[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----COLO., ARIZ., WASH., USA

[Rick Halperin]

Jan. 26



COLORADO:

Attorney: David Bueno Case Shows Why Colorado Should Abolish Death Penalty



The Colorado Supreme Court has upheld a lower court's decision to reverse David 
Bueno's 1st-degree-murder conviction because evidence that might have helped 
him was withheld in his death-penalty case. To attorney David Lane, who 
represents Bueno, the ruling casts shame on prosecutors with the 18th Judicial 
District DA's office currently occupied by Colorado Attorney General candidate 
George Brauchler even as it and other controversial cases, including those 
pertaining to death-row residents Sir Mario Owens and Robert Ray, undermine the 
argument for capital punishment in general.

"If Colorado is to maintain the integrity of its judicial system," Lane says, 
"it's absolutely essential that these matters be addressed by the Colorado 
Supreme Court disciplinary council - and the death penalty should be 
abolished."

"Arapahoe County DA Charges Death-Penalty Fees to State," a February 2008 
feature by Westword's Alan Prendergast, pivoted on the efforts of District 
Attorney Carol Chambers, Brauchler's predecessor, to give the ultimate 
punishment to Bueno and fellow inmate Alejandro Perez for a killing committed 
in prison. This effort "has been a head-scratcher from day one," Prendergast 
wrote, since "in the history of the state, Colorado has never sought the death 
penalty for a prisoner killing another prisoner."

As pointed out in the Colorado Supreme Court opinion, accessible below, a jury 
ultimately found Bueno guilty of slaying inmate Jeffrey Heird. However, 15 
months after Bueno's conviction, but before he was sentenced (jurors had 
already rejected the death penalty for him), Chambers's office revealed that it 
hadn't shared 2 reports in its possession since the earliest days of the 
investigation.

"One report documented the discovery of a note found on the day of the murder 
indicating that white supremacists were planning to murder white inmates in the 
prison," states the court, which notes that Heird was Caucasian. "The other 
evinced a detective's suspicion that the murder was linked to another homicide 
that had been committed in prison a few days earlier."

Bueno's legal team responded by asking for a new trial, and this request was 
granted. Then, in October 2010, the conviction was vacated, with one passage 
from the order by District Judge Douglas Tallman suggesting that the actions by 
Chambers and company may have been purposeful.

"Apparently, someone from the District Attorney's office made the conscious 
decision this information was not to be included in discovery because it was 
not relevant," Tallman wrote. "The Trial Court cannot say with certainty the 
District Attorney acted in bad faith by withholding relevant and possibly 
exculpatory evidence.... [But] it is apparent to the Trial Court that a 
conscious decision was made at some point early in this case to keep the 
information from the Defendant by separating these documents from the balance 
of [the] working file."

This was hardly the final word on the matter. Although Perez was acquitted 
circa 2011 in a development Lane characterized at the time as "virtually 
unheard of" for a high-profile death-penalty case, the 18th Judicial District 
DA's office under Chambers and, later, Brauchler, continued to maintain that 
Bueno's conviction should stand. But this week, the Colorado Supreme Court 
closed that door, standing behind the lower court's determination that "the 
prosecution...suppressed exculpatory and material evidence."

Lane calls the prosecutors' approach to Bueno "Mississippi in the mountains. 
And this is how the 18th Judicial District rolls. Look at the hearing for Sir 
Mario Owens," who was convicted, along with Ray, of killing Javad 
Marshall-Fields (son of state representative Rhonda Fields) and his fiancee, 
Vivian Wolfe, in 2005. "A judge found 22 instances of them hiding documents 
that should have been turned over to the defense."

These problems also happened on Chambers's watch, but Lane doesn't give her 
successor a pass. "Brauchler has vigorously defended the actions of Chambers's 
henchmen," he maintains. "And defending the indefensible and not seeking 
justice but seeking convictions and death sentences is not what his job is 
about."

He acknowledges that "I'm not accusing George Brauchler of hiding evidence. 
It's his deputies who are hiding the evidence. They have a pattern of hiding 
evidence in death-penalty cases, and for that, they should be disbarred and 
jailed."

