[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----MD., N.C., TENN., NEB., S.DAK., IDAHO, WASH., USA

[Rick Halperin]

Oct. 12



MARYLAND:

Author speaks on death row inmate exonerated through DNA evidence



Students listened to author Tim Junkin present his findings on the 1st death 
row inmate exonerated by DNA evidence at Salisbury University Thursday night.

Junkin is the author of the novels "Bloodsworth: The True Story of the First 
Death Row Inmate Exonerated by DNA Evidence," "The Waterman: A Novel of the 
Chesapeake Bay" and "Good Counsel." Junkin is a practicing attorney and an 
award-winning novelist who resides in Maryland.

All 3 of his novels take place on the Eastern Shore. His novel "Bloodsworth: 
The True Story of the First Death Row Inmate Exonerated by DNA Evidence" is the 
2018 One Maryland One Book selection.

Kirk Bloodsworth is the 1st American to be sentenced to the death penalty and 
be exonerated due to DNA evidence. Bloodsworth was convicted in 1985 for the 
1984 1st-degree murder and rape of Dawn Hamilton.

Police captured Bloodsworth in his home when he was 22 years old. He was later 
gassed multiple times in prison.

Bloodsworth was released 19 years after his arrest.

Bloodsworth is now a national spokesperson for prison reform and has gone on 
tour with Junkin presenting the novel. Bloodsworth was exonerated in 2004, but 
the death penalty was not eradicated in the state of Maryland until 2013.

The United States spends over $80 billion on incarceration each year. The 
United States comprises about 5 % of the world's population, but it houses 
approximately 25 % of the world's prisoners.

The death penalty is used disproportionately against minorities, with 50 % of 
death row inmates being black.

Junkin said that Bloodsworth became a symbol of hope and justice for people 
after speaking on their book tour and speaking at law schools together. He said 
Bloodsworth is a symbol of wrongful conviction and the problem of mass 
incarceration in the U.S.

"We have a burgeoning crisis of mass incarceration in our prison system," 
Junkin said.

Bloodsworth was represented by lawyer Bob Warren. At the time of Bloodsworth's 
conviction, only 2 labs in the country were performing DNA testing.

In the United States, 162 people have been exonerated from death row after 
Bloodsworth.

DNA evidence has convicted the serial sexual offender and rapist Kimberly Shay 
Ruffner as the killer of the 9-year-old girl whose body was found in Rosedale. 
Ruffner was an absolute DNA match with the semen and blood samples found on 
Hamilton's clothing.

Junkin's novel has experienced a renaissance in popularity recently despite 
having been released in 2004. Junkin said the themes of justice and wrongful 
conviction still ring true to audiences in 2018.

"I think it's got some really important parallels for today," Junkin said. 
"Everybody that comes in contact with him thinks he's innocent."

Junkin read about Bloodsworth's case in the newspaper and was inspired to find 
the truth. He studied police notes and the grand jury testimony, and he spoke 
directly to Bloodsworth and the people working the case.

He researched his case as an investigative journalist, speaking to every source 
that was willing to talk to him. He said the only people who refused to talk to 
him were the 2 homicide detectives in charge of the case.

He decided that creating a 1st-person narrative from Bloodsworth's point of 
view would be the best way to create sympathy and understanding with the 
reader, but he also only wanted to write information that was factual in his 
novel.

"Of course I wanted to write this story from Kirk's perspective," Junkin said, 
"But, I also wanted to write from the perspective of the investigators and the 
prosecutors."

Junkin believes that people in the community wanted to accept Bloodsworth as 
the killer without DNA evidence because it gave them a sense of security for 
their children. He said they wanted a simple case of justice that was solved 
quickly.

"The community is terrified," he said, "And they're afraid to let their kids 
out of the house."

Bloodsworth had weed in his shoes and was sweating nervously after having a 
fight with his wife at the time his psychological profile was performed. Junkin 
said this profile led the police to "key in on Kirk."

The case also relied on 10- and 7-year-old eyewitnesses who described a tan, 
blond, mustached man. Junkin said that Bloodsworth had red hair and pale skin 
that did not tan.

Junkin believed that Bloodsworth was innocent, but he did not want to make any 
assumptions as he investigated his case.

Molly Welch, a social work and community health major, thought the lecture was 
insightful and had an interest in the case because she wants to specialize in 
the criminal justice field of social work. Welch grew up in Somerset County 
around a family working in law enforcement, and she said working with people in 
this field has made both her and her family stronger.

Welch said people are "quick to jump to conclusions" whenever a child is harmed 
because people want to keep children innocent and safe. She thinks adults are 
better able to protect themselves than children, and children are also less 
mentally developed than adults.

"You wanna feel safe as a society, but you also don't wanna put others at risk 
and not have them be safe," Welch said. "In this country, we have a problem 
with knee-jerk reactions, and especially when it comes to children because we 
wanna protect children- we love children."

Brittany Tignor, a Snow Hill High School librarian, took a group of students 
who read the novel and were interested in the case on a field trip to learn 
more from the author himself. She thought her students found the lecture very 
informative, and she felt the lecture clarified things for both her and her 
students, especially the question and answer portion.

Tignor feels that people wanted a quick and decisive ending to the case because 
uncertainty is uncomfortable to live with. She said people wanted clear 
answers, not a list of possibilities to choose from.

"It's a great example of how broken our system has become," Tignor said. "I 
understood the prosecutor and the investigators' desire to solve the case, but 
I didn't understand the desire to just, like, find somebody to pin it on and be 
done with it."

Tignor enjoyed Junkin's novel, not from the perspective of the crime drama, but 
from the perspective of the characters. She said the novel made her believe in 
Bloodsworth's innocence and made her root for his character.

"As a former English teacher, I am not a big fan of crime drama - I'm not 
really a big fan of law books in general, but I loved how Tim Junkin made me 
care about the characters and sort of wove the characters throughout the 
process of the court system and everything," Tignor said. "You become very 
attached to Kirk ... and you're sort of cheering him on through the whole 
thing."

(source: thesuflyer.com)








NORTH CAROLINA:

A year later, district attorney pursues death penalty despite odds in 
Pasquotank prison break case



Despite the odds, a district attorney is pursuing the death penalty for the 4 
prisoners charged with killing a manager, a mechanic and 2 corrections officers 
in the deadliest prison escape attempt in the state's history.

The case meets almost every standard for capital punishment, said Andrew 
Womble, district attorney for northeastern North Carolina.

