[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OHIO, IND., NEB., N.MEX., ARIZ.

[Rick Halperin]

Aug. 24



OHIO:

Supreme Court affirms Trumbull County man's death sentence


The state's high court has affirmed the death sentence of a Trumbull County 
man, re-sentenced for the 2001 murder of his then-girlfriend???s ex-husband.

In a 6-1 decision Wednesday, a majority of Ohio Supreme Court justices found 
that Nathaniel Jackson's death penalty was "both appropriate and proportionate 
when compared with capital cases involving aggravated murder during an 
aggravated murder" and that an error made by the trial court was harmless and 
corrected under review by justices.

According to documents, Jackson and Donna Roberts planned the murder of 
57-year-old Robert Fingerhut for months, hoping to collect $550,000 in 
insurance money. Roberts provided Jackson with access to the Howland home she 
and Fingerhut shared, where Jackson shot the victim multiple times.

Both Roberts and Jackson received death penalties but were later ordered to be 
re-sentenced after it was determined that the prosecutor's office assisted in 
writing the original opinion in the case. Roberts' death sentence has been 
vacated twice.

Jackson's legal counsel has raised numerous issues with the death sentence, 
urging the state's high court to again vacate his death penalty. During oral 
arguments earlier this year, legal counsel for Jackson argued that the judge in 
the case filed essentially the same sentencing opinion, though he was ordered 
to file a new one one.

Jackson had hoped justices would remand the case to the trial court for another 
re-sentencing, with orders that the resulting entry be newly written and not 
copied from the early one and that other evidence offered by Jackson be 
considered beforehand.

But a majority of justices rejected Jackson's arguments Wednesday and affirmed 
the new death sentence.

"Upon independent weighing, we find that each aggravating circumstance 
outweighs the mitigating factors beyond a reasonable doubt," Justice Paul 
Pfeifer wrote in the decision. "The letters and phone conversations between 
Jackson and Roberts show that they planned Fingerhut's murder over the course 
of several months. After he was released from prison, Jackson murdered 
Fingerhut during a burglary and stole his car. Jackson's mitigating evidence 
has little significance in comparison."

Pfeifer was joined by Chief Justice Maureen O'Connor, Justices Sharon Kennedy 
and Judith French and Appeals Court Judge William Klatt in the opinion.

Justice Terrence O'Donnell concurred in part, while Justice Judith Ann 
Lanzinger dissented. The latter, in a separate opinion, wrote that the trial 
judge should have considered additional evidence and filings from Jackson 
before issuing the new sentence.

"... The trial court here failed to comply with these instructions to conduct 
Jackson's re-sentencing with the strict level of care that comports with the 
unique status of a capital case," Lanzinger wrote.

(source: vindy.com)

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

Homicide suspect could face the death penalty


A man accused in the triple shooting on Oxford Avenue could face the death 
penalty.

Prosecuting Attorney Mat Heck, Jr. said Tuesday an amended complaint has been 
filed against Muhammad Shabazz Ali, aka Robert Woodrow Ford, Jr., 61, of 
Dayton, for the shooting deaths of 3 people on August 10, 2016 inside a home on 
Oxford Avenue in Dayton.

Prosecutors met with homicide investigators from the Dayton Police Department 
shortly after Ali's arrest on August 12 and approved charges in a complaint 
filed in the Dayton Municipal Court.

After more investigation into the homicides, an amended complaint was filed 
Tuesday with additional charges as well as specifications that will allow the 
Montgomery County Grand Jury to consider indicting the defendant on counts with 
death penalty specifications.

The Prosecutor's Office said the case will be presented to the Montgomery 
County Grand Jury at a future date.

Ali remains in custody, being held on a $1,000,000 bond.

(source: WDTN news)






INDIANA:

Always question government's awesome power


Attorneys for a man who faces charges in the deaths of seven women have argued 
in court filings that the state of Indiana???s death penalty law is 
unconstitutional. More power to them.

Of course, they cannot argue that capital punishment is unconstitutional, since 
it is mentioned in plain language in the Constitution. No person, it says in 
the Fifth Amendment, may be deprived of "life, liberty, or property" without 
"due process of law." As long as there is due process, therefore, the death 
penalty is clearly constitutional.

