May 12 TEXAS: Faith-based prison plan questioned----Texas prison officials say they will not send convicts there. In the West Texas town of San Angelo, where Conrad Hilton built one of his first luxury hotels in 1929, a controversy is brewing over a different type of lodging, one that would accommodate more than 500 convicts. Tom Green County commissioners have signed off on a proposal to build a privately operated "faith-based" prison, billed as the first of its kind in bringing institutionalized Christianity into the cellblock. Proponents say the prison, run by employees with a "Christian world view," would help criminals learn to be law-abiding citizens. They say it would help reduce the number of Texas inmates, believed to be as high as 40 %, who eventually return to jail. But there is a hitch: Texas prison officials say they do not want to join the venture. "We simply are not in the market for that kind of space at this time," said Mike Viesca, spokesman for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. The department oversees state prisons, which are crowded. With the state saying that it will not send inmates to the Christian- oriented private prison, supporters say they will rely on securing contracts with other states and the Federal Bureau of Prisons to fill the jail. Such a proposal has been rejected in other parts of Texas, including Midland County, where officials a little more than a year ago worried that a jail with Bible classes would violate the constitutionally mandated separation of church and state. "We were a little bit anxious about whether we could do that with county funds, because of the many Supreme Court decisions about church and state separations," Midland County Judge Bill Morrow said. At the urging of President Bush, faith-based organizations, many of them grounded in a certain religion, have in recent years played bigger roles in social services. That can become a problem when the service pertains to holding and rehabilitating criminals, said Rob Boston, spokesman for Americans United for Separation of Church and State, a Washington-based nonprofit group. "I'm worried that this might just be the flavor of the month: the belief that, if you turn them on to Jesus, they'll stop committing crimes," Boston said. He said he was not swayed by promises that the private prison in San Angelo would not violate the Constitution. "It's a state promotion of religion, even if it's done through back-door channels," Boston said. However, another nonprofit organization, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, sees nothing wrong with the plan, even if public money blends with private contributions to pay for it. As long as inmates with other religious beliefs are not discriminated against, a Christian jail "should not be forced to lose its identity simply because it's receiving public funds for a public benefit," said Jared Leland, spokesman for the Becket Fund. Many elected officials in Tom Green County say they are confident that the plan will survive legal challenges because the prison -- estimated to cost as much as $28 million to build -- will be funded through the county's issuance of bonds, rather than placing the financial burden on the taxpayer. They also say inmates will not be forced into the prison. Instead, inmates will volunteer to leave their home state to serve out the last two years of their sentences in a Texas ranching community. Initial blueprints call for a maximum inmate population of 570. Instead of barbed-wire fences, the perimeters of the prison grounds would be protected by the 27-foot-high walls of four adjoining buildings, built around a courtyard. Inmates, dressed in "free-world clothing," would be required to work assembly-type jobs within the prison, at no less than the $5.15-per-hour minimum wage. Part of their salaries would go toward restitution and to help pay for their room and board, and 15 percent of their total earnings would be set aside as a nest egg for when they are freed. In the evenings, every inmate would be invited -- but not ordered -- to participate in Christian activities, said Bill Robinson, creator of the plan and a 3-time imprisoned felon. Robinson said he sobered up in 1980, stopped writing hot checks and began a prison ministry in 1984, which a year later became Corrections Concepts Inc., a Dallas-based nonprofit group that is the only group so far seeking the contract. He said state prison officials rejected his plan because it would reduce the number of repeat offenders and lessen the need for more money to add prison cells. (source: Austin American-Statesman) CONNECTICUT----impending execution//volunteer Even in Facing the Needle, a Killer Is Master of His Fate The videotape was taken earlier this year, during a psychiatric evaluation to determine whether Michael Bruce Ross, a convicted serial killer, is competent to forgo further appeals of his death sentence. Tilting back in a chair in a prison cell, Mr. Ross is shown laughing and then offering several enthusiastic thumbs ups to the camera. Played over and over on television here in recent weeks, the image of a killer seemingly smiling at death may be the last memory many people in Connecticut have of Mr. Ross. At 2:01 a.m. Friday, he is scheduled to die by lethal injection. He would be