[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----PENN., N.C., GA., FLA., ALA., OHIO, IND.

[Rick Halperin]

June 7



PENNSYLVANIA:

Meet Larry Krasner: Civil Rights Attorney, Death Penalty Opponent and 
Democratic Philly DA Candidate


Will a defense attorney with a long record of standing up to prosecutors and 
police soon head one of the nation's busiest district attorney offices? We 
speak with civil rights attorney Larry Krasner, who is considered the 
front-runner in the race to become Philadelphia's next district attorney after 
he overwhelmingly won the Democratic primary last month. Over his career, 
Krasner has represented protesters with Black Lives Matter, Grannies for Peace, 
ACT UP and Occupy Philadelphia. He's promised to never seek the death penalty.

AMY GOODMAN: The Clash's "Clampdown," sung by Philly rock 'n' roll band Sheer 
Mag, joined onstage by our next guest, Philadelphia district attorney candidate 
Larry Krasner. This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace 
Report. I'm Amy Goodman, with Juan Gonzalez.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, will a defense attorney with a long record of standing up 
to prosecutors and police soon head one of the nation's most busy district 
attorney offices? In Philadelphia, civil rights attorney Larry Krasner is 
poised to become the city's next district attorney, after overwhelmingly 
winning the Democratic primary last month. Philadelphia is a solidly Democratic 
city, and the odds for winning November's general election are in Krasner's 
favor, with Democrats commanding a 7-to-1 registration advantage.

Over his career as a criminal defense and civil rights attorney, Krasner has 
represented protesters with Black Lives Matter, Grannies for Peace, ACT UP, 
Occupy Philadelphia and other progressive groups. He's a longtime opponent of 
capital punishment who's promised to never seek the death penalty. Philadelphia 
jails more people than any other city in the Northeast, and Krasner is on 
record opposing police stop-and-frisk policies. He told The Intercept he hopes 
to create a team that will investigate and prosecute police and public 
officials for abuses.

This is a clip from an ad released by Krasner's campaign.

BERT ELMORE: When I heard Larry said he was going to run, I said, "He's going 
to run for DA? Perfect. I'm in."

KITTY HEITE: I think, unlike any other candidate in the DA's race, Larry is 
calling for a new approach.

MARGIE POLITZER: I've been aware of Larry Krasner since the '90s, when he was 
defending protesters involved with ACT UP.

MICHAEL COARD: I knew Larry because he and I worked together pro bono in 
representing activists. He's the attorney for Black Lives Matter.

AMY GOODMAN: As an attorney, Larry Krasner has never prosecuted a case, but 
instead spent his career representing protesters and the economically 
disadvantaged. He has also filed over 75 civil rights cases against police 
officers and successfully gotten some 800 narcotics convictions thrown out by 
revealing 2 officers perjured themselves.

For more, we're joined in studio by Larry Krasner himself, the longtime 
criminal defense and civil rights attorney, the Democratic nominee for district 
attorney for Philadelphia.

Larry Krasner, welcome to Democracy Now!

LARRY KRASNER: Thank you. Good morning.

AMY GOODMAN: Why did you decide to run for district attorney? You've gone after 
prosecutors for decades.

LARRY KRASNER: Well, I have spent 30 years being in court -- criminal court, 
that is -- 4 to 5 days a week. And I've been watching what I view as a 
slow-motion car crash for all that time. We have more and more people in jail 
all the time, and yet the rate of -- the rate of poverty, the rate of infant 
mortality, the rate of suffering, in many ways, doesn't get better, and we 
don't get safer. So, you know, I think the truth is, when you read a report 
card and it's all Fs, something needs to change. And I felt like there was no 
other candidate who wanted to do that.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And how were you able to catch fire with the voters, given the 
fact that there are -- there were quite a few candidates running, several of 
them with other progressive positions similar to yours, but you managed to eke 
out a -- not just a minor victory, but a big victory?

LARRY KRASNER: Well, I don't think it was really about me. I think it was about 
the ideas. I think the reality is that, especially in a place like 
Philadelphia, which is 80 % Democratic, and it's about 50 % nonwhite, you're 
dealing with people who don't want the death penalty. They realize it's nothing 
but a waste of money. They want their public schools. They don't want mass 
incarceration. They want treatment for people who are suffering from the 
disease that is addiction. And they also don't want civil asset forfeiture, 
cash bail, these other measures that effectively just step on the necks of the 
poor and don't make us any safer.

JUAN GONZALEZ: I wanted to ask you, the -- because you've been a defense 
attorney, you're well aware that a huge portion of a part of the legal system 
is basically plea bargaining. It's not actual criminal trials where guilt and 
innocence is determined by a jury of your peers, but it's basically prosecutors 
forcing defendants to somehow or other plea bargain to get a reduced sentence 
rather than risk a longer term. How would you, as district attorney, try to 
change that?

