[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, FLA., MISS., KY., ARK.

[Rick Halperin]

June 10




TEXAS:

Death penalty sought for alleged hitman accused of killing Uptown dentist


The Dallas County district attorney's office is seeking the death penalty 
against the man accused of shooting a dentist in a murder-for-hire plot.

Authorities say a love triangle may have led to the 2015 slaying of 35-year-old 
Kendra Hatcher in her Uptown apartment parking garage.

Kristopher Love, 33, is one of three people charged with capital murder in the 
case. Investigators believe Brenda Delgado, who used to date Hatcher's 
boyfriend, hired Love to be the triggerman.

Prosecutors filed a motion Friday to seek the death penalty against Love.

Police said Delgado, 34, was jealous of Hatcher's relationship with Ricardo 
Paniagua, whom Delgado had dated for two years. She's accused of hiring 
23-year-old Crystal Cortes to help rob Hatcher.

Cortes told police Delgado paid her $500, and she drove Love to Hatcher's 
parking garage. Before the slaying, Cortes asked Love how much he was being 
paid to rob Hatcher. He told her it was "none of her business."

Cortes said she waited in the getaway car while Love attacked Hatcher. She 
heard 1 gunshot, and then Love got back into the Jeep with 2 purses. He told 
Cortes that if she told police, she and her son "would be next," police records 
show.

But their getaway car, a Jeep Cherokee belonging to Delgado, was captured on 
surveillance cameras.

Initially, police questioned and released Delgado about her role in Hatcher's 
slaying. She told police that she loaned the Jeep to Cortes, who was arrested 
shortly after the killing.

About a month later, police issued arrest warrants for Love and Delgado, but by 
then Delgado had fled to Mexico.

Delgado was extradited to the United States a year after the killing. Though 
authorities believe she was the mastermind behind Hatcher's killing, she isn't 
eligible for the death penalty as part of the extradition agreement with 
Mexico.

Trial dates for Love, Cortes and Delgado have not been set.

(source: Dallas Morning News)






FLORIDA:

State could seek death penalty for Naomi Jones' alleged killer


The man accused of murdering 12-year-old Pensacola girl Naomi Jones has been 
denied bond.

Robert Letroy Howard, 38, made his first appearance in court Friday morning via 
video conferencing. At the hearing, Judge Joyce H. Williams determined there 
was probable cause for the State Attorney's Office to charge Howard with 
1st-degree murder, kidnapping and failure to register as a sex offender.

In a press conference following the hearing, Assistant State Attorney Greg 
Marcille said the state will present to a grand jury within the next 2 weeks 
its reasons for charging Howard. If the grand jury indicts Howard on the 
charges, the state will then decide whether or not to pursue the death penalty.

Marcille said he anticipates that decision will be made before Howard's 
arraignment June 30.

Marcille added the state is still investigating and reviewing the facts of the 
case, but at this point, "the factors of the case do indicate there are 
circumstances that would justify the death sentence."

A few of the factors under consideration are Naomi's age and whether her death 
was heinous, atrocious or cruel. Another factor will be Howard's previous 
criminal history.

Howard, of Brewton, Alabama, is a convicted felon who served 15 years in prison 
for 2 counts of rape. According to Alabama Law Enforcement Agency Community 
Information Center, Howard was arrested Dec. 8, 1998, and convicted Sept. 1, 
1999, in Escambia County, Alabama. Howard's address in Brewton was last 
verified the day after Naomi's murder.

Marcille said the state is reviewing the information on Howard's previous 
convictions.

"If the prior cases do constitute a violent felony, then we could consider 
those in seeking a sentence," Marcille said.

Howard was given a $600,000 bond for his failure to register charge, but was 
denied bond on the murder and kidnapping charges. Procedurally, the no bond 
takes priority, meaning Howard will remain in jail until his trial unless a 
judge orders otherwise.

Howard developed as a person of interest in Naomi's disappearance June 2, two 
days after the 12-year-old went missing, according to his arrest report.