What they're left with, then, is to argue that Indiana's application of the 
death penalty is unconstitutional. It's a tricky argument that has never been 
successful, but you can't blame them for continuing the effort.

What they claim is that there are not clear guidelines for juries on what they 
are supposed to weigh that could influence a death sentence. Furthermore, they 
say, it's unconstitutional to allow a judge to determine a defendant's death 
sentence when the jury can't.

Given the history of Indiana's Supreme Court, the attorneys are not likely to 
prevail, but they have provided a valuable service just by raising the 
objections.

The ability to take someone's life is the most terrible power a government can 
have. Even those of us who believe that capital punishment is sometimes the 
only punishment that is appropriate should be willing to consider difficult 
questions and engage those who think the death penalty should be abolished.

In Indiana, for example, you cannot be put to death merely for killing someone. 
There must also be 1 or more special circumstances, such as the murder of a 
police officer or the murder of a child or murder for hire. To face capital 
punishment is this state, you must truly be one of the worst of the worst.

On the one hand, that makes us seem less bloodthirsty and more humane. On the 
other hand, it makes it harder to argue that capital punishment is a deterrent.

We should never be afraid to examine our most strongly held beliefs, and those 
involving the awesome power of the state deserve the most scrutiny. Ideally, 
those conversations belong in the legislature, conducted by representatives 
sensitive to changing public opinion. But jurists who must administer death 
penalty proceedings have a stake in the conversation as well.

(source: Editorial, News Sentinel)






NEBRASKA:

Campaigns intensifying for, against the death penalty in Nebraska----This fall 
voters will decide whether Nebraska has the death penalty. It???s a complex 
issue with lots for voters to think about. With the election getting closer, 
both sides are intensifying lobbying for your vote.


It started with a Monday morning news conference. Omaha economist Ernie Goss 
presented his new study on the annual cost of having the death penalty in 
Nebraska versus not having it. Goss' study was commissioned by the anti-death 
penalty group Retain a Just Nebraska, hosts of the news conference.

NET News brought together advocates from each side of the issue to answer 
questions from students at Western Nebraska Community College in Scottsbluff, 
Northeast Community College in Norfolk and Metropolitan Community College in 
Omaha. These lively discussions are the foundation of a new 30-minute 
television program premiering Monday, Sept. 12 at 9 p.m. CT on NET Television.

"The additional cost for a death penalty case is about $14.6 million, opposed 
to life without parole," Goss told reporters. "A lot of folks see it as just 
the incarceration cost. Not so. It's the appeals process, again taking 
individuals in cases where there are hearings, you have to have individuals are 
taken back and forth to the hearing and costs such as that. The pretrial costs, 
jury selection. Think about jury selection in a death penalty case versus a 
non-death penalty or life without parole case. The jury selection is more 
intensive, it takes longer."

The report quickly came under fire from Nebraskans for the Death Penalty and 
Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson, who said in a news release that it 
"fails to accurately reflect actual costs" of the death penalty in Nebraska. 
Retain a Just Nebraska defended the report and criticized critics in news 
releases and another news conference.

It was a flurry of activity that if nothing else signaled the campaign for your 
vote on this issue is getting serious with Election Day looming.

The death penalty is an issue with a wide range of practical, emotional ... 
even spiritual aspects both sides want you think about.

"Nebraskans simply do not want to have an innocent person executed," said 
Darold Bauer, campaign manager for Retain a Just Nebraska. "And through the 
course of the campaign we believe that as we share information about innocence 
(and) cost, that Nebraskans, although they might say 'I support the death 
penalty,' when they stop and think about it and when they understand fully that 
we have life in Nebraska without parole, when they understand that gives them 
an option. We're not we're not looking to let people out of prison. We're 
looking to lock them up. We think that as Nebraskans think about the issue and 
study the issue, that they'll come around to our way of thinking."

Lincoln State Senator Colby Coash helped lead the Unicameral's repeal of the 
death penalty last year. A successful petition drive by death penalty 
supporters then put the question on the ballot. Coash continues to speak 
against the death penalty.