LARRY KRASNER: Well, you know, plea bargains always have been and always will 
be a part of the system. The problem that we have now is that they're done in 
such a coercive fashion. They're coercive because very often poor people sit in 
jail from the moment they're arrested, and they're effectively serving a 
sentence. So by the time they finally come up to their court date, the 
incentive to plead guilty, even if you're innocent, is very high. And the other 
thing that goes on is that people are punished, and often very severely, for 
taking a case to trial. This is how we have coercive plea bargains.

I don't believe that people should be punished for exercising their 
constitutional right to a trial, you know, and that's not something that I 
intend to do as district attorney. We need to be responsible in how we approach 
this. We need to be even-handed. We need to seek justice. And justice doesn't 
mean maximizing convictions by coercive means or maximizing sentences.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to turn to candidate Donald Trump, who called for a 
nationwide stop-and-frisk program at a town hall meeting hosted by Fox News. 
This is a town hall participant, Ricardo Simms, questioning Trump.

RICARDO SIMMS: There's been a lot of violence in the black community. I want to 
know what would you do to help stop that violence, you know, black-on-black 
crime.M

DONALD TRUMP: Right. Well, one of the things I'd do, Ricardo, is I would do 
stop-and-frisk. I think you have to. We did it in New York. It worked 
incredibly well. And you have to be proactive. And, you know, you -- you really 
help people sort of change their mind automatically. You understand. You -- you 
have to have -- in my opinion, I see what's going on here. I see what's going 
on in Chicago. I think stop-and-frisk -- in New York City, it was so incredible 
the way it worked. Now, we had a very good mayor, but New York City was 
incredible the way that worked. So I think that would be one step you could do.

AMY GOODMAN: So that was Donald Trump. Larry Krasner, what is the New York 
version of stop-and-frisk in Philadelphia, and what's your position on it?

LARRY KRASNER: So, Donald Trump, needless to say, is the gift that just keeps 
on giving. So much wisdom. It's a disaster. I mean, stop-and-frisk in 
Philadelphia, in fact, results in the following. Fifty young men -- it's almost 
always young men -- the vast majority people of color, get searched. They find 
something one out of 50 times. They find a gun one out of 400 times. But what 
they are doing, of course, is they are alienating over and over the other 49 
young men, mostly young men. They're reminding them that they're poor. They're 
reminding them that there are certain neighborhoods where police will do 
whatever they want. And they are creating an environment in which those young 
men don't want to be police officers and in which those young people do not 
want to share information with the police about a shooting that may be about to 
happen or about a shooting of their friend that has already happened. This is 
the destruction of intelligence-based policing in which information is actually 
shared. This is the genesis of the "don't snitch" culture. What you have here 
is -- thanks to Rudy Giuliani and other people like Trump, you have this 
incredible divide, which has been created by a policy that is unconstitutional.

AMY GOODMAN: The Fraternal Order of Police is very powerful in Philadelphia.

LARRY KRASNER: Fraternal Order of Police believes it's very powerful in 
Philadelphia. I would submit, if you look at the results of the last election, 
not so much. But I don't say that to gloat. You know, the problem is not the 
rank-and-file police in Philadelphia, many of whom are very good people. The 
problem is that the leadership of the FOP, unfortunately, during the campaign, 
engaged in rhetoric that was very much Frank Rizzo-era throwback, reactionary 
rhetoric. This is the same group that was on record as having endorsed Donald 
Trump in a city that is 80 percent Democratic, to the absolute outrage of the 
women and -- women officers and the officers of color. The Guardian Civic 
League, which is the black union of police in Philadelphia, did a press 
conference over how upset they were about that. So, you know, the leadership of 
the FOP has been pretty good at attracting attention during the election cycle. 
But they have also asked to meet with me, have met with me and are now talking 
in a different fashion.

What concerns me is not them, because, in fact, the leader is not even a police 
officer. What concerns me is the police commissioner. And we've had two fairly 
progressive police commissioners in a row. He and I have an excellent 
relationship. We've met. We've spoken by telephone. And while we will disagree 
on some things, I'm much more concerned with working with the police department 
as opposed to worrying about some throwback head of a police union.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Your ability to run for the seat was helped by the fact that the 
current district attorney is now facing trial for corruption himself. And it 
was not that long ago, wasn't it, that the state attorney general in 
Pennsylvania also faced criminal charges herself? I'm wondering your sense of 
what's going on where now even the prosecutors are ending up on corruption 
trials in Pennsylvania.

LARRY KRASNER: You know, unfortunately, for as long as I have been practicing, 
which is 30 years, the people who have become district attorneys in 
Philadelphia County have been politicians, and ultimately their goal was not to 
stop in the District Attorney's Office. It was to become governor or to become 
senator, whatever it may be. It goes all the way back to Arlen Specter, Ed 
Rendell, Lynne Abraham and now Seth Williams. So it's not surprising to me that 
they end up embroiled in corruption scandals, because, the truth is, they're 
mostly running for higher office. It has been, to a very large extent, an 
exercise of ego.

