March 8 USA: Mexicans on Death Row to Get Hearings----Bush Tells Texas Courts to Review Cases of 51 Denied Consular Aid The Bush administration has announced that it will attempt to defuse a long-simmering international dispute over the death penalty by instructing Texas state courts to give 51 Mexicans facing the death penalty new hearings on their claims that they were denied meetings with diplomats from their nation, in violation of international law. In a Feb. 28 brief filed with the Supreme Court, the administration said the United States would bow to a 2004 ruling by the International Court of Justice in The Hague, also known as the World Court, which found that Texas officials violated the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations by not providing the Mexicans with consular access. That treaty, ratified by the United States in 1969, provides that "consular officers shall have the right to visit a national of the sending State who is in prison, custody or detention, to converse and correspond with him and to arrange for his legal representation." The situation of Mexicans facing capital punishment in Texas has been a sore point in relations between Washington and Mexico City. Mexico argues that its citizens would fare better in Texas courts if they got aid from home-country diplomats. The consular-access issue has also flared between the United States and its European allies, who are generally critical of the death penalty, especially in Bush's home state. Germany pressed and won a World Court case in 2001 over a German national who faced a capital trial in Arizona without consular access. More broadly, the United States has been under fire in international forums for the Bush administration's perceived refusal to adhere to international legal norms in such places as the prison for accused terrorists at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. "The government of Mexico is very satisfied. . . . Without doubt this is a step that Mexico has looked for," said Arturo Dager, spokesman for the Foreign Ministry in Mexico City. He said that although it does not necessarily mean the sentences will be changed, Bush's decision to review them is "more in line with international law." Ana Maria Salazar, a political analyst in Mexico City, said that "if President Bush doesn't commute [the sentences], there could be a big backlash" for Mexican President Vicente Fox. She said that by raising the death penalty issue ahead of this month's meeting with Fox, Bush has taken what had been a dormant issue in Mexico and raised expectations of U.S. action. In its Supreme Court brief in the Mexicans' case, Medellin v. Dretke, No. 04-5928, the Bush administration declared that the president has concluded that, on this issue, it is in the United States' interest to provide foreigners with consular access, lest such access be denied to U.S. citizens abroad. "In this case, the President, the nation's representative in foreign affairs, has determined that the United States will comply with the ICJ decision," says the brief, drafted by Acting Solicitor General Paul D. Clement with input from State Department lawyers. "Compliance serves to protect the interests of United States citizens abroad, promotes the effective conduct of foreign relations, and underscores the United States' commitment in the international community to the rule of law." Bush's nod to international opinion involves a sweeping assertion of executive authority within the United States, in that, without any legislative action by Congress, he is issuing instructions to the courts of a sovereign state as to how to treat defendants. Texas courts, the president says, should review the Mexicans' cases to see if the lack of consular access affected their trials or sentencing. His approach would also greatly reduce the role of the Supreme Court, which has been asked by attorneys for one of the Mexicans, Jose E. Medellin, to rule that the decision of the World Court is all the authority individual foreigners need to get a new hearing in U.S. state courts. "It is for the President, not the courts, to determine whether the United States should comply with the decision, and, if so, how," the administration's brief says. It is unclear whether the Supreme Court, which is protective of its role in interpreting federal treaty obligations, will be willing to go along with Bush's suggestion. (source: Washington Post) ************************ Kids who are adult enough to kill should be executed The U.S. Supreme Court barred states from executing people for crimes committed when they were juveniles. An editorial in The Daily News urged Gov. Rick Perry to call a moratorium on the death penalty. I think kids should be executed if they think that they are adult enough and big and bad to go out and rape, rob, kill and steal and anything else. Why not? I think the