Feb. 19 CALIFORNIA---obituary George Davis, 98; Attorney Railed Against Death Penalty George T. Davis, a legendary San Francisco criminal lawyer who first gained fame representing a convicted bomber who was pardoned in a landmark 1930s case and later represented clients including California death row inmate Caryl Chessman and televangelist Jim Bakker, has died. He was 98. Davis died of heart failure Feb. 4 at his home at the Mauna Lani Resort on the Big Island of Hawaii, said his wife, Ginger. "George really was one of the great ones," Gerald Uelmen, a professor at Santa Clara University School of Law, told The Times on Friday. "He was a legendary voice against capital punishment in California, one of the earliest lawyers who really focused on death cases and challenged the employment of the death penalty in California." "My memory of George was that he was a very outgoing person," Uelmen added. "People liked him a lot, and he just loved to tell war stories." Davis had no shortage of them. A 1931 graduate of UC Berkeley's Boalt Hall School of Law, he worked for a year as an assistant district attorney in San Francisco before launching his solo practice as a criminal lawyer. By decade's end he had gained a national reputation for handling appeals on behalf of labor organizer Tom Mooney, who had been convicted of a 1916 parade bombing in San Francisco that killed 10 people and injured 40. The controversial case, in which it was widely believed that Mooney had been framed through perjured testimony, produced a 1935 U.S. Supreme Court decision liberalizing the rules under which new evidence could be introduced as grounds for a new trial. When Mooney was granted an unconditional pardon in 1939 after more than 21 years in prison, he and Davis staged a victory parade up Market Street in San Francisco, where they were cheered by an estimated 100,000 lining the street. After serving in the Army in Europe during World War II, Davis represented Alfried Krupp, heir to the German industrial and munitions empire, in post-Nuremberg trials appeals. Davis managed to get Krupp's prison term cut in half, arguing that Krupp was being tried for war crimes in place of his father, who had headed the firm under Nazi rule but had been declared mentally unfit to be tried. Davis ultimately helped Krupp get released from prison. In another landmark case, in 1948, Davis defended Air Force Sgt. Kenneth Long, who was charged with murdering his unfaithful wife. Long had already confessed on the witness stand, but the jury heard a different story when Davis persuaded the judge to admit - for the 1st time in California - a tape-recording as evidence. Davis had smuggled a recorder into the jail and secretly recorded a conversation between Long and a psychiatrist. During the conversation, Long, who had been injected with sodium pentothal, the chemical commonly known as truth serum, recalled witnessing his wife's boyfriend kill her. The jury found Long not guilty. A 1956 episode of the hour-long ABC anthology series "Conflict" featured an episode based on the Long case: "The People Against McQuade," featuring Tab Hunter and James Garner - and Davis playing himself as the defendant's lawyer. "He was open to everything," Ginger Davis said of her husband's brief fling in Hollywood. "George was such a happy person; he just always had a good time and loved meeting all those people." Davis' most notorious case - and one of his greatest war stories - was the federal death penalty appeal of Chessman, the so-called Red Light Bandit, who was convicted on kidnapping and rape charges in 1948. After a 12-year struggle for his life on San Quentin's death row, during which he wrote books protesting his conviction and won numerous stays of execution, Chessman was scheduled to die in the gas chamber at 10 a.m. May 2, 1960. In the wake of what a Los Angeles Times correspondent described as a "whirlwind series of legal maneuvers," Davis and fellow attorney Rosalie Asher rushed into the chambers of federal Judge Louis Goodman in San Francisco only a few minutes before the scheduled execution. The judge listened briefly to their plea for a stay. Then, agreeing to a 1-hour stay to hear arguments, the judge reached for the phone. But the judge's secretary obtained a wrong number for the prison warden on the 1st try, and by the 2nd try it was too late. "If ever there was a case proving the injustice of the death penalty, it was the Chessman case," Davis said in an interview years later. "Why, he hadn't even been accused of killing anybody." Chessman had been convicted under California's Lindbergh Law, which permitted the death penalty to be invoked when kidnapping victims suffered bodily harm. The law was repealed in 1973. Among Davis' other clients were Philippine opposition leader Benigno Aquino Jr., for whom Davis secured release from prison in Manila; and Robert W. T'Souvas, who was charged with killing 2 Vietnamese children during the My Lai massacre; Davis got the charges dismissed. Davis' last big case was in 1989, when he represented Bakker, who was convicted on 24 counts of conspiring to defraud his followers. Davis was born May 29, 1907, in St. Louis but at age 1 moved with his family to San Francisco, where his Greek-immigrant father managed restaurants. Davis, who played drums, trumpet and piano, joined the local musicians union while studying philosophy at UC Berkeley. Between his sophomore and junior years, he and four musician friends got a job playing on a