the 1st person executed in New England in 45 years. For some, the video underscores claims that Mr. Ross is mentally disturbed and thrives on the attention surrounding his latest execution date, the 2nd in 4 months. But his apparent self-assurance during the evaluation and in recent court appearances seems to confirm what judges have concluded: he controls his fate. "He will always hold in his hand the opportunity to change his mind," said Christopher L. Morano, the chief state's attorney, whose office prosecuted Mr. Ross. Until the moment the executioner administers the lethal injection into Mr. Ross's arm, he can stop the process by simply saying he wants to appeal. "Under the law, we have no option but to honor that if he does so," Mr. Morano said. "But that doesn't mean we will not do all we can to bring finality for the loved ones of his victims." Mr. Ross, 45, grew up on an egg farm in eastern Connecticut and graduated from Cornell University in 1981 with an economics degree. He was first arrested on murder charges in 1984 and eventually confessed to strangling 8 girls and young women and raping most of them. He was sentenced to death for 4 of the murders. His death sentence was upheld last May by the State Supreme Court. Mr. Ross has spent much of the time since then pursuing execution, rather than the array of state and federal appeals he still has available. Many people close to the case expect the execution to go forward on Friday. But execution has seemed imminent before. In January, Mr. Ross came within hours of execution before his lawyer, T. R. Paulding, unexpectedly requested a delay. Mr. Paulding, who had helped Mr. Ross seek execution, cited a potential conflict of interest after a federal judge, Robert N. Chatigny, of United States District Court, threatened to suspend his law license for not questioning Mr. Ross's competency more thoroughly. That led to a 6-day competency hearing last month in State Superior Court in New London that included testimony from four psychiatrists. Judge Patrick J. Clifford appointed a special counsel, Thomas J. Groark Jr., to argue that Mr. Ross is incompetent. All four psychiatrists agreed that Mr. Ross had mental illness that included bouts of depression and narcissistic personality traits. 2 said Mr. Ross was seeking to commit state-assisted suicide, and 2 said his mental health problems did not render him incompetent. Mr. Ross has said he wants to be executed in order to help heal his victims' families. Judge Clifford, who had found Mr. Ross competent after a one-day hearing in December, found him competent again after the April hearing. The State Supreme Court upheld that finding on Monday, 4 months after upholding the earlier competency finding. Others who have filed motions to prevent the execution have failed. Mr. Ross dismissed public defenders last year, and except for Judge Chatigny, courts have since ruled that they lack legal standing in the case. More motions were filed on Wednesday, with a lawyer representing a sister of Mr. Ross's asking a federal court to review whether Mr. Ross is making his decision voluntarily. The State Supreme Court had rejected the claim earlier in the day. Another suit, filed Wednesday on behalf of state inmates, claims that Mr. Ross's execution would "cause suicide contagion among suicidal and suicide-prone prisoners." Those motions were pending late Wednesday. Mr. Ross issued an affidavit Wednesday saying any suits purportedly filed in his interest were "unwarranted, unauthorized and against my wishes." Mr. Morano, the chief state's attorney, said his office had prepared countermotions in advance, anticipating various legal arguments. "I'm sure that something will pop up that haven't thought of," Mr. Morano said. "We'll be able to respond quickly should that occur." About 2 dozen death-penalty opponents have spent the week walking the 30 miles from Trinity College in Hartford to Somers, where Mr. Ross is to be executed at Osborn Correctional Institution just south of the Massachusetts border. "A serial killer should not be allowed to dictate public policy," said Robert Nave, director of the Connecticut Network to Abolish the Death Penalty, who is leading the march. "Michael Ross is totally in control." Corrections officials say their plan to administer lethal injection to Mr. Ross is identical to what it was last winter. At 2:01 a.m. Friday, the executioner is to begin administering a lethal dose of 2,500 milligrams of thiopental sodium with sodium chloride through an intravenous tube in the arm of Mr. Ross, who will be strapped to a padded table. The executioner will then administer 100 milligrams of pancuronium bromide, followed by potassium chloride. Several people are scheduled to witness the execution. Mr. Ross requested three witnesses: Kathy Jaeger, a spiritual advocate who meets with him regularly; one other spiritual adviser; and a freelance writer working on a book about him, Martha Elliott. Several relatives of his victims and 5 members of the news media will witness the execution. Mr. Paulding said that he met with Mr. Ross on Wednesday morning and that his client was determined to be executed. "He's totally committed to it," he said. ********************** 21 Haunted Years, Waiting to Watch a Killer Die In the 21 years since