April 29 KANSAS: Judge sets death penalty deadline in Cheever case U.S. District Judge Monti Belot on Thursday ordered the Department of Justice to decide by the end of June whether it will seek execution of the man accused of killing Greenwood County Sheriff Matt Samuels. Belot also told Scott Cheever's defense team it had 3 weeks to challenge the legality of statements he made to authorities after the Jan. 19 shooting. Cheever faces 2 federal charges of murder, which by law carry a potential death sentence. But before federal prosecutors in Wichita can seek the death penalty, they must get written approval from U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Belot didn't give the government lawyers as much time as they expected. Assistant U.S. Attorney Lanny Welch told the judge that meetings were scheduled June 6 with the Department of Justice's capital crimes unit. "We're told it would routinely take 30 to 45 days," Welch said. "I won't allow that," Belot said. "They'll have to have all their work done by June 30. If I don't do that, it will be the end of July or August before we hear from them." Federal public defender Ron Wurtz saw his deadline tightened for filing actions to test Cheever's arrest, questioning and law enforcement searches -- including statements to investigators. "I want that done right away," Belot said, setting a filing deadline of May 20. To help Wurtz meet the timeline, Belot also ordered the government to turn over documents related to search warrants today. Belot indicated he wanted keep the case moving and said he expects to assign parts of the case to U.S. Magistrate Judge Karen Humphreys, who sat beside him on the bench Thursday. Even by Belot's schedule, however, Cheever can expect pre-trial actions to continue until late January. Cheever originally was charged in state District Court in Greenwood County. Samuels was shot while trying to serve a search warrant at a home in the county's isolated Hilltop area. State officials normally would have pursued capital murder charges for the killing of a law enforcement officer. But in December, the Kansas Supreme Court ruled the death penalty law unconstitutional, then stayed its ruling to allow for an appeal. With the status of the law unclear, federal help was sought. In March, a federal grand jury indicted Cheever and others on charges of making methamphetamine at the house where Samuels died. The indictment also accused Cheever of killing Samuels so he wouldn't be a witness to the drug crimes. Under federal law, prosecutors may seek the death penalty under more than 40 circumstances, including the two charges facing Cheever. Welch said prosecutors plan on filing another indictment against Cheever on Tuesday.These so-called "superseding indictments" can include added charges or merely make minor changes in the original document. Cheever and his lawyers have scheduled a meeting with prosecutors in the Wichita office of U.S. Attorney Eric Melgren on May 13, before prosecutors take their case to Washington, D.C., in June. (source: The Wichita Eagle) NORTH CAROLINA----new US military death sentence Soldier Sentenced to Death for Grenade Attack A military jury sentenced an Army sergeant to death Thursday for a grenade and rifle attack on his own comrades in the opening days of the Iraq invasion, a barrage that killed 2 officers and that prosecutors said was driven by religious extremism. The defendant, Sgt. Hasan Akbar, gave a brief, barely audible apology hours earlier and showed no emotion as the verdict was delivered. Sergeant Akbar, 34, could have been sentenced to life in prison with or without parole for the attack in March 2003, which also wounded 14 fellow members of the Army's 101st Airborne Division at Camp Pennsylvania in Kuwait. The 15-member jury, which took just two and a half hours last week to convict Sergeant Akbar of premeditated murder and attempted premeditated murder, deliberated about seven hours in the sentencing phase. The sentence will be reviewed by a commanding officer and automatically appealed. If Sergeant Akbar is executed, it would be by lethal injection. "I want to apologize for the attack that occurred," he told the jury before it began deliberations in the sentencing phase. "I felt that my life was in jeopardy, and I had no other options. I also want to ask you for forgiveness." While the defense contended that Sergeant Akbar was too mentally ill to plan the attack, it did not dispute that he threw grenades into tents and then fired on soldiers. Capt. Chris Seifert of the Army and Maj. Gregory Stone of the Air Force were killed. Prosecutors said Sergeant Akbar, a Muslim, attacked his camp - days before the soldiers were to move into Iraq - because he was concerned about American troops killing fellow Muslims in the Iraq war. Maj. David Coombs, a defense lawyer, urged a sentence of life without parole. "Death is an absolute punishment, a punishment of last resort," Major Coombs said. Sergeant Akbar is the 1st American since the Vietnam era to be prosecuted on charges of murdering a fellow soldier in wartime. (source: Associated Press) ************************* US soldier is sentenced to death A US soldier has been sentenced to death for the murder and attempted murder of colleagues in the Iraq war. Sgt Hasan Akbar carried out a grenade and rifle attack killing two officers and wounded 14 other service personnel at a Kuwait camp early in the conflict. The death penalty was announced a week after he was convicted by a military jury at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. It was the first time since the Vietnam War that an American was prosecuted for murdering a fellow soldier in wartime. Akbar stood to attention between his lawyers as he was sentenced. Last week, the 15-member jury took just two-and-a-half hours to convict Akbar, but sentencing on Thursday came after a further 7 hours of deliberations. 