Oct. 23 OHIO----impending execution Execution of man convicted in 4 killings set for Tuesday In Youngstown, in a city once called the nation's crime capital, drug dealer Willie J. "Flip" Williams Jr. saw himself as a modern-day successor to the underworld bosses. Short but proud, Williams brought a formidable persona to Youngstown's streets: smart, brash and vicious, authorities say. He once walked into police headquarters, declared himself reformed and asked for information on drug rivals, getting none. Williams, 48, was convicted of aggravated murder, kidnapping and aggravated burglary in the slayings on Sept. 1, 1991, of 3 suspected drug dealers and a 4th man recently discharged from the Air Force. He is to be executed Tuesday by lethal injection. State and federal appeals courts have rejected Williams' appeal of his conviction and death sentence. He did not ask for clemency from Gov. Bob Taft. The evidence against Williams included the eyewitness testimony of 3 accomplices who pleaded guilty. Also, when Williams was arrested shortly after the deaths, a test showed he had recently used a gun. Williams escaped soon after his arrest and 3 months later broke into a juvenile detention center, taking hostages before surrendering with no one hurt. Police think he wanted to kill his 3 cohorts for testifying against him. Williams was kept out of the juvenile-detention cellblock when an employee, on her 5th day on the job, lied to him, saying she didn't have the keys. Williams, who turned down interview requests, earned notoriety at a time of rising street violence in Youngstown, with drug dealers flashing submachine guns and the murder rate ballooning. "This was a big fish. It's very unusual for you to get somebody on the top of the food chain," said Kenneth Bailey, who handled the Williams trial in Akron as a Mahoning County prosecutor and now works in the Trumbull County prosecutor's office. Youngstown police detective William Blanchard thinks the top was always where Williams wanted to be seen. Williams' height - about 5 feet, 6 inches - made him aspire to seem bigger, Blanchard said. Williams' role models were the dons of the Youngstown underworld who had battled for control of rackets as part of a feud between the Cleveland and Pittsburgh mobs. "He wanted to be the black Joey Naples," the city's one-time crime boss, Bailey said. Williams had a criminal record before he turned 18. He later was sentenced to 5 years in prison in California for cocaine trafficking. Youngstown tried and failed to block his return by asking California to limit his parole to the West Coast. Police said Williams had associates gather his top rivals, including William Dent, 23; Alfonda Madison, 21; and Eric Howard, 20. Air Force veteran Theodore Wynn, 23, of nearby Coitsville, was visiting Madison and Howard. The victims were variously bound, shot and strangled, the coroner ruled. Police at first said all 4 victims had been dealing drugs. Authorities backed off that contention, but the extra hurt had been done, Wynn's parents said. "What we're looking for is closure," said Theodore Wynn Sr., 65, a retired postmaster. His wife, Donna, 62, nodded in agreement. Their other children, Monica, 39, and Jason, 31, whose goal was to serve in the Air Force alongside his brother, also plan to witness the execution at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility. Williams' defense attorney, J. Gerald Ingram, said Williams didn't get a fair trial because the judge didn't adequately respond to allegations that some jurors had heard rumors about the case. Ingram said there was insufficient evidence to convict Williams, and prosecution witnesses were inconsistent and biased. The defense also said testimony about the juvenile detentioncenter hostage-taking should have been excluded from the trial. The Ohio Supreme Court said the hostage-taking showed that Williams wanted to kill his accomplices - an indication that Williams was aware of his guilt. Williams' relatives - his mother, Joyce; a sister; and a son and daughter - couldn't be contacted. Ingram said he didn't know how to reach them. At the time of his surrender, Joyce Williams was supportive of her son. "He's my child, and I love him. I'll go down with him to the end," she told reporters. "He's going to face it like a man, very stoic," Bailey, the prosecutor, predicted of Williams' final moments. "With honor and dignity," Ingram agreed. (source: Associated Press) DELAWARE: It's unanimous: We're tired of hearing about Capano bid to stay alive Nearly 6 years after politically connected lawyer Tom Capano was sentenced to death for murdering Anne Marie Fahey, the case shows no sign of closing soon. Capano's lawyer went before the state Supreme Court again last week as justices heard arguments about whether his death sentence should be overturned -- and, if it is, whether a new penalty hearing should be held. For attorneys and legal junkies who follow the capital-punishment teeter-totter, the principle is a fascinating one -- does a jury have to find unanimously that "aggravating circumstances" exist around a