Sept. 3


PENNSYLVANIA---new death sentence

The man accused of murdering 2 Bradford County Sheriff's deputies last
March will face the death penalty. That's the word from the Pennsylvania
Attorney General's Office, which just assumed the case of Dustin Briggs
from the Bradford County District Attorney.

Briggs is accused of gunning down Deputies Michael VanKuren and
Christopher Burgert as they attempted the serve warrants on Briggs and his
girlfriend. The killings happened at a junkyard owned by Briggs' father,
Arlan. The widows of both deputies have filed wrongful death suits against
Arlan Briggs and his wife, Dora.

(source: WENY News)

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

Death penalty vacated -- Charles Malloy, guilty in a 1996 murder, will get
a new sentencing hearing.


The jurors who convicted killer Charles "Kid Homicide" Malloy did not get
to see him as a person, as an individual, according to a Pennsylvania
State Supreme Court ruling.

Had they, the court stated, they likely would not have sentenced him to
death for the Nov. 8, 1996, murder of Arthur Irick.

In a 30-page opinion released Wednesday that vacated Malloy's sentence,
the court ruled that "the dry assessment of (Malloy's) individual
circumstances" presented in the penalty phase at his 2000 trial in York
County contributed largely to the jury condemning him to death.

Malloy's case has been remanded to York County for another sentencing
hearing.

Chief Deputy Prosecutor Bill Graff said Thursday, "I'd be glad to do this
again with a jury.

"I'd like to get the same jury," he added. "They had no problem seeing him
for what he was a cold-blooded killer."

According to trial testimony, Malloy executed Irick, 18, in a deserted
parking lot in the east end of the city. The prosecution maintained that
Irick was a known "stick-up kid" who robbed drug dealers and was killed
after being identified as 1 of 3 people who fired at Malloy hours earlier.

Malloy was convicted of 1st-degree murder, conspiracy and kidnapping.

On appeal, Malloy alleged his trial counsel, Rick Robinson, was
ineffective "for failing to prepare for the penalty phase." After
convictions in capital homicide cases, juries are required to weigh
aggravating circumstances against mitigating circumstances to determine if
a death sentence is appropriate. The decisions must be unanimous.

In Malloy's case, Graff offered the kidnapping as the aggravating
circumstance, and Robinson raised Malloy's age - 20 at the time of the
murder - and that he committed the murder under "the substantial direction
of another" as mitigating circumstances.

Testimony at the September 2001 trial of Willie Gooding Jr. established
that he ordered Irick's killing. Gooding was convicted of 3rd-degree
murder and kidnapping and was sentenced to 20 to 40 years in prison.

Malloy argued in his Supreme Court appeal that Robinson failed to advise
the jury of other potentially mitigating circumstances, specifically: he
was abandoned by his mother at a young age; he was physically abused by
his mother's boyfriend; both of his parents had substance abuse problems;
and he was institutionalized from age 12 to 15.

Justice Ronald D. Castille wrote "it is not just the failure to present
evidence of (Malloy's) background, but the fact that the failure occurred
in a case where there was little effort to personalize (Malloy) for the
jury."

He wrote, "Indeed, personalizing (his) background may have made one or
more of the jurors more likely to accept the other mitigating
circumstances that were pursued. (T)here is a reasonable probability that
at least one juror would have ... voted not to impose the death penalty."

Graff said Thursday that Robinson was called for an earlier appeal hearing
for Malloy and testified Malloy did not volunteer information on the
additional mitigating circumstances before the penalty hearing.

"Rick Robinson did a good job at trial," Graff said. "The reason he didn't
show (Malloy's) good qualities is because the truth is, he had none. He
had no redeeming social value at all.

"(Malloy) stood him (Irick) up, held onto his collar and shot him once
below the eye. And when he fell, shot him 5 more times on the top of the
head. What good, redeeming social value is that?"

(source: York Daily Record)






WASHINGTON:

Man charged in 1968 killing


A man already serving 2 life sentences for murder has been charged with
committing what prosecutors say is Washington state's oldest unsolved
crime, the 1968 fatal stabbing of a pregnant teenager.

John Dwight Canaday, 59, admitted recently during questioning by Seattle
police detectives that he killed Sandra Bowman, according to charging
papers filed Thursday.

