier allegedly stabbed the woman and children with a sickle late last month after she ignored his romantic overtures, a source said. Speaking on the development Military spokesman Maj.-Gen. Endang Sodik, said "he had been detained at the local military headquarters". The soldier could face the death penalty if found guilty by a military tribunal. Herman, the slain woman's husband, demanded death for the killer, a source said. "I want him to be tried openly," he was quoted as saying. The Papua region, which consists Papua and West Papua provinces, has been the scene of a low-level separatist insurgency for decades. The military has been accused of gross human rights abuses during counterinsurgency operations there. (source: Leadership Nigeria) INDIA: 2006 Mumbai train blasts: Prosecution not to seek death for all 12 convicts----Serial blasts on Mumbai local trains on July 11, 2006, killed at least 188 persons. The prosecution in the Mumbai serial train blasts case on Tuesday said it would not seek death penalty for all the 12 convicts. The defence lawyers, winding up their arguments on the quantum of punishment, pleaded that none of the convicts be given the death because according to the prosecution's own case they were mere foot-soldiers and not the masterminds. Earlier this month, the judge Yatin Shinde convicted 12 accused while acquitting one. Serial blasts on Mumbai local trains on July 11, 2006, killed at least 188 persons. Special Public Prosecutor Raja Thakare on Tuesday said that as far as the gravity of the offence was concerned, all the accused stood on the same platform. "If we go by the principle that all conspirators should be treated equally, then everyone should get the death penalty. However, I would not pray for death for all," he said. Thakare said he would classify the convicts into 2 categories: those who should get the death penalty and those who should get life imprisonment. "The punishment in grave and serious offences should reflect the revulsion felt by the great majority of citizens," said Thakare. "The offence against the state is committed with a view to striking terror and disturb the peace in the community and also to cause breach of public order," he argued. "There is a foreign hand in the commission of offence and some of the convicts went to Pakistani terror training camps to get training in handling of arms and preparing bombs," Thakare told the court. The RDX, which was used in the blasts, is capable of causing a mass destruction, prosecutor Thakare noted. Apart from the 188 deaths, the blasts also caused a loss off Rs 22 crore to the public exchequer, he said. It created a fear psychosis in the minds of the people, especially the commuters of Mumbai suburban trains. This trauma and the shock and agony caused by the blasts could not be calculated, he said. "It is not a case of a single isolated incident but a systematic planting of seven powerful bombs in a diabolical manner, set with such an extreme precision that they exploded within five minutes (of each other) causing utter chaos and confusion among the helpless and defenceless victims," Thakare argued. All the accused were settled, well-educated, had occupations and families; none of them claimed that he was induced by monetary temptations to take part in the conspiracy and they all were mature enough to know what was wrong and what was right for the society. But none of them had second thoughts about participating, said the prosecutor. Earlier, defence lawyer Yug Chaudhry argued that the mastermind of the conspiracy was Lashkar-e-Toiba member Azam Cheema (shown as an absconding accused in the case). "Cheema was the mastermind while the convicts are the foot-soldiers; even if the convicts had withdrawn, Cheema may have brought some new people to execute his plans," he said. It was Cheema who gave instructions and exercised complete control and selected people from India and Pakistan for the operation, he said. "Cheema was the architect of the entire operation, the RDX and finance required to execute the operation was provided by him," Chaudhry argued. The prosecution's argument would continue tomorrow. (source: dnaindia.com) IRAN----execution Iran regime hangs 19-year-old Iran's fundamentalist regime has hanged a teenager in the north-eastern city of Mashhad. The unnamed 19-year-old man was hanged in Mashhad's central prison on Sunday. A statement by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein on August 5 said: "Iran has reportedly executed more than 600 individuals so far this year. Last year, at least 753 people were executed in the country." Amnesty International said on September 7 that "the Iranian authorities must end their unprecedented killing spree - more than 700 people have been executed so far this year." Iranians plan to rally outside the United Nations in New York on September 28 to denounce the visit by the mullahs' President Hassan Rouhani to the UN General Assembly. The rally, which is being organized by the Organization of Iranian-American Communities (OIAC), will press the international community to hold the regime in Iran accountable for its abhorrent human rights record. The mullahs' regime in Iran continues to execute more of its citizens per capita than any other U.N. member state. Some 2000 people have been executed under Rouhani in the past 2 years. (source: NCR-Iran) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 23 09:28:45 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 09:28:45 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, GA., FLA., OHIO, ARK. Message-ID: Sept. 23 TEXAS: Case of Texas killer puts spotlight on executing the mentally ill Scott Panetti believes that the gold filling in his mouth is a Bluetooth device that transmits his thoughts to the prison guards who watch over his cell on death row. He told his lawyer that the state wanted to kill him to keep him quiet about prison corruption and stop him from preaching the gospel. He thinks actress-singer Selena Gomez is his daughter and is convinced that CNN's Wolf Blitzer has his prison ID card. "Communicating with Scott is done through the screen of his mental illness," said Kathryn Kase, executive director of the Texas Defender Service, which represents Panetti and other death row inmates. "He has been transformed by this severe mental illness that he will carry to his grave." On Wednesday, Panetti's lawyers will tell a panel of federal appellate judges in Dallas that their client is too disturbed to face execution for fatally shooting his in-laws, and they will ask for money to hire experts to evaluate his mental condition. Prosecutors will argue that Panetti understands why he was sentenced to death and that the continued delays in his punishment should end. Panetti, whose execution was stayed by a federal court in December, has become the poster child for a national debate over the execution of people with mental illness. His case raises difficult questions for the criminal justice system about whether people with serious mental illness ought to be exempted from the death penalty and how courts can fairly evaluate whether a criminal's mind is so addled by illness that his execution would constitute cruel and unusual punishment. "The Supreme Court has said that you can be mentally ill - and even seriously mentally ill - and still be executed, and that is very controversial," said Robert Dunham, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, which advocates for ending the death penalty. For nearly 40 years, Panetti has struggled with mental illness, Kase said. In the 6 years before he shot his estranged wife's parents, Joe and Amanda Alvarado, in Fredericksburg, he was hospitalized more than a dozen times, diagnosed with schizophrenia, delusions and hallucinations. On 1 occasion, he became convinced the devil had possessed his home and buried his furniture in the backyard. Despite that history, Panetti was allowed to represent himself at his 1995 trial, where he wore a cowboy get-up with a purple bandanna and demanded the testimony of Jesus Christ, JFK and the pope. His outrageous behavior frightened jurors, who rejected his insanity plea and sentenced him to death. In the 2 decades since, Panetti's appellate lawyers have tried to convince the courts that he is too mentally ill to face execution. In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court took up his case, issuing a landmark decision requiring inmates to have a "rational understanding" of their punishment to be considered competent for execution. In other words, they must know that they are being executed as retribution for their crime. The court left it up to states to determine what constitutes a rational understanding. In Texas, the courts have interpreted that ruling broadly. "This is the irony of that" ruling, Kase said. "The state of Texas is still trying to kill him, notwithstanding the extensive history of severe mental illness and delusions." Since that ruling, Panetti's lawyers argue, his condition has deteriorated, but he hasn't been evaluated by a mental health professional in nearly seven years. Though he had been a well-behaved inmate, in recent years, they say, his behavior has become aggressive. Prison staff reported that he banged loudly on his cell door, threw urine on the walkway and threatened to "smite" officers for their "wickedness." A neuropsychologist who reviewed Panetti's records for free at his lawyers' request concluded that his condition was worsening, exacerbated by age and the stress of living under a death sentence. They want the court to grant Panetti funds to hire an expert to determine whether he is competent for execution. Lawyers in the attorney general's office, which is handling the appeals, argue that he has had plenty of time to prove his incompetence and that the courts have rejected his claim. They say he is not entitled to funding because he cannot show that he is too mentally ill to face execution. "Panetti's mental status has at best been severely exaggerated by his counsel," state lawyers wrote in a legal brief. Dr. Joseph Penn, a psychiatrist at the University of Texas Medical Branch who works for the Texas prison system, wrote in an affidavit after reviewing Panetti's records that the inmate "may have had some baseline or chronic residual psychosis ... but nothing severe enough to warrant treatment with medications." State lawyers also argue that in recorded conversations with his parents, Panetti has shown a "fairly sophisticated" understanding of his case. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will decide whether Panetti's lawyers gets access to funds to try to prove his incompetence, but his case has much broader implications for mentally ill death row inmates. Since 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court has exempted from the death penalty those with intellectual disabilities and those who committed crimes when they were younger than 18. In both cases, the court concluded that diminished mental capacity meant those individuals should be held less culpable for their crimes. Death penalty opponents have long hoped that Panetti's case could help pave the way to a similar exemption for those who are severely mentally ill. But Douglas Berman, a criminal justice professor at Ohio State University, said the high court may be disinclined to grant another categorical exclusion from the death penalty. The court's decision to exempt those with intellectual disabilities sparked a small flood of claims, and courts nationwide have struggled to decide how to determine whether those inmates are incompetent. An exemption for the mentally ill would probably inspire another stream of incompetency claims and lead to more confusion among the courts, Berman said. But before those larger questions are answered, the appeals court must decide whether Panetti gets funds for an examination of his mental competency. A group of conservative political leaders, including death penalty supporters and former prosecutors, urged the court to at least grant the request and ultimately to have mercy on the delusional inmate. "Even for those who favor a measured and just system of capital punishment," they wrote, "the execution of Panetti would be a moral scandal that would only undermine confidence in such a system." (source: Dallas Morning News) ************ Schizophrenic Death Row Inmate's Case Back in Court A convicted murderer who tried to subpoena Jesus Christ during his 1995 murder trial will be the subject of a federal appeals hearing in an attempt to overturn a federal ruling denying a stay of execution and funding for a mental health expert. Scott Panetti was convicted of murdering his former wife's in-laws in 1995. He was sentenced to death. But late last year Panetti, who believes the State of Texas wants to kill him for preaching the Gospel, was granted a stay of execution. Lawyers will attempt to convince a judge to overturn that federal ruling and have his case sent back to a lower court. During the trial, Panetti also tried to call John F. Kennedy and the Pope to the stand. He wore a cowboy costume and confessed to the murder in the 3rd person under the personality of "Sarge." A diverse group of people and organizations that include the American Bar Association, former Congressman Ron Paul, Murder Victims Families for Reconciliation and many others have all expressed their support in sparing Panetti from the death penalty. (source: San Antonio Current) ****************** Stormont Conference explores Texas prison system "Prison and Punishment - The Texas Prison System" is the theme of the 2015 John W. Stormont Conference on South Texas, which will feature nine lectures and a documentary film. The conference, which is free and open to the public, will begin at 8 a.m. Oct. 2 in Victoria College's Student Center. Keynote speakers Juan Melendez and Delia Perez from the Witness to Innocence Project will kick off the conference with a lecture titled "The Death Penalty at What Cost? Stories of Innocence and Exoneration on America's Death Row." Each lecture will last about 20 minutes, followed by a question-and-answer session. The conference will conclude with a screening of "At the Death House Door," a film detailing the journey of Rev. Carroll Pickett, Huntsville penitentiary's death house chaplain, who accompanied more than 95 men into the execution chamber during his tenure. Pickett is a Victoria College alumnus. "We're so excited to have such a wide range of speakers at this year's conference: exonerees, social justice activists, scholars and former Texas Department of Criminal Justice employees," said Lisa DeVries, who co-chairs this year's conference along with Ann Kapp. "Texas' prison system is such a part of our state's history and involves many players." Lectures in this year's conference will include: "The Death Penalty at What Cost? Stories of Innocence and Exoneration on America's Death Row," by Juan Melendez and Delia Perez, at 8 a.m. -- "The Costs of Incarceration," by Amin Alehashem, at 9 a.m. -- "The School to Prison Pipeline in Texas," by Morgan Craven, at 9:30 a.m. -- "Pardon Me if I'm Sentimental: Radio and Texas Prison Bands in the New Deal Era," by Caroline Gnagy, at 10 a.m. -- "The Prison Show: Using Radio to Create Positive Community in a Prison Environment," by Raymond Hill, at 10:30 a.m. -- "The Treatment of Women in Texas County Jails," by Diana Claitor, at 11 a.m. -- "40 Days in Orange: A Lenten Journey in the Uniform of the Imprisoned," by Kent McKeever, at 11:30 a.m. -- "For-Profit Penitentiaries: The Past, Present, and Future of Prison Privatization in Texas," by Nacona Nix, at 1 p.m. -- "Citizen: Felonies, Voting, and Skin in the Game," by Corena White, at 1:30 p.m. -- Screening of "At the Death House Door" at 2 p.m. An opening reception will be at 6 p.m. Oct. 1 at the Museum of the Coastal Bend. The reception is free and open to the public. The conference is sponsored by VC's Division of Arts, Humanities & Social Sciences and is funded in part by Victoria College, the John. W. Stormont Endowment and the Kathryn Stoner O'Connor Endowment. For more information, call 361-582-2530. (source: Victoria Advocate) *************** Can Pope Francis Save a Texas Man on Death Row? It's been almost 30 years since Lidia Guerrero last embraced her son in Argentina. Back then, her teenager Victor Saldano was a teenager. He left home, telling her "he wanted to see the world." "Estuvo en Brasil, en el Mato Grosso, en Venezuela, en Colombia, en las Guayanas Francesas," she says. He went everywhere from Brasil to Venezuela to the French Guyanas. Every so often, he'd send postcards saying he was well. But in 1996 Lidia Guerrero got a call saying her son was not well. In fact, he was in Texas - accused of murder and facing the death penalty. She says: "Es muy duro tener un hijo acusado de asesinato - en fin - de un delito tan grave - es tremendo y vergonzante - la alegria - se pierde." ("When your child is accused of something as terrible as murder - it is shameful, it is tough, the joy is gone.") Sometimes the hope is gone as well. But not for Guerrero. Since her son's death sentence in the 1995 killing of Paul Ray King in Collin County, Guerrero has been praying for a miracle. She fears he may be guilty - but she prays to hold him again in Argentina where he could spend his life behind bars. Guerrero is a woman of faith, but not a Catholic. Her attorney is, though, and one day in 2014, he had an idea. "Since we have nowhere else to go, let???s go to the Pope," he said to her. "He's from Argentina too - he may advocate on behalf of Victor." A couple of weeks went by, and then Guerrero got word from her attorney: "El Papa quiere que vengan, que ustedes vengan a Roma." ("The Pope wants us to go to Rome.") Guerrero is elderly and poor - she's always been poor. So, how could she make it all the way to Rome? When friends and relatives heard that the Pope wanted to meet Guerrero, they scraped together money for her airplane ticket and room and board. At their meeting in Rome, Pope Francis told her that he knew Victor Saldano's case well: "Si habre rezado yo por ese cordobecito." He even said he's prayed multiple times on Victor's behalf. That strengthened Guerrero's faith. She knows a figure like Francis' carries a lot of weight in Texas, especially with Catholic Governor Greg Abbott. But papal interventions when it comes to death row inmates have not been successful historically. During his papacy, John Paul II often spoke against the death penalty. He raised it during his 1993 U.S. tour. "If you want equal justice and freedom, then America, defend life," he said in a speech. At the time, some argued the Pope was then speaking against abortion. But during a later visit in 1999, he was unambiguous, directly speaking against capital punishment and effectively sparing the life of a Missouri death row inmate Darrell Mease. "I got a letter - death letter - saying January 27 of 1999 Darrell Mease shall suffer death," Mease says. "But then, the Missouri Supreme Court found out that Pope John Paul II was coming to Missouri that very day, so they didn't want to execute me that very day, so they changed the date to February." Mease's sentence was commuted to life without parole. He's the only person in the U.S. whose life has been spared through papal intervention. But that doesn't mean it can't happen again. John Burke is a Catholic scholar with St. Edwards University. He says there are many arguments Governor Abbott may consider even beyond a papal appeal to spare Saldano's life on moral grounds. "The popularity of Francis, and the growing Latino population and its impact politically in the state of Texas - a large percentage of that population is either of Catholic background or Pentecostal background - and so, just speaking in political terms there's a political self-interest for wanting to - at least consider - to move someone from death to life without parole," Burke says. For her part, Lidia Guerrero's faith still stands strong. But, the mother of Texas death row inmate Victor Saldano says she'll give all glory to God when her son's life is spared. (source: kut.org) GEORGIA----impending female execution Religious leaders join fight against woman's execution A woman on Georgia's death row could be executed as early as September 29 and now religious leaders have joined her fight. Kelly Renee Gissendaner is scheduled to be executed on Tuesday, September 29 for killing her husband in 1997. Her children have released a video, asking for mercy in the case. The children said their mom has become a caring mother since she has been incarcerated. A court has set a seven-day execution window for Gissendaner, who is Georgia's only female death row inmate. Her execution was halted in March because of a problem with the lethal injection drug. Georgia Attorney General Sam Olens said in a news release that a Gwinnett County Superior Court judge issued an order September 19, saying Gissendaner may be executed between 12 p.m. on Sept. 29 and 12 p.m. on Oct. 6. Gissendaner was scheduled for execution at 7 p.m. March 2. Corrections officials told reporters about 11 p.m. that they were postponing the execution "out of an abundance of caution" because the lethal injection drug appeared "cloudy." Gissendaner was convicted of murder in the February 1997 slaying of her husband. Prosecutors said she conspired with her lover, who stabbed Douglas Gissendaner to death. Local religious leaders will fight the scheduled execution of Gissendaner on Wednesday. They are hoping that the parole board will change her sentence to life in prison. (source: WTOC news) *************** Standing with Kelly Gisendaner This is a message from Mercy Junction. I called. Would you? You could save a precious life... Mercy Junction Justice and Peace Center is asking that YOU call the Georgia Parole and Pardons Board TODAY and ask that they STOP the state-sanctioned murder of Kelly Gisendaner. PLEASE CALL: Georgia Parole and Pardons, (404) 656-4661 OR EMAIL: Clemency_Info at pap.state.ga.us WHAT TO SAY: I am calling regarding the impending execution of Kelly Gisendaner by the state of Georgia. The Parole and Pardons Board has the power to stop the execution from being carried out. Kelly's children are begging for their mother's life. Kelly is the example of remorse and rehabilitation. If there has ever been a case for clemency, a case in which the wisdom of the Board should stop the actions of the state, Kelly's is that case. STATEMENT FROM MERCY JUNCTION: Mercy Junction Justice and Peace Center appeals to the Georgia Parole and Pardons Board to grant a clemency hearing and commute Kelly Gisendaner's death sentence. Mercy Junction strongly opposes the state-sanctioned killing of Kelly for multiple reasons, and especially because of our faith in another who was executed by the state, Jesus Christ. 1. Mercy Junction believes in the possibility of redemption's power for all, even those who have committed the most heinous of crimes. This is centrally important to any understanding of following Jesus Christ (2 Peter 3:9, John 10:10). In Kelly we see the possibility of an incredible example of redemption (Romans 6:4). From limited freedom, Kelly has already changed the lives of others because she has experienced the positive change that the parole and pardon board wants to see as part of its own vision statement. 2. Mercy Junction believes that taking responsibility for one's own action is essential to the idea of redemption and the possibility for the beginning of wholeness of our society. Kelly, through her own words and the reconciling witness of her children, has taken responsibility for her actions (I John 1:9). 3. Mercy Junction believes that in following one who was tortured and killed on the cross by the state we have a responsibility to oppose this type of tragedy being repeated by a state that represents us as citizens. 4. Mercy Junction believes that the board of Pardons and Parole has the ethical and moral duty to commute Kelly's sentence to the same sentence that was given to the actual perpetrator of the crime. 5. Even though we do not support the death penalty, Mercy Junction believes that the current process of carrying out the death penalty is cruel to any who have to go through its legal machinations. Kelly has already gone through 2 stays of execution, and 1 was because of serious questions about the poisons being used to kill her. The decades spent on death row in isolation can only be considered cruel by any moral standard of incarceration. 6. Mercy Junction believes that even in the most unbending bureaucracy there needs to be the ability for wisdom to override processes. The parole and pardons board is the only party, according to the constitution of the State of Georgia, that can exercise wisdom and stop Kelly's execution. It is the members of this board who hold the responsibility for life and death in the stroke of a pen. The decision of death is an awesome responsibility. We believe that the only way that you can carry out a wise decision with a clear conscience in Kelly's case is to grant a clemency hearing, and then stop the killing of someone whose continued breath is valued in the divine's judgment. (source: The Christian Century) FLORIDA: Appeals court rejects death sentence in 1984 Jacksonville murder due to 'ineffective' counsel More than 30 years after a teen's body was found floating in the St. Johns River, a federal appeals court has tossed out the death sentence of a man convicted in the drug-related murder. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday upheld a lower-court decision that John Gary Hardwick Jr., now 56, did not receive adequate legal representation before being sent to death row in the Jacksonville murder. The appeals court ordered the state to hold a new sentencing hearing or to re-sentence Hardwick to life in prison. Hardwick was convicted in the December 1984 murder of 17-year-old Keith Pullum, whose body was found in the river, according to court documents. Hardwick was upset about the disappearance of a stash of quaaludes. A 3-judge panel of the appeals court agreed with Hardwick's argument that he received "ineffective assistance of counsel" during the sentencing phase of the case. The court said Hardwick's attorney did not bring up a series of issues to jurors, who recommended by a 7-5 vote that Hardwick receive the death penalty. Those issues, including Hardwick being neglected and abused as a child and a long history of substance abuse, could have been considered as "mitigating" evidence to argue against the death penalty. "Because of counsel's deficient performance, the jury saw only a drug dealer who brutally killed someone for stealing his quaaludes," said Friday's 45-page ruling, written by appeals court Judge Gerald Tjoflat and joined by judges Frank Hull and Beverly Martin. Jurors didn't hear about Hardwick's childhood "that was consistently marked by neglect, deprivation, abandonment, violence, and physical and sexual abuse. They never had a chance to examine the trove of documents evidencing his decade-and-a-half long history of drug and alcohol addiction starting at the young age of 11 or 12." the ruling continued. The ruling also said jurors were not told of Hardwick's heavy intoxication at the time of the crime, nor did they hear expert testimony about how all the factors combined to render him "substantially unable to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law, as the post-conviction mental health experts unanimously concluded." ************ Bill Seeks Unanimous Juries In Death Cases As Supreme Court To Hear 9 Mile Popeye's Case Juries would have to be unanimous before recommending the death penalty for defendants in murder cases, under a bill filed Tuesday in the Florida Senate, just weeks before the U.S. Supreme Court is to hear an Escambia County death penalty case that was unanimous. Under current law, a majority of a jury can recommend that a defendant receive the death penalty, with a judge ultimately deciding whether to impose the sentence. The bill (SB 330), by Sen. Thad Altman, R-Rockledge, for the 2016 legislative session, would establish the higher standard for death sentences. The bill also would give direction to judges on some jury instructions in death-penalty cases. Those instructions deal with what are known as "aggravating circumstances," which are factors used to support death-penalty recommendations. The bill, in part, would require aggravating circumstances to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and be subject to a unanimous vote. The bill - an identical measure (HB 157) has already been filed in the House - would only apply to sentencing proceedings that begin after July 1, 2016. Similar efforts have failed in prior legislative sessions. However, this year's proposal comes as the U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments Oct. 13 in a case that challenges the way Florida sentences people to death. The case stems from the 1998 murder of an Escambia County fast-food worker, and attorneys representing death row inmate Timothy Lee Hurst contend that Florida's unique sentencing system is unconstitutional. The attorneys argue, in part, that a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court ruling requires that determination of aggravating circumstances be "entrusted" to juries, not to judges. Also, they take issue with Florida not requiring unanimous jury recommendations in death-penalty cases. A judge sentenced Hurst to death after receiving a 7-5 jury recommendation. Hurst, now 36, was convicted in the 1998 murder of Cynthia Lee Harrison, who was an assistant manager at a Popeye's Fried Chicken restaurant where Hurst worked. Harrison's body was discovered bound in a freezer, and money was missing from a safe, according to a brief in the case. (source: northescambia.com) ARKANSAS: Don't use our drugs to kill - India-based company to state of Arkansas India's Sun Pharma prohibits its customers from selling its muscle relaxant to prisons for use in lethal injections, but Arkansas has its drug and intends to do just that - despite the company's objection. India's largest drug seller, Sun Pharma, is the 3rd pharmaceutical company to enforce such a policy. Its objection comes after an investigation by the Associated Press found that, as of June 30, the Arkansas Department of Correction had purchased sufficient quantities of 3 drugs used in its new lethal injection protocol to perform 8 executions. A few weeks later, Republican Governor Asa Hutchinson set dates for the state's 1st executions in almost a decade. 2 death row inmates are scheduled for execution and neither has filed an appeal for clemency, according to Parole Board spokesman Solomon Graves, the AP reported. The AP acquired photographs of the drugs' containers, product inserts, and expiration dates through an open records request while investigating how the state had managed to obtain the drugs. The news outlet contacted the 3 companies whose labels appeared to match the drugs in Arkansas' execution supply. Sun Pharma spokesman Federick Castro told AP that the company prohibits the sale of its drugs for lethal purposes. "We currently require our customers to certify that they will prohibit the use and sale of such products to other customers and members that may administer lethal injections or which may sell to facilities that administer lethal injections," Castro wrote in a statement. He did not tell the AP whether he would take action to retrieve the muscle relaxant, vecuronium bromide, if it was confirmed that the state had made the purchase. The other manufacturers are Hikma and Hospira, both of which have also said they do not want their products used for executions. London-based Hikma Pharmaceutical said it had launched an investigation to determine whether Arkansas had bought midazolam from its New Jersey subsidiary West-Ward. The company said it plans to contact the prison department and ask for the drugs back. Hospira, meanwhile, makes potassium chloride, which stops the heart. It prohibits the sale of that drug, as well as 6 others, to prisons for use in lethal injections. The company did not tell the AP whether it had contacted Arkansas. State officials said a secrecy law surrounding executions prohibits them from telling the companies if their drugs have been purchased. The news comes during a raging debate concerning capital punishment in the US, where concerns have mounted over the use of lethal injection drugs, particularly since a slew of high-profile executions went awry. A decade-old ban in the European Union prohibiting EU nations from exporting execution drugs has spawned a shortage in the US, prompting prison officials to seek out compounding pharmacists willing to come up with a new mix of drugs for cocktails to be used in carrying out death sentences. In March, the International Academy of Compounding Pharmacists, the top trade group representing over 3,700 compounding pharmacists, said it was discouraging members from preparing and dispensing drugs used to execute people. (source: rt.com) *************** Violent offender faces the death penalty in Clayton County A convicted felon in state prison for a violent crime in DeKalb County faces the death penalty in the Clayton County deaths of 2 women. Artemio Hernandez, 36, of Riverdale is serving a 10-year sentence for aggravated assault, attempted armed robbery and false imprisonment in an Oct. 25, 2010, DeKalb case. But Clayton County prosecutors said in the days before that incident, Hernandez killed Monica Ambriz, 17, in Jonesboro and Maria Rivera, 61, in Forest Park. Forest Park Police Maj. Chris Matson said Rivera's Oct. 12 death was "extremely violent" and included beating, strangling and stabbing. Ambriz was taking a break inside her truck at El Progresso No. 7 in Jonesboro Oct. 16 when she was taken to a vacant building, said police. Inside the building, the teenager was raped, assaulted, robbed and killed. Hernandez is also charged with robbing El Banco in Jonesboro and an ice cream shop in Forest Park Oct. 25. Henry County police said Hernandez is a suspect in armed robberies of 2 Stockbridge hair salons on Oct. 23 and 24. Women at the salons were sexually assaulted, police said. Hernandez also faces charges of rape and child molestation of a child under 10 in a 2008 case. Clayton County District Attorney Tracy Graham Lawson, who first took office in January 2009, has opted to seek sentences of life without parole in cases where she could have filed for the death penalty. Lawson has said capital punishment should be used sparingly and only in the worst cases. In the case against Hernandez, Lawson stacked the violent charges against him as statutory and non-statutory aggravating circumstances to justify the filing of the intent to seek the death penalty. According to court filings, a plea agreement with Hernandez could be worked out to avoid the death penalty. Prosecutors typically consult the families of the victims to assess how to proceed on punishment. The Hernandez case is the only death penalty case pending in Clayton County. (source: Clayton News Daily) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 23 09:30:00 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 09:30:00 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OKLA., WYO., NEV., ARIZ., ORE., USA Message-ID: Sept. 23 OKLAHOMA----impending execution Oklahoma death row inmate challenges new execution date Attorneys for an Oklahoma inmate scheduled to be put to death next week challenged his execution date Tuesday in a motion that claims a court order that set it violates state law. Richard Glossip, 52, was given a Sept. 30 execution date in an order handed down by the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals when it set aside his previous execution date and gave him a 2-week reprieve. Glossip's motion asks the appeals court to rescind the portion of its order that set his new execution date. Glossip was just hours away from being given a lethal injection on Sept. 16 for arranging the 1997 beating death of motel owner Barry Alan Van Treese when the appeals court halted the punishment. The court wanted to give judges more time to review Glossip's lengthy death penalty challenge in which he claims he is innocent. The appeals court granted an emergency stay of execution in the order that reset Glossip's execution "without further order" of the court. But Glossip's motion says state law requires that "a new execution date cannot be set before a stay is dissolved." The motion states that once a stay of execution is lifted by the court, state law requires a new execution date to be set for either 30 or 60 days later, not just 14 days as in Glossip's case. "Following the statute would permit an orderly presentation and evaluation of claims," the motion concludes. Aaron Cooper, a spokesman for Attorney General Scott Pruitt, said Pruitt plans to file legal papers in support of the court's order. "The attorney general believes the court's actions were entirely consistent with the law," Cooper said. Glossip was twice convicted of ordering the killing of Van Treese, who lived in Lawton and owned the Oklahoma City motel where Glossip worked. Prosecutors said Justin Sneed, a motel handyman, admitted robbing and beating Van Treese, but said he did so only after Glossip promised to pay him $10,000. Van Treese was found beaten to death Jan. 7, 1997, in a room at the motel. Van Treese was staying at the motel while delivering paychecks and picking up large amounts of money for deposit. Glossip was questioned by police, and a day later began selling his belongings and telling people he was leaving town, according to investigators. Police again detained him and found him with $1,200; court records show his net pay that week was about $430. Sneed was found with $1,700 after Van Treese's death. Glossip's case attracted international attention after actress Susan Sarandon, who portrayed nun and death penalty opponent Sister Helen Prejean in the movie "Dead Man Walking," took up his cause. Prejean has served as Glossip's spiritual adviser and frequently visited him in prison. Had it not been halted, Glossip's execution would have been the first in Oklahoma since a sharply divided U.S. Supreme Court upheld the state's 3-drug lethal injection formula in June. (source: Associated Press) WYOMING: Casper judge sets hearing in round 2 of Eaton death case Convicted murderer Dale Wayne Eaton is set to appear Wednesday before a state judge in Casper. District Judge Daniel Forgey has ordered Eaton transported from the state prison in Rawlins. Prosecutors are asking Forgey to require Eaton undergo an evaluation at the state hospital in Evanston to see if he's competent to face a new death penalty hearing. A federal judge last year overturned Eaton's original death sentence in the 1988 murder of Lisa Kimmell of Billings, Montana, ruling he didn't receive an adequate defense. Eaton's lawyers are appealing the judge's ruling that the state could pursue the death penalty against him again. Casper District Attorney Mike Blonigen says the federal courts could block a 2nd death penalty hearing, but says his office meanwhile has the responsibility to move forward. (source: Associated Press) NEVADA: Death-penalty trial begins over 2010 slaying of US airman from Guam A death penalty trial has begun in Las Vegas for a Nevada ex-convict accused of plotting with his girlfriend the ambush slaying of her husband, a U.S. Air Force servicemember and Iraq War veteran from Guam. Michael Rudolph Rodriguez, 36, waited outside the couple's southeast Las Vegas home and shot Staff Sgt. Nathan Paet 5 times as Paet headed to work at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev., late Dec. 1, 2010, prosecutor Frank Coumou told a jury during opening arguments Monday. Police said Paet, wearing his camouflage uniform, was shot several times in the back before stumbling from his garage into his home and collapsing in front of his wife, Michelle Antwanette Paet, and their four children. He died later at a hospital. Coumou told jurors that Michelle Paet had alerted Rodriguez by text message when her husband was leaving the house. "He's rushing to get out the door. Lol," one message said. Michelle Paet, now 33, is scheduled for trial later this month. 2 co-defendants, Jessica Ashley and Corry Hawkins, also await trial. Each has pleaded not guilty to conspiracy, murder and burglary with a weapon. Neighbors reported seeing a black Cadillac leave the scene of the shooting, and police said a witness told them that Rodriguez went to Ashley and Hawkins' apartment and burned his clothes in their fireplace. Rodriguez's attorney, Alzora Jackson, told the Clark County District Court jury that Rodriguez had nothing to gain from killing Nathan Paet. But police reported that Michelle Paet stood to receive $400,000 from the military, and she took out another $250,000 life insurance policy on her husband. Police said Michelle Paet told investigators that she and Rodriguez began planning the slaying in October 2010, and they planned to be together afterward. Nathan Paet was an F-15 supply technician with the 757th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron. He and Michelle Paet were high school sweethearts. He joined the Air Force in 2002. The couple married in 2006. Rodriguez, a 2-time felon convicted of attempted forgery charges in 2007 and 2008, worked with Michelle Paet at a telemarketing company in Las Vegas, according to arrest records. Rodriguez told police he was having sex with another woman at a Las Vegas casino-hotel at the time of the shooting. But that woman told police that Rodriguez asked her to be his alibi and told her he was set to receive up to $5,000 for the killing. (source: Stars and Stripes) ARIZONA: Prosecutors to seek death penalty against Mesa QT murder suspect Apolinar Altamirano Prosecutors intend to seek the death penalty against the undocumented immigrant charged with the murder of a Mesa gas station clerk. Video evidence from the January incident shows Apolinar Altamirano, 30, shoot Grant Ronnebeck in the head inside the Quik Trip near Stapley Drive and Broadway Road, according to court documents. One reason Altamirano shot Ronnebeck, 21, was to make a financial gain, in this case 2 boxes of cigarettes, according to documents filed by the Maricopa County Attorney's Office. Altamirano pleaded not guilty to the charges against him. He was awaiting deportation proceedings when he allegedly shot Ronnebeck, according to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE. A representative of the Mexican government has appeared at several of Altamirano's hearings, records show. Aggravating factors that allow the prosecution to seek the death penalty include the "especially heinous, cruel or depraved manner" of the crime and that Altamirano gained financially from the crime (by taking the cigarettes), according to the prosecution's filing. Altamirano is at least the second undocumented immigrant arrested in Maricopa County this year who could face the death penalty if convicted of 1st-degree murder. Prosecutors also put Carlos Cruz on notice that they intend to seek the death penalty if he is convicted. Cruz is accused of murdering his 3-year-old daughter in Surprise in May. He pleaded not guilty. 3 undocumented immigrants are on death row in Arizona, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. (source: ABC news) OREGON: Gov. Brown should set a date for death-penalty decision When you're taking over for a disgraced governor who skipped town in a hurry, changing the state's Constitution isn't necessarily first on your to-do list. Which is why it made perfect sense for Gov. Kate Brown to temporarily extend the moratorium on executions imposed by former Gov. John Kitzhaber in 2011. But Brown should avoid the trap of complacency that Kitzhaber fell into. While the former governor deserves credit for his stand against a system he rightly described as compromised, inequitable and costly, he failed to accomplish anything more. The statewide debate to find alternatives to the death penalty that Kitzhaber initially called for never materialized - due largely to his failure to push for it. Oregon's death row remains as active as ever, with limited state and local dollars funding the prosecution, defense and appeals of inmates who will face the death penalty in name only. Brown is beginning to address the question of what to do about Oregon's death penalty, according to The Oregonian/OregonLive's Denis C. Theriault. She acknowledges the many aspects of the complex, emotional issue - including the logistical challenges of simply obtaining the drugs necessary to carry out lethal injection. But, she, like Kitzhaber, has done little to move the conversation along. And unlike Kitzhaber, who announced his moratorium and issued a reprieve to stop the execution of 2-time killer Gary Haugen, Brown faces no pressing deadlines of an impending death sentence being carried out. Haugen, who volunteered for execution in 2011 as a protest of the legal system, is himself taking a different tack. He seeks to challenge his conviction and sentence. Brown should match Kitzhaber's momentary show of bold leadership with one of her own. She should set a deadline prior to the start of the 2016 legislative session by which her advisers conclude their review of the death penalty system. And then she should either lift the moratorium or work with legislators to refer a measure to the November 2016 ballot asking voters to amend the Constitution and abolish the death penalty. The governor has a willing legislator in Rep. Mitch Greenlick, D-Portland, who has been among the few voices in government pushing this issue in front of legislators and the public, sponsoring a bill that has gone nowhere, without the influence of the governor. It's time to stop this "we-really-should-have-a-discussion" rhetoric and really have the discussion. Attitudes - and the voter base - have changed from 1984, when voters agreed to amend the Constitution to include capital punishment as an option for those convicted of aggravated murder. But since then, only 2 people - both volunteers who waived their rights to appeal - have been executed: Douglas Franklin Wright in 1996 and Harry Charles Moore in 1997. For too long, Oregonians have been underwriting all the costs of a capital-punishment system without actually having one. How does this make sense? It doesn't. The death penalty, whether leaders agree with it or not, is a lawful punishment under the Oregon Constitution. Our elected officials are entrusted to follow and carry out the law. If they believe in the need for change, then they should lead the way. Kitzhaber did Oregon a great service in calling attention to a problem that has gone unaddressed for decades. But he ultimately accomplished nothing. It's up to Brown to avoid his mistake of confusing the act of identifying a problem with the act of solving it. (source: The Oregonian/OregonLive editorial board) USA: 4 People Who Changed Their Mind About the Death Penalty This year, a Pew Research Center poll found that support for the death penalty is at its lowest rate in 40 years. Down by more than 20 % from just 2 decades ago, that means a lot of people are changing their minds on capital punishment. It's not just average Americans who are switching their stances. Governors, Supreme Court justices and even state executioners - people who are arguably the most influential when it comes to the death penalty - are also having changes of heart. Here are 4 of the most high-profile examples: 1. Former Texas Governor Mark White As the governor of Texas for 4 years in the 1980s, White oversaw 19 executions. He even made his willingness to execute people a talking point in his reelection campaign, knowing that was popular with constituents. Because of his experience and position, White was asked to join the Constitution Project, a bipartisan think tank, to represent the pro-death penalty side of this contentious issue. As he conducted research to bolster his own opinion, however, he realized how biased the process is and how many innocent people have been put to death for crimes they most likely did not commit. While he still doesn't think that sentencing the most atrocious criminals to death is immoral, he no longer supports the death penalty as it stands. "Human life is too precious, and human error too prevalent, to continue to gamble with a system that we know is so flawed," said White. 2. Virginia Executioner Jerry Givens For 17 years, Givens served as Virginia's chief executioner, during which time he carried out 62 executions - most by electric chair, others by lethal injection. Givens would read up on each of the inmates' crimes so he could justify having to kill them. Then, just days before he was scheduled to execute Earl Washington, a mentally disabled man convicted of rape and murder, the state found DNA evidence that exonerated the man. Realizing that he was close to killing an innocent man, Givens' confidence in the death penalty was shaken. Those doubts continued when Givens was convicted of money laundering in 1999. Though Givens maintains his innocence to this day, he served 4 years in prison and says he learned a valuable lesson about how imperfect the justice system can be. He now regularly speaks out against capital punishment, arguing to legislators that it's easy for them to decide to allow the death penalty when they aren't the ones tasked with actually taking the lives. 3. Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper When Hickenlooper first ran for governor, he probably didn't realize how much of an important issue capital punishment would become. In 2010, the Democrat stated his support for the death penalty, an easy stance to take since the state hadn't executed anyone in over a decade. He later supported this opinion with a threat to veto potential legislation that would repeal capital punishment in Colorado. Things got serious when Nathan Dunlap, a man convicted of murdering 4 people, had his execution approaching during Hickenlooper's re-election campaign. At that point, the governor declared that he changed his mind and no longer supported the death penalty. In order to prevent Dunlap's execution, he indefinitely stayed it. Many pundits have called out Hickenlooper for his "wimpy" flip flopping, but if he really did switch his opinion on the matter to gain political traction with voters, then at least he's listening to the will of his constituents on this particular matter. 4. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Early in her career, Justice Ginsburg did not take a firm stance on the death penalty, indicating that she supported it in some cases. Over the years, however, her position has clearly evolved. She thinks that most people who get the death penalty, regardless of their guilt, are those with the worst representation at trial. "I have yet to see a death case among the dozens coming to the Supreme Court on eve-of-execution stay applications in which the defendant was well represented at trial," she said. Recently, Ginsburg has indicated that she thinks capital punishment could very well be considered unconstitutional. However, at this point, she is unwilling to take a hard no on all death penalty cases like a handful of previous justices so that she can participate in the deliberations and have a say in death penalty cases that make it to the Supreme Court. (source: care2.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 23 09:30:44 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 09:30:44 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 23 CHINA: China Arrests U.S. Woman Nabbed by Spy Agency, Husband Says An American businesswoman was arrested in China amid accusations of spying after months of detention, shortly ahead of Chinese President Xi Jinping's arrival in the U.S. for a state visit. Sandy Phan-Gillis, 55, was formally arrested over the weekend, her husband, Jeff Gillis, said by e-mail Wednesday. She was taken away by the Ministry of State Security in March in the southern city of Zhuhai while trying to go to Macau and is being investigated on charges of spying and stealing state secrets, according to a website set up by Gillis to bring awareness of the case and petition for her release. "I wouldn't say that she was in 'good' health," Gillis said in Wednesday. "She has had 2 hospital emergency room visits during her detention, and one of those with a 5-day hospital admission." She has still not been formally charged with a crime, according to Gillis. Hong Lei, a spokesman for the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said on Tuesday at that the woman was under investigation "on suspicion of activities harmful to Chinese national security," the New York Times reported. "We hope that the outside world will respect China's handling of this case according to the law," the newspaper cited Hong as saying at a regularly scheduled news conference in Beijing. "She is also cooperating." Xi arrived Tuesday in the U.S. and will meet in Washington for a summit with President Barack Obama on Friday. Human rights may be in the agenda along with cyber-attacks and tensions in the South China Sea. China released in June British investigator Peter Humphrey and his American wife, Yu Yingzeng, who were serving prison terms for illegally obtaining private information. A Canadian man who ran a coffee shop near the Chinese border with North Korea was charged with stealing state secrets this year. The punishment for stealing state secrets under Chinese law is life in prison with some severe cases receiving the death penalty. The SaveSandy.org website describes Phan-Gillis as a "hard-working businesswoman" and "not a spy or a thief." She was born in Vietnam, the daughter of a Chinese family whose ancestors come from Guangdong province, according to the site. "To date there has been no detailed explanation for her detention," the site says. "Sandy has now been detained for over 6 months, and she has not been allowed to see or speak with friends, family, or even her lawyers in that time." (source: Bloomberg News) SAUDI ARABIA: UN Human Rights Experts Urge Saudi Arabia to Halt Execution of Minors UN human rights experts called on the Saudi Arabian government to stop the execution of minors, pointing at the case of Ali Mohammed Nimr, who was convicted for a crime committed when he was a teenager, a statement issued Tuesday said. "We urge the Saudi authorities to establish a moratorium on the use of the death penalty, halt executions of persons convicted who were children at the time of the offence, and ensure a prompt and impartial investigation into all alleged acts of torture," 3 UN officials were quoted as saying in the statement. According to the UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, UN special rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and the current chairperson of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, Nimr may be executed at any time. "Ali Mohammed al-Nimr, a high school student, was arrested in 2012 by the Saudi authorities when he was 17 for his participation in Arab Spring protests in Qatif, Eastern Province. During his arrest and detention, he was reportedly subjected to torture and ill treatment by the General Investigation Directorate ... In May 2015, the Specialized Criminal Court (SCC) sentenced Mr. al-Nimr to death ... and confirmed its sentence in September," the statement read. The UN experts noted that at least 134 people were executed in Saudi Arabia in 2015 that was 44 more than in 2014. "Such a surge in executions in the country makes Saudi Arabia a sad exception in a world where states are increasingly moving away from the death penalty," the UN employees emphasized. Saudi Arabia is one of the world's leading countries by the number of executions. According to the Amnesty International rights group data, the country was 4th in 2013 and 3rd in 2014, preceded only by China and Iran. (source: sputniknews.com) ********** 24 Young Saudi Protestors on Trial, 18 Face Death Penalty The criminal court of the Saudi Arabian city of Jeddah has put 24 young prisoners on trial on a charge of participating in peaceful demonstrations, a Saudi activist announced, saying 18 of the inmates are facing the death penalty. Hamza al-Shakhuri said in his Twitter account that the prisoners on trial are aged between 20 and 30. The Al Saud's prosecutor general has demanded the maximum penalty, namely capital punishment, for 18 convicts, he noted. According to Shakhuri, the young defendants are from al-Qatif, al-Awamiyah, Tarout, Safwa and other regions, in east of the Kingdom. Saudi Arabia's regime has a record of suppressing the opposition groups and arresting political dissidents. Since February 2011, protesters have held demonstrations on an almost regular basis in Saudi Arabia, mainly in Qatif and Awamiyah in Eastern Province, despite a deadly crackdown by the regime. (source: Tasnim News) INDIA: 7/11 mumbai train blast: Prosecution seeks death penalty for 8, calls them merchants of death Judge, Y S Shinde will deliver the verdict on the quantum of sentence on September 30th. The court reserved orders on the matter after hearing for almost a week arguments advanced by both the defence and the prosecution. The defence pleaded that the court impose lesser sentence on the convicts while quoting various judgments of the Supreme Court which state that life sentence is a rule while death an exception. The prosecution sought life imprisonment for 4 accused while in the case of 8 others the death penalty was sought.The prosecution argued that the key conspirators and also those 5 persons who planted the bombs must be awarded death penalty. The key conspirators play the biggest role and it is on their instructions that the entire operation is planned and executed it was also argued. Even those 5 persons who planted the bombs would have to be awarded death penalty, the prosecution argued. The 5 persons who planted the bombs had done so willfully and it was not as though they were remote controlled. They were fully in the know of the operation and even took part in the training apart from surveying the trains that they bombed. Among those convicted are Tanvir Ahmed Ansari (37), Mohd Sajid Ansari (35), Ehtesham Siddiqui (30), Kamal Ahamed Ansari (37), Mohd Faisal Shaikh (36), Zamir Ahmad Shaikh (36), Mohammad Majid Shafi (32), Shaikh Alam Shaikh (41), Muzzammil Shaikh (27), Soheil Mehmood Shaikh (43), Naveed Hussain Khan (30) Asif Khan (38). (source: oneindia.com) BANGLADESH: One to die, 7 get life for murder The District and Sessions Judge's Court here yesterday sentenced a man to death and 7 others to life imprisonment for killing a madrasa student in Monohardi upazila of the district in 2011. Death penalty awardee Farid Mian and lifers Mostafa Hossain, Jakir Hossain Babul, Siam Mian, Tauhid Mian, Sanaullah, Dulal Mian, and Joynal Mian are from Kayetergaon village. According to the case statement, Mahfuz Hossain, 16, a Class X student of Barachapa Karamali Senior Madrasa, was stabbed to death by the 8. (source: The Daily Star) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 23 16:17:00 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 16:17:00 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, FLA., LA., OKLA., IDAHO Message-ID: Sept. 23 TEXAS: SALVADORIAN MAN FACES IMMINENT EXECUTION Alfredo Prieto, a Salvadorian man, is scheduled to be executed in Virginia on 1 October. ?He was convicted in 2008 of two capital murders committed in 1988. There is evidence that he has intellectual disability which would render his execution unconstitutional. Click here to view the full Urgent Action in Word or PDF format, including case information, addresses and sample messages. Rachael A. Raver and Warren H. Fulton III were murdered near Reston, Virginia in December 1988. In 2005, Salvadorian national Alfredo Prieto was identified as a suspect through DNA evidence. His first trial in 2007 ended in a mistrial due to juror misconduct. At his retrial in 2008, he was convicted on two counts of capital murder. The two death sentences were overturned in 2009 because of problems with the jury?s verdict forms. Alfredo Prieto was again sentenced to death in 2010 and these death sentences have survived the appeals process. The question of Alfredo Prieto?s intellectual functioning has been an issue throughout the case. In 2002, the US Supreme Court banned the execution of individuals who have intellectual disability (previously known as ?mental retardation?). At the time of Alfredo Prieto?s trial, Virginia law required a capital defendant to have an IQ of 70 or less in order to be considered a person with intellectual disability. Of Alfredo Prieto?s three IQ scores, two were well below 70 (64 and 66), but a third was 73. Prosecutors argued that the two scores below 70 were invalid. The jury agreed and sentenced Alfredo Prieto to death, finding that intellectual disability had not been proved. In 2014, the US Supreme Court ruled in Hall v. Florida that states cannot use a fixed IQ score as the measure of whether an inmate can be put to death. Intellectual disability, it said, ?is a condition, not a number? Courts must recognize, as does the medical community, that the IQ test is imprecise?. It found that Florida?s rigid IQ of 70 cut-off, which blocked the presentation of evidence other than IQ that would demonstrate limitations in the defendant?s mental faculties, was unconstitutional. Alfredo Prieto?s lawyers argue that Virginia has erred by relying on the unconstitutional definition of intellectual disability to reject Alfredo Prieto?s claim, and that procedural technicalities are preventing them from arguing the claim to the Virginia courts in a full and fair hearing. Governor McAuliffe has indicated that he will make a decision on the case well in advance of 1 October. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION In Hall v. Florida issued on 27 May 2014, the US Supreme Court wrote of Florida?s rigid IQ of 70 cut-off law: ?Pursuant to this mandatory cut-off, sentencing courts cannot consider even substantial and weighty evidence of intellectual disability as measured and made manifest by the defendant?s failure or inability to adapt to his social and cultural environment, including medical histories, behavioral records, school tests and reports, and testimony regarding past behavior and family circumstances. This is so even though the medical community accepts that all of this evidence can be probative of intellectual disability, including for individuals who have an IQ test score above 70.? Hall v. Florida reiterated the Supreme Court?s view that dignity is the basic concept underlying the US constitutional ban on ?cruel and unusual punishments?, and asserted that this ?protection of dignity reflects the Nation we have been, the Nation we are, and the Nation we aspire to be.? Florida?s IQ cut-off law, it ruled, ?contravenes our Nation?s commitment to dignity and to its duty to teach human decency as the mark of a civilized world?. The states of the USA, the Hall v. Florida ruling said, ?are laboratories for experimentation, but those experiments may not deny the basic dignity the Constitution protects?. Click here to view the full Urgent Action in Word or PDF format. Name: Alfredo Prieto (m) Issues: Imminent execution, Unfair trial, Legal concern UA: 198/15 Issue Date: 23 September 2015 Country: USA Please let us know if you took action so that we can track our impact! EITHER send a short email to uan at aiusa.org with "UA 198/15" in the subject line, and include in the body of the email the number of letters and/or emails you sent, OR fill out this short online form to let us know how you took action. Thank you for taking action! Please check with the AIUSA Urgent Action Office if taking action after the appeals date. If you receive a response from a government official, please forward it to us at uan at aiusa.org or to the Urgent Action Office address below. HOW YOU CAN HELP Please write immediately in English or your own language: * Calling on the Governor to commute the death sentence of Alfredo Prieto; * Noting evidence that he has intellectual disability and expressing concern that procedural technicalities are preventing this claim from being the subject of a full judicial hearing; * Pointing out that the power of executive clemency is not constrained by procedural rules; * Explaining that you are not seeking to downplay the seriousness of the crime or the suffering caused. PLEASE SEND APPEALS BEFORE 1 OCTOBER 2015 TO: Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe 1111 East Broad Street Richmond, Virginia, USA Fax: 011 1 804 371 6351 Email: via http://1.usa.gov/1AMwO17 (for those out of the USA, use Virginia as resident State and explain in comment that you are overseas) Salutation: Dear Governor Please share widely with your networks:?http://bit.ly/1QyPJTG We encourage you to share Urgent Actions with your friends and colleagues! When you share with your networks, instead of forwarding the original email, please use the "Forward this email to a friend" link found at the very bottom of this email. Thank you for your activism! UA Network Office AIUSA ?600 Pennsylvania Ave SE, Washington DC 20003 T. 202.509.8193 ? F. 202.509.8193 ?E. uan at aiusa.org ?amnestyusa.org/urgent FLORIDA: The death penalty isn't preventing deaths A lot of people aren't getting the memo. According to the Times-Union, homicides increased for the 3rd year in a row in Jacksonville last year. On top of that, those 121 slayings in 2014 were the highest since 2008. Yet apparently those killers didn't get the memo, the one that shows if they are convicted in Duval, Clay and Nassau counties, they are more likely to wind up on death row than if they did their killings elsewhere. They aren't getting the memo - the one that shows that with 58 people on death row, the 4th Judicial Circuit has a higher number of people there than any other judicial circuit in Florida. And nationally, it has the 8th-highest number of people facing the death penalty. The fact they aren't deterred is backed by many studies, such as one done in 2012 by the National Research Council. People who are bent on killing won't stop because they might get the needle. TOO MANY WRONG CONVICTIONS And it is one reason why Kristina Musante, coordinator of Justice 4 Jacksonville Coalition, recently told the First Coast Tiger Bay Club that it is past time to rethink the use of the death penalty here. It is an overused approach that doesn't scare criminals as much as it should scare taxpayers who are spending millions each year on capital punishment cases as well as those who are wrongly convicted. That happens too often in Florida. Of the 155 people freed from death row since 1973, 25 were from Florida.That's the highest number of exonerations of any state. "The death penalty is bad public policy," said Musante, who debated Bernie de la Rionda, an assistant state attorney who has tried numerous capital cases, on the use of the death penalty. "Florida would save $51 million a year if it abolished the death penalty for life without parole," Musante said. "The money that is saved could go to solving cold cases and to proven crime prevention programs." But de la Rionda argued that the death penalty is about ensuring that those who have killed won't do it again and to punish those who have committed particularly heinous slayings. "Without the death penalty, it just encourages killers to keep killing," de la Rionda said. WHAT ABOUT VICTIMS? But the criminal justice system is supposed to do more than punish people. It is supposed to discourage people from committing crimes in the first place. And it is supposed to minimize victimization. The disproportionate numbers of people from Jacksonville who are sitting on death row, even as the city's murder rate increases, tells me that this isn't happening here. It tells me that the death penalty isn't scaring people straight. Because if it were, homicides in this city would be going down - not up. That's why I agree with Musante. It's time for a new way. Justice 4 Jacksonville is pushing to establish a community advisory committee for this judicial circuit that would review cases where the death penalty might be sought and possibly help devise more prudent and less expensive alternatives. It should be considered. This judicial circuit is sending more people to death row than any other in Florida, it ranks 8th in the nation for sentencing people to death and yet people are still getting killed at the same rate. The bottom line is that we taxpayers are wasting our money. The murderers aren't getting the memo. (source: Tonyaa Weathersbee, Florida Times-Union) LOUISIANA: Killing A White Person Is Almost The Only Reason Murderers Ever Receive The Death Penalty Black men constitute 61 percent of homicide victims in Louisiana - nearly 13,000 black men were killed in this state since the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976. Yet only 3 people have been executed for killing a black man in all of this time. That's less than 6 % of the rate of executions for individuals who kill someone other than a black man, and 1/48th of the execution rate for people who kill white women, according to a study that will appear in the Loyola University of New Orleans Journal of Public Interest Law. The study, by Frank Baumgartner and Tim Lyman, reveals stark racial disparities in death sentences and executions. Though African Americans make up 72 % of murder victims in Louisiana, people who kill black men or women constitute only 33 % of those sentenced to death and only 21 % of those who are actually executed. White people, by contrast, make up 26 % of victims but their killers make up 79 % of people who are executed. Though this study focused on data from Louisiana, other studies confirm that its findings stretch well beyond this 1 state. A study of the death penalty in Texas, for example, found that "defendants are 6 times more likely to receive a death sentence if they kill the highest status victims (whites or Hispanics who have college degrees, are married, and have no criminal record), compared to those defendants who kill the lowest status victims (black or Asian victims who were single, with a prior criminal record, and no college degree)." Another examination of national statistics found that "only 10 whites have been executed in the modern era for the crime of killing a black male, with 6 additional cases where a black male was one of multiple victims, including victims of other races or genders." (source: thinkprogress.org) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Hearing canceled over Oklahoma use of midazolam in execution A federal judge has canceled a hearing this week on an Oklahoma inmate's request to stop his upcoming execution. Richard Glossip is challenging his execution date, now set for Sept. 30, on 2 fronts: a federal case over the execution drugs, and a state case in which he argues he's innocent in the 1997 killing of an Oklahoma City motel owner. A federal judge granted a request Wednesday from his attorneys, who asked that Friday's hearing over the drug midazolam be canceled. They say they can't show an alternative drug would be available by next week. The U.S. Supreme Court in June upheld the use of midazolam. Glossip was scheduled for execution last week, but an Oklahoma court delayed it after his attorneys said they had new evidence. (source: Associated Press) IDAHO: The death penalty remains an option for triple murder suspect John Lee It's still an option for the triple murder suspect John Lee. The Latah County prosecutor wants more time to decide if he'll seek the harsh sentence. On Friday, a county judge granted the extension. Thompson's original deadline for a decision was October, but now it's December 1. On August 4, Lee pleaded not guilty to 3 counts of 1st degree murder charges and 1 count of aggravated battery. Moscow police say on January 10, Lee shot and killed his adoptive mother, landlord and an Arby's manager, and wounded a Seattle man. If convicted, he faces life in prison or possibly the death penalty. His trial is set for May 2. (source: KLEW TV news) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 23 16:17:43 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 16:17:43 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 23 SAUDI ARABIA: France urges Saudi Arabia to cancel death penalty for young Shi'ite France called on Saudi Arabia on Wednesday not to execute a Shi'ite Muslim sentenced to death over his role in anti-government protests, saying he was a minor when he was arrested. Ali al-Nimr was given the death penalty in May after taking part in demonstrations three years ago for democracy and equal rights in Saudi Arabia's oil-producing Eastern Province. "France is concerned about the situation of Ali Mohammed al-Nimr, who was sentenced to death even though he was a minor at the time of the events," Foreign ministry spokesman Romain Nadal said. "Opposed to the death penalty in all cases and circumstances, we call for the execution to be called off." France does not usually comment on death penalty cases in Saudi Arabia due to their frequency. It has nurtured strong relations with Riyadh due to its tough stance on their Shi'ite rival Iran and shared positions on Middle East conflicts. The French statement came a day after United Nations rights experts called on Riyadh to halt Nimr's "imminent execution" Nimr was convicted of sedition, rioting, protesting and robbery in the Eastern Province district of Qatif, home to many of the Sunni Muslim-ruled kingdom's minority Shi'ites, who say they face entrenched discrimination. Nimr, who activists said was 17 at the time of his arrest in 2012, was also convicted of chanting anti-state slogans in illegal protests and inciting others to demonstrate, according to state media. "Saudi Arabia's plans to behead and crucify someone arrested as a child are indefensible," said Donald Campbell, spokesman for international human rights charity Reprieve. "The international community - particularly Saudi Arabia's close allies, the UK and the U.S. - must stand with the French government and U.N. experts against this outrage, and call on the Saudi authorities to put a halt to this unjustified killing." The conviction of Nimr, a nephew of Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, a prominent Shi'ite cleric who is also on trial, followed that of Rida al-Rubh, 26, the son of another cleric who has been critical of the authorities. The clerics are part of a group of around a dozen defendants on trial for their part in protests and violent unrest in Qatif, particularly in the village of Awamiya, where police officers and facilities have been attacked. (source: Reuters) IRAN: UN & Europe Fund Iran's Executions "The death penalty has no place in the 21st century." These words were spoken last year by the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. Many would agree. In fact, more than 140 countries worldwide have abolished capital punishment, including every country in the European Union. Yet the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and EU member states have financed Iran's drug war, a program that has allowed Iran to be a global leader in per capita executions. The regime in Iran is one of the most repressive governments in the world. In 2015, Iran received close to the lowest possible rating for political rights and civil liberties in a Freedom House report, and was ranked 173 out of 180 countries in the World Press Freedom Index. Dissidents are routinely arrested and tortured; freedom of speech is limited; and the judiciary provides little if any due process to prisoners. Yet the UNODC has given Iran more than US$15 million since 1998 to support operations by the country's Anti-Narcotics Police. This is despite significant evidence that Iran's governmental drug policies violate international law, and fall short of UNODC's own standards. A 2014 report by Ahmad Shaheed, the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Iran, quoted an experienced Iranian lawyer who said that drug trials "never last more than a few minutes." Prisoners are often denied accessed to counsel, and claim that confessions are forced under torture. By Iran's own admission 93 % of the 852 reported executions between July 2013 and June 2014 were drug related. Iran has already executed more than 750 individuals this year, and is on pace to reach 1,000 executions by the end of the year. Human Rights Watch has accused Iran of using drug charges against political prisoners and dissidents, raising further concerns about the implications of the UNODC's support for the country's anti-drugs program. In 2011, Zahra Bahrami, a citizen of both the EU and Iran was arrested and accused of drug trafficking - a charge she denied. She claimed her confession was extracted under duress, and activists contend that her arrest was based on her political views. Despite the limited scope of the UNODC, Iran???s policy of executions is about more than combating drug problems. Instead of focusing primarily on endemic problems such as poverty and a lack of opportunities for youth that foster drug abuse, Iran continues to enact draconian punishments on individuals, including publicly executing them. It appears these ritualistic killings are a strategy by the regime to maintain political authority through intimidation. These killings are part of Iran's policy of death, which seeks to terrorise and subdue a population, the majority of which is under the age of 30. Violations of International Human Rights Law >From a legal perspective there is ample evidence that Iran's executions are a violation of international human rights law, as enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The ICCPR, to which Iran and every EU member state is a party, explicitly reserves capital punishment for only "the most serious crimes." Article 6 of the ICCPR explicitly states that the death penalty cannot be imposed if a fair trial has not been granted. This statute has strong resonance given the lack of due process in Iran. The UNODC has also released a position paper that appears to critique its own involvement in Iran. The paper notes that cooperation with countries which use capital punishment "can be perceived as legitimising government actions." It concludes that in such circumstances the organisation, "may have no choice but to employ a temporary freeze or withdrawal of support." Yet the UNODC has never publicly expressed a desire to withdraw support from its Iran program. Political Hypocrisy and Human Rights The hypocrisy aiding Iran is not lost on all EU member states. The UK, Denmark and Ireland havewithdrawn funding for UNODC's Iran program, citing human rights concerns. However other countriesincluding Norway and France continue to provide funding. Earlier this year, the UNODC was rumoured to be finalising a 5 year deal with Iran, however no official announcement about the deal has been made. Unfortunately, these policies appear to be part of a larger failure by many Western countries to consider human rights as one of their negotiating points with Iran. It appears that they are willing to champion human rights as a reason for intervening in certain states, while relegating it to a footnote when it may negatively impact foreign policy interests. The attitude suggests that the executions of thousands of Iranians is part of the necessary collateral damage to keep the EU free of increased drug trafficking. This stance not only estranges those who reside outside of Europe's borders, as if their human rights are beyond the interests of international organisations, but it places Western states at the height of hypocrisy. One need look no further than the current discourse surrounding the nuclear deal with Iran to see a clear example of this. Recently, the EU's foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini visited Iran to endorse the agreement and did not express concerns over Iran???s human rights record. This meeting took place while the regime made preparations to execute Salar Shadizadi for crimes he committed when he was 15 years old. If international standards and human rights are to have universal application, the UNODC should suspend support for Iran's drug program and demand judicial reform and a moratorium on executions. EU member states should demand accountability in how their contributions are spent. Lastly, any nuclear deal should have also included recognition of the legitimate demands of Iranian society for civil and political rights, and underscored the egregious human rights conditions in Iran. This is not about interfering with the domestic affairs of a sovereign state, but holding true to the human rights values upon which the UN was founded. It is also about giving real force to international human rights law, which in this case should carry more weight. The death penalty can come to an end, but only if we have the political will to practice the ideals we have long preached. (source: Hamid Yazdan Panah is an attorney, writer and human rights activist from the San Francisco Bay Area----Iranian.com) ************ 7 years on death row 2 young Iranian Kurds that have been condemned to death are lingering in prison after 7 years. Zaniar and Loqman Moradi are charged with killing the son of a senior mullah in Kurdistan Province, western Iran, a charge they deny. They are spending their 7th year in Gohardasht (Rajai Shahr) Prison in Karaj, north-west of Tehran, and their families say that they are in poor physical condition. During these 7 years, Zaniar has never been able to meet his family and Loqman has just seen his family 2 or 3 times from behind a window. "Their file has turned complicated by the Ministry of Intelligence. It does not allow criminal courts to try them, nor does it allow clarification of their condition," says Zaniar's father who is Loqman's uncle. "Zaniar has undergone surgery 5 times because of the tortures he has suffered by his interrogators and Ministry of Intelligence agents. He has been operated on the spine, back, testis and knee," he added. Zaniar's father said that his family has moved out of Iran and thus Zaniar has not been able to have visits from them, but the regime has also barred any visits by his grandparents. "Recently, when Loqman was sent to court, he refused to put on a prisoner's outfit. He was beaten with batons, boots and other things for that, resulting in injury to 2 of his vertebras," he added. (source: NCR-Iran) INDIA: Law panel's 'Death Penalty' report sent to Home Ministry, govt unlikely to support it The Law Commission's report supporting abolition of death penalty except in terror-related cases has been forwarded to the Home Ministry for a final decision, amid indications that government may not be inclined to support it. The report 'Death Penalty' was submitted to the Law Ministry by the Law Commission on August 31. "Recently, we have forwarded it to the Home Ministry as changes in the Indian Penal Code is its domain," a senior Law Ministry functionary said here. He said while a final call on the subject will be taken by the Home Ministry, it can refer the report back to the Law Ministry for any clarifications it may require. 2 government appointees in the law panel -- ex-officio members P K Malhotra (Law Secretary) and Sanjay Singh (Legislative Secretary) had given their dissent on the report. Besides them, Justice (retd) Usha Mehra, a permanent member of the panel too had opposed the report. Sources in the government said the Centre is unlikely to support abolition of death penalty as there is a feeling that time is not ripe to do away with capital punishment. A copy of the report was also submitted to the Supreme Court by the Commission as the apex court had asked the panel to examine the issue. In 1967, the Commission in its 35th report had supported continuation of death penalty. Registering his dissent, Law Secretary Malhotra had said Parliament in its wisdom has prescribed death penalty only in heinous crimes. "The need of the hour is to retain it...We have a vibrant judiciary which is respected world-over. We should have faith in the wisdom of our judges that they will exercise this power only in deserving cases for which the law is well laid down in various judgments..." Legislative Secretary Singh had maintained the panel should not recommend something which has the effect of preventing the state from making any law in the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of the country. The Commission had said there is a need to debate as to how to bring about the "abolition of death penalty in all respects in the very near future, soonest." (source: Zee News) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 24 09:21:11 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 09:21:11 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, VA., N.C., GA., FLA., LA. Message-ID: Sept. 24 TEXAS----stay of impending execution Execution date put off for Fort Worth killer The execution of a convicted Fort Worth killer, scheduled for next month, has been called off while a state commission addresses concerns raised recently about DNA statistics and interpretation. Tarrant County prosecutors filed a motion Monday in 297th District Court, asking the judge to recall the death warrant for Christopher Chubasco Wilkins, who was scheduled to be executed Oct. 28. The prosecutors wrote that they were seeking the recall because the Texas Forensic Science Commission "is in the process of addressing emerging issues involving the calculation of DNA population statistics and DNA mixture interpretation." "While the State has no reason to believe that these DNA issues are material to or have any effect on [Wilkins'] conviction and death sentence, the State believes that a stay of [Wilkins'] currently scheduled execution should be granted in order to allow the parties to more fully investigate these matters." State District Judge David Hagerman signed an order that day, withdrawing the execution date and recalling the death warrant. DNA, including mixed DNA, was among evidence presented at the 2008 trial of Wilkins, who was convicted of fatally shooting 2 men - Willie Freeman and Mike Silva - on Oct. 27, 2005. Other evidence implicating Wilkins included fingerprints found inside and outside Silva's vehicle. A pentagram and the numbers 666 were carved into the hood of Silva's vehicle - matching tattoos on Wilkins. But perhaps most damning was Wilkins' own testimony, in which he admitted to jurors that he killed Freeman out of revenge after Freeman ripped him off in a dope deal. He said he killed Silva, who had been with Freeman, simply because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Wilkins also told jurors that he killed another man, Gilbert Vallejo, the day before outside a south Fort Worth bar during a dispute about a pay phone. He told jurors that he didn't care whether he lived or died, and he said whatever they chose for him was fine. "I am as undecided as you are," Wilkins told jurors. "You've got a job to do. You tell the judge, 'Get a rope' or not. ... "Look, it is no big deal. It is no big deal." The jury chose death, and prosecutors still intend to see that the sentence is delivered, said Sam Jordan, a spokeswoman for the Tarrant County district attorney's office. In an email responding to questions from the Star-Telegram on Wednesday, Jordan said the office has had the DNA recalculated and has received an amended report that confirms compliance with current lab interpretation and reporting protocols. Prosecutors hope to proceed with the Wilkins case after the state commission meets in October, when the DNA mixture issue is expected to be addressed. "It is our intention to enforce the jury's decision in this case," Jordan said. Hilary Sheard, Wilkins' attorney, said, "That funny sound you hear is heads being scratched across the state as people try to figure this out." "It is clearly a major issue in many cases, and I think that the state acted entirely appropriately in choosing to withdraw, or asking the court to withdraw, the warrant in these circumstances." Sheard said she hopes the delay will "allow sufficient time for other issues in the case to continue to be litigated." DNA concerns arise Concerns arose this spring when the FBI notified all Combined DNA Index System laboratories that minor discrepancies had been identified in the DNA statistical population database used by labs nationwide since 1999. The discrepancies in the database, which is used to calculate DNA match statistics in criminal and human identification cases, were attributed to human error and technological limitations. The FBI has since provided corrected data to labs. "The immediate and obvious question for the criminal justice community was whether the discrepancies could have impacted the outcome of any criminal cases," the Texas Forensic Science Commission wrote as part of a letter and attached memo to the criminal justice community. The letter was posted on the commission's website Aug. 21. Concerns arose this spring when the FBI notified all Combined DNA Index System laboratories that minor discrepancies had been identified in the DNA statistical population database used by labs nationwide since 1999. "The widely accepted consensus among forensic DNA experts is the database corrections have no impact on the threshold question of whether a victim or defendant was included or excluded in any result." Mixed DNA interpretation But adding to the concerns is that many labs have interpreted DNA mixtures found on evidence differently over the years. The scientific acceptability of some of those approaches has now been brought into question, and several labs are adopting a new standard of interpreting mixed DNA, which involves evidence that contains more than 1 person's DNA. In its letter, the commission recommends that prosecutors, defendants and defense attorneys with a pending case involving a DNA mixture should inquire with the testing lab whether new protocols were used. If not, the commission advises requesting a recalculation using the new protocols. "The extent to which any closed criminal cases my require re-analysis will be a subject of Commission review and subsequent notification to the stakeholder community," wrote Dr. Vincent Di Maio, the presiding officer. Tarrant County's response Amid the DNA concerns, Jordan said, the district attorney's office has been meeting with each of the labs to obtain a list of relevant cases during the time in question. She said the office is also reviewing pending cases involving DNA, as well as the case files of death row inmates from Tarrant County, to determine any potential effects. 