[Deathpenalty] death penalty news----FLA., ALA., LA., KY., NEB., WYO., IDAHO, USA

[Rick Halperin]

January 28




FLORIDA:

New conservative makeup of Florida Supreme Court is the start of DeSantis’ 
legacy



On the eve of the gubernatorial inauguration in early January, Florida’s new 
lieutenant governor told a ballroom of supporters what she believed to be the 
most lasting legacy for the incoming governor, Ron DeSantis.

It wasn’t the environment or expanding school choice. Rather, the chance to 
remake the Florida Supreme Court that “will single-handedly be the most 
important thing for the future of this state that we’ve ever seen,” Lt. Gov. 
Jeanette Nuñez said.

With three appointments since DeSantis took office, Florida’s Supreme Court no 
longer has any justices appointed by Democratic governors. Some say it’s now 
the most conservative in the country.

Whether the high court will remain a check on lawmakers remains to be seen. But 
Nuñez, at least, expects the justices to finally fall in line with Republican 
orthodoxy.

“For far too long, those of us who have served in the Legislature have battled 
with the Supreme Court on many issues,” Nuñez, a former state representative, 
said. “We are confident that the governor’s appointees are going to do what 
they are intended to do.”

For an indication of what that means on specific issues, here’s a look at some 
of the biggest recent clashes:

Terri Schiavo (2004) A national debate about Terri Schiavo, a severely 
brain-damaged woman whose family was at odds over whether she should be kept 
alive, led to years of litigation and action by Republican lawmakers.

Her husband said she never wanted to be kept alive artificially. Her family 
disagreed, and Republican Gov. Jeb Bush and his allies in the Legislature were 
on their side.

As lower courts continued to side with Schiavo’s husband, legislators had had 
enough. To get around the court decisions, lawmakers passed “Terri’s Law” in an 
emergency session in 2003, allowing Bush to intervene.

Bush quickly signed it and ordered state police to ensure Schiavo’s feeding 
tube was reinserted. But the state Supreme Court unanimously struck it down in 
2004, finding it violated the separation of powers between the legislative and 
judicial branches of government.

“It is a strong rebuke to politicians who attempt to negate court decisions — 
especially those involving extremely difficult life and death issues — simply 
because they disagree with the outcome,” Randall Marshall, then the legal 
director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, said after the 
decision.

Schiavo died in 2005 after having her feeding tube removed.

Redistricting (2012-15)

When voters passed the Fair Districts constitutional amendment in 2010, they 
intended to prevent politicians from gerrymandering the state’s various 
districts.

Yet the high court, which was responsible for approving the maps, repeatedly 
rejected the state Senate and congressional maps drawn by the Legislature 
because they didn’t comply.

Altogether, the debate over redistricting would lead to four trials, three 
special sessions and eight rulings from the Florida Supreme Court, costing 
taxpayers more than $11 million.

“The court, which is tremendously biased, took this biased and spiteful 
approach during the process,’‘ the current House speaker, Jose Oliva, R-Miami 
Lakes, said in 2017. “They overstepped their bounds.”

Private school vouchers (2006)

Republicans have repeatedly tried to expand the school voucher system, and 
while they’ve been successful, the Supreme Court has stopped attempts to allow 
vouchers to be used in private schools.

But with a totally revamped court, the court might get a chance to revisit the 
idea. Gov. DeSantis has already said that it’s time for the new court justices 
to revisit private school vouchers.

Capital punishment (2016)

After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Florida’s death penalty law unconstitutional 
in 2016, lawmakers and then-Gov. Rick Scott went back to the drawing board.

The result was a law that allowed 10 of 12 members of a jury to impose a death 
sentence. But in a 5-2 ruling, Florida’s high court found the new law 
unconstitutional as well.

On top of that, the court said that death sentences must be handed down by all 
jurors on a case.

Then-House Speaker Richard Corcoran, R-Land O’Lakes, called the decision 
further evidence of its “ongoing effort to subvert the will of the people as 
expressed by their elected representatives.”