Naomi lived in Aspen Village Apartments on East Johnson Avenue, the same 
complex where Howard's girlfriend resides. During a neighborhood canvas, Howard 
reportedly gave investigators inconsistent statements about his whereabouts at 
the time of Naomi's disappearance.

Naomi was found deceased in a creek bed near Ashland Avenue and Detroit 
Boulevard June 5.

On June 7, investigators recovered surveillance video from a business in the 
area. It allegedly showed Howard's silver Nissan Altima traveling around the 
intersection and bridge near the creek bed around 2:35 a.m. June 1, 
approximately 14 hours after Naomi disappeared.

Investigators re-interviewed Howard later in the day on June 7. According to 
the report, he told them he had been in Brewton when Naomi disappeared and had 
nothing to do with the case. He reportedly also said he had never been in the 
area of Detroit Boulevard and Ashland Avenue.

Howard was ultimately arrested early the morning of June 8 while he was still 
in interviews with investigators.

During the process, he reportedly told investigators he stayed at his 
girlfriend's apartment 3 nights a week, but was not required to register as a 
sex offender in Florida if he did not stay more than 3 days at a time.

According to the arrest report, Howard was required to register with Florida as 
a sex offender if he spent more than 5 days at 1 address in the state during 
any calendar year.

Howard will be formally charged at his arraignment June 30, when he will have 
the opportunity to enter a plea to the charges. He was assigned a pubic 
defender Friday.

(source: Pensacola News Journal)






MISSISSIPPI:

Interview: The Aftershocks of Sentencing a Man to Death----Film Shows Impact of 
Mississippi Death Penalty Trial on Jurors

In 1982 Bobby Wilcher stabbed to death 2 women he met at a Mississippi bar. 12 
years later Lindy Lou Wells served on the jury that sentenced him to die - a 
decision that unexpectedly upended her life. The documentary Lindy Lou, Juror 
Number 2, featured in the Human Rights Watch Film Festival, takes a nuanced 
look at the death penalty in the US while it follows Lindy on her journey to 
reconnect with the trial's other jurors. Amy Braunschweiger talks with her 
about the trial and her search for forgiveness.

The trial was in 1994. What was your take on the death penalty before this 
trial?

They asked me if I could deliver the death penalty without problems. And I 
said, sure, he killed somebody, I can do it.

Being in the conservative South, being a Baptist, a person of faith, and a 
Republican, you're brought up here with the notion that if someone murders 
somebody the death penalty is a just punishment. It's eye for an eye. It's just 
the way that you come up, you don't question it, you don't think about it.

What changed?

As I sat there in that jury box, and I watched him and everyone else in that 
courtroom, I'm thinking, oh my gosh. This guy had no one. His sister was his 
only defense, and the only thing she said was, "Please don't kill my brother." 
I just got this overwhelming compassion toward this young man. I can't even 
tell you what it was about him - he scared some of the other women on the jury.

When we went into the deliberation room, a panic attack or anxiety came over 
me. I remember walking to the window the day before we were supposed to give 
the sentence, and I looked outside and everyone is just shopping and going to 
stores, and I wanted to scream, ???You're down there acting like everything is 
wonderful and we're fixing to kill a man." There's something wrong with this 
picture.

Why did you feel death was the only option?

In Mississippi at that time, there was no life without parole. And I didn't 
want him back out, so we had no choice.

What did you think of the trial itself?

Those lawyers did a roughshod job. It was like they didn't care. They never 
objected to anything the prosecutor said. They never brought up his childhood 
or his background.

How did your life change after the trial?

I lost my temper really quick. Anxiety. I really didn't know it was the trial 
that was causing it. I knew I needed to talk to someone about what I'd been 
through, that I needed comfort, and I knew I wasn't acting right, either. I was 
not my usual self. I avoided people. I avoided social situations. I'd even gone 
to doctors - I thought it was hormonal. They couldn't find anything wrong. I 
wanted my life back, and I didn't have it. Nothing was the same.