18 death row inmates from Tarrant County According to Texas Department of Criminal Justice records, the county has 18 inmates on death row, including Wilkins. Jordan said labs used by Tarrant County agencies have told prosecutors that they are following current guidelines known as Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods. Staff members have participated in several lab meetings and multiple legal and Forensic Science Commission conferences to "understand and stay up to date on the evolving scientific protocols." "We remain in regular communication with the labs and the Forensic Science Commission, which has assembled a panel of world-renowed DNA experts to determine the potential to define a single standard protocol," Jordan said. (source: Fort Worth Star-Telegram) ******************* Executions under Greg Abbott, Jan. 21, 2015-present----10 Executions in Texas: Dec. 7, 1982----present-----528 Abbott#--------scheduled execution date-----name------------Tx. # 11---------October 6----------------Juan Garcia-----------529 12---------October 14---------------Licho Escamilla-------530 13---------November 3---------------Julius Murphy---------531 14---------November 18--------------Raphael Holiday-------532 15---------January 20 (2016)-----Richard Masterson--------533 16---------January 27---------------James Freeman---------534 17---------February 16--------------Gustavo Garcia--------535 (sources: TDCJ & Rick Halperin) ************ Panetti Case Argued Again Before 5th Circuit The 23-year saga that is the Scott Panetti death penalty case returned to the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals Wednesday as lawyers argued over whether the 57-year-old is competent enough to be executed, and who should pay to determine that. Panetti's attorney, Greg Wiercioch, argued before a 3-judge panel that his client does not meet the legal definition of competence needed for execution for the 1992 shooting deaths of his wife's parents. Panetti also has no money to hire experts to make his case, Wiercioch argued. He asked the judges to return Panetti's case to a federal district court so it can decide whether Panetti can have federally appointed counsel and funds for an evaluation by a mental health expert. Under Texas law, inmates must understand the crime they committed and know why they are on death row to be executed. Panetti has a documented history of mental illness going back almost 40 years, and his lawyers say he hasn't received a mental health evaluation for 7 or 8 years. Without an evaluation, they argued, they can't file a case arguing his incompetence. Judge Patrick Higginbotham acknowledged Wednesday that Panetti has a history of "mental difficulties," and 2 judges appeared frustrated with both sides for failing to answer the question of his competency. Higginbotham and Judge Priscilla Owen asked Panetti's attorney why they haven't filed a formal motion to have him declared incompetent. Wiercioch said Panetti, having no money, can't afford an expert and counsel to present the claims required to meet the threshold for the motion. The state won't pay for those resources, said Dustin Howell, an appellate attorney with the Office of the Solicitor General. Owen expressed frustration with the notion that an indigent inmate on death row who might be mentally ill would have to fend for himself when trying to make a motion on competency. "How in the world do they make a threshold showing?" she said, adding that the state could be denying defendants their due process under the law. "This is an impossible standard." Higginbotham asked Howell why the state wouldn't just agree to help determine Panetti's mental state and move forward. Howell said no statute allows for it, and he could not commit to such an idea. Panetti's case has been winding through the courts for years, creating a tangled legal trail of attempts to determine how - and why - Texas goes about executing a man with a long history of mental illness and aberrant behavior. Court filings show that the Wisconsin native was diagnosed with schizophrenia when he was 20. At the time of the murders, he had been collecting federal disability checks because the illness prevented him from holding down a job. Panetti represented himself during his capital murder trial, sometimes dressed in a cowboy outfit. He rejected an offer to plead guilty in exchange for a life sentence, and instead put on an insanity defense although he called no mental health witnesses. Panetti did try to call President John F. Kennedy, Pope John Paul II and Jesus Christ as witnesses. Appeal filings over the years detail how Panetti was first diagnosed with schizophrenia in 1978 when he was taken to Brooke Army Medical Center following an accident in which he suffered electrical burns while working as an electrical lineman. The diagnosis came shortly after Panetti spent only 10 months in the U.S. Navy. He would eventually be hospitalized at least a dozen times for mental illness. According to an earlier filing before the U.S. Supreme Court, Panetti's 1st wife, Jane, had her husband committed in May 1986 to a psychiatric facility after he nailed curtains in their home shut, buried household furniture in the backyard and conducted an exorcism of the devil from their home that involved spraying water over valuables that he had not buried. A flurry of subsequent hospitalizations followed at Kerrville State Hospital and the Veterans Administration medical centers in Waco and in Kerrville. In 1990, 2 years before Panetti would kill the parents of his 2nd wife, Sonja Alvarado, he was involuntarily committed again at Kerrville State Hospital. The action was taken after Panetti began "swinging a cavalry sword around the house and threatening to kill" his wife, their baby, his wife's father and himself. Panetti's wife eventually left him to live with her parents. On Sept. 8, 1992, Panetti shaved his head, put on camouflage combat fatigues and then, armed with a sawed-off shotgun and a deer rifle, went to the Alvarado's home and killed them both in front of their daughter and granddaughter. "Mr. Panetti still has paranoid schizophrenia, and he's going to have it for the rest of his life," said Kathryn Kase, one of Panetti's attorneys with the Texas Defender Service. "This disease is not going to go away." But the state sees it differently, consistently arguing that Panetti is aware of what he did and understands why he is on death row - the legal requirements for competence to be executed. Last year, a prison doctor said Panetti did not need treatment. Kase disagrees. Panetti's condition has worsened, Wiercioch argued Wednesday, saying that Panetti has asked for anti-psychotic medication and believes that his execution is tied to speaking out against corrupt prison staff. During the hearing, Owen also questioned whether Panetti's attorneys had exhausted their appeals in state courts before filing at the federal level. Owen said Panetti's team had the opportunity to seek what they wanted at the state level but they "didn't try." "You want to bypass the state," she told Wiercioch, who responded that Panetti has issues that only the federal courts can help remedy. He said his goal is to petition for a writ of habeas corpus in a federal court, a procedural move that claims unlawful imprisonment. (source: The Texas Tribune) VIRGINIA: Virginia's contempt for transparency Virginia's Supreme Court has just handed a ringing victory, and a misguided one, to champions of secrecy in government. In doing so the court has misread the clear intent of state law and signaled its contempt for the public's legitimate interest in obtaining information about the workings of state agencies. The ruling, in a case pitting a state lawmaker, Del. Scott A. Surovell (D-Fairfax) against Virginia's Department of Corrections, involved Mr. Surovell's request for information under the state's Freedom of Information Act, which has the explicit purpose of facilitating the release of information to the public, with certain discrete exemptions. Mr. Surovell sought documents related to procedures and facilities used for carrying out the state's death penalty. A Fairfax Circuit Court judge - Jane Marum Roush, who has since been elevated to the state Supreme Court - ordered the material released. The state appealed, arguing that the information's release could jeopardize security at the state's death chamber, and the Supreme Court mostly agreed. In siding with the state, however, the court went so far overboard as to effectively neuter Virginia's Freedom of Information Act. A majority of the justices said that if the material requested contained even a scrap of information exempt from disclosure under the FOIA, then officials, rather than simply redacting the exempt bits, could refuse disclosure entirely. That's absurd, as a respected judge, former attorney general William Mims, made clear in a partial dissent. If there is no valid reason to shield the main body of requested information from disclosure, Justice Mims said, then a state agency "must release the requested record, and it may redact the exempt information in its discretion." The court also erred on the side of secrecy in government - in contravention of the FOIA's stated purpose - by saying that government officials deserve "deference" about what to exempt from disclosure. Even a passing familiarity with some bureaucrats' penchant for gratuitous secrecy over-classification - in Washington, as in Richmond - would expose the danger of automatically granting such deference. Virginia already has a well-deserved reputation as among the least open and accountable state governments; notoriously, 3/4 of the bills defeated in House of Delegates committees and subcommittees got no recorded votes this year, according to a report from the group Transparency Virginia. The court's ruling will only further entrench that reputation for government-behind-drawn-curtains. (source: Editorial, Washington Post) NORTH CAROLINA: How to repeal the death penalty, from the Republican who did it Colby Coash is a 39-year-old state senator in Nebraska. He's a father of a 6-year-old boy and part owner of a microbrewery. He likes football and NASCAR, especially the drivers of Fords. Last week, just for fun, he gave wrestling names to all his colleagues in the Senate. His was "Chaos." Coash also happens to be a bit of a rock star in anti-death penalty circles, because as a Republican legislator in a conservative state, he led the effort this year to repeal the state's death penalty. Now, the unassuming Coash is getting invitations to speak and meet with people across the country, including in Charlotte, where he's the featured attraction at a luncheon today hosted by North Carolina Conservatives Concerned about the Death Penalty. This morning, we sat down for breakfast in Uptown, where Coash talked about how a solid conservative got this non-conservative idea passed in his red state. It's simple, he says, at least conceptually. Repealing the death penalty is the conservative thing to do. "You have to change the narrative," he says. That means instead of offering up the traditional arguments against capital punishment - unequal justice and inequitable application of death sentences - Coash gave his fellow conservatives 3 reasons the death penalty violated their principles: It's inefficient. Nebraska, like many states, hasn't executed a death row inmate in decades - 1995 was the last execution. Yet state and local prosecutors pay far more to prosecute capital cases and handle death row appeals. One Nebraska county, he says, was forced to put up its snowplows for collateral to borrow money for prosecuting a death penalty case. "If any other program was as inefficient as this, we would eliminate it," Coash says. It misplaces power. "Conservatives want limited government," Coash says. "We believe in emphasizing the power of the people." The death penalty, he argues, represents a supreme power that's given to the state. "That's too much power for government," he says. It doesn't deliver justice. Says Coash: "I got to know a victim - a woman whose brother's killer is on death row. He's been there for 30-something years. She came to me and said, 'How is it justice when the government tells me that for this horrific thing that happened, the state was going to execute him - and it never happens?'" It worked. Coash gathered enough Republican support to pass repeal, then he kept enough votes intact to override Gov. Pete Ricketts' veto with a 2/3 majority. Could the same happen in North Carolina? Coash says he had a few advantages back home that lawmakers might not have here. First, Nebraska's legislature is "unicameral," meaning it has just 1 chamber, the Senate. That means there???s only one group of lawmakers to persuade, cajole and keep together when things get hot from public backlash. Also, the Nebraska Senate had an influx of new Republican lawmakers who are more willing to entertain new perspectives on issues, including this one. Finally, Nebraska has term limits - 2 4-year terms in the Senate and you're done. That can be liberating to a state lawmaker contemplating a controversial vote. In the end, though, Coash believes the repeal passed because it was the right thing to do - no matter your party. "You don't have to turn in your Republican card because you support death penalty repeal," he says. "You can use what's on the back of that card." It's a nice line, and it's one of a handful he has when he talks to repeal advocates and legislators. This week, he met with Republican Rep. Jon Hardister of Guilford County, who's trying to start similar conservations in the N.C. House. All of which might seem like a longshot. Republican leadership in Raleigh is rooted and supportive of capital punishment. But just as unlikely is Colby Coash, Nebraska conservative, finishing off a biscuit in Charlotte before he gives a pep talk to death penalty opponents. "You're sitting there thinking 'Hell, no, repeal could never happen in North Carolina,'" he says. "We were saying the same thing in Nebraska a year ago." (source: Opinion; Charlotte Observer) GEORGIA----impending female execution Rally held to stop execution of woman on Georgia's death row Hundreds of people protested Wednesday against the planned execution of the only woman on Georgia's death row. Channel 2's Sophia Choi went to the rally where church leaders pleaded for mercy for Kelly Gissendaner. Through song and prayer, the religious leaders hope the Pardons and Paroles Board will commute Gissendaner's death sentence. "We're here to sort of plead and beg the board of paroles to spare Kelly Dissendaner," said Bishop Robert Wright, of the Episcopal Diocese of Atlanta. A Gwinnett County jury convicted Gissendaner of planning her husband's 1997 murder and getting her then-lover to do it. Gissendaner will be the 1st woman in the state to be executed in 50 years. Her supporters say she will also be the first person to die by lethal injection. "This breaks precedent, because she wasn't even there on site," Wright said about the murder Gissendaner is convicted of. "There's no good for anybody. For her, for the state, for public welfare," said Daniel Vestal, pastor of the Peachtree Baptist Church. Supporters, including 2 of her children, say Gissendaner is a changed woman and should be spared. "She has been a positive force in prison. She is changing people and changing hearts," Wright said. The group sent that message in a letter to the parole board in hopes of convincing them. Receiving life with no parole is an option for Gissendaner. "The court is in the business now of trying to save face. They've continue to persevere in this execution and the opinion is now they just got to finish it. And get it done. But they don't have to," Wright said. In March, Gissendaner got a reprieve when the state delayed her execution because a sedative used in lethal injections turned cloudy. The state has since said the sedative is OK to use and will work fine. (source: WSB TV news) *************** Gissendaner lawyers ask federal judge to stop execution Kelly Gissendaner's lawyers on Wednesday asked a federal judge to stop her execution, set for next week, so there's time for him to reconsider his decision to dismiss a lawsuit she filed accusing state officials of violating her constitutional rights. Lawyers for the state quickly countered with a filing that said there was no new information that would prompt U.S. District Judge Thomas Thrash to rethink his Aug. 10 decision to dismiss Gissendaner's complaint. Last Friday, a Gwinnett County judge signed a warrant scheduling Gissendaner's execution, which is set for 7 p.m. Tuesday. The filings Wednesday are most likely the 1st of a series of court challenges expected as lawyers try to stop the execution. The issue that Gissendaner's lawyers say Thrash needs to give another look is whether her constitutional rights were violated on March 2 when her scheduled execution was delayed, canceled, scheduled again and then stopped once more because of a potential problem with the execution drug. They argue the on-again, off-again scheduling constituted cruel and unusual punishment. The Department of Corrections called off her execution for the final time almost 3 1/2 hours after it was to have happened. DOC said it needed time to determine what was wrong with the drug. The pentobarbital was cloudy and contained clumps. DOC later said the drug's appearance changed because it had been stored at a temperature that was too cold. Otherwise, there was nothing wrong with it. Gissendaner also complained in her lawsuit that Georgia's secrecy law prevents her legal team from verifying that the drug will do what it is designed to do without causing unnecessary pain because lawyers have no way of knowing who had makes the powerful sedative and under what circumstances. Thrash dismissed Gissendaner's lawsuit last month, writing that prison officials did not deliberately cause her emotional distress so it was not unconstitutional. He also repeated what other courts have said - laws designed to protect the identities of those who provide lethal injection drugs do not violate the Constitution. A Gwinnett County jury convicted Gissendaner of murder and sentenced her to die for Douglas Gissendaner's February 1997 death, even though she didn't personally kill him. Kelly Gissendaner persuaded her then-lover, Gregory Owen, to kill her husband while she was at a bar with friends. She gave Owen the nightstick and the knife he used to murder Douglas Gissendaner. Eventually, Owen pleaded guilty and was sentenced to life with the possibility of parole after he has served 25 years, an offer Kelly Gissendaner rejected. (source: Atlanta Journal-Constitution) FLORIDA: State to seek death penalty While a Clay County Grand Jury has indicted Victor Lamar Cruger, 25, for 1st degree murder and other charges, the case remains under investigation. Green Cove Springs Police Department Detective Jim Acres said while 2 witnesses saw Cruger shoot 59-year-old Ernestine Griner Hines at close range around 4:10 a.m. on Aug. 23 while sitting in a van, they continue to search for a motive in the killing. Hines' 2 daughters have since given police details of the events that unfolded during the murder. "We know he did it because they were in the car and saw him do it," Acres said. "We're just fortunate they didn't become victims also." Acres said the murder began by Cruger making a simple request from Hines whom he lived near. "It all started with Victor showed up at Miss Ernestine's house wanting a ride to Washington Lane," Acres said. After the got to the home in the 300 block of Washington Lane, Acres said, Cruger shot Hines while he sat in the van's back seat while Hines sat in the front passenger's seat. Within minutes, he chased 1 of Hines' daughters around the van attempting to shoot her after he shot Hines with what was believed to be a 9-millimeter handgun, which has yet to be recovered. The 2 women then fled the scene in the van, while Cruger ran away from the home on Washington Lane into a wooded area. He was captured on Aug. 28 inside a home in southeast Gainesville after being holed up there with a woman with whom he fathered a child, Acres said. "That was one of the first places we knew to look," Acres said. "When the tip came in from Crime Stoppers, we sent the U.S. Marshals to go get him. He refused at first, but then we finally got him." Described as having "a fairly extensive record, court records show, that in November 2010, Cruger was sentenced to 4 years in state prison for 2 counts of selling cocaine near a school. Along with the 1st degree murder charge, the grand jury, on Sept. 17, indicted Cruger on 2 counts of attempted murder in the 1st degree for attempting to take Hines' daughters lives, armed burglary with assault or battery and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. "By getting into the car with a weapon with intent to commit a crime, he committed burglary," Acres said. Acres said since Cruger was extradited from Gainesville after being captured by U.S. Marshals on Aug. 28, he is not cooperating in the investigation. "He won't say a word," Acres said. "We've been working with the State Attorney's Office from day one on this." Jackelyn Barnard, director of communications for State Attorney Angela Corey, said the state plans to seek the death penalty when the case goes to trial, however, a trial date cannot be set while the case is still under investigation. Acres said Hines' murder is the most gruesome in the city since 2008. "We probably would have had 3 homicides on our hands if his gun hadn't jammed," Acres said. Police continue to search for Cruger's weapon as well. (source: claytodayonline.com) ***************** The death penalty isn't preventing deaths A lot of people aren't getting the memo. According to the Times-Union, homicides increased for the 3rd year in a row in Jacksonville last year. On top of that, those 121 slayings in 2014 were the highest since 2008. Yet apparently those killers didn't get the memo, the one that shows if they are convicted in Duval, Clay and Nassau counties, they are more likely to wind up on death row than if they did their killings elsewhere. They aren't getting the memo - the one that shows that with 58 people on death row, the 4th Judicial Circuit has a higher number of people there than any other judicial circuit in Florida. And nationally, it has the 8th-highest number of people facing the death penalty. The fact they aren't deterred is backed by many studies, such as one done in 2012 by the National Research Council. People who are bent on killing won't stop because they might get the needle. TOO MANY WRONG CONVICTIONS And it is one reason why Kristina Musante, coordinator of Justice 4 Jacksonville Coalition, recently told the First Coast Tiger Bay Club that it is past time to rethink the use of the death penalty here. It is an overused approach that doesn't scare criminals as much as it should scare taxpayers who are spending millions each year on capital punishment cases as well as those who are wrongly convicted. That happens too often in Florida. Of the 155 people freed from death row since 1973, 25 were from Florida.That's the highest number of exonerations of any state. "The death penalty is bad public policy," said Musante, who debated Bernie de la Rionda, an assistant state attorney who has tried numerous capital cases, on the use of the death penalty. "Florida would save $51 million a year if it abolished the death penalty for life without parole," Musante said. "The money that is saved could go to solving cold cases and to proven crime prevention programs." But de la Rionda argued that the death penalty is about ensuring that those who have killed won't do it again and to punish those who have committed particularly heinous slayings. "Without the death penalty, it just encourages killers to keep killing," de la Rionda said. WHAT ABOUT VICTIMS? But the criminal justice system is supposed to do more than punish people. It is supposed to discourage people from committing crimes in the first place. And it is supposed to minimize victimization. The disproportionate numbers of people from Jacksonville who are sitting on death row, even as the city's murder rate increases, tells me that this isn't happening here. It tells me that the death penalty isn't scaring people straight. Because if it were, homicides in this city would be going down - not up. That's why I agree with Musante. It's time for a new way. Justice 4 Jacksonville is pushing to establish a community advisory committee for this judicial circuit that would review cases where the death penalty might be sought and possibly help devise more prudent and less expensive alternatives. It should be considered. This judicial circuit is sending more people to death row than any other in Florida, it ranks 8th in the nation for sentencing people to death and yet people are still getting killed at the same rate. The bottom line is that we taxpayers are wasting our money. The murderers aren't getting the memo. (source: Tonyaa Weathersbee, Florida Times-Union) LOUISIANA: Killing A White Person Is Almost The Only Reason Murderers Ever Receive The Death Penalty Black men constitute 61 % of homicide victims in Louisiana - nearly 13,000 black men were killed in this state since the Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976. Yet only 3 people have been executed for killing a black man in all of this time. That's less than 6 % of the rate of executions for individuals who kill someone other than a black man, and 1/48th of the execution rate for people who kill white women, according to a study that will appear in the Loyola University of New Orleans Journal of Public Interest Law. The study, by Frank Baumgartner and Tim Lyman, reveals stark racial disparities in death sentences and executions. Though African Americans make up 72 % of murder victims in Louisiana, people who kill black men or women constitute only 33 % of those sentenced to death and only 21 % of those who are actually executed. White people, by contrast, make up 26 % of victims but their killers make up 79 % of people who are executed. Though this study focused on data from Louisiana, other studies confirm that its findings stretch well beyond this 1 state. A study of the death penalty in Texas, for example, found that "defendants are 6 times more likely to receive a death sentence if they kill the highest status victims (whites or Hispanics who have college degrees, are married, and have no criminal record), compared to those defendants who kill the lowest status victims (black or Asian victims who were single, with a prior criminal record, and no college degree)." Another examination of national statistics found that "only 10 whites have been executed in the modern era for the crime of killing a black male, with 6 additional cases where a black male was one of multiple victims, including victims of other races or genders." (source: thinkprogress.org) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 24 09:22:32 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 09:22:32 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OHIO, TENN., ILL., OKLA. Message-ID: Sept. 24 OHIO: Ohio bill puts limits on post-trial death penalty evidence An Ohio Senate committee has voted to allow limits on the ability of condemned killers to gather post-trial evidence in death penalty cases. New language in the bill before the Senate Criminal Justice Committee allows judges to deny requests for evidence gathering if it would annoy, embarrass or unduly burden the person from whom the evidence is sought. The Republican-controlled committee approved the change along party lines Wednesday but did not vote on the overall bill itself. Republican Sen. Bill Seitz of Cincinnati says the bill is still an improvement over existing law which leaves the decision to allow post-trial evidence gathering up to judges. Kari Underwood of the Ohio Public Defender's Office says such evidence limits are inappropriate in death penalty cases. (source: Associated Press) TENNESSEE: Cellmate indicted in "Tattoo Eddie" slashing death Notorious double-murderer Edward Leroy "Tattoo Eddie" Harris met his fate behind bars, repeatedly slashed and stabbed with a prison-made shank wielded by his cellmate, a Morgan County grand jury has determined. Gregory Smith, 34, serving a life sentence for a 2004 Dickson County murder conviction, has been indicted on a charge of 1st-degree murder. Harris, 58, was serving concurrent life sentences for the murders nearly 30 years ago of 2 employees of the Rocky Top Village Inn in Gatlinburg who were repeatedly stabbed and shot. During the attack on him last March, Harris' aorta was slashed, and he bled to death. Harris and Smith were "confirmed members of security threat groups," according to a news release from 9th Judicial District Attorney General Russell Johnson's office. The release doesn't specify which groups. Harris's stabbing occurred March 10 in a housing unit lobby at Morgan County Correctional Complex, a state prison with about 2,400 inmates. Tennessee Department of Correction video cameras captured the incident. The Morgan County grand jury returned the indictment against Smith during its Monday session. He remains in the prison. Harris and 3 cohorts were charged with the killings on Sept. 13, 1986, of clerk Melissa Hill, 21, and night guard Troy Valentine, 36. Each victim suffered repeated stab wounds and gunshot wounds in a robbery that netted $413 and the contents of Hill's purse. Harris was convicted in 1988. Also convicted in separate trials were Kimberly Pelley and Joseph DeModica, of Gwinett County, Ga. They received concurrent life sentences. A 4th defendant, Rufus Doby, a female impersonator also known as Ashley Silvers, pleaded guilty to 2nd-degree murder and received a 25-year prison sentence. A jury in the Harris trial originally imposed the death penalty. But the state Court of Criminal Appeals reduced that punishment to life in prison without parole. The court opined the death penalty couldn't be imposed because Harris' IQ was 70. Under a change in the law, the death penalty isn't permitted when the defendant has an IQ of 70 or lower. (source: Knoxville News Sentinel) ************* 'Dead Man Walking' nun urges students to fight death penalty Sister Helen Prejean could have been at the White House welcoming the pope. Instead the nun famous for writing "Dead Man Walking" chose to spend her day speaking to a group of Nashville college students about the death penalty. Prejean has been the spiritual adviser to several death row prisoners, most recently Oklahoma's Richard Glossip. His execution was halted just hours before he was scheduled to die last week after a state appeals court agreed to hear new evidence. That chain of events was largely set in motion by Prejean, who believes Glossip is innocent. Prejean spoke Wednesday at Belmont University about the events in her life that led her to become one of the country's foremost death penalty opponents. And she urged the students to take a stand as well. (source: Associated Press) ILLINOIS: IL Lawmakers propose to reinstate death penalty Should the death penalty come back to Illinois? Some lawmakers say it should and have a bill they hope will make it to the floor for a debate. Unlike the old death penalty, it would only be used in a few cases. One of them is when is when a police officer or other law enforcement office is killed. 26 officers have been shot and killed this year and lawmakers say that's a wakeup call. "I want to bring this back as a deterrent before you try to hurt somebody who's protecting us and our homes, you better think twice," said Rep.Bill Mitchell, 101st district. Lawmakers say Illinois made a mistake when it completely banned the death penalty 4 years ago. They say it needs to be brought back, but in a different way. "It's not the old death penalty that has some flaws. This is a totally new death penalty," said Rep. John Cabello, 68th district. The new penalty would affect murders involving police officers, children or multiple victims. "Right now we're going after the worst of the worst. We've got to find ways of making sure it's iron clad," said Rep. Cabello. But Illinois Innocence Project executive director John Hanlon said 17 death row inmates in Illinois were exonerated before the practice was banned. He said the state too often relies on confessions and eye witness testimony, which are some of the weakest forms of evidence. "When a witness gets on the stand and points a finger at someone, that is something unfortunately cannot always trust because of mistakes human beings make," said Hanlon. As for the new death penalty, he said Illinois tried it before in 1978 when it reinstated the punishment for cases involving only 6 types of criteria. But by 2011, it had expanded to more than 20. "Tthe concept of a limited category of cases, I'm not buying it. It's been disproved by history," said Hanlon. Sponsors of the bill say it could move forward as soon as Thursday's House session. But despite having some support from democrats the bill has not moved out of committee since it was first proposed last February. (source: ourquadcities.com) ************** Lawmakers seek limited renewal of death penalty Several years after the death penalty was abolished in Illinois, some state lawmakers want a limited reinstatement. State Rep. John Cabello, R-Machesney, and state Rep. Bill Mitchell, R-Fosyth, were in Decatur on Wednesday to urge lawmakers in Springfield to discuss whether the controversial punishment should be brought back in cases of those who murder a law enforcement officer, firefighter or child. "This is intended for the worst of the worst," Cabello said. "We feel if a member of our society is brutally murdered, the members of the family should be able to lobby for a different kind of punishment." Former Republican Governor George Ryan commuted the death sentences of all death row prisoners in 2000. Illinois became the 16th state to abolish the death penalty in 2011. Under the proposal, the option of the death penalty would only apply to those convicted of 1st-degree murder for the murder of a peace officer, correctional employee or fireman while in the line of duty, multiple murders, murder of a child younger than 12 or any murder committed on a school grounds or as an act of terrorism. In addition, the death penalty could only be sought if it is requested to the state's attorney by the family of the victim. "If the families do not wish someone to be expired, then it's not something we want to happen," said Cabello, who also stressed the penalty should only be sought in cases where the evidence is "iron clad." State Senator Bill Haine, D-Alton, announced earlier this month his intent to file similar legislation in the state Senate. The bill sponsored by Cabello, House Bill 4059, is in the House Rules Committee, with 3 Democratic and 3 Republican sponsors. Cabello said the changing climate of the past several years, including the recent death of an officer in Fox Lake, has changed the narrative. But while the national headlines of violence against law enforcement officers have seemingly increased, the actual number of cases is down. According to the Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, which tracks officers' deaths so their names can be enshrined on a Washington, D.C., memorial, the number of officers shot and killed has decreased over the past few decades. There were 26 shooting deaths through the end August this year, down from 30 last year. Mitchell said if the potential for the death penalty to deter 1 person from committing such a crime, then it will be worth it. "1 death is one too many," he said. (source: Decatur Times-Herald) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Oklahoma death row inmate's lawyers say prosecutors intimidating witnesses Attorneys for an Oklahoma death row inmate say prosecutors have arrested a key witness who has new evidence and filed a request on Wednesday asking the courts to order the state to stop intimidating witnesses. The defense team for 52-year-old Richard Glossip, who was convicted of arranging the 1997 murder of the owner of an Oklahoma City motel he was managing, filed the request in a state appeals court. The attorneys said Michael Scott, who signed an affidavit saying he heard convicted murderer Justin Sneed brag about setting Glossip up for the crime, was arrested on Tuesday on a warrant for a $200 unpaid fine and failure to complete community service connected to a recent drunk driving arrest. Scott was arrested in Rogers County, but was interrogated by Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater, who serves the county where the murder took place around 100 miles to the southwest, according to the filing. "Prater specifically told Mr. Scott that he ordered this action so that Scott would be forced to talk with Prater and his investigator," the filing said. Prater's office could not be immediately reached for comment. Glossip's lawyers have argued that no physical evidence tied their client to the murder of Barry Van Treese. They added that he was convicted largely on the testimony of Sneed, then 19, and the motel's maintenance man, who confessed to carrying out the killing after Glossip hired him to do it. Sneed avoided the death penalty by testifying against Glossip and is serving a life sentence. An appeals court threw out a previous conviction, saying evidence against Glossip was "extremely weak." The case went back to a jury in 2004, which found him guilty and upheld the death sentence. Glossip was set to be executed last Wednesday for the murder of motel owner Barry Van Treese, until a last minute stay from the Oklahoma Criminal Court of Appeals stayed the execution and reset the date to Sept. 30. Glossip's execution would be the first in Oklahoma since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June the use of midazolam, a sedative in the lethal injection procedure, did not violate the U.S. Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. (source: Reuters) ********** Hearing canceled over Oklahoma use of midazolam in execution A federal judge has canceled a hearing this week on an Oklahoma inmate's request to stop his upcoming execution. Richard Glossip is challenging his execution date, now set for Sept. 30, on 2 fronts: a federal case over the execution drugs, and a state case in which he argues he's innocent in the 1997 killing of an Oklahoma City motel owner. A federal judge granted a request Wednesday from his attorneys, who asked that Friday's hearing over the drug midazolam be canceled. They say they can't show an alternative drug would be available by next week. The U.S. Supreme Court in June upheld the use of midazolam. Glossip was scheduled for execution last week, but an Oklahoma court delayed it after his attorneys said they had new evidence. (source: Associated Press) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 24 09:23:19 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 09:23:19 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----ID., ARIZ., CALIF., ORE., USA Message-ID: Sept. 24 IDAHO: The death penalty remains an option for triple murder suspect John Lee It's still an option for the triple murder suspect John Lee. The Latah County prosecutor wants more time to decide if he'll seek the harsh sentence. On Friday, a county judge granted the extension. Thompson's original deadline for a decision was October, but now it's December 1. On August 4, Lee pleaded not guilty to 3 counts of 1st degree murder charges and 1 count of aggravated battery. Moscow police say on January 10, Lee shot and killed his adoptive mother, landlord and an Arby's manager, and wounded a Seattle man. If convicted, he faces life in prison or possibly the death penalty. His trial is set for May 2. (source: KLEW TV news) ARIZONA----foreign national faces death penalty Prosecutors to seek death penalty against Mesa QuickTrip murder suspect Prosecutors intend to seek the death penalty against the undocumented immigrant charged with the murder of a Mesa gas station clerk. Video evidence from the January incident shows Apolinar Altamirano, 30, shoot Grant Ronnebeck in the head inside the Quik Trip near Stapley Drive and Broadway Road, according to court documents. One reason Altamirano shot Ronnebeck, 21, was to make a financial gain, in this case 2 boxes of cigarettes, according to documents filed by the Maricopa County Attorney's Office. Altamirano pleaded not guilty to the charges against him. He was awaiting deportation proceedings when he allegedly shot Ronnebeck, according to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). A representative of the Mexican government has appeared at several of Altamirano's hearings, records show. Aggravating factors that allow the prosecution to seek the death penalty include the "especially heinous, cruel or depraved manner" of the crime and that Altamirano gained financially from the crime (by taking the cigarettes), according to the prosecution's filing. Altamirano is at least the 2nd undocumented immigrant arrested in Maricopa County this year who could face the death penalty if convicted of 1st-degree murder. (source: East Valley Tribune) CALIFORNIA: Retrial sought for Kevin Cooper, convicted in 1983 massacre----Attorneys plan to present governor with report that says Kevin Cooper's rights were violated. Attorneys for death row inmate Kevin Cooper announced plans to ask Gov. Jerry Brown to grant their client a retrial Wednesday, Sept. 23, after an international human rights advocacy group found "multiple violations of Cooper's human rights during his prosecution, conviction and sentencing." The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, a branch of the Organization of American States, concluded in a 32-page report that if California executes Cooper, the state would be committing "a serious and irreparable violation of the basic right to life." Cooper's attorneys from the Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe law firm plan to present the report to Brown in hopes that he will grant their client a new trial that will include forensic testing. "Before an innocent man is executed, we urge Governor Brown to take the steps that the (report) recommends: to review Mr. Cooper's trial and sentence," Norman Hile, 1 of Cooper's attorneys, said in a news release. "Mr. Cooper deserves the chance to prove that he is innocent." By Wednesday afternoon, Brown's office had not received the attorneys' petition, spokeswoman Deborah Hoffman said via email. Cooper was convicted of killing 2 adults, their daughter and a neighbor boy during a knife-and-hatchet attack in Chino Hills in 1983. Throughout the trial and appeal process, Cooper has maintained that evidence was planted or contaminated, that he was framed, and that the real killer or killers have escaped justice. State officials say Cooper has exhausted all his appeals. He could be among the first inmates put to death when California ends a years-long hiatus on executions. In 2004, Cooper won a last-minute stay on his execution from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. However, additional hearings and forensic tests did not prove Cooper's claim of innocence, a judge ruled. In 2009, the 9th Circuit denied him a rehearing, but multiple judges strongly dissented that ruling, including 1 who wrote, "the state of California may be about to execute an innocent man." For the 10th time, he asked the U.S. Supreme Court to take his appeal, but justices declined to review the case. In 2011, Cooper's attorneys petitioned the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to review the case. The organization issued its report in July. The commission found 8 instances of "the denial of Cooper's right to due process" during the trial and appeals processes, his attorneys said. Those instances include evidence mishandling, evidence destruction and evidence tampering by law enforcement and the prosecution, according to the news release. The report also found "ineffective assistance by Cooper's trial counsel," as well as instances of racism during evidence gathering, Cooper's prosecution and in the imposition of the death penalty, his attorneys said. The report recommends that Cooper be granted "effective relief, including a review of his trial and sentence in accordance with the guarantees of due process and a fair trial," his attorneys said. ************ Death penalty case gets new judge The judge presiding over a death penalty trial "reluctantly" agreed to step down from the case after a conflict was brought up several weeks into proceedings. 2 men are on trial for a 2011 Moreno Valley homicide. With a new judge in charge, proceedings will pick back up where they left off for one defendant, but a mistrial was granted for the defendant who had the conflict with the judge. He will start over with a new trial at a later date. After consulting with legal counsel, Riverside County Superior Court Judge Bernard Schwartz on Wednesday, Sept. 23, told attorneys and defendants in the case that he would recuse himself. He lamented the waste of almost 7 weeks of court time on the trial and the calling of almost 800 potential jurors, including the 12 selected to serve as jurors and 6 alternate jurors. Schwartz referred the case back to Judge Becky Dugan, who is in charge of assigning cases to judges in the Riverside courthouse. She reassigned it to Judge David Gunn, who will meet with the various parties on Monday to go over the plans. Deontray Robinson, 25, of Palm Desert, and Romaine Ulyses Martin, 40, of Moreno Valley are accused in the May 27, 2011 robbery and shooting death of Jerry Mitchell Jr. They will be eligible for the death penalty if convicted of special-circumstances allegations of murder committed during a robbery, murder to benefit a criminal street gang, murder during a burglary and murder to prevent the testimony of a victim or witness. The jury started hearing evidence Aug. 31. A question about Schwartz's impartiality came up this month because one of Martin's defense attorneys, Darryl Exum, learned recently that in 1996, when Schwartz was a criminal defense attorney, he represented Martin in a robbery case. The judge told attorneys last week he did not remember the case. With the jury not in the courtroom, Exum and other attorneys told Schwartz there was a chance that the prior case details might be brought up, including Schwartz's role. Exum sought a mistrial for Martin, which Dugan granted. Outside court, Exum said he wanted to start over, with his client's case considered separate from co-defendant Robinson. Because court reporters prepare daily verbatim transcripts, the attorneys suggested in court Wednesday to Dugan that the new judge could review the proceedings to date and continue with Robinson's trial. According to testimony so far, several people went to Mitchell's apartment intending to rob him of money, and the victim hid in a bathroom while the suspects ransacked and took property. The prosecution contends Robinson and Martin each had a handgun. After the defendants left, witnesses testified, Robinson returned and shot Mitchell. Martin denied any involvement when questioned by police, according to court records. (source for both: The Press-Enterprise) OREGON: Oregon's death penalty pause follows history of shifting views ---- A brief history of Oregon's death penaltyState politics reporter Denis C. Theriault gives a brief history of Oregon's back and forth on executions, along with some national context for the state's current posture. Gov. Kate Brown extended Gov. John Kitzhaber's controversial death penalty moratorium when she took office in February - promising a deep review of Oregon's system in time for next year's elections. Brown promised the study 8 days after taking office. But work is just getting under way, and any recommendations may not emerge until next fall, Brown's office acknowledged in a story published Saturday by The Oregonian/OregonLive. What comes next? That's unclear. The review isn't intended to decide whether the death penalty should be repealed, Brown's office said. It's just going to look at "practical" issues - such as the cost and availability of lethal injection drugs and issues around appeals, which can take years and cost millions of dollars. A ballot measure pushing for repeal could be on the table during the 2017 legislative agenda. That comes even though polling from three years ago shows Oregonians still showing strong support for public executions. But another change would be in keeping with the state's history. Oregonians voted to abolish the death penalty once before, in 1914. They also revived it in 1964 and then twice more voted to keep it around, most recently in the 1980s. State politics reporter Denis C. Theriault gives a brief history of Oregon's back and forth on executions, along with some national context for the state's current posture, in an accompanying video. One thing seems certain: Whatever might emerge from next year's review, Oregonians won't be done wrestling with the implications of capital punishment any time soon. (source: The Oregonian) USA: Justice Scalia Says He "Wouldn't Be Surprised" If Supreme Court Ended Death Penalty----In a speech Tuesday at Rhodes College, the conservative Supreme Court justice said that 4 of his colleagues think that the penalty is unconstitutional, The Commercial Appeal reported. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia told attendees of a speech given Tuesday that four of his colleagues believe the death penalty is unconstitutional and that "he wouldn't be surprised" if the court ends the penalty, according to reports from the event. Speaking at Rhodes College, the conservative justice bristled at the concept, believing the penalty to be constitutional and telling attendees that death penalty opponents should go to the states if they want to end it, Jennifer Pignolet of The Commercial Appeal tweeted. According to Pignolet's report, Scalia said that "he 'wouldn't be surprised' if his court ruled it unconstitutional, despite his belief that the Constitution allows for it with the establishment of protections like a fair trial." Specifically, Scalia said that "he now has 4 colleagues who believe it's unconstitutional," Pignolet tweeted. The statements provide new insight into the court's internal discussions - or at least Scalia's take on his colleagues - as his comments go further than Scalia's colleagues have gone themselves. In dissenting from the court's June decision upholding Oklahoma's use of the drug midazolam in its lethal injection protocol, Justice Stephen Breyer, joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, wrote, "I believe it highly likely that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment. At the very least, the Court should call for full briefing on the basic question." While close to declaring a view that the penalty is unconstitutional, the opinion reached no definitive conclusion - and neither justice has voiced opposition to decisions refusing stays of execution in multiple cases brought to the court since then. Although Scalia did not, from available reporting on the speech, name the justices of whom he was speaking, the other 2 justices who dissented from the Glossip v. Gross decision - Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan - did not even go as far as Breyer did in his dissent. Sotomayor, in her dissenting opinion, focused primarily on the midazolam issue directly before the court and the question of whether those challenging a method of execution must propose an alternative method. Kagan joined that dissenting opinion. And, while Justice Anthony Kennedy has written about "enforc[ing] the Constitution's protection of human dignity" in the course of addressing limits to the death penalty, the justice has not publicly stated any unambiguous opposition to the penalty itself. A spokesperson for Rhodes College told BuzzFeed News that the Supreme Court's public information office informed the school that no recordings of the speech would be allowed. An official with the court's public information office told BuzzFeed News that there would not be a text of Scalia's speech made available. (source: buzzfeed.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 24 09:24:06 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 09:24:06 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 24 BARBADOS: Death penalty and the law Laws are prescribed as remedies for mischief. The remedies include punishment and penalty. The punishment for some mischief is loss of liberty by incarceration. The penalty in some cases is a fine. The penalty for murder on conviction is death. As a penalty, it is an effective deterrent for the offender who will never commit murder again. That satisfies the law essentially as a remedy. The judicial execution of the death penalty is not an unlawful killing and cannot be equated with murder in any form of reasonable definition. To say that a Privy Council's or any other final court of appeal's interpretation of pleadings before it prevents the execution of convicted murderers in Barbados is to place the judiciary at any level, above the legislature by which it was created. None of the constitutional guarantees of fundamental freedom or international conventions are enforceable except as specific corresponding statute enacted by the legislature representative of a purported democracy of Barbados in the exercise of its powers of sovereignty. Contrary to some opinions expressed, all that is necessary to resume execution as a penalty for murder in the jurisdiction of Barbados as a sovereign state, is for the legislature to prescribe unequivocally according to the will of a majority of the people, that the execution of the sentence of death for the crime of murder shall be carried out in the manner prescribed for the humane termination of the convict's life. If hanging is deemed to be inhumane, then alternatives should be prescribed to effect the execution. To quibble about the Privy Council's interpretation of the clear intent of statute law is a form of sophistry that morality cannot condone. The interpretation by the judiciary at its highest level does not exceed the powers of the legislature to make laws for the remedy of mischief in the exercise of its powers to provide for the peace, order and good government of a sovereign Barbados. The laws of Barbados should be "agreeable to the people of Barbados (living here) first". Leonard St Hill (source: Letter to the Editor, Nation News) CHINA: Panda killers in China may face death penalty for selling endangered animal meat A Yunnan court in south-western China has ordered 3 of its citizens to be prosecuted for killing a female giant Panda in the wild and selling its meat in December 2014. Under Chinese law, killing protected animals such as pandas can result in a jail sentence of up to 10 years, and can even attract the death penalty. The perpetrators have been identified as brothers Wang Wenlin and Wang Wencai who shot the animal in a forest near Zhaotong in Yunnan province. Later they confessed to the police that they had mistaken the adult female panda for a more common species of bear. The brothers then proceeded to eat some of the animal's meat and sold the remaining, including its paws, to a 3rd man identified as Li Kequan for about $750. Wan Wei, deputy director of the investigation department of the Yunnan prosecuting office said, "The Wang brothers have confessed to killing the animal on 4 December in the hills outside their village." The court said the investigation into the killing of the panda has concluded and the 3 accused have been remanded for prosecution. Last December, police received a tip-off regarding the illegal sale of bear meat. When the house of the Wang brothers was raided, a bear-like skin, skull and liver were discovered along with 10kg of meat, China's state run news agency Xinhua reported. But further investigation and DNA tests proved the carcass was of a female panda. Although there is a thriving black market for exotic animal parts in China, panda meat being sold in a country, where the animal is considered a national treasure is unusual, experts believe. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature lists giant pandas as endangered and are only confined to south-central China. The latest census by the World Wildlife Federation (WWF) in 2014 found that there were only 1,864 giant pandas alive in the wild. (source: Yahoo News) INDIA: Law panel's 'Death Penalty' report sent to Home Ministry, govt unlikely to support it The Law Commission's report supporting abolition of death penalty except in terror-related cases has been forwarded to the Home Ministry for a final decision, amid indications that government may not be inclined to support it. The report 'Death Penalty' was submitted to the Law Ministry by the Law Commission on August 31. "Recently, we have forwarded it to the Home Ministry as changes in the Indian Penal Code is its domain," a senior Law Ministry functionary said here. He said while a final call on the subject will be taken by the Home Ministry, it can refer the report back to the Law Ministry for any clarifications it may require. 2 government appointees in the law panel -- ex-officio members P K Malhotra (Law Secretary) and Sanjay Singh (Legislative Secretary) had given their dissent on the report. Besides them, Justice (retd) Usha Mehra, a permanent member of the panel too had opposed the report. Sources in the government said the Centre is unlikely to support abolition of death penalty as there is a feeling that time is not ripe to do away with capital punishment. A copy of the report was also submitted to the Supreme Court by the Commission as the apex court had asked the panel to examine the issue. In 1967, the Commission in its 35th report had supported continuation of death penalty. Registering his dissent, Law Secretary Malhotra had said Parliament in its wisdom has prescribed death penalty only in heinous crimes. "The need of the hour is to retain it...We have a vibrant judiciary which is respected world-over. We should have faith in the wisdom of our judges that they will exercise this power only in deserving cases for which the law is well laid down in various judgments..." Legislative Secretary Singh had maintained the panel should not recommend something which has the effect of preventing the state from making any law in the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of the country. The Commission had said there is a need to debate as to how to bring about the "abolition of death penalty in all respects in the very near future, soonest." (source: Zee News) *********** Death Penalty for Food Adulteration? The state government has decided to bring amendments to the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, adding more teeth to the penal sections of the legislation, Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister T B Jayachandra said here on Wednesday. Speaking to reporters, he said, "The Centre had proposed to bring changes to the existing Act and had sent a draft note to all the state governments on the issue." "A serious thought is being given to award capital punishment to those guilty of the offence," he said Stating that legal experts are studying the draft note sent by the Centre on the proposed amendments, he said, "We also have plans to enact our own law based on the Central Act." Jayachandra further said that his department is awaiting a report from the Water Resources Department on a proposal to bring a legislation to check encroachment of river banks and beds across the state. Jayachandra, who also holds the Animal Husbandry portfolio, said that the state government has dropped the proposal to launch 'Dhanvanthari', a free ambulance service to transport ailing animals to polyclinics for treatments. "The idea was dropped as no agency came forward to provide the service." The minister, however said that the GVK group, which operates the 108 free ambulance service, has shown inclination to provide the veterinary ambulance service. Referring to the Yettinahole project, he said, "The government is committed to going ahead with the project and commissioning it without any delay." (source: The New Indian Express) SAUDI ARABIA: Looming crucifixion sparks global calls to spare life of young Saudi Ali Mohammed al-Nimr An international campaign calling on Saudi Arabia to halt the beheading and "crucifixion" of a young man arrested when he was still at high school is growing, but there are fears he could be killed at any time. Ali Mohammed al-Nimr was 17 when he was arrested after attending a protest in the midst of the pro-democracy Arab Spring unrest of 2012. Mr al-Nimr, now 21, the nephew of a high-profile Shiite cleric, was reportedly tortured, denied access to a lawyer before his trial and coerced into confessing to a range of charges, including joining a criminal group, carrying weapons and attacking police forces, according to human rights experts at the United Nations. He has denied those charges. His punishment is a brutal one, even by Saudi Arabia's standards. Not only was Mr al-Nimr handed a death sentence, but the method of punishment was determined to be crucifixion, which human rights groups say means he will be beheaded and then have his mutilated body displayed publicly. The death sentence was handed down on May 27 this year, and upheld this month, meaning he may be executed at any time. Saudi Arabia has one of the highest execution rates in the world, with up to 134 executions - many by public beheading - already this year. The UN was itself criticised this week for a decision to appoint a Saudi Arabian government representative, Faisal Trad, as the chairman of a new human rights panel. The panel will be responsible for choosing experts to report on human rights violations across the world. Amnesty International likened the appointment to "making a pyromaniac the town fire chief". Mr al-Nimr's case has attracted more attention than most internationally, both in the mainstream media and among users on social media. The French government, human rights experts and celebrities such as US talk show host Bill Maher have called for the punishment not to go ahead. Thousands have Tweeted in support, using the hashtags #AliMohammedalNimr and #freeNimr. Kate Higham, a caseworker with the British-based group Reprieve, which is campaigning for Mr al-Nimr, said his case was gaining prominence both because of his youth and the nature of his punishment. "There's a really clear point of international law that's being violated," Ms Higham told Fairfax Media, referring to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which prohibits states from handing down the death penalty for offences committed by children. "I think people are also shocked by the incredibly gruesome nature of the execution." The fact that he was just a schoolboy when he was arrested at the protests, and reportedly tortured into confessing his crimes, added to the public outcry over his case, she said. She said she had been heartened by the growing calls to halt the execution and said the international pressure should continue. "The king and the government do absolutely have the power to pardon Ali, and I think if they did so it would show that Saudi Arabia is serious about the commitments it's made under the Convention of the Rights of the Child, the Convention against Torture ... and not leave this family bereft of their son, their young son. "How awful to find yourself in the position where your child is being threatened with this absolutely horrible punishment, and you don't even know when it's going to happen." Some groups and commentators have argued Mr al-Nimr's arrest and sentence are politically motivated and linked to his family. His uncle is prominent Shiite cleric, Sheikh Nimr Baqir al-Nimr, who had spoken out about greater rights for Shiites - a minority in Saudi Arabia - and who was also sentenced to death in 2014, accused of inciting the overthrow of the state leaders. A group of human rights experts from the United Nations on Tuesday condemned Mr al-Nimr's unfair trial, torture and planned execution, and the French government on Wednesday called for the killing to be stopped. The campaign had been given a boost on Saturday by Maher, who criticised the media furore around a Muslim schoolboy arrested after bringing a homemade clock to school, suggesting social media users focus on Mr al-Nimr's case instead. (source: Sydney Morning Herald) **************** France urges Saudi Arabia to cancel death penalty for young Shi'ite France called on Saudi Arabia on Wednesday not to execute a Shi'ite Muslim sentenced to death over his role in anti-government protests, saying he was a minor when he was arrested. Ali al-Nimr was given the death penalty in May after taking part in demonstrations three years ago for democracy and equal rights in Saudi Arabia's oil-producing Eastern Province. "France is concerned about the situation of Ali Mohammed al-Nimr, who was sentenced to death even though he was a minor at the time of the events," Foreign ministry spokesman Romain Nadal said. "Opposed to the death penalty in all cases and circumstances, we call for the execution to be called off." France does not usually comment on death penalty cases in Saudi Arabia due to their frequency. It has nurtured strong relations with Riyadh due to its tough stance on their Shi'ite rival Iran and shared positions on Middle East conflicts. The French statement came a day after United Nations rights experts called on Riyadh to halt Nimr's "imminent execution" Nimr was convicted of sedition, rioting, protesting and robbery in the Eastern Province district of Qatif, home to many of the Sunni Muslim-ruled kingdom's minority Shi'ites, who say they face entrenched discrimination. Nimr, who activists said was 17 at the time of his arrest in 2012, was also convicted of chanting anti-state slogans in illegal protests and inciting others to demonstrate, according to state media. "Saudi Arabia's plans to behead and crucify someone arrested as a child are indefensible," said Donald Campbell, spokesman for international human rights charity Reprieve. "The international community - particularly Saudi Arabia's close allies, the UK and the U.S. - must stand with the French government and U.N. experts against this outrage, and call on the Saudi authorities to put a halt to this unjustified killing." The conviction of Nimr, a nephew of Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, a prominent Shi'ite cleric who is also on trial, followed that of Rida al-Rubh, 26, the son of another cleric who has been critical of the authorities. The clerics are part of a group of around a dozen defendants on trial for their part in protests and violent unrest in Qatif, particularly in the village of Awamiya, where police officers and facilities have been attacked. (source: Reuters) **************** Human rights groups ask for stay of execution of Ali Al-Nimr Ali Mohammed Baqir al-Nimr was sentenced to death on 27 May 2014. He "confessed" to offenses that had taken place when he was 17 years old. The sentence has now been upheld by appeal judges at the Specialized Criminal Court (SCC) and by the Supreme Court, according to his family, who have only just learned of the courts' decisions. The case was sent to the Ministry of Interior in August 2015 for the sentence to be implemented. He is liable to be executed as soon as the King has ratified the sentence. Ali al-Nimr was sentenced to death on 27 May 2014 by the SCC in Jeddah, for offenses that included taking part in demonstrations against the government, attacking the security forces, possessing a machine-gun and armed robbery. The court seems to have based its decision on "confessions" which Ali al-Nimr has said were extracted under torture and other ill-treatment and has refused to look into this allegation. Ali al-Nimr had been arrested on 14 February 2012, when he was 17 years old, and taken to the General Directorate of Investigations (GDI) prison in Dammam, in the Eastern Province. He was not allowed to see his lawyer and has said that GDI officers tortured him to make him sign a "confession". He was then taken to a center for juvenile rehabilitation, Dar al-Mulahaza, and was returned to the GDI prison in Dammam when he turned 18. Ali al-Nimr is the nephew of a prominent Shi'a cleric Sheikh Nimr Baqir al-Nimr, from al-Awamiyya in Qatif, eastern Saudi Arabia, who was sentenced to death by the Specialized Criminal Court on 15 October 2014. (source: The Muslim News) IRAN: 110 inmates sentenced to death in Iranian Kurdistan A court in Iran's Kurdish city of Sanandaj has sentenced 110 inmates, including 4 underage offenders, to death for manslaughter and drug trafficking, officials told the media Wednesday. 3 of the convicts are political activists who were charged with anti-government actions and "opposition to the rule of God," according to official statements from the court. Iran has one of the highest execution rates in the region with over 700 people executed so far this year, most of them convicted on drug-related charges, according to Amnesty International. The rights group said last week international law did not allow the death penalty for drug offenses, and appealed to Iranian authorities "to conduct fair trials." Of the 110 convicts, 37 were charged with possession or trafficking illicit drugs, and 69 others were accused of murder. According to Amnesty, many of the accused in Iran confess to crimes under torture and in unfair trials. Behrouz Alkhani, a Kurdish political prisoner, was executed last month while waiting for the outcome of a supreme court appeal, Amnesty said. (source: rudaw.net) ************** UN & Europe Fund Iran's Executions "The death penalty has no place in the 21st century." These words were spoken last year by the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. Many would agree. In fact, more than 140 countries worldwide have abolished capital punishment, including every country in the European Union. Yet the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and EU member states have financed Iran's drug war, a program that has allowed Iran to be a global leader in per capita executions. The regime in Iran is one of the most repressive governments in the world. In 2015, Iran received close to the lowest possible rating for political rights and civil liberties in a Freedom House report, and was ranked 173 out of 180 countries in the World Press Freedom Index. Dissidents are routinely arrested and tortured; freedom of speech is limited; and the judiciary provides little if any due process to prisoners. Yet the UNODC has given Iran more than US$15 million since 1998 to support operations by the country's Anti-Narcotics Police. This is despite significant evidence that Iran's governmental drug policies violate international law, and fall short of UNODC's own standards. A 2014 report by Ahmad Shaheed, the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Iran, quoted an experienced Iranian lawyer who said that drug trials "never last more than a few minutes." Prisoners are often denied accessed to counsel, and claim that confessions are forced under torture. By Iran's own admission 93 % of the 852 reported executions between July 2013 and June 2014 were drug related. Iran has already executed more than 750 individuals this year, and is on pace to reach 1,000 executions by the end of the year. Human Rights Watch has accused Iran of using drug charges against political prisoners and dissidents, raising further concerns about the implications of the UNODC's support for the country's anti-drugs program. In 2011, Zahra Bahrami, a citizen of both the EU and Iran was arrested and accused of drug trafficking - a charge she denied. She claimed her confession was extracted under duress, and activists contend that her arrest was based on her political views. Despite the limited scope of the UNODC, Iran's policy of executions is about more than combating drug problems. Instead of focusing primarily on endemic problems such as poverty and a lack of opportunities for youth that foster drug abuse, Iran continues to enact draconian punishments on individuals, including publicly executing them. It appears these ritualistic killings are a strategy by the regime to maintain political authority through intimidation. These killings are part of Iran's policy of death, which seeks to terrorise and subdue a population, the majority of which is under the age of 30. Violations of International Human Rights Law >From a legal perspective there is ample evidence that Iran's executions are a violation of international human rights law, as enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The ICCPR, to which Iran and every EU member state is a party, explicitly reserves capital punishment for only "the most serious crimes." Article 6 of the ICCPR explicitly states that the death penalty cannot be imposed if a fair trial has not been granted. This statute has strong resonance given the lack of due process in Iran. The UNODC has also released a position paper that appears to critique its own involvement in Iran. The paper notes that cooperation with countries which use capital punishment "can be perceived as legitimising government actions." It concludes that in such circumstances the organisation, "may have no choice but to employ a temporary freeze or withdrawal of support." Yet the UNODC has never publicly expressed a desire to withdraw support from its Iran program. Political Hypocrisy and Human Rights The hypocrisy aiding Iran is not lost on all EU member states. The UK, Denmark and Ireland havewithdrawn funding for UNODC's Iran program, citing human rights concerns. However other countriesincluding Norway and France continue to provide funding. Earlier this year, the UNODC was rumoured to be finalising a 5 year deal with Iran, however no official announcement about the deal has been made. Unfortunately, these policies appear to be part of a larger failure by many Western countries to consider human rights as one of their negotiating points with Iran. It appears that they are willing to champion human rights as a reason for intervening in certain states, while relegating it to a footnote when it may negatively impact foreign policy interests. The attitude suggests that the executions of thousands of Iranians is part of the necessary collateral damage to keep the EU free of increased drug trafficking. This stance not only estranges those who reside outside of Europe's borders, as if their human rights are beyond the interests of international organisations, but it places Western states at the height of hypocrisy. One need look no further than the current discourse surrounding the nuclear deal with Iran to see a clear example of this. Recently, the EU's foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini visited Iran to endorse the agreement and did not express concerns over Iran's human rights record. This meeting took place while the regime made preparations to execute Salar Shadizadi for crimes he committed when he was 15 years old. If international standards and human rights are to have universal application, the UNODC should suspend support for Iran's drug program and demand judicial reform and a moratorium on executions. EU member states should demand accountability in how their contributions are spent. Lastly, any nuclear deal should have also included recognition of the legitimate demands of Iranian society for civil and political rights, and underscored the egregious human rights conditions in Iran. This is not about interfering with the domestic affairs of a sovereign state, but holding true to the human rights values upon which the UN was founded. It is also about giving real force to international human rights law, which in this case should carry more weight. The death penalty can come to an end, but only if we have the political will to practice the ideals we have long preached. (source: Hamid Yazdan Panah is an attorney, writer and human rights activist from the San Francisco Bay Area----Iranian.com) ************ 7 years on death row 2 young Iranian Kurds that have been condemned to death are lingering in prison after 7 years. Zaniar and Loqman Moradi are charged with killing the son of a senior mullah in Kurdistan Province, western Iran, a charge they deny. They are spending their 7th year in Gohardasht (Rajai Shahr) Prison in Karaj, north-west of Tehran, and their families say that they are in poor physical condition. During these 7 years, Zaniar has never been able to meet his family and Loqman has just seen his family 2 or 3 times from behind a window. "Their file has turned complicated by the Ministry of Intelligence. It does not allow criminal courts to try them, nor does it allow clarification of their condition," says Zaniar's father who is Loqman's uncle. "Zaniar has undergone surgery 5 times because of the tortures he has suffered by his interrogators and Ministry of Intelligence agents. He has been operated on the spine, back, testis and knee," he added. Zaniar's father said that his family has moved out of Iran and thus Zaniar has not been able to have visits from them, but the regime has also barred any visits by his grandparents. "Recently, when Loqman was sent to court, he refused to put on a prisoner's outfit. He was beaten with batons, boots and other things for that, resulting in injury to 2 of his vertebras," he added. (source: NCR-Iran) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 24 11:25:45 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:25:45 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----IND., USA Message-ID: Sept. 24 INDIANA: Indiana Supreme Court upholds death penalty for William Clyde Gibson The Indiana Supreme Court has upheld a judge's ruling that serial killer William Clyde Gibson receive the death penalty, according to an opinion issued by the court. Gibson was sentenced to death in 2013 for the April 19, 2012 murder of family friend, 75-year-old Christine Whitis. He killed Whitis, sexually assaulted her and mutilated her corpse. "We find the nature of Gibson's offense to be beyond horrendous," the court wrote in its opinion, which was filed Thursday morning. "He brutally murdered an elderly woman, sexually assaulting her in the process, even after she was dead, then dismembering her body. As for his character, Gibson has an extensive criminal history. And although we understand he is afflicted with various mental disorders and grief over his mother's death, no one testified he was unable to appreciate the severity of his crime. Gibson's jury heard this evidence and more, determined the State proved all four aggravators beyond a reasonable doubt, and found those aggravators outweighed the mitigating evidence presented." "In light of the horrific manner in which Gibson took Whitis's life and his lack of redeeming character traits, we find this is not the kind of exceptional case that warrants appellate modification of a sentence," the court continued. "Finding Gibson's sentence of death was not inappropriate, we decline to revise it." Gibson has also pleaded guilty to the murder of Stephanie Kirk. Kirk's body was found buried in the backyard of Gibson's New Albany home in April 2012. He was sentenced to death in that case as well. In April 2014, Gibson received a 65-year sentence for the murder of Karen Hodella. Police say Hodella is the 1st person Gibson killed: a 44-year-old Florida woman, found stabbed to death near the Ohio River in Clarksville, Ind. (source: WDRB news) USA: Pope calls on US to abolish death penalty Speaking to Congress, Pope Francis is calling for an end to the death penalty in the U.S. and across the world. Francis says that every life is sacred and society can only benefit from rehabilitating those convicted of crimes. The pope noted that U.S. bishops have renewed their call to abolish capital punishment. That idea is unpopular, however, with many American politicians. The pontiff did not specifically mention abortion - a particularly contentious issue in Congress at the moment that threatens to force the shutdown of the U.S. government next week. Still, his remarks referred to the Catholic church's opposition to abortion. He urged lawmakers and all Americans to "protect and defend human life at every stage of its development." "Let us remember the Golden Rule: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" (Mt 7:12). This Rule points us in a clear direction. Let us treat others with the same passion and compassion with which we want to be treated. Let us seek for others the same possibilities which we seek for ourselves. Let us help others to grow, as we would like to be helped ourselves. In a word, if we want security, let us give security; if we want life, let us give life; if we want opportunities, let us provide opportunities. The yardstick we use for others will be the yardstick which time will use for us. The Golden Rule also reminds us of our responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage of its development. This conviction has led me, from the beginning of my ministry, to advocate at different levels for the global abolition of the death penalty. I am convinced that this way is the best, since every life is sacred, every human person is endowed with an inalienable dignity, and society can only benefit from the rehabilitation of those convicted of crimes. Recently my brother bishops here in the United States renewed their call for the abolition of the death penalty. Not only do I support them, but I also offer encouragement to all those who are convinced that a just and necessary punishment must never exclude the dimension of hope and the goal of rehabilitation." (sources: Associated Press & International Business Times) ************** Is the Death Penalty Unconstitutional?----Following a controversial ruling over lethal injections, Justice Breyer suggested that capital punishment may violate the 8th Amendment. It's time to bring that case to court. In the past nine months, the State of Oklahoma has tried twice to execute Robert Glossip. Sentenced to death in 1998 for the murder of his boss, Glossip was 1 of 4 death-row inmates suing the state over its use of an unreliable drug cocktail that contributed to botched executions. In January, the Supreme Court issued a stay and agreed to hear his case; in a bitterly split 5-4 decision, the Court ruled that Oklahoma could continue to use the procedure. But when the state sought to execute Glossip on September 16, new evidence suggesting that he'd been framed by his codefendant prompted a state court to stay his execution again, a mere 3 hours before it was carried out. That court is working fast to review Glossip's new claims, with a 3rd attempt at execution set for September 30. The Supreme Court's ruling in Glossip v. Gross arrived at a moment when the country's enthusiasm for executing its citizens reached a historic low. Prosecutors are seeking capital sentences far less often, and jurors, even in highly aggravated cases, are imposing long sentences instead of death. Seven states have repealed capital punishment since 2000 (most recently Nebraska, a red state), and its demise is soon likely in several more. 3 governors in capital states have announced that there will be no executions while they're in office; a fourth has put a halt to executions pending further review. Even longtime supporters of the death penalty, including former prosecutors and state attorneys general, are announcing their opposition with increasing frequency, in part due to the recognition that our system of justice is far more fallible than they once believed. But several states continue to execute in earnest, and a small number, including Oklahoma, continue to use a 3-drug cocktail for lethal injections. The 1st drug is supposed to be an anesthetic that knocks the prisoner out; the 2nd is a paralytic that prevents all movement; the 3rd causes searing pain and stops the heart. In recent years, states have had increasing difficulty obtaining an anesthetic, primarily because these drugs are largely manufactured in European countries that long ago abandoned capital punishment, and these companies are increasingly wary of supplying drugs to kill rather than heal. There is no dispute that prisoners will suffer horrifically if the first drug wears off prematurely or does not adequately induce and sustain unconsciousness. In the past 2 years, though, some states have selected the controversial sedative midazolam as the 1st drug. In 3 executions, it failed to keep the condemned unconscious despite the administration of high dosages. In an Ohio case, the inmate could be heard gasping and snorting more than 20 minutes after receiving it. In an Arizona case, the inmate gasped for nearly 2 hours before being pronounced dead. And in Oklahoma, condemned inmate Clayton Lockett awoke during the execution process after receiving a large dose of midazolam and suffered greatly before his death. In many ways, Glossip's case confirmed advocates' claims about the cruelty and arbitrary nature of capital punishment. Despite midazolam's troubled track record, an Oklahoma federal judge ruled that the inmates' evidence failed to show that it was unreliable. That court also denied relief because Glossip had failed to demonstrate that the state had a viable alternative - essentially faulting his legal team for representing his interests. And the Supreme Court granted Glossip's petition for review only after it allowed Oklahoma, on a 5-4 vote, to execute Charles Warner, another inmate who had joined the suit. As the opposing votes on Glossip and Warner make clear, the Court was already sharply divided when the justices heard oral argument. The hour-long hearing was as raw and charged as they come. Justices Samuel Alito and Antonin Scalia sharply questioned Glossip's counsel and charged that the pressure placed on the drug companies by death-penalty abolitionists was responsible for the lack of reliable anesthetic drugs. Justice Sonia Sotomayor pointed out inaccuracies in the state's brief, and Justice Elena Kagan argued that if midazolam failed to sedate, the inmate would feel as if he were being burned alive. On June 29, the conservative majority upheld Oklahoma's use of midazolam, concluding that there was not a "substantial risk of serious pain" necessary to establish an Eighth Amendment violation. The majority also held that it is the inmate's burden to identify a workable alternative. Justice Sotomayor's stinging 31-page dissent, joined by Justices Kagan, Stephen Breyer, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, vigorously asserted that Glossip's evidence established a substantial risk of cruel and unusual punishment. It found the district court was wrong on the science concerning midazolam and sharply disagreed with the majority's holding that inmates challenging execution protocols have the burden to establish an acceptable method of execution. But it is Justice Breyer's long dissent, joined by Justice Ginsburg, that will command the most attention in the coming years. Channeling a growing number of Americans, he wrote that it is time to consider whether the Eighth Amendment bars capital punishment in all cases. Breyer is hardly the 1st Supreme Court justice to invite constitutional debate about the death penalty. Several members of the Court that brought back the death penalty in 1976 later came to reject it. Nixon appointee Lewis Powell told his biographer that the death penalty should be abolished. Another Nixon appointee, Harry Blackmun, wrote in 1994 that he would no longer "tinker with the machinery of death." And in 2008, John Paul Stevens wrote that his review of hundreds of cases had persuaded him that the penalty is both profoundly unworkable and unconstitutional. What has Breyer learned to put him in such company? Plenty. In his dissent, he argued that the death penalty is seriously unreliable and arbitrary in application; he believes the long delays undermine its penological purpose; and he is convinced that we have executed the innocent. In the 1963 case of Rudolph v. Alabama, Justice Arthur Goldberg similarly suggested that capital punishment might violate the Eighth Amendment. That dissent prompted statewide moratoriums and encouraged cases to be brought to the Court challenging the constitutionality of capital statutes. A decade later, the Court struck them all down in Furman v. Georgia. Perhaps, in the wake of Glossip, we are about to travel down that path once again. (source: George Kendall, The Nation) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 24 14:07:39 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 14:07:39 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., FLA., USA Message-ID: Sept. 24 PENNSYLVANIA: Quarryville man faces death penalty in double murder trial Leeton Thomas, who is accused of killing an East Drumore mother and daughter to silence their testimony against him in a sex-assault case, will face the death penalty when the case goes to trial. The 38-year-old Quarryville man is charged with killing Lisa Scheetz, 44, and her 16-year-old daughter Hailey on June 11. Police allege Thomas murdered the women to make sure they couldn't testify on charges that he had molested Hailey and her sister in December 2013. Thomas was out on bail, awaiting formal arraignment on the molestation charges, when he allegedly broke into Scheetz's basement-level apartment at 2 a.m. and stabbed the woman and 2 of her daughters multiple times with a knife. Lisa and Hailey Scheetz died at the scene. The sister, 15, was critically injured in the attack - officials said she suffered multiple stab wounds to the chest, shoulder and back - but was able to flee the scene and seek help from a neighbor. Scheetz's 3rd daughter, age 13, was not at home at the time of the attacks. District Attorney Craig Stedman in June called it a 'premeditated assassination." Assistant District Attorney Christine Wilson, who is prosecuting the case with ADA Christopher Larsen, filed a notice of intent to seek the death penalty on Thursday, according to a release issued Thursday by the District Attorney's office. Wilson, in her filing, outlined 5 aggravating factors that she says make the case death-penalty eligible. They are: -- The victims were killed to prevent them from testifying in the sex-assault case. -- The killings happened during the course of a felony (burglary). -- Thomas created a grave risk of danger to another person (the sister who survived). -- Thomas is charged with multiple counts of homicide. -- Thomas broke a no-contact order in place regarding the victims. Thomas is at Lancaster County Prison, without bail, on charges of homicide (2 counts), attempted homicide and burglary. He waived a preliminary hearing in August. Brett Hambright, with the District Attorney's office, said Thomas has also waived his arraignment, which was scheduled for Friday. The trial will not be held before 2016, Hambright said. (source: lancasteronline.com) FLORIDA: State to seek death penalty against Green Cove Springs murder suspect The State Attorney's Office has filed a motion to seek the death penalty against a man accused of murdering a woman in Green Cove Springs last month, a spokesperson for the Fourth Judicial Circuit told First Coast News Thursday. Victor Lamar Cruger, 25, was indicted on charges of premeditated murder and attempted murder. He is currently being held in the Clay County Jail without bond. According to the Green Cove Springs Police Department, Cruger shot a woman named Ernestine Griner Hines Aug. 23. Hines later died from her injuries at a hospital, police said. Authorities said that the shooting took place in the back of a vehicle on the 300 block of Washington Lane before Cruger Jr. ran off into the woods. The daughter of the victim was then able to drive to another location and call police, according to GCSPD. Police said all 3 were acquaintances. Cruger was on the run until he was located in Gainesville, Fla. several days later on Aug. 28. He was arrested several days later in Clay County. His next court date is scheduled for Oct. 7. (source: First Coast News) ********* State Will Seek Death Penalty For Girl In Machete Murder State prosecutors have announced that they plan to seek the death penalty for a teenage girl accused of taking part in the grisly machete murder of a Homestead student. Desiray Strickland, 18, has been indicted on 1st degree murder. On Thursday, her attorney entered a plea of not guilty and said they would go to trial. Also charged with 1st degree murder in the June 2015 murder of 17-year-old Jose Guardado are 23-year old Joseph Cabrera, 20-year-old Kaheem Arbelo, 18-year-old Jonathan Lucas and 19-year-old Christian Colon. Strickland and the others were students at Homestead Job Corps, a live-in school and vocational training program for at-risk students run by the U.S. Department of Labor. The group allegedly spent 2 weeks planning Guardado's death. A few days before they actually carried it out, they went into the woods near the school and allegedly dug a shallow grave. On Sunday, June 28th, they lured Guardado into the woods and Arbelo ambushed him with a machete as the others watched, according to Strickland's arrest report. As Guardado lay dying on the ground, the group reportedly ordered him to crawl into the grave they had dug. When Guardado made 1 last attempt to fight back, Arbelo struck him repeatedly until his face caved in, according to the arrest report. They then placed him in the grave and buried him. Noticing all the blood, they burned Guardado's belongings as well as their own clothes, according to police. They also got rid of the shovel and machete. Strickland and Arbelo reportedly stayed in the woods and had sex until it was time to return the campus at Job Corp. (source: CBS news) USA: Pope's call to Congress to abolish death penalty comes at a critical moment ---- Pope Francis's bold statement arrived as several US states are preparing to restart the controversial practice after several months of hiatus Pope Francis's unequivocal call in his speech before Congress for the death penalty to be abolished in the US comes at a critical moment in the history of the ultimate punishment, with several states preparing to restart the controversial practice after several months of interlude. The pontiff's bold statement on Thursday could not be misconstrued: he told the assembled members of Congress that he wanted to see the "global abolition of the death penalty". He rooted his opposition in fundamental moral ground, saying the conviction stemmed from his belief that "every life is sacred, every human person is endowed with inalienable dignity, and society can only benefit from the rehabilitation of those convicted of crimes". A total of 1,414 prisoners have been executed in the US since the modern death penalty started in 1976. Overall, the practice has been on the wane since its peak in 1999 when 98 prisoners were killed - last year that number fell to 35. But though the wind of change is blowing against US capital punishment, a group of states, mainly in the south, continue to adhere doggedly to the contentious penalty. In June, the US supreme court in effect removed barriers to carrying out executions when it gave the go-ahead for the use of a controversial drug, midazolam, in death protocols - thus clearing a legal barrier that had been holding states back for several months. Now the death penalty rump is cranking back in to executions with renewed vigor. Between now and the end of October, 11 executions are scheduled in seven states - Arkansas, Georgia, Missouri, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas and Virginia. It was within that context that the pope delivered his forthright words. Robert Dunham of the Death Penalty Information Center said that Francis commanded significant influence. "People's views about the death penalty are affected by a number of different things - concern for the innocent, racial discrimination, cost. But they also have moral views about the death penalty and statements by the pope and other religious figures are influential in changing beliefs," Dunham said. While the most heated debate over the criminal justice system is reserved for the death penalty, the pope also vented his dismay over another extreme judicial practice in the US - the meting out of life without parole sentences. Otherwise called "life means life" sentences, this involves committing convicted prisoners essentially to remain behind bars for the rest of their natural life. The pontiff said he opposed the sentence because it removed all hope from the prisoner. "A just and necessary punishment must never exclude the dimension of hope and the goal of rehabilitation," he said. The US is the only country in the world that still sentences juveniles under 18 to life without parole, with some 2,500 people currently serving that sentence for crimes they committed as a child. As the ACLU has also reported, there are more than 3,000 prisoners of all ages who have been sentenced never to be set free for non-violent offenses that in one case included stealing a jacket valued at $159. (source: The Guardian) ********************* Cruz takes exception to pope on death penalty GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz said he disagrees with Pope Francis' call Thursday to abolish the death penalty, calling the use of capital punishment a "recognition of the preciousness of human life." In an interview with POLITICO shortly after the pope's historic address to Congress, the Texas senator said he respects Francis' views and the Catholic Church's teachings on the issue, but "as a policy matter, I do not agree." "I spent a number of years in law enforcement dealing with some of the worst criminals, child rapists and murderers, people who've committed unspeakable acts," Cruz said. "I believe the death penalty is a recognition of the preciousness of human life, that for the most egregious crimes, the ultimate punishment should apply." Cruz also said that whether the death penalty should be in place is an issue that should be left up to each state. Though Francis touched on several hot-button policy issues during his speech to lawmakers, one of his sharpest messages came on the topic of the death penalty. He called for its "global abolition" and arguing that any punishment should never preclude the chance for rehabilitation. "I am convinced that this way is the best," Francis said. "Since every life is sacred, every human person is endowed with an inalienable dignity, and society can only benefit from the rehabilitation of those convicted of crimes." (source: politico.com) ********* Pope Francis wouldn't have to call for ending the death penalty in most developed nations Pope Francis, in his speech to Congress on Thursday, renewed his call for the US to end its use of the death penalty. "The Golden Rule also reminds us of our responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage of its development," Francis said in his prepared remarks. "This conviction has led me, from the beginning of my ministry, to advocate at different levels for the global abolition of the death penalty. I am convinced that this way is the best, since every life is sacred, every human person is endowed with an inalienable dignity, and society can only benefit from the rehabilitation of those convicted of crimes." But if Francis were in almost any other developed country, he wouldn't need to make this call - because the US is the only developed nation, with the exception of a few in Asia, that still allows and actively uses the death penalty. The death penalty is abolished in most of the developed world. In fact, it is the rest of the developed world's opposition to the death penalty that is now making it more difficult to carry out executions in the US: Over the past several years, states have had trouble obtaining drugs used for lethal injections in large part due to a European ban on exporting the drugs and abolitionists' work in European countries to get companies to stop selling the drugs for execution purposes. But states continue pushing on with the death penalty, sometimes relying on untried drugs like midazolam, and resulting in several botched executions over the past couple of years. So Francis is left calling for the abolition of the death penalty in the US through a moral argument - one that sounds a lot like the reasoning conservative lawmakers in the US use to speak out against abortion rights. Of course, these same conservative lawmakers are more likely to support the death penalty in the first place - so it's clear whom the pope was trying to appeal to in his speech. (source: vox.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Thu Sep 24 15:40:29 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 15:40:29 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] Urgent Action 207/15 - USA: Missouri Execution Set as Innocence Claimed Message-ID: MISSOURI EXECUTION SET AS INNOCENCE CLAIMED Kimber Edwards is due to be executed in Missouri on 6 October. He was sentenced to death in 2002 for the murder-for-hire of his former wife. The man who shot the victim and who is serving a life sentence now claims that Kimber Edwards was not involved. Click here to view the full Urgent Action in Word or PDF format, including case information, addresses and sample messages. The body of Kimberly Cantrell was found in her apartment in University City, Missouri on 23 August 2000, a day after she was last seen alive. She had been shot in the head. She had been in a prolonged dispute with her ex-husband, Kimber Edwards, over child support. Police arrested Orthell Wilson after he was identified as the man who had been seen outside Kimberly Cantrell?s apartment on 22 August. He was charged with first-degree murder and also gave a statement implicating Kimber Edwards. The latter denied any involvement in the murder but when the police said that they would bring in his wife and children for interrogation, he said that he had paid a man named Michael US $1,600 to kill Kimberly Cantrell. When the police officers told him that Orthell Wilson had said that ?Michael? did not exist, Kimber Edwards told them that Wilson had demanded payment for his role in the killing. At his trial, Kimber Edwards denied that he had any connection to the murder and that he had given statements to the police so that they would leave his family alone. Orthell Wilson did not testify, but statements he had given to the police were heard by the jury. The jury found Kimber Edwards guilty of first-degree murder and voted for the death penalty after a sentencing hearing that lasted less than a day. Orthell Wilson pleaded guilty in exchange for not facing the death penalty. He was sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. On 8 May 2015, Orthell Wilson signed an affidavit recanting his statements implicating Kimber Edwards, claiming he made them under police pressure and the threat of the death penalty, and that ?I alone killed Kimberly Cantrell? Kimber Edwards is completely innocent and was not involved in any way in the murder?. He stated that in 2000 he was in a ?secret romantic relationship? with Kimberly Cantrell and that he had shot her in the context of an argument over his ?drug addiction and constant need for money?. Three of his neighbors from that time have signed affidavits stating that they knew of the relationship between Orthell Wilson and Kimberly Cantrell. In 2004, a psychiatrist concluded that Kimber Edwards has Asperger?s Disorder and that this ?adversely affected the reliability of his statement to detectives during interrogation as well as his ability to knowingly waive his rights?. The psychiatrist also concluded that Kimber Edwards? ?odd? reaction to the death of his former wife, which the jury heard described as ?nonchalant?, ?relaxed? and ?carefree?, could be explained by the defendant?s Asperger?s Disorder. The jury heard no such explanation for this ?damaging characterization? of his demeanor. