[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----N.H., FLA., ALA., NEB., UTAH, CALIF.

[Rick Halperin]

April 29




NEW HAMPSHIRE:

Repeal aside, New Hampshire not ready for executions



The vote was decisive, but Gov. Chris Sununu held his ground. Facing a 223-116 
House vote to repeal the state's death penalty, the governor maintained his 
previous stance: no.

But even as death penalty supporters cheered the promised veto and opponents 
vowed to change the governor's mind, all sides face an inconvenient reality. 
New Hampshire's death penalty is, for now, functionally nonexistent.

There are no drugs on hand to fulfill a lethal injection, according to Jeff 
Lyons, spokesman for the Department of Corrections. There are no protocols for 
how to obtain those drugs, where to obtain them or how to administer them. 
There isn't even an existing chamber in which to carry an execution out.

And as New Hampshire's only death row inmate proceeds through the court system, 
the state is holding off on making any major decisions on to move forward. That 
inmate, Michael Addison, was convicted for the 2006 killing of a Manchester 
police officer, Michael Briggs; his conviction is presently being appealed in 
federal court.

A spokesman for Sununu, Ben Vihstadt, declined to answer a series of questions 
Friday about the governor's proposals for state-run executions. But Deputy 
Attorney General Ann Rice said there isn't much to reveal.

"I don't think there's a specific plan at this point," she said.

It isn't that New Hampshire's death penalty law is absent from the statute 
book. Under RSA 630:1, "a person convicted of a capital murder may be punished 
by death," a provision encompassing murder of a police officer or judge; murder 
during a sexual assault; or murder in the course of a burglary. In RSA 650:5, a 
detailed process is laid out as to how the punishment be sought in court, 
including how and when the state must inform the defendant, how a guilty person 
must be sentenced, and what factors the jury may or may not consider in making 
its decision.

But as far as the execution itself, the law is far less clear. The punishment 
must be carried out by lethal injection, via the administration of 2 drugs: an 
"ultra-short acting barbiturate" and a "chemical paralytic agent," according to 
the statute. But it delegates to the Commissioner of the Department of 
Corrections which specific drugs are used and how they are obtained.

It specifies that the procedure must be carried out by intravenous injection, 
by a licensed physician, "according to accepted standards of medical practice." 
But it again leaves the details on set up and procedure to the commissioner, 
presently Helen Hanks.

Suffice it to say, that procedure is not in place yet. "At this time the New 
Hampshire Department of Corrections does not have a policy that outlines the 
step-by-step process for carrying out an execution," Lyons said Friday.

Meanwhile, the facility itself is an open question. The law is silent on where 
the executions must take place.

In 2008, an outside architectural firm, Crabtree, Rohrbauch and Associaties, 
designed a master plan for the Department that included a $1.77 million lethal 
injection chamber, replete with viewing areas, a holding cell and a break room. 
But the idea was never set in motion by the Legislature. And in 2015, 
then-Commissioner William Wrenn proposed a more frugal staging ground: the 
men's state prison gymnasium.

On Friday, Lyons said Hanks and the department do not have a position on where 
to carry out future executions. Asked whether Sununu would support the 2008 
chamber proposal, Vihstadt declined to comment.

For many, the considerations are important. Throughout the debate over death 
penalty repeal, representatives pointed to the potential costs incurred by 
housing death row inmates, court appeals and isolated housing. Without a clear 
plan over execution infrastructure, those costs are difficult to nail down.

Obtaining the drugs could prove its own quagmire. States have struggled 
recently to obtain the necessary chemical compounds to carry out their 
executions, as international pressure campaigns have led pharmaceutical 
companies to bar the use of their products for lethal injection, and in some 
cases stop producing them. Some states have been buying drugs internationally, 
stockpiling certain brands, and swapping out the chemical cocktail for other 
drugs when supplies run low.

