[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, N.H., FLA., LA., MO., OKLA., NEB., COLO., CALIF., USA

[Rick Halperin]

August 23



TEXAS:

Texas Can Keep Supplier of Execution Drug Secret


To ensure Texas can keep executing prisoners, it does not have to reveal the 
supplier of its lethal injection drug to a group of Arkansas death-row inmates, 
a federal judge ruled Tuesday.

Since Texas adopted lethal injection as its method of capital punishment in 
1982, it has executed several hundred prisoners, far more than any other state.

The supply of lethal injection drugs has dwindled in recent years, as 
anti-death penalty advocates have pushed manufacturers to stop supplying them 
for executions.

Due to the dearth, Texas changed its execution protocol in 2009 from a 3-drug 
cocktail to a single dose of pentobarbital.

2 grams of the sedative, which is used to treat epilepsy and relax patients 
before surgery, is fatal. Texas kills prisoners with 5-gram doses.

The backlash slapped Texas in 2013 when a public information request outed the 
compounding pharmacy supplying its pentobarbital.

Wilting under a firestorm of media coverage, protests and death threats, the 
Woodlands Compounding Pharmacy's owner asked Texas to return the pentobarbital.

Texas now gets the drug from another in-state supplier. Identified in court 
records as "Pharmacy X," it stated in a declaration that it too will stop 
selling pentobarbital to Texas if its identity is revealed.

"Pharmacy X did not and will not supply lethal injection chemicals to any state 
other than Texas under any circumstances," the declaration states.

The statement opposed a bid by 5 Arkansas death-row inmates to get the identity 
of Texas' supplier.

In a motion to compel, the inmates said Arkansas' use of the anesthetic 
midazolam in its 3-drug execution cocktail could subject them to cruel and 
unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

"Pentobarbital is a more humane alternative to Arkansas' current use of 
midazolam, which has been associated with several executions in which inmates 
suffered prolonged, tortured deaths," the motion states.

The 5 Arkansas inmates sought information from Texas for a federal lawsuit they 
filed challenging their state's lethal injection protocol after Governor Asa 
Hutchinson scheduled 8 executions for a 10-day period in spring 2017 because 
the state's midazolam had an April 30, 2017 expiration date.

A federal judge issued an injunction staying the executions, but the Eighth 
Circuit lifted the stay.

Arkansas has not executed anyone since April 2017. It has not set death dates 
for the 5 inmates who subpoenaed Texas, 1 of whom has been granted clemency.

U.S. District Judge Sim Lake in Houston granted Texas' motion to quash the 
subpoena Tuesday.

Lake said that to succeed on an Eighth Amendment lethal injection challenge, 
inmates must show a "substantial risk of serious harm" and that there are 
readily available alternative drugs that will reduce that risk of severe pain, 
citing U.S. Supreme Court precedent from the 2008 decision in Baze v. Rees.

Lake found the lack of availability of pentobarbital doomed the subpoena, 
focusing on Texas' supplier's statement that it will not provide pentobarbital 
to any other state.

The Arkansas inmates argued that a protective order would resolve any fears the 
supplier's name would get out. But Lake decided the strong possibility its 
identity would surface despite the protective order would make it hard for 
Texas to get pentobarbital, creating an undue burden for the state.

"Most persuasively, [the Texas Department of Criminal Justice] argues that the 
disclosure of information about its supplier of pentobarbital, even with the 
protective order in place, would end their ability to procure compounded 
pentobarbital," the Ronald Reagan appointee wrote in a 34-page order.

The Arkansas inmates are represented by attorneys with the firm Fish and 
Richardson, who did not immediately respond Wednesday to a request for comment 
on the order.

Texas state attorneys refused to weigh in because the "order is not final and 
may be subject to appellate review."

Texas leads the nation with 8 executions so far this year. 7 more Texas inmates 
are set to die in 2018. (source: Courthouse News)






NEW HAMPSHIRE:

Repeal the death penalty


To the Editor:

Both the New Hampshire House and Senate voted to end the death penalty. This 
was long overdue. Unfortunately, it appears the ugly head of political 
considerations pushed Gov. Chris Sununu to veto the bill.

