[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----ID., CALIF., ORE., USA

[Rick Halperin]

Sept. 24




IDAHO:

Renfro's jail behavior to be used to support death penalty


Prosecutors will be able to use the testimony about how a man accused of 
killing a Coeur d'Alene police officer has acted while he's been in jail 
awaiting trial.

The Coeur d'Alene Press reports that a judge ruled on Wednesday and Thursday 
that 26-year-old Jonathan Renfro's alleged conduct in jail can be included in a 
list of aggravating factors the prosecution can present to the jury in an 
attempt to secure the death penalty.

Renfro is charged with 1st-degree murder, grand theft, removing a 
law-enforcement officer's firearm, concealing evidence, robbery and eluding 
police in connection to the 2015 shooting death of Coeur d'Alene Police Sgt. 
Greg Moore.

Prosecutors say he has fashioned weapons, made escape plans, and described his 
actions as noble while incarcerated.

A jury trial has been tentatively scheduled Feb. 6, 2017.

(sourcec: KXLY news)






CALIFORNIA----new death sentence

Death for double-murdering, mutilating OC actor


A convicted double-murderer who mutilated the body of one his victims and tried 
to throw authorities off his trail by framing the dead man for the 2nd killing 
was sentenced to death Friday by an Orange County Superior Court judge.

Daniel Patrick Wozniak, 32, a former Los Alamitos community theater actor who 
killed the victims to raise funds for his pending nuptials and honeymoon, was 
convicted in December of the 2010 murders of 26-year-old Samuel Eliezer Herr 
and 23-year-old Julie Kibuishi.

Jurors recommended in January that Wozniak be sentenced to death.

Herr's father, Steve, had his wife and 8 veterans, some of whom served in 
combat with his son in Afghanistan, join him as he told Orange County Superior 
Court Judge John Conley about the effect his son's death had on him.

"I could talk for hours about our love for Sam from the day he was born," Herr 
said. "For me, Sam was not just my son, he was my best friend."

Herr read a letter from his son's troop commander, who detailed the victim's 
leadership skills.

"He possessed an unmatched ability to operate independently under harsh 
conditions," the troop commander wrote.

"This is the man who you, Dan, brutally murdered and dismembered," Herr said as 
Wozniak intently stared back, leaning slightly over in his chair. "So you could 
have a great honeymoon and pay off some debts. You are a coward and a poster 
child for the death penalty."

Herr lashed out at Wozniak's attorney, Scott Sanders, for raising the issue 
that Sam Herr once faced murder charges himself but was ultimately acquitted in 
Los Angeles County, claiming the defense attorney did it "just to get back at 
me" for complaining about delays in the trial.

Sanders "uses the legal system to advance his own agenda," Herr said. "But the 
jury got it right. My only regret is this state won't let me kill this coward 
myself."

Julie Kibuishi's mother, June, told Wozniak, "You took advantage of my 
daughter's kindness. You took her precious life just as a decoy."

Wozniak also intently stared at June Kibuishi, but did not otherwise react.

"To you, my daughter was just a decoy, nothing else. You had absolutely no 
reason to take her away from us," June Kibuishi said. "On that day (her 
daughter died) my heart was ripped apart. I felt indescribable pain. Why? What 
did she do to you? How could you do something like that to my baby? My daughter 
was the most caring friend and I am very proud of her for that."

June Kibuishi said that throughout the 6 years of legal proceedings she did not 
see any indication Wozniak felt remorse.

"I got to see you coming out to court, smiling for the cameras, enjoying being 
the center of attention," June Kibuishi said. "Did I ever see any remorse? No. 
You're not worthy of being called a human being."

If there was a punishment worse than the death penalty, Wozniak should receive 
it, June Kibuishi said.

"We're happy for these family members that justice was finally done," Senior 
Deputy District Attorney Matt Murphy said after the hearing.

Earlier Friday, Conley denied a defense motion for a new trial and refused to 
dismiss the death penalty as a potential sentence based on claims of government 
misconduct in the case. Conley also dealt a tongue-lashing to Wozniak's 
attorney, Sanders, for filing a 132-page motion during his arguments this 
morning.

Noting that he had denied Sanders' motion for a delay in sentencing 2 days ago, 
the judge asked, "Isn't this just an attempt through the back door to get the 
continuance you wanted?"

Sanders explained that his filing was a response to prosecutors' criticisms of 
the defense attorney and that he was told to file it if he wanted. Conley ruled 
that the filing be "stricken," but it will be part of the record for an appeal.

