[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----MO., NEB., NEV., CALIF., USA, US MIL.

[Rick Halperin]

Nov. 14




MISSOURI:

Missouri judge faces rare chance to impose death penalty



A southwest Missouri jury's inability to decide whether a man should be put to 
death for kidnapping and killing a 10-year-old girl sets up a rare situation 
where a judge will make that decision.

Circuit Judge Thomas Mountjoy is scheduled to announce Jan. 11 whether Craig 
Wood will get the death penalty or be sentenced to life in prison. Wood was 
convicted of kidnapping and killing Hailey Owen in Springfield in February 2014 
but the jury announced Monday that it couldn???t reach a unanimous decision on 
his sentence.

Missouri and Indiana are the only states where a judge can impose a death 
sentence, while other states follow the federal procedure that a defendant is 
sentenced to life in prison if a jury can't reach a decision on the death 
penalty. But in 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that only a jury, not a 
judge, can make that decision.

Robert Dunham, executive director of the nonprofit Death Penalty Information 
Center, said a judge-imposed sentence might contradict the Supreme Court 
ruling. He said if Mountjoy imposes the death penalty, the constitutionality of 
the process will "unquestionably" be challenged by Wood's attorneys during the 
appeal process.

But Wood's attorney Patrick Berrigan declined to comment on his legal strategy.

Berrigan, a public defender who handles only death penalty cases, said it's 
been more than 20 years since he had a case where a judge imposed the death 
sentence.

Judge Mountjoy did not respond to requests asking if he has ever been in this 
situation before.

Dunham said Missouri jurors have not imposed a death sentence since 2013, but 
the state's hung jury procedure allowed judges to sentence a few men to death 
row in recent years. He did not have statistics on how many times that has 
happened in Missouri.

"It raises very serious questions about circumventing the will of the public," 
Dunham said. "Especially in a state where no jury has sentenced anyone to death 
for 5 years."

(source: Missouri Lawyers Weekly)








NEBRASKA:

State follows voters' wishes with death penalty plans



The Ricketts administration is keeping the faith with Nebraska voters who in 
2016 strongly supported reviving the death penalty.

The Department of Correctional Services announced Thursday that it plans to use 
a new combination of 4 drugs to carry out the next execution. The previous, 
3-drug protocol was replaced because the state could not legally obtain the 
drugs.

Jose Sandoval, considered the ring leader of the 2002 Norfolk bank robbery 
murders, would be the 1st person executed using these drugs: diazepam, fentanyl 
citrate, cisatracurium besylate and potassium chloride.

The state's next step is for Attorney General Doug Peterson to request a death 
warrant.

It's been a while. Nebraska last carried out the death penalty in 1997, when it 
executed murderer and rapist Robert E. Williams.

Some members of the Legislature highlighted the delays in carrying out the 
death penalty as a key reason for repealing it in 2015. They had watched the 
state struggle to obtain the necessary drugs for lethal injection, and the 
courts had already outlawed using Nebraska's previous method, the electric 
chair.

A referendum revived capital punishment. Now voters frustrated with the pace of 
the state's latest implementation of the death penalty will need to practice 
patience. This new drug protocol, like others before it, will face legal 
challenges. The appeals process exists to reduce the likelihood of an innocent 
person being executed.

Death penalty opponents say they plan to question the unproven protocol, 
although that might be an uphill legal battle. Opponents also continue to 
appeal the legality of involving a 3-judge panel in Nebraska's sentencing 
process for capital cases.

The incremental nature of the process was to be expected. The wheels of justice 
typically turn slowly in capital cases.

But they are turning again, as sought by 61 % of the Nebraskans who voted to 
restore the death penalty.

(source: Editorial, Omaha World-Herald)

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

Opponents of death penalty weighing options to block state execution



Opponents of the death penalty are weighing their options now that the state 
has announced steps toward the 1st execution in Nebraska in 20 years.

ACLU of Nebraska Executive Director Danielle Conrad says it's interesting the 
Department of Correctional Services proposes a 4-drug lethal injection protocol 
to execute Jose Sandoval.

"At first blush, it definitely appears that this is a novel approach taken by 
the state of Nebraska and out of step with practices in other states," ACLU of 
Nebraska Executive Director Danielle Conrad tells Nebraska Radio Network.

States have traditionally used a 3-drug protocol for lethal injections, though 
some have moved to a 1-drug protocol.

Nebraska state law requires the department to give the condemned inmate at 
least 60 days' notice before the Attorney General requests an execution date 
from the Nebraska Supreme Court.