I really don't want to run for anything else, didn't -- wasn't even sure I 
wanted to run for this, until things got kind of out of hand. So, you know, I 
think I'm coming at it from a different perspective, which is that I have 
worked from the outside for justice for a very long time, and I now see an 
opportunity to be more effective on the inside, and that's what I'd like to do.

JUAN GONZALEZ: And do you -- do you fear that the career prosecutors in that 
office are going to -- because there have been some reports that there's 
thoughts of open rebellion, of people resigning. And, you know, people are used 
to watching "Law & Order" and seeing the heroic battle of prosecutors in New 
York City and other places. Is your sense is that there's going to be rebellion 
in the ranks when you come in?

LARRY KRASNER: No, not at all. The reality is that, once again, there are 
certain people who are trying to, you know, use publicity to indicate that 
there's more dissent than there actually is. I'm looking forward to working 
with a lot of these prosecutors. Many of their personal cellphones are in my 
phone, because I am in court 4 to 5 days a week for 30 years trying cases with 
them all the time. And there are some people in there who are not just good, 
they're truly excellent. Some of these folks have been feeding me information 
about police corruption that they could not address within the office without 
causing problems for their own career. So I'm looking forward to working with 
them.

But there is no question that in this location, as in many other locations 
across the United States where progressive prosecutors have come in, there will 
be some change of the guard. There has to be. When Josh Shapiro became the 
state attorney general in Pennsylvania, he dismissed about 13, 14 percent of 
the district attorneys in his office, a similarly sized office of about 300 
attorneys and a bunch of staff. And no one thought that was strange. There's 
nothing unusual about coming in and having some changing of the guard, because, 
otherwise, you would be violating your promises to try to achieve the cultural 
change that you have argued is necessary.

AMY GOODMAN: Would you ever pursue the death penalty in a case?

LARRY KRASNER: No.

AMY GOODMAN: Why?

LARRY KRASNER: So many reasons, but let me just quantify it for a moment. I 
think we all understand the moral arguments on this point. Pennsylvania has not 
executed anyone against his will since 1962, when I was was 1 year old. Three 
people wanted to die in the 1990s, and they were permitted to doing so. But 
during that period of time, there have been six exonerations of innocent people 
from death row. And there has been over $1 billion spent in the pursuit of 
executions that are never imposed. A billion dollars, if you break it down, 
turns out to be, at $40,000 a head, about 500 schoolteachers or social workers 
or young police officers across the commonwealth of Pennsylvania every year for 
the last 50 years. We know that measures like good public education stop crime, 
reduce homicides. We know that. And we also know that there's no evidence that 
the death penalty actually reduces crime. I see no value in destroying our 
public schools, which is exactly what's going on, in favor of a penalty that is 
never imposed, and shouldn't be, or we would be executing, frankly, significant 
numbers of innocent people.

JUAN GONZALEZ: I'm wondering -- perhaps the most famous prisoner from 
Philadelphia, if not in the entire country, is Mumia Abu-Jamal. And you're 
familiar, obviously, with his long history and his case. I'm wondering your 
thoughts on how justice was served in the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal.

LARRY KRASNER: Well, you know, as someone who may very well be the next 
district attorney, I have to be extremely careful about what I would say in 
advance of being in office, because it could become a basis for an argument 
that I should not be involved in that case. So, in this case, as with other 
significant cases in Philadelphia, for example, the investigation around the 
shooting and killing of Brandon Tate-Brown, I'm not commenting during this 
campaign.

AMY GOODMAN: And finally, you've represented so many different groups -- Black 
Lives Matter, Occupy and many different groups forming a kind of resistance 
right now to President Trump. You -- many of your supporters were Bernie 
Sanders supporters. Do you see yourself carrying on his fight?

LARRY KRASNER: I think -- I think the short answer is yes. You know, I think 
that while Bernie Sanders did not have quite as detailed a platform on criminal 
justice as I would have liked to see, that this campaign is much more in the 
tradition of Bernie Sanders.

The most exciting thing, in my view, to come out of this campaign is that in 
the last 2 similar election cycles for DA, there were about 105,000 and 110,000 
total votes each time; this time, there were 150,000 votes. The reason the 
national Republican Party and Democratic Party are noticing what's happening 
here is not me. What they're noticing is that in a state that was lost by 
Hillary Clinton to Donald Trump by 40,000 votes, in a single city, in an 
off-year election, about 45,000 new votes have turned out. There is a gold mine 
of untapped progressive votes. And there is a coalition of African-American and 
progressive votes that, unfortunately, Bernie Sanders was not able to tap as 
well as he might have liked. But they're there. And this could be -- not me, 
but this -- could be a model for what is possible across the country.

AMY GOODMAN: Larry Krasner, we want to thank you for being with us, criminal 
defense and civil rights attorney, Democratic nominee for district attorney for 
Philadelphia. When we come back, we'll be joined by the Republican nominee, the 
contender for district attorney for Philadelphia. Stay with us.