Colorado's capital-punishment statute should be sent away, too, Lane believes. 
"Colorado has only had 1 execution in 50 years," he stresses. "Right now, we 
only have 3 people on death row: Nathan Dunlap (who got a reprieve but not 
clemency from Governor John Hickenlooper in 2013), Sir Mario Owens and Robert 
Ray - and the death penalties of Ray and Owens are tainted by prosecutorial 
misconduct and the hiding of evidence that should have been turned over."

As for Bueno, "he escaped a death sentence," Lane continues, "but otherwise, 
it's exactly the same game plan: Hide evidence that might help David Bueno. And 
it's the very same DA's office doing it, because they want to win at any cost. 
Ethically, prosecutors are required to seek justice, not convictions. But they 
apparently lose sight of that on a regular basis, especially on death-penalty 
cases in the 18th Judicial District."

(source: Michael Roberts; Westword)








ARIZONA:

Bail Hearing Set for Man Accused in 9 Killings in Phoenix



A hearing is scheduled Thursday to consider whether to deny bail to a man 
accused in a string of killings in metro Phoenix.

Bail for Cleophus Emmanuel Cooksey Jr. was set at $1 million after his 
mid-December arrest on murder charges in the shooting deaths of his mother and 
stepfather.

It was upped to $5 million last week after police said he killed 7 others.

No charges have been filed in those deaths.

Prosecutors say state law denies bail to people charged with crimes for which 
they can seek the death penalty.

They haven't said whether they'll seek the death penalty.

His attorneys say prosecutors can't show why the deaths of Cooksey's mother and 
stepfather could lead to the death penalty.

Cooksey pleaded not guilty to the charges.

(source: Associated Press)








WASHINGTON:

Death Penalty Ban Clears State Senate Committee



A Senate committee has approved a measure to abolish the death penalty in 
Washington state.

Senate Bill 6052 passed the Senate Law and Justice Committee Thursday on a 
party line 4-3 vote and now heads to the Rules Committee. Bipartisan efforts to 
ban the death penalty have failed to gain traction in recent years, in spite of 
a moratorium put in place by Gov. Jay Inslee in 2014. As long as the moratorium 
is in place, death row inmates will remain in prison rather than face 
execution.

The Senate measure would remove capital punishment as a sentencing option for 
aggravated murder and mandate instead a sentence of life in prison without 
possibility of parole.

A 2015 study from Seattle University found that death penalty cases in the 
state cost $1 million more than similar cases where capital punishment is not 
sought.

(source: Associated Press)








USA:

Accused kidnapper's attorneys ask for delay in death-penalty trial



Following the government's decision last week to seek the death penalty against 
accused kidnapper and killer Brendt Christensen, his lawyers are asking to 
delay the trial.

In a motion filed Tuesday, Christensen's lawyers asked that any pretrial 
deadlines be removed and that a previously scheduled pretrial hearing be used 
to discuss a new schedule for the trial.

Prosecutors have until Feb. 2 to respond.

The trial is scheduled to begin Feb. 27, though a delay was expected if U.S. 
Attorney General Jeff Sessions decided to seek the death penalty.

"Both parties recognize that a February trial date would be impossible and 
impractical now that this case carries the possibility of capital punishment," 
Christensen's lawyers wrote.

On Wednesday, U.S. District Court Judge Colin Bruce said that any responses to 
other pretrial motions, including motions by Christensen's lawyers to move the 
trial and drop the main charge against him, won't be required until this motion 
to delay the trial is resolved.

Christensen, 28, is charged with kidnapping resulting in death in the June 9, 
2017, disappearance of University of Illinois visiting scholar Yingying Zhang, 
26, of China, as well as lying to federal agents.

He was arrested June 30 and has been in custody since.

Christensen's court-appointed public defenders - Elisabeth Pollock, George 
Taseff and Robert Tucker - had already stated that the decision to seek the 
death penalty would prompt them to seek a continuance. And prosecutors have 
indicated that they will not object.

The potential for the death penalty means more work for all involved, but 
especially the defense lawyers, who have to prepare for the penalty phase at 
the same time they are building a defense for Christensen's alleged crimes.