Corrections officials say the state has secured diazepam, fentanyl citrate, 
cisatracurium besylate and potassium chloride; the drugs needed for lethal 
injection.

Sandoval received a death sentence after being convicted on 5 counts of 
1st-degree murder for the deaths of 5 people in the Norfolk bank robbery in 
September of 2002. Prosecutors say Sandoval led a group of 4 men who attempted 
to rob the bank. He shot and killed 3 of the victims.

Nebraska held its last execution in 1997.

Conrad says the ACLU is reviewing the protocol and is consulting with capital 
punishment experts.

"And a lot of people are really scratching their heads over this very 
disappointing and strange approach," according to Conrad.

(source: nebraskaradionetwork.com)








NEVADA:

Why Nevada's new lethal injection is unethical



Nevada has temporarily called off its 1st inmate execution in 11 years. Scott 
Dozier, sentenced for the 2002 murder of his 22-year-old drug associate, 
Jeremiah Miller, was to be put to death on Nov. 14. Dozier instructed his 
lawyer in August not to file any more appeals.

On Thursday, Nov. 9, however, Judge Jennifer Togliatti temporarily postponed 
the execution. Judge Togliatti said she was "loath to stop" Dozier's execution, 
but she did so because she was concerned about the untested and controversial 
drug protocol that would be used to put him to death. She wanted to give the 
state Supreme Court a chance to evaluate.

>From my perspective as a scholar of capital punishment, Nevada's new drug 
protocol sheds a glaring light on the troubled state of lethal injections in 
the United States. It also raises some serious ethical questions.

The 1st lethal injection protocol was developed by Oklahoma's medical examiner, 
Jay Chapman, in the late 1970s. Back then, Oklahoma was looking for an 
alternative to electrocution, which was considered inhuman and brutal.

The protocol Chapman developed called for the use of 3 drugs: The 1st, sodium 
thiopental, would anesthetize inmates and put them to sleep before the lethal 
drugs were administered. The 2nd drug, pancuronium bromide, a muscle relaxant, 
was meant to render the inmate unable to show pain. The 3rd drug, potassium 
chloride, led to a cardiac arrest and eventual death. This protocol soon became 
the standard and was adopted by all death penalty states - now numbering at 31.

However, by the start of this decade, pharmaceutical companies, "citing either 
moral or business reasons," refused to allow their products to be used in 
executions.

The difficulty of securing the drugs that had been part of the standard 
protocol led death penalty states to experiment with many different drugs in 
many different combinations.

States likes Alabama and Arkansas, for example, maintained the 3-drug protocol 
but replaced sodium thiopental in the standard drug cocktail with midazolam or 
pentobarbital, which doctors normally use as sedatives or for anesthesia. Other 
states, including Arizona and Ohio, started using a 2-drug protocol, while a 
few, such as Georgia, Missouri and South Dakota, adopted a single drug.

Nevada's new protocol involves a 3-drug combination - the sedative diazepam 
(better known as Valium), the muscle relaxant and paralytic cisatracurium and 
the opioid fentanyl.

My research on methods of execution reveals that this combination of drugs has 
never been used in an execution.

Execution by a lethal injection, even when it follows the standard protocol, is 
a surprisingly complicated procedure. Finding usable veins and getting the drug 
dosages right has proved to be particularly difficult. As I found out, it has 
often been an unreliable method of execution. Since its introduction, 7 % of 
all lethal injections have been botched.

Those complications and difficulties increase when states try out new, untested 
drugs or drug combinations. Convicts have taken a leading role in opposing such 
experimentation. In February 2017, a death row inmate in Alabama appealed to 
the United States Supreme Court saying that he preferred death by firing squad 
to an injection of midazolam. While it recognized lethal injection's history of 
problems, the majority held that since Alabama did not offer the firing squad 
as an execution method, his preference could not be honored. In a dissenting 
view, however, Justice Sonya Sotomayor called the use of new drugs in lethal 
injection the "most cruel experiment yet."

Nevada's Dozier too has said that he is opposed to "the state's plan to kill 
him using a drug protocol that has never been used in an execution."

There are other troubling issues as well. Using fentanyl, a drug that is 
killing thousands of Americans annually during the current opioid crisis, is 
horrifying, to say the least.

In addition, figuring out the right dosage of diazepam and fentanyl in Nevada's 
new protocol will not be easy. And if this is not done correctly, Dozier could 
even wake up in the middle of the execution, as Susi Vassallo, a New York 
University professor of emergency medicine, has written on lethal injection 
notes. In the words of Judge Togliatti, he could be "aware of pain" and 
struggle to breathe.

