July 16


TEXAS:

Clifton Williams Arrested In Brutal Murder Case


Late Friday night, police arrested 21-year-old Clifton Lamar Williams.

Police said Williams was wanted for the murder of 93-year-old Cecilia
Schneider.

Mrs. Schneider was found stabbed to death inside her home. Police believe
Williams stole her purse and car, then set her home on fire to cover up
the crime.

He is being held at the Smith County Jail on a capital murder warrant.

Police said neighbors spotted Clifton Williams Friday night in the same
neighborhood, Mrs. Schneider called home.

They said officers searched the area around Callahan Street and Fannin
Avenue, where Williams lives. When they found him, police said Williams
led officers on a brief foot chase, then ran to his father's home to hide.
Police said William's father, brought his son to the police department.

Police are not yet saying how Clifton Williams, is linked to Mrs.
Schneider. However, when KLTV visited her neighborhood to talk with those
who lived right beside her about his arrest, we spoke to a woman who
declined to go on camera, but said her niece, who lives with her, has been
dating Clifton Williams for the past two months. She said on many
occasions Williams come to the house, including Friday night. She also
told us she was one of the people who alerted police he was in the area.
Their home is only a few doors down from Mrs. Schneider's home.

"We have such relief that this guy is off the streets now and can't do
this to anyone else," said Mrs. Schneider's daughter, Barbara Holder.
Barbara was thankful for Williams quick arrest.

"You have to understand this man was caught, almost to the hour of the
time that he killed my mother, one week ago," she said.

Barbara Holder wanted to meet with KLTV in front of the "Wall of
Memories," where the names of violent crime victims are written. Her
mother's name will one day be etched in the granite. Barbara said she
suspects Williams had seen her 93-year-old mother as an easy target.

"I don't know the circumstances totally, but I think he just saw an easy
way to get some money, or whatever he was looking for."

Barbara said she will leave Williams fate to a jury. "I don't wish anyone
harm. I could say that I want the death penalty but I'm not sure that
that's the answer."

Her heart still hurts for the mother she has lost. But Barbara is grateful
for all those she said helped find the man that took her mother away from
her.

"The people, the people are the ones that did this. They are trying to
make the community safe and it's safer now with this guy off the streets."

Again, authorities have not yet confirmed how Williams was linked to Mrs.
Schneider's murder. His bond has been set at $1 million.

(source: KLTV News)






USA:

Court Gutting in Congress


Congress is quietly considering whether to destroy one of the pillars of
constitutional law: the habeas corpus power of the federal courts to
determine whether an indigent defendant has been unjustly sentenced to
death in state courts.

A bill making alarming progress in committee would effectively strip
federal courts of most review power and shift it to the attorney general.
That's right: the chief prosecutor of the United States would become the
judge of whether state courts behave fairly enough toward defendants
appealing capital convictions. If a state system was certified as up to
snuff, then the federal courts would lose their jurisdiction and condemned
defendants their last hope.

It is appalling that lawmakers would visit such destruction on a basic
human right that's been painfully secured across three centuries of
jurisprudence. Repeatedly, federal court scrutiny has laid bare the shoddy
state of capital justice in the states. DNA science has drawn attention to
the frequency of false convictions.

The injustices of the criminal court process flow considerably from the
widespread lack of competent defense counsel in the first place. Yet the
proposal would allow state courts greater cover in pronouncing their own
flawed convictions as too "harmless and nonprejudicial" to merit further
review.

Proponents insist that truly meritorious complaints would somehow survive
under this oppressive bill. In fact, it would make the execution of the
innocent even more likely than it already is.

(source: Editorial, New York Times)






FLORIDA:

Death penalty request denied


A circuit judge denied a request to throw out the death penalty in the
Joseph P. Smith case.

Despite his argument that the indictment filed against Smith does not
allege a "single aggravated circumstance," Circuit Judge Andrew Owens
denied Assistant Public Defender Adam Tebrugge's motion, basing his
decision on precedents set by the Florida Supreme Court.