cruise ship. During the around-the-world cruise, on which he celebrated his 18th birthday, Davis made his 1st visit to Hawaii. He and Ginger, his 4th wife, moved to the islands permanently in 1980 and bought a 100-acre horse and cattle ranch on the Hamakua Coast on the Big Island of Hawaii. Davis served as Northern California campaign chairman for Harry S. Truman in 1948 and was Northern California campaign co-chairman for Jimmy Carter in 1976. Through 4 mayoral administrations, he was a member of the San Francisco War Memorial Commission, which overseas the opera house and other arts facilities in the civic center, and the San Francisco Host Committee, which entertains visiting heads of state. With J.K. Choy, Davis co-founded the Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco in 1965. He also was a founding member of the National Lawyers Guild and the American Board of Criminal Lawyers. Davis, who was twice divorced and widowed once, had no children. Ginger Davis, whom he married in 1974, is his sole survivor. A memorial service will be private. Memorial contributions may be made to the Death Penalty Clinic of Boalt Hall School of Law. (source: Los Angeles Times) ****************** 'First, do no harm': Can doctors ethically assist at executions? California's decision to hire an anesthesiologist to monitor an execution on Tuesday has rekindled a fierce nationwide debate over medical ethics. For the 1st time, California plans to have an anesthesiologist at an execution to ensure the prisoner is unconscious when a paralyzing agent and heart-stopping drugs are administered during lethal injection. The decision was made in response to a federal judge's ruling. Defenders of the procedure say a doctor's presence ensures the execution is carried out as humanely as possible. But several influential medical groups, including the American Medical Association, the American Society of Anesthesiologists and the California Medical Association, have condemned physician involvement in executions as unethical and unprofessional. "The use of a physician's clinical skill and judgment for purposes other than promoting an individual's health and welfare undermines a basic ethical foundation of medicine -- first, do no harm," said Dr. Priscilla Ray, who leads an AMA ethics committee. Never any reprimands Michael Morales, 46, is scheduled to be executed Tuesday for the murder of a 17-year-old girl 25 years ago. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger declined to grant clemency Friday. The issue of doctors participating in executions has been debated since the death penalty was reinstated in 1977. It has intensified now that lethal injection is used in all but one of the 38 states that execute prisoners. Despite the ethical objections, no doctor has ever been formally reprimanded for participating in an execution. The AMA and the other professional groups issue advisory guidelines only. A California appellate court in 1998 tossed out a lawsuit challenging the legality of physicians attending executions. The state board that oversees doctors in Kentucky last year dismissed a grievance filed against Gov. Ernie Fletcher, who is a doctor, alleging he violated medical ethics by signing a death warrant. The board concluded Fletcher was acting as governor and not a doctor when he allowed the execution to happen. Dr. Arthur Zitrin, a New York University psychiatry professor and death penalty foe, filed a formal complaint in Georgia against Dr. Hothur Sanjeeva Rao. Rao stepped in to insert a catheter into a condemned prisoner's arm after medical technicians failed to do so. In December 2004, the Georgia board dismissed the complaint and an appeal was denied. Rao could not be reached for comment. "All existing standards internationally and nationally held by professional health societies bars doctors from participating," Zitrin said. "I regret that there are colleagues who, for whatever reason, find it compelling, do participate." A lawsuit Zitrin filed to compel the Georgia medical board to punish participating doctors is pending in a Georgia court, but a bill advancing in the Legislature would shield doctors from punishment for attending executions. (source: Associated Press) *********************** Real doctors don't monitor state executions As society debates the rationale of state-sanctioned killing in an attempt to deter killing and provide the ultimate punishment for murder, the medical profession is now drawn into the process and has the absolute responsibility to speak out against the latest proposal by the state Department of Corrections to provide 2 board-certified anesthesiologists to monitor the execution of Michael Morales. This proposal is in direct conflict with the American Medical Association's Code of Ethics for physicians. It has generated reaction from physicians around the nation. Jonathan I. Groner, M.D., clinical associate professor of surgery at the Ohio State University College of Medicine and Public Health and national expert on lethal injection, issued the following statement: "An anesthesiologist who enters the death chamber is clearly violating national and internationally established medical ethics. Not since Nazi physicians supervised the killing of mentally and physically disabled individuals in Germany's notorious 'euthanasia' program have high-ranking physicians become so intimately involved in state-sponsored killing. "Every California anesthesiologist and, indeed, every California physician, should