(source: Juan Gonzalez co-hosts Democracy Now! with Amy Goodman. Gonzalez has 
been a professional journalist for more than 30 years and a staff columnist at 
the New York Daily News since 1987. He is a 2-time recipient of the George Polk 
Award.

Amy Goodman is the host and executive producer of Democracy Now!, a national, 
daily, independent, award-winning news program airing on more than 1,100 public 
television and radio stations worldwide. Time Magazine named Democracy Now! its 
"Pick of the Podcasts," along with NBC's "Meet the Press."----truth-out.org)

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

Motions denied to sever robbery, homicide cases


A Union County judge denied motions to sever pending robbery and homicide 
trials involving capital murder defendant Justin Richard.

Richard faces the death penalty on an open count of homicide for the 2012 
shooting of Randy Sampsell. He's also charged with robbery and burglary with 
co-defendant Theron Moore in separate cases that were merged for trial.

A home invasion in New Berlin and thefts of a pickup truck and motorcycle, in 
which Richard and Moore are accused, allegedly occurred 10 days after Sampsell 
was shot inside his home during a robbery.

Attorneys for both Richard and Moore sought to sever the other cases from the 
homicide trial.

Judge Michael Sholley denied the requests because the homicide charge hasn't 
yet been scheduled for trial. His order leaves open that the motions could be 
filed again.

"The court declines to take any action on the timing of the trial in this 
matter as the matter has not been listed for trial at this point and therefore 
these issues are premature," Sholley said.

A hearing on the matter was held in May, during which Sholley said the homicide 
trial could be pushed as far as 2019.

The prosecutor, Union County District Attorney D. Peter Johnson, prefers either 
to try Moore and Richard as part of the homicide trial or before the homicide 
case comes before a jury.

Should Richard be convicted on charges of felony assault before or at his 
homicide trial, it would add to aggravating circumstances supporting Johnson's 
call for the death penalty.

Moore isn't named as a co-defendant in the homicide case. His attorney, Matthew 
Slivinski, argued in court that Moore faces substantial prejudice if his cases 
are heard as part of the capital homicide trial.

Attorney Michael Dennehy, Richard's counsel, favored the joint trial of Moore 
and Richard come after his own client is tried in Sampsell's death.

Moore is next due in court July 14; Richard July 18. Both appearances are for 
pre-trial conferences.

(source: The Daily Item)






NORTH CAROLINA:

Search warrant paints fuller picture of Rockingham DA investigation


A Forsyth County grand jury indicted a man Monday on charges of 1st-degree 
murder and other offenses in connection with the death of a toddler in August 
2015.

Charles Thomas Stacks, 31, is accused of killing Jaxson Sonny Swain, a 
2-year-old boy, who died of head injuries on Aug. 19, 2015 at Brenner 
Children's Hospital.

Prosecutors have filed for a Rule 24 hearing, which determines whether they can 
pursue the death penalty against Stacks, if he is convicted.

Jaxson was found unresponsive Aug. 16 in a bathtub at a home in the 5400 block 
of Grubbs Street, Winston-Salem police said.

Charles Stacks lived in the home with Megin Elizabeth Stacks. At the time, 
police didn't describe their relationship.

Police described Jaxson's death as a case of child abuse. Charles Stacks was a 
friend of Jaxson's mother, Candace Swain.

The grand jury also indicted Charles Stacks on charges of intentional child 
abuse; inflicting serious bodily injury; possession of a firearm - a 
.45-caliber handgun - and altering or destorying its serial number; and felony 
possession of cocaine, according to the indictment.

He is accused of biting Jaxson on various parts of his body, a court record 
shows. The man was caring for Jaxson the day the child's injuries were 
reported, police said.

Jaxson died 3 days after he was found in the bathtub, the result of bleeding 
between the surface of his brain and its outer covering, which was caused by a 
blunt force head injury, according to the autopsy report by Dr. Donald Jason, a 
Forsyth County medical examiner.

The autopsy showed that the boy had bruises on his head, face and torso, as 
well as bleeding and bruising in his genital area.

(source: News Record)






GEORGIA:

Motions heard for man accused of killing stepdaughter


Attorneys representing a Cobb County man charged with killing his stepdaughter 
last July argued Tuesday that he shouldn't have to wear his orange jumpsuit to 
court.

Dafareya Hunter, 37, is accused of raping and stabbing his stepdaughter before 
setting fire to his home in an effort to cover his tracks. He faces the death 
penalty.

He appeared at his motions hearing in Cobb Superior Court wearing an orange 
Cobb County-issue jumpsuit and a white knit cap as his team of capital 
defenders argued in favor of a series of motions they filed in his case. Those 
motions included allowing Hunter to wear "civilian clothes" to court and 
putting a gag order on media outlets to prevent news cameras in the courtroom.

Hunter was arrested Aug. 26 in Florida in connection to the July 23 fire, which 
occurred at a home along Shadowridge Drive near the intersection of Powder 
Springs and Hurt roads.

When the fire was extinguished investigators discovered the body of 14-year-old 
Ana Then in one of the home's bedrooms. Her death was quickly ruled a homicide.