Three questions need to be asked: Will it be a deterrence? Will the victims' 
family feel justice was done? At what cost to the state? Then there is the 
morality of the state killing a killer. There are many other justifiable 
questions, but in the end, the job of our government is to do what is best for 
the state.

In most cases, it takes years and more than $5 million to prosecute and carry 
out such a judgment. The costs are too large unless there are corresponding 
benefits to the citizens of New Hampshire. Pope Francis recently said, "The 
death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and 
dignity of the person." Many judges and law enforcement officers now believe it 
is a huge waste of time and money for no benefit.

I ask our representatives to vote to override the governor's veto.

THOMAS WESTHEIMER

Peterborough

(source: Letter to the Editor, The Union Leader)






FLORIDA:

Markeith Loyd wrote letter to state attorney to try to avoid death penalty


Accused cop killer Markeith Loyd said the murders he's accused of committing 
are not his fault and that he's willing to take a lie detector test to prove 
it.

He made the statement in a letter to State Attorney Aramis Ayala.


Loyd wants her to keep fighting to take back his murder cases, which were 
reassigned by the governor after Ayala's announcement that she would not seek 
the death penalty.

He sent the letter, which he wrote from behind bars, near the end of 2017, 
nearly a year after Ayala announced she would not seek the death penalty and 
consequently ended up having the case taken away from her.

Now facing the death penalty, Loyd wants a do-over.

The letter was amicably addressed to "Miss A," with Loyd asking, "Why would you 
give up the fight?"

The letter appears to be part of a strategy Loyd hatched with family members in 
jail visitation tapes first uncovered by Channel 9 on Tuesday.

"He (Gov. Rick Scott) didn't want to hear what she (Ayala) had to say because 
he just wanted the death penalty. He got his call from John Mina or whoever he 
got the call from, and he just went off the fly with it," Loyd said to family 
members.

In the tapes, they talk at length about Gov. Scott and his reassignment of 
Loyd's case to State Attorney Brad King, who is pursuing the death penalty.

In that letter to Ayala, Loyd wrote, "You can defeat Scott using my case. After 
you win that, then you piggyback ride the rest of the cases."

Loyd also mentioned Sade Dixon, his pregnant ex-girlfriend who he is accused of 
killing before he allegedly shot and killed Lt. Deborah Clayton after she 
spotted him a a Walmart.

"He wants to talk about the police case and Sade, and (Sade's) case. Like, he 
trying to, he really trying to have two police, 2 police trials," Loyd said.

He never denied killing Sade in the letter, and instead wrote, "I don't see how 
I'm even charged with 1st-degree (murder) when (a) gun was pulled on me and I 
was attacked."

During jail visitations, Loyd was more focused on another of his girlfriends 
named Teeny, who is also in jail.

"They messed Teeny up," he said.

A representative for Ayala's office sent a letter back to the jail telling Loyd 
it was inappropriate for him to be communicating with the state attorney.

(source: WFTV news)






LOUISIANA:

Voters will have the final say this November on Louisiana's split-jury verdict


Louisiana is 1 of 2 states that don't require unanimous jury verdicts for 
non-death penalty felony cases.

There's an amendment to change that on the ballot this November.

As it stands now, 10 members of a 12-person jury can sentence someone to life 
without parole.

With the exception of Louisiana and Oregon, a conviction requires a unanimous 
vote.

According to the National Registry of Exonerations, Louisiana has the 2nd 
highest rate of wrongful convictions and exonerations per capita.

A public meeting was held Wednesday at City Club in River Ranch.

(source: KLFY news)






MISSOURI:

Williams death penalty review panel hears new evidence


A panel of 5 retired judges heard arguments Wednesday over whether new DNA 
evidence in the Marcellus Williams death penalty case is enough to exonerate 
him or at least warrant a new trial.

Williams, 49, was sentenced in 2001 for the 1998 murder of Lisha Gayle, a 
former reporter for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

His execution was scheduled 1 year ago today, but was postponed by then Gov. 
Eric Greitens. He later created the panel to examine the new evidence, which 
showed Williams' DNA was not on the knife used in the murder. Instead, it 
contained the DNA of a still unidentified person.

The Missouri attorney general's office declined to comment after the hearing, 
but has said in past interviews that there's plenty of other evidence that 
Williams is guilty.

