Nov. 10 NORTH CAROLINA----impending execution The NC Supreme Court this afternoon reversed a stay of execution for Steven McHone. Barring clemency from Gov. Mike Easley, McHone will be executed at 2 a.m. Nov. 11 ******************************************* Defense: Hear mother's dying words----Inmate was to die this week In Raleigh, a judge issued a stay Wednesday for a death-row inmate scheduled to die this week for the slayings 15 years ago of his mother and stepfather. Surry County Superior Court Judge Anderson Cromer agreed with defense lawyers' argument that the dying statement of Mildred Adams deserved more scrutiny before allowing the state to carry out the sentence. A paramedic said Adams told her that Steven Van McHone, 35, didn't mean to fatally shoot her or her husband, Wesley Adams Sr. McHone, 35, was scheduled to be executed by injection at 2 a.m. Friday. The state Supreme Court could overturn the stay to allow the execution to move forward. Defense lawyers also said the trial jury should have heard evidence from another of Mildred Adams' sons, who said his mother told him McHone was drunk at the time of the shootings. "This evidence was not previously known and not reasonably available to him," the defense motion for a stay said. "To execute Mr. McHone without considering this newly discovered evidence would be a gross miscarriage of justice." Paramedic Teresa Durham of Sparta said Mildred Adams grabbed her hand when Durham arrived at the shooting and said, "He didn't mean to do it, don't hurt him," according to an affidavit filed by the defense. Defense lawyers Ken Rose and Cynthia Adcock argued that prosecutors withheld the statement and that it might have persuaded a jury not to vote for a death sentence. The defense doesn't deny that McHone committed the crimes. (source: Charlotte Observer) ********************* State appeals stay in McHone execution case State lawyers sought Thursday to overturn a stay of execution for a Surry County man who was sentenced to die for the 1990 slayings of his mother and stepfather. The appeal was filed in the North Carolina Supreme Court as McHone prepared to start personal visits at Central Prison in Raleigh with family members. If the high court keeps the stay issued Wednesday in place, the execution probably wouldn't take place as scheduled at 2 a.m. Friday. The case could ultimately reach the U.S. Supreme Court. Surry County Superior Court Judge Anderson Cromer ordered the execution stopped to allow a paramedic who treated victim Mildred Adams, McHone's mother, to testify about her patient's dying statement. Then the courts could decide whether to grant McHone a new sentencing hearing, he said. Paramedic Teresa Durham said in an affidavit that Adams told her that McHone, 35, didn't mean to fatally shoot her. McHone also killed her husband, Wesley Adams Sr. "It's great we have a justice system where everything can be heard and we're grateful for this moment," said McHone's half sister Tina Walker, a daughter of Mildred and Wesley Adams Sr. who has pleaded with the governor to spare McHone's life. McHone's half brother is also working to win a new sentence for McHone. He has said his mother told him by phone on the day of the slayings in 1990 that McHone was drunk. Their conversation came shortly before the shootings, and his statement was never presented to the trial jury. "This evidence was not previously known and not reasonably available to him," the defense motion for a stay said. "To execute Mr. McHone without considering this newly discovered evidence would be a gross miscarriage of justice." Defense lawyers Ken Rose and Cynthia Adcock argued that the statements might have persuaded a jury not to vote for a death sentence. The defense doesn't deny that McHone committed the crimes. Wendy Adams, the wife of Wesley Adams Jr., said in a telephone interview Wednesday that despite the defense argument, Mildred Adams might not feel the same way had she known that McHone killed her husband and threatened Wendy and Wesley Jr. "There were 2 different weapons," she said. "He was disarmed of the first weapon. He got another one and extra ammunition. This is not a person who wasn't thinking clearly." Prosecutors also argued that Mildred Adams' statement wouldn't have swayed the jury. But Cromer decided that while the dying statement wouldn't have influenced the jury's verdict, it "tends to support mitigating factors" that a jury could consider when deciding McHone's punishment. (source: Associated Press) ***************** Who lives, who dies?