Nov. 14 KENTUCKY: U.S. Supreme Court Refuses To Hear Death Row Case The U-S Supreme Court has refused without comment to consider an appeal from Kentucky death row inmate Thomas C. Bowling. Franklin County Circuit Judge Roger Crittenden had issued stays of execution for Bowling and Ralph Baze on July 12th despite objections from the attorney general's office. Crittenden last week upheld the use of lethal injection in Kentucky in a setback for the 2 death row inmates. They claim that the drug formula amounts to cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Kentucky and U-S constitutions. Bowling was sentenced to be executed for killing Edward and Tina Earley and shooting their 2-year-old son outside the couple's Lexington dry-cleaning business in 1990. Baze was convicted of killing Powell County Sheriff Steve Bennett and deputy Arthur Briscoe during an attempted arrest in 1992. (source: Associated Press) MISSISSIPPI: Supreme Court rejects appeal of Miss. Death Row inmate The Mississippi attorney general's office moved quickly to seek a new execution date for Death Row inmate John B. Nixon Sr. after the U.S. Supreme Court refused Monday to consider his latest appeal. Nixon, convicted in a 1985 murder-for-hire case, appears to have exhausted his appeals through state and federal courts, said Jacob Ray, a spokesman for Attorney General Jim Hood. Ray said a motion was filed Monday afternoon with the state Supreme Court asking for a new date. He said it was possible the date ordered would be before the end of the year. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had earlier denied Nixon's claims that his lawyer didn't do a good job and that his Rankin County jury shouldn't have been told about a previous rape conviction. A federal judge in Jackson had twice denied those claims. Nixon, a one-time Utica auto mechanic, was convicted of capital murder in the Jan. 2, 1985, killing of Virginia Tucker, 45, in her Brandon home. The victim's husband, Thomas, was wounded and identified Nixon as the attacker. Tucker's ex-husband, Elester Joseph Ponthieux of Raymond, is serving a life sentence for hiring Nixon. 2 of Nixon's sons and a friend were also convicted in the killing. (source: Associated Press) ALABAMA: Supreme Court rejects appeal in death penalty case from Cullman The U.S. Supreme Court turned down an appeal Monday from an Alabama death row inmate convicted of killing a night clerk during the robbery of a Cullman motel 18 years ago. The rejection marked the second time the nation's highest court has turned back an appeal from Doyle Lee Hamm. Hamm was convicted of killing Patrick Cunningham during a robbery on Jan. 24, 1987. (source: Associated Press) ILLINOIS: Former death row inmate to visit Heritage U.P. Church On Tuesday, November 15, Heritage United Presbyterian Church, located on East Broadway in Monmouth, will be hosting a special speaker at a 7 p.m. presentation. William Neal Moore, a former Georgia death row inmate who is now an ordained minister with the Christ Assembly of Evangelistic Ministries, will be delivering an address at Heritage Church dealing with issues involved with redemption and his experience with the death penalty and on death row. The event is free and open to the public, and members of the community are encouraged and invited to attend. A freewill offering will be accepted. "No one is beyond redemption," says Moore in his biographical information, "even people on death row." Moore was convicted and sentenced to death for the 1974 robbery-murder of a 77-year-old man. He subsequently spent 16 years on death row before coming within 20 hours of his execution by electric chair on August 21, 1990. It was at this time that, due in great part to the fact that Moore was sentenced without having gone to trial, his sentence was commuted to life by the State Board of Pardons and Paroles. Later, in response to pleas from Moore's relatives and from notable figures such as Mother Theresa and the Reverend Jesse Jackson, Moore was paroled, becoming a preacher and professional speaker. Moore admits to the commission of the crime that nearly resulted in his execution, and rather than proclaiming his innocence, focuses on his contrition and redemption for the acts he committed. "Unlike other speakers who once resided on death row, [Moore's] is not a story of innocence, but a story of redemption," said Professor Phyllis Goldfarb of Boston College School of Law according to Moore's biographical information, "It is a story that raises fascinating questions about blame, forgiveness, mercy, and the death penalty. He is an extraordinary person who provides an audience with an extraordinary educational experience." Moore currently resides in Rome, Georgia, with his wife, Pastor Donna Moore. After being ordained as a minister, he formed Jesus Christ Prison Ministry, and now speaks in a variety of venues, including churches, universities, youth detention centers, and prisons. Previous speaking engagements for Moore have included a long list of colleges and law schools scattered across the East Coast and Midwest. Moore will be staying in the Monmouth area until Sunday, November 20. Anyone who is interested in speaking with Mr. Moore may contact Carol McCrery at (309) 221-2852, in order to inquire about an opportunity to