ruling should stay. Cat Cooper----Hitchcock -- If they commit the crime, they should be punished I think that whole thing of exempting minor murderers stinks because killing is in the heart - not in their age. They can commit the crime; they should do the time. Peewee Kershaw----La Marque -- State should support respect for life Congratulations on your support for the Supreme Courts ruling on the death penalty for juveniles. Im only sorry that it didnt apply in time to save the life of Napoleon Beazley. I live in Northern Ireland, where we know all about death and destruction. But I dont know anyone who would want the brutality of the death penalty. I love the United States and visit at least once a year. I will never see Texas, however, because I regard it as savage. I prefer to go to places that dont subscribe to the ridiculous principle that you reinforce respect for human life by strapping someone to a table and injecting them with poison. Mike Philpott----Bangor, Ireland -- Ruling was just a travesty I would just like to say I think it is a travesty what the Supreme Court did. No matter what age you are, if you murder someone, you should have to pay the penalty. I think it is just a travesty. Clarence Ghirardi----League City (source: Galveston County Daily News) ****************************** Juveniles and death penalty Juveniles and death penalty Q. Last week, a divided Supreme Court (5-4) banned executions for killers who were under age 18 when they committed murder, saying such executions violate the Constitution's protections against cruel and unusual punishment. What do you think? Amber Bennett, 14, North Stanly High School, New London: I do believe that they should ban the execution of killers under 18. Young kids still have some learning to do. Yes, they should know right from wrong if their parents teach them. But some might not know what they are doing. Yes, the victim's family may want the guilty person to be executed. Yes, they should be put into jail to suffer the consequences. But they shouldn't be killed for it. Quinn Patrick Foster, 15, Sun Valley High, Monroe: The Supreme Court was wrong. If a perpetrator commits a crime which merits capital punishment, age should not be a factor. Cruel and unusual punishment would be imposing the death penalty for a lesser offense. When one individual recklessly or without merit causes the death of another, there needs to be a fatal consequence, no matter the age. Will Stancil, 19, Wake Forest University, Winston Salem: Sentencing individuals to die for crimes committed as minors is clearly illogical. How can we claim children must face full adult responsibility for their actions, if we don't also trust them with other adult responsibilities, such as driving, voting, drinking and supporting themselves? Jennifer Inskeep, 11, Randolph Middle, Charlotte: The high court was right to overturn the death penalty for juvenile killers. The part of the brain that judges between right and wrong isn't fully developed until 20. Juveniles might not fully understand that it is wrong to kill someone. There is still time to teach juveniles that it is wrong to kill. But the government killing people isn't the way to show them that. Jamie McSpadden, 19, Yale University, New Haven, Conn.: The Supreme Court reasoned that minors are psychologically immature and, therefore, cannot be executed. Justice Kennedy put it best: "When a juvenile commits a heinous crime, the State can exact forfeiture of some of the most basic liberties, but the State cannot extinguish his life and his potential to attain a mature understanding of his own humanity." I am proud to be an American when our highest court stands up to stop the morally reprehensible practice of executing minors. David Scott, 14, North Stanly High, New London: I believe that banning execution of killers under 18 is preposterous! The Supreme Court says it was banned because the killers' brains are not yet developed enough to realize completely what they are doing. If they have the brains to kill then they need to be killed themselves. (source: Opinion, Charlotte Observer) WISCONSIN: Dance grows out of conviction to inform Most dances are about dance, and if not about that, they are about love. Milwaukee native David Popalisky uses an image of a clock to demonstrate the slow passage of time for inmates in his dance "Barred from Life." "Barred from Life" is about a social issue: false conviction and imprisonment. David Popalisky will perform "Barred from Life" Friday and Saturday at the Marcus Center for the Performing Arts. Popalisky, a Milwaukee native who now is chairman of the dance program at Santa Clara University in California, created "Barred from Life" with Cookie Ridolfi. Ridolfi is neither a dancer nor a choreographer. She is a law professor at Santa Clara and director of the Northern California Innocence Project, one of