[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----OKLA., NEB., N.MEX., CALIF., USA

[Rick Halperin]

Sept. 13




OKLAHOMA:

Tulsa plea deal reflects challenges of death penalty


The killings last year of five members of a Broken Arrow family would seem to 
constitute a case tailor made for the death penalty. The deceased - a mother 
and father, and 3 of their 7 children - were stabbed to death in their home. 2 
of the couple's sons were quickly arrested, with one later telling a police 
detective they intended to kill their family, cut up the bodies and carry out 
further mass killings.

That son, Robert Bever, "was laughing or chuckling on several occasions," 
during his interview, the detective testifed in February. "He appeared to be 
laid back and mildly excited to tell the story."

In a Tulsa courtroom last week, Bever, 19, told a judge that he and his 
17-year-old brother, Michael, acted together and were responsible for the 
killings, and that they intended to kill one of their sisters who survived 
(another, younger sister was unharmed).

Yet Robert Bever won't face the death penalty. As part of a plea agreement, he 
will be sentenced instead to life in prison without the possibility of parole. 
His brother, who had a not-guilty plea entered on his behalf, isn't eligible 
for the death penalty because he was 16 at the time of the killings.

Bever's attorney acknowledged "there was overwhelming evidence about what 
happened," and said his goal all along was to avoid the ultimate punishment. 
District Attorney Steve Kunzweiler was amenable to that. His reason was 
understandable: a desire to spare the 2 sisters further heartache and stress.

"Those children deserve to move on with their lives as best they can without 
the continued torment of a trial and decades of appeals that a death penalty 
case would most likely bring," Kunzweiler said.

Similar sentiments are shared by prosecutors around the country. The Death 
Penalty Information Center, which opposes capital punishment, reports that the 
death penalty declined "by virtually every measure" last year - fewer people 
were executed than in any year since 1991, and the number of death sentences 
handed down by juries (49) was a 33 % decline from 2014.

Some of this is fueled by growing concerns, among jurors and others, about the 
potential to send an innocent person to death row. These aren't all driven by 
progressives, who traditionally have opposed capital punishment. Groups such as 
Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty are among voices on the right 
that are calling for changes. That group's national coordinator, Marc Hayden, 
calls the death penalty "a broken government program that has the real 
potential of killing innocent Americans." (Hayden is scheduled to make 
presentations Tuesday evening in Guthrie and Thursday evening in Midwest City.)

The costs associated with trying death penalty cases, including the lengthy 
appeals process, also have contributed to the reduction in these cases. In 
Randall County, Texas, prosecutor James Farren told an Amarillo TV station in 
December that his office had spent "conservatively ... at least $400,000" 
prosecuting the case of a woman who has been on death row since 1998. That's a 
lot to ask of taxpayers, Farren said, and "I do not want to subject them to 
this kind of thing any longer."

Although the death penalty remains popular in Oklahoma, opinion is shifting. A 
SoonerPoll released in August said three-quarters of Oklahomans support the 
death penalty, but about half of those polled said they would be OK without it, 
provided those to whom it would otherwise be applied were given life without 
parole and made to forfeit their property and pay restitution to victims' 
families.

The long and short of it is this: The country seems to rapidly be approaching a 
point where death sentences are the rare exception, rather than the rule - no 
matter how heinous the crime.

(source: The Oklahoman Editorial Board)






NEBRASKA:

Beatrice 6 book author tours Nebraska, talks about death penalty's influence in 
the case


The author of a book about the Beatrice 6 says the 30 year old Gage County 
murder case is still relevant today.

"Failure of Justice" by John Ferak traces the investigation of the February 
1985 rape and murder of Helen Wilson and the story of the 6 people wrongfully 
convicted of the crime.

Ferak says the case relates to the current debate over the death penalty in 
Nebraska.

"The death penalty was used as an instrument to get a lot of these individuals 
to plead guilty, and they kind of fall over like a stack of dominos," Ferak 
tells Nebraska Radio Network.

He wonders if investigators had not used the punishment as a "scary carrot 
dangled over their heads," would things have turned out differently.

"We don't know the answer to that, but it very well could have," Ferak says.

The book goes into the backstories of the six suspects. Joseph White, Thomas 
Winslow, Ada Joann Taylor, James Dean, Debra Shelden, and Kathy Gonzalez were 
ages 23 to 30 and struggling to survive in the small Nebraska town at the time 
of the crime.

"They were easy pickings, basically, for a local sheriff or sheriff's official 
who was out to make a name for himself or just kind of bring some piece of mind 
to the victim???s family and the community of Beatrice," Ferak says.

DNA testing years later showed none of the 6 were responsible for Wilson's rape 
and murder, but Ferak says some people still believe that members of the group 
were involved.

He thinks the Gage County prosecutor and Sheriff's investigator produced bad 
evidence and confessions.

"The jury really doesn't realize how these folks [the accused] have been 
manipulated and told and told and told again, 'Here's what really happened. 
Here's what you need to say. Here's a video of the crime scene.' So, when the 
jury is hearing this information, probably to their ears it's like 'Well, these 
guys were really there. This sounds really credible and believable.'"