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION At jury selection for a US capital trial, the defense and prosecution will question prospective jurors and can exclude certain people, either for a stated reason (for cause) or without giving a reason (a peremptory challenge). Those citizens who would be ?irrevocably committed? to vote against the death penalty can be excluded for cause by the prosecution, under a 1968 US Supreme Court ruling. In 1985, the Court relaxed the standard, thereby expanding the class of potential jurors who could be dismissed for cause during jury selection. ?Under this standard, a juror can be dismissed for cause if his or her feelings about the death penalty would ?prevent or substantially impair the performance of his duties as a juror in accordance with his instructions and his oath?. In 1986, the Supreme Court acknowledged research showing that the ?death qualification? of capital jurors ?produces juries somewhat more ?conviction-prone? than ?non-death-qualified? juries?. In 2008, the then most senior judge on the Court, Justice John Paul Stevens, wrote that ?the process of obtaining a ?death qualified jury? is really a procedure that has the purpose and effect of obtaining a jury that is biased in favor of conviction?. Click here to view the full Urgent Action in Word or PDF format. Name: Kimber Edwards (m) Issues: Imminent execution, Unfair trial, Legal concern UA: 207/15 Issue Date: 24 September 2015 Country: USA Please let us know if you took action so that we can track our impact! EITHER send a short email to uan at aiusa.org with "UA 207/15" in the subject line, and include in the body of the email the number of letters and/or emails you sent, OR fill out this short online form to let us know how you took action. Thank you for taking action! Please check with the AIUSA Urgent Action Office if taking action after the appeals date. If you receive a response from a government official, please forward it to us at uan at aiusa.org or to the Urgent Action Office address below. HOW YOU CAN HELP Please write immediately in English or your own language: * Calling for Kimber Edwards? execution to be stopped and for his death sentence to be commuted; * Noting that the man who actually shot Kimberly Cantrell has recanted his post-arrest statements implicating Kimber Edwards and maintains that the condemned man had nothing to do with the murder; * Pointing out the irrevocability of execution and the errors that have been revealed in US capital cases; * Explaining that you are not seeking to downplay the seriousness of the crime or the suffering caused. PLEASE SEND APPEALS BEFORE 6 OCTOBER 2015 TO: Office of Governor Jay Nixon P.O. Box 720, Jefferson City, MO 65102, USA Fax: 1 573 751 1495 Email: via website http://governor.mo.gov/contact/ Salutation: Dear Governor Please share widely with your networks:?http://bit.ly/1LQqcC4 We encourage you to share Urgent Actions with your friends and colleagues! When you share with your networks, instead of forwarding the original email, please use the "Forward this email to a friend" link found at the very bottom of this email. Thank you for your activism! UA Network Office AIUSA ?600 Pennsylvania Ave SE, Washington DC 20003 T. 202.509.8193 ? F. 202.509.8193 ?E. uan at aiusa.org ?amnestyusa.org/urgent From rhalperi at smu.edu Fri Sep 25 08:15:58 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:15:58 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, VA., TENN., ARK., MO., OKLA., USA Message-ID: Sept. 25 TEXAS: Execution of mentally ill man serves no greater good Any reasonable debate over the value and efficacy of the death penalty must eventually return to the greater good. Those who support the continued application of capital punishment believe a greater good is served by putting to death the worst of the worst, those whose criminal acts forever brand them as evil beyond redemption. And while recognizing that moral argument, this newspaper disagrees that any greater good can result from a penalty of such irrevocable finality so inconsistently applied. When the life in question is a schizophrenic who demanded to represent himself at trial dressed as a TV cowboy and sought to subpoena the pope, John F. Kennedy and Jesus Christ, where is the point of contention? Scott Panetti has struggled with mental illness for 4 decades. In the 6 years before he shot his estranged wife's parents, Joe and Amanda Alvarado, in Fredericksburg, he was hospitalized more than a dozen times, diagnosed with schizophrenia, delusions and hallucinations. On 1 occasion, he became convinced the devil had possessed his home and buried his furniture in the back yard. Today he believes that prison guards have implanted a listening device in one of his teeth. If the state of Texas puts him to death, as a jury ruled in 1995, he will take his last breath believing it was the end of a plot to silence his allegations of prison corruption and attempts to preach the gospel. Panetti is caught in a fatal Catch-22: He has no money to hire an expert to evaluate his condition, yet the state argues that courts already have rejected his claims and that he's not entitled to funding because he cannot show that he's too mentally ill to face execution. He hasn't been evaluated by a mental health professional in nearly 7 years. A neuropsychologist who reviewed his records pro bono at his lawyers' request concluded that his condition was worsening, exacerbated by age and the stress of living under a death sentence. In what could be his last hope, a panel of 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals justices heard testimony this week and will decide whether to grant his lawyers access to funding that could prove his incompetence. So we're back to that fundamental question: What greater good is served by putting Scott Panetti to death? This newspaper finds common ground with Richard A. Viguerie, speaking for a group of national conservative thought leaders, and Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Judge Tom Price, who dissented from his Republican colleagues on allowing Panetti's execution to go forward. Because no matter where you come down on capital punishment, the evidence in this case is clear: Carrying out this sentence, especially in the absence of a complete and timely mental health evaluation, serves neither deterrence nor retribution. It only diminishes us as a state, as a nation and as a people. There's no greater good in this. No good at all. (source: Editorial, Dallas Morning News) VIRGINIA----impending execution Group asks Virginia Gov. McAuliffe to delay man's execution A group that advocates for people with intellectual disabilities wants Gov. Terry McAuliffe to delay the execution of a man convicted of killing a young couple in Virginia. Alfredo Prieto's attorneys have asked McAuliffe to grant a temporary reprieve of his Oct. 1 execution so he can be transferred to California and assessed on whether he's intellectually disabled. Jamie Liban, executive director of The Arc of Virginia, said in a letter supporting Prieto's request that the group has serious concerns about the upcoming execution. Liban says allowing it to go forward would be "unjustified scientifically." Prieto was already on California's death row for raping and killing a 15-year-old girl when he was sentenced to death in 2010 for the shooting deaths of Rachael Raver and Warren Fulton III. (source: Associated Press) TENNESSEE: Tennessee Supreme Court Sets October Oral Arguments The Tennessee Supreme Court will hear 2 civil cases, 2 Board of Professional Responsibility cases and 1 death penalty case when it sits for oral arguments in Nashville Oct. 1. State v. Howard Hawk Willis - This death penalty case comes to the Supreme Court on a direct appeal. The Supreme Court is required by law to review all death penalty cases. Mr. Willis was convicted of the 2003 murders of a teenage husband and wife near Johnson City and sentenced to death. The defendant, who represented himself at trial after changing lawyers multiple times, has raised 20 issues on appeal for the Court to consider regarding his conviction and sentence. Oral arguments, which are open to the public, begin at 9 a.m. CDT at the Supreme Court building, 401 7th Ave, N., Nashville. (source: The Chattanoogan) ******************* TN Supreme Court to review Howard Hawk Willis' death penalty case Oct. 1 The Tennessee Supreme Court will hear a death penalty case from our area. On Oct. 1, the death penalty case of Howard Hawk Willis will go to The Supreme Court on a direct appeal. The Supreme Court is required by law to review all death penalty cases. In 2010, a jury convicted Willis in the 2003 murders of Samantha and Adam Chrismer. Investigators found the teen couple's dismembered bodies in plastic containers at a Johnson City storage facility. Willis represented himself at trial and changed lawyers multiple times. He has raised 20 issues on appeal for the court to consider regarding his conviction and sentence. (source: WJHL News) ARKANSAS: On death row, clemency asked A death-row inmate, scheduled to be executed in November, has requested executive clemency, a state Parole Board official said Thursday. Stacey Johnson, 45, filed the request Wednesday. Granting the request can mean either total forgiveness for the crime or a reduction of the criminal penalty, said Parole Board administrator Solomon Graves. Johnson and Terrick Nooner, 44, are scheduled to die by lethal injection Nov. 3. Nooner had not requested clemency as of late Thursday, but has until noon Monday to do so, Graves said. The Parole Board will hold a clemency hearing with Johnson at the Arkansas Department of Correction's Varner unit in Gould at 9:30 a.m. Oct. 15. The 2nd part of the hearing -- which includes the state's objection to the clemency as well as victim-impact testimony -- will be at 1 p.m. Oct. 15 at the Parole Board's office in Little Rock. The Parole Board will consider the application and the testimony, then make a recommendation to Gov. Asa Hutchinson to either grant the clemency or deny it. The governor is not obligated to follow the board's decision. Death-row inmates Bruce Ward, 58, and Don Davis, 52 -- who are set to die by lethal injection Oct. 21 -- did not submit clemency requests by the Sept. 21 deadline, Graves said. Besides Johnson, Nooner, Ward and Davis, inmates Marcel Williams and Jack Jones Jr. are scheduled to be executed Dec. 14 and Jason McGehee and Kenneth Williams are scheduled to die Jan. 14. All 8 have exhausted all standard appeals. Williams and Jones have until Nov. 3 to request clemency and McGehee and Williams have until Dec. 4 to request it. Last week, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined Ward's request for a review of his death-sentence case. A lawsuit filed in June in Pulaski County Circuit Court by all 8 men asking the prison system to disclose the source of its execution drugs is pending. Jeff Rosenzweig, an attorney for all 8 men, has said that he will ask the court to delay the executions. (source: arkansasonline.com) MISSOURI: Nonprofit Group Reports That Flawed FBI Hair Analysis Was Used to Convict Defendants Faulty testimony contributed to at least 35 guilty verdicts, with 9 executions resulting. The Innocence Project, a nonprofit organization based in New York, announced on April 21 that the FBI erroneously testified about hair samples in 6 criminal cases in Missouri, including 1 that resulted in the execution of the defendant. And now the executed man has been identified as Jeffrey Ferguson, who was convicted in St. Louis County last year for the 1989 murder of Kelli Hall. In a joint statement that was released the previous weekend, the FBI, Justice Department, National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the Innocence Project declared that in an overwhelming number of cases - 96 % of 268 trials - the FBI hair examiners' testimony used against the defendant was flawed. Furthermore, the review found that 26 of 28 hair examiners overstated the scientific certainty of their hair matches when they either wrote lab reports or testified. In addition to Jeffrey Ferguson, eight other prisoners convicted in trials in which faulty hair testimony was admitted have been executed and another 5 prisoners died while awaiting execution. Overall, at least 35 defendants who were convicted in trials with erroneous hair testimony received the death penalty. "People finding themselves charged with a crime are already at a serious disadvantage against the phalanx of legal resources that the state uses against them," said Charles James, a prominent criminal defense attorney in St. Peters, Missouri. "The admission of botched hair sample testimony is not only unjust but also tips the scales against the defendant even more." In the Ferguson case, the Missouri State Public Defender's Office has documented that the FBI analyst involved, Michael Malone, made several errors and that he "exceeded the limits of science" when he claimed that the hair "could be associated with a specific individual to the exclusion of all others." The office further stated that Malone erred in providing a statistical probability to his assertion and in citing other comparisons done, all in order to support his findings. However, Tom Dittmeier, the prosecutor who handled Ferguson's murder trials that led to his execution on March 26, 2014, has insisted that there was plenty of incriminating evidence to convict Ferguson and that not admitting the faulty hair analysis would not have mattered in his case. "The prosecution may have had compelling evidence in the case of the executed man from Missouri, but the revelation about the faulty hair analysis has now cast some doubt on that assertion," James said. "And it begs the question of just how many innocent people have been wrongly convicted based on erroneous testimony." (source: lawfirmnewswire.com) OKLAHOMA: State responds to affidavits from condemned inmate Richard Glossip's legal team, defends his conviction ---- In a filing with a state appeals court, the reliability of 3 defense witnesses' testimony is questioned. In a court filing Thursday, the Oklahoma Attorney General's Office called new witnesses in death-row inmate Richard Glossip's innocence claim "inherently suspect." Glossip, 52, came within 4 hours of execution on Sept. 16 before receiving a stay from the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals. The court postponed Glossip's lethal injection until Sept. 30 to provide time for review of new evidence in his claim that he is innocent. Glossip was sentenced to death for hiring Justin Sneed to kill their boss, Barry Alan Van Treese, in 1997. In recent weeks, Glossip's legal team has filed affidavits from 2 men who served time with Sneed who said he either lied about Glossip's involvement in the killing or never mentioned it at all. A 3rd affidavit from a man who took drugs with Glossip's brother also conflicts with the prosecution's position that Sneed was under Glossip's control. (source: Tulsa World) ******************* Psychiatric report of key witness surfaces in Glossip execution appeal Richard Glossip is scheduled to be executed next week for the 1997 murder of a motel owner. The execution has already been stayed 3 times. It was the testimony of Justin Sneed that sent Glossip to death row years ago. Sneed claimed Glossip ordered him to kill the victim, Barry Van Treese. Sneed is currently serving a life sentence. Glossip's attorneys are still working up until the last minute to build their case against Sneed. In a legal back and forth between Glossip's attorneys and the state, new court filings are pouring into the Court of Criminal Appeals. The attorney general recently included a psychiatric report on Sneed. Sneed was in jail when the report was done. "He indicated that the alleged crime was in connection with a burglary, but that he does not carry a charge of burglary," the doctor said. Sneed went on to say he was in jail for killing someone. He didn't ever mention Glossip to the doctor, even though Sneed testified Glossip paid him to carry out the murder. Police arrested Glossip back in 1997 outside attorney David McKenzie's office. "I can tell you what he wanted me to tell the police, which I did," McKenzie said. "He wasn't going to cooperate with their investigation anymore, and I called the police while he was in my office and relayed that to them." Glossip had a lot of cash with him and said it was for the attorney. Police allege it was money stolen from Van Treese. The late district attorney Bob Macy charged Glossip with the death penalty. Macy sent more than 50 offenders to death row - the most in state history. Former dean of OU School of Law, Andy Coats, was Macy's predecessor. "It's a case where, personally, if I'd been DA at the time, I wouldn't have filed the death penalty on it, because I don't think it's solid enough," Coats said. Glossips attorneys tell Newschannel 4 they continue to interview new witnesses, but hit a snag this week. Arrest warrants were issued for 2 of their witnesses for probation violations. (source: KFOR news) ******************* Prosecutors Seek Death Penalty Against Bethany Man Accused In Toddler's Death Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty against a man accused of killing a 2-year-old child. Dustin Davison was arrested back on May 18 after he called 911 saying the child was unresponsive. News 9 talked with child's uncle Thursday afternoon by phone. Mike Sepe says he thinks Dustin Davison should rot in prison for the rest of his life for what he's accused of doing to this little boy. But Sepe says the rest of the family is in favor of the death penalty. Court papers reveal Dustin Davison had been babysitting 2-year-old Kreedin Brooks while the son's mother, who was his girlfriend at the time, was away from their apartment. "He was an innocent little child you know," said Sepe during an on camera interview back on July 24. "I mean innocent little child, at 2 years what could you do? There's no way any child any child would deserve something like that." Court papers state Kreedin was covered in bruises and had blood coming from his nose and mouth. He also suffered blunt force trauma to his head. When paramedics arrived at the Bryan Hill apartment complex near NW 36th and Meridian back on May 18, they hoped they could save the child. But they could not. Davison's call to 911 ended up implicating him in the child's death. According to court papers, Davidson originally told Bethany police officers that he was in the shower for 15 minutes prior to finding the victim lying unresponsive and unconscious on the living room floor. Davison stated he attempted to administer CPR to the victim. He explained how the victim was in his terrible 2's and liked to climb things. When asked, Davison stated he did not see the incident occur. While at the police department, Davison told investigators the same story as he told responding officers, however, he added the victim fell and hit his head on the coffee table. Once confronted with the evidence that did not match his recollection of the events of the incident, Davison admitted to playing rough with the victim. He admitted to getting into a pillow fight with the child and hitting him with a pillow, which caused the child to fall off the couch and slam his head into the coffee table. Davison stated the victim hit the table very hard. According to medical personnel at the hospital, the victim sustained a fractured skull and had swelling and bleeding of the brain. The victim also had other previous injuries to the head due to older bruising and the injuries were consistent with abuse. Recent bruising also led investigators to believe the victim sustained multiple hits to the head. Davison reportedly told investigators the victim caused the recent bruises and head trauma by playing slip and slide in the bathroom tub and claimed the bruises were self - inflicted. Court papers state police also found marijuana in the living room on the coffee table. News 9 obtained an excerpt of the 911 call Davison made back on May 18. Davison is heard saying: "I was in the shower and next thing I know I come out and there's blood on the left side of his head - and also his forehead is severely bruised. and I think the internal bleeding from the skull went into the lungs ... I tried patting his back as many times as I could to get all of the blood out but I'm just holding him right now hoping that he will make it through this." In the bill of particulars filed Wednesday, prosecutors stated they are seeking the death penalty because the murder was especially heinous and they feel Davison would be a threat to society. Now, Kreedin's uncle Mike just waits for Davison's day in court. A court date is yet to be set. "Any grown person that abuses a child isn't worth nothing in my eyes," said Sepe. Sepe's mission now is to help raise money and awareness for child abuse victims. (source: KWTV news) USA: Pope has influenced Obama's attitude on death penalty Pope Francis's appeal to end the death penalty has "influenced" President Obama's thinking on the issue, the White House said Thursday. In a speech to Congress, Francis reiterated his call to abolish the death penalty across the globe, saying it violates mankind's "responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage of its development." "It's fair to say the president's views are influenced by statements that are made by the pope," White House press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters. But Earnest stressed that Obama, who watched at least part of Francis's speech, is not ready to change his position on the issue. Francis's U.S. tour has revived the debate over the death penalty, one of the most polarizing elements of the American justice system. Obama backs the death penalty but has raised concerns in the past with how it is applied. After a botched execution in Oklahoma last year, the president ordered a review by the Justice Department. "In the context of answering this question in the past, the president has noted his concerns with the way that the death penalty has been applied," Earnest said. Obama has also expressed worry about racial disparities and situations where death row inmates have been exonerated after further evidence proved them innocent. "Certainly, those kinds of results are troubling," Earnest said. The debate over the death penalty comes as Obama is pushing Congress to pass a sweeping set of criminal-justice reforms. Lawmakers are considering a number of bills that would reduce sentences for nonviolent drug offenders. Abolishing the federal death penalty would be a heavy lift in Congress. (source: the hill.com) ************* Newt Gingrich 'More Open' To Ending Death Penalty After Pope's Address----"We need to profoundly rethink what we've done over the past 25 years in criminal justice." Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker and onetime Republican presidential candidate, said he is "more open" to eliminating the death penalty after hearing Pope Francis' address to Congress. "I very deeply believe we need to profoundly rethink what we've done over the past 25 years in criminal justice," Gingrich said Thursday on HuffPost Live. Earlier that day, the pope had spoken to a joint meeting of Congress about many issues, including the importance of ending capital punishment. "The Golden Rule also reminds us of our responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage of its development," Pope Francis said. "This conviction has led me, from the beginning of my ministry, to advocate at different levels for the global abolition of the death penalty." Gingrich, who converted to Catholicism several years ago, was "very impressed" with the way the pope made his argument. As for the death penalty, he said, "You do want to be careful not to execute someone that you find later on, as we've found, to be innocent." The former U.S. representative had previously taken a strict stance on capital punishment, even proposing death as a penalty for possession of significant amounts of marijuana. But as he noted Thursday, Gingrich has been evolving on criminal justice issues for some time now. He even found common ground with hip-hop mogul Jay Z last year on California's Proposition 47, which sought to make the state a little less "tough on crime." "I think we have destroyed lives by getting them in situations where they learn how to be good criminals, but not anything else. In that sense, I am more open than I would have been," Gingrich said Thursday. (source: Huffington Post) ******************** Rep. Rodney Davis open to repeal death penalty, says he held position before pope's speech U.S. Rep. Rodney Davis said Thursday that he's open to elimination of the federal death penalty, something Pope Francis called for worldwide in his speech to a joint session of Congress. Davis, a Taylorville Republican and a Catholic, said he has been open to the option before, and the pope didn't change his mind. He also said that a change in the law should be coupled with other law changes, possibly including those concerning some illegal drugs. "I'm somebody who understands both sides of that debate," Davis told reporters via telephone after the pope's speech. "And I can easily agree with the pope to eliminate the death penalty." But Davis said he thinks the message was also about criminal justice reform. "We have policies in place now that sometimes punish those who may have made a mistake of having a certain amount of marijuana," Davis said. "They're in jail longer than folks who were accused of much more heinous crimes, in my opinion. We as the federal government need to take a strong look at ensuring that our criminal justice system punishes those who deserve to be punished." Davis is anti-abortion, and asked specifically if he would be OK with abolition of the death penalty, he said he would like to couple that with doing "everything we can to protect the sanctity of life." On the death penalty, Davis said he also understands "the call for those who are victims of crime to have that option." "But in my case, I'm somebody who said I would consider the repeal, and this was long before the pope came today," he said. Davis converted to Catholicism in 2001, and his wife, Shannon, who was his guest in the House chamber, is a lifelong Catholic. Davis said he was intrigued and energized by the message. "It wasn't about politics," he said. "It was about how the pope feels. ... We all want to make a difference. Caring for the poor, the sick and the unborn are fundamental." Davis said he sat next to new U.S. Rep. Darin LaHood, R-Peoria, and it was a proud moment for both when the pope mentioned Abraham Lincoln as the "guardian of liberty," given that both Davis and LaHood represent areas Lincoln once represented. "For me, it was a message that hit close to home," Davis said. In a prepared statement, LaHood said it was humbling to attend the address. "As a practicing Catholic and someone who has looked to my faith throughout my life, the opportunity to be present to hear the spiritual leader address Congress and the American people was an experience that will stay with me for my entire life," he said. U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin, a Springfield Democrat, told reporters by telephone that Francis "has really captured the imagination of the people around the world." If it were possible to describe the "winning formula," said Durbin, also a Catholic, "I think it's genuineness on one hand, humility on the other, and I think he continues to challenge all of us, every person, whether you're Catholic or not, to lead a better life and to help people." Durbin said messages Francis continued to return to were helping the poor and being "sensitive and conscious about our changing world." He said he hoped members of Congress could find common ground in addressing those concerns. The genuine nature of the pope was on display a day earlier, Durbin said. "From the minute he drove up to the White House in that little Fiat, I thought to myself, 'This fella is for real,'" Durbin said. The small car fit with the pope's modest living quarters and efforts to seek out and spend time with the poor, he said. U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk, a Republican from Highland Park, issued a statement calling it an honor to have the pope, "a symbol of love and compassion," in the country. "May we take his message of unity and cooperation to heart," Kirk said. (source: Springfield (Ill.) Journal-Register) ****** Pope's death-penalty remarks draw renewed attention to Scalia's Memphis speech As Pope Francis spoke to Congress Thursday, advocating for the abolishment of the death penalty, his remarks kindled new interest in statements made by a Supreme Court justice just days ago - in Memphis. In case you missed our story, Justice Antonin Scalia, the longest-serving justice on the court, spoke at Rhodes College Tuesday night and mentioned the death penalty several times in his hour-and-20-minute speech. His talk was in honor of Constitution Day (although a few days late after the actual holiday) and was titled "Constitutional Interpretation." Scalia adheres to a doctrine known as "originalism," which holds that it is not up to a court to rewrite the Constitution. It must be preserved in its original form, and it is not up to judges to use it to rule on mainstream issues like abortion and the death penalty. Scalia also mentioned it wouldn't surprise him if his court did rule that the death penalty is unconstitutional. It's clear he would not be in the majority if that were to be the case. But Scalia mentioned he "wouldn't be surprised" because he said there are four judges who have already said they believe it is unconstitutional. But the only1 of the 4 Scalia mentioned was Justice Stephen Breyer. And at first, Scalia said there are only three judges that believe it is unconstitutional, but later corrected it to 4. "If the death penalty did not violate the 8th amendment when the 8th amendment was adopted, it doesn't violate it today," Scalia said. "But I sat with three colleagues who thought the death penalty is unconstitutional ... Even though it's mentioned in the original Constitution. 'No person shall be deprived of life without due process. And in all capital cases, the accused is entitled to a grand jury indictment.' That's what the Constitution says. "(But) I sat with 3 colleagues, and there is now a 4th - Justice Breyer has announced that he thinks the death penalty is unconstitutional." In a written dissent in June, Breyer and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg called for a new legal examination of the death penalty, and said it might not be constitutional. In his speech, Scalia asked, "Where does this come from?" "Do you really want your judges to rewrite the Constitution? What is it that I learned at Harvard Law School that makes me peculiarly qualified to determine such profound, moral and ethical questions as to whether there should be a right to abortion, whether there should be same-sex marriage, whether there should be a right to suicide. "What have I learned at Harvard Law School? It has nothing to do with the law. Even Yale Law School doesn't teach that." Scalia continued that the idea of a changing Constitution and activist judges does not permit any flexibility, as is commonly argued, because once the Supreme Court weighs in, the discussion ends. "It's no use talking about abortion any more," he said. "It's just off the (Democrats') table. No use arguing about it. Coast to coast. Now and forever. Or I guess until the Supreme Court changes its mind. Is that flexibility?" It was then he made his statement predicting a possible outcome on the death penalty. "If we decide - and it wouldn't surprise me if we decided that the death penalty is unconstitutional - that will be the end of it. Coast to coast. Nobody can have the death penalty. "Whereas, under my Constitution, it is flexible. You want abortion? Persuade your fellow citizens it's a good idea. You want to prohibit abortion? Persuade them that way. And you can change your mind. The same with the death penalty. You can abolish it, if it turns out you're having a lot more murders, you can reinstitute it. That's flexibility." (source: Memphis Commercial Appeal) ******* Can the pope's moral anti-death penalty argument sway American lawmakers? Logic, experience and evidence have failed to turn the tide against the death penalty. Perhaps faith, and Pope Francis??? concern for humanity, can succeed There are many substantive policy reasons for opposing the death penalty: the risk of executing innocent people; the unfairness inherent in the judicial process; the persistent evidence of racial discrimination; and lack of evidence that killing some people deters other people from killing anyone. And, for the past 20 years, support for the death penalty has been falling more or less consistently - though a comfortable majority of Americans still support its use. Empirical evidence, however, rarely moves Congress. So perhaps a moral argument, made by somebody with perhaps the greatest moral authority on the planet, might be more effective. Pope Francis' impassioned speech before Congress Thursday morning might just be what it takes to move hearts and legislative pens on the issue. Speaking before both houses of Congress, US supreme court justices, members of the president's cabinet and to millions of viewers watching the live broadcast, Francis made an explicit call to end capital punishment. Though he spoke more poetically - some might say obtusely - about immigration, "the family" and climate change, citing his belief in the Golden Rule, Francis said, "This conviction has led me, from the beginning of my ministry, to advocate at different levels for the global abolition of the death penalty." "I am convinced that this way is the best, since every life is sacred, every human person is endowed with an inalienable dignity, and society can only benefit from the rehabilitation of those convicted of crimes," he continued. No sooner had the pope finished his speech, then advocacy groups were breaking out in celebration. "The pope's speech before Congress was nothing less than historic," the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty executive director Diann Rust-Tierney said in a statement. "His words are a critical endorsement of our fight." More dispassionate voices also agreed that the pope's statement was a meaningful boost for reformers. The executive director of Death Penalty Information Center, which doesn't take a side in the debate, told the Guardian that his question was what impact the pope' words might have. "I think that Pope Francis's statement was very clear, very direct and compelling," Robert Dunham said. "And I think that it will have a an effect. It's hard to immediately measure what that effect will be." It will, almost certainly, pose a direct challenge to Catholic legislators, prosecutors and judges who are willing to be swayed by the Pope's words. Indeed, many of the states to abolish the death penalty in recent years are heavily Catholic, including Illinois, New Jersey, New Mexico, and New York. And in a couple of cases - Governor Pat Quinn in Illinois and Governor Bill Richardson in New Mexico - Catholic leaders played an influential role in abolishing it. Polling data suggests that Catholics are more disturbed by the problems posed by capital punishment than the general population. But not all Catholics are apparently swayed by this Pope: in addition to Catholic Republican Congressman Paul Gosar, who boycotted the speech, and a variety of other criticism from ultra-conservative Catholics, of the 6 members of the US supreme court who are Catholic, only 3 (John Roberts, Anthony Kennedy, and Sonia Sotomayor) attended the pope's address to Congress. The more right-leaning Catholic justices (Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito) were notably absent. Still, now any reporter or citizen can approach Catholic lawmakers from House speaker John Boehner on down, and ask if they agree with the pope that the death penalty should be overturned. It puts pressure on them that, if it existed before, wasn't as explicit. And it's not just Catholics that Francis might have reached with his remarks about the death penalty: while other popes have been mainly popular among Catholics, Pope Francis has been able to reach a wider audience, especially young people. "This particular pope has demonstrated a crossover appeal that goes beyond Catholicism" said Dunham, noting that his statements about support for the poor and dispossessed have resonated widely. "When a public figure who is that highly regarded makes a statement like this, it's going to have an effect." Those trying to quantify the effect of the pope's speech may not have to wait long for data. Last year Gallup found support for the death penalty, while down, is still as high as 63%. A more recent survey from Pew, puts the number at 56%, down from a high of 78% in 1996. The new Gallup poll is scheduled to come out in a matter of weeks, so we'll have an idea of just how big the pope effect really is. People's views on the law are already affected by their views about morality and their level of compassion for humanity. Pope Francis has made a strong argument that concern for humanity and morality should lead one to oppose the death penalty; maybe he - and faith - can succeed in turning the public tide where logic, experience and evidence has failed. (source: The Guardian) **** Pope Francis and the future of the death penalty When Pope Francis called for the "global abolition" of the death penalty on Thursday, he touched upon a debate brewing across the country that is on the minds not only of the public and lawmakers, but 4 of the Supreme Court justices who were sitting in the front row of the House chamber. "Every life is sacred, every human person is endowed with an inalienable dignity, and society can only benefit from the rehabilitation of those convicted of crimes," Francis told the joint meeting of Congress. As the number of Americans who approve the death penalty has hit a 40-year low, some federal judges question its constitutionality, and states struggle with a shortage of lethal injection drugs, some 3,000 inmates across the country hope they live long enough to see the debate resolved in their favor. "I also offer encouragement to all those who are convinced that a just and necessary punishment must never exclude the dimension of hope and the goal of rehabilitation," the Pope said. At the current center of the death penalty debate are Richard Glossip and Kelly Renee Gissendaner, two inmates currently scheduled for execution next week. Last week, Glossip came within three hours of being strapped to a gurney in Oklahoma when a new set of lawyers managed to win a two-week delay. Gissendaner, the only woman on Georgia's death row, was taken to a death cell last March only to have her execution postponed after prison officials grew jittery because the drugs meant to kill her seemed unusually cloudy in their vials. What is the future of the death penalty? Experts like Elisabeth Semel of the Death Penalty Clinic at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law, decline to guess. "I do not believe in prognostication," she said in an interview. But she allowed that, "it is fair to say we may be approaching a crossroads based on signs from multiple sources," including popular opinion, legislatures, policymakers and declining death sentences and executions. The issue is not lost on death row inmates. "Condemned prisoners are paying close attention," said Dale Baich, an assistant federal public defender and lawyer for Glossip. "There is a sense by some that they are caught in the middle of continuing political discussions and legal proceedings, and that their execution dates will be set while the process unfolds. Victims' Rights Some victim's family members are baffled by the outpouring of support for Glossip and Gissendaner and other inmates. Glossip was convicted of a murder-for-hire plot involving the death of Barry Alan Van Treese. But he has received widespread support from Hollywood actress Susan Sarandon as well as activist Sister Helen Prejean, who both say he is innocent. Gissendaner was convicted for plotting the 1988 murder of her husband, Doug Gissendaner. The faith community has rallied around her pointing out that she has become a model prisoner and counsels others. Doug Gissendaner's family members says they have been on a "long, heartbreaking road." "Doug is the true victim of this pre-meditated and heinous crime," the family said in a statement released after the postponement. Victims' rights groups wonder why so much attention is spent on the death row inmates at the cost of their victims. Indeed, the majority of Americans still support the death penalty, according to Pew Research Center. Fifty-six percent favor the death penalty for those convicted of murder, while 38% oppose it. But Pew says the support has fallen to a 40-year low. The change is evident when it comes to Democrats, where 40% favor the death penalty while 56% are opposed. Republican support has changed less dramatically. In 1996 87% were in favor, today that has fallen to 77%. Currently, the death penalty is legal in 31 states, but in 2014, only 7 states actually went through with an execution. "The death penalty is on the books, but rarely carried out," said Richard Dieter, the senior program director of the Death Penalty Information Center, a group that takes no official position on the death penalty. Dieter notes that death sentences were at a new low last last year. Opponents of the death penalty say it is being arbitrarily implemented and doesn't serve a purpose to deter crime. They worry about the number of exonerations - 155 inmates have been exonerated since 1973 - and the length of time it takes from the time a person is sentenced to death and the time of execution. And then there are the costs. A 2011 study by Judge Arthur Alarcon and Professor Paula Mitchell concluded that trial costs, appeals, and the cost of incarceration contributed to a price tag of $4 billion for the State of California since 1978. The authors contend that if those on death row received commuted sentences, the state could see a savings of $170 million per year. "We are in the midst of a reconsideration of the death penalty" Dieter said, pointing out that juries are returning it less and prosecutors aren't seeking it as much. Constitutional questions Some of those issues came up when Glossip's case initially went before the Supreme Court last term. He was challenging the use of one of the drugs - midazolam - that he said would not put in him in a deep enough coma so that he didn't feel the effect of the other 2 drugs in the protocol. Oral arguments in the case were particularly tense. On the last day of the term, a 5-4 Court allowed the use of the drug. The liberal justices on the bench were in dissent, and 2 of them, Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, went even further saying that they thought the Court should revisit the constitutionality of the death penalty. In 1972, the Court voided death penalty statutes across the country, but by 1976 it effectively reinstated the death penalty in a case called Gregg v. Georgia. Court watchers are curious regarding the impact of Breyer and Ginsburg's dissent. Since it was issued, the Court has denied emergency requests for death sentence reprieves from other death row inmates with no noted dissent by either of the justices. Neither Justice Elena Kagan nor Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined the dissent. And Justice Anthony Kennedy, often a crucial swing vote, has shown no inclination to say the death penalty is unconstitutional even though he has voted to narrow its application when it came to juvenile offenders and the intellectually disabled. Meanwhile, in California, a federal district court judge issued an opinion last July holding that the state's death penalty system violates the federal Constitution. In that case, U.S. District Court Judge Cormac J. Carney wrote that since 1978 over 900 people have been sentenced to death for their crimes in California, but only 13 have been executed. Carney said that California's "dysfunctional " administration of the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. The case is currently on review at the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. Drug shortages In other states, a major struggle is that manufacturers, in part due to pressure from death penalty opponents, have stopped providing lethal injection drugs. As a result, states have had to try different drug protocols. During the Glossip hearing before the Supreme Court, Justice Samuel Alito took on some death penalty opponents who he suggested might be contributing, indirectly, to the shortage of proven drugs. "Is it appropriate for the judiciary to countenance what amounts to a guerrilla war against the death penalty which consists of efforts to make it impossible for the State to obtain drugs that could be used to carry out capital punishment with little, if any, pain?" he asked. Alito's comments revealed fissures on the Court as it tries to sort out claims, many of which arrive on a last minute basis, and the country as a whole as it weighs the issue of victims' rights against the potential rehabilitation of death row inmates in an effort to target what the Pope called the need to "protect and defend human life." (source: CNN) From rhalperi at smu.edu Fri Sep 25 08:18:02 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 08:18:02 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 25 SAUDI ARABIA: Parents of Saudi Juvenile Set for 'Crucifixion' Plead for Mercy, Amid UK and US Silence The family of a juvenile sentenced to 'crucifixion' in Saudi Arabia have appealed to the Saudi authorities to spare him, as pressure mounts on the US and the UK to intervene. Speaking to AFP, Mohamed al-Nimr said he hoped the King would save his son, student Ali al-Nimr, who was 17 when he was arrested in 2012 in the wake of protests in the Eastern Province. Ali was tortured into signing a false 'confession', which was then used to convict him, and it emerged last week that the unusually harsh sentence had recently been upheld without Ali's knowledge. With legal avenues now exhausted, Ali could be executed at any moment, with no prior notification of his family. Mr al-Nimr said "we hope that the king will not sign" the execution order for his son. The appeal comes as the UK and the US - strong allies of the Saudi government - faced questions on their failure to speak out about the case. Questioned yesterday by AP, US State Department spokesman Mark C Toner refused to say he'd welcome a commutation of the sentence, saying that he was "not aware of the case." The UK government has so far limited itself to a brief statement last week that "We continue to raise our human rights concerns with the Saudi authorities, including their use of the death penalty." The Ministry of Justice has also faced criticism after it indicated that it would continue with an ongoing bid to provide prison services to the Saudi government. In contrast, the French government yesterday joined UN experts in calling for the death sentence to be commuted, because Ali was a juvenile at the time of his arrest. The French Foreign Ministry said it was "concerned by the situation of Ali Mohammed al-Nimr, who was sentenced to death even though he was a minor at the time of the events [...] We call for the execution to be called off." The group of independent United Nations human rights experts on Tuesday asked the Saudi authorities "to immediately halt the scheduled execution", and to ensure a "fair retrial" of Ali. Commenting, Maya Foa, director of Reprieve's death penalty team, said: "Saudi Arabia's plans to behead and crucify Ali al-Nimr, a juvenile, for attending a protest are an outrage - the French government and UN experts are right to be calling for it to be cancelled. It's deeply troubling that the UK and the US - both close allies of the Saudi government - are staying silent. The international community must stand firm against this utterly unjustified sentence, and call on the Saudi authorities to change course." (source: commondreams.org) ********** US expresses 'deep concern' over Saudi death row youth The United States expressed alarm on Thursday over the case of a Saudi Arabian who was sentenced to death for his alleged role in anti-government protests as a teenager. Saudi Arabia is a close ally of the United States, but State Department spokesman John Kirby said Washington was "deeply concerned" about the case of Ali Mohammed al-Nimr. The United States, where the death penalty is used in several states, did not condemn the sentence itself, but echoed the growing international outcry over the young man's trial and failed appeal. "We are deeply concerned by the case of al-Nimr, who was sentenced to death although he was a minor at the time or his arrest, and by allegations that his sentence was based on a confession made under duress," Kirby said. "We call on the government of Saudi Arabia to respect universal human rights and its international obligations to ensure fair and transparent judicial proceedings that afford requisite fair trial and safeguards in this and on all cases." Ali al-Nimr, a manner of Saudi Arabia's Shiite minority, was a 17-year-old schoolboy in 2012 when he joined an Arab Spring-style pro-reform protest in Qatif in the eastern part of the kingdom. He was sentenced to death for allegedly belonging to an illegal organization and his last appeal failed recently, leaving him facing execution, probably by decapitation. Earlier this week, a panel of United Nations legal experts complained that his appeal was been handled "with a complete disregard for international standards." "Any judgment imposing the death penalty upon persons who were children at the time of the offense, and their execution, are incompatible with Saudi Arabia's international obligations," the UN experts said. The UN panel said 134 people have already been executed in the kingdom this year, 44 more than in the whole of last year. In August, Amnesty international reported that at least 2,208 people were executed between January 1985 and June 2015 in Saudi Arabia, nearly half of them foreigners. Ali al-Nimr's father Mohammed al-Nimr has called on Saudi Arabia's King Salman, who was received with great pomp this month at the White House, not to sign his son's death warrant. Ali is the nephew of Nimr al-Nimr, a Shiite religious leader who is also on death row. Nimr al-Nimr was a driving force behind demonstrations that began 4 years ago in Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province. Most of Sunni-majority Saudi Arabia's Shiites live in the east, and have complained of marginalization. Ali al-Nimr's father admitted that his son, then a high school student, had joined thousands of other people in protest. But he insisted that Ali was innocent on numerous other charges including burglary, attacking police and using a Molotov cocktail. (source: Yahoo news) *************** Saudi Arabia should immediately halt execution of juvenile Ali Mohammed al-Nimr Ali Mohammed al-Nimr has been sentenced to death by crucifixion for his participation in an illegal demonstration during the Arab Spring pro democracy uprising, despite the fact that at the time of the offence, he was a minor. He could be executed at any moment. "Saudi Arabia has already reached a macabre record of executions, with far more people executed thus far in 2015 than in all of 2014. Ali's execution would be the paradigm of horror of the country's application of the capital sentence" declared Karim Lahidji, FIDH President. "If it carries out the sentence, Saudi Arabia would be in violation of all international standards and commit a terrible crime." Ali al-Nimr, a high school student, had just turned 17 when he was arrested on 14 February 2012 during an anti-government protest in the Shiite province of Qatif. He was charged by the authorities with participating in illegal protests and other offences including "insulting the King and delivering religious sermons that 'disrupt national unity'", "explaining how to give first aid to protestors", and "using his blackberry to invite others to join him at the protest". Ali was held in pre trial detention for 2 years without access to his laywer, severely tortured, and forced to sign a false confession. During his trial, he was not given access to the evidence against him, and was informed of the charges at a very late stage of the proceedings. His forced confession was the only evidence brought against him. Ali was sentenced to death by crucificion on 27 May 2014 and even his final appeal was held in secret. "International law prohibits using evidence obtained under torture. International law also prohibits to impose the death penalty on persons who were children at the time of the offence. This execution would thus be clearly incompatible with Saudi Arabia's international obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, that it ratified" added Karim Lahidji. Ali's case seems to be linked to the case against his uncle, Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, a 53-year old critic of the Saudi regime, and a prominent religious leader in the Kingdom. Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr has also been sentenced to death in his case. "These proceedings are a complete mockery of justice. This sentence amounts to crual and inhumane treatement. If executed, Ali would be crucified for having exercised his right to freedom of expression. We urgently call on the international community to mobilise against this state crime that would shock the conscience of humanity" affirmed Karim Lahidji. FIDH, who is a member of the World Coalition against the death Penalty, strongly opposes the death penalty for all crimes and in all circumstances and works with its member organisations for its global abolition. The death penalty constitutes an inhumane treatment. FIDH has further documented that the death penalty is commonly pronounced after unfair trials, and its application is often discriminatory. FIDH recalls that the so called deterrent effect of the death penalty has never been proven. (source: FIDH) From rhalperi at smu.edu Fri Sep 25 13:56:33 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 13:56:33 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, PENN., GA., FLA., OHIO, MO., OKLA., NEB. Message-ID: Sept. 25 TEXAS: Texas Is Making Its Own Execution Drugs, Oklahoma Inmate Alleges Many death penalty states have struggled to obtain a lethal injection drug that Texas has consistently been able to procure. In a filing Thursday in Oklahoma, lawyers provided evidence that Texas sold pentobarbital to Virginia in August. The state of Texas is making its own execution drugs and has sold them to at least 1 other death penalty state, an inmate facing execution in Oklahoma alleges in a court filing Thursday. His attorneys point to documents that show the Texas Department of Criminal Justice sold pentobarbital to Virginia in late August. Pentobarbital is a sedative that many death penalty states, including Oklahoma, have claimed is impossible for them to get their hands on. As a result, some states have turned to midazolam, a drug that critics argue is significantly less effective. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the use of midazolam in executions this June. The records submitted as part of the new filing show that Virginia received 150 milligrams of the drug. Under the heading "Name of Supplier," the Texas Department of Criminal Justice is listed. The labels do not identify the pharmacy that prepared the drug. However, the lawyers for the Oklahoma inmate state that the labels were created by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, which they also allege "is compounding or producing pentobarbital within its department for use in executions." On Friday, Texas confirmed to BuzzFeed News that it sent the execution drugs to Virginia. A spokesman said it was to repay Virginia for having given Texas drugs in the past. "In 2013, the Virginia Department of Corrections gave the Texas Department of Criminal Justice pentobarbital to use as a back up drug in an execution," spokesman Jason Clark said. "Virginia's drugs were not used." "The agency earlier this year was approached by officials in Virginia and we gave them 3 vials of pentobarbital that [were] legally purchased from a pharmacy. The agency has not provided compounded drugs to any other state. Texas law prohibits the TDCJ from disclosing the identity of the supplier of lethal injection drugs." In a statement, the Virginia Department of Corrections said it intended to use the pentobarbital next week. "The Department did recently obtain pentobarbital from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice," spokesperson Lisa Kinney said. "That pentobarbital is scheduled to be used in the Oct. 1 execution of Alfredo Prieto. There was no payment involved." Kinney added that questions about who made the drug would have to be directed to Texas. The lawyers raise these issues to make the argument that Oklahoma could avoid the use of the controversial midazolam drug in its executions. It could do so, they argue, by purchasing pentobarbital from Texas, like Virginia, or by "compounding or producing pentobarbital in the same manner as does TDCJ." States have struggled to obtain execution drugs for years after makers enacted more stringent guidelines to keep them away from states that would use them for executions. The idea of a state-run lab making its own death penalty drugs is something Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster raised last year, although many wondered how it could be done. Missouri, like Texas, has had no trouble obtaining pentobarbital. (source:BuzzFeedNews.com) ************* Texas shared its execution drugs with Virginia Texas prison officials acknowledged on Friday that they have supplied at least 1 other state with execution drugs - but the original source of those drugs remains shrouded in secrecy. The disclosure came the day after a death-row inmate claimed in court papers that Texas is now making its own lethal injection drugs and had shared vials of them with Virginia. In a statement, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice confirmed it gave three vials of pentobarbital to the Virginia Department of Corrections. "The drugs have been tested for purity and will expire in April 2016," the statement said. "State law prohibits the agency from disclosing the identity of the supplier of lethal injection drugs," it said. Several death penalty states have passed laws to keep the source of their execution chemicals confidential to protect pharmacies that mix them from negative publicity and protests. Defense lawyers say the secrecy rules also prevent inmates from investigating whether the drugs that will be used to kill them are unadulterated. States across the nation have struggled to obtain execution drugs because pharmaceutical companies have been pressured to stop selling them to prisons for lethal injections. Virginia has not executed anyone since the 2013 electrocution of Robert Gleason. Texas, on the other hand, has put to death 10 prisoners this year. The details of its shipment to Virginia were first revealed in a court filing by Richard Glossip, who is set to be executed in Oklahoma on Sept. 30 barring another last-minute reprieve. Oklahoma uses a drug called midazolam, which inmates say does not protect them from an excruciating death. Glossip argued that the state could use pentobarbital since Texas appears to be able to supply it. It's not clear if the vials sent to Virginia were in fact mixed in-house by Texas or by an outside compounding pharmacy. (source: WSLS news) PENNSYLVANIA: Prosecutors seek death penalty for Lancaster County killings----Police: Suspect killed victims to stop them from testifying in assault case Lancaster County prosecutors announced that they would seek the death penalty in a double-murder case that shocked the southern end of the county. Leeton Thomas is charged with breaking into Lisa Scheetz home near Quarryville in June and killing her as well as her 16-year-old daughter. Scheetz's 15-year-old daughter was critically injured in the attack. Police say Thomas killed the victims to stop them from testifying in a previous sexual assault case. (source: WGAL news) GEORGIA----impending female execution Hope Dies Last: A Word on Kelly Gissendaner On September 21, 2011, I wrote an Open Letter to the State of Georgia about the state-authorized death of one of their sons, Troy Davis. The blog went viral in a matter of 24 hours, finding its way on a host of news sites and it would be the first time that I would enter into public discourse about social justice and the death penalty. 4 years later, I'd find myself penning yet another article about a daughter of the State of Georgia, Kelly Gissendaner, a woman whose original execution was stayed because the drugs the State planned to use to kill her were cloudy and not fit for use. Recently, we learned that Kelly would be executed by the State of Georgia on the 29th of this month, after 6 long months of appeals and public outcry for her stay of execution. Kelly's story touched a personal place for me; she was more than just an inmate at the Lee Arrendale State Prison, she was a friend, classmate, and student of people I consider friends and colleges at the Candler School of Theology at Emory University. Her graduation from Candler's prison-based theological certificate program was a transformation of a unique kind; no longer was she a woman whose checkered past overshadowed the possibility of a bright future. She is a woman who has overcome them, proving that grace is, in fact, sufficient. As friends and supporters of Kelly prepare for what some can consider her imminent death, as her children, teachers, and friends like Nikki Roberts continue to fight against the State-sanctioned killing of Kelly, a fight that Nikki says will go on until the very last minute... ...as we remember brothers like Troy Davis, who on this day, took his last breath at a Jackson, Georgia state prison, with SWAT teams, sirens, news crews, and a faithful couple of thousands shouting his name in solidarity, kneeling with systematic violence to our face and somber Georgia breezes to our back... ...we remember what it means to die a good death, to die leaving a mark on a world that forces us to face our own idiosyncrasies and short comings. A life that requires others to consider our otherness, our humanness, our lives that One thought was worth saving, even when we're so deep in our own mess that we couldn't see that we needed saving. Right now, Kelly is still alive. Heart beating, and in my mind, feet pacing. She is symbolic of what it means to see redemption in the flesh, to see the unfathomable possibility of hope in a dark place. She embodies hope for us all, hope for the chance to get it right, to remember our own dark places, the places that most people don't see -- or get to judge. September 29, 2015 may come and that just might be Kelly's last day on earth. Maybe. But one thing we do know for sure, that the last thing to ever die, the last remnant that remains after the last breath has escaped its fleshly cage, is hope. Hope is always the last thing to die -- if it ever does. Hope lives on in those who find solace that a life worth living is one that was worth fighting for -- even until the end. (source: Alisha L. Gordon, M.Div. is a well sought-after writer, religious educator, and scholar activist; Huffington Post) FLORIDA----female faces death penalty Prosecutors to seek death penalty for girl in machete murder Florida prosecutors said Thursday they will seek the death penalty for a teenage girl accused of taking part in the murder of a teen who was attacked with a machete, reports CBS Miami. Desiray Strickland, 18, has been indicted for 1st degree murder in the June death of 17-year-old Jose Guardado, along with 5 other suspects: 23-year old Joseph Cabrera, 20-year-old Kaheem Arbelo, 18-year-old Jonathan Lucas and 19-year-old Christian Colon. On Thursday, Strickland's attorney entered a plea of not guilty and said they would go to trial. The suspects and victim were students at Homestead Job Corps, a live-in school and vocational training program for at-risk students run by the U.S. Department of Labor. Prosecutors say the group spent 2 weeks planning Guardado's death, including digging a shallow grave in the woods near their school days before he was killed. On Sunday, June 28th, they allegedly lured Guardado into the woods, where police say Arbelo ambushed him with a machete as the others watched. As Guardado lay dying on the ground, the group allegedly ordered him to crawl into the grave. Police say when Guardado made 1 last attempt to fight back, Arbelo struck him repeatedly until his face caved in. They then allegedly buried him and, to hide evidence, burned Guardado's belongings as well as their own clothes, according to police. Investigators say all but Strickland and Arbelo went back to campus, but the duo allegedly stayed behind to have sex near where the murder took place. Guardado's remains were discovered four days later by family members who were searching for him. (source: CBS news) OHIO: Father of victim calls for death penalty Bishop Howard should die for allegedly killing 2 men during a brutal crime spree this summer, the father of 1 of the victims said Thursday after aggravated murder charges carrying a possible death sentence were handed down against the 18-year-old. "The kid's a butcher with no regard for human life. He deserves the death penalty," Tom Zaffer, the father of Eric Zaffer, whom Howard is accused of shooting on Aug. 4 before setting his Brighton Township home on fire. Howard had already been facing charges for killing Zaffer, but the new round of charges also accuses him of wielding the baseball bat used in the July beating death of Farris Jones inside his Carlisle Township home. Lorain County Prosecutor Dennis Will said the 2 crimes were connected and that Howard and 3 other people, including a 14-year-old boy facing a murder charge in Jones' death, were engaged in a pattern of criminal activity along with Trevor White and Ryan Crews. Defense attorney Dan Wightman, who represents Howard, said he hadn't seen the new charges against his client and couldn't comment on the details of the case. He said it was unfortunate the death penalty was now on the table in the case. "It really is tragic in so many ways because this kid is so young. He's 18," Wightman said. Prosecutors contend that Howard and the 14-year-old boy broke into Jones' Midvale Drive home, attacked him and ransacked the home. Gloria Pasters, a longtime friend of Jones who found his body on July 17, said the beating was so bad that she initially thought Jones had been shot in the head. During the 911 call she told a dispatcher that there were broken eggs on her friend's head as well. Will declined to discuss the details of the case. "It's an ugly matter," he said. (source: The Chronicle-Telegram) MISSOURI: Why one reporter is suing Missouri over death-penalty secrecy - again Reporter Chris McDaniel, formerly of St. Louis Public Radio, took a job with BuzzFeed and moved to New York City earlier this year. But he hasn't let go of the story - and the related legal battle - that occupied much of his time in Missouri. In May 2014, while still with SLPR, McDaniel filed a lawsuit, along with the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the ACLU of Missouri, alleging that the Missouri Department of Corrections had violated the state's open-records law by refusing to release information about the source of drugs used in lethal injections. As major pharmaceutical companies have increasingly refused to allow their drugs to be used for capital punishment, a number of states have turned to lightly regulated compounding pharmacies - and have kept the identities of those pharmacies secret even as the compounded drugs have in some cases been linked to botched executions. McDaniel's suit was part of a broader effort by media organizations and attorneys for death-row inmates to pierce that shroud of secrecy. 14 months later, after McDaniel had left the state and started his new job as BuzzFeed's national "death-penalty reporter," the Cole County Circuit Court of Missouri finally ruled in his favor. State law did not authorize the DOC to designate a compounding pharmacy a member of the "execution team" and thus keep its identity confidential, ruled circuit judge Jon E. Beetem. It seemed a clear win, but the gears of justice grind slowly. To date, the DOC still has not been compelled to release the requested information, as the state's attorneys continue to dispute which documents should be subject to the ruling, what redactions are permitted, and other issues. Even once the court resolves these questions, which could happen soon, that will only start the clock for the expected appeal, which could drag the process out for months more. Meanwhile, Missouri continues to execute prisoners at a record clip, using drugs obtained from secret sources. And McDaniel, for his part, has decided to sue again. A few days after the July ruling, McDaniel decided to put it to the test. Knowing that the documents requested in his original case were voluminous, he made a smaller request, for copies of agreements between the state and any suppliers of lethal-injection drugs and testing labs - amounting to "just 3 pages of records," he told me in an email. DOC officials supplied the records - but with the names of contractors redacted, just as they had been for all such requests ever since McDaniel and others began to pursue the story back in 2013. As a result, McDaniel announced earlier this month that he's going back to court, this time with the help of BuzzFeed's own legal team and the Missouri Press Association's lead counsel, Jean Maneke. "I have to say I was pretty surprised when they decided to still withhold the records after the judge???s clear ruling," McDaniel says. "BuzzFeed's attorneys reached out to the DOC to see what was going on and how they thought they could do that in light of the judge's ruling. They were clear that they weren't going to budge. So at that point, after the state disregarded the judge's ruling, we had to sue." A spokeswoman in the Missouri attorney general's office, which represents state agencies, declined to comment for this story as it concerned pending litigation. The new suit is only the latest chapter in a saga that began in October 2013, when the Department of Corrections expanded its interpretation of the state's "black hood" statute - designed to protect the anonymity of its execution team - to cover the suppliers of its execution drugs as well. The state's law is so broad that even people outside government are barred from sharing information about drug suppliers: Missouri's ACLU chapter was forced to take down information on its website about suppliers that it had already obtained; the organization subsequently sued the state, claiming its First Amendment rights were being violated. A few months later McDaniel and Veronique LaCapra, his colleague at St. Louis Public Radio, as well as reporter Steve Vockrodt at the Kansas City alt-weekly The Pitch, decided separately to defy the state's new interpretation of the "black hood" law and publish the name of what was then the likely supplier - which, it turned out, was an Oklahoma pharmacy that was not even licensed to practice in the state. In February 2014, however, the state announced that it had found another, secret vendor, and would resume its brisk pace of executions - which has continued to this day. In April, the botched execution of Clayton Lockett in Oklahoma, which happened under a similarly secretive injection protocol, brought a new level of national attention to the issue. The McDaniel/RCFP suit, and a similar lawsuit filed by The Associated Press, The Guardian, and t3 Missouri papers - the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Kansas City Star, and the Springfield News-Leader - followed soon after. (The cases were consolidated and argued alongside each other. The AP/Guardian suit raised a First Amendment claim against the state, but the judge didn't address it because he ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on the narrower Sunshine Law argument.) Through this tumultuous period, McDaniel obsessively pursued the story in Missouri, and he has continued to pursue it since joining BuzzFeed. "I think a large part of why I've stuck with it is because of that secrecy," McDaniel says. "States rarely exert this much effort into keeping something secret if they're proud of what they're doing, and that turned out to be the case when Veronique and I broke the story that the source wasn't licensed to sell. I'm very interested to see what else it is that they've been trying to keep secret." But no one knows just how soon this will happen. While the state attorney general, Democrat Chris Koster, a leading candidate for governor next year, has expressed discomfort with the secretive execution protocol, his office continues to defend it vigorously against the media lawsuits - as well as those by the death-row inmates themselves, whose lawyers argue they have the right to know about the drugs that will be used to terminate them. So even once the circuit court resolves disputes in the Reporters Committee and AP/Guardian cases over attorneys' fees and precisely which documents the state is withholding, an appeal by the state appears likely. Meanwhile, there's no telling when McDaniel's new lawsuit will be on the docket. And even the ACLU of Missouri's separate First Amendment case, filed all the way back in 2013, remains stuck in legal limbo. "That's unfortunately the nature of litigation," says Katie Townsend, litigation director for the Reporters Committee. "When you force requesters into litigation, it ends up creating so much delay. When the requesters are members of the media and you are seeking information vital to the public, it's a problem." Those delays are consequential in a state where the pace of executions has been set at nearly 1 per month since October 2013, precisely the point when the DOC first took steps to shield its drug suppliers. The next lethal injection is set for Oct. 6, with another to follow on Nov. 3. "We're now nearing 2 years of the state continuing to violate open-records law," McDaniel says. "That's a really long time for the state to break the law. During that time, Missouri has carried out a record number of executions with little oversight and largely cleared out its death row." (source: Columbia Journalism Review) OKLAHOMA: Oklahoma's AG tells court Cole execution should move forward Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt is urging a state appeals court to reject a death row inmate's request to halt his execution, arguing that defense attorneys have failed to show the inmate is insane and ineligible for the death penalty. Legal papers filed by Pruitt's office urge the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals to deny a stay of execution for Benjamin Cole, 50, of Claremore. Cole was convicted of 1st-degree murder in Rogers County and is scheduled to be executed by lethal injection on Oct. 7 for the 2002 killing of his 9-month-old daughter, Brianna Cole, whose spine was broken and her aorta torn after she was forcefully bent backward. Pruitt filed the legal papers on Wednesday, and the appeals court did not immediately hand down a ruling. Defense attorneys are appealing a ruling by Pittsburg County District Judge James Bland last month that rejected claims Cole is insane and that executing him is unconstitutional. Attorneys for Cole asked the appeals court last week to halt his execution, claiming he is mentally ill, suffers from schizophrenia and brain damage and is incompetent to be executed under the U.S. Constitution. Cole is also challenging plans to use the sedative midazolam as the 1st in Oklahoma's 3-drug lethal injection protocol instead of an ultrashort-acting barbiturate defense attorneys claim is called for in state law. Cole's attorneys claim Anita Trammell, warden at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester where Cole is scheduled to be executed, has been on notice since January "that there is good reason to believe Mr. Cole is insane for purposes of execution." "Substantial evidence has been presented to the warden documenting an abnormality in Mr. Cole's brain in a specific region associated with schizophrenia," the defense motion states. "This evidence presents 'good reason' to believe Mr. Cole is insane." Defense attorneys allege that the warden is violating a state law that requires her to notify the local district attorney when an inmate has become insane. In his response, the attorney general maintains Cole's claims of insanity were rejected when Bland denied his request for a stay of execution following a hearing on Aug. 28. During the hearing, Trammell testified she has been able to converse with Cole on numerous occasions and that he understands why he's being executed. "Petitioner has made it clear that he understands he is being executed because he murdered his daughter," Pruitt's office states in its legal response. Trammell is under no legal duty to refer the case to local prosecutors, it says. (source: Associated Press) NEBRASKA: Ricketts Says Nebraskans Should Get to Vote on Death Penalty Issue Secretary of State John Gale says enough signatures have been verified to put the issue of the death penalty on the ballot next year, but complaints and lawsuits could potentially get in the way. At least one group is protesting the language chosen for the ballot. And in the last week a lawsuit has challenged the petition's validity, saying Gov. Pete Ricketts should have been named as an official sponsor on the petition, but wasn't. Rickets says the discussion should be up to voters. "I think that capital punishment is something that we need for good public policy to help protect our law enforcement officers. They're the ones who are putting themselves at risk everyday. We need to help protect the people who protect us," said Ricketts. "And I believe this was something the Legislature was out of touch with the people of Nebraska when they repealed it. And the people of Nebraska should have a chance to vote on it." (source: nebraska.tv) From rhalperi at smu.edu Fri Sep 25 13:57:54 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 13:57:54 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 25 NIGERIA: Guilty Boko Haram Members Deserve Death Penalty - Ekhomu Interview----By Ifeoma Ononye Chairman of Trans-World Security Systems Limited, Dr Ona Ekhomu, is an international security expert. In this interview with Ifeoma Ononye, he explains the advantages and disadvantages of President Buhari's 3 months deadline to the military to end Boko Haram attacks. President Buhari has already clocked 100 days in office. What is your opinion about his ongoing fight against terrorism so far? I think the President's 100 days in office has been very eventful in terms of the war on terror. The President has gone round the world building coalitions. This visits started with the visit to the G7 and then to the United States, Chad, Cameroon, Niger and Benin Republic. In fact, those where his immediate priorities; which was visiting the local neighbours. This way, the President has forged a coalition that perhaps was not there before. Before now, the relationship was more adversarial with these immediate neighbours and those neighbours are very important because they have been traditionally giving sanctuary to Boko Haram fighters. And because of the new rapprochement, Boko Haram fighters are being denied that sanctuary which has been giving them safe haven; after they attack Nigeria they run across the border because the borders are very porous. That has been a very good strategy. That has been a master stroke, but my problem with that has been that BoKo Haram has taken roots in those countries too. When Chad sentenced 10 BoKo Haram fighters to death, nine of them were from Chad, only one was from Nigeria. That shows that the sect has taken roots in those countries. When we say Boko Haram, it is an ideology. It's a group and it's no longer a Nigerian thing anymore. Even as far back as December 2003, when Muhammed Ali converted Mohammed Yusuf (the leader of Boko Haram) to radical Islam. Back then, Yusuf used to be a regular Muslim cleric. But when he was converted to Taliban style conservatism, they adopted the name Boko Haram. They do not want anything to do with Western education because it is sinful and also because westernisation did not lead to wholesale conversion to Islam. Not just Islam but their own brand of Islam, i.e, the fanatical Islam. What I am saying is that even as far back as when Muhammed Ali did his Hijra, i.e, a spiritual movement from a bad place to a good place which is little Afghanistan. Little Afghanistan is a town called Kanama in Yunusari Local Government Area of Yobe State. It is called little Afghanistan because they saw themselves as offspring of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Then they were called Nigerian Talibans or Yobe Talibans. They separated from Boko Haram back then, because Yusuf said that he was not going o fight. Muhammed Ali's Group went and became the Nigerian Talibans and started fighting with the police. The then Governor of Yobe State, Alhaji Bukar Abba Ibrahim, now Senator Abba Ibrahim called out the military and police and fought them, and eventually they were subdued. I was about asking why they were not crushed right from the beginning if this started as far back as 2003? Remember, I said that Yusuf's group which was the Boko Haram group separated from Ali's group that became the Nigerian Talibans then. Boko Haram group stayed back in Maiduguri at the railway quarters and was growing as an organisation. They had their branches and emirs in Niger, Chad and in Cameroon. And they had emirs in almost every state in Nigeria including some places in the south. That is the point I am trying to make. The lesson here is that the seed of fundamentalism has been sown deep a long time ago. Why I am saying all these is that if we are expecting that because President Buhari have stayed 100 days in office and so should solve all the problems of Boko Haram, we are expecting too much. But he has started by building that coalition with neighbouring countries where BoKo Haram has members who are nationals in those countries. My prediction is that this problem is going to continue for a while. In terms of the battle on ground, the new government has sustained the fight that was started by former President Jonathan and the new government has intensified and also changed the fight. The military is getting back some territories that have been taken over by the sect since handover to President Buhari. The shooting war is still ongoing. Why do you think we are still having these pure terror attacks? It is because Boko Haram has gone back to its original method of attacking, which is sneak attack. The reason we are still witnessing these attacks is because we still need to develop a robust programme for counter terrorism. We are still fighting the conventional way which is frontline. We are still fighting the conventional battle whereas we have an asymmetric conflict. We need to look at the nature of this asymmetric conflict. We need to find out the nature of the beast and how we are going to slay it. Yes, we also need intelligence but the next question we should be asking is 'how do we get the intelligence?' How do you process the intelligence? And how do you capitalise on the intelligence? Some of our methods of handling suspects are wrong. Few weeks ago, we heard on the news that some Boko Haram fighters who were caught were later let go. And I ask, let go to where and for what? This is why we have to go back and tell ourselves that we are not serious. Chad is sentencing them to death while we are letting them go, so they would prefer to be where they can be let go. When fighting terror, you have to be serious and single-track minded. The Chadian treatment is a beautiful one. People should be hanged and shot for being Boko Haram fighters. When you do this to a sufficient number and you discover that there isn't a deterrent effect that is when you start looking at alternative means. But are you in support of death penalty for any Boko Haram fighter that is caught? Yes, very much. I have been calling for that for 5 years. They should go through the judicial process. There must be an accusation, and defence but at the end of the day, what they deserve is a death penalty, particularly if it can be proved that they had killed people in the cause of their operations. Boko Haram is evil. They have taken more than 25,000 lives in this country and somebody should pay for that. Do you think that the reshuffle of service chiefs has helped in any way, have we started seeing the effect of the reshuffle? There is always need to bring a new lease of life into any organisation. The new lease is to reinvigorate the organisation because every new chief that comes in feels that he needs to work hard so that the ball is not dropped during his tenure in office. It is still too early to judge these service chiefs. They have just been there for just a month, so it is too early. They have just been confirmed and decorated. They have just assumed full duties. There is ongoing operation on ground which they are inheriting. It's not like they are going to come in and create new structures. They move around theirs officers and appoint new principal officers to carry out their duties all in line with Mr. President's vision. Also, I will say that where this battle should be in the realm of intelligence, we have not seen much action. I say this because, for instance, who do you call if you see suspected bomb makers? It's a rhetorical question because we have not been given the numbers of people to call. We need numbers to call to report suspected bombers. This is the real threat that is facing us. Boko Haram taking territories is not the main threat facing us anymore. Young girls are strapped with bombs and are remotely detonated; even children have been used too. So suicide bombing is our biggest threat now and we must find a way to tackle this. What is your view about state police, do you think it can help in anyway? I am always opposed to state police because it is a back door way of introducing anarchy into our system. Some people want to control the elements of coercive force. Right now, these same elements are in government, so why do they still want state police. The federal police that we already have, we are not able to fund them. We are not able to get it to work right and be effective. We don't have data. We don't have adequate policing infrastructure. We don't have patrol vehicles. When people are in distress and they call police, they say they don't have tire, tube or even fuel. So why take the time to start setting up new policing structures when we have not been able to use the structures on ground effectively. We also have other agencies like EFCC, Customs and ICPC carry out policing at their own levels. I think the best thing to do is focus on the Nigerian Police Force and give it the needed equipment to be successful. We have too much arms in circulation in this country and they need to be controlled. What do you think about President Buhari's time limit to end Boko Haram? The presidential order to defeat of Boko Haram and end their attacks in 90 days is praiseworthy. The issue of deadline is useful because it mandates someone to hurry up and get the job done. I believe that this has got some military commanders to put in more efforts. The apparent goal of the order is to give target to the military commander something to work towards. If you do not set targets, you will not know when you have reached or exceeded where you want to be. It is very smart to say 'achieve this objective within this defined time space. Having said that, the point is that the target can only be enforceable with the activities related to recovering territories from Boko Haram because the asymmetrical dimensions of the warfare, i.e the suicide bombings and roadside bombing might continue in another few years. It is the approach, the security programme that we put in place to tackle that is what is going to bring that to an end. Not necessarily deadlines. If we do not map out a programme that will help us catch the suicide bombers before they attack or before they detonate, i.e. nipping them in the buds, the bombings will not just go away like that. I don't think the 90 days time limit is realisable but I understand the essence of it. Do you think Nigerians will be disappointed if after three months, we still hear of bombings? Nigerians should not be disappointed because the nature of the beast we are fighting is not a simple one. It's not a frontline war but asymmetric. It is a situation where you do not know who the enemy is. It could be the person sitting by you. That kind of enemy is hard to fight against. It is only when the person carries out his evil act that you know that the person is a bad guy. Generally, Nigerians are not security conscious and that does not help matters. That means that there are many juicy targets. We need to create a culture of security awareness of trusting the authorities so that intelligence can be given to them and eventually strengthen the communities against surprise attacks. Do you think we can get any help from the West? Seeking Western help is a very lame endeavour. We should not be asking for anybody's help. We are resourced enough to solve our problems. What we require is partnership with these Western countries because the problem that is bedevilling us also bedevils the rest of the world. Even if the jihadists are unable to attack them on their soil, they can attack their assets or their personnel here in Nigeria. When you say help, it's like unmerited assistance. We don't want any such help. We want partnership based on mutuality of needs, congruence of needs. We are getting a lot of moral support. Like the francophone countries, they have enduring military arrangements with their metropolitan partner, France. Part o f the support that France is giving us is that they have been speaking with our French-speaking West African neighbours. They have closed their borders and they monitor closely their borders. The Chad Basin Commission has been helping us in frontline battles. The US and other Western countries can help through moral persuasions for other neighbouring countries to identify with our course. (source: Daily Independent) INDIA: Supreme Court: If we end death penalty, shouldn't life term be till death? Taking note of the high-pitched push for abolition of death penalty when Mumbai serial blasts convict Yakub Memon desperately attempted to avoid the gallows, the Supreme Court on Thursday asked whether life imprisonment could be truncated through remission if death penalty was done away with. The court was reacting to the demand from a section of legal experts for abolition of death penalty while dealing with petitions by 5 men from Chhattisgarh challenging their conviction for a murder. They were seeking bail during pendency of their appeal on the ground that they had been in jail for more than 5 years. A bench of Justices T S Thakur and V Gopala Gowda said, "Today , there is a movement against death penalty . They say that instead of hanging a condemned prisoner, put him in jail for entire life." The Supreme Court on Thursday, while raising the question whether abolition of death penalty and limiting life term to 14 years could co-exist, said, "Most of the prisoners sentenced to life imprisonment get out of jail after 14 years as government remits the rest of the sentence. And general public thinks that life imprisonment is only for 14 years. If convicts are awarded life sentence even in brutal and heinous crimes, they come to court and ask for bail during pendency of their appeal against conviction if they have served 5 or more years in jail on the ground that life sentence is only for 14 years. Is it not incongruous?" The bench was possibly attempting to include an important point -if life sentence is to be awarded in 'rarest of rare' category of murder cases where death penalty is given at present, would it mean these are at par with other life sentences spanning 14 years? Over the years, the SC has been extremely reluctant to award death penalty and has been finding some lacuna or the other in concurrent judgments of trial court and high court awarding death penalty to commute it to life imprisonment. But it has been reluctant to completely do away with award of death penalty, saying there were certain cases where, as long as the extreme penalty was stipulated by law, capital punishment was in sync with the gravity and brutality of the crime and socie ty's cry for justice. The attempt by the bench of Justices Thakur and Gowda will have a strong bearing on future debates and could well be taken note of by another bench which has reserved judgment on the crucial issue -whether life sentence means imprisonment for entire life -in the case relating to convicts in Rajiv Gandhi assassination case. Immediately after the SC commuted the death penalty of four convicts in the case to life imprisonment, the Tamil Nadu government used its constitutional power to decide commutation of the rest of their sentence saying they had already undergone 23 years imprisonment. (source: The Economic Times) ****************** Prosecution seeks death for 8 convicts in 7/11 case Describing them as "merchants of death", the prosecution in the 7/11 serial train blasts on Wednesday sought capital punishment for 8 of the 12 convicts who planted bombs in crowded Western Railways suburban locals in Mumbai. The blasts claimed over 200 lives and injured over 1,000 people. For the remaining four accused, the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), the prosecuting agency is demanding life imprisonment. Additional Sessions Judge Y D Shinde, who presides over a special court set up under Maharashtra Control for Organised Crime Act (MCOCA), reserved the next hearing for September 30, when he would pronounce the quantum of sentence. On September 11, Judge Shinde convicted 12 of the 13 accused in the case. The blasts was planned by Bahawalpur-based Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) commander Azam Cheema alias Babaji, who double up as an ISI operative. He and his close aides took the help of homegrown activists of banned Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI), which over the years has taken shape as Indian Mujahideen (IM). The lone accused to be acquitted is Abdul Wahid Din Mohammed Shaikh (38) and he has been released from prison. "Considering their role, 8 convicts deserve death penalty," Special Public Prosecutor Raja Thakre said. The convicts for whom death was sought are- Kamal Ahamed Ansari, Dr Tanvir Ahmed Ansari, Mohammed Faisal Shaikh, Ehtesham Siddiqui, Shaikh Alam Shaikh, Mohammed Sajid Ansari, Naved Hussain Khan and Asif Khan. For the remaining four convicts - Mohamid Majid Shafi, Muzzammil Shaikh, Soheil Shaikh and Zamir Ahmed Shaikh - life jail term was sought. While giving reference to the recent Law Commission recommendation on death penalty, Thakre said: "The Commission says that death penalty should be gradually done away with, but in terror cases, it is there and everyone's desire is that such offences call for no mercy. Law must respond to the society's cry for justice." (source: The Indian Panorama) From rhalperi at smu.edu Fri Sep 25 15:41:39 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 15:41:39 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----GEORGIA Message-ID: Sept. 25 GEORGIA----impending female execution Georgia Set to Execute First Woman in 70 Years The state of Georgia is set to execute Kelly Gissendaner next week, on Tuesday September 29. In some ways this case is unusual, even exceptional; in other ways, it's business as usual - especially in a state like Georgia. What makes Kelly Gissendaner's case different? For one thing, she's a woman. Gissendaner is the only woman on Georgia's death row. If she's executed, she'll be the 1st woman put to death by the State of Georgia in 70 years. Another aspect of Kelly Gissendaner's case that is drawing attention is the life she's led since entering death row. She completed a theological degree program while living behind bars in Georgia through Atlanta's prestigious Emory University. She became a minister to other women living in prison with her, and has profoundly impacted the lives of many of them. You can watch the powerful testimony of some of those women here explain how Kelly changed their lives. What's somewhat less unusual - but still noteworthy - is the fact that 2 defendants accused of the same crime received starkly different sentences. One of them is now facing imminent execution while the other may one day walk free. Both Kelly Gissendaner and her co-defendant, Gregory Owen, were offered a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for 25 years if they pled guilty to the murder of Kelly's husband Douglas Gissendaner. Owen took the deal, but Kelly Gissendaner did not. She went to trial before a jury, which convicted her and sentenced her to death. The thing is, while Kelly Gissendaner has taken full responsibility for her role in the murder of her husband, it was not actually she who stabbed him to death. That was done by Gregory Owen, even if it was Kelly Gissendaner who had initiated the idea. It is not that Gregory Owen should have recieved the death penalty - no one should, regardless of the crime or their culpability, as scores of countries have recognized. But the situation brings to mind what Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in May in his dissent in the recent lethal injection opinion of the US Supreme Court, Glossip v. Gross. Suggesting that the time is now right for the Supreme Court to consider the constitutionality of the death penalty, Justice Breyer recalled how "after considering thousands of death penalty cases and last-minute petitions over the course of more than 20 years. I see discrepancies for which I can find no rational explanations. Why does one defendant who committed a single-victim murder receive the death penalty, while another defendant does not?" When prosecutors and state officials defend the death penalty, they often use the refrain that it's reserved for the "worst of the worst." That's supposed to mean that only the most serious crimes and the most culpable of offenders receive the death penalty and that the system is fair and reliable in this selection process. In reality, a host of other factors can determine who gets sentenced to death: race, class, geography, quality of legal representation, even the political aspirations of official decision-makers can play a role in who is sentenced to live or die in the United States. No one should have their human rights stripped away by the state. Cases like Kelly Gissendaner's illustrate why every person is more than the sum total of their worst actions. Although she participated in a violent crime with very serious consequences, she has gone on to improve the lives of many other women in prison. This has been recognized by many correctional staff who have come into contact with her over the years. Governments are expected to prioritize rehabilitation in their prisons. Here, a prisoner's rehabilitation is about to be met by her eradication. Surely Georgia can do better than that. (source: Amnesty International USA) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sat Sep 26 08:36:13 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 08:36:13 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., N.C., VA., FLA., ALA. Message-ID: Sept. 26 PENNSYLVANIA: 2 death penalty cases to begin next week The Allegheny County Courthouse will be the setting for 2 death penalty cases next week. Jury selection will begin Monday for Antoine Ward, 39, accused of killing 2 people in Allentown nearly 2 years ago. Testimony will start Wednesday in the case of Talon Perozich, 22, accused of killing a man and injuring his girlfriend in McKeesport in June 2013. Having 2 capital cases in Pittsburgh at the same time is highly unusual. In the case of Perozich, he is charged with killing Brian Cook, 24, and injuring Stephanie Pavlovic over money about 5:40 a.m. on June 26, 2013. Mr. Cook was shot in the head and arm while sleeping in bed, police said. Ms. Pavlovic was shot in the hand while trying to defend herself and the couple's 1-year-old child, who was unharmed. Prosecutors listed five aggravating circumstances authorizing the office to seek the death penalty - including that Perozich has a significant history of felony convictions; that he killed Mr. Cook during the perpetration of a felony; that he created a grave risk of death to another person during the killing; and that the victim had been "involved, associated or in competition with the defendant" in drug trafficking and that the killing was related to that association. Perozich has previous convictions for felony burglary and theft. Jury selection was completed Friday. About 150 potential jurors were interviewed to select the panel, which includes eight men, 4 women and 4 alternates. In the case against Ward, he is accused of killing Cheralynn Sabatasso and her boyfriend, Jason Eubanks, on Jan. 23, 2014, in Allentown. Prosecutors believe that Ward was trying to get drugs fronted to him that night. Ward, in a statement to police, said things became heated in the car while the 3 rode around together, and that Mr. Eubanks pulled a gun from between the seats and pointed it at him. Ward told police they struggled over the gun and Ms. Sabatasso was accidentally shot in the head. Mr. Eubanks was shot twice while he and Ward wrestled for the firearm, the defendant told police. The aggravating factors in that case include that there were multiple victims; that the killings occurred during the commission of a felony and that the defendant has a significant history of violent convictions. Jury selection in Ward's case will begin Monday. President Judge Jeffrey A. Manning said death-penalty cases are "a huge drain on court resources. You have to prepare for the possibility of 2 trials - the guilt phase and the penalty phase." If the jury returns a unanimous verdict of guilty of 1st-degree murder, the panel then must hear evidence in the penalty phase. To return a sentence of death, the jury must unanimously find that the aggravating circumstances presented by the prosecution outweigh any mitigation offered by the defense. Choosing a jury in a death-penalty case generally takes longer than other homicide cases because both sides in a capital case are given 20 peremptory challenges - meaning either the prosecution or defense can strike a potential juror for any reason. They also have unlimited challenges for cause - for example, when a potential juror says that his conscience would prohibit him from ever imposing a death sentence. (source: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette) ***************** Toomey lobbies for bill expanding death penalty in law enforcement murders U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey came to Bethlehem Friday, to lobby for a new bill that would expand the death penalty in the killings of police officers, firefighters and EMS. Called the Thin Blue Line Act, the bill would allow federal prosecutors to seek the death penalty if a victim was killed, or was targeted, because they are a federal or state law enforcement officer, prosecutor, or firefighter. A similar bill was first introduced in the House of Representatives this past February by Rep. David Jolly, R-Fla., but has been sitting in committee since. Toomey discussed the bill following a roundtable discussion with Lehigh County District Attorney Jim Martin and police chiefs from Bangor, Bethlehem, Catasauqua, Coplay, South Whitehall and Whitehall townships. It was one of a number of roundtables the Republican senator, who is seeking re-election this year, is holding across Pennsylvania. "Police work today is very dangerous. There appears to be an anti-police agenda across the country," Bethlehem police chief Mark DiLuzio said. Toomey said protesters have called for the murder of cops, leading to a "chilling" effect on law enforcement officers, most of whom are honest and hardworking. The senator said he proposed the bill because of "cold-blooded killers targeting law enforcement officers simply because they are law enforcement officers." Toomey brought up the case of Eric Frein as an example. Frein is accused of killing Pennsylvania State Police Cpl. Bryon Dickson and wounding Trooper Alex Douglass in a shooting ambush Sept. 12, 2014 outside the state police's Blooming Grove barracks in Pike County. "Corporal Dickson was, in fact, murdered," Toomey said. Frein is being prosecuted at the county level and killing a member of law enforcement is already an aggravating factor for the death penalty in Pennsylvania, Martin said. Pike County District Attorney Raymond Tonkin plans to seek the death penalty if Frein is convicted of 1st-degree murder. So far, there have been 95 police officers killed this year in the line of duty, according to the Officer Down Memorial Page. Earlier this month, The Guardian reported the United States was on track for 36 non-accidental, firearm-related police fatalities in 2015. It would be the lowest total in 25 years. Toomey referenced fatal police shootings of civilians that have led to nationwide protests. "If a police officer breaks the law, then that police officer needs to be prosecuted," he said. The Washington Post has been tracking fatal police shootings this year in the United States. As of Friday, the tally was 727. The Thin Blue Line Act was one of a number of law enforcement topics Toomey touched on during his visit. Toomey lambasted President Obama for restricting the transfer of federal surplus military equipment to local law enforcement. The president said, "It can alienate and intimidate local residents and send the wrong message," to which Toomey said, "I couldn't disagree more." "It's time for us to show we stand with police officers," the senator said. Toomey said he also discussed the influx of cheap heroin into the Lehigh Valley. "It's a huge criminal justice problem," he said. (source: lehighvalleylive.com) NORTH CAROLINA: North Carolina prosecutors might seek death penalty for Doyle murder Cheyenne businessman David Doyle died a grisly death earlier this year in his posh North Carolina home, and now prosecutors are considering whether the three men charged with his murder should face the death penalty. A court hearing for the 3 men was postponed Thursday while prosecutors contemplate whether to seek the highest possible punishment. Peter Jay Gould, Daniel Demetrius Blakeney and Tardra Eterell Bouknight are facing numerous charges related to the July 18 death of Doyle, including murder, kidnapping and assault. Gould reportedly was Doyle's gardener in the upscale Charlotte subdivision of RiverPointe and knew Doyle kept a stash of gold in the home. He met Blakeney and Bouknight, who are cousins, not long before the murder, and the 3 decided to make some money by burglarizing Doyle's home. Doyle is known in Cheyenne for being co-owner of Tyrrell-Doyle Auto Center with his stepbrother, Brian Tyrrell. He did business here up until his death, but lived full time in North Carolina. (source: Wyoming Tribune Eagle) VIRGINIA: Former Virginia executioner Jerry Givens expresses regret Jerry Givens, a former Virginia executioner who now opposes capital punishment, says he would prefer that people convicted of heinous crimes be sentenced to something akin to incarceration for life in "a hole with no windows." Givens carried out 62 death sentences from 1982 to 1999 as an executioner at a state penitentiary in Greensville County. In recent years, he has received national attention as a vocal opponent of capital punishment. On Thursday he suggested that, instead of executing inmates by electrocution or chemical injection, inmates could be sentenced to what still would be labeled the "death penalty" but would consist of incarceration until natural death, alone in a cell that has no windows, with no visitors allowed. "You will be incarcerated for the rest of your life ... in a hole with no windows," Givens said. Givens, who spoke at a University of Richmond forum attended by several dozen people, suggested the idea in response to an audience member who asked him to opine on an alternative to capital punishment. Although Givens has actively called for an end to the traditional death penalty, he said he hasn't actually lobbied for the alternative he suggested Thursday. In February 2010, Givens told the Virginia Senate Courts of Justice Committee: "The executioners and the people that participate in these things, they have to suffer through this stuff. These things linger on." On Thursday, he described the particulars of executing a convicted offender. He used lethal injections and the electric chair during his 17 years as an executioner. Givens said he believes lethal injection is less humane than the electric chair because it's a longer process that paralyzes and eventually kills the inmate. But he also noted cases in which electrocution has been a lengthy process and the inmates didn't die quickly. Givens described the unscientific approach he used when performing electric chair executions. He had to judge how much voltage to use to put convicts to death as quickly as possible while causing as little bodily damage as possible. Givens spent much of Thursday's session focusing on convictions that have been overturned, noting that there have been 155 death row inmates who have been exonerated since 1973 in the United States. He said he could have potentially been the executioner of Earl Washington Jr., who was sentenced to death for a 1982 rape and murder but was later exonerated based on DNA evidence. "Come to find out, he didn't commit this crime," Givens said of Washington on Thursday. If it wasn't for DNA evidence showing his innocence, Givens said, "we would have killed him." Givens said he met Washington many years later and greeted him with a hug and told him that he could have been his executioner if hadn???t been for the DNA evidence that led to his exoneration. "'I'm glad you didn't,'" Givens recalls Washington telling him, to which Givens recalls responding: "I'm glad I didn't either." Givens told audience members Thursday: "I don't know what I would have done if I had taken his life." Givens said that he's not proud of being an executioner but bluntly acknowledges that he killed people, though he didn't enjoy doing it, he said. One audience member questioned Givens' idea of having a "death penalty" in which a person is incarcerated and kept in isolation, considering the potential negative effects of isolation. Givens said that with his idea, an innocent person could at least be released. "When you take an innocent life, you can't go back and tell the man you're sorry," he said. (source: Richmond Times-Dispatch) FLORIDA: Lawyers drop case of Jupiter woman charged with killing girl, 2 2 private defense attorneys withdrew Friday from the case of the Jupiter woman who says one of her alternate personalities drowned her 2-year-old daughter on Memorial Day last year. Marc Shiner and Heidi Perlet had represented Kimberly Lucas' since shortly after her arrest in the death of Elliana Lucas-Jamason, but on Friday, Shiner told Circuit Judge Charles Burton that Lucas' relatives had been overwhelmed by the high costs of medical experts and other expenses and could no longer afford to pay. Burton accepted Lucas' claim of indigence and appointed Assistant Public Defender Elizabeth Ramsey to take over her case. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty against Lucas, 41, but her lawyers say she suffers from dissociative identity disorder, and one of her alternate personalities killed the girl. Lucas also tried to kill Ethan Lucas-Jamason, the 10-year old son she shared with Jacquelyn Jamason, her former partner, by crushing sleeping pills into a cup of coffee and getting him to drink it by telling him it would "make him grow." The boy survived. Jamason, a therapist who had been in a civil union with Lucas in a relationship that spanned 20 years, said this week she feared a new set of lawyers would further delay the trial. "I don't want to come to court and see her at every hearing, but I'll be there every time to fight for my kids, to let them know that I'm not going to go away," said Jamason, who calls Elliana her "angel baby." If the local public defender's office handling of 2 other death penalty-insanity defense cases is any indication, Lucas' case could be headed for a plea agreement. In those similar high-profile cases, Public Defender Carey Haughwout worked out life-in-prison deals with prosecutors. One was Paul Michael Merhige, who killed his 33-year-old twin sisters, Carla Merhige and Lisa Knight, his 6-year-old cousin, Makayla Joy Sitton and his aunt, 76-year-old Raymonde Joseph, during a Thanksgiving Day 2007 family gathering. Merhige in October 2011 accepted a plea deal that earned him 7 consecutive life sentences for killing the 4 and injuring 3 other relatives. 4 months later, Haughwout and Ramsey worked out a similar agreement for Neal Jacobson. The Wellington man received 3 consecutive life sentences for killing his wife, Franki, and their 6-year-old twin sons, Eric and Joshua. Jacobson is now seeking to withdraw his plea. As for Lucas, Burton on Friday set her next hearing for Nov. 9. Lucas' former lawyers in their insanity defense pleading listed Cleveland psychiatrist Phillip Resnick as a defense witness. Resnick testified in the 2002 trial of Andrea Yates, whose initial conviction for drowning her 5 children in a bathtub in Texas was later overturned. Another jury found her not guilty by reason of insanity. (source: Palm Beach Post) ALABAMA: Death row mom petitions to have 2009 conviction set aside A Franklin County woman on death row in connection with the 2008 death of her 6-year-old son has filed a petition asking the Franklin County judge who sentenced her to death to set aside the conviction. Christie Michelle Scott, 36, filed a Rule 32 Petition requesting she be released from prison because of "ineffective counsel." Scott was convicted of capital murder in July 2009. She was found guilty of starting a fire Aug. 16, 2009, at her family's home on Signore Drive, Russellville. Her son, Mason, died in the house fire. On Aug. 5, Scott became the 1st woman in Franklin County to be sentenced to death. Circuit Judge Terry Dempsey overrode the jury's recommendation that she be sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Records indicate the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals, the Alabama Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court have all 3 denied direct appeals filed on behalf of Scott. According to reports, those appeals were based on rulings of the court, and evidentiary issues during the 4-week trial. In her latest appeal, Scott's petition brings up the issue of ineffective counsel throughout the trial. Robert Tuten, a Huntsville attorney, was lead counsel during the trial. The Rule 32 hearing will be heard by Dempsey. No date has been set for the hearing. Also, in her petition, Scott has requested the court appoint an attorney to assist her in her appeals. Franklin County District Attorney Joey Rushing said the Rule 32 Petition is another step in Scott's appeal process. He contacted Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange's office. "The attorney general's office will be handling the matter since it involves a death penalty sentence, and will be responding to the petition," Rushing said. "(The attorney general's office) has handled all the other appeals, so, I'm sure they have someone dedicated to this case and are well prepared to file a response." If Dempsey denies the request to set aside the conviction, court officials said Scott can appeal that decision to the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals. The U.S. Supreme Court denied in April a petition to review Scott's death penalty sentence. According to reports, the Equal Justice Initiative in Montgomery filed a petition on Scott's behalf asking the U.S. Supreme Court to convert the death penalty sentence to life without the possibility of parole. Alabama Criminal Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court ruling and conviction on Oct. 5, 2012. In September 2014, the Alabama Supreme Court affirmed the decision. Scott's trial was the longest criminal case tried in Franklin County. She testified she had no idea how the fire might have started in the bedroom where her son was sleeping. During the trial, Scott said she tried to get her son out of the house, but couldn't because of heat, smoke and fire. She and her younger son escaped by jumping from a window. Her husband was out of town when the fire occurred. During the trial, prosecutors contended Scott started the fire to collect on a $100,000 life insurance policy. Scott is being held on death row at Julia Tutwiler Prison for Women in Wetumpka. (source: The Times Daily) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sat Sep 26 08:36:55 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 08:36:55 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----IND., OKLA., KAN., CALIF., USA Message-ID: Sept. 26 INDIANA: Indiana man's death penalty upheld in slaying-mutilation The Indiana Supreme Court upheld the death penalty Thursday for a man convicted of killing a family friend and mutilating her body in a slaying the justices called "beyond horrendous." The court affirmed William Clyde Gibson III's sentence for his 2013 conviction in the killing of 75-year-old Christine Whitis after finding no errors by the trial court among six issues Gibson raised on appeal. Their ruling noted that Whitis, who had been the best friend of Gibson's late mother, was sexually assaulted by Gibson as he slowly strangled the Clarksville woman and even after her death. Once she was dead, Gibson cut off part of her body and placed that severed flesh in the console of her van, which he then drove to various bars to go drinking, the decision noted. "We find the nature of Gibson's offense to be beyond horrendous: he brutally murdered an elderly woman, sexually assaulting her in the process, even after she was dead, then dismembering her body," the justices wrote in their ruling. Whitis' strangled and mutilated body was found in Gibson's garage in New Albany in April 2012, days before the body of 35-year-old Stephanie Kirk of Charlestown was found buried in his backyard. Gibson, 57, pleaded guilty in Kirk's murder last year and was also sentenced to death in her killing - a sentence that's also been appealed to the state's high court, said Steven Ripstra, 1 of Gibson's 2 court-appointed attorneys. Ripstra said he was disappointed by the court's ruling in Whitis' killing. He said he thought one of the issues the appeal raised about the Floyd County jury that convicted Gibson "was very good." "It doesn't look like they addressed that in great detail," he said Thursday. Ripstra said he would file a motion asking the court to rehear Gibson's appeal, and if that is rejected the next step would be to appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. Gibson also pleaded guilty last year to the fatal stabbing of Karen Hodella, a 44-year-old from Port Orange, Florida, who had been visiting Indiana. Her remains were found in 2002 in Clarksville along the Ohio River. Gibson received a 65-year sentence in her killing. (source: Associated Press) OKLAHOMA: Oklahoma Attorney General's Office Calls New Witnesses In Glossip Innocence Claim 'Inherently Suspect' In a Thursday court filing, the Oklahoma Attorney General's office called new witnesses in death row inmate Richard Glossip's innocence claim "inherently suspect." Glossip, 52, came within 4 hours of execution on Sept. 16 before receiving a stay from the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals. The court postponed Glossip's lethal injection until Sept. 30 in order to review new evidence in his claim that he is innocent. Glossip was sentenced to death for hiring Justin Sneed to kill their boss Barry Alan Van Treese in 1997. In recent weeks, Glossip's legal team has filed affidavits from 2 men who served time with Sneed who said he either lied about Glossip's involvement in the killing or never mentioned it at all. A 3rd affidavit from a man who took drugs with Glossip's brother also conflicts the prosecution's position that Sneed was under Glossip's control. The legal team is asking the court to hold an evidentiary hearing to look at the new evidence. Sneed received a sentence of life without parole after testifying that Glossip hired him to murder Van Treese. In a 2014 interview with The Oklahoman, Sneed stood by his testimony that Glossip asked him to murder Van Treese. In the Thursday filing, Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Miller called the testimony of the former inmates questionable, pointing to the fact that all 3 testimonies came very late and that each one of the witnesses has a checkered past that includes drug abuse and serious crime such as rape and burglary. The most recent affidavit is from a man named Joseph Tapley, who said he shared a cell with Sneed in the Oklahoma County jail shortly after the murder. Tapley testified that Sneed never mentioned Glossip's name when referring to the crime, only that he murdered Van Treese to steal money from him. "Put simply, the 'inherently suspect' affidavit of an individual who has been repeatedly convicted of crimes involving deceit, describing alleged conversations that occurred almost 20 years ago while Mr. Sneed and Mr. Tapley may have been under the influence of methamphetamine, does not even come close to being clear and convincing evidence of Petitioner's actual innocence," Miller wrote of Tapley's testimony. Miller argued that none of the affidavits brought forth compelling evidence that Glossip was not significantly involved in the murder of Van Treese. A new hearing is not warranted, she contends. "As this Court has explained, it does not remand for an evidentiary hearing in a capitol post-conviction proceeding 'on a whim,'" she wrote. In previous court filings, Glossip's attorneys have also questioned the integrity of the testimony at the murder trial of Dr. Chai Choi, who performed the autopsy on Van Treese. Choi testified that Van Treese likely died of blood loss several hours after he was attacked by Sneed. Prosecutors implied Van Treese could have been saved if Glossip had alerted authorities as soon as Sneed told him about the attack. Glossip waited until the day after Sneed beat Van Treese with a baseball bat to tell police he knew where the body was located. Glossip's legal team filed expert testimony disputing Choi's autopsy and asserting that it unfairly affected the jury's decision to pursue the death penalty. Miller argued in the Thursday filing the distinction was a moot point in terms of Glossip's guilt. "The issues of whether it took Mr. Van Treese hours to die or only minutes and whether blood loss contributed to his death do not impact Petitioner's guilt, nor the aggravating circumstances found in this case," Miller wrote. (source: The Oklahoman) KANSAS: Kansas Death Penalty Opponents Heartened By Pope's Comments Opponents of the death penalty in Kansas are hoping the pope's words can spur some action on the issue. Pope Francis called for ending capital punishment during a speech before a joint session of Congress Thursday. Mary Sloan, with the Kansas Coalition Against the Death Penalty, had hoped Pope Francis would talk about the issue during his visit to the U.S., and she's especially pleased it came during his high-profile speech. "I think he's a great source of inspiration and leadership. I do think it puts it on the public agenda, makes it something that people will talk about and consider," Sloan says. Opponents of the death penalty haven???t made much headway in the Kansas Statehouse in recent years. Sloan is hoping they'll be energized by the pope's comments. "I hope that they will all be inspired that now is the time to make this happen in Kansas," Sloan says. Sloan hopes the issue will get a hearing next year. Kansas reinstated the death penalty in the 1990s, but no executions have been carried out since then. (source: KMUW news) CALIFORNIA: Double murder death penalty defendant's case postponed as lawyers try to oust judge The trial of an accused double murderer facing the death penalty will again be postponed as the defendant's attorneys ramp up another effort to get the judge presiding over the case disqualified. Daniel Wozniak. Daniel Wozniak.Attorneys for Daniel Patrick Wozniak have filed a motion to get Orange County Superior Court Judge John Conley booted despite having failed to do the same thing earlier this year, when similar motions were rejected by the state Supreme Court. This time, however, Assistant Public Defender Scott Sanders claims he has new information that Conley, when he was a prosecutor in the 1980s, was aware of misconduct allegations related to the handling for informants in the county's jails and did nothing about it. Sanders subpoenaed Conley as a witness in his attempt at an evidentiary hearing into allegations of outrageous government misconduct regarding an informant's encounter with Wozniak while they were both locked up in the county's jail. Sanders made the same arguments in his representation of the worst mass killer in the county's history - Scott Dekraai - and persuaded a judge to kick the Orange County District Attorney's Office off the penalty phase of the case, a ruling that is under appeal. Sanders is also seeking to have Orange County Superior Court Judge Walter Schwarm, a former prosecutor, testify in an evidentiary hearing. Sanders' motion to subpoena the judges was assigned to Orange County Superior Court Judge Gregg Prickett, who Sanders also moved to disqualify because he was the sentencing judge for the inmate accused of violating Wozniak's constitutional rights through illegal interrogation as a snitch. Prickett denied Sanders' motion to disqualify Prickett, allowing Sanders to make his case to subpoena Conley and Schwarm. Prickett said he would read Sanders' 754-page motion, filed last month, and issue a ruling next Friday. After the hearing before Prickett, the defendant was sent back to Conley's courtroom, where it was decided that Sanders' motion to recuse that judge would delay the planned trial of Wozniak, which was scheduled to begin next Friday. Just like earlier this year, the motion likely will be sent to a judge in another county, who will issue a ruling. Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Kevin Brazile in March rejected Sanders' motion to have Conley removed from the case, prompting appeals that were denied by the state Supreme Court. Sanders is arguing that an "entrenched culture" of corruption exists when it comes to the handling of jailhouse informants, which encourages inmates to sometimes fabricate confessions so they get leniency from prosecutors. He has cited cases Conley and Schwarm worked on as prosecutors that included informants that he would like to question the jurists about. "This has been going on for 30 years," Sanders told Prickett. "Judge Conley has been on the front lines for this." Sanders further argued Friday that the District Attorney's Office cannot be trusted to turn over evidence that helps the defense as it is legally bound to do. The defense attorney is also trying to get Senior Deputy District Attorney Matt Murphy and his entire office kicked off the prosecution of Wozniak. Murphy argued that Sanders cannot show that Wozniak has suffered any "prejudice" or harm in his case that would allow a judge to grant Sanders' motions, therefore, all of the requests to remove the judges and prosecutors from the case should be denied. In a reply to Sanders' lengthy motion, Murphy blasted Sanders for misstating evidence in multiple cases he cites involving jailhouse informants. Murphy said in many of those cases, forensic evidence led to the convictions, not the testimony of snitches, and those convictions were upheld on appeal. The snitch in question in Wozniak's case is Fernando Perez, who was also a key player in the Dekraai case. Sanders argues that Perez violated Wozniak's rights because he wasn't allowed to be questioned by a government agent when he already had legal representation. Murphy counters that Perez was not an official informant yet, was not asked to question Wozniak, and that what he ultimately provided to authorities was useless because the defendant already had made a "full confession" to Costa Mesa police. Sanders cannot show that the jailers are part of the prosecution team, so the law prohibits him from seeking recusal of the prosecutors and dismissal of the death penalty. Murphy said Costa Mesa police are the lead investigators and the sheriff has not been involved in the case at all. Murphy also blasted Sanders in court Friday for including a great deal of private information such as telephone numbers and addresses of witnesses, victims and informants in his massive legal filing. Sanders replied that he tried to have the motion filed under seal, which was denied by Conley. On Friday, however, Conley, ordered the file sealed until next week so officials can redact the private information. Murphy said it was "incredibly careless and reckless" to include the private information and that it could lead to someone getting killed by gangs looking for revenge. Sanders angrily shot back, "We didn't do it to endanger anybody. ... I am absolutely glad to seal these documents." Wozniak is accused of shooting a friend, Samuel Herr, after luring him to the Los Alamitos Joint Forces military base in May 2010. Prosecutors allege he then used the victim's cell phone to trick another friend, Juri Kibuishi, into going to Herr's Costa Mesa apartment, where the defendant gunned her down and then made it look like Herr killed her during a sexual assault. Wozniak then allegedly returned to the base to dismember Herr. (source: mynewsla.com) USA: Elected Judges more likely to Impose Death Penalty than Appointed Judges How a judge reaches and stays on the bench has an impact on the most important of judicial rulings: death penalty cases. An analysis of more than 2,100 state supreme court rulings from 37 states during the past 15 years revealed "a strong correlation between the results in those cases and the way each state chooses its justices," Reuters reported. The study shows that judges who are elected to the bench are more than twice as likely to rule in favor of the death penalty as judges who have been appointed. The findings suggest that politics factors into life-and-death decisions made for defendants in criminal justice cases. In 15 of the states Reuters examined that directly elect their supreme court justices, those justices rejected the death sentence in 11% of appeals. That rate was far lower than the 26% reversal rate in the 7 states where justices are appointed. Another group of 15 states that initially appoint their justices but then require them to go through retention elections to remain on the bench produced a 15% reversal rate in death penalty decisions. The influence of politics and fundraising by judges campaigning to be elected absolutely has an influence on judicial rulings, according to a recently published paper that focuses on the North Carolina Supreme Court. "What would happen if you had a judicial system where judges did not have to raise campaign money from lawyers and clients who had business before the court?," asked Vox's Lee Drutman, referring to the conclusion reached by the paper. "The answer, it turns out, is pretty much what common sense would dictate: You'd get justices who were more impartial, and less likely to vote in favor of attorneys who donated to their campaigns." "In addition to finding evidence that justices who opted in to public financing became 'relatively less favorable toward attorney donors,' the paper also shows that justices who opted in to the public funding system became more moderate in their voting patterns," continued Drutman. "Unfortunately, North Carolina did away with this public funding system in 2013..." As far as the Reuters study goes, its "findings, several legal experts said, support the argument that the death penalty is arbitrary and unconstitutional because politics - in addition to the facts - influence the outcome of an appeal," Reuters' Dan Levine and Kristina Cooke wrote. They also cited the opinion of Yale Law School lecturer Stephen Bright, who has worked on hundreds of death penalty case defenses. According to Bright, "courts have a responsibility to protect a defendant's constitutional rights without political pressure, especially when the person's life is at stake," wrote Levine and Cooke. Said Bright: "It's the difference between the rule of law and the rule of the mob." (source: Reuters) *************** After Sentencing 2 to Death, Former Judge Reflects on Pope, Capital Punishment When Pope Francis called for the death penalty to be abolished Thursday, there was at least 1 person in the audience who had condemned convicted criminals to death. "Having been a judge in Texas who handled capital murder cases, I had come to a conclusion that there were some cases ... where that was appropriate, and I still think that way," Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert said in an interview while passing through the Capitol basement after the historic address to Congress. "I appreciate, you know, the pope's comments but there are some places, there are some cases where it's appropriate. In Texas, if you commit a felony and a murder or multiple murders or a murder on a first responder, then that gets you there. I had 3 capital murder cases I tried." Gohmert told CQ Roll Call. "2 got the death penalty, and it is quite sobering to look somebody in the eye and tell them they're going to be taken and put to death." Gohmert proceeded to tell a story of one of the men who was sent to death row on his watch, saying that while some people have been known to find religion as a way of improving their chances of getting clemency, he had a case where he thought there was a real change. "I can understand the seriousness, but I also know that one of the 2 - who was being put to death - became a Christian while he was waiting for the death penalty. He was the farthest thing from a Christian before that," Gohmert said. "I agree with the pope that there should never be a lack of hope, and even with him, he found his hope, and that was before the death penalty." The Texans who serve on the other side of the Rotunda said they also supported capital punishment, and it should be a state matter. "I think that's consistent with what I understand the Catholic church's position is. It's not Texas law. I was glad to hear the pope's views, I think taken as a whole they were very inspirational," Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn said. "I'm not going to look to him to give us direction on public policy in Texas, necessarily." His colleague, presidential hopeful Ted Cruz, said likewise. "The Catholic Church doctrine has long opposed capital punishment, I certainly respect that teaching. As a policy matter, I don't agree with it. Under our Constitution, capital punishment is a question for the states to decide. There are states that have chosen to abolish capital punishment, that's their prerogative," Cruz told reporters. "There are other states, such as my home state of Texas, that have quite properly concluded that capital punishment is a recognition of the sanctity of life. That for the most egregious crimes, they merit the ultimate punishment." Democratic Sen. Christopher S. Murphy, whose home state of Connecticut recently abolished the death penalty, said members seemed surprised by the pope's words about the sanctity of life turning to a specific policy message about death sentences, rather than about the church's strong anti-abortion views. "The golden rule also reminds us of our responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage of its development. This conviction has led me, from the beginning of my ministry, to advocate at different levels for the global abolition of the death penalty. I am convinced that this way is the best, since every life is sacred," the pope said in his speech. "Every human person is endowed with an inalienable dignity and society can only benefit from the rehabilitation of those convicted of crimes." "It was a bit of a head fake moment in the speech that seemed to catch some people by surprise, but it shouldn't be a surprise to anybody that the church doesn't, you know, support the death penalty," Murphy said. "It was a good reminder that the church is not just against the death penalty in name, but it's willing to give voice to that position as well." Murphy said the imposition of capital punishment in Connecticut itself was so rare that the system was out-of-date. Before the reference to capital punishment, members were gearing up for comments from the pope about abortion, and conservatives came away disappointed on that point. "A lot more people in the chamber agreed with him on abortion than they did the death penalty," Senate Judiciary Chairman Charles E. Grassley said. The Iowa Republican was one of several lawmakers who suggested there's a false equivalency drawn between the 2 issues. (source: rollcall.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sat Sep 26 08:37:42 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 08:37:42 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 26 IRAN----execution A Prisoner Hanged In Sanandaj A prisoner, who had been accused of murder and sentenced to death, was executed in Sanandaj prison. According to the report of Human Rights Activists News Agency in Iran (HRANA), Rauf Hassani who was sentenced to death for murder, was executed in Sanandaj prison on Wednesday 16th September. HRANA had reported earlier, that this prisoner was transferred to solitary confinement in Sanandaj prison in order to be executed. Rauf Hassani, son of Hassan, who had been transferred from ward "Salamat" in Sanandaj Prison to solitary imprisonment, was on death row since 13 years ago. There is no specific information about the case process, murder, and execution of his sentence, and the authorities and judicial authorities have not released any information in this regard. (source: Human Rights Activists News Agency) PAKISTAN: Catch-22 that disabled the hangman's geometry for condemned paraplegic prisoner Abdul Basit The clock is moving inexorably towards half an hour past Monday midnight. This will be the killing hour for Abdul Basit. On death row for seven years in Faisalabad, Pakistan, this is to be his date with the gallows. There may be doubts about his case: Did his trial even approximate due process? But all that is in the past now. Once before this, recently, he has come within 24 hours of execution. Then, he cheated the noose but it seems that this time around he will not be so lucky. Our colleagues on the ground in Pakistan have been in the Supreme Court earlier today. Abdul Basit had been fit and well when first he went to jail in 2008. But he contracted TB meningitis, and when the authorities failed to treat him, he was permanently paralysed from the waist down. The technical legal issues before the court today were twofold - first, had he not been punished enough, no matter what the merits of the case? Second, would hanging him from a wheelchair be consistent with anything we might deem civilised? One justice had seemed sympathetic; the other two justices, less so. They concluded that the fact that Abdul Basit is now unable to move his legs at all, or even control his bowels, is irrelevant to the government's right to kill him. The rules on how to execute are designed to protect the right to a dignified death and this should be sufficient to allow Basit's hanging to proceed. The written order comes out at 4:18 pm London time, just eight hours and 12 minutes before the allotted time. The word "DISMISSED" is writ large. It seems that al this work has gone to waste - but is there a faint window of hope? The Court has penned a subtle order: the execution may go ahead, it says, but "we do not feel chary, even for a while, of observing that the Superintendent of Jail and other staff assigned the job of executing the condemned prisoner shall comply with the relevant rules." Just as Shylock could have his pound of flesh, so the jailer may take revenge upon Abdul Basit. But just as Shylock would himself face death if he took one jot of blood, so perhaps the jailer will fear judicial wrath if somehow the rules fail to provide for a clean execution of a paraplegic man. The Pakistan Prison Rules require precise measurements to be taken from standing so that the risk of decapitation or strangulation is mitigated; no such measurement can be taken from Abdul Basit. The Rules require that the condemned man mount the gallows; Abdul Basit cannot get out of his wheelchair. The Rules require that he stand on the trapdoor as the noose is placed around his neck and the sack cuts off his final sight of the world; Abdul Basit cannot do this. Tale of vengeance That Shakespeare's cautionary tale of vengeance might provide an avenue to save Abdul Basit's life is a faint hope, but with eight hours of life left to him, any hope is better than none at all. How many times have I asked judges and governors, if they have decided to spurn mercy, to withhold their judgement until the final minutes, to allow false hope to edge out despair? But now we are powerless, just like Abdul Basit himself. Our Reprieve team is in England, thousands of miles from the unfolding drama. For us, day has long since passed into night. In Faisalabad, in a few too-short hours, the sun will be rising. Abdul Basit is to die with the Pakistan dawn. Our colleagues in Pakistan are at the jail. It is 22:16. Just two hours and twelve minutes left now. Updates come through by text message: at midnight, the magistrate will arrive to oversee the hanging. He will be given a copy of the Supreme Court judgment and remind him that it is his to interpret, his to enforce, and on his head if the Prison Rules are not scrupulously followed. But for now it is merely a matter of waiting. Inside the Jail, Abdul Basit must wait alone. It is 23:53. The Magistrate should be there in minutes. A text message comes through - updates on a conversation with the Jail medical officer. He has a role to play to supervise the execution. He knows what could happen if it goes wrong, that Basit's head could be ripped from his body. The doctor does not want to see this happen. It is midnight. The magistrate is already inside the jail. The lawyers negotiate to get access. A few minutes later, the message comes back out. The Magistrate wants to speak with them. At thousands of miles distance, it is an ambivalent sign. He is completing a formality. He will appease them and order the hangman to begin, we think. It is half past midnight. The fierce buzz of the text message. "Still waiting." As we wait in England, all our colleagues can do is to watch the prison walls in Faisalabad. The minutes go by. What will the news be? Has Caesar, in his 21st century Coliseum, raised his thumb up for mercy, or down for death? 1 o'clock slowly approaches us. I have been there many times, at the dark hour of death. The downward pressure of inhumanity is suffocating. My irritating heart complaint is acting up again, and I have to turn to my medication. It takes 20 drawn-out minutes to kick in. It is half past 1. Surely by now the witnesses to the hanging should be filing out? Still nothing to report. Nearly 2. The urgent buzz startles me again. "It's getting very light in Pakistan. But no one able to confirm yet." 2:15. 2:30. 2:49. "Effective stay." Word comes out that the magistrate, the medical officer and the jail authorities have finally agreed that the execution cannot be carried out without violating the prison rules. They have notified the Punjab government, who must now amend the rules to allow the execution of a paraplegic man if they are to see Basit executed. Yet still Abdul Basit is all alone. These are not legal visiting hours. For us, so far away, and for JPP, there is celebration. But the new day has come, and it is back to the trenches. One battle has been won, but the war for Abdul Basit's life will continue. The truce will be counted in hours. And then the machinery of death may be gearing up once again to try to hang him and his wheelchair. (source: Clive Stafford Smith, International Business Times) GLOBAL: Hangman's quagmire----Civilizations have attempted to curtail acts of crime by instilling horror in criminals and would be criminals by using very harsh forms of punishment. Death is the ultimate end to all human existence. Yet during this mortal lifespan the human mind has for centuries displayed in gruesome and bloody fashion its dark ability to commit, without any remorse, an assortment of crimes, including murder. Seeking revenge or justice was a matter of much controversy in ancient times, and perhaps still is in the present society. This has been impacted by various culture, religion and political mindsets. The Death Penalty was said to be codified by the defiant ruler King Hammurabi of Babylon. During the 16th Century, Egypt carried out their first execution, punishing a noble for practicing magic. The Romans also codified capital punishment through the Roman Law of the 12 Tablets. Capital punishment, Death Penalty, Execution all refer to punishment by death. The word capital here derives from the Latin Capitalis, meaning head and in this instance cutting off the head, as in beheading. Today the Death Penalty is active in 36 countries, including China, America and India, whilst 103 countries have abolished this form of punishment. It is interesting to note that the United Nations General Assembly, confirmed on November 15, 2007 a Global Moratorium on Execution, which calls for a general suspension of the death penalty. This was also supported by the International group Hands off Cain, founded by Sergio D'Ela a former left wing terrorist, presently a nonviolent politician. Ancient forms of punishment Civilizations have attempted to curtail acts of crime by instilling horror in criminals and would be criminals by using very harsh forms of punishment. Crushing by an elephant was certainly scary, and people would come in hundreds to witness this spectacle. Often elephants were raised in Royal palaces simply for this task! Some were thrown into dens where frenzied lions awaited in earnest. It was equally terrible to be thrown into a large pond that was home to blood thirsty crocodiles. Quartering was another method that was used, where a person's limbs were tied to four horses and the animals driven in four directions, the body being torn into four segments. The bold Vikings not to be outdone would cut open the accused and pull out the lungs, feeding it to eagles and vultures. The vulture has an inclination to impending death. Still others were buried alive, with Scorpions thrown inside, to induce more agony. During Medieval times women accused of witchcraft were burnt alive or put into the Iron Maiden (an iron casket in the form of a woman with razor sharp iron spikes that would press into the flesh, and cause heavy bleeding, when the lid was tightly shut). The Romans, who controlled a mighty Empire were said to be the first to introduce Crucifixion, and also decapitation by sword (beheading). This was later abolished by the Emperor Constantine. Another ancient method was Gibetting where the criminal was shut in a cage and left in a public place to die slowly, due to starvation, and exposure to the elements. Poisoning criminals was also common, especially for crimes of treason against Kings, this was subsequently stopped and the firing squad seemed to perform the execution with much pomp. Scaphism was a method where the prisoner was fed with milk and honey (symbols of supposed prosperity), tied and left afloat in a large pool, where he would attract bees and insects that would eventually eat into his body. Stoning was punishment for crimes including adultery. Finally there was a maritime law that used Keel Hauling where sailors were punished by being tied and thrown overboard, where they would drown. Certainly all of these punishments would have instilled trepidation and respect for the Law, and yet have they? The Death Penalty was said to be codified by the defiant ruler King Hammurabi of Babylon. During the 16th Century, Egypt carried out their 1st execution, punishing a noble for practicing magic. The Romans also codified capital punishment through the Roman Law of the 12 Tablets. During the early 450 BC era the British used to blindfold criminals and throw them into infested quagmires. It was only during the 10th Century that Hanging was introduced to curtail crime. By the early 1700s there were 222 crimes punishable by death. However the 1st legal execution was of a man named Daniel Frank, who was found guilty of theft. In America the State of Michigan was the 1st to abolish the Death Penalty in 1846. The advent of Electrocution has a very impressive story, one which evolved from business rivalry and reads thus - The Edison Company with its DC (direct current) electrical systems began competing with Westinghouse Company and its AC (alternating current) electrical systems as they were pressing for nationwide electrification with alternating current. To demonstrate how dangerous AC could be, Edison Company began public awareness by electrocuting animals. People reasoned that if electricity could kill animals, it can kill people. In 1888, New York approved the dismantling of its gallows. The nation's 1st electric chair was created. It held its 1st victim, convicted murderer William Kemmler, in 1890, and even though the 1st electrocution was clumsy at best, other states soon followed. One must watch the English movie the Green Mile, starring Tom Hanks which brilliantly explores the mind of a man condemned to death, and also the judicial system of that time. In the history of prison inmates being executed by electric chair two men stand out as an embodiment of pure evil. Albert Fish, was a convicted child rapist who proceeded to cook and eat body parts of his victims. He was known as the Brooklyn Vampire. He was sent to the chair in 1936. Some say that it was due to him that we have the character of the Boogey Man, one who bundles kids into a sack, or in local lore the 'Goni billa'. Many would be aware of Ted Bundy, a psychotic serial killer, violent rapist and necrophile (a person who has sexual arousal from viewing a corpse). He was sent to the chair in 1989. On July 13, 1928, 7 men were sent to the chair at Kentucky State Penitentiary, creating a record number. Today many countries have replaced the Electric chair with the Lethal injection, which is considered a more rapid form of death. Death by hanging The practice of hanging a person has also been used in many cultures, often as a warning. People would gather in hundreds and cheer. Hanging takes place as legal punishment and the other as self inflicted suicide. Hanging is defined as death by means where a condemned person is suspended by a noose or ligature. There are three kinds of drops used to ensure death. 1. Short Drop - where person is placed on a cart or horse and that is driven away 2. Standard Drop - where a person is suspended from a height of 4 to 6 feet, this discovery being made by Irish doctor Samuel Haughton in 1866 3. Long Drop - where it was found that each inmate's height and body weight would finally determine the slack required upon the rope. This method was introduced by William Marwood of Britain. Violent acts of inhuman murder and ghastly deaths call for justice. It is the cry of the victim's family and loved ones. After all, each life is precious. Society is sent into a state of shock when we witness the death of innocent people, especially children. There remains an ever increasing need to update existing Laws of the Penal Code and also rapidly implement them, with due protection to witnesses. Additionally our prisons must also be brought abreast to foreign standards where death row inmates are held as per their individual crimes. Law enforcement agencies must also have Special response units to trace missing persons, with the use of K-9 (Police dogs) in every province. Religious and Civil society must create awareness on how to overcome impending criminal elements, mainly by evoking the human conscience, by teaching self respect and also respect for others. This is a time for spiritual awakening. Unsupervised internet use by minors only fuels sexual lust and fornication. The dark and biased criminal mind, with its relentless quest to fulfill evil desires and selfish motives, is an ever present danger to all of us. The time to act is now. (source: The (Sri Lanka) Nation) SAUDI ARABIA: Saudi Arabia's troubling death sentence On September 14, local media reported that an appeals court and Saudi Arabia's Supreme Court had upheld the death sentence of Ali al-Nimr for participating in protests four years ago. He was 16 at the time. Today, he awaits the execution of his sentence, which stipulates that al-Nimr should be beheaded and that his headless body should be strung up for public display. Among the "crimes" for which al-Nimr was convicted were "breaking allegiance with the ruler," "going out to a number of marches, demonstrations, and gatherings against the state and repeating some chants against the state," and using his cell phone to incite demonstrations. He was also accused of sheltering men wanted by police, helping wanted men avoid police raids, and attacking police with Molotov cocktails and rocks, although prosecutors offered no clear details of injuries to police officers. Al-Nimr denied the charges and told the court that security officials coerced a "confession." Saudi Arabia is one of the only three countries in the world known to maintain the death penalty for people who allegedly committed crimes as children -- along with Sudan and Iran. So there was nothing to stop Saudi authorities from bringing al-Nimr to trial before its notorious terrorism court, which sentenced him to death in May 2014. True, Saudi Arabia has ratified international treaties that prohibit executing anyone for offenses committed when they were under 18. Yet despite this obligation, under the Saudi system, someone who exhibits physical signs of puberty can be tried as an adult. In January 2013, Saudi Arabia executed a Sri Lankan domestic worker convicted of murdering a newborn when she was 17, and in March of the same year authorities executed two Saudi men convicted of committing armed robbery before they turned 18. And al-Nimr is far from alone. In fact, he's part of a rising trend. Saudi Arabia has one of the highest known execution rates in the world and so far this year, it has executed 135 people. Saudi diplomats have been trying to deflect criticism of the country's soaring execution rate. In September, the country's permanent representative to the United Nations in Geneva dismissed the criticism as "protecting the rights of the killer." In fact, just under half of all executions in Saudi Arabia in any given year are not for murder, but for nonviolent drug crimes or even occasionally for dubious "crimes" such as sorcery. And those accused of serious crimes don't always get fair trials. Al-Nimr's case is a prime example. Saudi's internal security service arrested al-Nimr in February 2013 in connection with an uprising by the country's minority Shia citizens in Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province in 2011. They were demanding an end to longstanding discrimination by the government and protesting Saudi Arabia's role in suppressing peaceful protests in neighboring Bahrain. Authorities held him nearly nine months without taking him before a judge, and did not allow him to have a lawyer during his interrogation. Many of the broadly framed charges against him don't resemble recognizable crimes under international law. The court also failed to investigate al-Nimr's allegations that officials mistreated him in detention. Family members told Human Rights Watch that following al-Nimr's arrest in February 2012, authorities did not permit them to visit for four months. When authorities finally brought him before a judge for the first time, in December 2013, they allegedly did not allow him to inform his family or appoint a lawyer, and did not provide him a copy of his charge sheet. The court held three more sessions before the authorities allowed al-Nimr to appoint a defense lawyer. Despite court orders to the contrary, prison officials did not allow al-Nimr's lawyer to visit him in prison to help prepare a defense before or during his trial. The court found al-Nimr guilty in May 2014 solely on the basis of a confession he signed during his interrogation, even though he said in court that one of his interrogators wrote it and that he signed under duress without reading it. The court ruled the confession admissible anyway, since he had signed it. Family members said that al-Nimr agreed to sign the statement only after interrogators told him that if he did, they would then release him. Al-Nimr's life is now in the hands of Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, whose decision will signal whether he is committed to reforming the justice system or to perpetuating the status quo of gross due process violations and executing child offenders. If King Salman believes in justice he should acknowledge the serious flaws in the case and commute the sentence. (source: CNN) ************* Corbyn to Cameron: Ask Saudi Arabia to drop death penalty for Nimr UK Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn has called on the British premier to urge Saudi Arabia to commute the death sentence of Ali Mohammed Baqir al-Nimr, a young Saudi man, over his alleged role in anti-regime protests in the Arab kingdom. "As you may be aware, Ali has now exhausted all his appeals and could be executed any day - in a particularly horrific manner, which involves beheading and the public display or 'crucifixion' of the body," said Corbyn in a letter to David Cameron on Friday, adding that "numerous fair trial violations" appeared in Nimr's trial. Corbyn urged the premier to raise the case directly with his Saudi counterparts and "request that they commute the unjust and horrific sentence ... which violates any number of international laws." The Labor Party leader also rejected the Ministry of Justice's bid to provide services to Saudi Arabia's prisons. "Will you step in to terminate the Ministry of Justice's bid to provide services to the Saudi prisons system - the very body, I should stress, which will be responsible for carrying out Ali's execution?," Corbyn further wrote. He highlighted the urgency of Nimr's case, saying that "the secrecy of the Saudi system means that he could face execution at any time." "There is therefore no time to spare in taking this up with the Saudi authorities, if we are to prevent a grave injustice," he wrote in conclusion. Ali Mohammed Baqir al-Nimr, a Saudi youth and the nephew of prominent Saudi Shia cleric Ayatollah Sheikh Nimr Baqir al-Nimr, was sentenced to death over his alleged role in anti-regime protests in 2012, when he was a teenager. Nimr, the nephew of prominent Saudi Shia cleric Ayatollah Sheikh Nimr Baqir al-Nimr, was arrested during an anti-government protest in Qatif, Eastern Province, back in 2012 when he was only 17 years old. He was later convicted of alleged criminal activities and handed down a death penalty by Saudi Arabia's Specialized Criminal Court in May 2015. (source: PressTV) THAILAND: Thailand shrine bombing: Man in custody confesses, police say A man who has been in police custody in Thailand since August 29 has been identified as the primary suspect in a bombing that killed 20 people at Bangkok's Erawan Shrine last month, Thai police said Friday. After the man admitted he was the suspect seen in video in a yellow shirt, he confessed to the bombing, Thailand national police spokesman Prawut Thavornsiri told reporters. Police used new surveillance images to confirm they had the man responsible for the bombing, the spokesman said. The images showed the suspect walking into a restroom and changing his clothes before he walked out. "He did admit that the man in the photo was him, and each of his admissions they became all connected. And finally he admitted it all," Prawut said. Police said they are confident that the man -- who goes by several names including Adem Karadak -- carried out the bombings that also injured more than 100 people. Police on Saturday will take Karadak and Yusufu Meirailee -- who was arrested earlier this month -- to the crime scene at the Erawan Shrine. The duo will go to Hua Lumphong train station where they allegedly met to swap the bomb rucksack. They also will visit the spot where they allegedly dropped a mobile phone used to set off the bomb, authorities said. CNN reached out to an attorney for Karadak but didn't hear immediately back. 17 arrest warrants Also Friday a Thai military court issued arrest warrants for 17 people, 3 of whom were named publicly for the 1st time as members of the network responsible for the bombing at the shrine. 2 of the suspects -- Ali Noor and Manu Muhammad Ismail -- are suspected of buying SIM cards that were used in triggering the bomb. Another man is believed to be the suspect who dropped a second bomb at a pier. That explosive fell into the water and didn't injure anyone. They will face charges of premeditated murder and jointly making bombs that resulted in deaths, injuries and losses of property. If convicted, they could face the death penalty, Prawut said. The shrine, at a bustling intersection near a large shopping mall, is a big draw for tourists. At least 7 people from other Asian countries were reported to be among the dead as well as 1 Briton. The site is popular among Buddhists as well as Hindu and Sikh members of Thailand's Indian community. (source: CNN) KYRGYZSTAN: Death penalty for pedophilia will not help to save children "The initiative to institute the death penalty for pedophilia, raised by some parties during the election campaign, is an irresponsible populism," ex-minister of social development of Kyrgyzstan Edil Baisalov said to 24.kg news agency. "Instead of crime prevention, we discuss only punishment again. We should immediately institute at least 600 new units of social workers and many times increase the capacity of local bodies, protecting children as well as to improve prevention of mental disorders. Unfortunately, the last government did not pay attention to the needs of social development, and we see the bitter consequences of such a policy in the tragic news every day. We should not forget that, as a rule, only a tiny bit of violence against children is made public. Death penalty for pedophilia will not help to save them," Edil Baisalov said. It should be noted that it was repeatedly offered in Kyrgyzstan to toughen the punishment for pedophilia, including introduction of castration, life imprisonment and death penalty. There were even collected signatures in support of the latter norm. (source: eng.24.kg) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sat Sep 26 11:35:37 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 11:35:37 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, USA Message-ID: Sept. 26 TEXAS: Questions raised after shock belt used at Texas murder trial A potential death penalty trial in East Texas is set to resume on Monday after it was put on hold when a judge was said by a TV station to have had a shock belt used on the defendant for misbehaving. James Calvert, 45, of Tyler, Texas, is on trial in Smith County, where prosecutors allege he beat and fatally shot his former wife at her home and abducted their 4-year-old son in October 2012. Judge Jack Skeen allowed Calvert to defend himself, over objections from attorneys specializing in the death penalty, at the outset of the trial in August. Skeen also ordered a shock device be placed on Calvert for security reasons because of his unpredictable behavior, legal officials said. On Sept. 15, when Calvert did not stand up at the judge's request, Skeen had an electric shock administered on the defendant that caused him to twist in pain before the jury, local TV broadcaster KLTV reported. "Calvert refuses to stand up when talking to judge. Shock belt is administered, Calvert scream 'ahh' for about 5 seconds," Cody Lillich, a KLTV reporter, tweeted from the courtroom. After Calvert was shocked, Skeen allowed public defenders who had been monitoring the hearings to defend him, court officials said. The trial is set to resume on Monday after it was put on recess on Sept. 16. The judge has issued a gag order in the case, a court official said. Skeen did not respond to requests for comment. Legal experts said the judge's conduct could open the door to appeals if Calvert is convicted and possible sanction for abuse of the shock belt, which is to be used only if the defendant poses an immediate security risk. "This is just a travesty of justice as far as I'm concerned. This man is facing an execution if he's convicted," said George Parnham, a Houston lawyer who represented Andrea Yates, who drowned her 5 children and was found innocent by reason of insanity on appeal. Skeen, who was Smith County district attorney before he was elected a district judge, has had no disciplinary sanctions, according to the Texas Bar Association. Calvert has been disruptive because of mental illness, making it all the more reasonable to have had a lawyer represent him from the start, said Kathryn Kase, executive director of the Texas Defender Service, which has been monitoring the case. "I know of no death penalty trial in the state of Texas where the defendant has been able to represent himself who got life in prison," Kase said. It is common to have a shock belt on defendants at jury trials for safety, and the device is less obvious than handcuffs or leg irons, Smith County Sheriff's Lieutenant Gary Middleton said. "It's really pretty effective when we use it. It's kind of like a Taser," he said. (source: Reuters) USA: International Community Condemns U.S., Recommends End to Police Deadly Force, Racial Profiling and Death Penalty America's racist practices - including police violence and the implementation of its criminal justice system - have human rights implications and face international scrutiny. The United Nations has reviewed the country's human rights record and the international body slammed the U.S. for its racial profiling and use of deadly force, and its implementation of the death penalty. Of the 343 recommendations made by the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, Switzerland, the U.S. accepted 44 recommendations for eliminating racial discrimination and addressing excessive use of police force and racial bias in the death penalty, as Al Jazeera America reported. In addition, the U.S. supported another 20 recommendations "in part" and rejected 1 - calling for an independent commission to prosecute racially motivated crimes. During the peer review process - in which 117 UN member states participated, and each state must undergo every four years - the international community was able to weigh in and offer comments and recommend changes. The panel called on the U.S. - which often characterizes itself as a beacon of human rights and criticizes other nations on their human rights record - to abolish the death penalty, end extrajudicial killings, and protect the human rights of indigenous people and immigrants. The council also urged the U.S. to punish torturers, and close its Guantanamo Bay detention facility in Cuba. The French delegation recommended the U.S. "take necessary measures to fight against discriminatory practices of the police based on ethnic origin." Meanwhile, Malaysia suggested the U.S. "double its efforts in combating violence and the excessive use of force by law enforcement officers based on racial profiling through training, sensitization and community outreach, as well as ensuring proper investigation and prosecution when cases occur." The U.S. accepted these peer recommendations, while also explaining its criteria for supporting recommendations. Some recommendations ask us to achieve an ideal, e.g., end discrimination or police brutality, and others request action not entirely within the power of our Federal Executive Branch, e.g., adopt legislation, ratify treaties, or act at the state level," the U.S. wrote in an official response to the review process. "We support or support in part these recommendations when we share their ideals, are making serious efforts to achieve their goals, and intend to continue doing so. Nonetheless, we recognize, realistically, that the United States may never completely accomplish what is described in these recommendations' literal terms." The U.S. added that, "We support recommendations to take actions we are already taking or have taken, and intend to continue taking, without in any way implying that our ongoing or prior efforts have been unsuccessful or that these actions are necessarily legally required. With respect to judicial remedies, we note that we cannot make commitments regarding, and do not control, the outcome of court proceedings." However the U.S. did say it would take a closer look at other recommendations. "Where recommendations include inaccurate assumptions, assertions, or factual predicates, we have decided whether we support them or support them in part by looking past their rhetoric to the proposed action or objective," the U.S. said. The UN report came as Pope Francis gave a speech to a joint session of Congress on September 24, in which he called for an abolition of the death penalty and urged the U.S. to adopt policies that embrace immigrants. According to Amnesty International, the U.S. is 1 of 5 countries accounting for the overwhelming majority of executions in the world. Further, the U.S. has very permissive policies on the use of deadly force by police, raising serious human rights questions. "Deadly Force: Police Use of Lethal Force In The United States" - a report released by Amnesty in June 2015 - found that all 50 states and Washington, D.C. fail to comply with international law and standards on the use of deadly force by police. Further, 9 states and Washington, D.C. have no laws on the books regarding the use of lethal force by law enforcement, while 13 states have laws that do not even comply with the lower standards for deadly force set by the U.S. constitutional law. Some states allow for deadly force to "suppress opposition to an arrest"; to arrest someone for a "suspected felony"; to "suppress a riot or mutiny"; to prevent a prison or jail escape, or for crimes such as burglary. Some states allow private citizens to use lethal force if they are carrying out law enforcement activities. In recent years, the killing of unarmed Black people by police has received national and international attention, and has spurred the growth of a Black movement against police violence. According to The Counted, a database maintained by The Guardian, 861 people have been killed by police in the U.S. in 2015. Blacks are killed by law enforcement at a rate of 5.1 per million, as opposed to 2.08 for whites and 2.27 for Latinos. (source: Atlanta Black Star) ****************** Blind Justice Leads to Black Death Though many of us whites have been able to rationalize away the experience that people of color have always reported, the recent proliferation of smartphone video recordings of encounters between people of color and the police makes it much more difficult for us to deny that the same police whom we trust so implicitly are, in many cases, subjecting people of color to unwarranted violence. The issue goes far deeper than the police/citizen encounter. A system that ensnares and traps people of color in a permanent underclass has been exposed. Much research and critique has been done on the subject. Ta-Nehisi Coates' October 2015 Atlantic article offers a remarkably comprehensive view of the system with the brevity of a magazine article. Michelle Alexander's book The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness is for many our first introduction to the issue of mass incarceration and the criminal justice system's disparate treatment of and destructive impact on people and communities of color, especially Black/African American people. Numerous other thinkers, researchers, and writers, many of them people of color, have contributed to this body of knowledge, none of whose work this blog post could hope to emulate. In The New Jim Crow, Ms. Alexander devotes a chapter to Supreme Court decisions that act to perpetuate the disparate treatment of people of color and are yet considered race neutral. They are particularly clear examples of the legal system acting to perpetuate racial inequity and creating a societal maze from which there is no escape. Often it is because the Supreme Court demands that evidence of conscious, deliberate bias must be present for a person to seek relief or redress from a criminal justice system that creates blatantly different outcomes for different racial groups. One of those decisions is McClesky v. Kemp. A study found that in the state of Georgia convictions of murder in which the victim was white resulted in the death penalty up to 4.9 times more frequently than when the victim was black. The court found that this was not enough evidence to prove that the death penalty was being applied unfairly. Even if there was a "racially disproportionate impact," no redress could be sought unless there was proof of a "racially discriminatory purpose." In other words, unless there is obvious, overt racism, the application of the death penalty, even though it was proven statistically to be applied differently based on the race of the victim, is deemed to be fair. Colorblind justice means it's a worse crime to kill a white person than a black person. Another case that Alexander cites is United States v. Armstrong. In this case a defendant's lawyers noticed that a certain prosecutor's office assigned only black crack offenders to the harsher federal system. They sought the prosecutor's records to investigate this more fully. The Supreme Court ruled that the discretion of prosecutors to pursue cases as they see fit is so important that only evidence of conscious, intentional bias would be grounds enough to open prosecutors' records to that degree. With no sense of irony, the court ruled that in order to get the evidence needed to prove bias, one must first prove bias. Colorblind justice means a person can legally be prosecuted more harshly because of her of his race. In Purkett v. Elem the court ruled that any reason for the use of the peremptory strike of a person from a jury by a lawyer doesn't need to be persuasive or even plausible to be accepted as reasoning for doing so, even if a clear pattern of racial discrimination in jury selection can be discerned. This ruling includes incidents when judges discern the pattern, not just competing lawyers. The judge in such a case has no power to address a prosecutor who uses her or his peremptory strikes to create all white juries. Colorblind justice means a black defendant can expect an all-white jury. Blacks make up about 13 % of the US population and almost 35 % of the people executed. Whites are about 78 % of the population but only 55 % of executions. Because of decisions like the ones described by Ms. Alexander, criminal justice professionals pursuing the death penalty who act on unconscious biases are beyond censure (even though by some counts, 70 % of whites have unconscious bias against blacks . It also means that those who are actually acting on bias, as long as they are smart enough not to publically admit it, can continue to do so with impunity. Personally, I have been known to get snippy if someone unwittingly joins the express line at the supermarket with more than ten items. We live in a nation where the need to fight against perceived unfair treatment of us has become so pervasive and powerful that we've coined the term "road rage" for the now commonplace violence that occurs as the result of selfish or thoughtless driving. I wonder if some of my white brothers and sisters, looking at these statistics, can put themselves in black people's shoes. I do know there are plenty of us who feel that we are the ones who are discriminated against, but in almost every measure of quality of life and justice, whites fair better statistically than other groups*. We mistake the loss of complete dominance for the loss of liberty. We mistake attempts to create parity with minority dominance. There is a system in place that's killing all of us, some at a higher rate than others. * Except Asians, who fair slightly better in some areas. This fact is used by many whites as proof that white society is in no way the cause of disparities in other groups without any critical reflection on how the different kinds of common stereotypes of Asians make more room for them to be successful in certain ways within white society while continuing to circumscribe their choices in many ways -- the "model minority" phenomenon. (source: Peter DiCaprio, Huffington Post) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sun Sep 27 13:25:19 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2015 13:25:19 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----DEL., VA., N.C., GA., FLA. Message-ID: Sept. 27 DELAWARE: Panel talks Del. prisons, race, death penalty in Lewes When Sherry Dorsey Walker, a Wilmington councilwoman, described her opposition to the death penalty inside a Lewes church, she spoke from personal experience. In 1986, her cousin was killed in Newark by a group of white teenagers in what she called a racially motivated attack. "Once he and the young men fought, it was really supposed to have been over," Walker said. But after her cousin lost the fight and dropped to the pavement, the group got into a vehicle "and they drove over his face. And they put the car in reverse and drove back over his face." Then, still in grade school, she believed the perpetrators needed to pay for their crime. "For many, many years I was so angry," she continued. "I thought they deserved the death penalty for what they did to my cousin." But as she grew, she said her view on the punishment "evolved spiritually and emotionally," and now she's one of the leaders of the Delaware Repeal Project, a movement to urge legislators to vote to remove the penalty from state law. In a forum held inside the newly constructed Unitarian Universalists of Southern Delaware church in Lewes, a number of guest speakers focused on Delaware's criminal justice system. In a state where blacks and minorities make up the majority of those incarcerated in its prisons, it was a frank talk about how the repeal movement reaches farther than only its primary focus. Race and incarceration - 5:1 for blacks vs. whites After Walker set the stage for the discussion, the Rev. Donald Morton, pastor of Perfected Life Church in New Castle, spoke to what he believes is a "normalization of social misery" in Delaware's urban areas. "In urban spaces in particular, there's this sense that what's happening in urban spaces has been normalized," Morton said. His point was urban communities, mainly those with large minority populations, have become numb to violence and poverty. Therefore, they fall into a cycle in which both they and the state's criminal justice system see them as a target. He raised the fatal shooting of a wheelchair-bound black man in Wilmington to illustrate his point. While police say the man, Jeremy "Bam" McDole, was armed and reaching for his gun when 4 police officers shot him on Sept. 23, the state's Department of Justice is now investigating after a video showing part of the incident was posted online. In the video, a man narrates the event while watching it unfold. To Morton, it was the man's tone of voice that stood out. "It wasn't as if (he) was excitable as it was something new," Morton said. "(He) lives in that every day. The man shot lives in that every day." His argument was that if those in urban communities - which see larger minority populations than compared to whites nationwide - feel gun violence is a regular part of day-to-day life, it'll continually "normalize" that violence as a common response. And because of the cultural roots African-Americans have with the urban community, it becomes what he called "our intoxication of thinking." "We've actually made it illegal to be young, black and outside," Morton said. "So we're guilty of something. I don't know quite what that something is. But black folks are guilty of something." "We're guilty of something based on the clothes that we wear. We're guilty of something based on the words we use," he continued. Death penalty and race At the beginning of a 3-person panel, the discussion led with an examination on how the death penalty affects the disproportionate number of blacks and minorities in Delaware's prisons. In 2012, a group of professors at Cornell University found that of 49 defendants sentenced to death since 1972, 53 % were black while 39 % were white. Comparatively, whites make up for 73 % of the state's population. In addition, that disparity has continued in recent years, with whites only accounting for 23 % of those currently on death row, according to the study. Paula Maiorano, a minister with Unitarian Universalists and an advocate against inequality, said the state's prison population is representative of a societal bias not represented by facts. "White people actually do drugs more ... than African-American young people," Maiorano. "And yet, the concentration is particularly aimed at African-Americans. The stops are made. The arrests are made." "So what we have is a targeted number of our citizens in our state who are arrested more frequently, go to trial more frequently, are convicted more frequently (and) are given longer sentences more frequently," she added. Delaware Chief Justice: Delaware prisons have "shocking disparities" with racial makeup It was a point touched upon by the Rev. Morton earlier when he said "well over 70 % of those on death row are black and brown." "There's still a prevailing thought that we're not supposed to be here," Morton said. "The way to deal with that is do we incarcerate (blacks and minorities) ... or do we determine to rehabilitate them?" Jessica Mann, a law clerk with a Philadelphia-based law firm, argued the death penalty "doesn't serve any purpose of punishment because you're sending someone to death when there's 20 years of appeals." "But when you add on the fact that African-Americans, Hispanics, Latinos are being incarcerated at a rate so much higher than other individuals, and they're more likely to receive the death penalty, it reflects negatively on our criminal justice system," Mann said. "Because it helps to bolster the fact that today, despite what we may want to think, we value white lives more than we value other life." Poverty, race and criminal justice Maiorano also pointed to how poverty plays a part in conviction rates. "Because if you have a good lawyer, often you get a lighter sentence or no sentence at all versus if you do not have the money and you're represented by a public defender," Maiorano said. She added that conviction rates rise for those who cannot pay bail and await trial in jail, which disproportionately affects the poor and, by extension, the black population. Several members also focused on Sen. Bryan Townsend, D-11-Newark, who was at the forum. "We've got to vote about it. Nobody ever gets a pass," Morton said. "It's time to evaluate what they are voting for." He then pointed at Townsend, asking those who feel strongly about the movement to repeal the death penalty to "hold elected officials like Bryan Townsend accountable." (source: delmamrvanow.com) VIRGINIA: Terry McAuliffe Has To Decide Whether To Allow Virginia To Execute A Man----If McAuliffe allows the execution of serial killer Alfredo Prieto to go forward on Oct. 1, it will be the state???s first in more than 30 months. It would also make McAuliffe only the 3rd sitting Democratic governor to execute someone. On Oct. 1, Alfredo Prieto, a serial killer sentenced to death by juries in two different states, is scheduled to be executed by the Commonwealth of Virginia. If Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe allows the execution to go forward, it will make him only the 3rd sitting Democratic governor to execute someone. Death penalty opponents have asked Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, who has the sole authority to grant clemency in Virginia, to "grant a temporary reprieve of his execution" so that Prieto can be transferred to California, where he has challenged his 2nd death sentence by claiming intellectual disability. Prieto also has a case pending before the Supreme Court about the conditions he faces in Virginia's prisons - death row inmates are automatically placed in solitary confinement - but that case, obviously, will come to an end should Prieto be put to death. All signs at the moment point to the commonwealth preparing to move forward with the execution. This past week, Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring???s office said that there were no challenges pending to his Virginia convictions that would prevent him from being executed. Earlier this year, McAuliffe supported an effort to shield information about how Virginia obtained its lethal injection drugs. The measure failed, however, and on Thursday lawyers in an unrelated case in Oklahoma claimed in a court filing there that public records from Virginia show that the commonwealth purchased its current supply of its execution drug, pentobarbital, from the state of Texas. On Friday, Virginia confirmed the claim, with its department of corrections spokesperson specifying that the drug purchase was intended to be used to execute Prieto next week. In a story earlier this year addressing his support for the pending secrecy legislation, spokesman Brian Coy told The Washington Post that McAuliffe does not support the death penalty but would enforce it: "He is a Catholic, so there is a moral component to his position on the issue, but he's governor, and he will enforce the law." Coy did not immediately respond to a request Saturday for comment on whether McAuliffe is considering using his clemency authority to stop Prieo's execution. As The Washington Post reported last year, Prieto "has been convicted of murdering 3 people, raping 2 of them, and DNA or ballistics link him to another 6 homicides and 2 rapes." Nonetheless, his execution in Virginia would both be unusual and is a sign of the changing landscape for the death penalty. Historically, in the period since the Supreme Court ended its 4-year moratorium on executions in 1976, Virginia has been 1 of the more active death penalty states in the country, having conducted 110 executions - 14 in one year, 1999. In the past 5 years, however, the commonwealth has only executed 2 people. McAuliffe's predecessor, Bob McDonnell, conducted both. The most recent execution in Virginia took place more than 2 1/2 years ago, when Robert Gleason was electrocuted for the murders of 2 men. McAuliffe is not quite half-way through his single term-limited 4-year term, but the commonwealth has yet to conduct an execution under his watch. Likewise, while several recent Virginia governors have granted clemency to at least 1 person on death row under their watch - including Govs. Douglas Wilder, George Allen, Jim Gilmore, Mark Warner, and Tim Kaine - McAuliffe has not. This issue has not come up, in part, because only 8 people remain on Virginia's death row. In addition to the significant number of executions carried out by the commonwealth between 1995 and 2000, there has been a large decrease in the number of people added to Virginia's death row. No one in the commonwealth has been sentenced to death since McAuliffe became governor in January 2014. Mark Lawlor was the last person added to Virginia's death row back in 2011. While the diminishing role of the death penalty in Virginia is 1 element of why Prieto's execution would be unusual, another is the national political scene. Among Democratic governors in America, only 2 have allowed executions to proceed under his or her watch. McAuliffe would be the 3rd. The only other 2 sitting Democratic governors to execute anyone are Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon, whose state tied Texas in 2014 for the most executions in the country, and Delaware Gov. Jack Markell, whose state had 2 executions in his first term in office. Markell, however, has said he would sign death penalty abolition legislation that was passed by the state???s senate, but stalled in the house, earlier this year. Among other Democratic governors, 7 are running states with no death penalty, including 1 - Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy - who signed legislation ending the death penalty into law. The others are Hawaii Gov. David Ige, Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Rhode Island Gov. Gina Raimondo, Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin, and West Virginia Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin. 4 Democratic governors have put a moratorium on executions in place: Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper; Oregon Gov. Kate Brown, who extended the previous governor's moratorium; Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf; and Washington Gov. Jay Inslee. Markell and 1 other governor, New Hampshire Gov. Maggie Hassan, said they would sign death penalty abolition legislation considered in their respective states this year, and a 3rd, California Gov. Jerry Brown has said he opposes the death penalty. Neither Hassan nor Brown have conducted any executions. Finally, no execution have taken place during the terms of Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear or Montana Gov. Steve Bullock, and no executions are expected to be set during their time in office. (source: BuzzFeedNews) NORTH CAROLINA: The power to kill Colby Coash was a college freshman in Lincoln, Neb., in 1996 when friends talked him into going to the state penitentiary, where an execution was about to take place. 2 crowds were outside the prison - 1 in favor of the death penalty, the other opposing it. Without giving it much thought, he joined the death-penalty group. A band was playing, there was a barbecue and a clock was counting down to midnight, when the electric chair would be turned on. "I thought it was a New Year's party," Coash recounted in an interview in Greensboro Tuesday. "I didn't feel good about that experience." Coash has been pro-life ever since. As a Catholic, he's against abortion - and the death penalty. As a Nebraska state senator, and a Republican, he spearheaded a breakthrough accomplishment this year. That conservative state's single-chamber legislature passed a bill repealing the death penalty and then overrode the governor's veto. Coash pulled 16 to 17 Republican senators to his position by making conservative arguments against capital punishment, he said. He was in Greensboro and Raleigh last week at the invitation of a group called North Carolina Conservatives Concerned about the Death Penalty. One of its leaders is Greensboro attorney Marshall Hurley, a former general counsel for the state Republican Party. Coash was joined in Raleigh by state Rep. Jon Hardister, a Republican from Greensboro, who repeated his own reservations about the death penalty. No one has any illusions about the position of North Carolina's legislature. "Honestly, it will be hard to repeal the death penalty in North Carolina because the leadership in the House and Senate supports it," Hardister said Tuesday. In fact, the legislature passed a bill intended to restart executions, which have been suspended since 2006. Among other features, the bill makes information about lethal-injection chemicals a state secret. That doesn't square with conservative values, according to Coash. "A government that would hide that from you, what else would it hide? Conservatives believe in limiting the power of government," he said. Coash was successful, where North Carolina death-penalty opponents have not been, in reshaping the debate. He called capital punishment a product of a "broken government. ... That narrative began to speak to people," he said. "We believe inefficient government is bad government." Many North Carolina Republicans distrust "government schools," "government health care" and other government institutions - but trust government with the power to decide who should live or die. The results are inconsistent, or worse. A year ago, Henry McCollum was released from prison after spending 30 years on North Carolina's death row for crimes, it was finally discovered, he did not commit. Last week in Guilford County, a man was sentenced to life in prison - not death - after pleading guilty to 2 counts of 1st-degree murder. He killed a father and 7-year-old son. The little boy had tried to hide in a bathroom closet during a home invasion. Decisions about who gets the death penalty and who doesn't seem to be entirely arbitrary. Some of the 148 offenders on North Carolina's death row have been there for decades. Their appeals cost millions of dollars. So as a government spending issue, the death penalty is inefficient. Nebraska isn't a liberal state that coddles criminals. Killers will serve life in prison without parole. It???s time for North Carolina conservatives to eliminate the inconsistency, expense and potentially fatal errors associated with capital punishment. Surely, our legislators are not so eager to resume the execution countdown that they can't consider the costs. (source: Opinion, Greensboro News & Record) **************** State Bar says lawyer not guilty of professional misconduct A State Bar disciplinary hearing committee on Friday cleared a defense attorney who worked on a historic Racial Justice Act case of professional misconduct allegations. The Engel case has been carefully watched by attorneys across the state for the larger implications it could have on lawyers whose court documents include unintentional mistakes. Some have described the bar complaint against Engel as politically motivated by prosecutors and others unhappy with the findings and rulings in a former death row inmate's successful challenge of his capital-punishment sentencing using the Racial Justice Act. But it is unclear who filed the grievance against Engel because it was filed anonymously. Lane Williamson, a lawyer from Charlotte who represented Engel at the bar hearing, argued before the ruling that the panel would set a dangerous precedent with a misconduct ruling. What happened, Williamson said, "was a mistake, an honest mistake made by a hard-working lawyer." Mary Winstead, a former prosecutor with the state attorney general's office, argued that Engel's mistake was prejudicial to the administration of justice. She said that a sworn statement submitted by Engel inaccurately "carried the message that a prosecutor had discriminated in his question" and played a role in the outcome of the Racial Justice Act case. But the disciplinary panel disagreed with her. The bar complaint focused on Engel's work with a team of lawyers who used the short-lived Racial Justice Act to convert a North Carolina death row inmate's sentence in 2012 to life without possibility for parole. At issue was whether Engel violated professional codes of conduct in relaying information to the courts after interviewing 2 African-American men who were excluded from serving on the 1994 jury that decided the fate of Marcus Reymond Robinson. Robinson, an African-American male, was sentenced to death for the 1991 killing of Erik Tornblum, a white teenager. In 2012, Judge Gregory Weeks issued a landmark ruling in Cumberland County Superior Court saying prosecutors across the state had engaged in deliberate and systematic racial discrimination when striking black potential jurors in death penalty cases. Under the Racial Justice Act, which has since been overturned by the North Carolina legislature, Weeks was able to reduce the death sentence for Robinson to life in prison with no possibility for parole. The State Bar has not brought any complaints against prosecutors, who also submitted sworn statements in the Robinson case that included inaccurate information. "We're not saying, 'Oh, they ought to be charged as well,'" Williamson said in his closing statement to the disciplinary panel. "We're saying they made mistakes." The bar complaint contended that Engel and Cassandra Stubbs, another lawyer on the Racial Justice Act case, included inaccurate information for the court to consider that ranged from a wrong address to a recollection from one of the potential jurors that did not jibe with the official trial transcript. When Engel and Stubbs, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union Capital Punishment Project, received notice of the allegations, they brought them to the attention of Weeks. The judge said in an order that the statements submitted by Engel and Stubbs had not played a role in his Robinson decision. In his ruling, he also mentioned mistakes made by prosecutors from 4 counties - Forsyth, Cumberland, Johnston and Wilson. Stubbs took a different legal route from Engel in fighting the bar accusations against her. She was found guilty by a different bar disciplinary panel of professional misconduct. Stubbs was admonished, meaning the three-member panel that presided over her case found she committed a minor violation of the rules of professional conduct. Stubbs, who was at the Engel hearing but left before the ruling, could appeal the decision in her case or ask for her panel to reconsider its finding in light of the Engel ruling. (source: News & Observer) GEORGIA: Former high-ranking state officials join growing chorus asking for Gissendaner clemency On Tuesday, the state will execute the only woman on death row in Georgia - Kelly Gissendaner. She was sentenced to death in 1998 for recruiting her boyfriend to kill her husband, Doug. The man who committed the murder is serving a life sentence. Leading up to the execution, there have been vigils and rallies to get the state to spare her including a video from her own children asking for clemency. Now, on Saturday, 2 influential voices are joining the chorus of those asking that she be allowed to live. Former State Corrections Deputy Director Vanessa O'Donnell released a statement calling for mercy as did a former chief justice of the state supreme court - Norman Fletcher. O'Donnell's statement said the following: Kelly Gissendaner's execution is scheduled for Tuesday, September 29, 2015. I am a retired Georgia Department of Corrections Deputy Director and Warden, and I have requested that the Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles grant Ms. Gissendaner clemency. Although I understand the severity of her conviction, it seems appropriate in this case that the 17 years of isolation she has spent on death row warrants a commutation permitting her to spend the remainder of her life serving as an example to fellow inmates. She can provide hope to the most desperate female offender in a manner no one else could possibly understand. As the only woman on death row, Ms. Gissendaner has been sequestered from other prisoners for most of her incarceration, and has been housed in a cell in our secure housing unit. I was her warden from 2001-2004 at Metro State Prison. For those three years her primary contact was the correctional officer assigned to the unit and the Inspection team which made daily contact. I got to know her during this period and found her to be polite and respectful in her interaction with the staff. Although Ms. Gissendaner rarely had physical contact with other inmates when I was the Warden, she was able to provide support and inspiration with her strong and kind words to those housed on the secure unit. The maximum security housing unit in any prison houses inmates who are disruptive in the prison, inmates who have fought with staff and other inmates, and often inmates whose mental health causes them to behave in ways that pose a danger to other inmates and staff. In addition to these inmates, the women's prison placed juveniles on the maximum security housing as it was one of the units in the prison that permitted less physical interaction among prisoners thus providing them with a level of protection that was superior to other areas of the prison. Corrections officers, volunteer staff, other inmates, and juveniles who have visited Ms. Gissendaner through prison programs attest to the work that she has been able to achieve in prison despite her solitary conditions of confinement. She has reached out to other inmates at their lowest ebb of despair and helped them to recognize their worth and to see a path out of prison. Her ability to reach these inmates and provide them with the will to reform and excel has been repeatedly exhibited. This in turn provides a great service to the DOC as it increases the safety of the institution while helping inmates to leave the confines of the DOC permanently. Georgia has recently been recognized as a state on the forefront of prison reform. These accolades are deserved. Governor Deal has made reform a central tenet of his policy, providing support and resources to the DOC to ensure their success. The ultimate goal of prison reform is to magnify the chance for all inmates to leave prison with the tools necessary to lead productive and fulfilling lives. Ms. Gissendaner, through her dedicated efforts to better herself and in turn assist in the support of other inmates and juveniles who visit our prisons, has shown herself to be a great benefit to those who are working to see that the reform movement continues to succeed. >From a corrections standpoint, Ms. Gissendaner's execution would serve no significant penological interest. As her prison record illustrates, and as many staff members and administrators over nearly 2 decades of incarceration attest, Ms. Gissendaner has proven to be an asset to the institutions where she has been incarcerated. This reason alone should give serious pause to those empowered with the authority of whether to extend mercy in Ms. Gissendaner's case. Additionally, the children of the victim, Douglas Gissendaner, Jr., who are also the children of Kelly Gissendaner, are united in their wish to see their mother's life spared. Ms. Gissendaner's exceptional prison adjustment, her role in the crime as compared with her co-defendant who is serving a life sentence, her remorse, and the pleas of the Gissendaner children all signal the compelling need for mercy in this case. Fletcher, echoing the overall sentiment, said the punishment is not proportional to the crime in the following statement: Kelly Gissendaner is scheduled to be executed September 29, 2015, for her role in the murder of her husband, Douglas Gissendaner. No matter where one stands on the propriety of the death penalty generally, it is abundantly clear to me that Ms. Gissendaner should not be put to death. Since retiring from the Supreme Court of the State of Georgia, I have come to the conclusion that the death penalty is not an appropriate form of punishment. But these beliefs do not form the basis of my conviction that Ms. Gissendaner's life should be spared. Rather, that judgment rests upon the disproportionate nature of Ms. Gissendaner's sentence when compared to that of her co-defendant, Gregory Owen, who actually stabbed Douglas Gissendaner to death. Mr. Owen will be eligible for parole in 7 years. Ms. Gissendaner was not present when Mr. Gissendaner was killed, but she is scheduled to be executed in less than a week. As the Supreme Court has held, the death penalty is constitutional only to the extent that it is proportional. The principle of proportionality review is deeply rooted in our legal system, with the fundamental goal of ensuring that the death penalty is not arbitrarily applied. It is especially appropriate to consider proportionality when evaluating cases in which one defendant who is more culpable than another is given a sentence of less than death, while the latter is given the ultimate punishment. When this issue came before me as a justice, I joined in the ruling against Ms. Gissendaner. As part of that opinion, we concluded that her sentence was proportionate to her role in the crime. I was wrong. In addition, the process we used at the time to conduct proportionality review was deeply flawed, as outlined in an AJC series of articles in 2007. While Ms. Gissendaner's sentence was wrong on the day that it was imposed, it is impossible to ignore her work as a true minister of mercy during her years on death row. I am profoundly moved by the testimony of former and current prisoners, prison guards and officials, prison volunteers, and chaplains who have borne witness to the goodwill, hope, and example that she has provided for dozens of inmates in desperate need. She serves as a shining example of her faith, which is the product of her own remorse and devotion, and also a testament to the tremendous success of the reforms we have made in our prison system. The State of Georgia has not executed a person who did not commit the actual killing since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. There is a reason for this. Kelly Gissendaner should not be the 1st. (source: 11alive.news) **************** Forgiving Kelly Gissendaner: A condemned killer's purported reformation On March 2, Dakota Brookshire thought his mother was going to die. "Today, I got to see my mom for the last time," he wrote to friends on Facebook. "Telling her bye was without a doubt the hardest thing I have ever done." The mother was Kelly Gissendaner, Georgia's only woman on death row, who, before a last-minute cancellation, was scheduled to be executed at 7 p.m. that day. Her crime: She had her lover stab and beat her husband, Doug Gissendaner, to death in a field off Luke Edwards Road in Gwinnett County. The victim, a Desert Storm veteran recalled as "God-fearing family man," was Brookshire's stepfather but treated him as his own son when the child's biological father died of cancer. While his mother was irresponsible in those years and drifted aimlessly through life, her husband gave Brookshire stability and love. Now, Brookshire believes his mother will die at 7 p.m. Tuesday, the rescheduled date of execution. Again, he doesn't want it to happen. How could he forgive her? The answer, it appears, is faith. Faith that Doug Gissendaner was a good enough man that he wouldn't want even the woman who set his death in motion to die. Faith, perhaps most of all, that the mother has changed and become a godly woman who is ashamed and devastated by her sins. To understand how the son might come to these conclusions - and what he had to overcome to reach them - it is helpful to follow Kelly Gissendaner back to the beginning of the case. As testimony detailed at the trial, the wife went drinking with friends on Feb. 7, 1997 while her lover, Greg Owen, abducted and killed her husband. The Gissendaners' relationship was troubled long before that night. They married for the 1st time in 1989, soon having a daughter, Kayla, and falling on hard financial times. They moved in with Kelly's mother. Kelly argued with her husband and got mad when he didn't argue back. They divorced in 1993 after Doug joined the Army. Kelly soon joined the Army herself and got pregnant with Dakota. In May 1995, after Dakota's father died, Kelly remarried Doug. They filed for a separation 4 months later, about the same time Owen came into the picture. As with Doug, Kelly had an on-again, off-again relationship with Owen. Her troubles with love, records and statements filed in court suggest, stem from abuse she suffered at the hands of men in her life from a very early age, including multiple incidents of molestation and rape. One court filing describes a mental defense she has used throughout life to block out approaching memories such trauma: She imagines herself in a white and airy room or, sometimes, a field of flowers. "There is always a door that can be closed and locked," the filing says. "The room is a 'peaceful place: no music, no talking - just quiet.'" The same document, filed by the inmate's legal team, suggests the torment she endured corrupted her so much emotionally that she preferred Owen to her husband because Owen was abusive. Things with Doug seemed to go too well. It's hard to pinpoint when Kelly Gissendaner began to change, if you believe the many people who say she has, including former Georgia Supreme Court Chief Justice Norman Fletcher, who spoke out for her Saturday. Best guesses are that it was a gradual shift after she was convicted in 1998 and received the death sentence as Owen went away for life - and the possibility of parole by 2023 - thanks to his testimony. Jenny McBride, a religion professor who knows Gissendaner from her days working in Georgia prisons, said she believes Gissendaner's change began early on, perhaps in the 1st year. In that time, the inmate started meeting with a pastor who still serves her today. "The pastor was there to love her," McBride said, declining to reveal their identity. "Part of that love is to ask difficult questions and to get Kelly to face what she's done." Another help was Gissendaner's theological studies, which began in earnest at Metro State Prison, according to several friends. Kara Stephenson, now 38, met her at the south Atlanta prison, before it closed in 2011. Stephenson ended up there around 2002 after an armed robbery conviction and remembers the condemned killer for her kindness and distinctive chuckle. "I was in prison for 10 years and I never seen Kelly be anything like what her crime was," she said. That is, nothing like a murderer. To the contrary, Stephenson said, Gissendaner saved her life. It happened one night near the end of Stephenson's sentence. She said she was terrified to go home and return to the fractured life she'd left. She threw a fit, fighting with guards and screaming. They put her in lockdown, near Gissendaner's permanent cell there. "Why are you scared to go home?" she recalls the condemned woman asking. Stephenson told her she wanted to kill herself. Other prisoners overheard and yelled for her to just do it; Gissendaner quoted scripture and convinced not to. To hear Gissendaner's supporters tell it, this wasn't an isolated incident. Several others tell similar stories. Nikki Roberts, also convicted of robbery, said she slit her wrist in 2007 and soon heard a calming voice through the air vent in her lockdown cell: "Don't you dare wish death on yourself," Gissendaner said. "Roberts got out of prison almost a year ago. "I love life and I have hope," she said. For the retired Georgia Supreme Court justice, these stories show that Gissendaner should be spared. "While Ms. Gissendaner's sentence was wrong on the day that it was imposed, it is impossible to ignore her work as a true minister of mercy during her years on death row," he said in an emailed statement, in which he also said he was wrong in a previous ruling upholding Gissendaner's death sentence because it wasn't proportional to her lover's sentence. The stories also appear important to Dakota's forgiveness of his mother. He talked about them in a recent videotaped statement, asking the state of Georgia for mercy. "She's saved people's lives," he said, a hint of pride in his voice. Gissendaner's children went to live with their maternal grandmother after she went away. Brandon, the eldest son, hasn't spoken publicly about his relationship with his mother, though Kayla said in the video that all 3 kids want her to live. Dakota and Kayla each took years to reconcile with their mother. The children and inmate haven't given interviews on the subject and, according to Gissendaner's attorney, won't ahead of the execution. But the children's public statements offer a glimpse into the difficulty they've had accepting the situation their mother created. "As a young child I could not grasp why my father had been taken from me. As my awareness grew, so did my anger toward my mother," the daughter said in a statement posted on a website for her mother. Kayla stopped visiting the prison after enrolling in college around 2008. Her mother reached out for a year before Kayla decided she had ask her about the murder. They had never talked about it before. "It was hard for both of us, but she told me the terrible truth. As painful as that was, I realized then that I wanted to try to have a relationship with her again," the daughter said. Kayla convinced Dakota visit the mother after a 7-year break. "Something had changed," he recalled in the video. "She said, 'Ya know, I'm not asking for your forgiveness. I'm not asking you to love me, because if it was me I don't think I could forgive myself.'" The children's forgiveness has won Gissendaner favor with many onlookers. It has not, however, swayed many others, including Gwinnett County District Attorney Danny Porter. "I don't have any reason to doubt that they're sincere, but I'm not sure they're the ones that are in the position to grant forgiveness," Porter said this week of the children. "Kelly arranged for them to be raised by her mother. In other words, she put them in the same environment that created her. She did that on purpose." According to Porter, the more "aggrieved party" and "harmed" in the case is Doug Gissendaner's family, who lost their son and their grandchildren. The victim's family has remained largely silent in the case recently, except for 2 statements sent to the media from the DA's office. The 1st thanked the law enforcement workers and others who helped them through their time of sorrow; the 2nd came on March 4, 2 days after an issue with lethal injection drugs halted the last execution. At the time, people from around the world, who had been fighting to save the inmate, were rejoicing. The victim's family was not. "Doug is the true victim of this pre-meditated and heinous crime," their statement said. "We, along with our friends and supporters and our faith, will continue fighting for Doug until he gets the justice he deserves no matter how long it takes." The DA plans to see Gissendaner's death carried out. It will be the drd execution he's witnessed in his more than 20 years in office. The 1st inmate was Tracy Lee Housel, who met the state's needle on March 12, 2002, for strangling and viciously beating a woman he met at a Lawrenceville truck stop in 1985. The 2nd was James Willie Brown, who was put to death on Nov. 4, 2003, for the 1975 murder of a topless dancer he suffocated with her own panties. If Porter's experience is an indication, Gissendaner's death will happen something like the others: The witnesses sit on benches in a dimly lit room, "like a movie theater," and peer through glass at the condemned inmate on a gurney as the drugs seep in. "Usually, they yawn once or twice," Porter said, "and then they snore, and then they die." You can tell they're dead when the color drains from their face. As Housel and Brown slipped out of life, Porter had a thought he expects to be repeated with Gissendaner: They got off a lot easier than the victim. Dakota and Kayla might have a familiar experience Tuesday night, too. Just as on the mother's last death date, they are likely to be waiting for the news that she is gone, that they've lost their last parent. (source: Gwinnett Daily Post) ***************** Questions remain on cloudy drug, even as new execution looms In late March, William King placed a vial of pentobarbital in a refrigerator at the state prison in Jackson and dutifully logged the temperature at 34 degrees. Earlier that same month, the execution of the only woman on Georgia's death row had been halted abruptly after prison officials noticed that the drug that was supposed to stop her breathing appeared cloudy. Now King - an investigator with the state Department of Corrections - was attempting to prove a theory: that the lethal barbiturate took on a clumpy, opaque quality because it had been stored in the cold. The experiment was a bust. 11 days after the vial was chilled, records show, the drug remained crystal clear. As the state again prepares to execute Kelly Gissendaner on Tuesday they still cannot explain with certainty what was wrong with the drug that put the brakes on her execution earlier this year. State officials maintain the cold temperature caused the drug to separate as it did. But death penalty opponents contend that's little more than an unproven theory. What would have happened if it was used on Gissendaner is also an open question. It's a puzzle that worries some, especially as Georgia prepares to ramp up executions this fall. As many as 8 condemned inmates could have their execution dates set over the next year or so. "It gives me great pause," said Norman Fletcher, a former chief justice for Georgia's highest court who recently came out in opposition to the death penalty. "No one really knows what happened, or what could have happened, and that does concern me very much." Gwinnett County District Attorney Danny Porter has no such concerns. "The drugs are perfectly effective for their purpose," said Porter, who successfully convinced a jury to sentence Gissendaner to death. "What did the Supreme Court say? No death is painless? The drugs are perfectly adequate in the way they are administered and for the purpose they are intended." The death sentence, if it's carried out, will signal that Georgia's capital punishment machine is kicking into high gear after an 8-month hiatus. Gissendaner could be the 1st of 5 - and possibly as many as 8 executions - in the coming months. According to the state attorney general's office, 4 other condemned inmates are soon to be execution eligible. 