meet Heritage Church's guest. (source: Daily Review-Atlas) USA: Priests, death penalty, lay ministers on agenda on bishops' 1st day The U.S. Catholic bishops opened their annual fall meeting Nov. 14 with encouragement for the nation's priests and preliminary discussion of topics ranging from the death penalty to children's Masses, from lay ecclesial ministers to budget matters. In his presidential address, Bishop William S. Skylstad of Spokane, Wash., called priests "the treasures who safeguard the church as a eucharistic community" and said they deserve the gratitude, support, esteem and collaborative respect of the bishops. Attention stemming from publicity about sexual abuse cases and how the church has handled them was not about the "wonder, commitment, dedication and perseverance" of priests, but about "the darkness and sin which overwhelmed some," he said. "It has been a personally painful time for the vast majority of priests who did nothing to deserve that pain." Bishop Skylstad's request that the bishops show their appreciation for priests by applauding was met with a standing ovation that lasted nearly a minute. Members of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops then turned their attention to the major agenda items of the Nov. 14-17 meeting, including decisions on a statement about lay ecclesial ministry, a new text of Scripture readings for Masses with children and a new statement calling for an end to the use of the death penalty in the United States. Also on the agenda were the election of a new USCCB general secretary, the election of chairmen-elect for seven USCCB committees and approval of 2006 priorities, plans and budget for the USCCB. In the first vote of their 2005 meeting, the bishops agreed to make May 22 an annual Day of Remembrance and Prayer for Mariners and People of the Sea. The initial presentation of the proposed guidelines on lay ecclesial ministry brought a lively discussion on terminology, with some bishops asking whether the term "lay ecclesial ministry" might lead to confusion with the ministry proper only to those who are ordained. Called "Co-workers in the Vineyard of the Lord," the document containing the guidelines is a response to one of the most significant phenomena to emerge in the church since the Second Vatican Council -- the rapid growth of lay ministerial leaders collaborating with the priests and deacons as an integral part of parish and diocesan life. The document to be voted on by the bishops Nov. 15 is the result of several regional and national consultations and has gone through seven drafts over the past year and a half. The proposed new Lectionary for Masses With Children, adapted to the simpler vocabulary and shorter attention span of preadolescent children, must be approved by two-thirds of the country's Latin-rite bishops and confirmed by the Vatican before it can be used. It is intended to replace the experimental Lectionary that has been in use since 1993. The bishops have been on record opposing use of the death penalty for 25 years, but the proposed new statement, "A Culture of Life and the Penalty of Death," says the bishops seek "to seize a new moment and new momentum" in their campaign against capital punishment. "It is time for our nation to abandon the illusion that we can protect life by taking life," the statement says. "Ending the use of the death penalty would be one important step away from a culture of death toward building a culture of life." Both the children's Lectionary and the death penalty statement were scheduled for debate and vote Nov. 15. In a departure from previous years, the bishops were to conclude public sessions of their fall meeting by lunchtime Nov. 15 and meet in executive session that afternoon and the 2 following days. The evening of the meeting's 1st day was to feature a concelebrated Mass at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception and a concert, with guests from other faiths, commemorating the 40th anniversary of "Nostra Aetate," the Second Vatican Council's Declaration on the Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions. The schedule for Nov. 15 called for special presentations by Cardinal Ignace Moussa Daoud, prefect of the Vatican Congregation for Eastern Churches and former patriarch of the Syrian Catholic Church, and by Cardinal Marc Ouellet of Quebec, where the 2008 International Eucharistic Congress is to be held. Oral reports were scheduled on the bishops' hurricane task force, Ad Hoc Committee on Africa and immigration reform campaign, as well as on the Religious Alliance Against Pornography and the Catholic Near East Welfare Association. (source: Catholic News Service) ********************** Terrorism Trial's Strategies Revealed As preparations intensify for the upcoming death penalty trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, newly unsealed court documents are laying out the arguments prosecutors and defense attorneys plan to make in what is likely to be the only judicial reckoning for the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Prosecutors will tell an Alexandria federal court jury that Moussaoui deserves to die because he lied to the FBI when he was arrested a month before the terrorist assaults that killed nearly 3,000 people, the papers indicate. If