Neither Lyons nor Rice would speculate on which drugs it would seek for New 
Hampshire - or how the state would obtain them. Under New Hampshire statute, if 
the drugs are unavailable, death by hanging is an option; Vihstadt said that 
Sununu would oppose the practice.

And some legal observers say designing a legally-sound injection procedure can 
become another landmine. Protocols that were designed poorly or improperly have 
opened some states up to constitutional challenges upon implementation, 
according to Elisabeth Semel, director of the Death Penalty Clinic at UC 
Berkeley in California - tying them up in even more legal delays. And those are 
the states that actually implement the procedures.

"It sounds like New Hampshire has a lot of work to do," Semel said Friday.

Rice says the state does have a general game plan. Officials are monitoring the 
ongoing appeals of Addison, which could stretch years, and plan to take action 
if it is likely his appeals are close to exhaustion. That action will likely 
involve the Department of Corrections approaching the Attorney General's Office 
for legal advice in crafting a process, and moving from there.

In the meantime, Rice said, anything said is speculation. "We're talking in a 
vacuum," she said.

Some observers see New Hampshire's lack of preparation for its death penalty as 
evidence of the emptiness of the rhetoric behind those in the state supporting 
it.

"What's going on here a status competition," said Frank Zimring, a UC Berkeley 
law professor and author of The Contradictions of American Capital Punishment, 
speaking on New Hampshire's repeal efforts. "What's going on here is the 
symbolic dance which has absolutely nothing to do with pushing the state close 
to actual execution."

On Friday, a day after the House vote, repeal advocates attempted to mobilize 
their supporters to persuade the governor to change his mind before the bill 
reaches his desk. But Sununu - like Gov. Jeanne Shaheen before him - is 
standing behind his intended veto.

Barring an improbable reversal of 2 senators and 37 representatives to override 
a veto, New Hampshire will stay among the 31 states whose capital punishment 
law remains on the books.

What that means in practice remains to be seen.

(source: Ethan DeWitt, Concord Monitor)

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

NH bill repealing the death penalty in doubt



The state Senate majority leader said it was doubtful proponents of a bill 
repealing the death penalty will have enough votes to override Gov. Chris 
Sununu's anticipated veto of the legislation.

Senate Majority Leader Jeb Bradley, R-Wolfeboro, believes the 10 senators who 
voted to kill the legislation in March would not budge on their stance if asked 
to override the veto promised by Sununu. It takes a 2/3 majority vote from both 
the House and the Senate to override a veto.

Senate Bill 593, which would change New Hampshire's death sentence to life in 
prison without parole, passed the House Thursday with a 223-116 floor vote. The 
House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee had voted 12-6 in favor of 
passage.

Rep. Renny Cushing, D-Hampton, a longtime advocate for repealing the death 
penalty, said the House may have the votes to override a veto.

SB593 is sponsored by Sens. Martha Fuller Clark, D-Portsmouth, and David 
Watters, D-Dover, along with Cushing. It proposes to abolish the state's death 
penalty and replace the sentence for capital murder to life imprisonment 
without the possibility of parole.

A provision in the bill specifies that "this act shall apply to persons 
convicted of capital murder on or after the effective date of this act," which 
is set for Jan. 1, 2019, eliminating the chance for change of the death penalty 
sentence for the murderer of a Manchester police officer several years ago, 
whose execution is pending.

Senators voted 14-10 last month to pass the legislation, short of a two-thirds 
majority. Bradley, who opposed the bill, said it would take 2 extra Senate 
votes to give proponents of repealing the death penalty the numbers to 
challenge a veto. However, he said most harbor a deep-seated conviction for 
their stance on the death penalty, which he believes makes it doubtful that any 
of the bill's opponents will flip their vote.

"I think people have made up their minds on the death penalty," Bradley said. 
"It's something that's kind of 'yes' or 'no.'"

If there were a state in which opponents of a repeal might reconsider, Bradley 
said it would probably not be New Hampshire.

