July 13 MISSOURI: Reopening Griffin case may sway debate over executions When death penalty advocates appear before Congress, they often justify their position by saying no innocent person has ever been executed in the United States. Doubt about that was raised Tuesday in St. Louis with the release of a new report saying Larry Griffin was innocent of the drive-by shooting of Quintin Moss for which Griffin was executed 10 years ago. The report raised enough questions to persuade Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce to reopen the investigation. Although it will be months before she can issue findings, death penalty opponents are expected to raise Griffin's execution in arguments against capital punishment. That could come as early as today when the Senate Judiciary Committee considers a bill that would streamline federal appeals of state death penalty cases. Barry Scheck, a lawyer for one of the witnesses to the drive-by shooting in which Moss was killed, is scheduled to testify at the hearing. "If this bill passes, a number of innocent people will be executed," predicted Scheck, who represents Wallace Conners, who was wounded in the drive-by shooting. Moss, 19, was killed June 26, 1980, at the corner of Olive Street and Sarah Avenue in St. Louis. The key witness against Griffin, Robert Fitzgerald, was a convicted felon who had been relocated in St. Louis under the federal witness protection program. Conners has said Fitzgerald was not present when the shooting occurred and that Griffin, whom he knew, was not one of those firing a gun from the moving car. Conners left town after the killing and was never called to testify. Some death penalty supporters said the study's authors were biased. "The comments that this is a one-sided report are going to resonate as true with everyone who is pro-death penalty, while the anti-death penalty people are saying 'look, look, look,'" said Dudley Sharp, a vocal advocate for the death penalty who lives in Houston. "What you'll have to have are a lot more objective voices brought in to look at the case to make any determination at all." Others said the fact that Joyce was willing to reopen the case gave some weight to the report. "It could be a huge issue," said Joshua Marquis, a prosecutor and board member of the National District Attorneys Association. "Opponents of capital punishment have been unable to locate any case in which an innocent person has been executed. If they did, I'm sure it would have a profound impact on the discussion" Marquis said death penalty opponents had to find an innocent victim. "The opponents of the death penalty are looking for the great innocent executed person," Marquis added. "About 10 years ago they recognized that claiming the death penalty was immorally wrong wasn't working with the American people." Marquis has said that studies show the murder rate has decreased because of the deterrent effect of the death penalty. "The justice system is far from perfect and has made many mistakes, mostly in favor of the accused." Marquis testified before Congress. Joyce said Tuesday that her interest was in finding justice and providing the truth of what happened to the Moss and Griffin families. She promised to approach the case "fully, meticulously and with a completely open mind." Those who worked to reopen the case oppose the death penalty. Scheck is director of the innocence project at Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University in New York. The project has helped exonerate dozens of prison inmates using DNA testing. Samuel Gross, the University of Michigan Law School professor who supervised the project, has been involved in litigation over racial discrimination in the use of the death penalty. U.S. Rep. William Lacy Clay Jr., D-St. Louis, brought the report to Joyce's attention. Clay, a longtime opponent of the death penalty, had talked to both Conners and Michael Ruggeri, the 1st police officer to arrive at the shooting scene. Ruggeri now says that Fitzgerald was not there when he arrived. "What I heard leads me to believe an innocent man was executed for this murder," Clay said. The report was funded by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, a group that is no longer connected to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. "We got into this case because we believe there was credible evidence of innocence," said Theodore Shaw, president of the fund. "We know human beings are fallible. That's why the death penalty is the irreversible penalty. It can never be undone if there is a mistake made." There have been exoneration efforts in other states and indications that the person executed was innocent. In at least 3 cases - 2 in Virginia and 1 in Texas - authorities refused to allow tests that might have exonerated someone already executed. This is not the 1st time that questions have been raised about Griffin's execution. Death penalty foes like Equal Justice, a public interest research group, and Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty had said Griffin had a credible claim of actual innocence. Currently, 52 inmates face the death penalty in Missouri. State officials have always said no innocent person has ever been executed in Missouri. 