the French citizen had confessed his knowledge of the hijacking plot, the government is expected to argue, the carnage of Sept. 11 could have been prevented. To build their case that Moussaoui should die, prosecutors are planning to use admissions he made in April, when he became the first person convicted in a U.S. case stemming from the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. When he pleaded guilty, Moussaoui signed a statement of facts admitting that he "lied to federal agents to allow his al Qaeda 'brothers' to go forward with the operation to fly planes into American buildings." Defense attorneys, while arguing that Moussaoui actually knew very little about Sept. 11, are also preparing to put the government itself on trial. Both the Bush and Clinton administrations were warned that Osama bin Laden wanted to strike the United States, the attorneys are arguing, but did little to prepare. In fact, they say, the government knew far more about bin Laden's intentions than did Moussaoui -- and also knew enough about Moussaoui to realize that he could pose a threat. "We need to know, almost frozen in time, what was known by the government before the planes hit the World Trade Center," Moussaoui attorney Edward B. MacMahon Jr. said at a classified hearing whose contents were made public last week. Defense attorneys said that before Sept. 11, former CIA director George J. Tenet was briefed about Moussaoui after Moussaoui was arrested because his behavior at a Minnesota flight school was suspicious. The title of the briefing: "Islamic Extremist or Islamic Fundamentalist Learns to Fly." Moussaoui, 37, pleaded guilty to six counts of conspiring with al Qaeda and said that bin Laden had personally instructed him to fly an airplane into the White House. But he denied that he was planning to be a Sept. 11 hijacker and said his attack was to come later. A trial, starting Jan. 9 with jury selection, will now convene to determine if he should be executed or spend the rest of his life in prison. The trial itself, expected to last several months at a courthouse just miles from the Pentagon, promises to be extraordinary. Scores of reporters will descend on a building already under extremely tight security due to numerous other high-profile cases. Jury selection alone, from a pool filled with government workers, is expected to take almost a month, according to a schedule set by U.S. District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema -- far longer than most high-profile cases. During the proceedings, relatives of Sept. 11 victims will have their day in court for the first time since the attacks. An unknown number are expected to testify as part of a massive and unprecedented outreach the government mounted, both to secure relatives' cooperation in court and to help them deal with their loss. Prosecutors acknowledged in a recent filing that their so-called victim impact evidence will be "emotionally charged." The trial will also be aired on closed-circuit television to Sept. 11 family members at highly secure, remote locations outside Alexandria. At the defense table, the trial could feature wild unpredictability. Moussaoui, an admitted al Qaeda member, is known for rambling speeches and heated courtroom outbursts. When he pleaded guilty, he called one of his attorneys a "Judas" and screamed: "Lord! God curse America!" Sources familiar with the case said that Moussaoui has not talked to his attorneys in months. It is unclear how this will affect the defense case or how Brinkema will react to any outbursts. Brinkema initially granted Moussaoui the right to represent himself but revoked it after he scrawled blistering handwritten motions from jail in which he taunted the government and compared the judge to a Nazi SS officer. Moussaoui has indicated that he wants to testify, sources said, which is his right under the U.S. Constitution. At his plea hearing, he said he would "fight every inch against the death penalty." Prosecutors and defense attorneys would not comment beyond the court filings. Moussaoui has been in the Alexandria jail for nearly 4 years. He was arrested more than three weeks before Sept. 11 and was charged in December 2001 with conspiring with al Qaeda in the Sept. 11 attacks. A constitutional showdown over access to top al Qaeda detainees delayed the case for more than two years. Moussaoui wanted to interview the captives, saying they could clear him. Brinkema agreed, but the government vehemently resisted on national security grounds. Eventually, a federal appeals court ruled that Moussaoui could not interview the detainees but could present to the jury portions of statements they made to interrogators. The 2 sides are still fighting over the issue. In May, defense attorneys sought access to other detainees, recently unsealed court filings show. Brinkema has yet to rule on the request. And the government urged Brinkema to reconsider her earlier rulings, saying the al Qaeda witnesses are not relevant to the sentencing trial. Brinkema declined to do so in an order unsealed Thursday, writing that the witnesses' statements "remain extremely material to this case." It is unclear how the statements will be presented at the trial, but what is clear is that much will turn on whether jurors conclude that Moussaoui