[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----TEXAS, FLA., OHIO, ILL., MO., UTAH, ORE., USA

[Rick Halperin]

August 20




TEXAS----impending execution

Death row inmate Larry Swearingen denied clemency before Wednesday execution



Montgomery County’s only death row prisoner lost a long-shot bid for clemency 
Monday, just over 48 hours before he is scheduled for execution.

For convicted killer Larry Ray Swearingen, these final days and last-minute 
legal filings must feel familiar. The Wednesday execution date marks the 6th 
time he’s been scheduled for death in the past 2 decades.

The 48-year-old Willis man was sent to death row in July 2000, after he was 
convicted of slaughtering Montgomery County college student Melissa Trotter and 
dumping her body in the Sam Houston National Forest.

(source: Houston Chronicle)

How 'Body Ranch' Research Impacts The Appeal Of A Texas Death Row Inmate



In a murder investigation, establishing a time of death help can lead to 
arresting and convicting the perpetrator — or exonerating someone wrongfully 
accused. That's why getting it right can mean life or death for someone like 
Texas death row inmate Larry Swearingen. He is facing execution Wednesday for a 
murder he says he didn’t commit.

The science of “time of death” is something studied every day at the Forensic 
Anthropology Center in San Marcos, also known as “The Body Ranch.”

Scattered around an open field under the hot Texas sun there are a dozen human 
bodies. Their skin is blackened, their flesh is half eaten by bugs and 
varmints. They are in varying states of decay. This isn’t the scene from a 
horror movie or a mass murder — this is science.

“What we're interested in doing is getting some kind of idea of the rate of 
composition and then the pattern of decomposition,” said Daniel Wescott, the 
center’s director and professor of Anthropology at Texas State University. “We 
typically have about 60 to 70 bodies out at at any given time that might be 
involved in various different experiments.”

This is 1 of the 7 outdoor body composition laboratories in the United States 
and the largest such forensics research facility in the world.

“So what you want to try to do is have some kind of baseline information about 
what's going on and then alter a single thing to look at how that affects it,” 
Wescott said.

Here, human cadavers are left out in the open and carefully monitored for 
patterns of human body decomposition. That data is used to train forensic 
experts so when they look at a murder victim they can read the body and the 
crime scene to gain an understanding of the time of death.

“It's not guesswork,” Wescott said. “We do lots of bodies, so we have a good 
idea of the normal variation.”

In the murder of Melissa Trotter, establishing when she died is central to the 
conviction and the pending execution of Larry Swearingen. Trotter went missing 
in Willis Texas on Dec. 8, 1998. Her body was found 25 days later on Jan. 2 in 
the Sam Houston National Forest. She had been sexually assaulted and strangled. 
Her body was tossed onto a pile of bushes. Swearingen had been arrested and 
jailed on Dec. 11 — three days after Trotter was last seen alive.

Swearingen maintains he didn’t kill her and based on the condition of Trotter’s 
body, forensic experts have said there are questions about his guilt.

“The climate, weather, temperature, the data where the body was found, the 
environment where it was found,” Swearingen said. “[The forensic doctors] 
looked at all the weights, the organs — [they] looked at everything and they 
said Melissa died within 10 to 12 days of her body being discovered.”

There is a lot of circumstantial evidence in this case that the prosecution 
says points directly at Swearingen but there is no DNA that ties Swearingen to 
the death of Trotter. The prosecution’s case depends on establishing that 
Trotter died before Swearingen was jailed. The forensic evidence for that 
narrative is weak at best.

“Every doctor has said from Texas and beyond that Melissa was dead no more 10 
to 12 days before discovery, which would have put it at about the 18th [of 
December] and I had been locked up over a week by that time,” Swearingen said.

Kelly Blackburn is with the Montgomery County District Attorney’s Office, which 
prosecuted Swearingen. He said one piece of evidence isn’t what this case is 
about.

“Science can only tell you so much,” said Blackburn. “You have to look at the 
whole story because no matter how good the scientist is, no matter how unbiased 
they claim to be, there is still interpretation.”

And what the conditions were in the Sam Houston National Forest for those 25 
days is also undetermined.

“If you're looking at what the weather was like at Intercontinental Airport and 
basing the way the body would decompose on those weather patterns versus what's 
actually happening 20 miles north of here in the national forest, and how cold 
the temperature could have gotten during that period of time, and how cold it 
stayed for that period of time, all of that comes into play,” Blackburn said.