In the film, you say that your changing views on the death penalty cost you 
people in your life. How did that happen?

Some people really did just stop being my friend, although most of them now 
talk to me. But that's never a topic of conversation. Even me doing this film, 
it's not discussed. I don't bring it up with anyone around here, just close 
friends.

I talked mostly to my husband about the trial. My sister, who I'm really close 
to, is one of those eye-for-an-eye people. I talked to my pastor, and he didn't 
help. He just showed me the "eye for an eye" passage in the Bible. And I said, 
"I can't accept that." I really had nowhere to turn.

You met Bobby after the trial. What was that like?

About the time Bobby was to be executed, I told his lawyers that I wanted to 
meet him. I said I need to ask for his forgiveness, and I want to do it 
face-to-face.

I went to visit him on July 6, 2006. I was the only visitor that he'd had in 15 
years. And I was scared to death. But Bobby put me at ease. He asked me about 
my trip to Parchman [the Mississippi state penitentiary]. We got to talking, he 
asked me about my family, how many kids I had. He wasn't at all what I 
expected.

I left at 4:30, and they were going to execute him at 6 that evening. I was 
with my mom and sister at a Mexican place in my hometown, having a margarita, 
when Bobby's attorney called me and said there had been a stay of execution. I 
thought, 'God has given me more time to befriend this guy.'

I visited him on the 3rd Tuesday in August and September. He asked if he could 
call, and he'd call 2-3 times a week, and we talked for 5 minutes. He said he 
loved me. He knew I was married. I'd say I love you too, but I felt like I was 
lying. My love was not a romantic love, it was the love of a friend or for 
people. I just didn't have the heart to tell him.

Why did you do that?

I thought, why does it matter? He's going to die, and I didn't want him to die 
thinking nobody cared about him because his mother and no one visited him.

But when he was executed in October, the commissioner of prisoners said on 
national TV that Bobby and I were having a love affair. That was absolutely not 
true. When I went to see him I was 55 years old. Bobby was 42. I was married. 
My mother heard, and called me freaking out. But the damage was done. People I 
knew asked why I was going up there and seeing him.

I gave people around here something to talk about for quite a while.

Do you like the movie?

Florent [the filmmaker] portrayed me the way I am, and the way I think. He gave 
me a voice. People don't think about the jurors. We see all these pictures of 
dead bodies and other evidence, and people expect us to just go home and resume 
our lives?

Are you glad you did it?

What really made me glad I did this was that I found out I'm not by myself. 
There were still some jurors who felt he deserved what he got, but I just don't 
think we're in the judgment business. But other jurors were suffering inside 
like I was. Seeing that made me realize there's nothing wrong with me. What I'm 
feeling is a normal reaction to a terrible situation. And 4 of those jurors 
said they would never serve on a death penalty case again.

In watching the film, I noticed you were very good at talking to jurors who 
held different views on Bobby's sentencing than you did. What was that like for 
you?

I can't sit and judge. Florent and I are just opposites on everything, and he's 
one of my best friends. He's a progressive. I'm a conservative. When it comes 
to faith, he's not a believer, I am. And he is one of the most gentle, 
sweetest, kindest, thoughtful persons I've ever met. And he feels about me the 
same way I feel about him. It makes life interesting.

I think that's what's wrong with the world today. People just can't sit down 
and get past their own feelings or thoughts. We don't even take the time to 
listen to people. We don't have to agree on everything, nobody is alike. But 
why would that upset people?

It's like the political stuff today. This to me was absolutely crazy. I think 
everybody just wants to overreact. Why have so much drama in your life? Life's 
just too short. I just don't have time for it.

Did you find any closure in making this film?

I did. Florent helped me put things into perspective. I had all this angst and 
I couldn't talk about it with anybody. My brain was on a carousel.

