Feb. 28 INDIANA----new execution date Execution set for convicted murderer The Indiana Supreme Court today set an April execution date for a man convicted in the 1987 torture-slaying of an 18-year-old Terre Haute woman. Bill J. Benefiel, 48, is scheduled to be put to death by lethal injection April 21 at the Indiana State Prison in Michigan City. He received the death sentence in 1988 for killing Dolores Wells of Terre Haute. The U.S. Supreme Court in November declined to hear Benefiel's appeal in what was his final appeal, said David Remondini, a spokesman for the state Supreme Court. In that appeal, Benefiel argued for a new trial, saying his trial attorneys were incompetent and that prosecutors engaged in misconduct. A message seeking comment was left today for Alan Freedman, an attorney with the Evanston, Ill.-based Midwest Center for Justice who is representing Benefiel. A Vigo County judge sentenced Benefiel to death following his conviction in Wells' torture-slaying. During his trial, prosecutors alleged that Benefiel held Wells captive in a vacant house for 12 days, sexually abusing her before killing her on Feb. 17, 1987. Her body was found buried in a rural area outside of Terre Haute. Alicia Elmore, whom Benefiel held captive for a 4-month period in the same house, survived the ordeal and testified against him during his trial. (source: Associated Press) TEXAS: On the defense----Defense team in Andre Thomas' trial ready to present their case. After several days off, attorneys and jurors will return to the Andre Thomas capital murder case Monday. The fact that Thomas killed his estranged wife Laura Boren Thomas, their son, Andre Boren and her daughter Leyha Hughes last March is uncontested in the case. He walked into the Sherman Police Station on the day of the killings and confessed. After being indicted for capital murder, Thomas pleaded not guilty by reason of mental defect or mental disease. The trial centers on the death of Leyha Hughes and whether or not Thomas was sane at the time that the deaths occurred. This week, Thomas' attorneys, Bobbie Peterson and R.J. Hagood, will present more than 25 witnesses in an effort to show jurors that Thomas was not sane when he killed the family. Peterson said the defense case could take 4 to 5 days. Generally, defendants in criminal trials are not required to present evidence. Peterson said because the so-called "insanity defense" is an affirmative defense, she and Hagood must put on witnesses and prove their theory of the case. Peterson explained that the defense must prove the mental illness by a "preponderance" of the evidence. She said that is a much lower standard of evidence than the "reasonable doubt" level that the state must usually reach to prove guilt in a case. "We have to prove that there is more evidence that he suffered from a mental disease (at the time of the killings) than there is evidence that he did not," Peterson said. She also said that the defense only has to prove that Thomas suffered from that disease "at the moment the crimes were committed." Peterson readily admits that Thomas, as jurors have seen him in court, is sane. "But he's also on the maximum amount of anti-psychotic drugs allowed," Peterson said. Absent those drugs, she pointed out, her client would not look and act as "normal" as he does in court. To prove their point to the jury, the defense team will have to counter evidence that state put forth in its week of testimony. Prosecutors Joe Brown and Kerye Ashmore said the state's case showed that Thomas was sane at the time of the killings because he did things that sane people would do in such situations. The state said Thomas planned the attack in advance and took items he would need to his wife's apartment, including the 3 knives he used to stab his victims and cut out their hearts. He also took a roll of duct tape in case he had to restrain one of the victims. Further, the state contends, Thomas retreated from the scene after committing the crimes in an attempt to avoid being there when the police arrived. That, prosecutors said, shows he knew what he did was wrong. He even told people that the police would be looking for him and turned himself in, all of which, the prosecution said, showed he knew he had done something wrong. Brown is seeking the death penalty in the case. Peterson said that evidence will have to be weighed against the number of people who testified that Thomas was acting strange in the weeks and months before the killings. In confessions the jury heard last week, Thomas said he killed the young family because he thought Mrs. Thomas was Jezebel, their little boy was the anti-christ and the little girl was a demon. Peterson said if the jury agrees with the defense and finds her client was not sane "at the moment of the killings," then they must find him not guilty by reason of mental defect or disease. That does not, she said, mean Thomas will be going