Stacey Pratt, who heads Missourians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, 
cited statistics from University of North Carolina researcher Frank Baumgartner 
to suggest that Williams was sentenced to die because of his race.

"A person of color who is facing a capital sentence is 14 times more likely to 
receive one if the victim is a white female," she said. "It's against that 
context and backdrop we have to make sure that justice is done here, and that 
it is possible for the people of the state of Missouri to have faith that we 
have a just and fair system."

Williams' son, Marcellus Williams II, remains hopeful.

"My father, he always says 'everything is God's will,' so we trust the whole 
legal team, so we're counting on them to get it done, so I'm feeling real good 
about it," he said. "It's a slow process, but slow motion is better than no 
motion."

Wednesday's hearing was closed to the public, and attorneys for both sides 
declined to discuss what happened. That included Barry Scheck, co-founder of 
The Innocence Project and a former member of O.J. Simpson's "dream team" of 
attorneys.

"By statute and by agreement, none of us are saying anything - that's the law," 
Scheck said. "But it was a very professional, very fair hearing, and we 
appreciated it."

Gov. Mike Parson will have final say once the panel makes its recommendation.

(source: St. Louis Public Radio)

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

Ex-judges review Missouri death penalty case


A panel of former judges is considering the Missouri death penalty case of 
Marcellus Williams and whether Gov. Mike Parson should spare his life.

The board met Wednesday in Jefferson City and heard from attorneys on both 
sides.

Williams' son, the Missouri NAACP president and other supporters gathered 
outside. Innocence Project Co-Founder Barry Scheck, who was one of O.J. 
Simpson's defense attorneys, also attended.

Williams was convicted of killing former St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter Lisha 
Gayle during a 1998 burglary. He was hours away from execution when then-Gov. 
Eric Greitens ordered an investigation last year.

Greitens' action followed the release of new DNA testing previously 
unavailable. DNA found on the weapon matched another unknown person, not 
Williams.

Prosecutors have said they're still confident Williams is guilty based on other 
evidence.

(source: Associated Press)



OKLAHOMA:

Congressional Black Caucus asking Gov. Fallin to review Julius Jones murder 
case


A national organization is asking Governor Mary Fallin to take a closer look at 
the case against a man on death row.

When he was just 19-years-old, Julius Jones was convicted and sentenced to 
death in the 1999 murder of Paul Howell, an Edmond businessman who was gunned 
down in cold blood in his parent's driveway.

He had just pulled up to the house with his sister and 2 young children. The 
other 3 were able to run into the house before the gunman took off in Howell's 
suburban.

The red bandana and the gun used in the crime were both found in the Jones' 
home when police searched it back in 1999. Julius' supporters contend one of 
his friends, who was convicted of being an accomplice, stashed it there - not 
Julius.

Julius Jones was a 19-year-old honor student on a scholarship at the University 
of Oklahoma at the time of the murder. He was arrested for the crime, convicted 
and sentenced to die.

Since the crime, Jones and his family have maintained his innocence.

"But, it isn't fair for him to be in jail for something he didn't do," said 
Julius' dad, Anthony Jones.

After spending several years on Oklahoma's death row, Jones' case catapulted 
into the spotlight after being featured on a 3-part documentary series. 'The 
Last Defense' highlighted possible missteps by law enforcement and the judicial 
system during Jones' conviction.

"This is what we have been hoping for all this time, for hope, prayer, to get a 
chance, you know, to be heard," Anthony Jones, Julius??? father, told News 4 in 
July.

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals said it was looking into racial bias by 
certain members of the original jury.

Now, the Congressional Black Caucus is asking Gov. Fallin to review Jones' case 
and that possible biases that may have played a role in his conviction.

"In November 2017, Mr. Jones' current legal team discovered new evidence that 
at least one juror harbored racial prejudice that influenced his vote to 
convict and sentence Mr. Jones to death. One juror reported telling the judge 
about another juror who said the trial was a waste of time and 'they should 
just take the [n-word] out and shoot him behind the jail.'

The United States Supreme Court has made unequivocally clear that our criminal 
justice system cannot tolerate such blatant examples of racial prejudice on the 
part of even a single juror. In this way and many others, Mr. Jones' rights 
under the state and federal constitutions appear to have been violated. On July 
24, 2018, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals agreed to consider this newly 
discovered claim of the juror using the racial slur. There is also a petition 
pending before the United States Supreme Court regarding the unfair application 
of the death penalty on the basis of race," the letter read.