Employing the powerful paralytic cisatracurium in this new drug protocol raises 
other ethical concerns.

If the combination of diazepam and fentanyl fails to work, cisatracurium will 
prevent Dozier from signaling to his executioners that they are botching the 
execution even as it happens. As David Waisel, an anesthesiologist at Boston 
Children???s Hospital, claimed, "Cisatracurium can hide signs of inadequate 
anesthesia." That is its only purpose.

In other lethal injection protocols, the muscle relaxant was also designed to 
stop the heart. Thus, those who conduct the execution and those who witness it 
will not be able to see the visible signs of Dozier's suffering if it occurs.

In my view, if Nevada and other death penalty states insist on experimenting 
with new drugs to keep the machinery of death running, citizens and government 
officials alike need to take responsibility to prevent any cruelty.

Writing about the use of the guillotine in France more than half a century ago, 
Albert Camus, philosopher, author and journalist, said,

"Society must display the executioner's hands on each occasion, and require the 
most squeamish citizens to look at them, as well as those who, directly or 
remotely, have supported the work of those hands from the first."

While lethal injection is different from the guillotine, in modern times the 
imperative remains the same.

(source: Austin Sarat, Amherst College, The Conversation)

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

After saying he opposes death penalty, governor hopeful Sisolak now says it 
would be appropriate in extreme cases



Democratic gubernatorial candidate Steve Sisolak is walking back a previous 
statement opposing the death penalty, saying he believes capital punishment 
would still be appropriate in "very extreme" cases such as that of Las Vegas 
mass shooting suspect Stephen Paddock.

Sisolak, a Clark County Commissioner and devout Catholic, staked out a strong 
stance against executions in an interview with The Nevada Independent last 
week.

"I'm opposed to capital punishment," he said. "One, there's a cost factor 
associated with it that's significant. Two, I think there have been cases where 
it was proven that the wrong person was executed, and 3, that I don't think 
that I should play God in terms of determining who dies and who lives."

But on Monday, his campaign sought to clarify that while Sisolak stands by his 
quote, he thinks capital punishment might be warranted in certain cases such as 
that of Paddock, who killed 58 people and injured more than 500 on the Las 
Vegas Strip last month. The Paddock case is moot because the shooter killed 
himself.

The campaign did not clarify what would constitute a "very extreme" case and 
whether the defendant in a forthcoming execution would fit under that category, 
and Sisolak himself didn't immediately respond to the question of how he would 
define death penalty-worthy cases.

Debate about capital punishment has reemerged as Nevada prepares to carry out 
the death penalty for the first time in 11 years. The execution of Scott 
Dozier, a former methamphetamine dealer who has been convicted of murdering 2 
drug associates and is now volunteering to die, is on hold pending an order of 
the Nevada Supreme Court about a never-before-used lethal injection cocktail.

Governors play an outsized role in the death penalty in Nevada. They can put a 
temporary hold on an execution, and as part of the Board of Pardons 
Commissioners, hold the deciding vote on whether someone's sentence can be 
reduced from death to life without parole and can decide whether the board 
should even consider such a request.

The governor can also veto bills seeking to abolish the death penalty and the 
future governor's position can determine Nevada's very status as a death 
penalty state. Democratic lawmakers who supported a death penalty abolition 
bill this spring abandoned their push after Gov. Brian Sandoval signaled he was 
opposed to it.

The death penalty bill was not brought up for any votes in the 
Democrat-controlled Legislature. Notably, the threat of a veto did not prevent 
Democrats from passing other bills that Sandoval opposed out of the Legislature 
and sending it to his desk, where he fulfilled the threat.

A poll conducted by The Nevada Independent in January found 66 % of voters 
support the death penalty.

Sisolak's position to retain the death penalty as an option puts him in line 
with 3 other Republicans contenders in the governor's race - Adam Laxalt, Dan 
Schwartz and Jared Fisher. His Democratic primary opponent, Chris 
Giunchigliani, opposes the death penalty.

Nevada is 1 of 31 states with the death penalty. It has executed 12 people 
since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976.

(source: The Nevada Independent)

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

CLU To Deliver Death Penalty Petition Today



The American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada will deliver a petition to 
Governor Brian Sandoval, asking him to help prevent the use of an untested 
combination of lethal drugs to execute convicted killer Scott Dozier.

The Nevada Independent reports that the petition is part of a strategy to keep 
Dozier from being executed, despite the fact that Dozier himself has asked the 
state to carry out the execution.