3 people in Missouri history have been cleared of a death penalty conviction before their execution and removed from death row. In Illinois in 2003, then-Gov. George Ryan pardoned 4 condemned men and commuted the sentences of 167 remaining on death row after appeals courts exonerated 13 Illinois death row inmates. "Every time doubt is raised about the accuracy of the system and the case in which somebody has been executed, it just causes more and more people to take a harder look at really what's going on here," said Rob Warden, director of the Center on Wrongful Convictions at the Northwestern University School of Law. "It's so fundamental to our concept of justice in this country to execute somebody for a crime that he did not commit is just about the worse thing that you can do." Stephen B. Bright, director of the Atlanta-based Southern Center for Human Rights, said everyone should be concerned about the possible execution of an innocent person, no matter who it is. "The execution of an innocent person indicates that as a society we are tolerating shoddy police work and a sloppy legal process even in cases where the stakes are life and death," Bright wrote in an e-mail. "It shouldn't matter whose life or death is on the line, the verdicts handed down should be accurate and reliable." (source: St. Louis Post-Dispatch) **************** DEATH PENALTY: Dead man talking LARRY GRIFFIN went to his execution in 1995 protesting his innocence in the drug-related murder of Quintin Moss in 1980. Now, new evidence suggests that Griffin was telling the truth and that Missouri executed an innocent man by lethal injection a decade ago. If that is true, Griffin's case could have a profound effect on the state's - and the nation's - legal machinery of death. Year after year, condemned murderers on death row have been freed after new evidence surfaced that they had been wrongfully convicted. Since 1973, 119 prisoners facing execution have walked out of prisons in 25 states based on new evidence of innocence, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, a group that collects data on capital punishment, which it opposes. In Illinois alone, 18 men were found to be wrongfully convicted. And yet proponents of the death penalty here and elsewhere, including 2 past Missouri governors and the current attorney general, continue to argue that no innocent person ever has been executed. It will be hard to make that argument now. The case against Griffin was flimsy from the start. The state's star witness, Robert Fitzgerald, was a felon from Boston who was in the federal government's witness protection program. In fact, he faced criminal charges in St. Louis County. Fitzgerald was released from jail the same day Griffin was convicted. Now, as the Post-Dispatch's Terry Ganey disclosed this week, a new investigation by the NAACP Legal Defense Fund has found more reasons to question Fitzgerald's testimony. A police officer, a shooting victim and a relative of the murder victim say they did not see Fitzgerald at the scene. St. Louis Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, to her credit, has taken the unprecedented step of reopening the case of a dead man. She took that bold step - one that is sure to invite criticism - at the urging of Rep. William Lacy Clay, D-St. Louis, and after seeing the new evidence. Ms. Joyce, supported by Mr. Moss's relatives, wants to make sure that the real killer or killers are identified. By chance, the evidence of Griffin's possible innocence comes as Congress is considering a bill that would streamline federal appeals, making it harder for death row inmates to prove their innocence. Today, the Senate Judiciary Committee takes up S 1080, sponsored by Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., which would greatly restrict the use of the writ of habeas corpus. The "Great Writ," with roots as deep as the Magna Carta, is the legal tool prisoners use to challenge their convictions after other appeals have failed. The bill would cut off most of those appeals, except where a prisoner could make a compelling argument for his innocence. On the surface, that sounds reasonable enough; only innocent people should be cleared. But in reality, cases of innocence seldom emerge full-blown. Prisoners get new trials built not upon oak-solid evidence of innocence, but upon the thin reeds of technicalities artfully woven together: A defense lawyer made an ineffective argument; a prosecutor failed to turn over key evidence. The Kyl bill would cut off habeas corpus for those intermediate appeals, making it nearly impossible to construct a case of innocence. 7 people exonerated after serving years on death row are expected to attend today's hearing to drive home the point that the Kyl bill could have sent them to the death chamber. Larry Griffin cannot attend, but senators should heed his story and kill the bill. Griffin is not the only person with a strong case of innocence who has been executed. His is just the strongest case among many. The machinery of capital punishment is so fundamentally flawed that it violates our standard of decency. (source: Editorial, St. Louis Post-Dispatch) OHIO----2 new execution dates (1 volunteer) Execution dates set for drug dealer, man who dropped appeals In Columbus, the Ohio Supreme Court on Wednesday set death sentence dates for a man who shot 4 people in a drug territory dispute and the state's 3rd volunteer for execution. Herman Ashworth is to be executed by