James Rytting, Swearingen’s Attorney, said the time of death is a major problem 
for the state’s case. He said the bottom line is that when Melissa Trotter’s 
body was discovered, had it been out in the woods for 25 days, it would have 
been in terrible condition.

“The day that girl disappeared as it did on the slab and it was left out in the 
open in the Texas woods. It is, as everyone knows, filled with vultures, with 
raccoons, with wild pigs. There should not have been much left to that body at 
all. After 25 days, let alone 105 pounds out of 105 pounds,” Rytting said.

But Wescott from the Body Ranch said some bodies don’t always decompose the way 
you’d expect them to — sometimes there are surprises.

“So typically when we get one that is a little bit off of what we expect, it 
usually turns out to be that they were on heavy dose of antibiotics at the time 
or sometimes chemotherapy,” Wescott said.

Forensic entomology and establishing time of death is a science — but if it’s 
an exact science, it shouldn’t depend on if it’s being used by the prosecution 
or the defense.

Editor’s Note: This is the 2nd story in a 3 part series that investigates 
Swearingen’s claim that he’s innocent.

(source: tpr.org)








FLORIDA----impending execution

Catholic bishops urge Ron DeSantis to commute Gary Ray Bowles’ death 
sentence----The Catholic Church has long advocated to end the death penalty.



The Florida Conference of Catholic Bishops has asked Gov. Ron DeSantis to 
commute Gary Ray Bowles‘ death sentence to life in prison.

Bowles, set to be executed Thursday for the 1994 murder of Walter Hinton, also 
pleaded guilty to 5 other murders and is serving life sentences for 2 of them, 
the Conference explained in a news release.

In a letter released Monday, Michael Sheedy – executive director of the 
conference – told DeSantis “intentionally ending Mr. Bowles’ life is 
unnecessary.”

“Society can remain safe from any future violent actions of his through 
life-long incarceration,” Sheedy said. “Premeditated, state-sanctioned homicide 
of Mr. Bowles would only perpetuate the cycle of violence that victimized him, 
and which he later perpetuated.”

Sheedy “acknowledged that Bowles’ actions caused grievous harm to the victims, 
their loved ones, and the community (and) noted Bowles’ history of childhood 
trauma as a victim of abuse, homelessness, and child prostitution,” an 
accompanying news release said.

The Catholic Church has long advocated for an end to the use of the death 
penalty. Preceding each execution for nearly 4 decades, the Florida bishops 
have urged governors to commute the sentence of the condemned to life in 
prison. This is the second death warrant signed by Gov. DeSantis.

Prior to Bowles’ scheduled execution, Catholic faithful and members of the 
community will gather across Florida to pray for the victims of violent crimes 
and their families, for those on death row, for the governor as he confronts 
the decision to proceed with the execution, and for an end to the use of the 
death penalty.

(source: Florida Politics)

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

Death-Row Inmate Couldn’t Have Federal Defender at State Hearing



A Florida death-row inmate facing execution Aug. 22 wasn’t entitled to have his 
federal public defenders represent him before the state clemency board, the 
Eleventh Circuit said Aug. 19.

The court denied a motion to stay the execution.

Under 18 U.S.C. §3599, federal courts pay for federal public defenders to 
represent state capital defendants who file federal habeas corpus petitions. 
The statute says the federal defenders “shall also represent the defendant” in 
clemency matters.

After his federal habeas corpus petition was denied, Gary Bowles was appointed 
state counsel to represent him before the Florida Clemency Commission and 
Board.

(source: bloomberglaw.com)








OHIO:

DeWine says fentanyl for Death Row inmates not constitutional



Governor Mike DeWine said he currently didn't see a way for the State of Ohio 
to execute inmates on death row. There are roughly 140 people sentenced to die 
but the state has run into problems finding drugs to use for lethal injection. 
The governor said pharmaceutical companies could stop selling to all state 
agencies if its drugs are used for executions.

DeWine postponed the next scheduled execution from September to May 2020 to 
give state officials more time to find a new solution.

This problem led Rep. Scott Wiggam (R - Wooster) to come up with a new plan -- 
use Fentanyl seized in drugs raids on death row inmates. The powerful 
painkiller has been linked to a surge in overdose deaths.