But the reality is that it's been 12 years since an inmate was executed in 
North Carolina, according to the state’s Department of Corrections. The state 
has 141 inmates on death row. The oldest case goes back to 1985, and the most 
recent one is from 2016, according to the state.

"The death penalty is all but extinct in North Carolina," according to a report 
by The Center for Death Penalty Litigation, a Durham, N.C. nonprofit. "It is a 
relic of another era."

For the district attorney, the effort is worth pursuing. The circumstances of 
the brutal killings, he said, are enough to justify the punishment he is 
seeking.

"These 4 scream for the death penalty," Womble said in an interview this week. 
"I feel incredibly confident about this case."

Escape attempt

A year ago today, 4 prisoners started a fire inside the Pasquotank Correctional 
Institution north of Elizabeth City and attempted to escape. During the chaos, 
4 employees were killed with hammers and scissors from a sewing plant inside 
the facility off U.S. 17 where the prisoners worked.

Mikel Brady, Jonathan Monk, Seth J. Frazier and Wisezah Buckman were charged 
with 1st-degree murder. Killed were Veronica Darden, manager of the sewing 
plant, Geoffrey Howe, a mechanic, and corrections officers Justin Smith and 
Wendy Shannon. All 4 prisoners were serving time for violent crimes.

The prison was short 84 positions, about 1/4 of the recommended staff, 
according to a report released in January by the The National Institute of 
Corrections. One correctional officer and 3 staff members oversaw 30 inmates at 
the sewing plant where they made high-visibility vests for highway workers and 
embroidered uniforms. Deadly tools such as scissors with 6-inch blades and claw 
hammers were distributed by inmates rather than staff, as required, according 
to the report. Prisoners were able to come and go from the sewing area without 
a search. Doors to other parts of the prison that should have been secured were 
left unlocked.

The prisoners used hammers and scissors to bash the victims in the head and 
chest, according to autopsy reports. One was stabbed more than 65 times, 
according to one autopsy report.

Prison administrator Felix Taylor and his second-in command Colbert Respass 
were removed from their posts. Taylor was reassigned and Respass retired. 
Dennis Daniels, an experienced North Carolina prison administrator, was 
appointed to lead the Pasquotank facility.

On Wednesday, The Virginian-Pilot confirmed that the families of the victims 
have hired lawyers.

"This was a tragedy waiting to happen," Cate Edwards, of the Raleigh law firm 
Edwards Kirby, said in an email Wednesday. She is the daughter of former 
senator and presidential candidate John Edwards.

"We are working on taking broad legal action because four people needlessly 
lost their lives," she said. "These people were public servants and deserved 
better, safer working conditions from this state."

Chicago attorney Donnya Banks is co-counsel for the families of Darden, Smith 
and Shannon. Banks had no comment.

"Brutal murders" In laying out his argument for the death penalty, Womble, the 
district attorney, said that 9 of 11 aggravating factors needed in such a case 
apply, though no trial date has been set. Those circumstances include that the 
acts were cruel, they endangered many people and were committed against prison 
officers, he said. A jury only needs 1 factor to give a death sentence, he 
said.

The deadly escape was premeditated, he said. The people killed were 
"sympathetic victims," he said, rather than criminals killing other criminals. 
The prisoners were captured on the spot just after the murders.

"This is not a 'who-done-it' case," Womble said. "We got it all."

Rep. Bob Steinburg, R-Chowan supports Womble. Steinburg, who represents 
Pasquotank County, said he has spoken extensively with family members and 
correctional officers about the escape attempt.

"These were brutal, brutal murders,' he said. "One woman was nearly 
decapitated. I think as people become aware of the details of this case, it 
will change a lot of hearts and minds."

State executions stalled

Executions in North Carolina have been stalled by lawsuits over racial bias and 
lethal injection drugs, said Gretchen Engel, executive director of the Center 
for Death Penalty Litigation.

6 capital cases await a hearing before the state's Supreme Court to decide if 
race played a role in jury selection. A study showed the state's prosecutors 
struck black jurors at roughly double the rate of others, according to the 
Death Penalty Information Center.

Additionally, a lawsuit is pending in Wake County Superior Court where several 
prisoners claim lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment, Engel said.

"There will be no executions as long as they are pending in court," she said.

While Engel acknowledges extreme murder cases, the system as a whole remains 
flawed, she said.

"You're bound to have arbitrary results," she said.

One of the primary cases cited is that of Henry McCollum, who spent 30 years on 
death row for the murder and rape of an 11-year-old girl before DNA evidence 
exonerated him in 2014.

In the 1990s, most death row inmates were sentenced under different laws, The 
Center for Death Penalty Litigation report said. Legislation passed since then 
guarantees that death row defendants get trained defense attorneys and have the 
right to see all evidence in their cases, among other things.

A 2013 survey showed 68 % of North Carolina residents supported replacing 
capital punishment with life without parole as long as the offender worked and 
paid restitution to the victim's family, according to the Death Penalty 
Information Center in Washington.

But the Pasquotank prison break attempt also raised questions about allowing 
violent offenders to work.

Another argument against executions? Defendants can be imprisoned for life and 
not harm anyone, Womble said.

"These guys can't say that," he said of those accused in the Pasquotank County 
case. "They were in prison."

(source: The Virginian-Pilot)








TENNESSEE:

Haslam Grants Edmund Zagorski Reprieve From Execution



Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam today made the following statement on death row 
inmate Edmund Zagorski:

"I am granting to Edmund Zagorski a reprieve of 10 days from execution of the 
sentence of death imposed upon by him by a jury in 1984 which was scheduled to 
be carried out later today. I take seriously the responsibility imposed upon 
the Tennessee Department of Correction and me by law, and given the federal 
court's decision to honor Zagorski's last-minute decision to choose 
electrocution as the method of execution, this brief reprieve will give all 
involved the time necessary to carry out the sentence in an orderly and careful 
manner."

(source: tn.gov)

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

Supreme Court rejects Tennessee death row inmate efforts



The U.S. Supreme Court rejected two last-ditch efforts to save the life of 
Tennessee death row inmate Edmund Zagorski, apparently clearing the way for his 
execution despite a delay caused by legal wrangling.

The court rejected a challenge of Tennessee's lethal injection protocol and 
lifted a stay of execution ordered by a lower court because of inadequate 
counsel.

