Dec. 15
CALIFORNIA:
State's chief justice sees slow improvement in death penalty system
California Chief Justice Ronald George on Tuesday called the state's death
penalty system "in many ways dysfunctional," but he predicted only
incremental improvements for the foreseeable future.
"The leading cause of death on death row is old age," George said a day
after a jury recommended death for Scott Peterson, renewing a debate over
the pace of executions in a state where inmates inhabit death row for
decades.
The remarks by George, who first rose to prominence as a death penalty
prosecutor, came during an informal question-and-answer session at an
annual reception for reporters.
George said progress has been made in recent years toward clearing a
backlog of capital appeals, partly because fewer death row inmates lack
lawyers and the pace of new death judgments has slowed.
But he expects no dramatic improvement in the process, he said, unless the
Legislature unexpectedly commits massive resources to raise the pay of
capital defense appellate lawyers, encouraging more of those who are
qualified to accept the arduous cases.
Virtually all capital defendants rely on court-appointed, court-paid
lawyers when their cases are appealed. The wait to get a lawyer is
currently about 4 years. Appeals are on hold in the meantime.
George said he personally appoints each lawyer and often rejects
applicants. He acknowledged that the state courts, which he has headed
since 1996, set high standards.
"We don't turn (the cases) out like Texas does, and I'm glad we don't," he
said.
The nation's leader in executions, Texas has been drawing increasingly
sharp criticism from the federal courts.
California now has 118 unrepresented, death row inmates, down from a high
of 170 in 1998, George said.
"We may be in a category by ourselves," he said, noting that the other
states with large death row populations are in the South, "where they take
a different attitude toward appointment of counsel."
(source: Sacramento Bee)
***********************
Our View Judge should commute Peterson death sentence
If there is a silver lining to the Scott Peterson murder trial, which has
been in the national spotlight for the past 7 months, perhaps it is a
chance to revisit the appropriateness of the death penalty in this
country.
Thankfully most of us seldom have any reason to contemplate our position
on this issue because murder cases are so unusual and so far removed from
our everyday lives.
The relentless coverage of the Peterson murder trial changed all that by
beaming images of Scott Peterson, his deceased wife Laci, girlfriend Amber
Fry and a veritable media circus into our living rooms, night after night
for what seemed like an eternity. Every nuance of every aspect of the case
was explained in excruciating detail. In the process, the American people
got to know the Petersons and their extended family vicariously, almost as
if we knew them personally. In the days since the 6-man, 6-woman jury
found Scott Peterson guilty of murdering his wife and unborn child,
millions of Americans also got to consider the ramifications of the death
penalty.
Proponents of death argue that Peterson's crime was so heinous ? he
mercilessly murdered a woman who loved and trusted him ? that he deserves
the same outcome.
Others believe the death penalty is morally wrong and only extends the
cycle of violence and creates more innocent victims, who will suffer as
the result of Peterson's death.
Still others suggest that life in prison is a harsher punishment than
death because Peterson will have to think about his actions for years to
come, and that in the meantime he can make amends for his crime in some
small way, whether it is by turning boulders into gravel, making license
plates by hand or writing a book and donating the proceeds to charity.
We tend to fall into the third camp because, in our view, death by lethal
injection seems like a cop out ? not only for society but also for the
perpetrator of the crime. Murderers ought not be let off the hook with an
injection that quietly sends them off to never-never land. They should
have to reflect on their atrocities for a long, long, long, long time
before they are permitted to check out. In the meantime, if they can
contribute in some small way to the betterment of society while they live
like a caged animal, that is all the more reason to let them live.
Granted, keeping someone in prison for years, and perhaps decades, is
expensive and may put guards and others in harm's way. But that is part of
living in a civilized society; and it's what separates our society from
barbarians like the ones in the Middle East, who have rationalized
beheadings and other violent acts in the name of their own idea of
"justice."
One of the hallmarks of a civilized society is the ability to take the
moral high ground at all times, even in the face of the most egregious
acts of anti-social behavior. The death sentence might feel good for
members of the mob who want revenge in the Peterson case, but there is no
getting around the fact that erasing another human life is not the road to
the moral high ground.
Hopefully the judge in the Peterson case will take the high road by
overruling the jury's recommendation and choosing life in prison over
death. That won't be easy or popular but it is the right thing to do.
(source: Opinion, Lahontan Valley News)
CONNECTICUT:
Sentencing delayed in death penalty case
Some misgivings by a juror over the death penalty have delayed the
sentencing of a Torrington man facing the death sentence.
Eduardo Santiago, 25, of Torrington, was scheduled to be sentenced
Wednesday in Superior Court for his role in the December 2000 murder of
Joseph Niwinksi, a West Hartford landscaper.