Sanders again argued that the Orange County Sheriff's Department engaged in 
outrageous government conduct in the handling of jailhouse informants, 
particularly Fernando Perez, who heard Wozniak make incriminating statements. 
But Perez was never a witness in the trial, since Wozniak had already confessed 
to Costa Mesa police and Perez's information was redundant and not useful to 
prosecutors, Senior Deputy District Attorney Matt Murphy argued previously.

Sanders also argued that Murphy has made "inconsistent" arguments in the 
separate cases against Wozniak and his fiancee at the time, Rachel Buffett, who 
was charged as an accessory after the fact. The defense attorney also argued 
that a police lieutenant testified that Buffett should have been charged with 
murder.

Buffett is awaiting trial.

Conley, however, said while there was evidence that Buffett may have known 
about the murders there wasn't enough evidence to show she did anything to help 
Wozniak kill the victims.

Conley went over the gruesome details of the killings, including how Wozniak 
lured Herr to a Los Alamitos theater to shoot him in the back of his head and 
then, with help from a 16-year-old accomplice he "tricked," he used the 
victim's ATM card to withdraw money from Herr's bank account. Then he went on 
stage in Huntington Beach to perform in a play.

After the play, he went back to the crime scene and began hacking off the head 
and arms of the victim to impede the investigation, Conley said.

The next day, he used Herr's phone to lure Kibuishi to Herr's Costa Mesa 
apartment, where he shot her and then pulled her pants down to make it appear 
Herr had raped and killed her, Conley said. The judge noted Wozniak's use of 
the internet to research how to get away with the murders.

Wozniak then returned to the stage and "again he looked fine," Conley said.

Conley also noted that it took jurors about 79 minutes to return a verdict of 
death.

Conley said it was "unclear" how much of a role Buffett played in the killings, 
but it didn't matter because Wozniak was the one who carried out the murders 
and dismemberment.

Conley also denied an automatic motion to reject the jury's recommendation of 
death.

Wozniak was deep in debt in May 2010, facing eviction and without money for his 
pending wedding, when he concocted the money-acquisition plan to kill his 
neighbor, Herr, and throw police off the trail by making it look like Herr 
murdered and raped Kibuishi, Murphy argued at trial.

Wozniak, who grew up in Long Beach, further tried to confound investigators by 
dismembering Herr and dumping the body parts in the El Dorado Nature Center in 
Long Beach, Murphy said.

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

After 37 years: Will he get death in cold case rape-murder?


The jury that convicted a man - already in prison for 1 murder - of murdering a 
young woman during the commission of a rape in Glendale about 37 years ago is 
due back in court Monday for the trial's penalty phase. Darrell Mark 
Gurule.Darrell Mark Gurule. Photo via Glendale Police DepartmentIn that 
hearing, the panel will be asked to recommend a sentence of death or life in 
prison without parole for the defendant.

Darrell Mark Gurule, 57, was found guilty Wednesday of the 1st-degree murder 
for the shooting death of 23-year-old Barbara Ballman, whose naked body was 
found inside her Volkswagen sedan that was parked across from Edison Elementary 
School in the early morning hours of Sept. 21, 1979.

The criminal complaint alleges that she had been killed on or about Sept. 20, 
1979.

Jurors found true the special circumstance allegations of murder during the 
commission of a rape and murder with a prior conviction, and deadlocked on a 
3rd special circumstance allegation - murder during the course of a robbery.

Glendale police said semen evidence was recovered from the victim, who had been 
shot in the abdomen, but DNA analysis was not available at the time.

In 2009, Glendale police re-opened an investigation into Ballman's killing and 
submitted the semen evidence to the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department's 
crime lab, police said.

The DNA was linked to Gurule, who was 19 at the time of the killing and had 
been serving a life prison sentence since 1987 for the kidnap-murder of a man 
in a case detectives believe was a drug deal gone wrong, according to police.

Jurors are expected to hear more about the prior murder case during the trial's 
penalty phase.

Gurule had also been convicted of attacking a woman in Los Angeles in 1977, 
according to police.

Gurule was arrested in 2010 in connection with Ballman's killing. He has 
remained behind bars without bail since then.

(source for both: mynewsla.com)

********

High-profile defense attorney attempts to represent Huntsman


An attempt by a high-profile defense attorney to represent a woman accused of 
killing 2 children was quickly squashed by a Monterey County judge in denying 
her request for a new trial date.