3 more inmates could be added to the list if the U.S. Supreme Court declines to hear their appeals after the new term begins on Oct. 1. That accelerated pace would come even as some states have moved away from capital punishment - some with unofficial moratoriums as they sort out drug supply and other issues. Currently, 31 states still have capital punishment laws on the books. The number of executions nationally has dropped or held steady every year since 2009. Lauren Sudeal Lucas, who is on the board of the Southern Center for Human Rights and a law professor at Georgia State University, said she isn't surprised that Georgia is moving to swiftly resume executions, bucking the national trend. "I have heard they are planning to set dates for all the people mentioned," Lucas said. "It marches on regardless." THE "MOST LIKELY" CAUSE Gissendaner was already in a holding area near the death chamber at the Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison on March 2 when prison officials noticed something was amiss with the syringe of pentobarbital. Several hours passed while they decided what to do. Late that night, a Department of Corrections spokeswoman told reporters only that the drug appeared cloudy and Gissendaner's lethal injection was called off in "an abundance of caution." 6 weeks later, they released a video showing the suspect syringe. In it, chunks of a white solid material floated in the solution. They also released documents. Among them was an affidavit from University of Georgia pharmacy professor Jason Zastre who wrote that "there is no evidence that the solution was adulterated." Instead, Zastre wrote, it was "most likely" that the drug was shipped and stored at a temperature that was too low - 37 degrees over seven days. The drug manufacturer advises that the solution should be stored at a controlled room temperature not less than 59 degrees, he said. But Zastre also provided an alternate explanation, the solvent and the powder form of the drug separated because it was not properly mixed. By that time, King had already conducted his experiment, which showed no change in drugs stored in a refrigerator. In a log that covered 9 of the 11 days, he recorded the temperature and remarked that the solution was clear. Still, the state has stood by the claim that the cold temperature was to blame and, in an opinion issued last month, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia dismissed a challenge from Gissendaner's team, clearing the way for the state to proceed on Tuesday. Georgia Attorney General Sam Olens declined an interview request from The Atlanta Journal-Constitution because the case is ongoing. A spokesman pointed the newspaper to the state's legal filings. Bob Keller, who was Clayton County's district attorney for nearly 3 decades before serving on the state parole board, said it wasn't unusual for Gissendaner's lawyer to key in on the drug problem since it was new. "The cloudy drug, the refusal to disclose who is doing those things, those things are unique and can be litigated. But once those issues are cleared, it's cleared for everybody so you don't have anything unique," Keller said of last-minute appeals. A SCRAMBLE FOR DRUGS To understand how perilous the stakes are for officials weighing what to do about the drugs in the Gissendaner case, it???s important to look back 5 years or so. As political pressure mounted from anti-death penalty forces, the supply of lethal injection drugs nationwide began to evaporate. Georgia and other capital punishment states hunted for drugs far and wide. Georgia once bought lethal injection drugs from a London pharmacy that shared an office with a driving school. That resulted in a raid by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. The DEA said the state lacked a license to import the drug, which was at the time part of a 3-drug lethal injection cocktail. Georgia eventually followed the lead of other states in turning to pentobarbital, which had been used for years to euthanize animals. But again, protests led drug companies worldwide to refuse to supply the drug for executions. Last year, Georgia began to use a compounding pharmacist to assemble the drug themselves so it would have a ready supply. So far, there have been no high-profile complications with pentobarbital. But other drugs have been blamed for botched executions elsewhere. In Ohio, Dennis McGuire snorted, gasped for air and appeared to struggle as the lethal injection drugs hydromorphone and midazolam took effect. Clayton Locket writhed, clenched his teeth and strained to lift his head when Oklahoma attempted to put him to death using a t3 drug-cocktail in April. Locket died 43 minutes later of a heart attack. And in Arizona, Joseph Wood gasped for an hour and 40 minutes before he was pronounced dead of a 2-drug cocktail, midazolam and hydromorphone. Arizona officials said Wood was only snoring loudly. IT'S A SECRET In the Gissendaner case, the pharmacist who assembled the drug was the 1st to suggest the cold storage caused the cloudiness. Who is that pharmacist? The state of Georgia won't say. Nor will they provide information on the pharmacist's credentials. Though compounded pharmacists are licensed, their work does not receive the same oversight as drug manufacturers. The Food and Drug Administration does not approve compounded drugs because they are mixed one batch at a time for one, specific purpose. Compounding pharmacies can be accredited but it isn't required. Questions about the pharmacists are among the many facts surrounding the execution process that the state keeps shrouded in secrecy. A law adopted in 2013 specifically prohibits the state from divulging the manufacturer of the lethal drugs as well as the identities of those directly involved in the execution process. It's designed to prevent intimidation, supporters say. But state officials have said the spirit of the law allows them to withhold other information as well, such as the quality standards in production, when the state acquired the drugs or the credentials of those involved. Those who argue for more transparency say that effectively abolishes accountability in what is the greatest exercise of power the state may exert. Nonetheless, the state's highest court last May upheld the secrecy law by a 5-2 vote. That decision by the Georgia Supreme Court was similar to rulings in other states who have backed secrecy laws. "I DON'T DESERVE TO DIE" On Monday morning, Gissendaner's lawyers will appear before a federal district court judge to make a last-ditch plea to delay the death sentence. The state Board of Pardons and Parole turned down Gissendaner's clemency appeal earlier this year. She was convicted of conspiring with her lover to kill her husband, Douglas Gissendaner, in 1997. That Gissendaner is a woman has certainly led to heightened curiosity about her case. Women remain a rarity on death row. Nationally, she is 1 of just 56 - less than 2 % of the overall death-row population. But there are other unique elements to her story as well. Gissender was sentenced to die by a Gwinnett County jury even though she wasn't even present when her husband was knocked unconscious with nightstick and then repeatedly stabbed in the neck. Gregory Owen, who pleaded guilty to the brutal slaying, was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole after serving 25 years. It is exceedingly rare for those who didn't actually commit a murder to be executed. Out of 1,414 murderers executed since the 1970s, only 5 were co-conspirators like her, according to an Atlanta Journal-Constitution analysis of death penalty records. Additionally, Gissendaner's apparent conversion behind bars to a deeply religious mentor for other inmates has attracted a robust crowd of supporters to her cause. A number of religious groups are urging the state to reconsider the decision to execute her. Some of her most passionate supporters include a loose-knit group of former women inmates who credit Gissendaner with helping them move on to productive lives. 2 of Gissendaner's 3 children have filmed an emotional video pleading with the state not to take away their remaining parent. But the parents of the husband she had killed remain staunch supporters of her execution. Porter said that Gissendaner may not have wielded the knife, but she was the instigator. She spent the night of the murder at a bar with friends while Owen waited for Douglas at the Gissendaner house. She gave Owen a night stick and a hunting knife, Porter said. Gissendaner's lawyers and prison officials declined to make her available to the AJC. But in a 2004 interview with the newspaper she made her thoughts on the matter clear: "I deserve to be here," she said. "But I don't deserve to die." What the State Won't Say A 2013 Georgia law requires the state to shield information related to the execution process, including most information about letal injection drugs. Some of the things Georgia officials can now keep secret include: --The identity of the drug manufacturer of lethal drugs --The date the drug was purchased --The date the drug expires --The identity of the compounding pharmacist who mixes the drug --The names of medical officials overseeing the execution --Quality control reports related to the drug THE NEXT TO DIE 4 death row inmates have exhausted most of their legal appeals and are waiting for an execution date to be set: Marcus Ray Johnson: Sentenced to die for the 1994 murder of Angela Sizemore in Dougherty County. A judge stayed his execution scheduled for October 2011 to allow time for testing of newly-discovered DNA evidence. Brian Keith Terrell: Sentenced to die in Newton County for the 1992 murder of John Henry Watson, a friend of Terrell's mother. His execution that was set for March 10 was called off because the state wanted to determine the problem with the execution drug that was acquired for Gissendaner's execution. Travis Hittson: Enlisted in the Navy and was sentenced to die in Houston County for the 1992 murder and dismemberment of shipmate Conway Utterbeck. Joshua Daniel Bishop: Sentenced to die for the 1998 beating death in Baldwin County of Leverett Morrison because Morrison would not turn over the keys to his Jeep. 3 inmates are awaiting final appeals pending before the U.S. Supreme Court: Kenneth Fults: Sentenced to die for the 1996 murder in Spalding County of Cathy Bounds, who was shot 5 times in the back of her head. The U.S. Supreme Court is considering whether to hear his appeal alleging that one of the jurors in his case was racist. Daniel Joseph Lucas: Sentenced to die for the 1998 murders of 3 members of a Jones County family. His co-defendant, Brandon Joseph Rhodes, was executed for the crime in 2010. Brandon Astor Jones: Sentenced to die in the 1979 robbery and murder of Roger Tackett, a 30-year-old teacher who was working a 2nd job managing a gas station. His co-defendant, Van Roosevelt Solomon, was executed on Feb. 20, 1985, but Jones was granted a new trial because there was Bible in the jury room during deliberations. (source: Atlanta Journal-Constitution) FLORIDA: Unanimous juries sought in death-penalty cases If a unanimous jury vote should be needed to impose the death penalty, as a new Florida Senate bill now proposes, seven out of 10 of the most heinous killers to face trial in Lake County would have never landed on death row. Despite their vicious crimes, between 1 and 4 members of these murderers' 12-person juries couldn't vote to recommend the death penalty - despite finding them guilty. Under current law, a simple majority of a jury is needed to recommend that a defendant receive the death penalty. Sen. Thad Altman, R-Rockledge, wants to establish the higher standard of a unanimous jury vote with Senate Bill 330 filed this week. The bill would also give direction to judges on some jury instructions in death-penalty cases. Those instructions deal with what are known as "aggravating circumstances," which are factors used to support death-penalty recommendations. The bill, in part, would require aggravating circumstances to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and be subject to a unanimous vote. The bill - an identical measure (HB 157) has already been filed in - would only apply to sentencing proceedings that begin after July 1, 2016. Similar efforts have failed in prior legislative sessions. However, this year's proposal comes as the U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments Oct. 13 in a case that challenges the way Florida sentences people to death. The case stems from the 1998 murder of an Escambia County fast-food worker, and attorneys representing death row inmate Timothy Lee Hurst contend that Florida's unique sentencing system is unconstitutional. The attorneys argue, in part, that a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court ruling requires that determination of aggravating circumstances be "entrusted" to juries, not to judges. Also, they take issue with Florida not requiring unanimous jury recommendations in death-penalty cases. A judge sentenced Hurst to death after receiving a 7-5 jury recommendation. Here are the 7 cases in Lake and Sumter where some jurors couldn't bring themselves to recommend a sentence of death: J.P "Pig" Parker was convicted of robbing and kidnapping a convenience store clerk in Stuart in 1982, stabbing the woman so she fell to her knees, then shooting her execution-style in the back of the head. His take from the store was about $30. The case was moved to Lake County because of intense press coverage, with the death-penalty vote coming in at 11-1. Allen Cox was already serving several life sentences for kidnapping, sexual battery and aggravated battery when someone stole $500 from him at Lake Correctional Institution in 1998. He used a prison shank to stab a suspect 3 times, causing the man to bleed to death. Cox also beat up the man's cellmate. His death-penalty vote was 10-2. Guy Gamble told his girlfriend he was going to kill his landlord 6 days before repeatedly hitting the man in the head with a claw hammer in 1991. He then stole the man's car and took his girlfriend out to a restaurant for dinner. Gamble's death-penalty vote was 10-2. Jason Wheeler ambushed and killed a Lake County sheriff's deputy responding to a domestic call at his Paisley residence in 2005. 2 other deputies also were shot. Wheeler's death-penalty vote was 10-2. Donte Hall burst into a house filled with female strippers, robbing and opening fire on the male guests before killing 2 of them with an AK-47 assault rifle in 2006. His death-penalty vote was 8-4. Donald Williams helped an 81-year-old woman shop for groceries in a motorized wheelchair then robbed and kidnapped her from the supermarket's parking lot in 2010. Her body was found in the woods several days later. His death-penalty vote was 9-3. James Duckett, a Mascotte police officer in 1987, was convicted of raping and killing an 11-year-old girl and tossing her body in a local lake. At his trial, 3 other girls said he had made sexual advances toward them. His death penalty-vote was 8-4. (source: Daiy Commercial) **************** Judge denies Toledo's request for delay A judge has denied a request by attorneys for Luis Toledo, who is accused of killing his wife and her 2 children, to stay his case until the U.S. Supreme Court reviews Florida's death penalty. Toledo, 33, is charged with 2nd-degree murder in the slaying of his wife, Yessenia Suarez, 28, and 2 counts of 1st-degree murder in the killing of her children, Thalia, 9, and Michael, 8. The mother and children were reported missing by the children's grandmother on Oct. 23, 2013. Their bodies have not been found. The case is scheduled to go to trial next year. Defense attorney Jeff Deen asked Circuit Judge Raul Zambrano to delay the proceedings until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of Florida's death penalty. Florida is 1 of only 2 states with the death penalty that does not require a unanimous recommendation from a jury for a judge to impose a death sentence. The other state, Alabama, requires a super-majority of 10-2 but Florida requires only a majority of jurors, 7 to 5. Zambrano issued a ruling on Friday in which he wrote that granting a stay based on what may or may not happen would require him to infer outcomes for Toledo's case and in the case of Hurst v. Florida, which is the one before the Supreme Court. Zambrano also said he would have to assume that the outcome in the Hurst case would be the final outcome, but that's unlikely since "the death penalty is constantly under constitutional scrutiny." Zambrano also wrote that the "premise of the request is an uncertain stacking of hypothetical outcomes." (source: Pensacola News Journal) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sun Sep 27 13:26:06 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2015 13:26:06 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----MO., ORE. Message-ID: Sept. 27 MISSOURI----impending execution Autism undermines scheduled execution I am concerned that Missouri plans to execute Kimber Edwards on Oct. 6 for a crime for which he might well be innocent. It is all the more disconcerting that Edwards has also been diagnosed with Asperger syndrome, an autism spectrum disorder. Edwards was convicted of hiring Orthell Wilson to kill his ex-wife, Kimberly Cantrell. Wilson has consistently acknowledged he fatally shot her on Aug. 22, 2000, in University City. I mourn her death and all who have been murdered. Regarding accountability, nobody hired him - Wilson acted alone, he stressed in a May 2015 affidavit, undermining the state???s strongest pieces of evidence theoretically implicating Edwards. "I was coerced by the police to implicate Edwards in a murder for hire by the threat of the death penalty," Wilson said. In exchange for his cooperation, he was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. Soon after Edwards' conviction, Wilson said he lied to gain favorable treatment from the court. The painful reality is that, while officials almost always get it right, mistakes are made, even with something as irreversible as capital punishment. At least 156 people who were convicted and sentenced to death across the country have been exonerated since 1974, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. That includes four men in Missouri. On average, for every 8 U.S. executions, one death-sentenced individual has been exonerated. There is no physical evidence that Edwards was involved in the murder. The case against him was also largely based on incriminating statements he made under pressure. At trial and since, Edwards has insisted he wasn't involved in his ex-wife's death. He had no prior criminal record. A day after finding Cantrell's body, police officers brought Edwards to their station for questioning. They assumed state custody of a daughter he and Cantrell co-parented and also brought in Jada, his wife at the time, and their 2 children. A few days later, they brought him back and threatened to bring his wife and kids in once more. Eager to avoid retraumatizing them, he "confessed" to hiring a man named "Michael," then said he hired Wilson. False confessions are surprisingly common. More than 25 percent of the few hundred people nationwide who were wrongly convicted of crimes but later exonerated by DNA evidence made false confessions or self-incriminating statements, according to the Innocence Project. Jurors, along with his trial attorneys and law-enforcement officers, were also sadly unaware that Edwards has Asperger disorder. Physician William Logan documented that conclusion years after Edwards' conviction in a 2007 psychiatric report. He said there was evidence of autism spectrum disorder beginning early in Edward's childhood, when he was described as "lost in his own world" and engaging in "repetitive behavior" such as biting his tongue. Through my 30 years as an educator, consultant and, internationally, as a presenter on autism, I have learned what other researchers know - that individuals with autism are especially susceptible to being pressured. They often do not understand the consequences when they agree to requests to escape from a difficult situation. They might make statements that are at odds with the truth. Many individuals with such disabilities have learned that, when unsure, it is best to say "yes" to get along. Frequently, they do not accurately read social cues such as voice tone, body language and facial expression, and their own facial expressions might vary from what others think would be typical for a person in an emotional situation. Kimber Edwards' expression or lack of expression at his ex-wife's death, as Logan reported, was introduced at the trial and used as damaging characterization to the jury, when it is common in autism to feel emotion but not show it in the typical manner. As an adult, Edwards continues his autism characteristics with over-focused interests on certain types of objects and the need for inflexible routines, according to Logan's report. He has made his predicament more difficult through an inability to understand the big picture of his conviction and to effectively work with others on his legal defense. There certainly is enough doubt about Edwards' involvement in this crime - in addition to his previously undetected Asperger disorder - to warrant stopping the execution and taking a deeper look at this case. Please join us in asking Gov. Jay Nixon to stop this execution. Contact Gov. Nixon's office by calling 573-751-3222 or writing via www.governor.mo.gov. Please urge him to stay Edwards' execution and convene a board of inquiry to reconsider the case. Also, please contact Attorney General Chris Koster's Office, calling 573-751-3321 or writing via attorney.general at ago.mo.gov. Urge him to desist in efforts to have Edwards be executed. If there's no intervention, consider joining a vigil for life remembering all murder victims and opposing his execution from noon to 1 p.m. Oct. 6 in the Capitol outside the governor's office, Room 216. Later that day in Columbia, concerned citizens will gather from 5 to 6 p.m. outside the Boone County Courthouse at Walnut and Eighth streets. (source: Julie A. Donnelly was an autism consultant with Columbia Public Schools for more than 20 years and recently retired from being associate director of Missouri's state educational autism agency, Project ACCESS----Columbia Daily Tribune) OREGON: Clear up death penalty debate by ending it Debating the death penalty has become a lot more than an academic exercise around here with the U.S. Supreme Court and Oregon Gov. Kate Brown seemingly in legal limbo on the matter. Where are those 3x5 debate notecards I made in college listing arguments in opposition to capital punishment? In a recent story by The Oregonian's Denis Theriault, we were reminded that eight days after taking office, Brown said she would convene a group of advisers devoted to puzzling through death penalty law and practices in Oregon. While seeking direction, she'd extend the moratorium former Gov. John Kitzhaber made on executions. The death penalty has been carried out in Oregon just twice in more than 50 years. Both happened on Kitzhaber's watch during his first administration. In a Nov. 22, 2011 statement about his moratorium, Kitzhaber wrote about being torn between his personal convictions about capital punishment and his oath to uphold the Oregon constitution. Of the executions, he said, "They were the most agonizing and difficult decisions I have made as Governor and I have revisited and questioned them over and over again during the past 14 years. I do not believe that those executions made us safer; and certainly they did not make us nobler as a society." I was proud of him for that statement and sympathized with the situation he faced. Brown, too, has expressed personal opposition to the death penalty and is now stuck weighing her personal feelings with her governor job. Kristen Grainger, Brown's spokeswoman, told me, "These are very, very difficult issues. They test every leader's ability to balance a personal view with one's official role," and, given the Supreme Court's recent happenings, "Could Oregon even go forward with execution?" That says to me Brown is happy to take advantage of the national limbo going on, because she still has no idea what to do. In February, then-Attorney General Eric Holder asked states to hold off on executions pending a Supreme Court decision on the use of lethal injection drugs in Oklahoma. That ruling hit in June and use of the drug was upheld, but justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined in a dissenting opinion that called for a full re-examination of capital punishment. That hasn't yet happened and isn't expected to in the court's current session. It's the 7nth month of a Brown reign. She's been extra busy having been thrust into office when Kitzhaber reluctantly resigned, and her office admits she is just starting the process on this issue. It's likely that any decision about reinstating the death penalty won't be made by Brown until after the 2016 general election. That's a little lame, since the death penalty is one of the passion issues that can determine who some voters support. Aside from the politics, I'd like to see Brown use her convictions and leadership role to help drive Oregon law to a better place. In college, my 3x5 cards were mostly about the heavy taxpayer cost associated with the death penalty (compelling); the inevitability that governments, at some point, will be responsible for executing an innocent individual (extra compelling), and the argument that our justice system needs to be more about rehabilitation and safety than punishment, even when rehabilitation fails. And that lends itself to continued assessment of criminals over time, not killing them. The most compelling argument I'm drawn to today wasn't even on one of those notecards; it's that killers shouldn't get to lower our standards, alter who we are or have us -- or a governor -- revisiting, questioning and reliving personal conflict. Supreme Court rulings about what's cruel and unusual and governor deliberations about moratoriums are happening as South Carolina is seeking the death penalty for Dylann Roof, the man who allegedly killed nine people during a Bible study in Charleston, South Carolina. Roof's crimes are not only offering fodder for the debate, they're making anti-death penalty people like me squirm a bit. If the death penalty is utilized, Roof is an awesome candidate for the punishment. Does this man "deserve" death as headlines say? Arguably and comparatively so. Do we deserve to be lowered to killing for any reason other than self defense? Absolutely not. I admire Brown for convening advisers and best navigating her role. She also shouldn't be afraid to use her bully pulpit on this one. It's worth it. I spent some time in my 20s visiting inmates at the Washington Corrections Center for Women. That's where I learned criminals were sometimes only 1 bad choice different than me and that rehabilitation is often possible. Jails are full of reasons to be against the death penalty. And they're full of examples of why we should be thankful that we're capable of making better choices. (source: Opinion; Elizabeth Hovde writes Sunday columns for The Oregonian/OregonLive) *************** Oregon maintains only the illusion of a death penalty For whatever reason, Pope Francis, in his historic visit to the United States, did not make it to Portland. Maybe nobody told him about our South American food carts, or someone was worried about the Popemobile getting bogged down in a sea of bicycles. But as he spoke to Congress Thursday, there were passages that seemed to speak directly to us. When he spoke about immigrants - "We, the people of this continent, are not fearful of foreigners, because most of us were once foreigners... When the stranger in our midst appeals to us, we must not repeat the sins and the errors of the past" - Francis might have found a more responsive audience here than among most of the congressmen and senators he was addressing. When he pleaded for steps "to avert the most serious effects of the environmental deterioration caused by human activity," he may not have made much progress among senators who consider global warming "the greatest hoax" in human history. But Francis might have gotten a closer hearing in a place that, once again, has just had the hottest summer in its history, on a coast in the midst of a near-biblical drought, with countless counties declared disaster zones. Francis may have spoken most topically to Oregon when he declared his determination "from the beginning of my ministry, to advocate at different levels for the global abolition of the death penalty. ... Recently, my brother bishops here in the United States renewed their call for the abolition of the death penalty. Not only do I support them, but I also offer encouragement to all those who are convinced that a just and necessary punishment must never exclude the dimension of hope and the goal of rehabilitation." Rehabilitation of those on Oregon's death row may seem a distant and implausible vision. But Francis was speaking in the same week as yet another development in Oregon's continuing inability to find an acceptable way of dealing with the death penalty, leading to a deepening discomfort with having one at all. Several years ago, former Gov. John Kitzhaber - who during the 1990s became the only Oregon governor in the last 50 years to sign execution orders, although our death row has become a high-density residential area - announced that as long as he was governor, there would be no more executions. Some people complained that Kitzhaber hadn't said this when running for the job in 2010, but his clear opposition to capital punishment didn't keep him from being re-elected in 2014. (What kept him from still being governor, of course, was something else entirely.) When Secretary of State Kate Brown succeeded Kitzhaber in February, she said she would continue the execution moratorium while setting up a process to assess it. As The Oregon/OregonLive's Denis C. Theriault reported this month, not much has happened to move things along. Brown's spokeswoman Kristen Grainger did tell Theriault that Brown has directed her office attorney, Ben Souede, to seek "legal advice about the practical aspects related to capital punishment in Oregon," although there might not be any actual recommendations until deep into next year, when Brown runs for re-election. The problems with Oregon's death penalty have long been clear: The highly expensive legal process takes decades; Oregon has more than 30 inmates on death row, but no executions actually expected for years; the only executions scheduled in the decades since the death penalty was restored were at the request of the convict, not exactly a testament to its deterrent power. This year, a similar situation caused the Legislature in deep-red Nebraska to abolish its death penalty and then override the governor's veto. Last month, the Connecticut Supreme Court, ruling that the state's recent abolition extended to all its death row inmates, quoted Ninth Circuit appeals judge Alex Kozinski: "[W]e have little more than an illusion of a death penalty in this country. ... Whatever purposes the death penalty is said to serve - deterrence, retribution, assuaging the pain suffered by victims' families - these purposes are not served by the system as it now operates." >From either the pope's principles or Kozinski's reality, it's hard to argue for Oregon to continue pretending to have capital punishment. "A good political leader is one who, with the interests of all in mind, seizes the moment in a spirit of openness and pragmatism," Francis said Thursday. "A good political leader always opts to initiate processes rather than possessing spaces." On a number of issues, this advice might have arrived too late for this Congress. But it might still work in Salem. (source: Opinion; David Sarasohn's column appears on Wednesdays and Sundays----The Oregonian) From rhalperi at smu.edu Sun Sep 27 13:26:51 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2015 13:26:51 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 27 NIGERIA: NLC insists on death penalty for looters The President, Nigeria Labour Congress, Ayuba Wabba, and the factional National Deputy President, NLC, Mr. Issa Aremu, have insisted on capital punishment for corrupt government officials and others individuals. The NLC noted that corruption had become pervasive and endemic, adding that it had led to the death of many innocent Nigerians. Wabba spoke in Ilorin on Saturday during his condolence visit to Aremu who lost his 91-year-old mother, Hafsat. He further said there had been a collapse of social services and basic amenities as few Nigerians corruptly enrich themselves to the detriment of the majority. Wabba said, "We must canvass for capital punishment. It is only people who are stealing that will go against it. If we are campaigning for capital punishment and people are kicking against it, we must be consistent because people are reaping from where they did not sow. "We are facing challenges because many people have appropriated the resources needed to drive development. Schools are not developing; there are no drugs in hospitals. People have helped themselves and Nigerians are suffering. We have the right to demand for good governance and accountability." The NLC boss claimed the crisis that factionalised the labour union had been resolved. Wabba said the strength of any labour union lay in its solidarity and oneness. He stated that all labour unions were bound together by the quest for improvement in the living and working conditions of workers. "We never had a faction. We were not divided over the issues of unity and issues that will advance the interests of Nigerian workers. We have been the same," he added. On his part, Aremu said many Nigerians were dying from corruption as a result of avoidable deaths from decayed and unavailable infrastructure and social amenities. (source: Punch.com) CANADA: Alberta filmmaker questioning capital punishment after making doc Doubts still linger over the guilt of the last man hanged to death in Alberta. Filmmaker Rick Smallwood was a firm believer in capital punishment until he started working on a documentary titled The Grease Pit about Robert Cook, who was hanged in November 1960 at the Fort Saskatchewan Jail. Now, he's not so sure. "I put it to the interviewees, do you think this guy was guilty? The most (common) answer I got was, 'Yes, probably,'" Cook said. "It was always probably." The Grease Pit delves into the brutal June 1959 slaying of Robert's father Raymond Cook, his wife Daisy and their 5 children in Stettler. The adults were shot and the kids were clubbed to death with the double-barrelled shotgun, before all 7 were stuffed into a grease pit in the family garage. Robert was charged with capital murder based on circumstantial evidence, amid doubts expressed by media at the time. In the documentary, Smallwood speaks with Robert's defence lawyer and an RCMP officer who responded to the grisly murder scene. By most accounts, Robert was a "very likable young guy," despite being a habitual thief always in trouble with the law. Some believe he did commit the murder but had no recollection of the crime. He maintained his innocence until the moment he was hanged, at age 23, in a dingy storage room-turned-execution chamber inside the jail. It was the only execution ever carried out in that room. The recent slaying of 2-year-old Hailey Dunbar-Blanchette and her father Terry Blanchette has spurred some calls for the return of the death penalty, including a Facebook group called Justice for Hailey and Terry that has close to 1,700 members. Smallwood knows the feeling. "I have to admit, when this murder happens my first thought is, this guy should hang," he said. Aside from the doubts he found in the Cook slayings, examining the sentencing process has also gotten him thinking about the morality of capital punishment. "I have to wonder if the process they put these prisoners through to execute them, this whole draconian way they do it, is any better than what these guys did? And aren't we a little above that as a society?" he said. "It really has had me thinking." The documentary is available through robertcook.ca (source: Edmonton Sun) CHINA: Reducing death penalty offenses is a step in the right direction China recently passed an amendment canceling the death penalty for a number of several criminal offenses, including the smuggling of weapons and ammunition, nuclear materials and fake currency, as well as for counterfeiting banknotes, organizing prostitution, forcing others into prostitution, and obstructing military operations. A total of 13 criminal offenses were removed from the list of crimes punishable by death in the bill passed by the National People's Congress, the 2nd of its kind in 4 years. The move shows China is inclined to diminish the use of the death penalty, especially for economic or non-violent crimes. Under the revised Criminal Code, officials convicted of corruption and given a 2-year stay of execution are entitled to have the penalty commuted to a life sentence based on the criminal acts committed - a state of affairs that has already existed in practice for some time. They are not entitled to any further reduction or parole, however. It has been more common over the past decade to read news of executed criminals who were later found to be innocent, something a nation which wishes to consider itself civilized should not tolerate. Similar miscarriages of justice undoubtedly took place in the past and the mere fact that such cases are now being openly reported marks a step forward in itself. Though the number of death sentences handed out has been gradually reduced in recent years, China still executes more people by far than any other country in the world and the standard rationales offered of "national conditions and cultural traditions" only go so far. (source: Editorial, Want China Times) MALAYSIA: 7 including army doctor to be charged with Kevin Morais murder tomorrow 7 men, including a military doctor, will be charged tomorrow (Sept 28) with the murder of Mr Anthony Kevin Morais, the deputy public prosecutor (DPP) whose body was found in an oil drum filled with cement on Malaysia Day in Subang Jaya last week. 5 of them will be charged with murder under Section 302 of the Penal Code, while 2 others, including the military doctor, will be charged with abetting the murder which falls under Section 109 of the Penal Code, sources told The Malaysian Insider. All 7 suspects face the death penalty if convicted. Police had earlier said that Morais was the DPP in the case where the military doctor, a colonel in his 50s attached with the pathology lab at the Tuanku Mizan Military Hospital, was charged with unlawful trade in December 2013. In September last year, the doctor, who was on a RM100,000 (S$32, 430) bail, had claimed trial to 2 bribery charges involving RM700,000 (S$227,000) for allegedly recommending 3 companies to supply medicine and disposable medical tools to the hospital. The 7 will be charged at the Magistrate's Court at the Jalan Duta court complex tomorrow, even as Mr Morais's remains are still left unclaimed at the Kuala Lumpur Hospital mortuary. Mr Morais's brothers - Charles, David and Richard - are believed to be unhappy over the uncertainty over the cause of death, and decided not to claim the remains pending the complete post-mortem report. A memorial mass was held at the St Joseph's Church in Sentul yesterday, after the family held a 3-day wake at the Nirvana Memorial centre in Kuala Lumpur. The funeral mass will be held at the Church of the Divine Mercy in Shah Alam on October 3. Mr Morais went missing on September 4 after he was abducted by several men following a fender bender along Jalan Dutamas during morning rush hour traffic. He was grabbed by the suspects after he came out of his car to inspect the damage. Mr Richard lodged a missing person's report the following day at the Jinjang police station after it was discovered his brother had not reported for work and calls to his 2 mobile phones went unanswered. Police then found a burnt-out Proton Perdana, with its chasis and engine numbers erased, in a plantation in Hutan Melintang, Perak. Mr Morais was last seen driving a government-issued Proton Perdana. A day later, Attorney-General Mohamed Apandi Ali issued a statement that Mr Morais was not part of the government task force which had earlier investigated government-owned 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) over its debt controversies. Mr Apandi was addressing speculations on social media about the possible links between Mr Morais's disappearance and the high-profile probe into the state investment vehicle. According to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), Mr Morais served as a DPP in MACC's legal and prosecution division for 10 years until he returned to the Attorney-General's Chambers in July last year. Inspector-General of Police Khalid Abu Bakar was the 1st to disclose several days later that police suspected foul play in Mr Morais's disappearance, adding that the case was re-classified as abduction. This was after the emergence of closed-circuit television camera (CCTV) footage which showed the fender bender and Mr Morais being bundled into a pick-up truck. 12 days after his abduction, police were led to a swamp in Taman Subang Mewah in USJ 1, Subang Jaya, where they found Mr Morais's body in a cement-filled steel drum. It was also reported that police made several arrests in the Klang Valley, Penang and Kedah in their investigations. Hundreds of people attended his wake over the last 3 days, and colleagues in the legal fraternity have described Morais as a brilliant prosecutor, approachable, humble, a mentor, teacher and patriot. (source: TodayOnline.com) SRI LANKA: Death Penalty Or Right To Life? With the increasing number of murders, sexual offences and drug smuggling in the nation, President Maithripala Sirisena recently spoke of re-introducing the capital punishment with the approval of parliament in a bid to eradicate these crimes. Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe said the government was willing to implement the death penalty if it was necessary to avert the increasing trend in serious crimes in the nation and stressed the need to expedite investigations and punish offenders. "We will try our best to prevent the increasing trend in crime and we will take steps to combat it also by implementing capital punishment," he said. At present, there are over 1,115 inmates sentenced to death for murders and drugs smuggling detained at the Bogambara, Mahara and Welikada Prisons in Sri Lanka. The Department of Prisons confirmed that the prisoner who was sentenced to death recently was imprisoned about a month back. He also said that most of the prisoners who were sentenced to death were murderers, adding that there are 40,000 high court cases, and therefore it is hard to keep a count on how many of them are given death sentences as sometimes it seems that almost every day the judges around the country give the verdict of death for serious crimes if the suspect is proven guilty with strong evidence. There was one even last week, he added. However, the oldest inmate who was sentenced to death due to the commitment of murder is 84-year-old while the 1st prisoner on the death row has been there for the last 18 years since 1997, with the government spending Rs. 300 every day including food and clothing for the inmates. However, the expenses of water and electricity used by them were not included in the said Rs. 300, claimed the Commissioner of Prisons (Operations) H. M. N. C. Dhanasinghe. There are around 600 inmates on whom the re-appealing of the cases has been cancelled due to the nature of their crimes and 400 prisoners have re-appealed against their verdicts. In the meantime, the hearings of the re-appealed cases in courts are pending and the final verdict will decide on whether to reduce the period of life in prison or to cancel the appeal depending on the judge's decision. Commissioner of Prisons (Operations) confirmed that approximately 5 female and over 1,000 male inmates were sentenced to death in Sri Lanka, adding that the department awaits the President???s decision to carry out the executions. If an individual is arrested with more than 4 grams of drugs in his or her possession and if proven guilty, that person will be sentenced to death depending on the strong evidences. Meanwhile, the department had already received around 15 applications for the post of hangman and the interviews of the applications will be held within 3 weeks. However, responding to the questions by The Sunday Leader, the Commissioner of Prisons said that the death penalty does not apply to the criminals who commit sexual offences unless they commit murder following the abuse, but will be sentenced for 10-20 years in prison. Meanwhile, the Director for Human Rights Watch's South Asia Meenakshi Ganguly said, "Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty because it is inherently inhumane," adding that the death sentence as a punishment should be totally abolished. She went on to say that Sri Lanka should not engage in what might appear to be a populist idea in the country. "Surely, the government knows that there is no clear evidence that the capital punishment serves as an effective deterrence for serious crimes. Therefore the criminal justice system should be strengthened which will be more effective to prevent serious crimes in the country," she said. She further noted that the death penalty is incompatible with human rights and human dignity. The death penalty violates the right to life which happens to be the most basic of all human rights. It also violates the right not to be subjected to torture and other cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment. Furthermore, the death penalty emasculates human dignity which is natural to every human being. In the meantime, many human rights activists claim that there is a risk of executing innocent people in the justice system. There have been several, and always will be, cases of executions of innocent people. "Even we have experienced one in the recent past. No matter how developed a justice system is, it will always remain vulnerable to human failure. Unlike prison sentences, the death penalty is irreversible and irreparable," they said. They also claimed that the death penalty can be used in a disproportional manner against the poor, minorities and members of racial, ethnic, political and religious groups. As the General Assembly of the United Nations recently stated that there is no conclusive evidence of the deterrent value of the death penalty (UNGA Resolution 65/206), it is significant to note that the implementation of the capital punishment in order to eradicate serious crimes in many countries is at stake as the increasing number of crimes are still on the rise. Just because the public request the government to take away the life of a human being does not mean that it is always the right way of eradicating the crimes in future whereas it is the duty of the justice system and the judiciary officers to emphasize the unsuitability of capital punishment with human rights and human dignity, claims the human rights activists adding that it should be abolished. Nimalka Fernando, a lawyer and a human rights activist in Sri Lanka, says that she is alarmed that our leaders are taking decisions of this nature with scant disregard to the international standards and human rights law. "At least I expected the Yahapalanaya (Good Governance) leaders to have a better sense and wisdom when taking decisions" she added. She went on to say that she is concerned that the President is not receiving proper guidance from the advisors and hopes the international experts around him will tell him that introducing death penalty is a violation of basic fundamental human rights. "You cannot remove the life of a person to bring justice to another. The present norm is life imprisonment and not death penalty," she said. "It looks as if the Sri Lankan experts have to be exposed to the international standards. They have remained under Mahinda Rajapaksa so much that they cannot think straight now", she further said. It is noteworthy, that the request from the public for the capital punishment in the country indicates the desire to be free from crime. Nevertheless, there exist more effective ways to prevent crimes, claim the Human Rights activists. (source: The Sunday Leader) SAUDI ARABIA: Saudi Arabia's Troubling Death Sentence On September 14, local media reported that an appeals court and Saudi Arabia's Supreme Court had upheld the death sentence of Ali al-Nimr for participating in protests four years ago. He was 16 at the time. Today, he awaits the execution of his sentence, which stipulates that al-Nimr should be beheaded and that his headless body should be strung up for public display. Among the "crimes" for which al-Nimr was convicted were "breaking allegiance with the ruler," "going out to a number of marches, demonstrations, and gatherings against the state and repeating some chants against the state," and using his cell phone to incite demonstrations. He was also accused of sheltering men wanted by police, helping wanted men avoid police raids, and attacking police with Molotov cocktails and rocks, although prosecutors offered no clear details of injuries to police officers. Al-Nimr denied the charges and told the court that security officials coerced a "confession." Saudi Arabia is 1 of the only 3 countries in the world known to maintain the death penalty for people who allegedly committed crimes as children -- along with Sudan and Iran. So there was nothing to stop Saudi authorities from bringing al-Nimr to trial before its notorious terrorism court, which sentenced him to death in May 2014. True, Saudi Arabia has ratified international treaties that prohibit executing anyone for offenses committed when they were under 18. Yet despite this obligation, under the Saudi system, someone who exhibits physical signs of puberty can be tried as an adult. In January 2013, Saudi Arabia executed a Sri Lankan domestic worker convicted of murdering a newborn when she was 17, and in March of the same year authorities executed two Saudi men convicted of committing armed robbery before they turned 18. And al-Nimr is far from alone. In fact, he's part of a rising trend. Saudi Arabia has one of the highest known execution rates in the world and so far this year, it has executed 135 people. Saudi diplomats have been trying to deflect criticism of the country's soaring execution rate. In September, the country's permanent representative to the United Nations in Geneva dismissed the criticism as "protecting the rights of the killer." In fact, just under half of all executions in Saudi Arabia in any given year are not for murder, but for nonviolent drug crimes or even occasionally for dubious "crimes" such as sorcery. And those accused of serious crimes don't always get fair trials. Al-Nimr's case is a prime example. Saudi's internal security service arrested al-Nimr in February 2013 in connection with an uprising by the country's minority Shia citizens in Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province in 2011. They were demanding an end to longstanding discrimination by the government and protesting Saudi Arabia's role in suppressing peaceful protests in neighboring Bahrain. Authorities held him nearly nine months without taking him before a judge, and did not allow him to have a lawyer during his interrogation. Many of the broadly framed charges against him don't resemble recognizable crimes under international law. The court also failed to investigate al-Nimr's allegations that officials mistreated him in detention. Family members told Human Rights Watch that following al-Nimr's arrest in February 2012, authorities did not permit them to visit for 4 months. When authorities finally brought him before a judge for the 1st time, in December 2013, they allegedly did not allow him to inform his family or appoint a lawyer, and did not provide him a copy of his charge sheet. The court held 3 more sessions before the authorities allowed al-Nimr to appoint a defense lawyer. Despite court orders to the contrary, prison officials did not allow al-Nimr's lawyer to visit him in prison to help prepare a defense before or during his trial. The court found al-Nimr guilty in May 2014 solely on the basis of a confession he signed during his interrogation, even though he said in court that one of his interrogators wrote it and that he signed under duress without reading it. The court ruled the confession admissible anyway, since he had signed it. Family members said that al-Nimr agreed to sign the statement only after interrogators told him that if he did, they would then release him. Al-Nimr's life is now in the hands of Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, whose decision will signal whether he is committed to reforming the justice system or to perpetuating the status quo of gross due process violations and executing child offenders. If King Salman believes in justice he should acknowledge the serious flaws in the case and commute the sentence. (source: Human Rights Watch) JORDAN: The king demanded vengeance and 'Zarqawi's woman' was sent to the gallows Just after nightfall Feb. 3, a warrant arrived at the city's main women's prison for the execution of Sajida al-Rishawi. The instructions had come from King Abdullah II himself, then in Washington on a state visit, and were transmitted from his private plane to the royal court in Jordan's capital. A clerk relayed the message to the Interior Ministry and then to the prisons department, where it caused a stir. State executions are complicated affairs requiring many steps, yet the king's wishes were explicit: The woman would face the gallows before the sun rose the next day. The chief warden quickly made the trek to the cell where Rishawi had maintained a kind of self-imposed solitary confinement for close to a decade. The prisoner, 45 now and no longer thin, spent most of her days watching television or reading a paperback Koran, seeing no one and keeping whatever thoughts she had under the greasy, prison-issued hijab she always wore. She was not stupid, yet she seemed perpetually disconnected from whatever was going on around her. "When will I be going home?" she asked her government-appointed lawyer during rare meetings in the months after she was sentenced to death. Eventually, even those visits stopped. Now, when the warden sat her down to explain that she would die in the morning, Rishawi nodded her assent but said nothing. If she cried or prayed or cursed, no one in the prison heard a word of it, according to Jordanian officials who described the sequence of events for a new book, "Black Flags: The Rise of ISIS." That she could face death was not a surprise to anyone. In 2006, a judge sentenced Rishawi to be hanged for her part in Jordan's worst terrorist attack: 3 simultaneous hotel bombings that killed 60 people, most of them guests at a wedding party. She was the suicide bomber who lived, an odd, heavy-browed woman made to pose awkwardly before TV cameras showing off the vest that had failed to explode. At one time, everyone in Amman knew her story, how this 35-year-old unmarried Iraqi had agreed to wed a stranger so they could become a man-and-wife suicide team; how she panicked and ran; how she had wandered the city's northern suburbs in a taxi, lost, stopping passersby for directions, still wearing streaks of blood on her clothes and shoes. But nearly 10 years had passed. The hotels had been rebuilt and renamed, and Rishawi had vanished inside Jordan's labyrinthine penal system. Within the Juwaida women's prison, she wore a kind of faded notoriety, like a valuable museum piece that no one looks at anymore. Some of the older hands in the state security service called her "Zarqawi's woman," a mocking reference to the infamous Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who ordered the hotel bombings. The younger ones barely remembered her. Then, in the span of a month, everything changed. Zarqawi's followers, it turned out, had not forgotten Rishawi. The terrorists had rebranded themselves over the years and were now known in Jordan by the Arabic acronym Daesh - in English, as ISIS. And in early January, ISIS asked to have Rishawi back. The demand for her release came in the middle of Jordan's worst domestic crisis in years. A Jordanian air force jet had crashed in Syria, and its young pilot had been captured alive by ISIS fighters. The group had broadcast photos of the frightened, nearly naked pilot being paraded around by grinning jihadists, some of them reaching out to embrace this great gift that Allah had dropped from the sky. >From the palace to the security agencies, the king and his advisers steeled themselves for even more awful news. Either the pilot would be publicly butchered by ISIS, they feared, or the terrorists would demand a terrible price for his ransom. True to form, ISIS announced its decision in macabre fashion. Less than a week after the crash, the captured pilot's family received a call at home, from the pilot's cellphone. On the other end, a stranger, speaking in Iraqi-accented Arabic, issued the group's singular demand. We want our sister Sajida, the caller said. The same demand was repeated, along with several new ones, in a constantly shifting and mostly one-sided negotiation. All the requests were routed to the headquarters of the Mukhabarat, Jordan's intelligence service, and all eventually landed on the desk of the imposing 47-year-old brigadier who ran the department's counterterrorism unit. Even in an agency notorious for its toughness, Abu Haytham stood apart, a man with a burly street fighter's physique and the personality of an anvil. He had battled ISIS in its many incarnations for years, and he had famously broken some of the group's top operatives in interrogation. Zarqawi himself had taken several turns in Abu Haytham's holding cell, and so had Sajida al-Rishawi, the woman ISIS was now seeking to free. Outside Jordan, the demand made little sense. Rishawi had no value as a fighter or a leader, or even as a symbol. She was known to have participated in exactly 1 terrorist attack, and she had botched it. Hardly "Zarqawi's woman," she had never even met the man who ordered the strike. If ISIS hadn't mentioned her name, she probably would have lived her remaining years quietly in prison, her execution indefinitely deferred for lack of any particular reason to carry it out. But Abu Haytham understood. By invoking Rishawi's name, the terrorists were reaching back to the group's beginnings, back to a time before there was an ISIS, or a civil war in Syria; before the meltdown in Iraq that gave rise to the movement; even before the world had heard of a terrorist called Zarqawi. The Mukhabarat's men had tried to keep this terrorist group from gaining a foothold. They had failed - sometimes through their own mistakes, more often because of the miscalculations of others. Now, Zarqawi's jihadist movement had become a self-declared state, with territorial claims on 2 of Jordan's borders. And Rishawi, the failed bomber, was one of many old scores that ISIS was ready to settle. In summoning this forgotten ghost, ISIS was evoking one of the most horrifying nights in the country's history, a moment seared into the memories of men of Abu Haytham's generation, the former intelligence captains, investigators and deputies who had since risen to lead the Mukhabarat. Once, Zarqawi had managed to strike directly at Jordan's heart, and now, with the country's pilot in their hands, ISIS was about to do it again. The black flags will come Abu Haytham had been present that night. It was just before 9 p.m. on Nov. 9, 2005, when the first call came in about an explosion at the Grand Hyatt across town. The early speculation was that a gas canister was to blame, but then came word of a 2nd blast at the Days Inn, and then a 3rd - reportedly far worse than the others - at the Radisson. He raced to the Radisson and pushed his way inside, past the rescue workers, the wailing survivors, and the recovered corpses that had been hauled out on luggage carts and deposited on the driveway. In the ballroom, through a haze of smoke and emergency lights, he could see more bodies. Some were sprawled haphazardly, as though flung by a giant. Others were missing limbs. Just 2 days later came the news that one of the attackers - a woman - had survived and fled. A day after that, Sajida al-Rishawi sat in a chair in front of him. The woman would never offer a useful syllable. "I don't know, I don't know," she would occasionally manage, in a soft mumble. Yet, already, Abu Haytham knew who was behind the act. Zarqawi was, at the time of the bombing, the head of a particularly vicious terrorist network called al-Qaeda in Iraq. But the Jordanians had known him back in the days when he was Ahmad the hoodlum, a high school dropout with a reputation as a heavy drinker and a brawler. They had watched him wander off to Afghanistan in the late 1980s to fight the communists, then return as a battle-hardened religious fanatic. After a first try at terrorism, he had vanished into one of Jordan???s darkest prisons. This time, he emerged as a leader of men. Still, few would have ever heard of Zarqawi had Washington not intervened. His terrorist career was at a dead end when the George W. Bush administration inadvertently made him a terrorist superstar, declaring to the world in 2003 that this then-unknown Jordanian was the link between Iraq's dictatorship and the plotters behind the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The claim was wrong, yet, weeks later, when U.S. troops invaded Iraq, the newly famous and well-funded terrorist gained a battleground and a cause and soon thousands of followers. Over 3 tumultuous years, he intentionally pushed Iraq to the brink of sectarian war by unleashing wave after wave of savage attacks on Shiite civilians in their mosques, bazaars and schools. He horrified millions with a new form of highly intimate terrorism: the beheading of individual hostages, captured on video and sent around the world, using the Internet's new power to broadcast directly into people's homes. Along the way, he helped transform America's lightning victory in Iraq into the costliest U.S. military campaign since Vietnam. Although some would cast his movement as an al-Qaeda offshoot, Zarqawi's brand of jihad was utterly, brutally original. But Zarqawi's excesses also deepened his adversaries' resolve. In 2006, with help from Jordan, U.S. forces discovered Zarqawi's safe house and flattened it with a 500-pound bomb. Two years later, his terrorist network appeared finished, but instead, his followers merely retreated, quietly gaining strength in Syria's lawless provinces until they burst into view in 2013, not as a terrorist group, but as an army. This time, war-weary America would refuse to help until it was too late. There would be no serious effort to arm the moderate rebels who sought to deny ISIS its safe haven, and no airstrikes to harry ISIS's leadership and supply lines. Twice in a decade, a jihadist wave had threatened to engulf the region. Twice, it seemed to the Jordanians, the American response had been to cut a fresh hole in the lifeboat. Zarqawi's successors called themselves by different names before settling on ISIS - or simply the Islamic State. But they continued to refer to Zarqawi as the "mujahid sheik," acknowledging the founder who had the audacity to believe he could redraw the maps of the Middle East. And, like Zarqawi, they believed their conquests would not end there. In the prophetic passages of the Muslim holy texts known as the Hadith, Zarqawi saw his fate foretold. He and his men were the black-clad soldiers of whom the ancient scholars had written: "The black flags will come from the East, led by mighty men, with long hair and beards, their surnames taken from their home towns." These conquerors would not merely reclaim the ancient Muslim lands. They also would be the instigators of the final cataclysmic struggle ending in the destruction of the West's great armies, in northern Syria. "The spark has been lit here in Iraq," Zarqawi preached, "and its heat will continue to intensify until it burns the Crusader armies in Dabiq." The Mukhabarat's men had heard enough of such talk from Zarqawi back when he was their prisoner. Now the brazen claims were coming from his offspring. 30,000 strong, they were waiting just across the border, calling for their sister Sajida. 'I'm going to war' The charade of a prisoner swap ended abruptly Feb.?3, 2015, the day after Jordan's king arrived in Washington for the official visit. For Abdullah II, it was the latest in a series of exhausting journeys in which he repeated the same appeal for help. His tiny country was struggling with two burdens imposed from abroad: a human tide of refugees from Syria - about 600,000 so far - and the cost of participating in the allied Western-Arab military campaign against ISIS. The trip was not going particularly well. Members of Congress offered sympathy but not much more; White House officials recited the usual pledges to bolster Jordan's defenses and struggling economy, but the kind of assistance Abdullah most desperately needed was nowhere in the offing. During previous visits, President Obama had declined Jordan's requests for laser-guided munitions and other advanced hardware that could take out ISIS's trucks and tanks. On this trip, there was no firm commitment even for a meeting between the 2 leaders. Abdullah was at the Capitol, making a pitch to John McCain, the Republican chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, when one of the king's aides interrupted him. The monarch stepped into the corridor, and on the small screen of a smartphone, watched ISIS deliver its final statement on the proposed prisoner swap. As video cameras rolled, masked jihadists marched the young Jordanian pilot into a small metal cage that had been doused with fuel. Then they lit a fire and filmed as the airman was burned alive. By the time Abdullah returned to the meeting, McCain's aide had seen the video as well. The monarch kept his composure, but McCain could see he was badly shaken. "Can we do anything more for you?" McCain asked. "I'm not getting support from your side!" Abdullah finally said. "I'm still getting only gravity bombs, and we're not even getting resupplied with those. Meanwhile, we're flying 200 % more missions than all the other coalition members combined, apart from the United States." The king continued with his scheduled meetings, but he had already made up his mind to return home. He was making arrangements when the White House phoned to offer 15 minutes with the president. Abdullah accepted. In the Oval Office, Obama expressed condolences to the pilot's family and thanked the king for Jordan's contributions to the military campaign against ISIS. The administration was doing all it could to be supportive, the president assured the monarch. "No, sir, you are not," Abdullah said, firmly. He rattled off a list of weapons and supplies he needed. "I've got 3 days' worth of bombs left," he said, according to an official present during the exchange. "When I get home, I'm going to war, and I'm going to use every bomb I've got until they're gone." There was one other item of business to attend to before his return. From the airport, Abdullah called his aides in Amman to start the process of carrying out a pair of executions. On Jordan's death row, there were 2 inmates who had been convicted of committing murderous acts on orders from Zarqawi. One was an Iraqi man who had been a mid-level operative in Zarqawi's Iraqi insurgency. The other was Sajida al-Rishawi. Both should be put to death without further delay. The king foresaw that Western governments would protest the executions as acts of vengeance, even though both inmates had been sentenced long ago as part of normal court proceedings. But he would not be deterred. As far as he was concerned, the appointment with the hangman already had been delayed too long, he told aides. "I don't want to hear a word from anyone," Abdullah said. The king was still airborne at 2 a.m. Amman time when the guards arrived to collect Rishawi from her cell. She had declined the customary final meal and ritual bath with which devout Muslims cleanse the body in preparation for the afterlife. She donned the red uniform worn exclusively by condemned prisoners on the day of execution, along with the usual hijab to cover her head and face. She was taken outside the prison to a van with a military escort for the drive to Swaqa, Jordan's largest prison, on a desert hill about 60 miles south of the capital. The vehicles arrived just before 4 a.m., as a full moon, visible through a light haze, was dipping toward the southwestern horizon. Her last earthly view, before she was blindfolded, was of a small execution chamber with white walls and a row of tiny windows, and a few tired faces looking up from the witness gallery just below her. An imam prayed as a noose with a heavy metal clasp was secured, and a judge asked if Rishawi cared to convey any last wishes or a final will. She gave no reply. She likewise made no audible sound as the gallows' trap opened and she plunged hard into the darkness. It was 5:05 a.m., nearly 90 minutes before sunrise, when the prison doctor checked for a pulse. "Zarqawi's woman" was dead, her execution the closing scene in the worst act of terrorism in Jordan???s history. But Zarqawi's children were pursuing the founder's far grander ambitions: the end of Jordan and its king, the erasing of international boundaries and the destruction of the modern states of the Middle East. Then, with black flags raised above Muslim capitals from the Levant to the Persian Gulf, they could begin the great apocalyptic showdown with the West. (source: Washington Post) PAKISTAN: Plan to Execute Paralyzed Prisoner Called 'A New Low' for Pakistan The government of Pakistan is coming under fire over its plans to execute 2 inmates next week. One of the inmates is disabled, the other claims he was a teenager at the time he was arrested. Critics say both sentences violate Pakistan's constitution. The 1st man, 43-year-old Abdul Basit, was paralyzed from the waist down 5 years ago after contracting tuberculous meningitis in prison. According to a report conducted by a government-appointed medical board and obtained by Basit's lawyers at Justice Project Pakistan, he remains "bed bound with urinary and fecal incontinence." There is, the board adds, "almost no chance of recovery." Basit, whose execution is now set for Tuesday, was originally scheduled to be hanged on July 28. The Lahore High Court stayed his execution after Basit's lawyers argued that his sentence would would constitute "cruel and unusual punishment" and violate the "fundamental right to human dignity" protected by the country's constitution. "Hanging a man who is unable even to stand would be a new low for Pakistan's death penalty system, and a clear violation of the country's constitution," Maya Foa, director of the death penalty team at the international human rights organization Reprieve, said in a statement. Lawyers for the 2nd inmate, Ansar Iqbal, argue he was 15 when he and a friend were arrested on charges that they murdered their neighbor 16 years ago. The execution of juveniles is illegal in Pakistan. Iqbal's lawyers have produced school records and birth certificate that indicate he was either 14 or 15 years old at the time of the murder, but judges have refused to examine the evidence, saying that it was submitted too late. Instead, the courts are relying on the arresting officer's estimate that Iqbal was in his early 20s at the time. Iqbal and Basit are just 2 of more than 8,000 inmates presently sitting on death row in Pakistan. The country reinstituted the death penalty in December of last year in an effort to crack down on violent militants. It has executed 240 people in the months since. (source: vice.com) ***************** Pakistan to hang man who claims he was 15 at time of crime----Ansar Iqbal arrested 16 years ago for murder of a neighbour but denies involvement Pakistani authorities are set to hang a man who says he was 15 when he was arrested for a murder he claims he did not commit, lawyers said on Saturday. Ansar Iqbal says he was 15 when he and a friend were arrested 16 years ago for the murder of a neighbour, which the victim's family said was over an argument at a cricket match. Iqbal says police framed him because he was poor by planting 2 guns at his house. Pakistani law forbids the execution of juveniles, but the country's courts have refused to examine Iqbal's school records and birth certificate because they say they were submitted too late, said Maya Foa of British legal aid group Reprieve. His old school record and a new birth certificate issued this year give his age as 14 and 15 respectively. Record keeping in Pakistan is poor and records are easily forged. Instead, the court concluded he was in his early 20s based on a policeman's estimate at the time of his arrest, Foa said. Iqbal's friend was tried as a juvenile. "The onus has to be on the government and prosecution to prove that the individual facing the gallows is not a juvenile if all the available evidence points otherwise," she said. "Otherwise it puts the defendant in an impossible position." Iqbal's lawyer, Munir Basit, confirmed his client had been tried as an adult and had been notified he was to hang at Sargodha jail next week. "He has received his black warrant in the concerned jail." Court and prosecution officials were not available for comment. Pakistan brought back hanging in December as a way to crack down on militancy after Taliban gunmen massacred more than 130 pupils at an army-run school. But very few of the 240 people hanged have any links to militancy. Most, like Iqbal, were convicted of murder. Many of their families say they were falsely accused and too poor to get good lawyers. Few, if any, wealthy convicts have been hanged. Pakistan's criminal justice system is widely considered corrupt. Police frequently ask for bribes and few are trained in preserving a crime scene or collecting evidence. Instead, they rely on easily manipulated oral statements. Accusations of torture are common. Unskilled, poorly paid court-appointed lawyers often fail to examine witnesses or do not turn up for hearings, and tales of judges who ask for bribes are common. (source: The Irish Times) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 28 06:23:19 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 06:23:19 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, ALA. Message-ID: Sept. 28 TEXAS: Texas Prison Guard Union Urges Death Row Reforms In a move that surprised many in the prison reform community, the president of the local chapter of a Texas prison guards' union wrote a letter to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) on January 20, 2014, urging officials to introduce major reforms in the state's handling of death row prisoners. Lance Lowry, president of Huntsville's Local 3807 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), wrote the letter amid the TDCJ's review of conditions at the Polunsky Unit in Livingston, where Texas death row prisoners are held. Prisoners at Polunsky are housed in solitary confinement, confined to their cells 23 hours a day. "Recreation" comes in the form of exercise 1 hour per day, alone in a dog-run type enclosure. Televisions are not permitted, nor are prisoners allowed to use the telephone or participate in education, work or religious programs. While a 3-tiered classification system allows some condemned prisoners a radio and occasional non-contact visits, all prisoners remain on death row until their execution or, in the rare case, release, for several decades on average. According to Lowry, the draconian conditions at Polunsky are a "knee-jerk reaction" to a 1998 escape from death row, in which convicted murderer Martin Gurule escaped only to drown in a stream nearby. 6 months later, the death row prisoners at the Ellis Unit in Huntsville were moved to Polunsky. "This has not been a positive thing for the inmates or the staff," Lowry said. "There has been increased aggression toward the officers." In his letter to the TDCJ, Lowry wrote that "staff incompetency and lack of proper security equipment" were the biggest factors in the 1998 escape. As a result, "the agency ignored the root of the problem," and in the current death row management model, "inmates have very few privileges to lose and staff become easy targets." The AFSCME letter called for greater privileges to be used as a management tool. Certain death row prisoners should be housed 2 offenders to a cell and [given] privileges such as work assignments and allowed TV privileges by streaming over-the-air television to a computer tablet using a closed Wi-Fi network." Lowry added, "Lack of visual r auditory stimulation results in increased psychological incidents and results in costly crisis management." A coalition of prisoners' rights advocates including mental health groups, religious organizations, security experts and civil rights activists also sent a letter to TDCJ officials urging similar reforms. The National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) said the TDCJ's current system of long-term solitary confinement causes suicide, depression, paranoia, psychosis and other anti-social behaviors. "Sticking with the status quo is alarming," stated NAMI policy coordinator Greg Hansch. TDCJ spokesman Jason Clark said the agency is "currently reviewing and updating the [department's] Death Row Plan." As of September 9, 2015, 6 women and 247 men were awaiting execution in Texas. (source: Prison Legal News) ************ Texas Murder Trial Set to Resume After Shock Belt Used on Defendant Representing Self A Texas capital murder trial is set to proceed Monday - but the defendant has already experienced a very small taste of how an electric chair might feel: He was given a shock in court for refusing to comply with a judge's orders. James Calvert, 45, has represented himself in the possible death penalty case since 2012, when he was charged with killing his estranged wife and abducting their son. Calvert was outfitted with a shock belt after Judge Jack Skeen raised security concerns and said Calvert was acting erratically, Reuters reported. The belt was used when Calvert didn't follow a judge's order to stand up. Kathryn Kase, executive director of Texas Defender Service, told NBC News that Calvert appears to be mentally ill and shouldn't have been allowed to act as his own lawyer in the first place. "The Supreme Court has ruled: People with a history of mental illness are supposed to show a much higher level of competence to represent themselves," she said. It does not appear that Calvert has shown that level of competence, Kase said, adding that earlier in the trial, Calvert told the judge that all of his objections "will be phrased as 'foxtrot.'" "That's something that someone with mental illness does," she said. "That says to me, someone is losing their grip on reality." A sheriff's lieutenant told Reuters that the shock belt is used like a Taser, and it is less obvious to a jury than leg irons and handcuffs. It was unclear who ordered it to be used, Kase said. Skeen did not respond to interview requests on Sunday, and Reuters reported that he issued a gag order on the trial. After the shock was administered, Skeen told Calvert that would no longer be allowed to represent himself, Kase said. But a 2-week break, she added, was hardly enough time for a new attorney to prepare his case. "During all this time that Mr. Calvert was representing himself, he wasn't doing what a qualified lawyer [would be] doing," she said. (source: NBC news) ALABAMA: Capital trial in 2-year-old's death set this week The mother of a 2-year-old Gadsden boy and her boyfriend are expected to come to trial this week on capital murder charges for his death. Trevaughn Lee Blount died Aug. 24, 2011, as a result of blunt force trauma to the head and other injuries. His mother, Brandy Nicole Lee, and her boyfriend, Narshun Temar Smith, were charged with capital murder just days after the toddler's death. The boy was unconscious and not breathing when his mother took him to a Gadsden hospital emergency room. Physicians there suspected the child had suffered head trauma and notified police. After the child was stabilized, he was flown to Children's Hospital in Birmingham, where he later died. The 2 remained in jail until April. Both were released on $50,000 bond after the prosecutors decided not to seek the death penalty against the pair. Under Alabama law, the murder of a child under 14 is a capital crime. Prosecutors have discretion in whether to seek the death penalty. Both are charged with the lesser offense of felony murder during aggravated child abuse as well. Trials for the 2 were consolidated and will be heard by Etowah County Circuit Judge David Kimberley. Potential jurors in the case will report to the judicial building today, and the trial is expected to begin Tuesday, according to Etowah County Deputy District Attorney Marcus Reid. Defense attorneys has asked last month that the case be continued because the cases had been consolidated, and because both defendants were released on bond only a few months ago. (source: Gadsden Times) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 28 06:24:36 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 06:24:36 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 28 INDIA: When It Comes To Terror, Law Commission Flinches At Its Own Findings The Law Commission's recommendations to abolish death penalty for all offences except terror has been much lauded - but the fact is that it has stepped back from its own conclusions about judicial arbitrariness In the global discourse on the gradual abolition of death penalty, the 262nd report of the Law Commission of India is going to be an important milestone, as it represents one-sixth of humanity. The Commission chief recommendation is that the death penalty be abolished in all cases except for terror cases and cases of waging war against the State often a concomitant charge in terror cases). Though not unequivocal in its rejection of capital punishment, it has concluded that the arguments against death penalty, even for terror cases, are substantial, and has called for 'a more rational, principled and informed debate on the abolition of the death penalty for all crimes.' This is important since in most debates about death penalty, its popular appeal as a befitting punishment for heinous crimes has for long prevailed over any reasoned argument against it. So much so that, the opponents of death penalty are often accused of sympathising with the perpetrators of horrific crimes rather than their victims. The phenomenon of terrorism has further stifled the debate, since those who challenge the rationale behind capital punishment can easily be labelled as 'traitors' in such cases. The doctrine of 'rarest of rare', laid down by the Supreme Court as a prerequisite in the case of Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab in the year 1980, is the decisive factor for arriving at whether or not to award capital punishment in a case. The Law Commission, by examining several such cases in its report, has completely exposed the lack of a principled approach by the Supreme Court when it comes to following its own doctrine. An astounding revelation such as this - that the maximum punishment has been awarded arbitrarily - would have been sufficient for the higher courts in India to declare death penalty unconstitutional, since it violates the right to equality. The reason it has not happened is because of what may seem a technicality - the notion that fundamental rights given to the individual by the Constitution is against the state and not the judiciary, and therefore the judiciary cannot by definition violate these rights. This is why, despite having completely demolished the arguments in favour of death penalty as practiced by the courts, the Commission has pinned its hope on the legislature and not the judiciary for its abolition. Terror still the exception Nevertheless, the Commission's report quotes with approval the Supreme Court judgements in Shatrughan Chauhan v. Union of India (2014), where it said that devising a separate category for terror cases within 'rarest of rare' cases is flawed. This case relates to the issue of inordinate delay in the disposal of mercy petitions by the President of India or the Governors of State which are filed by or on behalf of the convicts condemned to death after the conclusion of the judicial process. The Court in this case had commuted the death penalty of several convicts to life imprisonment, citing that keeping convicts waiting for an unreasonably long period of time on their mercy petitions amounts to infliction of cruelty. In the same case, the Supreme Court declared its own earlier judgement, in the case of Devendar Pal Singh Bhullar v. (State) NCT of Delhi (2013), bad in law. In that case, the court had held that a person sentenced to death under an anti-terror law (in this case, TADA) cannot claim that his death sentence should be commuted to life imprisonment on the ground of inordinate delay in the disposal of his mercy petition. The Supreme Court in Shatrughan Chauhan observed that 'all death sentences imposed are impliedly the most heinous and barbaric and rarest of its kind. The legal effect of the extraordinary depravity of the offence exhausts itself when court sentences the person to death for that offence.' Given how the Court has enunciated this principle, any attempt by the legislature to distinguish terror and non-terror offences so as to inflict death penalty is likely to be constitutionally vulnerable before a court of law. Unsound jurisprudence The Law Commission's recommendation to retain death penalty in terror cases is unsound also in terms of jurisprudence. Anti-terror laws reduce the threshold for the basis of conviction by making evidences otherwise not admissible under the Indian Evidence Act, admissible. For example, confessions made before the police-officer not below the rank of Superintendent of Police are admissible under most anti-terror laws. Given such exemptions, there's a greater probability of innocents being convicted under these laws; all the more reason why the law must guard against providing for an irreversible punishment like death penalty in such cases. A useful comparison would be to cases of 'Dowry death' under the Indian Penal Code. In such a case, if a woman dies under abnormal circumstances within seven years of her marriage, the law allows for the presumption that the woman's husband or his relatives may have possibly caused her death in connection with a demand for dowry. Here, because this provision lowers the threshold otherwise required for proving culpability in a murder case, it also proscribe death penalty as the punishment, instead restricting it to not less than seven years imprisonment which may extend to life. Further, even if a law (in this case, anti-terror laws) retains death penalty, it cannot make it the only punishment for such offences. It must include provision of life imprisonment as an option, without which it would be unconstitutional, as the Supreme Court has held in the case of Mithu Singh v. State of Punjab (1983). What this means is that the discretion to decide which case deserves death penalty will still vest with the courts. How the courts will then be able to evade the lingering charge of judicial indiscretion bordering on arbitrariness - a fact the Commission itself arrived at in its report - remains unanswered. Such quandaries could have been avoided, if only the Law Commission had found the gumption to examine the merits and demerits of death penalty in cases related to terrorism as well. (source: Manwendra Kumar Tiwari is Assistant Professor, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow----The Wire) **************** Wrong to seek death penalty----Death penalty is a primitive, vengeful and unjust After a trial court in Mumbai earlier this month found 12 of the 13 accused persons charged for planting bombs in the city???s local trains on July 11, 2006, the prosecution has sought death penalty for 8 of the 12 convicts. The demand for death penalty is reflexively made by the prosecution and by sections of the public in most cases of murder, especially when the offences are related to terrorism. It is as if the prosecution thinks its efforts are successful only when the accused are awarded the ultimate penalty. This wrong notion continues even when there are cases of the death penalty being awarded wrongly and there is increasing demand and action the world over for its abolition. The idea that death penalty is a primitive, vengeful and unjust form of punishment and that it has no deterrent value is gaining more acceptance everywhere but India is among the last few holdouts where it is legally prescribed, sanctioned and practised. The 7/11 Mumbai serial bomb blasts were among the worst terrorist attacks in the country's history. About 200 people were killed and over 1,000 others injured in the attack. The case has taken a long time to come to a conclusion, but this is not final as the verdict is certain to be appealed in higher courts. The case was complex and involved examination of a lot of evidence and a large number of witnesses. The investigations were controversial too with 2 investigating agencies - the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad and the Mumbai crime branch - contradicting each other and charges of custodial torture and forced confessions being widely made. But these issues are to be examined again in the appeals. The matter of immediate interest now is the quantum of punishment and whether the court would accept the demand for death penalty as made by the prosecution. There is no doubt that those who were found to have perpetrated the crime should receive stringent punishment. But no stringent punishment should take the form of the ultimate punishment of taking the life of the accused, even if the crime was the killing of people. Human justice can always go astray and the best evidence in many cases has collapsed in course of time. In this case too the court acquitted 1 accused who had spent 9 years in jail. The prosecution has taken the Law Commission???s support to plead for death penalty. But it is wrong to award it in terrorism cases as much as it is wrong in other cases. The court will hopefully reject the counsel for the most extreme punishment. (source: Deccan Herald) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 28 09:56:35 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 09:56:35 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----VA., GA., OHIO, ILL., OKLA., USA Message-ID: Sept. 28 VIRGINIA----impending execution//foreign national Virginia Plans For Thursday Execution The Commonwealth is scheduled to execute a man this week at its prison near Jarratt. 