lied to federal agents after his arrest. The newly unsealed documents indicate that is the heart of the government's case. According to a transcript of the Oct. 12 hearing unsealed last week in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Brinkema said to prosecutors: "I think your theory of the case now is that his failure to tell the agents what he knew about Sept. 11 resulted in death." "You are correct, your honor," responded Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert A. Spencer. Later in the hearing, Spencer referred to Moussaoui's admissions in the statement of facts and said: "We know he knew that much and lied, and instead of giving those answers, he gave false answers." The hearing transcript was released with redactions; much of the material in the case is classified. Attorneys can view classified material only in two locked rooms -- a defense room in the basement of the federal courthouse in Alexandria and a government room within the U.S. attorney's office, located in the same building, sources said. At the Oct. 12 hearing, defense attorneys outlined their argument that Moussaoui knew very little about Sept. 11 and that his confession wouldn't have stopped the attacks anyway because the government had repeatedly failed to act on warnings about al Qaeda's plans. "We're trying to pinpoint what information the government had before 9/11 . . . to compare it with what Mr. Moussaoui may or may not have known or what they did even with the information that they had," MacMahon said. Another recently unsealed defense filing says that President Bill Clinton was warned in 1998 "that bin Laden was preparing to hijack United States aircraft." The same filing cites a controversial August 2001 briefing given to President Bush titled "Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S." The White House declassified that briefing last year after a request from the commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks. It warned Bush that the FBI had information that terrorists might be preparing for a hijacking in the United States and might be targeting a building in Lower Manhattan. "Substantial evidence will be presented at trial," Moussaoui's attorneys wrote in their filing, "that the United States government knew more about al Qaeda's plans to attack the United States than did Mr. Moussaoui." (source: Washington Post) VIRGINIA: Governor Warner Should Save Robin Lovitt from Death Row Robin Lovitt, who has been on death row since March 1, 2000, has now been rescheduled for execution on November 30. On July 11, 2005, the United States Supreme Court granted the Virginia death row inmate a glimmer of hope. Amid claims that he could prove his innocence if DNA evidence used at his trial had not been destroyed, the Court decided to stay Lovitts execution and consider whether his appeal merited further review. Last month, however, the High Court shattered Lovitts hope when they decided not to hear his case. Lovitts final appeal for justice now rests solely on the shoulders of Virginia Governor Mark Warner. Lovitt's long and unsuccessful crusade through state and federal courts is a story many claim is marred with countless instances of injustice. It began when he was convicted of fatally stabbing a man with scissors during a 1998 pool hall robbery in Arlington, Va. But since his 1999 conviction, Lovitt continues to insist that although he committed the robbery, he is innocent of murder. During Lovitt's trial, low-level DNA evidence was deemed "inconclusive" as to whether he was the perpetrator. But history has shown that previously inconclusive DNA evidence can later be deemed "conclusive" upon further analysis. The case of Earl Washington, Jr., who was convicted of rape and murder, illustrates this fact. Washington spent nine and a half years on death row, only to be exonerated nine days before his scheduled execution when a re-examination of previously inconclusive DNA evidence proved his innocence. In response to the alarming reality of inconclusive DNA evidence in the Washington case, Gov. Warner ordered the re-examination of low-level DNA evidence for many death row inmates. But although Lovitt was among this group, his chances for exoneration were dealt a devastating blow when the DNA evidence that might have spared his life was destroyed by the chief clerk of the Arlington Circuit Court. Two clerks at the Arlington County Circuit Court testified that they had advised their superior, Robert McCarthy, not to destroy the evidence from Lovitts trial. But McCarthy destroyed it anyway, in violation of the law and in violation of Robin Lovitts right to have the evidence re-examined. Consequently, Lovitt once again turned to the courts, appealing to the Supreme Court of Virginia, the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia and the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. At every stage, his claim was denied. The Fourth Circuit even went so far as to declare that although McCarthy made a "serious error in judgment," Lovitt was not entitled to relief because he could not prove that McCarthy destroyed the evidence in "bad faith." The U.S. Supreme Courts subsequent refusal to hear the case in Oct. 2001 seemingly left Robin Lovitt with no further legal recourse. During the next 4 