"The practical reality of the death penalty in Nebraska is this. We haven't 
executed anybody in almost 20 years. We haven't used it and there's a reason 
for that. The reason is we can't," Coash said, in comments to Metropolitan 
Community College students in Omaha for NET's upcoming "Classroom 
Conversations" project. "The ship has sailed and this is a broken system. I'm 
choosing my position based on my compassion for the victims that they deserve a 
system that does what it says it's going to do."

Lincoln lawyer Bob Evnen is a co-founder of Nebraskans for the Death Penalty, 
the group that led the petition drive to get the issue on the ballot this year. 
He began a presentation to a weekly lunch hour gathering of Omaha Republicans 
with a Bible-based appeal.

"Capital punishment is the only penalty that is repeated in all 5 of the Books 
of Moses," Evnen said. "The Old Testament is composed of 3 parts. The 5 Books 
of Moses, the Prophets and the Writings. The 5 Books of Moses, in each of those 
5 books you'll find capital punishment is prescribed for certain crimes. And so 
we begin with capital punishment is morally required."

Evnen has talked to groups throughout the summer, and said a variety of pro 
death penalty selling points are influencing voters.

"I think people are very responsive to the idea that law enforcement 
overwhelmingly supports the death penalty. That it is something that helps 
protect them as they go out to protect us, and I think that that rings true for 
a great number of Nebraskans," Evnen said. "I think that a substantial majority 
of Nebraskans support the death penalty. They understand the importance of 
having the death penalty on the books. They understand that we don't use the 
death penalty every day, all the time, that it's reserved for the most heinous 
crimes and the most vicious criminals."

Former attorney general Don Stenberg is honorary co-chair of Nebraskans for the 
Death Penalty.

"I think there's a deterring effect for some people in the death penalty," 
Stenberg said, also talking with Metropolitan Community College students in 
Omaha for NET's "Classroom Conversations" recording. "I think it does help 
public safety, and I just think there were some cases which are so egregious, 
where maybe a mass murder of grade school kids or a bomb in a football stadium 
that kills 50 or 100 people and injures 200 more. At some point I think justice 
requires that the person that did that horrendous act pay the ultimate price."

The Nebraskans for the Death Penalty campaign has been seemingly low key 
compared to its opposition throughout the summer, but Evnen said that will 
change when they "kick into gear" after Labor Day. Bauer said Retain a Just 
Nebraska will also continue what he called a "full blown campaign."

Both sides said they need to sell their side of the issue, but also how to 
understand possibly confusing ballot language. Here's one simple way to think 
about it. If you are against the death penalty, vote "retain" on the ballot. If 
you are for the death penalty, vote "repeal."

(source: netnebraska.org)

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

Spokesman for anti-death penalty group dismisses poll indicating pro-death 
penalty leanings in Nebraska


A spokesman with a group campaigning to uphold the repeal of the death penalty 
rejects the conclusions of a recent public opinion poll.

A poll commissioned by Nebraskans for the Death Penalty indicates 2-to-1 
support for capital punishment in Nebraska. Global Marketing Research Services 
of Melbourne, Florida took a survey of 600 likely Nebraska voters in early 
August. The survey asked four questions centered on the Unicameral's approval 
of LB 268, which repealed the death penalty in Nebraska.

Retain A Just Nebraska has mounted a campaign to uphold the action of the 
Unicameral in the 2015 legislative session.

Spokesman Dan Parsons rejects the conclusion of the poll, claiming it is not 
accurate.

"Well, the poll is not accurate in the sense that they only asked 1/2 the 
question," Parsons tells Nebraska Radio Network. "They did not ask the question 
that Nebraskans will be asked on November 8th and that is, should we replace 
the death penalty with life in prison without the chance of parole? That's the 
question that will be on the ballot and they didn't ask that question."

Parsons insists than when the alternative to the death penalty, life without 
parole, is included, Nebraskans are more inclined to be against the death 
penalty.

"Historically, across the country, and polling that we have access to indicates 
that that question is, at best, a toss-up and in many of those polls, it goes 
to our favor."

Additionally, Parsons says it is too early to get a read on how Nebraskans will 
vote.