The caucus asks Fallin to "take a close and careful look at [Julius Jones'] 
case, and use your authority to correct this wrongful conviction. Justice 
requires it."

(source: KFOR news)






NEBRASKA:

Krist says, if elected governor, he would uphold law, follow through with 
capital punishment


As a state senator, Bob Krist opposed the death penalty.

Krist says if he is elected governor, he will carry out the law.

Krist, the Democrat running against Republican Gov. Pete Ricketts, says though 
he voted to repeal capital punishment, he will respect the decision by voters 
to reinstate it.

"It is the law. It is currently the law of the state of Nebraska. Are we doing 
it correctly and do we have transparency around the issue? I think those are 
the keys," Krist tells Nebraska Radio Network.

Krist questions whether the execution of Carey Dean Moore met that criteria.

Nebraska legislators voted to repeal the death penalty in the 2015 legislative 
session. Enough lawmakers stuck with that vote to override a veto by Gov. 
Ricketts. Krist voted both to repeal capital punishment and to override the 
veto. An effort to place the issue on the ballot for voters to decide began 
almost immediately after the session adjourned, receiving significant campaign 
funding from Ricketts. Voters in November of 2016 voted to reinstate the death 
penalty.

Gov. Ricketts vowed his administration would work to carry out the vote of the 
people. Moore was executed August 14th using a 4-drug protocol never used 
before.

Krist faults the Ricketts Administration for failing to disclose how they 
obtained the drugs. He also questions why the curtain was lowered for 14 
minutes during the Moore execution, blocking media witnesses from observing the 
Lancaster County coroner from examining his body to determine the time of 
death.

Krist points out he took an oath of office as a pilot in the United States Air 
Force, pledging to obey the Constitution and the law of the land. He says if he 
takes the oath of office as governor, he will set his personal feelings about 
the death penalty aside.

"When I take that oath, in the inauguration in January, I will once again take 
an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and of the state of 
Nebraska and the laws herein," Krist says. "I will do what's call upon me to do 
based upon those statutes."

(source: nebraskaradionetwork.com)






COLORADO:

Prosecutors Seek Death Penalty in Murder Case


Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for 2 men, accused in the murders of 
2 Colorado Springs teenagers.

Diego Chacon and Marco Bravo were in court Tuesday. They were supposed to go to 
trial in October, but a judge postponed the proceedings.

Several questions still need to be resolved, like if they will be tried 
together or separately.

Chacon and Bravo allegedly executed 16 year old Natalie Partida and 15 year old 
Gerek Greer in March of last year. The crimes are thought to be gang related.

(source: KVOR news)






CALIFORNIA:

Man in California Subway Stabbing Eligible for Death Penalty


Prosecutors have added charges that could qualify a man for the death penalty 
if he's convicted of killing 18-year-old Nia Wilson at a train station in 
Northern California.

Alameda County prosecutors added the special-circumstances enhancement of 
"lying in wait" to the charges against John Cowell, who didn't enter a plea 
during a court hearing, the East Bay Times reported .

Cowell, 27, is charged with murder in the fatal stabbing of Wilson last month 
as she changed trains at a subway station in Oakland as well as attempted 
murder in the attack that also wounded Wilson's sister.

Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O'Malley said authorities are still 
investigating whether Cowell was motivated by racial hate in the attack. The 
women are black, and he is white.

O'Malley said last month after Cowell appeared in court for the first time that 
there hasn't been any evidence of a hate crime but that such a charge could be 
filed if investigators find any proof of that as a motive.

Alameda County Public Defender Brendon Woods, who is Cowell's attorney, said he 
doesn't agree with the added special-circumstance allegations and that there is 
no evidence the crime was fueled by racism.

"I'm deeply concerned that they're now seeking death, possibly for someone that 
has severe, severe mental illness," Woods said.

"What we have here is someone who was released by a state hospital just 75 days 
before this incident," Woods added. "He suffers from severe mental illness, and 
that's why we're here today."