appeal to the anesthesia chief at his or her hospital to stay away from California's death chamber. Physician participation in lethal injection defiles not only those who participate, but the entire medical profession as well. "In addition, the American Society of Anesthesia, the California Society of Anesthesiologists, and the California Medical Association should unconditionally condemn participation in executions by anesthesiologists and all physicians." The co-presidents of Physicians for Social Responsibility Los Angeles, whose mission is "to address violence and its causes," have issued the following statement: "We learn with dismay that the state intends to employ 2 anesthesiologists in the execution of Michael Morales scheduled for Feb. 21. We are shocked that 2 medical doctors would agree to participate in an execution. They and your readers should be reminded that it has long been the position of organized medicine that it is absolutely unethical for a physician to participate in a legal execution in any way. The relevant portion of the American Medical Association's Code of Ethics for Physicians states: 'A physician, as a member of a profession dedicated to preserving life when there is hope of doing so, should not be a participant in a legally authorized execution.' "Physician participation in execution is defined generally as actions which would fall into one or more of the following categories: (1) an action which would directly cause the death of the condemned; (2) an action which would assist, supervise or contribute to the ability of another individual to directly cause the death of the condemned; (3) an action which could automatically cause an execution to be carried out on a condemned prisoner. "We call on the 2 unnamed physicians to reconsider their agreement to participate. We further call on the governor, the attorney general and the secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to change their plans. Finally, we ask that the Medical Board of California investigate and discipline these 2 physicians should they decide to go forward." As society attempts to address the root causes and appropriate response to violence, this is the wrong path to go down. A physician's role is to heal and relieve suffering, not to participate in or stand idly by and observe the execution of another human being. Concerned citizens are encouraged to call the governor's office at 916-445-2841 or fax 916-445-4633. (source: Robert F. Dodge, M.D., of Ventura, is president of the Ventura County Physicians for Social Responsibility, co-chairman of Citizens for Peaceful Resolutions, and board member of Beyond War----Ventura County Star) ********************* "Excruciating Pain" Banned by 8th Amendment? Amendment V111 to the US Constitution prohibits "cruel and unusual punishments." Although neither cruel nor unusual are defined in the Article, one can safely assume it was not the founders' intent to prohibit capital punishment altogether, or they would have done so. The electric chair did not exist in those times, but public hanging and death by firing squad were employed. Obstructing justice in death penalty cases has become a rallying point for liberals, elitist judges, the ACLU and others more concerned about the welfare of brutal killers than innocent victims. The current case of Michael Morales in California provides insight into the latest liberal insanity impeding justice. Morales raped and murdered a 17-year old girl, Terri Winchell, in 1981 and is scheduled to pay the ultimate price for his crimes at 12:01 AM, next Tuesday. The killer's lawyers, including Ken Starr, have tried to block the execution with an unbelievable argument. To wit: California's lethal injection procedure masks an inmate's excruciating pain and amounts to cruel and unusual punishment! Excruciating pain is cruel and unusual? What in the hell is an execution all about if not excruciating pain followed by death? US District Judge Jeremy Fogel, a Clinton appointee, has so far refused to block the scheduled execution, but has ordered California to assure that! the killer is unconscious before the final drugs are administered. In other words, drug the killer into oblivion, then kill him. California intends to comply by assigning an anesthesiologist to the death chamber during the execution. Judge Fogel has not yet signed off on California's plan. In any event, additional appeals will be filed including one to the 9th Circuit. That liberal zoo has never blocked an execution based on the lethal injection argument, but we are talking about liberal extremists in black robes. So anything is possible. In the interest of justice for Terri Winchell and her family, liberal insanity must be defeated in this case and the miserable life of Michael Morales terminated as scheduled. And if Morales actually suffers excruciating pain, all the better! (source: The American Daily (Arizona); John W. Lillpop) ************* Governor turns down killer's bid for clemency -- Morales running out of options as Tuesday's execution nears Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger denied clemency for condemned inmate Michael Morales on Friday, arguing that Morales' remorse over the rape and murder he committed in 1981 does not outweigh the brutality of his crimes. Morales' lawyers filed two further legal appeals Friday, but Schwarzenegger's decision was a major blow to their effort to prevent Morales' scheduled execution next week. He is set to die