"Let's keep in mind that Nebraskans are just now starting to focus on this 
issue," according to Parsons. "Nebraskans haven't thought about this issue, 
haven't been asked to think about this issue, for a long, long time. We have 
not had an execution in this state for almost 20 years and so, death penalty 
cases have not been front and center on people's minds."

Voters will be asked in November whether to retain LB 268 which eliminated 
capital punishment in Nebraska, or repeal it.

(source: Nebraska Radio Network)

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

The real cost of the death penalty


Economist Dr. Ernie Goss reported this month that the death penalty costs 
Nebraska $14.6 million annually.

Attorney General Doug Peterson disputed that report, saying the numbers are 
"misleading" because they rely on data from other states that doesn't fairly 
represent Nebraska. This has been followed-up by additional responses by Dr. 
Goss and various State Senators.

But the dollar figures aren't primarily what Nebraska voters should consider 
when they decide this November whether to retain the repeal the death penalty. 
The real costs of the death penalty must be measured by other standards as 
well.

The cost of the death penalty can be measured by the lives of those unjustly 
put to death for crimes they didn't commit. Since DNA testing has made new 
methods of investigation possible, hundreds of people across the country have 
been exonerated of criminal convictions. Nebraska's own "Beatrice 6" were 
exonerated by DNA in 2008. The death penalty costs the lives of innocent 
people.

The cost of the death penalty can be measured in the inequality of sentencing. 
The race and social status of criminals has frequently shown to be a factor in 
sentencing. So has the location of the crime, and the social status of the 
victim. Justice is supposed to be blind. But the death penalty costs Nebraska's 
commitment to equality before the law.

The death penalty is needed when execution is the only way to keep a community 
safe from a persistent threat. The need for the death penalty must be absolute 
and Nebraska is far from that requirement. In fact, in Nebraska the death 
penalty is a panacea: it provides the illusion of security and deterrence, 
without demonstrably providing either. A state with our creativity and 
resources can reform our prisons, deter crime, and build safe communities 
without needing to kill anyone. Nebraskans can solve serious social problems 
without recourse to violence.

However much the death penalty impacts our budget, the death penalty costs more 
than dollars and cents. It costs us our human dignity. Execution costs us the 
opportunity to achieve justice without taking life, to overcome our penchant 
for vengeance, to build a culture that values all human life, and establish a 
civilization of mercy. The death penalty coarsens our sense of life's value and 
dignity. This is all a cost that is far too high.

(source: Opinion; Tom Venzor is the Associate Director for Pro-Life and Family 
for the Nebraska Catholic Conference. The Nebraska Catholic Conference 
represents the mutual public policy interests of the three Catholic Bishops of 
Nebraska----Lincoln Journal Star)






NEW MEXICO:

Poll: More than 1/2 of New Mexicans support death penalty revival


A new poll shows more than 1/2 of New Mexicans want to bring back the death 
penalty.

This comes just a week after Gov. Susana Martinez says she's going to push to 
undo the death penalty ban at the next legislative session.

The poll comes in the wake of some highly publicized murders, and it shows 
voters may want ta return of the death penalty.

The poll, done by Public Policy Polling for the New Mexico Political Report, 
found that 59 % support the governor's proposal to bring back the death 
penalty. Meanwhile, 34 % oppose it and 8 % haven't made up their minds. About 
1,100 registered voters took part in the poll.

Albuquerque residents who KRQE News 13 spoke with appear split on the issue.

"The death penalty gives the state the opportunity to get revenge on a 
perpetrator that we can't do ourselves, but I support Susana and you won't hear 
me say that often," said Zach Anaya.

"It's a terrible thing. We should not make decisions like that about other 
peoples' lives," said Lyn Berner.

The push from the governor comes after the latest killing of a New Mexico 
police officer - the 3rd in a little more than a year.

The governor has made it clear that she thinks people who murder police 
officers or children deserve "the ultimate punishment."

New Mexico is now one of 19 states without capital punishment. The state still 
has 2 people on death row from before the death penalty was abolished in 2009. 
New Mexico hasn't executed anyone since 2001.