49-year-old Alfredo Rolando Prieto is slated to die at 9 p.m. Thursday at the Greensville Correctional Center. Prieto has been sentenced to die for the rape and murder of 22-year-old Rachel Raver and the murder of 22-year-old Warren Fulton, III. Those crimes were committed in Fairfax County. Raver and Fulton were last seen alive in December 1988. He's also been accused of the death of 24-year-old Veronica "Tina" Jefferson. Texas prison officials are helping Virginia carry out Prieto's scheduled Thursday night execution by providing the lethal drug pentobarbital. Prieto was born and spent part of his childhood in El Salvador. (source: WINA news) GEORGIA----impending execution Lawyers seek execution delay for woman on Georgia death row 1 day before she's set to be executed, lawyers for the only woman on Georgia's death row will appear in court to argue that her life should be spared. The hearing is set for Monday morning in a federal courtroom in Atlanta. Attorneys for 47-year-old Kelly Renee Gissendaner want Tuesday night's planned execution halted over concerns about lethal injection drugs the state plans to use. If the execution happens, Gissendaner will be the 1st woman executed by the state in 70 years. Gissendaner was convicted of murder in the February 1997 slaying of her husband, Douglas Gissendaner. Prosecutors said she conspired with her lover, Gregory Owen, who stabbed Douglas Gissendaner to death. Owen, who took a plea deal and testified against Gissendaner, is serving a prison sentence. (source: Associated Press) *************** Judge To Hear Emergency Stay Request For Ga. Death Row Inmate A federal judge is set to hear an emergency request to stay the execution of Georgia death row inmate Kelly Gissendaner. Gissendaner's attorneys will ask federal Judge Robert Thrash to reconsider their Eighth Amendment argument. They contend the state has violated Gissendaner's constitutional rights by subjecting her to cruel and unusual punishment with delays and postponements of her execution. In August, Judge Thrash heard and rejected that argument. WABE Legal Analyst Page Pate says it's unlikely the judge will come to the same decision. "I don't anticipate this new motion to really stop the execution," Pate says. "I think the judge will probably deny that motion because he's already considered the claims in the lawsuit and found them to be without merit." Gissendaner, who was sentenced for conspiring to kill her husband, is scheduled to be put to death Tuesday. Her execution has been postponed twice, first because of weather, and then because of problems with the lethal injection drug. (source: WABE news) **************** Georgia's secret lethal injection protocol wasn't always so mysterious Georgia plans to execute Kelly Gissendaner Tuesday, but many details of the lethal injection are top secret. Under a 2013 state law, Georgia corrections officials don't have to publicly identify the manufacturer of the execution drug, the compounding pharmacist who mixes the solution, or much of anything else. Georgia's lethal injections weren't always so secretive. In 2007, the state's chief medical examiner testified in open court about all the drugs then used for executions, the dosages and the effects on the condemned prisoner. Dr. Kris Sperry was an expert witness for the state of Florida when a death row inmate challenged that state's execution protocols after the botched lethal injection of another prisoner. When Florida executed Angel Diaz in December 2006, the procedure took a remarkable 34 minutes. The intravenous line that was supposed to feed the drugs into Diaz's bloodstream apparently was not properly inserted. The drugs leaked into the muscles of his arm and took far longer than usual to put him to death. The following day, anticipating a challenge from the next inmate scheduled for execution, Florida's attorney general hired Sperry - who frequently moonlights as an expert witness in forensic pathology - to help defend the state's procedures. In a hearing in Ocala, Florida, in July 2007, Sperry testified that Florida and Georgia used the same combination of drugs for lethal injection. The only difference, he said, was that Florida used heavier doses that would kill an inmate faster. The recipe for the lethal "cocktail," according to a transcript of Sperry's testimony: --Thiopental sodium, also known as pentobarbital. Florida administered 5 grams, while Georgia used 2, Sperry said. Any dosage of more than 400 milligrams would leave a person unconscious and in "respiratory depression," he said. "The brain would forget to breathe." --Pancuronium bromide. Florida's cocktail contained 100 mg, compared to Georgia's 50. Either dosage, Sperry said, would cause "virtually instantaneous" paralysis and prevent a person from breathing. In combination with the 1st drug, he said, "the person would be unable to perceive any kind of paralysis because they would have been rendered unconscious." --Potassium chloride. This drug - at Florida's dosage of 240 milliequivalents or Georgia's of 120 - would cause "instantaneous cessation or stoppage of the heart," Sperry said. The entire cocktail, Sperry said, would result in "a humane and painless death." The judge upheld Florida's execution plan. But the inmate, Ian Deco Lightbourne, who now calls himself Ish'od Gi'hon, sentenced to death for a 1981 murder, remains on death row, his appeals continuing. Gissendaner, convicted of conspiring to murder her husband in 1997, is still appealing, too, of course, but with far less detail about the execution process than Lightbourne had. *********************** Former Ga. chief justice regrets vote in Gissendaner case Former Georgia Supreme Court Chief Justice Norman Fletcher, who opposes capital punishment, said in a statement he wished had he dissented 15 years ago when the court ruled Kelly Gissendaner's death sentence was proportional, even though her co-defendant was sentenced to life for her husband's murder. Fletcher was not yet chief justice when the court ruled unanimously in 2000 to uphold Gissendaner's sentence for plotting the 1997 murder of her husband. The opinion cited several reasons she was more culpable than her former lover who murdered Douglas Gissendaner, while Kelly Gissendaner spent the evening with friends, driving to the place where her husband was killed just as he died. Gregory Owen testified against Kelly Gissendaner after pleading guilty to forcing Douglas Gissendaner to drive to a remote corner of Gwinnett County on Feb. 7, 1997, knocking him unconscious and then repeatedly stabbing him. Owen was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole once he has served 25 years, while Kelly Gissendaner rejected a similar plea deal and went to trial. She is scheduled to be executed at 7 p.m. Tuesday. Fletcher said he is arguing that Gissendaner should be spared based on "the disproportionate nature of Ms. Gissendaner's sentence when compared to that of her co-defendant, Gregory Owen, who actually stabbed Douglas Gissendaner to death. Mr. Owen will be eligible for parole in 7 years. Ms. Gissendaner was not present when Mr. Gissendaner was killed, but she is scheduled to be executed in less than a week." In the unanimous 2000 opinion, the 7 justices wrote that death was an appropriate sentence for Gissendaner because she was the "moving force behind the murder and even insisted upon murder when her co-conspirator suggested divorce instead." The justices also wrote in the opinion she stood to gain financially from her husband's death by collecting on a life insurance policy and would get their $84,000 house and she tried to find someone who, for $10,000, would beat beat up prosecution witnesses and also claim responsibility for her husband's murder. "We concluded that her sentence was proportionate to her role in the crime. I was wrong," Fletcher wrote. The former chief justice also said Kelly Gissendaner's ministry in prison and the help she has provided other inmates in despair are reasons Gissendaner should be spared. (source for both: Atlanta Journal-Constitution) OHIO: Trial set to begin for man accused of killing Akron police officer Justin Winebrenner The trial of an Akron man accused of killing an off-duty Akron police officer will begin Monday. The 12-member jury - evenly split with 6 men and 6 women - will first visit the scene of the fatal encounter in the morning. Akron police officer Justin Winebrenner was inside Papa Don's Pub on East Market Street on Nov. 16 when another patron, Kenan Dason Ivery, 36, was kicked out for being unruly. Authorities say Winebrenner, 32, attempted to defuse the situation when Ivery returned a short time later. Ivery is charged with firing 4 shots - leaving 6 victims - after he returned to the bar. Winebrenner was shot twice in the torso and died a short time later at Summa Akron City Hospital. 4 other bar patrons, including a 2nd off-duty Akron police officer, were also shot. Another victim had a bullet pass through his clothing. After visiting the scene of the shooting, the jury is expected to return to Summit County Common Pleas Judge Alison McCarty's courtroom Monday afternoon for opening arguments. Ivery is charged with 18 separate counts and could get the death penalty if convicted of any of the aggravated murder charges. McCarty previously issued a court order banning Summit County Assistant Prosecutors Jonathan Baumoel and Jennie Shuki and Ivery's defense lawyers Kerry O'Brien and John Greven from commenting on the case outside of court proceedings. The trial is expected to last well into October. (source: ohio.com) ILLINOIS: Lawmakers want death penalty back in some cases Several years after the death penalty was abolished in Illinois, some state lawmakers want a limited reinstatement. State Rep. Bill Mitchell, R-Fosyth and John Cabello, R-Machesney, are urging fellow lawmakers in Springfield to discuss whether the controversial punishment should be brought back in cases involving the murder of a law enforcement officer, firefighter or child and other specific cases. "This is intended for the worst of the worst," Cabello said last week. "We feel if a member of our society is brutally murdered, the members of the family should be able to lobby for a different kind of punishment." Former Republican Gov. George Ryan commuted the death sentences of all death row prisoners in 2000. Illinois became the 16th state to abolish the death penalty in 2011. Under a measured introduced by Mitchell and Cabello, the option of the death penalty would only apply to those convicted of 1st-degree murder for the murder of a peace officer, correctional employee or fireman while in the line of duty, multiple murders, murder of a child younger than 12, any murder committed on a school grounds, or as an act of terrorism. In addition, the death penalty could only be sought if it requested by the family of the victim through a state's attorney's office. "If the families do not wish someone to be expired, then it's not something we want to happen," said Cabello, who also stressed the penalty should only be sought in cases where the evidence is "iron clad." Mitchell said if the potential for the death penalty would deter one person from committing such a crime, then it is worth it. "1 death is 1 too many," he said. State Sen. Bill Haine, D-Alton, announced earlier this month his intent to file similar legislation in the state Senate. The bill sponsored by Cabello, House Bill 4059, is in the House Rules Committee, with 3 Democratic and 3 Republican sponsors. Cabello said the changing climate of the past several years, including the recent death of an officer in Fox Lake, has changed the narrative. But while the national headlines of violence against law enforcement officers have seemingly increased, the actual number of cases is down. According to the Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, which tracks officers' deaths so their names can be enshrined on a Washington, D.C., memorial, the number of officers shot and killed has decreased over the past few decades. There were 26 shooting deaths through the end August this year, down from 30 last year. (source: pantagraph.com) OKLAHOMA: Glossip attorneys cross line with criticism of DA Everyone deserves a zealous defense, but efforts to prevent the execution of Richard Glossip are taking on the appearance of a smear campaign aimed not only at Oklahoma's law enforcement community, but also all Oklahomans who support them. Glossip has been convicted, twice, of paying a co-worker in 1997 to murder his employer, Barry Van Treese. Glossip's defenders argue the co-worker, Justin Sneed, lied about Glossip's role in order to avoid the death penalty himself. Now Glossip's attorneys have come forward with last-minute affidavits from former convicts who claim to have been incarcerated with Sneed and heard him make vague comments about sending Glossip "up the river" for the murder. Of course, one reason juries believed Glossip played a role in the killing is because Glossip admitted he tried to cover up the murder. This, it must be noted, is not a minor point. Among other things, Glossip diverted cleaning staff from the motel room where Van Treese had been killed to prevent discovery of the body; he and Sneed split thousands of dollars stolen from Van Treese; and Glossip not only failed to immediately tell police investigators he knew who killed Van Treese, but gave conflicting statements that impeded the investigation. In short, for a supposedly innocent man, Glossip did plenty to look guilty. The filing of the affidavits led the court, hours before Glossip was to be executed, to delay the execution by two weeks. It is now set for Thursday. Yet this new "evidence" seems shaky, at best. One former inmate involved, Michael G. Scott, previously admitted to Department of Corrections officials in 2005 that he lies "all the time." Glossip's attorneys did little to suggest they're confident in the validity of the new affidavits when they objected to prosecutors interviewing the supposed witnesses. Instead, they suggested Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater and law enforcement officials across the state are trying to intimidate defense witnesses and railroad an innocent man. Those claims were levied after Rogers County authorities arrested Scott for parole violations and Prater and other Oklahoma County officials questioned Scott while he was in custody. Yet as The Oklahoman's Graham Lee Brewer reported, "It is not uncommon for prosecutors to interview defense witnesses directly to determine if what they are saying in an affidavit is accurate, and sometimes parole arrests play a role in that process." Among the details Glossip's attorneys highlighted was that the room where Scott was interviewed "was equipped with a camera, although Mr. Scott did not know if it was turned on or not." If Scott is telling the truth, why would a camera be intimidating? On the other hand, if Prater and other law enforcement officials are pressuring Scott to change his story and frame an innocent man for a murder he didn't commit and for which he may soon be executed, why would they film themselves? Contrary to the implications made by Glossip's legal team, Prater has a long-established record as an above-board, independent prosecutor. So his blunt rebuttal of their claims is noteworthy: "The day will come when it will be clear that everything that the defense lawyers and their witnesses say in this case are lies." Glossip's attorneys are obligated to defend him by every legal means. But if they are demonizing law enforcement officials for merely doing their jobs, they've gone too far. (source: Editorial Board, The Oklahoman) USA: How Prosecutors Get Away With Cutting Black Jurors This term, the Supreme Court will consider an outrageous case of prosecutorial misconduct. But will it do anything about it? A curious thing happened at the trial of Timothy Tyrone Foster, a young black man accused of killing an elderly white woman: every black prospective juror was dismissed. He was convicted, and sentenced to death, by an all-white jury. Even more curious: there were 42 prospective jurors that morning, 5 of whom were black. All dismissed, 4 of whom by "peremptory challenge," in which the prosecutor strikes a juror at his or her discretion. In Georgia, where Foster's trial took place, prosecutors have 10 such options. Peremptory challenges were entirely unreviewable for most of American history. That was their function: in addition to dismissals with reasons, they were meant to give prosecutors and defense attorneys (in Georgia, defense attorneys get 20 such challenges) leeway to strike potentially problematic jurors without explanation. That changed somewhat in 1986, when the Supreme Court decided Batson v. Kentucky. In Batson, the Court held that using peremptory challenges to strike jurors on the basis of race was unconstitutional. Foster's trial, though, took place after Batson. How is that possible? Because Batson has proven to be almost worthless in practice. All a prosecutor must do is provide some race-neutral reason for striking jurors, and that is extremely easy to do. Maybe the juror didn't make eye contact. Maybe she was female. Maybe he looked bored or inattentive - as most of us are at the end of hours of jury duty. Any of these reasons will do, and so, in Foster's case and countless others, winning a "Batson challenge" is basically impossible. Except Foster's case has turned out to be different. During the lengthy appeals process (nearly thirty years and counting), the prosecutor's notes were made public. And they are laughable and tragic at the same time. Black prospective jurors are annotated as B#1, B#2, et cetera. Weighing the different options, the prosecutor noted that one has "the most potential to choose from out of the 4 remaining blacks." And so on. And then there were the absurd pretexts the prosecutor provided to satisfy Batson. First, he listed over 30 different reasons, basically throwing everything against the wall to see what would stick. He said 3 didn't make enough eye contact. He said another was a social worker, which in fact she was not. He said one was close in age to the 18-year-old defendant; she was 34. All this make it abundantly clear that race was the predominant factor in striking these jurors, notwithstanding the pretexts given for their dismissals. And that's why Foster's case is now at the Supreme Court, which will have an opportunity to update Batson, and perhaps give it some teeth. The Court will also, of course, determine the fate of Foster, who is developmentally disabled and who has now spent nearly 30 years on death row. "Batson has failed miserably to prevent race discrimination," says Stephen Bright, who is Foster's lawyer, a professor at Yale Law School, president of the Southern Center for Human Rights, and 1 of the leading advocates for criminal justice reform, including abolition of the death penalty. Bright has been down this road before, having won 2 Supreme Court cases on race discrimination and jury selection. And he says that Foster's case is not unusual in the least. "What went on at trial was typical," he told the Daily Beast. "What's unusual is we know what's in the prosecutor's files. These notes that show not just a consciousness of race but an obsession with race." Black prospective jurors are annotated as B#1, B#2, et cetera. Batson has failed to prevent discrimination, says Bright, for at least 3 reasons. First, "every prosecutor has a handy-dandy list of race-neutral reasons that they give. They even distribute reasons in advance. Some state training programs even distribute a list called 'Articulating Juror Negatives.'" That's right, all prosecutors have to do is read from a prewritten list of reasons, and they'll prevail. "They just say, 'take a lot of notes when you strike a black juror.'" Second, Bright notes the awkward dynamic that Batson challenges present. "When you challenge a prosecutor's strike, you're saying the prosecutor intentionally discriminated on the basis of race and lied about it. The psychological dynamics between judge and prosecutor are such that it'll be very hard for the judge to make either one of those findings. You deal with the prosecutor day in and day out - you're gonna call the guy a liar and a racist?" Third, and most damningly, "elected judges in the state courts are not known for recognizing constitutional violations, especially in cases of race. The local judge would've been voted out of office had he found a Batson violation. He and the district attorney work together all the time. There's just no chance that's going to happen." As a result, says Bright, "A lot of defense lawyers have quit making Batson objections because they just don't think there's any point." The result is a perpetuation of the institutional racism of the judicial system itself. First, of course, individual cases are influenced. In the case of Foster, Bright says "this kid got sentenced to death because was a black kid who committed a horrible crime against a white woman. If it had been a black woman, it wouldn't have been a death penalty case." Amazingly, in front of his all-white jury, the prosecutor in Foster's case told the jury in his closing argument to "give Foster the death penalty to deter people in the projects" - which Bright calculated to be 94% black at the time. "That's a pretty racist appeal to say to an all-white jury." Second, the net effect of blocking black jurors from service, in addition to the discrimination they experience, is to diminish the integrity of the judicial system. Says Bright, "A person comes to a courtroom where you may have a 30-40% black population, and the average citizen sees all-white juries. Not only that: everybody's white up there in the front: the prosecutor, the judge, the jury. The only person of color is the person on trial." (As reported in an earlier installment of Out of Order, prosecutors are 95% white.) As a result, says Bright, "black people know they are not part of the criminal justice system. It's an all-white system. And white people know it too." What happens now? In Bright's opinion, the Foster case will likely be decided on its specific facts: with this evidence, the Supreme Court may well decide that there is a clear inference of racial discrimination. But Foster may turn out to be too easy a case. Most prosecutors don't leave smoking guns lying around - as Bright said to me, the mistake this one made was not shredding his notes afterwards. So what about the more numerous cases where racial discrimination takes place without smoking guns like this one? One option would be to reduce the number of peremptory challenges available to prosecutors - but that is a matter of state law, with each state having different regimes in place. (Bright says there is no appetite for eliminating peremptory challenges altogether because prosecutors, needing unanimous verdicts, are "scared to death there'll be that 1 eccentric person on the jury who's going to hang the jury.") At the very least, that would limit prosecutors' capacity to use challenges to stack all-white juries. Another could be to change the evidentiary standard for finding racial discrimination. The current standard requires that the prosecutor have a "mind to discriminate" - basically, that a prosecutor be found racist. But the Court could set out a standard that looks more like disparate impact. Without making any inference as to what's in a given prosecutor's head, the bare statistical imbalance could enable a defendant's challenge to prevail. Disparate impact reasoning was recently (barely) upheld by the Supreme Court in the last term in the context of the Fair Housing Act. To be sure, it is imperfect and can lead to quotas, thus increasing, rather than decreasing, race-based decisionmaking. But it also eliminates Batson's embrace of the ridiculous pretext, and the uncomfortable inference that a legal colleague is a liar and a racist. It's also possible that, amazingly, Foster could lose. If the Court finds that the race discrimination at issue was a harmless error - in particular, if the new evidence of discrimination is not a "relevant circumstance" that the appeals court should have considered - Foster could still face execution. Given the current composition of the Supreme Court, this is a very real possibility. But even if Foster gets a new trial, the phenomenon of the "all-white jury," which Bob Dylan sang about in 1975, will remain as long as prosecutors can exercise challenges on a pretext, and bar people of color from sitting on a jury of one's peers. In Bright's words, "When one part of the community is systematically kept off the juries undermines the respect that people pay to the courts' decisions. Something needs to be done about it." (source: The Daily Beast) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 28 09:57:17 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 09:57:17 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 28 INDIA: Delhi High Court awards life term to servant, commutes death penalty in double murder case Negating a local court ruling, the High Court on Friday commuted death penalty and awarded life term to a domestic help for murdering an elderly woman and her 12-year-old grandson here in 2007. In 2010, holding that the offence of Mithilesh Kumar Singh fell in the category of "rarest of rare" case, a Delhi Court had awarded death sentence to the accused. The court had on July 1, 2010 convicted him for the offences of murder, attempt to murder, robbery and for destroying evidence under the IPC. Singh, a resident of Samastipur in Bihar, had killed Karamveer (12) and his maternal grandmother Surjit Kaur, 60, in their house at Vasant Kunj in south Delhi on March 2, 2007. The convict, who was working as a domestic help, sedated their pet dog and killed them before decamping with valuables, and cash. He was apprehended with the help of Mehar Legha, 15, sister of the deceased boy. The girl, who was also attacked by the domestic help, had raised an alarm which led to the accused being apprehended. The girl was later honoured with the national bravery award in 2008. Besides Mehar, her mother Manjit Legha, a teacher of Delhi Public School, Noida, and her husband, a retired army officer, had also testified in the case. (source: Zee News) PAKISTAN----impending juvenile execution Pakistan faces outcry over plans to execute 2 men - 1 disabled, the other a juvenile offender----Last week, Pakistan tried to kill wheelchair user Abdul Basit. This Tuesday, it will push ahead with the execution of Ansar Iqbal - who says he was 15 at the time of his arrest Pakistan is facing growing international condemnation over plans to execute 2 men - 1 thought to be a juvenile offender, the other severely disabled. Ansar Iqbal and wheelchair user Abdul Basit both face death by hanging, after their death sentences were upheld by the country's Supreme Court. Last week, it was reported that Mr Basit's death was delayed after his severe paralysis meant he would be unable to walk to the gallows, as is required by the jail's rules on carrying out executions. Now, the campaign group Reprieve says that Mr Iqbal's case involves a fundamental breach of Pakistan's commitments to international law. According to Reprieve, courts in Pakistan have refused to consider evidence from a birth certificate which appears to show that Mr Iqbal was 15 at the time of his arrest on murder charges in 1994. Like many in Pakistan, Mr Iqbal's birth was not registered at the time. He was issued a certificate earlier this year by Nadra, the National Database and Registration Authority - but court officials say it has come too late to be considered. Maya Foa, director of the death penalty team at Reprieve, said: "It is a fundamental principle of Pakistani and international law that children should not be sentenced to death. "In Ansar's case, none of the documentary evidence of his juvenility that was presented to court was given proper consideration. Instead, the courts relied solely on an estimation of his age in the police record, and now Ansar faces death by hanging at dawn on Tuesday. "Pakistan has already executed at least three people convicted as children since December. On Tuesday morning they risk hanging another. The Pakistani authorities must stay this execution and allow a full examination of the evidence." (source: The Independent) *********** Juvenile set to be hanged tonight in Pakistan Pakistani authorities are preparing to execute a man who was a juvenile at the time of his arrest, in the early hours of tomorrow morning (local time). Ansar Iqbal was arrested in 1994 on murder charges - which he denies - and sentenced to death in 1996, despite telling the court he was 15 at the time of his arrest. All the documentary evidence provided to the courts during his trial or appeal indicates that he was a child at the time of the alleged offence; however, the courts have chosen to believe the estimate of police officers that he was in his 20s. His scheduled hanging follows a recent Supreme Court hearing in which judges refused to consider a birth certificate issued by the country's official National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA). The certificate gives his date of birth as 25 December 1978 - confirming Iqbal's account that he was a 15 at the time of the alleged offence in June 1994. The execution of people who were children at the time of the alleged offence has long been banned under both international and Pakistani law. However, since resuming executions in December 2014, the country has seen at least 3 people executed who were children at the time of the alleged offence, alongside hundreds of others. The executions took place despite Pakistan's commitments to human rights standards set out in trade agreements with the European Union, with which Pakistan enjoys preferential status. Foreign Office minister Tobias Ellwood visited Pakistan for talks last week, and said in a statement that he "highlight[ed] the steps [Pakistan] still needs to take in protecting human rights." Human rights organization Reprieve has today written to the minister asking if he raised the issue of executions, including that of Iqbal, during his trip. Commenting, Maya Foa, head of the death penalty team at Reprieve, said: "Ansar Iqbal is scheduled to be hanged in Pakistan in less than 12 hours, despite the fact that the government's own records show that he was a juvenile at the time of his arrest. The execution of juveniles are prohibited under Pakistani and international law, yet there have already been 3 juveniles executed in Pakistan this year alone. Given that over 70% of births are unregistered in Pakistan, the Pakistani authorities should be doing all they can to ensure that they are not inadvertently sending children to the gallows. All the documentary evidence shows that Ansar was a child when he was arrested - his execution tomorrow morning would be a grave travesty of justice and must be stopped." (source: Reprieve.org.uk) MALAYSIA: 8 Ethnic Indians Charged in Prosecutor's Murder in Malaysia 8 ethnic Indians, including a military doctor, were today charged in connection with the murder of a public prosecutor, who handled many high profile cases in Malaysia. 6 of the accused have been charged with murder of Deputy Public Prosecutor Anthony Kevin Morais while 2 others, including the military doctor, have been charged with abetting the murder. Police had earlier said that Morais was the DPP in a case where military doctor Col Dr R Kunaseegaran, 48, working with the pathology lab at the Tuanku Mizan Military Hospital, was charged with unlawful trade of medicines in December 2013. In September last year, Kunaseegaran, who was on a RM 100,000 bail, had claimed trial to 2 bribery charges involving RM 700,000 for allegedly recommending 3 companies to supply medicines and disposable medical tools to the hospital. G Gunasegaran, 47, R Dineshwaran, 23, Thinesh Kumar, 22, M Viswanath, 25, S Nirmalan, 22, and S Ravi Chandran, 44, allegedly committed the offence on September 4, the court said. The 7 suspects face the death penalty if convicted. A mechanic, A Murugan Arujalan, has also been charged with abetting Morais's murder. Magistrate Siti Radziah Kamardin has fixed November 30 for mention pending the postmortem and chemist reports. Morais went missing on September 4 after leaving his residence for work in Putrajaya. He was abducted by several men during morning rush hour traffic. A DNA test performed on the body found in a cement filled oil drum on September 16 matched that of Morais. The oil drum was dumped at a swamp and 1 of the suspects arrested led police to the location of the oil drum. Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission director of legal and prosecution division Umar Saifuddin Jaafar has said that Morais, who was seconded to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission for 10 years, handled many high-profile cases. (source: The New Indian Express) IRAN----executions 7 prisoners hanged in Iran Iran's fundamentalist regime has hanged 7 prisoners, including 6 in 1 prison alone. 6 of the prisoners, including 3 brothers, were hanged on Wednesday in the central province of Yazd. All 6 were from Iran's south-eastern Sistan & Baluchestan Province. Another prisoner, identified as Mohammad-Reza Fiouji, 27, was hanged in a prison in Bandar Abbas, southern Iran. He had been transferred to solitary confinement on Saturday (September 26) in preparation for his execution. The mullahs' regime in Iran continues to execute more of its citizens per capita than any other U.N. member state. Some 2000 people have been executed since Hassan Rouhani became president 2 years ago. Iranian-Americans plan to hold a major rally later on Monday to condemn the presence of the mullahs' President Rouhani at the United Nations in New York. The rally, which is being organized by the Organization of Iranian-American Communities (OIAC), will press the international community to hold the regime in Iran accountable for its abhorrent human rights record. In a statement on Sunday, the Iranian Resistance strongly condemned Rouhani's presence in New York and at the United Nations General Assembly. "He is among the most senior officials involved in the production of the nuclear bomb, 120,000 political executions, and warmongering and slaughter in the region. This regime does not represent the Iranian people, and its leaders, from whatever faction, should face justice for crime against humanity in Iran. Iran's seat at the United Nations should be given to its people and their legitimate resistance," the NCRI said. (source: NCR-Iran) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 28 16:08:58 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 16:08:58 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----N.H., VA., GA., MO., OKLA., KAN. Message-ID: Sept. 28 NEW HAMPSHIRE: Addison attorney challenges death penalty law----Motion argues that death penalty is unconstitutional An attorney for New Hampshire's only death-row inmate is challenging the constitutionality of the state's death penalty law. In a recently filed motion, a lawyer for Michael Addison argues that the two methods of execution allowed by New Hampshire -- lethal injection and hanging -- violate the state and federal constitutions, including the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The attorney argued that the drugs needed for lethal injection are unavailable and would inflict pain and suffering. Senior Assistant Attorney General Jeff Strelzin said the state plans to file a response. Addison was sentenced to death for the 2006 killing of Manchester police officer Michael Briggs. The state Supreme Court upheld his sentence in April. David Rothstein, Addison's attorney, said he also plans to file an appeal of the case with the U.S. Supreme Court within the next month. New Hampshire's last execution was in 1939, and lethal injection was added as an execution method in 1986. The state has no designated facility for carrying out executions. Department of Corrections Commissioner William Wrenn has said the state may use a prison gymnasium to carry out Addison's execution rather than construct a costly new facility. In the motion, first reported by New Hampshire Public Radio, Rothstein argues it will be difficult for the state to obtain the drugs necessary to ensure that Addison is not subject to pain and suffering during his execution. Because New Hampshire has never put anyone to death by lethal injection, the state has not developed proper procedures or protocols, he argued. "A constitutional lethal injection process is dependent on the proper administration of the right drugs, in the right dosages, delivered by the right people, with the right safeguards," Rothstein wrote. State law says executions can be carried out by hanging if it is impractical to use lethal injection. Rothstein argues death by hanging "offends contemporary norms and standards of decency." The filing mentions recent executions in Ohio, Arizona and Oklahoma, where lethal injection procedures caused the people being put to death to gasp for air or writhe in pain. "These executions demonstrate that lethal injection ... poses an acute risk of intolerable suffering," the motion says. "The fact that these states have experience with lethal injection, and New Hampshire has none, is cause for even greater concern." Legislative efforts to repeal the death penalty over the past decade have failed. The debate over repeal in 2014 focused heavily on Addison, with repeal opponents arguing that it could jeopardize the state's ability to legally execute him. U.S. Sen. Kelly Ayotte, who prosecuted Addison while serving as attorney general, urged lawmakers not to repeal the death penalty. Both the House and Senate passed a repeal bill in 2000, but then-Gov. Jeanne Shaheen, now a U.S. senator, vetoed it. (source: WMUR news) VIRGINIA----impending execution//foreign national Virginia Preparing to Execute 1st Inmate in Nearly 3 Years Virginia is poised to execute a convicted serial killer who claims he's intellectually disabled using lethal injection drugs from Texas because the state's supply of another controversial drug will expire the day before the execution is supposed to take place. Unless Gov. Terry McAuliffe or the U.S. Supreme Court steps in this week, Alfredo Prieto will be the 1st Virginia inmate to be executed in nearly 3 years Thursday. The El Salvador native was already facing execution in California for raping and murdering a 15-year-old girl when a Virginia jury sentenced him to death in 2010 for the 1988 killings of Rachael Raver and her boyfriend, Warren Fulton III. California officials agreed to send him to Virginia on the rationale that it was more likely to carry out the execution. Authorities have said DNA and ballistics evidence has linked Prieto to several other killings in California and Virginia but he was never prosecuted because he had already been sentenced to death. Matthew Raver, Rachael Raver's brother, said Prieto's seemingly endless efforts to delay his execution have felt like "salt in the wound" for his family, which remains devastated by his sister's death nearly three decades later. Matthew Raver plans to attend the execution at the Greensville Correctional Center. "I look forward to it as a relief that this individual ... and all his games, his plotting, his violence has ended," Matthew Raver said. But Prieto's lawyers are still fighting to prove that the 49-year-old is intellectually disabled and therefore disqualified for the death penalty. Prieto's exposure to violence in warn-torn El Salvador and a lack of proper nutrition because his family was poor contributed to "significant brain dysfunction" that affected his ability to think abstractly and control his impulses, Ricardo Weinstein, a psychologist who evaluated Prieto at the defense's request, said during his trial in 2007. As a child, Prieto struggled with learning and was quiet and withdrawn, often sitting alone and "staring blankly at nothing," Prieto's attorneys said last week in their request to McAuliffe to delay the execution. They want Prieto to return to California, where they believe he can receive a "full and fair" assessment of his intellectual disability. McAuliffe has not yet made a decision on Prieto's request. Prieto's lawyers appealed his death sentence after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled last year that rigid cutoffs on IQ test scores used in Florida to determine whether someone is intellectually disabled were unconstitutional. Virginia had a virtually identical law. But a federal appeals court ruled in June that Prieto failed to prove that no reasonable juror would find him eligible for execution, saying that Prieto's ability to handle everyday tasks was "at best inconclusive." Psychologists testifying for the prosecution noted that Prieto was well-spoken, bilingual and analytical. But Prieto's attorneys and advocates for people with intellectual disabilities say his cognitive strengths are irrelevant. "You shouldn't discard the idea that someone has an intellectual disability just because they have a girlfriend or a job," said Rob Lee, one of Prieto's lawyers. They have appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has not yet decided whether it would hear the case. Prieto has also asked the justices to rule on the constitutionality of Virginia's policy of automatically placing death row inmates in solitary confinement. With 110 executions, Virginia ranks just 3rd in the nation for the number carried out since the Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1976. But the state hasn't executed an inmate since January 2013, when Robert Gleason Jr. was put to death in the state's electric chair, which inmates can choose over lethal injection. Gleason had been serving a life in prison for a 2007 murder when he killed his cellmate in 2009. Since Prieto didn't make a choice, the state will use a lethal 3-drug cocktail. The 1st drug will be pentobarbital that Virginia obtained from Texas because its supply of midazolam will expire on Wednesday, said Lisa Kinney, a spokeswoman for the Virginia Department of Corrections. Virginia recently approved the use of midazolam -- a controversial drug used in a botched execution in Oklahoma last year -- but has never used it. Death penalty opponents, who have been pressing McAuliffe to call off the execution, plan to hold vigils at 10 locations across the state Thursday evening. Dede Raver, Rachael Raver's sister, said she believes Prieto's execution will help her and others who were affected by the killings to close a long and painful chapter in their lives. "I have no interest in taking someone's life away, but honestly I feel like Prieto will return to hell," she said. "This man is so evil and he has no regard for human life." (source: nbcwashington.com) **************** Convicted killer who claims disability to be executed in Virginia A convicted serial killer who claims he's intellectually disabled is scheduled to be executed in Virginia on Thursday - by using drugs from Texas. Alfredo Prieto was sentenced to death 5 years ago for the 1988 killing of a couple, both George Washington University students. Lawyers for the convict - who was on death row in California from 1990 until his transfer to Virginia, when he was found guilty of the rape and murder of a 15-year-old girl - want him to be returned to the golden state, where they believe he will receive a fair assessment of his alleged handicap, The Associated Press reported. Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe faces a decision on whether or not to allow an execution go through as planned on Thursday. The attorneys argue that Prieto's upbringing in his native El Salvador has hindered his ability to maintain proper brain function and keep control of his actions. The Arc of Virginia, an advocacy group for people with intellectual disabilities, has also called on Gov. Terry McAuliffe to delay the execution. As they wait for McAuliffe to make a decision, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice confirmed that it sent 3 vials of the execution drug pentobarbital to Virginia. The trade was initially leaked in a court filing for a death penalty case in Oklahoma - where, like Texas, laws allow prison officials to not disclose where they get execution drugs. McAuliffe supported a similar bill in Virginia, but it ultimately failed. Since capital punishment was re-authorized by the Supreme Court in 1976, there have been 110 executions in the Commonwealth of Virginia - which places it 3rd in the nation for the most carried out in that time. There is also growing political pressure since public support for the death penalty has reached its lowest numbers in 40 years, according to a Pew Research Center poll conducted in April. McAuliffe's spokesmani told The Washngton Post in February that the governor opposes the death penalty because he is a Catholic but that "he will enforce the law." Stopping or delaying an execution would not be an unprecedented move since 5 of the last 6 Virginia governors have used this executive power due to reasons of possible innocence or mental health concerns like Prieto is claiming. Though Virginia has received attention in the past 2 presidential elections as a key swing state, on the state-level it still has a strong Republican majority in the house and a slim majority in the state senate that has worked to block any legislation on restrictions to the death penalty. McAuliffe is now in the position of being the 3rd sitting Democratic governor - joining Missouri and Delaware - to execute an order of capital punishment. (source: New York Daily News) GEORGIA----impending female execution Ministers Want Execution Halted For The Only Woman On Georgia Death Row Kelly Renee Gissendaner is the only woman on Georgia's death row. She was convicted of the 1997 stabbing death of her husband Douglas Gissendaner. She was accused of orchestrating the murder, for which her lover Gregory Owen was sentenced to life in prison. He testified against Gissendaner and is eligible for parole in 2022. The 47 year old Gissendaner is scheduled to be put to death at 7pm tomorrow. She would be the 1st woman to be executed by Georgia in 70 years. An earlier postponement of her execution in March occurred after concerns surfaced about the lethal injection drugs that were to be used. Reports indicate that a federal judge today declined to halt the execution. Lawyers for Gissendaner had contended that the more than a dozen hours spent by Gissendaner in March, as it was determined whether or not she'd be put to death, was cruel and unusual punishment. Among those also calling for Gissendaner's life to be spared are Rev. Kim Jackson, Episcopal Chaplain with the Atlanta University Center, Min. Cassandra Henderson with the Youth and Children's Program at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, and Letitia Campbell with the Candler School of Theology. Rev. Jackson says that Gissendaner's life should be spared because "human life is worth saving." According to Jackson, "Kelly has had an experience of transformation and redemption." Minister Henderson has served as a chaplain at Lee Arrendale State Prison, where Gissendaner was kept as an inmate. According to Henderson, "I sat with Kelly, I prayed with Kelly, and I got to see what transformation looks like." Letitia Campbell is with the Candler School of Theology. She knows Gissendaner through the program that Candler sponsors through the women's prison at Arrendale. "Many of my students, and the women affiliated with the theology program at Arrendale were deeply moved by Kelly", says Campbell. "In many cases", acccording to Campbell, "these women credit Kelly with saving their lives." Jackson, Henderson, and Campbell are advocating for Gissendaner to receive a life sentence with no opportunity for parole. Even that sentence, according to Rev. Jackson, "is still not equal to what the person who actually committed the murder received." (source: CBS news) ****************** Judge denies Kelly Gissendaner's stay of execution request, restraining order against state Federal Judge Thomas Thrash, Jr. of the Northern District of Georgia has denied Kelly Gissendaner's emergency motion for a stay of execution. He has also denied her emergency motion for a restraining order against the state. The only woman on Georgia's death row is set to be put to death by lethal injection on Tuesday, Sept. 29. If the execution goes forward, Kelly Gissendaner will be the first woman executed in the state in several decades; she's the 35th person put to death by lethal execution. This after lawyers for Gissendaner scrambled to try to convince a judge to halt her execution, which is scheduled to take place Tuesday night. She's the only woman on Georgia's death row, and she's scheduled to die by lethal injection. Gissendaner's lawyer, Gerald King, Jr says he will appeal to the 11th Circuit County of Appeals. Gissendaner does have a surprising new ally in her fight. He's one of the people who originally gave the stamp of approval for her to be put to death. In an exclusive interview with CBS46 News, former Georgia Supreme Court Justice Norman Fletcher said he now regrets his decision to uphold Gissendaner's execution. She was convicted of conspiring with her lover to kill her husband, Doug Gissendaner, in 1997. Fletcher said he changed his mind after learning that Gissendaner's accomplice later admitted he lied about her being there for the murder. "If we had known that, it could have very well changed some outcome," Fletcher said. Fletcher also said he's not convinced it's enough to keep her from being put to death because the wheels are already in motion. "There are a lot of procedural bars that are involved under the law which sometimes are very unjust," said Fletcher. "I have high hopes that the Board of Pardon and Parole will reconsider and actually commute her sentence either to life with parole or life without parole." Fletcher said he opposes the death penalty altogether because of the possibility of making irreversible mistakes and because of the cost. "We spend approximately ten percent of all court resources on death penalty cases," he said. The family of Doug Gissendaner released the following statement: "We have been asked by various news outlets for a statement regarding the pending execution of Kelly Gissendaner. While the focus should be on Doug, the victim, we offer the following in response: "Kelly planned and executed Doug's murder. She targeted him and his death was intentional. Kelly chose to have her day in court and after hearing the facts of this case, a jury of her peers sentenced her to death. In the last 18 years, our mission has been to seek justice for Doug's murder and to keep his memory alive. We have faith in our legal system and do believe that Kelly has been afforded every right that our legal system affords. As the murderer, she's been given more rights and opportunity over the last 18 years than she ever afforded to Doug who, again, is the victim here. She had no mercy, gave him no rights, no choices, nor the opportunity to live his life. His life was not hers to take. "But we want to take this opportunity to ask you to focus on Doug, not Kelly. For those of you who did not have the pleasure of knowing Doug, he was a truly wonderful person, the kind of selfless person who always thought of others instead of himself. His last act on earth was helping his friends. He was a friendly, trusting, good-hearted soul with a smile that will never be forgotten. He was undisputedly a family man, a great friend and an even greater father who loved and sacrificed everything for the sake of his daughter and 2 stepsons. For those of us that loved him, we will always feel great sorrow and indescribable pain at how he was so brutally taken from us, but also take comfort in knowing that he's in heaven waiting for each and every one of us to rejoin him someday. "We would like to thank our family, friends and other supporters for your continued prayers and words of comfort and support. We have been following online comments very closely and while we prefer to keep our privacy, know that we are truly thankful for your kind comments. "To all who read this---we ask you to remember Doug and honor his memory by telling the ones you love how much you love them. He would love that. We pray that his memory will bring a smile to the faces of all that knew him and even those who didn't." (source: WCGL news) MISSOURI----impending execution Advocates say man facing execution next week in Missouri in death of ex-wife is innocent Missouri risks executing an innocent man next week, advocates for Kimber Edwards warned Monday, citing a key witness who says his testimony was coerced and the inmate's contention that his own confession was false. Edwards, a 51-year-old former St. Louis jailer, was convicted of hiring Orthell Wilson to kill his ex-wife, Kimberly Cantrell, in 2000 in her suburban St. Louis apartment. His execution is scheduled for Oct. 6. Prosecutors said Edwards wanted Cantrell dead so he didn't have to pay child support. Wilson was sentenced to life in prison after a plea deal in which he agreed to cooperate against Edwards. Edwards confessed to the crime. But Edwards' attorney, Jeremy Weis, and Tricia Bushnell, legal director of the Midwest Innocence Project, said Wilson has since said in an affidavit that he was trying to save himself from the death penalty when he cooperated against Edwards. Meanwhile, Edwards has recanted his confession. "This could become a case where we could execute an innocent man without even looking at the evidence that he is innocent," Bushnell said. Weis said he has asked the Missouri Supreme Court and Gov. Jay Nixon to halt the execution. Messages seeking comment from representatives for Nixon and Attorney General Chris Koster were not immediately returned. Bushnell said false confessions are not uncommon. An Innocence Project examination of murder convictions overturned by DNA evidence found false confessions in nearly two-thirds of those cases, she said. Edwards was diagnosed as autistic after his conviction, Weis said. Autistic people are more susceptible to confession to crimes they didn't commit, said Dennis Debbaudt, an expert on the relationship between those with autism and law enforcement. Edwards and Cantrell had divorced in 1990, with Cantrell taking custody of their daughter, Erica. In early 2000, Edwards was charged for failing to pay child support. He faced a court appearance on Aug. 25, 2000. Erica stayed with her father for 3 weeks prior to the hearing, but became concerned when she did not hear from her mother by Aug. 23. She called her aunt, who went to Cantrell's home in University City and found the body. Cantrell, 35, had been shot twice in the head the day before. Wilson, a tenant in a rental property owned by Edwards, was arrested and pleaded guilty to 1st-degree murder for killing Cantrell. He was sentenced to life in prison without parole after implicating Edwards. Police said Edwards admitted to paying a man $1,600 for the contract killing. In an affidavit in May, Wilson said he was "coerced by police to implicate Edwards" by threat of the death penalty. Wilson now says he acted alone. Weis said Wilson and Cantrell were in a relationship and he killed her after an argument. "Kimber Edwards is completely innocent," Wilson said in his affidavit. Edwards, meanwhile, has long contended he was framed and had no motive to kill his wife because the couple had worked out a child support agreement. Edwards' supporters also claim racial bias in his conviction and sentencing - Edwards is black and was convicted by an all-white jury. He was first scheduled to be executed in May, but the Missouri Supreme Court stayed the execution without explanation. Weis said the reprieve may have been because the attorneys were too busy with other cases to give attention to Edwards' case. (source: Associated Press) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Oklahoma's highest criminal court rejects death row inmate's innocence claim; execution set An Oklahoma appeals court on Monday narrowly denied a death row inmate's last-minute request for a new hearing and ordered that his execution may proceed. In a 3-2 decision, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals denied Richard Glossip's request for an evidentiary hearing and an emergency stay of execution. The court ruled the state can proceed with Glossip's execution, which is scheduled for Wednesday at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester. Glossip, 52, was scheduled to be executed on Sept. 16 for ordering the beating death of a motel owner, despite his claims that he was framed by the actual killer, Justin Sneed, who is serving a life sentence. But just hours before he was set to receive a lethal injection, the court granted Glossip a 2-week reprieve after his attorneys claimed they had new evidence that he was innocent, including another inmate's claim that he overheard Sneed admit to framing Glossip. But the court ruled the new evidence simply expands on theories that were already raised on his original appeals. "This evidence merely builds upon evidence previously presented to this court," Judge David Lewis wrote in his opinion. Glossip's execution will be the 1st in Oklahoma since a sharply divided U.S. Supreme Court upheld the state's 3-drug lethal injection formula in June. Glossip, the lead plaintiff in the case, argued that the sedative midazolam violated the U.S. Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment because it didn't adequately render an inmate unconscious before the 2nd and 3rd drugs were administered. Glossip's case attracted international attention after actress Susan Sarandon, who portrayed nun and death penalty opponent Sister Helen Prejean in the movie "Dead Man Walking," took up his cause. Prejean has served as Glossip's spiritual adviser and frequently visited him in prison. (source: Associated Press) ****************************** Oklahoma court denies Richard Glossip's request for a stay of execution 2 weeks ago, Oklahoma was hours away from executing Richard Glossip when a state court stepped in and delayed his execution so it could consider his appeals. On Monday, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals said it was rejecting these appeals and Glossip's request for a stay of execution. As a result, Glossip's lethal injection remains scheduled for Wednesday afternoon. Glossip's case has stretched over the better part of 2 decades, but it has received renewed attention as his execution date approached. His attorneys asked the state appeals court to halt his execution earlier this month because they argued that Glossip was improperly tried and sentenced. He was sentenced to death for the murder of a motel owner named Barry Van Treese, though he was not convicted of personally killing Van Treese. In 1997, Van Treese was beaten to death with a baseball bat, and Glossip - who worked for Van Treese - was found guilty of paying another motel worker to kill him. Justin Sneed, who confessed to killing Van Treese, testified against Glossip, and he was sentenced to life in prison without parole while Glossip received a death sentence. Glossip, 52, was convicted of murder and sentenced to death 2 separate times. He was first sentenced in 1998, but that sentence was overturned due to what a state court deemed ineffective legal counsel, and he was sentenced again in 2004. However, Glossip's attorneys argue that executing him based on Sneed's testimony "risks a wrongful execution." They also submitted an affidavit from a man who said that while in an Oklahoma state prison, he heard Sneed say that Glossip hadn't done anything. The appeals court decided 3-2 to reject Glossip's claims and arguments, finding that his conviction was "not based solely on the testimony of a codefendant" and adding that the same court believed Sneed's testimony "was sufficiently corroborated for a conviction," according to an opinion from Judge David Lewis. Presiding Judge Clancy Smith dissented, though, arguing that "the tenuous evidence in this case is questionable at best" if Sneed had disavowed his earlier remarks, and writing that she would allow a 60-day stay to allow for an penitentiary hearing. Glossip's attorneys pointed to the 3-2 decision in arguing that a man should not be put to death when 2 judges felt the execution should be delayed. "We should all be deeply concerned about an execution under such circumstances," Donald Knight, an attorney for Glossip, said in a statement Monday afternoon. The execution currently scheduled for Wednesday will mark the 3rd time this year Oklahoma will attempt to put Glossip to death. An execution date in January was nixed when the U.S. Supreme Court decided to hear the case. The court later upheld Oklahoma's protocol as constitutional, while Justice Stephen Breyer, in a dissent joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, questioned whether capital punishment itself was unconstitutional. That case bore Glossip's name, though it was focused on the particular drugs used by Oklahoma and larger questions about how capital punishment is carried out in the United States. Oklahoma had intended to execute Glossip on Sept. 16 in what would have been the state's 1st execution since the Supreme Court ruling, but the appeals court called that off with hours to spare. When the order delaying the execution for 2 weeks came down, Glossip was so close to his scheduled execution time that he had already been served his final meal. In addition to their requests to the Oklahoma court, Glossip's attorneys had also asked Gov. Mary Fallin (R) to stay the execution, arguing that the lethal injection should be halted due to new evidence. However, Fallin denied these requests, and she said her office determined that none of the evidence presented by Glossip's attorneys changed her mind. "After carefully reviewing the facts of this case multiple times, I see no reason to cast doubt on the guilty verdict reached by the jury or to delay Glossip's sentence of death," she said in a statement earlier this month. Fallin also said her office would respect the appeals court's decision. High-profile voices have called on state officials to call off Glossip's execution due to the questions over his conviction. Sister Helen Prejean, a prominent death penalty opponent, and Susan Sarandon, an activist and actress who won an Oscar for portraying Prejean in the movie "Dead Man Walking," both asked the state to stop the lethal injection. As of Monday, more than 244,000 people had signed a MoveOn.org petition from Prejean and Sarandon asking Fallin to delay the execution due to "a breathtaking lack of evidence" in the case. In a letter published earlier this month, U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), former University of Oklahoma football coach Barry Switzer and Barry Scheck, co-founder of the Innocence Project, were among those who called on Fallin to"prevent a deadly mistake" and stay the execution. "We also don't know for sure whether Richard Glossip is innocent or guilty," they wrote in the letter. "That is precisely the problem." Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt had said after the execution was delayed earlier this month that he was confident that the appeals court would "conclude there is nothing worthy which would lead the court to overturn" Glossip's guilty verdict and sentence. "The family of Barry Van Treese has waited 18 agonizing years for justice to be realized for his brutal death," Pruitt said in a statement. After the bungled execution of Clayton Lockett last year, Oklahoma postponed all executions for months while it investigated what happened and tinkered with its execution protocol. Lockett, a convicted murderer, grimaced and kicked during his prolonged execution, 1 of 3 lethal injections that went awry last year and drew increased scrutiny to the scattershot way executions are carried out in the United States. (source: Associated Press) ****************** "Death and Justice: An Expose of Oklahoma's Death Row Machine" by Mark Fuhrman----BOOK REVIEW: Death and Justice: An Expose of Oklahoma's Death Row Machine by Mark Fuhrman, (William Morrow) 2003 Anyone who has been following Tim Farley's excellent Red Dirt Report articles on the case of death row inmate Richard Glossip has to have an uneasy feeling, whatever their opinion of Glossip's guilt or innocence. Is Glossip an innocent man wrongfully convicted? Was the evidence sufficient to meet the reasonable doubt standard regardless of his guilt or innocence? And if Glossip is an innocent man who may die next week for a crime he did not commit, are there others like him? Is the system broken? More than a decade ago former Los Angeles Police Detective Mark Fuhrman was invited to come to Oklahoma to find out. Fuhrman is a cop turned investigative journalist. As a true crime writer any book by him comes with instant name recognition. A notoriety based on being the only person involved in the trial and acquittal of O.J. Simpson to come out with a felony conviction. A felony conviction for perjury, based on a lie he told on the stand conclusively refuted by eyewitness testimony and an audio recording that proved he had indeed used "the N-word" within the previous 10 years. Fuhrman's credibility was called into question by defense attorneys trying to suggest he had planted evidence, a blood-stained glove, at the crime scene. How ironic it is that Fuhrman's 4th book is about convictions tainted by misleading evidence and testimony. The irony is not lost on Fuhrman. Over the course of researching the book he reexamined his position as a self-described law-and-order death penalty advocate. "When I first began this project, I didn't think there was anything fundamentally wrong with the death penalty. Instead, I had the conviction that any problems with capital punishment were rare and isolated instances where mistakes, usually unintentional, had been made. I certainly didn't want to see the death penalty abolished, which I believed was the ultimate motivation for many of its critics. They didn't want the system to work, because they wanted to change it. I knew the system wasn't perfect, but I believed that it worked." Furhman was invited to come to Oklahoma in 2001, by Jack Dempsey Pointer, then president of the Oklahoma Criminal Defense Lawyers Association. Fuhrman said he liked Oklahoma. He found the people friendly and open, even people who disagreed with him or didn't want to talk to him. He also found a perfect storm of factors that created an alarming possibility of wrongful convictions. A population that largely favors the death penalty. Detectives and prosecutors so convinced of their gut feelings they ceased to inquire in any but the most cursory fashion once they became fixated on a suspect and a theory of the case. A media that supported them uncritically. And a forensic examiner Joyce Gilchrist, who gave Oklahoma County District Attorney Bob Macy everything he asked for. Who testified beyond the limits of forensic science, tampered with evidence, destroyed evidence, contaminated evidence, and gave personal opinions of guilt on the stand disguised as the product of evidence. If this were not a true crime story it might easily be a horror story worthy of Stephen King. Fuhrman's dispassionate workmanlike prose details how possibly innocent men were convicted of heinous crimes. How guilty men were convicted on inadequate or tainted evidence which may cause them to be released. And how Macy convinced juries to disregard strong alibis based on what now seem like absurd theories of guilt. In one case a defendant, no angel, had witnesses that he was in Texas within an hour of a murder in Oklahoma City he allegedly committed. Macy sold the jury a theory that he had flown to Oklahoma on a Lear Jet to commit the crime, in spite of the fact no such jet was recorded to have flown into or out of any airfield nearby. Bob Macy was a larger-than-life figure; heroic in adversity, firm in friendship, implacable in hatred, and dangerous to cross. He loved Oklahoma and its people passionately and yearned to protect them, using any means at all. His tragic flaw was an unquestioned belief in his own rightness. In the pursuit of justice he lost sight of all that insures justice. When he was finally shown beyond doubt that a man he convicted and sent to prison for 15 years for rape was innocent - it broke him. He retired 18 months before his term ended. In a 2001 ruling the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said, "Macy's persistent misconduct ... has without doubt harmed the reputation of Oklahoma's criminal justice system and left the unenviable legacy of an indelibly tarnished legal career." Joyce Gilchrist died not long ago, still pursuing a lawsuit against the city for wrongful termination. If ever there was a case of a charming sociopath in a position to do so much harm, it was her. And it is worth noting that if any of the 11 men sent to their deaths based on her testimony are ever proved to have been innocent - and this seems likely, she would have been eligible for the death penalty herself in California or Utah. With that one exception this is not a story of bad men doing injustice. It is a story of good men working within a flawed system. Bob Macy created a culture within the district attorney's office of "win at all costs." Now 12 years after Fuhrman published his findings in Death and Justice we are confronted with the question of whether that culture is Macy's enduring legacy. (source: reddirtreport.com) KANSAS: U.S. Supreme Court to Consider Kansas Death Penalty Cases Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt's office is preparing for arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court next month. As KPR's Stephen Koranda reports, the justices will consider death sentences that were overturned by the Kansas Supreme Court. At issue are the Carr brothers murders from Wichita in 2000 and the case of Sindney Gleason convicted of murders in 2004 in Barton County. The Kansas Supreme Court overturned the death sentences in those cases, but left the underlying convictions intact. For the Carr brothers, the Kansas high court said they should have had separate sentencing hearings. In the Gleason case, the court said improper jury instructions were given. The attorney general's office will argue before the U.S. Supreme Court that the Kansas Supreme Court came to the wrong conclusion when overturning the death sentences. (source: KMUW news) From rhalperi at smu.edu Mon Sep 28 16:09:39 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 16:09:39 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 28 INDIA: Home ministry says death penalty can't be abolished----The Law Commission had recommended abolishing the death penalty except in cases related to terrorism The home ministry has rejected the Law Commission's recommendation of abolishing the death penalty except in cases related to terrorism. The commission's report in which the suggestion was made was forwarded to the ministry earlier last week by the law ministry for a decision since amendments to the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) are in the jurisdiction of the former. The home ministry was of the view that at present the death penalty cannot be abolished, 2 ministry officials said on condition of anonymity. "We will also discuss the issue in detail with the law ministry over the next few days, but our view is clear that in the present situation, the death penalty should not be done away with," 1 of them said. "If required, we may seek some clarifications from the law ministry as well." The 10-member law panel headed by former Delhi high court chief justice A.P. Shah in its report submitted to the law ministry on 31 August had said: "While death penalty does not serve the penological goal of deterrence any more than life imprisonment, concern is often raised that abolition of capital punishment for terror-related offences and waging war will affect national security." While questioning the concept of awarding the death sentence in the rarest of rare cases, the commission observed: "After many lengthy and detailed deliberations, it is the view of the Law Commission that the administration of death penalty, even within the restrictive environment of rarest of rare doctrine, is constitutionally unsustainable. Continued administration of death penalty asks very difficult constitutional questions, these questions relate to the miscarriage of justice, errors, as well as the plight of the poor and disenfranchised in the criminal justice system." The home ministry, however, believes the death penalty acts as a deterrent, at least in cases of sensational crime. "The provision for death penalty in law has been kept for exceptional or extraordinary cases. For instance, if there is a gruesome case of rape and murder or an incident in which several members of a family are murdered for a property dispute or robbery," said the 2nd official cited earlier. "It is not just about terror-related cases only. The home ministry's view is that the time is not right to do away with the death penalty." The government should pay due heed to the Law Commission's recommendations as these have been made after the commission examined the issue in great detail, according to lawyer Yug Mohit Chaudhry. Capital punishment is a shameful remnant of a medieval age and has no place in a modern civilized society, Chaudhry said. At least 3 members of the law panel had given a dissent note, opposing the recommendation to abolish the death penalty. Law secretary P.K. Malhotra, legislative secretary Sanjay Singh and former judge Usha Mehra opposed the recommendation. Parliament in its wisdom has prescribed death penalty only in heinous crimes, Malhotra said in his dissent note. "The need of the hour is to retain it. We have a vibrant judiciary which is respected world over. We should have faith in the wisdom of our judges that they will exercise this power only in deserving cases for which the law is well laid down in various judgements," Malhotra noted. Similarly, Singh maintained that the panel should not recommend something that has the effect of preventing the state from making any law in the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of the country. (soruce: livemint.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 29 09:09:25 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 09:09:25 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----N.H., DEL., VA., GA., FLA. Message-ID: Sept. 29 NEW HAMPSHIRE: Addison lawyers challenge dealth penalty in conviction for Manchester officer's murder Lawyers representing Michael Addison have filed a challenge to his 2008 death penalty conviction, saying it violates the state and federal constitutions. The filing was made Friday in Hillsbourgh County Superior Court North.Addison killed Manchester police Officer Michael Briggs in October 2006. The New Hampshire Supreme Court affirmed his sentence earlier this year. The latest court filing claims the death penalty amounts to cruel and unusual punishment, which violates provisions of the state and federal constitutions. It also claims that one of the class of drugs that the New Hampshire death penalty requires - ultra-short acting barbituate - is difficult to find.It also said the state lacks any procedures for ensure that people administering the drugs are properly trained. The motion, which has yet to be scheduled before a Superior Court judge, cites three 2014 executions that went awry: The Ohio execution of Dennis McGuire, which took 25 mintues; The Oklahoma execution of Clayton Lockett, where he reportedly grimaced and writhed; and the Arizona execution of Joseph Wood, where he reportedly gasped more than 600 times. "These executions demonstrate that lethal injection, once thought to be as simple a process as giving an injection that painlessly puts the inmate to death, poses an acute risk of intolerable suffering," reads the motion, filed by David Rothstein, deputy director of the New Hampshire public defender program. (source: Union Leader) DELAWARE: Convicted murderer Sadiki Garden dies after illness A convicted murderer serving a life sentence at Vaughn Correctional Center near Smyrna died Sunday. Sadiki Garden, 40, of New Castle, died of natural causes at Christiana Hospital after an illness, according to Jason Miller, spokesman for the Delaware Department of Correction. Delaware State Police is conducting an investigation, though foul play is not suspected, Miller said. Garden's body was turned over to the state Division of Forensic Science. Garden was serving a life sentence for the December 1999 murder of Denise Rhudy, a 36-year-old mother of 4 who lived in Newark. Garden shot Rhudy once through the chest and once through the shoulder and neck in a botched robbery in a Wilmington Parking Authority-owned lot outside the now-closed Bottlecaps Bar & Restaurant on the 200 block of West Ninth St. in downtown Wilmington. A jury voted 10-2 that Garden should serve a life sentence for the slaying, but Judge John E. Babiarz Jr. imposed a death penalty. The Delaware Supreme Court overruled the sentence and sent the case back to Babiarz with instruction to give the jury recommendation greater weight. However, Babiarz again imposed a death sentence, and the Supreme Court in 2004 sent back the case with instructions that all but ordered Babiarz to impose a life sentence. Later on, the Delaware General Assembly clarified state law to note a judge is not bound by the jury's recommendation, but the judge had to give the jury recommendation "appropriate weight." (source: The News Journal) VIRGINIA----impending execution Va. governor rejects bid to halt execution of inmate who says he's intellectually disabled Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe on Monday denied a last-minute attempt to delay the execution of a convicted serial killer who says that his life should be spared because he is intellectually disabled. Unless the U.S. Supreme Court steps in this week, Alfredo Prieto will be the 1st Virginia inmate to be executed in nearly 3 years Thursday. Prieto's attorneys had asked the Democratic governor to grant a temporary reprieve of his execution so he could be transferred to California, where they hoped to argue that he's ineligible for the death penalty because he is intellectually disabled. But McAuliffe said Monday that he won't intervene in the case, noting that state and federal appellate courts have already reviewed and denied the prisoner's request for relief. "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," McAuliffe said in a statement. "After extensive review and deliberation, I have found no such circumstances, and have thus decided that this execution will move forward." The El Salvador native was already facing execution in California for raping and murdering a 15-year-old girl when a Virginia jury sentenced him to death in 2010 for the 1988 killings of Rachael Raver and her boyfriend, Warren Fulton III. California officials agreed to send him to Virginia based on the rationale that Virginia was more likely to carry out the execution. Authorities have said DNA and ballistics evidence have linked Prieto to several other killings in California and Virginia but he was never prosecuted because he had already been sentenced to death. Rob Lee, one of Prieto's attorney's, called McAuliffe's decision "profoundly disappointing." He said in an email that it goes against past governors' efforts "to ensure that every time the most severe and final sanction is carried out in Virginia, it is done fairly." Matthew Raver, Rachael Raver's brother, said Prieto's seemingly endless efforts to delay his execution have felt like "salt in the wound" for the victim's family, which remains devastated by Rachael Raver's death nearly three decades later. Matthew Raver plans to attend the execution at the Greensville Correctional Center. "I look forward to it as a relief that this individual ... and all his games, his plotting, his violence has ended," Matthew Raver said. Prieto's exposure to violence in war-ravaged El Salvador and a lack of proper nutrition because his family was poor contributed to "significant brain dysfunction" that affected his ability to think abstractly and control his impulses, Ricardo Weinstein, a psychologist who evaluated Prieto at the defense's request, said during his trial in 2007. As a child, Prieto struggled with learning and was quiet and withdrawn, often sitting alone and "staring blankly at nothing," Prieto's attorneys said last week in their request to McAuliffe to delay the execution. They want Prieto to return to California, where they believe he can receive a "full and fair" assessment of his intellectual disability. A federal appeals court in Virginia ruled in June that Prieto failed to prove that no reasonable juror would find him eligible for execution, saying that Prieto's ability to handle everyday tasks was "at best inconclusive." Psychologists testifying for the prosecution noted that Prieto was well-spoken, bilingual and analytical. But Prieto's attorneys and advocates for people with intellectual disabilities say his cognitive strengths are irrelevant. "You shouldn't discard the idea that someone has an intellectual disability just because they have a girlfriend or a job," Rob Lee said. Prieto's lawyers have appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has not yet decided whether it will hear the case. Prieto has also asked the justices to rule on the constitutionality of Virginia's policy of automatically placing death row inmates in solitary confinement. With 110 executions, Virginia ranks 3rd in the nation for the number carried out since the Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1976. Prieto is 1 of 8 inmates on death row. But the state hasn't executed an inmate since January 2013, when Robert Gleason Jr. was put to death in the state's electric chair, which inmates can choose over lethal injection. Gleason had been serving a life in prison for a 2007 murder when he killed his cellmate in 2009. Since Prieto didn't make a choice, the state will use a lethal 3-drug combination. The 1st drug will be pentobarbital, which Virginia obtained from Texas because its supply of midazolam expires on Wednesday, said Lisa Kinney, a spokeswoman for the Virginia Department of Corrections. Virginia recently approved the use of midazolam - a controversial drug used in a botched execution in Oklahoma last year - but has never used it. Death penalty opponents, who have been pressing McAuliffe to call off the execution, plan to hold vigils at 10 locations across the state Thursday evening. Dede Raver, Rachael Raver's sister, said she believes Prieto's execution will help her and others who were affected by the killings to close a long and painful chapter in their lives. "I have no interest in taking someone's life away, but honestly I feel like Prieto will return to hell," she said. "This man is so evil and he has no regard for human life." (source: Associated Press) GEORGIA----impending female execution Georgia grants clemency hearing hours before woman's scheduled execution ---- Kelly Renee Gissendaner would be first woman executed in state in 70 years State officials have granted a new clemency hearing for the lone woman on Georgia's death row, hours after a federal judge declined an emergency request to temporarily halt her execution over concerns about the lethal injection drugs the state plans to use. The Georgia board of pardons and paroles - the only entity with the authority to commute a death sentence - said in a news release on Monday that it will hold the hearing at 11 Tuesday morning before Kelly Renee Gissendaner's scheduled 7pm execution. Susan Casey, a lawyer for Gissendaner, said the board set the new hearing after Gissendaner's oldest son asked to speak to the board members. Her other 2 children had already asked the board to spare their mother's life at a hearing earlier this year. Lawyers for Gissendaner had earlier been denied a request by US district court judge, Thomas Thrash to stay the execution and give himself time to rule on their request to reconsider his dismissal of a complaint they filed in March. Gissendaner's lawyers planned to appeal against Monday's ruling to the 11th US circuit court of appeals. Gissendaner was convicted of the murder in February 1997 of her husband, Douglas Gissendaner. An earlier attempt to execute her in March was called off after she was already in the execution chamber over concerns that the single drug to be used appeared cloudy. Lawyers for Gissendaner argue that the 13 hours she spent not knowing whether she would be executed immediately - or what drug would be used to kill her - amounted to cruel and unusual punishment. If the execution happens, Gissendaner will be the first woman executed by the state in 70 years. Prosecutors said she conspired with her lover, Gregory Owen, who stabbed Douglas Gissendaner to death. Owen, who took a plea deal and testified against Gissendaner, is serving a life sentence and he will be eligible for parole in 2022. Gissendaner's supporters last week released a video featuring 2 of her 3 children. Dakota and Kayla Gissendaner talk in the video about overcoming their intense anger at their mother and the difficult journey to forgiving her. "Forgiving our mother was the best way to truly honor our dad's memory," Dakota Gissendaner, who was 5 when his father died, said in the video. "We've lost our dad," said Kayla Gissendaner, who was 7 at the time. "We can't imagine losing our mom too." Georgia corrections officials temporarily suspended executions in the state until a drug analysis on the "cloudy" sample could be done. In April, they released lab reports, a sworn statement from a pharmacological expert hired by the state and a short video showing a syringe of clear liquid with chunks of a white solid floating in the solution. Corrections officials have said the most likely cause of the formation of solids in the compounded pentobarbital was shipping and storage at a temperature that was too cold, but they noted that storage at a low temperature does not always cause pentobarbital to precipitate. The department of corrections does not currently have pentobarbital on hand but will obtain it before the execution date, spokeswoman Gwendolyn Hogan said in an email. She did not immediately return phone messages on Monday and did not respond when asked several times by email whether the drug would come from the same compounding pharmacy that provided the problematic pentobarbital earlier this year. Gissendaner's lawyers had filed a lawsuit in March saying the period of uncertainty after her execution was postponed, not knowing whether the state would try to proceed again before the execution window expired and what drugs it might use, amounted to "unconstitutional torment and uncertainty". They also raised questions about the quality of the lethal injection drug the state would be able to get in the future. Gissendaner's execution has been scheduled for 7pm on Tuesday at the state prison in Jackson. (source: The Guardian) **************** Georgia parole board will again consider the state's only female death-row inmate hours before her scheduled execution Georgia's parole board says it will reconsider the case of Kelly Gissendaner, the only woman on the state's death row, in the hours before her scheduled lethal injection Tuesday. Gissenander was scheduled to die by lethal injection earlier this year, but the state had called off her execution 2 different times. The 1st execution date was postponed due to a winter storm, while the 2nd was canceled because corrections officials said the lethal injection drugs appeared "cloudy." Georgia had indefinitely postponed its executions while it examined the drugs, eventually declaring that the drugs were likely too cold. Authorities said earlier this month that they had scheduled a 3rd execution date for Gissendaner for Tuesday at 7 p.m. Gissendaner was convicted of murdering her husband nearly 2 decades ago. She convinced her boyfriend, Gregory Owen, to kill Douglas Gissendaner, her husband, in February 1997, according to the office of Sam Olens, Georgia's attorney general. The following year, Gissendaner was convicted and sentenced to death. However, as her execution date approached earlier this year, theologians and religious leaders had asked the state to halt the execution, pointing to Gissendaner's work completing a theology studies program while in prison. Bishop Robert Wright of the Episcopal Diocese of Atlanta, who has asked Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal (R) to halt all executions in the state, signed a letter asking authorities to commute Gissendaner's death sentence and change her punishment to life in prison without parole. The letter argued that Gissendaner has "experienced a profound spiritual transformation" during her time behind bars. Earlier this year, as the initial scheduled lethal injection loomed, her attorneys had filed an emergency stay request with the state parole board, which denied her clemency bid. However, the parole board said Monday it would give her case another look due to a new request from Gissendaner. The parole board announced that it would meet on Tuesday at 11 a.m. to "receive and consider supplemental information" regarding Gissendaner. It also said that its members had already reviewed a request made last week asking the board to reconsider its earlier rejection. In Georgia, the Board of Pardons and Paroles is the only entity in the state that can commute a death sentence or change it to life in prison or life without parole. The board said that after it meets on Tuesday morning, its members will decide whether to reject her request or grant a 90-day stay so that it can consider whether to convert her death sentence to a sentence of life in prison without parole. (source: Washington Post) FLORIDA: Legislators Want Death Sentences Unanimous ---- A Republican lawmaker is trying again to require Florida juries to vote unanimously to recommend a death sentence. The attempt usually goes nowhere, but this year supporters say there's a new wrinkle. The U.S. Supreme Court is about to hear a challenge to Florida's death penalty sentencing procedure. Meanwhile, lawmakers are pushing reforms. Florida is the only state that doesn't require a jury to vote unanimously to recommend a death sentence. And that's not justice, says Ingrid Delgado, an associate with the Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops. "We're not then encouraging that jury to really deliberate and discuss if this case really is death eligible, if it merits a death sentence." Reform-minded legislators have been trying for years to change the system and bills are already filed for 2016. But this year Delgado says things are different. The U.S. Supreme Court is about to hear a direct challenge to Florida's death penalty sentencing procedure, including non-unanimous recommendations. But death penalty supporters say they're not too worried. The existing system survived numerous federal challenges and the Supreme Court seemed satisfied when it upheld Florida's death penalty in 1976. Northwest Florida State Attorney Glenn Hess, head of the statewide prosecutors association, says the system gives juries more of a chance to fit the punishment to the crime. "You may have Jack the Ripper, and you may have one soft-hearted juror who says, 'Oh, I can't vote for death,' and Jack the Ripper may not get the death penalty. And that would violate the concept of proportionality." The court is scheduled to hear the case on October 13. (source: WFSU news) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 29 09:10:28 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 09:10:28 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----MO., OKLA., KAN. Message-ID: Sept. 29 MISSOURI: Supporters of death row inmate say he is innocent Supporters of Missouri inmate Kimber Edwards say the state risks executing an innocent man if Edwards is put to death next week. Edwards was convicted of hiring Orthell Wilson to kill his ex-wife, Kimberly Cantrell, in 2000. Prosecutors said Edwards wanted Cantrell dead so he didn't have to pay child support. Wilson was sentenced to life in prison after a plea deal in which he agreed to cooperate against Edwards. Edwards' attorney, Jeremy Weis, and Tricia Bushnell of the Midwest Innocence Project say Wilson now says he lied to save himself from the death penalty. They say Edwards is autistic, and that played a role in a confession he now says was false. (source: KTRS news) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Glossip's attorneys plan to appeal U.S. Supreme Court for stay of execution While the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals rejected a death row inmate's plea for a stay, his attorneys say they will not stop fighting. Richard Glossip is set to die on Wednesday, Sept. Glossip was convicted of murder for the 1997 death of motel owner Barry Van Treese, though Glossip wasn't the actual killer. The man who bludgeoned Van Treese to death, Justin Sneed, testified that Glossip hired him for the murder. On Monday, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals denied Glossip's request for a stay of execution. (source: bayoubuzz.com) ****************** Divided Oklahoma Court Refuses To Halt Richard Glossip's Execution----The majority said "the legal principle of finality of judgment" trumps Glossip's claims of innocence. A deeply divided Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals declined to halt again the upcoming execution of Richard Glossip, the Oklahoma inmate who was spared just hours before the state???s third execution attempt on Sept. 16. In a pair of orders issued Monday, Glossip's execution was reconfirmed for 3 p.m. Wednesday, in accord with a prior order where the court allowed for a 2-week window "out of abundance of caution" to resolve other motions his attorneys filed a day before his original execution date. One by one, the court declined those motions, which included requests to grant Glossip a new post-conviction hearing to consider fresh evidence his defense team said casts serious doubts on his murder conviction. "After reviewing Glossip's succesive application and motions, we find that the law favors the principle of finality of judgment," Judge David B. Lewis wrote for the court. "Moreover, Glossip has not shown that failure of this Court to review his claims would result in a miscarriage of justice." Glossip's attorneys said they expect to file a motion with the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday. The court gave little credence to Glossip's claims that new circumstances called his guilt into question -- including evidence that the co-defendant and sole witness who testified against him, Justin Sneed, was not credible and that Glossip's previous defense counsel had been ineffective. "This evidence merely builds on evidence previously presented to this Court," the court said. With respect to Sneed -- Glossip's co-worker at the time of their boss' murder who secured a plea deal by implicating Glossip as the mastermind of the crime -- the court said his testimony was "sufficiently corroborated," that "no other trial witnesses have recanted their testimony" and that "Glossip has presented no credible evidence that the witnesses gave falsified testimony at trial." Judge Robert Hudson, like Judge Lewis, was skeptical of the new evidence claims, characterizing the additional information advanced by Glossip's attorneys as "hearsay' that is "as dubious as that of a jailhouse informant." But the orders caused division among the judges on the court, with all 5 judges writing separately to express their views on why Glossip should or shouldn't be granted a further reprieve from execution to consider the new evidence. Presiding Judge Clancy Smith was the chief dissenter, calling the evidence in the case "tenuous at best" if Sneed in fact recanted earlier testimony implicating Glossip and rejecting the notion that finality trumps justice. "While finality of judgment is important, the State has no interest in executing an actually innocent man," Smith said, and added he would have granted Glossip additional time to prove that Sneed had a change of heart. Judge Arlene Johnson went even further, calling Glossip's trial "deeply flawed" and reiterating misgivings she expressed in 2007 when a "bare majority" of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals upheld his murder conviction. She dissented from that decision as well. "Because I believe Glossip did not receive a fair trial, I cannot join in the denial of this successive post-conviction application that further calls into doubt the fairness of the proceeding and the reliability of the result," Johnson wrote. Quoting from a U.S. Supreme Court case decided in 2014, she wrote that a sentence of death is "the gravest penalty our society may impose" and that those facing it "must have a fair opportunity to show that the Constitution prohibits their execution." Glossip's defense gave the appellate court stacks of new evidence they said further weakened the case against him. Testimony from experts and witnesses backed the defense's claims that Sneed lied to police to save himself from a death sentence. Newly revealed discrepancies in the medical examiner's hugely influential testimony raised further questions as to whether the jury at Glossip's retrial was misinformed, his attorneys said. After Glossip's most recent execution date was put on hold 2 weeks ago, his federal defense attorney filed a preliminary injunction to prevent the state from executing Glossip using midazolam, a controversial sedative used in several of Oklahoma's previously botched lethal injections. Glossip should be executed with pentobarbital, a less risky drug used in states such as Texas, attorneys argued. But on Wednesday, the petition was withdrawn. Dale Baich, Glossip's federal public defender, said they were unable to prove pentobarbital was available. And in June, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Oklahoma's use of midazolam is constitutional. In a statement issued when Glossip's execution was first put on hold, Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin (R) said she'd abide by the the legal process. Glossip was convicted in 2004 for the murder of motel owner Barry Van Treese. Sneed, the hotel handyman, confessed to beating Van Treese to death with a baseball bat but later secured a plea deal for life without parole in exchange for testimony against Glossip. There was no physical evidence linking Glossip to the crime, and his defense has long criticized the state's decision to prosecute him based on the testimony of the admitted killer. (source: Kim Bellware & Christian Farias, Huffington Post) ************** Nun pleads for the life of American man on death row A nun in Oklahoma has made an emotional last ditch plea to save the life of a man on death row. Richard Glossip faces execution after being convicted of murdering his boss, but he claims he has been framed. The 52-year-old was sentenced to death on the basis of evidence from a colleague who said he ordered the murder. This evidence meant the colleague was jailed and avoided the death penalty himself. He has now lost a last-minute bid for a retrial to avoid his execution but a campaigning nun has intervened. Sister Helen Prejean, a prominent campaigner against the death penalty, said if the execution goes ahead it is "very likely that Oklahoma will add the death of an innocent man to this record of mistakes". Mr Glossip's lawyers claim they have a statement from a prisoner who claims to have overheard his colleague boast about implicating him. There is now a chance for a last attempt to save him at the US Supreme Court. Sister Prejean and Oscar winning actress Susan Sarandon have made several appearances on US TV appealing for clemency. "With the U.S. Supreme Court's recent refusal to look at the constitutionality of the death penalty, it falls on the people of Oklahoma to take a deeper look, not only into Glossip's case, which is greatly flawed with loopholes, but at the faults of our system of capital punishment," the nun said. She added: "The outcry of the people is fair, people have a sense of justice - and they say 'well he's had these trials,' but then they say, you mean a man is going to his death on the word of a 19 year old kid, who was under threat of the death penalty himself, who saw a lawyer one time. "He delivered to them what they needed to save his own life. "There's not a fingerprint of Richard Glossip's on the money, there's no forensic evidence to corroborate what Sneed said. "Solely on Sneed's testimony Richard Glossip is going to his death." (source: premier.org.uk) ********************** Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals to take up case of death row inmate convicted of killing 2 The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals is taking up the case of a death row inmate convicted of 1st-degree murder for the October 2009 killings of a Comanche County couple. The court is scheduled to hear oral arguments by prosecution and defense attorneys Tuesday in the appeal of 35-year-old Mica Martinez, who was found guilty in the deaths of 64-year-old Carl Miller and 55-year-old Martha Faye Miller. The court will convene the hearing at the Oklahoma City University School of Law. Prosecutors argued for the death penalty, alleging Martinez's crime was especially heinous and cruel. He was convicted of beating the couple to death at their home in Cache. Defense attorneys are urging the court to reduce Martinez's sentence to life in prison. They say Martinez suffered from severe depression. (source: Associated Press) KANSAS: Death penalty petition spending tops $900,000 A campaign to gather petition signatures to stop a repeal of the death penalty spent $903,000 over the summer, campaign finance reports