“If drug companies blacklist the State of Ohio through the Medicaid program and 
won’t sell to the State of Ohio which is what I keep on reading is a fear, well 
then we’ll bypass that altogether," Wiggam said. “Through bureaucracy we would 
end the death penalty instead of doing it through legislature or asking the 
people what way forward they’d like to see.”

DeWine dismissed the idea on Friday saying he didn't "believe it would pass 
constitutional muster".

“We haven’t even tried," Wiggam said. "Was that question asked when the 
Heartbeat Bill was signed? It wasn’t, but we signed the Heartbeat Bill and it 
was the right thing to do and now it is in the court system.”

Opponents of the death penalty said they were grateful for the temporary 
reprieve and a chance for the state to re-evaluate executions generally.

“We don’t need it," said Abraham Bonowitz with the group Death Penalty Action. 
"We’re wasting a bunch of money with it, and we can be safe from dangerous 
offenders and hold them accountable with what the alternative is in Ohio – 
throwing away the key, life without the possibility of parole.”

Bonowitz said the Ohio Constitution calls for quick and relatively painless 
executions not to comfort the convicted, but to make it easier on those 
carrying out that punishment.

“It could be easy," he said. "We have plenty of rope, plenty of bullets but 
people don’t want to make a mess of it. That’s why they’ve medicalized the 
procedure.”

He said the death penalty has been used inconsistently, mostly in large 
counties with a large enough tax base to afford expensive death penalty trials.

“The death penalty doesn’t keep us any safer, and we can hold dangerous 
offenders accountable and be safe from them and people in prison can be safe 
from them without executions," he said. "It’s what we do the vast majority of 
the time.”

Wiggam's bill has not been officially introduced yet. He hoped it would still 
pass despite the governor's dismissal.

(source: ABC News)








ILLINOIS:

How does restoring death penalty improve Illinois?



What is gained by restoring capital punishment in Illinois?

That’s the question lawmakers like state Rep. David McSweeney have to answer as 
they stump for restoring the death penalty nearly 2 decades after Republican 
Gov. George Ryan put it on ice with a moratorium, setting the stage for Gov,. 
Pat Quinn to sign off on full abolition 8 years ago.

McSweeney, R-Barrington Hills, said “eliminating the death penalty was a 
terrible mistake,” according to Capitol News Illinois. “It has been a complete 
failure.”

Pointing to recent mass shootings in Dayton, Ohio, and El Paso, Texas — both of 
which still have capital punishment on the books — McSweeney said “The time to 
act is now, because the death penalty is a deterrent that we need to protect 
our citizens. No one can argue the state of Illinois is a model for how to 
fight crime.”

Ohio killed 28 people from 2009-2018, according to the Death Penalty 
Information Center; Texas has killed 135. As of April 1, Ohio had 141 people on 
death row; Texas had 225.

McSweeney acknowledged past problems with wrongful convictions and said 
dramatic improvement in DNA testing will enable the kind of safeguards that 
might engender the political support he’ll need to advance his proposal.

Nationwide, 166 people sentenced to die since 1973 were later exonerated. 2 
men, North Carolina’s Charles Finch and Florida’s Clifford Williams, were set 
free this year after 43 years on death row. Both cases involved official 
misconduct and mistaken witness identification.

The DPIC said it’s difficult to catalog how many of the 1,501 people executed 
since 1976 might’ve been innocent, but highlighted 15 cases with strong 
evidence of innocence, said others suggest more than 40 such instances.

The FBI’s 2016 Uniform Crime Report said Southern states accounting for more 
than 80 % of executions also had the highest murder rate, while Northeast 
states accounting for fewer than 1 % of all executions had the nation’s lowest 
murder rate.

Prosecuting crimes that carry a death sentence can cost 3 or 4 times more than 
those where the stiffest penalty is a life sentence, depending on the 
jurisdiction.

In other words, McSweeney wants Illinois to enact a stiffer penalty that puts 
more strain on an underfunded criminal justice system, isn’t proven to act as a 
crime deterrent and opens the door to using taxpayer dollars to commit 
uncorrectable, fatal errors.

So what’s gained? How does giving the state the power to kill, rather than 
simply permanently imprison, make Illinois better?

“This one will have a lot of opposition,” McSweeney predicted.

Only from those with common sense.

(source: mywebtimes.com)








MISSOURI:

Prosecutors will seek death penalty for man accused of 3 murders in Springfield



Prosecutors announced Monday they plan to seek the death penalty for a 
Springfield man accused of killing 3 people last fall.