Capital punishment is rare, he said, since it applies to such a short list of 
crimes, which include murders of police officers, judges or prosecutors or 
killings during kidnappings, robberies or rape. He pointed out the state has 
not executed anyone since 1939, and that 1 person is currently on death row - 
Michael Addison, convicted of murder in the slaying of Manchester police 
officer Michael Briggs.

"It's a narrow statute we have in New Hampshire," Bradley said.

Fuller Clark, Watters and John Reagan, R-Deerfield, voted to pass the bill. 
Sens. Dan Innis, R-New Castle, William Gannon, R-Sandown; James Gray, 
R-Rochester, voted against it.

Cushing believes there is a chance for some senators to change their vote. He 
said he has spoken with lawmakers both for and against the death penalty, 
though he declined to say if he has approached any senators about switching 
their vote.

Cushing, whose father and brother-in-law were both murdered, has sponsored 
bills in the past to repeal the death penalty. He has described state execution 
as a "ritual killing" that does nothing to remove the pain for victims of 
violent crimes.

"People evolve on the issue," Cushing said. "So I never presume how someone is 
going to vote on the death penalty until their vote is cast."

The only time a similar bill has passed the House and Senate was in 2000, but 
it was vetoed by then-Gov. Jeanne Shaheen.

(source: seacoastonline.com)








FLORIDA:

Judge moving along Florida high school shooting case



A judge pushed to get things moving in the death penalty case against Florida 
school shooting suspect Nikolas Cruz.

Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer set a May 4 deadline at a hearing Friday for 
defense lawyers to file a demand for evidence from prosecutors, who would then 
begin turning it over.

Scherer also granted a request by Cruz's public defender to waive Florida's 
speedy trial rule. The rule generally requires that a felony defendant go to 
trial within 175 days of arrest unless it's waived, which is commonly done in 
complex or major cases because the defense typically needs more time to 
prepare.

"I explained to him his constitutional right to a speedy trial," assistant 
public defender Melisa McNeill said.

The judge set a May 25 hearing to gauge progress in the case "so we can move 
things along and set a proposed trial date."

"I don't want this case treading water," Scherer said.

Cruz, 19, is charged with 17 counts of murder and 17 counts of attempted murder 
in the Feb. 14 massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, 
Florida. His lawyers have repeatedly said Cruz would plead guilty if guaranteed 
a sentence of life without parole, but prosecutors seek the death penalty.

As in past hearings, Cruz spoke only to his lawyers and sat shackled at a 
defense table with his head bowed. He made no eye contact with the audience, 
which included his younger brother, Zachary.

Also Friday, attorneys for the family of shooting victim Joaquin Oliver, 17, 
called on the Broward County School Board not to attempt to limit total 
liability in future lawsuits to $300,000. A lawyer for the board has signaled 
that the Stoneman Douglas shooting should be considered a single occurrence 
with numerous victims - which would impose that dollar limit - rather than 34 
separate occurrences.

"The school board is watching after its financial best interest instead of that 
of the families it has publicly claimed it would continuously support," said 
Michael Haggard, who represents the Oliver family in one of many expected 
lawsuits against several government entities.

The school board issued a statement saying it is following state law in terms 
of the caps on damages a government agency can be forced to pay in a lawsuit.

Elsewhere, the Broward school board is looking into claims that a Stoneman 
Douglas teacher said a student was acting like Adolf Hitler.

The SunSentinel reports the controversy involves history teacher Greg Pittman, 
who supports gun control, and junior Kyle Kashuv, who has defended gun rights 
after the mass shooting at their school.

Kashuv tweeted that 3 students told him Pittman said "Kyle is acting like the 
next Hitler."

Kashuv had complained about being questioned by school security after posting 
photos of him holding an AR-15 assault-style rifle at a gun range.

The newspaper says Pittman then tweeted that "you don't have to be the sharpest 
tack in the box" to understand why authorities might ask questions after a 
school shooting.