The execution has been delayed over concerns about the drug combination 
scheduled to be used, and as of now, the delay hangs on an order from the 
Nevada Supreme Court, which has not given a date for its decision.

(source: KNPR news)








CALIFORNIA:

Mom's boyfriend 'liked torturing' Gabriel Fernandez, 8, prosecutor says at 
murder trial



A prosecutor, summing up the case Monday against a Palmdale resident charged in 
the torture-murder of his girlfriend's 8-year-old son, called the defendant an 
"evil" man who "liked torturing" the youngster.

Deputy District Attorney Jonathan Hatami began his closing argument by showing 
a photo of Gabriel Fernandez' battered body lying on an autopsy table - covered 
in head-to-toe injuries - as evidence of defendant Isauro Aguirre's intent to 
kill the boy.

"You can't believe a person in our society would intentionally murder a child," 
Hatami said, comparing the abuse to that suffered by a prisoner of war.

"Believe it, because it happened. This was intentional murder by torture," he 
told the jury. "Do not go back in the jury room and make excuses for the 
defendant ... this had nothing to do with drugs ... this had nothing to do with 
mental health issues."

Aguirre, 37, who worked as a security guard, is charged with murder, along with 
a special circumstance allegation of murder involving the infliction of 
torture.

Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty against Aguirre and his girlfriend, 
Pearl Sinthia Fernandez, 34, who will be tried separately for her son's May 
2013 killing.

Hatami said Gabriel was systematically tortured for months.

"He was being starved and punched and kicked and abused and beaten ... he was 
belittled, bullied and called gay. His teeth were knocked out," Hatami said. 
"He was tied up every night in a box ... Gabriel was dying."

The prosecutor said Aguirre is one of a small group of people who are "just bad 
... There is evil in this room, and it is right over there."

He painted a picture of Aguirre sleeping in a comfortable bed night after night 
while, in the same room, Gabriel was bound and gagged inside a small cabinet 
with a "sock in his mouth, a shoelace (tying) up his hands, a bandanna over his 
face" and his ankles handcuffed.

"To force a child to eat cat litter and cat feces, more than once, how does 
somebody do that?" Hatami asked.

After the 6 foot, 2 inch, 270-pound defendant allegedly punched and kicked 
Gabriel hard enough to dent the walls of the family's apartment and leave the 
8-year-old unconscious, Aguirre and the boy's mother hid some of the child's 
bloody clothing and moved a picture to cover up one of the biggest indentations 
before calling 911, according to the prosecutor.

"There's no evidence that he was going to save Gabriel," Hatami said, telling 
jurors that the defenant lied to the 911 dispatcher and paramedics who arrived 
on the scene.

The defense was scheduled to present a closing argument this afternoon.

One of Aguirre's attorneys, John Alan, acknowledged during his opening 
statement last month that his client committed "unspeakable acts of abuse" 
against the boy before "exploding into a rage of anger." But the defense 
contends that Aguirre never meant to kill the child.

Hatami sought to undercut that claim, telling jurors in his summation of the 
case that Aguirre hated the boy. The couple only took him from his maternal 
grandparents so that they could collect welfare payments for his care, the 
prosecutor said.

"Gabriel was a gentler boy, a sweeter boy (than his brother) and the defendant 
hated him because of that ... he believed Gabriel was gay," Hatami said. "This 
stressful situation and rage thing is a lie ... because it's not supported by 
the evidence. The defendant actually liked torturing Gabriel. He got off on it 
... he is a murderer and he is a torturer."

Hatami recalled testimony about a medical excuse to explain Gabriel's absence 
from school, which was allegedly forged by Aguirre and Fernandez. The 
prosecutor said that documentation, along with the couple later telling the 
school that the boy had moved to Texas, was evidence of their sophistication 
and premeditation.

He said text messages between the pair in the month the boy was beaten to death 
included 1 from Aguirre telling Fernandez: "stop giving him atencion (sic) ... 
"I told u I'll handle him." 2 days later, according to Hatami, Aguirre sent a 
text saying he was "looking at murder cases."

Hatami showed jurors an earlier picture of Gabriel, sitting next to his brother 
with a big smile on his face.

"The defendant took everything from him," the prosecutors told jurors, urging 
them to "Hold him responsible. It ends here. It ends now."

During the trial, jurors heard testimony from 2 of the boy's siblings, with his 
16-year-old brother telling jurors that the boy was forced to eat cat litter 
and cat feces and was repeatedly beaten in the months leading up to his death.

The boy's sister testified that Aguirre shot her youngest brother with a BB gun 
and put him in a cabinet that had handcuffs attached to it so he couldn't get 
out.