Santa Monica defense attorney Marcia Morrissey, who's represented Snoop Dogg 
and the Menendez Brothers, made an appearance in court Friday with Tami 
Huntsman in an attempt to be appointed as her 2nd attorney.

But after Superior Court Judge Pamela Butler said the trial date would not be 
postponed, Morrissey said she no longer would want to be considered.

"I cannot be ready for the case by February," she said. "I have obligations in 
other cases. I'll decline the appointment as it does not give me time to 
prepare."

California law allows a 2nd attorney to be appointed for indigent clients in 
death penalty cases.

Huntsman, 40, is accused of abusing a 9-year-old girl and of killing her 6- and 
3-year-old siblings, Shaun and Delylah Tara. Their bodies were found stuffed in 
barrels soon after they were reported missing.

Huntsman is facing the death penalty. Her co-defendant, Gonzalo Curiel, is 
facing life in prison since he was a minor when the crimes were committed.

Butler said she would appoint a 2nd attorney, also known as Keenan counsel, on 
Oct. 14.

Morrissey and Kay Duffy, Huntsman's attorney, asked the court to put off the 
trial until September 2017 to give them time to prepare. Duffy said the 
February date would not give her enough time.

But prosecutor Steve Somers said the trial should not be delayed any longer 
because children will be called as witnesses and they are likely to forget 
details the more time goes by.

"I have children who have to remember things, and the defense (wants to) make 
it as long, tedious and expensive" as possible, he said.

Duffy denied wanting to protract the proceedings unnecessarily, saying she had 
an obligation to defend her client's life.

"We have an ethical obligation to do the process as it's supposed to be done," 
Duffy said. "We don't have a set agenda."

(source: Monterey Herald)






OREGON:

Woman accused of shooting Ex-Gladstone cop's wife spoke of killing her before, 
sister says


Karen Benton said Friday she never took seriously Susan Campbell's comments 
about trying to kill her sister-in-law.

Even after Debbie Higbee Benton was found dead in May 2001, Karen Benton 
testified in Clackamas County Circuit Court, she never connected it to 
statements Campbell had made months earlier. The fact was that Campbell 
threatened to kill many people, including her own husband, she said.

"I never took Susan seriously. She was always speaking grandiose things," Karen 
Benton said. "I thought she was just talking. She always talked like this."

The prosecution called Karen Benton to the stand as her brother's murder trial 
closed in on its 2nd full week. Lynn Edward Benton, a former Gladstone police 
sergeant, is accused of paying Campbell and her son, Jason Jaynes, $2,000 to 
kill Higbee Benton.

The couple, who married in 2010, had separated in April 2011 after Lynn 
Benton's transition from woman to man frayed their relationship.

Higbee Benton was found dead on the floor of her beauty salon, shot, strangled 
and beaten. Prosecutors say Campbell shot her and, when that didn't kill her, 
Lynn Benton watched as Jaynes strangled and beat her.

Lynn Benton could face the death penalty if he is convicted of aggravated 
murder. He also faces charges of solicitation to commit aggravated murder, 
criminal conspiracy to commit aggravated murder and attempted murder.

Campbell pleaded guilty in 2012 to attempted aggravated murder as part of a 
cooperation deal with prosecutors. However, a judge ruled that Campbell 
repeatedly violated the deal and it was revoked earlier this month.

Prosecutors say Lynn Edward Benton orchestrated the murder-for-fire plot 
against his wife, Debbie Higbee Benton, in 2011 with the help of a friend and 
her son.

Karen Benton, Lynn Benton's older sister, met Campbell in the early 2000s, 
before Lynn Benton and Higbee Benton started dating, she told prosecutors on 
Friday.

Karen Benton didn't know Campbell well, she said. She mainly interacted with 
Campbell when visiting her grandmother, whom Campbell was caring for in 
September 2010, she said.

That same month, Campbell told Karen Benton that she had tried to kill Higbee 
Benton multiple times. She claimed she tried to poison Higbee Benton and push 
her into a river, Karen Benton said. She also claimed to be building a silencer 
for a gun.

However, Karen Benton didn't believe her.

"I didn't take them seriously," she said. "They were the ramblings of an 
individual who never meant what she said."

In the days after Higbee Benton's death, she said that she didn't think about 
what Campbell's words. Instead, she focused on trying to support her brother, 
who was devastated, she said.

Them about a week after the slaying, Karen Benton drove Lynn Benton to a local 
restaurant to meet Campbell. Her brother and his friend exchanged checks, she 
testified, then Campbell leaned through the car window where Karen Benton sat.