home. "He will be committed to a hospital," Peterson said. She said he would remain hospitalized until a team of doctors and the court found him to be sane. The defense starts presenting their case Monday morning. After the presentation of the defense case, the state will have the opportunity to present rebuttal evidence. After that evidence, the jury will hear closing arguments in the case. Then, the jury will deliberate. If the jury finds Thomas guilty, the trial will move into a penalty phase. During that phase, the state will try to prove that Thomas deserves to die for his crime. The defense will try to prove that Thomas should be spared. The least that Thomas could face, if convicted, is life in prison. (source: The Herald Democrat) ******************** Texas may find a model in crime labs elsewhere -- Oversight panel likely to top list of reforms in state as legislators learn from other systems Just as DNA testing emerged as a powerful forensic tool, New York, known for strict regulation of similar disciplines, began to examine how best to monitor its crime labs. Months of debate led to the 1992 creation of the Commission on Forensic Science, a panel of representatives from all corners of the justice system that oversees the operation of all New York crime labs. The 12 members include nominees of top government officials, prosecutors, defense attorneys and forensic scientists. The panel is the ultimate authority that determines which crime labs are allowed to operate and has the power to demand qualifications beyond those of professional organizations that outline basic standards for accredited labs nationwide. "It is good for lab personnel to be aware that there is an entity interested in monitoring what they are doing," said John Hicks, the state's director of the Office of Forensic Services, which works alongside the board. "It has been successful." The New York system has emerged as an attractive model for Texas as lawmakers consider reforms to prevent the recurrence of crime lab problems such as those that have plagued the Houston Police Department. Such an oversight board is likely to be the cornerstone of any legislation passed this session regarding crime labs, although lawmakers have not ruled out more sweeping reforms, such as the elimination of locally run DNA labs. Variety of models Scientists for decades have struggled with the question of where crime labs should fit within government and law enforcement, long before DNA testing came into common use. The answer has come in a variety of models across the country, from labs based within academic institutions to labs entirely divorced from law enforcement's oversight. No one model wins universal endorsement from experts. But several jurisdictions have set up differently from those in Harris County, where a hodgepodge of labs is run by police departments, the medical examiner and the state, through the Department of Public Safety. In Virginia and Alabama, for example, state departments of forensic science operate regional labs that are independent of a law enforcement agency. The departments analyze everything from fingerprints to DNA and serve all jurisdictions in the state, eliminating the need for locally run labs. The roots of Alabama's Department of Forensic Sciences date to 1935, when the governor established an Office of the State Toxicologist and affiliated it with Alabama Polytechnic University. "Our unique strategic placement as a separate entity within the executive branch has served the state well for over 6 1/2 decades and is a model to which other crime labs across the country aspire," former director J.C. Upshaw Downs wrote in a recent report. "We are truly grateful that our creators had the foresight to ensure fairness for all suspects by removing political pressures and prosecution/defense bias from our agency." A range of clients While Texas' statewide DPS laboratories have not eliminated the need for local labs, 2 counties have established labs that mirror those in Virginia and Alabama. The crime labs in Dallas and Bexar counties are the only public forensic science divisions in their area. They operate outside the purview of law enforcement and take work from many clients, including defense attorneys. Experts say such labs may serve as a model if lawmakers limit reforms to Harris County. Timothy Sliter, of Dallas' Southwestern Institute of Forensic Sciences, said autonomy is essential to the success of his lab, which was set up as its own division in the late 1960s. "It's not unusual for people in a lab position to get pressure from various agencies about what tests are needed or when you get to testimony, the DA's office can exert pressure," he said. "If your program isn't set up to protect your analysts from that, it can lead to trouble." Bexar County moved to a similar model in the late 1990s, after having a forensic scandal of its own. The stand-alone nature of his lab, director