Ferak is a former Omaha World-Herald reporter who did not cover the original 
case. He now writes for USA Today Network in Wisconsin.

Ferak says he reviewed thousands of pages of police reports and court records 
before writing the book, and interviewed some of the people involved.

He is speaking at Concordia University, Nebraska campus Sept. 13 at 7 p.m. in 
the Thom Leadership Education Center Auditorium. The presentation is free and 
open to the public.

Ferak is giving a talk and will sign copies of "Failure of Justice" at Indigo 
Bridge Books, 701 P Street, Suite 102 in Lincoln Sept. 14 from 6:00 - 7:30 p.m.

(source: nebraskaradionetwork.com)






NEW MEXICO:

Susana Martinez, New Mexico governor, fights to restore death penalty after 
horrific murders


New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez has reignited her fight to bring back the death 
penalty as the state reels from a recent string of horrific murders, including 
the slayings of 2 police officers and 3 girls.

The Republican governor, who won her first term in 2010 as a staunch supporter 
of capital punishment, said she will push for the state Legislature to overturn 
the ban on executions in January. Her announcement came shortly after a 
33-year-old officer was gunned down by a fugitive at a routine traffic stop on 
Aug. 12.

"The man who killed Officer Jose Chavez from Hatch Police Department for a 
simple traffic stop, people need to ask themselves, 'Do those people that are 
charged deserve the ultimate penalty, which is the death penalty?'" Ms. 
Martinez told KRQE-TV. "I say, 'Yes, they do.'"

The timing may never be better for the term-limited governor, who has been 
stymied by Democratic lawmakers in her quest to bring back capital punishment 
after former Gov. Bill Richardson, a Democrat, signed the ban in 2009.

Already, the public appears to be on her side. A survey released Aug. 23 found 
59 % of registered New Mexico voters said they support reviving the death 
penalty, while 34 % oppose it, and just 8 % are undecided.

(source: Washington Times)






CALIFORNIA:

Killer demands no defense to death penalty: Judge says OK


A convicted killer who, from his jail cell, arranged the murder of a witness 
against him in a robbery case, told a judge Monday he doesn't want his 
attorneys to actively defend him against the death penalty.

The judge then agreed, and told the defendant's attorneys they would not be 
allowed to put on much of their case in battling a death sentence.

"I don't want to even listen to the proceedings. I don't care," defendant 
Michael Thomas, 50, insisted in court. He then left the courtroom without 
hearing the prosecution's opening statement in the penalty phase of his murder 
trial.

"I don???t care for anyone to know about my life ... to go into detail about my 
upbringing, my family," Thomas, who spent time in juvenile detention, told the 
judge.

When questioned by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Robert J. Perry, Thomas 
said a number of times that he didn't want to be in court and didn't want his 
attorneys to call witnesses or make any statements in his defense. Thomas 
reiterated a stance he took last Thursday when jurors convicted him of 
murdering 42-year-old Erik Poltorak.

A defense lawyer failed in his effort to sway the judge to allow a full 
defense. "We are obligated as defense attorneys to present mitigating 
evidence," Joel Koury said, telling the judge that the defense planned to call 
an expert on child development and a gang expert who would impeach some of the 
prosecution's witnesses.

But Perry disagreed, overriding multiple objections by the defense attorneys 
and ruling that they would not be allowed to present an opening statement, call 
witnesses, offer a closing argument or cross-examine the prosecution's 
witnesses.

"It is not irrational to prefer the death penalty to life in prison without the 
possibility of parole," Perry said, adding later, "I'm not allowing you to put 
on a defense when he doesn't want you to."

After allowing Thomas to leave the courtroom, Perry called him back to restate 
his wishes and shortly after that said he didn't want to hear any more 
arguments from the defense.

"I made the decision. If it's wrong, it's wrong," he concluded.

Murder victim Poltorak was the target of an Aug. 13, 2011 home invasion 
robbery. Poltorak had planned to testify against Thomas, identifying him as the 
perpetrator. Poltorak was shot to death on his doorstep in Beverly Grove on 
Halloween night 2012.

Jurors found true special circumstances allegations of killing a witness and 
lying in wait, which make Thomas eligible for a death sentence and triggered 
the penalty trial phase that began Monday.

Thomas was dressed in blue jail garb rather than the dress shirt and other 
street clothes most defendants wear during trial and said he wanted to go back 
to sleep.

Defense attorneys James Cooper and Koury said members of Thomas' family from 
Oklahoma and Vancouver, Canada, would be in court Tuesday and could offer 
testimony about his character.

"We are trying to change his mind," Cooper told the judge of their 
uncooperative client, adding that he hoped seeing family members would make a 
difference.

His attorneys argued that Thomas was still shaken by the conviction and unable 
to make a coherent decision in his own best interests.

Perry disagreed.

"Mr. Thomas is an intelligent man and he has decided that he doesn't want to be 
here," the judge said.

Deputy District Attorney Candice Henry also objected to Thomas not being in 
court to hear witnesses against him and victims' impact statements.

Perry cited case law that he said gave Thomas the right to waive his 
appearance, and added that he had presided over a case more than a decade ago 
in which the defendants had asked their attorneys not to put on a defense.