Luis Perez, 24, is facing three counts of first-degree murder for killings that 
occurred within a 2-day span in November.

At a pre-trial court appearance on Monday, Greene County Assistant Prosecutor 
Emily Shook said Perez rejected a plea offer that would have sent him to prison 
for the rest of his life. So, the state is now going for the death penalty.

Court documents say this case started last year when Perez was kicked out of a 
home in the 900 block of East Locust Street.

Police say Perez returned to the home early on Nov. 1 and opened fire on his 
ex-roommates, killing Steven Marler and Aaron Hampton and injuring 2 others.

The next day, police say Perez killed Sabrina Starr, a 21-year-old woman who 
had provided him with the gun he used in the other 2 killings.

Aaron Anderson, 20, was charged as an accessory after police say he was 
involved in the first 2 homicides.

Prosecutors have not made a formal announcement about whether or not they will 
seek the death penalty against Anderson, who also appeared in court Monday in 
front of Judge Thomas Mountjoy.

Nyadia Burden, 26, is facing 2 1st-degree murder charges after police say she 
bought the bullets used to kill Marler and Hampton.

A 4th suspect, Perez's girlfriend Dalia Garcia, was charged with evidence 
tampering. Police say she helped burn the clothing Perez was wearing on the 
night of the double homicide.

In the days after Perez was charged with the killings, U.S. Immigration and 
Customs Enforcement issued a scathing news release criticizing Middlesex County 
New Jersey for not holding Perez in jail in December 2017. ICE said it had 
asked that Perez be held in jail while it started deportation proceedings 
against him since he is originally from Mexico and was in the country 
illegally.

According to its website, Middlesex County has a policy of declining requests 
by ICE to detain some inmates, if those people have not been convicted of 
certain serious offenses.

Perez came to Springfield from New Jersey not long before the killings.

Perez will now get a new lawyer as his case is transferred to the public 
defender's capital division. His next court appearance is scheduled for Oct. 
15.

(source: Springfield News-Leader)




UTAH:

Attorney certified in death penalty defense appointed for man charged in baby's 
death



A Salt Lake City defense attorney has been appointed to represent a Logan man 
accused of killing a baby girl in December, just days before her 1st birthday.

Kyle Gooch, 30, was charged with aggravated murder — a capital offense — in 
connection with the death of his girlfriend’s daughter, who police say was 
found dead in her crib at about 8:30 a.m. on Dec. 15, tightly swaddled in a 
blue blanket, with obvious signs of trauma on her head.

According to court records, an autopsy report completed in April this year 
showed 13 different blunt force injuries to the baby’s head, including numerous 
bruises and abrasions to her face, all of which are “consistent with inflicted 
pressure as might occur with smothering.”

Gooch was charged in 1st District Court with aggravated murder, a 1st-degree 
felony that might have been punishable by the death penalty, although the Cache 
County Attorney’s Office has stated it will not be seeking the death penalty in 
this case.

According to Utah law, indigent defendants charged with a capital offense are 
entitled to defense by a team of 2 attorneys who meet certain eligibility 
requirements. The lead attorney must be state-certified.

Defense attorney Bryan Galloway said the names of 3 “Rule 8 certified” 
attorneys are submitted to the judge assigned to the case, who selects one to 
represent the defendant.

In Gooch’s case, attorney Rudy Bautista was appointed as lead attorney, and 
Galloway has been appointed to assist.

While the Cache County Attorney’s Office is not seeking the death penalty, 
Galloway said the judge has the discretion to decide if the Rule 8 certified 
attorney will remain on the case and at least as of Monday, Bautista stays.

If Gooch is convicted as charged, the judge has the discretion to sentence him 
to either 25 years to life in prison or life in prison without parole, 
according to the Cache County Attorney’s Office.

Gooch has also been charged in several other cases with crimes ranging from 
misdemeanor assault and protective order violations to aggravated kidnapping 
and aggravated assault. Those cases will trail behind the aggravated murder 
case.

(source: The Herald Journal)








OREGON:

New law could take Lane County man off of death row



A new law that redefines the crime of aggravated murder in the state of Oregon 
could mean that a Lane County man may be taken off of death row, to the 
surprise of prosecutors who were reassured during the legislative session that 
the law wouldn’t apply to old cases.

Senate Bill 1013, which was signed into law this month by Gov. Kate Brown and 
goes into effect Sept. 29, limits the crimes eligible for the death penalty and 
narrows the definition of aggravated murder, which is the only crime in Oregon 
eligible for a death sentence.