Canaday sighed, held up his hands and declared, "Yes, I killed her," when
told he had left DNA at the scene, the documents said.

A prisoner at the Walla Walla penitentiary, Canaday faces another possible
life sentence for the Bowman slaying. He is scheduled to be arraigned
Wednesday.

Earlier this year, a state forensic scientist matched Canaday's DNA to
sperm found on Bowman's body. His genetic profile was in the database
because of 2 1969 murder convictions.

Bowman, who was in her second trimester of pregnancy, was stabbed at least
57 times. The 16-year-old was found by her husband when he came home from
work -- face down on their bed, her hands tied behind her back.

Canaday was working as a pipeman's helper for the city water department
when Bowman was killed.

In a June interview, according to the documents, Canaday told the
detectives that he "randomly knocked on her door" and "attacked her ... I
stabbed her."

The charging papers said Canaday blamed the December attack on a bitter
divorce, "a lot of anger at myself and immaturity."

In court documents, Deputy Prosecutor Timothy Bradshaw said killing Bowman
"evidently emboldened" Canaday to attack other women, killing 2 of them.

In January 1969, Canaday kidnapped and strangled 21-year-old Mary
Bjornson. 3 weeks later, he raped and killed Lynne Tuski, 20.

Canaday was sentenced to die for those murders but won a reprieve in 1972
when the Supreme Court struck down the death penalty in more than 30
states, including Washington.

(source: Associated Press)






VIRGINIA:

Malvo Transferred To State Prison System


Convicted sniper Lee Boyd Malvo was transferred Friday from a Chesapeake
jail to a state prison in Boydton, where the Department of Corrections
will determine a permanent location for him.

The Mecklenburg Correctional Facility holds about 700 inmates and serves
as a classification center, said Department of Corrections spokesman Larry
Traylor.

Inmates typically spend several weeks at Mecklenburg while prison
authorities determine their needs and which prison is best suited to hold
him.

Malvo's attorneys have requested he be placed in a prison that will allow
adequate mental-health treatment.

Malvo was sentenced Wednesday to life in prison for his role in the
October 2002 sniper spree that left 10 people dead in the Washington,
D.C., area.

His partner in the killings, John Allen Muhammad, was sentenced to death.

(source: Associated Press)

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

Sniper Raises Speedy Trial Rule


When suspected thief Robert V. Funk escaped from the Fauquier County jail
in 1988, he set off a chain of events -- and a key legal ruling -- that
could lead to the dismissal of all remaining charges in Virginia against
sniper John Allen Muhammad.

Muhammad's attorneys are using a 1993 Virginia appeals court ruling in
Funk's case to argue that Muhammad's right to a speedy trial was violated
because he wasn't brought before a Fairfax County judge after a Fairfax
grand jury indicted him in November 2002. Virginia law requires that a
person who has been indicted and held in custody be tried within 5 months
unless the person waives the right to a speedy trial.

At first, the argument might sound questionable. Muhammad, 43, had been
charged with killings in numerous jurisdictions in the October 2002 sniper
shootings that left 10 people dead in Maryland, Virginia and the District.
U.S. Attorney General John D. Ashcroft designated Prince William County as
the site of the 1st prosecution, and after several weeks of deliberation,
Muhammad's defense team waived its client's right to a speedy trial, as
lawyers typically do in complex death penalty cases.

But defense attorney Peter D. Greenspun said that Muhammad was entitled to
make that same decision in Fairfax and that Muhammad might have preferred
to go to trial there first. Muhammad's accomplice, Lee Boyd Malvo,
admitted firing the fatal shot in the Fairfax sniper killing, and, because
of that, Muhammad probably would have demanded to be tried in Fairfax
first, Greenspun noted.

Muhammad's attorneys are asking Fairfax Circuit Court Judge Jonathan C.
Thacher to dismiss the case because of the speedy trial violation. Thacher
has given every indication that he is taking the request seriously. He
listened to Greenspun argue the issue for more than 45 minutes Monday,
asked Fairfax Commonwealth's Attorney Robert F. Horan Jr. questions
specifically linked to the Funk case and then ordered a transcript of the
hearing.