Leslie Shelley was strangled by Michael Bruce Ross, the Connecticut serial killer whose execution is scheduled for Friday morning, her father has remained haunted by one rhetorical question. "Can you imagine how scared that little girl was?" Edwin Shelley asked, emotion sandpapering his voice and fogging his sunglasses. "And people tell me to turn the other cheek." In a story steeped in sadness, it is a cruel truth that Mr. Shelley and his wife, Lera, have spent more years trying to ensure that Mr. Ross is executed than they had with their daughter. She was 14 when she died, 1 of 8 girls and young women Mr. Ross murdered in a 3-year period in the early 1980's. Twice sentenced to die, the subject of numerous appeals, pleadings and psychiatric exams, Mr. Ross has followed a path to a sentence of death by lethal injection that has been anything but straight. The Shelleys, more than any of the other families of his victims, have accompanied him on that labyrinthine journey, driven by one goal: his execution. "I don't think he's mentally ill," Mrs. Shelley said of Mr. Ross. "He might have a mental disorder, but he graduated from Cornell and he knew right from wrong." The Shelleys are country people, more comfortable with a fishing pole than with a legal brief. Yet after their daughter's murder, they scoured court documents, police records and newspaper articles connected with the case. Mr. Shelley, 66, worked as a postman until 1992. Mrs. Shelley, 61, is a retired mental health aide who worked at a state psychiatric hospital. After Leslie died, they also became legal experts, attending every day of Mr. Ross's 2 trials and his other court proceedings. He was convicted of killing their daughter; he confessed to her murder and the murders of 7 other girls and young women. Most of the hearings involved his death sentence. "When the guards brought him into the courthouse, I was close enough," Mr. Shelley said, smacking at the air, "to touch him." "You could have killed him," Mrs. Shelley said. "I could have," her husband answered. They followed the case for "the girls," Mr. Shelley said, not just Leslie but the 7 others Mr. Ross killed. They described a compulsion to ensure that Mr. Ross did not escape death with an insanity defense. On Wednesday, the Shelleys talked about their daughter as they fished off a wooden bridge above Kinne Brook, near their house in eastern Connecticut. They remembered her one and only home run in softball when she was 13, how she liked to wait up for her mother to finish the night shift so they could play cards and talk, how she could be stubborn but was "just a little sweetheart, pretty as a picture." "You think you remember a lot, you got the face visualized, but you don't remember that much after 21 years," Mr. Shelley said. In good weather, the Shelleys drive their pickup down to the brook, where they fished with Leslie and her siblings - an older brother and sister and a younger sister - in the days when they counted themselves lucky, when all their kids were alive. Only three reached adulthood, and the Shelleys have 8 grandchildren and two great-grandchildren. On that Easter Sunday afternoon, April 22, 1984, when Leslie asked to go to the movies with her best friend, April Brunais, 14, who lived two houses away, Mr. Shelley said yes. April's mother was giving them a ride home, they said. Instead, the girls hitchhiked home. Mr. Ross picked them up and drove them to a secluded spot in the woods, according to court documents. He ordered Leslie into the trunk of his car, where she could hear April's cries as Mr. Ross raped and strangled her friend. After apologizing to Leslie, he knelt on her back and killed her. The girls' bodies were found 2 months later. "He was so brave, since she was all of 90 pounds," Mr. Shelley said as he swatted his fishing line over the water. A former Navy man with tattooed forearms, he did most of the talking. Mrs. Shelley, her gray-threaded hair drawn back into a tight bun, mostly looked down. Her tears dropped into the water. In the months and years after Leslie died, the Shelleys turned their grief into action. They met with the families of Mr. Ross's victims and with relatives of other murder victims. They met with state legislators and worked to establish a prison psychiatric review board. They persuaded state officials to hire victims' advocates for each county. If the execution of Mr. Ross proceeds, the Shelleys will be there, as they were last January when it was called off just hours before its scheduled time. "The media will be on one side and Ross's family on the other, and we'll be right here," he said, lining his feet on the slats of the bridge and motioning an alignment with an invisible Mr. Ross. "Dead center." (source for both: New York Times) ********************** With Connecticut less than 24 hours away from its first execution in nearly 45 years, legal challenges that could derail the execution of serial killer Michael Ross remained undecided this morning and are certain to be appealed. But those closest to the case say they believe Ross will be dead by day's end Friday, though none would lend their names to such speculation. They cite the speed with which the federal appeals courts dealt with a barrage of appeals in the days leading up to Ross' original execution