Whether or not prosecutors decide to seek the death penalty will occur after a 
hearing in which a judge will determine if Cowell should be held on his 
charges. A date for that hearing has not yet been set.

California hasn't executed anyone since 2006 and has the nation's largest death 
row with nearly 750 inmates.

(source: Associated Press)






USA:

Capital Punishment and the Sex Abuse Crisis


Many sense that the hierarchy's rejection of capital punishment and their 
complacency about clergy sexual abuse are not unconnected. What I want to say 
on the matter falls under three headings: separation; vengeance; and 
protection. All of these serve to distinguish justice, which the Church should 
uphold, from mere "regulatory compliance," which seems the main thing on offer 
right now from our bishops.

First, separation. There is a fundamental connection between punishment and 
separation from the community in which one committed a crime. Children who 
misbehave at table are sent to their rooms. Dishonest lawyers are disbarred. 
Someone who commits a mortal sin loses friendship with God and must be 
"reconciled" to return to the communion of the saints.

Likewise a criminal, by the very act of committing a capital crime, separates 
himself decisively from society. The sentences of exile and life imprisonment 
are public judgments which are understood to confirm that separation. Capital 
punishment is the extreme instance of separation.

It follows that it always remains a possibility that capital punishment be 
prudentially justified, namely, when society wishes to express and confirm its 
abhorrence for certain crimes, by the definitive separation of the criminal 
from society. A clear example would be the execution of the Nuremberg war 
criminals. These criminals were not merely executed, but also their mortal 
remains were cremated and the ashes scattered. Why? So that they would in no 
sense continue to abide as a presence in society. Today many communities 
reasonably want to separate serial murderers from themselves in the same way.

Thus, an attitude which absolutely opposes the death penalty, in all 
circumstances, must be an attitude which downplays or even rejects the aspect 
of separation, so fundamental to punishment. From that point of view even 
imprisonment, as it is a separation, can appear suspect. For instance, Pope 
Francis, in his 2015 letter to the President of the International Commission 
against the Death Penalty, writing as pope and not as a private theologian, 
condemned as "unacceptable" not merely the death penalty but also lengthy 
prison sentences. Separation, he contended, ought never be definitive, and 
lengthy prison sentences "may be considered hidden death sentences, because 
with them the guilty party is not only deprived of his/her freedom, but 
insidiously deprived of hope."

So then, what happens when a bishop who denies that punishment of itself 
implies separation, and is grieved by the very thought of definitive 
separation, is confronted with cases of clergy sexual crimes?

In the pages of the Pennsylvania grand jury report, one sees repeated instances 
of bishops unwilling to separate offending priests from priestly ministry. When 
Donald Wuerl celebrated the funeral mass of one of the accused men, he remarked 
to the press, "A priest is a priest. Once he is ordained, he is a priest 
forever." This is true, but there seems a structural similarity between the 
idea that, on account of his priestly dignity, we cannot separate a priest 
definitively from ministry, and the idea that, on account of his human dignity, 
we cannot separate the criminal definitively from society. This reluctance to 
separate offending priests has often been blamed on a "clubbish" mentality and 
more recently on "clericalism." But could it in fact stem from a lack of a 
sense of justice? As a Catholic father, I say without hesitation that a priest 
who, for instance, goes into the room of a young man in the middle of the night 
to start stroking the young man's penis (as described in the Pennsylvania 
report) should be defrocked.

Second, vengeance. As St. Thomas observes - merely summarizing two millennia of 
human wisdom - vengeance, the habit of soul by which we earnestly wish that 
offenders receive due punishment, is a virtue, not a vice. No one can genuinely 
possess the cardinal virtue of justice if he lacks the minor, though essential, 
virtue of vengeance. But is vengeance contrary to gospel meekness?

The good bear with the wicked by enduring patiently, and in due manner, the 
wrongs they themselves receive from them: but they do not bear with them as to 
endure the wrongs which the wicked inflict on God and their neighbor. For 
Chrysostom says: "It is praiseworthy to be patient under our own wrongs, but to 
overlook God's wrongs is most wicked."

To apply this to the case at hand: It would be wicked for a bishop to "endure 
patiently" a priest who goes into a young man's room at night to stroke his 
member.