The 1st time Florent was here, I didn't say I was against the death penalty. 
Because when people would ask me, "What if something happened to one of your 
granddaughters?" I'd say that I'd probably kill the person who did it myself. 
Florent told me he'd feel the same way if something happened to his kid. But 
then he said, that's not justice. You're looking for revenge, not for justice.

I couldn't have those conversations in my life before.

The film ends shortly after another juror's daughter says she could never 
sentence anyone to death. What did that mean to you?

It was enlightening. It just lifted my spirits. It dawned on me that's what I 
wanted to do. I had started talking with my granddaughter about the death 
penalty. The younger people that are here in this state, I don't want them to 
grow up with that mentality that this is the answer. I want them to think about 
each individual circumstance. If they're ever put in that position to sentence 
someone to death, I want them to think about it, and not just assume that 
because someone killed someone, they deserve the death penalty.

And if they're going to continue the death penalty - I don't see it to be done 
away with - there needs to be some changes. There's no way you can take the 
average person off the street, put them on a death penalty case, and expect 
them to decide of the lawyers had proven the case beyond a reasonable doubt. 
They need insight into the judicial system.

Also, they should have a counselor who could offer assistance if a juror needs 
it. You can't kill someone and then go home and wash dishes. It changes you 
from the inside out.

[Tickets for the film, part of Human Rights Watch's International Film Festival 
in New York, are on sale now at bit.ly/HRWlindylou. The movie will screen the 
evenings of Friday June 16 and June 17.]

(source: Human Rights Watch)

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

Capital cases are complex, costly


The man accused of killing 8 people in a shooting spree Memorial Day weekend is 
facing a capital murder charge. If he is indicted and the case proceeds to 
trial, it will be a lengthy and expensive process that may not take place in 
Lincoln County.

Willie Cory Godbolt was charged with 1 count of capital murder and 7 counts of 
1st degree murder. The capital murder charge is for the death of sheriff's 
deputy William Durr. The 1st degree murder charges are for the deaths of 
Barbara Mitchell, her daughter, Toccara May and Mitchell's sister Brenda May, 
all of Bogue Chitto; Austin Edwards, his cousin, Jordan Blackwell, of 
Brookhaven; and Ferral and Shelia Burage, of Brookhaven.

The court documents detailing the charges against Godbolt state that he knew 
Durr was a law enforcement officer when he killed him.

Joel Smith, district attorney of Hancock, Harrison and Stone counties, whose 
grandfather was the founder of Brookhaven Funeral Home, said the potential 
death penalty case would be expensive and could take years.

Up next for Godbolt will be a preliminary hearing in Justice Court. He is being 
represented by court-appointed public defenders Paul Luckett of Pike County and 
Gus Sermos of Lawrence County. The court will review probable cause and facts 
of the case. From that point forward, a file will be put together for an 
investigative agency. Whether it be witness statements, recordings, written 
statements, any kind of identification procedures - an investigative team will 
put all of the information together.

The investigative team will also gather any forensic testing items. Whether 
it's DNA testing, fingerprints or ballistics testing, those types of things 
would be submitted to the Mississippi Crime Lab or to a private lab for 
analysis.

"One they get all of that information put together, they will turn that 
completed file over to the prosecutor's office and at that point, the 
prosecutor would then present their case to the next available grand jury," 
Smith said. "The formal charging comes after you present the information in 
front of the grand jury. The timing of that can vary depending on the 
complexity of the investigation and the complexity of any testing. Prosecutors 
want the evidence to be completed prior to presenting the case to the grand 
jury."

It could be as late as the end of the year before a Lincoln County grand jury 
potentially hears the case.

"The crime lab in Mississippi has a significant case load, which can make it 
difficult as far as timing goes," said Smith. "It can cause a delay in moving 
forward with the case."

If the grand jury were to indict Godbolt, the accused would be brought before 
the court for a formal arraignment.

Whether there would be one trial or eight different trials for each victim if 
the case reaches that point is still to be determined.