Ballot initiatives (many years)

Then, there are the various ballot initiatives that the court has to decide on 
each year. Those decisions have frequently earned the ire of Republicans.

In 2010, for example, after the court blocked 3 initiatives passed by the 
Legislature, then-House Speaker Dean Cannon lashed out, saying the court didn’t 
have the authority.

Last year, the court blocked an initiative by the Constitution Revision 
Commission that would have given control of charter schools to the state, 
saying the ballot language was misleading. The sponsor, Erika Donalds, blasted 
the decision by “activist judges.”

(source: miamiherald.com)








ALABAMA:

Man’s death penalty trial to begin in 2013 Huntsville slayings of wife, son



The death penalty trial of Stephen Marc Stone, a man accused of killing his 
wife and young son nearly six years ago, is scheduled to begin Monday in 
Madison County.

Stone is charged with 2 counts of capital murder in the February 2013 deaths of 
32-year-old Krista Stone and 7-year-old Zachary Stone at their south Huntsville 
home.

He’s pursuing an insanity defense.

Jury selection is set to begin around 9 a.m. Monday. Lawyers say it could take 
a few days before the jury is seated and testimony begins.

Questions about Stone’s mental capacity have delayed the trial in the past. 
Madison County Circuit Judge Donna Pate in 2017 ruled Stone was not competent 
to stand trial and ordered he be treated at the Alabama Department of Mental 
Health. A new trial date was set after Stone was released from mental health 
treatment.

Before the trial begins Monday, Pate still has to rule on a defense motion to 
bar Stone’s police interview from being used as evidence. In the interview, 
police have said, Stone confessed to both killings. In their motion, defense 
attorneys Brian Clark and Larry Marsili argue that Stone didn’t understand his 
Miranda Rights, meaning his statements were made involuntarily.

“The defendant’s purported confession and/or statements are inadmissible 
because they were involuntarily made,” the defense attorneys said in court 
records. They are also asking the judge to toss any evidence that police found 
as a result of or after the “illegal interrogation.”

“All searches and seizures that followed … the illegal interrogation are fruit 
of the poisonous tree,” Clark and Marsili wrote.

Madison County District Attorney Rob Broussard and Chief Trial Attorney Tim 
Gann are prosecuting the case. If Stone is convicted, prosecutors will ask the 
jury to recommend the death penalty. The defense has filed several motions to 
bar the death penalty. The judge said she will rule on those motions if Stone 
is convicted.

The potential witness list includes several Huntsville police officers, medical 
experts and others.

Authorities say after the killings, Stone took his 2 young daughters to his 
parents’ home in Leeds. Stone turned himself in for the killings at the police 
station in Leeds, previous court testimony revealed. Leeds police contacted 
Huntsville authorities, who went to the Stone home at 11313 Chicamauga Trail 
S.E. and found both bodies on Feb. 24, 2013. Court records say Krista and 
Zachary Stone were both choked, and the boy was also drowned.

Stone is charged with 1 count of capital murder that accuses him of killing 2 
or more people and a 2nd count of capital murder alleges he killed a person 
younger than 14.

Stone doesn’t have a criminal history, according to police. He and Krista 
worked at Crestwood Hospital.

(source: al.com)








LOUISIANA:

Death penalty repeal gaining momentum — but needs your support



Louisiana has a broken death-penalty system. It’s arbitrary, vengeful and 
inordinately expensive in a state with dire fiscal needs. It embodies a sordid 
history of racism and is shamed by one of the highest rates of reversal and 
exoneration in the country.

I am excited that a local organization, LA REPEAL, a project of the Promise of 
Justice Initiative, is bringing together a strong coalition of churches, other 
faith communities, and civil rights advocates to repeal capital punishment in 
Louisiana. They hope to end the legal “relic” of taking a life in order, 
typically, to avenge the crime of taking a life.

