Feb. 25
TEXAS----female, foreign national faces death penalty Jury finds woman guilty in kidnapping-murder It took just 90 minutes Thursday for jurors to find Asel Abdygapparova guilty of capital murder in the 2001 kidnapping, rape and strangulation of Rosa Maria Rosado. Rosado was a 37-year-old single mother with a son and a daughter when she was forcibly abducted from a bus stop near her home and taken to a West Side motel, where she was repeatedly raped and then strangled. Abdygapparova, 30, a citizen of Kazakhstan, is the 3rd person to be convicted in connection with the attack. Jurors are scheduled to begin hearing testimony today in the penalty phase of the trial. Prosecutors have said they plan to seek the death penalty. In October 2002, Abdygapparova's ex-boyfriend, Ramon Hernandez, 32, was convicted and sentenced to die for his part in the crime. Five months later, a jury handed the same verdict and sentence to his pal, Santos Minjares. "We're obviously very disappointed in the verdict," said Bill Reece, one of Abdygapparova's 2 defense attorneys. It was five days after the attack when Abdygapparova first notified an FBI agent about the attack, gave San Antonio police a statement, then showed detectives where Rosado's body was buried off Loop 1604 near University of Texas at San Antonio. That day, Hernandez and Minjares were arrested. Meanwhile, Abdygapparova was five months pregnant with Hernandez's son and remained free and cooperated with police and prosecutors in their investigation until she was arrested and charged nearly 4 months later. She had the baby while she was an inmate in the Bexar County Jail. In her statements to police and prosecutors, Abdygapparova said she witnessed the abduction and rape of Rosado, but was too afraid of Hernandez and Minjares to call for help. Lead prosecutor Robert McClure told jurors Abdygapparova was just as guilty as her boyfriend for Rosado's murder because she used the victim's money to rent the motel room, she brought items back to clean up the crime scene, and she bought the shovel used to bury the body. In another development, the case took on an international tone with the arrival Wednesday of Kazakhstan's Consul General Samat K. Zhanabay from Washington, who was monitoring the trial. Although Kazakhstan has, in the past, imposed the death penalty for certain crimes, President Nursultan Nazarbayev has ordered a moratorium on death sentences, embassy spokesman Roman Vassilenko said. (source: San Antonio Express-News) ********************** GAITAN ATTENDS FIRST HEARING The man charged with killing a pregnant Wichita Falls woman made his 1st appearance today in front of a judge and in front of the victim's distraught family. 27-year-old Steven Gaitan is charged with capital murder in the shooting death of 24-year-old Stella Perez and her unborn child. Police say Gaitan murdered Perez last October in front of her 8-year-old son just before they were about to celebrate his birthday. Perez's father attended today's pretrial conference where he saw his daughter's accused killer for the 1st time. Prosecutors won't say if they will seek the death penalty. So far, no further hearings or a trial date have been set. (source: KFDX News, Feb. 24) ********************** Mrs. G's Book Club discusses 'A Lesson Before Dying'----Novel's treatment of racism leaves deep impressions on high-school panel Ernest J. Gaines' lead characters Grant Wiggins and Jefferson left a lasting impression on high-schoolers who responded to the latest installment of Mrs. G's Book Club. A panel of 6 of the most passionate readers gathered at The Dallas Morning News in the middle of Black History Month with former honors English teacher Beth Palma. They were part of a special high-school-oriented installment of the book club and discussed Mr. Gaines' A Lesson Before Dying (Vintage, $12). The 1993 novel, winner of the National Book Critics Circle Award for Fiction, tells the story of Jefferson, a 19-year-old uneducated black man facing death in the late 1940s for a crime he didn't commit. He meets Grant Wiggins, the twentysomething hometown-boy-made-good who is burdened with the job of teaching Jefferson how to become a man before he is executed. The lesson comes at the request of Jefferson's aunt, who is horrified when his defense lawyer compares him to a pig. Many of the book's characters learned several lessons, Ms. Palma and the students agreed. But for Kaitria Sievers, 15, it was very difficult to get over the bare facts. "Jefferson didn't kill anybody. He did absolutely nothing. And he's going to die because of 12 racist jurors?" >From the story's beginning, it was clear that race would be at its core. "When we open up with the trial, right away you start to understand what it's like to be a black man in Louisiana in the 1940s," said Ms. Palma. "It was difficult to accept how the defense didn't even try to help," said Lola Obamehinti, 14. But