date in late January. The families of Ross' victims, who were stunned and angry when the planned Jan. 29 execution went awry at the eleventh hour, no longer put faith in dates or times. "I'll believe it when he's strapped on the table and they are injecting the poisons into him," said Robin LaFleche, whose 14-year-old sister, Leslie Shelley, was killed by Ross in 1984. "We're still on that roller coaster of maybe it will, maybe it won't. We'll never know until it's done." Meanwhile, the lawyer for death row inmate Sedrick Cobb, who last month said he wanted to withdraw his appeals and proceed to his execution, said Cobb is no longer volunteering to be executed. His attorney, David Golub, said Wednesday he is sending a letter to that effect to the state Supreme Court. Wednesday was a day of court hearings, decisions and new motions being filed in Ross' case. One action that raised some eyebrows in legal circles was a motion by attorney Antonio Ponvert III on behalf of inmates he says are vulnerable to attempting suicide if Ross is allowed to choose to die. Ponvert, who in past efforts to halt the execution represented Ross' father, Dan Ross, said the execution could prompt "suicide contagion" in a system with an unusually high rate of suicides. Nearly 1/3 of the 38 suicides that occurred in the system since 1997 happened in the past year, he said. Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said the suit was "not only last-minute, but very far-fetched. "This claim has never been made in any death penalty case in the country," Blumenthal said. "It's completely incredible." A small band of lawyers and reporters Wednesday moved from the state Supreme Court, which denied a motion by Ross' sister to intervene on his behalf, to the federal courthouse in Hartford, where U.S. District Judge Christopher F. Droney heard virtually the same case brought by Ross' sister, Donna Dunham. Droney kept the federal courthouse open until 10 p.m. so that lawyers could file supplemental briefs and responses, and is expected to rule early today. Notably absent were spectators to what could be the last legal arguments in Connecticut before an execution that has historic and regional ramifications. Courtrooms in both venues were largely vacant. What may well prove to be Ross' last public statement before he is strapped to a gurney at 2:01 a.m. Friday - possibly his last ever if he declines the opportunity to make a final statement in the moments before he is executed - played to a near-empty courtroom. Ross, 45, in October opted to forgo further appeals and "volunteer" for execution. His former public defenders, family members and death penalty opponents have worked in earnest to halt the execution since that time. In an affidavit he signed minutes before noon Wednesday, Ross made it clear he wanted no one to interfere with his execution. "I am aware that I am scheduled to be executed by the state of Connecticut in the early morning hours of May 13, 2005," Ross's lawyer, T.R. Paulding, read from the affidavit. "I specifically do not authorize, endorse, concur in or approve any stay of my execution by any court, board, agency or other entity." Senior Assistant State's Attorney Harry Weller argued to the state Supreme Court that because Ross has been deemed competent twice, there is no way his sister can now try to intervene. "Here we have the sister coming in on the cusp of the execution saying, 'I've got another reason why he's incompetent,'" Weller said, predicting, "We'll be back here at 6 p.m. with another plaintiff. At some point this has to stop." Attorney Diane Polan, representing Dunham, said the trial court and state Supreme Court in affirming Ross' competency disregarded a separate test of whether his decision to die was truly voluntary. She argued in vain that because of mental illness and stringent conditions of confinement over 20 years, Ross can't possibly make a rational decision. The seven judges on the panel asked no questions of either side, and dismissed Polan's petition less than 2 hours after arguments ended. They also declined to postpone the execution. Droney had a conference call with lawyers involved in the Ponvert "suicide contagion" complaint sometime after 5 p.m. Wednesday. The named plaintiff in the class action motion is an inmate named Duane Ziemba. During the telephone conference, Assistant Attorney General Steven Strom told Droney that when the correction department attempted to place Ziemba on suicide watch, based on conversations earlier in the day with Ponvert, Ziemba strenuously objected. "We have some information that he was surprised to find out this lawsuit had been filed with his name on it, trying to stop this execution," Strom told Droney. "This whole lawsuit in our view is a sham, your honor. It really is." After Droney rules on the motions filed by Ponvert and Polan, both lawyers can appeal to the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan, which may rule on the briefs alone or require oral argument. A petition for a stay of execution or request to review the lower court rulings could then be filed with the U.S. Supreme Court, but that court in January vacated a string of stays of execution. Ross was sentenced to death for the murders of 4 young eastern Connecticut women in 1983 and 1984, but