'Maximum carnage' The Associated Press news agency reports that Akbar, 34, delivered an apology before members of the jury began considering the sentence. "I want to apologise for the attack that occurred. I felt that my life was in jeopardy and I had no other options. I also want to ask you for forgiveness," Akbar said in a low voice. The attack occurred in the middle of the night as the 101st Airborne was preparing to move into Iraq in support of the US-led invasion in March 2003. Capt Christopher Seifert, 27, and Maj Gregory Stone, 40, were killed. Prosecutors say Akbar told investigators he launched the attack because he was concerned that US troops would kill fellow Muslims in Iraq. They said he carried out the attack "with a cool mind" to achieve "maximum carnage" on his comrades in the 101st Airborne Division. The defence acknowledged that Akbar had carried out the attack, but said he was too mentally ill to have premeditated it, and was fuelled by emotion. The sentence is subject to an automatic appeal. If Akbar is eventually executed, it will be by lethal injection. (source: BBC NEWS) VIRGINIA: Appeals Court Sides With Condemned Va. Killer A federal appeals court prolonged the stay of execution yesterday for a triple killer in Virginia, overturning a lower court's decision that Percy L. Walton is neither insane nor mentally retarded. In its ruling, the majority of a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit found that the lower-court judge did not apply the necessary standards in determining that Walton could receive the death penalty and ordered the court to reconsider Walton's claims. The appeals court found that the lower court failed to establish whether Walton was "capable of preparing for his own death," a requirement set by the U.S. Supreme Court in determining mental competency. The court also ruled that the U.S. District Court had not adequately considered Walton's claims of mental retardation and must hold a hearing to do so. Since 2002, when the Supreme Court ruled in another Virginia case that execution of the mentally retarded is unconstitutional, attorneys for dozens of death row inmates nationwide have sought to have their sentences reduced to life in prison, and they often have paired that argument with insanity claims. The Supreme Court ruled in 1986 that inmates must be mentally competent, or sane, to be executed. But appeals by death row inmates under both defenses -- particularly insanity -- have rarely been successful. Experts said yesterday's ruling, though not necessarily sparing Walton's life, could show that the appeals court is heightening its scrutiny of such claims. "We don't know whether they're saying, 'Cross your t's and dot your i's and then we'll affirm the death sentence,' or perhaps recognizing . . . that the Supreme Court is really trying to apply a stricter standard as to whether death sentences are constitutional, and it may be that that attitude is trickling down," said Scott Sundby, a law professor at Washington and Lee University. Walton, a diagnosed schizophrenic, was convicted of robbing and killing 3 Danville neighbors in 1996 and was scheduled to die in May 2003. A federal District Court judge postponed the execution 3 days before it was to take place to hear experts' assessments of Walton's mental abilities. The judge later ruled that Walton was neither mentally retarded nor insane. Writing for the 4th Circuit in yesterday's ruling, Judge Diana Gribbon Motz noted that, according to the Supreme Court, a defendant facing execution must be able to understand why "he has been singled out and stripped of his fundamental right to life." The lower court, Motz wrote, had found this issue "irrelevant" and had based its decision on Walton's responses to basic questions about whether he understood that he was being punished by execution and why. Questioning must be broader, Motz wrote. Walton's attorneys also argued that he was mentally retarded under the state's definition: a score of 70 or below on an IQ test, with a disability that began before age 18. Walton took an IQ test shortly before he was 18 and scored 90. He took one a year later and scored 77. His attorneys argued that the first test results were inadequate and that the second score, when factors such as standard margin of error were included, might really be lower than 70. The appeals court ruled that the lower court had not considered these arguments and said that "we hold merely that Walton is entitled to be heard on them." Jennifer Givens, Walton's attorney, said yesterday that the appeals court's ruling on Walton's mental retardation claim showed that "the way the District Court resolved this was not fair." She said the ruling also could help guide other courts as they interpret a new legal standard. But while the ruling will add to case law, it is unclear how significant it will be for Walton, said Christopher Slobogin, a University of Florida law professor who studies law and mental illness. "He's received a reprieve, but stay tuned," Slobogin said. "That does not mean there's going to be a bar to execution." (source: Washington Post) USA: Little Change For U.S. Death Penalty Views Many Americans are in favour of capital punishment, according to a poll by TNS released by the Washington Post and ABC News. 65 % of respondents support the death penalty for persons convicted of murder. Since 1976, 961 people have been put to death in the United States, including 17 during 2005. More than a third of all executions have taken place in the state of Texas. 12 states and the District of Columbia do not engage in capital punishment, and moratoriums on executions have been issued in Illinois and Maryland. In March, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that applying the death penalty to minors violates the Constitutions Eight Amendment - which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. Before the decision, 19 American states had provisions that allowed for the execution of people younger than 18 years. Last week, alleged al-Qaeda member Zacarias Moussaoui pleaded guilty to conspiracy charges in a U.S. court. Prosecutors have said they will seek the death penalty for the only person directly judged in connection with the 9/11 attacks. Al-Qaeda operatives hijacked and crashed 4 airplanes on Sept. 11, 2001, killing nearly 3,000 people. Polling Data Do you favour or oppose the death penalty for persons convicted of murder? Apr. 2005 ---- Jan. 2003 ---- May 2002 Favour 65% 64% 65% Oppose 29% 31% 26% (sources: TNS/Washington Post/ABC News)