----McHone matter is a compelling case for commutation If you've paid attention to the news this week, you may have been stuck with a troubling question: Why does one murderer get the death penalty but another doesn't? Consider these cases. Ann Miller Kontz's arsenic poisoning of Eric Miller was no accident. She and her lover, Derril Willard, planned it. Each gave him a dose of the poison. After Mr. Miller's agonizing death, Derril Willard committed suicide. Ann Miller remarried. After authorities learned of their plot, a grand jury indicted Mrs. Kontz for 1st degree murder, but the prosecutor did not seek the death penalty. Mrs. Kontz hired two of the region's finest trial lawyers, who helped her win a 25-year minimum sentence. She gets to live. Contrast that case with one now on Gov. Mike Easley's desk. Until a Superior Court judge issued a stay Wednesday, Steve McHone was to be executed Friday for the brutal 1990 murder of his mother and stepfather. He killed them in a drunken, drugged rage. His mother told another son shortly before the killings that Steve McHone was "drunk and doped up" and the "worse she had ever seen him." Such facts might help show he hadn't planned to kill anyone and deserved a life sentence, not death. But the prosecutor did not disclose significant evidence and Mr. McHone's trial lawyer, Terry Collins, made no effort to discover it. Mr. Collins had legal problems of his own. He was charged with forgery and fraud and convicted of common law robbery and obtaining property by false pretenses. He went to prison and was disbarred from practicing law -- after 5 of his clients were sentenced to death. It would be difficult to find a more incompetent lawyer. Prosecutor James Dellinger wound up in trouble, too. He resigned after then-Attorney General Mike Easley's office petitioned for his removal as district attorney in Stokes and Surry counties. Mr. Dellinger had been indicted for obtaining property by false pretenses, forgery and soliciting forgery. Mr. Easley dropped 5 felony charges after Mr. Dellinger quit. This is the sordid fact about our system: not the crime, not the criminal, but the trial lawyers determine whether a murderer is sentenced to life or death. If further appeals fail and Gov. Easley allows the execution of Mr. McHone, the governor will be complicit in a corrupt system of injustice that spares killers with good lawyers and sends those with bad lawyers to their deaths. It's not a system worth having. Gov. Easley should commute this sentence to life in prison. (source: Charlotte Observer) ****************** Take a closer look North Carolina needs a 2-year moratorium to explore how its death penalty is meted out - justice delayed does not mean justice denied. Last week, Rep. Jim Black, speaker of the N.C. General Assembly, called for the formation of a commission to review the death penalty in North Carolina. We applaud the move and think it should be expanded to include a temporary moratorium. The death penalty in North Carolina has come under attack in recent years. Darryl Hunt spent 18 years of his life in prison following his conviction for the rape and murder of a Winston-Salem woman in 1984. He was sentenced to death by lethal injection but was cleared by the introduction of DNA evidence that proved the guilt of another man. Hunt lost 18 years of his life to an incomplete investigation and has been trying to catch up with the changes in the world since the early 1980s - he didnt know what a cell phone was when he was released. But at least he cleared his name while he was still on death row. 5 North Carolinians recently have been exonerated following their executions - tragically, too late to save them. The validity of the death penalty itself is not what is in question. The right of the state to execute murderers is supported by a majority of North Carolinians, as well as by this editorial board. But the execution of innocent people - at a time when many of them could be freed by a thorough review of their cases - is unacceptable. All citizens have a constitutional right to due process, and there is good evidence that many people on death row did not receive fair trials. Consider the case of Alan Gell, who was convicted on the testimony of two teenage girls. There was no other evidence, and the prosecutor knew his case was over when he found 17 different witnesses willing to testify that the victim was alive on the day after Gell was proved to have left the state. Instead of dropping the charges, the prosecutor purportedly withheld the testimonies from the defense counsel. After being ordered by the court to release them, the prosecutor gave a list of the 10 witnesses he felt he could defeat by cross-examination, and Gell was convicted and sentenced to death. While on death row, Gells lawyers successfully obtained the names of the seven strongest witnesses, as well as a taped conversation with a medical examiner that proved the victim could not have died before Gell left the state. On the weight of this evidence, he was awarded a new trial. It took the jury less than 3 hours to set him free. We know of innocent people who have been wrongly sentenced to death in North Carolina. What we dont know is how many more of them there are out there, hoping to be freed before they reach their execution dates. And thats a question that needs to be answered. Attorney General Roy Cooper has asked that prosecutors open their death penalty files to defense attorneys as a way to avoid wrongful convictions. And the new commission hopefully will come up with some recommendations on how we can do things better in the future. But more can - and should - be done. Last year, the N.C. Senate passed a 2-year moratorium designed to give the state time to review the cases of current death row inmates and to take a look at the way we go about figuring who we should put to death. Unfortunately, the General