death penalty news
June 5, 2004
OHIO:
Johnson gets death penalty
During his trial for murder, Marvin Johnson asked for the death penalty,
and he has received it.
Judge David Ellwood announced Friday morning in the Guernsey County Common
Pleas Court that Johnson would receive the death penalty for the fatal
beating and kidnapping of Daniel Bailey, 13, of Cambridge.
Johnson, 37, was convicted last month for the murder.
He also was found guilty of raping and robbing his ex-girlfriend and
Daniel?s mother, Constantina ?Tina? Bailey. For those crimes he received a
three 10-year prison sentences to run consecutively before the death sentence.
Johnson does have the chance to appeal.
(source: Zanesville Times Recorder)
=========================
FLORIDA:
Racketeering case in South Florida could open door to death penalty for mob
suspects
By Ann W. O'Neill
Staff Writer
June 5, 2004
For years, "Ronnie One Arm" Trucchio, "Crazy Eddie" Callegari and other
members of their Gambino-connected organized crime crew wreaked havoc from
Queens to Fort Lauderdale, leaving behind a trail of bullet-riddled bodies,
cowering witnesses and fire-bombed buildings, federal prosecutors say.
Now the government soon may take the unusual step of seeking the death
penalty against them in a South Florida mob racketeering case.
So far, the Mafia has avoided the federal death penalty.
That could change if prosecutors with the U.S. attorney's organized crime
unit in Fort Lauderdale get their way.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Paul Schwartz announced at a recent court hearing
that he expects a grand jury to hand up a new indictment, perhaps as early
as next week, adding capital offenses and new defendants to an ongoing
racketeering case against 10 reputed Gambino family members and associates.
A grand jury indictment in December accused them of running a criminal
enterprise involved in everything from chop shops and credit card schemes
to arson, kidnapping and extortion.
The new charges will include the 1995 murders of two potential witnesses
against the crew, Schwartz said. Nightclub bouncer Mark D'Angola, 27, and
his girlfriend, former exotic dancer Jami Schneider, 24, were shot 15 times
as they slept at D'Angola's apartment in Fort Lauderdale, the prosecutor
said in court.
D'Angola fell in with Callegari through Fort Lauderdale's club scene.
Months before he died, D'Angola posted $1,000 to bail Callegari out of the
Broward County Jail, where he was being held on grand theft charges. Then
came a falling out that proved fatal for D'Angola and his girlfriend.
They died, Schwartz told U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra on Wednesday,
because Callegari and the others feared they would cooperate with
authorities or otherwise "open their big mouths."
When it comes to the federal death penalty, history is not on the
prosecutors' side.
So far, just one mobster's life has been left in a jury's hands. A jury in
Brooklyn spared Thomas "Tommy Karate" Pitera, a Bonnano family crew leader
who dismembered some of the people he killed, in 1992. Now in his 50s,
Pitera is serving a life prison sentence.
If the grand jury in Fort Lauderdale returns an indictment alleging capital
crimes, a team of Justice Department lawyers in Washington will decide
whether to seek the death penalty. The final decision rests with Attorney
General John Ashcroft, who has been pushing prosecutors to aggressively
pursue death sentences.
Some legal experts think Ashcroft might feel pressure from critics who
claim he has been inclined to seek death against black and Hispanic street
drug gangsters while going soft on the Mafia.
"The federal government has taken a complete pass against seeking the death
penalty against the Italian mob, while it has sought it at least 129 times
against black and Hispanic drug gang members," Kevin McNally, a lawyer with
the Federal Death Penalty Resource Counsel Project, said recently.
But the decision is far from a slam-dunk. Prosecutors have been unable to
convince their bosses in Washington to seek death in several other mob cases.
The most notable South Florida case involved some of the same prosecutors
as the Trucchio case. The Justice Department declined to seek the death
penalty four years ago for Gambino family henchmen Frederick "Uncle Freddy"
Massaro and Ariel Hernandez, who murdered a Pembroke Pines exotic dancer
they feared would expose their criminal exploits.
Most recently, the Justice Department declined to seek the death penalty
against reputed Bonnano family head Joseph "Big Joey" Massino, 61, who is
currently on trial in federal court in Brooklyn. Many of the murders the
so-called "last don" is accused of orchestrating occurred before 1994, when
the federal death penalty law was beefed up to cover racketeering, said
David Bruck, an attorney with the Federal Death Penalty Resource Counsel
Project.