Broward schools spokeswoman Nadine Drew says they're reviewing the matter.

(source: WCVB news)








ALABAMA:

Alabama should bring back public executions



Today the State of Alabama, on behalf of its citizens, will strap convicted 
murderer Walter Leroy Moody to a table, stick a needle in his arm and then pump 
a series of poisons into his bloodstream until he's dead.

This is wrong for all sorts of reasons.

First, if you support the death penalty, then lethal injection is hardly 
retribution (it's painless) and it's not much of a deterrence (it's hidden from 
view). It may be justice in a procedural sense, but killing someone is usually 
about more than just law enforcement.

Second, if you're against the death penalty, the citizens don't have to face 
the reality of what their state is doing (again, it's hidden) nor the 
gruesomeness of the act (again, it's painless and oddly sterile).

That's why, for these reasons and more, the State of Alabama should bring back 
public executions - hangings, firing squads or even the guillotine.

That would sure focus our minds a bit more on what's happening, like it or not.

The man being put to death today is guilty. Moody used pipe-bombs in 1989 to 
murder U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Robert Vance Sr. of Mountain 
Brook and civil rights attorney Robert E. Robertson of Georgia. Vance's wife 
was also seriously injured in the blast.

Moody is a convicted domestic terrorist and a murderer, no different than those 
we've locked up at Git'mo. He not only murdered our fellow citizens, he 
attacked our nation by targeting its justice system. Case closed.

Alabamians overwhelmingly support the death penalty for such crimes. I didn't 
even need to cite any polls or surveys to write that - it's self-evident.

And while our Christian faith teaches that God will forgive Moody for his sins, 
our human need for retribution will demand execution just as our human need for 
mercy will seek commutation.

But as long as we're "administering capital punishment" behind closed doors in 
dystopian "Giver"-like sterility, neither cause will be served.

So, Alabama ... get a rope.

(source: Editorial, Yellowhammer News, April 19)








NEBRASKA:

State must hold itself accountable before any killers are put to death



Nebraska voters reinstated the death penalty in 2016 as a means of ensuring the 
state's most heinous murderers are held accountable for their crimes.

Accountability must also extend to the state officials responsible for 
implementing and carrying out capital punishment. Despite repeated efforts - 
and now, lawsuits and potential subpoenas - those in positions of authority 
have hypocritically refused to open themselves up to such scrutiny.

Carrying out the ultimate punishment of ending a person's life comes with the 
utmost responsibility because of the gravity of the situation. Yet the state's 
refusal to do so brings an ever-increasing number of lawsuits and legal costs. 
Most recently, the Nebraska Legislature's Judiciary Committee received subpoena 
power to seek information on the death penalty protocol that???s remained 
hidden.

"We're just trying to make sure that the process was followed," said Crete Sen. 
Laura Ebke, chair of the Judiciary Committee. "If the state is going to put 
someone to death, then we ought to at least make sure that we're following our 
own rules for doing so."

Amen to that.

Simple transparency could have avoided all this heartburn. Yet, in the state's 
eyes, the desire to hide information seems to continue superseding the 
obligation of accountability to its citizens.

Let's look at what Nebraskans don't know:

* We don't know how the Nebraska Department of Correctional Services crafted 
the new policy, which it told the Journal Star was written in a single draft 
without input from the governor, attorney general, Corrections director, 
outside experts or other state officials, thus the lack of available public 
records.

* We don't know where the state obtained its lethal injection drugs.

* We don't know how the 4-drug cocktail was tested.

All we have on the last 2 is Corrections' word that they were done in 
accordance with the law. Given the state's costly failed attempts to illegally 
buy execution drugs overseas, that alone is not good enough.

(source: Editorial, Lincoln Journal Star)








UTAH:

Utah Department of Corrections changing policies after withheld records derail 
death penalty case



After revelations that the Utah Department of Corrections withheld medical 
records in a death penalty case, derailing a sentencing trial and prompting a 
plea deal, 74 additional cases are being reviewed to ensure compliance.