show. Nebraskans For the Death Penalty raised just over $913,000, 1/3 of it from Gov. Pete Ricketts and his father Joe Ricketts. Nebraskans for Public Safety, the group that wants to see the repeal become law, collected about half the amount the pro-death penalty group brought in and spent a little more than $455,000 to oppose the referendum petition campaign. In August, petition campaign organizers turned in nearly 167,000 signatures when it needed 113,883. Earlier this month, the Secretary of State's Office reported that enough signatures had been both certified and verified to meet the 10 % threshold to put a hold on the repeal until a November 2016 vote. In addition to the Ricketts family, funding to gather those signatures has come largely from monied donors and groups who contribute to Republican and conservative candidates and causes. The campaign finance report, filed Monday afternoon with the Nebraska Accountability and Disclosure Commission, showed the group raised about $254,000 in the latest reporting period, which covered July 28 through Sept. 21. The Washington-based Judicial Crisis Network, led by chief counsel and policy director Carrie Severino, has paid for about one-third of the costs of the petition drive. It offered up another $100,000 this period, on top of earlier $200,000 contributions. Ricketts said recently he had not contributed to the network. Asked for a list of Nebraska contributors, Judicial Crisis Network officials responded:"We are ethically bound to protect the privacy rights of our supporters. To prevent any unwarranted inferences from being drawn, we do not confirm or deny questions about supporters and/or related information." Officials said no matter where a person stands on the issue of the death penalty, "we can all agree that Nebraskans should have the ability to democratically express themselves on such a weighty matter. The Judicial Crisis Network supports this measure allowing Nebraskans to decide on the death penalty for themselves." Other sizable contributions to Nebraskans for the Death Penalty in this period came from: * Robert Mercer, $100,000. Mercer, of the hedge fund firm Renaissance Technologies in New York, is said to be a major contributor to Republican politics. * C.L. Werner of Werner Enterprises, $25,000. * Richard Uihlein, $10,000. Uihlein, a businessman from Lake Forest, Illinois, is a major contributor to conservative candidates and causes. * State Sen. Merv Riepe of Ralston, and campaigns of Sens. John Kuehn of Heartwell, Lydia Brasch of Bancroft and Jim Smith of Papillion, $1,000 each. Chris Peterson, campaign co-manager, said the challenge in the short-term will be raising additional funds to defend the petition drive from lawsuits. "We know opponents are and will continue to be well-funded. So the committee's fundraising efforts continue with this in mind," he said. Opponents to the petition campaign have filed 2 lawsuits in recent weeks. Nebraskans for Public Safety filed a lawsuit in Lancaster County District Court on behalf of longtime death penalty opponents Christy and Richard Hargesheimer, questioning the validity of the petition process based on the belief that Ricketts' name was omitted from the list of sponsors even though he is the "primary initiating force" behind the petition. A 2nd lawsuit, filed by Lyle Koenig, a private practice attorney in Gage County, alleges the ballot language prepared by Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson and Secretary of State John Gale is insufficient or unfair. Nebraskans for Public Safety reported Monday collecting $461,579, but only about $10,500 in cash in the most current reporting period. In-kind contributions this period totaled about $17,500. The largest single contributors to the organization have been the Protreus Action League, a social justice group out of Massachusetts, which gave $400,000, and philanthropist Richard Holland, a key Democratic contributor, who gave $20,000. Equal Justice USA of Brooklyn, New York, has contributed in-kind staff time worth $12,500. "Our campaign is proud to have garnered strong grassroots support over the summer in addition to national support from a very diverse set of donors," said Danielle Conrad, spokeswoman for Nebraskans for Public Safety. "Almost 300 Nebraskans have added contributions large and small to help our campaign educate Nebraskans about why the death penalty is broken and belongs in our past." She said the group has gotten a positive outpouring of support from conservative leaders, faith groups, victims??? families and traditional death penalty opponents, and has a growing list of more than 200 grassroots volunteers statewide. "We will continue to raise funds aggressively in Nebraska and beyond to ensure we have the resources we need to share our positive message with Nebraska voters," Conrad said. Nebraska's death penalty was repealed by the Legislature in May with the passage of LB268. Ricketts vetoed the bill, but lawmakers voted 30-19 to override that veto. (source: Lincoln Journal Star) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 29 09:11:23 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 09:11:23 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----USA Message-ID: Sept. 29 USA: After Few Executions This Summer, 6 Executions Slated For Next 2 Weeks----Georgia, Oklahoma, Virginia, Texas, and Missouri are set to execute 6 inmates within 2 weeks. The U.S. is set to execute 6 inmates in the next two weeks after only three executions were held during the entire summer. Since January, only 2 states have conducted executions - Missouri and Texas - but 3 other states are aiming to do so in the coming days: Georgia, Oklahoma, and Virginia. Beginning in January, executions in Oklahoma, Florida, and Alabama were halted pending the Supreme Court ruling on Oklahoma's use of midazolam - a lethal injection drug that was part of at least 3 problematic executions in 2014. Ohio's governor also held off all executions in 2015. On June 29, however, the Supreme Court allowed the use of midazolam in executions, a ruling that had implications not only for states that used the drug, but also set a high bar for inmates challenging lethal injection in other states. As a result of the halt on executions using midazolam during several months, Missouri and Texas, which do not use midazolam, together carried out the most number of executions in 2015 - including the 3 that occurred over the summer. Now, Georgia is going to attempt an execution it halted before it began earlier this year, Oklahoma - the state at the center of the Supreme Court case - is slated to hold an execution that was delayed earlier this month, and Virginia - which has not seen an execution in more than 30 months - is scheduled to hold an execution. Executions in all 3 states have attracted national attention for different reasons and renewed debates on the constitutionality of different aspects of the death penalty. On Tuesday, Sept. 29, Georgia is set to execute Kelly Gissendaner for her role in the 1997 murder of her husband. If executed, she will be the 1st woman put to death in the state since 1945. On Monday, Sept. 28, the State Board of Pardons and Paroles announced that it would reconsider its February decision denying clemency to Gissendaner. In a press release, the board said it would meet on Sept. 29 to review "supplemental information" presented by Gissendaner's representatives. The board can deny clemency again, or issue a 90-day stay to further consider the case, or grant clemency and commute the sentence to life with or without parole. Georgia has already postponed Gissendaner's execution twice this year. In February, her execution was delayed due to a winter storm. In March, her execution was called off before she was administered the lethal injection after the state found particles floating in the syringe. Gissendaner sued the state saying she was a victim of cruel and unusual punishment, as she accused Georgia of putting her through "a state of immense fear and anxiety for thirteen hours while dithering over whether to proceed with her execution." In August, a judge dismissed her lawsuit, allowing Georgia to execute Gissendaner again. The lawsuit raised questions about the drug's potency and concerns over whether it would cause a botched execution. Concerns over the source of lethal injection drugs in various states has been a contentious and, in many cases, litigious issue. Shortage of drugs has led to several states seeking out their supply from unregulated compounding pharmacies. States have refused to disclose identities of these sources citing threats to the pharmacies from anti-death penalty advocates. Gissendaner's 3rd execution date is set for Tuesday. (source: buzzfeed.com) ************* Humane Criminal Justice Is Not Hopeless----The Supreme Court is beginning to take cruel and unusual punishment seriously - just like Pope Francis is. Pope Francis concluded his historic 1st visit to the United States on Sunday, spending most of his final few hours with women and men imprisoned at Philadelphia???s Curran-Fromhold Correctional Facility and putting an exclamation mark on a central theme of his visit: the need to infuse more dignity and hope into America's criminal justice system. Last week, during his address to Congress, Pope Francis called for "global abolition of the death penalty," because "every life is sacred, every human person is endowed with an inalienable dignity, and society can only benefit from the rehabilitation of those convicted of crimes." The pope's address also criticized life without parole sentences, offering "encouragement to those who are convinced that a just and necessary punishment must never exclude the dimension of hope and the goal of rehabilitation." Here's a sentence I never thought I would write: Much of the pope's sermon to America on the need to curb our corrosive penal excess echoes themes emerging from the Supreme Court, particularly its recent cruel and unusual punishment jurisprudence. Indeed, Pope Francis' homily on dignity and hope must have struck a familiar cord with Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was sitting in the audience during the address. Violent crime spiked in the 1980s and '90s, and the public panicked. "When the law punishes by death, it risks its own sudden descent into brutality, transgressing the constitutional commitment to decency and restraint," Kennedy wrote in a 2008 opinion barring the death penalty for nonhomicide offenses. In another recent death penalty case, Kennedy reiterated that death is an excessive punishment for intellectually disabled offenders, because "to impose the harshest of punishments on an intellectually disabled person violates his or her inherent dignity as a human being." Kennedy wrote for the court in a 2010 decision that barred the imposition of life without parole on juvenile offenders who commit a nonhomicide offense: "Life in prison without the possibility of parole gives no chance for fulfillment outside prison walls, no chance for reconciliation with society, no hope." Both Pope Francis and Justice Kennedy have expressed deep concern about prison conditions, and solitary confinement in particular. Last year, in a speech at the Vatican, Pope Francis referred to solitary confinement as a "genuine surplus of pain that is added to the suffering of detention." He deplored the "paranoia, anxiety, depression," and elevated "chances of suicide" that such isolation entails. Kennedy, in testimony to Congress last year, said: "Solitary confinement literally drives men mad." This year, Kennedy wrote in a separate concurring opinion that because "years on end of near-total isolation exact a terrible price, the judiciary may be required" to place limits on the use of solitary confinement. That the judiciary would intervene to eradicate excessive punishment or to alleviate abhorrent prison conditions was an empty promise until very recently. Courts are supposed to step in to ensure, as Kennedy wrote, "moderation or restraint" in punishment. In other words, the judiciary has an obligation to protect us from undue government coercion - whether it be an excessively long sentence or inhumane prison conditions, the punishment and its administration must meaningfully serve a legitimate objective of punishment, or else it's unconstitutionally excessive. Justice Harlan Stone, writing in the 1938 case of United States v. Carolene Products, explained that courts might have to intervene to invalidate excessive punishments because the "political processes ordinarily to be relied upon to protect minorities" often falter when it comes to laws that target "discrete and insular minorities." As Justice William Brennan put the point, especially in times of public panic over real or perceived crime spikes: "Those whom we would banish from society or from the human community itself often speak in too faint a voice to be heard above society's demand for punishment. It is the particular role of courts to hear these voices, for the Constitution declares that the majoritarian chorus may not alone dictate the conditions of social life." And so it was as violent crime spiked in the 1980s and '90s and the public panicked. The ghost of Willie Horton, a man who committed murder while on a work furlough from a Massachusetts prison, propelled states to curb or eliminate parole. The death of college basketball star Len Bias from a cocaine overdose triggered brutally tough punishments for possessing or selling crack cocaine. The murder of young Polly Klaas in California spawned the passage of so-called 3 strikes laws across the country. The traditional media added fuel to the fire, spreading panic like a virus through our television sets and newspapers. Politicians, too, exploited fear for political gain by, for example, labeling as "soft on crime" anyone foolish enough to consider humane sentencing practices. The Supreme Court did little to slow down the excessively punitive trajectory. In 1989, the court affirmed the constitutionality of the death penalty for both intellectually disabled and juvenile offenders. In 1991, near the height of the war on drugs, the court affirmed a life without parole sentence for a Michigan man convicted of possessing "more than 650 grams of cocaine" even though the jury in that case - and in most life without parole cases - had no opportunity to consider "the particularized circumstances of the crime and of the criminal." In 2003, the Supreme Court upheld 2 California "3 strikes" cases each involving a sentence of 25 years to life - in 1 case the defendant was convicted of "stealing 3 golf clubs, worth $399 apiece" while the other case involved a man who "stole approximately $150 worth of videotapes." Times are finally changing. This convergence between Pope Francis' call for a more humane justice system and the Supreme Court's increasingly robust role in policing penal excess reflects more than shared values. The pope's sermon, like the court's revitalization of its cruel and unusual punishments jurisprudence, tapped into a growing national dissatisfaction with the penal extravagance that shaped criminal justice over the past 3 decades. In 2010, Congress passed a bill eliminating the egregious sentencing disparities between crack and powdered cocaine. In 2012, a California ballot measure to repeal the 1990s era 3 strikes law passed with a whopping 69 % of the vote. 9 states in 3 years have abolished life without parole for juveniles who commit murder, meaning that these young offenders will have the opportunity to try to convince a parole board that they have transformed their lives and are fit to re-enter society. 1 in 25 death sentences nationally involves the conviction of an innocent person. Earlier this year, a Republican-led Legislature in Nebraska repealed the state's death penalty, becoming the seventh state in eight years to do so. Applause erupted from corners of the congressional floor when Pope Francis called for the abolition of the death penalty last week. Later that day, in response to the pope's message, Newt Gingrich (who infamously suggested capital punishment for marijuana offenses) said that he was "more open" to ending the death penalty. In a speech at Rhodes College in Memphis, Tennessee, Justice Antonin Scalia said that 4 of his colleagues on the Supreme Court believe that the death penalty is unconstitutional and that he "wouldn't be surprised" if the court ultimately holds that the death penalty is a cruel and unusual punishment. The Supreme Court is changing, too. Reversing its 1989 decisions, the court barred the death penalty for both juvenile and intellectually disabled offenders. It also held that the death penalty is an excessive punishment for nonhomicide offenses. In 2010, the court held that juveniles who commit nonhomicide offenses couldn't be sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. 2 years later, the court invalidated mandatory life without parole for juveniles who commit murder, meaning that jurors must be given the opportunity to consider the circumstances of the offense and the background and characteristics of the teenage offender. But the Supreme Court has only just begun to fulfill its rightful role. Though most jurisdictions have abandoned the death penalty in law or practice, this punishment is the symbolic crown jewel of a criminal justice system that degrades dignity and rejects the possibility of redemption. Justice Stephen Breyer explained in his recent dissent in Glossip v. Gross, "the number of active death penalty counties is small and getting smaller." Indeed, of the 3,143 county or county equivalents in the United States, "only 15 counties imposed 5 or more death sentences" - an average of 1 per year - since 2010. This shows that the death penalty is unusual, and looking closely at the people whom we ultimately execute also shows that it is cruel. Take just this week, for example: No. 1: On Tuesday, Georgia is scheduled to execute Kelly Gissendaner, a woman who persuaded her lover to kill her husband. Gissendaner has mentored despondent prisoners, people who when released became productive members of society, including those who are now social workers and literacy teachers. "Kelly is the poster child for redemption," one of those women said. "Killing Kelly is essentially killing hope." Gissendaner's case has parallels to the case of Karla Faye Tucker, a drug-addicted woman who became a born-again Christian while on Texas' death row. A spokesman for the National Association of Evangelicals called Tucker "a woman of such obvious spiritual change." Conservative minister Pat Robertson reminded then-Gov. George W. Bush that "any justice system that is worthy of the name must have room for mercy." Robertson said that executing Tucker would be "more an act of vengeance than it is appropriate justice." Texas executed her anyway. In 2005, California executed Stanley Tookie Williams, one of the co-founders of the Crips street gang. During his incarceration on death row, Williams became an anti-gang activist, helped to create a peace protocol between the Bloods and the Crips, and authored children's books on the perils of gang violence. He was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize 5 times. As Bryan Robinson wrote, Williams' supporters thought that his "execution would extinguish the hopes of imprisoned gang members considering reform, telling them that no one, no matter what they do to change their ways, is worth saving - that there is no mercy for the reformed." No. 2: On Wednesday, Oklahoma is scheduled to execute Richard Glossip. Justin Sneed confessed to the murder of Barry Van Treese, a motel owner for whom Glossip and Sneed both worked. However, police inserted the idea that Glossip ordered the killing and offered to not pursue the death penalty against Sneed if he testified against Glossip. Justin Sneed then changed his story. Recently, Sneed's daughter wrote a letter to the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board, stating that her father acted alone in killing Van Treese and that he refused to recant his trial testimony out of fear that the district attorney would still pursue a death sentence against him. A former cellmate of Sneed's saw news of Glossip's pending execution, performed a Google search to identify Glossip's lawyers, and then wrote in an affidavit that Sneed claimed to have acted alone. Another cellmate of Sneed's, Michael Scott, claims to have overheard Sneed boasting about how he framed Glossip. Scott wrote in an affidavit: "Among all the inmates, it was common knowledge that Justin Sneed lied and sold Richard Glossip up the river." In what Glossip's lawyers say is witness intimidation, both of these men were arrested for minor probation violations after they came forward. If he is innocent, Glossip's death sentence would hardly be unique. A recent study demonstrates that 1 in 25 death sentences nationally involves the conviction of an innocent person. Since 1973, 155 wrongfully convicted women and men have been exonerated from death row. Post-conviction DNA testing alone has led to the release of 20 condemned prisoners. No. 3: On Thursday, Virginia is scheduled to execute Alfredo Prieto, who "for the last 7 years ... has spent 23 hours or more every day alone in a 71-square-foot cell." His case exhibits a common theme of long-term solitary confinement - many people exposed to this form of torture are among our most vulnerable, including juveniles and people with severe mental illness and other disabilities. More than almost any other, though, Prieto's case exemplifies the need for the Supreme Court to enforce the principle that the justice system should exercise restraint in the face of an undoubtedly brutal crime. Prieto committed multiple horrific crimes, including rape and murder. However, regardless of the severity of the offense, the Eighth Amendment permits the execution only of offenders with extreme personal culpability. Prieto is intellectually disabled. He has IQ test scores of 64, 66, and 73. In a letter urging Gov. Terry McAuliffe to stop Prieto's execution, the Virginia Chapter of the Association for Retarded Citizens wrote: "We believe that allowing Mr. Prieto's execution to go forward on the evidence as it stands is unjustified scientifically and would endorse a misunderstanding of intellectual disabilities." Prieto is hardly unique among recently executed offenders. I co-authored a report that examined the cases of 100 recently executed offenders and found that the vast majority of those executed fall into one or more of the following categories: "intellectually impaired, too young to buy a beer, severely mentally ill, or chronically abused as children." As Charles Ogletree of Harvard Law School concluded, "severe functional deficits are the rule not the exception among the individuals who populate the nation's death rows." So far in 2015, as David Menschel reports: --"Georgia executed Andrew Brannan, an Army veteran who developed PTSD while earning a bronze star in Vietnam." --Georgia also executed Warren Hill. "All of the doctors who examined Hill - including 3 who testified for state - eventually conceded Hill was mentally retarded." --Texas executed Robert Ladd, despite compelling evidence of intellectual disability. "Though Ladd had an IQ of 67, Texas said that he did not sufficiently prove that he is mentally retarded." --Texas executed Kent Sprouse, a drug-addicted man who suffered from paranoid delusions. --Missouri executed Clayton Lockett, "a 74-year-old man with severe brain damage. Clayton was left severely disabled by a sawmill accident in which he lost 20 % of the frontal lobe of his brain." A restrained justice system does not execute people like Kelly Gissendaner, Richard Glossip, and Alfredo Prieto. * * * Even if the death penalty ended tomorrow, the Pope's admonition that "a just and necessary punishment must never exclude the dimension of hope and the goal of rehabilitation" would remain valid. There may be room for disagreement about the cruelty of life without parole sentences in general. But there are people serving these more accurately named "death in prison" sentences for whom the hopelessness of the punishment is patently excessive. Death in prison sentences for children who commit homicide offenses are one example. In the 1990s, academics and politicians peddled the racist and disproven idea that urban youth represented "a new generation of street criminals [that] is upon us - the youngest, biggest, and baddest generation any society has ever known." This morally bankrupt idea caused a public panic that helped ratchet up punishment on kids. This month, a report issued by the Phillips Black Project documented that, "although JLWOP [juvenile life without parole] dramatically expanded between 1992 and 1999 - an era of hysteria over juvenile superpredators," today the nation has "rapidly abandoned JLWOP in law and practice." Indeed, similar to the isolated use of capital punishment, the sentence today is concentrated in a handful of outlier counties. Though the precise figure is hard to pin down, Philadelphia County alone accounts for nearly 10 % of the national total of juvenile life without parole sentences. Next month, in Montgomery v. Louisiana, the Supreme Court will hear arguments on whether its earlier decision barring mandatory life without parole for children who commit murder applies retroactively to those sentenced before the court issued its decision. Pending before the court, though, are 2 additional petitions - 1 from Michigan and 1 from Louisiana - that ask the court to declare death in prison sentences unconstitutional for juvenile offenders who commit murder. The point is not that every teenager who commits a homicide will eventually be released, but instead that it is impossible to know at the time of the trial whether any particular juvenile offender will eventually transform his life so much so that he is fit to re-enter society. In short, then, ending juvenile life without parole means only that every child has the possibility of redemption and the hope of release. Personal transformation is not an abstract idea. Where given hope and a chance, kids who were in prison for homicide have changed themselves. Consider, for example, George Toca, sentenced to mandatory life without the possibility of parole in Louisiana. In a filing to the U.S. Supreme Court, Louisiana argued that Toca should never have an opportunity for release from prison. However, once the Supreme Court decided to hear his case, the state decided Toca was "no longer a public safety risk" and agreed to his immediate release in exchange for his agreement to waive his appeal (presumably because if the state lost the case in the Supreme Court, it would have to provide an opportunity for other juveniles to try to prove that they have transformed their lives). Since his release, roughly three decades after being sentenced to die in prison, Toca obtained a job and then started a small business. One of the most serious obstacles to curbing penal excess is the artificial line that the Supreme Court has drawn between sentences it has addressed, such as some death penalty and juvenile life without parole cases, and all other forms of excessive punishment. It is now time for the Supreme Court to alter the miserly approach to regulating excessive sentences that it took in Harmelin (the Michigan cocaine possession case), Andrade (the $150 videotapes case), and Ewing (the golf clubs case). "Maturity can lead to that considered reflection which is the foundation for remorse, renewal, and rehabilitation," Justice Kennedy wrote in Graham, the case that first curtailed the use of juvenile life without parole. Why should the possibility of redemption and rehabilitation be limited to those under the age of 18? Adults change, too, often dramatically. Addicts and alcoholics get sober. People with serious mental illness get treatment. Others transform themselves through religion or education or work. And, though less profound, most people simply age out of serious criminality. In 2013, the American Civil Liberties Union released a report that documented the then 3,278 people serving a death in prison sentence for a nonviolent crime. Of these prisoners, nearly 80 % were incarcerated for a drug crime. Here are a few of the crimes that led to a life without parole sentence, according to the report: "possession of a crack pipe," "possession of a bottle cap containing a trace, unweighable amount of heroin," possession of "a trace amount of cocaine in clothes pockets that was so minute it was invisible to the naked eye and detected only in lab tests," and "having a single, small crack rock at home." Ending juvenile life without parole means that every child has the possibility of redemption and the hope of release. Akin to how capital punishment and juvenile life without parole sentences are becoming more rare, the country is abandoning life without parole sentences for nonviolent offenders. Most states now formally prohibit such a sanction. In a sign of the times, in July, President Barack Obama commuted the sentences of 46 nonviolent offenders, many of them sentenced to life imprisonment. However, more than 3,000 women and men will continue to languish under these extravagant sentences, until the Supreme Court holds that the Eighth Amendment, as a forthcoming law review article by Bidish Sarma and Sophie Cull concludes, "offers these offenders an opportunity to demonstrate the unconstitutionality of their punishment to the Supreme Court, which is in a position to redress these excessive sentences of a bygone era." * * * Pope Francis focused his critique on the nation's harshest sentences. During his visit to the Philadelphia jail, however, he mostly met people awaiting trial. Some of them are in jail, separated from their families, communities, and jobs, because of a couple of hundred dollars' worth of fines or fees that they cannot afford to pay. The Eighth Amendment applies not only to cruel and unusual punishments but also to "excessive fines." The judiciary pays virtually no attention to the exorbitant fines and fees that tie citizens, especially those in poverty, to the criminal justice system. In the wake of the civil unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2014, Joseph Shapiro reported: "In 2013, the municipal court in Ferguson - a city of 21,135 people - issued 32,975 arrest warrants for nonviolent offenses, mostly driving violations." These offenses are often resolved by payment of court costs and a fine; however, the debt is often unmanageable for many impoverished residents. Shapiro profiled 1 woman, Ebony, who owed $2,000 in fines and fees. She explained that she had previously been arrested for failure to pay her fines, including "just 2 weeks after she had given birth" and despite the fact that her "lawyer was calling and saying that I'm under doctor's care, I just had a baby." In Georgia, the Southern Center for Human Rights recently represented a woman, Ora Lee Hurley, who had been imprisoned for almost 12 months "due to her inability to pay a $705 fine from a 15-year-old drug conviction." Even though Hurley worked "full-time at a restaurant that sent her paycheck directly to the Department of Corrections," the department charged her a daily fee that "took nearly every penny of her earnings." As the Southern Center for Human Rights said in connection with a lawsuit against the Department of Corrections: "Left with only $23 per month to buy food, toiletries, and pay her fine, Ms. Hurley was being confined in perpetuity." These fines and fees serve no legitimate objective of punishment. They simply strip the dignity from the people buried under them and eradicate their hope for a brighter future. These fines and fees are every bit as emblematic of an extravagantly punitive justice system as life without parole sentences or the death penalty. Pope Francis' 1st visit to the United States came at a time when the desire for a more humane criminal justice system has reached an inflection point. We see it in legislative proclamations, in the charging practices of prosecutors, and the verdicts of juries. But we also must know that we are not immune to another era of moral panic like the one that drove the punitive turn in American criminal justice during the 1980s and '90s. That's why we have an Eighth Amendment and a judiciary to enforce it. Courts, especially the U.S. Supreme Court, failed to fulfill their constitutional obligation to curb excessive punishments at the end of the 20th century. Now, as America begins to come out from the other side of those decades of misery and suffering, it is important for all of us - and especially the justices who occupy the highest court of the land - to remember, as Justice Kennedy put it, "The Eighth Amendment's protection of dignity reflects the Nation we have been, the Nation we are, and the Nation we aspire to be." That's a homily that even the pope might find inspiring. (source: Robert J. Smith is a visiting scholar at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law, formerly an assistant professor at the University of North Carolina School of Law----slate.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 29 09:12:11 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 09:12:11 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 29 SAUDIA ARABIA: Saudi Arabian protester facing 'crucifixion' sparks international outrage An international campaign is underway to stop the execution of a young Saudi Arabian man sentenced to death for his role in the 2012 Arab Spring pro-democracy protests. Ali al-Nimr, who was arrested at the age of 17, is the nephew of a high-profile dissident in Saudi Arabia, which has one of the highest execution rates in the world. Authorities have accused him of attacking their security forces, but his lawyer said Nimr's confession was made after he was tortured. Nimr now faces "crucifixion", which human rights groups say means that he will be beheaded and then placed on public display. Former attorney-general Philip Ruddock, who leads a group of Australian politicians against the death penalty, has been lobbying Saudi officials to spare Nimr. "Chris Hayes and myself have written directly to Saudi Arabia, to the crown prince and to the diplomatic representatives here in Australia, because we view it as very significant," he said. An international social media campaign calling for Nimr to be freed has been gaining momentum, but Mr Ruddock said he was yet to receive a response from Saudi officials about the case. "These are allegations that he admitted these offences. But the argument that is put by his representatives is that [the confession] occurred under torture," he said. "Now, when you've got issues of doubt like this about a person who is a minor when it occurs, then I think it's fundamentally wrong and I can't see any way that it can be justified." Saudi Arabia chosen to lead UN's Human Rights Council So far this year, Saudi Arabia has executed 134 people, many by public beheading. According to Amnesty International, last year China had the highest execution rate in the world, followed by Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and the United States. Last week Saudi Arabia was chosen to lead a United Nations Human Right's Council. The decision was questioned by human rights groups, but the US State Department welcomed the news that one of its key allies had been chosen for the job. "I mean, we've talked about our concerns about some of the capital punishment cases in Saudi Arabia in our human rights report, but I don't have any more to add to it," deputy spokesman Mark Toner said. Mr Toner said he welcomed Saudi Arabia heading the council. "Again, I don't have any comment, don't have any reaction to it. I mean, frankly, it's ... we would welcome it. We're close allies," he said. He said he could not say "off the top of my head" whether Saudi Arabia got into the human rights report annually. (source: ABC news) PAKISTAN----juvenile execution Pakistan Hangs Man Who Was 15 When Arrested ---- Ansar Iqbal, who was convicted of killing a neighbour, is put to death despite Pakistan not allowing the execution of juveniles. A Pakistani man has been executed for murder after nearly 20 years on death row, despite claims he was just 15 year old at the time of the killing. Ansar Iqbal - who always insisted he did not commit the crime - was hanged at a prison in Sargodha in the eastern Punjab province at dawn on Tuesday. His death came a day after international human rights group Reprieve appealed to the authorities to spare Iqbal because he was a juvenile at the time of his arrest in 1994. Pakistani law does not allow the execution of someone who is underage at the time of their arrest. "All the documentary evidence provided to the courts during his trial or appeal indicates that he was a child at the time of the alleged offence; however, the courts have chosen to believe the estimate of police officers that he was in his 20s," Reprieve said in a statement. The court refused to look at the man's school records and birth certificate, which give his age at 14 and 15 respectively, saying the documents were submitted too late. Iqbal and a friend were arrested for the murder of a neighbour - the victim's family said Iqbal committed the crime over an argument at a cricket match but Iqbal said police had framed him by planting 2 guns at his home. He was sentenced to death in 1996. Pakistan has executed 239 people since it lifted a 2008 moratorium on the death penalty following last December's Taliban attack on a school in Peshawar in which 150, most children, were killed. However, human rights groups say most of those killed were "routine" criminals rather than terrorists. The country's criminal justice system is widely criticised, with police being accused of demanding bribes and gaining confessions through torture of manipulated spoken statements. Defence lawyers are sometimes unskilled, either failing to examine witnesses properly or not appearing in court for hearings. According to Reprieve, 73% of Pakistanis are not registered at birth which means it is "almost impossible to prove the age of most of the 8,000 prisoners on Pakistan's death row". Last week, the execution of a paraplegic man convicted of killing somone over a financial dispute was postponed. Abdul Basit, 43, has been on death row since 2009 and became paralysed from the waist down after contracting meningitis in prison in 2010. (source: Sky News) ***************** Juvenile Justice Since Pakistan resumed executions on 19th December 2014, it has emerged that a significant proportion of the individuals currently facing execution were sentenced to death while still children. The execution of juvenile offenders is prohibited by international law, and Pakistan's own law also prohibits the execution of child offenders. Yet, unfortunately for those who now face the gallows, this law remains largely unimplemented. Authorities are set to hang Ansar Iqbal on the 29th of September, a man who says he was 15 when he was arrested for a murder he claims he did not commit. According to his lawyers, says he and a friend were arrested 16 years ago for the murder of neighbour, which the victim's family said was over an argument at a cricket match. Iqbal says police framed him because he was poor by planting 2 guns at his house. The country's courts have refused to examine Iqbal's school records and birth certificate, the latter for them being dubious as it was only issued in 2015- an argument that seems quite senseless. This latest case only shines a spotlight on Pakistan's crumbling criminal justice system. In 2008, Pakistan ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which also prohibits the imposition of the death penalty on anyone who was under 18 at the time of the alleged offence. Again, this has been honoured more in breach, than in compliance. In the face of a public campaign to save the life of Shafqat Hussain, the first of many child offenders to be told that he would be sent to the gallows (he was just 14 years old when he was arrested and he has always maintained his innocence), his lawyers have claimed that "It is widely recognised and acknowledged that torture by the police in Pakistan is systemic and indeed endemic. The fact that there is credible evidence relating to Shafqat's confession being obtained though torture is a surprise to no one". His case only reaffirms the fact that the criminal justice system has never been kind to the poor or helpless. Under the guise of terrorism, Pakistan has gladly forgotten about any domestic commandments or international implications of its decisions. 8,000 prisoners on death row are now awaiting execution, with petitions for pardon pouring in. Abdul Basit, a paraplegic man, has been recently sentenced to death, while many others are hanging by a thread, waiting to confront their gruesome destiny. It is then no surprise that juveniles are condemned to the same fate. In most cases, justice is often lost before it is fought, and those without means are on the receiving end of harsh, often undeserved sentences. (source: Editorial, The Nation) *************** SC upholds death penalty awarded by military court The Supreme Court of Pakistan has rejected the review petition filed by sepoy Muhammad Saeed and upheld the capital punishment awarded by military court to him for killing 5 soldiers. Court martial was conducted of Sepoy Muhammad Saeed and a military court had awarded death penalty to him for killing 5 soldiers during duty hours. A 3-member bench of SC presided over by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Anwar Zaheer Jamali took up the case for hearing Tuesday. Col (Retd) Muhammad Akram, the counsel for the petitioner, told the court during the hearing of the case that military court announced death sentence without fully hearing the stance of his client. Therefore, the review petition was being filed so that their stance could be heard in details, he added. However, the apex court upheld the military court decision and rejected the review petition after hearing detailed stance of the petitioner. (source: Daily Pakistan) MALAYSIA: Former College Student Gets Death Penalty For Double Murder The 4th murder suspect, Muhamad Safwan Muhamad, 23, who was involved in the double murder of a disabled lecturer Zara Eleena Omar Abdullah and her father, Omar Peter Abdullah, three years ago, have been sentenced to death by the High Court, here today. Judge Datuk Abdul Halim Aman, who read out the sentence, said the 4th accused Safwan had failed to produce a reasonable doubt of the prosecution's case. He said the accused defence were mere denial throughout the trial and he did not succeed to raise any reasonable doubts. "I find that the evidence presented by the prosecution's witnesses were more reliable and rational. "Therefore, there is only 1 sentence in this murder and you are sentenced to be hanged until death," he said. Last year, the Federal Court had acquitted the accused of both murder charges when the prosecution had failed to prove a prima-facie case against him. Therefore court, allowed the appeal by the prosecution against Safwan for Zara's murder and ordered his defence to be called but his acquittal over Zara's father was dismissed. The incident took place at No. 28, Jalan TK 1/11, Taman Kinrara, Puchong on March 8, 2012, where the victim's father was murdered between 11.30pm and 1.30am, while Zara was killed between 1.30am and 2.30am. After the court announced the decision, Safwan's mother was seen crying while hugging him. Muhammad Safuan was represented by counsel Shah Rizal Abdul Manan. The 3 other accused, Mohamad Zul Shahril, 23, Mohamad Sharafe, 22, and Azizi Aizat, 23, were also sentenced to death after they were found charged of committing both murders, killing Zara and her father. All 4 accused were former students of Cybernetics International College of Technology. (source: Malaysian Digest) NIGERIA: Death Penalty: Policeman To Die By Hanging For Murder A Port Harcourt High Court sitting in Port Harcourt, presided over by Justice Adolphus Enebeli, yesterday sentenced a police officer, Inspector Samuel Timothy, to death by hanging. Timothy was convicted for shooting and killing one Onyekachi Nwasouba, a graduate of Industrial Chemistry at about 5am on November 10, 2010, along Old Aba Road, Port Harcourt. However, his colleague, Corporal Obediah Moses, was discharged and acquitted. The deceased, Nwasouba, who was into production and distribution of sachet water, was said to have been branded a robber by the policemen on the fateful day after he had gone to distribute his products to customers. LEADERSHIP gathered that the convict, who led the police patrol team, pursued him to the front of his house and shot him dead, after he had shouted that he was not a robber. Delivering his judgement, the trial judge, Enebeli, in a three-hour verdict, said the convict who had been standing trial since 2010 alongside Moses demonstrated act of inhumanity. He stated that going by the testimonies of witnesses (including members of the patrol team) in the matter, the convict was an "inhuman trigger-happy policeman, who engages in murder; a hater of humankind and merciless killer after hearing that the victim was an ordinary pure water seller." Enebeli maintained that the killing was deliberate and pronounced death sentence on him, saying, "According to Section 319 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, I do not have the power to reduce your sentence. That, you, Inspector Timothy Sampson be hanged on your neck until you are dead." Moses was discharged and acquitted by the court on grounds that all the policemen on duty that day did not conspire to kill the victim; rather, they wanted to demonstrate esprit de corps. (source: Leadership Nigeria) SOMALILAND: Hillingdon family fight to save man sentenced to death ---- Faisa Ali is urging the President of Somaliland to intervene and stop her brother - who is mentally ill - from being executed by firing squad The sister of a mentally ill man sentenced to death in Somaliland is fighting to save his life. Abdullahi Ali, 38, was sentenced to death in August for shooting and killing a man in the region of Las-Anod, in Somaliland, in April last year. Father-of-nine, Abdullahi had been suffering from mental illness with psychotic symptoms for around five years prior, his family claims. His mental illness leads him to being violent and angry. On April 6 2014, after a stay at a mental health hospital, he was involved in the shooting and killing of his friend, following a dispute. He was arrested by authorities and kept in prison for a year until he was charged with manslaughter and sentenced to death by firing squad in August this year. His sister, Faisa Ali, from Hillingdon, has taken the case to the Supreme Court in Hergeisa and is urging for him to be released. "We are appealing against the death penalty imposed on him in this crime against humanity. "They are well aware of his mental condition but have refused to look at his medical documents and the death by firing squad is still going ahead." According to Faisa, Abdullahi was in prison for over a year before he was charged and sentenced. "He couldn't take any of his medication in the prison, so he has been awake all day and night fighting with prison guards," she said. The 27-year-old is appealing to the President of Somaliland, Ahmed Mohamed Mohamoud Silanyo, to intervene and stop the death penalty from being enforced on her brother. Abdullahi was sentenced to death at the regional courts in Las-Anod in August and Faisa said she appealed against the ruling at the start of September, showing medical files and records proving her brother's mental illness, but it was disregarded. "They didn't even look at it and he is still sentenced to death, not even accepting his medical records," she told getwestlondon. Her next step was to appeal to the supreme court in Hergeisa but said she received a similar response. "This was the final step, I contacted the chief executive of the Supreme Court, who said they would agree with the regional court's ruling." 'This is a crime against humanity and is just unacceptable' Faisa says she now has no other option but to turn to the media in hopes that her brother's case and plea will be brought to the attention of her country's president in an attempt to stop the death sentence. "I'm absolutely devastated that a person who has been proven mentally ill and doesn't know what he's doing has been sentenced to death," she said. "This is a crime against humanity and is just unacceptable, please save my brother." Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have both expressed concerns about the treatment of Abdullahi. Faisa said that this case has brought to light how much discrimination there is facing mentally ill people in Somaliland. "I want to advocate for people with mental illness in Somaliland after being forced to help my brother," she added. "I feel that I should advocate for mentally ill people in Somaliland because they have no voice or anyone to speak to." Somaliland resumed the death penalty after a 9-year hiatus this year, executing 6 prisoners by firing squad. In a statement in April, the Heads of Mission of the European Union and Member States said: "The EU Heads of Mission deplore this grave backlash after nine years of suspended executions and urge Somaliland authorities to rethink its decision to leave the progressive path followed so far. "The EU Heads of Mission call upon the Somaliland authorities to immediately halt the execution of death sentences as a first step towards adopting appropriate legislation, which aims at the abolition of the death penalty." An Amnesty spokesman said: "The use of the death penalty is always abhorrent as it is a cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. "Amnesty opposes the death penalty at all times - regardless of who is accused, the crime, guilt or innocence or method of execution." (source: getwestlondon.co.uk) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 29 14:08:39 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 14:08:39 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----GA., LA., USA Message-ID: Sept. 29 GEORGIA----impending female execution Ga. board denies clemency, Gissendaner set to die----Georgia Board of Pardons and Parole received a letter from Pope Francis Tuesday The Georgia Board of Pardons and Parole has denied clemency for death row inmate Kelly Gissendaner, it said in a news release. The 47-year-old, convicted of a crime in which she convinced her lover to kill her husband, is scheduled to die by lethal injection Tuesday at 7 p.m. ET at the Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison in Jackson. The board met for hours and heard from her oldest son, Brandon Brookshire. Her other children, Kayla and Dakota, were present and have previously spoken out in support of their mother. The hearing, which began at 11 a.m. ET, was closed to media. It was only the board members, attorneys and the children present. While awaiting an answer from the board, a representative for Pope Francis sent a letter saying that his Holiness wanted the board to spare Gissendaner's life. Gissendaner would be the state's 1st female convict to be executed in 70 years. The board had the option to commute her sentence to life in prison. Only 15 female inmates have been put to death in the United States since 1976, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. The last woman in Georgia was executed by electric chair in 1945. The family of Gissendaner's slain husband, Douglas, issued a statement Tuesday. It read, in part, "As the murderer, she's [Kelly] been given more rights and opportunity over the last 18 years than she ever afforded to Doug, who, again, is the victim here. She had no mercy, gave him no rights, no choices, nor the opportunity to live his life. His life was not hers to take." "Kelly planned and executed Doug's murder," it said. "She targeted him and his death was intentional. Kelly chose to have her day in court and after hearing the facts of this case, a jury of her peers sentenced her to death." There had been a big push to keep her from being executed. Earlier Kayla Gissendaner said, "My dad would not want my mom to be executed, even knowing her role in his murder. He would not want us to endure another devastating loss." The daughter has said her mother has changed over the past 18 years. "I had to face what my mom had done and find a way to forgive her," Kayla Gissendaner said. "In the process, I saw that my mom had struggled through the years to come to grips with what she had done and face her own horror about her actions." More than 90,000 people have signed a petition urging Gov. Nathan Deal to halt her execution, claiming the mother of three has turned her life around and calling her a "powerful voice for good." "While incarcerated, she has been a pastoral presence to many, teaching, preaching and living a life of purpose," the petition states. "Kelly is a living testament to the possibility of change and the power of hope. She is an extraordinary example of the rehabilitation that the corrections system aims to produce." Officials had previously set a date and called off the execution in February due to inclement weather. A few days later, the department of corrections indefinitely postponed Gissendaner's execution after finding "cloudy" lethal injection drugs. The constitutionality of lethal injection drugs has made headlines in recent years and European manufacturers -- such as Denmark-based Lundbeck, which manufactures pentobarbital -- banned U.S. prisons from using their drugs in executions in 2013. That meant 32 states had to find new drug protocols. Last year, Oklahoma issued a moratorium on executions after murderer and rapist Clayton Lockett convulsed, writhed and lay alive on a gurney for 43 minutes before dying. It was the state's 1st time using a new, 3-drug cocktail for an execution. On Tuesday, as the board weighed its decision, the Rev. Cathy Zappa appeared on CNN. Zappa has counseled Gissendaner. When Kelly was threatened with execution previously, the inmate "faced her fate with grace," the reverend said. CNN's Ashleigh Banfield asked Zappa what her "words of comfort" would be to the family of Doug Gissendaner. "That's a really hard question because I'm aware of how hard this has been" for them, Zappa answered. "I don't know if they'd want words of comfort from me," she said. "I pray for him. I pray for them. I hope they can find healing. If this execution doesn't happen, I hope they find healing and closure some way and I believe it's possible." (source: CNN) ************** Pope Francis urges Georgia to call off execution scheduled for Tuesday night----Pope writes to Georgia board of pardons and paroles in case of Kelly Renee Gissendaner, who is scheduled to die by lethal injection at 7pm on Tuesday Pope Francis has urged a Georgia prison board to call off Tuesday's planned execution of the only woman on the state's death row. The pope's plea was addressed to the Georgia board of pardons and paroles, which met on Tuesday morning to hear from the children of Kelly Renee Gissendaner, who is scheduled to die by lethal injection at 7pm at the state prison in Jackson. The letter was sent through a representative, Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano and was accompanied by one from Wilton D Gregory, the archbishop of Atlanta. "While not wishing to minimize the gravity of the crime for which Ms Gissendaner has been convicted, and while sympathizing with the victims, I nonetheless implore you, in consideration of the reasons that have been expressed to your board, to commute the sentence to one that would better express both justice and mercy," Vigano wrote on behalf of the pope. Gissendaner's execution is the 1st since the pope's address to the US Congress last week in which he called on the United States to abolish the death penalty. There are 5 other executions scheduled over the next nine days across the US, including that of Richard Glossip in Oklahoma, where a nun, Sister Helen Prejean, has been urging the state to hear new evidence of his possible innocence. Gissendaner's execution "follows up so directly on what he just recommended last Thursday, so it's a first response to a longstanding concern that the holy see and the bishops of the United States have had," Gregory told a press conference on Tuesday. Gissendaner, 47, was convicted of murder in the February 1997 slaying of her husband. She conspired with her lover, who stabbed Douglas Gissendaner to death. 2 of Gissendaner's 3 children asked the Georgia board of pardons and paroles earlier this year to spare their mother???s life. It met again on Tuesday morning to hear from her oldest child, Brandon, who had not previously addressed the board and now wants to make a plea for his mother's life, said Susan Casey, an attorney for Gissendaner. The board could let an earlier denial of clemency stand, issue a stay of up to 90 days to further consider the case, or grant clemency and commute her sentence. The board is expected to rule sometime Tuesday afternoon. Gissendaner was previously scheduled for execution on 25 February, but that was delayed because of a threat of winter weather. Her execution was reset for 2 March, but corrections officials postponed that execution "out of an abundance of caution" because the execution drug appeared "cloudy". The parole board, which is the only entity in Georgia authorized to commute a death sentence, declined to spare Gissendaner's life after a clemency hearing in February. Her lawyers asked the board to reconsider its decision before the 2nd execution date, but the board stood by its decision to deny clemency. Gissendaner's lawyers last Thursday submitted a second request to reconsider the denial of clemency. The parole board said on Monday that its members have thoroughly reviewed that request. The board said the meeting on Tuesday will allow it to gather additional information from representatives for Gissendaner. In the request for reconsideration, Gissendaner's lawyers cite a statement from former Georgia supreme court chief justice Norman Fletcher, who argues that Gissendaner's death sentence is not proportionate to her role in the crime. Her lover, Gregory Owen, who did the killing, is serving a life prison sentence and will become eligible for parole in 2022. Fletcher said he has now decided he was wrong in voting to deny Gissendaner's appeal in 2000 when he sat on the state supreme court, the statement says. He also notes that Georgia has not executed a person who didn't actually carry out a killing since the US supreme court reinstated the death penalty in 1976. Gissendaner's lawyers also argue she was a seriously damaged woman, has undergone a spiritual transformation while in prison and has been a model prisoner who has shown remorse and provided hope to other inmates in their personal struggles. The new request for reconsideration includes testimony from several women who were locked up as teens and who said Gissendaner counselled them through moments when they felt scared, lost or on the verge of giving up hope. 2 of her 3 children, Dakota and Kayla, previously addressed the board and earlier this month released a video pleading for their mother's life to be spared. They detailed their own tough journeys to forgiving her and said they would suffer terribly from having a second parent taken from them. Douglas Gissendaner's family said in a statement released on Monday that he is the victim and Kelly Gissendaner received an appropriate sentence. "As the murderer, she's been given more rights and opportunity over the last 18 years than she ever afforded to Doug who, again, is the victim here," the statement says. "She had no mercy, gave him no rights, no choices, nor the opportunity to live his life." Kelly Gissendaner repeatedly pushed Owen in late 1996 to kill her husband rather than just divorcing him as Owen suggested, prosecutors have said. Acting on her instructions, Owen ambushed Douglas Gissendaner at Gissendaner's home, forced him to drive to a remote area and stabbed him multiple times, prosecutors said. Investigators looking into the killing zeroed in on Owen once they learned of his affair with Kelly Gissendaner. He initially denied involvement but eventually confessed and implicated Kelly Gissendaner. (source: The Guardian) LOUISIANA: Former death row inmate to speak at Tulane Law School John Thompson came within weeks of being executed for a 1984 New Orleans murder before new evidence arose in his case. After spending 18 years in prison, he was tried again, acquitted and released. 1 of more than 40 exonerees in Louisiana, Thompson founded Resurrection After Exoneration, a New Orleans nonprofit that helps reconnect exonerees to their communities. On Tuesday night (Sept. 29) at Tulane University Law School, he will speak about wrongful convictions with John Hollway, author of a book about Thompson's ordeal, "Killing Time: An 18-year Odyssey from Death Row to Freedom." Hollway, associate dean of the University of Pennsylvania Law School, is executive director of the Quattrone Center for Fair Administrative of Justice. He and Thompson will discuss the book and wrongful convictions in the United States, where 1,660 have been wrongly convicted of crimes and later exonerated, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. The event is open to the public and begins at 6:45 p.m. in the Wendell H. Gautheir Moot Court Room 110. Tulane Law is located in John Giffen Weinmann Hall at 6329 Freret St. A reception will follow at 8:00 p.m. (source: The Times-Picayune) USA: Scholars Discuss Role of Neuroscience in Youth Criminal Justice A panel of legal and medical scholars and practitioners agreed in a panel discussion on Monday night that the American criminal justice system does not give adequate consideration to the cognitive underdevelopment of adolescents. The death sentence of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the American student who carried out the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing, served as a preface for the discussion. A standing-room-only crowd of about 100 people packed the Wasserstein Hall classroom at Harvard Law School for the discussion entitled "From Troubled Teens to Tsarnaev: Promises and Perils of Adolescent Neuroscience and Law." The event, hosted by the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology, and Bioethics, was the center's 1st of the year. "Our country is going through a profound movement toward the punitive," said Nancy Gertner, a senior lecturer at the Law School. In a previous editorial in the Boston Globe, Gertner cited prominent lawyer Clarence S. Darrow's argument that "the imposition of the death penalty made citizens no better than the killers on trial." She argued that modern neuroscience research can provide objective grounds for greater discretion in sentencing juvenile criminals. Leah Somerville, director of the Affective Neuroscience and Development Lab at the University, struck a similar note. "The adolescent brain is structurally different from the adult brain," she said. These objective differences between adult and juvenile brains, resulting in measurable decreases in inhibition, underdeveloped resistance to peer pressure, and increased attraction to risk, should be given more consideration when sentencing juvenile criminals, according to Somerville. The panelists described the need to apply the findings from modern neuroscience and criminal justice research to programs that aim to support at-risk youth. They also discussed the need to strengthen programs aimed at promoting healthy environments for adolescents, keeping students in school, and rehabilitating youth offenders. "Individual sentencing cannot solve this issue," Gertner said. "We have to look at this problem institutionally." Panelist Robert T. Kinscherff, a senior visiting fellow in law and neuroscience at the Petrie-Flom Center, said there is a need for increased understanding of the very common conditions that lead to youth delinquency. He also spoke of the "growing political agreement" that - rather than being tough on crime - the U.S. Department of Justice should be "smart on crime." The panelists were hopeful about enacting change. Describing how to implement these scientific breakthroughs, Judge Gertner emphasized the importance of objective neuroscience in strengthening the argument for programs to support at-risk youth and discretion when sentencing young criminals. "It's no longer just faith and hope and some gut, common-sense solution," Gertner said. "You can actually look at the [neurological] differences, and we need to take them into account." But some audience members left the event with mixed feelings about the potential for change. Takahiko Iwasaki, a Japanese judge and visiting scholar at the Law School, said, "I think it's very difficult for lawyers or judges to actually take into account these [scientific] accomplishments in specific cases." (source: The (Harvard) Crimson) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 29 14:09:23 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 14:09:23 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 29 BANGLADESH: Man to die for killing sister A local court in Gazipur has sentenced a man to death for killing his pregnant sister three and a half years ago to gobble up the whole of ancestral property. The convict is Md Jahirul Islam Kalu, 36, son of Md Nurul Islam, from Barmi village in Sreepur upazila. Gazipur District and Session Judge AKM Enamul Hoque pronounced the death verdict in presence of Kalu on Tuesday morning and fined him Tk10,000. When asked, local public prosecutor Advocate Haris Uddin Ahmed acknowledged the incident. According to case briefing, nine-month pregnant Farzana Akter Nargis was taken to her father's residence in Barmi village on March 4, 2012 for safe delivery. Earlier, Kalu had long been threatening his father with killing his sister Farzana if the whole property was not handed over to him legally. On the following day in the morning, Kalu slaughtered his sister to death and locals caught him soon after the murder. Farzana's husband Asaduzzaman Azad launched a case with Sreepur model police station in this connection and police placed submitted the charge sheet accusing Kalu for the killing. Later, the court handed down death penalty to Kalu after finding his involvement in the murder. (source: Dhaka Tribune) INDONESIA: Cannabis trafficking suspect faces death penalty A Kota Samarahan man is facing the death penalty for allegedly trafficking 1.0999kg of cannabis. Abdul Hafiz Abdul Latip, 26, from Kota Samarahan is also accused of being in possession of 1.44 g of the same drug. He claimed trial to all charges when the case was mentioned in the High Court here before Judge Alwi Abdul Wahab yesterday. Drug trafficking, which comes under Section 39(B) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, provides for a mandatory death sentence upon conviction. The other charge was framed under Section 6 of the same Act, which provides for a fine of up to RM20,000 and up to 5 years in prison or both. The court fixed pre-trial case management on Oct 18 to monitor the supply of related documents, while the trial was set for Jan18-22 next year. Hafiz allegedly committed the offence around 2.30am on July 25 this year at his rented house at Taman Uni Garden, Kota Samarahan. He is represented by defence counsels Osman Ibrahim and Roger Chin. (source: The Borneo Post) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 29 23:37:03 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 23:37:03 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OKLA., NEB., CALIF., USA Message-ID: Sept. 29 OKLAHOMA----impending execution Fallin: "Some Anxiety" in Oklahoma Ahead of Glossip Execution Gov. Mary Fallin will not intervene in the case of Richard Glossip, who is scheduled for execution tomorrow afternoon. "Richard Glossip has had almost 18 years of hearings, trials, appeals. He's had 3 stays on his execution. He took it all the way to the Court of Criminal Appeals," Fallin said during a day-long visit to Tulsa. "It's the law of the state of Oklahoma; my job as the governor is just to make sure the law is carried forth." Barring action by the U.S. Supreme Court, Glossip will be executed by lethal injection Wednesday at 3 p.m. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals rejected a request Monday from Glossip's attorneys for a new hearing. They say new evidence shows the man Glossip purportedly hired to kill their boss, Oklahoma City motel owner Barry Van Treese, acted alone. Fallin said the criminal justice system has worked as it should in Glossip's case. "I will say, I still believe in the death penalty, which is the current law in Oklahoma, and I still believe in justice for the victims that have suffered so much in horrible crimes like murder," Fallin said. While she avoided speaking personally, Fallin said there is anxiety in the state over Glossip's impending death. "This particular case has received a lot of national press because of anti-death penalty groups, and they are truly what they are: anti-death penalty groups that do not support that," Fallin said. Glossip's lawyers are also challenging Oklahoma's use of midazolam after it was discovered the Texas Department of Corrections compounded the more reliable pentobarbital and gave some to Virginia. (source: publicradiotulsa.org) ************* Richard Glossip lawyers submit appeal to U.S. Supreme Court Richard Glossip is innocent and his execution would be the result of a wrongful conviction, according to a petition for a writ of certiorari filed by Mr. Glossip's attorneys today with the United States Supreme Court. Information on the appeal was circulated to news organizations worldwide the afternoon of Tuesday (September 29). The petition comes a day after a splintered Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals denied, in a close 3-2 vote, Mr. Glossip's request for an evidentiary hearing and a stay of execution. Mr. Glossip is scheduled for execution in Oklahoma at 3 p.m. on Wednesday, September 30. Arguing that the execution of Mr. Glossip would be unconstitutional because of the weakness of the evidence against him, the petition states: "'The State's entire case' against Mr. Glossip turned upon the testimony of Justin Sneed. Glossip v. State, 29 P.3d 597, 560 (Ok. Cr. 2001). Newly discovered evidence completely undermines Sneed's credibility. Mr. Glossip claimed below that his execution based solely on Sneed's bargained for, and now provably unreliable, testimony would violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments." (p. I) The Petition for a Writ of Certiorari can be accessed here: [http://bit.ly/1PM4rXD] The dissents by OCCA Judges Johnson and Smith can be accessed here [http://bit.ly/1KJ8Fha http://bit.ly/1MEthI8]. The dissent states: "Glossip's materials convince me that he is entitled to an evidentiary hearing to investigate his claim of actual innocence ...While finality of judgment is important, the State has no interest in executing an actually innocent man." Glossip's attorneys contend in their brief that new evidence, not fully considered by any court, shows that Mr. Glossip is innocent of the murder for which he faces execution. Mr. Glossip was not present during the murder. Justin Sneed committed the murder and does not face the death penalty. Mr. Sneed avoided death by providing testimony that Mr. Glossip was involved. A lower court has already recognized that "the State's entire case" rests on Mr. Sneed's testimony (Glossip v. State, 29 P.3d 597, 560 (Ok. Cr. 2001.) However, multiple witnesses have come forward to say that Mr. Sneed acted alone. If the state proceeds with Mr. Glossip's execution, it will be based solely on unreliable information provided by 1 witness, in exchange for his life. Glossip's laewyes note that two new witnesses, Michael Scott and Joseph Tapley, have come forward, "at no benefit to themselves, and offered sworn affidavits that Mr. Sneed revealed that Mr. Glossip had no involvement in the murder. Another new affidavit reveals the extent of Mr. Sneed's methamphetamine addiction at the time of the crime, and his modus operandi of breaking into cars and hotel rooms to steal to get money for his drug addiction." Additionally, new evidence implicates the interrogation of Justin Sneed. Dr. Richard Leo, Ph.D., J.D., is the national, leading expert on police-induced false confessions and erroneous convictions. After reviewing Mr. Glossip's case, based on decades of social science research, he concluded that law enforcement in this case used the "personal and situational factors associated with, and believed to cause, false confessions." See Dr. Richard Leo report, App. B. An analysis of a recent video interview with Mr. Sneed and background information, which reveals multiple, changing stories, can be accessed in the following links. Justin Sneed Transcribed Interview----https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3_bre24T7cBbnNmRUhyUjJDc28/view?usp=sharing Sneed Competency Evaluation, 7.1.97----https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3_bre24T7cBSFJOOU5oV2dTclk/view?usp=sharing Detailed Elements from Sneed's 8 Stories----https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3_bre24T7cBenozcXdxWm9RNU0/view?usp=sharing When Eight is Enough 8.28.15----https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3_bre24T7cBR3FXVnhiWFNTMXc/view?usp=sharing Donald Knight, one of Glossip's lawyers, observed in today's press release: "This case splintered the Court of Criminal Appeals - a 3-2 vote. 2 Judges believed a further stay of execution and a hearing on innocence was required on the facts. We should all be deeply concerned about an execution under such circumstances," said Donald Knight, 1 of Mr. Glossip's attorneys. Knight's team of lawyers seeking to present Glossip's execution includes Kathleen Lord and Mark Olive. (source: The City Sentinel) NEBRASKA: Lawsuits question pro-death penalty petition----Lawsuits want ballot language changed and questions Governor's role in petition A pro-death penalty group's effort to bring forth a referendum vote on Nebraska legislatures repeal of the death penalty is being challenged in 2 lawsuits. Nebraskans for the death penalty, has spent close more than $900,000 and has collected nearly 167, 000 to bring a public vote in 2016 on whether to reinstate the death penalty. Opponents of the death penalty are now suing the organization. "We want to make sure that everything was done correctly," said Matt Maly, Conservatives Concerned with the Death Penalty Coordinator. "The basis of the 1st suit has to do with Governor Ricketts not being listed as a sponsor even though he was clearly funding and organizing their effort." The latest suit, filed by Nebraskan's for Public Safety, claims the ballot language is unlawfully misleading by stating that life in prison would be the "maximum" sentence allowable if the death penalty is not restored. Phrasing, the group says gives the impression that the repeal of the death penalty provides a more lenient punishment than life behind bars, which is the mandatory sentence. A second suit, questions Governor Ricketts involvement in the petition drive. It suggests that Ricketts, who donated $200,000 to the cause should have been listed as a sponsor. "The financial donations aren't so much the problem as the organization and using his staff to put together their effort in gathering signatures," Maly. The petition drive was managed by Jessica Moenning, a republican political consultant who is on the governor's payroll. Ricketts does not deny donating to the organizations, however he's says he is simply supportive of the cause. "I wasn't listed as a sponsor because I'm not a sponsor. I'm certainly a vocal advocate because I along with most Nebraskans believe we ought to have capitol punishment." said Governor Pete Ricketts (R-Nebraska), "I've also donated to the cause, but that doesn't make me a sponsor." Maly told ABC9 he's doesn't mind having the issue on the ballot. He just wants to make sure it gets there the right way. (source: siouxlandmatters.com) CALIFORNIA: 1 of 2 men charged with murder of UCLA student may face death penalty One of the men arrested in connection with the death of UCLA student Andrea "Andy" DelVesco may face the death penalty, according to prosecutors. The Los Angeles Police Department arrested Eric Marquez, a 5th-year biology student, and Alberto Medina, both 22, over the weekend after forensic evidence and witness statements linked the 2 to a suspected homicide and arson. Prosecutors said Medina, a Fresno State University student, entered the apartment and fatally stabbed DelVesco with a knife before setting the apartment on fire, according to a Los Angeles District Attorney's Office press release. Los Angeles District Attorney spokeswoman Sarah Ardalani said Medina is being held without bail because he was charged with capital murder with a special circumstance of murder during a robbery. Ardalani added Medina could face the death penalty. Prosecutors also charged Medina with 1 count of arson and 2 counts of 1st-degree burglary. County prosecutors charged Marquez with 1 count of murder and 2 counts of 1st-degree burglary. Marquez and Medina are scheduled to appear at the Airport Branch of the Los Angeles County Superior Court after 2 p.m. LAPD is still investigating the case. (source: The (UCLA) Daily Bruin) **************** Why I Changed My Mind to Oppose the Death Penalty For 30 years I supported the death penalty. I felt that the state should make a strong statement that those who commit the most heinous crimes receive the ultimate penalty. This view was reinforced by the almost universal support from law enforcement. The people who most often deal with the worst criminals understand that evil exists in a small percentage of the population. As a public official, their opinion on this issue counted for a lot with me, as did my own sense of justice. We can, and should, continue to debate the morality of the death penalty, but over the past several years, it has become clear to me that, in practice, our death penalty system is failing and should be abolished. I've come to this conclusion for 3 reasons. It costs too much: The state of California has spent $4 billion on the death penalty since 1978. That's $308 million for each of the 13 executions carried out between then and now. We spend $90,000 more each year to house someone on death row than in regular prison. That cost adds up, as most death row inmates in California stay there for over 25 years. The bottom line -- replacing the death penalty with lifetime imprisonment without parole would save the state over $140 million a year. There are better ways to spend this money. It's broken: In the past 40 years, over 150 people have been wrongly convicted and sentenced to death in the United States. People of color are at least twice as likely as Caucasians to be sentenced to death for comparable crimes. Even in our age of advanced medicine, we have not figured out how to administer the death penalty appropriately. A botched execution in Oklahoma just last year took 45 minutes, during which time the prisoner cried out and convulsed in pain before dying of a heart attack. We must ensure that those who commit the worst offenses are caught and punished, and are never allowed to threaten the public again. But we also must do a better job of living up to the principles enshrined in our Constitution, including the prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishment." It doesn't make us safer: There is no evidence that the death penalty helps prevent crime. Researchers have been looking for evidence for decades, including in the 19 states and 140 countries that have banned the death penalty. They haven't found it. What they have found is people are less likely to commit crime the more they worry that they will get caught. In other words, the money we spend on death row would be better spent on ensuring law enforcement officers have the resources they need to prevent, investigate and solve crimes. I know many Californians of goodwill continue to believe the death penalty is a just punishment for those who commit the most heinous offenses. In a democracy, though, we must make hard choices about how to spend our money. Having served as California's Chief Fiscal Officer, I know that we often don't have enough money to make critical investments in the future of our state. The evidence is compelling -- the death penalty is simply not worth the cost. The money we spend on our failed death penalty program in California could pay for 1,500 new police officers, or 3,000 new teachers, or the cost of pre-K for 20,000 children. These are the type of investments we need to make to provide security and opportunity for the next generation of Californians. (source: Steve Westly, Former CA State Controller; Managing Partner, The Westly Group----Huffington Post) USA: The U.S. Is Ignoring Pope Francis' Call to Abolish the Death Penalty Peter denied Jesus 3 times. Today and over the next several days, we will deny Peter's apostolic successor 3 times. Pope Francis, during his visit last week to the United States, reiterated his and the Catholic Church's current opposition to capital punishment; yet, 3 executions are imminent. As I write this, the Georgia Board of Pardons and Parole is meeting and listening to Kelly Gissendaner's son, Brandon, whose brother and sister have already pleaded for mercy for their mother. In 1997 Kelly Gissendaner murdered Doug Gissendaner, who was the stepfather to Gissendaner's sons and father to her daughter. Other inmates, officials, clergy, and theologians - including Jurgen Moltmann - have asked that Gissendaner not be executed. The 2nd execution is scheduled for Sept. 30 in Oklahoma. However, death row inmate Richard Glossip's case raises many doubts, especially since he was convicted solely on the testimony of only one witness, who confessed to the crime and received a life sentence with no physical evidence directly linking Glossip to the crime. Again, many people are asking for his life to be spared. And 3rd, in the state where I reside and work, Missouri plans to execute Kimber Edwards on Oct. 6, even though he, like Glossip, may have been wrongfully convicted. I formerly served as a corrections officer at a maximum security facility. I also used to be a reserve police officer. I have sped through city streets in a squad car, sirens blaring, on my way to shootings. I have booked and interviewed (interrogated) alleged murderers. I have seen victims??? families cry. I have had inmates hit me. I even used force when I wore a badge. And yet, as a Catholic Christian, over the years I have come to oppose capital punishment for a number of reasons. I agree with Pope Francis' remarks about the death penalty. During his speech before Congress, Democrats and Republicans applauded when he emphasized: "Let us remember the Golden Rule: 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you'" (Mt 7:12). The pope added: "This Rule points us in a clear direction. Let us treat others with the same passion and compassion with which we want to be treated. Let us seek for others the same possibilities which we seek for ourselves. Let us help others to grow, as we would like to be helped ourselves. In a word, if we want security, let us give security; if we want life, let us give life; if we want opportunities, let us provide opportunities. The yardstick we use for others will be the yardstick which time will use for us. The Golden Rule also reminds us of our responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage of its development." And then he specifically devoted attention to capital punishment: "This conviction has led me, from the beginning of my ministry, to advocate at different levels for the global abolition of the death penalty. I am convinced that this way is the best, since every life is sacred, every human person is endowed with an inalienable dignity, and society can only benefit from the rehabilitation of those convicted of crimes. Recently my brother bishops here in the United States renewed their call for the abolition of the death penalty. Not only do I support them, but I also offer encouragement to all those who are convinced that a just and necessary punishment must never exclude the dimension of hope and the goal of rehabilitation." Pope Francis has made similar remarks previously, echoing Pope John Paul II who, 16 years ago here in St. Louis, asked then-Governor Mel Carnahan of Missouri to commute the death sentence of Darrell Mease, and the governor complied with his request. John Paul II added: "The new evangelization calls for followers of Christ who are unconditionally pro-life: who will proclaim, celebrate and serve the Gospel of life in every situation. A sign of hope is the increasing recognition that the dignity of human life must never be taken away, even in the case of someone who has done great evil. Modern society has the means of protecting itself, without definitively denying criminals the chance to reform. I renew the appeal I made most recently at Christmas for a consensus to end the death penalty, which is both cruel and unnecessary." So the current Catholic position on capital punishment views it as morally unjustified. It is not necessary to protect society. It does not make up for the horrible crime committed. It does not really respect the sanctity of life. Just as nobody can earn or merit grace and salvation, so too can no one do anything that absolutely excludes them from possibly receiving grace and salvation. We are all sinners, as the apostle Paul noted in Romans 3:23. In his encyclical Evangelium Vitae (1995, par. 56), John Paul II said that it is only justified as "legitimate defense" against an imminent threat to society, a scenario that he believed is "rare if not practically nonexistent" in countries such as the U.S. (reiterated in the Catechism, par. 2267). Although, unlike direct abortion, capital punishment is not what is referred to as an "intrinsic evil" (never morally justified because it is per se evil), I would say that now - in the view of the Catholic Church - the death penalty is a "grave evil" much like unjust war. Just war might be morally justified, as is the death penalty, as "legitimate defense" against imminent and grave threats; otherwise, it is morally unjustified and therefore a grave evil. These 3 executions, if carried out, would be gravely evil, in my view. And, as a former corrections officer, I also worry about what carrying out these executions does to the officers and staff involved. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Let us also not do unto others what we would not have them do unto us. And let us not become the very evil from which we are trying to protect ourselves. (source: Tobias Winright is a contributing writer for Sojourners, and he holds the Maeder Chair in Health Care Ethics and is teaches theological ethics at Saint Louis University in St. Louis, MO.----sojo.net) *************** Ted Cruz's Hedge Funder Sugar Daddy Spends $100,000 to Bring Death Penalty Back to Nebraska A coalition of right-wing donors and activists wants Nebraska to start executing people again. Over the summer, the conservative legislature of Nebraska - led by left-wing lawmaker Ernie Chambers - stunningly voted to end the death penalty, overcoming the veto of the state's Republican governor. Now, a coalition of right-wing donors and activists, buoyed by one of Ted Cruz's biggest funders, has converged on the state to bring capital punishment back. New York City hedge funder Robert Mercer gave $100,000 to the $900,000 campaign that successfully placed a referendum about the issue on the state's 2016 ballot. Mercer is a well-known funder of right-wing causes, giving millions of dollars to organizations such as the Media Research Center and the Heartland Institute. More recently, Mercer gave $11 million to a constellation of outside Super PACs supporting Cruz's campaign for the Republican presidential nomination. Recall that Cruz recently dismissed Pope Francis's calls for abolition of the death penalty, telling Politico that he "spent a number of years in law enforcement dealing with some of the worst criminals, child rapists and murderers, people who've committed unspeakable acts. I believe the death penalty is a recognition of the preciousness of human life, that for the most egregious crimes, the ultimate punishment should apply." This is despite the fact that as a lawyer in private practice, Cruz once argued against the death penalty's unfairness as it was meted out in the current criminal justice system. Recall that over the last quarter, Cruz's Super PACs accumulated $38 million. This means that more than 1/4 of all of the outside money coming Cruz's way so far has come from a single man - and that man is doing his best to bring the death penalty back to a state that just got rid of it, a viewpoint that the candidate who is depending on his resources seems to be echoing. (source: alternet.org) From rhalperi at smu.edu Tue Sep 29 23:37:56 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 23:37:56 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 29 GLOBAL: At event on abolishing death penalty, Ban stresses need to respect rights of victims' families As momentum continues to build towards abolishing the death penalty, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today stressed the need to ensure that the rights of victims and their families are respected as part of efforts to ensure a life of dignity for all. "The rights of victims and their families must absolutely be respected," Mr. Ban said in his message to an event on Moving Away from the Death Penalty: The Voices of Victims' Families, delivered by United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra???ad Al Hussein. Critical in this regard, he noted, are the right to see effective investigations and proper retribution for crimes and the right to demand redress for the harm suffered, through judicial and administrative mechanisms that are expeditious, responsive, fair, and accessible. "This implies that all victims should be fully informed about such processes, which should be inexpensive and allow for the presentation of victims' views and concerns," Mr. Ban stated. 