According to court records, Hunter allegedly raped his stepdaughter, stabbed 
her multiple times and then doused her body in gasoline before setting it on 
fire. The man's stepson was sleeping in the home at the time but managed to 
escape the fire through a window, sustaining minor injuries.

Hunter was indicted Nov. 3 on 5 counts of felony murder and 1 count each of 
malice murder, aggravated assault, rape, 1st degree cruelty to children, 
aggravated child molestation, 1st degree arson and criminal attempt to commit a 
felony.

Attorneys Crystal Bice and Jerilyn Bell, who were appointed to Hunter's case 
after it was announced the state would seek the death penalty, argued before 
Cobb Superior Court Judge Lark Ingram that having their client appear in court 
shackled and clad in an orange jumpsuit could lead jurors to believe he is 
guilty before he even has the chance at a fair trial.

"It's prejudicial for the potential jury pool," Bice said. "Every time he comes 
to court in his shackles and jumpsuit, the public sees him that way."

A motion filed in February says forcing Hunter to wear bright orange jail 
clothing is "manifestly prejudicial to (his) rights to due process and a fair 
trial."

Chief Assistant District Attorney Jesse Evans reminded the court that Hunter is 
charged with the most serious offense possible and that this was a capital 
case.

"The defendant needed to be moved to protective custody because of the nature 
of the charges against him," he said.

Hunter's team of attorneys also filed a gag order in an attempt to prevent 
members of the media from taking photographs and video of the court 
proceedings.

"My concern is that we are inviting all the media outlets to come and take an 
interest in this case," Bice said, maintaining that photos and videos of her 
client in newspapers and on the nightly news could lead people to presume 
Hunter is guilty before his trial begins.

Evans argued it that it wouldn't be fair to keep members of the media from 
covering a high-profile case by prohibiting video and photographs.

Judge Ingram suggested allowing news organizations that have expressed interest 
in the case to continue their coverage, but is set to make a formal ruling on 
the motions filed sometime between now and the next scheduled hearing.

Hunter's case marks the 1st time Cobb District Attorney Vic Reynolds has sought 
the death penalty since he was elected in 2012.

The next hearing in the case is scheduled for July 13 at 9 a.m.

(source: Marietta Daily Journal)






FLORIDA:

Fla. death penalty-prosecutor fight heads to high court----Aramis Ayala is 
fighting Gov. Rick Scott's orders to transfer almost 2 dozen cases after she 
said her office wouldn't pursue the death penalty against Markeith Loyd


Gov. Rick Scott and a Florida prosecutor who refuses to seek the death penalty 
will square off against each other before the state's high court.

The Florida Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered a June 28 hearing so justices can 
question attorneys representing the Republican governor and State Attorney 
Aramis Ayala.

The Orlando prosecutor is fighting Scott's orders to transfer almost 2 dozen 
cases after she said her office wouldn't pursue the death penalty. Ayala has 
said the process is costly and it drags on for the victims' relatives. Ayala 
announced her decision in March as her office was starting to build a case 
against Markeith Loyd in the fatal shootings of an Orlando police lieutenant, 
and his pregnant ex-girlfriend.

Scott reassigned the cases to a prosecutor in a neighboring district.

(source: Associated Press)

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

Trial opens in 2006 murder of Broward Deputy Brian Tephford


Broward State Attorney Mike Satz faced a jury for the 1st time in 7 years 
Tuesday, delivering opening statements in the case of 3 men accused of gunning 
down a Broward sheriff's deputy in 2006.

Without consulting notes, Satz spent an hour laying out the case against Andre 
Delancy, Bernard Forbes and Eloyn Ingraham, each of whom is charged with the 
murder of Broward Deputy Brian Tephford, conspiracy to commit murder, and 
attempted murder in the shooting of Deputy Christopher Carbocci. The defendants 
face the death penalty if convicted.

Satz spoke in meticulous detail, starting with the defendants getting an 
apartment in Tamarac earlier in 2006, recounting the shooting and the desperate 
hours that followed, and ending with the defendants arrested at a Dania Beach 
motel less than a day after the bullets were fired.

Satz has personally handled 3 trials since Tephford was murdered, all involving 
the murder or attempted murder of law enforcement officers.

The start of trial was put off for a decade by a series of scheduling setbacks: 
some routine arguments about the admissibility of evidence; some complications 
arising from the challenge of coordinating the calendars of multiple defense 
lawyers, prosecutors and witnesses; and some unexpected roadblocks caused by 
the fluctuating status of the state's death penalty laws.

Jurors were told the trial would last 6 months or more. Of the 22 selected to 
hear the case, 3 were dismissed Tuesday morning after telling Broward Circuit 
Judge Paul Backman and the attorneys that they had conflicts that arose between 
the time they were chosen in March and Tuesday. Their dismissal leaves the case 
with 12 jurors and 7 alternates.