lethal injection on Sept. 27 after telling a judge he deserves to be killed for beating a man to death in 1996. William J. Williams Jr., 48, was convicted of shooting in the head 3 men he had heard were dealing drugs in his former territory at a Youngstown housing project and a friend who dropped by their apartment that day in 1991. His execution is set for Oct. 25. Ashworth, 32, was convicted in the beating of Daniel Baker in 1996 in an alley in Newark, about 30 miles east of Columbus. He wrote to U.S. District Judge Edmund Sargus in June that he was guilty and always believed the price for taking a life is death. Ashworth's attorneys, who oppose the death penalty, withdrew from the case but said they would help him with legal matters if he asks. He follows Wilford Berry and Stephen Vrabel in dropping their appeals to speed up their death sentences. Berry was executed in 1999 and Vrabel last July. Ohio justices had upheld Williams' conviction and death sentence in 1997, and the U.S. Supreme Court rejected his final appeal in April. A message seeking comment was left with his Cleveland attorney, John Gibbons. Williams escaped custody before he was tried, then took a receptionist and officer hostage at the Mahoning County Juvenile Justice Center in an alleged attempt to kill 3 juveniles who helped him with the slayings and agreed to testify against him. His trial was moved to Summit County because of pretrial publicity. He was convicted on 17 counts including aggravated murder and kidnapping. His appeals had centered on 2 jurors who concealed their views on the death penalty. But courts upheld the death sentence, saying the jurors' views did not affect their ability to be impartial. Ohio has put 16 men to death, including 7 last year, since resuming executions in 1999 with Berry. 1 other execution is set this fall, John Spirko, 1 week before Ashworth. (source: Associated Press) USA: Streamline or steamroll? THERE IS A GROWING awareness in this country, given a growing number of exonerations based on DNA and other evidence, that it's too easy for innocent people to land on death row. These cases help explain why public support for the death penalty has been eroding. The U.S. Supreme Court is increasingly alarmed by the quality of legal representation afforded defendants in capital cases, and some states are hesitant to apply the death penalty given mounting doubts about the level of error built into their judicial systems. So it's the opposite of logic to see some in Congress moving the other way, seeking to curtail the ability of federal courts to hear claims of an improper trial from defendants convicted in state court. The Senate today holds a hearing on the ill-advised and Orwellian-sounding Streamlined Procedures Act. What this legislation and its House companion threaten to streamline is the execution or lifetime incarceration of the innocent. The federal judiciary is the ultimate guarantor of Americans' constitutional rights, including the right to due process, and it's sad to see members of Congress (including California's former attorney general, GOP Rep. Dan Lungren) eager to further limit federal oversight over flawed state proceedings. The centerpiece of the legislation would eliminate the review of most claims for cases coming out of states that the U.S. Department of Justice has certified as providing defendants with competent counsel. Should we leave it up to Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales, he of the torture memos, to pass judgment on the quality of representation given convicts in Texas? Sounds like a great idea if you are a state prosecutor annoyed at those pesky federal judges. The measure may even be unconstitutional - it's for a federal court, not a federal prosecutor, to determine whether states are violating the U.S. Constitution. To sell their "streamlining" law, its proponents are offering to leave the door to the federal courthouse ajar for defendants who can point to evidence of their actual innocence. This is a cynical ploy. It's pretty hard to produce such evidence if your right to a competent lawyer has been denied, or if a prosecutor got someone to lie on the witness stand. Exonerations of people wrongly convicted of a crime typically start with a finding that there was a procedural flaw in the case, and only subsequent fair hearings establish the truth. That's one reason Congress ought to stand up for the due process rights of all Americans. (source: Editorial, Los Angeles Times) ******************* Judging the death penalty ----Reviewed by ALLYNE SMITH After the sniper shootings around Washington in 2002, then-U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft made the decision to have the culprits tried first in Virginia for two simple reasons: Virginia is second only to Texas in its number of executions, and at the time it allowed for the execution of minors. Many in the American press debated whether it would be right to sentence John Lee Malvo, then 17, to the death penalty; some said his youth made him more susceptible to being coerced or even brainwashed. In the end, a jury did not recommend a death sentence for the teenager. Since then, the practice of allowing the execution of minors was deemed unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court (Roper v. Simmons on March 1), and the debate over the morality