(source: KRQE news)

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

Recalling the last execution in New Mexico


I kept missing his calls.

Again and again, the phone rang when I was not home, which left my then-husband 
with the awkward task of making small talk with a condemned man he had never 
met and had never wanted to meet.

"What do you say to a guy who rapes and murders a child?" he would ask later.

Oh, I had plenty to say, plenty more questions to ask. In the fall of 2001, I 
had already been communicating with Terry Clark for 2 years, and time was 
running out. In days, he was scheduled to die, the 1st person in 41 years to be 
executed by the state of New Mexico.

Gov. Susana Martinez would like to change that. Last week, she said she will 
push during next year's legislative session to bring back the death penalty. 
It's a position she campaigned on as a gubernatorial candidate in 2010, a year 
after her predecessor signed legislation abolishing the practice.

In the 6 years since she took office, her death penalty redux has gone nowhere, 
and capital punishment has continued to lose its appeal nationwide. 19 states 
no longer carry out the death penalty, 4 making that move just in the past 6 
years. 4 more states have temporarily suspended the practice; Nebraska will ask 
voters to decide on the matter in November.

Martinez's revitalization of what to most was a, ahem, dead issue appears to be 
a reaction to the shooting death of Hatch police officer Jose Chavez this month 
and the fatal bludgeoning of 11-year-old Ashlynne Mike near Shiprock in May. 
Horrific deaths, to be sure.

But New Mexico has always been squeamish about imposing the death penalty, even 
for the worst offenders. Since statehood, we've put to death just 28 men - 19 
by hanging, 7 by the electric chair and 1 by the gas chamber. Clark was the 
only man to die by lethal injection, the method the state switched to in 1980.

Clark deserved the harshest sentence. He had been out on bail pending an appeal 
for the rape of a 6-year-old Roswell girl when he snatched 9-year-old Dena Lynn 
Gore from outside an Allsups in Artesia on July 17, 1986, drove her to a ranch 
60 miles out of town, molested her, trussed her up like wild game, held a gun 
to her temple and fired 3 times when she presciently told him, "You're going to 
pay for this."

He did. He was sentenced to death in 1996, then continued on through the 
lengthy and costly appeals process until he himself short-circuited the battle, 
waiving his right to further appeals.

When it appeared Clark was at last on track to his death date, I began writing 
to him in the hopes he would agree to an interview so I could ask the questions 
he had never answered publicly: Why? Why Dena? Why a child? Why violate an 
innocent child and bury her in the dirt?

He wrote back, his letters strikingly polite and thoughtful, with just enough 
introspection to allow me a glimpse into the dark abyss of his heart but never 
completely, never enough.

He wrote mostly to complain about his attorneys, who he believed were 
undermining his dogged quest for death. He wrote about tolerating life on death 
row, locked in the Penitentiary of New Mexico's North Unit outside Santa Fe. He 
wrote about finding God and forgiveness even for the horrors he had committed 
upon a child.

He denied raping the 1st girl in Roswell and declared that he was no child 
molester, even when it came to Dena.

"What occurred with Dena Gore was a terrible, terrible mistake and it had 
NOTHING to do with her being a CHILD," he told me.

He never explained further.

Arguably, I came to know him better than any other journalist and likely more 
than most people would care to know him. As the days drew near to his execution 
date, he began calling me, but only at my home. In the end, we managed to speak 
just once. He told me he had made his peace, that he was ready to go home.

"I have no fears," he said. "I've been forgiven."

I was there Nov. 6, 2001, at the penitentiary when he breathed his last, 
covering the execution along with dozens of other reporters from across the 
state.

It took 8 minutes for him to die. In that final moment of his life, I briefly 
bowed my head and whispered to no one, "Goodbye, Terry," then went back to 
writing my story.

Even knowing Clark as I did, I have never firmly taken a stand on the death 
penalty. At best, it seems a tool prosecutors can use to ferret out a plea 
agreement from a defendant who kills but doesn't wish to be killed. At worst, 
it can be - and nationally has been - wrongly imposed on defendants later found 
to be innocent.