LA REPEAL puts it this way: “Repealing Louisiana’s death penalty will prevent a 
flawed system from making irreversible mistakes, and will free up immense 
resources that can be redirected to violent crime prevention strategies.”

As a longtime opponent of the death penalty, I believe LA REPEAL represents the 
best prospect for abolishing the death penalty that I have seen. I hope readers 
of the Lens will swing into full support for this reform even before the bill 
comes up in the state legislature, as promised, later this year.

Suddenly he was gone. My friend had had enough of Death Row. He hanged himself.

That means writing, emailing or calling our state representatives. You will be 
in good company! Sister Helen Prejean, author of the culture-changing book, 
“Dead Man Walking,” later made into a movie, is part of the LA REPEAL 
Leadership Council. So is Bill Quigley, one of the strongest civil rights 
lawyers in the nation. So is Episcopal Bishop Joe Doss, a decades-long activist 
against the death penalty. And so is Calvin Duncan, who spent nearly 30 years 
as an inmate at Angola for a crime that he did not commit.

My deep opposition to the death penalty was buttressed recently by a tragedy. 
Most every month for four years I had been driving to Angola to visit an inmate 
awaiting execution. Suddenly he was gone. My friend had had enough of Death 
Row. He hanged himself.

I had chosen not to ask what Tyrone, as I’ll call him, had done to get himself 
convicted of a capital crime. I was not there as a judge. I was there to offer 
what help I could as he sought spiritual rehabilitation. What was obvious to me 
and to Tyrone’s family and friends was how much his life had changed. 
Scriptural study and the passage of time had opened his heart. Sullenness and 
fear had given way to repentance. But the isolation and hopelessness of life on 
the Row had thrown him into despair.

At his home-going (funeral) in a small Central Louisiana town, friends and 
family members spoke of their love for Tyrone and how he sought their 
forgiveness for his crime. I was able to testify to how much my monthly visits 
had meant to me and, I hoped, to Tyrone as well. I may be a clergyman, but I 
think I learned as much from Tyrone as he learned from me. On occasion, I have 
quoted him in my sermons—protecting his identity, of course.

I learned from Tyrone just how much any of us can change. The lesson was 
reinforced during my many years serving as a volunteer at Angola in the Kairos 
Prison Ministry International. When volunteers take part in the Kairos 
three-plus days in-prison retreats, they do their best to carry out the Kairos 
mantra—“Listen, listen, love, love”—as they relate to the inmates (“residents,” 
as some prefer to be called). Those who have done the worst can and do change. 
Many take responsibility for their crimes and seek ways to ask forgiveness from 
those they have deeply hurt.

That life-altering power to change is my first reason for opposing the death 
penalty.

My second reason: Those on death row at Angola are doomed to life-long solitary 
confinement. They are let out of their small cells only to enter a larger cage 
for 1 or 2 hours a day. As a result of this treatment, many of the men go 
crazy, become impossibly hostile, or curl-up-in-a-corner, defeated, bored, 
beyond reach of rehabilitation. Imagine how many more stories of redemption 
there might be if instead we treated those on Death Row humanely.

Imagine how much better off we’d be if the money wasted on the death penalty 
were spent instead on preventing crime more effectively and rehabilitating 
prisoners and their victims.

Third, the cost of condemning inmates to death row is, as LA REPEAL attests, 
immense. One recent Louisiana case involving 5 co-defendants cost $15 million, 
and yielded only 2 death sentences, both of which are under appeal. LA REPEAL 
calculates that over the past 10 years, the death penalty in Louisiana has cost 
taxpayers $155 million. At this writing, tax payers are footing the bill for 67 
men on death row at Angola, 73 % of whom are African American or Hispanic. The 
1 woman on death row in the Louisiana Correctional Institute at St. Gabriel is 
black.

If these same brothers and sisters were in one of the other Angola prison 
camps, they would have an opportunity to work, “earning their keep” or at least 
paying for some of it. In solitary, they do nothing and earn nothing. Imagine 
how much better off we’d be if the money wasted on the death penalty were spent 
instead on preventing crime more effectively and rehabilitating prisoners and 
their victims.

