July 29 FLORIDA: Conviction in Florida could mean execution----Ira Township man also accused of killing New Baltimore teen Life or death were the only possible fates facing a former Anchor Bay-area man in a Florida courtroom late Thursday after a jury found him guilty in an August 2000 robbery-homicide. The jury of 7 women and 5 men, who deliberated roughly 6 1/2 hours in the case earlier this week, found Dennis M. Bryan of Ira Township guilty of premeditated murder and armed robbery in the shooting death of Charles "Lee" Pennington at a Subway sandwich shop in St. Augustine, Fla. The jurors returned to court Thursday afternoon for additional testimony and arguments on whether Bryan should get the death penalty or life in prison without parole. "(My wife) Denise, she's kind of befriended Mrs. Pennington over the years since then. They've talked a lot on the phone, and they have a like experience," said Henry Mello, father of the slain Justin Mello of New Baltimore, believed to be another victim in the robbery-homicide spree of Bryan and co-defendant David Scott Baumann. "So she (Denise Mello) is down there now. For her it was important to be down there and support her friend and encourage her through the trial." As of late Thursday, no word had come from the St. Johns County courtroom where the penalty arguments were being made, and court officials expected the proceedings may last well into the evening or continue today. Assistant state attorney Robin Upchurch said the jury had convicted Bryan on all counts, and that a colleague in her office is making legal arguments seeking the death penalty. Officials believe Bryan was the triggerman in the Florida slaying, although he has reportedly accused Baumann. Court officials believe Baumann is responsible for the pair's 2 other slayings. Mello said Thursday he does not have a strong opinion one way or the other on Bryan receiving a death sentence. "The system is going to do what it's going to do," he said, adding that he hopes Bryan's conviction and Baumann's trial next month will lead to a Michigan trial soon for both men in his son's slaying. "I would like to see them brought back here. But I'm not the prosecutor and I don't get to make the decision, and they have to think about the costs to do it and all that," he said. "But if it's up to me, they should have to come back here and answer for it." Bryan, 24, of Ira Township, and Baumann, 23, of Chesterfield Township, face charges together but are being tried separately in the Aug. 14, 2000, Florida killing. Pennington, 24, was working by himself at a sandwich shop in St. Augustine when he was shot once in the back of the head and left inside a walk-in cooler. Justin Mello, 16, was working alone in October 2000 at Mancino's Pizza and Grinders on 23 Mile Road when a co-worker returned from a delivery route to find him dead of a gunshot wound to the head in a back area of the eatery. Robert Merrelli, chief of homicides for Macomb County prosecutors, said he intends to see both men returned to Michigan for a trial in the Mello case even if both get the death penalty for the Florida homicide. "It's a question of justice, not just the cost to taxpayers," Merrelli said. "You have to remember, this isn't just a crime against the Mello family, though it's important to give them closure, too. But it's a crime against the people of the state of Michigan, and we ought to do this for all of them." Baumann and Bryan have already been convicted and sentenced in Virginia for the death of weapons storeowner Norman Rey Pelfrey in August 2000. Baumann received life in prison there and Bryan a term of 50 years. After the Florida proceedings, the Macomb County case is the sole remaining murder charge against them. (source: Macomb Daily) NORTH CAROLINA: Murderer convicted in '92 dies in prison 13 years after being convicted for the murder of his wife, Ronnie Wayne Baker died of natural causes at a hospital in Greensboro. Baker, 56, was an inmate at Randolph Correctional Center in Asheboro, serving a life sentence for the 1988 murder of his wife of 19 years. Shirlene Baker, store manager of N.C. 91 Presto Food, disappeared from her store between 5:15 a.m. and 5:45 a.m. on April 11, 1988. The next day, her unclothed body was found in a wooded area on Rural Unpaved Road 1536, near Stantonsburg. An autopsy revealed that she died from a single shotgun blast to the head. Investigators originally believed the motive was robbery, but they turned toward Baker after collecting more evidence. He was indicted Dec. 4, 1989, for kidnapping, armed robbery and first-degree murder. After 11 trial continuances, a Wilson County