the group concluded that the defense's indifference typified the times when segregation was the rule of law and racism was an undertone, particularly in courtrooms across the South. The panel also wrestled with the death penalty and socioeconomic disparity. Walden Avery, 16, a sophomore at Jesuit College Preparatory School of Dallas, is cast in his campus's upcoming production of Dead Man Walking, based on Sister Helen Prejean's story about a man on Louisiana's Death Row. Preparing for the performance and reading Mr. Gaines' book had the death penalty weighing on Walden's mind. "Jefferson was innocent," he said. "That's why it's hard to fully support the law, especially here in Texas, where the history of the death penalty is so controversial." As the novel illustrates, Jefferson's race played a part in his sentence because Jim Crow statutes had prevented him from having a proper education and a fair trial. His lack of education contributed to his inability to reason as he watched a crime being committed, said Robert Breinin, 16. "The students were only in school for five months, and the classrooms were inferior to the whites' classroom. How could they be better educated?" Robert asked. "Have things really changed?" Ms. Palma inquired. When you look at wealthy suburban schools such as Plano West and compare them with the embattled Wilmer-Hutchins district, things are not very different, Robert and Walden quickly asserted. The huge gap between the black and white communities fueled 16-year-old Sally Stewart's understanding of Grant Wiggins' pivotal role. The lone teacher for the black community had grown up in the town, left for college and, even though he was conflicted about returning, hadn't found a way to leave again. "Things stay the same unless you have the courage to help bring change. His predicament is a common one," said Sally. "He's an educated person. He sees what needs to be done in order to make change, but he cannot muster the strength to bring about that change." Jay Gambulos, 15, said he understood Grant's personal demons. "He's cynical because of all the injustices he's had in life." Grant had to give up his own happiness, Lola explained, "because he felt he had to stay and help the people. But he still had Vivian (his girlfriend), who struggled, too." It was more complicated than deciding to stay and fight, Robert pointed out. "Where would he go during that time and find a better life? The one thing that kept him and Vivian from leaving was the fear of the reality of being in a different place where things really weren't much different." Still, Paul, the young white jailer responsible for who oversaw Grant's visits, provided hope in the end, he said. "Paul learns that after all he'd been taught about being the superior race, in the end Jefferson is the strong one," Sally said. What is Mrs. G's Book Club? Several times a year, counselor and former reading teacher Angela Glancy, a.k.a. Mrs. G, works with Kids Day to select a book for children under 12. Kids who read the book write to Mrs. G about why they should be on a discussion panel, and a small group of different children is selected. In this book club, we chose a special selection for high school students and asked Beth Palma to be our guest moderator. (source: Dallas Morning News) ****************** How Did He Get In? Asst. DA Unwelcome at Defense-Oriented CLE Event If there was any doubt about which segment of the criminal bar the 4-day continuing legal education seminar was meant for, all anyone had to do was consider the title: "Capital Trial Advocacy -- The Defense." But on Jan. 26, the first day of the event, numerous criminal defense attorneys attending that Plano, Texas, seminar were hopping mad when they discovered a prosecutor in their midst at the program put on by the Center for American and International Law. The prosecutor, Stephen Tittle, a Hunt County, Texas, assistant district attorney, initially was told the seminar was full. But on Jan. 26, with the permission of the person at the registration desk, Tittle gained entry by taking the spot of a defense attorney who was unable to attend the seminar, says Tittle's boss, Hunt County District Attorney Duncan Thomas. Tittle declines to comment, instead referring all questions about the incident to Thomas. On Jan. 27, Tittle was asked to leave the seminar, Thomas says. But Tittle had good reason to be there, Thomas maintains; Tittle attended the seminar as a way to prepare for some of the 10 capital murder cases pending in Hunt County. The incident has touched off a controversy over who should and shouldn't be allowed to attend criminal law CLE courses funded in part by state money. Allowing prosecutors to attend programs meant for criminal defense attorneys is a big problem, says Philip Wischkaemper, capital-assistance attorney for the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, who spoke at the seminar. "We have speakers