has admitted to killing 8 women in all, including 16-year-old Paula Perrera in upstate New York. Barbara Willard, one of Perrera's childhood friends, is opposed to the death penalty and says it is what has kept Ross so prominent all these years. She blames capital punishment for the protracted nature of the proceedings. "It's a shame that our legal system allows for such a pingpong match to happen," Willard said. "One minute it's on, the next minute it's not. It's tough on people's emotions. It's just too much." Edwin Shelley, Leslie's father, said he has weathered ulcers and bouts of depressions in the past 6 months of legal controversies, but remains confident Ross will be executed soon. Shelley and his wife have been out fishing a lot lately, making an effort to avoid the nonstop news coverage. "I'm living it," Shelley said. "I don't have to hear about it 24 hours a day. "I want the man dead." (source: Hartford Courant) ******************** Many Questions, Few Simple Answers In Michael Ross Case----Killer's Legal Battleground 20 Years In The Making The day Michael Ross announced he wanted to die, Connecticut entered a mirror-world. Had he exhausted every legal appeal available, the state, perhaps another decade from now, would finally, and presumably without compunction, have put him to death. But after 20 years of mandatory appeals, Ross had had enough. The killer who had written extensively against the death penalty now wanted to serve himself up on its altar. His choice to forgo any further appeals turned the legal system inside out. Suddenly, Ross had to prove to the state that he was sane enough to be executed. He fired his public defenders and hired an attorney who would take on the job of seeing that his client was executed: T. R. Paulding, himself an opponent of the death penalty. Ultimately, the state would appoint its own attorney, Thomas J. Groark Jr., to argue that Ross was incompetent to make the choice he'd made. When the state Supreme Court issued its decision affirming Ross' competency Monday, Justice Flemming L. Norcott Jr. wrote a dissent. "This case illustrates ... the sheer irrationality of the capital punishment system," Norcott wrote. "These proceedings have ... been cruel and traumatic for the victims' families and a significant part of the punishment for the defendant himself ..." Legal experts agree. "Cases like Ross' demonstrate how operatic or ridiculous the whole ritualized process can be," said Michael Meltsner, the Matthews Distinguished University Professor of Law at Northeastern Law School. "The law has framed this issue as what Ross wants, and thus the next question is, is he able to choose?" The peculiar question "lurking in the shadows," Meltsner said, "is whether it's his choice. Can somebody make us do something that is not constitutional? Can somebody make us kill them?" The larger question raised by the Ross case, said Todd Fernow, director of clinical programs and professor of law at the University of Connecticut Law School, is what is the death penalty supposed to be doing? "I don't think anybody thinks the death penalty is efficient in Connecticut. Does it work? The notion that it works presupposes that it's accomplishing something. It has not been shown to have any deterrent effect." Nor does 20 years of litigation give any closure to the victims' families. He said that if the ultimate sentence was life without parole, then the families of victims would not have to wait for the sentence to be meted out. But the deth penalty is "cruel," he said, because it leads vitims' families to expect retribution. Indeed, a Quinnipiac University Poll taken in January showed the majority of people who favored the death penalty gave "retribution" as their reason. But the poll also revealed the public's profound ambivalence about capital punishment. The poll found that 49 % of state voters favored life without parole over the 37 % who favored the death penalty. And yet, when those same people were asked about Michael Ross, 70 percent said he should be put to death. 25 % of voters who generally oppose the death penalty would make an exception in his case," said poll Director Douglas Schwartz. Fernow said he believes the poll shows "the range of discord in Connecticut is substantial. It's just not going to go away. I think sooner or later people are going to realize that the debate will never end." Hopefully, he said, that will someday lead the people in the middle on the issue to say "enough is enough. Let's just get rid of it." If nothing else, the Ross case may have nudged some people in that direction. Even Michael Malchik, the detective who, with his partner Frank Griffin, captured Ross in the summer of 1984, has come to have doubts about the death penalty. "The legislators weave this tangled web of appeals and counter-appeals, then they jump from the federal court to the state court and back to the federal court. It's almost a joke, it really is," Malchik said. "They use everything in the book to keep him alive ... You've got mandatory appeals, voluntary appeals. It's never ending. I think people are finally seeing that. I'm almost for not having the death penalty if this is what it's going to take." Malchik remembered being surprised at the number of family members who came to witness the