Jan. 31 TEXAS----new execution date Jesus Aguilar has received an execution date set for May 24; it should be considered serious. (sources: Texas Department of Criminal Justice & Rick Halperin) ****************** DA says condemned killer will meet fate Bowie County District Attorney Bobby Lockhart is confident prosecutors will win their fight to keep Julius Jerome Muphy on Texas death row. Murphy, 27, of Texarkana, Texas, was scheduled to die almost 2 weeks ago for the 1997 slaying of Jason Erie, 26. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the highest appeals court for Texas criminal cases, stepped in less than 24 hours prior to Murphys scheduled execution in the Huntsville death chamber. The Court of Criminal Appeals agreed with Murphys lawyers that Murphy should have more testing to see if he is mentally retarded. It was one of the last-ditch claims his lawyers used after the U.S. Supreme Court, on Jan. 18, rejected taking up the case. But his lawyers are using the very same courts ruling - that retarded people cannot be executed - to make their case. In this instance, they say Murphys dropping out of school when he was in 8th grade and his low IQ should define him as mentally retarded. The U.S. Supreme Court set the IQ threshold for retardation at a level of 70. But Lockhart said he believes that Murphy has an IQ of 81. He said Dr. Rafael Otero, a psychologist, interviewed Murphy at the time of his 1998 trial in Bowie County. "Even with that, he's above the line," Lockhart said. Lockhart says a school dropout who takes an IQ test is more likely to have a lower IQ than someone who has completed high school and college. But the psychological theory Murphys lawyers are using argues that an IQ should be lowered for a school dropout who takes the IQ test years after he quit school. While the Court of Criminal Appeals sent the case back to the 102nd District Court, the same court where Murphy was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death in 1998, Lockhart says there is no new trial at this point. He said District Judge John F. Miller will have to hold a hearing to determine if Murphy is legally mentally retarded. If Miller finds that Murphy is not retarded, Lockhart says the appeals process starts all over again on the issue of fairness of the finding of nonretardation. "We feel good about his issues," Lockhart said. He said First Assistant District Attorney James Elliott has spoken to Erie's family following the halting of the execution and what happens next. A Bowie County jury decided Murphy should die for the fatal shooting of Erie, whose car broke down in the early morning hours of Sept. 19, 1997, near his father's home on Summerhill Road in Texarkana. Murphy, then 18, and a companion, Christopher Solomon, 17, told friends they had spotted Erie at the side of the road and were going to go back to "jack him," a witness said. They helped him get the car started and Erie offered them $5. They pulled out a .25-caliber semiautomatic pistol and robbed him of his wallet and his cash. Then Erie, a Navy veteran and father of 2, was shot in the forehead. Solomon also was convicted and received the death penalty. His sentence was commuted to life last year when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled it was improper to execute offenders who were under 18 at the time of their crimes. Solomon is now 26. He is housed at the Beto Unit in Tennessee Colony, Texas. He is eligible for parole on June 4, 2039, when he will be 59. According to the TDCJ, Bowie County has 8 offenders on death row. (source: Texarkana Gazette) ********************* Capital murder trial's jurors see videotape Jurors saw a surveillance videotape Monday of a man walking into a convenience store, pointing a gun at a clerk and demanding cash, and then shooting the clerk. That's how the 1st day of trial began for defendant Christopher Young in his capital murder case. Young, 22, is facing a possible death sentence in the shooting death Nov. 21, 2004, of Hasmukh "Hash" Patel, who was the owner and operator of the Mini Food Mart in the 3800 block of East Southcross Boulevard. Police reports at the time said Patel's death was the culmination of a 1-man crime wave that began with an assault on a woman at a nearby apartment complex and her car being stolen. 2 witnesses described the shooting; one of them identified Young as leaving the store after shots were fired. Testimony in the trial continues today in the court of 187th District Judge Raymond Angelini. (source: San Antonio Express-News) ***************** Death Penalty Sought For Bart Whitaker In Family Murder Plot Fort Bend County prosecutors will seek the death penalty for Thomas "Bart" Whitaker when he goes on trial for plotting to kill his Sugar Land family. But Whitakers father, Kent Whitaker, sole survivor of a Dec. 10, 2003, shooting rampage in which his wife, Patricia, and son Kevin were killed, has told prosecutors he doesnt want the death penalty applied to his only remaining son. Sugar Land police have said Whitaker, 25, conspired with Steven Champagne and Chris Brashear, both 23, in a plot to kill