Superior Court jury heard his case. After deliberating almost 3 hours, jurors found Baker guilty of all 3 charges on April 8, 1992. Soon after the verdict was handed down, he was sentenced to death. After Baker had been on death row in Central Prison for three years, the state Supreme Court granted him a new sentencing hearing because of errors involving mitigating circumstances in the initial sentencing phase. A new sentencing hearing in December 1998 reduced his death sentence to life in prison. Maj. J.H. Farmer of the Wilson County Sheriff's Office, one of the original investigators in the case, learned of Baker's death Wednesday. "I think the evidence spoke for itself in the case," Farmer said. "... It was a tragic situation all around. It affected a lot of lives. And it's continuing to affect a lot of lives." Timeline on Crime and Punishment APRIL 11, 1988: Shirlene Baker disappears from N.C. 91 Presto Food in what appears to be robbery. APRIL 12, 1988: Baker's nude body is found on Rural Unpaved Road 1536, near Stantonsburg. DEC. 3, 1989: Ronnie Wayne Baker indicted and arrested for kidnapping, armed robbery and 1st-degree murder. APRIL 8, 1992: Baker convicted of kidnapping, armed robbery and 1st-degree murder. APRIL 17, 1992: Jurors recommends death for Baker OCT. 8, 1998: N.C. Supreme Court grants Baker a new sentence hearing. DEC. 18, 1998: Baker's death penalty reduced to life in prison. JULY 26, 2005: Baker dies of natural causes in a Greensboro hospital. (source: Wilson Daily) ALABAMA: Poll: Alabamians back death penalty, but question fairness Results of a poll released Thursday show that 57 % of Alabamians surveyed support a suspension of the death penalty while questions of fairness and reliability are studied. Less than half, 47 %, believe the death penalty is applied fairly in the state, and 80 % think an innocent person could be executed, according to the poll of 863 likely voters statewide. It was conducted earlier this month by the Alabama Education Association's Capital Survey Research Center. Despite concerns of fairness, Alabamians strongly support capital punishment, with 71 % in favor of the death penalty, the poll found. Center Director Gerald Johnson said the poll's results were consistent. Though voters support capital punishment, they question its fairness and believe steps could be taken to improve its accuracy. "It's an impressively logical sequence," Johnson said. Anti-death penalty groups say the poll is encouraging. "The evidence of unfairness surrounding the administration of the death penalty is so overwhelming that it's not surprising that more folks are acknowledging it," said Montgomery anti-death penalty lawyer Bryan Stevenson, director of the Equal Justice Initiative. The poll also found that 62 % would be more likely to vote for a candidate who supported suspension of the death penalty until questions about the use of DNA testing have been answered. Esther Brown, who leads a moratorium movement in the state, said 37 local governments and more than 300 churches, businesses and political groups have signed her petition calling for executions to be suspended while the system is studied. "I'm hoping that the people running for office will see that and understand that supporting a moratorium is not something that's going to harm them," said Brown, executive secretary of Project Hope to Abolish the Death Penalty. State Sen. Hank Sanders, D-Selma, has introduced a moratorium bill for several years, but it has not gone far. The new poll also found that 96 % of people support the use of DNA in cases where it might prove guilt or innocence. The survey was conducted July 12-21 and has a margin of error of 3.5 %. (source: Birmingham News) ARIZONA: Arizona jury system serves as model for nation's trials If the nation's largest professional society for lawyers gets its way, jury trials around the country will be run like they are in Arizona. That means allowing jurors to question witnesses, permitting jurors to take notes during a trial and requiring judges to educate jurors on the specifics of the law at the beginning of the trial instead of the end. "Juries very much bring the community into the courtroom, and that has played a very important role throughout our country's history," Phoenix attorney Patricia Refo said. Refo spent the past year as chairwoman of an American Bar Association committee called the American Jury Project, whose intent was to study jury management around the country and create a list of "best practices." "I think that one of the things that we as a profession can do," Refo said, "is to find ways to make jury trials speedier and more