The court issued the rulings Thursday night around the time Zagorski's 
execution had been scheduled. But earlier in the day, Gov. Bill Haslam granted 
a 10-day reprieve to give the state time to prepare for an execution by 
electric chair.

It was not immediately clear what options Zagorski's attorneys have in the wake 
of the decisions by the court and the governor.

"We are reviewing the court's opinion and will assess what options we have," 
his lawyer, Kelley Henry, wrote in an email.

Zagorski had asked to die in the electric chair earlier in the week, instead of 
lethal injection, which he argued was cruel and unusual punishment and 
therefore unconstitutional.

The state denied the request, arguing that Zagorski missed the deadline, but 
hours before the scheduled execution, a federal judge blocked the state from 
using its 3-drug cocktail.

Zagorski was sentenced in 1984 for the slayings of 2 men during a drug deal.

Supreme Court Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer dissented from the 
majority's decision not to stay the execution, with Sotomayor writing that 
those sentenced to die "are not entitled to pleasant deaths under the Eighth 
Amendment, but they are entitled to humane deaths.

"The longer we stand silent amid growing evidence of inhumanity in execution 
methods like Tennessee's, the longer we extend our own complicity in 
state-sponsored brutality."

Zagorski had been set to be executed at 7 p.m. Thursday, but that was halted 
after the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday granted a stay over 
concerns of inadequate representation.

As the state rushed to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the ruling 
and ensure the execution took place as scheduled, a separate federal judge 
barred the state from using lethal injection to kill Zagorski after it refused 
his request to die in the electric chair.

Tennessee is one of only of nine states that allow electrocutions. The last 
electrocution in the U.S. took place in Virginia in January 2013.

Zagorski had asked to die by electrocution just days before his execution 
because he said the three-drug cocktail the state used constituted cruel and 
unusual punishment and violated his constitutional rights.

However, the state denied his request, arguing Zagorski waited too long to ask 
for the electric chair. U.S. District Judge Aleta Trauger disagreed with that 
decision and barred the state's lethal injection method so both Zagorski's 
request could be honored and more time would be allowed to review the state's 
lethal cocktail.

Haslam then granted the reprieve.

"I take seriously the responsibility imposed upon the Tennessee Department of 
Correction and me by law," Haslam said in a statement. "And given the federal 
court's decision to honor Zagorski's last-minute decision to choose 
electrocution as the method of execution, this brief reprieve will give all 
involved the time necessary to carry out the sentence in an orderly and careful 
manner."

Shortly after the Republican governor's announcement, the Department of 
Correction said it would return Zagorski to death row after moving him to a 
"death watch" cell earlier this week.

The Republican governor had said he wouldn't intervene in Zagorski's case.

The temporary reprieve will be in effect until Oct. 21. It's still unknown when 
Zagorski's new execution date will be set.

"Tennessee's death penalty statute makes it clear that Mr. Zagorski has the 
right to choose execution by electrocution," Henry said. "While being burned 
alive and mutilated via electricity is not a good death, Mr. Zagorski knows 
that death by electric chair will be much quicker than lethal injection using 
midazolam, a paralytic, and potassium chloride."

Zagorski was sentenced in 1984 in the slayings of John Dotson and Jimmy Porter. 
Prosecutors said Zagorski shot the men, then slit their throats after robbing 
them in Robertson County in April 1983. The victims had planned to buy 
marijuana from Zagorski.

He's been on death row for 34 years, the 2nd longest in Tennessee.

Zagorski's decision to ask for electrocution was based on evidence that 
Tennessee's lethal injection method would cause him 10 to 18 minutes of mental 
and physical anguish. He argues the electric chair will be quicker even if it 
means being set on fire.

In Tennessee, death row inmates whose offenses came before January 1999 can 
choose either lethal injection or the electric chair. The last time Tennessee 
put someone to death by electrocution was in 2007.

(source: Associated Press)

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

Prosecutor who called for Zagorski's death penalty speaks out after reprieve 
granted



Death row inmate Edmund Zagorski's execution was initially slated for Thursday 
evening, until Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam granted the convicted killer a 
10-day reprieve. Haslam decided to give Zagorski more time after a judge 
granted his last minute decision of choosing the electric chair instead of the 
3-drug lethal injection method. The governor said he wants to make sure 
officials have enough time to prepare and correctly carry out the process. 
Sumner County District Attorney Ray Whitley called for the death penalty back 
in February 1984 when Zagorski was convicted for shooting 2 people, then 
cutting their throats over a marijuana deal.

"He shot them out in the woods and before they were dead, he went over and slit 
their throats and slaughtered them, and left them there," Whitley says. "They 
weren't found for 2 more weeks."

The victims of the crime were John Dale Dotson and Jimmy Porter.

"There's no question about his guilt," says Whitley. "I don't think anyone, 
even Mr. Zagorski at this point, questions his guilt."

Court documents show that since his sentence, Zagorski has made several appeals 
to Whitley's decision.

The death row inmate's current appeal claims he has had inadequate counsel and 
ineffective assistance at trial. That's something Whitley disagrees with, 
saying Zagorski was represented by two very qualified people. One became a 
circuit judge for many years, the other later served as president of the 
Tennessee Bar Association.

He added that Zagorski has had nothing but excellent representation since his 
conviction. He believes he would have killed again if he had the chance.

And while calling for the death penalty is not an easy decision, Whitley says 
it's a call he would likely make again today.

"I would like to see justice done," Whitley says. "It's an appropriate 
punishment for the type of crime that was committed and that's what justice is 
all about."

Whitley also says that while back in 1984 life without parole was not an 
option, it's unfair to go back 34 years and question jurors on whether they'd 
change their options if they had that option.

(source: WZTV news)

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

Here's The Horrifying History Of The Electric Chair That Might Soon Kill An 
Inmate In Tennessee----Documents obtained by BuzzFeed News show the original 
sales pitch for the Tennessee machine in 1985. The chair has only been used 
once so far.



A Tennessee death row prisoner hoping to avoid a lethal injection he believes 
would be "torture" just won a major victory in his battle to choose how the 
state will kill him. If Edmund Zagorski is to be executed, a federal judge 
ruled on Thursday, the state will have to use the electric chair.