(source: News-Gazette)

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

How IQ Tests Are Perverted to Justify the Death Penalty----Research has 
identified embedded racism in IQ tests. Now, prosecutors in at least 8 states 
are using that research -to legalize more executions.



As a concept, IQ is terrible. The idea that we can reduce intelligence to a 
simple number, quantifiable in a test, exacerbates inequality in numerous 
racist, classist, sexist, and ableist ways. Not only do people have worth 
beyond their measurable cognitive ability, but IQ also routinely awards higher 
numbers to abled middle- and upper-class white males, reinforcing pre-existing 
ideologies in the name of "science." Over the last many decades, scholars and 
activists have pushed back against the regime of IQ testing in all contexts, 
often successfully.

Now, prosecutors in at least 8 states have been hiring experts to testify about 
the racist nature of IQ, in order to kill more black and brown men.

HOW MANY DEATH ROW PRISONERS ARE DISABLED? By some metrics, all of them.

The Supreme Court has slowly been carving out exemptions to the death penalty 
for people with intellectual disabilities. In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled in 
Atkins v. Virginia that people with intellectual disabilities could not be 
executed, but left it up to the states to determine who is or is not eligible 
for that protection. In 2014, in Hall v. Florida, the court ruled that a state 
can't use a simple IQ cut-off. Then, in last year's Moore v. Texas, the court 
ruled that states must consider the best psychiatric and medical information 
about disability when determining disabled status. Still, IQ testing continues 
to play a major role, with a threshold of around 70 serving as the cutoff 
score, below which a person cannot legally be executed.

Here's where "ethnic adjustments" come in. The practice, as documented by 
attorney Robert Sanger in a 2015 article in the American University Law Review, 
adjusts IQ scores upward for people of color convicted of capital crimes. 
According to Sanger, prosecutors in Florida, Texas, Alabama, Tennessee, 
Missouri, California, Pennsylvania, and Ohio have all used ethnic adjustments 
to successfully impose the death penalty on people who otherwise might have 
been deemed exempt. In his article, Sanger works methodically through case 
after case, noting in particular the role played by expert witnesses for the 
prosecution, who testify to the racial biases of IQ testing. In most cases, 
these experts have never met the person convicted of the capital crime or 
assessed that person for disability, even as their testimony clears the way for 
execution.

At the end of his article, Sanger writes, "The idea of racially classifying a 
person and then using 'ethnic adjustments' to increase his or her IQ score, 
thereby qualifying that person for execution, is logically, clinically, and 
constitutionally unsound. In fact, when looked at more closely, it is a wonder 
how the practice has gone largely unchallenged over the last few years." When I 
spoke to him over the phone, Sanger confirmed to me that no clear 
constitutional challenge to the practice has emerged to his knowledge, and 
certainly not at the United States Supreme Court, or in California, where he 
practices law.

As I wrote last year, most people on death row are disabled. In reporting the 
story, I found that this fact presents a challenge to people trying to save 
lives: Do they fight for total abolition of the death penalty, or do they try 
to carve out ever-increasing exemptions? Everyone who ends up on death row has 
experienced a complex panoply of mitigating factors - intersecting 
disabilities, traumas, and inequities - that led them to be convicted of a 
capital crime. So anti-death-penalty lawyers look for narrow legal strategies 
to protect their specific clients, which of course is just what they should do, 
while slowly pushing new exemptions up through the court process to seek new 
exculpatory precedents. Atkins, Hall, and Moore - the big 3 Supreme Court 
decisions protecting people from intellectual disabilities -are the result of 
these Herculean efforts.

It's not enough. As Sanger writes, "A more profound conclusion of this article 
may be that the project of attempting to determine who should live and die is 
an endeavor lost from the beginning. Perhaps there is no way to devise a just 
means to implement an unjust result. If the state's executing prisoners is 
wrong, there can be no right way to do it." He's correct. Racism, ableism, and 
classism are too deeply held for incremental efforts to effect true change. 
Even the anti-racist work against the tyranny of the IQ test is being used to 
perpetuate the state's killing of people of color. Abolition is the only 
answer.

(source: David Perry; psmag.com)