The request was one of 14 motions Tebrugge filed and Owens reviewed at the
Sarasota County Courthouse on Friday morning.

Smith, who is charged with the February 2004 abduction, rape and murder of
11-year-old Carlie Brucia, was not present at Friday's hearing. He may
begin attending future court hearings as the Nov. 7 trial date approaches,
Tebrugge said.

On Friday, Owens also denied two similar motions filed by Tebrugge who,
citing case law, asked the judge to declare the state's death penalty
unconstitutional in the Smith case and to bar the death sentence on the
basis that Florida's capital sentencing procedure is unconstitutional.

"Even though I did not prevail today, I still continue to believe that our
death penalty statute is unconstitutional," Tebrugge told The Herald after
Friday's 3-hour hearing.

Prosecutors declined to comment on the judge's decisions following the
hearing, which was scheduled to address the 14 nonevidentiary motions
Tebrugge filed.

6 of the motions were aimed at the State Attorney's Office. The defense
attorney asked the judge to order prosecutors to provide the defense with
favorable evidence they had gathered in their depositions, interviews and
findings, which includes any information that indicates Smith is not
guilty of any or all of the charges filed against him.

Tebrugge also requested any information that may be considered mitigating
evidence, such as police reports and witness statements, that could
present Smith's character in a favorable manner.

Another motion asked the judge to order prosecutors to share police
lineups or other information that may have been used when witnesses were
asked to identify the suspect in the car wash video. That video captured
Carlie's abduction and a station wagon the suspect used.

Tebrugge stressed that, by law, prosecutors must give this information to
the defense and that "suppression violates due process."

To counter Tebrugge's argument, Assistant State Attorney Debra Johnes Riva
told the judge that prosecutors have been cooperative with Tebrugge's
requests and that Tebrugge can obtain the information by conducting his
own depositions. She also added that Tebrugge's motions were too broad.

"I do not have an issue at all with the argument the defense made with
regard to the state's responsibility to make sure that we have all written
statements and to give them to the defense," Johnes Riva said.

"We've done that, judge. . . . My main response to his motion is we don't
need an additional order from the court to tell the state what its
obligation is."

Among his requests, Tebrugge asked the court to order prosecutors to
disclose whether any jailed witnesses or those under prosecution on other
cases will receive leniency by testifying in Smith's case.

He asked that the court order prosecutors to release all of Smith's prior
records and other old files and that they also be ordered to disclose
their statement of particulars as to aggravating circumstances and theory
of prosecution - or whether their argument against Smith is based on a
premeditation or as a felony.

Tebrugge's insistence mildly agitated prosecutors, who reiterated that
they have cooperated with the defense, that, under state law, they are not
obligated to give him the information he seeks and that they will provide
the defense with requested documents during the trial.

"We have provided hundreds of witnesses who are listed in police reports,
and we have provided thousands of pages of discovery," Chief Assistant
State Attorney Dennis Nales told the court. "We have given him everything
in our possession that we physically have and have searched out through
law enforcement records. What's left is the opportunity for the defense to
take discovery depositions."

In court, Nales said Tebrugge interviewed the lead detective in the case
and failed to ask important questions, like whether witnesses saw a photo
lineup.

"Why do we have to go through the materials that we've provided to him and
specifically categorize again and delineate or outline things that are
included in those materials?" Nales said, posing a rhetorical question to
the judge. "Why would we have a burden greater than what the rule
provides?"

Owens deferred a decision on the 6 motions Tebrugge filed against
prosecutors. The judge denied the request to declare Florida's rule of
criminal procedure unconstitutional.

Owens also denied a motion to compel the disclosure of mitigating
circumstances, and he rejected 3 motions concerning sentencing guidelines
and another motion asking for a unanimous decision by a jury. All the
motions were filed by Tebrugge.

Owens asked the attorneys whether they are comfortable with the Nov. 7
trial date. While Tebrugge said he was, Riva said prosecutors still had a
lot of discovery material to go through and preparation before they could
be ready to go to trial.

A future hearing date was not set during Friday's hearing. Smith is being
held at the Manatee County jail without bond.