his 19-year-old brother, 51-year-old mother and 56-year-old father. All three men were arrested in September and are in custody in the Fort Bend County Jail. Police believe the motive was money; Whitaker would have stood to inherit assets, including the family house on Herron Way, of more than $1 million. According to court documents and police statements, investigators believe Bart Whitaker returned home with his family after a dinner on the night of the murders. Allegedly, Brashear was inside hiding with a gun, waiting for the family to enter. He fired on them, police believe, killing Patricia and Kevin, wounding Kent and wounding Bart in the shoulder as the 2 appeared to struggle before Brashear ran out, got into a car driven by Champagne, and left. Police say the struggle between Bart Whitaker and Brashear was staged. Bart Whitaker was the last of the three suspects to be arrested; FBI agents located him in Mexico, where he had been in hiding. After his arrest, police said Whitaker had plotted at least twice before to murder his family, with acquaintances other than Brashear and Champagne. Those acquaintances, whom police have declined to identify, have hired attorneys but have not been arrested. Bart Whitaker was indicted for capital murder by a Fort Bend County grand jury. His trial date has not been set. Fort Bend County District Attorney John Healey said no decision has been made yet whether to seek the death penalty for Brashear and Champagne. (source: FortBendNow) FLORIDA----impending execution Execution nears for killer of Panhandle woman A Vietnam veteran who drowned and strangled a Florida Panhandle woman was set to be executed Tuesday unless the U.S. Supreme Court intercedes like it did last week when it blocked the lethal injection of another Florida inmate. Arthur Rutherford, who was set to be executed at 6 p.m. EDT, pressed his appeals to the Supreme Court after a federal appeals court has turned him down late Monday. Last week, the high court stayed the execution of Clarence Hill on an issue Rutherford also has raised, that the state's lethal injection procedure is cruel and unusual punishment. "He is real anxious about the appeal," said Linda McDermott, one of Rutherford's lawyers. She said four separate petitions were filed with the Supreme Court on Rutherford's behalf early Tuesday. Appeals court judges rejected that argument for Rutherford on Monday, saying the inmates' cases differ because Rutherford waited until the Supreme Court had agreed to hear Hill's lethal injection appeal before he raised his claim. Rutherford, 56, was condemned for the Aug. 22, 1985, attack on Stella Salamon, whose head was found submerged in the bathtub of her Milton home. Salamon had a broken arm, bruises on her face and arms, and three severe head wounds. The medical examiner said Salamon died from drowning or asphyxiation. Salamon, a widow from Australia, has hired Rutherford to do a series of odd jobs, including replacing her sliding glass patio doors. She expressed concern about him to her friends. Police found Rutherford's fingerprints and palm prints in the bathroom where Salamon was killed. At his trial, 2 witnesses, Elizabeth Ward and her mother, Mary Heaton, testified that Rutherford asked for their help in cashing a $2,000 check from Salamon's bank account. Rutherford forged Salamon's name on the check and took Heaton to a bank, where she cashed the check. The Supreme Court granted Hill a last-minute stay of execution so the justices can determine whether the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta erred by denying him a chance to appeal the lethal injection claim. Hill, 48, of Mobile, Ala., had fatally shot a Pensacola police officer during a 1982 bank robbery. He was strapped to a gurney with intravenous lines attached to his arm Tuesday when Justice Anthony M. Kennedy granted a temporary stay. The full court the next day extended the stay to give lawyers time to present their arguments. However, an Indiana inmate failed in his attempts to press a similar issue early Friday and was executed. Attorneys for Hill and Rutherford contend that a cocktail of three chemicals used by Florida and several other states can cause excruciating pain. A study published in The Lancet medical journal last year by a University of Miami researcher found that a painkiller is likely to wear off before a second chemical causes the inmate to suffer a heart attack. The third chemical paralyzes the inmate so he cannot react to or express the pain, according to the study. The Florida Supreme Court refused to grant Hill or Rutherford a trial court hearing to present evidence on the issue, concluding that the study was inconclusive. The state justices Friday also rejected Rutherford's claim that new evidence might exonerate him. Rutherford would be the 61st inmate executed in Florida since 1976, when executions resumed after a 12-year moratorium, and the 257th since 1924, when the state took that duty from individual counties. ***************** Significant events in case of Arthur Rutherford Following are significant events in the death case against Arthur