Vengeance is the habit of earnestly wishing for and willing due punishment. It 
follows that anyone who regards punishment as solely remedial, by the nature of 
the case, cannot have this virtue. Such a person will indeed appear complacent 
and passive in the face of grave wrongdoing, because vengeance stirs up anger 
and incites to action. Our hierarchy has evidently been complacent before evil.

But what is the connection between vengeance and capital punishment? In theory, 
it would be possible for someone to reject the death penalty without rejecting 
retribution as the basis of punishment. But in practice, opponents of the death 
penalty also reject retributive justice, presumably because they recognize the 
immediate fittingness of punishing murder with death, affirmed indeed by God at 
the beginning of the Bible (Gen 9:6), and wish to neutralize that motive.

Pope Francis, in the previously cited letter, even seems to regard retribution 
as nonsensical: "When the death penalty is applied, people are killed not for 
current acts of aggression, but for offences committed in the past. Moreover, 
it is applied to people whose capacity to cause harm is not current, but has 
already been neutralized, and who are deprived of their freedom." Apparently, 
that a punishment should be meted out in order to match an accomplished crime 
is itself an argument against such punishment. Obviously, punishment is 
retrospective, administered for crimes committed in the past - otherwise, 
murderers who have no reason for killing anyone beside their past victim ought 
to be released.

Third, protection. Vengeance takes on a combative aspect and is a noticeable 
trait in a strong father, who, precisely because he loves his child, cannot 
tolerate wrongdoing in him, as Scripture repeatedly says (Proverbs 3:12, 13:24, 
Job 5:17-18, Hebrews 12:6). But this makes strong fathers also strong 
protectors. It is obvious that our bishops have failed to be strong fathers in 
the face of sexual unchastity. They have combated neither unchastity in 
priests, nor unchastity in their congregations, nor, for the most part, 
unchastity in our culture.

"Children are a precious gift from God," says Cardinal Wuerl on his "Wuerl 
Report" website (since taken down). Ah, "the children"! But as Anthony Esolen 
does not tire of saying, so is that woman who is the object of predation by the 
young men in a priest's congregation, and the troubled young person who is 
afflicted with gay propaganda, and the husband and wife who have given 
themselves over to non-procreative acts. All of these need the "combative" love 
of a genuine father in their priest and bishop.

The tradition says that the death penalty may sometimes be necessary to defend 
society against the aggressor, and in such cases the state may even have a duty 
to use it. It is a gross mistake to take this to mean merely that the death 
penalty is licit only when necessary to keep a murderer from committing further 
crimes (with the added thought: and of course we have prisons now to do that). 
It is likewise a mistake, though not so crude, to say that the penalty plays 
the role of a psychological "deterrent," as if it were no more than a heavy 
fine, the most severe dissuasion.

No, what is meant is rather that the framework of law as applying proportionate 
punishment defends society, and that, given this framework, something 
proportionate to death must be promised for capital crimes. The homeowner's gun 
may protect him against a night intruder. If he lacks a gun, the promise that 
the police will soon arrive can play the same role. If the police cannot get 
there in time, the framework of law plays a comparable role. The promise of 
proportionate retribution is essential to this order: Be assured that it will 
be done to you, as you wish to do to others.

We can expect that any bishop who, from his stance against the death penalty, 
has fully embraced the attitude that punishment is never retributive, but only 
deterrent, will fail to protect his flock by appropriately punishing offenders. 
He will misapply the standard of proof for criminality, moving it from past to 
future crimes: "Indeed, Fr. N. did, beyond a shadow of a doubt, fondle the 
genitals of that young man, but, unless it can be shown beyond a shadow of a 
doubt that he will do something like that in the future (and the experts won't 
say this much), then he should not be punished."

Retributive punishment presupposes rather than denies the dignity of the 
persons involved. In contrast, the purely "remedial" concept of justice, like 
the legal concepts of training and compliance, involves no more than thinking 
of others instrumentally. But seeing the dignity of others presupposes that we 
understand our own dignity. We know that some of the hierarchy lacked 
seriousness about sexual unchastity in others, because they were not serious 
about it in themselves. Such men may not believe in retribution, but unless 
they repent in their hearts they will learn of it at the hands of God.

(source: Michael Pakaluk is professor of ethics at the Catholic University of 
America----firstthings.com)