Aggravated murder now only applies to defendants who kill two or more people as 
an act of organized terrorism, kill a child younger than 14 intentionally and 
with premeditation, kill another person while in jail or prison for a previous 
murder, or kill a law enforcement, correctional or probation officer.

Before the new law, aggravated murder applied to cases involving murder for 
hire, more than one victim, torture, a criminal justice professional victim, a 
juror or a witness, or a defendant that was in custody or a fugitive when the 
murder occurred. It also applied to defendants previously convicted of murder 
or manslaughter, and to cases involving murder that occurred during another 
felony act, murder committed to conceal a crime, or murder that was committed 
using explosives.

The new law also affects how a jury decides on a sentence of death, removing 
“future dangerousness” as a factor in making the decision. It requires the 
state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant should receive a 
death sentence. It also reclassifies all current manners of committing 
aggravated murder as 1st-degree murder. The crime of murder is now renamed 
2nd-degree murder.

In an Aug. 9 email to Oregon prosecutors, Oregon Department of Justice 
solicitor general Benjamin Gutman said his office concluded that the new, 
narrower definition of aggravated murder in SB 1013 does apply to pending 
cases, including cases that have been sent back for new penalty or guilty 
phases.

Gutman reviewed the new law on request of attorneys representing death row 
inmate Martin Allen Johnson, who was convicted in Washington County in 2001 of 
eight counts of aggravated murder for the 1998 rape and murder a 15-year-old 
girl. Johnson was granted a new trial in 2017, on the grounds of inadequate 
representation. After the DOJ’s assessment that the new law affects Johnson, 
the judge ruled that Johnson’s crimes now aren’t considered aggravated murder 
and therefore he is not eligible for the death penalty.

“I know that I have had conversations with many of you in which I suggested 
otherwise,” Gutman’s email to prosecutors read, “but after careful review of 
the issue in a Washington County case where the court ruled that the death 
penalty was not available, we have concluded that we don’t have a plausible 
basis for an appeal ... This was a surprise to me.”

Locally, the law also would affect the case of Jeffrey Dale Tiner, who was 
convicted in 2000 of murdering a Springfield boat builder.

Tiner, now 61, returned to Lane County Circuit Court last fall because his 
aggravated murder conviction and death sentence were overturned when a judge 
ruled Tiner was not given a proper defense during the sentencing hearing of his 
trial. A conviction for intentional murder — a lesser homicide charge that 
carries a life sentence — remains intact.

But his new trial, which was expected to begin in February of this year, was 
postponed. Tiner’s attorneys said they needed more time to prepare for trial, 
furthered delayed by the new bill that narrowed the definition of aggravated 
murder, of which Tiner was convicted of 2 counts. His new trial is scheduled 
for November 2020.

Lane County District Attorney Patty Perlow said she was not surprised by the 
Department of Justice email. She testified in the House and Senate against the 
bill, “not as an advocate for the death penalty, but because it was a poorly 
drafted bill,” she said.

“There will be no cost savings from this bill,” Perlow said. “Every aspect of 
it will require litigation at every level from the trial court, through the 
appellate courts, to post-conviction relief.”

According to the Oregon Department of Corrections, there are 30 people on 
Oregon’s death row — 29 men and one woman. The last person to be executed on 
Oregon’s death row was Harry Charles Moore in 1997. It was the second and last 
execution in Oregon since 1962. Perlow said fewer than six of those cases would 
be eligible for the death penalty under the new law in Oregon, none of which 
are Lane County cases, such as that of David Ray Taylor or Jesse Caleb 
Compton.M

Perlow foresees more confusion that may come from SB 1013. While the new law 
defines aggravated murder to include the killing of a child younger than 14 
intentionally and with premeditation, Perlow points out that the term 
“premeditated” isn’t defined anywhere in Oregon law but is an element of the 
new version of aggravated murder.

For 1st-degree murder, the presumptive sentence is life with the possibility of 
parole after 30 years, but the judge can impose a sentence of life without 
parole if she or he gives “reasons” for imposing that sentence, Perlow said. 
There is no guidance of what acceptable “reasons” would be, Perlow added, 
meaning the appellate courts would have to determine in every case whether the 
“reasons” were sufficient.