Steven Crutcher, 37, had pleaded guilty to aggravated murder, a 1st-degree 
felony and a capital offense, in the death of a fellow inmate and was advancing 
toward a sentencing trial scheduled for this month where jurors would have 
decided whether he would have faced the death penalty.

However, after the Department of Corrections failed to turn over 1,572 pages of 
medical records to Crutcher's attorney, even when ordered to do so by a judge, 
prosecutors pulled the option of the death penalty and offered Crutcher a 
sentence of life in prison with no possibility of parole. He accepted.

Following a furious admonition from 6th District Judge Wallace Lee, the 
Department of Corrections - which issued a statement following the hearing 
saying the records hadn't been released due to a "misinterpretation" of the 
judge's order - set about reviewing records requests made since Jan. 1, 2015, 
through the state's Government Records Access Management Act, court orders and 
subpoenas.

In its review of 2,708 requests, the department identified 74 cases where the 
same error could have occurred, according to a spokesman. Representatives from 
the department are now contacting attorneys in each of the cases to determine 
whether they received all the records they sought.

More than 1/2 have been resolved following conversations with a single attorney 
overseeing them all, according to Department of Corrections spokesman Steve 
Gehrke, and the department is in talks with the Salt Lake Legal Defender's 
Office about several more.

"That leaves about a dozen cases that we have to reach out to individual 
attorneys on and, again, in those cases I need to stress that we don't know 
that they're going to ask for any supplemental records to be provided, but we 
want to reach out to make the offer because we know this issue has been out 
there," Gehrke said.

In addition to the case review, all department employees who deal with records 
must now complete a thorough re-training, Gehrke said, and additional education 
about answering records requests will be added to trainings for new hires.

After Crutcher took the deal in a March 28 hearing and was sentenced to prison 
for the 2013 murder of Rolando Cardona-Gueton, 62, Lee voiced his frustration 
over the department's lack of cooperation in the case and his fear the same 
problem could be occurring in other cases.

Lee ordered a letter about his concerns drafted to Department of Corrections 
Executive Director Rollin Cook, who resigned earlier this month, to the 
warden's of both prisons and to Gov. Gary Herbert's office.

A representative from the Utah Attorney General's Office was called before the 
judge to explain why the department hadn't complied with his order.

"We do sincerely apologize, this was a failure on our part, and we recognize 
that and we apologize to the court and we apologize to the state and we 
apologize to defense counsel that we did not produce all of these records," 
said assistant attorney general Amanda Montague, according to an audio 
recording of the hearing.

Montague indicated that medical records staff were confused about what records 
should be released, believing that providing a list of Crutcher's prescribed 
medications rather than his full history was sufficient.

"They didn't realize, that they needed to provide every piece of paper, every 
electric file that we had, to support that list of medications," Montague said.

Lee pushed back, saying he didn't understand how his judicial order to provide 
all records could have been misunderstood and that he was "beyond angry" about 
the department's failure to comply.

"I am angry with the Department of Corrections. This was totally wrong. It 
makes me doubt the credibility of everything I hear from the Department of 
Corrections. It was sneaky and it was deceitful and there is no proper excuse 
that can satisfy me that this was an honest mistake. It was wrong on every 
level," Lee said.

Crutcher's attorney, Ed Brass, also questioned the opposition the defense team 
faced in its efforts to talk to medical professionals who treated Crutcher, 
ultimately being forced to get a court order compelling them to talk.

"Keep in mind this is a different branch of the same government that is trying 
to kill Mr. Crutcher," Brass emphasized.

Montague said that faced with a number of regulations about releasing records, 
medical professionals are wary of providing more than they should.

"They get nervous about disclosing things without court orders because they 
think someone is going to sue them or they are going to be criminally liable 
for disclosing a medical record that they shouldn't have disclosed," Montague 
said.