The Justice Department also declined in 1999 to seek death against
Philadelphia mob boss Joseph "Skinny Joey" Merlino, despite an internal mob
war that produced multiple murders. The reason: The government's turncoat
witness was partially responsible for the body count.
In the Trucchio case, prosecutors disclosed their plan to seek death at a
pretrial hearing on Wednesday. The case already is making a mark because
Marra has been asked to shield jurors' identities and sequester them.
Prosecutors pointed to the Gambino family's long history of witness
tampering and intimidation, including several murders, a Molotov cocktail
tossed into a Fort Lauderdale nightclub and a witness who nearly died after
his throat was slashed.
"He received the last rites three times," Schwartz said.
Marra has not yet ruled.
One of the defendants, Joseph "Baby Face" Kondrotos, 35, is cooperating
with prosecutors and working on a plea bargain under which he would testify
against nine other members of a crew known as the Young Guns or Ozone Park
Gang.
Besides Trucchio, 52, Callegari, 39, and Kondrotos, the other alleged gang
members are: Kevin "Capone" Antinuche, 34; Gennaro "Gerry" Bruno, age
unknown; Robert "Bucks" Bucholz, 37; Darrin Sirrota, 33; Valentino Nucci,
age unknown; Frank Roccaforte, 36; and Dave Prevete, 41.
Attempting to demonstrate how dangerous the defendants are, Schwartz read
Wednesday from a letter he said Callegari wrote while at the Federal
Detention Center in Miami.
Callegari seemed ambitious to move up in the Gambino organization. The
Gambinos "only have a few guys out there," he wrote. "They're old."
Callegari vowed, "If I get out and go home, I will push back." Schwartz
asserted that "pushing back means putting a bullet in somebody's head."
Callegari added, "I'm stepping up to the other families."
Murdering the prosecutors also was considered, Schwartz said. The
defendants talked about the corkboards in their cells, the prosecutor said,
planning to take down the metal hangers, fashion them into knives and bring
them to court.
"They planned to kill everybody in court," Schwartz said. "I don't think
that any court in the Southern District of Florida has seen defendants of
this ilk. They are predators, your honor. They cut a man's throat."
Antinuche's lawyer, Scott Safin, said Schwartz was being melodramatic.
Pointing to his client and the others, he said: "They're sitting here like
a bunch of puppy dogs."
(source: Sun-Sentinel)
--------------------------------
Sister of murder victim speaks about death penalty
by Marissa Cruz
June 04, 2004
Most people think it impossible to want anything but restitution if someone
in their family or someone dear to them was murdered. This is not the case
for Jane Martin or other families involved with Murder Victim?s Families
for Reconciliation (MVFR).
On May 25, Martin, hailing from Bainbridge Island, came to speak to a
relatively small group in Schaefer Auditorium as part of Amnesty
International?s annual Death Penalty Abolition Week.
?This is the one event that we?ve done every year,? said senior Christen
Knowles, President of SU?s chapter of Amnesty International. ?And we make
it a club focus, because [we believe] abolishing the death penalty in the
United States is something that could happen in the immediate future.?
In August of 2001, Martin got a frantic call from her sister?s friend,
Lisa, and by the way she spoke, Martin knew her sister was dead. Martin?s
sister, Sue, was murdered by Daniel Perez, her step-mother?s
granddaughter?s husband. Stabbing Sue 94 times and confessing made it
certain to the police, the Judge and jury and to Martin, that this murder
was certainly premeditated. Perez went through a swift five day trial, and
was convicted in May of 2002, with the jury voting nine to three for the
death penalty.
?About a month after Sue?s death, I realized that the police, the DA and
the State of Florida expect me to feel better about my sister?s death when
Daniel Perez is executed. How dare they project that on me! I want my
sister back, not to kill another person. Two wrongs don?t make a right,?
Martin said.
Martin does not feel that the death penalty would do her sister justice,
and would certainly not make her feel any better or more vindicated about
her sister?s murder. She opts that Perez be given life in prison, without
the chance of parole, because ?death is a release of his actions, and
remorse can only come with time,? Martin said. ?If I could, I would give
him life in jail, and have him be surrounded by all of my sister?s favorite
things, where he?d have to eat macaroni and cheese, drink Sprite, and watch
my sister?s favorite movies all the time.?