efficient, to find ways to help jurors understand the information they're given even better, to find ways to protect your privacy." Next week at its annual convention, the ABA will discuss a list of recommendations that looks a lot like the way juries have been conducted in Arizona for a decade. The hope is that municipal, state and federal courts around the country will use the guidelines to improve their own jury systems. "You're one of the leaders, if not the leader, in the country, and you ought to be proud of that," said Robert Grey, outgoing ABA president, who initiated the project. That opinion was seconded by Judith Kay, chief judge for the state of New York, a position equivalent to our state's chief Supreme Court justice. "Arizona certainly is the trend-setter," she said. According to Grey, an ABA poll indicated that most Americans believe in the jury system and would rather be tried in front of a jury than in front of a judge alone. However, jury rules differ from state to state. The number of jurors can vary, for example. And in two states, Oregon and Louisiana, criminal verdicts do not have to be unanimous. "Part of the focus this year was to try to raise the standard for jury trials around the country," Grey said, "not necessarily trying to impose uniformity but trying to improve the system and raise the bar for everybody." Another part of the focus was to make jury service more convenient, because even if the majority of people recognize the importance of juries, they don't necessarily want to have to serve on one themselves. "The things that jurors complain about most are pay and delay, the money and the time," Grey said. The recommendations include limiting jury service to one day or one trial, whichever is longer, and prohibiting employers from penalizing employees who serve on juries. Those who do serve generally say they find it to be a meaningful experience. Patte Marie, an executive recruiter from Scottsdale, spent three months on a murder trial in Maricopa County Superior Court. "I don't regret it, she said. "Being self-employed, I had every reason to get out of it. But I was very glad I didn't, and now I encourage everyone to do it." In fact, Marie has returned to watch other high-profile trials. "We live in a free country," said Brad Hazen of Phoenix, who was part of a 2-week civil jury in Superior Court this month. "We need to sit on juries to know what's going on." Arizona overhauled its jury system in the mid-1990s under the leadership of now-retired Maricopa County Superior Court Judge B. Michael Dann. "The trials seemed to be for the benefit of the lawyers and the judges and not so much for the benefit of the jurors," Dann said. Arizona jurors were expected to sit through proceedings, listening to witnesses without being able to question what they said, without necessarily taking notes and without necessarily understanding the law they were supposed to rule by. They were forbidden to discuss the case until their final deliberations. And at the end, they were expected to recall everything that was said and make a decision accordingly. Dann's committee felt instead that jurors needed to be engaged, interested and made a part of the proceedings. And they needed ways to retain and process the testimony they heard. The changes, which went into effect in 1996, allow jurors in criminal and civil cases to pass questions to the judge. Jurors in civil cases are allowed to discuss the case among themselves during trial. And jury instructions are given at the beginning of the case instead of the end, alerting jurors to what they will hear over the course of the trial, what is and is not considered evidence, and how they are to interpret the law. Those innovations, as Dann said, seemed intuitive "to everyone but lawyers and judges." Dann also served on the American Jury Project, and many of the concepts he pioneered in Arizona were discussed and incorporated into the ABA recommendations. But the American Jury Project conclusions are not identical to the Arizona system. Among the ABA recommendations not practiced in Arizona are requiring that civil juries have 12 members and that they reach their decisions unanimously, as is done in criminal trials. In Arizona, a minimum of 8 jurors serve in civil trials. In February, the ABA approved the American Jury Project's recommendations. Refo said that several states and at least two federal court districts have already reviewed the recommendations as they ponder change. "Our hope is that they will be an inspiration for change in those states that have not made any jury innovations at all," she said. (source: Arizona Republic)