years, while Lovitt sat on death row, his attorneys continued to fight in the courts to save his life. However, after exhausting all legal claims, Lovitt was scheduled to be executed on July 11, 2005, barring a stay of execution by Gov. Warner or the U.S. Supreme Court. Warner refused to act. Then, moments before his execution, Lovitts despair turned into hope when prison officials received word that the U.S. Supreme Court had granted his stay - temporarily sparing his life. However, the stay only offered the Supreme Court justices the opportunity to consider whether they would hear his claim. And, in a disappointing move on Oct. 3, 2005, the Supreme Court, without explanation, refused to hear Lovitts arguments. Immediately afterward, Virginia officials, for the second time, scheduled Robin Lovitt's execution date. Now, Lovitt's life undoubtedly rests with Gov. Warner. Barring a commute by Warner, Robin Lovitt will be put to death by state execution on Nov. 30, 2005. Warner has a chance to do the right thing. He has the opportunity to take a stand for fairness and justice by ensuring that a potentially innocent man is not put to death. Indeed, Gov. Warner is in a unique position to ensure that the right to a fair and just judicial process, afforded to every American by our federal and state constitutions, is not jeopardized by government carelessness. The Governors authority to commute death sentences is reserved specifically for situations like this one. Yet, if Warner does not acknowledge the governments wrongdoing in this matter and fails to commute Lovitt's sentence to life in prison, the same injustice will likely occur in the future. No matter what Warner decides, it will have an impact on Virginians. Either the misdeeds of government officials will continue to be protected or the Governor can send a message to government officials that errors of such magnitude when dealing with matters of life and death will not be tolerated. Although Warner is to be commended for his decision to review death penalty cases involving low-level DNA evidence, he needs to take the next, but crucial, step of ensuring that accountability and fairness are not only aspirations but also realities. With Nov. 30 fast approaching, Robin Lovitt's death sentence should be commuted to life in prison. Turning a deaf ear on this issue will not solve the problem. It will occur and reoccur so long as government actions remain protected. With Robin Lovitts life and the lives of other Virginians at stake, fairness and government accountability must be held to the highest standard. Although Virginians are in the midst of a gubernatorial election stained with images from demeaning, negative campaign ads - many of them focusing on the death penalty - it is critical that we realize that this case is not about whether the death penalty is good policy or whether it is morally justified. This is a case about basic fairness and the need for government accountability through executive checks and balances. It is a case about ensuring that no innocent person falls prey to reckless government action. And it is a case about erring on the side of caution when a persons life is at stake. Among all the actions of government, there are none that carry greater risks and responsibilities than ensuring a person's guilt before terminating his life. Clearly, Gov. Warner should save Robin Lovitt from death row. (source: Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute, Nov. 3) CALIFORNIA: Snoop Dogg joins protest against Williams execution Rap star Snoop Dogg will head a youth rally on Saturday outside San Quentin State Prison to protest the Dec. 13 scheduled execution of convicted murderer and former Crips gang co-founder Stanley "Tookie" Williams. Dogg, whose real name is Calvin Broadus, once ran with the infamous Los Angeles-area street gang. He joins a chorus of opposition to the execution of a gang leader-turned peace advocate who has garnered unusual celebrity and several Nobel Prize nominations while on death row. That chorus is bound to rise as the execution date draws near. Williams, 51, filed a clemency petition last week with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, after the U.S. Supreme Court in October refused to hear his appeal. Williams, 51, has renounced gang life from death row. He has penned anti-gang children's books and advocated for street peace in calls to gang members, incarcerated youth and at-risk children. Last year, actor Jamie Foxx starred as Williams in the cable TV movie "Redemption." Anti-death penalty groups see the case as a firm test for Schwarzenegger and the idea that rehabilitation should play a renewed role in clemency deliberations. Since California restored the death penalty in 1978, no governor has granted clemency. Prosecutors and family members note that Williams continues to maintain his innocence in the 1979 shotgun killings of Albert Owens at a Whittier 7-Eleven store and Yen-I Yang, his wife, Tsai-Shai Yang, and their adult daughter, Ye Chen Lin, at a Los Angeles motel. Williams has failed to sway the courts on his legal claims of racially biased jury selection and inadequate representation, among others. The rally outside the gates of the Marin County prison is scheduled for 10 a.m. to noon. (source: Contra Costa Times)
