Dec. 27



TEXAS:

Tarrant killers set for death


2 death row inmates from Tarrant County who were condemned in unrelated
slayings are scheduled to be executed in early 2006.

Robert James Neville Jr., 1 of 2 men sent to death row for the abduction,
torture and killing of Amy Robinson, 19, of Arlington in February 1998, is
scheduled to die Feb. 8.

2 weeks later, the execution is set for Steven Kenneth Staley, who gunned
down restaurant manager Robert Read during a botched robbery of a far west
Fort Worth Steak and Ale in October 1989.

If the executions are carried out, they will be the 1st involving Tarrant
County inmates since August 2004.

Staley had been scheduled to die in March, but the Texas Court of Criminal
Appeals granted him a stay so his attorney could pursue claims that
Staley's mental condition has deteriorated so much that he no longer
comprehends the punishment that awaits him. His execution is now set for
Feb. 23.

According to court testimony and news accounts, Neville, 31, and a friend,
Michael Wayne Hall, offered to give Robinson a ride Feb. 15, 1998, when
they saw her riding her bicycle to work at a Kroger store in Arlington
where she sacked groceries. Robinson, who was learning-impaired, knew the
pair as former co-workers and had considered them to be friends.

Instead of taking Robinson to the store, they took her to a field in east
Fort Worth where they shot at her with a pellet gun and a pistol-grip
crossbow. She was also beaten and begged for her life before she was
killed by rifle shots to her chest and head.

Neville and Hall were arrested March 3, 1998, in Eagle Pass. Neville
boasted about the slaying and told investigators, as well as TV and
newspaper reporters, that he laughed as Robinson lay on the ground,
gasping for air.

Her body was not discovered for 16 days.

"It was an extremely brutal murder," said Arlington police spokeswoman
Christy Gilfour, who covered the slaying as a reporter for the
Star-Telegram.

Neville expressed remorse after his death sentence was handed down.

"I feel if ... I get this over with now, hopefully my ... execution will
bring some kind of peace to the victim's family," he said at the end of
his trial.

Hall was also convicted and sentenced to death. His execution date has not
been set.

Staley, 43, is one of several death row inmates whose scheduled executions
were postponed in 2005.

According to court records and news accounts, Staley and 2 accomplices,
brandishing semiautomatic weapons, demanded access to the cash registers
and safe after eating at the Steak and Ale.

While patrons and employees huddled in the restaurant's rear area, an
assistant manager slipped away and called police.

Read, the manager, offered himself as a hostage as the trio attempted to
escape in full view of police who had surrounded the restaurant.

Read was fatally shot while resisting when the robbers tried to force him
into a commandeered car.

Read, 35, was married and had 3 small children.

1 of Staley's accomplices, Tracey Duke, is serving 3 life sentences in
Texas; he was also sentenced to 30 years in Colorado for murder and armed
robbery. The 3rd robber, Brenda Rayburn, is serving 30 years in prison.

2005's final execution was Shannon Charles Thomas on Nov. 16. He was 1 of
5 Harris County inmates executed in 2005.

There were 19 inmates executed in 2005, the lowest number since 2001 and
far below the high of 40 in 2000.

The 1st execution of 2006 is scheduled for Jan. 19.

Texas remains the nation's leader in executions since the Supreme Court's
ban on capital punishment was lifted in 1976. Since executions resumed in
Huntsville, 355 inmates have been put to death, meaning that Texas has
accounted for about 35 % of all modern-era executions in the nation.

(source: Fort Worth Star-Telegram)

*********************

Inmate Seeks Appeal Because Judge Performed Prosecutorial Work


1 of the men convicted in a series of robberies, rapes and slayings that
terrorized Houston in 2002 is seeking a new trial because the judge
presiding over his trial was doing prosecutorial work on another
death-penalty case.

Edgardo Cubas was 1 of 3 men who became known as the East End killers. He
was sentenced to death in May 2004 for the rape and murder of 15-year-old
Esmeralda Alvarado.

In a brief filed with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Cubas' attorney
Kurt Wentz contends his client should get a new trial because of state
District Judge Jan Krocker's actions. The appeal points out Krocker's
participation in death row inmate Martin Draughon's case before a federal
court while presiding over Cubas' state court trial.

Krocker was a prosecutor for the Harris County District Attorney's Office
in 1987 when she secured a death sentence against Draughon in the shooting
death of a man after a robbery. After becoming a state district criminal
court judge in 1995, Krocker intervened in Draughton's appeal by filing
written statements from herself and witnesses she contacted. Draughon's
attorneys and the Texas Attorney General's Office, which was defending the
conviction, objected to Krocker's involvement.

"By resuming the practice of law in a prosecutorial capacity ... in
another death-penalty case while presiding over the (Cubas) case, the
trial court deprived (Cubas) of an impartial and disinterested tribunal,
thereby offending a principle of justice so rooted in tradition and
conscience of the American people as to violate the fundamental aspect of
(due process)," Wentz wrote in his appeal.

One of the witnesses Krocker contacted to oppose Draughon's appeal
included Dr. Dwayne Wolf of the Harris County Medical Examiner's Office,
who later testified in Cubas' trial, Wentz said.

Neither Krocker nor the District Attorney's Office advised Cubas' defense
of her actions in the Draughon case, Wentz noted.

"Judge Krocker's interests and desires were clearly similar to that of the
Harris County District Attorney's Office," Wentz wrote.

Cubas' appeal was still under review, a spokesman for the District
Attorney's Office said.

Krocker appointed Wentz to represent Cubas in his appeal earlier this
year. Wentz then filed a motion asking Krocker to recuse herself from the
appeal process. Krocker did, saying she wanted to avoid the appearance of
impropriety.

(source: The Associated Press)

*******************

Eyewitnesses - not always infallible----Panel looking for ways to make the
identifications of crime suspects more reliable


Barbara Hervey sits on the top criminal appeals court in Texas. But her
interest in the subject of eyewitness identification dates to her days as
a law student when she was robbed at gunpoint.