Those defendants believed their accommodations would be better on death row and 
were "not afraid that ... given the broken system ... the death penalty was 
going to come their way anytime soon," Perry said.

That said, the judge agreed that it was "very unusual" that "a death penalty 
defendant would effectively ask for the death penalty."

The defense argued that it wasn't Thomas's choice to make. He could choose not 
to testify in his own defense, but could not prevent his attorneys from putting 
on a case.

All of this happened while jurors waited in the hallway. When they were seated, 
Perry told them only, "The defendant is not here. He has asked to not be here."

During his opening statement, Deputy District Attorney Bobby Zoumberakis played 
a 911 call in which a co-worker who arrived at Poltorak's house and found him 
shot in the face and back of the head sounded hysterical and was 
hyperventilating.

She tied the murder to Poltorak???s pending court appearance, telling the 911 
dispatcher, "I'm sure he did it, he did it," of the man charged in the robbery 
case, without citing Thomas by name.

Poltorak "left behind a 15-year-old daughter who suffered from autism," 
Zoumberakis said, telling the 6-man, 6-woman jury they would hear evidence of 
the impact of the crime on her life.

"She was 9 years old when he was killed ... she can't talk about it to this 
day," Zoumberakis said.

"This was a brutal execution," but the case isn't just about Poltorak, the 
prosecutor said. "The other victim" is the justice system and the penalty phase 
is about "making sure no one is above the law," he said.

Zoumberakis said Thomas manipulated his three co-defendants to carry out 
Poltorak's killing and had a long history of criminal and violent acts, 
including threats to Culver City police officers, a stabbing and using a shank 
in jail.

"This is the type of conduct and this is the type of (individual) that warrants 
it," Zoumberakis told the jury, asking them to recommend the death penalty 
rather than life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Allen Williams, the gunman, who was 23 years old with no prior criminal record 
at the time of the crime, is serving a life sentence without the chance of 
parole.

Thomas's niece, Jessicha Thomas, was 20 years old at the time and also had no 
criminal record. She testified against Thomas in exchange for a leniency 
agreement for 2nd-degree murder.

Yvonne Keith, 49 years old at the time of the murder, pressured the other two 
into committing the killing. She is also serving a life sentence without the 
possibility of parole.

(source: mynewsla.com)

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

California police groups giving money to fight death penalty repeal


California law enforcement organizations are giving hundreds of thousands of 
dollars to fight efforts to repeal the death penalty according to a MapLight 
analysis.

While 5 of the 17 measures on the state's November ballot concern crime and 
punishment, contributions from police groups are focused on 3 initiative 
battles, the analysis found.

Law enforcement groups have provided nearly $2 million of the $3.6 million 
given to the campaign for Proposition 66, a measure aimed at reducing delays in 
the death penalty appeals process.

That campaign is also working to defeat Proposition 62, which would replace the 
death penalty with life in prison without the possibility of parole. Supporters 
of Proposition 62, which include several prominent Silicon Valley executives, 
have raised about $4.7 million so far.

Law enforcement organizations from throughout the state, including its 5 
largest cities, have given money to the campaign for Prop. 66. The top 
contributors are the California Correctional Peace Officers Association, which 
represents state prison guards and parole agents and which has given $325,000; 
the Peace Officers Research Association of California, which has given 
$305,000; and the California Association of Highway Patrolmen, which has given 
$250,000.

(source: maplight.org)






USA:

Dylann Roof's Attorneys Argue Death Penalty Clashes With Religious Freedoms Of 
Prospective Jurors


Attorneys for the man accused of killing 9 black members of a historic South 
Carolina church expanded their argument opposing the death penalty on Monday, 
asserting it violates the religious freedoms of prospective jurors.

The attorneys for Charleston church shooter Dylann Roof argue that asking 
potential jurors to state they are capable of imposing a death sentence "cannot 
be justified as having a legitimate secular purpose when it functions to skew 
the jury in favor of conviction" and encourages judges and prosecutors "to 
interrogate private citizens about their religious beliefs."

The court filing was an answer to the government's argument against Roof's 
motion to strike the death penalty as a possible punishment in the federal 
case, which is set to start jury selection this month.

Religious freedoms are also inhibited, Roof's attorneys added, because 
potential people are forced to choose between jury service and "adherence to 
their most closely-held religious, spiritual, and moral values."

Prosecutors for the government argue that the so-called process of "death 
qualifying" jurors isn't religious discrimination because it's the same if you 
oppose the death penalty for religious reasons or non-religious ones.

"A prospective juror's religion or religious beliefs do not potentially 
disqualify the juror from service; only his inability to apply the law does 
so," prosecutors have argued.

Roof's attorneys are also arguing that the death penalty itself is 
unconstitutional. They also noted that their challenge is only being brought 
because the government rejected his offer to plead guilty and accept a 
punishment of multiple life sentences without the possibility of parole.

Jury selection in Roof's federal trial is scheduled to begin later this month, 
with 3,000 Charleston-area residents slated to participate in the process.

(source: BuzzFeedNews)