Santiago agreed to carry out the murder-for-hire scheme in exchange for a
broken snowmobile.
Earlier this week, Santiago's defense team reported that one of the 12
jurors in the case had expressed misgivings about the death sentence the
jury recommended in September.
Judge Douglas Lavine Tuesday gave lawyers on both sides until Jan. 31 to
prepare briefs arguing why the juror's reservations should or should not
interfere with the sentencing. If Lavine feels the sentencing should go
forward, it would happen on that day.
The jury reached its decision after convicting Santiago on capital felony
and murder charges in August, agreeing with prosecutors that Santiago was
the one who broke into Niwinski's apartment and shot him in the back of
the head with a rifle as Niwinski slept.
Prosecutors argued that Santiago had been asked to carry out the murder by
Mark Pascual, a Torrington machine shop owner.
Pascual, 40, is facing a sentence of anywhere between 25 and 100 years
after he agreed to testify against Santiago during the trial.
A 3rd suspect in the case, 23-year-old Matthew Tyrell of Winsted, who was
convicted of helping Santiago plan the crime and joining him when he broke
into Niwinski's apartment, is serving a life sentence.
(source: The Hartford Courant)
********************
State challenges effort to block Ross execution
The Office of the Chief State's attorney is challenging efforts by the
state public defender's office to block the execution of serial killer
Michael Ross.
The state prosecutor's office filed a motion Tuesday in Superior Court
objecting to the public defender's office's request to litigate on behalf
of Ross, whose execution is scheduled for Jan. 26.
The state argues that the public defender's office has no legal grounds to
represent Ross, especially since its desire to halt his execution
contradicts Ross' wishes.
"The public defender represents clients, not causes, and they do not
represent Michael Ross," Assistant State's Attorney Harry Weller wrote in
the motion.
Ross has repeatedly said that he has no intention of filing any more
appeals and wants his execution to be carried out.
Earlier this month, the Office of the Chief Public Defender filed a motion
asking Judge Patrick Clifford to permit the office to litigate on Ross'
behalf and suggested several ways its involvement could take place.
A hearing to decide on representation was scheduled for Wednesday.
The office asserts that it should be appointed as a "next friend" of Ross
because he is incompetent and wants to commit "state-assisted suicide."
But the chief state's attorney's office argues that if the public
defender's office knows something that calls Ross' competency into
question, it should tell Ross' attorney, T.R. Paulding Jr.
A hearing on Ross' competence will take place Dec. 28.
Paulding also filed an objection to the public defender's request. In that
motion, he said Ross is competent and that he came to his decision after
long deliberation.
Ross, 45, who has admitted killing 8 women in Connecticut and New York, is
on death row for killing 4 young women in eastern Connecticut in the
1980s. He would be the 1st person executed in the Northeast in more than
40 years.
(source: The Day)
TENNESSEE:
Ruling moves death-row inmate Alley closer to execution
A convicted killer whose execution was delayed because of an appeal by
another death-row inmate got bad news yesterday.
A 3-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals moved convicted
killer Sedley Alley a step closer to death. The state attorney general
asked the Tennessee Supreme Court for a new execution date, requesting it
within 21 days.
The ruling came one day after the full 6th Circuit sided with death-row
inmate Abu-Ali Abdur'Rahman, who was convicted of killing a drug dealer in
Nashville in 1986.
In a 7-6 ruling, the 6th Circuit granted Abdur'Rahman a lower court
hearing on a claim that evidence which could have helped him was wrongly
kept from his trial jury.
Alley was scheduled in die in June, but a federal judge in Memphis delayed
the execution to await a ruling on Abdur'Rahman's appeal.
The 6th Circuit panel, finding a legal distinction between the 2
petitions, said the district judge lacked the jurisdiction to stop Alley's
execution.
Legal experts say Abdur'Rahman's appeal could affect the fates of others
among the 100 inmates on Tennessee's death row.
At issue is how long a death-row inmate can keep his appeal going in
federal court.
Under the 1996 Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, death-row
inmates are allowed one federal appeal on arguments that they were wrongly
convicted.
The 6th Circuit said Abdur'Rahman's petition was, in effect, a
continuation of earlier arguments and therefore not a second appeal.
With Alley, the court said his petition, which also included a claim of
state wrongdoing, among others, amounted to a second appeal. The panel
said Alley's petition focused on constitutional, rather than factual,
arguments that already have been reviewed and rejected.
Alley was convicted of kidnapping, raping and murdering a young female
Marine near Memphis in 1985.
(source: Associated Press)