It was in the late 1970s when Hervey and two friends were held up on the
San Antonio Riverwalk. They were able to get the license plate of the car
in which the gunman and his 2 companions fled and flag down a nearby
police officer.

Their quick action helped police, who stopped the car about 10 minutes
later. But when Hervey was presented with the suspects, she found herself
struggling to identify them.

"I could only recognize one. I had been too busy looking at the gun," she
said. "Quite frankly, I was urged to identify the other 2, but I could not
do it."

Hervey, a Republican, is one of several members of Gov. Rick Perry's new
Criminal Justice Advisory Council who believe Texas needs to consider ways
to improve the reliability of eyewitness identifications.

"I appreciate when people raise the issue of questionable identity,"
Hervey said.

One change being discussed is to use a so-called "blind presenter,"
someone not involved in the investigation, to show the photo or live
lineup to a victim or witness. Since the presenter doesn't know who the
suspect is, there are no suggestive expressions or comments to influence
the witness.

A more controversial change involves presenting photos to a witness
one-by-one instead of simultaneously in a photo spread. Some studies have
found that witnesses are less likely to make a selection - either
correctly or incorrectly - when photos are shown sequentially.

Faulty eyewitness testimony has been implicated in a number of cases where
convictions were overturned after DNA evidence was tested.

"In 75 % of the nation's 1st 164 DNA exonerations, at least one mistaken
eyewitness contributed to the wrongful conviction," said Stephen Saloom,
policy director of the Innocence Project at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School
of Law in New York City.

Cantu witness at issue

A flawed identification is at issue in the possible wrongful execution of
Ruben Cantu, who was put to death in 1993. The Houston Chronicle reported
last month that the lone eyewitness to a 1984 murder-robbery has recanted.

The witness, Juan Moreno, identified Cantu only after San Antonio police
officers showed him Cantu's photo three times. He said he felt pressure by
police to identify Cantu, even though he knew it was wrong.

Bexar County District Attorney Susan Reed has reopened the case.

Hervey was an assistant in the Bexar County DA's appellate section in 1993
when she wrote a letter to the head of the state's pardons and paroles
division opposing Cantu's request for a 30-day reprieve and commutation.
She said at the time that there was no new evidence to cast doubt upon his
guilt.

Hervey said the Cantu case has raised the issue of eyewitness evidence to
the public and those who work in criminal justice.

"We really are looking at these issues very seriously," she said.

Perry formed the criminal justice council in March to make recommendations
regarding changes in legal procedures to better protect the rights of both
victims and the accused. He named nine members in June and asked for their
initial recommendations in early 2006.

Testing procedures

Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, is chairman of the Actual Innocence
Subcommittee of the governor's council. His panel is recommending the
state begin a pilot project in four locations to test simultaneous and
sequential identification procedures. The suggested locations are El Paso,
Wichita Falls and Bell and Caldwell counties.

"The key step is to start somewhere," said Ellis, who also is chairman of
the board of the national Innocence Project. "I want to help create a
greater public awareness of these issues and try to gather some political
support."

Perry will consider the council's recommendations when he gets them next
month, said his press secretary Kathy Walt.

"He established the council, as he said at the time, to get
recommendations to enhance public confidence in the criminal justice
system," said Walt. "He's aware that (eyewitness identification) is one of
the issues they're looking at."

Working with police

During this year's legislative session, Ellis did not get a hearing on his
bill to require that witnesses be shown photographs one at a time and must
state whether the individual shown is the offender before viewing the next
photograph. The bill would prohibit the person who administers the lineup
from knowing which photograph represents the suspect.

Charley Wilkinson, political and legislative director for the Combined Law
Enforcement Association of Texas, said officers would be unlikely to
support changes that could hurt their ability to solve crimes.

"Anything that would promote a better, clearer system of getting to what
actually happened and who actually did it would have to be supported by
people seeking justice," he said.

"If the new system, however, that's being imposed would in any way hamper
law enforcement's ability to jog the memory of a victim or would any way
hamper law enforcement's ability to get at the truth, then the officers
would worry about that."

Christian Meissner, a professor of psychology and criminal justice at the
University of Texas at El Paso, has done research into sequential and
simultaneous lineups. He found that people shown photos one at a time are
less likely to make an identification.

"We are seeing in our data a reduction in false identification, which is a
positive step, but also a reduction in correct identification. The
question becomes how much of a cost in correct identification are we
willing to accept," he said.

Meissner said the key is to find techniques that will reduce false
identifications but not influence correct identifications.

Finding a neutral party

Using a blind or neutral tester to show lineups is less controversial but
has been slow to gain acceptance, said Gary Wells, a psychology professor
at Iowa State University in Ames who has studied eyewitness identification
techniques for 30 years.

"There's a failure to realize how fragile memory can be and how easily it
can be to cue witnesses into mistaken identification," said Wells.

He compared the concept of a blind presenter to a drug study where neither
the patient taking the medication nor the person examining the patient
know whether the patient received the drug or the placebo.

In addition to a neutral presenter, Wells said, witnesses should be
required to state their level of certainty about an identification. And,
he added, police should not be allowed to keep showing a witness a
suspect's photo in different lineups.

"That by nature is suggestive. It gives away the so-called correct
answer," he said.

In 2001, New Jersey became the first state to adopt eyewitness evidence
guidelines issued by the U.S. Department of Justice. Then-state Attorney
General John J. Farmer Jr. used his authority to implement the use of
blind presenters and sequential lineups.

New Jersey satisfied

Farmer acted after a New Brunswick man was freed from prison following new
DNA findings that showed he had been wrongly convicted in the rape of a
Rutgers University student. The New Jersey Supreme Court also pushed for
the change.

"Our Supreme Court indicated to us we needed to find a way to make the use
of eyewitness evidence better or change our court rules and our evidence
rules to make it very difficult to use (eyewitness identification) unless
we had significant physical corroborating evidence," said Lori Linskey, a
deputy attorney general with the Division of Criminal Justice in Trenton,
N.J.