When Knowles was asked how she felt about the presentation, she replied, ?I
think every year when we have someone come in from [MVFR] it?s always the
most powerful event that we have for Death Penalty Week, because they
answer the one question that we can?t, which is, how would you feel if it
happened to you??
(source: The Spectator)
=============================
ARKANSAS:
Death Penalty Abolition Week event examines homicide case
Imagine ending up on deathrow just for wearing black nail polish.
This is essentially the case of the Damien Echols, 18, one of the group of
three teenagers imprisoned in Arkansas, for a brutal triple homicide of
three eight-year-old boys. Echols, Jessie Misskelly and Jason Baldwin, ?The
West Memphis Three,? were tried and convicted of this case based solely on
circumstantial evidence. Echols remains on deathrow, while the other two
serve life sentences.
Last Thursday?s discussion of what happened in the Robin Hood Hills, West
Memphis, AR, was the final event in Seattle University?s third annual Death
Penalty Abolition Week. A small group of students came out of the rain to
listen to and discuss the story of three teenage males convicted of
homicide by Judge David Burnett, because they were different.
Chris Knowles, Amnesty International and senior psychology and English
major, facilitated the discussion entitled ?The West Memphis Three: A
Modern Day Witch-Hunt.?
Knowles feels adamantly that this case deserves to be reexamined. She
discussed it last year during DPA week and again this year with added
excerpts from the HBO documentary-film about the case, ?Paradise Lost.? She
began the discussion by briefing the audience on the case and introducing
the major players, such as West Memphis police inspector, Gary Gitchell.
She explained her case study, pointing out ?how the court system is flawed.?
On May 5, 1993, the three eight year-old boys disappeared while riding
their bicycles in the Robin Hood Woods of West Memphis, just across the
Mississippi River from Memphis, Tenn. The next day their mutilated bodies
were discovered and rumors regarding the nature of their murders began to
spread, rapidly, through the predominantly Baptist community, typically
described as being ?the buckle of the Bible Belt.?
Police began questioning suspects. They were teenagers suspected of
involvement in ?satanic rituals.? Stories in the local papers were fed by
the community?s shock, outrage and need to find a perpetrator.
After a month no arrests had been made, and the community was livid. Police
brought in Misskelly, 17, who was ?operating below average intelligence?
and was a known acquaintance of Echols. His parents were not notified nor
were his Miranda Rights read. After eight hours of questioning a
seven-minute statement was recorded. The statement pointed the finger at
Echols, Baldwin and Misskelly.
The film showed actual footage of the questioning and hearings of these
teenagers including what the community used to convict them: Pentagrams
painted on an abandoned building, wearing black nail-polish and black
T-shirts, listening to heavy metal music, involvement with Wicca, the
murders coinciding with the ritual of Beltane, and ?being different.?
As one of the mothers of the slain boys said in the film, ?Just look at ?em
. . . just look at ?em. They?re punks.?
The film gave insight to the mentality of the town, their judicial system
and their sense of justice.
?No one in this situation denies that the crime was heinous, but it is the
way the legal system handled it,? explained Knowles. ?This is about scaring
the boys to confess.?
The prosecution poorly followed up on any other leads.
?The police system broke the law, Jessie Misskelly keeps getting put in
line for the appeals process?but he is just dealing with the same judges,?
said Knowles. ?Nothing is happening.?
Knowles explained how, through her case study, she sees evidence that the
case against the West Memphis Three was premeditated. If the police
targeted Misskelly for his association with Echols, they targeted someone
to evoke a confession.
She and many of the people in the audience are appalled how poorly the
prosecution is handling the information, such as mistaking bite wounds for
cuts from a serrated knife. The post discussion focused on how or why
police never investigated other leads, or delved deeper into a possible
case against the stepfather of one of the victims.
As Knowles explained the details, listeners grew increasingly dismayed
about the case, many stayed after the discussion to talk about this case
and how the death penalty is not a viable solution.
?We think we are so morally righteous, but what is happening in Iraq is a
perfect example,? explained Dominque Bourge, sophomore English major. ?I
think this case is one of the biggest travesties, but these things happen
all the time, especially in the South. They [the judge and the prosecution]
wouldn?t even listen to the defense.?
