Dec. 5 CALIFORNIA: Californians Conflicted on Williams' Fate If Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is feeling conflicted as he weighs life or death in the case of Stanley Tookie Williams, he is not alone. Bill Knox opposes capital punishment because he believes it has not "been handled fairly over the decades - especially in the minority communities." Still, the law is the law. If Schwarzenegger believes, after Thursday's clemency hearing, that Williams deserves to die for the 1979 murders of four people, "then he has to carry out the sentence," said Knox, a 57-year-old retired corporate executive in Danville, an affluent suburb east of San Francisco. "I don't personally like it, but I have to separate myself from a bigger system," he said. Just over Altamont Pass, dotted with churning windmills and grazing cows, Joe Cisneros is equally torn. He supports the death penalty "to a certain extent." But the Williams case is a hard one, he says. "What he's doing, writing books, trying to keep future generations out of gangs - that type of a figure kids might want to listen to," said the 58-year-old Cisneros, who has operated a hair salon in downtown Tracy for nearly 30 years. On the other hand, he said, "You've got to show these gangbangers if you do the crime, you've got to pay for it." Cisneros finally threw his hands in the air, literally, his palms facing the ceiling. "When you're in that position like Arnold is, it's a tough one," Cisneros concluded. "I can't make that judgment call. I just can't." Deciding whether someone should live or die with the sanction of the state cannot be an easy thing. Schwarzenegger has already said he dreads deciding whether to let the Dec. 13 execution go forward. But although the judgment will not hinge on politics, the choice is particularly fraught for Schwarzenegger as he seeks to recover from last month's disastrous special election and runs for a second term next year. Abandoned by a large swath of the state's Democratic-leaning electorate, Republican Schwarzenegger has worked to reclaim his centrist image by aggressively reaching out to old adversaries, even going so far as naming a longtime Democratic activist, Susan Kennedy, as his new chief of staff. Granting clemency to Williams "would fit in with that kind of new characterization" of the governor as a more "humane, caring individual," said Larry N. Gerston, a San Jose State political scientist. And yet blocking Williams' execution could further antagonize conservatives already outraged by Kennedy's appointment and Schwarzenegger's talk of huge new borrowing to pay for improved roads, ports and other infrastructure projects. "If he blinks on this issue, does he perhaps add more fuel to that fire and open the possibility for a primary fight?" Gerston asked. But public opinion on the matter appears shaded with nuance. In polls taken over roughly the last decade, a majority of Californians have consistently said they support the death penalty for serious crimes. At the same time, some surveys have also found strong support for an alternative sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole. A series of random interviews around the state last week - in politically competitive areas reflecting California as a whole - found similar ambivalence among nearly four dozen individuals who agreed to discuss their views on Schwarzenegger, capital punishment and the choice the governor faces. Supporters of the death penalty expressed concern about its application, citing cases of innocent men being freed from death row on the basis of new DNA evidence. Opponents questioned whether it was fair that Williams' fame - Jamie Foxx starred in a movie based on his life and has joined other celebrities in taking up his cause - has given him a shot at clemency that others were denied. Lance Leber seemed to be a walking embodiment of on-the-one-hand, on-the-other sentiment. "If someone hurt my family, I'd be quite upset. I don't know what kind of reaction I'd have," said the lanky 33-year-old, a wine shop owner and part-time disc jockey in Livermore, on the far eastern reaches of the San Francisco Bay Area. "It matters if he's 100% guilty or not. There's some things I've heard that this guy's done some major repentance. But even with that - does that really matter?" Weighing vengeance and mercy as he stood in the middle of a strip mall parking lot on a cold, blustery day, Leber finally said, "I just don't think the death penalty would be the right solution in this case. There's too much controversy." There were plenty of people who had no doubt, one way or the other - among them Marie Retti, a 56-year-old cattle rancher who was slinging 20-pound bags of cat food into her faded red pickup nearby. "Didn't he kill four people? Didn't he influence a lot of people to kill a lot of other people?" Retti said of Williams, co-founder of the Crips street gang. "I think evil is evil, and I don't think people change." Four hundred miles to the south, in the bluff-top suburbs north of San Diego, Marge Benton said much the same thing. "Right is right and wrong is wrong, and an eye for an eye," the 81-year-old retiree said after a worker at Solana Beach's Dixieline Lumber loaded starter logs into the trunk of her white Lexus. "If you kill somebody, you have to pay the price." Mention of that Old Testament injunction brought a smile to John King's face. The 50-year-old air traffic controller