But I have my doubts as to whether it is any deterrent. Since Clark's execution 
15 years ago, more children have been murdered, more law enforcement officers 
gunned down, more innocent lives lost. The specter of the death penalty saved 
none of them.

Clark told me he had not thought about the consequences as he pumped 3 bullets 
into Dena's brain. And still, over the years, he had come to favor the death 
penalty, at least for his own benefit.

"It's all good," he wrote 9 days before his execution. "I see it as parole and 
a full pardon by the only one that really matters. This is a good thing to 
happen, don't you think."

I'm not sure if what he thinks is what should matter most.

(source: Joline Krueger, Albuquerque Journal)






ARIZONA:

Harvard Death-Penalty Study Rips Maricopa County Prosecutors


Maricopa County's death-penalty system is plagued by "overzealous" prosecutors 
and creates a high number of questionable death-penalty cases, according to a 
new Harvard Law School report.

"Too Broken to Fix: Part I: An In-Depth Look at America's Outlier Death Penalty 
Counties," by the school's Fair Punishment Project, identifies Maricopa as 1 of 
16 "outliers" among the nation's 3,143 counties or "county equivalents," for 
having sentenced 5 or more defendants to death during the period 2010-2015.

The report calls out three deputy county attorneys by name, suggesting they're 
reckless, and it lays heavy implications on the current county attorney, Bill 
Montgomery. But it also notes that the number of death-penalty cases has 
declined since the departure of former county attorney Andrew Thomas.

Thomas, who resigned office in 2010 for an unsuccessful run for state Attorney 
General, was disbarred in 2012 for abuse of power - as the Harvard study 
prominently mentions. Voters put Montgomery, also a Republican, in office in 
2010 with a special election, re-electing him in 2012. He's running for office 
once again in 2016 against low-profile Democratic contender Diego Rodriguez.

For much of Montgomery's time in office, he has sought the death penalty at a 
higher-than-average rate, according to the study. Between 2010 and 2015, the 
county had 28 capital-punishment cases. On a per-homicide basis, the county's 
rate of death sentencing is 2.3 times higher than the rest of Arizona. 
Nationally, it accounts for about about 1 % of the country's population but 3.6 
% of the country's death-penalty cases between 2010 and 2015.

"If I were charged with a crime in Maricopa County, based on what we've seen in 
capital cases - it's not a place where I would feel confident that the county 
attorney's office would play by the rules," Robert Smith, a Harvard researcher 
and director of the Fair Punishment Project tells New Times.

The report illuminates problems that go back much further than 2010, showing 
that Maricopa County has had more cases - and more problems with those cases 
and its prosecutorial system - than nearly any other U.S. county.

Founded in 2005 by Harvard Law School professor Charles J. Ogletree Jr., the 
Fair Punishment Project has a stated mission to serve as a "critical critical 
bridge between scholarship, law, policy and practice to solve the challenges of 
a multi-racial society." The project, led by professor Ronald Sullivan Jr., is 
a collaboration between the law school's Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for 
Race and Justice and its Criminal Justice Institute.

Citing media coverage, including stories from New Times, the report notes that 
starting in 2004, Thomas sought capital cases at twice the rate of his 
predecessor, Rick Romley - thus crippling the county's public-defender system 
and leaving a dozen murder defendants without lawyers. While the county has 
backed off its zeal for the death penalty since 2010, Montgomery's office 
retains three deputies whose strong interest in capital cases appears to color 
their conduct in court.

Jeannette Gallagher, Juan Martinez, and Vincent Imbordino account for more than 
1/3 of all of the capital cases (21 of 61) in which the Arizona Supreme Court 
has found problems on direct appeal since 2006. The higher court overturned or 
vacated the death penalty in 4 of the 21 cases and found instances of "improper 
behavior" in 8 of the cases.

The report notes that the state Supreme Court found that Martinez - who gained 
worldwide fame as the prosecutor in the Jodi Arias murder trial - committed 
misconduct in at least 3 capital cases. Additionally, the state's high court 
cited 17 examples where Martinez had acted "inappropriately" in the murder 
prosecution of Shawn Patrick Lynch. (The U.S. Supreme Court overturned the 
death penalty in that case for reasons unrelated to alleged prosecutor 
problems.)