The decision, if it holds, would result in the first electric chair death in 
Tennessee since 2007, and the first in the US since 2013. Gov. Bill Haslam 
granted a 10-day reprieve to Zagorski on Thursday to "give all involved the 
time necessary to carry out the sentence in an orderly and careful manner." 
Although dying by electrocution can be incredibly gruesome, it's more reliably 
lethal than drug injections. Until the 1990s, electric chairs were common 
across the country. But all states eventually turned to lethal injection as 
their primary choice, over concerns that electric chairs were too barbaric, 
particularly for viewers. 9 states permit the use of the electric chair, but 
just 2 - Virginia and South Carolina - have used one in the past 10 years.

Documents obtained by BuzzFeed News show the original 1985 sales pitch for the 
construction of Tennessee's current machine, as well as reservations by its 
creator - a Holocaust denier who falsely presented himself to the Tennessee 
Department of Correction as an engineer - decades later, when he feared that 
modifications would make the chair "an instrument of torture."

On at least one occasion after the chair was installed, experts disagreed about 
the exact configuration of current and voltage that would lead to a humane 
death. The documents also include several versions of a checklist for operating 
the chair, one of which ends with the instruction: "LEAVE EXHAUST FAN ON!!!"

The inmate who wants to die in this chair, 63-year-old Zagorski, was convicted 
for the murder of two men in April 1983. Zagorski lured John Dotson and Jimmy 
Porter into the woods in northern Tennessee, under the pretense that they were 
buying at least 100 pounds of marijuana. According to court documents, Zagorski 
instead shot and slit the throats of the 2 men, and took the thousands of 
dollars that they brought for the drugs. He was sentenced to death a year 
later.

Of the 30 states that still have the death penalty, 21 do not have the electric 
chair as an option. And two of those states have explicitly ruled that 
electrocution is unconstitutionally cruel: In Georgia's ruling banning the 
device's use, for example, the state Supreme Court cited expert testimony 
suggesting the alternating current "could repetitively activate the brain, 
causing the perception of excruciating pain and a sense of extreme horror." 
Experts in that case had also said that the voltage sequence used in the 
execution could stop the heart, only to start it up again.

The Nebraska court, in its ruling, cited expert testimony claiming that a chair 
caused a prisoner's skin to reach "a temperature of 200 degrees." It noted that 
protocol required a fire extinguisher be kept nearby, and that witnesses of 
past executions had described smoke emerging from a prisoner's leg, and 
reported smelling burning flesh in the viewing room.

Both court rulings mentioned the possibility of burns to the head from "the 
sloughing or 'slippage' of a large portion of the scalp," and "sagging skin on 
the sides of the prisoner's head from the temple areas and cheeks to above and 
behind the ears."

Although the electric chair can result in grisly outcomes, lethal injection 
actually has a higher rate of botched attempts than electrocution. Tennessee, 
like several other states, employs a 3-drug lethal injection protocol: 1st a 
sedative akin to Valium, then 2 incredibly painful drugs - a paralytic and 
potassium chloride. If the inmate is not properly anesthetized by the 1st drug, 
the final 2 drugs would feel like being buried alive and then burned alive, 
according to medical experts. The sedative Tennessee hopes to use, midazolam, 
has been implicated in several botched executions over the past few years. 
Although the electric chair can result in grisly outcomes, lethal injection 
actually has a higher rate of botched attempts than electrocution.

Zagorski, along with dozens of other death row inmates, sued the state, arguing 
this method constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. On Monday, three days 
before Zagorski's scheduled execution, the Tennessee Supreme Court disagreed, 
finding that the inmates had not met their burden of coming up with a better 
way to be killed. The inmates had proposed using another drug, but the state 
said it couldn't be obtained.

Within hours of Monday's ruling, Zagorski asked to be killed by the electric 
chair, to avoid a lethal injection he says would be torture. In Tennessee, 
inmates sentenced to death before 1999 have a choice between the chair and 
lethal injection.

But the Tennessee Department of Correction swiftly rejected his request. The 
state argued that Zagorski needed to make his decision weeks before, by Sept. 
27. TDOC Deputy Commissioner of Administration and General Counsel Debra Inglis 
told Zagorski's attorney that he would have to die by lethal injection.

On Wednesday, Zagorski's lawyer filed an emergency motion to compel the state 
to consider his request, arguing the deadline the state set was arbitrary and 
not in the statute. On Thursday, a federal judge ruled in Zagorski's favor and 
prohibited the state from executing the inmate by any method other than the 
electric chair.

Zagorski's execution is still on hold, however. Late on Wednesday, the US Court 
of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit stayed his execution over concerns that he had 
inadequate representation during his original trial in 1984.

"Tennessee's death penalty statute makes it clear that Mr. Zagorski has the 
right to choose execution by electrocution," Kelley Henry, an attorney for 
Zagorski, said in an emailed statement. "While being burned alive and mutilated 
via electricity is not a good death, Mr. Zagorski knows that death by electric 
chair will be much quicker than lethal injection using midazolam, a paralytic, 
and potassium chloride."

BuzzFeed News asked the state's Department of Correction for the chair's 
execution protocols, manuals, logs of quarterly equipment checks, and related 
records. The documents show that the state's current chair was made by Fred 
Leuchter Jr., a Boston man who would eventually be charged with fraud for 
practicing engineering without a license. He was also the author of a report 
that attempted to show that the Holocaust gas chambers were not used to kill 
people.

Leuchter had advised more than a dozen states on execution equipment of various 
types, but by 1990, according to a New York Times report at the time, states 
were finding that his methods fell short. The Illinois Department of 
Corrections terminated his contract after an expert testified that one machine, 
used to inject potassium cyanide, "would cause the prisoner unnecessary pain, 
consisting of a severe burning sensation."

Starting in 1985, documents show, he corresponded with the Tennessee State 
Penitentiary about the benefits of his electrocution machine. In October 1987, 
he sent a quote for execution equipment to a warden, noting that the company 
had equipment in many states throughout the US, "including hardware for 
electrocution, lethal injection, Gas chambers, and gallows."

Leuchter completed the installation of the electrocution system at the 
Riverbend Maximum Security Institution in November 1989. A purchase order dated 
June 1989 and issued to Fred A Leuchter Associates Inc. indicates he was paid 
$41,844 for "movement, renovation, and repair of the electrical equipment," 
including labor and materials. Additionally, the state purchased a "modular 
power supply test unit" for $5,900.

A manual that Leuchter provided to Riverbend included detailed descriptions of 
how the chair worked, instructions on how to disengage the prisoner after the 
execution, and how to clean the chair.