a number of organizations around the country that seek to free wrongly convicted inmates. "Barred from Life" came about because she and Popalisky kept crossing paths at their children's school. "I knew she was in the law school, and she knew I was in dance," Popalisky said, in a conference-call interview, also involving Ridolfi, from California. "One day we started talking about tenure. Lawyers write articles to get tenure, and she wondered what dancers have to do." They have to make dances. Popalisky was between projects when Ridolfi suggested that a dance piece about wrongful imprisonment might drive home the human side of it. Doing the research Popalisky pursued the idea, and Ridolfi pointed him toward exonerated former inmates in California and to contacts in the network of organizations dealing with this issue around the country. The Center for Wrongful Conviction, at Northwestern University, was especially helpful. He spent time with 10 former inmates who had been exonerated, and in some cases members of their families. Among them are James Newsome, who spent 15 years in prison in Illinois for a murder he did not commit; Delbert Tibbs, who spent almost three years on death row in Florida; and Gary Gauger, who, after an all-night interrogation, made statements that police and prosecutors claimed constituted a confession. He was convicted in his parents' deaths and spent about three years in prison in Illinois. None of these men got off on technicalities; they were freed because someone else admitted to the crimes or because technical evidence proved their innocence. "It was critical to meet the exonerees," Popalisky said. "I wanted to get at their feelings while they were being interrogated and while they were in jail. Were they ticked off? Anxious? Did they think everything would work out, because they were innocent? "To be honest, it was a little scary to approach them. Why should they talk to me? Who the hell am I, some dancer? But they did. For some, it was a wonderful opportunity to just talk. For others, I'm sure it was painful to relive the experiences." Popalisky shot more than 15 hours of video. Parts of it run during the 50-minute piece. He is in front of the screen, interpreting in movement. Original music by True Rosaschi is woven into the texture. "It's really a dance docudrama, a hybrid form," Popalisky said. "I tried to tone down the danciness of it. I'm not trying to make pretty pictures. In one of the prison sections, I have this whole sequence of push-ups. I do it again a little later; I'm sure the audience thinks, 'Oh, no, not that again.' But I wanted to get the terrible routine of prison, where every day is the same." Ex-inmates participate He's done the show at Santa Clara University and at the national conference of the American Association of Law Schools. On both occasions, ex-inmates became part of the piece at the very end and stayed on to converse with the audience. Popalisky expects at least 2 to be part of the Milwaukee performances. "They want to help," Ridolfi said. "My experience is that they're really great guys. They're grateful to the people who've helped them, and they want everyone to know about the problem. But I feel bad sometimes, because every time we trot them out to do something, they have to tell that story again. It needs to be told, but we don't want to use them." Ridolfi gave more to the piece than a list of contacts. She attended rehearsals and wasn't shy about offering opinions on matters artistic, as well as legal and political. "I'm not a dancer and my friends are not dancers," Ridolfi said. "Their first reaction was: What? 'The Dance of the Exonerated'? But David and I became bonded through this." She laughed as she added: "It wasn't long before I was bossing him around." "She'd say that this section wasn't working or this one was, and I trusted her and believed her," Popalisky said. "She helped me get at the crux of the issue. And when I did it in San Diego, I found her on her hands and knees scrubbing the dance floor before the performance." "The piece doesn't just tell a story," Ridolfi said. "It invites you to experience what these guys went through. These people are among us. They really are our neighbors, and by the end you get a very good sense of that." "I've been changed by meeting these men," Popalisky said. "And the audience has been, too." After Milwaukee, Popalisky will perform "Barred from Life" in Chicago and Santa Cruz, Calif. For more information, visit the show's Web site, www.itrs.scu.edu/bfl/index.html. (source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel) NORTH CAROLINA: Death-penalty bill filed again in House----Sponsors are hopeful for hearing, vote North Carolina needs to take a pause from executing convicted murderers, according to a death-penalty moratorium bill filed in the House on Monday. The measure is similar to one