was navigating the crush of holiday shoppers at an upscale mall in Pleasanton, east of San Francisco. "I guess those people must believe in the Bible," he said of the eye-for-an-eye adherents. "So therefore, if they believe in the Bible, they should believe that God is the only one who has the power over life and death." Although Benton is a fan of the governor and King opposed the recall that carried Schwarzenegger to office, opinions about Williams did not always divide neatly along partisan lines. Around the corner at the Pleasanton mall, Democrat Jesus Romero questioned the sincerity of Williams' jailhouse crusade against violence. "I've seen him in interviews. I've seen the books that he's written," Romero, 31, a juvenile counselor, said as he strained to keep an eye on his rambunctious 2-year-old, Isaac. "He's done a lot of bad. He's trying to do good, but in a way I think he's just trying to save himself." Conversely, although Republican Chris Rudd was hazy on the facts in Williams' case, he confessed to being "a little ambivalent" when it comes to the death penalty in general. "Without really solid evidence, I know that juries make mistakes," the 72-year-old retired metal parts salesman said as he waited to meet a buddy for breakfast at an International House of Pancakes in Glendale. "Sad to say, we all do." Whatever Schwarzenegger's decision, there was little sense among voters questioned last week that it would haunt him politically. Many said they empathized with the difficulty the governor faces, and more than a few said they were glad it was his responsibility and not theirs. Even some of those who felt strongly one way or the other said they could understand the governor's reaching a different conclusion. "The death penalty is like abortion," said Sherry Cain, 61, as she stopped by Dixieline Lumber to pick up some poinsettias. "It's a real personal issue and it's very difficult." Although opinions were decidedly mixed on whether Schwarzenegger deserves reelection, not one of those interviewed said they would base their decision on his actions in Williams' clemency case. Kathy Kindred, the 43-year-old owner of K2 Knits Yarn Salon in Tracy, is a staunch Schwarzenegger backer and proponent of the death penalty. "If he did take the lives of four, I think he should pay for it, no matter how good," Kindred said of Williams as she smoked a cigarette in front of her shop on a downtown side street. "I think there is a trend in our society now where we make excuses for things. This gentleman, Tookie Williams, obviously reacted by turning over a new leaf. But he still should be responsible for what he did," she said. That said, if Schwarzenegger allows Williams to live out his life behind bars, Kindred still plans to vote to give the governor a 2nd term. "I elect somebody not to have to watchdog them. I elect them on their overall campaign," Kindred said. "Some things Schwarzenegger has done I don't agree with. But I'm going to do things that people don't agree with." (source: Los Angeles Times) ***************** Let 'Tookie' live for the good he's doing Since the Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment nearly 30 years ago, only one governor - Virginia's George Allen in 1997 - said he took someone off death row due to character reform. Now, California's governor can take this courageous stand. On Thursday, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) will hold a hearing to decide whether to grant clemency to Stanley "Tookie" Williams, a cofounder of the Crips, a violent Los Angeles street gang. Mr. Williams is scheduled to be executed Dec. 13. The case is far from clear-cut. Hollywood celebrities, politicians, and other death-penalty opponents are urging limited mercy (life in prison without parole) because Williams has transformed into an anti-gang activist, apologized for starting the Crips, and written children's books to discourage kids from joining gangs. But law enforcement officials, victims' rights defenders, family members of the victims, and even a grim radio show called the "Kill Tookie" hour won't accept anything less than execution for this man convicted of four murders. He hasn't accepted responsibility for the killings, and so isn't truly reformed, they say. Williams maintains his innocence. Were prisoner repentance to become more widely accepted as a reason to commute a death sentence, that would take the nation a welcome step closer to eliminating the immoral practice of capital punishment. The nation's support for the death penalty is waning. Over the past 5 years, juries handed out far fewer capital sentences and executions dropped. One reason is concern over possible execution of the innocent, reinforced by DNA technology. Another is that many states introduced life-without-parole as an alternative to execution. The Gallup Poll finds support for the death penalty drops from 3/4 to about 1/2 when life-without-parole is an option. And the Supreme Court recently ruled it unconstitutional to execute the mentally retarded and juveniles. But what about character reform as cause for mercy? The Williams murders were gruesome, leaving behind deep emotional pain. That's why those opposing clemency believe he should pay with his life - and thus, they say, teach violent gang members a lesson. Such justifications, as well as a desire for revenge, are understandable, but offbase. Capital punishment does not deter murder. States