According to this manual, the chair itself was made of oak - Leuchter claimed 
it included wood from Tennessee's 1st electric chair - and had an adjustable 
backrest, as well as a removable drip pan. Its 2 ankle electrodes were made of 
brass, and a 3rd electrode - a "tightly fitting cap" - would ensure that the 
current would pass "through the complete trunk of the subject's body."

There were also medical notes about the device explaining that one had to 
consider both the "conscious and the autonomic nervous system” for the best 
outcome. Calculations for "an average man weighing 70 kilos" estimated the 
right voltage that would stop the heart and "minimize body damage (cooking)." 
One version of the manual included the disclaimer that the company "assumes no 
liability for the intended or actual use of this device."

Leuchter trained 19 employees and even made his own certificates to say that 
each was an "Electrocution Technician."

The documents also revealed that technical experts disagreed sharply on the 
most humane way to administer an electric current with the goal of killing a 
person.

In April 1994, as part of a lawsuit, an outside expert visited the prison, 
inspected the equipment and wrote in a report to the state attorney general 
that the electric current typically used was too low and that the machine "does 
not seem to have the capacity to function with a typical load for an 
execution."

The facility hired an engineer from Arkansas, Jay Wiechert, who helped 
implement a series of modifications, including increasing the amount of current 
that would flow during an execution, and changing the timing of the 
electrocution cycle.

But the Leuchter camp disagreed with those changes.

"These modifications may result in 'tissue cooking' of the executee, and 
further, fibrillation of the executees heart resulting in failure to execute 
and a brain dead vegetable at the conclusion of the execution procedure,' John 
V. Maye, president of JVM, the firm that had acquired rights to Leuchter's 
designs and technology, wrote to the associate warden at Riverbend in April 
1996.

Maye called the modifications, particularly the change in cycle timing, 
"dangerous" and said that the changes voided the guarantee with Leuchter's 
firm, which JVM had now acquired.

"We bear no legal liability in this matter except to advise you of these 
conditions and the possibility of torture of the inmate if an execution is 
carried out with the modified equipment."

Riverbend warden Ricky Bell replied in September that year asking that JVM 
provide documentation "that the system will not function as expected, and 
further, to refute the modifications recommended" by the other 2 experts. (No 
reply was ever received, he wrote in a 2006 memo.)

Wiechert continued to visit and examine the equipment through at least 2007 - 
the year it was used for the 1st time, to execute convicted murderer Daryl 
Holton.

The day before Holton's execution, Leuchter told the City Paper that he had 
reservations about if the chair would work - he worried that the voltage was 
too low and that the chair would fall short of its lethal goal, leaving the 
inmate brain dead. He reportedly even petitioned then-Tennessee Gov. Phil 
Bredesen to halt its use. (Leuchter could not be reached by phone or Facebook 
message.)

Holton did die. His body tensed and arched upward with each of the 2 blows of 
electricity, according to a news report.

Zagorski would be only the 2nd person to die in the chair since. "I don't want 
to be tortured with those drugs," he told the Nashville Scene earlier this 
week, "but I am not afraid of death."

(source: BuzzFeedNews)








NEBRASKA:

Texas offers model for death penalty



The state of Texas has used lethal injection as its method of executing death 
row inmates since 1982. During this period of time, Texas has used legally 
obtained drugs in more than 400 executions. Though difficulty in purchasing 
lethal injection drugs has forced Texas to reduce its 3-drug cocktail to a 
single fatal dose, its execution protocol is swift and humane.

After 35 years of Texas using legal execution drugs, it is obvious to me that 
Nebraska Director of Corrections Scott Frakes should be communicating with the 
Texas Department of Criminal Justice as to where they obtain these drugs, so 
that Nebraska will follow the lawful order of the judges who sentenced these 
men on death row to be executed according to the law.

Sadly, if Nebraska takes the men off death row and gives them life sentences, 
our own Board of Pardons or Parole Board could, in 15 or 20 years, find them 
rehabilitated and parole them. I personally know of 1 inmate who received 2 
life sentences and was paroled 17 years later.

John Wheat Sr., Lincoln

Retired, Nebraska Department of Correctional Services

(source: Letter to the Editor, Lincoln Journal Star)








SOUTH DAKOTA:

Final moments: The execution process in South Dakota



With Rodney Berget's execution scheduled for the fall, the inmate convicted of 
murdering a prison guard in 2011 will soon join a small cohort of South 
Dakotans: Those put to death by the state.

Berget will be the 19th person to be executed in South Dakota, which saw its 
last death sentence carried out in 2012. A warrant for execution was issued on 
Wednesday morning by Attorney General Marty Jackley.

Few and far between

Only 18 people have been executed by the state in South Dakota's history. The 5 
most recent are:

Donald Eugene Moeller: Executed by lethal injection on October 30, 2012 for the 
1990 rape and murder of 9-year-old Becky O'Connell.

Eric Robert: Executed by lethal injection on October 15, 2012 for the 2011 
murder of correctional officer R.J. Johnson.

Elijah Page: Executed by lethal injection on July 11, 2007 for the murder of 
Chester Allan Poage.

George Sitts: Executed by electrocution on April 8, 1947 for murdering state 
criminal agent Thomas Matthews and Butte County Sheriff Dave Malcolm.

Joe Rickman: Hanged on December 3, 1913 for murdering Ellen Fox and her 
daughter, Mildred.

That the state has few and far between death penalties demonstrates the 
severity of the sentence, according to Attorney General Jackley.

"That demonstrates (that) investigators and prosecutors, courts and juries, 
have really reserved capital punishment for the most heinous crimes - those 
individuals that pose an ongoing danger to the public," he said.

The execution process

Berget is scheduled to die by lethal injection any time between Oct. 28 and 
Nov. 3, 2018. South Dakota State Penitentiary Warden Darin Young will choose 
the date and time of the execution.

"We will be ready to carry out the order of the court," South Dakota Department 
of Corrections secretary Denny Kaemingk said in a statement.

Department of Corrections spokesman Michael Winder declined requests for 
interviews regarding the upcoming execution.

The 3 most recent South Dakota executions were carried out by lethal injection. 
Elijah Page died by a 3-drug cocktail of sodium pentothal, pancuronium bromide 
and potassium chloride, while Eric Robert and Donald Moeller were both given a 
single drug, pentobarbital.

South Dakota Department of Corrections policy states that inmates can be 
executed by either of the 2 methods above or by a 2-drug cocktail of 
pentobarbital and pancuronium bromide. The DOC has not stated the method by 
which Berget will be executed.