7 decades ago, only 14 countries had abolished the death penalty. Today, 82 % have either introduced moratoria by law or in practice or have abolished it. Over the past 12 months alone, Fiji, Madagascar, Suriname, and the state of Nebraska in the United States have abolished the practice of putting people to death. But despite this overarching worldwide trend towards abolition, Mr. Ban said, a small number of countries have increased or resumed executions in recent months. "Frequently, these policies are justified by authorities invoking the rights of crime victims' families. In reality, many murder victims' families believe that responding to one killing with another does not honour the victim." The event, held on the margins of the high-level segment of the General Assembly, was organized by the UN human rights office (OHCHR), which noted that a growing body of evidence suggests that, from the perspective of murder victims' families, the death penalty is harmful and interferes with a difficult healing process. "A life of dignity for all includes the dignity of victims and their families, who must be acknowledged by all law enforcement and judicial personnel with full compassion and respect. It is also paramount to secure the safety of victims, their families and witnesses from intimidation and reprisal," said Mr. Ban. The UN Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power clearly states these and other rights of victims of crime, and it outlines measures to secure them. "I call on States to do far more to realize these principles in practice," said Mr. Ban. "And I urge all States and individuals to join the United Nations as we continue advocating for an end to the imposition of death penalty as part of our larger push for a more just and sustainable future." (source: UN News Centre) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 30 09:58:35 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 09:58:35 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----VA., S.C., GA., OHIO, ARK. Message-ID: Sept. 30 VIRGINIA----impending execution 3 murder victims' families prepare for Alfredo Prieto's execution After 27 years, the families of Tina Jefferson and Rachael A. Raver still clearly remember where they were when they learned that their loved ones had been killed: Velma Jefferson was at work in Lawton, Okla., when a family friend unexpectedly appeared with news about her daughter. Deidre Raver was in a neighbor's car in Yorktown, N.Y., when she learned that her missing sister's body had been found. "I just screamed," Raver said. "It's like your body isn't prepared for something like that." Now they are steeling themselves for one more unforgettable moment: the execution of the murderer, Alfredo R. Prieto, on Thursday night. Tina Jefferson, a 24-year-old CIA financial analyst from Oklahoma, was living in Arlington when she was raped and shot to death behind an elementary school there in May 1988. Raver, 22, had just graduated from George Washington University, and her new boyfriend, Warren H. Fulton III, also 22, was a senior there when they were shot in the back in a vacant lot outside Reston in December 1988. Investigators believe that Raver was raped as she lay dying. It was the beginning of a horrific rampage by Prieto, now 49, who is linked by ballistics to a 4th slaying in Northern Virginia: Manuel F. Sermeno, 27, was found shot to death in a burning car on Interstate 95 in Prince William County in 1989, according to law enforcement authorities. Prieto then returned to California, where he apparently killed 5 more people before being captured in September 1990 - a total of 9 murders and 4 rapes in a 2-year period, police in both states say. "If there ever was a human being for whom capital punishment makes sense," Robert F. Horan Jr., the former Fairfax commonwealth's attorney, said Tuesday, "it's this guy." After DNA unexpectedly connected Prieto to the unsolved Virginia killings, Horan decided in 2005 to put Prieto on trial in Fairfax even though he already had a death sentence in California. Prieto has not spoken publicly about any of his crimes. He never spoke to investigators in California or Virginia. He did not testify at his trials. He refused even to answer a question from prison officials recently about whether he preferred death by lethal injection or electrocution, a corrections spokeswoman said. By default under Virginia law, he will receive a lethal injection. But at his 4th and final trial, in Fairfax in 2010, Prieto stood and answered questions from a judge about whether he was cooperating with the prosecution's mental health expert after his defense, in two prior trials, posited that his client was mentally retarded. In clear English, with the jury out of the nearly empty courtroom, he told Fairfax Circuit Court Judge Randy I. Bellows he "spoke to [the expert] about a variety of issues. Some of the questions I could not answer, under the Fifth Amendment. I have a right to remain silent. He asked me some questions about my state of mind. What I said was, I was using a lot of drugs. I was drinking. I gave him a lot of answers." The jury heard from the prosecution expert, then voted for two death sentences, which Bellows imposed in December 2010. If Prieto is executed Thursday at the Greensville Correctional Center in Jarratt, Va., his state and federal appeals processes will have been completed in under 5 years. A request for a stay from the U.S. Supreme Court is pending. That does not seem like a short amount of time to the families of the three Northern Virginia victims, who endured three long trials between 2007 and 2010. Some of the family members did not survive. Rachael Raver's mother, Veronica, struggled through stomach cancer and chemotherapy and traveled from Yorktown to Fairfax for all three trials. As Prieto was being led out of the Fairfax courtroom for the last time, Veronica Raver hissed at him: "Hey, Prieto - does your mother know you rape dying dead girls?" In the hallway afterward, she said she did not expect to be around for Prieto's execution but that she'd "be there in spirit." Veronica Raver died in 2013. Tina Jefferson's father, Henry Jefferson, died in April 2007, weeks before Prieto's 1st trial. He was a Vietnam veteran and a career soldier who never stopped pushing for an answer to his daughter's death. "I broke down and started crying" after Arlington County police told him that Prieto had been identified through DNA, he told The Washington Post in 2005. "For a 62-year-old man, that's something." Tina was an honors student and a basketball player in high school who served as a resident assistant and president of her sorority at Oklahoma State University. She was last seen at a Giant grocery in Baileys Crossroads at 9:30 p.m. on May 10, 1988, although a witness saw her red Camaro in Arlington not long after that. Her body was found at 2 a.m. the next day behind McKinley Elementary School, and her car was back in the Giant parking lot. No one knows how or where she might have crossed paths with Prieto, but his semen was found on her body, authorities said. "She was a kindhearted, loving, very outgoing person," her mother said. "And that probably was the cause of her demise." Raver was a varsity soccer player who graduated from George Washington University in May 1988 with an education degree. She was living in Alexandria, working as a secretary there and planning to apply for law school, when she met Fulton in the summer of 1988. "She was a clean-cut kid," said her brother Matthew Raver. "She would not hurt a fly." Fulton was a senior at George Washington, living with his parents in Vienna while they helped run the local chapter of the Salvation Army. On the night of Dec. 3, 1988, Raver went to their home for dinner. Then the young couple went to a Christmas party in Arlington and finally to Mister Days, a sports bar in the District. They had planned to attend church with Fulton's parents the next morning. They did not come home. It is not known where they might have encountered Prieto, although autopsies showed that they ate food not long before their deaths. Their bodies were found in a lot off Hunter Mill Road on Dec. 6, 1988. "He was a gorgeous, wonderful, talented young man," Fulton's father, Warren Fulton Jr., told a jury in 2008. "22 years of work and sacrifice and hopes and dreams, and suddenly it's over." After the slayings of Jefferson, Raver and Fulton in 1988, Prieto moved to Manassas, not far from where Sermeno was found dead in September 1989. In February 1990, Prieto returned to California, trial testimony showed. In May 1990, Stacey Siegrist, 19, and Tony Gianuzzi, 21, were abducted and shot to death in Rubidoux, Calif. The next month, Lula and Herbert Farley, 71 and 65, respectively, were abducted and shot to death in Ontario, Calif. Prieto was connected by DNA to the 1st double killings and by ballistics to the 2nd set, California authorities said. Finally, in September 1990, Prieto and 2 other men abducted 3 women from a rival gang's party and raped them, according to court testimony. Prieto shot 15-year-old Yvette Woodruff in the head, according to testimony, and the other women were stabbed but not killed. The survivors identified their attackers, the 2 accomplices were convicted, and Prieto was finally arrested, convicted and sentenced to death. His accomplices were convicted and sentenced to life in prison. (source: Washington Post) ************* Death penalty is the law in Virginia, and this killer is the reason why Alfredo Prieto has little more than a day to live. Unless the U.S. Supreme Court comes to his rescue, that is. On Thursday evening, the 49-year-old is scheduled to die by lethal injection at the Greensville Correctional Center. Prieto inched closer to the death chamber Monday when Gov. Terry McAuliffe said he would not spare the condemned man's life. "I have decided not to intervene in this execution," McAuliffe said in a statement. "Mr. Prieto was convicted in a fair and impartial trial and a jury sentenced him to death in accordance with Virginia law. Federal and state appellate courts have extensively reviewed his case and denied his requested relief. It is the [g]overnor's responsibility to ensure that the laws of the [c]ommonwealth are properly carried out unless circumstances merit a stay or commutation of the sentence.... I have found no such circumstances.... I will continue to pray for all of the individuals and families affected by these tragic and horrible crimes." Good for McAuliffe. First, for not waiting until the 11th hour to make his decision, which always seems a tad dramatic. Second, for not substituting his own beliefs - The Washington Post reported earlier this year that the governor opposes the death penalty - for the laws of the commonwealth. Third, for remembering those who matter most. The victims. With Virginia's 1st execution in more than 2 years, cue the chorus of death penalty opponents who will wail that poor Prieto should be shown mercy. After all, he grew up in El Salvador and came to America as a teenager, to begin his new life as a serial killer. The truly heart-tugging part of their argument is that they believe his IQ is too low for him to be executed. Oh, please. It's unclear how the intelligence of an uneducated man from a non-English speaking background is measured, but chances are this killer - who knew how to murder people and get away with it - may have figured out that if he could bamboozle the guys with beards and clipboards, he could also avoid execution. According to news stories, experts for the prosecution testified in court that Prieto was not intellectually disabled, while experts for the defense said he was. If Prieto dies this week, it will be for the heinous murders of 2 22-year-olds in Fairfax County in 1988. That may not be the extent of his killing spree. The Post reports that "authorities believe Prieto is responsible for 9 killings between 1988 and 1990, when he was arrested... for the rape and murder of 15-year-old Yvette Woodruff" in California. Prieto received his first death sentence for the Woodruff killing. In fact, it was years after California sentenced him to die that his DNA was entered into a national databank and he was linked with older slayings in Virginia. Prieto was brought to Virginia from California - where death row is a euphemism for life in prison - to stand trial for the deaths of Rachael A. Raver and Warren H. Fulton III. According to various news reports, Prieto refused to talk about the crime, so it was left to prosecutors to piece together what happened on Dec. 4, 1988. Raver and Fulton were last seen leaving a restaurant. Their bodies were found days later. Police believe Prieto somehow abducted the couple and forced them to drive to a secluded area not far from Dulles Airport. There, he shot Fulton. When Raver made a run for it, he shot her in the back. Prosecutors believe Pietro raped Raver as she lay wounded and dying. Eventually he made his way back to California, where he was apprehended after he killed the teenager. Are these the actions of a mentally deficient person? A jury, multiple juries, in fact, said they were not. Consider this for a moment: Raver and Fulton have been dead for 26 years. In the ensuing time, Prieto has been able to kill at least one more person, eat, sleep, communicate with his family and celebrate birthdays. The governor had a tough decision this week. He held the life of a man in his hands. McAuliffe did the right thing. If Virginians are uncomfortable with the death penalty, they should do what other states have done and abolish it. It's a discussion worth having. In the meantime, thanks to the abolition of parole, executions have become increasingly rare in Virginia - there are just 8 inmates on death row - and reserved for the most barbaric killers. People like Prieto. (source: Kerry Dougherty, Columinst, The Virginian-Pilot) SOUTH CAROLINA: Washington and Lee law professor to represent Charleston church shooting defendant ---- The accused shooter is the latest notorious defendant to be represented by David Bruck. A Washington and Lee University law professor is defending the man charged with federal hate crimes in the fatal shootings of nine people during a Bible study at a historic African-American church. David Bruck was appointed lead attorney for Dylann Roof because of his "extensive experience" in death penalty cases across the country, Judge Richard Gergel wrote in a July 23 order filed in U.S. District Court in Charleston, South Carolina. At W&L, Bruck directs the Virginia Capital Case Clearing House, a law school program that serves as a resource center for court-appointed defense lawyers in death penalty cases. Bruck has also been in the national spotlight as a member of the defense team for several high-profile defendants. Earlier this year, he represented Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who was convicted and sentenced to death for the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing. The case involving Roof is equally notorious, not just for the alleged crime but also for the impact it had on many communities - including Lexington and the W&L campus - that were thrust into a debate over the display of the Confederate battle flag, which has been linked to the defendant's motives. Bruck, who is representing Roof in federal court along with Charleston attorney Michael O'Connell, declined to comment Tuesday. In addition to the federal hate crime charges, Roof is facing murder charges in state court, where prosecutors have said they will seek the death sentence in a trial set for next July. No trial date has been set in federal court, and prosecutors there have not indicated whether they will seek the death penalty. A separate team of attorneys is representing Roof on the state charges. Roof, a 21-year-old white man, is accused in the June 17 slayings of 9 black parishioners at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston. Authorities say he was invited to participate in a Bible class study, where he interacted with his victims for nearly an hour before opening fire on them. An indictment filed in Charleston's federal court alleges that Roof selected his victims based on their race and sought them out at a historic African-American church "in order to make his attack more notorious." The indictment cites a manuscript that Roof posted online, espousing his racist beliefs and containing photographs of him holding a Confederate flag, in alleging that he intended to increase racial tensions across the country. What happened was a backlash against the Confederate flag, with calls for its removal from public buildings and other places. In Lexington, W&L officials decided in August not to lease the school's Lee Chapel to a Sons of Confederate Veterans Group for a Lee-Jackson Day celebration, citing ongoing tensions over the flag that began before the Charleston church shootings. A local controversy also erupted in mid-July when a man who flies a huge Confederate flag on his private land proclaimed in a newspaper advertisement that blacks and Democrats were banned from his property because "of all the trouble" they had been causing. Bruck joined W&L's law school in 2004. He has ties to South Carolina, having practiced law in Columbia for nearly 30 years. In 1995, he represented Susan Smith, who was convicted of drowning her 2 small children in a lake, where she drove them in her car before attempting to blame a fictitious carjacker for their deaths. In both the Smith and Tsarnaev cases, Bruck teamed up with Judy Clarke, another well-known death penalty lawyer who in the past has been a visiting professor at W&L. (source: The Roanoke Times) GEORGIA----execution//female Kelly Gissendaner: Georgia executes 1st woman for 70 years despite last-minute appeals ---- Letter on behalf of Pope Francis and video from three of her children pleading for clemency did not sway authorities in the state Georgia has executed Kelly Renee Gissendaner with a fatal injection for the slaying of her husband, despite a plea for clemency from their children. After a 5-hour delay, Georgia death row inmate Kelly Gissendaner was executed Wednesday morning for her role in the killing of her husband. She died at 12:21 a.m. ET, the Georgia Department of Corrections said. Last-minute appeals from her lawyers to the 11th US circuit court of appeals and the US supreme court as well as the Georgia board of pardons and paroles all failed. Gissendaner, 47, died by injection of pentobarbital at 12:21am EDT on Wednesday at Georgia Diagnostic and Classification prison in Jackson, a prison spokeswoman said. She sobbed as she said she loved her children and apologized to the family of her husband Douglas Gissendaner, who she was convicted of conspiring to murder, saying she hoped they could find some peace and happiness. She also addressed her lawyer, Susan Casey, who was among the witnesses. "I just want to say God bless you all and I love you, Susan. You let my kids know I went out singing Amazing Grace," Gissendaner said, according to Associated Press. The corrections department said she turned down an optional sedative ahead of the execution. She was the 1st woman executed in Georgia for 70 years and the 16th across the US since the supreme court reinstated the death penalty in 1976. The board of pardons and parole had received a letter on behalf of Pope Francis urging them not to allow Gissendaner's execution, the 1st since the pope's address to the US Congress last week in which he called on the United States to abolish the death penalty. Gissendaner's is 1 of 6 executions scheduled over the next 9 days across the US, including that of Richard Glossip in Oklahoma on Wednesday afternoon. Gissendaner was convicted of conspiring with her lover, Gregory Owen, who ambushed her husband, forced him to drive to a remote area and stabbed him repeatedly in February 1997. Owen and Gissendaner then met up and set fire to the dead man's car. Owen pleaded guilty and testified against Gissendaner, who did not take part in the stabbing. He is serving a life sentence and becomes eligible for parole in 2022. It was Gissendaner's 3rd scheduled execution date. Her 1st, on 25 February, was called off because of the threat of winter weather. A 2nd, on 2 March, was called off "out of an abundance of caution" when corrections officials found the drug to be used in her execution appeared "cloudy". The department of corrections then temporarily suspended executions until a drug analysis could be done. Corrections officials have said a pharmacological expert told them the most likely cause of the formation of solids in the compounded pentobarbital was shipping and storage at a temperature that was too cold, but they noted that storage at a low temperature does not always cause pentobarbital to precipitate. Gissendaner's 3 children, Dakota, Kayla and Brandon, had sought clemency for their mother and earlier this month released a video pleading for her life to be spared. They detailed their own journeys to forgiving her and said they would suffer terribly from having a 2nd parent taken from them. Douglas Gissendaner's family said in a statement Monday that he is the victim and that Kelly Gissendaner received an appropriate sentence. Various courts, including the US supreme court denied multiple last-ditch efforts to stop her execution on Tuesday night, and the parole board stood by its February decision to deny clemency. The board didn't give a reason for the denial, but said it had carefully considered her request for reconsideration. Gissendaner's lawyers submitted a statement from former Georgia supreme court chief justice Norman Fletcher to the parole board. Fletcher argued Gissendaner's death sentence was not proportionate to her role in the crime. He also noted that Georgia hadn't executed a person who didn't actually carry out a killing since the supreme court reinstated the death penalty in 1976. She was the 1st woman executed in Georgia in 70 years. Lena Baker, a black maid, was executed in 1945 after being convicted in a 1-day trial of killing her white employer. Georgia officials issued her a pardon in 2005 after 6 decades of lobbying and arguments by her family that she likely killed the man because he was holding her against her will. Gissendaner becomes the 2nd condemned inmate to be put to death this year in Georgia and the 58th overall since the state resumed capital punishment in 1983. Gissendaner becomes the 21st condemned inmate to be put to death this year in the USA and the 1415th overall since the nation resumed executions on January 17, 1977. (sources: CNN, The Guardian & Rick Halperin) OHIO: Bill allows but limits death-penalty evidence post trial An Ohio Senate committee has scheduled a possible vote on a bill limiting the ability of condemned killers to gather post-trial evidence in death penalty cases. The bill before the Senate Criminal Justice Committee Wednesday allows judges to deny requests for evidence gathering if it would annoy, embarrass or unduly burden the person from whom the evidence is sought. Republican Sen. Bill Seitz of Cincinnati says the bill is an improvement over existing law which leaves the decision to allow post-trial evidence gathering up to judges. Kari Underwood of the Ohio Public Defender's Office says such evidence limits are inappropriate in death penalty cases. The bill also lifts page limits on petitions for inmates' post-trial challenges or in their appeals if those challenges are denied. (source: Associated Press) ARKANSAS----impending executions 9 inmates on death row cite pain risk----New filing in lawsuit claims latest drug strategy a gamble 9 state prisoners -- 8 of whom are scheduled for execution in the coming months -- amended an ongoing lawsuit Monday, claiming that the state's recently developed lethal-injection protocol creates a "risk of severe pain." The inmates, through attorney Jeff Rosenzweig, filed the lawsuit in June in Pulaski County Circuit Court asking for a permanent injunction against the executions because the Arkansas Department of Correction will not reveal the source of the execution drugs. A footnote on Monday's amendment says a motion for an emergency injunction will be filed later this week. If the judge grants that motion, the eight execution dates -- set earlier this month by Gov. Asa Hutchinson -- will be on hold until the full court case is decided. Rosenzweig declined to comment on the court filing. The inmates claim in the case amendment that the Correction Department's protocol, which was developed in late August, entails "unreasonable risks of substantial and unnecessary pain and suffering; unbearable anxiety; and/or a lingering death." Specifically, Rosenzweig said the risk is high that the possible use of compounded drugs -- created in a pharmacy's lab -- could be "counterfeited, adulterated, contaminated, super-potent or sub-potent." Department of Correction spokesman Cathy Frye said last month that the drugs obtained by the prison system for the executions were not purchased from a compounding pharmacy. The new procedures were required by Arkansas Act 1096, which was passed in April and allows the state to use either a barbiturate or the drug midazolam, followed by 2 other drugs, to put inmates to death. Frye referred a request for comment on the case's development to Attorney General Leslie Rutledge, who acts as legal counsel for the Correction Department. "We cannot comment on pending litigation," Frye said. When contacted, Rutledge spokesman Judd Deere declined to comment. Act 1096 also shields the state from disclosing any information that may identify the source of execution drugs. The new act voided a 2013 settlement in a previous lawsuit by the same nine inmates in which the Correction Department agreed to reveal the source of any future execution drugs. The nine inmates filed a lawsuit in Pulaski County on June 25 against the Correction Department and its director, Wendy Kelley, demanding that the Correction Department make good on the previous settlement and reveal its source when purchasing execution drugs. His clients have the right to know whether the drugs obtained by the Correction Department were obtained from a reputable vendor, Rosenzweig said previously to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. In June, the Correction Department purchased vials of the execution drugs potassium chloride, vecuronium bromide and midazolam for a total of $24,226.40. Midazolam has been linked to botched executions in Oklahoma and in Ohio. In response to an Arkansas Democrat-Gazette Freedom of Information Act request, the Correction Department released redacted invoices as well as photographs of the drug vials that were purchased. The photographs were heavily redacted with no signs of the manufacturer's name. Nationwide, suppliers of the execution drugs -- which are commonly used for the treatment of seizures or for anesthesia and other health purposes -- are refusing to sell to prisons that use the drugs for executions because of the outcry from death-penalty opponents. The resulting shortage has led prison officials nationwide to seek alternative suppliers overseas or to turn to compounding pharmacies. The compounding pharmacies are subject to less federal scrutiny because they produce only a small amount of the drugs. The state had to turn over its supplies of the execution drug sodium thiopental in 2011 to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration when it was discovered that the drug was obtained from a supplier that operated out of a driving academy's offices in London, according to court documents. British authorities had banned exports of the drug in November 2010. Arkansas is among a growing number of states that have passed or are seeking legislation shielding the identity of the execution-drug providers. A 2014 Associated Press survey of the 32 death-penalty states found that the majority refuse to disclose their execution drug sources. Delaware, Nevada, Ohio and Virginia are exceptions. Rosenzweig wrote in Monday's filed amendment that the release of the supplier's name is necessary to "determine whether Arkansas's execution procedure will be cruel or unusual" and keeping the information secret "violates the state guarantee of due process." The 8 inmates are the only ones of the 34 on death row who have exhausted all their legal appeals. They are Bruce Ward, 58; Don Davis, 52; Terrick Nooner, 44; Stacey Johnson, 45; Jack Jones Jr., 51; Marcell Williams, 44; Jason McGehee, 39; and Kenneth D. Williams, 36. Inmate Ledell Lee is also a plaintiff in the case. Ward and Davis are are set to die by lethal injection on Oct. 21. Neither requested clemency by the Sept. 21 deadline. Johnson and Nooner are scheduled to die Nov. 3. In Johnson's Sept. 18 clemency application, Rosenzweig said that Johnson should not be executed because he may be innocent. Under the state's protocol, the Parole Board must first review the application and then make a recommendation to the governor to either approve or deny the request. The governor is not obligated to follow the board's decision. Nooner did not request clemency by Monday's deadline. Marcell Williams and Jones are set to be executed Dec. 14. They have until Nov. 3 to apply for executive clemency. McGehee and Kenneth Williams are scheduled to die Jan. 14. They have until Dec. 4 to request clemency. (source: Democrat Gazette) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 30 09:59:18 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 09:59:18 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OKLA., MO., COLO., USA Message-ID: Sept. 30 OKLAHOMA----impending execution Oklahoma death row prisoner Richard Glossip to be executed after final appeal fails A man on death row for 17 years is to be executed by lethal injection after his final appeal failed. Richard Glossip, 52, says he didn't murder motel boss Barry Van Treese in 1997. Sir Richard Branson and actress Susan Sarandon have called for him to be freed. Glossip will be killed in McAlester, Oklahoma. His lawyers won a 2-week stay on 16 September just hours before he was due to be executed. But at 5pm on Wednesday he will sit down to his final meal. Justin Sneed was 19, he confessed to police that on the morning of January 6, 1997, he beat Van Treese to death, claiming hos boss Glossip put him up to it. However, there is no physical evidence corroborating Sneed's accusation. The 52-year-old has been on death row since 1998. His advocates include death penalty opponent Sister Helen Prejean and actress Susan Sarandon who portrayed Prejean in film 1995 film Dead Man Walking. Businessman Richard Branson has also appealed for his release. Glossip's lawyers had tried to submit a statement from a prison inmate who said he heard his former colleague boast about implicating him in the murder of Barry Van Treese. They also argued there were issues with medical examiner testimony about when the victim died of his injuries. But the court ruled the new evidence simply delves back into arguments that were raised at Glossip's original appeals. (source: The Mirror) *********** Glossip In Last-Minute Appeal Over Execution ---- Sky News speaks to death row inmate Richard Glossip as he is served his last meal ahead of a scheduled execution later today. Attorneys for Oklahoma death row prisoner Richard Glossip have made a last-ditch appeal to the US Supreme Court to grant a stay of execution. He is due to die at 3pm local time (9.00pm BST) today. Glossip spoke to Sky News on the telephone from his cell in Oklahoma State Penitentiary just as he was being served his last meal. 2 weeks ago he went through the same ritual, and ordered the same food. Then, the following day, three hours before he was to be put to death, an appeal court halted the execution. Then, earlier this week, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that it wouldn't delay the process again. Judges split 3-2 in favour of carrying out the death sentence. 2 of the judges who objected said the evidence in the case was flawed and tenuous. Glossip was convicted of murdering his boss, motel owner Barry Van Treese, because the man who carried out the killing said Glossip paid him to do it. In return for his testimony, Justin Sneed escaped a death sentence and is serving life in prison. Sneed continues to blame Glossip, telling the Oklahoma news organisation The Frontier: "Mr Glossip coerced me, and pleaded with me for over 3 months and the amounts of money he was offering me kept changing. "He kept begging and pleading until the point he pushed me over an edge." Glossip's attorneys say he is lying and point out that in the interview he made a new claim which he had never raised before, to explain why there was no physical evidence linking Glossip to the crime. "I look back now and I notice that he put some gloves on and he made sure his fingerprints wasn't there." Glossip told Sky News: "He testified at my 2nd trial. He was asked that by the DA (District Attorney): 'Was Richard wearing gloves?' He said no. "'He said 'Does Richard own a pair of gloves?' He said no. And now he's on TV saying that I did. It continues to show the discrepancies in anything that Justin Sneed has to say." He said he believes his attorneys have a good chance of convincing the Supreme Court to intervene in his case. (source: Sky News) ********************* Is Oklahoma About to Execute an Innocent Man? Just after Pope Francis called for an end to the death penalty in his address to Congress, six death-row inmates are set to be put to death over the next two weeks. It's the biggest burst of executions in the U.S. in more than two years, and there are many legal and moral issues surrounding the cases. Early on Wednesday morning, Georgia executed Kelly Renee Gissendaner for conspiring to kill her husband, though he was stabbed to death by her lover and she went on to become a model prisoner. This afternoon Oklahoma is set to execute another inmate who wasn't even present when the murder in question was committed - and in this case, there are serious doubts about whether he had any involvement in the crime. Richard Glossip has been convicted twice for the 1997 murder of Barry Van Treese, his boss at the Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City. Fellow employee Justin Sneed admitted to killing Van Treese, but he claims Glossip pressured him into committing the murder because he was embezzling money from the business and on the verge of being fired. There is no physical evidence linking Glossip to the crime, and the bulk of the prosecution's case against him is based on the testimony of Sneed, who was given life without parole rather than a death sentence in exchange for his testimony. Glossip was convicted and sentenced to death in 1998, but in 2001 the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals overturned his conviction, saying he had ineffective representation and the evidence supporting Sneed's testimony was "extremely weak." Glossip was offered a plea deal before his retrial, but he rejected it, insisting that he was innocent. He was convicted and sentenced to death at his 2nd trial in 2004. Once again, his attorneys failed to show video of Sneed's confession to jurors, though that was one of the reasons he won his appeal. The Intercept reports that they would have seen Detective Bob Bemo coach Sneed into implicating Glossip: Had members of the jury watched the tape, they would have heard Bemo tell Sneed that before he decided whether or not to waive his rights and talk to the cops, he should consider the situation. "Before you make your mind up on anything," Bemo cautioned him, "I want you to hear some of the things that we've got to say to you." Sneed was read his rights, and then Bemo leaned in: "We know this involves more than just you, okay?" Sneed told Bemo that he didn't "really know what to say about" what happened to Van Treese. Well, Bemo said, "everybody is saying you're the one that did this and you did it by yourself and I don't believe that. You know Rich is under arrest, don't you?" No, Sneed said, he didn't know that. "So he's the one," Bemo replied. "He's putting it on you the worst." If Sneed didn't want to talk about the involvement of anyone else, Bemo said he would be happy to walk Sneed into the jail and book him for Van Treese's murder, "and you would be facing this thing on your own," Bemo said. "And I don't think it's just you." Sneed changed his story considerably over the years, adding more elaborate details about how Glossip badgered him into killing their boss, and instructed him to pick up a hacksaw and muriatic acid to dispose of the body. As Glossip continued to appeal his case - the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld his conviction in 2013 - Sneed's story has continued to evolve. A year ago his adult daughter, O'Ryan Justine Sneed, wrote a letter to the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board saying she believes her father lied about Glossip's involvement in the murder to avoid the death penalty. "For a couple of years now, my father has been talking to me about recanting his original testimony," she said. "I'm sure if he felt safe that he would not lose his plea agreement, he would give new and truthful testimony, much different from his testimony 17 years ago. He has asked me several times to look into what the legal ramifications would be to his own case if he recanted." The parole board rejected Glossip's clemency request and he was scheduled to be executed on September 16. His attorneys claimed they had new evidence, but Oklahoma governor Mary Fallin refused to delay the execution, saying they waited until the last minute to turn over the new materials. "After reviewing it with my legal team, we have determined the vast majority of the limited content they have presented is not new; furthermore, we find none of the material to be credible evidence of Richard Glossip's innocence," she said. Glossip's attorneys then released an affidavit in which Michael Scott, who was formerly incarcerated with Sneed, said he openly discussed lying about Glossip's involvement. "I specifically remember Justin on the top run with a couple of other inmates, fixing some food, and laughing with them about setting Richard Glossip up for a crime Richard didn't do," he said. "It was almost like Justin was bragging about what he had done to this other guy - Richard Glossip. Justin was happy and proud of himself for selling Richard Glossip out." Oklahoma County district attorney David Prater called the new information a "bullshit PR campaign," but just hours before Glossip was set to receive a lethal injection, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals said it wanted 2 weeks to review the evidence. On Monday, the appeals court ruled in a 3-2 vote that the new information "merely builds on" previous evidence presented by the defense. "After reviewing Glossip's successive application and motions, we find that the law favors the principle of finality of judgment," the court said. On Tuesday night, Glossip made one final plea to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the court to give him a stay of execution and review his case. The justices are already familiar with Glossip, as he was the lead plaintiff in the case that led the court to uphold Oklahoma's use of the lethal-injection drug Midazolam last summer, despite claims that it is not an adequate sedative and played a role in several botched executions. Nearly 250,000 people have signed a MoveOn.org petition asking Governor Fallin to grant Glossip a 60-day stay of execution to make his case, and the group staged a protest outside the Supreme Court on Tuesday night. Republican senator Tom Coburn, Barry Scheck, co-founder of the Innocence Project, and death-penalty opponent Sister Helen Prejean have also called for a halt to the execution. Prejean said she hopes the Supreme Court takes up the case as, "It may be the perfect case before the court that shows just how broken the death penalty is, and perhaps it can save other lives." (source: nymag.com) MISSOURI----impending execution Attorneys, advocates want Missouri execution scheduled for next week halted Missourians who oppose the death penalty are asking courts and Governor Jay Nixon to consider the testimony of a confessed murderer, that the man sentenced to death for hiring him is innocent, before that man is executed for that hiring next week. Kimber Edwards is scheduled to die by lethal injection October 6 at the state prison at Bonne Terre. He was convicted of hiring Orthell Wilson to kill his ex-wife, Kimberly Cantrell, 15 years ago at her University City home. Wilson told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch in April he lied to investigators about Edwards' involvement to secure a plea deal that would allow him to avoid the death penalty. Wilson???s claim now is that he had been secretly carrying on a relationship with Cantrell and killed her after an argument. "15-years later he has decided to finally tell the truth, and the truth is that he wasn't paid, that he was in a relationship with Miss Cantrell, that he knew her independent of any connection to our client, Kimber Edwards," said Weis. "Under no pressure from us, under no pressure from Mr. Edwards - in fact we can't offer him anything - he has decided to come forward and tell the truth." The Attorney General's Office says that's not true. In its response to the request for a new hearing with the Missouri Supreme Court, it calls the statements made this year by Wilson "incredible," and said they are his "4th version of events." It said Edwards' attorneys told Wilson they would help him challenge his life sentence if he said Edwards is innocent. "Wilson's 4th statement was clearly orchestrated by Edwards, not to save an innocent man, but instead made to help Edwards escape his death sentence. Wilson was also motivated to make this new statement after he received assurances that he may receive legal help in exchange for his assistance, and was not concerned that his recent statement was false because, as he told his family, he had already been convicted of the murder," the Attorney General's Office wrote in its response. Advocates argue say Edwards' and Wilson's confessions that led to their convictions were false and given after they were coerced. Police said Edwards admitted to paying $1,600 for the murder. Tricia Bushnell with the Midwest Innocence Project says Edwards has Asperger's syndrome and blames that for impairing his judgement, and says members of his family were questioned and fingerprinted by police, all adding to pressure on him to confess. "It's difficult for us, those of us who don't go through the system and aren't actually accused of doing something we didn't commit, to understand how someone could ever confess to something they didn't do, particularly something has heinous as murder," said Bushnell, but she says of 330 cases in which DNA exonerated someone convicted of murder, false confessions were taken in more than 1/4 of them. Edwards was originally sentenced to be executed in May but that date was suspended by the state Supreme Court. It did not give a reason for that action but his attorneys at the time said they were too busy with other cases to spend time on Edwards' case. (source: Missourinet.com) COLORADO: Let's talk about death If you want to get people riled up but you're sick of talking about abortion, the death penalty is always a good backup. We just can't seem to agree whether the state of Colorado should be allowed to kill people. The questions are numerous: Are the drug cocktails common in executions "cruel and unusual"? Do we tend to execute people of color for the same crimes that white people serve prison time? Why does someone like James Holmes get life in prison, while others get the death penalty for lesser crimes? Is the death penalty a deterrent? Does it provide healing for the families of victims? Is it fair? And how many innocent people are we killing? That last question is coming into full focus with Oklahoma prisoner Richard Glossip once again scheduled for execution, despite abundant evidence that he's not guilty of hiring another man to kill his boss. Colorado College is apparently ready to dive into the weeds on the subject. The school is hosting a three-day series on the death penalty. It's open to the public, and more details are below: The Colorado College History Department is hosting a 3-day series of presentations on "Addressing Capital Punishment" for the campus and community. Cornell University Professor of History Paul Friedland will speak on "Why States Kill: The History of Capital Punishment from the Medieval to the Modern" at 7 p.m. Wednesday (Sept. 30) in Colorado College's Worner Center, 902 N. Cascade Ave. Thursday evening, San Quentin Prison Chaplain George Williams, S.J. will speak on "The Cost of Killing: Dimensions of Capital Punishment," 7 p.m. in Colorado College's Slocum Commons, 130 E. Cache La Poudre St. Finally, Friedland and Williams will lead a dialogue on "Does Capital Punishment Make Sense: Historical and Ethical Perspectives" at noon Friday in the Cornerstone Arts Center, 825 N. Cascade Ave. The panel will be moderated by former Colorado College President Richard Celeste and followed by a luncheon and small group conversations in Worner Center. (source: Colorado Springs Independent) *********************** Man who killed 5 in Denver bar to be sentenced to life; jurors rejected death penalty A man convicted of stabbing 5 people to death during a Denver bar robbery that netted $170 will be formally sentenced to life in prison on Wednesday. A judge will issue a mandatory sentence of life without parole for Dexter Lewis, 25, who was convicted in August of 5 counts of murder for the October 2012 stabbings at Fero's Bar and Grill. Prosecutors said Lewis led a 4-man robbery crew at Fero's, where he killed the bar's owner and 4 customers. 2 men testified that Lewis stabbed his victims while they were held at gunpoint. Jurors couldn't agree on death for Lewis, whose attorneys carefully detailed an abusive childhood. The case raised doubts about whether capital punishment will ever be imposed again in Colorado as it came just after theater shooter James Holmes was given a life sentence for murdering 12 people and trying to kill 70 more at a crowded midnight movie. In both cases, prosecutors said a single juror blocked the death penalty. In Lewis' case, the juror found that the details of his troubled upbringing favored the mercy of a life sentence over execution. That took the death penalty off the table, because death sentences must be unanimous in Colorado. Relatives of Lewis' victims will have a chance to tell the judge about the crime's continuing impact on their lives before he issues his sentence. Lewis and his family will also have a chance to speak. Killed in the robbery were the bar's owner, Young Suk Fero, 53, and customers Daria M. Pohl, 21, Kellene Fallon, 44, Tereasa Beesley, 45, and Ross Richter, 29. Prosecutors have said that the victims' families had come to terms with the life sentence. Lewis' accomplices, brothers Joseph and Lynell Hill, pleaded guilty to murder and received lengthy sentences. The fourth man, Demarea Harris, was a confidential informant at the time for the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and reported the slayings to authorities. He was not charged in the case. (source: Associated Press) USA: Here's What We Learned By Looking At Female Death Row Inmates----Gender aside, there is an astonishing number of people on death row in the U.S. Kelly Renee Gissendaner, the only woman on death row in Georgia, was scheduled to die by lethal injection at 7 PM local time on Tuesday night, pending one last-ditch plea for clemency. Assuming a stay is not forthcoming, Gissendaner will be the 16th woman to be executed since 1976, the 1st executed in the U.S. in 2015, and the 1st woman executed in Georgia in 70 years. Gissendaner was accused in 1997 of planning the murder of her husband with Gregory Owen, her lover. Owen hit her husband on the back of the head and stabbed him in the neck 8 to 10 times, the Attorney General's Office reported. All of the women executed since 1976 were convicted of at least 1 murder, 8 of them of having murdered their boyfriends, husbands or significant others. Here's How Many Death Row Inmates Die Waiting To Die Women are rarely executed, however. Out of 1,414 executions since 1976, women made up just 1 %, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. What is most striking, however, when you visualize the proportion of women on death row, is not just the disparity, but the sheer number of people waiting to be killed by the state in prisons across America. As of April 1, 2015, there were 3,002 people on death row in the U.S., and only 54 of those were females, according to NAACP data. 35 people were executed in 2014, and so far in 2015, 20 have been executed. If the U.S. decided it wanted to execute 1 death row every single day, it would take until December 18, 2023 to complete that macabre task, which is probably why so many prisoners die in their cells, waiting to be killed. (source: vocativ.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 30 10:00:00 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 10:00:00 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 30 PAKISTAN----execution Death row convict hanged in Lahore A death row convict has been sent to the gallows at the Kot Lakhpat Jail Lahore on early Wednesday morning, Dunya News reported. Death row prisoner Mushtaq had killed a man named Abdullah in 2000. The body Mushtaq was later handed over to the relatives. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif lifted the moratorium on the death penalty on December 17, 2014, a day after Taliban gunmen attacked a school and killed 134 students and 19 adults. The killings put pressure the government to do more to tackle the insurgency. (source: Dunya News) AUSTRALIA: Julie Bishop: ending death penalty worldwide on Australia's UN agenda Australia would use a seat on the United Nation's chief human rights body to wage a tireless campaign to end the death penalty around the world, Foreign Affairs Minister Julie Bishop said during a speech to the UN's General Assembly. As she spoke on Tuesday evening in the US, the state of Georgia was preparing to execute a woman despite a direct appeal from the Pope, who left America after his visit earlier this week. Ms Bishop's speech was in effect a ringing endorsement of the UN. Aside from the decision to bid for a seat on the UN's Human Rights Council for the 2018-2020 term, Ms Bishop formally announced Australia's decision to run again for a seat on the Security Council in 2029. "Australia's recent experience as a Security Council member confirmed that the council's role is more essential than ever," she told the General Assembly. She said the UN carries out crucial work in an increasingly hostile world, and is often not recognised for its successes. (source: Sydney Morning Herald) THAILAND: Thai drug trafficker spared death penalty A 30-year-old Thai woman, who agreed to help a Nigerian man transport "illegal stuff" from New Delhi to Bangkok via Singapore for $2,300, was spared the death penalty despite being convicted of importing 2kg of methamphetamine. Instead, Samruamchit Wipha was given life imprisonment yesterday, after she was certified by the prosecution to have helped the authorities in a substantive way. Justice Choo Han Teck found that she "acted solely in the role of a courier". She was detained at Changi Airport on Dec 17, 2012, with about 3kg of a crystalline substance, concealed in a false compartment in her backpack which contained clothing and shoes. The substance was found to contain about 2kg of methamphetamine, commonly known as Ice. Under the law, anyone convicted of trafficking in more than 250g of Ice may face the death penalty. During her High Court trial, Samruamchit testified that she only knew she would be carrying illegal stuff for "Kelvin", a Nigerian man she had met 2 months earlier. He approached her at a cafe in Bangkok, after she quarrelled with her Italian boyfriend over the phone. Kelvin was very nice to her and they had sex, although she did not consider him her boyfriend. She testified that she had delivered a bag containing clothes for Kelvin within Thailand. This led her to believe that the "illegal stuff" she was tasked to deliver were the clothes and shoes in the backpack. But Justice Choo rejected her defence that she was unaware the backpack contained drugs, given that she had made various references to drugs in her statements to the Central Narcotics Bureau. Samruamchit claimed that the Thai interpreter made a mistake in translation, but the judge noted that the Thai words for "drugs" and "illegal stuff" do not sound alike at all. Justice Choo was also not satisfied that she really believed she would be paid $2,300 just to deliver a pile of inexpensive clothes and shoes, none of which were branded items. "The evidence shows that she had agreed to carry the drugs from New Delhi to Bangkok via Singapore, and that she was to be paid for that service," he said. New laws that took effect in 2013 gave judges the discretion to sentence drug couriers to life imprisonment instead of death, if they substantively assisted the authorities. (source: Straits Times) INDIA: 7/11 Mumbai train blasts: 5 convicts get death, life for 7 others----In the 7/11 Mumbai train blasts, 7 RDX bombs had exploded in the 1st class coaches in many suburban trains, killing 188 people and injuring 829. 9 years after a series of bomb blasts in suburban trains rattled Mumbai killing 188 people, a special MCOCA court awarded the death sentence to five convicts Kamal Ansari, Faisal Atur Rahman Shaikh, Ehtesham Siddiqui, Naveed Khan and Asif Khan. All others have been awarded life sentences under various sections of UAPA, MCOCA Acts and IPC. Of the 12 convicts, the prosecution had demanded capital punishment for Kamal Ahmed Mohammad Vakil Ansari, Dr Tanvir Ahmed Mohammed Ibrahim Ansari, Mohammad Faisal Ataur Rahman Shaikh, Ehtesham Kutubuddin Siddiqui, Shaikh Mohammad Ali Alam Shaikh, Mohammad Sajid Mugrub Ansari, Naveed Hussain Khan and Asif Khan. For the rest of them, the prosecution sought life imprisonment. They are Mohammad Majid Mohammad Shafi, Muzammil Ataur Rehman Shaikh, Sohail Mehmood Shaikh and Zameer Ahmed Latiur Rehman Shaikh. The defense and the prosecution in the case, on the point of quantum of punishment, argued for almost a week in a special court in Mumbai. From showing reformation to the dozen convicts being "merchants of death", the 2 sides contradicted each other at every juncture of legal arguments, leaving no stone unturned. Special Judge Yatin D Shinde had concluded hearing arguments on the quantum of sentence when prosecution demanded death penalty for 8 of the 12 accused while it sought life imprisonment for the remaining 4. On September 23, the Special MCOCA court had reserved its order on sentencing in the case for today, September 30. Earlier, on September 11, it had convicted 12 of the 13 accused, all allegedly having links with banned SIMI, while acquitting 1. The accused were found guilty of charges under IPC, Explosives Act, Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act and Indian Railway Act and those under MCOCA. The court also found all the 12 accused guilty under Section 3 (1) (i) of MCOCA, which could also attract capital punishment. Those convicted are Kamal Ahamed Ansari (37), Tanvir Ahmed Ansari (37), Mohd Faisal Shaikh (36), Ehtesham Siddiqui (30), Mohammad Majid Shafi (32), Shaikh Alam Shaikh (41), Mohd Sajid Ansari (34),Muzzammil Shaikh (27), Soheil Mehmood Shaikh (43), Zamir Ahmad Shaikh (36), Naveed Hussain Khan (30) and Asif Khan (38). After 12 accused were found guilty, Judge Shinde, later, allowed the defence lawyers to examine witnesses to bring out the mitigating circumstances in the case. Defence lawyers subsequently examined nine witnesses to show the court that the accused have undergone reformation and and thus may not be given capital punishment. The list of witnesses included the relatives of accused, doctors, teachers etc while one of the convicts examined another accused in Mumbai 2012 serial blasts. After the examination of witnesses, the defence advocates pleaded leniency saying that the 12 convicts were merely the pawns of mastermind Azam Cheema, member of Pakistan based Lashkar-e-toaiba. They also pointed out that the convicts faced several hardships in jail and that was also one of the mitigating circumstances. On the other hand, special public prosecutor Raja Thakare called the convicts "merchants of death" and pressed for capital punishment to 8 of the 12 convicts. Thakare also told the court that (social) thinkers feel that why money of honest taxpayers should be spent and government burdened for the upkeep of these convicts. He also argued that the court may, if it feels, take a lenient view of 4 convicts and grant them life term. During the investigations, 13 accused, all of them Indians, were arrested and brought to trial. The charge sheet filed by Anti Terrorism Squad (ATS) in November 2006 had named 30 accused, out of which 17 of them are absconding. The absconding which comprise 13 Pakistan nationals, include Azam Chima, an alleged Lashker-e-Taiba member. The ATS charge sheet had said that Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) were made in a room in Govandi in suburban Mumbai and some Pakistani nationals were also present during the bomb-making. 7 RDX bombs had exploded in the 1st class coaches in many suburban trains on July 11, 2006, killing 188 people and injuring 829. In the trial that ran for 8 long years, the prosecution examined 192 witnesses, including eight Indian Police Service (IPS) and 5 Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officers as well as 18 doctors. The defence lawyers examined 51 witnesses and 1 person was called as a court witness. The blast occurred within a span of 10 minutes between Khar Road-Santacruz, Bandra-Khar Road, Jogeshwari-Mahim Junction, Mira Road- Bhayander, Matunga- Mahim Junction and Borivali. The MCOCA judge had concluded the trial on August 19 last year. The examination of witnesses resumed after two years since the Supreme Court had stayed the trial in 2008. Before the stay, the prosecution had already examined a police officer. The Supreme Court vacated the stay on April 23, 2010. Of the 13 accused arrested by ATS between July 20, 2006 and October 3, 2006, 11 had given statements admitting to their involvement in the blasts but later retracted. The case took a twist when the defence lawyer sought to call Indian Mujahideen co-founder Sadiq Sheikh as defence witness after he told the police in 2008 that IM members were responsible for all the blasts that happened since 2005 including the train blasts. The court had allowed to examine Sadiq as a defence witness who later claimed that he gave his confession under duress. (source: Indian Express) MEXICO: Politician Says Homeless People Should Be Put Down By Lethal Injection A Mexican councillor has provoked outrage after that homeless people should be put down like animals to keep the number of them on the streets down. Olga Gutierrez Machorro believes that beggars should be culled with lethal injection, believing it to be in their best interests. She said: "Yes they're a little crazy, but they're harmless. "Which is why I think to myself wouldn't it be kinder to just give them a lethal injection?" Unbelievably, Machorro, who is a member of the local government in Tecamachalco, Mexico, is also the councillor responsible for the Vulnerable Groups Commission - who try to find ways to help the homeless and disadvantaged. Her outrageous remarks, made in an interview with the local newspaper Cambio, came when she alleged the Tecamachalco government, led by Ines Lopez, lacked the necessary resources to deal with beggars who are increasing in number on the streets. She alleged that killing beggars was already going on unofficially, and added that the local psychiatric hospital, El Batan, often just deposited patients deemed "un-aggressive" in the middle of the motorways at night, where they are killed by cars but also cause accidents that put others at risk. Machorro has previously offered her own home as sanctuary for those on the streets, but claimed this was not a long term solution. The councillor's comments were blasted by locals and she has since apologised. She has now promised a new action plan which is to be put forward to the government in a bid to solve the problem. (source: tumblr.com) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 30 14:04:23 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 14:04:23 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., VA., OKLA. Message-ID: Sept. 30 PENNSYLVANIA: 7 convicts facing death penalty in Lehigh Valley cases George Hitcho Jr. appealed the Northampton County jury's verdict that he be put to death for shooting Patrolman Robert A. Lasso in the back of the head while Lasso was being attacked by Hitcho's dogs. Lasso was preparing to use a stun gun on the animals when Hitcho blasted him with a 12-gauge shotgun. In Georgia, officials executed a woman for the 1st time in 70 years. Kelly Renee Gissendaner was pronounced dead at 12:21 a.m. Wednesday. Gissendaner had been sentenced to death for conspiring with a lover to killer her husband in 1997. Hitcho and 6 other people from the Lehigh and Northampton counties face death sentences in Pennsylvania. Junius Bruno 45, was sentenced to death in March 2007 in the Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas. Bruno killed 2 men during a botched robbery inside an Allentown apartment in 2003. George Ivan Lopez 56, and Edwin R. Romero 51, were sentenced to death in April 1996 in the Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas. The pair conspired with 2 other men to rob an Allentown landlord when he came to collect rent. They hit David Bolansky over the head, hogtied him, strangled him to death with a towel, wrapped his body in bedding and dumped him in a wooded area. Harvey M. Robinson 40, was sentenced to death in November 1994 in the Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas. Robinson is believed to be Allentown's 1st serial killer. He raped and murdered 3 women. His 4th victim escaped before being killed. When he returned to her home to kill her, police were waiting and gunshots were exchanged. He was later arrested at an area hospital. Raymond Solano, 36, was sentenced to death in May 2003 in the Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas. Solano shot another man 6 times on an Allentown basketball court in 2001 and kept firing as he and dozens of players and onlookers fled. Michael Ballard, 42, was sentenced to death in May 2011 in the Northampton County Court of Common Pleas. Ballard stabbed his ex-girlfriend, her father, grandfather and neighbor to death in 2010. There are 11 death row inmates from Berks County, 3 from Monroe, 3 from Schuylkill, 6 from Bucks, 7 from Montgomery and none from Carbon. (source: Morning Call) VIRGINIA: Virginia inmate challenges 'secret' lethal injection drugs in attempt to halt execution Attorneys for a convicted serial killer facing the death penalty in Virginia moved Wednesday to halt the 49-year-old's execution by challenging the state's use of lethal injection drugs that it obtained from Texas. The state plans to execute Alfredo Prieto on Thursday after Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe rejected an attempt earlier this week to delay his death sentence. The El Salvador native was on death row in California for raping and murdering a 15-year-old girl when DNA evidence linked him to the 1988 slaying of a young couple in Virginia. Authorities say he has been linked to several other murders in both states but he was never charged because he had already been sentenced to death. Prieto's attorneys have asked the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia to stay the execution until officials disclose more information about the pentobarbital it intends to use - including the name of the supplier, tests confirming its sterility and potency and documents showing that the drugs were properly handled, transported and stored. Texas allows prison officials to shield where they get execution drugs and Prieto's attorneys say Virginia officials have not provided that information. The Associated Press filed a public records request for the names of the manufacturers and the suppliers of the drugs, but the documents show only that the drugs were provided by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Texas prisons spokesman Jason Clark told AP last week that the three vials of pentobarbital given to Virginia were legally purchased from a compounding pharmacy, which he declined to name. Virginia will substitute the pentobarbital for midazolam that it intended to use because its supply of that sedative expires Wednesday. Prieto's attorneys, Rob Lee and Elizabeth Peiffer, said the lack of information about the drugs puts the state at risk of carrying out a cruel and painful execution. It is unknown whether Virginia or Texas "know any pertinent information about the compounding pharmacy, including its ability to make a sterile injectable drug, its track record with regard to faulty drugs and adverse incidents, or even the source of the raw ingredients it uses," they said in a statement. If Virginia does possess this information, "it is keeping it secret. This lack of transparency prevents the courts from assessing the constitutionality of VDOC's execution procedure." A spokeswoman for the Virginia Department of Corrections didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. Senior Assistant Attorney General Richard Vorhis said in a letter to Peiffer on Tuesday that the drugs were legally acquired, tested and transported in an appropriate manner. He noted that Texas has successfully used the same compound in 24 executions over the past 2 years with no problems. Pentobarbital is the 1st of 3 drugs that the state intends to use Thursday. Mylan, the manufacturer of the rocuronium bromide - another drug that will be used - said the company sent several letters to Virginia officials when it learned about the drug's possible use and then demanded that the state return the product when it received no response. Spokeswoman Nina Devlin said in a statement that the company is contractually restricting its distributors from distributing Mylan products, including rocuronium bromide, for use in lethal injection or for any other use outside of the approved labeling or applicable standards of care. Prieto's attorneys in Virginia and California have also both asked the U.S. Supreme Court to stay his execution so that they can prove that he's intellectually disabled and therefore ineligible for the death penalty. A federal appeals court in Virginia upheld his death sentence in June, saying that he failed to prove that no reasonable juror would find him eligible for execution and that "absent some new 'smoking gun,'" evidence of his ability to handle everyday tasks was "at best inconclusive." (source: Associated Press) OKLAHOMA----impending execution Oklahoma Death Row Inmate's Lawyer Speaks Out Hours Before His Execution This afternoon, Oklahoma is slated to execute death row inmate Richard Glossip after a protracted legal battle. Glossip, whose case has received widespread media attention, was spared just hours before the state's scheduled execution on September 16 after his lawyers claimed they had new evidence proving his innocence. On Monday, the Oklahoma Court of Appeals narrowly declined to halt Glossip's execution. In a 3-2 decision, the court rejected Glossip's newest request for an new hearing and an emergency stay of execution, ruling that the new evidence presented by Glossip's attorneys "merely expands" on theories that were raised in his earlier appeals. The court was sharply divided. In dissenting opinions, the two judges who voted in stay of the execution wrote that Glossip's original trial was "deeply flawed" and argued that "the State has no interest in executing an actually innocent man." Glossip was convicted of ordering the grisly 1997 murder of Barry Van Treese, the owner of a motel where Glossip worked. Prosecutors argued that Glossip commissioned Justin Sneed, who also worked at the motel, to kill Van Treese because Glossip was embezzling money from the motel and was concerned Van Treese would find out. Sneed confessed to beating Van Treese to death with a baseball bat and was sentenced to life in prison. Glossip's attorneys said that Sneed implicated Glossip in exchange for a deal to receive life in prison without parole instead of the death penalty. To date, there is no physical evidence linking Glossip to the crime. Glossip's attorneys presented 3 affidavits as new evidence after the stay was granted on September 16. One was from Richard Barrett, Sneed's former drug dealer, who claimed that Sneed was a methamphetamine addict who stole to sustain his habit and that Glossip was a "good hearted guy" who did not appear to "know anything about Justin Sneed stealing from motel rooms or cars in the motel parking lots or the businesses nearby." A 2nd affidavit was from Michael Scott, an inmate at the facility where Justin Sneed was inncarcerated in 2006. Scott testified that he overheard Sneed bragging about framing Glossip. "Among the inmates, it was common knowledge that Justin Sneed lied and sold Richard Glossip up the river," Scott said. The 3rd affidavit came from Joseph Tapley, who shared a cell with Sneed in 1997 at the Oklahoma County Jail. Tapley said that Sneed told him about the crime but did not mention Glossip. Glossip's execution is Oklahoma's 1st since the U.S. Supreme Court in June upheld the state's controversial lethal injection drug formula. Glossip, the lead plaintiff in the case, challenged the use of the sedative drug midazolam in executions, arguing that it risked causing inmates excruciating pain. ThinkProgress spoke with one of Glossip's attorneys, Don Knight, shortly before Glossip's scheduled execution. Knight talked about Glossip's reaction to Monday's ruling, next steps for the case, and the significance of the case for proponents and detractors of the death penalty. THINKPROGRESS: What was your reaction when you found out that Oklahoma Court of Appeals rejected Glossip's request for a stay? Were you anticipating that result? KNIGHT: Well ... I don't ever want to pre-judge what any judge or jury does. So, I'm always prepared for anything. Honestly we feel like we have given them enough information to show that again, if those witnesses are to be believed, we've got a pretty good chance to show that Richard Glossip is innocent. I think that there is no way that a jury with all of the information that we now have finds him guilty. So I think that we've given them enough information. I was shocked and I was sad. No, I can't say I was shocked. Disappointed and sad that the court ruled the way that it did. What are the next steps? We just submitted a document to [Governor Mary Fallin] asking her to grant us a 60 day stay. Another one. We're filing in the United States Supreme Court this afternoon. We also filed a request with the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals for a rehearing. We will continue to do everything we possibly can. Whatever those steps may be, will be determined after each of these other steps have been taken and completed. I can't tell you what's going to happen in the future. And how is Richard Glossip taking the news after the announcement yesterday? It's tough. He's struggling greatly, of course. Trying to keep positive somehow in the face of what looks like a very bad situation that's coming. So, he's trying real hard to stay positive. This case has gotten so much attention. Is this level of attention unprecedented compared to other cases you have worked on? Has this case received more attention than others? I think this case has received a lot more attention than almost any other case. I think it has resulted in a lot of the information that we have being able to come forward, because people hear about it on the press and then they have information and then they come forward. I wish everybody, I wish every single defendant who is at Richard Glossip's stage had this kind of opportunity for this much attention to be drawn to their case. And I'm sad that they don't. Do you think generally the response is indicative of shifting attitudes about the death penalty? I hope so. I honestly believe that ... I would be hard-pressed to believe that any less than 90 % of people don't want to kill an innocent man. I'm sure that there are people out there who take some kind of perverse joy in doing so, but we only asked for an opportunity to show that he was innocent. That's all we asked for. Because I don't believe anybody wants to kill an innocent man. So I don't know about the attitudes about the death penalty, but I don't think anybody wants to kill an innocent man. Do you think that this case [is a not a good case] for proponents of the death penalty? I think it's a very bad case for them. I think that this is a case that is going to help end the death penalty because we know before we killed him that he's innocent. A lot of cases you find out afterward, the DNA, oops, gee we made a mistake on that one. Or like Cameron Todd Willingham down in Texas when the forensic evidence came out afterward and changed the nature of the case, but what do we know now beforehand? We know right now today that there is probably a pretty darn good chance that this guy's innocent if he went to trial tomorrow. And yet, we're going to kill him. And that's going to do a lot of damage I think to the death penalty as a whole. Is there anything else you would like to add? Anything else you would like people to know? Write, email. Do anything you possibly can to get peoples attention. Make this a big deal. Don't let this happen in the shadows. Just don't let it happen in the shadows. That's all. (source: thinkprogress.org) ********** "The Jury Never Heard It": Richard Glossip to Be Executed in Oklahoma Today Despite New Evidence Death row prisoner Richard Glossip is slated to be executed this afternoon. An Oklahoma court recently rejected a request for a new hearing in the case. In 1997, Glossip was working as a manager at the Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City when his boss, Barry Van Treese, was murdered. A maintenance worker, Justin Sneed, admitted he beat Van Treese to death with a baseball bat, but claimed Glossip offered him money and job opportunities for the killing. The case rested almost solely on Sneed's claims. No physical evidence ever tied Glossip to the crime. In recent months, 2 men who served time in jail with Sneed have come forward saying Sneed framed Glossip to avoid the death penalty himself. On Monday, the court ruled this evidence "merely builds upon evidence previously presented to the court," and rejected a stay of execution. More than 240,000 people have signed a petition to spare Glossip's life. We're joined on the phone by 2 guests: Don Knight, 1 of the pro bono attorneys representing death row inmate Richard Glossip, and Sister Helen Prejean, one of the world's most well-known anti-death-penalty activists. As a Catholic nun, she began her prison ministry over 30 years ago. She is the author of the best-selling book, "Dead Man Walking: An Eyewitness Account of the Death Penalty." JUAN GONZALEZ: Death row prisoner Richard Glossip is slated to be executed this afternoon. An Oklahoma court recently rejected a request for a new hearing in the case. In 1997, Glossip was working as a manager at the Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City when his boss, Barry Van Treese, was murdered. A maintenance worker, Justin Sneed, admitted he beat Van Treese to death with a baseball bat, but claimed Glossip offered him money and job opportunities for the killing. The case rested almost solely on Sneed's claims. No physical evidence ever tied Glossip to the crime. In recent months, 2 men who served time in jail with Sneed have come forward saying Sneed framed Glossip to avoid the death penalty himself. On Monday, the court ruled this evidence, quote, "merely builds upon evidence previously presented to the court," and it rejected a stay of execution. More than 240,000 people have signed a petition to spare Glossip's life. AMY GOODMAN: For more, we're joined on the telephone by 2 guests: Don Knight, one of the pro bono attorneys representing death row prisoner Richard Glossip, and Sister Helen Prejean, one of the world's most well-known anti-death-penalty activists. As a Catholic nun, she began her prison ministry over 30 years ago. She's the author of the best-selling book, Dead Man Walking: An Eyewitness Account of the Death Penalty. Don Knight, let's start with you. You're both in Oklahoma about to head over to the prison, where Richard Glossip is right now scheduled to die 3:00 p.m. Oklahoma time. Can you tell us what the latest is, what you have filed to try to prevent his execution and why you are contending he's an innocent man? DON KNIGHT: Well, thank you, Amy and Juan, for having us on your program this morning. This is obviously a very, very important issue for everyone today. We have filed 2 matters that are pending right now. One is with the governor here, Mary Fallin. We have once again asked her for a 60-day stay of execution, so that we can have an opportunity to get back in front of the clemency board and ask once again for clemency for Richard Glossip, with our new evidence as the basis for the clemency claim. The second issue is pending in front of the United States Supreme Court this morning on a writ asking the court to grant a stay and give us an opportunity for a hearing. The basis for our claim in front of the Supreme Court is, first off, that Richard Glossip is innocent. There just doesn't seem to be any doubt, and all of the doubt that has ever been in this case seems to be disappearing very quickly, because we have really uncovered evidence that Justin Sneed is just simply categorically unreliable. He remains so today. In a recent interview that he gave, he lied several times in the interview, made up new facts just simply to fit whatever narrative he had going on that particular day. This was an interview with a woman reporter from a magazine called The Frontier. But his testimony has been pretty unreliable ever since the first time he ever opened his mouth with the police. He told 4 different stories just in 1 interview way back in 1997. So our basis is the fact that the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution requires reliability and fairness in capital cases. And in this particular case, there is simply no reliability. And if he is to be executed today, there is simply no fairness in the Eighth Amendment. JUAN GONZALEZ: And, Don Knight, what are the key - the key aspects of the new evidence that you are claiming needs to be reviewed? DON KNIGHT: Well, we have uncovered information, and this is new evidence from three individuals. The first one, just sort of in time, is the man who was selling Justin Sneed drugs. Justin Sneed was portrayed as being somebody who was simply a drifter, sort of a loner, but he didn't have a real drug problem, he just occasionally used drugs, kind of a lazy guy hanging around the motel, and he was somehow subject to the whims of Mr. Glossip, who had some control over him. The drug dealer will testify, actually, that Justin Sneed was your basic meth head. He was constantly using the drug, using it intravenously, stealing from cars, stealing from motel rooms. And that's exactly what happened here. He went into the motel room and beat Barry Van Treese to death in an attempt to get his car key so that he could take money from the car. He did not need to be, nor was he directed to do so by Richard Glossip. The 2nd new evidence, new witness that we found, was a man who spent time with Justin Sneed shortly after Justin Sneed was arrested in 1997. He was his cellmate in the county jail. And that individual will testify that Mr. Sneed told him all about the crime on many occasions and never once mentioned that it was a murder for hire, never once mentioned Richard Glossip's name. He just basically said he did for the money, which is of course what we know that he now did. The 3rd witness will testify that after the second trial, while he was in the prison with Mr. Sneed, he overheard Mr. Sneed telling a very close friend of Mr. Sneed, in fact, laughing about the fact that he had set Richard Glossip up so that Sneed could get a life sentence and Glossip was going to die. AMY GOODMAN: I'd like to play a short clip from the interrogation video of the key witness against Richard Glossip, Justin Sneed. The jury was not shown the video. The video was taken directly after his arrest for the murder of Barry Van Treese. Sneed talks about the amount of money he received and how it was divided. Listen carefully, as the audio quality isn't very good. JUSTIN SNEED: And then we went and got the money out of the car, and went and took it back to my room, so I guess like his girlfriend wouldn't know nothing or nothing like that. And we split the money. INTERROGATOR: How much did - money did you get? JUSTIN SNEED: Uh, like about $1,900. I mean, he told me that the guy was sitting on like $7,000, but it only come out to being a little less than 5, I think. AMY GOODMAN: That was Justin Sneed, 19 years old at the time, being interrogated for the murder of Barry Van Treese. Now, last year, Justin Sneed's daughter, O'Ryan Justine Sneed, wrote a letter to the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board seeking clemency for Glossip and asserting his innocence. She also said her father had spoken to her of recanting his testimony. She wrote, "I strongly believe [Glossip] is an innocent man sitting on death row. ... For a couple of years now, my father has been talking to me about recanting his original testimony. But has been afraid to act upon it, in fear of being charged with the Death Penalty ... His fear of recanting, but guilt about not doing so, makes it obvious that information he is sitting on would exonerate Mr. Glossip." So, this whole issue of this teenager who was charged, at the time being told by the police detectives that he would not be put to death if he implicated Glossip, is that right? DON KNIGHT: That's basically exactly what happened here, Amy. You know, they didn't come right out and use those terms, but everything that they said basically pointed to him making sure that he implicated Glossip. The name Richard Glossip was brought up by the police, driven home by the police. And after Mr. Sneed gave a couple of versions that included Mr. Glossip and the police liked the one, the final one that he gave, they told him that he had basically helped himself out a great deal. We know from the first witness that we have found, after this matter took place, the one when he was in county jail, that witness told us that Justin Sneed was terrified of the death penalty, and he would do anything to get out of the death penalty. And it appears that that's exactly what he's done. JUAN GONZALEZ: And have you been able to talk to Glossip in the last - in the last day or 2? Give us a sense of his state of mind right now. DON KNIGHT: I know that Sister Helen is on the line with us, and I think she's spoken to him more recently than I have, and I think I'll turn it over to her, if that's OK with you. JUAN GONZALEZ: That's fine. Sister Helen Prejean? SISTER HELEN PREJEAN: Yes, I've spoken to Richard twice yesterday. And Richard is in this place. See, he's come close to death 3 times, and each time he came through unscathed. And his big question to me always is, "Sister Helen, what do you think is going to happen?" And up to now, to this point, I just said, "You are not going to die, Richard. And look at all the forces being assembled for you, all the people speaking for you, all the support." But recently when we talked, I knew that I had to say to him, "Richard, you're like in the whitewater rapids right now in your boat, and the waterfall is right there. You can hear it. And I'm praying for you, and you've got to position yourself to either go over the waterfall, which means the state is actually going to kill you for this, or to live." And as he made in his own statement, which was read on the Dr. Phil show by Susan Sarandon, "I don't want to be a martyr, and I don't want to die, but if in fact this attention to my case and all that could go wrong in this and that you could actually put an innocent man to death, if it could bring attention in this country to all the people going through this and it could help end the death penalty for everyone, then my life will not be in vain." These are not just words he says off the top of his head. It's really within his being. And I think Richard is poised, at this point, to live or die. I will hardly be able to believe it if he dies. The system in our criminal justice system, and particularly the administration of the death penalty, is so corrupt, it is so messed up. And just what Don Knight was just saying about Justin Sneed being terrified of death, that's a tactic prosecutors use all the time to get people to confess or to buy their version of the story. And the reason that Richard Glossip is even facing death today at 3:00 is because the prosecutor, Bob Macy, got 54 death penalties. Every time he did, he cut a notch on his belt. And Richard had miserable defense. He almost had no defense. And there was no way investigation would be done. These witnesses that Don Knight and his stalwart team have cobbled together now, it was not done. The jury never heard it. So the jury only bought the version of what had happened from the prosecutor. And that's the soil in which this tree produces such terrible fruit of people actually going to their death on the word, almost completely, of another man who has been shown to be a serious meth addict and who stole all the time. You don't need to introduce Richard Glossip to be the mastermind. Justin Sneed was going in - sometimes, the drug dealer said, he would bring him coins. He stole from vending machines. Sometimes he brought him food stamps, a stereo from a car, because he was hooked on drugs. Why introduce Richard into the scenario at all, that he had to be the mastermind? And why? Because the 1 aggravating circumstance the prosecutor used to get the death penalty was murder for hire. That qualifies for the death penalty. And Richard Glossip is staring down death at 3:00 today because of that. That's how broken this thing is. JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, Sister Helen, you talk about the injustice of the death penalty for so many others. Well, this last week, Pope Francis, when he was speaking to Congress, called for the abolition of the death penalty. This is what he said. POPE FRANCIS: The Golden Rule also reminds us of our responsibility to protect and defend human life at every stage of its development. This conviction has led me, from the beginning of my ministry, to advocate at different levels the global abolition of the death penalty. And I am convinced that this way is the best, since every life is sacred, every human person is endowed with an inalienable dignity, and society can only benefit from the rehabilitation of those convicted of crimes. Recently, my brother bishops here in the United States renewed their call for the abolition of death penalty. Not only - not only do I support them, but I also offer encouragement to all those who are convinced that a just and necessary punishment must never exclude the dimension of hope and the goal of rehabilitation. JUAN GONZALEZ: That was Pope Francis speaking to Congress last week. Sister Helen Prejean, your sense of the impact of the pope's words and whether this is going to have some kind of effect in terms of achieving the abolition of the death penalty here in the United States? SISTER HELEN PREJEAN: Well, a lot of people heard those words - and words that speak truth to us and call us to the more noble parts of ourselves, that protection of life, not just of innocent life - and that was a big surprise, because it was sustained applause when the pope said, you know, "protect life at every stage." And I think everybody thought they knew what was coming next, and it would have to do with innocent life. But he held up the guilty. He held up people who have done terrible crimes, that they have dignity, and that - so the global abolition of the death penalty. And so, the words are out there, and the words reach some hearts. Some hearts seal off the words and refuse to let them come in. But I knew that Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy was sitting there. He's the 5th vote on the Supreme Court we need, which could abolish the death penalty. And the Richard Glossip case could be the case that just shows exactly how broken this thing is. When you let the states, like Oklahoma, be the administers of the death penalty, all the politics, all the culture comes in, so you get a Bob Macy, and you get people running for political office - off of the deaths of people. And so, I can only hope the pope's words, spoken in such truth to us, will have an effect on hearts. AMY GOODMAN: Sister Helen Prejean, can you say what's going to happen today? You have walked many men to death row. What will happen when you get in your car right now, with Don Knight, and head over to the prison? What is the schedule of the day? SISTER HELEN PREJEAN: We get to the prison around 11:00 or a little bit before 11:00, because Don and another one of the lawyers are going to go be visiting with Richard from 11:00 to 1:00. I, with the other witnesses, will be put into a van and brought back to wait in a room, because we are the ones who are going to be witnesses for Richard. And they're going to have a coffee pot going. They're going to be polite to us. And they're going to say, "Do you need anything? Here is everything you need," as the Van Treeses are going to be brought to a room to wait. This is the moment of justice they???ve been promised. AMY GOODMAN: The murder victim's family. SISTER HELEN PREJEAN: The murder victim's family, right. And just the last time when Richard got a stay and they brought us back to the van, I looked across the way, and there was the Van Treese family being put into a van to be taken out of the prison. Look what happens to the victims' families. They wait for this moment of justice. And then - and then they're led out: "Sorry, not today. You'll get your justice maybe in two weeks." And it's unlike anything I know to describe to you. I know what the lawyers have filed with the Supreme Court. I know of Justice Breyer's strong dissent when they did the lethal injection thing on the Glossip case. I can only hope that they are persuaded by the arguments and don't just fall back behind procedure and say, "This should have been filed much sooner," which is what the Court of Criminal Appeals did in Oklahoma: "Procedure bars you from raising these issues. We've already looked at these issues," which meant they were impervious to look at the new information and the new facts, because procedure bars you from looking. I only hope that this court will have the heart and conscience to widen it, to see that to kill a human being, especially an innocent human being, is cruelty, it is torture, and it is against our noblest beliefs. It's like putting your boat on a wave, and you ride it, to let the time fill up as we're waiting, as I'm waiting. They have a bathroom in that place, where you can go and have a little privacy. And I plan to retreat to that little place of privacy as often as I can. AMY GOODMAN: Don Knight, let me end with you. Of course, I'm sure many people are asking, how are you presenting innocence at the last possible minute? DON KNIGHT: Well, Justin Sneed is the key to this whole case. He has always been the key to this whole case. The truth of the matter is, he was a 19-year-old, meth-addicted person with a criminal history. He is not the kind of person that you would have ever counted on to do anything. If you would have asked him to take some money to the bank for you, you would know categorically that he would not get that money to the bank, that he would use it for himself. He was not a reliable person when he was 19. He is still not reliable, in the latest interview that he gave just within the last 2 weeks. It's disgusting, really, to think that we are going to - today, maybe - kill a man based upon the word of someone that no one would count on under any circumstances. And that's what we're facing today, Amy. AMY GOODMAN: I want to thank you both for being with us. Don Knight, one of Richard Glossip's pro bono attorneys, he'll be with Richard Glossip today, has also appealed the case to the Supreme Court in this last minute. Sister Helen Prejean, author of Dead Man Walking, will be accompanying Richard Glossip on whatever it is that happens today. And, of course, we'll keep you updated, even after this broadcast, at democracynow.org. (source: democracynow.org) **************** Richard Glossip and the End of the Death Penalty If the Supreme Court abolishes the death penalty soon, which Justice Antonin Scalia said, last week, that he "wouldn't be surprised" to see, the case of Richard Glossip is likely to be a significant point of reference in accounts of how it happened. The state of Oklahoma is scheduled to execute Glossip by lethal injection this afternoon. He was sentenced to death for a murder that, the record in the case makes clear, he did not commit. He had never been arrested before. He had no history of violence. His conviction was based on the testimony of the murderer, a man named Justin Sneed, who confessed to using a baseball bat to bludgeon the victim to death. Sneed claimed that Glossip had pressed him to commit the murder and, in exchange for his testimony against Glossip, which was coaxed by a police interrogator, he got a sentence of life in prison rather than death. "I'm trying to stop them from killing me by any method," Glossip told The Intercept this summer, "because of the fact that I'm innocent." Glossip was twice convicted and sentenced to execution. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals overturned the first conviction, holding that his lawyer's "conduct was so ineffective that we have no confidence that a reliable adversarial proceeding took place." After that ruling, the prosecution stipulated that no physical evidence linked Glossip to the crime scene. He was convicted again based largely on Sneed's testimony, although his account of Glossip's alleged involvement diverged from what he said at the 1st trial, which diverged from his original confession to police. According to Glossip's lawyers, Sneed has given 8 "very different" accounts. Last January, the Supreme Court stayed Glossip's execution so that it could hear a challenge that he and other death-row inmates had made to the use of the drug midazolam as the anesthetic in a 3-drug lethal-injection procedure, before the other drugs were administered to paralyze the inmate and then to stop his heart. The challenge came after Oklahoma's gruesome execution of an inmate in 2014, when the state used midazolam and it failed to fully anesthetize him, causing him searing pain. 3 months ago, at the end of the recent Court term, the Justices upheld the use of the drug by 5-4. They said that Glossip's lawyers had not shown that the state had a better option than midazolam or that the use of midazolam with the other drugs was "sure or very likely to result in needless suffering." The 1st reason that the Glossip case is likely to be a point of reference is the widely commented-on dissent by Justice Stephen Breyer, who, "rather than try to patch up the death penalty's legal wounds one at a time," devoted 41 pages to arguing "that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment" - that is, the constitutional clause prohibiting the infliction of "cruel and unusual punishments." Breyer's dissent laid out his reasons: "(1) serious unreliability, (2) arbitrariness in application, and (3) unconscionably long delays that undermine the death penalty's penological purpose. Perhaps as a result, (4) most places within the United States have abandoned its use." The Glossip case doesn't illustrate all of these reasons, but it provides a case study in the unreliability of the application of the death sentence. Glossip's current lawyers have raised serious doubts about his guilt, which make his conviction dubious and his death sentence unjust. His counsel in his 1st trial was reprehensibly bad. His counsel in his 2nd trial exceeded the very low standard for ineffective counsel, but did a poor cross-examination of Sneed, the main witness against Glossip. From the decision to charge Glossip with a capital crime to some unsavory tactical moves in the second trial, the prosecution was unquestionably overzealous and may have crossed the line into misconduct. Cases like Glossip's are all too common. In 2005, the Center on Wrongful Convictions, at Northwestern, reported that 51 of the 111 people exonerated of capital crimes since the death penalty was reinstated, in the 1970s, "were sentenced to death based in whole or part on the testimony of witnesses with incentives to lie," including some who were "promised leniency in their own cases," as Sneed was in this one. The 2nd reason that this case is likely to be a point of reference in any narrative of death-penalty abolition is the way that it has played out in an Oklahoma state court this month. After his loss at the Supreme Court, Glossip was scheduled to be executed on September 16th, but his lawyers asked the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals for a stay of execution so that they could put together a case based on newly obtained accounts from 2 witnesses, which, they said, destroyed the credibility of the testimony implicating Glossip. The court granted a stay "in order for this court to give fair consideration to the materials included," but, on Monday, decided not to let a state trial court consider the new evidence. It ended the stay, so the state can execute Glossip today, unless the Supreme Court intervenes. The opinion for the majority in the state appeals-court decision is technical, and this sentence is key: "The claims do not fall within the guidelines of the post-conviction procedure act allowing this Court to consider the merits or grant relief." The opinion said, basically, that the new evidence wasn't new and that Glossip's lawyers were raising issues already raised and rejected on a previous appeal. A dissent pointed out that the failure to review his claims could be a miscarriage of justice: Glossip is about to be executed and "the State has no interest in executing an actually innocent man." The ruling has nothing to do with the merits of the case. It has everything to do with the state's attempt to bring death-penalty cases to an end because of "the legal principle of finality of judgment," as the majority opinion put it - even if that means denying a hearing that might exonerate an innocent man. The Supreme Court has favored this kind of impatience for decades. It has repeatedly put an end to federal cases, even when a federal appeals court had good reasons for not wanting to end a case - not wanting to permit a state to execute a death-row inmate who might be innocent or who might have been wrongfully sentenced to death. The Breyer dissent this summer laid out why there are often strong reasons to address the merits of these cases: Researchers have calculated that courts (or State Governors) are 130 times more likely to exonerate a defendant where a death sentence is at issue. They are 9 times more likely to exonerate where a capital murder, rather than a noncapital murder, is at issue. Why is that so? To some degree, it must be because the law that governs capital cases is more complex. To some degree, it must reflect the fact that courts scrutinize capital cases more closely. But, to some degree, it likely also reflects a greater likelihood of an initial wrongful conviction. How could that be so? In the view of researchers who have conducted these studies, it could be so because the crimes at issue in capital cases are typically horrendous murders, and thus accompanied by intense community pressure on police, prosecutors, and jurors to secure a conviction. This pressure creates a greater likelihood of convicting the wrong person. Breyer's dissent riled Scalia. He responded with a concurrence that said that Breyer's "argument is full of internal contradictions and (it must be said) gobbledy-gook." In a more sober mood, during a speech last week at Rhodes College, in Tennessee, Scalia said that there are 4 votes on the Supreme Court to rule the death penalty unconstitutional - those of the moderate liberals. In the term that opens next week, 4 of the 34 cases the Justices have said, so far, that they will review deal with the death penalty. As Rory Little of the University of California's Hastings College of Law wrote on Scotusblog, this could be "the biggest Eighth Amendment term in 40 years." In the wake of Pope Francis's visit, Robert J. Smith, who is a visiting scholar at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law, suggested that there might be a 5th vote to abolish capital punishment. In Slate, he compared the Pope's call for "global abolition of the death penalty," based on the values of dignity and hope, with themes of recent Supreme Court rulings that have limited the application of the death penalty and other excessive punishment. He quoted opinions of Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was in the audience when the Pope addressed Congress. Smith didn't predict that Kennedy will vote to rule that the death penalty is unconstitutional, but he quoted a recent opinion of the Justice, in which he wrote, "The Eighth Amendment's protection of dignity reflects the Nation we have been, the Nation we are, and the Nation we aspire to be." That's the kind of Kennedy homily that makes Scalia apoplectic, but it's in the spirit of the Breyer dissent. It's also the kind of statement that can inspire many Americans, including state-court judges far from Washington, D.C. A 2nd dissent from Monday's state-court ruling in Oklahoma, allowing the state to execute Glossip, quoted from the same Kennedy opinion: "The death penalty is the gravest sentence our society may impose." The state court, the dissent said, should have granted Glossip's request for a new evidentiary hearing to investigate his claim of innocence. Why? Because - in Kennedy's words again - those who face "that most severe sanction must have a fair opportunity to show that the Constitution prohibits their execution." (source: The New Yorker) ******************* Pope urges Oklahoma governor to stop execution of man who claims innocence Oklahoma death row inmate Richard Glossip is set to be executed Wednesday afternoon. The Pope urged Oklahoma's governor to halt the execution of an inmate set to die Wednesday. A letter from Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, Pope Francis' diplomatic representative to the U.S., requested that Gov. Mary Fallin commute the death sentence of inmate Richard Glossip. The note, dated Sept. 19 was released by the state Wednesday, just hours before Glossip - who has long claimed he is innocent in the 1997 motel killing - is set to die. Capital punishment should only be used in "cases of absolute necessity" and such instances are "very rare" today, Vigano wrote, invoking the words of Pope John Paul II. Commuting Glossip's sentence "would give clearer witness to the value and dignity of every person's life," the Catholic leader wrote. "May God guide your prayerful consideration of this request by pope Francis for what I believe would be an admirable and just act of clemency," he said in the note. Pope Francis urged Oklahoma's governor to halt the execution in a newly released letter dated Sept. 19. A spokesman for Fallin said the governor does not have the authority to grant a commutation. Vigano sent a similar letter Tuesday to officials in Georgia, but that didn't stop the execution of Kelly Renee Gissendaner. Glossip is scheduled to be executed Wednesday afternoon at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester, despite his claim of innocence. His lawyers have requested a stay of execution with the U.S. Supreme Court. Glossip was convicted of ordering the beating death of an Oklahoma City motel owner. But Glossip has long claimed that he was framed by the actual killer, Justin Sneed, who is serving a life sentence. Sneed was the state's key witness against Glossip in 2 separate trials. Just hours before Glossip was originally to be put to death on Sept. 16, the state's highest criminal court granted a 2-week reprieve to investigative new evidence - including another inmate's claim that he overheard Sneed admit to framing Glossip. The note was penned by Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, Pope Francis' diplomatic representative to the U.S. But in a 3-2 decision earlier this week, the same court denied Glossip's request for an evidentiary hearing and emergency stay of execution, paving the way for his execution to proceed. Unless a court halts the execution, it will be the 1st in Oklahoma since the U.S. Supreme Court in June upheld the state's three-drug lethal injection formula that includes the sedative midazolam. Glossip and other death row inmates had argued that the sedative did not adequately render an inmate unconscious before the lethal drugs were administered. Oklahoma first used the drug last year in the execution of Clayton Lockett, who writhed on the gurney, moaned and clenched his teeth for several minutes before prison officials tried to halt the process. He died 43 minutes after it was first injected. (source: New York Daily News) ************ Fallin receives letter on behalf of Pope Francis 'to commute' Glossip execution On behalf of Pope Francis, Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano sent a letter to Gov. Mary Fallin in regard to the planned execution of Richard Glossip. The letter asked Fallin 'to commute' Glossip's death sentence. Despite the request, Fallin does not have the legal authority to move the execution, said Alex Weintz, communications director for Fallin. Glossip is scheduled to be executed Wednesday afternoon. (source: KOCO news) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 30 14:06:03 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 14:06:03 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----worldwide Message-ID: Sept. 30 IRAN: Iranian death sentence commuted to 2 years' theology study ---- Soheil Arabi ordered to read 13 religious books and serve 90 days in prison after court annuls original sentence An Iranian man who was on death row for allegedly insulting the prophet Muhammad has had his sentence commuted to reading 13 religious books and studying theology for 2 years. Soheil Arabi, 31, was arrested by members of the Iranian revolutionary guards in November 2013 in connection with Facebook postings which the Iranian judiciary deemed insulting to the founder of Islam. He was convicted of blasphemy and sentenced to death. A higher court annulled his death penalty, and his new sentence, which includes a 90-day jail term, emerged this week. Arabi will not be coming out of prison time any time soon, as he is also serving a separate 7 1/2-year sentence for allegedly insulting the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, alongside similar charges. The commuting of Arabi's death sentence is the 1st such decision to have been taken by a judiciary court in Iran. It is not clear how many people are on death row in the country for blasphemy, heresy or other religious grounds. Last year a 37-year-old man was executed after being found guilty of insulting the prophet Jonah, making "innovations in the religion" and "spreading corruption on earth". He had interpreted Jonah's story in the Qur'an as a symbolic tale. The state-owned Jamejam newspaper said Arabi was required to prepare a 5-10-page summary of each of the 13 religious books he must read. He then has to write an article about religion and reference at least 5 -10 of those books. He should study theology for 2 years and report to the authorities every 3 months on his progress. Amnesty welcomed the development but said Arabi should not have been jailed in the first place. Nassim Papayiann, Amnesty's campaigner on Iran, said: "International law clearly protects the right to criticise political leaders and religious institutions, even if the criticisms are thought to be shocking or offensive. A sentence that requires an individual to serve time in prison, study theology and read certain books as a punishment, if handed down for peacefully exercised their freedom of expression, clearly tramples over a range of rights, including the right to freedom of belief." Amnesty has raised alarms in recent years about Iran's ongoing crackdown on internet users, especially those active on Facebook. "The increasing, and sometimes creative, ways in which the Iranian authorities are cracking down on freedom of expression, particularly on social media, is truly alarming and goes counter to the fundamental principles of human rights," Papayianni said. Iran's judiciary, dominated by hardliners, operates independently of President Hassan Rouhani's government and is at times at odds with the administration's drive for more social freedoms. Some analysts believe that the judiciary is tightening its grip to send a signal that it is will resist Rouhani's repeated calls for reform. Rouhani, meanwhile, has largely remained quiet about human rights violations in the country. (source: The Guardian) From rhalperi at smu.edu Wed Sep 30 16:27:30 2015 From: rhalperi at smu.edu (Rick Halperin) Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 16:27:30 -0500 Subject: [Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OKLAHOMA Message-ID: Sept. 30 OKLAHOMA----stay of impending execution Oklahoma governor stays execution of Richard Glossip amid drug concerns----Order comes an hour after US supreme court denies last-minute appeal over new evidence Glossip's attorneys allege show he was framed for murder of boss Oklahoma governor Mary Fallin has issued a stay of execution for Richard Glossip amid concerns over one of the drugs to be used to put him to death. The order came an hour after the US supreme court denied a last-minute appeal alleging that new evidence showed Glossip was framed by the actual killer. Outside the prison in McAlester, Glossip's family were visibly upset at hearing of the supreme court's refusal to issue a reprieve, local media reported. Attorney Don Knight told the crowd: "There's nothing more we can do ... Everyone knows. The world knows that Richard Glossip is innocent." About 30 people also gathered in front of the Oklahoma governor's mansion to protest the execution. The protesters held signs that read "Don't Kill For Me, Stop Executions" and "Save Richard Glossip". Glossip, who has maintained his innocence, was convicted twice of orchestrating the beating death of Barry Van Treese, the owner of the Oklahoma City motel where Glossip worked. But Glossip claims he was framed by Justin Sneed, who is serving a life sentence and was the state's key witness against Glossip in 2 separate trials. Just hours before Glossip was originally to be put to death on 16 September the Oklahoma court of criminal appeals granted a 2-week reprieve to review his claims of new evidence in the case, including another inmate's assertion that he overheard Sneed admit to framing Glossip. (source: The Guardian)