Assembly declined to bring the bill to a vote. North Carolina needs a 2-year moratorium with a sunset clause so that it can ensure that justice is being served but that doesnt eliminate the ability of the legal system to deliver death sentences for those who deserve them. Gov. Mike Easley and the General Assembly believe a moratorium is not the answer. We respectively and strongly disagree. A moratorium would not let any convicts off the hook; it would just give the state a chance to make sure that it wasnt executing innocent North Carolinians for crimes they didnt commit and that justice was being served. (source: Editorial, The Daily Tar Heel) ALABAMA: No airtight case for death In his 3rd 2000 debate with Al Gore, then presidential candidate George W. Bush said he believes in the death penalty because it saves lives. "It's the only reason to be for it," Bush said. "I don't think you should support the death penalty to seek revenge. I don't think that's right. I think the reason to support the death penalty is because it saves other people's lives." But does the death penalty save lives? Does killing convicted killers stop other would-be killers from killing? The opinion expressed by Bush, who as governor of Texas presided over 152 executions in six years (more than any other state since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976) finds agreement with many politicians, including Gore. Gore, too, said he believes the death penalty deters other murders. The facts, though, don't back them up. In looking at the most-often used arguments to bolster support for the death penalty - deterrence, justice, respect for human life, closure for victims' loved ones - what's clear is that none of them makes a clear case for using the ultimate punishment. For those who believe in the sanctity of all life, as does this editorial board, it's another reason to wonder why governments are in the business of executing people. The case for any state exercising its awesome power to kill ought to be airtight. It is not. The most damning argument against capital punishment as a deterrent is that states with the death penalty generally have higher rates of murder than states without the death penalty. In 2003, for example, the murder rate in the 12 states without the death penalty was 4.1 for every 100,000 people. In the 38 states with the death penalty, the murder rate was 5.91 - 44 % higher. Even among death penalty states, those that carry out executions the most tend to have the highest murder rates. Texas, with the nation's busiest death chamber, had a murder rate in 2004 of 6.1 per 100,000 people, according to FBI statistics. Alabama, with the nation's 6th-highest death penalty rate, recorded a murder rate of 5.6 in 2004. California, which has the nation's largest Death Row, had an even higher murder rate of 6.7 in 2004. And Louisiana, which has carried out the 10th-highest number of executions since 1976, had the nation's highest murder rate among all states last year at 12.7 per 100,000 people. Conversely, Massachusetts, a state without the death penalty, had a 2004 murder rate of just 2.6. Oregon, a death penalty state that rarely uses it - only twice since 1976 - had a murder rate of only 2.5, tied for 8th lowest. The 3 states with the lowest murder rates in 2004 were Maine, North Dakota and New Hampshire, each at 1.4 per 100,000. Maine and North Dakota do not have the death penalty; New Hampshire has it but doesn't use it (no execution since 1976 and no one on death row). There are regional disparities as well. The death penalty is most popular in the South, accounting for more than 80 % of all executions in the nation. Yet Southern states also have the highest murder rates, according to the FBI. In fact, in 2003, the South was the only region above the national average - with a murder rate that was about 50 % higher than the Northeast, where the death penalty is least popular. For the past half century, many studies by well-respected researchers have concluded the death penalty is not a deterrent. Still, some death penalty supporters point to other studies that claim executions do prevent crime. Some of these studies conclude that each execution saves multiple lives because of its deterrent effect. But these studies are highly controversial. Other researchers have attacked the findings because of the methods used, of results that are inconsistent, of key information that is left out, of heavy reliance on data that skew results. Texas, for example, accounts for more than a third of all executions in the United States. Last year, it carried out 23 of the 59 executions in the country; no other state approached double figures. Since the peak period of the 1980s and 1990s, the number of murders in Texas has decreased dramatically, which some death penalty supporters attribute to its increased use. Misleading on murder: But murders have decreased nationwide as well, including in states without the death penalty or that haven't carried out any executions. Using Texas as proof the death penalty deters is just as misleading as using the decrease in murders in nondeath-penalty states during that time to argue the absence of the death penalty deters murders. The truth