Campbell asked if she had told anyone about what she'd said about Higbee 
Benton.

"I didn't know what to think," Karen Benton said. "I didn't know at that point 
in time whether Susan was serious when she made those statements months ago 
(or) is she just being her typical Susan self and making more grandiose 
statements?"

When investigators questioned her in November 2011, Karen Benton told them 
about Campbell's statements. She wondered then if things would have been 
different if she believed Campbell before, she said.

"Maybe if I had taken her seriously months ago then maybe Debbie would still be 
alive," she said.

Prosecutors also called Gladstone assistant city manager Jolene Morishita to 
the witness stand on Friday. Morishita recalled multiple conversations with 
Lynn Benton about his marital issues after his transition. At one point, he 
said Higbee Benton no longer loved him and that he believed she stole money 
from him, Morishita said.

The trial will continue next week.

(source: oregonlive.com)






USA:

Jury selection process in Roof trial begins Monday


One of the highest profile murder trials in state history begins in November, 
but first the lengthy task of finding a jury for Dylann Roof's federal trial 
must begin.

Roof is charged with killing 9 people Emanuel AME Church last year.

Court officials say they expect Roof to attend the jury proceedings that begin 
Monday. The process will take place in downtown Charleston, and many legal 
experts plan to observe.

"The procedure coming up in jury selection in my view is the key," said former 
state Attorney General Charlie Condon. "It's the key in the Dylann Roof case."

Condon believes it will be the most important murder case to be tried in South 
Carolina history. He believes who ends up on the jury could make or break the 
case.

"The defense really only needs to have one juror out of the 12 that will vote 
for life imprisonment. If that happens, it will be a life imprisonment 
sentence," he said.

That's why Condon thinks the jury process is especially critical. With an 
overwhelming amount of evidence against Dylann Roof and the nature of the 
crime, selecting a jury panel of 12 from a pool of 1,500 people will be 
challenging.

"First of all, you've got to get jurors what haven't made up their mind about 
guilt or innocence. That's why so many are being summoned to the federal court, 
because this case has been so very well-covered, as it should be," Condon said.

The former attorney general believes the jurors' beliefs on the death penalty 
will be weighed heavily.

"You cannot be a juror that says in every murder case the defendant has to get 
the death penalty," he said. "You can't be a juror that says in every death 
penalty case, 'I'm against the death penalty. I can never vote for the death 
penalty.'"

Even with strict qualifications, the long-time lawyer believes defense 
attorneys have a tough job.

"The defense has an extremely difficult burden in this matter, and the odds of 
them finding that 1 juror is going to be a really difficult task."

700 people will eventually be chosen from the group of 3,000 potential jurors. 
Selecting a final jury panel of 12 people will take place in November before 
the federal trial begins.

(source: WCIV news)

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

Racism is keeping the death penalty alive


The Delaware Supreme Court recently struck down the state's death penalty on 
Sixth Amendment grounds. In November, California, the largest state in the 
country, will have a ballot initiative to end the death penalty.

It's almost certain that the United States has executed innocent people, and 
death row inmates are being exonerated with DNA evidence across the country. 
With the possibility of a Supreme Court that is appointed by Democrats, it's 
increasingly likely that the death penalty will eventually be banned in the 
United States.

But despite the liberalization that has happened in America in recent decades 
on issues like gun control, marijuana legislation, and LGBTQ rights, the death 
penalty has proven stubbornly resistant to a change. A recent Gallup poll finds 
that 61 % of Americans still favor the death penalty; Pew places support at 
about 56 %. That's lower than in the early 1990s, when 80% of Americans 
supported the death penalty, but it's still high when compared to other 
industrialized nations, and a far smaller gain than other progressive political 
causes have made in the U.S. during the same time period.

Why has support for the death penalty proven so consistent among Americans? Our 
research shows 1 possible reason: namely, support for the death penalty is 
deeply linked to larger questions of racism in America.

In trying to answer these questions, we created a model that used several 
academic data sources and controlled for race, income, education, ideology and 
party to explore how racism affects attitudes about the death penalty. And when 
we ran the numbers, we found that people who harbor racist stereotypes about 
black people and those with racial resentment towards the position of black 
people in American society are far more supportive of the death penalty than 
those with more tolerant attitudes.

In other words, the data clearly show that the death penalty isn't a party-line 
issue- it's a racism issue.

The links between the death penalty and racism

We know, first and foremost, that support for the death penalty is most highly 
concentrated among older white Americans.