?This program challenged me to consider the impact of prejudice on the
justice system,? said Andy Farnum, senior philosophy major. ?Also, I am
very impressed with Chris Knowles? leadership with Amnesty International
and her work of the advocacy of human rights.?
The unsettling case of the West Memphis Three has garnered major media
attention worldwide. The BBC called this case, ?one of the most troubling
cases to pass through the American justice system in recent times.? There
have been various fundraisers and after the release of ?Paradise Lost? in
1996 Eddie Spaghetti, lead singer of the Supersuckers, put together a
compilation CD dedicated to the cause. The CD, entitled ?Free The West
Memphis Three,? features performers such as Joe Strummer, Tom Waites, Eddie
Vedder and the Murder City Devils.
Currently, there is another film about the case in production, ?The West
Memphis Three,? in which Michael Madsen plays Gitchell, and Micheal Pitt
plays Echols. Alex Steyermark directs the film.
Knowles asks, if an innocent 18-year-old is in line to be put to death, is
the death penalty correct? Currently Arkansas, like Washington State, is
one of the 38 states to uphold the death penalty.
As the discussion ended Knowles reminded the audience that if they come
into any money, the Free the West Memphis Three Support Fund is a great
cause to support.
(source: The Spectator)
=========================
CALIFORNIA:
Trial set for alleged family killer
The Foster City man accused of driving his 4-year-old daughter, wife and
unborn child off a cliff received an Aug. 2 court date yesterday after
exercising his right to a speedy trial.
Until yesterday, District Attorney Jim Fox was talking with the judge about
putting the trial off for awhile. Rapoza wasn?t ready to wait, however,
said Chief Deputy District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe.
?He exercised his right to a speedy trial ? that?s why it was set on such a
quick basis,? Wagstaffe said.
Generally speaking, Wagstaffe said defense attorneys do not mind waiting
longer for trials. The theory is that witnesses will disappear and memories
will fade, he said.
In addition, Wagstaffe said defense attorneys use the time to further
investigate and prepare their cases. That?s why the right to a speedy trial
isn?t exercised more often, he said.
Defense attorney Jeff Boyarski said Rapoza wanted to move the trial along
since he has been in custody for a long time. Although Boyarski said he
could have used the additional time, he will be ready by August.
?We?ll try our very best to accommodate his wishes,? he said.
Despite the surprising turn of events, prosecutors won?t be caught off guard.
?We?re ready for trial,? Wagstaffe said.
Rapoza?s family ? his 34-year-old wife Raye, her nearly 8-month-old fetus
and 4-year-old daughter Tehani ? plunged into the ocean Oct. 6, 2002 when
their minivan sped over the side of a cliff. Raye and her unborn daughter
died at the scene and Tehani struggled on life support two days before
being declared brain dead. Rapoza survived the crash, was treated for
multiple injuries and arrested for murder in the hospital.
Investigators from the Sheriff?s Department claim that, during his
hospitalization, Rapoza confessed to purposely crashing the car in a
botched suicide attempt. Investigators say Rapoza believed the fetus his
wife was carrying was not biologically his and he accelerated the vehicle
in a jealous rage.
In subsequent interviews, Rapoza claimed his foot was stuck on the
accelerator. He has also said that any confession he made was induced by a
combination of marijuana he smoked earlier in the day, his own injuries and
the painkillers given to him by medical personnel.
Eddie Rapoza faces life in prison or the death penalty if District Attorney
Jim Fox decides to pursue capital punishment.
(source: Daily Journal)
------------------------------------------------
Jury Seeks Death for Murderer of 4
The man killed two women and two teens in a dispute with rival motel owners.
Virendra "Victor" Govin should be executed for murdering four members of a
family in a business dispute, a Los Angeles County Superior Court jury
decided Friday.
Govin, 37, a Studio City motel owner, struck against the owners of a rival
motel, jurors found.
"It's difficult to see what people are willing to do just for money," said
Joseph Woods, the jury foreman. "This case was all about money; it was all
about greed."