is, there is no proof the death penalty deters - or that it doesn't. Deterrence supporters can argue the murder rate would be even higher in states with the death penalty if they didn't use it, just as detractors can point to high murder rates seemingly corresponding to active use of the death penalty. There's no way to show cause and effect. But most data do suggest there's plenty of reason to doubt the death penalty's ability to deter other murders. Even those on the front lines of crime are skeptical about the deterrent effect of capital punishment. In a 1995 study of 386 randomly selected police chiefs, 2/3 of them said the death penalty didn't significantly reduce the number of homicides. A 1996 survey of criminology experts - past and current presidents of three criminology associations - also rejected the notion that executions deter. More than 87 % believed the death penalty had no deterrent effect, University of Florida sociologists Michael L. Radelet and Ronald L. Akers, who conducted the survey, found. The prospect of the death penalty doesn't deter most people because they don't expect to be caught, nor do they consider the differences between a sentence of death or life in prison, according to Tufts University Professor Hugo Adam Bedau, author of "The Case Against the Death Penalty." Indeed, many killers commit their crimes in moments of passion or anger, or under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Dampening deterrence: Some death penalty supporters argue the long wait between conviction and execution dampens whatever deterrent effect the death penalty has. The Alabama attorney general's office lays the blame for delays on death row inmates and their lawyers. "Why raise 5 claims (on appeal) ... when you can raise 50 and the courts have to review every claim?" asked Clay Crenshaw, chief of the attorney general's capital litigation division. "I think there's a motivation on the part of the lawyers who represent these inmates to delay." Crenshaw has announced he is running for the Alabama Criminal Court of Appeals, with a top priority of preventing capital murder cases from dragging on. Capital appeals "need repair because it takes too long for a capital case to go through the long appeals process," he told The Associated Press. But lawyers for Death Row inmates say the state's lack of a defense system for poor inmates contributes to the delay because inmates often have to find new lawyers during the appeals process. Of course, dissuading would-be killers isn't the only argument capital punishment supporters offer. Attorney General Troy King cites exacting justice, not deterrence, for his strong support for the death penalty. "Certain crimes are so heinous, savage and brutal, there's only one punishment that suits them," King said. "The death penalty is a strong statement that we value life. I think it cheapens life when (a life is) taken, and it doesn't get the sentence it deserves. "Seeing justice carried out means the killer's life is required." Prosecutors like King say the execution of a killer offers closure for families of victims. But does it? Some victims' families say yes; others no. At the very least, an execution marks the end of what is often a wrenching ride through the legal system. Because of the intense scrutiny death cases demand, victims' families almost always endure multiple appeals. Because of the errors that too often occur in the trial of death cases, it's not uncommon for a case to be overturned and retried, starting the whole process over. So it's no wonder victims' families greet execution days with a measure of relief. "I'm relieved that he's got it over with, and I don't have to deal with it anymore," said Bill Choron of Bon Secour, whose sister's killer was executed by lethal injection in September. But carrying out the death sentence doesn't do the one thing families want most: to undo what happened to their loved ones. Taking a life for a life doesn't make things even. Nor does it increase respect for life. For years, Catholic bishops have espoused a culture of life, opposing both abortion and capital punishment. "Respect for all human life and opposition to the violence in our society are at the root of our long-standing opposition to the death penalty," said a 1999 statement by the National Conference of Catholic Bishops. "We cannot teach that killing is wrong by killing. We oppose capital punishment not just for what it does to those guilty of horrible crimes, but for what it does to all of us as a society. .. The death penalty offers the tragic illusion that we can defend life by taking life." Even if one accepts the view that capital punishment shows the ultimate respect for life, why are there so few executions? Since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1976, about 7,000 people have been sentenced to die. But that's only about 2 % of convicted killers. Fewer than 1,000 of those sentenced to death actually have been executed. The fact that such a small percentage of killers wind up on death row is itself an argument against the death penalty. It says some murderers deserve to die, but the vast majority don't. We, in essence, pick and choose which lost lives should be avenged - an