The boy's maternal grandfather described him as "like a son" and said he and 
his wife had practically raised the tot before his daughter and Aguirre took 
the child to live with them. Robert Fernandez cried as he recalled promising 
the boy that he could come home and live with his grandparents after an 
investigation by the county Department of Children and Family Services was 
completed.

"Was he loved?" Deputy District Attorney Jonathan Hatami asked.

"Always," the boy's grandfather responded.

The boy's 1st-grade teacher, Jennifer Garcia, told jurors that she called 
authorities to report his account that he was being hit months before his death 
and continued to call social workers at various times throughout the school 
year about the boy, saying it was more calls than she had ever made in her 
career.

Garcia testified that she stopped sending home notes about behavioral concerns 
because she was concerned that they were causing the youngster to get injured. 
She also said she noticed that he had "various bruises in different stages of 
healing" when he returned from being absent from school.

Jurors also heard emotional testimony from a registered nurse who saw the boy 
on May 22, 2013, after he was brought by paramedics to Antelope Valley 
Hospital's emergency room. Christine Estes described the boy's body as 
"lifeless" with "bruising from head to toe," saying it was "literally worse 
than any horror movie I've seen."

During the defense's portion of the case, jurors saw portions of a videotaped 
interview in which Aguirre was crying as he was being interviewed by a Los 
Angeles County sheriff's detective and saying that he wanted to go see the boy.

Los Angeles County Fire Department personnel were called to the family's home 
in the 200 block of East Avenue Q-10 in response to a call that Gabriel was not 
breathing. He was declared brain dead that day, then taken off life support 2 
days later.

Aguirre and the boy's mother have remained jailed without bail since being 
charged in May 2013 with the boy's death. The 2 were subsequently indicted by a 
Los Angeles County grand jury.

2 former Los Angeles County social workers - Stefanie Rodriguez and Patricia 
Clement - and supervisors Kevin Bom and Gregory Merritt were charged last year 
with 1 felony count each of child abuse and falsifying public records in 
connection with the case.

(source: Los Angeles Daily News)

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

Palmdale abuse case: 'He had 8 months to save him,' prosecutor says in closing 
arguments



Closing arguments began in downtown Los Angeles on Monday in the trial of the 
man accused of beating and torturing to death his girlfriend's 8-year-old son 
in Palmdale.

Gabriel Fernandez died from his injuries in 2013.

Isauro Aguirre is accused of repeatedly beating the boy and torturing him 
because he believed the child was gay.

The jury that will be asked to decide the case against Aguirre heard testimony 
from a senior deputy medical examiner who said that it took 2 days to finish 
the autopsy on Gabriel.

The boy suffered burns, a fractured skull and broken ribs and was malnourished 
when he died. Eight BBs were recovered from the boy's body after his death.

Aguirre, 37, is charged with murder, along with a special circumstance 
allegation of murder involving the infliction of torture.

His lawyer admitted his client is guilty but said he doesn't deserve the death 
penalty.

Gabriel's mother is also charged with murder and will be tried separately.

During the closing arguments, the prosecutor told jurors that Aguirre never 
tried to save Gabriel during his last moments. "He had 8 months to save him" 
and didn't. The prosecutor added that although the boy's mother, Pearl 
Fernandez, was not a good person, evidence shows that the most serious signs of 
abuse came after Aguirre got in the family picture.

""None of this stuff started until that defendant showed up," the prosecutor 
said as he pointed at Aguirre.

Aguirre and the boy's mother have remained jailed without bail since being 
charged in May 2013 with the boy's death. The two were subsequently indicted by 
a Los Angeles County grand jury.

2 former Los Angeles County social workers -- Stefanie Rodriguez and Patricia 
Clement -- and supervisors Kevin Bom and Gregory Merritt were charged last year 
with 1 felony count each of child abuse and falsifying public records in 
connection with the case.

(source: ABC News)








USA:

The Skewed Politics of the Death Penalty



Alfred Dewayne Brown was condemned to death in 2005 after his conviction for 
killing a Houston police officer and a store clerk in a botched robbery in 
Texas. He spent a decade trying to prove his innocence, but it was only when an 
attorney named Brian Stolarz took his case and helped uncover the records of a 
phone call that proved he wasn't anywhere near the scene of the crime - records 
that had been concealed from the grand jury - that Brown was finally exonerated 
and released in 2015.