The jury of 10 men and two women took two days to return the verdict of
death. The panel deliberated nearly four weeks on whether Govin and his
business partner, Pravin "Peter" Govin, 34, were responsible for the
killings of Gita Kumar, 42; her son, Paras Kumar, 18; her daughter, Tulsi
Kumar, 16; and her mother-in-law, Sitaben Patel, 63. The victims were
strangled May 4, 2002, with plastic ties and burned in a fire at their home
in the Hollywood Hills.
"This is the right penalty for him, no doubt about it," said Harish Patel,
whose wife, children and mother were slain. "I can feel from the inside
that my family found justice."
The courtroom was crowded with family and friends of both the victims and
the defendant. Govin, wearing a cream-colored suit and a light blue shirt,
stared straight ahead, showing no emotion, while a relative wept silently.
"Any time you have to sentence someone to death, it's difficult," Woods
said. "Govin was involved in the recruiting, planning and the motives. That
in itself was enough to convict him of first-degree murder and give him
death."
The death penalty was a possibility because the jury found that Govin
committed multiple murders and killed for financial gain.
Jurors could not agree on the guilt or innocence of co-defendant Peter
Govin. He will be tried again, said Jane Robison, a spokeswoman for the
district attorney's office.
"In terms of evidence, we didn't see enough to put Pravin in the same
position" as his brother, said juror Michael Munoz.
Judge Kathleen Kennedy-Powell instructed both the prosecutor and defense
attorney not to discuss the case.
The Govin brothers and Patel's family own neighboring motels in the 10700
block of Ventura Boulevard. Both families wanted to renovate and expand
their businesses. Both also wanted to use the alley behind their motels for
different purposes: The Govins, who own Studio Place Inn, wanted to build
on the alley, and the Patels, who own Universal City Inn, wanted to use it
as a driveway.
For the victims' relatives, the verdict was a partial win. "We appreciate
[them] giving us the death penalty and look forward to
the second guy
getting the death penalty too," said Sagar Kumar, 21, Patel's nephew.
"Maybe then we can start our lives again."
Sentencing is Sept. 23. The judge could choose to impose death or life
without parole.
(source: LA Times)
==============================
USA:
Excluded from Communion
Catholic politicians and others who fail to support the Church's teachings
could be
Presidential hopeful John Kerry and other U.S. politicians who support
abortion rights aren't the only Catholics to face possible exclusion from
Holy Communion. Every day, divorced Catholics who've remarried without
first securing a church annulment are banned from receiving the sacrament.
Gay rights supporters wearing rainbow-colored sashes also have been turned
away by bishops who don't want the sacrament used for political statements.
And six years ago, John Prenger was notified that he, too, was being
barred. He'd left the priesthood to marry after 20 years of service in the
Diocese of Jefferson City, Mo.
But the politicians argue their case is different because they haven't
directly violated church law, according to Kenneth Pennington, a church law
historian at the Catholic University of America in Washington.
"A few bishops are trying to selectively bar Catholic politicians from
Communion for upholding the law of the land," he said. "This is a new idea
among the bishops."
However, the wrangle with Catholic politicians over abortion is old. It has
taken center stage because of Kerry's bid to become only the second
Catholic in history to be elected president.
Sixty-six percent of Catholics say they don't want bishops pressuring
lawmakers and that it won't impact their vote in November, according to a
poll released recently by the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute in
Hamden, Conn.
Most of the bishops who lead the nation's 195 dioceses haven't taken a
public stance. Some say they are awaiting the results of a bishops' task
force that's drawing up guidelines on how to relate to those in public office.
Kerry's archbishop, Sean O'Malley of Boston, has put the onus on the
politicians not to receive Communion.
But two of the U.S. church's highest-ranking officials -- the cardinals of
Los Angeles and Washington -- said they would not withhold the sacrament.
'It's death dealing'
Denying Communion cuts Catholics off from what many consider their most
intimate encounter with Christ.
"It's death dealing," said the Rev. Prenger of Columbia, Mo., who left the
church to become a Episcopal priest after being barred from the table.
"It's as if the bishop told me to shoot myself in the head spiritually."
Holy Communion is so central to Catholic spirituality that it's the focal
point of every Mass. Catholics believe they're receiving the body and blood
of Jesus, not mere bread and wine.
"Eucharist is the highest sign of our unity with each other as a faith
community," said the Rev. Stephen Bierschenk, pastor of St. Michael the
Archangel Catholic Church in McKinney. "You do not need be to sin-free, but
you need to be free of serious sin."