with the death penalty have a higher rate of murder than those without it. And even the brother of one of Williams's victims acknowledges that revenge is self-perpetuating. Additionally, a state's most basic duty to its citizens is to protect life, not take it. But there's a moral side to this debate, and that's where redemption comes in. Capital punishment violates the Mosaic command, "Thou shalt not kill." All lives have value, and a life redeemed - even partially - comes closer to realizing a life of purpose than one cut short. Williams's continued outreach illustrates this. By reducing Williams's sentence to life-without-parole, Mr. Schwarzenegger can assure that the former gang leader still pays his debt to society, but also improves it - and himself. Such a decision can inch America toward yet another reason to end the death penalty. This practice, not a human being, deserves an execution. (source: Christian Science Monitor) MARYLAND----impending execution Faithful split on death penalty----Foes, supporters speak out as Md. execution nears The solemn voices echoed through the high-vaulted sanctuary of St. Vincent de Paul Roman Catholic Church in Baltimore. "There is in our land a great cry for vengeance as we fill up death rows and kill the killer in the name of justice, in the name of the peace," the two dozen worshipers intoned last week at the interfaith prayer service. "Holy Spirit of God ... help us work tirelessly for the abolition of state-sponsored death and to renew our society in its very heart, so that violence will be no more." As the execution of Wesley Eugene Baker nears, the religious are lining up on both sides of the capital punishment debate. Most visible have been those who are calling on Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. to grant clemency to Baker for the 1991 killing of 49-year-old Jane Tyson during a robbery outside Westview Mall in Baltimore County. Faith-based opponents of capital punishment have taken a leading role in the campaign to stop the execution by lethal injection. The death warrant signed by Ehrlich ordered that Baker be executed between 12:01 this morning and 11:59 p.m. Friday. Less vocal have been those believers who support the death penalty as punishment for grave crimes. "Just as good Catholics believed in World War II and can believe in the need to get rid of Osama bin Laden and the Taliban, and believe in self-defense, a Catholic can argue that the death penalty is justified," said Michael Paranzino, a Catholic who is president of the Kensington-based pro-capital punishment group Throw Away the Key. Like war, abortion and homosexuality, capital punishment remains an area over which co-religionists disagree - with both sides finding support for the positions in Scripture. "I don't see any grounds within the historic biblical Christian tradition for saying that the death penalty is un-Christian or unbiblical," said James W. Skillen, president of the Center for Public Justice, a Christian public policy research organization based in Annapolis. David Gushee, a professor of religion and ethics at Union University in Jackson, Tenn., attributes the split among Christians on capital punishment to differences in the parts of Scripture that are given the greatest emphasis, and how they are interpreted. "The pro-death penalty stance is primarily rooted in Old Testament texts that in numerous places command the death penalty and do so unequivocally for a number of different offenses," said Gushee, a Southern Baptist who opposes capital punishment. "The anti-death penalty side generally is most impressed by the examples and teachings of Jesus, who is interpreted as nonviolent, pacifist." Rabbi Rex D. Perlmeter of Baltimore Hebrew Congregation says his own thinking on the issue has changed. "In the strict system of Judaism's earliest sacred text, the Torah, ... justice would call for [Baker's] death," the Reform rabbi wrote in a letter read at the prayer service at St. Vincent de Paul. But "the Jewish notion of justice, like our very relationship with God, has been evolutionary," he added. "Several centuries after the formulation of the Torah law, the sages of Jewish rabbinic tradition announced their feeling that a court (and, by extension, a society) which must execute capital justice even once is one which has failed. "I understand this evolution, for it is one I, myself, have experienced. As one who once believed in the strict voice of justice in relation to the guilty, I have come to understand the greater voice of compassion for the good of society." Cardinal William H. Keeler, the archbishop of Baltimore, visited Baker in prison last week and joined Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick of Washington and Bishop Michael A. Saltarelli of Wilmington, Del., in asking Ehrlich to commute Baker's sentence to life without parole. Their letter to Ehrlich followed the call last month by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to end the use of the death penalty in the United States. Paranzino is critical of the bishops' statement. "As a Catholic, I find it unsettling, at a minimum, to have the Catholic bishops expending such energy on behalf of cold-blooded killers," he said. American Catholics are evenly split on the issue, according to independent poll results circulated by the bishops last month. Support for capital punishment fell from 68 % in June 2001 to 48 % in March 2005, according