As murder trial looms, slain Broward deputy remembered for his love of job

For the trial, prosecution witnesses will be subject to cross-examination from 
attorneys representing each of the three defendants, who were arrested a day 
after the 34-year-old Tephford was shot to death after stopping a vehicle at 
the Versailles Gardens apartment complex on Nov. 12, 2006.

Prosecutors say Ingraham's girlfriend was driving the vehicle and had told 
Tephford the license tag did not match the car because her father had replaced 
it, Satz said. Tephford was on the phone with the woman's father when Delancy 
and Forbes showed up and opened fire, Satz said. The shots killed Tephford and 
wounded Carbocci, who had responded to Tephford's call for backup.

"This brutality, this ruthlessness is the reason you are all here," Satz said, 
promising the jury the evidence would be more than enough to prove the men 
guilty.

Tephford was a 6-year veteran of the sheriff's office and was working an 
off-duty detail for extra income.

The defendants were arrested the day after the shooting, at a Dania Beach 
motel. Investigators said they found evidence there implicating Forbes and 
Ingraham in an otherwise unrelated robbery and kidnapping at a Tamarac clothing 
store a month before the Tephford shooting. But the two men were acquitted 
after a trial in 2015.

Judge Backman had anticipated the murder trial would start once the robbery 
case ended, but the U.S. Supreme Court indirectly slowed the case's progress by 
declaring portions of Florida's death penalty unconstitutional. The state's 
legislature passed a new law in 2016, but the state's Supreme Court struck it 
down, ruling that the changes to the previous law did not adequately address 
the federal court's concerns.

The current law was enacted in March, enabling jury selection in the Tephford 
case to conclude and the trial to proceed.

Defense lawyer H. Dohn Williams delivered the 1st of 3 opening statements for 
the defense. Speaking on behalf of Delancy, Williams said prosecutors will 
likely be able to tie the defendant to activities that took place after the 
shooting, but not to anything that took place before or during.

"What did the state prove that Andre Delancy did before he got in the car and 
drove away" with Ingraham, Forbes and a neighbor minutes after the shooting, 
Williams asked. "He did get in that car. We don't dispute that." But he denied 
Delancy was involved with the murder.

Defense lawyers for Forbes and Ingraham are scheduled to deliver their opening 
statements on Wednesday, with testimony to get underway Thursday morning.

(source: Sun-Sentinel)

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

Woman on death row resentenced to life in prison----Emilia Carr, once Marion 
County's only female death row inmate, will now spend the rest of her life in 
prison.


After an evidentiary hearing May 19, the State declined to seek a new death 
penalty phase, according to court records, and 5th Judicial Circuit Court Judge 
Willard Pope resentenced Carr, 32, to life in prison without parole. She has 
been fighting her death sentence since 2011. There are now only 3 women on 
death row in the state of Florida.

A Marion County jury in 2010 found Carr guilty as charged of kidnapping and 
1st-degree murder in the 2009 death of 26-year-old Heather Strong. Carr and her 
boyfriend, co-defendant Joshua Fulgham, 35, lured his estranged wife, Strong, 
to a storage trailer in Boardman in north Marion County.

When Carr arrived, Strong tried to leave and a scuffle ensued. Fulgham held 
Strong down as Carr taped her to a chair. Fulgham then forced Strong to sign a 
document that gave him custody of their 2 children.

Carr placed a garbage bag over Strong's head and Fulgham held it tight and 
wrapped tape around his wife's neck. Carr tried twice to break Strong's neck. 
Carr said Fulgham then put his hands over Strong's nose and mouth, and 
suffocated her.

Strong's body was found near the trailer 4 days later.

The jury voted 7-5 to recommend death for Carr. Fulgham was sentenced to life 
in 2012 with a vote of 8-4.

Carr appealed her sentence, raising several issues including possible errors by 
the trial judge and the proportionality of the death sentence.

In 2015, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed Carr's death sentence.

"This case involves a love triangle between the victim, Heather Strong, her 
estranged husband, Joshua Fulgham, and the defendant, Emilia Carr, that ended 
when Carr and Fulgham carried out their plan to murder Strong," the high court 
wrote in its decision.

Carr restarted the appeal process, claiming ineffective assistance from her 
lawyer. It was during an evidentiary hearing on this appeal that her fate 
changed.

Neither the State or defense attorneys were available Tuesday for comment.

Carr's resentencing comes at a pivotal time for Florida's death penalty.

After being ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in January 2016, 
Florida's death sentence scheme became a topic of debate and revision. The 
Florida Supreme Court released an opinion in October 2016 calling for a 
unanimous jury.

In March of this year, Gov. Rick Scott signed new rules requiring a unanimous 
jury decision for the death sentence. The Florida Supreme Court is still 
hammering out final jury instructions for the new death sentence scheme.

Several appeals for resentencings have entered the state Supreme Court's queue. 
Of the now seven convicted Marion County murderers on death row, one is arguing 
for a reduced sentence of life on an intellectual disability claim, 2 were 
granted resentencing by the Florida Supreme Court, the other 4 are still 
fighting their death sentence with various appeals.