Stolarz' book about the case, Grace and Justice on Death Row (Skyhorse 
Publishing), arrives at a time when the movement for abolishing the death 
penalty continues to be stymied at the federal level - even as it has won more 
support in the states. In a conversation with TCR's Julia Pagnamenta, Stolarz 
discusses the outlook for the abolition of capital punishment in the U.S., how 
the politics of electing judges makes death sentences more likely, and how his 
Catholic faith influenced his own approach to the issue.

The Crime Report: Why write this book now?

Brian Stolarz: The death penalty debate in this country is trending towards 
abolition. In a new Gallup poll, approval is the lowest it's been since the 
70's. A Pew research poll had [the approval rate] below 50 %. It is my belief 
that it will be abolished one day. And I hope that cases like Dewayne's shine a 
light on why.

TCR: And yet in the current political climate, it doesn't seem like the death 
penalty will be abolished on the federal level.

Brian Stolarz: I think the best way to attack the death penalty right now is 
through the states. Nebraska was a good example of a traditionally red state 
having that important debate. I think the federal death penalty will stay in 
large part because of the make-up of the Supreme Court. Now, with [Neil] 
Gorsuch taking Justice Antonin Scalia's seat, I think it will be a number of 
years, if not decades, before the court shifts to a 5-4 for unconstitutionality 
of the death penalty.

So the way to attack that is on the state level and to identify what is called 
the "outlier counties." There are only certain counties in this country that 
use it, and if there's pressure even in those states to narrow it, and get rid 
of it, then maybe we can chip away at this brick by brick. If Nebraska is doing 
it, then other states can too, and if we get it so that it's done only in a 
couple of states, then it becomes even more unconstitutional, and you may even 
have a federal challenge to it.

TCR: Let's talk a little about Dewayne's case: the prosecutor coerced Dewayne's 
girlfriend, Ericka Dockery, into giving false testimony, and then hid the phone 
record that would have exonerated him. How did this happen?

Brian Stolarz: This case was in our view a rush to judgment. You have a high- 
profile case in which a black defendant is being charged in the murder of a 
white police officer, and there is a sense that they want to get quick justice. 
And so because there was never any science that connected Dewayne to the case, 
(and) never will be, this case was based largely on the testimony of his 
girlfriend Ericka Dockery.

Dewayne's alibi was incredibly straightforward: He was at Ericka's apartment at 
the time of the murders, and made a phone call to where she worked. Ericka 
testified that way in the grand jury.

The DA, and the grand jurors in particular, were badgering her, and in our view 
threatening her, and they kept pressing on her. I've never seen anything like 
the transcript in this case. But she held firm to Dewayne's alibi. And the DA - 
and this is the moment where the case changed - decided that on his own, he 
would charge her with perjury, and ask for a very high bail, and then she sat 
in jail for 4 months. Her life fell apart. She lost her job, her kids ... and 
so she said "fine, I'll say whatever you want."

But then we uncovered through our investigation that she testified about the 
phone call occurring on the caller ID box. The DA, Dan Rizzo, subpoenaed the 
phone company the day after she testified in the grand jury. The documents were 
sent by the phone company to the police, and it showed that Dewayne paid (for) 
that phone call, but they never turned the record over.

And that is still astonishing to me. The reason we got it was because the DA 
who was in charge of the writ of appeal emailed us in May of 2013, and said 
that the cop in charge of the investigation had recently spring-cleaned his 
garage, and found a box of documents. He sent it to us, and in the middle of 
the box was the phone record we had been looking for (over) 8 long years.

"It's easier to be rich and guilty than poor and innocent in this country":

TCR: You write about the lack of money and resources for public defenders, 
especially compared to the funding and political backing prosecutors receive. 
Please explain.

Brian Stolarz: Sadly, it's easier to be rich and guilty than poor and innocent 
in this country, and it's always more popular to pay the prosecutor than to pay 
a public defender. I hope that is going to change, because the Constitution is 
only upheld and preserved and maintained if the process is fair for everybody. 
In this case, Dewayne had a court-appointed lawyer, and the DA had all the 
resources to investigate. I see that in cases I work on all the time, and it's 
bothersome to me because if Dewayne had the law firm I worked at, K & L Gates, 
that could have thrown a lot of resources at it, it might have been a different 
result for him, and he might not have spent 12 years and 62 days in jail for 
something he didn't do.

TCR: You worked pro bono nature on Dewayne's case. Is this a common practice 
for private law firms?

Brian Stolarz: A strong public defender is always the first line of defense and 
that should be where our resources go. You can't depend on large law firms to 
pick up the slack on everything because there are only a few law firms that 
will put the kind of resources that our firm put towards it.

