[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OHIO, OKLA., NEB., ORE., USA

[Rick Halperin]

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)