to the survey. Opposition to the death penalty grew from 27 % to 48 % during the same period. Arthur Laffin, who lost his younger brother to violence in 1999, praised Keeler for visiting Baker. Paul Laffin, a shelter worker in Hartford, Conn., was stabbed to death by a mentally ill homeless man. "My prayers go out to all family members throughout our society and world who are grieving the loss of loved ones who have been murdered - including the family of Jane Tyson," Arthur Laffin, who lives at the Dorothy Day Catholic Worker House in Washington, told fellow death penalty opponents last week at First Unitarian Church in Baltimore. "There are many people who believe that we have to kill the murderer in order to bring closure for their family," he said. "Killing the person who killed my brother will never bring my brother back. ... I oppose the death penalty because, ultimately, it violates God's command: Thou shalt not kill." (source: Baltimore Sun) ************************* Death Penalty For Baker Could Come Any Moment Baltimore, MD Wesley Bakers lawyers tell Eyewitness News that a Maryland court will rule on one appeal early this morning. The Supreme Court could also consider two other appeals placed before it. This is the latest chapter in the Wesley Baker saga which will take another turn after midnight when his death warrant goes into effect. The controversy over Marylands potential fifth death penalty since 1976 has gone from Supermax, to the steps of the Supreme Court, and now all the way to the Governor's office in Annapolis. Gov. Ehrlich has the power to stop Bakers execution at any moment. Yesterday, dozens of death penalty opponents called for Governor Ehrlich to spare the life of Wesley Baker in a protest . But they also singled out Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele, who, unlike his boss, opposes capital punishment. The protests and controversy stirring over the Wesley Baker case highlight a growing national push against the death penalty. Although 2/3rds of Americans support capital punishemnt those numbers are dropping. On Friday, Kenneth Boyd of North Carolina was executed becoming only the 1,000 individual to be given the capital punishment sentence since 1976. But cases like Kent Bloodsworth, a Baltimore native, who spent two years on death row before DNA exonerated him only convolute the controversy further. In fact, since death row was re-instated over 100 people scheduled to die have been set free. Richard Dieter, Executive Director, of the Death Penalty Information Centre says, " We are making mistakes in a ratio for every eight executions we are finding one person who should never have been on death row or in prison in the first place." On the other hand, Wesley Baker will not be exonerated based on D.N.A evidence. Baker received the death penalty for the 1991 murder of Jane Tyson outside of a Baltimore County mall, and right in front of her grandchildren. Tyson, an elementary school teacher's aide, had taken her 2 young grandchildren to Westview Mall on the evening of June 6, 1991, to buy them shoes for a family reunion. As she helped Kyle, 6, and Carly Sulewksi, 4, into her car, a man approached her. He pressed a gun to her head and fired once, killing Tyson, then took her purse and fled in a Chevy Blazer. The robbery netted just $10. Baker and the Blazer's driver, Gregory Lawrence, were arrested soon afterward by Baltimore County police. Tyson's blood was also found on Baker's shoe, socks and pants, and the gun was in the Blazer. Both men were charged with murder. At his trial, Baker's attorneys conceded his involvement, but argued he was not the trigger man. Lawrence testified against him, saying Baker shot Tyson. Lawrence was convicted and sentenced to life in prison, while Baker was given a death sentence. In recent days, Baker's lawyers have prepared hundreds of pages in appeals, and they reveal shocking details about his background, including the claim that Baker was the product of rape. According to court documents, Wesley Baker was living on the streets of Baltimore by the time he was 8-years-old, and by 12 he'd overdosed on heroin. Courts sent him to the Hickey School for troubled youths, where he claims he was abused. "The easy or short answer is there's a lot of information about Mr. Baker's upbringing that wasn't presented to the trial judge that should have been,"Michael Lawlor, Baker's attorney, tells WJZ.com's Mike Hellgren. But Baker's attorneys aren't arguing that he didn't commit murder, rather his childhood is to blame. One psychiatrist says of Baker, "This exposure further traumatized him, leaving him numb and available for the type of violence with which he has been convicted and scheduled for execution." Baker's lawyers have argued that the judge that sentenced him didn't take into account his tragic family background. At a recent rally against the death penalty, Baker's mother told WJZ.com, "I've already lost one son to the streets, I don't want to lose another son." The conttroversy over whether to give Wesley Baker the death penalty is even heightened more due to the fact that he has been close to death before. 