at 12:01 a.m. Tuesday for the rape and murder of 17-year-old Terri Winchell of Lodi (San Joaquin County). In summing up his decision to deny clemency, Schwarzenegger wrote, "The pain Ms. Winchell's loved ones have been forced to endure at the hands of Morales is unfathomable as is the brutality of the acts he perpetrated." < Morales, 46, was sentenced to death for strangling Winchell with a belt while he was sitting behind her in a car, striking her 23 times with a hammer, stabbing her 4 times with a knife and raping her while she lay wounded. Winchell's body was found in a San Joaquin County vineyard. Morales and his attorneys had based much of their clemency arguments on Morales' life since sentencing. Morales noted that he had expressed regret when he was sentenced for the crime and wrote a letter to Schwarzenegger apologizing. But Schwarzenegger dismissed that sentiment, arguing that Morales has never acknowledged the rape he was convicted of and also at one point blamed the crime on his alcohol and drug use. "The changes in Morales' life do not override the jury's decision of guilt and sentence, which have been upheld by all the reviewing courts," the governor wrote in a 6-page decision. "Being a changed man today does not change the nature of the murder and rape Morales committed against Ms. Winchell when he was younger." It was the 5th clemency appeal the governor has considered since taking office, and Schwarzenegger has denied all 5 requests. In several of the denials, Schwarzenegger has shown little deference to arguments by inmates that they had changed their ways in prison, instead focusing on the facts of the cases and whether there were any remaining legal questions. Schwarzenegger also rejected Morales' argument that his death sentence should be reduced because a witness against him had lied, raising questions about the special circumstance -- lying in wait -- that led to the death penalty. Morales has argued that a jailhouse informant testified that Morales described and bragged about the murder to him in Spanish, but Morales does not speak Spanish. The discrepancy led Morales' trial judge to ask Schwarzenegger to grant clemency. But the governor noted that there is other evidence proving the circumstance, and that other courts have discounted that claim. Prosecutors praised the governor. "I can't say I'm surprised," said San Joaquin County Deputy District Attorney Charles Schultz, who opposed the clemency petition. "I'm sure the governor was convinced by the same thing that convinced every court, the jury and every prosecutor in the case -- it was the brutality of the crime. This was such an awful thing that happened to that poor girl. Clemency was certainly not appropriate in this case." Morales' lawyers were visibly upset by the decision. "I'm disappointed," said lead defense attorney David Senior who appeared to be fighting back tears outside the gates of San Quentin State Prison. "For 25 years, Michael Morales has acknowledged his crime," Senior said. "For 25 years, he's shown regret and remorse. We're not asking for a pardon. We're asking that his sentence be commuted to life in prison without the possibility of parole." Morales' case has featured several unusual twists. A federal judge is requiring that an anesthesiologist be placed in the execution chamber next week to ensure that the inmate is unconscious when he is put to death. And pro-clemency statements from five members of the jury that convicted Morales were withdrawn earlier this week, leading prosecutors to charge that they had been forged. Morales' lawyers filed 2 appeals Friday to the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. One appeal was a renewed challenge to the death sentence, arguing that it was brought about by the jailhouse informant's false testimony. The state Supreme Court denied the same appeal earlier this week, and the federal appeals court has rejected an earlier appeal that attacked the informant's testimony. The second appeal disputes the federal judge's decision late Thursday to let the execution proceed after the state agreed to put an anesthesiologist in the death chamber to make sure Morales is unconscious from a heavy dose of the barbiturate sodium pentothal before administration of paralyzing and heart-stopping drugs. (source: San Francisco Chronicle, Feb. 18) FLORIDA: COURTS----Jury panel asked: Life or death?; The upcoming trial of a man charged with murder brings the death penalty debate closer to home for 100 prospective jurors. The 50 or so people in the courtroom mostly ignored the gaunt man in the corner as they debated whether it would be OK to execute him. Michael Locascio, his face a pale gray, almost fainted. He is charged with the stabbing death of his sister-in-law, Silvia Margarita Locascio. This week, he goes to trial and, if convicted, faces the death penalty. Before the trial starts, the judge and attorneys on both sides must find 12 people and two alternates who are "death qualified" -- legal jargon to describe jurors willing to recommend a man be killed. The time-consuming process begins with potential jurors being asked to consider the death penalty in a way they may never have before. This is not a political debate or a discussion over cocktails. This is real and personal, yet still confusingly hypothetical. For 4 days they are asked: Could you vote for the death of a man you don't know for reasons you aren't being told? Investigators say Locascio and his brother Edward, an