execution on the night of January 28. Many of them had stayed away from the courts over the years, he said, because they had lost faith in the system. He told the family of Wendy Baribeault, the last of Ross' victims, whose father didn't live to see that day, "I hope your father gets some satisfaction out of this; he's probably looking down ..." It was then that Kevin Kane came in, "and he said something to the effect that it was off, and I think there was a chuckle because everybody thought he was joking. It flashed through my mind that this is not really a good time for humor," Malchik said. "Then he said, 'I'm serious,' and there was dead silence. Then there was anger. Then there were tears. Stunned. The people were just stunned. Now, here they were, believing the day had come at last, only to be slapped in the face once again." If Michael Ross dies tomorrow morning, it is unlikely to resolve a single question about the death penalty. There will always be other killers waiting in the wings. "Suppose you have these doubts. At the same time you see this guy as a brutal monster. It's very hard to look at capital punishment in a detached manner when you're faced with this," Meltsner said. "I could see a scenario where he gets executed and then people pass some kind of life-without-parole statute, but every few months there's another Ross," he said. "We seem to produce a significant number of these people and no system of penalties prevents that. In 6 months there will be somebody else they're talking about." And no matter how the legislature might attempt to "fix" the death penalty, Meltsner said, "It's just unworkable. Even if you think it's a good thing, it brings more pain and suffering than it removes. It's like killing a witch: Whatever the fear they evoked that led them to be identified as threats to the community, did it go away because the witch was killed?" Or as Norcott put it: "And yet, at the end of the day, the question remains: After the execution, what will the state of Connecticut have gained from all of this? "The answer seems to be that, minimally, the state has secured the proverbial pound of flesh for the crimes of this one outrageously cruel man. But now, what is to be? Has our thirst for this ultimate penalty now been slaked, or do we, the people of Connecticut, continue down this increasingly lonesome road?" (source: The Day) NEW MEXICO: Prosecutor can seek death penalty----Defense can appeal ruling in Hobbs slayings trial District Judge Don Maddox ruled Wednesday that the trial of accused killer Paul Wayne Lovett could go forward as a death penalty case. At the same time, Maddox said he would allow public defender Rebecca Reese to appeal his ruling to the New Mexico Supreme Court. Lovett is charged with 1st-degree murder and criminal sexual penetration in the May 2003 beating death of Patty Simon and kidnapping and 1st-degree murder in the January 2002 stabbing death of Elizabeth Garcia. Lovett, 25, appeared at Wednesdays hearing in a jail-issue orange-and-white striped jumpsuit and was handcuffed and shackled. Members of Simons and Lovetts families were also present. Senior trial attorney Brian Stover claimed 2 aggravating circumstances while arguing for the death penalty. In the Garcia case, he claimed her killing occurred in the commission of a kidnapping. Garcia, a 26-year-old Allsups clerk and mother of 3, was found in a vacant field near French Drive and Sanger Street, Hobbs Police Department Detective Rodney Porter testified. She was stabbed numerous times, Stover said. Garcia's car and backpack with books spread out to study were undisturbed in the store on the Lovington Highway, officers testified. At the site where she was found, police found a womans watch and a clump of hair, which Stover said showed signs of a struggle. Stover said what appeared to be claw marks and a large pool of blood were found near Garcia. And Stover said semen found in Garcias underwear belongs to Lovett. Simons body was discovered May 14, 2003, in a caliche pit at the west end of Bender Boulevard. Her car was nose down in the pit. She was a mother of 4 children and a manager-trainee at Bealls department store in Hobbs. Simons body was nude from the waist up, her legs spread open and underwear pulled down to her ankles, Stover said. A shirt was placed over her head, he said. He said bruising around the vagina and anus indicated criminal sexual penetration. Reese argued that being moved does not connote kidnapping in the Garcia case. The essence of kidnapping, she said, is someone held for service or ransom. In Simons case, Reese said there was suspicion of sexual assault, but her injuries did not indicate criminal sexual penetration. Maddox, however, ruled there were aggravating circumstances in each case. "I'm pleased with his ruling today," Stover said. "I think it's appropriate. We already had preliminary hearings where we found probable cause of these 2 circumstances and this just confirms that." Simon's mother, Patsy Hodges, also said she was glad about Maddoxs ruling. "I'm very pleased with our judge. We have been praying for him. ... We trust his judgment. We know he's going to do everything he can ... within the law," she said. Lovett's trial was scheduled to start May 9, but it was delayed due to a New Mexico requirement