3 years ago, Baker was days away from receiving a lethal injection when then-Gov. Parris Glendening placed a moratorium on executions. That move spared Baker's life. Those who see Baker in prison say he is hopeful the governor will commute his sentence to life in prison. Meanwhile, he worries about how his family, including a son and grandchild, will react to his execution. "He wants to live," said Baker's attorney, Gary Christopher. "Obviously, anyone who may be living their last few hours is very apprehensive and concerned." But the family of Baker's victim, Jane Tyson, is also anxious, according to Baltimore County Assistant State's Attorney S. Ann Brobst, who prosecuted Baker's case. When Baker's last execution was postponed by Glendening, Tyson's relatives had no warning, she said. "They felt very betrayed by that," Brobst said. "They want it to happen, but to the extent possible they are trying to distance themselves from the last-minute goings on." "Mr. Baker is a cold-blooded killer, if he wants something and you have it, he'll get it," Brobst said last week as she sifted through a long clemency petition from Baker's lawyers. "He didn't even ask Mrs. Tyson for her purse. He just shot her." Tyson's brother, Martin Andree, is upset that religious leaders have called for Baker's sentence to be commuted. The delays have been frustrating, said Andree, who keeps a photo of his sister on the wall of his bedroom in Destin, Fla. "Let's carry out the law. This man was apprehended, tried, and sentenced. The sentence needs to be carried out. There is no closure in my family until this is ended," he said. (source: WJZ.com) USA: Catholic bishops again condemn death penalty The U.S. Roman Catholic bishops have renewed their call to end the death penalty, saying state-sponsored executions are unfair, unnecessary and unhealthy for America's soul. The nation's Catholic bishops, in Washington for their annual mid-November meeting, affirmed church teaching that allows capital punishment in limited circumstances, but said life imprisonment is a better alternative. "We seek to build a culture of life in which our nation will no longer try to teach that killing is wrong by killing those who kill," the bishops said in an 18-page statement. "This cycle of violence diminishes all of us." On the death penalty, the bishops are hoping to harness growing skepticism over capital punishment among both Catholics and the general public. A poll commissioned by the bishops in March found that support for the death penalty among Catholics has slipped to just 48 percent, down from 68 percent in 2001. It might be a mistake, however, to make too much of the declining numbers. A separate Gallup poll conducted last spring for the National Catholic Reporter found that 57 % of Catholics support "stiffer enforcement" of the death penalty. While abortion, euthanasia and the death penalty are frequently condemned as part of a "culture of death," the bishops were clear that capital punishment is different, and that "people of goodwill disagree" on its merits. Indeed, church teaching allows the death penalty when it "is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor," but says such circumstances are rare. Catholic politicians who have been criticized for their support of abortion rights have complained that the bishops are not applying equal pressure on politicians who support the death penalty. "The death penalty has never been considered intrinsically evil by the church," said Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn. "We're not saying that anyone who would be signing a death warrant would be committing an intrinsically evil act. That's the difference." Since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1976, nearly 1,000 people have been executed. But the annual number of executions has dropped by about 40 % since 1999, and at least 119 death row inmates have had their death sentences overturned. Given those realities, plus growing skepticism about the fairness of the death penalty and recent Supreme Court decisions that outlawed executions for juveniles and the mentally retarded, the bishops said the death penalty has become obsolete. "The use of the death penalty ought to be abandoned not only for what it does to those who are executed, but for what it does to all of society," the bishops said. (source : The Christian Century) *************** Time to halt death penalty The scheduled Dec. 13 execution of Stanley "Tookie" Williams, a founder of the infamous Crips street gang who was convicted of 4 counts of murder in 1981, is again leading our nation to question the rightfulness of the death penalty. Williams' formal application for clemency - for which California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has final say - will be heard one week after the execution of Kenneth Lee Boyd in North Carolina. Last Thursday, Boyd became the thousandth person to be executed since the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a new series of state death penalty laws in 1976. Supporters argue that the death penalty deters crime. To them, it constitutes legitimate punishment of murders that are especially shocking. It implicates the forfeiture of the place of the worst criminals in our implicitly Lockean social order, and it also provides closure to victims. For opponents, the death penalty is unconstitutionally cruel and unusual punishment - an institution that brutalizes the state by forcing it to ape the vile nature of condemned murderers. It disproportionately affects minorities and the poor, and it is inherently susceptible to arbitrary application at every level, from sentencing to the granting or withholding of executive clemency. Besides, the