of state-sponsored executions continues in the press and public consciousness today. The death penalty is on trial, as evidenced in 2 recent books. The lawyer-turned-investigative journalist Bill Kurtis, well known as the host of A&E Network's "American Justice" and "Cold Case Files" programs, takes aim at the unreliability of the capital punishment system in The Death Penalty on Trial: Crisis in American Justice. After supporting the death penalty for three decades, Mr. Kurtis changed his mind when it became apparent that justice is not served by the system. Innocent people can find themselves on death row. He examines two cases in depth -- Arizonas 1991 Kim Acona murder and Pennsylvanias 1994 Dryfuse family murder. Mr. Kurtis examines the crimes, the police investigations, the trials, the appeals and the subsequent exoneration of the men who were awaiting execution. Reading the book feels like reading a transcript of one of his programs, which is both good and bad. It is compelling but not literary. An open-minded reader could not come away undisturbed by the case Mr. Kurtis marshals against capital punishment. In the final chapter he briefly discusses the two-year moratorium on the death penalty ordered by Gov. George Ryan of Illinois in 2000, his commutation of the sentences of everyone on his states death row and the subsequent enactment of reforms signed into law by his successor in 2004. While Mr. Kurtis acknowledges that the reforms in Illinois make errors less likely than before, he remains convinced of the capital punishment systems fragility and its inability to guarantee that the innocent will not be put to death. "The administration of justice is complicated," he concludes, "too complicated to make death its product." Perhaps no book on capital punishment in the last 2 decades has had the prominence of Sr. Helen Prejeans 1993 Dead Man Walking: An Eyewitness Account of the Death Penalty in the United States. It was a powerful, moving testimony about the executions of two men guilty of the murders for which they were sentenced, and it became a successful film -- economically and artistically -- with Susan Sarandon in the role of Sr. Helen. It was a testimony to her conviction that each person is worth more than the worst thing that person has done as well as a tribute to the remarkable and gracious experience of forgiveness. In her new book, The Death of Innocents: An Eyewitness Account of Wrongful Executions, Sr. Helen follows Mr. Kurtis in examining 2 cases in great detail of men on death row who she believes were innocent. Unlike the cases Mr. Kurtis wrote about, however, these innocents were executed rather than legally exonerated. Dobie Gillis Williams was a poor black man in Louisiana with an IQ of 65 who was represented by an incompetent attorney who did not manage to effectively challenge the state's improbable arguments. The case is especially tragic because his 1999 execution would just have been barred by the U.S. Supreme Courts 2002 decision in Atkins v. Virginia, which declared the execution of the mentally handicapped to be unconstitutional. The case of Joseph Roger ODell is equally disturbing. Convicted on the testimony of a jailhouse snitch who later recanted, Mr. ODell sought DNA testing to prove his innocence, but the courts refused to have the testing done. Sr. Helen's accounts of these two cases are more compelling than those by Mr. Kurtis, but then she writes not as an investigative reporter but as the spiritual adviser who accompanied both men to their executions. She treats at greater length those aspects that make the system rife with error, although she goes a bit further in illuminating "how race, prosecutorial ambition, poverty, election cycles and publicity play far too great a role in determining who dies and who lives." U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia is the political figure who receives the greatest attention from Sr. Helen, no doubt because of his unbridled support for the death penalty (he proudly refers to himself as part of "the machinery of death") and the fact that he is a practicing Catholic. George W. Bush, who in his 6 years as governor of Texas presided over an astounding 152 executions, also comes under scrutiny, as does his legal counsel at the time, Alberto Gonzalez, who is currently the U.S. Attorney General. Particularly disturbing are the private remarks then-Gov. Bush made before the execution of Karla Faye Tucker, a case that featured appeals for clemency not only from Pope John Paul II but from some religious supporters of capital punishment such as Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell. An important part of the book's message is something that goes underreported -- the stories of forgiveness. Sr. Helen dedicates The Death of Innocents to the organization Murder Victims' Families for Human Rights. This reviewer's one disappointment with the book is how un-theological it is overall. While mentioning some specific scriptural and church texts, Sr. Helen misses an opportunity to make a theologically compelling argument against the execution of anyone, even the guilty. When she mentions the Mass, she does so only to discuss the role of scriptural readings and homilies that could address the death penalty; she overlooks the case for why the church and Christians who celebrate the Eucharist should