that won't even show up if they know that there [are] prosecutors there," Wischkaemper says. "That's a real concern for us, because some people feel that they are giving out proprietary information that we [defense attorneys] don't want to give to prosecutors." Thomas says he's equally troubled that his assistant DA was thrown out of a seminar funded by public money. He says Tittle did nothing wrong and recounts the incident this way: "Steve Tittle sent his form in, and when they found out that he was a prosecutor, they said it was full." Tittle sought and received the permission of a defense attorney who was not attending the seminar to pick up the course materials, Thomas says. When Tittle showed up at the event and went over to pick up the course materials, he asked the person at the registration desk if he could attend the seminar in the place of the absent criminal defense attorney, Thomas says. "And they said 'sure,'" Thomas says. No one asked him if he was a prosecutor, Thomas adds. Later on the first day of the seminar, several criminal defense attorneys recognized Tittle as a prosecutor, Thomas says. On Jan. 27, seminar officials "took it upon themselves to unprofessionally and, I believe, wrongly throw him out of the seminar," Thomas says. "There's nothing that said that any segment of the bar was to be excluded," Thomas says of the seminar materials. "And it seems to me that because this seminar is funded by the Court of Criminal Appeals, any licensed attorney should be able to attend." Mark Smith, vice president of the Center for American and International Law, confirms that Tittle was asked to leave but declines to comment about the specifics of the incident. "We've been asked to do a report to the Court of Criminal Appeals" by the court's grants committee, Smith says. And whether anything inappropriate occurred at the seminar is "for the court to determine." IN OR OUT? CCA Judge Barbara Hervey, who chairs the court's grant committee that provided funds for the program, says this is the first she has heard of a controversy arising over which side of the criminal bar can attend a CLE seminar. "Traditionally, you just don't have one side going to the other's " seminar, Hervey says. "We've just not seen this problem before." Months before the January program, officials at the Center for American and International Law asked the CCA's grant committee for a special request, Hervey says. They wanted approval to discuss trial strategy on specific pending cases -- a request the grant committee approved, Hervey says. "If you're going to discuss specific trial strategy, you don't want the other side there," Hervey says. "I can understand that." But the question about whether prosecutors could attend the seminar never came up in the grant committee meeting, she says. "It didn't mean that they could exclude people. Frankly, we didn't discuss people [being excluded], because we didn't know that it would come up," Hervey says. "We're going to have to examine that policy, what we're going to do about that." Diane Beckham, senior staff counsel for the Texas District and County Attorneys Association, says her group does not exclude criminal defense attorneys from attending its CLE courses. In fact, criminal defense attorneys sometimes attend annual TDCAA seminars that delve into topics such as criminal law legislative updates. "In the eight years I've been here, we've never prohibited a defense lawyer from coming to one of our conferences," Beckham says. "Part of it is because it's a philosophical deal," Beckham says. "Because we're the state, we don't want to act like we have anything to hide." Although the program was not aimed at prosecutors, there was plenty to be learned from the seminar, Thomas says. "Part of our job is to anticipate defenses," he says. And defense strategies are evolving in light of recent U.S. Supreme Court opinions such as Wiggins v. Smith, a 2003 decision that requires criminal defense attorneys to delve into mitigation evidence in death penalty cases. "In light of Wiggins ... we need to find out what's going to be involved in mitigation in terms of capital murders," Thomas says. John Niland, a lawyer with the Texas Defender Service, which represents capital-murder defendants, led a discussion about mitigation defenses at the January seminar. "I have a lot of work product that I have developed for defense lawyers that [Tittle] had access to," Niland says. "And I feel that was meant to be confidential between defense lawyers on the morning he was there. And I think it takes on particular significance, because his county has [several] pending capital murders." But, as a practical matter, the capital murder seminar "is not the way to get prosecutors up to speed," Niland says of Thomas' assertions. "And if he believes that," Niland says, "it raises a question as to whether they should be seeking death in the first place." (source: Texas Lawyer)