penalty's purposes are equally served by the imposition of life sentences without possibility of parole - which, unlike death, can always be reversed if exculpatory evidence becomes available. The considerations urged by both sides are valid and worthy of rigorous examination. In the end, however, the arguments in support of abolishing the death penalty are more compelling. Humane justice demands mercy. As William Brennan - the greatest Supreme Court justice in our nation's history - wrote in 1972 in Furman v. Georgia: "no immutable moral order requires death for murderers and rapists." Inevitably, the death penalty operates against paramount American values. These include our common belief in the possibility of human redemption, as well as our societal need - in pondering our delegation of the act of carrying out executions to prison officials - to confront the exigencies of collective responsibility. When it comes to redemption, the death penalty places irreversible punishment above forgiveness and reconciliation. It sets firm calendar dates for the obliteration of the condemned from this world - dates that will not surely be set aside, even in cases of individuals who have changed their ways. It would be nobler - and a national affirmation of the wonder of human rebirth - to insist that penitent convicts never be executed. What is more, mercy shall triumph when we abandon the death penalty entirely because we know that one out of a thousand unrepentant men, whom we refrain from executing today, might fall upon his knees tomorrow and beg forgiveness. By placing faith in salvation and according grace to all murderers (by permitting them - if parole is inappropriate - to spend the rest of their lives in prison), we interrupt the cycle of violence that every murder initiates. When it comes to collective responsibility, we must recognize that even the delegation to prison officials of the voluntarily assumed duty of killing incarcerated individuals is fundamentally unjust. Delegation reinforces the banality of the act involved - which we hide from the public, no longer conducting it in public squares - and blunts the urgency of popular inquiry into its rectitude. It allows society to say to the warden and the prison guard: You alone must execute these individuals that our jurors have condemned. We will pay you to live with the burden, and we hope you'll never regret the act. Given that application of the death penalty is a uniquely grave and solemn matter - which is not required for the immediate public safety - only a society that requires randomly selected citizens to serve as executioners avoids the charge of popular cowardice. Put bluntly: If we desire that individuals who are reasonably secured in prisons be killed, we should call upon everyday citizens to flip the death switch. That way, we might better reckon with the incomparable nature of ending lives that, for all practical purposes, no longer pose tangible threats to society. By the foregoing, I do not mean to imply insensitivity to the plight of victims of crimes. Other human beings cannot tell them how they should feel about capital punishment, and no criminal law can truly console them. But even without the death penalty, the criminal law can promise the permanent removal from society of murderers and rapists. In the cases of dangerous pedophiles who have served their prison sentences as well as the criminally insane, the mental health law can assure the restraint of institutionalization. More than 35 years ago, Arthur Goldberg and Alan Dershowitz invoked the writings of the French philosopher Albert Camus to urge this country to take the "great civilizing step" of eliminating the death penalty. Today, we should again cause this urgent appeal to echo in the halls of our legislatures. Gov. Schwarzenegger can take a bold step in the right direction by commuting the death sentence imposed upon Stanley Williams - now an author of children's books against gang violence - to life imprisonment without parole. (source: The Daily Texan -- Matthew Nickson is a 3rd-year law student and executive editor of The Texas International Law Journal) NEW YORK: CONSERVATIVES CALL FOR EXTRAORDINARY SESSION TO PASS DEATH PENALTY LEGISLATION In an unusual move, the NYS Conservative Party, responding to the tragic death of NYPD Detective Dillon Stewart, called upon the Governor to call an Extraordinary Session to have the Members of the Legislature return to Albany immediately and pass a viable death penalty. "The Conservative Party would not normally call for the Members of the Legislature to return to Albany for an Extraordinary Session, due to the cost to our taxpayers, but the cold-blooded murder of Detective Stewart, is an extraordinary crime and the death penalty is warranted, it is just too bad that it is not law now," said State Chairman Michael R. Long. "We urge the Legislature to resolve this injustice immediately," Long stated. The Resolution, passed by the State Executive Committee, follows: Whereas; It is the responsibility of Government to protect all citizens; Whereas; When a citizen has made a conscience choice to harm another human being as defined in penal law section 125.27; Whereas; When a jury has examined the evidence and found that a person is guilty of committing the crime they have been charged with; Whereas; Current scientific and forensic evidence, pre-trial, trial, appeals, writ and clemency procedures