Tim Fallon said, also increases accountability. "The commissioners wanted responsibility at the closest level," Fallon said. "We are not a lab operating within a department with thousands of employees and a huge budget. If things go wrong, my head's on the chopping block." One measure of their success is seen in their annual audits reviewed by the Houston Chronicle. Both labs performed well and far surpassed both HPD, in its last audit, and some DPS labs. Both Fallon and Sliter expressed concern that an overhaul of the state's crime lab network would do away with well-run local labs. "An oversight board might make sense because right now DPS is charged with the responsibility of overseeing accreditation," Sliter said. "To keep the current lab structure, but have a board that involves law enforcement types but also scientists and others, would allow us to continue to serve our communities." Lawmakers, too, seem to favor the creation of an oversight board like New York's. "A diverse commission with a lot of liberty to go into local jurisdictions and look at their labs looks like the best answer," said Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, chair of the criminal justice committee. Whitmire said he expects to file a bill this week proposing an oversight board. Options are open Texas lawmakers, however, have not limited their options to a monitoring panel. Some, including Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, have said they favor establishing regional DNA labs around the state and the elimination of such labs in local police departments and medical examiner's offices. In the end, experts said, a lab's structure is not what distinguishes labs that perform well. "I could discuss each state and their arrangement is somewhat different from everyone else," said Ralph Keaton, director of the American Society of Crime Lab Director's accrediting arm. "But it's about committing the necessary resources to do a good job and having competently trained people in the labs." (source: Houston Chronicle) CALIFORNIA: Lawyer maintains Peterson's innocence Mark Geragos, the prominent criminal defense lawyer who recently represented Scott Peterson, who was recently convicted of killing his wife, Laci and their unborn son, spoke Friday about his career and defending clients in highly-publicized trials. According to sophomore Seepan Parseghian, president of the Armenian Students Association, which sponsored the event, the group asked Geragos to speak in order further its goal of "contributing the Armenian perspective to the Stanford community in an academic and social context." "I am well aware of [Geragos's] charisma and vibrant personality when in the spotlight," Parseghian said. "But I give more emphasis to his dedication to the Armenian-American community. He has taken on numerous cases involving a wide range of Armenian issues." Geragos, an Armenian American who attended Haverford College and Loyola Law School, founded a private law firm with his father in 1983 and has specialized in criminal defense work ever since. Geragos said it is becoming increasingly difficult to defend accused criminals due to wide-spread media coverage. "What's happened with cable TV is that you have a 'Foxification' of criminal law," Geragos said. "You get these high-profile criminal cases and the mainstream media covers them in the most sensational way possible. With the internet, any rumor is quickly picked up and once it is on cable TV mainstream media feels compelled to run with the story." This 'Foxification,' said Geragos, was especially prevalent during Peterson's murder trial. "So many times during the case people were bringing up rumors about evidence that was not even presented," he said. Although jurors convicted Peterson of murdering his wife Lacy and their unborn son, Geragos maintains Petersons innocence. He said he took the case originally because he felt moved by the scene that he observed when Peterson was initially brought into custody. "I became so incensed when he was arrested," Geragos said. "There was a throng of people outside holding up signs that he should die. I never thought that in this day and age that I would see anything like that. It was a very troubling thing for me to see - someone being railroaded and confronted by a virtual lynch mob." Geragos did not speak specifically about the trial because he is under a gag-order until Petersons sentencing in March. He did, however, say that much of the press coverage did not accurately represent the evidence or facts of the case. He attributed much of this misinformation to the fact that the judge did not sequester jurors. "During the course of the case we were able to expose three separate stealth jurors who lied in order to try to get on the jury," Geragos said. "There was so much community fervor against Scott that many of the jurors wanted to be on the jury because they had their own private