My 4th reason for opposing the death penalty: Every day of their lives, those 
on the Row face sudden notification that their execution date has been set. It 
is hard enough to face death from an illness, but think about what happens to 
those scheduled to be killed by the state. There is no one in the last weeks or 
months to hold your hand, to thank you for what you have tried to give them, to 
pray with you. Special family members can be with you on that last day, but it 
is always a day of “fear and trembling” as you become the dead man walking. The 
possibility that the “execution date” could be set any day terrified Tyrone 
and, I believe, contributed to his hanging himself.

My 5th reason for opposing the death penalty is that it does not serve as a 
deterrent. Despite myths to the contrary, it does not stop others from taking a 
life. The National Institute of Justice, the research arm of the federal 
Department of Justice, confirms this. (See also “Deterrence and the Death 
Penalty,” edited by Daniel S. Nagin and John V. Pepper.) The National Institute 
of Justice study is backed by a poll of nationwide police chiefs on ways to 
reduce violent crime; they ranked the death penalty last— the least effective 
approach.

Common sense leads to the same obvious conclusion. Who among those planning a 
murder will hold back, thinking that if they are caught, it would be much 
better to spend their days locked up for life than to be executed?

Finally, I am opposed to the death penalty because I care about victims’ 
families. I think it is absolutely necessary to support the families of crime 
victims as much as we are able. I learned this long ago as a member of the 
clergy at Trinity Episcopal in New Orleans. The teenage son of one of our 
active church members had been murdered. Horrified as we all were by the death 
of that young man, I nonetheless spoke out against the death penalty. The young 
man’s loving father was furious with me. I had neglected him and his family 
members, he charged, adding that I only wanted to be politically correct. He 
was right about the neglect but not about the reasons for my opposition to the 
death penalty.

>From then on, I promised the father and myself that any time I spoke out 
against the death penalty, I would also speak up for, and support as I could, 
the families of the victims. As many discover — whether or not they want a 
defendant sentenced to death — the protracted death penalty process only adds 
to their suffering.

The automatic appeals, the inevitable delays and the years of uncertainty are a 
sentence the victims’ families must also endure! What’s more, with the 
publicity surrounding death penalty cases, the renewed attention that comes 
with every appeal or ruling in the judicial process rips open wounds. The 
victims’ families struggle to heal when they are ensnared in a seemingly 
never-ending legal process.

LA REPEAL acknowledges the Catholic Church as a leader in the effort to end the 
death penalty. Pope Francis has often called on people of faith to work for an 
end to the death penalty. Here is one of his statements:

Nowadays the death penalty is inadmissible, no matter how serious the crime 
committed. It is an offense against the individuality of life and the dignity 
of the human person, which contradicts God’s plans for man and society and his 
merciful justice, and impedes the penalty from fulfilling any just objective. 
It does not render justice in the victims, but rather vengeance.

One does not have to be a Catholic or even a person of faith to embrace what 
the Pope is preaching. As we strive to change our laws, thank you, Pope 
Francis, for your insights and the strength of your determination to end this 
barbaric practice.

LA REPEAL is working with numerous groups and individuals to lobby every 
Louisiana legislator, to write op-eds for various newspapers, to circulate 
petitions, and to hold interfaith meetings. Visit the LA REPEAL website to keep 
up with this work and, in particular, to find out when the anti-death penalty 
bill will be brought up in committee.

William Barnwell

The Rev. Barnwell

I believe that together, we can work to end Louisiana’s broken and outdated 
death penalty.

William Barnwell’s recent book, “Angels in the Wilderness,” was named Book of 
the Year in the Indie Book Awards inspirational non-fiction category. He tells 
more about his ministry to Angola inmates, including his friend who committed 
suicide, in a previous book: “Called to Heal the Brokenhearted: Stories from 
Kairos Prison Ministry International.”

The opinion section is a community forum.