accountant, conspired to kill Edward's estranged wife in 2001. Michael Locascio was arrested shortly after the stabbing in Coral Gables. Investigators matched his DNA to a knife with the woman's blood on it. But the potential jurors, men and women of all walks of life, knew none of this. "We're asking them to interview for a job they may not even get to do, or may not even want to do," explained Locascio's lead attorney, Bruce Fleisher, who's tried 19 other death penalty cases. Circuit Judge Stanford Blake started the week with 2 groups of 50 potential jurors. He urged them not to make up excuses to get out of jury duty, calling on their sense of civic duty. And he held out the possibility of high drama. "[If selected] you'll find this is a fascinating case with good lawyers, better than anything you ever see on television," he assured one group. "Because this is real." Then, he began asking about the death penalty. Several jurors said they could never vote to recommend the death penalty. Juror number nine, a hotel pool attendant, stood and declared "Only God takes a life." Excused. Several others felt just the opposite. Juror No. 4, a woman with short, blond hair who works as a personal trainer, said "I think if you kill someone, you deserve to die. Period." Excused. Halfway into the second day of jury selection, Locascio put his head down on the table. "Judge, I thought I was going to pass out," he explained later. Blake asked a corrections officer if Locascio could lie down on courtroom benches during lunch. The officer refused, instead offering to let him sleep in his jail cell for 45 minutes. The potential jurors didn't seem to notice Locascio's distress and the debate. Assistant State Attorney Gail Levine, who has prosecuted five men on death row, had memorized the potential jurors' names from a seating chart she had scrawled on a manila folder. She called several out by name, like a school teacher grilling a class, and asked if they could be the deciding vote. Florida law requires a unanimous guilty verdict, but only a majority vote for recommending the death penalty. Ultimately, the judge decides the sentence, but the jury carries a lot of weight. Could you be the seventh vote for death?, Levine asked. "If you put them to death and you were wrong, that life is wasted," said one woman in the front row. "I'm halfway in the middle because what if we are wrong?" Levine probed further; Locascio buried his head in his hands. More jurors acknowledged the whole thing made them uncomfortable. One woman, a Miami-Dade teacher, said she worried she would see Locascio's face in her dreams if she voted for death. Excused. Others were sent away for personal reasons. Juror No. 48 had plane tickets to Peru. Excused. It's high season for the tax accountant, juror No. 22. Excused. Then there was the student who works part-time to pay her college tuition. "What are you studying?" Blake asked. "Sexology," she said without a hint of humor. The rest of the courtroom let out a quiet gasp. "See, this is why I love jury selection," Blake said, laughing. Excused. One man made the cut Monday, but then called Tuesday to say he forgot to mention his wife was having a baby Wednesday. Excused. "You need to tell us things like that," Blake told the group. Only 37 people remained Thursday, the final day of jury selection. Those left got a few tidbits about the case. Not only is this case about murder, it is about the murder of a family member, Levine explained. "Everyone OK with that?" she asked in a thick New Jersey accent. The group, like a well-trained class, said yes in unison. So Levine asked if everyone could handle gruesome crime scene photos. "I could be fair, but it gets worse the more I think about it," responded a clearly uncomfortable Miami Dade Community College student who also works part-time at a shoe store. Levine then asked their opinions about witnesses who don't want to testify, their opinions about people getting involved in romantic relationships on the job, their opinions about divorce. Levine couldn't tell them that Edward and Silvia Locascio were married 28 years and were in the middle of a bad divorce at the time of her death. Or about a witness being held in jail because she had refused to testify. Or a homicide detective who got romantically involved with a witness. All that would come out at trial. Fleisher took turns questioning the panel, too, mostly reminding them that Locascio was innocent until Levine proved to them he was guilty, that all these questions were hypothetical, that they might never need to consider the death penalty. Finally, the potential jurors were sent out of the room late Thursday afternoon and, like a strange game of bingo, the judge read off their names. The attorneys on either side were looking for two different juries. Fleisher and his co-counsel, Charles White, want a politically liberal jury with people who are skeptical of authority and, if they convict, are willing to believe there were extenuating circumstances -- or mitigators, as they are called under the law. Levine and her co-counsel, Monique Annunziato, want politically conservative jurors who will trust experts called to testify about certain evidence and be willing to deal out the ultimate punishment. "This part is as bad as waiting for the verdict," Levine said. "It's exhausting," Fleisher said. They haggled over jurors for an hour before selecting eight women and 6 men. They settled on a jury of 3 nurses, a part-time