State Rep. Jennifer Williamson, D-Portland, told The Oregonian/OregonLive last 
month that lawmakers drafted a separate bill, Senate Bill 1005, to make clear 
that SB 1013 wouldn’t apply to those who have been previously sentenced but 
have been granted reversals.

Gutman said he and many others were under the impression that SB 1005 ensured 
that SB 1013 would not apply to cases that had previously been tried and were 
being retried after an appeal or post-conviction relief.

“There are news stories citing legislators as saying as much,” Gutman said.

(source: The Register-Guard)

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

Opinion: Oregon’s new death-penalty law is not retroactive. It’s how the law 
works.



Recently, we’ve seen some controversy emerge over Senate Bill 1013, the new law 
that sensibly narrows the definition of aggravated murder. Currently, 
aggravated murder is the only crime in Oregon for which someone can be 
sentenced to death.

The Oregon Department of Justice recently released an opinion that says the new 
law applies to pending cases, and to cases where death penalty convictions and 
sentences have been overturned but no new death sentence has been imposed. 
Prosecutors—who largely opposed the bill during the legislative session—cried 
foul, claiming they’d been misled. They’re now demanding the Legislature “fix” 
the new law.

This call is perplexing and potentially damaging. As law professors who closely 
tracked the legislative process and supported and testified for SB 1013, the 
DOJ opinion aligns with our understanding of SB 1013’s language, intent and 
impact. Changing SB 1013 now, as some prosecutors are suggesting, would have 
serious unintended consequences.

Like most Oregonians, we believe accountability in our criminal justice system 
is paramount. People who are guilty of crimes must be held accountable for 
them. And if there are errors in how cases have been tried, people accused of 
crimes deserve due process to be sure that they are not inappropriately 
sentenced to death and innocent individuals are not executed.

SB 1013 was professionally and carefully drafted in alignment with those 
values, and the new law is not retroactive. That means it does not reverse the 
convictions or sentences of people on Oregon’s death row.

If the new law were retroactive, it would mean that even those with valid death 
sentences affirmed through appeals could request a new trial or sentencing 
under SB 1013. Legislators rebuffed that approach by rejecting a different bill 
that expressly sought that outcome. Instead, they passed SB 1013, which allows 
death sentences to stand when original convictions and death sentences are 
valid.

But SB 1013 does—and should—apply to death row cases that are overturned on 
appeal because the old trial or sentence is ruled unconstitutional or unfair. 
That’s not retroactivity—that’s retrial or resentencing to correct serious 
errors. Moreover, a reversal of a death sentence (where the conviction remains 
valid) does not mean release, it means life in prison, often without the 
possibility of parole.

This isn’t an issue of semantics; rather, it’s how the law works. When someone 
is re-prosecuted after a reversal, current laws at the time of retrial or 
resentencing will apply.

The “fix” some prosecutors are asking for would effectively take away due 
process rights that everyone deserves, even those accused of a very serious 
crime. Unfortunately, the death penalty is too often unconstitutionally 
applied, and sometimes innocent people are sentenced to death; Since 1973, over 
156 people have been released from death rows in 26 states because of 
innocence. Nationally, at least one person is exonerated for every 10 who are 
executed. When the stakes are this high, it is critically important that 
defendants receive a fair trial and sentencing proceeding.

Finally, we cannot let this debate distract from the numerous benefits of SB 
1013. By clarifying when the death penalty can be applied, SB 1013 will make 
prosecutors’ jobs easier. They won’t be forced to make as many difficult 
discretionary decisions, or allocate scarce resources toward expensive capital 
trials where a death penalty sentence is not likely to be obtained, or is 
likely to be overturned if it is obtained. Instead, our state can focus our 
finite public resources on effective violence prevention measures including 
mental health treatment and addiction recovery programs, victim services, and 
public defense. These are expenditures that are more likely to have a positive 
impact on the safety of our communities.

We applaud Rep. Jennifer Williamson and Sen. Floyd Prozanski, the chief backers 
of SB 1013. They have worked diligently and with integrity to make this needed 
change to our state’s death penalty laws and have championed doing the right 
thing from the beginning. Our communities will be safer, and our criminal 
justice system more effective because of SB 1013. The law should stand as 
adopted.