"There is a statutory procedure in Mississippi that allows cases to be tried 
together if they arise out of a common scheme or plan," said Smith. "The court 
will consider a lot of factors in determining whether or not the case arose out 
of common scheme or plan, then they would make the decision whether to try 
every count together, separately, or some combination thereof."

If there is a trial, it could take place outside of Lincoln County. A motion 
filed for change of venue is often associated with someone believing that they 
could not get a fair trial in the home county of the case.

"Most capital cases have tremendous pre-trial publicity and because of that, 
the question for the trial judge is whether or not the defendant can receive a 
fair and impartial trial in a county where the crime allegedly occurred," Smith 
said. "There are 2 options for changing the venue for the trial. The court at 
the change of venue hearing would allow both parties and the court to interview 
a sampling of jurors from the home county. They would be able to ask them about 
their knowledge of the case and their in-depth knowledge of the cases and then 
determine whether or not their knowledge of the case would affect them to be a 
fair juror."

Based on those sample jurors statements, the court would make the decision on 
whether or not to keep the case in the home county or change venues. If the 
judge decides to change venues, they have a couple of different options.

"They can change venues to a similarly situated county in the state of 
Mississippi, where they would have less knowledge of the case," Smith said. 
"The 2nd option would be to select jurors from a new county, bring the jury 
back to the home county and try the case. What comes into play is what is the 
most efficient way to try the case."

In all capital murder trials, the jurors are sequestered. Whether the jury is 
picked and brought back to the home county or whether it's tried in another 
county, the jury would stay in hotel rooms and have no contact with the public 
for the duration of the court proceedings.

"Death penalty cases are expensive," Smith said. "They have significant cost 
attached to them, primarily because what is at stake in the case."

A death penalty case is a unique case to try because it is what you call a 
bifurcated proceeding," Smith said. "A bifurcated proceeding means you have 2 
phases of a case. The 1st phase of the case is the guilty or innocent phase. 
Where the jury hears all of the facts of the case and they decide whether or 
not the accused in guilty or innocent of that particular crime. The jury will 
have the option of deciding whether or not the accused is guilty of capital 
murder or not in this case," Smith said.

"The 2nd phase of the case, if he's found guilty of capital murder, is the 
sentencing phase," said Smith. "The same jury typically will hear the 
sentencing phase of the trial. The state will give reasons of why the accused 
should receive the death penalty and the defense will give reasons not to give 
the death penalty and ultimately it's up to the jury to decide that."

Death penalty sentences are typically appealed at several levels. The appeals 
process can take years, meaning Godbolt, if indicted and convicted and 
sentenced to death, could spend years in jail awaiting a sentence that may 
never be carried out. Mississippi hasn't executed someone since 2012, according 
to an online database.

There are currently 47 people on death row in the state.

(source: dailyjournal.com)






KENTUCKY:

Are 18-year-olds too immature to face the death penalty? Lexington attorney 
says yes.


Fayette Circuit Judge Ernesto Scorsone will soon decide whether to exclude the 
death penalty for a murder defendant who was 18 when he was charged with murder 
and robbery.

In a 2005 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the execution of people 
who were younger 18 at the time of their crimes violated the federal 
constitutional guarantee against cruel and unusual punishments.

The defense team for Travis Bredhold wants Scorsone to extend that exclusion to 
people 21 and younger. Bredhold, 21, was 18 when he was charged Dec. 13 with 
murder and robbery in the fatal shooting of Marathon gas station attendant 
Mukheshbhai Patel.

Police said surveillance camera footage indicates that Patel, 51, was trying to 
comply with a robber's demand for cash when he was shot. He died later at 
University of Kentucky Chandler Hospital.

Bredhold was "only 5 months and 13 days older than the limitation" established 
by the U.S. Supreme Court, public defender Joanne Lynch said.