The report cites instances in which the state Supreme Court deemed Gallagher's 
conduct "improper," "very troubling," and "entirely unprofessional."

"Gallagher, who heads Maricopa's capital case unit, has personally obtained at 
least nine death sentences, including against a military veteran diagnosed with 
paranoid schizophrenia and a brain-damaged child whom she described to the jury 
as '16 going on 35,'" according to the report.

Smith has harsh words for the 3 prosecutors.

"They don't have the temperament required to prosecute a jaywalking citation, 
and what they're being entrusted with is the death penalty," he tells New 
Times. "They shouldn't be prosecuting misdemeanor cases, much less deciding 
whether or not somebody lives or dies."

The report delves into the problems behind the high rate of cases, noting 
overworked or incompetent defense attorneys, racial bias, and the exonerations 
of 5 Maricopa County death-penalty defendants since 1978. More than 1/2 of the 
people sentenced to death between 2010 and 2015 were people of color. The Fair 
Punishment Project can't say for certain whether Maricopa County has executed 
any innocent people, but Smith says it has come "perilously close."

It's Montgomery's responsibility to fix the county's sorry record on the death 
penalty, Smith adds, even though many of its problems predate his tenure. As 
things stand now, Montgomery shows a "callous disregard" for the people he's 
been entrusted to protect, Smith says.

Montgomery did not return a message seeking comment.

(source: phoenixnewtimes.com)

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

Murder suspect's tweet could make him eligible for death penalty


A Twitter posting by an Arizona man who was arrested on suspicion of killing 
his roommate during a struggle could elevate the severity of charges he could 
face.

2 days before the fatal shooting, 21-year-old Zachary Dale Penton posted a 
comment saying he needed to move out of the metropolitan Phoenix home where he 
was living before he killed his roommates. The comment creates an opening for 
prosecutors to argue that Sunday's killing of Daniel Garofalo was premeditated, 
meaning they could charge Penton with 1st-degree murder and seek the death 
penalty.

"They will say this kid thought about killing his roommate 2 days before," 
Dwane Cates, a criminal defense lawyer in Phoenix who isn't involved in the 
case.

Penton's attorney says his client's social media posts weren't intended to be 
taken literally and believes the evidence will show he was acting in 
self-defense.

Penton, a convenience store manager who had lived in the suburban Gilbert home 
for 2 months, told investigators that a physical struggle broke out Sunday when 
the 41-year-old Garofalo, who owned and lived in the house, came into his 
bedroom to say Penton had to move out, according to court records. Penton 
claimed Garofalo had tackled him and took away his phone.

Penton told police that he reached under his pillow for his loaded 
semi-automatic handgun and fired after Garofalo frightened him by speaking 
irrationally. He then called 911 to report the shooting.

Police Lt. Hugh White said there were no eyewitnesses to the shooting, so 
investigators were analyzing physical evidence to determine whether Penton's 
account is credible. Police also were interviewing 2 other people who lived at 
the house.

Over the last 3 months, a Twitter account in Penton's name had several posts 
that mentioned guns. The posts included comments on the ease of buying a gun 
and asked friends whether anyone wanted to go shooting on a particular day. 
Another post -- perhaps made in jest -- said Penton was forced at gunpoint to 
download a fast-food restaurant's app.

Penton, who was booked in jail on suspicion of second-degree murder, hasn't yet 
been formally charged in Garofalo's death.

The Maricopa County Attorney's Office, which will prosecute Penton, declined to 
comment on whether it will pursue 1st-degree murder charges.

Joshua Davidson, Penton's attorney, said the shooting wasn't calculated or 
planned and believes the evidence will show Penton was trying to defend himself 
in a tough situation. "There are things we all say figuratively every day that, 
if taken literally, would have a completely different connotation," Davidson 
said of his client's social media postings.

Penton, who is being held in jail on a $750,000 bond, declined an interview 
request from The Associated Press.

Cates said the case underscores the need for people to be careful about what 
they say on social media, where it's hard to convey sarcasm and irony.

"Nobody knows if you are joking," Cates said.

(source: Associated Press)