not be involved in executing people. But this does not diminish the power of Sr. Helens book. One cannot come away from it without at least suspecting that Justice Harry Blackmun was right when he concluded, "The death penalty experiment has failed." If capital punishment is eventually abolished in the United States as it has been already in most of the civilized world, it will be in no small way due to the efforts of Sr. Helen Prejean. Fr. Allyne Smith is an Orthodox priest who teaches philosophy and theology for William Penn University in Des Moines, Iowa. He is coauthor of the Ekklesia Project pamphlet "Christian Worship and the Death Penalty." (source: National Catholic Reporter) ********************* Cure for Drug Problem Every day I read of someone dying of an overdose or stealing or selling drugs. The federal government could pass a law that anyone convicted of selling, manufacturing or growing drugs illegally receives the death penalty with only one appeal, and that approval has to be within 6 months. If the appeal is denied the sentence would be carried out within 1 year of conviction. It would be only a short time before the dealers disappear and the drug users would have no place to buy drugs. Also, the state would save a tremendous amount of money by not having to keep the people in jail or prison. The amount of robberies would decline because a large percent are to buy drugs. H. Osmon Coombs -- Winter Harbor (source: Letter to the Editor, Red Nova) ********************** Death penalty says killing is OK In this week's poll from The Times Argus, the question was on whether Donald Fell should receive the death penalty for his actions. I find that that question is not an easy one to answer. I assume, like most people, that their gut reaction is "Yes, kill him," but is that the message we want to give? If we kill that man for his actions, then what we are telling him is it is OK when certain people say it is. Is this the message we want to give? If we kill that man, even if it is government-sanctioned, then we are murdering another human being. What he did was wrong, but to kill him would only sink us down to his level. We have to take a stand. If we say that taking a life is wrong, then we have to stick to it. While there are areas of gray in life, some things are black and white. Which side do you stand on: the black or the white? Heather Blakey, Barre (source: Letter to the Editor, Times Argus OKLAHOMA----impending execution Ex-soldier is denied clemency A former Fort Sill soldier who shot and killed a Lawton convenience store clerk with a sawed-off shotgun was denied clemency Monday. The governor will not consider clemency for Michael Pennington, 37, the state Pardon and Parole Board decided in a 4-1 vote. The convicted murderer is scheduled to be executed July 19. "I was petty, narcissistic and selfish, and because of my actions, Bradley Grooms is dead," Pennington read from a letter he kept in a manila envelope. Pennington shot Grooms, 20, in 1991 at a 7-Eleven store. "Murder is the worst of all crimes, and I have not learned to live with it," Pennington said. "Nothing I can say or do will wash away the hate and self-loathing." Pennington apologized to Grooms' parents, who did not attend the hearing because it was too difficult, Assistant Attorney General Seth Branham said. Defense Attorney Fred Skaggs argued that trial lawyers didn't submit "the real cause" of what turned "this young man of high achievement, service to country into a fleeing murderer" -- steroids. Board members extensively questioned Skaggs and Pennington about the possible effects of steroids and how or if it was related to the murder. The death row inmate said he used a horse steroid days before the killing. ************************** 2 murder trials set for August In Pryonr, 2 Mayes County murder cases will go to trial in August, a prosecutor said Monday. Chuck Ramsey, Mayes County assistant district attorney, said Carl Sitsler's trial is set for Aug. 1. Virgel Avery's trial is set for Aug. 8. Sitsler, 40, is charged with 1st-degree murder in the death of his brother, Johnny Dee Sitsler, on Jan. 7, with a shotgun blast to the chest, court reports state. Avery, 76, is charged with 1st-degree murder and shooting with intent to kill in connection with the fatal shooting of Darryl Jumper, 36, and wounding of John Easter, 34, both of Spavinaw. (source for both: The Oklahoman, July 12) IDAHO: Lovelace spared death penalty The Office of Attorney General has negotiated an agreement under which Faron E. Lovelace will serve a fixed life sentence for the 1995 kidnapping and murder of Jeremy Scott, Attorney General Lawrence Wasden said. Lovelace also agreed to waive all direct appeals in his case. As a result of the agreement, the Attorney General's Office has withdrawn its notice of intent to seek the death penalty in Lovelace's pending resentencing. Lovelace accepted the agreement in First District Court in Bonner County July 8. District Judge Steven Verby then sentenced Lovelace to life in prison without the possibility of parole. In 1997, the Attorney General's Office, serving as special prosecutor at the request of the Bonner County Prosecuting Attorney, determined that sufficient evidence existed in this case to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Lovelace committed a murder and a kidnapping