mortgage broker who delivers flowers on the side, a state probation officer, the college student uncomfortable with the grisly photos, a computer technician, a truck mechanic, a BellSouth worker, an administrator in an import-export firm, a retired typist, an airplane mechanic and a cruise line employee. All are U.S. citizens who have valid driver's licenses. These 14 men and women will decide whether Michael Locascio is guilty or not -- and, if convicted, whether he lives or dies. Opening arguments in the case will begin Tuesday. (source: Miami Herald) ************ Crime measures proposed for the 2006 legislative session Among the crime-related issues expected to be considered by the Florida Legislature in the upcoming session are: - A bill that would require sex offenders to live at least 2,500 feet from schools and other places where children spend time. Current state law requires a 1,000-foot buffer, but many municipalities have passed local ordinances extending it. - A bill that would remove deadlines for prison inmates requesting DNA testing of evidence to try to prove their innocence. - A bill that would allow prosecutors to bring charges against someone based on new DNA evidence, after the statute of limitations has run out. - A bill that would stop employers from prohibiting legal firearms on work premises if they are kept in employees' vehicles. - A bill calling for mandatory prison sentences for people who leave the scene of deadly accidents. - A bill setting a minimum mandatory 1-year jail term for a person who get a 4th or subsequent conviction for driving or boating under the influence of drugs or alcohol. ****************** Sex offenders, DNA evidence among crime issues in Legislature After a little girl was nearly abducted by a stranger in Davie last year, leaders of the Broward County city decided to do something more to try to keep the community's children safe. Although the suspect was never identified, Davie turned its attention to convicted sex offenders, becoming the 1st Florida municipality to go beyond state law in trying to keep them even farther away from kids. A city ordinance bans sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of schools and other places children congregate. "That was one avenue we could approach to provide additional protection for kids," city councilwoman Susan Starkey said. Other municipalities have followed suit, and the Florida Legislature is expected to take up a bill when the session begins March 7 that would increase the existing 1,000-foot buffer zone to 2,500 feet statewide. New sex-offender legislation is among the crime measures that also include an effort to lift the deadline for DNA testing of old evidence for prison inmates trying to prove their innocence, and a bill that would make it easier to take a gun to work. Last year, angry lawmakers rushed to make life tougher for convicted sex offenders after one was accused of killing 9-year-old Jessica Lunsford. New laws meant longer sentences and the prospect of lifetime electronic monitoring for some sex offenders once they are released from prison. Rep. Susan Goldstein, R-Weston, wanted to raise the pressure on freed sex offenders even more this year. She introduced the bill to increase the buffer zone. She said it will create consistency across the state and effectively keep sex offenders out of neighborhoods where there are many children, she said. "With the fact that we have 1,100 people a day moving to this state, I think this bill is strong enough that we will send a loud message that they are not welcome here," Goldstein said, noting that the state still doesn't know the whereabouts of a large number of registered sex offenders who relocated to Florida after Hurricane Katrina. Critics have complained that such a buffer would keep everyone with a sex crime in their background out of most urban areas of the state and that such laws aren't effective anyway. Howard Simon, executive director of the ACLU of Florida, pointed to a recent report by the Iowa County Attorneys Association stating that a 2,000-foot residency restriction for sex offenders there doesn't work. Costs of enforcing it and unintended effects on families of offenders make it necessary to replace the law with more effective measures, the report said. "It's an issue that has more to do with grandstanding by politicians and exploiting the fears of the community than it does with protecting children," Simon said. The bill also would require landlords to conduct background checks on prospective tenants. However, it would not force sex offenders who already live within the new boundaries to move, and it is being amended to exclude an 18- or 19-year-old convicted of lewd and lascivious conduct for having consensual sex with a 16- or 17-year-old partner. Hillsborough County Sheriff David Gee said it's too early to tell if buffer laws have had any effect. But anything that brings public attention to the problem helps, he said. His agency recently distributed a tabloid newspaper insert listing names, addresses and photos of registered sex offenders living in the county. Underscoring the debate over deadlines for DNA testing is the recent exoneration of Alan Crotzer, who was freed after spending more than 24 years in prison for a Tampa armed robbery and rape he didn't commit. DNA evidence showed he wasn't one of the rapists, and a co-defendant backed Crotzer's story that he wasn't even there. Others who were wrongly convicted and may be able to