murder, making the crime eligible for the death penalty, or is an 11-1 vote enough? That was the tally by which Capano's jury determined his crime demonstrated "substantial planning," the condition that made it a capital case. The U.S. Supreme Court reopened the question with its 2002 ruling in Ring v. Arizona, which gave juries greater say in death-penalty cases. Such legal hair-splitting understandably failed to engage Fahey's older sister, Kathleen Fahey-Hosey. She said after the Supreme Court session that she wasn't sure she could endure another penalty hearing, which would require once again hearing the graphic accounts of Anne Marie's last days, hours and minutes. "I'd rather [Capano] just get life and get back into the regular prison population," she said. Erin Reilly of Wilmington can imagine better than most people what Fahey-Hosey must feel like. Reilly wasn't related to Anne Marie Fahey, but she was one of the jurors who convicted her killer, and seeing the story back in the headlines infuriated her. "You're told it doesn't have to be unanimous," she said. "I never thought it would come back because of that [11-1] vote in the penalty phase." Under Delaware's law at the time, since changed to reflect post-Ring conditions, jury votes counted only as recommendations. Judges held final discretion over both the eligibility of a case for capital punishment and the killer's fate. For a jury to find a defendant guilty, the vote must be unanimous. Capano's lawyer, Joseph Bernstein, contended the same standard should apply in finding the existence of an aggravating circumstance. Reilly has a ready answer for that argument. "If we were told, 'Look, it has to be a unanimous decision,' we would have kept going," she said. After hearing all of the testimony, she said, one juror kept expressing misgivings about applying the death penalty. Did Capano's purchase of a gun and a cooler in which he transported Fahey's body to sea show beyond a doubt that he intended to kill the woman who sought to end their affair? Since the vote didn't have to be unanimous, Reilly said, the other jurors did not press the holdout as they might have had they been in danger of creating a mistrial by hung jury. "You're very conscious that you have to take all your personal feelings and put them aside and go by the law," Reilly said. "You can never speak for someone else, but I think we would have reached a unanimous decision." On the other hand, considering all that has happened since, it might have been more merciful for all concerned had the jury taken the death penalty off the table 6 years ago. (source: Column, Al Mascitti; The News Journal) UTAH: Death for child molesters who kill? A state lawmaker wants to do away with sentencing hearings for those convicted of molesting and then killing a child - and automatically condemn them to die. The proposal by Rep. Dave Ure, R-Kamas, is one of three measures expected to be introduced in the upcoming Legislature that would deal with sex offenders. Rep. Paul Ray, R-Clearfield, has proposals to help rehabilitate first-time sex offenders more effectively and to make a sentence of life in prison without parole mandatory for second-time sex offenders. Ure said he realizes his proposal for an "automatic death penalty" for murdering a child under 15 years of age, as well as sexually abusing or raping them, is a radical change in how Utah deals with capital murder convictions. Currently, juries or judges decide, in separate penalty-phase hearings after conviction, whether the sentence is death or life without parole. "I want to send a clear proclamation to the world that if you rape and kill an innocent child in this state you will leave Utah in a box (a coffin) or you will stay in Utah in a box," Ure said. He said he's been thinking about the measure for some time. But the grisly murder and sexual abuse case in Idaho this summer "is what more or less sealed my desire to press forward with this," Ure said. In that case, Shasta Groene and her brother, Dylan, were allegedly kidnapped and repeatedly sexually abused after their parents had been slain. Dylan was later found dead, while Shasta was recovered when a waitress recognized her with her abductor from her picture on posters. Joseph Edward Duncan III, 42, of Fargo, N.D., has been charged with three counts each of first-degree kidnapping and 1st-degree murder and prosecutors are seeking the death penalty. "I believe (the automatic death penalty) brings closure more quickly both to the victims' and perpetrators' families," he said. Ure said he has "four or five" attorneys working on the expected constitutional questions of due process and cruel and unusual punishment that his proposal will raise. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the judge or jury must decide between life and death during a separate sentencing phase after a person is convicted, and that they must be given the option for mercy. Also, in 1976 the court ruled as unconstitutional laws that mandate the death penalty for specific crimes. As for being too harsh on a murderer/rapist, Ure said he's talked to his constituents in Park City - known to be rather a liberal group - "to the left- and right-wingers. No one said it is barbaric and shouldn't be passed. No one has confronted me in opposition, and that has surprised me. We believe we can write it to pass constitutional muster. There will be an automatic appeal to the (Utah) Appellate Court." Even if his bill doesn't pass the 2006 Legislature, says Ure, "This sends a message that we are very, very serious about trying to protect our children here." Paul Boyden, executive director of the Statewide Association of Public Attorneys, said that although he has not seen the bill or discussed it with Ure, there would be some concern if the death penalty were the only option. Along with the constitutional issues, there would also be concern about a limitation of options for prosecutors. He hoped these issues could both be worked out with legislators. "We'll work with him, and try to help him get what he wants in a way that works," Boyden said. Currently, somebody charged with rape and murder of a child can be charged with the death penalty, although it is not mandated. In a case like Duncan's, however, he said prosecutors would definitely pursue the death penalty. The man has a long history of child sexual abuse. As for Ray's proposed bill, his approach would be 2-pronged. First, he would seek to implement treatment programs to prevent repeat offenses and use risk assessments to help determine the risk factors for repeat crimes by sex offenders once they are released. "We throw them into prison, and some of them seek treatment, but it's only effective if we can really get them the help they need," Ray said. For those who repeat their crimes, especially against children, there would be very little leeway given, Ray said. For them, he would mandate life in prison without parole, which he thinks would be a big step toward stopping predators. "I'm trying to be very fair," Ray said. "My goal is to put the real bad guys, the real predators, into jail." (source: Desert Morning News) ALABAMA----new death sentence Baldwin County judge sentences Saunders to death A judge sentenced Timothy Wade Saunders to death for bludgeoning his elderly neighbor to death and attacking the slain man's wife last year. Saunders, 26, apologized to the victim's family shortly before Baldwin County Circuit Court Judge Robert E. Wilters upheld a jury's unanimous recommendation for the death penalty, which brings an automatic appeal. At trial, Saunders admitted killing Melvin "Curly" Clemons, 77, in July 2004. Saunders beat Clemons with a crowbar and choked the man in his backyard before attacking Clemons' 73-year-old wife inside the couple's home, according to testimony last month. Saunders claimed he was high on crack cocaine and did not intend to attack the victims. Defense attorney Thomas E. Dasinger had asked the judge for a life sentence because of Saunders' unfavorable childhood and his lack of a "significant criminal history." No one from Saunders' family attended Friday's sentencing. "I know what I did was wrong," Saunders told the judge. "I'm willing to accept the punishment of the court. I would like to apologize to Ms. Clemons and her family. I'm sorry." Saunders was found guilty of 2 counts of capital murder and 1 count of attempted murder. He was sentenced to life in prison without parole for the attack on Agnes Clemons. "I don't believe I'll ever feel safe again in my life," Clemons said outside court. "It's just left me with a fear inside that I can't get over." (source: Mobile Register) ****************** In Bay Minette, Killer gets death penalty A judge sentenced Timothy Wade Saunders to death for bludgeoning his elderly neighbor to death and attacking the slain man's wife last year. Saunders, 26, apologized to the victim's family shortly before Baldwin County Circuit Court Judge Robert E. Wilters upheld a jury's unanimous recommendation for the death penalty, which brings an automatic appeal. At trial, Saunders admitted killing Melvin "Curly" Clemons, 77, in July 2004. (source: Associated Press) FLORIDA: Death Penalty Review Possible The Florida Supreme Court in a ruling this month asked the Legislature to review how defendants are sentenced to death to avert possible challenges to the state's death penalty law. Whether lawmakers will discuss changes to the law when they convene in March remains unclear. Legislators thus far have avoided the politicking that normally surrounds such controversial issues, raising doubts that the momentum to make immediate changes will have developed by next year's session. "The question is a matter of fairness and a matter of what makes sense for Florida," said Senate President Tom Lee, R-Brandon. "You never know how these issues will be received by the Legislature when the arguments are made." The Supreme Court decision, which stems from the Dade City murder case of Alfredie Steele Jr., suggests that the high court sees problems with the way state courts determine whether murder defendants should be sentenced to death or life in prison. In the ruling, justices