The issue has stirred a flurry of legal briefs -- 3 from Muhammad's
attorneys and 2 from the prosecution, including one filed late yesterday
by Deputy Commonwealth's Attorney Raymond F. Morrogh, indicating an
unusual level of concern from the Fairfax prosecutors.

"It's always the concern of a prosecutor to make sure the speedy trial
rules are followed," said Todd F. Sanders, a former Fairfax prosecutor who
is in private practice. He said that because Fairfax prosecutors did not
specifically request Muhammad's arrest in Prince William, "that might be
the deciding factor."

If Thacher were to grant the defense motion for a dismissal, prosecutors
could not appeal it or seek another indictment. Muhammad's attorneys could
use the same argument to attack pending cases against him in Spotsylvania
and Hanover counties in Virginia. The rule does not affect Malvo, because
he was 17 at the time of the sniper shootings. He was charged in juvenile
warrants and was not indicted by a Circuit Court grand jury other than the
one in Fairfax.

The ruling also would not affect the convictions already returned against
Muhammad and Malvo in trials last fall. And it would not affect pending
cases in other states; both men face murder charges in Maryland, Alabama
and Louisiana and in the District.

Muhammad was convicted and sentenced to death for the Oct. 9, 2002,
slaying of Dean H. Meyers at a Prince William gas station. Malvo, 19, was
convicted and sentenced to life in prison for the sniper slaying five days
later of Linda Franklin at a Fairfax Home Depot. Muhammad now faces a
capital murder trial in Franklin's death.

Muhammad and Malvo were arrested in Maryland in October 2002 and were
taken to separate counties in Virginia the next month, with Muhammad going
to Prince William and Malvo to Fairfax. Horan told Thacher that he sent a
copy of Fairfax's indictment to the regional jail in Prince William but
said it did not qualify as an arrest on the Fairfax charge and thus did
not get the speedy trial clock ticking.

Yesterday, Horan added an argument: that the jailers in Prince William are
not sworn law enforcement officers, as deputies in most county jails are,
and so were not legally empowered to arrest Muhammad. And, Horan said,
Fairfax told Muhammad's jailers "we didn't want him arrested" on the
Fairfax charge because it did not want to risk violating the speedy trial
rule. Horan noted that if a formal "detainer" had been entered against
Muhammad, he would have been transferred immediately to Fairfax after his
Prince William sentencing rather than to the death row prison in Sussex.

The case now at the center of the Muhammad trial began when Funk was
arrested in Fauquier in 1988 on a Pennsylvania larceny warrant. While Funk
was awaiting transfer back to Pennsylvania, he escaped. Fauquier issued a
warrant for escape.

In January 1991, Funk was arrested in Hanover County on unrelated charges.
Almost immediately, Fauquier sent a teletype to Hanover requesting that
Funk be held. "The teletype constituted authority for the Hanover County
Sheriff's Department to arrest [Funk]," the Virginia Court of Appeals
ruled. "Thus, the defendant's detention pursuant to that authority was an
arrest on the [Fauquier] escape charge."

Funk was not tried in Fauquier until August. And, the court concluded, "at
any time during that period [from January to August], Fauquier County
could have obtained the defendant and brought him to trial. . . . It did
not, and he must, therefore, be discharged from prosecution."

When Fairfax sent its indictment to Prince William, Greenspun argued,
Muhammad's 5-month clock began. He said Muhammad should have been tried in
Fairfax no later than April 2003 or at least given the opportunity to go
to trial. A trial could have been held before books and movies about the
sniper case appeared, and before Malvo's trial -- all of which created
"ongoing prejudice" against Muhammad, Greenspun said.

Horan responded, "In hindsight, we probably should have brought him over
here in a pro forma matter and let the lawyers whine" about not having
enough time to prepare for trial. Horan said prosecutors were ready to try
Muhammad then but had the Malvo trial pending, Muhammad had his Prince
William trial pending, and Muhammad "never asked for a speedy trial" in
Fairfax.

Twice during the hearing, Thacher asked Horan for a copy of the detainer
sent to Prince William. Horan said he had sent a copy of Muhammad's
indictment to Prince William. Thacher then said he would consult the
Prince William file.