TCR: How important to the capital punishment issue is the fact that judges 
administering these cases are elected?

Brian Stolarz: There's a part in the book where I write that the Alabama 
judicial system had a jury override function, that the jury could recommend 
life, but then the judge could override that and give death. Well, in election 
years, the judges would override the jury verdicts more. It's transparent to me 
to why they did that: to get elected. To me, that's not justice, that???s 
political gain; I think all judges across the country should be appointed by 
their respective governors, or whatever bodies can do it. I think that when you 
politicize law, you are making it such that certain things are valued over 
other things, whether it's these tough-on-crime sentences, or whether it's a 
judicial override, so that a person can say at a rally, I put 10 people to 
death. Well that's not what I want my judge to be up there saying.

TCR: Your Catholic faith guided you through Dewayne's case, and informs your 
opposition to the death penalty. And yet, in the book you recall how a 
religious group outside of Dewayne's prison refused to serve you any food after 
you told them you were defending a person on death row. How did that affect 
you?

There is a certain level of hypocrisy that I see when I speak in churches. When 
I talked to this group, where they were all too happy to give a fish platter to 
the guard but they wouldn't give one to me because I was defending someone in 
there. They were all happy to advocate for this man's death. It just didn't 
seem like the Christian way. Growing up Catholic, I was told that life was 
life, beginning and end, no matter what you've done, and it's not the state's 
role to kill anybody. Pope Francis has put a finer point on that now, and I 
hope that that combined with the advocacy work of Sister Helen, we can finally 
show that the Christian stance is that the death penalty should not happen.

TCR: Justice Scalia, also a practicing Catholic, supported the death penalty.

Brian Stolarz: Justice Scalia and I differed on our application of it even if 
we both had a strong Catholic faith.

TCR: Well, maybe in his case it wasn't a Catholic interpretation, but a 
Constitutional reading of the death penalty?

Brian Stolarz: Yeah, it had to be. That's what I read into it, but my faith has 
told me it's not the right thing to do. If I were a judge I guess I would have 
to think about it differently, but from where I sit right now, it's not the 
right thing to do. The state shouldn't do this, and I hope Pope Francis\'s 
message carries some weight.

TCR: There is currently an art exhibit, "Windows on Death Row" at Columbia Law 
School. People on death row made the art, and Columbia hosted several events 
this fall around the topic. At the 1st event, a Swiss representative who 
introduced the discussion said a central tenet of Switzerland's foreign policy 
was a universal abolition of the death penalty. It's also a European Union 
foreign policy objective. Why is it that the United States is one of the only 
countries in the Western world that still uses the death penalty?

Brian Stolarz: I spend a lot of time talking to folks in the European Union 
(EU). I've been to a few conferences and people are still shocked that we have 
it. We're on a list with countries like Iraq and Iran and China, countries we 
don't normally want to be on a list with as far as human rights. You can't be a 
member of the EU if you have the death penalty. EU companies are not allowing 
drugs to be shipped here for this reason. Their advocacy is really important, 
and I think with more pressure like that, it may begin to change how we all 
think.

The American frontier spirit, and the Old Testament "eye-for-an-eye" approach 
has carried the narrative for us up to now. But I think that's changing given 
the recent public opinion polls.

(source: Julia Pagnamenta is a news intern for The Crime 
Report----thecrimereport.org)

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

ACLU claims death by lethal injection inhumane, cruel and unusual 
punishment----Media witness account says executions 'somewhat peaceful,' seems 
ACLU fear-baiting.



The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) wants Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval 
to halt the execution of Scott Raymond Dozier, 46. The state's branch of the 
civil liberties organization objects to using a previously untested drug 
cocktail on the condemned killer to deliver capital punishment at Dozier's 
request, KNPR reported.

Dozier's execution by lethal injection was originally scheduled for today but 
was postponed on November 9. Judge Jennifer Togliatti, Clark County District 
Court pulled an untested paralytic from the lethal mix of drugs slated for the 
Nevada murderer's execution injection.

The proposed lethal injection protocol included the paralytic cisatracurium, as 
well as the sedative diazepam and the opioid fentanyl.

No state has ever used such a drug combination in carrying out a death 
sentence.

Once Judge Togliatti said no-go to the paralytic drug during execution. James 
Dzurenda, Nevada's prisons chief, nixed Dozier's execution for now. A solicitor 
for state Attorney General Adam Laxalt's office assured that the order will be 
appealed to the Supreme Court of Nevada, according to Time.