Church officials, however, have long debated what constitutes serious sin.
Priests who leave their ministry and undergo a process known as
"laicization" -- return to the lay state -- can receive the sacraments. But
those who leave and marry without undergoing the process are technically
ineligible for Communion.
"Most of those priests continue to receive the Eucharist without any
problems," said Terry Dosh of Minneapolis, former leader of Corpus, a
national organization of resigned priests who've married.
Irene Varley, who leads the North American Conference of Separated and
Divorced Catholics, said Catholics who remarry without an annulment tend to
be of two minds on being restricted from Communion.
"There are those who truly, truly want to follow the letter of the law,
even if it means not taking Communion," she said. "And there are those who
think the rules are unfair and follow their conscience. Some priests deny
them Communion, but many don't."
Historically, the church has put the burden on Catholics to decide whether
they were worthy to receive, except in extreme cases.
Some church leaders say it's an embarrassment to have Catholics supporting
abortion legislation when it goes against fundamental church teaching.
"These politicians are making a mockery of the Catholic faith," said Bishop
John Yanta of Amarillo, Texas. "A lot of these politicians feel like if you
go to church, you're a good Catholic. But actions speak, too. They should
not come forward for Holy Communion."
At least two bishops advocate carrying the sanctions beyond the
politicians. Bishop Michael Sheridan of Colorado Springs, Colo., has said
the Catholics who voted them into office shouldn't receive Communion either
-- at least until they've repented.
And Dallas Bishop Charles Grahmann argues that CEOs of media corporations
that support abortion rights, anti-immigration policies, the death penalty
and gay marriage should also refrain from Communion.
"These individual CEOs are as much of a threat to society as politicians
who vote for abortion," he wrote in a column for the diocesan newspaper.
"Neither should present him/herself for Communion."
Open vs. closed Communion
That kind of sacramental censuring is foreign to many Protestants.
"We would not keep someone from coming to Communion because of a public
stance they take," said Bishop Kevin Kanouse of the Northern Texas-Northern
Louisiana Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. "It's God's
gift that is given.
"If it counted on anyone being right and perfect and acceptable, then none
of us could take Communion."
Many Protestants practice "open" Communion, meaning baptized Christians of
any denomination can partake. Pastors do not act as a liturgical police,
but rely on an honor system to ensure that those who come forward are eligible.
"The presumption is that those who commune are communing in faith," said
Ronald Byars, a theologian at Union Theological Seminary in Richmond, Va.
"Eucharist is not a reward for the worthy, but there for sinners aware of
their need for God's grace."
Catholics and Orthodox Christians practice "closed" Communion, meaning the
sacrament is only for baptized members of those faith communities.
"It's simply saying that those who partake of the cup are of one faith,"
said Peter Bouteneff, a theologian at St. Vladimir's Orthodox Theological
Seminary in Crestwood, N.Y.
As a practical matter, priests say it's impossible to know the individual
state of the thousands of souls coming forward for the sacrament on any
given weekend.
Censuring politicians
Denying Communion isn't the same as outright excommunication, an extreme
judgment that means individuals are no longer considered Catholic or
entitled to any of the sacraments of the church.
Popes frequently excommunicated kings and emperors during the Middle Ages.
But popes also excommunicated one another during the Great Western Schism
of the 14th century, when three men claimed to be the Successor of Peter.
"Fifty years ago a Catholic was excommunicated if they married a
Protestant," said the Rev. Richard McBrien, a theologian at the University
of Notre Dame. "You don't see that today. Now, excommunication happens if
you procure an abortion or take a poke at the pope."
The attempt to censure the politicians has had little noticeable impact
except in New Jersey. Gov. James McGreevey said he would not longer take
Communion "publicly" after two New Jersey bishops -- including Joseph
Galante, formerly with the Dallas diocese -- said the governor wasn't
eligible because of marriage and abortion issues.
Meanwhile, Kerry continues to receive the sacrament.
And recently, 48 of his Catholics colleagues in Congress, all Democrats,
sent a letter to church officials protesting attempts to bar them from
Communion.
"We do not believe it is our role to legislate the teachings of the
Catholic Church," the letter said. "Because we represent all of our
constituents, we must, at times, separate our public actions from our
personal beliefs."
(source: Dallas Morning News)