(source: Guest Columnists, Stephen Kanter and Aliza B. Kaplan----Kanter is 
emeritus dean at Lewis & Clark Law School. Kaplan is a law professor and 
director of the Criminal Justice Reform Clinic at Lewis & Clark Law 
School----The Oregonian)








USA:

U.S. House Oversight Committee Launches Investigation into Resumption of 
Federal Executions



The U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Reform announced 
on August 14, 2019 that it has launched an investigation into the Department of 
Justice’s plan to restart federal executions using the drug pentobarbital. 
Citing concerns about the source of drugs the Administration intends to use in 
5 executions it has scheduled in December 2019 and January 2020, the Oversight 
Committee’s Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties has sought 
documents and information from the Department of Justice (DOJ) related to 
Attorney General William Barr’s announcement on July 25, 2019 that the federal 
Bureau of Prisons (BOP) would resume executions after a 16-year hiatus.

The letter, signed by Subcommittee Chair Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and Congresswoman 
Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), seeks information about the manufacturer of the 
pentobarbital the government plans to use to execute prisoners in its new 
one-drug execution protocol, the procurement process, and whether the BOP has 
already acquired the drugs. “We are extremely concerned about the types of 
facilities from which the Bureau will obtain its pentobarbital, whether the 
Bureau will be able to guarantee that its intended method of execution is as 
painless as possible, and whether the Bureau will be subject to rigorous 
protocols to prevent the problems that have occurred at the state level,” 
Raskin and Pressley wrote.

The Administration’s new execution plan is similar to the single-drug execution 
process used in Texas, Missouri, and Georgia. Collectively, those state have 
carried out 92 pentobarbital executions since January 2014, 2/3 of the 
lethal-injection executions in the United States during that period.

“Numerous reports document the dangers associated with pentobarbital and the 
difficulty in procuring reliable doses,” the letter says. “Texas reportedly 
purchased its supply from a compounding pharmacy whose state license was on 
probation for providing dangerous drug mixtures to children; the same pharmacy 
was warned by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) about ‘serious 
deficiencies in [its] practices for producing sterile drug products.’ Missouri 
reportedly purchased its pentobarbital from a pharmacy that has repeatedly been 
found to engage in hazardous pharmaceutical procedures.”

The committee members called the Administration’s possible reliance on 
compounding pharmacies as a source of execution drugs “particularly troubling” 
given that “though pentobarbital is supposed to be painless, five people 
executed in Texas using pentobarbital complained during their executions that 
they felt as if they were burning before they finally died.” In November 2018, 
the Death Penalty Information Center issued a major report, Behind the Curtain: 
Secrecy and the Death Penalty in the United States that warned about the 
dangers of compounded drugs produced by questionable drug producers. “One 
inmate” who was executed with compounded pentobarbital, the Committee’s letter 
said, “yelled ‘I can feel that it does burn. Burning!’”

The Committee also asked the DOJ to produce records related to its May 3, 2019 
Office of Legal Counsel opinion asserting that the Food and Drug Administration 
lacks authority to regulate lethal injection drugs. In 2015, the FDA, acting 
pursuant to a federal court directive, seized drugs Arizona and Texas had 
attempted to illegally import from a drug supplier in India.

The House action is the latest in a flurry of highly politicized activity 
relating to the federal death penalty. On August 5, urging that “capital 
punishment be delivered quickly, decisively, and without years of needless 
delay,” President Trump directed the DOJ to propose legislation to accelerate 
the federal execution process for those charged with mass shootings or with 
killing law enforcement personnel. One week later, Attorney General Barr 
delivered a speech to law enforcement in New Orleans promising “a strict 
timetable for judicial proceedings that will allow the imposition of the death 
sentence without undue delay.” That legislation is unlikely to pass. On July 
25, Representative Pressley introduced a bill in the House to abolish the 
federal death penalty, followed one week later by a similar bill introduced by 
three Democratic senators on the Senate Judiciary Committee. The Senate bill is 
co-sponsored by four U.S. senators who are running for the Democratic 
nomination for President in 2020.

The House subcommittee has asked the DOJ and BOP to respond to its requests by 
August 27, 2019.

(source: Death Penalty Information Center)

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

Beto O'Rourke says he opposes death penalty for El Paso mass shooter



On his way to the site of the Oklahoma City bombing on Monday, Democratic 
presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke affirmed that he categorically opposes the 
death penalty — even in the cases of convicted terrorist Timothy McVeigh and 
the El Paso mass shooter, who killed 22 Wal-Mart shoppers earlier this month in 
the district he once represented in Congress.