8 Marion County defendants await sentencing in death penalty-eligible cases. 
Kelvin Coleman is scheduled to be the 1st local defendant to put the state's 
new death penalty ruling to the test. Jury selection for the penalty phase of 
his trial starts Aug. 21. Coleman was convicted in October 2016 of 2 counts of 
1st-degree murder.

(source: ocala.com)






ALABAMA----impending execution

Alabama execution back on for Thursday after U.S. Supreme Court ruling

The execution of Robert Bryant Melson is back on for Thursday after the U.S. 
Supreme Court tonight lifted a stay that had been granted last week by an 
appeals court.

The stay of the execution was lifted in an order issued by U.S. Supreme Court 
Associate Justice Clarence Thomas shortly before 10 p.m. Tuesday.

3 of the 9 Supreme Court associate justices - Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen 
Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor - said they did not want to vacate the stay of 
execution, according to the brief order.

Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall on Monday had asked the U.S. Supreme 
Court to overrule the appeals court and reinstate Thursday's planned execution 
of Melson, the man convicted in the 1994 shooting deaths of three fast food 
employees at a Popeye's in Etowah County.

The execution is set for 6 p.m. Thursday at Holman Correctional Facility in 
Atmore.

The 11th Circuit on Friday had granted a stay of Melson's execution. Melson is 
challenging his execution on grounds that the three-drug cocktail Alabama uses 
for lethal injections "has failed to work properly."

The 11th Circuit issued the stay so it can rule on Melson's challenge, which is 
also being appealed by 4 other death row inmates.

Melson and the other inmates argue that the 1st drug administered in the 
cocktail, the sedative midazolam, doesn't work well enough prevent the inmates 
from experiencing the pain caused by the other 2 drugs that stop breathing and 
the heart.

The Alabama Attorney General on Monday, however, filed a motion to the U.S. 
Supreme Court that argues in part that the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled 
that midazolam can be used in drug protocols.

Melson has been on death row since May 1996. He was convicted along with 
Cuhuatemoc Peraita in the shooting deaths of fast-food employees Tamika 
Collins, 18, Nathaniel Baker, 17, and Darrell Collier, 23, during a robbery of 
a Gadsden's Popeye's restaurant. A 4th person, Bryant Archer, was shot 4 times 
but survived.

Also, the Attorney General argues, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the stay 
requests of 4 Arkansas inmates who were executed using the same drug protocol 
as Alabama. And Alabama has already carried out 3 executions using the 
protocol, including the May 25 execution of Tommy Arthur in which the 11th 
Circuit denied a stay.

The other 2 Alabama inmates who were executed - Ronald Smith and Christopher 
Brooks - also were co-plaintiffs in the case with Melson "and their stay 
requests were denied by the Eleventh Circuit because their nearly identical 
claims were also time-bared," the Attorney General also argued.

(sosurce: al.com)






OHIO:

House Bill would keep mentally ill from death row


For the 2nd year in a row, the Ohio Prosecuting Attorney's Association voiced 
strong opposition to a bill that would keep severely mentally ill people from 
being executed on death row.

If passed, House Bill 81 would bar the possibility of the death penalty for 
people who can prove they had a serious mental illness when they committed 
aggravated murder. The maximum penalty would be a life sentence. The proposal 
also would permit for current death row inmates to apply for resentencing.

John Murphy, executive director of the organization, said the bill would allow 
countless criminals to avoid the death penalty by claiming mental illness at 
the time of the crime. He said the bill is redundant when considering current 
Ohio law and court precedent.

"If this were enacted, I think it would in effect repeal the death penalty," 
Murphy said. "Proponents argue that the process would apply to very few persons 
- we don't see it that way. I think every single one of the persons on death 
row will file for this."

Rep. Bill Seitz, R-Cincinnati, who sponsored the legislation, said the bill 
came as a result of an Ohio Supreme Court joint task force recommendation. The 
recommendation implores lawmakers to enact legislation that would exclude 
defendants from the death penalty who were afflicted by "serious mental 
illness" at the time of the crime.

"I guess they're fixated on executing the mentally ill," Seitz said.

Kevin Werner, executive director of Ohioans to Stop Executions, said the bill 
does well to recognize that people with severe mental illnesses shouldn't be 
executed. It doesn't take anything away from prosecutors, he said, instead 
allowing for more options and convictions.

Currently 139 people are on death row in Ohio, according to figures from the 
Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections. Only 1 of those inmates is 
female. Ohio has carried out 53 executions since the state resumed them in 
1999. The state has killed a total of 393 convicted murders in its history.

Early in 1999, Jay Scott, a diagnosed schizophrenic, was the 1st person 
executed against his will since capital punishment resumed. A contentious legal 
battle preceded the execution as his lawyers fought and won appeals in both 
state and federal courts. The Ohio Supreme Court and U.S. Supreme Court upheld 
a state law that allowed executions as long as the prisoner understands he will 
die as punishment for his crimes.