Defense attorney Mark Lipinski said Tebrugge's motions are not uncommon in
cases such as Smith's.

"You just never know what's going to happen in court," he said. "What's
the worst that could happen? The judge says no."

He also considered Owens' responses standard in such a case, which are
usually reviewed by the Florida Supreme Court for errors.

"One thing trial judges never like is to go into cases with a built-in
reversible error," Lipinski said. "They know death cases are the ones that
receive review and if there is an error, they go back to square one."

(source: Bradenton Herald)






CALIFORNIA:

Rincon man could face death penalty in double slaying


Marlene Magee was nearly seven months pregnant when she was shot to death
in February 2004. Now her boyfriend ---- the man accused of killing her
---- could face the death penalty for the slaying of Magee and her unborn
baby girl.

Prosecutor Geoff Allard filed an allegation Friday morning that makes
Andree Francis Calac eligible for the death penalty if he is found guilty
of first-degree murder in the shooting.

Calac pleaded not guilty Friday to 2 murder charges, as well as the newly
added allegation that there were multiple slayings ---- a special
circumstance for which he could be put to death if convicted.

District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis will decide before the trial if her
office will seek the death penalty or life in prison without the
possibility of parole as a punishment if Calac is convicted.

In order for Calac to be convicted of the allegation of multiple murders
---- and thus the death penalty or life in prison without parole ---- at
least one of those slayings has to be deemed to be 1st-degree murder.

"We're contending the murder of Marlene Magee was murder in the 1st
(degree)," Allard said after the hearing.

According to testimony at a preliminary hearing last month, Calac was
drinking and using drugs on the day before the early morning slaying.

At some point, Calac picked up 22-year-old Magee from her home and the
couple returned to his trailer on the Rincon Indian Reservation, according
to police.

The couple began arguing, and Calac snatched a shotgun, grabbed Magee by
the face with his left hand and, using his right hand, pointed the barrel
of the gun in her face, according to testimony from investigators.

The medical examiner testified that the webbing on Magee's hand appeared
to have been blown off by the blast. The thumb on Calac's left hand was
also partially blown-off.

After the shooting, Calac drove the woman to a nearby fire station,
according to testimony.

Fire Capt. Brian Beresford testified last month that Calac was bleeding,
babbling and incoherent when he showed up at the station. Beresford said
firefighters followed Calac back to his car, where they found Magee but
were unable to find her pulse.

Medical examiner Glenn Wagner testified on cross-examination that for as
long as 34 minutes after Magee was shot, there was a chance Magee's unborn
child could have survived. It is unclear at exactly what time Magee was
shot and exactly when she died, Wagner testified.

According to testimony, Calac has said he was the father of Magee's unborn
child. Magee, 22, was also the mother of 3 little girls.

(source: North County Times)





*******************

Appeals Court Overturns Death Sentence----U.S. 9th Circuit blocks man's
execution for a 2nd time after being told by Supreme Court to reconsider
the 1st decision it made in 2003.


For the 2nd time, a federal appeals court in San Francisco has overturned
the death sentence of a man who has spent more than 2 decades on death row
for beating a woman to death with an iron bar.

In recent years, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has toppled more
than a dozen California death sentences, on some occasions drawing rebukes
from the Supreme Court.

On Friday, the 9th Circuit overturned the death penalty for Fernando
Belmontes, 44.

He was 19 when he and 2 other young men went to the home of Steacy
McConnell in Victor, Calif., just east of Lodi, to steal her stereo in the
aftermath of an argument over drugs, according to trial testimony.
McConnell's parents later found their daughter lying in a pool of blood.

In mitigation, the defense presented evidence that Belmontes had a family
history of poverty and violence.

The 9th Circuit first blocked Belmontes' execution in 2003, ruling that
the trial judge had failed to instruct the jury to consider all mitigating
evidence before deciding on execution.