Rutherford, whose execution was scheduled Tuesday: Aug. 22, 1985: Body of 63-year-old Stella Salamon found submerged in bathtub in Milton home. She had a broken arm, bruises on her face and arms and severe head wounds. Medical examiner said she died from drowning or asphyxiation. Aug. 23, 1985: Arthur Rutherford arrested after getting assistance from friend to cash as $2,000 check on Salamon's account. Rutherford had done some carpentry work for Salamon. His finger and palm prints were found in bathroom where Salamon was killed. Sept. 11, 1985: Rutherford indicted on charges of first-degree murder and robbery with a firearm. Jan. 31, 1986: Rutherford found guilty of all charges. Feb. 1, 1986: Jury recommends death sentence by an 8 to 4 majority. April 2, 1986: Judge grants mistrial due to discovery violations by the state. Oct. 2, 1986: On retrial, Rutherford was found guilty on all charges. The jury, on a 7 to 5 vote, recommends death penalty. Dec. 9, 1986: Rutherford sentenced to death for murder count and 30 years on armed robbery. June 16, 1989: Florida Supreme Court affirms conviction and sentence. Oct. 30, 1989: U.S. Supreme Court denies appeal. Dec. 17, 1998: Florida Supreme Court denies appeal. Sept. 1, 2000: U.S. District Court dismissed petition for writ of habeas corpus. Oct. 12, 2000: Florida Supreme Court denied petition for writ of habeas corpus. Aug. 29, 2002: U.S. District Court again denies appeal. Nov. 29, 2005: Gov. Jeb Bush signs death warrant. Dec. 20, 2002: Motion for rehearing denied for Santa Rosa Circuit Court. May 25, 2004: Florida Supreme Court turns down appeal. Sept. 27, 2004: U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals affirms denial of Rutherford's petition for habeas corpus. Feb. 22, 2005: U.S. Supreme Court denies appeal. April 18, 2005: U.S. Supreme Court denies another appeal. July 18, 2005: Florida Supreme Court denies appeal. Jan. 5, 2006: Florida Supreme Court denies petition for writ of habeas corpus. Jan. 5, 2006: State Supreme Court denies appeal. Jan. 27, 2006: Florida Supreme Court denies appeal. Jan. 30, 2006: U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals turns down Rutherford's appeal in 2-1 vote. (source for both: Associated Press) MARYLAND----impending execution Judge denies Evans' appeal on death procedure----Defense argued that method of execution doesn't comply with act A state judge denied a bid today to halt next week's scheduled execution of Vernon Evans, agreeing with the state that the defense had little hope of winning a court challenge of the execution procedure. Evans' attorneys argued the procedure used by the state was not developed in compliance with the Administrative Procedures Act. As a result, public comment on the procedure, for example, was not obtained. Evans attorney A. Stephen Hut Jr. said his client was seeking to "avoid a death effectively by torture," noting the painful effects of the chemicals used. One of the three is not allowed to be used by veterinarians for euthanizing animals, a point that the public could have brought up at hearings on the execution method, Hut said. Judge Marcella Holland said she "didn't see a likelihood of success, even with the added APA claim," noting the state's highest court had previously upheld the procedure. Hut said he would appeal the ruling, most likely as soon as Wednesday. "It's disappointing. The judge has a point" about the previous appeals court ruling, Hut said. "However, I don't think she gave enough weight and consideration to the APA claim." Earlier, Assistant Attorney General Michael O. Doyle said if public comment had been sought the "results wouldn't have been any different." Hut responded that corrections officials may have found public comments "persuasive, they may have decided on a different regime." Hut also told Holland that the manual the correction division uses to conduct executions differs from the law that established the process. While the manual dictates the use of three drugs, the statute specifies 2. The manual also requires 2 short bursts of one chemical while the statute calls for a continuous stream. And the statute demands substantial training for employees involved in executions, while the manual doesn't address training. Assistant Attorney General Scott Oakley told Holland that the state legislature passed the statute after receiving a letter from the correction commissioner detailing how the department would carry out executions. The corrections division has maintained that procedure since then, Oakley said. Evans, 57, is scheduled to be executed next week for the contract murder killings of Scott Piechowicz and his sister-in-law, Susan Kennedy. Evans has admitted that he was offered $9,000 by drug dealer Anthony Grandison, who had wanted Piechowicz and his wife dead because he believed they were going to testify against him in a criminal trial. Kennedy was killed by mistake when she was mistaken for her sister. Evans insists that although he joined the conspiracy to kill the 2, he was not the gunman. Grandison is also awaiting execution in a state prison. The circuit court battle is one of