prove their innocence with DNA technology faced deadlines for getting evidence tested for comparison. The proposed bill removes deadlines and also extends testing to those who pleaded guilty or no contest, in addition to those convicted by juries. Jennifer Greenberg, executive director of the Florida Innocence Initiative that helped free Crotzer, said of 174 inmates exonerated across the nation by DNA, 7 had entered guilty pleas including a mentally retarded man in Florida. The Legislature previously had opened a four-year window to DNA testing, although limiting it to those who had been convicted. It was due to shut on Oct. 1, 2005, but the Florida Supreme Court is holding it open until July 1 so the justices can decide whether to continue testing beyond that date regardless of what the Legislature does. Gov. Jeb Bush also has ordered government agencies to preserve biological evidence. Another bill, sponsored by Sen. Alex Diaz de la Portilla, R-Miami, would let prosecutors use DNA evidence to bring charges after the statute of limitations has run out, if the new material identifies a suspect. The law would give prosecutors a year after the DNA analysis identifies a suspect to file charges. "It only makes sense that if the evidence becomes available, it should be used to prosecute criminals who otherwise have skirted the system," de la Portilla said. Another crime measure expected to be considered would stop employers from prohibiting legal firearms on work premises if they are kept in employees' vehicles. It has the backing of the National Rifle Association, which says gun owners lose their Second Amendment rights under current law. The Florida Chamber of Commerce, which represents 137,000 Florida businesses, opposes the law. "This would interfere with employer-employee relationships, and we are always going to work to preserve the rights that surround that relationship," said Robert White, chairman of the chamber's board of directors. "We are going to tell our lobbying team to work to defeat any bill that has to do with this." On the Net: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/ (source for both: Associated Press) VERMONT----re: federal death sentence Judge slow to consider Fell death sentence 7 months after a federal jury called for the execution of convicted killer Donald R. Fell, the judge has yet to act on the verdict. "I really don't know what's taking so long," said Barbara Tuttle of North Clarendon, sister of the late Tressa King, 53. Fell, 25, a Pennsylvania native, was convicted last summer of capital crimes in Vermont's 1st death penalty trial in nearly 50 years. "It's frustrating. The whole family is frustrated," said Tuttle, who supports Fell's execution. "It's kind of like it's still out there hanging over your head. You can't really put it behind you until it's resolved." Fell abducted King from Rutland and killed her in New York state in November 2000. An alleged accomplice, Robert J. Lee, later died in prison. A federal jury convicted Fell of kidnapping and slaying King after he and Lee allegedly fled from two earlier killings in Rutland. The same jury then issued a separate verdict on July 14 that Fell be executed for his crimes. U.S. District Judge William K. Sessions has yet to rule on the matter, and no hearing or sentencing date has been set. "Usually once the jury recommends the death penalty, it's pretty much over," said Richard Dieter of the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington, D.C. "There is a formal sentencing process, but none of them have been surprises." Dieter said he is not aware of any federal judge who has defied a jury's death penalty verdict. "There hasn't been one like that. There have been death sentences overturned by the appellate courts," he added. "In all the other cases, if the jury says, death, it's death. If the jury says, life, it's life, and they have all resulted in the sentences that have come down." A total of 47 people have been sentenced to execution under the federal death penalty statute since it was restored in 1988, Dieter said. Of those, 41 are on death row. 3 prisoners have been executed, including Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh. In two cases, appellate courts have overturned the death sentences and in one case a condemned man was granted a presidential commutation. In those three cases, Dieter said, the death sentences were changed to prison terms of life without parole. "It seems to me it's usually done in the realm of a few months," Dieter said of the formal imposition of the death penalty by a federal judge. "Three to six months would not be unusual in the federal system. I don't know any that have taken a year, but this one (Fell) isn't quite there yet, either, so it's not too extreme at this point." According to federal law, the judge must impose the death penalty as recommended by the jury, unless he determines some type of misconduct took place in the trial. Fell's defense team in August filed a motion to overturn the death sentence, claiming prosecutors mishandled interviews of their client by mental health experts. Prosecutors in September filed their response, denying any wrongdoing and asking the judge to let the death penalty verdict stand. Alexander Bunin, a federal public defender representing Fell, said Friday there was little he could say on the matter. Bunin did say that he was aware that the judge has had a busy court schedule since the Fell trial this summer. Bunin said he hopes