More importantly, Lynch said, research indicates that people's brains don't 
mature until they are in their mid-20s. The Supreme Court ruled that people who 
are young and immature and who are likely to be more impulsive are not as 
culpable as a group and shouldn't be up for the death penalty.

Bredhold's defense team is asking to extend the exclusion "because people under 
the age of 21 are almost completely like people under the age of 18. You really 
don't mature until you are in your mid-20s," Lynch said.

Fayette Commonwealth's Attorney Lou Anna Red Corn argued during a hearing 
Friday that there isn't a "national consensus" on whether to extend the 
death-penalty exclusion to defendants 21 and younger.

In its 2005 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court noted that states were reducing 
the frequency by which they applied capital punishment to juvenile offenders. 
At the time of the decision, 20 states had the juvenile death penalty on the 
books, but only 6 states had executed prisoners since 1989 for crimes committed 
as juveniles. Only 3 states had done so since 1994.

If the judge rules against the commonwealth, the appeal would be taken up by 
the Kentucky Attorney General's Office.

Bredhold's trial is scheduled to start Sept. 5.

(source: kentucky.com)






ARKANSAS:

2015 state law protects actions, judge says----Griffen says AG, justices 
violated religious rights


Pulaski County Circuit Judge Wendell Griffen stood on the steps of the state 
Capitol on Friday and took aim at lawmakers and the Arkansas Supreme Court, 
accusing them of breaking the state's 2015 religious freedom law by 
scrutinizing his public displays of faith.

Backed by a cadre of supporters who appeared at a rally on his behalf, Griffen 
told reporters that he planned to take his case to court if sanctions against 
him are not lifted.

The circuit judge has been stripped of his power to hear death penalty cases 
since he appeared at a death-penalty protest at the Governor's Mansion in 
April, the same day he issued an order that temporarily halted the state's 
efforts to begin a series of executions.

Griffen later said his decision to lie prostrate on a cot at that April rally 
-- which fell on Good Friday -- was meant to portray the crucifixion of Jesus.

On Friday, donning his Panama hat like he did at the rally (though he took it 
off when he lay on the cot), Griffen said his actions fell under the protection 
of the 2015 Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

The law says the government cannot "substantially burden a person's exercise of 
religion," unless it is "the least restrictive means of furthering" a 
compelling government interest.

Griffen is under investigation for his conduct by the state Judicial Discipline 
and Disability Commission, and some Republican lawmakers have floated the idea 
of impeachment.

That's in addition to the Supreme Court justices removing Griffen from cases 
involving the death penalty.

"It has already happened. The violation [of the religious act] has already 
happened," Griffen told reporters Friday.

In response to the complaints filed against him with the judicial discipline 
commission, Griffen filed his own ethics complaint against the justices and 
Attorney General Leslie Rutledge for not offering him a hearing before 
delivering sanctions.

2 of the top officials at the commission later recused from the competing 
cases, citing potential conflicts of interest.

David Sachar, the executive director of the commission, said Friday that the 
staff was looking to recruit 2 independent attorneys and 2 investigators to 
handle the cases.

Griffen told reporters that he had not yet been contacted by the commission and 
has not spoken to investigators.

Griffen did not speak at the rally that preceded his talking to reporters. At 
the rally, supporters from the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, the NAACP and 
local Baptist churches came to his defense.

A series of more than a dozen speakers from several states -- and one who said 
she was a missionary in Indonesia -- accused lawmakers of trumpeting their own 
brand of Christianity while chastising others.

Rizelle Aaron, the president of the Arkansas chapter of the NAACP, read a list 
of other judges who had run into trouble with the law or been accused of 
breaking judicial rules without facing similar scrutiny from the courts or 
lawmakers. (One of the judges he mentioned, former District Judge Joseph 
Boeckmann, stepped down amid an investigation into sexual misconduct.)

"Where were you, Supreme Court? Where were you, impeachment legislators?" Aaron 
repeated several times.