filed two years ago and approved by the state Senate at the time. The House, however, didn't take up the bill in part due to a power-sharing arrangement between Democratic and Republican speakers. This year, with Mecklenburg County Democrat Jim Black as the sole speaker, bill supporters believe they have a better chance at a hearing and a vote. "I've had no signals to the contrary," said House Democratic Leader Joe Hackney of Orange County, one of the bill's primary sponsors. "There's no harm in it, except that executions would be ... delayed." Judges have removed two men from death row since 2002 after allegations that prosecutors withheld evidence that may have undermined their cases. The bill would suspend executions for two years while legislators study issues such as prosecutorial misconduct and whether sentencing is determined unfairly by race. (source: Associated Press) INDIANA----impending execution Wallace's father once thought son innocent For 25 years, the father of convicted killer Donald Ray Wallace Jr. believed his son was an innocent man, wrongly sentenced to death for the murders of Theresa and Patrick Gilligan and their 2 small children. But a week ago, when he finally heard his son publicly confess to the crime, Donald Wallace Sr. gave up hope that his son would be spared the death penalty, scheduled for Thursday morning in Michigan City, Ind. He threw away a 5-page written plea he was about to send the governor of Indiana, outlining his son's defense and asking for his son's life to be spared. "I just got rid of it. It went down the drain, and my heart went with it," Wallace Sr. said. "When I finally heard Donnie say it, how could I deny it?" Now, just two days before his son is to be executed, Wallace wants people to know that he still loves his son, and prays his son will soon know peace. "Donnie's asked for God's forgiveness," said Wallace. "As a Christian, I have to believe that if he's truly remorseful, God will forgive him and that when he dies, the Lord will take him to heaven." It's a prayer, he predicts, that may bring a bitter reaction from those who remember how the Gilligans were slain in their North Side home during a burglary gone bad. Patrick Gilligan, 30, was shot in the head and beaten with a barbell. Theresa was shot twice. Their children, Lisa, 5, and Gregory, 4, were tied together with a vacuum cord and each shot in the back of the head. "I know there are people who want him to die and think he'll burn in hell," said Wallace. "I can't believe that. I've been praying for so long that he'd get right with the Lord, and so many others have been praying for that too. I think our prayers are being answered." Wallace says his prayers are not just for his son, but for healing for his own family and for the family of the Gilligans. "I know they're hurting,'' said Wallace Sr. "I know they're in pain, but I don't think my son's death is going to make it better for them." Still, he understands their pain and anger. He remembers hearing the news of the Gilligan murders just hours after police discovered the crime, but before knowing it was his 22-year-old son who had be arrested for it. "I remember thinking, 'They ought to take the guy who did this and hang him,'" recalls Wallace Sr. "Little did I know it was my son." After his arrest, on Jan. 15, 1980, Wallace Jr. called his father from the jail. "He said, 'Dad, you're going hear a lot of bad things about me, but there's one thing I want you to know: I wasn't the one who pulled the trigger.' " And the father said he believed those words for 25 years. Then two weeks ago, he heard his son had given an interview to an Indianapolis television reporter, admitting the crime. Wallace also read excerpts from letters his son had sent to Diana Harrington, sister of Theresa Gilligan, describing details of how he shot and killed the family. "Up till 2 weeks ago, I thought he positively didn't do it," said Wallace Sr. "Once I heard him say it, I knew he wasn't lying." Wallace wrote his son, urging him to pray and to ask God for forgiveness. He also reached out to members of his church, the Point Township Church of the Nazarene, to ask for their prayers and support. Wallace Sr. also wants people to know he and his family understand the pain of murder victims more than anyone may know. In 1989, his wife's niece, Stacy Forsee, and Forsee's two young children were murdered. Forsee and her children frequently visited Wallace Sr. and his wife. "It just tore us up," said Wallace Sr. "Just like the relatives of the Gilligans, I felt that same pain." Wallace will be at his Posey County home when his son is executed for the Gilligan murders. His son asked him not to attend the execution, scheduled to begin shortly after 12:01 a.m Thursday. "Donnie just wants to get it over with now," said Wallace Sr. "He told us he doesn't want us to do anything to try to stop