(source: Washington Post)



CALIFORNIA:

THE PETERSON TRIAL ---- Defendant returned to Berkeley Marina; Police
followed him secretly on several trips from Modesto


In the month after his wife disappeared, Scott Peterson took at least 3
trips to the Berkeley Marina, stayed for less than 10 minutes each time
and then drove away, law enforcement witnesses testified Wednesday.

A series of Modesto police officers and one agent from the California
Department of Justice took the stand for the prosecution and in great
detail described Peterson's movements during early January 2003.

Peterson, a 31-year-old Modesto fertilizer salesman, is on trial in
Redwood City on charges that he murdered his pregnant wife, Laci, and the
couple's unborn child. Prosecutors say he killed her on the night of Dec.
23, 2002, and dumped her body off his fishing boat in San Francisco Bay
the following day. In April, Laci Peterson's remains and the body of her
child were discovered on the Richmond shoreline, less than 2 miles from
the Berkeley Marina.

Authorities wasted no time focusing on Peterson as a prime suspect in his
wife's disappearance and began watching his Modesto home in early January.

Deputy District Attorney Rick Distaso spent much of Wednesday trying to
show that Peterson's repeated trips to the marina were consistent with a
killer obsessed with returning to the scene of his crime.

But defense lawyer Mark Geragos says the reason for the trips is simple -
- the Modesto Bee had run stories that authorities would be searching the
bay for Laci Peterson's body, and his client wanted to check on the
progress.

Modesto police Officer Alexander Bettis, an investigator on the
department's narcotics squad, testified that a camera was secretly
installed on a telephone pole across from the Petersons' house Jan. 3,
2003. On a computer screen at a nearby location, officers were able to
monitor the couple's driveway 24 hours a day -- specifically Peterson and
his visitors' comings and goings. Bettis said that whenever Peterson left
his house, a number of officers and Department of Justice agents would
follow him in unmarked cars.

On Jan. 5, 2003, at about 1:10 p.m., Bettis said he followed Peterson, who
was driving a friend's car, from Modesto to the Berkeley Marina. Bettis
said he never saw Peterson park or stop to talk to anyone. He just seemed
to circle the marina and then zipped back onto the freeway, according to
Bettis. When Peterson got home, Bettis said, he then went to his Modesto
country club for 53 minutes.

The next day, Bettis said, he watched Peterson rent a red Honda Civic at
Enterprise Rent-A-Car in Modesto at about 10:21 a.m. Peterson drove the
rental to his business, stayed at his office for a short time and then
once again headed for the Berkeley Marina. This time, according to the
officer, Peterson parked his car for a few minutes, then backed out and
parked in a different spot. He drove to another area, where he stayed
about 1 to 2 minutes before leaving the marina, Bettis said.

The officer admitted that he had a difficult time trailing Peterson
through Berkeley and at one point found himself being followed by the
suspect.

DOJ agent Jeff Mackanin said he was watching Peterson on Jan. 9, 2003,
when the defendant pulled into the Berkeley Marina at around 10:38 a.m. He
said Peterson was there for about 5 minutes, and then the agent said he
followed Peterson to Bakersfield, where the fertilizer salesman got a
hotel room.

Under cross-examination, Geragos suggested that Peterson had gone to
Bakersfield for business. The defense attorney also spent some time
questioning the witnesses about Peterson's other activities on the days he
was followed. The police officers testified that every morning Peterson
went to the volunteer center to help in the effort to search for his wife
and spent hours hanging missing person flyers in neighboring towns.

About Peterson's visits to the Berkeley Marina, the defense attorney asked
Mackanin: "Are you aware that the Modesto Bee printed a story a few days
earlier that police would be searching the bay?"

"No," the agent answered.

A library search of the Modesto Bee shows that the newspaper did publicize
the bay searches in early January.

In a pointed cross-examination earlier Wednesday, Geragos attacked both
the credibility of a dog handler and the reliability of her search dog.

Dog trainer Eloise Anderson testified Tuesday that her highly trained
Labrador retriever had tracked Laci Peterson's scent from a parking lot to
a boat launch at the Berkeley Marina four days after her husband reported
her missing.