Linskey said there was an initial backlash when law enforcement agencies
complained they didn't have enough personnel to meet the blind presenter
requirement. Police also worried that the sequential lineups might result
in guilty individuals escaping justice.

The division spent six months training the officers. Nearly 600 New Jersey
law enforcement agencies that responded to a survey indicated overall
satisfaction with the guidelines. "I think the anticipation of the change
was far more difficult," she said. "The sky hasn't fallen. Witnesses are
still making ID's, criminals are being prosecuted."

*******************

Defense seeks new trial for one East End killer----Judge was not
'impartial' during trial, attorney says


The attorney for one of the so-called East End killers is seeking a new
trial, contending that the judge in his client's capital murder trial
performed prosecutorial work in another death-penalty case at the same
time.

Edgardo Cubas was one of three men convicted in a series of slayings,
sexual assaults and robberies that terrorized Houston's East End in 2002.
He was sentenced to death in May 2004 for the rape and murder of Esmeralda
Alvarado, a 15-year-old Lamar High School sophomore.

However, according to an appeal filed by his attorney, Cubas should be
tried again because of state District Judge Jan Krocker's actions during
the trial.

"By resuming the practice of law in a prosecutorial capacity ... in
another death-penalty case while presiding over the (Cubas) case, the
trial court deprived (Cubas) of an impartial and disinterested tribunal,
thereby offending a principle of justice so rooted in tradition and
conscience of the American people as to violate the fundamental aspect of
(due process)," attorney Kurt Wentz wrote in his appeal.

Restaurant slaying

Questions about Krocker's judicial ethics were raised because of her
involvement in the appeal of another death row inmate, Martin Draughon,
also of Houston.

While she was a prosecutor for the Harris County District Attorney's
Office in 1987, Krocker secured a death sentence against Draughon for the
fatal shooting of a man after the robbery of a fast-food restaurant.

Draughon's appellate attorney argued that Draughon did not intentionally
shoot the victim, as Krocker had claimed, but that the victim was struck
by a bullet that had ricocheted. The appeal also claimed that Krocker had
not informed Draughon's trial attorneys about witnesses who might have
helped support that theory.

Krocker became a state district criminal court judge in 1995.

However, in 2004, over the objections of Draughon's attorneys and the
Texas Attorney General's Office, which was defending the conviction,
Krocker inserted herself into the federal appellate fray by filing a
motion to intervene.

U.S. District Judge Lee Rosenthal denied the request but did allow Krocker
to file written statements from herself and several witnesses she had
contacted. Despite Krocker's efforts, Rosenthal eventually ruled that
Draughon should receive a new trial because of ineffective counsel.

In September this year, a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals unanimously upheld Rosenthal's ruling. A spokesman for the
Attorney General's Office says the state expects to file a request by
Thursday that the U.S. Supreme Court review the case.

Krocker appointed Wentz earlier this year to represent Cubas in his
appeal. His 1st move was to file a motion asking Krocker to recuse herself
from the appeal process, which she did.

"I want to avoid the appearance of any impropriety," Krocker told the
Houston Chronicle last week.

Participated in 2 courts

Wentz also filed a brief with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals,
accusing Krocker of participating in the prosecution of Draughon in
federal court while presiding over Cubas' state court trial.

Specifically, Wentz notes that witnesses contacted by Krocker in
opposition to Draughon's appeal included Dr. Dwayne Wolf of the Harris
County Medical Examiner's Office - who later testified in the Cubas trial.

"Judge Krocker's interests and desires were clearly similar to that of the
Harris County District Attorney's Office," Wentz wrote. He added that
neither Krocker nor anyone from the District Attorney's Office advised the
Cubas defense team of her actions in the Draughon case.

A spokesman for the District Attorney's Office said the Cubas appeal is
still being reviewed.

Beyond her reason for recusal, Krocker declined to comment, saying that
state law "does not allow me to discuss the case."

(source for both: Houston Chronicle)

*****************

A MURDEROUS TREND----Rising homicide rate requires more efforts by City
Hall


Longtime Houstonians recall the late 1970s and early '80s, when Houston
vied for the dubious status of being the nation's murder capital. The
bloodbath peaked with a local record of 701 killings in 1981.

Sociologists and law enforcement officials blamed the outbreak of
lawlessness on the city's booming economy that attracted a tide of
rootless immigrants from areas of the country afflicted by high
unemployment rates.

This fall, following the influx of hurricane evacuees from Louisiana, the
city suffered another killing spree reminiscent of what occurred a quarter
century ago. While only eight of the more than 325 violent deaths this
year have involved storm-displaced people, the forced migration has filled
Houston apartment complexes to near capacity, increasing the stress on our
urban environment and making it more conducive to violence and crime.

Because a higher percentage of the city's murders now involve stranger to
stranger interaction rather than family disputes, such crimes generally
require more intensive and lengthy investigations to apprehend the
killers. The knowledge that cold-blooded killers are at large makes
law-abiding residents more fearful of crime and diminishes our quality of
life.

Houston Police Chief Harold Hurtt, responding to the increasing violence,
has launched a $4 million overtime program to put more officers on patrol.
He has chosen 5 particularly crime-ridden apartment complexes for more
police scrutiny.

According to Mayor Bill White, look for more city anticrime initiatives in
2006. "The overall crime rate and the violent crime rate per thousand in
2004 and 2005 were down compared to the prior 2 years, but there are hot
spots in the city," the mayor said after accompanying officers on an
evening patrol of a crime-plagued area. "We're going to have to deploy a
lot more officers, including on foot and on bicycles so that we can deal
with that."

The mayor has asked the Federal Emergency Management Agency to provide
$6.5 million for a police task force to focus on troubled areas. This
would be a good use of federal funds.