it. He said, 'If they kill me, I'll finally be out of here.'" (source: Courier & Press) *********************** Trial begins in slaying of airplane mechanic A man currently on Death Row in Texas went on trial Monday in Marion Superior Court in the killing of an airplane mechanic at a home in Speedway. Prosecutors say Joshua Maxwell, 26, and his girlfriend abducted Robby L. Bott, 45, forced him to take them shopping, then strangled him in September 2000. Jurors were seated Monday for Maxwell's trial on charges of murder, criminal confinement, arson and theft. "Maxwell took everything Robby Bott had," Deputy Prosecutor Rom Byron said, "and when he didn't have anything more to give, Maxwell took his life." After killing Bott, police say, Maxwell and Tessie McFarland, 25, went on a multistate crime spree. They killed an off-duty jailer in Texas and were caught in San Francisco after a shootout with police Oct. 17, 2000. Maxwell was sentenced to death in 2002 for the murder of Bexar County (Texas) Sgt. Rudy Lopes II. He was brought back to Indianapolis for the trial. McFarland is serving a 40-year sentence in Texas. She goes on trial May 16 in Bott's slaying and other crimes. (source: Indianapolis Star) MISSOURI: New DNA test key to execution or exoneration For 7 years, Clay County lawyer Fred Duchardt fought to get death-row inmate Brian Kinder a DNA test that would prove him innocent or guilty. Time and again, courts ruled against him. Then on Thursday, Duchardt received unexpected news: The Missouri Supreme Court, without explanation, had issued an order last Tuesday approving the test. Now, a St. Louis judge is to order it within 30 days. Results could take weeks to months to arrive. They will determine whether Kinder, 45, is executed or exonerated in the beating death of his estranged wife. "We're willing to take the risk," Duchardt said. "Either way, the right thing happens." The order, he said, is the 1st time the state high court has spoken on whether inmates whose cases involved obsolete DNA testing can get modern and certain DNA testing. Missouri Attorney General Jay Nixon, whose office opposed the new test for Kinder, said he would work to get it done and "once again confirm he was a brutal murderer." Nixon is concerned, he said, that "there are new scientific methods every day, and I don't think every one of them should bring on delays and appeals." A Jefferson County jury convicted Kinder of first-degree murder in the Dec. 22, 1990, death of Cynthia Williams. Her body was found in the bedroom of her Crystal City home south of St. Louis. Apparently beaten with a pipe, she died in the early morning. At Kinder's 1992 trial, an expert testified that there was only a one in 8.9 million chance that semen in the victim belonged to anyone but Kinder, her estranged husband. The defense argued that the test results shown at trial were altered from the original results. Plus, one spot on the results could be read as not matching Kinder's DNA, the defense said. Since then, that kind of DNA test has been replaced by another, which in turn has been replaced by yet another. Today's "short tandem repeat" DNA test can be used on far smaller samples and virtually identifies a person, said Frank Booth, a manager at the Kansas City Police Crime Lab. It is done by machine instead of by hand and looks at 13 different genetic locations. The oldest test looked at as few as four, said Booth, who explained the differences in an affidavit in Kinder's case. Chances of the newest tests being wrong are one in a quadrillion, which is a million billion. Kinder always maintained he was innocent. In 1998 a judge appointed Duchardt to represent him on appeals. Duchardt, 53, has been making such appeals since 1985. Missouri law gives inmates the right to DNA tests to prove innocence, but courts largely have limited new tests to those who lacked previous DNA tests. In 2003 a Missouri appeals court ruled that Kinder did not qualify for several reasons. For one thing, it ruled, his defense team could have had its own DNA testing done for trial but did not. It also said: "We perceive no legislative intent to allow serial retesting of evidence due to a change in DNA technology." The Missouri Supreme Court chose not to take an appeal from that ruling. Nixon later asked the Supreme Court to set Kinder's execution date. Duchardt argued that executing Kinder without the test violated his rights. Last week's ruling in effect overturns the appeals court and indicates that the state law allowing inmate DNA tests might be more broadly interpreted, Duchardt said. Now Kinder gets his chance. Duchardt will be there with him until the nail-biting end - death or freedom. His high-pressure job seems to require a touch of madness, Duchardt said. But then he quotes Gen. George Patton's battlefield comment: "God help me, I love it." (source: Kansas City Star)