On March 28, the Supreme Court vacated the decision and directed the court
to reconsider its ruling in light of a decision a week earlier. That case
concerned Orange County murderer William Payton, who raped and stabbed to
death a Garden Grove woman in 1980. Payton had argued that his trial judge
failed to instruct the jury to consider his behind-bars conversion to
Christianity.

In Payton's case, the high court noted that Congress in 1996 changed the
law to say that federal judges should defer to state courts' reasonable
judgments in death penalty cases.

The 9th Circuit, however, ruled Friday that Belmontes' case was different
because he filed his challenge before the 1996 law was enacted.
Consequently, the state court rulings were due less deference, the court
said, and it was appropriate to overturn the death penalty because of the
judge's failure to issue the mitigation instruction.

The ruling was written by Judge Stephen Reinhardt, an appointee of
President Carter who is one of the court's most consistent skeptics about
the validity of death sentences. Judge Richard A. Paez, a Clinton
appointee, joined Reinhardt's opinion. Judge Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain, a
Reagan appointee who consistently votes to uphold death sentences, issued
a strong dissent, just as he did 2 years ago.

"The majority strains mightily - and unpersuasively - to perceive
constitutional error in the comprehensive and perfectly proper jury
instructions given by the state trial judge," O'Scannlain wrote. "Because
there simply is no such error, and the Supreme Court has expressly told us
so on 2 separate occasions, I must respectfully dissent."

Mill Valley attorney Eric Multhaup, who has represented Belmontes in
appeals for 23 years, called the ruling "really good news."

The California attorney general's office had no immediate comment. The
office almost always asks the Supreme Court to review a case when the 9th
Circuit overturns a death sentence.

(source: Los Angeles Times)






PENNSYLVANIA:

Is a man still a killer 25 years later?


On the occasion of their 1st death sentences, Michael Travaglia and John
Lesko were trotted from the courtroom in shackles when Travaglia paused a
few inches from prosecutor Tim Geary.

"I'm coming back to get you," Travaglia spat.

"That's the kind of animal you are," Geary replied.

"Mike," Lesko said, "let's not make this any worse than it already is."

Here they were, sentenced to die for killing a policeman, the grand finale
to an eight-day festival of mayhem that left 4 dead, and Lesko didn't want
to complicate matters with harsh words.

Since 1981 Pennsylvania's electric chair has been replaced by lethal
injection. Geary has moved along to private practice as a lawyer. The very
dome of the courthouse in which they were sentenced has changed in hue.

More saliently, the animal Travaglia was that day he promised revenge no
longer paces his cell on death row. A year after arriving in prison,
Travaglia got religion, or perhaps religion got him. He heads a Bible
study, counsels fellow prisoners, expresses neither remorse nor many
excuses for the drug-and-alcohol abetted hell he and Lesko dispensed over
Christmas season 1979-80.

They shot a man they lured out of a seedy bar in Pittsburgh. They gunned
down a young widow who picked them up as they hitchhiked in the fog. They
tied a large rock around a bleeding church organist and dropped him 38
feet to the bottom of a lake. Still high on the thrill, they baited
Officer Leonard Miller into chasing them across the Armstrong-Westmoreland
line, then shot him twice.

Geary was called to the scene when Miller's body was found on a roadside
outside the town of Apollo.

"Leonard was lying on the ground in his uniform. I thought to myself,
'He's the last protection between us and the Huns and the Visigoths,' "
Geary said.

With a young man's corpse on a roadside, another's at a lake bottom, and
the earth just settling over the bodies of a young widow and an ordinary
guy shanghaied from a bar, the depth of anger in the citizenry has lasted
the quarter-century since a judge's error made the first death sentences
invalid. Travaglia's fresh chance at a life sentence -- his murder
conviction stands -- began this week with a new jury, new prosecutor, new
judge and, if redemption is real, a new man in the defense chair. Quite
possibly we are witnessing that rarest of rarities: the Pennsylvania
Department of Corrections has actually corrected someone.

Geary has given the matter some thought. The distance of time allows for
that. He still comes down on the side of execution, something he did not
believe in before he saw Miller's body on the roadside. What is
interesting is the lack of stridency in this feeling. Were the jury to
give Travaglia life, Geary will not be bothered.