The White administration is expected to push an ordinance next year that
will require apartment complexes registering a high number of calls for
police assistance to hire in-house security officers to protect residents.
Such a law would allow for round-the-clock deterrence and law enforcement
in high crime areas and make maximum use of regular police patrols.

It's only fair that apartment complex owners reaping increased revenues
from storm-induced high occupancy rates should shoulder their share of the
increased security costs. Their residents - and the city - will be safer
from the threat of criminal activity. Vigorous anticrime measures are
essential to making the rise in homicides a statistical anomaly rather
than a long-term trend.

(source: Editorial, Houston Chronicle)

********************

UTA, Texas Wesleyan students join North Texas Innocence Project


Saying there is "plenty of injustice and false conviction in North Texas,"
defense lawyers are joining forces with faculty and students from 6
universities in the North Texas Innocence Project, which will investigate
Texas prison inmates' claims.

Led by Fort Worth lawyer Mike Ware, the program will review cases from
inmates convicted in Tarrant, Dallas and other North Texas counties. Once
a claim is considered valid, there will be an extensive follow-up
investigation and, in some instances, litigation, Ware said.

"I think there are a lot of problems with the system, and I think this is
one way to correct it," Ware said. "I'm not maintaining the prisons are
full of innocent people, because they are not. But if it is 1/2 of 1 %,
that's a lot of innocent people."

The project will be based primarily at the University of Texas at
Arlington and the Texas Wesleyan University School of Law, with 40
criminal-justice and law-school students working with lawyers on the
cases.

The UT-Arlington students, who have been meeting for almost a year, have
identified a murder in Tyler, a sexual assault in Dallas and a robbery in
Fort Worth for further review.

Under the direction of licensed lawyers, the local students will work with
law students from Texas Tech University, Texas Southern University and the
University of Houston as well as journalism students from the University
of St. Thomas in Houston.

"I think there is a need for it because people need to have confidence
that the system works," said John Stickels, a criminal justice professor
at UT-Arlington and a former prosecutor. "And there needs to be an
organization that looks at the cases that fall through the cracks."

About a year ago, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, often criticized
for being indifferent to the claims of wrongful prosecution by prison
inmates, joined in the push to create an innocence network that would use
law students to investigate cases. At the court's urging, the Texas
Legislature set aside $800,000 over the next two years to support
innocence projects at four Texas law schools.

The law schools at the University of Houston, the University of Texas,
Texas Tech and Texas Southern will get $200,000 each over the next 2
years.

Stickels started an innocence project at UT-Arlington last year, but
because it was unconnected with a law school, it did not receive state
assistance. The fledgling group reviewed cases during the past school
year, but Stickels said it needed the support and expertise of the
established groups at the other universities.

The University of Houston students will probably initially review
requests, sending letters and questionnaires back to the inmates and
helping cull cases for more extensive review, Stickels said.

The Texas Innocence Network at the University of Houston Law Center began
in 2000 and has processed more than 6,000 requests for assistance. As a
result of its work, two inmates have been released, and a half-dozen
requests for clemency or new trials are pending.

UH students have been working with journalism students at St. Thomas
University and Lamar University in Beaumont.

Morris Overstreet, a former Texas Court of Criminal Appeals judge, directs
the innocence project at Texas Southern, and lawyer Jeff Blackburn, who
helped represent the more than 40 people wrongfully accused of drug
charges in Tulia, is the director at the Texas Tech School of Law.

"It is clear from the casual observer that there is plenty of injustice
and false conviction in North Texas," Blackburn said.

Having Ware direct the North Texas Innocence Project was key to getting it
off the ground, Blackburn said. Ware, a top criminal-defense lawyer who
has practiced law since 1983, has handled a number of high-profile cases.

"This is a special deal," Ware said. "When we are acting on behalf of one
of these guys, we are not wearing our criminal-defense-attorney hats; we
are trying to get at the truth."

Tarrant County District Attorney Tim Curry said he does not object to the
innocence network. He said that the work of such projects depends greatly
on the person running them and that he respects Ware.

"If in fact such people are actually innocent, you can't argue against
that. Nobody can," Curry said.

(source: Fort Worth Star-Telegram)






USA:

Judge throws out death sentence for inmate


In Philadelphia, a federal judge Tuesday threw out the death sentence of
an inmate convicted of strangling his cellmate nearly a decade ago.

U.S. District Judge Malcolm Muir ruled that prosecutors should have
disclosed to David Paul Hammer's lawyers the existence of four interviews
that may have supported Hammer's claim that he used rope made from bed
sheets for bondage sex.

The interviews could have led the jury to conclude that Hammer did not
engage in substantial planning before he killed bank robber Andrew Marti
at Allenwood Federal Penitentiary in 1996, the judge said.

The judge ordered a new sentencing hearing.

Prosecutors argued that Hammer killed Marti after the two agreed to stage
a hostage-type scenario in which Marti was tied to a bunk as a way to
speed Marti's transfer to a different federal prison.

But Hammer has denied that, saying he and Marti used the ropes "for other
purposes," Muir wrote. Hammer told doctors that he and Marti engaged in
sexual activity "around the time of the murder," the judge said.

Muir rejected Hammer's claim that he was mentally incompetent when he
pleaded guilty in 1998 or when he sought to abandon his appeals.

Ron Travis, who helped represent Hammer at trial, said he was "happy that
at least the death penalty was set aside for the moment."

"I would have preferred that the guilty plea be allowed to be withdrawn,
but in this case, half a win is better than no win," he said.

Phone messages seeking comment from federal prosecutors were not
immediately returned.

Hammer, 47, is being held at the federal prison in Terre Haute, Ind. At
the time of the slaying, he was in federal prison after being charged with
escape.

(source: Associated Press)

***************

Curbing abuse of the convicted


The purpose of the Bill of Rights, as Thomas Jefferson wrote in
encouraging the amendments to the Constitution, was to "guard the people
against the federal government," and one thing is certain if you are going
to do that. You must impose limits on how that government treats people
accused of crime.