According to data from the 2016 American National Election Studies, a survey of 
1,200 eligible voters taken in late January, 79% of Republicans support the 
death penalty, while only 45% of Democrats do. 63% of white people support the 
death penalty, compared with 42% of black people and 1/2 of all people of 
color. Among those less than 30 years of age, support stands at only 46%, while 
65% of those 50 years and older favor the death penalty.

1 question on the ANES survey asks respondents, "Do you favor, oppose, or 
neither favor nor oppose the death penalty for persons convicted of murder?" We 
compared this data with other ANES questions that ask respondents questions 
about racial resentment - such as whether they think black people are lazier 
and more violent than white people.

Interestingly, this effect is not true among Latinos. Latinos who harbor more 
resentful views or negative stereotypes of black people are no more likely to 
favor the death penalty than those without resentful views. This suggests that 
the death penalty is uniquely tied to race for whites - maybe unsurprising, 
given its long history as a tool for racial oppression.

The death penalty is being successfully killed by high-knowledge Democrats

Even though support for the death penalty doesn't fall neatly along party 
lines, there is still a link to partisan politics - namely, Democrat-controlled 
states are much more likely to abolish the death penalty than those controlled 
by Republicans.

In 2012, 74% of Democrats supported the death penalty, compared to about 84% 
for Republicans and 81% for Independents. Between 2012 and 2016, Democrats and 
Independents have become significantly less likely to support the death 
penalty. Among strong Democratic partisans, there is now only a 45% probability 
of support for the death penalty, compared to 85% for strong Republicans.

The explanation for the emergence of partisan polarization on death penalty 
attitudes can be found in the shifts within the Democratic coalition. First 
off, we find that Democrats are no longer divided along racial lines - our 
model of 2016 opinions shows no significant differences in support probability 
between Democrats of different racial backgrounds. Second, and perhaps even 
more important, Democrats with high levels of political knowledge are now 
significantly less likely to support the death penalty than those with low 
levels of political knowledge. As shown in the chart below, probability of 
support among "high knowledge" Democrats - defined by the survey as Democrats 
who correctly answered a series of questions about American politics and 
government - is only 35%. This group, more than any other, is pushing the death 
penalty toward abolition.

America will probably abolish the death penalty - eventually

Though several states have curbed the use of, or entirely abolished the death 
penalty, it still exists in 31 states. The increasing difficulty in obtaining 
the drugs used to carry out lethal injections has also slowed the pace of 
executions. Executions per year have steadily declined, from 52 in 2009 to 28 
in 2015 and 15 so far in 2016. One study finds, "Only 2% of the counties in the 
U.S. have been responsible for the majority of cases leading to executions 
since 1976."

But even if states don't vote to abolish the death penalty, the Supreme Court 
appears ready to strike, accepting two death penalty cases for its upcoming 
term. Both cases include sympathetic defendants: one, a black man whose trial 
included testimony claiming that black people are more prone to violence than 
whites and another includes a man with severe mental disabilities. Justices 
Breyer and Kennedy had previously signaled opposition on the grounds that the 
death penalty was applied too inconsistently. Ginsburg joined a Breyer dissent 
declaring death penalty unconstitutional and it???s likely Sotomayor believes 
this as well. It???s unlikely Kagan would dissent with the conservatives, 
particularly if Kennedy is on board.

The Court as it is currently will continue to limit the death penalty; a Court 
with a liberal majority could end the death penalty for good, while a Court 
with one or more new justices appointed by Donald Trump would likely uphold it. 
(Trump has signaled strong support for the death penalty, especially for people 
who kill police officers.)

The death penalty has a fraught history in the United States. It has roots in 
lynching, a form of extra-judicial terrorism that propped up white supremacy. A 
study by the Equal Justice Institute finds, "the decline of lynching in the 
studied states relied heavily on the increased use of capital punishment 
imposed by court order following an often accelerated trial." Black men were 
frequently executed for rape, though white men rarely did. According to the 
ACLU, "Between 1930 and 1976, 455 men were executed for rape, of whom 405 - 90 
% - were black." The youngest American in the 20th century who was executed was 
a black 14 year old, convicted in a trial that was deemed unfair 70 years after 
his execution.

Even today, there are stark racial biases in who faces death, and for what 
crimes. These disparities persist today.

The death penalty can't be separated from America's long history of racial 
oppression. Luckily, the social liberalization of the country combined with 
judicial challenges may, eventually, make state-sponsored executions a thing of 
the past.

(source: fusion.net)