(source: thelensnola.org)








KENTUCKY:

KY Students Hear Conservative Case Against Death Penalty



Conservatives historically are pegged as champions of the death penalty, but 
some say there's growing momentum to change that narrative.

Hannah Cox, national manager of the group Conservatives Concerned About the 
Death Penalty, will make the conservative case against capital punishment 
Monday night at a public forum at Campbellsville University.

As a former death penalty supporter, Cox says she now recognizes that the 
practice doesn't align with the traditional conservative principles of limited 
government and fiscal responsibility.

"We know that the government does not operate correctly,” she asserts. “We know 
there's corruption. We know that they're definitely not using our resources 
correctly.

“Why would I ever think this government could competently handle matters of 
life and death? Of course they can't! So, it's kind of a natural eye opening 
moment for a lot of people on the right."

Cox adds not only does capital punishment cost more than a life sentence, a 
wrongful execution cannot be reversed.

And in order to truly uphold conservative beliefs about the sanctity of human 
life, Cox argues that view should be consistent from birth through death, 
regardless of a person's mistakes.

A Kentuckian is among 164 people on death rows who've been exonerated. And 
while DNA is a beneficial tool, Cox notes it's only available in fewer than 10 
% of criminal cases.

Cox says she expects more conservatives to change their stance on the issue.

"There's a bit of a zeitgeist moment happening right now, where people are 
really paying attention to the criminal justice system,” she states. “There's a 
lot of 'true crime' out there. There's a lot of big things happening, both 
nationally and at the state level, to reform. People are becoming more educated 
about the realities of our system and how it actually operates."

John Chowning, executive assistant to the president of Campbellsville 
University for government, community and constituent relations, says Cox's 
visit is part of a Quality Enhancement Plan focused on ethics. He says she'll 
also be speaking with individual classes.

"The death penalty, both pro and con, comes up in various classes from various 
points of discussion from political science, to theology to social work,” he 
states. “It is an emotional issue that is debated, and we felt like it was 
appropriate for our students to be presented that case."

The event at the Badgett Academic Support Center Banquet Hall begins at 6 p.m.

(source: Mary Kuhlman, Public News Service - KY)








NEBRASKA:

Nebraska Supreme Court dismisses suit from death-row inmates



The Nebraska Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit Friday filed by 8 death-row 
inmates who argued that their sentences were invalidated by the Legislature’s 
repeal of capital punishment in 2015, before voters overturned the ban.

Justices denied the inmates’ request for a declaration that their sentences 
were no longer valid, upholding a decision issued by a district court judge. 
But the state’s highest court left open the possibility that the inmates could 
raise similar arguments when challenging their convictions individually.

“We conclude that the inmates have equally serviceable remedies and accordingly 
affirm the district court’s dismissal” of the case, Chief Justice Michael 
Heavican wrote in the opinion.

The inmates argued that the Legislature’s 2015 vote to override Republican Gov. 
Pete Ricketts’ veto and abolish the death penalty effectively reduced their 
sentences to life in prison. A petition drive led by death penalty supporters 
suspended the repeal law before it could go into effect and placed the issue 
before voters, who reinstated capital punishment in the 2016 general election.

The lawsuit also contended that the petition drive was invalid because Ricketts 
helped finance it, which the inmates said violated constitutional separation of 
powers. It further claimed that Ricketts should have been listed as an official 
sponsor of the petition because of his contributions and close ties to 
activists who spearheaded the petition drive.

The court rejected those arguments.

(source: trib.com)








WYOMING:

Editorial board: Death penalty is extremely costly to state, doesn't deter 
crime



For several years, some Wyoming lawmakers have attempted to pass legislation 
that would repeal the state’s death penalty. Each time, the legislation has 
failed. This year, however, with the help of some significant – and bipartisan 
– support, the bill stands a better chance than earlier attempts.