Thus we get 4 amendments - including the Eighth - that aim to prevent the
kinds of abuses so readily at hand when the government is deciding whether
you may or may not have your liberty, or even your life.

The Eighth Amendment has mostly been in the news because of debate over
capital punishment, and, lately, because of treatment of prisoners at
Guantanamo Bay. But the short sentence that constitutes the amendment has
2 parts besides the one that directly applies to these controversies,
namely, the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

The 1st part of the amendment says there must not be excessive bail, which
is not the same as saying the courts must guarantee bail. It has been
understood from the start that some offenses are so awful and the
motivation to flee so great that the courts need not release the accused
prior to trial.

Otherwise, however, you don't want people in jail who haven't been proved
guilty of anything, and so you let them loose with bail, which is to say,
with the payment of money that will be forfeited if the accused does not
show up for trial.

In England, magistrates of the king frequently would require bail
incommensurate with the crime, and so, through a series of acts beginning
more than 700 years ago, the English forged a principle saying that bail
cannot be in amounts exceeding the crime's seriousness.

The amendment's 2nd clause, which concerns fines, does not apply to civil
suits, which some people might regret, considering that punitive damages
in some civil-suit rewards have been as astonishing as they are unjust.

Clearly, this part of the amendment means that fines should bear a
reasonable relationship to the crime, but students of the U.S. Supreme
Court note that it has never been precise on what this reasonableness
might amount to.

In thinking about the most discussed portion of this amendment, don't
suppose it a totally simple thing. What's forbidden is punishment that is
both cruel and unusual, and all punishment, after all, is likely to cause
some degree of suffering. That's why we call it punishment.

Surely, the Founders wanted to avoid any return to such barbarous and
discontinued English practices as disemboweling a convict and then pulling
off his arms and legs, and the Supreme Court says the government cannot
torture convicts nor punish them arbitrarily or unnecessarily.

Punishments, the court also has held, should not be disproportionate to
the crime. But the chief meaning of the clause, it has been argued, is to
make sure no particular lawbreaker is punished in some more brutal way
from how others guilty of morally comparable offenses are punished.

Does the clause mean the death penalty should be abolished? The Supreme
Court has never said so, though it has ruled, among other things, that the
death penalty must not be inflicted for any reason other than murder, that
it must not be discriminatory, and that it cannot be applied to the
mentally retarded or to anyone whose crime was committed under the age of
18.

The decision concerning murders by minors came just this year, and,
according to those who believe the Constitution should be interpreted in
accordance with its original meaning, is an outrage. Robert Bork, who was
rejected by the Senate as a Supreme Court justice, has noted that the
criminal at issue, who was 17 at the time, broke into a house with a
friend, kidnapped a girl, took her to a bridge, tied her up, and threw her
in a river, where she drowned. The court said that "evolving standards of
decency" required that the youth be spared execution. Bork notes that, of
the 38 states with a death penalty, 20 permitted it for murderers under
18.

The standards the court refers to are clearly not those of society at
large.

Bork's fundamental position is that it is the Constitution that matters,
not the supposed sensibilities of justices, and that court alterations in
the document's meaning (except through further amendment) make it
pointless.

Scholars agreeing with him note that the authors of the amendment wrote it
at a time when capital punishment was common, though they made no
reference to it.

It is inconceivable they meant the amendment to outlaw the death penalty,
although legislative bodies are certainly free to do so if persuaded by
any number of strong arguments.

Also this year, the debate has been intense on the question of whether the
Eighth Amendment applies to enemy combatants detained by the United States
at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

To suppose it does would be to assume for the 1st time that enemy forces
captured during a war are entitled to the same Bill of Rights protections
as citizens in the criminal-justice system.

That's not to say, of course, that Congress has no say in how those
detainees are treated.

(source: The Daily Press - Ambrose is a columnist and former editor of The
Rocky Mountain News and the El Paso (Texas) Herald Post)






CALIFORNIA:

People Must Organize to Change the Death Penalty Laws ---- Formula to
change the laws is easy when many people help with the work and expenses


Nobody understood organizing better than Stanley "Tookie" Williams. I
propose that the way for his students to honor his memory is to organize
their voting muscle instead of to lament or feel helpless. What a perfect
tribute to his memory this would be to mobilize the youth to end the death
penalty

We have the legislator's gang, the CCPOA gang,and the La Familia of law
enforcement in charge of the California turf. We as voters can do
something about that with simple tools. Pens, protest signs, recruiting to
build voting databases, raising money to pay signature gatherers and to
buy media space, taking 20 people each to the polls on election day and
always registering the poor and teaching them how to get out the vote
against the Republicans.

A bill has been proposed to put a Moratorium on the Death Penalty but at
this time such a bill doesn't have a prayer to be passed as the California
legislature is in gridlock. There are too many Republicans who vote
against everything healing or progressive to achieve the 2/3 vote required
to change most laws. At least some of the Republicans would have to vote
for such a moratorium. That will not happen based on their past lock-step
voting performance records on law changes such as amending Three Strikes
for example. Check their voting records so you can see this insane
pennywise, pound foolish trend for yourself.

The only way to end the Death Penalty or to get a moratorium in place is
through the initiative process because the Republicans are legislative
dinosaurs who aren't about to have a change of heart. In fact, another
bill has been proposed by Roy Ashburn (R) Bakersfield to speed up the
executions in spite of the common knowledge that the system is corrupt
arrest through parole.

The fact is that 6500 people willing to work can change any law, defeat
any politician, do recalls and force reform through our initiative
process. There are least 3 million voters attached to a State prisoner,
this does not include those on parole, in county jails, federal prisons or
in juvenile halls. This voting muscle outnumbers everyone if only the poor
and uneducated will learn how the system works and be motivated to do
something about the current oppression controlling our lives

Here's the basic formula. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to do it, but
it does take organizing the numbers of ACTIVE people to be ready to go
because there are only 150 days to collect the signatures needed.