The drawback with administering a paralytic, according to experts, is that it 
might also mask problems with the injection protocol and render Dozier 
incapable of signaling distress and could lead him to suffocate to death. After 
the state's high court rules on Nevada's proposed injection protocol, the 
execution could still take place, Judge Togliatti stated.

The ACLU gave Governor Sandoval a petition yesterday that was reportedly signed 
by an excess of 600 Nevada residents, asking him to call off the execution, the 
Nevada Independent noted. Dozier not only murdered 22-year-old Jeremiah Miller, 
he also dismembered him, shoved his torso in a suitcase, and tossed the 
suitcase in a trash dumpster. He was convicted and sentenced to death. He also 
murdered Jasen Green, 26, in Arizona and dumped his dismembered body in the 
desert.

With Dozier voluntarily asking to have capital punishment exacted, and having 
abandoned all appeals, his execution will represent an end to the 11-year break 
Nevada took from carrying out the #death penalty against condemned killers. 
When executed, Dozier will be the 1st death row inmate put to death in the 
state's new $860,000 execution chamber.

Condemned killer's execution makes possible additional capital punishments

If Governor Sandoval does not grant a stay of execution and if the Nevada's 
high court rules to allow Dozier's execution, and if Dozier stays the course, 
(he assured Judge Togliatti that he very much wants his wishes to be 
respected), then, there is much more at stake following his capital punishment.

Dozier's execution would open the possibility for additional capital 
punishments to be carried out. The state will have established its death 
injection protocol.

Horror stories about executions' cruelty don???t stand up to media witness 
account

While civil libertarians present strong opinions about why Dozier should not be 
executed, falling back on the ever-ready claim that capital punishment is 
inhumane and that execution is cruel and unusual punishment, there are 
additional opinions that should not be slighted. Media witnesses have attended 
the executions of death row inmates.

Most recent was the lethal injection of Patrick Charles Hannon in Florida on 
November 9, the very date that Dozier's date with death was delayed in Nevada. 
Greg Angel, a CBS news reporter, was one of the media witnesses. It was not his 
first time watching a killer held accountable for taking people's lives. 
Hannon's execution marked the third time Angel has witnessed capital punishment 
imposed on a condemned killer.

Despite horror stories employed by death penalty opponents, it has been Angel's 
observation that the condemned killers did not suffer as capital punishment was 
carried out. Angel likened the executions to "watching someone fall asleep," 
the New Zealand Herald reported.

Executions missing pain and violence, 'somewhat peaceful'

Angel did as was expected in witnessing executions. He reported whether the 
lethal injection protocol administered was done humanely. Killers going to 
sleep permanently is entirely a lot less cruel than how they behaved toward 
their victims.

Among Angel's observations, pain and violence were missing from the executions. 
According to the New Herald, he actually remarked, "It is silent and somewhat 
peaceful." That's a far cry from what the ACLU and others would like Nevada's 
governor to believe, in seeking to sway him to grant Dozier a stay of 
execution.

State authorities are quite competent and capable of ensuring that justice is 
not elusive and haunting crime victims' families and friends. When killers are 
sentenced to die, maybe society needs to stop embracing the fear-baiting of 
those, such as the ACLU, opposed to the death penalty.

(source: blastingnews.com)








US MILITARY:

2 US Navy SEALs suspected of killing an Army Green Beret could face the death 
penalty



The 2 US Navy SEALs who authorities suspect killed US Army Staff Sgt. Logan 
Melgar in a diplomatic compound in Bamako, Mali, may face the death penalty if 
convicted, a legal expert told Business Insider.

Investigators have ruled Melgar's death a homicide by strangulation, and a 
recent report in The Daily Beast cited 5 sources in the special-operations 
community as saying the SEALs, who have not been publicly identified, killed 
Melgar after he discovered they had illegally pocketed money used to pay 
informants.

Lawrence Brennan, a former US Navy captain who's an expert on naval law, told 
Business Insider that although the Navy had not executed a sailor in more than 
150 years, this case was extraordinary.

"If the reported facts were established, the murder of Staff Sgt. Melgar would 
be among the most aggravating factors and could justify referral to 
courts-martial as capital cases," Brennan told Business Insider.

According to the law, "the death penalty is available in cases of pre-meditated 
murder, as appears possible in this case," Brennan said.

Brennan said the SEALs could stand before the military equivalent of a grand 
jury, where capital punishment would be on the table.

Melgar, a 34-year-old Texan, deployed to Afghanistan twice. He was assigned to 
Mali with the 3rd Special Forces Group to help train locals and support 
counterterrorism operations.

(source: businessinsider.com)