There are several moral arguments both in favor of and opposed to repealing the 
death sentence. People look at this issue with an emotional lens, because the 
sentence is reserved for especially heinous crimes. But at the heart of this 
legislative effort is an argument based on practical issues.

The death penalty is hugely expensive (Wyoming will spend approximately 
$750,000 in 2020 on the capital defense fund), there’s no evidence that it 
works to deter crime and Wyoming has only executed one person in the last 40 
years.

The primary issue is the complexity of the death penalty – it’s significantly 
more difficult to try someone under the death penalty, and once someone is 
sentenced to death, it can take decades to carry out a sentence. Meanwhile, 
taxpayers are on the hook for the enormous cost required to pursue a death 
penalty conviction and fight the many appeals that follow.

The legal road to a death penalty conviction is long and complex. And even once 
a death penalty sentence is secured, there’s no guarantee that the sentence 
will stick. Dale Wayne Eaton, for example, spent years on death row in Wyoming 
for a crime he committed in 1988. And after 10 years, his death penalty 
conviction was overturned.

A primary reason why lawmakers have been reticent to repeal the death penalty 
in the past, despite its cost, has been the belief that having a death penalty 
deters people from committing 1st-degree murder. And if that was the case, the 
cost might be justifiable. However, there is no evidence to support the idea 
that the death penalty prevents crime.

The solution to this issue may appear to be in simplifying the trial and 
appeals process. If we could streamline the process and more efficiently 
sentence murderers to death and then execute them swiftly, the costs to the 
state would be reduced and more violent and dangerous criminals would be put to 
death. But this idea is contingent on a justice system that is infallible. And 
it would likely only come at the cost of essential constitutional rights that 
we are all guaranteed. So either we all trust, implicitly, that our court 
system will only sentence and execute guilty people – or we risk giving a 
fallible bureaucratic system a fast-track option for sentencing people to 
death.

That then leaves us with 3 options: 1) Streamline the system at the cost of our 
constitutional rights 2) Accept the exorbitant cost of retaining the system 
that is rarely used and has no other evident positive impacts; or 3) Repeal the 
death penalty and save the state hundreds of thousands of dollars annually. 
Crimes otherwise eligible for the death penalty would still be treated with the 
same gravity and punished accordingly — life without the possibility of parole.

Ultimately, whether or not you support or oppose the death penalty on the 
grounds of your moral convictions, it is clear the status quo is not working to 
the benefit of Wyomingites, either in keeping us safer from dangerous people or 
in preventing the waste of our tax dollars. It’s appropriate to look for a 
better way to dispense justice, because the death penalty as it stands today 
does not accomplish its intended goal.

(source: Editorial Board Casper Star-Reibune)








IDAHO:

IDOC lethal injection trial to begin Monday



On Monday, the ACLU of Idaho will be going to trial against the Idaho 
Department of Correction, regarding lack of government transparency over 
Idaho's lethal injection drugs and sources.

The trial, called "Cover vs. Idaho Board of Correction" stemmed from a public 
records request from Death penalty scholar and law professor Aliza Cover for 
the source of Idaho's lethal injection chemicals. The trial is expected to 
continue through Wednesday at the Ada County Courthouse.

During the trial, the court will hear evidence to decide whether Idaho can keep 
its drug suppliers secret and refuse to disclose public records about them.

(source: KIVI TV news)








USA----film review

'Clemency': Film Review | Sundance 2019



Alfre Woodard plays a prison warden internalizing the psychological and 
emotional weight of her responsibility over state executions in writer-director 
Chinonye Chukwu's death-row drama.

Probing close-ups of Alfre Woodard open and close Clemency, the admirable 
restraint and extraordinary stillness of her deeply felt performance resonating 
even in scenes when her character, prison warden Bernadine Williams, is 
offscreen. She is the burdened conscience of writer-director Chinonye Chukwu's 
powerful drama, but it's the humanity and compassion invested across all the 
principal characters that makes this contemplative examination of the terrible 
weight of taking a life so commanding. Elegantly shot in widescreen 
compositions loaded with meaning, the film is a tad drawn out, but it's never 
less than engrossing and often acutely affecting.