6500 x 200 signatures each gathered on a registered initiative filed with
the Secretary of State equals l.3 million signatures, about twice what it
takes to get a change in the law on the ballot This is a little more than
one signature per day.

6500 x $200 each would pay for the signature gatherers and some of the
publicity campaigns needed to win.

13,000 workers could win it with 100 each

26,000 workers could get it on the ballot with 50 each and so forth

That is enough of a potential voting group to cream Schwarzenegger at the
polls.

If we don't organize, raise money, do initiatives to change the harsh
laws, we can expect to be at the mercy of politicians put into office by
law enforcement labor unions. Except that they have no mercy. Prisons and
punishing are their holy grail and they can treat people in this horrible
manner and still call themselves Christians.

Other groups outside of human rights do this TO us everyday. The more who
will help up with the work and put up funds, the faster we can do away
with the death penalty.

Blood does not wash out blood.

Jesus himself was a victim of the death penalty and this is not how he
would have wanted His birthday honored. It is a barbaric practice from the
dark ages that does not deter crime. How does killing the mentally ill
inmates on death row deter another mentally ill person from acting out his
illness?

It doesn't.

Our failure to massively organize and mobilize a citizen's voting group
allows this abomination to take place. Schwarzenegger is a murderer as
sick as the most mentally ill person on death row who has predictably
acted out his illness. Maybe he's a bit sicker since Schwarzenegger killed
in a calculating, cold-blooded manner for the sake of political gain. He
sold his soul for an election and it is only appropriate that he loses
that election at the hands of the voters he most anguished and outraged
with this misuse of our tax dollars. Executions cost more than imprisoning
people for life and at no time in the Bible did they ever kill the
mentally ill for acting out their illness.

There is never going to be a better time to do an initiative campaign than
now because millions in press coverage and the high profile murder of
Tookie Williams has created an international outcry. Five more executions
are expected to take place in California this year. These initiative
campaigns are done all the time by groups outside of human rights/prison
reform. The San Francisco Chronicle's poll that 66% of California voters
favor the death penalty doesn't take into consideration that the majority
of the poor people don't even bother to vote. There is something we can do
about this rather than just crying the blues. Why not channel your grief
into organizing and teaching the poor, especially the neighborhood kids,
about voting muscle.

The movie stars could kick in a million but each person who abhors
barbarism can contribute too. It shouldn't always depend on a handout
whether or not we can effectively change laws with initiatives. The Repugs
can raise the money to do an initiative in a few hours with a single
email. That is how they can control us. We outnumber them all, our human
rights gangs are larger and in a majority rules democracy, he with the
largest database of active voters can make the laws. That would be the
human rights people who have been snoozing while some very bad people
brings us to a place where we are to try and celebrate the holidays with a
high profile state murder. Who picked that date to kill Tookie Williams?
Spawn of Satan? Someone on the payroll of we, the people to ruin
everyone's holiday? For shame!

Our UNION did 4 protests and several lawsuits this year so we cannot do
this campaign as the coffers are empty. But we can all reach out and see
what we can do to bring in fresh workers to our movement, can we not?
There is no way we are even close to tapping the 3 million people
connected to state prisoners to get them moving and registering the poor
to vote. Much more one on one teaching needs to be done.

I note there is a lot of preaching to the choir instead of reaching out
and doing public education. The prisoners on death row need to learn how
to mobilize their families. Their lives depend on organizing.

When there is a crisis, it's too late to put this necessary voting machine
together. Misplaced priorities is what is killing us, and those on the
sidelines are the problem. We outnumber everyone so it is only by inaction
that we are suffering oppression.

Let's be backbones, not wishbones and teach the gang kids a way to utilize
their networks which will give them hope for the future instead of a
lifetime of slavery to the State as prison slaves. Forget washing the car,
cleaning the house and wasting money when our democracy and very lives are
at stake.

"Ignorance and apathy of the people rule governments. Knowledge is power.
Knowledge comes from reading newspapers,not from getting your news from
television alone"

(source: WEBCommentary - B. Cayenne Bird is a 37-year veteran journalist
who volunteers her time as founder and director of United for No
Injustice, Oppression or Neglect UNION. The UNION is active in prison
reform and criminal justice issues. She is a mother and grandmother and
focuses on human rights and restorative justice. She is also the host of
television series "Cayenne Common Sense" and publishes a daily online
newsletter.)

**************

Tragedy strengthens mother's quest for peace


For years, Venus Noble has advocated against violence. Most recently, the
42-year-old social worker has experienced tragedy in a way few others
have.

Last month, Noble's two sons were shot -- one fatally -- in Richmond as
they headed to a vigil for death row inmate Stanley Tookie Williams, who
was executed Dec. 13.

The double shooting was the latest blow to Noble and her family. Within
the past six years, her nephew was slain before he was to testify against
an alleged killer in Oakland and her youngest son -- the one who was
killed last month -- had accused Oakland police of assaulting him.

Noble, however, remains strong -- even defiant -- in her crusade to bring
peace to the streets of the East Bay.

"Spirit -- I can't attribute this strength to anything but spirit," she
said.

Noble looks at her surviving son, who was shot twice in the head in
Richmond last month but needs her constant care, and is forever reminded
of the risks young black men face.

Few would blame the tall, articulate native of Chicago if she simply gave
up. But the Alameda County social worker, activist and writer remains a
beacon of hope in neighborhoods plagued by crime, friends said, and an
advocate for the disenfranchised at police-misconduct hearings and
protests in Oakland.

"Both Venus and I have other children that will continue to need our
support," said Rashidah Grinage, an Oakland activist whose own son and
husband were killed by gunfire in a 1993 shootout that also left a police
officer dead. "Despite everything that happened to her and to many of us,
I think we all understand we need to stay strong and we need to stay
united in order to turn things around."