that the defendant have two attorneys. Lovett is now represented by Reese and co-counsel Mark Horton. Stover said it was his decision to combine the 2 slaying cases. "I believe the two cases are linked. I believe he's a serial killer. He kills without reason," Stover said. (source: Odessa American) USA: House passes law to get-tough on gangs----To halt street violence: Bill expands range of gang crimes punishable by death House members telling true-crime tales of gang beheadings and machete attacks were interrupted when a small plane strayed off-track, forcing the evacuation of the Capitol. But even after the scare, it was rising street violence - not terrorist attacks - that lawmakers warned about as they sped a tough anti-gang bill through the House on Wednesday. "No longer are we talking about the old Jets and Sharks from West Side Story. We're talking about gangs that are across the country," said Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Va., the bill's author. "If they were an army from a foreign country, they would be the 6th-largest army in the world." Forbes' bill, approved 279-144, would expand the range of gang crimes punishable by death, establish minimum mandatory sentences, authorize the prosecution of 16-and 17-year-old gang members in federal court as adults, and extend the statute of limitations for all violent crimes from 5 to 15 years. The Republican-driven legislation is in reaction to recent high-profile gang crimes, including victims hacked by machetes in Virginia, and to the activities of gangs like MS-13 - the Central American-influenced Mara Salvatrucha. According to Justice Department statistics cited by the bill's supporters, there are 25,000 active gangs in 3,000 jurisdictions across the country, adding up to 750,000 gang members nationwide. Democrats said the bill puts too much emphasis on punishment and neglects prevention. While the bill authorizes $387.5 million over the next 5 years to fight street crimes, Democrats said the cost of accommodating new prison inmates alone would exceed $9 billion over the next decade. "We must give our young people a path to success, not just a path to prison," said Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Texas. Anti-gang strike forces Under the bill, federal prosecutors would share about $50 million a year to designate areas of high-intensity interstate gang activity and create law enforcement teams to go after gangs. Forbes aides said the intent is to produce an estimated 200 new federal anti-gang prosecutions a year that would strike at gang networks much like the federal government has pursued organized crime syndicates. The bill defines criminal street gangs as groups of 3 or more people who commit two or more gang crimes, one of them violent. Minimum mandatory sentencing guidelines would impose death or life imprisonment for any crime resulting in death; at least 30 years in prison for kidnapping, aggravated sexual abuse or maiming; and at least 20 years for an assault resulting in serious bodily injury. Convictions for other gang crime - defined as violent crimes and other felonies committed to further the activities of a street gang would result in a minimum prison term of at least 10 years. Gang members would be able to avoid the toughest sentences if they cooperate fully with prosecutors. Supporters looked at the mandatory minimum sentences as the first remedy to a recent Supreme Court ruling that made sentencing guidelines advisory instead of mandatory - a decision that disturbed many Republicans. Backers also said they were the best way to force low-level gang members to cooperate with prosecutors and turn in gang leaders. But Democrats said such sentencing requirements would disproportionately affect minorities, remove the discretion of judges and swell prison populations without stopping crime. Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., introduced an amendment that would have struck the mandatory sentencing provisions from the bill, but withdrew it in face of GOP opposition, saying she didn't want it to become a political issue. "I know there are people who are just salivating for this amendment to remain on the floor so they can catch Democrats voting for something they will use in their campaigns," Waters said. Illegal alien criminals targeted The House approved an amendment by Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., that stiffens penalties for illegal immigrants, who law enforcement officials say make up a large proportion of the membership of some gangs. The provision, approved 266-159, adds 5 years to violent crime and drug trafficking sentences when the violator is an illegal immigrant, and 15 years if the violator has previously been deported for a criminal offense. The bill's supporters include the National Sheriffs' Association and the Fraternal Order of Police. Opponents include civil rights groups like the NAACP, the American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights Watch. The bill's prospects in the Senate are uncertain. Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, have introduced an anti-gang bill that, unlike Forbes' bill, contains funding for crime prevention programs and does not include mandatory minimum sentence provisions. (source: Suburban Chicago News)