recommended the Legislature re-evaluate the process by which judges make that decision. According to legal scholars, Florida's death penalty has 2 basic problems: - Judges, not juries, ultimately determine whether a defendant receives the death penalty, though judges are expected to give "great weight" to jury recommendations about what sentence to impose. That system, however, seems to conflict with the 2002 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Ring v. Arizona, which requires jurors make the decision. - Juries in Florida need only a majority vote to decide whether an aggravating circumstance exists and to recommend a death sentence. Legal experts say Ring presents a strong case for requiring unanimity in recommending death and possibly in enumerating aggravating circumstances -- factors that provide legal justification for imposing the death penalty. By comparison, juries must reach a unanimous decision to convict someone in a criminal case. "I think the state death penalty statute is ripe for a constitutional challenge and a successful constitutional challenge," said Robert Batey, a professor at Stetson University College of Law. The Ring decision spurred speculation about Florida's death penalty, but the state Supreme Court never issued a definitive ruling about how trial judges should deal with Ring. That has left judges presiding over first-degree murder cases to guess about how best to alleviate possible appeals on the Ring issue. Steele's case ended up on appeal because of Circuit Judge Lynn Tepper's attempt to satisfy Ring concerns. Steele, 21, of Lacoochee, is charged with first-degree murder in the 2003 shooting death of Pasco County Sheriff's Lt. Charles "Bo" Harrison. The state is seeking the death penalty. During pretrial hearings, Tepper said she would require jurors to fill out special verdict forms detailing their vote on aggravating factors, in the event Steele was convicted of 1st-degree murder. Prosecutors appealed Tepper's order, arguing that the state's death penalty statute does not require special verdict forms. The 2nd District Court of Appeal referred the case to the Florida Supreme Court because of its public importance. The court struck down Tepper's order requiring special verdict forms but recommended legislative action on Florida's death penalty statute. The ruling, however, does not obligate legislators to do anything about the court's concerns. Sen. Rod Smith, a Gainesville Democrat who sits on the Senate Criminal Justice Committee, said he expects any change in the statute would be, at most, incremental. "I would be surprised if we moved to do anything dramatic in death penalty litigation," said Smith, a former state attorney who is running for governor. "In death penalty cases, every time you make a change, as incremental as it may seem, you open up so many cases that have already been there so long. "So I guess my answer is that I know I'm not contemplating any immediate action." Rep. Dennis Baxley, an Ocala Republican who sits on the House Judiciary Committee, said he has spoken with other House members about the Steele ruling. "It's still early on in the response, but the buzz has started that we may need to do some polishing on [the death penalty statute]," he said. Precedent exists for the Legislature passing laws in response to a Supreme Court ruling. In October 1997, the court asked lawmakers to consider lethal injection as an alternative to avert possible constitutional questions about the electric chair's use in executions. The Legislature approved lethal injection as an alternate means of execution in January 2000. Still, what legislators might do in response to the latest court request remains anyone's guess. "It's hard to predict what a majority of the Legislature will do," said Jon Mills, a former speaker of the House who is a professor of law at the University of Florida. The Steele decision "may be a warning shot, or it may just be a policy statement. In either case, the Legislature doesn't have to do anything." WHAT HAPPENED Jan. 9, 2004: Pasco-Pinellas Circuit Judge Lynn Tepper ordered that jurors would fill out special verdict forms during the penalty phase of Alfredie Steele Jr.'s trial, should he be convicted of first-degree murder. The forms were intended to detail jurors' votes on the aggravators they might have cited as justification for a death sentence. Prosecutors appealed the ruling to the 2nd District Court of Appeal, which referred the question to the Florida Supreme Court. Oct. 12: The high court struck down the use of special verdict forms but asked the Legislature to review the process by which trial judges impose the death penalty, hoping to avert possible constitutional challenges. WHAT'S NEXT So far, legislators seem undecided about whether they will review Florida's death penalty law when they convene in March. Lawmakers are not required to act, but legal scholars say they would be well advised to shore up the state's death penalty statute in light of a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court ruling. (source: The Tampa Tribune)