John Burris, the noted Oakland civil rights attorney who befriended Noble
several years ago, says, "There's the tragic irony in the sense that she's
being an advocate against violence and it's engulfed her family, almost in
a happenstance way. It's not retaliation. It's the world in which she
lives.

"Her attitude is: 'It happened to my family. It could happen to your
family, and we want to do something about this.'"

It was violence that in 1999 prompted Noble to move her family to
Brentwood from Oakland's Brookfield Village neighborhood. That fall,
however, she pulled up to her driveway in Brentwood and found a 3-foot
cross burned into her lawn.

"I thought I was seeing things," she said. "People are in extreme denial
that racism exists. I don't think anything's changed."

Noble said she didn't want to return to Oakland but did so because her
husband, Larrie Noble Sr., wanted to be close to his mother. For a while,
the couple and their 3 children lived in relative peace in Oakland, she
said.

But in January 2002, Noble's 21-year-old nephew, Chance Grundy, was killed
in Oakland just weeks before he was to testify against an accused killer
in a slaying he had witnessed.

"The 1st thing that came to mind was how close to home it (violence) had
struck," Noble said.

A year and a half later, Elliott Noble, her youngest son, accused Oakland
police of roughing him up as he tried to help a friend who had been hit by
a squad car during a drug sting. Police denied any wrongdoing, and Burris
sued; that case is pending.

Venus Noble grew increasingly vocal after that incident, railing against
police misconduct while leading anti-violence programs through the United
Way, the YMCA and other organizations.

On Nov. 19, the day Noble learned about the shootings of her two sons, she
was packing to move from Oakland to Alameda and feeling angry that Elliott
and Larrie Noble Jr., hadn't arrived to lend a hand. Her husband called a
few hours later, and she knew something was terribly wrong. "I said, 'What
is it? I hear it in your voice -- tell me now!'" she recalled.

It's Elliott and Larrie, he said. They've been shot. Elliott's dead.
Larrie's at the hospital.

All she could do was scream.

Larrie, 22, was unconscious for 2 weeks. When he awoke, Noble told him his
brother, who was just 20, was dead.

"I told him it wasn't his fault," she said.

These days, Noble -- who has settled into a new home in Alameda -- has
taken a leave of absence from her job to care for Larrie Jr., who was
released from the hospital on Dec. 7 but may yet lose sight in his left
eye.

"It's a 24-hour-a-day job," she said. "It's like I have a baby again."

But her son is alive, and it's a miracle, she said.

"Nobody takes 2 slugs from a .45 in the head and lives, for no reason. So
he has a destiny."

The 2 young men, aspiring rappers who called themselves Tha Dirty Mack'N
Boys, had released an album that gained some popularity. Noble says they
were far from perfect but did not deserve to be victims of violence.
Larrie Noble had a drug conviction and some scrapes with the law, court
records show.

Investigators still don't know who shot Noble's sons, and Noble and her
18-year-old daughter, Jazmin, desperately want them brought to justice.

"I want them to suffer for what they did," she said. "I want to look them
in the face and ask why they shot my sons."

She may never know why, but she knows what created the circumstances that
led to the shooting. "This is random, ignorant, perpetual violence," she
said. "It's a group of people who hate themselves, so they hate anybody
who looks like them -- young black men. They have no regard for life.
Society has created these monsters."

In her quest to help end violence, Noble plans to launch a foundation,
called Be Yourself Foundation for Nonviolence and Social Affirmation.

"I am not deterred at all," she said. "My only solace is that my children
knew that I stood for something."

(source: San Francisco Chronicle (How to help - Venus Noble is launching
the Be Yourself Foundation for Nonviolence and Social Affirmation to help
eradicate violence in Bay Area communities. Donations may be made to
Washington Mutual Bank, account No. 188-398-912-2, 10800 International
Blvd., Oakland, CA 94603.)

**************

Imprisoned to the bitter end


State law allows for the release of inmates whom prison medical
authorities have determined have 6 months or less to live and present no
danger to society. The purpose is to allow inmates some time to spend with
relatives before they die, either in private homes, or in community
hospices.

It is also intended to spare the state the hugely expensive task of caring
for gravely ill inmates. Except for those fortunate enough to be at the
California Medical Facility at Vacaville, which houses the prison system's
only hospice and skilled nursing facility, dying inmates typically have to
be taken to a private hospital, where they need to be watched over by
multiple guards 24 hours a day.

Yet only a small number of inmates or families seeking "compassionate
release" are granted one. Through October of this year, out of 49 inmates
who applied, only 12 received compassionate releases. That was double the
6 inmates who received a compassionate release last year -- but still far
fewer than the 37 granted in 1994 or the 41 in 1995.

An application has to be initiated by a prison's chief medical officer and
approved by the prison warden. It then has to be approved by the director
of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation or the Board of Parole
Hearings, and then signed off by a judge. The governor is not involved.

The process is so cumbersome that often an application isn't acted on
until after the inmate has died.

That's what happened to 64-year-old Frank Russano, who was serving a
25-years-to-life term in the R.J. Donovan Correctional Facility in San
Diego for killing a man during a botched robbery. On July 23, Russano, who
had completed the 25-year portion of his indeterminate life sentence, was
diagnosed with terminal lung cancer. Nearly a month later, his sister Joan
Keetch, who lives in San Diego, was told about the terminal diagnosis, and
arranged to provide hospice care for him in her home.

But the prison's chief medical officer only issued the required paperwork
for his release on Oct. 4, according to Carrie Kojimoto, an attorney for
the family. Russano's eventually became so ill that he was moved under
armed guard to Alvarado Hospital, a private hospital in San Diego, which
treats dying inmates. No prison official contacted his family to tell them
what had happened.

Fortunately for Keetch, a fellow inmate placed a collect call to tell her
about her brother's deteriorating condition. After contacting a maze of
unhelpful prison officials, she eventually found out where Russano was.
Accompanied by her 90-year-old mother, Keetch rushed to the hospital on
Oct. 28. They found Russano unconscious, shackled to a bed, with several
guards posted in the hallway outside.