Directly before the execution, 2 IVs are inserted into the inmate's arms, 
including 1 as a backup method in case the 1st fails. The inmate is then given 
an opportunity to make a final statement before the fatal drugs are 
administered.

According to DOC policy, several people will be invited to witness the 
execution, including:

Others on death row

Excluding Berget, there are 2 inmates on death row in South Dakota.

Charles Rhines: Sentenced in 1993 for the 1992 murder of a Rapid City doughnut 
shop worker Donnivan Schaeffer. Rhines has appealed his case time and again 
claiming the jury that convicted him had tainted views on his sexual 
orientation. The South Dakota Supreme Court and United States Supreme Court 
have both ruled his sentence appropriate.

Briley Piper: Sentenced by jury to death in 2011 for the March 2000 murder of 
19-year-old Chester Allan Poage near Spearfish. A trial judge initially handed 
down Piper's sentence, but the South Dakota Supreme Court overturned the 
ruling, saying a jury should decide his fate.

Both cases are "proceeding through the court system," Jackley said.

(source: Argus Leader)








IDAHO:

Attorney Wants to Remove Death Penalty in Case of Murdered Indian American Cab 
Driver



A man charged with murder in northern Idaho is too young to face the death 
penalty, his lawyer says.

Attorney R. Keith Roark filed a motion Oct. 4 in 1st District Court on behalf 
of Jacob Coleman, 20, the Bonner County Daily Bee reports.

Coleman was 19 when authorities say he stabbed to death 22-year-old Indian 
American cab driver Gagandeep Singh of Spokane, Washington, in Kootenai in 
August 2017. Singh had driven him to Idaho after picking him up at the Spokane 
International Airport. Coleman has pleaded not guilty to 1st-degree murder.

Roark contends the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution eliminates the 
death penalty for Coleman or a life sentence without parole. The Eighth 
Amendment prohibits governments from imposing cruel and unusual punishments.

Roark argues that research shows human brains aren't fully developed until at 
least the age of 21. He said 23 states don't execute offenders who are under 
that age.

"The age of 18 is not, and has never been, a true age of maturity and 
adulthood,'' Roark said in the 91-page motion. "It was chosen for expedience. 
There is no principled reason to treat those who are still immature as if they 
are fully developed adults."

Law enforcement officials say Coleman flew from Seattle to Spokane to start a 
new semester at Gonzaga University.

The school said a person matching Coleman's description approached housing 
officials on campus but was not enrolled as a student and was never assigned 
campus housing.

Police said Coleman called a cab and Singh picked him up. Authorities say 
Coleman told police he became homicidal and bought a knife during a stop at a 
store.

Singh stopped in Kootenai when it became clear Coleman didn't have a 
destination. Police say Coleman then stabbed Singh, who died at the scene.

Coleman is being held at the Bonner County Jail. His trial is set for spring.

(source: indiawest.com)








WASHINGTON:

Washington Supreme Court tosses out state's death penalty



Washington state's Supreme Court ruled Thursday ruled that the death penalty, 
as applied, violates its Constitution.

The ruling makes Washington the latest state to do away with capital 
punishment. The court was unanimous in its order that the eight people 
currently on death row have their sentences converted to life in prison. 5 
justices said the "death penalty is invalid because it is imposed in an 
arbitrary and racially biased manner."

"Given the manner in which it is imposed, the death penalty also fails to serve 
any legitimate penological goals," the justices wrote.

Gov. Jay Inslee, a 1-time supporter of capital punishment, had imposed a 
moratorium on the death penalty in 2014, saying that no executions would take 
place while he's in office.

In a written statement, the Democrat called the ruling "a hugely important 
moment in our pursuit for equal and fair application of justice."

"The court makes it perfectly clear that capital punishment in our state has 
been imposed in an 'arbitrary and racially biased manner,' is 'unequally 
applied' and serves no criminal justice goal," Inslee wrote.

The ruling was in the case of Allen Eugene Gregory, who was convicted of 
raping, robbing and killing Geneine Harshfield, a 43-year-old woman, in 1996.

His lawyers said the death penalty is arbitrarily applied and that it is not 
applied proportionally, as the state Constitution requires.

In its ruling Thursday, the high court did not reconsider any of Gregory's 
arguments pertaining to guilty, noting that his conviction for aggravated 1st 
degree murder "has already been appealed and affirmed by this court."

(source: USA Today)

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

Washington Supreme Court Abolishes the Death Penalty



On Oct. 11, 2018, the state of Washington's supreme court unanimously struck 
down the death penalty as unconstitutional, ruling the "death penalty is 
invalid because it is imposed in an arbitrary and racially biased matter" and 
because it fails to serve any legitimate penological goal." The death penalty 
is a punishment that is as flawed as it is final, and as the Washington high 
court acknowledges, one plagued by racial bias and arbitrariness.

The ruling came in response to an appeal in Allen Gregory's case. Gregory 
argued that the entire death penalty scheme in Washington was 
unconstitutionally discriminatory, relying in large part on a rigorous and 
sophisticated statistical study by researchers at the University of Washington. 
The study ultimately showed that Washington juries were more than four times as 
likely to sentence a Black defendant to death as a non-Black defendant.

Gregory's case led a broad group of advocates, researchers, and criminal 
justice attorneys to file amicus briefs arguing Washington's death penalty 
scheme was a demonstrated failure, infected by racial bias and arbitrariness. 
75 retired or former judges in Washington state joined the ACLU’s amicus brief 
asking the Washington court to strike the death penalty. They did so because 
they had the grim benefit of front row seats to its unjust application.

Today's decision is a blow to racial injustice, yet nationwide the racism 
inherent in the procession and decisions in capital cases too often is 
unaddressed. In fact, the Washington Supreme Court joins just a small number of 
state courts, including Massachusetts and Connecticut, that have struck down 
the death penalty after recognizing the intolerable taint of racial 
discrimination.

Racial bias is the intractable legacy of the death penalty's history in 
America. Capital punishment can never free itself of the yoke of its roots in 
lynchings and racial terror. As the Equal Justice Initiative's national 
lynching memorial viscerally demonstrates, many of the same southern and 
midwestern counties that tolerated and even encouraged lynchings of Black men 
were enthusiastic proponents of capital punishment.

But the legacy of racial violence extends beyond just any county or state 
border: Racial bias permeates capital punishment at every stage from the 
decision to charge the death penalty to execution. One acute pinch point of 
that discrimination is in jury selection.