Sessions will set a hearing on his post-trial motion. "It's a serious issue," he said. "We've asked for a hearing and I think we'll have a hearing. When? I don't know." Assistant U.S. Attorney William Darrow, one of the prosecutors in the case, said Friday he could not comment on the matter. A message left for Judge Sessions was not returned. Prior to the Fell case, the last federal death penalty case tried in New England involved Gary Lee Sampson in Massachusetts. Judge Mark L. Wolf sentenced convicted killer Sampson to death in late January 2004 following a jury death sentence recommendation a month earlier. Michael Mello, a Vermont Law School professor and death penalty expert, agreed with Dieter that should Sessions overturn a federal jury's death sentence recommendation it would be quite a surprise. "I can't think of a reason why Sessions would be waiting to rule on the motions or to have an evidentiary hearing on the motions," Mello added. Since the Fell trial, Sessions has also presided over a 3 1/2-month trial involving a Burlington eye doctor, the state's longest federal trial, which came to an end in mid-December. "That's probably the most likely explanation for the delay in the Fell case," Mello said. The law professor said it's unlikely that Sessions will not impose the death sentence, but added that the judge has surprised people before. Mello pointed out that Sessions made national headlines in September 2002 when he granted a motion by Fell's attorneys to declare the federal death penalty unconstitutional in Fell's case. Prosecutors appealed and the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City reversed Sessions' ruling. "I still think by far the most likely outcome is that the jury's death verdict will stand," Mello said. Should Sessions, indeed, hand down the death sentence, Mello said, there will still likely be more than a decade of appeals. During the trial, prosecutors said Fell and Lee were fleeing a double homicide in Rutland early in the morning on Nov. 27, 2000, when they carjacked King as she arrived for work at the Price Chopper store in downtown Rutland. They beat her to death in New York state, according to testimony. Prosecutors said the men had already killed Fell's mother, Debra Fell, 47, and her friend, Charles Conway, 44, after a night of drinking and playing cards in Debra's apartment on Robbins Street in Rutland. State charges of murder were never filed, as the federal capital crimes took precedence. Lee died in prison in September 2001, and his death was ruled an accident. Vermont does not have the death penalty. However, because King's death involved crossing state lines, federal charges that carried the death penalty were filed in the case. Fell is now incarcerated in a federal prison in upstate New York, awaiting his next Vermont court appearance. Meanwhile, King's family is also awaiting word on when that will take place. "We're just wondering when the phone is going to ring this time, to let us know when there is going to be a formal sentencing," Tuttle said. "We're still waiting for him to make another decision even though the jury came back with their verdict and their penalty. We're still waiting for Judge Sessions." (source: Rutland Herald) SOUTH DAKOTA: Judge sets Page execution date In Deadwood, a judge has set the week of Aug. 28 for the execution of Elijah Page, a death row inmate who wrote a letter that said he's giving up his appeals and wants to face execution. Page, 24, of Athens, Texas, pleaded guilty to 1st-degree murder in January 2001 for torturing and beating Chester Poage, 19, of Spearfish to death in March 2000. Circuit Judge Warren Johnson gave Page the death sentence. The execution week was set Friday after a brief teleconference hearing in Deadwood. Johnson canceled a March 1 hearing in the case. Paperwork on the execution date will be sent to the participating attorneys, Gov. Mike Rounds and State Penitentiary Warden Doug Weber, who will announce the specific date and time 48 hours before the execution as per state law. One of Page's lawyers, Mike Butler of Sioux Falls, said that as the execution approaches, he will ask for a hearing to examine Page's competency to make the decision to face execution. Page might simply be "seeking to end the status of his current confinement," Butler said, adding that he will have Page professionally examined for competency. Briley Piper, 25, of Anchorage, Alaska, also pleaded guilty in the slaying and was sentenced to death by lethal injection as well. The South Dakota Supreme Court later upheld Johnson's sentences. A jury convicted a 3rd defendant, Darryl Hoadley of Lead, of murder in the case, and he was sentenced to life in prison. Piper's lawyer has asked for a new sentence for his client based on information Page wrote in his Jan. 29 letter. Page wrote that Piper was not as involved in the murder as prosecutors claimed and that it was Page's and Hoadley's idea to kill Poage. "Piper really wanted nothing to do with it all, but if Darryl and I (were) in it, we weren't going to let Piper be out of it," the letter said. "To manipulate Piper was easy. I simply told him that if he didn't go along with what he was told, I was going to shoot him, and then after that, I was going to shoot his sister." Prosecutors have said Poage was beaten, stabbed and tortured and was forced to drink a concoction of Drano and beer. Poage was finally killed when large rocks were dropped on his head. (source: Associated Press)