minimize the chance of an innocent person being convicted; Whereas; The victims and their family are entitled to justice; Be it resolved; That New York State Government has a moral responsibility to reinstate the death penalty; Let it be known; That the New York State Conservative Party calls on the New York State Legislature to pass a viable death penalty in New York State as soon as they return to Albany, in fact, an extraordinary session should be called immediately. (source: Conservative Party of New York) TEXAS: Lawyers fight for a new trial in killings of 6 ---- Attorneys say evidence backing Anthony Graves' alibi has surfaced Attorneys for death row inmate Anthony Graves will argue Tuesday for a new trial that will allow evidence unearthed by the Texas Innocence Project to be presented. Graves remains a candidate for execution despite his co-defendant's declaration of Graves' innocence moments before being executed and a federal judge's ruling that the prosecutor withheld evidence during his trial. As Graves' attorney, Roy Greenwood, prepared to argue before a 3-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, an affidavit by prominent Houston attorney Dick DeGuerin surfaced, showing that there may be a witness who can testify that Graves was with his family while the slayings he was convicted of were taking place. The effort to convince the appeals court to give Graves a new trial comes amid increasing evidence that there may be more wrongful convictions in death penalty cases than law enforcement officials thought. In the latest of a string of national cases that have raised doubts about death-penalty convictions, the lone surviving witness and a co-defendant say that Ruben Cantu was innocent of a San Antonio murder that he was executed for in 1993. In the Graves case, DeGuerin signed an affidavit last month stating that a Brenham woman was prepared to testify at Graves' trial that she was speaking with Graves on the phone about the time of the murders. "He was not there," DeGuerin said in an interview Friday. DeGuerin was retained by a local businessman to challenge the validity of the charges against Graves, but other attorneys represented Graves during the trial, he said. DeGuerin said he spoke with Kay Vest, a dormitory supervisor at Blinn College in Brenham. Vest denied speaking with DeGuerin. "I cannot believe that Dick DeGuerin, with his reputation, would say something like that," Vest said in a telephone interview. "That is not true." DeGuerin signed the affidavit at the request of journalism students from the University of St. Thomas in Houston, who are part of the University of Houston-based Texas Innocence Network. Trying for years Law and journalism students at universities belonging to the network analyze hundreds of innocence claims every year, but investigate only those that meet rigorous standards of evidence. Those making innocence claims are warned that evidence uncovered by students could be used against them. Journalism professor Nicole Casarez, adviser to the St. Thomas students, said they have been trying for the last three years to get a statement from Vest. Student Robin Hunter, 20, said she and student Andrew Lubetkin tried last week to present Vest with a copy of DeGuerin's affidavit, but Vest threatened to call the police and slammed the door. Casarez said that if DeGuerin's affidavit is correct, Vest could support Graves' alibi that he was home with his girlfriend, brother and sister the night of the slayings. The students have located other witnesses and evidence, such as a copy of grand jury testimony never made available to the defense in which the wife of Graves' co-defendant says her husband framed Graves. Based on testimony Graves and Robert Earl Carter were convicted and sentenced to death in separate trials for the Aug. 18, 1992, slaying of Bobbie Davis, 45; her 16-year-old daughter, Nicole; and four grandchildren ages 4 to 9 in Somerville. They were shot, stabbed and beaten before their house was torched. Carter declared Graves innocent moments before he was executed May 31, 2000. "Anthony Graves had nothing to do with it," Carter said. "I lied on him in court." Carter had also insisted on Graves' innocence in an deposition before his execution. Greenwood said Carter wrote him at least 11 letters in an effort to clear Graves. Greenwood said he was unaware of any other case in which the "primary witness, the primary killer" recanted. The prosecution's case was built almost entirely on Carter's testimony. Charles Sebesta, district attorney for Washington and Burleson counties during Graves' trial, said in a television interview in 2000 that Carter had told him before the trial that Graves' was innocent. The case ended up in Galveston last year before U.S. Magistrate Judge John Froeschner, who found that Sebesta was guilty of prosecutorial misconduct for failing to disclose Carter's statement to Graves' defense attorneys. Try for reversal Nevertheless, Froeschner said a jury would still have found him guilty based on the evidence presented and recommended against granting a new trial. U.S. District Judge Samuel Kent adopted Froeschner's recommendation. In a rebuttal filed with the court, Greenwood said it was improper for Froeschner to speculate on how the jury might have ruled. Greenwood will try Tuesday to convince the circuit judges to reverse Kent. The rules won't permit Greenwood to use any evidence that