"It's up to a jury. That's why they don't leave it up to prosecutors," he
said.

What is left up to prosecutors is to argue that Travaglia deserves to die
and to somehow convince a jury that the meek, balding, 46-year-old before
them is still the man who killed Leonard Miller. They must somehow be
convinced they are executing the person, not just his history, and that it
somehow serves a social purpose beyond using law as a substitute for
conscientious reflection.

It remains for John Peck to overcome that distance of time that separates
the two realities of Michael Travaglia. Peck is as gracious a man as walks
the streets of Greensburg, a former seminarian from the Pontifical College
Josephenum whose own church is unlikely to approve in the least of one of
its own seeking a death penalty.

"I realize what may result from prosecuting this case and I thought about
it long and hard," Peck said. "I wouldn't get any satisfaction out of
seeing him die." He sounds less relieved to be the prosecutor than to not
be a juror.

We cannot be about the business of killing people just in case they are
insufficiently reformed, just as we cannot be about the business of
killing people in roadside sprees. If Travaglia's self-redemption is borne
out in the forthcoming days, jurors will have to ask themselves a question
posed by Sophocles 2,500 years ago: "Who is the slayer, who the victim?
Speak."

(source: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)




MASSACHUSETTS:

No guarantees in life - or in death penalty


Gov. W. Mitt Romney told lawmakers Thursday that his proposal to reinstate
the death penalty comes with a guarantee that no innocent person would
ever be executed in Massachusetts if his bill becomes law.

"This is as foolproof a death penalty as exists, and you will not have
false convictions and false executions under this bill," the governor told
the Judiciary Committee. "This won't happen."

If lawmakers believe that, we've got a tunnel in Boston we could sell
them.

Since 1973, 119 convicted murderers in 25 states have been freed after
evidence surfaced that they had been wrongly convicted, according to the
Death Penalty Information Center.

Earlier this month, a prosecutor in Missouri said she will reopen the case
of convicted murderer Larry Griffin after receiving evidence of his
possible innocence - 10 years after he was executed by lethal injection.

Romney believes his bill has safeguards to prevent such mistakes,
including a requirement for conclusive scientific evidence such as DNA
analysis.

The death penalty, however, can never be made foolproof, as Romney later
acknowledged when pressed by lawmakers.

A commission created by George Ryan when he was governor of Illinois
concluded in 2002 that "no system, given human nature and frailties, could
ever be devised or constructed that would work perfectly and guarantee
absolutely that no innocent person is ever again sentenced to death."

2 years ago, Romney vetoed funds approved by the Legislature to create a
Department of Forensic Sciences - just the type of department that would
be necessary to provide the strict burden of proof that the governor
promises in his bill.

In addition, the state's crime laboratory, medical examiner's office and
local police departments are not funded at the levels needed to ensure
that only the guilty are executed.

This newspaper has long opposed the death penalty, and will continue to
speak out against it each time an attempt is made to reinstate it in
Massachusetts. The death penalty does not deter violent crime; it unfairly
targets blacks and other minorities, and it relies on a judicial system
that, while the best in the world, is not perfect.

There are no guarantees in life - or in the death penalty.

(source: The Republican)






COLORADO:

D.A. asks U.S. Supreme court to reinstate death penalty in bible jury case


The Adams County District Attorney is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to
reinstate the death penalty of a man convicted in a 1995 kidnapping, sex
assault and murder.

Juror whose Bible was used in Harlan case says she has no regrets --
Colorado Supreme Court throws out Robert Harlan's death sentence

Robert Harlan was sentenced to death for the murder of Rhonda Maloney.

His sentence was overturned by the Colorado State Supreme Court because
one of the jurors brought a bible to deliberations. Jurors discussed 2
passages during their deliberations.

Adams County District Attorney Don Quick says the jury's death penalty
decision should stand because Harlan's crimes were, "extraordinarily
evil."

The Supreme Court won't decide if it will hear the case until it
reconvenes in October.

(source: 9News)



Reply via email to