Seitz said his bill is an attempt to address current law, which he called 
inadequate. Following one of the recommendations of the task force, Seitz's 
bill considers the defendant's state of mind at the time of the crime. He said 
he worked with the National Alliance on Mental Illness to craft the bill.

Current law, according to Murphy, adequately considers mental illness and 
retardation during the trial and sentencing. He said House Bill 81 expands the 
definition beyond what's necessary, effectively making the death penalty null 
and shifting the burden to the state to disprove the defendant's claims.

Seitz said that without reining in the death penalty, the state will lose it. 
The bill is an attempt to protect a vulnerable population from being unfairly 
sentenced to death.

"We think this is an appropriate and needed change to Ohio's Revised Code," 
Werner said. "This is the direction our society is moving in."

(source: Columbus Dispatch)

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

Canton Man Who Narrowly Escaped Execution Pushes for a New Trial


For more than 2 decades, Kevin Keith and his family have been fighting his 
conviction on charges he gunned down 6 people, killing 3, in a small town in 
central Ohio. Their latest attempt was in arguments Tuesday before a 3-judge 
appeals panel in Lima. WKSU's M.L. Schultze reports the judges heard very 
different interpretations of what forensic evidence showed and why it matters.

In the next 15 minutes, defense attorney Zachary Swisher argued that a 
deposition from a controversial forensics analyst at the Ohio Bureau of 
Criminal Investigation was fatally flawed, yet it provided the scientific 
framework jurors relied on to convict Keith. Swisher read from Michelle Yezzo's 
personnel file.

'2 eyewitnesses testified at trial that the appellant is the one who carried 
out these heinous acts.'

"Her findings and conclusions regarding evidence may be suspect. She will 
stretch the truth to satisfy a department.' I'm not sure a more damaging quote 
could be attributed to a forensic expert who's testifying in a dealth penalty 
trial."

Assistant Crawford County Prosecutor Robert Kidd acknowledged the analyst's 
work record could have boosted the defense had it been revealed 23 years ago. 
But "they're simply ignoring the rest of the evidence at trial. We have not 1 
but 2 eyewitnesses that testified at trial that the appellant is the one who 
carried out these heinous acts."

A decision is expected within three months. Keith had been on death row until 
then-Gov. Ted Strickland commuted his sentence to life in prison.

Among those pushing for a new trial for Kevin Keith is former Ohio Republican 
Attorney General Jim Petro. He's become an outspoken opponent of the death 
penalty but says this case involves other questions.

"There's absolutely no confidence in the testimony and the proof presented by 
the BCI expert. And of course, part of my career I managed BCI. So I'm 
particularly concerned about that issue. But I think there's no proof 
scientifically that is credible that points to Kevin Keith."

(source: WKSU news)






INDIANA:

State is in a death penalty corner


Indiana officials probably don't want to have a big debate about the death 
penalty, but they more or less have to. The issue has been hijacked by capital 
punishment opponents, who have pushed the state into a corner by challenging 
the lethal cocktail used to carry out state-sanctioned executions. If the state 
can't talk its way out of the corner, it might have to go back to "less humane" 
methods of execution.

Most death penalty states have a similar dilemma. Influenced by anti-capital 
punishment activists, major drug companies have stopped making their lethal 
products available to states using them for capital punishment, so states have 
been scrambling to find alternatives.

In 2014, the Indiana Department of Correction came up with a 3-drug cocktail of 
methohexital, potassium chloride and pancuronium bromide, which no state or 
federal prisoner in the country has been executed by. Other states coming up 
with their own concoctions have had horrible instances of prisoners dying 
gruesome, drawn-out deaths, which has put the "cruel and unusual punishment" 
argument back on the table.

Roy Lee Ward, 1 of Indiana's 11 prisoners on death row, sued the state in 2015, 
arguing that the DOC skirted procedures when it chose the new drugs. A LaPorte 
Circuit judge dismissed the claim. But now a 3-judge Indiana Court of Appeals 
panel has reversed the lower court. The judges found that when the DOC chose 
the new drugs, it violated Ward's rights under the state and federal 
constitutions. The DOC did not follow guidelines set by the General Assembly 
that regulate how state agencies change its rules, including holding a public 
hearing, the court said.

The state's options are limited. Even if it backs up and follows all the 
procedures the court says are necessary, it may be a moot point. Indiana's 
stock of lethal injection drugs is expired - and, given the attitude of the 
drug companies, the state is not likely to replenish them any time soon.

So what is the state to do? Put executions on hold indefinitely, which would 
have the effect of eliminating capital punishment? Bring back the gas chamber, 
hanging, the firing squad, the electric chair?

It is more than a little ironic that lethal injections were settled on as a 
more humane way of dispatching capital offenders. In trying to deal with claims 
of its cruelty, the state might have to revert to killing in ways considered 
even more barbaric.

Maybe it's time for one of those public hearings.

(source: Editorial, (Fort Wayne) News-Sentinel)