journalism students have discovered over the last 3 years, enough to convince them of Graves' innocence. "We do look at these cases objectively," Casarez said. "But there comes a certain point that the evidence we've collected and seen points to nothing but his innocence." (source: Houston Chronicle) ************************ Justice starved----Half of poor Texans who qualify for civil legal aid don't get it. The consequences are far-reaching. Texans are used to big miscarriages of justice: a capital defendant whose lawyer snores through trial, a crime lab where evidence is lost or just made up. Yet it may be that more misery flows from the sheer volume of less showy failures. In Texas, only 50 % of citizens who need and qualify for civil legal help receive it. These Texans include wives trying to survive the highly risky maneuver of leaving a violent husband. They're tenants cheated by landlords and construction workers robbed of payment by their bosses. According to the Texas Equal Access to Justice Foundation, for every person helped by their affiliates, another must contend with their bitter circumstances without any legal recourse. The Texas Supreme Court created Equal Access to Justice in 1984 on the premise that poor people deserve the same legal rights within the civil justice system as others. The foundation musters state funds, cash and labor from Texas lawyers to support pro bono legal groups across Texas. Only citizens who earn less than $11,963 annually are eligible for help. Even so, because about 3.7 million Texans live below the poverty level, the foundation's grants are not nearly enough to ensure poor people the justice other Texans take for granted. When poor people do get access to the civil courthouse, the results can affect generations. About half of Texas legal aid cases address family violence. With this legal help, abused spouses can get protective orders, child support, divorces and child custody - the essentials to start healthy lives. According to one national study, legal aid is a major factor in successfully snapping the family violence cycle. And no wonder. Because abusive spouses typically control family purse strings and public interactions, many women need legal backing to get out of a destructive relationship safely. When they do, children learn better, escape distorted models of behavior and stand an improved chance of becoming law-abiding, hard-working adults. Because of its short funding, Equal Access prioritizes cases such as abuse or loss of a home. The group also stretches its dollars ingeniously. It leans heavily on the Houston legal community to match Dallas' Lend-A-Lawyer program, in which law firms donate pro-bono lawyers for 6 months or a year. Equal Access also stresses self-help: Its Web site, TexasLawHelp.org, offers information, and resources include do-it-yourself restraining order applications that judges are required to consider. The unfair truth is, justice costs. But family violence, homelessness and subcultures where law is not respected exact great societal costs. It's in the interests of all Texans for state and local donors to find ways to ensure civil legal aid for everyone. (source: Editorial, Houston Chronicle, Dec. 4) **************** NEWS ON THE NON VIOLENT PROTEST TEXAS DEATH ROW----MEDIA ADVISORY CONTACT: [email protected] TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 2005 DEATH ROW INMATES IN POLUNSKY UNIT PROTEST AGAINST EXECUTIONS AND INHUMANE CONDITIONS. A group of about 10 death row inmates have been involved in a non violent protest against the executions of Tony Ford and Jaime Elizalde and the inhumane conditions the have been dealing with for these past years they have been in the Polunksy unit. The inmates initiate "sit ins" as a way of protesting; simply just sitting down and refusing to move. The inmates say that they have to organize protests to be heard because former complaints have been ignored by the prison administration. However, not too long after the protest family and friends received letters about how the prison guards reacted to the non violent protest. The following information was given by the death row inmates their selves. Tony Ford was gassed, beaten, repeatedly refused showers, all his personal property was taken and the warden told him "we can't wait to kill you". His writing material was taken from him, all his media and personal visits were cancelled and they threatened to take away his legal representation. Kenneth Foster was gassed, appointed a 10 second (!) shower (which only spread the gas he was sprayed with over the rest of his body), his clothing was cut off his body and his personal property was taken. Gabriel Gonzales was gassed, beaten, strangled, his personal property was taken, and he was refused showers, sheets, clothes and writing material. Robert Gene will was gassed, his personal property was taken and he was refused a shower after he was gassed. Earlier this week Tony Ford, whom is set for execution on December 7th, talked to KTFP radio and explained why the protest is held and how the prison reacted to it. He made very clear that no matter how violent the prison will react, the prisoners involved in the protest will not fight back physically, and the protest remains non violent. He added in that this protest will go on till changed are made. For more information and the personal reports of the inmates please visit http://www.drivemovement.org ###