Starting with a sober yet emotional pre-titles sequence showing a botched state 
execution in agonizing detail, this is a tough watch, and its core audience is 
likely to be people already ethically opposed to the death penalty. However, 
Chukwu, the founder of a filmmaking collective dedicated to teaching and 
empowering incarcerated women, who worked as a volunteer on a number of 
clemency appeal cases, states her position with articulate economy and without 
preachiness. Even some who are pro-capital punishment might find this 
persuasive food for thought.

The hook for any distributor taking on such challenging material will be the 
towering performance of Woodard, which ranks among the best of this fine 
actor's career. Everything we need to know is written across Bernadine's eyes 
as she sits with dignified composure waiting for the final word from the 
Governor's office on a prisoner's fate; as she walks the corridor approaching 
the execution room, her face a mask of stoical responsibility; or as she 
silently surveys the gurney on which the condemned man will be strapped down 
before the lethal injection is administered. That makes the too-literal 
nightmare sequences spelling out her anxieties seem like superfluous false 
notes. But those touches are minor blemishes on an otherwise expertly wrought 
character study.

The media attention and public outcry from mistakes made in the film's dramatic 
prelude heighten tension around the approaching execution of Anthony Woods 
(Aldis Hodge), a still-young African-American man convicted of shooting a 
police officer during a convenience store robbery 15 years earlier. His death 
will be the 12th that Bernadine has overseen during her years at the maximum 
security prison, the location of which is never identified. "I do my job," she 
says calmly at one point, when asked how she can continue. "I give these men 
respect all the way through."

The warden's perspective dominates the film to a degree rarely if ever seen in 
death-row screen dramas, but Chukwu demonstrates an even hand by folding in 
several other key points of view, fleshed out in equally nuanced performances. 
They include that of Marty Lumetta (Richard Schiff), the attorney who maintains 
his client's innocence, seemingly backed up by lack of hard evidence. He has 
kept Woods' hope alive through the long appeals process, even as the emotional 
cost has worn him down, prompting him to plan for retirement after this case.

Then there's Woods himself, played with relatively few words but with quiet 
strength by Hodge, whose rangy, coiled physicality makes the pain of his silent 
tears cut deeper. Only in exchanges with his lawyer does he become voluble, 
revealing the gratitude and generosity of spirit of a decent man. He has a 
number of intensely moving scenes, perhaps none more so than when Evette 
(Danielle Brooks, terrific), his high school-age girlfriend at the time of his 
arrest, comes to visit him after distancing herself through his trial and for 
years after, finally revealing her reasons and giving him momentary new cause 
for hope. Even the comparatively small role of the prison chaplain (Michael 
O’Neill) adds further shades of empathy to the complex picture.

But the chief focus is the staggering toll of the job on Bernadine. The gravity 
of her position is inescapable, amplified by the shouts of "I am Anthony Woods" 
from the protestors outside the prison perimeter, audible from her office. 
Chukwu shows the strain on her marriage to schoolteacher Jonathan (the always 
wonderful Wendell Pierce) as he fights for their union despite her emotional 
unavailability, her after-work drinking and increasing insomnia. In some 
moments she almost seems closer to her deputy warden (Richard Gunn). "I need a 
pulse, Bernardine," Jonathan tells her in one sorrowful plea. Even when she 
does open up to him about her corrosive doubts, asking if he believes Anthony 
Woods is guilty, she still doesn't really let him in, telling him, "I am alone, 
and nobody can fix it."

Bernadine's scenes with Anthony are some of the film's best, as she goes point 
by point over the preparations for and procedural details of his execution, 
maintaining professional detachment while indicating her sympathy in unspoken 
ways. In most of these encounters his pride makes him refuse to acknowledge 
her, but even without the tears it's clear that her words are registering. And 
when he finally does respond to her kindness with a simple "thank you" after 
he's suffered a crushing personal blow, the effect is shattering. The impact of 
this key relationship being between a black woman and a black man requires no 
additional commentary, though it tacitly underscores the way the American 
justice system is stacked against people of color.