Prosecutors across the country routinely discriminate against potential Black 
jurors in capital cases by striking them from serving. In 2016, the U.S. 
Supreme Court ruled for Timothy Foster after handwritten notes from the 
prosecution surfaced showing its relentless efforts to strike Black jurors from 
his capital case. This included the prosecutor's notes designating each Black 
juror with a "B" and noting the lone juror they would accept if they "have to 
pick a Black juror."

This kind of discrimination in juror selection is far from limited to Foster's 
case. In studies ranging from North Carolina up to Pennsylvania and back down 
to Louisiana, we see clear systematic discrimination against qualified Black 
jurors in capital cases. In North Carolina, prosecutors were trained statewide, 
with a handy top-10-style cheat sheet, in how to give pre-textual explanations 
to avoid being caught for racial discrimination.

Decisions about who should live and who should die are too often driven by the 
race of the defendant or race of the victim, as studies for decades have 
repeatedly shown. But, as the Washington Supreme Court found, the death 
penalty's problems go far beyond racial bias. It is a flawed and ineffective 
tool of justice, one has become itself a tool of injustice. Capital punishment 
does not deter crime, and it fails to protect the innocent from wrongful 
convictions.

These concerns have caused the public to turn from the death penalty, with 
support for capital punishment at a near-historic low in the modern area. 
Likewise, death penalty jury verdicts and executions have plummeted. Today, 
Washington became the 20th state to officially reject capital punishment. 3 
other states have governor moratoriums, and another 10 states have not had an 
execution in the last decade.

The problems with the death penalty cannot be fixed. It is time for other 
courts to follow Washington's lead and strike the unconstitutional, unjust, and 
racially discriminatory punishment from the books once and for all.

(source: Cassandra Stubbs, Director, ACLU Capital Punishment Project)

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

Washington Becomes the 20th State to Abolish the Death Penalty



Reacting to news that the Washington State Supreme Court has ruled the death 
penalty violates its Constitution, Kristina Roth, Senior Program Officer at 
Amnesty International USA stated:

"This is tremendous news for all who fought to abolish the death penalty in 
Washington. Now that Washington has become the 20th state to end the ultimate 
cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment, other states should follow suit.

"The Court ruled that the death penalty is imposed in an arbitrary and racially 
biased manner and is invalid. The death penalty is the ultimate denial of human 
rights, it does not deter crime or improve public safety, and it should be 
ended once and for all."

106 countries had abolished the death penalty in law for all crimes by the end 
of 2017 and 142 countries had abolished the death penalty in law or practice. 
These figures underscore the global trend towards abolition of the death 
penalty. Only a few countries carry out executions. Just 4 countries were 
responsible for 84% of all recorded executions in 2017.

In 2017, the US had 23 executions in 8 states: Alabama (3) Arkansas (4) Florida 
(3) Georgia (1) Missouri (1) Ohio (2) Texas (7) Virginia (2). Texas remained 
the state with the highest number of executions, accounting for 30% of the 
national total.

(source: Amnesty International USA)

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

Citing Arbitrary Use and Racial Bias, Washington Supreme Court Abolishes 
State's Death Penalty



Citing racial bias and arbitrary application, the Supreme Court of Washington 
on Thursday ruled that the use of capital punishment violates the state's 
Constitution, a decision that will ban the use of the death penalty going 
forward and immediately commuted the sentences of death-row inmates to life 
terms.

"Washington's Supreme Court showed courage in refusing to allow racism to 
infect life and death decisions. Let's hope that courage is contagious." —Jeff 
Robinson, ACLU"Today's decision by the state Supreme Court thankfully ends the 
death penalty in Washington," declared Washington's Democratic Governor Jay 
Inslee in response to the ruling.

"The court makes it perfectly clear that capital punishment in our state has 
been imposed in an 'arbitrary and racially biased manner,' is 'unequally 
applied' and serves no criminal justice goal," Inslee added. "This is a hugely 
important moment in our pursuit for equal and fair application of justice."

The ACLU noted the ruling makes Washington the 20th state in the U.S. to ban 
the death penalty, but the group said it "won't stop fighting until it's struck 
down everywhere in America."

As Slate reports:

the court held Thursday that capital punishment is imposed in "an arbitrary and 
racially biased manner" and "fails to serve any legitimate penological goals." 
The problems go beyond race: Most prosecutors in the state have stopped seeking 
the death penalty, so all current capital sentences arise from just 6 of 
Washington’s 39 counties. The location of your crime may therefore determine 
whether you live or die. This "random" and "capricious" application of the 
ultimate punishment, the court ruled, fatally undermines any state interest 
"retribution and deterrence of capital crimes by prospective offenders."

There are currently 8 inmates on Washington's death row. The court converted 
their sentences to life imprisonment and forbade the state from conducting any 
further executions. Because its ruling is based entirely in the state 
constitution, the U.S. Supreme Court cannot overturn it. And the court left no 
room for future reconsideration of its unanimous decision. Capital punishment 
is over in Washington State.

Jeff Robinson, deputy legal director and director of the ACLU's Trone Center 
for Justice at the American Civil Liberties Union, said the court recognized 
clearly that racial bias remains at the heart of "who should and who should 
die" in the America's skewed justice system.

"There is nothing unique about the role racism played in Washington's death 
penalty," said Robinson. "What is rare is the Supreme Court’s willingness to 
call out the truth that has always been there."

Noting that both conscious and unconscious racial bias "plays a role in the 
death penalty decisions across America, influencing who faces this ultimate 
punishment, who sits on the jury, what kind of victim impact and mitigation 
evidence is used, and who is given life or death," Robinson said that this kind 
of "disparity can be described by many words - but justice is not one of them."

Human rights groups and other death penalty opponents said they hope that 
others states, and ultimately the U.S. federal government, will now follow the 
other 20 states and ban the death penalty nationwide:

"Washington's Supreme Court showed courage in refusing to allow racism to 
infect life and death decisions," said the ACLU's Robinson. "Let's hope that 
courage is contagious."

(source: commondreams.org)

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

Bellingham teen-killer’s death sentence commuted due to state Supreme Court 
ruling



A Whatcom County man sentenced to death for the 1995 rape and murder of a 
teenage girl will have his sentence converted to life in prison due to a 
Washington state Supreme Court unanimous ruling that says the death penalty, as 
applied, violates the state Constitution.