"I don't support the death penalty," O'Rourke told reporters. "I don't know 
that taking another life will prevent the taking of lives going forward. I 
understand that some people feel differently, and it's hard to argue with them 
after seeing the faces of the lives lost.

"It's hard to argue with those in El Paso who feel that way, when someone came 
in and killed 22 human beings in our community. ... That's my belief and — but 
I understand those who feel differently about it," he said.

NEW, TOUGHER-SOUNDING BETO UNLOADS ON TRUMP: 'WELL, JESUS CHRIST, OF COURSE 
HE'S RACIST'

O'Rourke has previously said that nonviolent felons should be able to vote 
while behind bars, stopping short of fellow White House hopeful Bernie Sanders, 
who has called for the total enfranchisement of all felons, including the 
Boston Marathon bomber.

The former Texas congressman's comments came after he announced last week he 
would reset his flailing presidential campaign, with a tougher tone and a new 
focus on domestic terrorism and gun violence.

O'Rourke's position puts him at odds with authorities in his own state and the 
Justice Department. Prosecutors in Texas have announced they will seek the 
death penalty against the El Paso gunman, 21-year-old Patrick Crusius, as a 
domestic terrorism and hate crime investigation unfolds.

In July, Attorney General Bill Barr said the federal government will resume 
capital punishment and will move forward with plans to execute 5 inmates on 
death row for the 1st time in more than 15 years.

"It’s a good thing Robert Francis O’Rourke will never be president and stand in 
the way of justice being served in this case," Trump campaign Communications 
Director Tim Murtaugh told Fox News late Monday, using O'Rourke's legal name.

O'Rourke's opposition to the death penalty is a recent policy shift. In March, 
he apologized for backing legislation in 2017 that would have made it easier to 
pursue the death penalty in cases where law enforcement officers or other first 
responders were targeted and murdered. The bill, called The Thin Blue Line Act, 
has not been taken up by the Senate.

O'Rourke's vote for the bill came shortly after he launched his ultimately 
unsuccessful bid to defeat incumbent Texas GOP Sen. Ted Cruz.

TRUMP ADMIN TO RESUME EXECUTIONS FOR FIRST TIME SINCE 2003

“I think attacking a police officer should be an aggravating factor, but I 
don’t think that should contribute to taking someone else’s life," O'Rourke 
said earlier this year. "And so that was a mistake on my part, and if I could 
have that vote again, I would not vote for it."

At the same time, O'Rourke has made clear what he feels could prevent future 
massacres: change in the White House. On Sunday, O'Rourke squarely blamed 
President Trump for the massacre in El Paso, saying it was a "cost and 
consequence" of his rhetoric.

“It wasn't until that moment that I truly understood how critical this moment 
is and the real consequence and cost of Donald Trump,” O’Rourke told NBC's 
“Meet the Press.“

Former White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove says Robert Francis 
O'Rourke's comment that Trump is an accomplice in a mass murder is way beyond 
the limit.

In his manifesto, the El Paso shooter cited a range of motivations, including 
immigration and ecofascism, or militant environmentalism. The shooter said his 
views predated the Trump campaign.

Nevertheless, O'Rourke said, the administration's crackdowns on illegal 
immigration sent an unmistakable signal.

"There is a concerted, organized attack against immigrants, against people of 
color, against those who do not look like or pray like or love like the 
majority in this country,” O’Rourke said. “And this moment will define us one 
way or another. And if we do not wake up to it, I am convinced that we'll lose 
America, this country, in our sleep. And we cannot allow that to happen.“

O'Rourke, in a speech last Thursday in the face of stagnant and deep-underwater 
poll numbers, announced he wouldn't leave the presidential race to challenge 
Republican Sen. John Cornyn next year. He said "that would not be good enough" 
for El Paso and its shooting victims, since only taking on Trump will do.

Trump's reelection campaign responded that O'Rourke was using tragedy "to 
bolster his struggling presidential bid."

"O'Rourke's 2nd campaign reboot is likely to end up failing just like his 
first," Trump campaign spokeswoman Samantha Cotton said in a statement.

O'Rourke had attempted a major strategy shift in recent months, increasing his 
television appearances and releasing a string of policy proposals, attempting 
to show he didn't prioritize political style over substance. Those efforts 
failed to recapture the strong buzz and fundraising O'Rourke had upon entering 
the presidential race in March, though, and he's remained plagued by low 
fundraising and polling ever since.

(source: Fox News)