Anderson testified that her dog, Trimble, who is a certified search dog,
had been trained to follow the trail of a person, even if the person
traveled by vehicle. She produced a list of records, detailing a variety
of successful trailing exercises completed by the dog over a three-year
period.

But in a dramatic confrontation, defense attorney Geragos played a video
of Anderson's dog failing to track a person who had gotten into a car and
driven a short distance away. The video was taken during a seminar
Anderson and Trimble attended just 2 months before the duo were asked to
help in the search for the missing woman.

The trial is scheduled to resume today with more testimony about the
police surveillance of Peterson.

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

THE PETERSON TRIAL/Defendant realized he was being followed/After 8 days,
police, state agents had to end surveillance


Police and state agents had to abort their round-the-clock surveillance of
Scott Peterson just eight days after it began, when the Modesto fertilizer
salesman realized he was being followed, witnesses in his double-murder
trial said Thursday.

The stakeout came to an abrupt halt on Jan. 11, 2003 -- nearly 3 weeks
after his 27-year-old wife disappeared -- when Peterson pulled alongside
an undercover agent who had been trailing him in a Ford Mustang.

"We were operating under a lose-it-before-you-burn-it capacity," said
California Department of Justice Agent Thomas Chaplin. "At that point it
had been burned."

For 3 months now, prosecutors have been trying to drive home their point
that Peterson acted suspiciously and inappropriately in the weeks after
his wife disappeared on Dec. 24, 2002. Peterson's lawyers are attempting
to paint the Modesto police as Keystone Kops who rushed to judgment
against their client.

Agent Tera Faris, who works with the state Department of Justice, was one
of a half-dozen agents tracking Peterson's every move. On Jan. 11, 2003,
she testified Thursday, she was tailing Peterson when he pulled over to
the side of Highway 99 outside of Modesto. Trying to avoid notice, Faris
said she continued to the next exit, got off the highway and pulled into a
parking lot. Peterson, behind the wheel of a rented silver Saturn, began
driving again and used the same exit before pulling up alongside Faris'
Mustang.

He then looked her in the eye, while holding up a piece of paper, she
testified. Faris drove off, and Peterson went in another direction.

Peterson's lawyer Mark Geragos suggested through his line of questioning
that his client believed he was being followed by a tabloid reporter.

"Mr. Peterson thought the person in the Mustang was an investigator for
the National Enquirer," Geragos said, noting that his client had mentioned
his concern to someone else during a phone conversation that had been
secretly recorded by police.

Meanwhile, 90 miles away, divers were at the Berkeley Marina preparing to
search the San Francisco Bay floor for an item they had detected two days
before using sonar and believed might be the body of the 8-months-
pregnant Laci Peterson.

Police traced Scott Peterson later that day to Berkeley through cell phone
records. They also, according to the prosecution, caught him in a series
of lies that day.

While in Berkeley, he told his mother over the phone that he was in
Fresno, according to their conversations recorded by police. He was also
recorded telling several close friends that the chief of the Berkeley
police had called him personally to tell him that the item they had
detected on the bay floor turned out to be an anchor -- not a body. In
fact, phone records showed he never talked to the police chief that day.

The bodies of Laci Peterson and the couple's unborn son were discovered
the following April on the Richmond shore, less than 2 miles from the
Berkeley Marina.

During the 8-day surveillance, authorities followed Peterson to the
Berkeley Marina on Jan. 5, 6 and 9, 2003. Each time, he traveled in a
different car and stayed just minutes before leaving.

Despite hearing from 6 witnesses, testimony Thursday lasted just 80
minutes and court recessed for the long Labor Day holiday before lunch.

Geragos used much of his cross-examination to depict the surveillance team
as incompetent -- repeatedly losing Peterson in traffic and failing to
note in their reports that he had shopped at a Sears and Kmart on 2 of the
days he was being watched.

The defense lawyer also took pains to show that Peterson, 31, spent much
of his waking hours in search of his wife, showing up early each morning
to the volunteer center and printing and distributing flyers with his
missing wife's picture.

Peterson's trips to Berkeley, according to Geragos, coincided with news
reports publicizing searches of the bay for his wife.

The trial is scheduled to resume Tuesday. Prosecutors plan to spend much
of next week presenting DNA evidence.

(source for both: San Francisco Chronicle)



Reply via email to