agenda." Geragos called what happened on the day of the verdict - thousands of people lined up outside of the courthouse and cheering the outcome - "one of the sickest things [he had] ever seen." "There is truly nothing worse than to see a guy you believe is innocent get sentenced to death," Geragos said. Although Peterson has not yet been sentenced, upon his conviction, jurors recommended that he receive the death penalty. Geragos called capital punishment "abhorrent." Junior Louise Nutt is taking a class on the death penalty and came to the talk specifically to ask Geragos about his opinion on the subject. "He brought up a lot of points about the death penalty that I think are very important, but that people outside of the law dont usually hear about," Nutt said. In addition to defending Peterson, Geragos has also been involved in numerous other high-profile cases. In the late 1990s, he represented Susan McDougal, a close friend of former President Bill Clinton, when she was tried and convicted on fraud charges related to the Whitewater scandal. Despite his role in criminal cases, Geragos called a class-action lawsuit that he filed for survivors of the Armenian genocide one of his biggest successes. The suit, which was filed against New York Life Insurance on behalf of 2,300 Armenian Americans who purchased insurance policies when they immigrated to the United States during the genocide, resulted in a $20 million settlement for the thousands of people who were originally denied the right to collect on their policies. Part of the settlement was also earmarked for Armenian charities. Mazi Pielsticker, a 1st-year law student, said he enjoyed Geragoss speech and appreciated the opportunity to hear such a prominent lawyer speak. "I thought he was awesome, very charismatic," Pielsticker said. (source: The Stanford Daily) PENNSYLVANIA: Love found after 22 years on death row A man who spent 22 years on death row in solitary confinement, falsely accused of murder and rape, is to marry a local woman and live in St Albans. Mr Nick Yarris, 43, arrived from the USA on Sunday to begin his new life with his 30-year-old fiance Karen Karbritz, of Kennedy Close, London Colney, who he is to marry in May. He walked free from prison in January last year, at last proved innocent of the murder and rape of Linda Mae Craig in Pennsylvania in 1981. He said: "When I met Karen, something inside me changed. I knew after only a few days I was going to live my life with her. "I walked away from the family I had not seen for 22 years, to come to this country. "I had dreamed of getting back to my home for 22 years. The ordeal ripped skin from my hands, but the only sane home I could make was with someone 3,000 miles away. I know this is going to be my home." In 2002, he was diagnosed with terminal hepatitis, and, fearing an excruciating and undignified death, wrote from his cell to a judge asking to be executed by lethal injection. He said: "I had been through so many things you could not imagine, but I wanted a peaceful resolution. "I had made myself into a good human being, but I decided enough was enough. I did not want to die a horrible death. "I decided I would rather go out on my own terms." Knowing he faced death within 60 days, his lawyers, who had been pressing for DNA tests to prove his innocence, made one final effort. Much of the evidence that had convicted him had been lost, but a pair of gloves, found in the dead woman's car but not disclosed to the trial jury, finally proved Mr Yarris' innocence. At first, the State of Pennsylvania pressed for a retrial, but they gave up and he was released last year in a media storm. He immediately embarked on a campaign against the death penalty on behalf of 2 other men on death row he believes to be innocent. In October he came to Britain, addressing MPs at the House of Commons and giving talks, which is how he met Ms Karbritz, a regional manager for a property company, who has an interest in criminology. She said: "I had seen him on television, I went to a talk he gave at a law firm and we exchanged numbers." They met again when she travelled to the USA to meet relatives and he came back to visit her in December, proposing on his knees in front of crowds at Gatwick Airport. He is now writing a book about his experiences, his illness and complete remission, which baffles doctors, and intends to devote his life to campaigning for penal reform. Ms Karbritz said: "People think he must be damaged by what he went through, but I think he is one of the most normal people I have ever met. He is also one of the most intelligent people I have ever met." Unlike prisoners who are guilty but have served their terms, Mr Yarris has been given no health care, financial help or housing by the US government and the couple cannot afford a honeymoon. He is pressing for compensation, but fears it will be many years before he receives it. (source: St Albans Observer)