and that the existence of statutory aggravating factors could also be proven. Following conviction by a jury, First District Judge James Judd sentenced Lovelace to death by lethal injection. In preparing for resentencing, deputies attorney general reviewed every document available concerning Lovelace, his prior involvement with the criminal justice system, case files concerning associates involved with him in criminal matters, as well as in his dealings with the victim, Jeremy Scott. The Attorney General's Office also examined Lovelace's conduct during the past 10 years of incarceration, his current medical condition, and his mental health history. This evaluation also included an examination of the background and activities of the victim. "A prosecutor's highest duty is to seek justice," Wasden said. "When my office acts as a special prosecutor, we review the facts and the law existing at the time. As a result of our exhaustive review of this case, we have concluded that the death penalty is not a just sentence in this case. Although there is evidence to establish one or more statutory aggravating factors, there is also a significant amount of evidence which mitigates Mr. Lovelace's crimes and which must be weighed against imposing the death penalty." U.S. Marshals arrested Lovelace on August 18, 1996, for a federal parole violation. While in custody, he confessed to murdering Jeremy Scott in 1995 in the mountains near Sandpoint. Lovelace shot Jeremy Scott in the back of the head with a .38 caliber handgun. He had previously taken Scott at gunpoint and held him through the night, talking, discussing religion, and praying. During the early morning hours, Lovelace shot Scott in the back of his head, killing him instantly. Early the next morning, Lovelace hauled Scott's body to a remote mountainous area and buried him along a roadside in Boundary County. The crime was undiscovered until Lovelace's confession. The Office of Attorney General prosecuted the case at the request of the Bonner County Prosecuting Attorney. Prior to trial, the Office of Attorney General attempted to resolve the case by offering Lovelace a fixed life sentence in return for guilty pleas to the murder and kidnapping charges. Lovelace, serving as his own attorney, rejected the plea offer and stated his desire to be sentenced to death. In September of 1997, Lovelace was tried in First District Court in Bonner County for first-degree murder and 1st degree kidnapping. Lovelace, still representing himself, presented no evidence, except for a statement to the jury wherein he admitted the elements of the state's case. Lovelace asked the jury to find him guilty and requested that the judge sentence him to death. On September 11, 1997, the jury returned guilty verdicts on the charges of first degree murder and first degree kidnapping. On December 17, 1997, First District Judge James F. Judd sentenced Lovelace to death. In January 1998, Lovelace, still acting as his own attorney, filed a motion for post-conviction relief. Lovelace notified the court in March 2000 that he was withdrawing his application and waiving his right to post-conviction relief proceedings. Under Idaho law, all death sentences must be reviewed by the Idaho Supreme Court. On July 23, 2003, and November 20, 2003, the Idaho Supreme Court affirmed Lovelace's conviction and vacated the death sentence. The Supreme Court sent the case back to district court for sentencing pursuant to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Ring v. Arizona. In the Ring case, the nation's highest court held that the question of whether the aggravating factors necessary for a death sentence were present in a case is a factual determination that must be made by a jury, rather than a judge. (source: Kootenai Valley Press News) ******************** Suspect stalked family, records say ----------------------------------- Sex offender used night-vision goggles to learn the home's layout, authorities say A convicted sex offender charged with kidnapping and murder spent days stalking the home where 3 people were bludgeoned to death and 2 young children were abducted, according to court documents. Joseph Edward Duncan III had spotted Shasta Groene, 8, playing in a bathing suit with her 9-year-old brother, Dylan. "(Duncan) told her he watched her 2 or 3 days, and at night would peer inside the home," Detective Brad Maskell told the judge, according to records Tuesday. He used night-vision goggles to learn the home's layout before bursting in, Maskell said. Duncan, 42, was charged with 1st-degree murder and 1st-degree kidnapping in the bludgeoning deaths of the children's mother, Brenda Groene, her 13-year-old son Slade and her boyfriend Mark McKenzie. If convicted, he could face the death penalty. On the morning of May 16, Shasta's mother called her into the living room. There, she told investigators, she saw Duncan wearing dark gloves and holding a shotgun. Her mother, brother Slade and McKenzie were bound with zip-ties and duct tape. Duncan then bound Shasta and Dylan, taking them outside, according to authorities. Shasta told detectives that she heard McKenzie yell several times, and at one point she saw Slade stagger, bloody and incoherent, out of the home. Maskell said Duncan bragged about killing her family with a hammer and showed it to Shasta. (source: Associated Press)