Multiple speakers mentioned the religious freedom law, Act 975, which passed 
after an earlier version sparked heated debate over protections for lesbian, 
gay, bisexual and transgender people. The bill was pulled and rewritten to more 
closely match language in federal law.

Asked Friday to comment on Griffen's remarks, the sponsor of Act 975, state 
Sen. Jeremy Hutchinson, R-Little Rock, said in a text message that he would 
need to study the judge's argument more closely to give a full response.

However, Hutchinson said the argument would appear to carry more weight under 
the earlier, failed version of the religious freedom law, which he voted 
against.

(source: arkansasonline.com)

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

Religious Leaders Defend Arkansas Judge's Death Penalty Protest----"We need 
more moral leadership in America, not less."


Religious leaders rallied on the state capitol steps Friday in defense of an 
Arkansas judge's 1st amendment rights, after he was barred from hearing capital 
murder cases in April.

Pulaski County Circuit Judge Wendell Griffen joined about 15 religious leaders 
and scholars from different faiths and states in calling the actions against 
him a "direct attack on religious liberty."

"I rise to say, 'Shame on you!,' to those in Arkansas government, law 
enforcement and judicial branches who have falsely accused Judge Wendell 
Griffen of being biased," said Valerie Bridgeman, the dean of the Methodist 
Theological School in Ohio, as a crowd of 50 people cheered. "Do the right 
thing, Arkansas. Do the constitutional thing."

Griffen, a Baptist preacher, came under fire on Good Friday when he lay 
strapped to a cot as part of a death penalty protest organized by his church in 
front of the Governor's Mansion, the same day he issued a ruling that blocked 
the state's upcoming executions.

"When Pastor Griffen silently prayed while lying on a cot in solidarity with 
Jesus on Good Friday, he did not impose his religious beliefs on others," said 
Ray Higgins, the executive coordinator of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship of 
Arkansas, which is the organization that sponsored the rally.

The president of the Arkansas chapter of the NAACP, Rizelle Aaron, asked the 
crowd why Griffen, not other judges who have been criminally prosecuted, was 
targeted for impeachment with "Guinness World Record lightning speed." Then 
Aaron answered his own question: "His race."

"There's a great irony when a judge of justice is punished with injustice for 
exercising his legal right," Aaron said.

After the Arkansas Supreme Court stripped Griffen of his authority to hear 
death penalty cases, he sued the court and Attorney General Leslie Rutledge.

"It's not illegal to pray," Griffen said. "I've been targeted because I have 
acted consistent with my ethics and my faith and that's wrong."

Griffen argues he hasn't done anything unethical. However, the state's Judicial 
Discipline and Disability Commission (JDDC) is investigating misconduct 
complaints against him.

Griffen said he has not been involved in the JDDC proceedings and plans to take 
legal action under the state's Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).

"I do not misunderstand what freedom means," Griffen said. "I am not a slave. I 
am a free man... I will fight this as long as there is fire in my body and 
breath in my spirit."

Several state lawmakers have called for Griffen's impeachment, including Sen. 
Trent Garner, R-El Dorado.

"He's trying to use his religion to justify his mistake," Garner said. "While I 
think RFRA was an excellent piece of legislation, there's a distinct difference 
between what it was meant for and what Griffen did."

Garner doesn't believe Griffen's actions had anything to do with religious 
expression, classifying them as gross misconduct that would justify 
impeachment.

"You can't use religion as an excuse for violating the code of ethics," Garner 
said.

When asked if there was ever a moment he regretted his decision to lay on the 
cot that day, Griffen responded, "Never a moment."

"I will go to my death with 2 things in my mind," he continued. "There was 1 
right place for me that day. I was there. And if I had to do it a thousand 
times, I'd be right back there doing that. I'll go to my maker and say, 'I'll 
take whatever that means.'"

The religious leaders at Friday's rally would continue to stand beside him.

"We applaud the many ways Judge Griffen serves this state and this community. 
Amen."

(source: KARK news)