5 of the justices argued in the Thursday opinion the "death penalty is invalid 
because it is imposed in an arbitrary and racially biased manner," while the 
other 4 said additional state principles applied, the Associated Press 
reported.

All justices agreed that the 8 people currently on death row, which includes 
Clark Richard Elmore of Whatcom County, should have their sentences converted 
to life in prison.

In late December 2016, Gov. Jay Inslee granted his 1st reprieve for a death-row 
inmate to Elmore. The Whatcom man was sentenced to death for killing his 
girlfriend's 14-year-old daughter, Kristy Lynn Ohnstad, in a van south of Lake 
Samish in April 1995. Elmore raped Ohnstad, choked her, drove a metal skewer 
through her skull, beat her with a sledgehammer and dumped her body in the 
woods off Nulle Road, according to previous reports in The Bellingham Herald.

Elmore led his own search party and told local media the police weren't trying 
hard enough to find Ohnstad. Elmore initially fled to Oregon after Ohnstad's 
body was found, but later returned to Bellingham and turned himself in, The 
Herald reported.

Elmore pleaded guilty to aggravated 1st-degree murder and was sentenced to 
death May 3, 1996. Since that time, Elmore appealed in the hopes of having his 
sentence overturned. In October 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear 
his case and several weeks later the U.S. 9th Circuit denied a rehearing.

Elmore's execution was then scheduled for Jan. 19, 2017. Elmore, who was 1 of 9 
inmates on death row at the time in the state penitentiary in Walla Walla, was 
the 1st to exhaust all of his appeals.

In light of the new state Supreme Court ruling, Elmore's sentence will be 
commuted to life in prison without the possibility of parole, as Inslee's order 
of reprieve only stayed his execution date at the time. He remains on death row 
in Walla Walla.

(source: bellinghamherald.com)








USA:

Supreme Court examines dementia, health issues in death penalty cases



The U.S. Supreme Court, no stranger to death penalty cases, is looking very 
narrowly at 2 aspects of capital punishment this term: if an inmate with 
dementia should be executed if he has no memory of the crime he committed 3 
decades ago and if a death-row prisoner with a specific health problem can be 
executed by a less painful manner because of his condition.

These 2 cases "put the unworkability and inhumanity of capital punishment on 
full display," said Krisanne Vaillancourt Murphy, executive director of 
Catholic Mobilizing Network, a group that champions restorative justice and an 
end to the death penalty.

She said state prison systems are increasingly "faced with the question of how 
to execute people with severe mental and physical health problems" particularly 
since America's death-row populations are getting older and the average 
death-row inmate spends 15 years awaiting execution.

"Harsh living conditions, including solitary confinement, only further 
exacerbate physical and mental illness," she added.

The court heard oral arguments Oct. 2, the second day of its new term, about 
the pending execution of Vernon Madison, an Alabama man who killed a police 
officer 30 years ago. He has suffered strokes in recent years that left him 
blind and with vascular dementia and significant memory loss. He cannot tell 
what season or day it is, nor does he remember committing the crime.

This case, Madison v. Alabama, was argued before eight judges while Justice 
Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation was on hold. The court has already held that 
states may not execute the mentally ill or the intellectually disabled but has 
not ruled on those with dementia. This case also examines whether someone can 
be executed if they were mentally capable when they committed the crime but 
later developed cognitive impairments.

During arguments, the judges appeared to lean in Madison's favor, but this also 
is a new bench without Justice Anthony Kennedy, who in recent years played a 
key role in the court's opposition to the death penalty. He wrote the majority 
opinion in the court's 2007 decision saying people who cannot understand their 
punishments cannot be executed and in its 2005 ruling that juvenile offenders 
could not be executed. Both decisions had 5-4 votes.

Kavanaugh will not vote on the Madison case, but the court could decide to have 
it retried if it reaches a split vote.

During arguments, Bryan Stevenson, founder and executive director of the Equal 
Justice Initiative, a nonprofit organization for prisoners' rights based in 
Montgomery, Alabama, told the court that it is simply not humane to execute 
someone who is disabled, confused or fragile. He also put it this way: "No 
penological justification or retributive value can be found in executing a 
severely impaired and incompetent prisoner."

But the state saw it differently.

Alabama Deputy Attorney General Thomas Govan said the state still deserves to 
win "retribution for a heinous crime," and described Madison's claim as 
"unprecedented."

Justice Stephen Breyer, who has been the court's leading death penalty 
opponent, said Madison's numerous impairments are not unusual since death-row 
prisoners are older on average than they used to be and have been awaiting 
execution for 20 to 40 years.

"This will become a more common problem," Breyer said, adding that a narrow 
ruling in Madison's favor might prevent similar cases from flooding the courts.

The other death penalty case before the court is Bucklew v. Precythe. Russell 
Bucklew is on Missouri's death row for a 1986 murder. He suffers from a rare 
medical condition that causes blood-filled tumors in his head, neck and throat, 
which can easily rupture. His attorneys have argued that the state's lethal 
injection protocol would be more gruesome and cause more suffering than if he 
were put to death by lethal gas, which the state does not have the protocol to 
use.

Kavanaugh will hear the oral arguments in this case before the court Nov. 6, 
but how he will vote on a death penalty case is still pretty much unknown 
since, as a federal appeals court judge, he rarely heard capital punishment 
cases.

Garrett Epps, a law professor at the University of Baltimore, wrote in the 
Sept. 18 issue of The Atlantic that however the Bucklew case is resolved, it 
shows "how fully the court has become enmeshed in the sordid details of 
official killing. As the population of death row ages, issues of age-related 
disease and dementia will become more important in assessing individual death 
warrants, and the court will be the last stop for those challenged."

Vaillancourt Murphy said it is not likely that many Catholics are paying 
attention to either of these cases before the court, but she said there has 
been an increased interest among Catholics to understand what capital 
punishment means in modern society particularly since the catechism was revised 
in early August calling the use of the death penalty "inadmissible."

"This added clarity in Catholic teaching is a welcome validation of the 
church's pro-life stance. We are called to uphold the sacred dignity of every 
human person, no matter the harm someone has caused," she said in an Oct. 9 
email to Catholic News Service.

She said Catholics "should pay attention to these cases because they serve as 
important measures of how the highest court in the land is working to defend or 
disregard human life."

"As believers and as U.S. citizens, we should be prepared for more cases 
resembling these to go before the court in coming years," she added. "The 
conundrum of America's aging death rows is not going to go away."

(source: National Catholic Reporter)