He died 2 hours later.

A week later, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation approved
releasing him on compassionate grounds. The department apparently wasn't
aware that he had died. His sister is furious about the way her brother
was treated. "Somebody dropped the ball," she says. "Someone always the
drops the ball."

Russano's case is not unusual, says Cynthia Chandler, director of Justice
Now, a public-interest law firm in Oakland that handles half of all
compassionate release petitions in the state. In fact, she says, it is
becoming even more difficult to get one. "More and more doctors are not
willing to initiate the process unless they are absolutely sure that
inmates are bedridden and about to die," she told us. "And then they die
before the process can be completed."

As the prison population soars and the prisons are crammed to twice their
capacity, officials should be eager to discharge sick and dying inmates to
someone else's care. But just the opposite happens.

As in the case of LaVerne Gurule, prisons usually don't bother to inform
inmates and their families about the compassionate release option. If they
do, they don't give them advice on how to apply for one.

Last July, Gurule, 42, was admitted to the Central California Women's
Facility in Chowchilla on a parole violation. In September, she was told
that she had cancer, but was only released to her family on Nov. 4, her
scheduled release date.

By the time she was released, she was already near death. "We had never
seen her like this," says her 26-year-old daughter, Aurora, of Pittsburg,
who cries when she recalls her mother's condition. "She could barely walk,
water was coming out of her legs, she was in so much pain."

Gurule died three weeks later on Nov. 26. What is especially upsetting to
her daughter is that her family wasn't informed about how sick her mother
was, or even that she could apply for a compassionate release.

Last year, Assemblyman Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, introduced a bill
requiring the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to notify
inmates and their relatives about the application procedure for
compassionate release. It would also have expanded the criteria to cover
not only terminally ill inmates but also "permanently incapacitated" ones.

But Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed the bill, saying that it did not
include a provision that would require the inmate to be returned to prison
should he or she make an unexpected recovery. But Steinberg says that
Schwarzenegger's objections were groundless, because prison officials
could release inmates on the condition that if they recovered, or
committed another crime, they could be imprisoned again.

"Like so many bills dealing with corrections, it got caught up in politics
and ideology," Steinberg, who left the Assembly in January and is now
running for the state Senate, said in a recent interview. "It illustrates
how difficult it is to reform criminal justice in California."

Let's be clear. We're not arguing that compassionate releases to Death Row
inmates such as 75-year-old Clarence Ray Allen, who is legally blind and
confined to a wheelchair, and is scheduled to be executed on Jan. 16. But
we see no reason to keep most other terminally ill or incapacitated
inmates behind bars, especially those who have completed the mandatory
portion of their sentences and are so sick that they are no danger to
anyone.

Says Justice Now's Chandler: "The real folks who get punished are family
members, who are completely denied the possibility of coming together with
relatives who have been in prison, and reconciling with them before they
die."

(source: Editorial, San Francisco Chronicle)






VIRGINIA:

The DNA solution----Evidence credited with closing more cases


ONCE AGAIN, crimes have been solved thanks to incontro- vertible DNA
evidence. An inmate on California's death row has been indicted in the
1988 slayings in Northern Virginia of a man and two women. The 2 women
were also raped.

"After 17 years and some months, that's the best Christmas present a guy
can get," said Henry Jefferson, whose daughter, Veronica "Tina" Jefferson,
was found slain in May 1988. You can bet he has kept track of the passage
of time.

DNA evidence has been called upon not only to identify suspects in
criminal cases, but to clear unjustly accused and convicted individuals.
Just before Christmas, Gov. Mark Warner pardoned two men convicted of
sexual assault who have now been cleared by DNA evidence. Philip L.
Thurman had been convicted in 1985 of rape, abduction, and assault, and
sentenced to 31 years in prison. Pardoned in February, he has now been
completely exonerated. Willie N. Davidson was convicted in 1981 of sexual
assault. He served 11 years before being paroled in 1992.

DNA evidence is becoming more and more useful as the national database
increases, as more police departments cooperate and contribute, and as
evidence in older cases is preserved based on the anticipation of
improving technology. Participation in the DNA database at every level of
law enforcement is key because violent criminals are likely to move from
place to place, committing crimes as they go. Just 2 years after the
Northern Virginia slayings, killer Alfredo Prieto raped and murdered a
15-year-old girl in San Bernardino, Calif., the crime for which he was
sent to death row.

Closer to home, it was DNA evidence that led to the conviction of Archie
Talley of Fredericksburg. 10 years after Elizabeth Herrington was slain in
her Sophia Street apartment, Talley was sentenced to 80 years for killing
her.

Developments prompted by DNA evidence in criminal cases give new hope to
families that are still waiting for closure in cases involving their loved
ones.

Among those are Sue and Mark Baker of Stafford County, who at this time of
year always hope that next year will be their year. In March 1989, the
Bakers' daughter Amy was sexually assaulted and murdered after her car
broke down along Interstate 95 in Fairfax County.

There is DNA evidence on file in Amy's case. After nearly 17 years on an
emotional roller coaster, the Bakers have seen suspects come along only to
be cleared. They are heartened by the DNA revelations in the Prieto cases,
and were alerted by Fairfax police before the news was made public. There
was no DNA match in Amy's case.

Thanks to DNA evidence, no case in which it is available ever really goes
cold. There is always hope.

(source: The Free Lance-Star)






NEW YORK----possible federal death penalty case

Rochester Possible Site For Death Penalty Case


Rochester's federal court could be the site of a death penalty case.

13 WHAM's news partner the Democrat And Chronicle reports there is a good
chance the Connecticut man accused of killing Jason Argersinger, 24, could
be tried in Rochester.

Noah Gladding is accused of killing Argersinger, 25, and dumping his body
in Genesee County.

This would be the 1st time in more than 10 years that Rochester has had a
death penalty case.

(source: WHAM News)



Reply via email to