eye for an eye - and which lives don't merit that degree of justice. It starts with the way states write laws that set out capital punishment guidelines. Alabama's death penalty laws provide 18 categories for which the ultimate penalty can be exacted. Often, there's not much separating a murder that calls for the death penalty from one that does not. Shoot someone to death on the street and flee, and you can be tried for murder but not capital murder. Take his wallet, and you could face the death penalty. Shoot and kill someone from your car, it's a capital offense. Get out the car and shoot the person, it's not. "If it fits the statute, we charge it. If it doesn't, we don't," Jefferson County District Attorney David Barber said of his office's philosophy in deciding whether to seek the death penalty in murder cases. But some DAs reserve death penalty prosecution for the most heinous of crimes. How effective can the death penalty be when its application can depend on something as arbitrary as whether a shot came from a car or in whose jurisdiction the murder took place? Costing dearly: The privilege of executing convicted murderers costs taxpayers dearly. A misperception about capital punishment is that it's cheaper than keeping killers locked behind bars for the rest of their lives. The opposite has usually proved true. Adding up the costs of trials, of providing adequate counsel for the defendant and of appeals, capital punishment can cost much more than locking up killers for life. Attorney General King says the state has not studied what it costs to take the average capital murder case from investigation, through trial and appeals to execution in Alabama. In other states, however, the pricetag can surpass $1 million. A 2003 Kansas study, for example, found that capital cases are 70 percent more expensive than comparable nondeath-penalty cases, and that the average case all the way through execution costs $1.26 million. A 2004 Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury report said capital murder trials cost 50 % more than life imprisonment trials. A North Carolina study in 1993 put the cost at $2.16 million per execution. And a 2000 study said Florida could save $51 million a year by sentencing capital murderers to life in prison without parole instead of executing them. Why? Because at every step, death-penalty cases cost much more than other cases. Trials are longer, more lawyers and expert witnesses are involved, more motions are filed, appeals must go through both state and federal courts. Even housing death row inmates may cost more. (Alabama's condemned are kept in solitary confinement, away from the regular prison population.) So, if the death penalty can't be shown to prevent crime, is arbitrarily applied, likely costs more than even life imprisonment and runs a real risk of taking the lives of innocent people, why use it? It's undeniable that public support for the death penalty is strong - about 70 % of those polled in both Alabama and the nation back it (though support drops significantly when life without parole is given as an option). That makes the death penalty good politics, as Bush and Gore can attest. But politics has an ugly way of putting its thumb on the scales of justice. Doing what's right, not playing good politics, ought to weigh more heavily on those scales, especially in matters of life and death. Doing right means sifting through all the false and questionable reasons for supporting the death penalty - and choosing life. (source: Editorial, Birmingham News) OHIO: Jury Recommends Death Penalty A jury in northeast Ohio Tuesday recommended the death penalty for a man who killed his live-in girlfriend, her 7-year-old son and a college student from Canada. The actual sentence for 45-year-old James Trimble of Brimfield Township will be up to Portage County Common Pleas Judge John Enlow. He scheduled a sentencing hearing for November 16th. The judge can sentence Trimble to death or life in prison. Prosecutors say Trimble killed the trio in January in a shooting and hostage rampage that began over his girlfriend's threats to leave him. Trimble told the jury he began using drugs and alcohol at 13 and started using methamphetamine at 20. He says he wishes he could bring back the 3 victims. (source: Ohio News Now) ARKANSAS----impending execution Lawyers for condemned killer say client is mentally retarded In Little Rock, lawyers for condemned killer Eric Nance told the state parole board today that Nance is mentally retarded and cannot be legally executed. They asked that the board recommend that Governor Huckabee recommend clemency for Nance and strike his November 28th execution date. Nance was given the death penalty for the 1993 killing of 18-year-old Julie Heath of Malvern A hunter found her body about a week after she disappeared. Her throat had been slashed with a boxcutter. Federal public defender Julie Brain told the parole board that courts have agreed there is evidence of Nance's mental retardation. But she said Nance's trial lawyers were ignorant and didn't raise the issue, so it has been rejected on appeal. Family members of the victims are to address the parole board later today. (source: Associated Press)