several attempts to halt the execution. On Monday, Evans' attorneys petitioned the governor for clemency, arguing that a jury did not hear compelling evidence that Evans was not the man who pulled the trigger. They also argued in U.S. District Court in Baltimore on Friday that the execution would violate constitutional protections against cruel and unusual punishment. Attorneys and doctors said Evans' history of heroin use so badly damaged his veins that Maryland's execution procedure could subject him to excruciating pain. (source: Baltimore Sun) ARIZONA: Q&A: Carla Ryan, Tucson attorney Tucson attorney Carla Ryan, 55, is known for her work in death penalty law. She has appeared before the World Court in The Hague - "it was an astonishing experience; there was no bullying, skepticism or disdain from the judges," she said - and the U.S. Supreme Court on several occasions. The former Arizona State University professor of law and former Pima County public defender is in private practice. She talked about some of her experiences and legal views with Citizen reporter Anthony Gimino. Question: What were your professional experiences in front of Sandra Day O'Connor? Answer: Justice O'Connor was the first judge I ever appeared before when she was on the Maricopa County Superior Court. It was a divorce case. The firm I worked for represented the husband. She was so intimidating! She was very conservative and certainly not interested in a very young, naive lawyer with no experience and little reputation. When she was nominated to the United States Supreme Court, I was horrified. But she surprised me on my cases in the Supreme Court. She was much more cordial and even became a little more liberal. That's not to say she was liberal, but in comparison to others.... She was very concerned about judicial errors and the misuse of capital punishment. Now, I wish she was not retiring. Q: If Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito is confirmed, what would you expect of his interpretation of the Constitution? A: This is a tough one because he has been so evasive in his answers to inquiries. I do believe he will be very anti-women issues ... and very supportive of this White House and their misuse of power. I believe he will quickly side with Justices Scalia and Thomas. Q: Legally speaking, what gives you the most pause about the death penalty? A: Human error. Who receives the death penalty in the United States depends on who the prosecutor is or the county where the crime occurred. Some counties and states refuse to seek death just because of the price of litigation. Or sometimes it depends on who is appointed to represent the defendant, and race - not so much of the defendant, but of the victim. Moreover, the majority of individuals on death row are mentally ill, poor and uneducated. We have CEOs of companies that destroy millions of people's lives and, in reality, cause these people not only economic hardship, but also cause them to commit suicide. They're never considered as candidates for execution. Q: What's important right now, in the courts or government, regarding the death penalty? A: I believe the courts and the governments, instead of just pushing for the execution or the conviction, should slow down and take the time to study the situation. The death penalty is excessively expensive - and not just because of defense lawyers. Mistakes are made. Attorneys are appointed without the experience or the resources to be able to competently represent defendants. The majority of capital cases involve mentally ill individuals. And then we have overzealous prosecutors. I'm not saying all, but some. Just like some defense lawyers are ineffective and others are not. The money being spent to look like Arizona is tough on crime should be reallocated to education and mental health. These 2 areas are deprived of funding and will in the long run do more to stop violent crime than any execution. Q: Does being involved in capital cases in a town the size of Tucson give you any undesired attention? A: I have suffered from hate mail, hundreds of death threats, having my mailbox blown up on more than one occasion, and the execution of one of my German shepherds. I have had tomatoes thrown at my vehicles. I have had pickets outside of my office. All because I was appointed to represent an individual accused of capital murder. Friends of mine have had to take their children out of public schools and, on at least one occasion, relocate their family out of state. We all know that the defense lawyer is there to make sure that the Constitution is followed and that the prosecutor proves that an individual is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Nevertheless, some individuals see the defense lawyer as the criminal. Q: You're also a noted chef. What would you ask for your last meal? A: If it was going to be my last meal, I would ask for a thousand-year-old dinosaur egg with a mushroom-and-wine sauce. I would hope that the egg would not be available and my last meal would be stayed. I always want to have another argument to present to the courts. (source: Tucson Citizen)