Lee insisted that the Department of Corrections must make changes and be 
forthcoming with the information it is expected to provide in other cases.

"Something has to change there, because it has been like pulling teeth in this 
case to get them to be honest with us, and that is totally wrong. That is 
something I would expect from Russia or North Korea or some other place like 
that, not a society like we have under the constitution. It has got to stop," 
Lee said.

Brass emphasized in his statement that prosecutors in the case should be 
commended for their work, noting they had been honest and responsive as both 
sides prepared for trial and had assisted the defense in seeking Crutcher's 
medical records.

"I do not respect what was done in this case by the Department of Corrections 
to withhold those records and put Mr. Crutcher in a situation where he might 
have been facing the death penalty," Brass said. "But in recognition of what's 
fair and what constitutes due process, (Sanpete County Attorney Kevin Daniels) 
opted to do what was the right thing in this case and give Mr. Crutcher a life 
without parole sentence."

(source: deseretnews.com)








CALIFORNIA:

Calif. DA candidate: Cop killers shouldn't get death penalty----Lawrence 
Strauss said he wouldn't seek the death penalty against defendants who???ve 
killed a police officer because, "it's part of the risk they take"



A candidate for Contra Costa District Attorney said during a forum this week he 
wouldn't seek the death penalty against defendants who've killed a police 
officer because, "it's part of the risk they take."

The comments by attorney Lawrence Strauss - 1 of 3 candidates in the June DA 
election - were promptly slammed by local police union presidents, one of whom 
said Strauss' name shouldn't be on the ballot.

Strauss was responding to a question during an April 24 forum at the Lesher 
Center in Walnut Creek, which asked Strauss, interim DA Diana Becton, and 
senior deputy district attorney Paul Graves if they would seek the death 
penalty against cop killers. Of the 3, Strauss was the only one to give a 
direct answer.

He began his comments saying that when an officer is murdered it affects not 
only his family, but "a nationwide network of police officers." He added, 
however, that people who kill single officers shouldn't be death-penalty 
eligible. He cited the 1995 Oklahoma City Bombing as an example of a death 
penalty case he'd support.

"I feel sorry for the officer. It's part of the risk they take as being an 
officer of the law," Strauss said. He added that he trained police officers as 
a prosecutor in Hawaii and always told them to approach every traffic stop with 
caution because someone could pull a gun out at any time.

Contra Costa Sheriff Sgt. Sean Welch, president of the agency's officer union, 
called the comments "archaic" and "extremely inappropriate."

"Law enforcement officers are hired to ensure the public's safety and enforce 
the constitution and laws of the state. We are not pawns for a brutal 
dictator," Welch said. "Strauss' performance last night should have made it 
clear to anyone voting in the primary election that he should not even be on 
the ballot for district attorney."

Officer Ben Therriault, president of the Richmond Police Officer's Association 
called Strauss "tone-deaf" when it came to public safety, adding that "the men 
and women in our profession don't sign up to be hurt or killed or receive less 
justice than our fellow citizens we protect."

The other 2 candidates seemed to hedge the question, with Graves saying death 
cases are reserved for "the most heinous crimes," and Becton saying, "Yes, to 
answer your question, whenever there is a case in our system where the crime in 
heinous or serious, the death penalty is the law in California." Both said 
they'd use an existing committee that makes decisions on each potential death 
case.

Strauss has operated a private practice for 23 years and spend nearly 2 years 
as a prosecuting attorney in Hawaii, according to his online biography. His 
priorities include ending "wealth-based disparities," excessive sentences, and 
quashing the War on Drugs, increasing transparency and accountability, and 
promoting polices "that aid undocumented communities," according to his 
response to a candidate questionnaire.

Asked to respond to Welch's comments, Strauss put out a 2-page written 
statement in which he says he's seen firsthand the impact when officers are 
killed in the line of duty, and thanking police for their service. He said 
people who kill single officers should receive life sentences without the 
possibility of parole.

(source: Contra Costa Times)