Backed by the unimpeachable integrity of Woodard's work, Chukwu deftly avoids 
melodrama for the most part, even if touches like having Jonathan read the 
opening lines of Ralph Ellison's Invisible Man to his students feel borderline 
heavy-handed. Likewise, an explosion of anger from the dead cop's mother 
(Vernee Watson), demanding an additional seat in the execution observation 
room, seems slightly out of character with the subdued tone that defines the 
movie. But the filmmaker's serious intent is undeniable, all the more so 
because she frames her cause-driven argument in such personal terms.

>From the sparing use of Kathryn Bostic's subtle score to Phyllis Hogan's fluid 
editing, this is a superbly crafted film, particularly in terms of its visual 
sense. The graceful movement of Eric Branco's camera, with especially masterful 
use of reverse pans, displays a sensitivity to the subject matter that 
considerably enhances Clemency's emotional and psychological depth. And if 
Chukwu perhaps overextends the devastating gut-punch of an ending, there's no 
arguing with the final shot of Bernadine's face. It leaves us wondering long 
after about where this staunch woman, embodying both fortitude and suffering, 
can go to find redemption within herself.

Venue: Sundance Film Festival (U.S. Dramatic Competition)

Cast: Alfre Woodard, Richard Schiff, Aldis Hodge, Wendell Pierce, Danielle 
Brooks, Michael O’Neill, Richard Gunn, Vernee Watson, Dennis Haskins, LaMonica 
Garrett, Michelle C. Bonilla

Production company: Ace Pictures Entertainment, in association with Big Indie, 
Bronwyn Cornelius Productions

Director-screenwriter: Chinonye Chukwu

Producers: Bronwyn Cornelius, Julian Cautherley, Peter Wong, Timur Bekbosunov

Executive producers: Annie Chang, Calvin Choong, Johnny Chang, Emma Lee, Alfre 
Woodard, Kathryn Bostic

Director of photography: Eric Branco

Production designer: Margaux Rust

Costume designer: Suzanne Barnes

Music: Kathryn Bostic

Editor: Phyllis Housen

Casting: Kerry Barden, Paul Schnee

Sales: Paradigm Agency

112 minutes

(source: hollywoodreporter.com)

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

Rodriguez continues conviction, death sentence appeal in Sjodin case



Attorneys working to overturn the death sentence of Alfonso Rodriguez Jr. will 
present evidence regarding his mental capacity starting Monday in a Fargo 
courtroom.

Rodriguez was sentenced to death in 2007 for killing University of North Dakota 
student Dru Sjodin, a 22-year-old from Pequot Lakes, Minn.

He was found guilty of abducting Sjodin from a Grand Forks, N.D., shopping mall 
parking lot in November 2003, killing her and disposing of her body in a field 
near Crookston, Minn., where it was found 5 months later. He was registered as 
a Level 3 sex offender, Minnesota's highest risk category, when he was released 
from a state prison several months earlier.

Because the crime crossed state lines, Rodriguez was tried and convicted in 
federal court, which opened the door to the death penalty sentence he received. 
It was the 1st time in more than a century the death penalty had been 
deliberated in North Dakota.

In 2017, his defense attorneys presented testimony challenging forensic 
evidence that had been presented during the trial.

The two-week hearing scheduled to start Monday will present evidence about 
Rodriguez's mental capacity when he committed the crime. The defense is 
expected to argue that Rodriguez has impaired intellectual capacity and should 
not be executed.

Among those testifying will be toxicological and psychiatric experts, as well 
as the attorney who defended Rodriguez during his 2006 trial.

Sjodin's killing sparked a debate about sex offender laws in Minnesota and 
nationwide. Federal legislation establishing the Dru Sjodin National Sex 
Offenders Public Registry was passed in 2006.

(source: mprnews.org)